“results based accountability” and how could it

Report
Results Based Accountability
Charlotte Drury
WLGA
Results Based Accountability
Purpose of Workshop:
•
Provide an overview of the RBA framework
•
Show how RBA can help to plan and deliver outcome
based services
•
Give some examples of practice in Wales
Results Based Accountability
A disciplined way of embedding outcome based
decision making into planning, delivery and
accountability for partnerships and projects.
RBA increasingly popular in UK and elsewhere . . .
•
•
•
Embeds performance management into
planning and delivery
Helps turn talk quickly into actions
Explains both collaborative and service
accountability and how they fit back together
RBA included in CYP Plan and HSCWB Guidance
www.cartoonstock.com
The Importance of Language
All these new words are very elitist, and I
don’t think there’s a place for it. [By...]
using language that a fair proportion of the
community won’t understand you’ve
already set yourselves apart before you’ve
even started.’
Interview transcript - Royal Town Planning
Institute research into the language of
regeneration, 2001
The Importance of Language
Too many terms. Too few definitions. Too little discipline
Outcome
Benchmark
Indicator
Aim
Milestone
Result
Modifiers
Measurable
Core
Urgent
Qualitative
Priority
Programmatic
Targeted
Performance
Incremental Strategic
Systemic
Goal
Objective
Target
Impact
Measure
RBA Common Language Tools
IDEAS
POSSIBLE LABELS
WORDS
CHOICE
MODIFIERS
4 legged
• Dog
mammal –
• Hound
often kept as • Canine
pet – barks
• Large
• Brown
• Toy
• Dangerous
“Toy dog”
What we use • Measure
to measure
• Result
the benefits • Indicator
of our service
• Impact
• Customer
“Customer
Result”
Two Types of Accountability
Population Accountability – collective or
collaborative responsibility for the well being
of populations (e.g. Local Service Board
accountable for all people in L.A. Area)
Performance Accountability – the
responsibility of a project, programme or
service system for specific results for its
“customers” (e.g. drug cessation programme
accountable for “customer results”)
Why This Matters: Responsibility
English National Indicator Set:
Outcome 4: Healthy & Successful Adults
(Population Accountability)
NI131: Timeliness of social care assessment
(Performance Accountability)
Why This Matters: Responsibility
CYP Plan Outcome Measures Framework:
Priority 3.2: Every child and young person is safe
and protected from abuse, victimisation and
exploitation
(Population Accountability)
Outcome Measure: % of initial Social Services
assessments carried out within 7 working days
(Performance Accountability)
Performance
Population
Keeping Accountability Straight
Population Outcome
A condition of well-being for a
population (or sub-pop) stated
in plain language
People in Wrexham live
in a safe community
Population Indicator
Measurable information which
helps quantify achievement of
population outcome
Crime rate in Wrexham
Performance Measure
Measurable information which
helps quantify if a service etc
works
• How much did we do?
Children in Wales are
born healthy
Rate of low birth weight
babies in Wales
• How well did we do it?
• Is anyone better off?
Population and Performance Accountability
CONDITION OF
WELL-BEING
A Flying Start for Children
in Cardiff
POPULATION INDICATORS
% low birth weight
% breast fed at 6 months
% fully immunised
% assessed ready for school
End
Contribution
Parenting
Project
Children in Cardiff
WHOLE POPULATION
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
% parents attending gaining
better coping skills
% parents who use techniques
learnt after 6 months
Means
Courtesy of David Burnby & Associates
Outcome, Indicator or
Performance Measure?
1.
People in the community are safe
2.
Crime Rate
3.
Average Police Response Time
4.
People living in safe, stable affordable housing
5.
First time entrants to Criminal Justice System
6.
% of low birthweight babies
7.
% of LAC reviews carried out on time
8.
Achievement of 5 A*-C grades at GCSE
Outcome
Indicator
P.Measure
Outcome
Indicator
Indicator
P.Measure
?
If the question is “How are we doing as a community on education attainment?” Indicator
If the question is “How good is XYZ school at raising educational attainment?” P.Measure
From Ends to Means in 7 Questions
Population Accountability
1. What is the quality of life condition we
want for the selected population in our
community?
Population Outcomes
A condition of well being for a population or
sub population stated in plain language.
A Population (or sub)
+
A Place
+
A Condition of Well Being
From Ends to Means in 7 Questions
Population Accountability
1. What is the quality of life condition we
want for the selected population in our
community?
2. What would this look like if we could
see it?
3. How can we measure these conditions?
4. How are we doing on the most important
of these measures? (Baselines and the
story behind them)
Baselines
3 years if nothing
changes – OK?
Today
% Teen
pregnancy
WHY?
Time
Target for 3 years
from now
From Ends to Means in 7 Questions
Population Accountability
5. Who are the partners that have a role to
play in doing better?
6. What works to do better, including no
cost/low cost ideas and off the wall
ideas?
7. What do we propose to do? Action –
what, how, who, when, how much!
1. Condition of Well Being
Children in Powys are safe
2. What does this look like?
Safe at home, from crime & bullying etc
DD1
3. How can we measure
these conditions?
4. How are we doing?
% young people victims of crime
Baselines &
stories
5. Which partners?
6. What works to do better?
7. What are we going to
do?
Police, YOTs, schools, families etc
DD2
Best ideas, new ideas etc
Action plan and budget – by when and
how?
The RBA Commissioning Journey
– From Talk to Action
ENDS (POPULATION ACCOUNTABILITY)
DESIRED
OUTCOME
Choosing the
INDICATORS
Drawing the
BASELINE (and
the CURVE TO
TURN)
Choosing the
PARTNERS
REVIEW
Contributory
Relationship
The STORY
BEHIND THE
BASELINE
The ACTION
PLAN
Deciding WHAT
WORKS
COMMISSIONING
MEANS (PERFORMANCE ACCOUNTABILITY)
PERFORMANCE
MEASURES
How Much?
How Well?
Better Off?
(CLIENT OUTCOMES)
Risks
• Less money – fewer grants – more
competitive
• Everyone likely to be hit - some more than
others
• Less stability = more difficult to retain and
develop good people
• Ultimately the price falls on people who need
these services
Opportunities
• Agencies which speak a common language
best placed improve services & save money
• Greater clarity of expectations
• Being able to demonstrate impact of wellfounded programmes
• Able establish clear link between service
results and population well being
• Opportunity to use flexibility of 3rd Sector
Performance Accountability - for
projects/services with a defined customer)
Two Types of Accountability
Population Accountability – collective or
collaborative responsibility for the well being
of populations (e.g. Local Service Board
accountable for all people in L.A. Area)
Performance Accountability – the
responsibility of a project, programme or
service system for specific results for its
“customers” (e.g. drug cessation programme
accountable for “customer results”)
Performance
Population
Keeping Accountability Straight
Population Outcome
A condition of well-being for a
population (or sub-pop) stated
in plain language
Older people in Flintshire
live in a safe community
Population Indicator
Measurable information which
helps quantify achievement of
population outcome
Crime rate in Flintshire
Performance Measure
Measurable information which
helps quantify if a service etc
works
• How much did we do?
Older people in Gwent
live independent lives
Number of hospital
admissions due to falls
• How well did we do it?
• Is anyone better off?
Performance Measures
Quantity
Effort
or
Quality
How much
did we do?
How well did
we do it?
#
%
or
Effect
Is anyone better off as
a result?
%
#
Performance Measures
Types of Performance Measure
How much did we do?
(#) Customers served
(#) Activities
How well did we do it?
(%) Common measures
(e.g. % staff fully trained)
(%) Activity specific
(e.g. % on time, % fully
completed
Is anyone better off as a result?
(%) Skills or Knowledge (e.g. qualification)
(%) Attitude or Opinion (e.g. towards school)
(%) Behaviour (e.g. attendance)
(%) Circumstance (e.g. in work)
Performance Measures
Substance Misuse Service
How much did we do?
# young people seen
# 1-to-1 sessions
How well did we do it?
% staff with higher
qualification
% 1st appointments within
2 weeks of referral
Is anyone better off as a result?
% people using service who are off
drugs/reduced use at end of 12 week
intervention
% people using the service who are off
drugs/reduced use 6 weeks after end of
intervention
Performance Measures
Education
How much did we do?
How well did we do it?
# of additional learning
courses
% sessions delivered to
schedule
# young people on
courses
% young people
completing course
Is anyone better off as a result?
% young people on additional learning
courses gaining 1 or more GCSEs
% young people on additional learning
course with improved general attendance
Performance Measures
Youth Outreach Service
How much did we do?
# outreach bus sessions
# contacts
How well did we do it?
% sessions delivered to
schedule
% young people writing
action plan
Is anyone better off as a result?
% young people accessing appropriate
training as a result of contact with youth
outreach
% young people reporting increased healthy
behaviour
Turning Case Management Data into
Performance Measures
NAME
ISSUE
RESULT
John C
Anxiety about attending school
Significant change
Laura D
Feels “lonely & friendless”
Partial change
Carl F
Involved in nuisance activity
No change
Anne P
Using alcohol
Partial change
Mary H
Unauthorised absences
No change
Possible service performance measure of “Is Anyone
Better Off”? (Lower Right)
An aggregate of the
• % service users showing
difference the service has
“significant” or “partial”
made to individuals!
positive change (60%)
Population Outcome Contributed to – “High Achievement for Young People”
1. Customer Population
Young people on ed. support programme
2. Is anyone better off? LR
% Key Stage passes
DD1
3. Are we delivering
services well? UR
4. How are we doing?
% sessions delivered on scheduled date
Baselines &
stories
5. Which partners?
6. What works to do better?
7. What are we going to
do?
Schools, families, peers etc
DD2
Mentoring, alternative curriculum
Action plan and budget
Fitting Population Accountability and
Performance Accountability Together
Fitting it all Together
POPULATION ACCOUNTABILITY
Outcome = Healthy children
Indicator = % low birth weight
Contributory
Relationship
PERFORMANCE ACCOUNTABILITY
Ante-Natal Smoking Project
How much?
How well?
# sessions
% sessions to
schedule
# service users
% satisfied
Is anyone better off?
# service users
% service users
stopping while
stopping while
pregnant
pregnant
Customer Result
Alignment
of measures
Appropriate
responsibility
Presenting Your Contribution
Population
Accountability
Outcome(s) to which you most directly contribute
Indicators
Story behind the curves to turn
Partners with a role to play
Actions – what its going to take to turn the curve
Your role – as part of the larger strategy
Performance
Accountability
Your programme & what it delivers
Performance measures
Story behind the curves to turn
Partners with a role to play
Actions – what its going to take to turn the curve
How it all fits together
Community Strategy
Outcome = Prosperous City
Economic Strategy
Indicator = % unemployed
CYP Plan
Outcome = Children Live Free
From Poverty
Flying Start
Indicator = % children living in
workless households
Project = Maintained Childcare
% parents helped to access
work, education or training
Outcomes & contributions align – indicators/measures make sense – appropriate
accountability – what matters is outcomes not plans and process
THE WELSH EPILEPSY UNIT
Service Description: The Welsh Epilepsy Unit is a tertiary referral centre for specialist epilepsy services in
South Wales. The immediate catchment population covered is 700,000, but many referrals are also taken from
elsewhere in Wales. The Unit offers a multidisciplinary approach to epilepsy care and offers a very broad range of
services to people with epilepsy, their families and carers.
DEFINED SERVICE USERS
Patients with a first suspected seizure or unexplained blackout
HEADLINE PERFORMANCE MEASURES
DATA DEVELOPMENT AGENDA
1. % seen by a specialist within 2 weeks
2. % DNA first seizure clinic
3. % have diagnostic tests within 4 weeks
4. % follow the correct pathway
1. % on inappropriate treatment
2. % have clinic letters sent within one week of clinic
3. Why patients DNA first seizure clinic
HOW ARE WE DOING?
% Seen b y a Sp ecialist wit hin 2 W eeks
% have d iag no st ic t est s w it hin 4 w eeks
% D N A F ir st Seiz ur e C linic
30%
25%
35%
15%
100%
30%
25%
20%
B asel i ne
20%
B as el i ne
P r edi ct i on
15%
P r edi c t i on
Cur ve t o t ur n
10%
Cur v e t o t ur n
80%
25%
B asel i ne
5%
0%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
P r edi ct i on
15%
Cur ve t o t ur n
10%
P r edi ct i on
40%
Cur ve t o t ur n
5%
5%
20%
0%
0%
0%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
STORY BEHIND THE BASELINES
Clinic capacity – 1 clinic per week with 5 patient slots
Unpredictable demand
Small MDT – unable to cover absence to prevent clinic cancellation
Low frequency of clinics causes delay if appointment not suitable
Clinic booked by Epilepsy Unit admin staff – if admin staff on leave clinic slots not
filled
Consultant triage’s fax referrals – delay if unavailable
Patient anxiety
Stigma attached to Epilepsy
Patients put off by unit name – diagnosis seems pre-determined
Concerns re implications e.g. diving
B asel i ne
60%
20%
10%
% f o llo w co r r ect p at hway
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
PARTNERS WHO CAN HELP US DO BETTER
Emergency Unit/MEAU, Radiology, Neurophysiology, Medical records, A&C staff,
Consultants, Ambulance Trust, Cardiology, Psychology, Care of the Elderly,
Neurosurgery, Prison, Voluntary Sector, CELT, Practice Nurses, Family members/
witnesses, Drug and Alcohol Services, Occupational Health, Referral Management
Centre, Obstetrics.
WHAT WE PROPOSE TO DO TO IMPROVE PERFORMANCE
 Develop nurse led Emergency Unit assessment service
 Develop nurse led first seizure clinics
 Enable specialist nurse referral for EEG
 Change the name of the Epilepsy unit
POPULATION
Children aged 0-3yrs 11 months with an eligible post
code, resident in one of the eight Cardiff Flying Start
catchment areas.
Population
Scorecard
OUTCOME
Flying Start Children are Healthy & Thriving
Headline Indicators (Bellwethers)
DATA DEVELOPMENT AGENDA
•% FS Children assessed, scoring >2 deviations below their
chronological age on the ‘Schedule of Growing Skills Assessment
at 2yrs (21-29 mths) & at 3yrs (33-41 mths)
•% FS Children completing primary immunisations
•% FS Children fully immunised to schedule at 47 mths
•% FS Families who respond to questionnaire, reporting that FS
has helped THEIR CHILD ‘a lot or more’
•% FS Children with a BMI below the 91st percentile and
above the 2nd percentile at 36 months
•% FS Children scoring >2 deviations below their
chronological age on the ‘hearing & language skills SOGS
Assessment ‘ when aged (a) between 21-29 mths & (b)
33-41 mths
HOW ARE WE DOING?
% Children scoring at/above or below chronological age
% Children assessed at 2 & 3yrs, scoring at/above or below their
chronological age (1st April 2009 - 31st March 2010)
100
80
80%
60
70%
%
60%
40
%
50%
20
2 Years
40%
3 Years
0
30%
20%
10%
0%
Adam Glan- Green Herbe Moun Shire St Trelai Wind
sdow Yrway
rt
t
newto Mary Catch sor
% Below Ch. Age
66
8
52
26
36
20
35
35
17
% At/Above Ch. Age
33
91
48
73
63
80
64
65
82
Catchment
% At Above Chron. Age
% Below Chron. Age
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
% 4 yr old FS
50%
Population
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Children Born 1/10/06-31/10/06
% Uptake of % Uptake % Uptake
Completed MMR, HIB, MMR & HIB
Primary
MENC
Catch-Up
Courses Booster &
Imms
PNE Imms
% Parents responding to questionnaire, reporting that Flying Start
has helped their child with:
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
DECEMBER 2009 - 38 out of
140 questionnaires returned
(27%)
MARCH 2010 - 21 out of 98
questionnaires returned (22%)
Sp
ee
ch
Be
ha
vi
So
ou
cia
r
lS
kil
ls
Co
nf
id
en
ce
Le
ar
ni
ng
To
i
l
et
Ea
in
tin
g
g
ha
G
Ph
en
bi
ts
er
ys
al
ica
He
lD
al
ev
th
el
op
m
en
t
% FS Children Fully Immunised at 47 months
% answered "a lot" or "a huge amount"
HOW ARE WE DOING (Con’t)?
JULY 2010 - 31 out of 182
questionnaires returned (17%)
Immunisations
STORY BEHIND THE BASELINE
PARTNERS WHO CAN HELP US
•Children who had their 1st SOGS II assessment at 3 yrs were born in 2006/7, prior to the initiation of
the FS Programme. These are children that would have had very limited exposure to FS
interventions. In comparison the children who had their 1st SOGS at 2yrs were born in 2007/8 & would
have had greater exposure to FS interventions. The trend line indicates that children having greater
exposure to FS are more likely to be developing normally. Initial analysis needs to be treated with
caution, as we need to be certain that SOGS assessment are being applied consistently SOGS scores
shows marked developmental variations across catchments, with some children in particular
catchments scoring lower than average on particular skills sets.
FS Service Managers & Teams; FS
Catchment Schools; Early Years
Forum; Childcare Settings; Childcare
Workforce Development Team;
Parents; GP Practices
•Schools are telling us that FS children are entering nursery classes with good language &
communication skills, are settling quickly and are more independent that their non FS peers.
WHAT ARE WE DOING & WHAT IS
OUR RESOURCE
•The introduction of mandatory training for all FS practitioners on supporting and developing childrens
language & communication is possibly having an impact on practice. Childcare settings are also being
encouraged to take up and apply the ‘Learning Language & Loving It’ training and we think that this is
starting to improve practice.
•Develop a referral pathway for children with
additional needs
•Parents are reporting that FS is helping their children to be more confident and sociable and that they
are learning more, but more could be done to support parents in developing their childrens language
skills; relationships and managing behavioural issues.
•Interrogate SOGS & Parental questionnaire
data to establish trend lines & what might
help parents more
• Immunisation data suggests that parents are good at taking their children for Primary Course &
Booster immunisations but that it drops below 50% for the final MMR & HIB catch up immunisations.
•Develop a standardised induction process
for all FS staff, which includes compulsory
training on language development and
behaviour management strategies.
•Explore development of ANCo role for FS
childcare settings
Cardiff Flying Start Parents Plus Service : Performance Evaluation Report 2009-10
Service Description: The Parents Plus service is part of the Parenting core strand of the National Flying Start
Programme. The Parents Plus Service consists of one Senior Educational Psychologist; three Senior Home Liaison
Officers; four Home Liaison Officers; and two p/t Administration Officers. In addition, there is one f/t Specialist
Home Liaison Officer (Homeless) and two Home Liaison Officers (former Sure Start) It has a budget of £312,972
and aims to offer time-limited, targeted, home-based parenting interventions in each of the 8 Cardiff Flying
Start catchments reaching approximately 110 families annually.
Purpose of Service
•
•
•
Assessment of child’s functioning within family and community context
Agreement with parents on appropriate changes to implement within the home
Evaluate improvements in early play skills; in family interactions and relationships; and in the child’s behaviour
Headline Performance Measures
1.
2.
3.
Perceived improvements by parents in play/devt; relationships; and/or behaviour
Perceived improvements by HLO in play/devt; relationships; and/or behaviour
Use of behaviour techniques by staff with EY children 6 months after PP+ Behaviour Training course
How Are We Doing?
Data Development Agenda
DD1 - % Families referred (needing the intervention) who take it up
DD2 - % Families receive Initial Assessment Visit within five weeks of referral
Story Behind (last 3 years) Performance
Parents Plus has been through a period of transition: from earlier Sure Start processes to greater Flying Start standards
and requirements. It has been an exciting and challenging period. Forming a coherent induction period and regular
supervision has ensured new HLOs have become established within the team. The additional supervision and monitoring
by Senior HLO have contributed to the successful and relatively smooth move to Flying Start functioning. Unfortunately,
significant personnel changes and alterations in working practices by other partners, has had knock-on effects to our
referrals and integrated working. Over time, this has been improving. Staff illness and absenteeism has also interfered
with our capacity to engage with some families. The developments within the EYFT(Homeless) has ensured an innovative
multiagency team approach to working across city hostels, including within Flying Start areas.
Research by Cardiff University followed up families which had received Parents Plus interventions up to six years ago.
Parental interviews confirmed the effectiveness of our behavioural techniques; and their long lasting influence. This was
in part due to empowering the parents to take ownership of the changes. There was evidence that the families referred
to Parents Plus have had more entrenched difficulties and dysfunctional patterns of family life. This has meant they
tend to be more difficult to engage and to intervene with to implement change. Nevertheless, evaluations of changes
following Parents Plus interventions [ Before v After ] continue to show better play/developmental progress, benefits for
family relationships and improvements in behaviour management. Parents Plus contributes to improving the wellbeing
and progress of Flying Start children through high quality training to EY staff working with young children.
Partners Who Can Help
Us Do Better
Referral criteria explicit
and awareness raising:•Childcare staff
•Health Visitors
•Children’s services
•Nursery staff
•Play team
•Home Start
•CAMHS/PSS
What We Propose To Do To Improve Performance In The Next Year
Low Cost/No Cost Idea:
-Provide “telephone clinic” weekly when Senior HLO will be available at base
-Print a leaflet for parents attending all settings on “Building Better Behaviour Together”
-Publish article on Parents Plus approach
-Re-establish termly visits to all Nursery settings [school-links]
-Posters for childcare settings about 1. referral to Parents Plus and
2. self referral by families to Parents Plus
Off the Wall Idea:
-Develop a training manual for childcare staff with introductory, intermediate and
-advanced modules on Understanding and Managing Behaviour in Early Years Settings
-& identify funding source to publish and disseminate
-put together video examples of “before and after”
-Team approach with gypsy-traveller families through childcare session
Distribution of Parents Plus
service activities
Home Interventions
PNP facilitating
FS Training
Behaviour advice into
sessions
Psychology into FS
EYFT Homeless
Sandfields Family Support Project REPORT CARD : Performance Accountability
Compliance monitoring and outcome data reporting
Please note: demo example only
The Service will contribute to the Core Aims and the Local Authority’s Vision for Children and Young People .
How well did we do it
Early Intervention Service :










Reduction in risk factors related to offending
Increase in protective factors related to offending
Increased presence of positive role models and positive
peer influences in children’s lives
Increase in positive coping strategies within children and
young people
Increased levels of self esteem within children and young
people
Increased levels of emotional well -being
Increased engagement between parents and other relevant
services
Improved parenting skills
Increased numbers of children engaged with education
Increased parental participation in the education of their
children
90 referrals received for Summer Playschemes
18 parenting courses delivered- focus: resolving conflict
and difficulties
12 Child Care:- Creche
96 Child Care:- Playgroups
39 Summer Playschemes
91 Drop-in
Action for Children has identified and are working
with 43 indicators to evidence our contribution to
achieving outcomes defined in the
Wales Core Aims
Action for Children will work with our Partners to maximise customer outcomes as measured by our “Did we make a difference”.
Did we make a difference
% of C/YP who report they are more able to deal with conflict and difficulties
% of C/YP who develop positive coping strategies
% of C/ YP who report increased confidence and self esteem
% of C/YP who report they now more able deal with bullying
% of C/YP who remain safely in their own homes
% increase in school attendance
% reduction in offending behaviour
% reduction in risk behaviours
% parents and carers who report they are more able to deal with conflict and difficulties
% parents and carers who report improved relationship with their C
/YP
% parents and carers who report more confidence when dealing with their C
/YP educational needs
Improved outcomes for children and young people – Qtr 1 2009/10 – cohort 52
Enjoy the best possible
health and are free from
abuse , victimisation and
exploitation – The C/YP
recognises their own
health and
developmental needs
Enjoy the best possible
health and are free from
abuse , victimisation and
exploitation – There is
an improvement in the
C/YP’s emotional
wellbeing
% referrals responded to in (x) days
% of parents and carers completing parenting courses
% parents and carers who report satisfaction with
programmes
% C/YP engaged in safe activities within their community
% C/YP who have re-engaged in education
% parents / carers actively participating in C/YP
educational reviews/plans
% C/YP who report satisfaction with the service
How much did we do
Enjoy the best possible
health and are free from
abuse , victimisation and
exploitation – The risks
to the C /YP are known
and protective factors
are in place
Are not disadvantaged
by poverty – The young
person has suitable
accommodation
A comprehensive range of
education and learning
opportunities – The C /YP
achieves satisfactory
attendance at school ,
further education , training
or in employment
Profile of Service Users on Discharge from Action for Children’s Service
Are not disadvantaged
by poverty – There is an
improvement in the child
or young person’s
practical life skills
Jacky Davies , Diane Hardy - September 2009 ©
How Can RBA Help Us?
1. Planning & performance management framework to
deliver on collaborative duties
2. Planning & performance management framework
for funded projects (e.g. Cymorth)
3. Organise and explain how population and
performance levels fit together e.g. CYP Plan and
Cymorth projects
4. Make sense of multitude of partnerships and plans
– what matters is results not processes!
5. The future – less money, less small specific grants,
more emphasis on outcomes and collaboration
Implementing Results Based
Accountability
• Leadership at a senior level
• Championship by a senior project manager
and from champions at different
organisational levels
• Ownership of a commitment to recognising
success as better outcomes, not outputs
• Partnership and multi-agency working.
RBA is hard to implement where
partnerships are not invested in
Resources
• Mark Friedman Trying Hard Is Not Good Enough
(Trafford Publishing, 2005)
• www.raguide.org – website including
implementation guide and examples
• www.resultsaccountability.com – website
including papers on Results Accountability and
links to other resources
Results Based Accountability
Charlotte Drury
Questions?

similar documents