Marin County Grand Jury • 2014-2015

2014/2015 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Managing for Results: a Fine Tool in Need of Sharpening Report Date: June 19,

Published: June 25, 2015 21 pages
View Original PDF

Findings and Recommendations 7 findings

F1
The Marin County government’s MFR program is not an integral part of the strategic planning process.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
The Marin County Board of Supervisors strengthens the Managing for Results Program with meaningful goals and measurements that emphasize major outcomes or eliminates the MFR Program.
F2
The current quantitative measurements of the MFR program are not aligned with the important goals of the Communities described in the strategic plan.
Related Recommendations (2)
R1
The Marin County Board of Supervisors strengthens the Managing for Results Program with meaningful goals and measurements that emphasize major outcomes or eliminates the MFR Program.
R2
The Marin County Board of Supervisors designates a County executive to be responsible for the MFR Program including the following: • Build new goals and outcomes. • Develop a dashboard to publicly display Community group and department level metrics. • Develop an MFR training program ranging from basic orientation to advanced certifications. • Develop cross-department teams to define community goals and implement improvement initiatives using established problem solving techniques. • Conduct resident and business surveys to provide insight into how County services are viewed by the consumers of those services.
F3
The Board of Supervisors has not utilized the MFR program to improve Marin County services. Walters, Abrahams, and Fountain, Managing for Results, 13.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
The Marin County Board of Supervisors strengthens the Managing for Results Program with meaningful goals and measurements that emphasize major outcomes or eliminates the MFR Program.
F4
Department managers are not using MFR metrics as an integral part of a continuous improvement activity; a majority of department metrics show little or no history of improvement.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
The Marin County Board of Supervisors designates a County executive to be responsible for the MFR Program including the following: • Build new goals and outcomes. • Develop a dashboard to publicly display Community group and department level metrics. • Develop an MFR training program ranging from basic orientation to advanced certifications. • Develop cross-department teams to define community goals and implement improvement initiatives using established problem solving techniques. • Conduct resident and business surveys to provide insight into how County services are viewed by the consumers of those services.
F5
The County fails to portray its data in a modern multimedia form to transmit information to its employees and the public, e.g., it does not use a dashboard or similar displays of data.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
The Marin County Board of Supervisors designates a County executive to be responsible for the MFR Program including the following: • Build new goals and outcomes. • Develop a dashboard to publicly display Community group and department level metrics. • Develop an MFR training program ranging from basic orientation to advanced certifications. • Develop cross-department teams to define community goals and implement improvement initiatives using established problem solving techniques. • Conduct resident and business surveys to provide insight into how County services are viewed by the consumers of those services.
F6
MFR reports do not compare benchmark results of other similar government entities as a tool for evaluation.
No recommendations for this finding
F7
The Marin County government has not conducted a resident survey in six years, and the Grand Jury found no evidence of business surveys being conducted, thereby missing the opportunity to gather critical feedback to guide County efforts.
No recommendations for this finding

Conclusions 1