Enhancing Governance with Key National Indicators in the 21st Century

1. Key National Indicator Systems: A U.S. Perspective Bernice Steinhardt Director, Strategic Issues U.S. Government Accountability Office

2. The 21st Century: A Period of Profound Transition • Changing security threats • Long-term fiscal and environmental sustainability • Economic recovery and restored growth • Global interdependency • Demographic and other social change • Advancements in science and technology • Public expectations of government

3. Implications for U.S. Government • Many of the current policies, programs, functions, and activities are based on conditions that existed decades ago and are not well aligned with 21st century realities. • We cannot afford to continue to do business as usual. • Accomplishing U.S. government goals will increasingly rely on strengthened mechanisms for collaboration.

4. Key National Indicators and Governance in the 21st Century • U.S. government increasingly has to partner with other governments, other levels of government, private and not-for-profit sectors, to achieve results. Examples: • Disaster planning, response and recovery • Environmental protection • Public health • Need tools and metrics to link efforts

5. Role of Key National Indicator System • Inform strategic planning (link shared purposes) • Enhance performance and accountability • Inform congressional oversight and decision making • Facilitate oversight, and stimulate greater citizen engagement

6. History of Key National Indicators in the United States • Numerous sets of national-level indicators in response to changing needs and conditions: • Economic indicators developed during the Great Depression of the 1930s • Growth in social programs in the 1960s drove need for social indicators (e.g., education, health) • Concern for environmental protection led to interest in developing environmental data

7. Subnational Indicator Systems in U.S. • While lacking a national indicator system, considerable interest and activity at the city, state and regional levels during last 20 years • Learning-oriented: information about social, cultural, economic, environmental conditions, presented with little or no commentary or analysis, for educational purposes • Outcome-oriented: indicators used to monitor and encourage progress toward goals • About 150 community, state or regional indicator projects across the U.S.

8. Efforts to Develop National Indicator System for U.S. • GAO, in cooperation with National Academy of Sciences, convened forum in 2003 to discuss whether and how to create key national indicator system for U.S. • About 60 leaders in accountability, business, education, NGO, government, labor, media, minority, scientific, and statistics communities • Efforts continued over next several years under leadership of National Academy • Independent non-profit organization created in 2007: State of the USA

9. State of the USA(www.stateoftheusa.org) • Envisioned as public-private partnership, supported by government and non-government sectors • All sectors involved in achieving national goals have a stake in outcomes • Vital to have shared understanding in order to link efforts towards common goal • Expect to develop about 300 key indicators, including some number of composite indicators in 12 core domains (e.g., environment) and 12 cross-cutting domains (e.g, competitiveness) • Created 20 key health indicators in 2009

10. Congressional Action to Develop a KNI System • In March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-148) included a provision mandating • the National Academy to establish a U.S. key national indicator system through its own institutional capability or in partnership with an independent, private, nonprofit organization; and • creation of a bipartisan Commission on Key National Indicators composed of eight members, appointed by congressional leadership, to provide oversight of such a system, among other responsibilities.

11. GAO Role in Legislation • Act also directed GAO to study previous work conducted by public agencies, private organizations, or foreign countries with respect to best practices for a key national indicator system. • GAO study also subject of a request from Senate committee chairman to examine other KNI systems and their implications for federal government.

12. Research Objectives for GAO Study • Examine trends in development and maintenance of indicator systems and experiences of key stakeholders • Identify how indicator systems have been used by governments and stakeholders in policy and management decisions • Identify factors affecting development and use of indicator systems and their potential implications for (a) the organization responsible for developing and overseeing a key national indicator system and (b) the federal government as data provider and user • Report to be issued March 2011

13. Scope of GAO Study: Case Study Selection Criteria • Comprehensiveness - a mixture of economic, environmental, and social and cultural indicators. • Longevity - in existence for at least 5 years and currently in operation. • Outcome-oriented – measures of progress towards achievement of stated goals or outcomes. • Connection with a governmental entity that uses the system to establish or modify programmatic priorities or to gauge progress in priority areas.

14. Indicator Systems Selected as Case Studies • National: Australia, Switzerland, United Kingdom • State: Virginia; Victoria, Australia • Local: Boston, MA; King County, WA • Focused reviews of other indicator systems: • Albuquerque, NM; Jacksonville, FL;Truckee, CA; Oregon; the European Union, Lisbon Indicators; Finland; Latvia.

15. Potential Roles for GAO in Future • Assess development of indicators or system • Audit quality of information, including validity and reliability • Audit effectiveness of KNI system in achieving objectives • Use indicator data to help target improvement opportunities

16. For Further Information • About GAO—www.gao.gov • Prior GAO work on Key National Indicators • Informing Our Nation: Improving How to Understand and Assess the USA’s Position and Progresswww.gao.gov/products/GAO-05-1 • Controller General Forum on Key National Indicators www.gao.gov/products/GAO-03-672SP • Key National Indicators Mandate • H.R. 3590, Public Law 111-148, Title V, Subtitle G, Section 5605 • Available at www.thomas.loc.gov