Budget Success

Blueprint for drafting an effective budget

With Washington facing a potential $2 billion budget deficit, now is the time to take a fresh look at the state’s budgeting practices and the decision-making process that governs state programs. A responsible state budget must be limited to providing essential services as effectively and efficiently as possible.

There are three steps to crafting a responsible budget: 1) review agency mission statements, 2) review agency goals and performance measures, and 3) review agency programs to ensure that they comply with their mission statement, goals, and performance measures.

Review agency mission statements

To make budget decisions clear for legislators, all state agencies are required to provide a mission statement, program goals, and performance measures to the Office of Financial Management (OFM). This information makes it possible to determine which programs government should offer and by which agency.

Agreeing with an agency’s mission statement is not vital to determining if the agency is properly spending allocated funds. Leaving the question of whether an agency has a good or bad mission statement aside, it should not be providing any programs that do not directly relate to its stated purpose.

To illustrate this point, examine two similar programs offered by the Department of Health and the Department of Ecology.

The Department of Health’s (DOH) mission statement reads, "... to protect and improve the health of people in Washington State by identifying significant factors which enhance or threaten health, developing policies and promising combinations of activities to address them and assuring that actions are taken."

Based on this mission statement we ask: is the agency’s Drinking Water Protection program relevant? With over 103 full-time employees (FTEs) at a biennial expense of $25,815,668, the program seeks to, ". . . provide technical assistance, inspection, and water system plan review for public water systems . . . protect the quality of drinking water . . . also contribute to the conservation and reuse efforts associated with Salmon Recovery."

With the exception of the salmon recovery aspects of the program, one could argue that this program complies with the agency’s mission statement.

The Department of Ecology’s (DOE) mission is, " . . . to protect, preserve, and enhance Washington’s environment, and promote the sustainable management of the air, land, and water for the benefit of current and future generations."

Keeping this mission statement in mind, look at a program within the DOE almost identical to DOH’s Drinking Water Protection program. Ecology’s Protection of Water Quality program – with over 212 FTEs and a biennial price tag of $41,403,292 – seeks to ". . . prevent and limit pollution in all Washington waters." It also "funds local government facilities, projects, and activities, and provides technical assistance and educational services. Its objectives are to protect human health, the state economy, and habitat for fish and wildlife."

Even though the Protection of Water Quality program appears to fall within the DOE mission, questions arise. Why do we have separate programs in two different agencies (employing over 315 FTE’s at a biennial expense of $67,218,960), both concerned with the quality of water in our state? The Drinking Water Protection program naturally fits the stated purpose of the Protection of Water Quality program. The two programs should be merged into one program, under one agency, cutting the amount of overhead and expense.

These are the types of questions that must be asked during the budgeting process after a critical review of each agency’s mission statement and offered programs.

Review agency goals and performance measures

The mission statements, goals, and performance measures for each state agency are available on OFM’s website at http://www.ofm.wa.gov/budget01/recsum/contents.htm under the classification of Agency Recommendation Summaries. To access, click on the agency of choice and then click on the "Performance Measures" link at the top of the page. When reviewing this information, it is important to compare goals and performance measures with an agency’s mission statement. If they aren’t directly related, chances are the agency’s programs will be unrelated as well.

Review agency programs

The mission statement and goals of each state agency should be compared with the programs it offers. Agency programs can be obtained by visiting: http://www.ofm.wa.gov/activity/contents.htm. When viewing the various programs, one should keep in mind the stated purpose of each agency to determine if the programs should be offered or managed by the agency in question, a different agency, or the private sector.

By using these resources, a responsible and deliberate accounting of all state funds can be successfully achieved. If lawmakers want to solve Washington’s current budget deficit and avoid future deficits it is essential that they closely examine how agencies are spending allocated funds, and whether or not the programs offered comply with agency mission statements. It is also critical that an agency’s missions and programs are, in fact, core functions of government. (EFF’s Stewardship Series shows how to determine core governing principles. Available upon request). It is important to remember that managing a responsible budget is the first and foremost duty of all legislators. Legislative success depends on carrying out that duty in an efficient and accountable way.

Evergreen Freedom Foundation P.O. Box 552, Olympia, WA 98507 Phone: (360) 956-3482, Fax: (360) 352-1874 Email: effwa@effwa.org