THE GOVERNMENT PERFORMANCE PROJECT Report Card: Alabama FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT: D+ Alabama has difficulty estimating expenditures, especially for Medicaid. Its legislative leaders don’t seem overly concerned about shortfalls, though, and are willing to make supplemental appropriations. If cash is short, they cut low-priority items. Definitions of low priority, however, have landed the state in some trouble. Alabama is under court order to fix its prisons and mental health services, and faces a similar threat in child welfare. “We don’t provide the level of services that are needed until we get sued,” says a legislative staffer. The legislature has finessed legal funding requirements for the state’s empty rainy day fund by passing an annual “financial emergency resolution.” Indeed, returns on Alabama’s investments are good. But there’s little oversight, and the Examiner of Public Accounts has expressed concerns about uncollateralized deposits in banks. Alabama’s debt burden, historically low, is rising, and there are no written debt policies. A few bright spots: The state’s pensions are fully funded; Alabama is moving toward compliance with generally accepted accounting principles; financial reporting on revenues is done monthly; and legislative fiscal officers have access to online information on a daily basis. CAPITAL MANAGEMENT: D- There’s no capital budget or master plan in Alabama. There is no statewide capital inventory, though agencies presumably maintain their own. Each agency plans for its own needs, and bond issues are passed as needed. Bill Newton, assistant finance director, says the system makes sense, given the state’s decentralized management. Project requests tend to be funded on the basis of “whoever has the most pull,” says a legislative staffer. Departments prepare five-year capital plans, and some of them track projects. But others, such as a number of state universities, do no tracking whatsoever. Many agencies have totally ignored both routine maintenance and major maintenance and repairs. The four-year universities indicate that in the past two years, 100 percent of maintenance costs have been deferred. HUMAN RESOURCES: C- Human resource managers are trying to do a professional job in Alabama. They’ve moved to cut down on the number of job classifications and are trying out ways of getting longer lists of applicants delivered to agencies. The state has a new employee appraisal system. But personnel managers run into obstacles at every turn. There’s almost no centralized planning. It’s needed. The governor and legislature agreed last year to cut the workforce with very generous early-retirement incentives; the opportunity was open from August 1 to September 1, and some 2,000 employees suddenly left state government, with no statewide plans for filling necessary positions. The legislature decided not to fund the incentives, so agencies had to divert cash from hiring needs to make good on the incentive promises. Alabama faces at least three major lawsuits claiming discrimination in promotion or hiring practices. As a result of one suit, all the exams it develops for new applicants in the Department of Transportation require review by plaintiff’s attorneys. State government pay compares favorably to the private sector, but cost-of-living increases were withheld for several years—until this past election year, when whopping 8 percent raises were allocated. Training is one relatively strong point. For example, Alabama’s new appraisal system was introduced with training for employees and managers. MANAGING FOR RESULTS: F Alabama’s legislature requires that the governor produce a strategic performance measurement plan. But so far, the legislature has ignored it. The same has been true of a four-year-old law to begin some pilots in performance budgeting. The pilots concluded in fiscal year 1997, but the legislature paid little attention. “Our legislature does not seem to be dissatisfied with our appropriations process,” says Newton, the assistant finance director. Some agencies produce output measures for their own use. And all are required to fill out a performance-related form four times a year. But most put very little effort into this process, and some do little more than copy over the previous quarter’s form. The House of Representatives’ fiscal office does research-oriented projects, but there’s no one in state government doing full-time program evaluation. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY: D Alabama appointed its first chief information officer in March 1997. Last September, a new CIO, Eugene Akers, took over the job. “The only way I can go is up,” says Akers, who acknowledges that the state has historically done an abysmal job of managing IT. In his few months of service, Akers has at least lifted the IT process above outright failure level. But he still has an enormous job ahead of him. Major systems provide minimal information to managers, and agencies maintain their own databases of mission-related data. Though Akers wants to move toward standardization, there is no consistent informational architecture. Many agencies historically bought technology to resolve individual problems without planning or project management. Akers is introducing Alabama to the concept of strategic information technology planning for the first time. He is also forcing agencies to produce business plans before they are allowed to make major purchases. AVERAGE GRADE: D GOVERNORS Fob James Jr. (Republican, 1995-99; also served 1978-83) Don Siegelman (Democrat, took office 1999) LEGISLATURE House—69 Democrats, 36 Republicans Senate—23 Democrats, 12 Republicans Main introduction page | Governing home page Copyright © 1999, Congressional Quarterly, Inc. Reproduction in any form without the written permission of the publisher is prohibited. Governing and City & State are registered trademarks of Congressional Quarterly, Inc.