Grading the Cities introduction THE GOVERNMENT PERFORMANCE PROJECT Report Card: Washington, D.C. Revenue Rank: 3 Form of Government: Mayor-Council Mayor: Anthony A. Williams (took office 1999) City Council: 13 members (8 elected by ward, 5 at large) FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT: B- Management here is complicated, as it always has been, by the city’s responsibility to perform many services that are handled elsewhere at the state level. This leaves it dealing with the U.S. Congress, instead of a state legislature, and depending on the political winds, Congress can be unsympathetic, to say the least. But that does not excuse a long record of malfeasance. For years, D.C. finances were a shambles, resulting in a near fiscal default several years ago. Anthony A. Williams helped turn the situation around as the city’s chief financial officer; now, as mayor, he is trying to institutionalize the improvements. He is getting results: The $332 million accumulated deficit has been eliminated, and there was a fund balance of 2.5 percent at the end of 1998. The budgetary cushion is slight, but is being built up. The four-year financial plan is excellent — it could be used as a model for other cities — although short-term revenue estimates still come out wide of the mark. General fund spending has been under control. D.C. is trying to improve contracting as well — establishing a uniform system of monitoring and evaluation, for example. This is needed. The old decentralized approach had multiple flaws, with specifications poorly laid out and managers often losing track of contracts altogether. HUMAN RESOURCES: B- Major changes here, too: This was once perhaps the nation’s most bloated civic work force, but there’s been a 10 percent decrease in staffing in recent years. This was needed, but it created problems: So many departures in a short time led to a void in historical knowledge. “I don’t think anyone anticipated how many people would take advantage of the early retirements that were offered,” says a veteran HR official. Management now makes serious efforts to solicit workers’ opinions and reward them for good performance. Hiring has become speedier, and the salary cap has been raised to attract more experienced managers. But problems linger. Work force analysis has suffered from poor data, and recruitment efforts have had trouble keeping up with those of far richer governments in the adjoining suburbs. The job-classification system mandated by Congress is a mess, with 1,889 titles and rigid standards that make it difficult to hire the best person. If you want to be a draftsman in D.C, the job description doesn’t talk about software skills — it focuses instead on an ability to read old-fashioned blueprints. A whole new set of job standards is being prepared. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY: C+ Amazing. A year ago, D.C. government still had 8,000 rotary phones. The city’s 541 business locations had no integrated electronic backbone at all. The city was suffering from a decade during which technology was starved for attention. But signs of progress are all around. For the first time, there are real IT standards and a chief technology officer to manage them. Agencies cannot purchase equipment that’s not on the standardized list. The Y2K-remediation process purged many old systems, replacing them with modern technology. Of course, dramatic IT change can’t happen in a nanosecond. Training is still insufficient. Agencies have difficulty transmitting data back and forth. And obsolete data doesn’t become useful overnight just because there is new software to move it around. CAPITAL MANAGEMENT: C The District’s capital improvement plan stands out as one of the most candid assessments of infrastructure needs anywhere in the country. The candor points up just how bad things have been here, however. As one official notes, the city is suffering from a “disinvestment in capital infrastructure over the past 20 years.” The money that was spent was spent inefficiently. Projects were approved and funded long before they were ready for construction. When it came to maintenance, things were, if possible, even worse. D.C. is under court order to replace leaking roofs at most of its schools. It does not really know how bad its other building problems are because, as its report admits, there is a “lack of actual maintenance funding data.” All of this does appear to be changing. The District has made solid steps at improving project management, with central capital managers assisting the agencies to provide meaningful project data. The city is implementing feasibility studies to ensure that projects are ready before workers start breaking ground. MANAGING FOR RESULTS: C+ One of the mayor’s first priorities was to deliver immediate service improvements to beleaguered D.C. residents. Some 42 action items are now targeted, such as establishing a call center so that citizens with complaints wouldn’t have to deal with “a dozen numbers, half of which didn’t work,” says Norman S. Dong, interim city administrator. Now the administration has moved to longer-term issues. It has required agencies to come up with their own plans and goals, and to work together on common issues. The departments of health; consumer and regulatory affairs; and public works have joined forces against rodent-infestation. “Part of the reason why the District government has not performed well in the past,” says Dong, “is that agencies have operated in their silos, with very little interagency cooperation.” All this sounds terrific, and D.C. gets an A for effort. But the initiatives are brand-new; and it remains to be seen how they will work. It takes years to develop good MFR systems, and D.C. has a long way to go in developing the indicators and the data to feed into them. AVERAGE GRADE: C+ Copyright © 2000, Congressional Quarterly, Inc. Reproduction in any form without the written permission of the publisher is prohibited. Governing, City & State and Governing.com are trademarks of Congressional Quarterly, Inc.