1. law, govt and politics
2. government

LOCAL MONEYBALL
FOR GOVERNMENT:
A Brief Overview
APRIL 2015
Invest in
What Works
Policy
Series
RESULTS FOR AMERICA: INVEST IN WHAT WORKS
FROM THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
AND CO-FOUNDER OF RESULTS FOR AMERICA,
MICHELE JOLIN
Billy Beane, general manager of the Oakland A’s, transformed baseball by ignoring the scouts
and using data to build championship-contending teams despite limited budgets. Across
all levels of government, leaders today are using data and evidence to ensure that taxpayer
dollars are invested in what works. At Results for America, we are improving outcomes for
young people, their families, and their communities by encouraging government leaders to
play Moneyball—that is, to build evidence about what works, invest in practices, policies, and
programs that work, and shift public resources away from practices, policies, and programs that
consistently fail to achieve measureable results.
In 2012, we launched a national Moneyball for Government campaign, targeting federal policymakers to build support for the What Works agenda. We anchored our campaign in an “Invest in
What Works” scorecard, highlighting the extent to which federal departments and agencies are
using data, evidence, and evaluation when making budget, policy, and management decisions.
We are pleased to see positive change happening in the federal government. Between FY14
and FY15, almost $500 million was shifted toward evidence-based, results-driven programs and
policies at the federal level.
In September 2014, Results for America, with funding support from the Laura and John Arnold
Foundation, launched the Local Moneyball for Government Fellowship. Our 11 senior local
government leaders are part of an expanding national community that is committed to playing
Moneyball at all levels of government. They’re playing Moneyball because the intentional use of
data and evidence leads to reliably better outcomes for the individuals and communities they
serve.
Using examples from all across the country, this playbook offers readers an introduction to
Moneyball for Government—what it is, why it matters, and how to play. I am hopeful that the
information that follows will help inspire and guide cities all across the country to invest in what
works. Let’s play Moneyball!
Sincerely,
Michele Jolin
RESULTS FOR AMERICA: INVEST IN WHAT WORKS 2
PLAYING MONEYBALL
Throughout the country, more local leaders are demanding that public policy and funding
decisions be driven by the best possible data and evidence. This approach, called Moneyball
for Government, is changing the way cities manage for outcomes and improve the lives of
residents. Given the importance of ensuring that tax dollars are invested as effectively and
efficiently as possible and the imperative to make progress on our nation’s great challenges,
local leaders are playing Moneyball to ensure that public funds are invested in what works. Too
often, even during times of profound budgetary constraints, programs with little or no evidence
of results continue to receive funding, contributing to a lack of trust in the government’s ability
to solve problems. On the other hand, investing public resources based on data and evidence
can improve results, bridge partisan divides, build the momentum needed to solve problems,
and increase public confidence in government.
When we talk about Moneyball for Government, we mean that city leaders are improving
outcomes for young people, their families, and communities by putting the following three
principles into action:
»»
Build evidence about the practices, policies, and programs that will achieve the most
effective and efficient results so that policymakers can make better decisions;
»»
Invest limited taxpayer dollars in practices, policies, and programs that use data,
evidence, and evaluation to demonstrate they work; and
»»
Direct funds away from practices, policies, and programs that consistently fail to
achieve measurable outcomes.
And we know a city leader is putting the Moneyball Principles into practice when they take
the following steps, developed by Bloomberg Philanthropies as part of its What Works Cities
program:
#1 Commit. City leaders develop citywide strategic goals and make public
commitments to achieving them through the increased use of data and evidence.
#2 Measure. City leaders develop and implement the data, evidence, and evaluation
infrastructure necessary to be able to measure their progress toward meeting their
strategic goals.
#3 Review. City leaders consistently review progress toward meeting their strategic
goals and make necessary corrections.
#4 Act. City leaders use data and evidence when making funding, policy, and
management decisions.
When city leaders play Moneyball, they develop an insatiable appetite for collecting evidence
about what is and is not working. They review evidence, consider its implications and, where
appropriate, shift money away from practices, policies, and programs that are underperforming
and toward those that are achieving desired outcomes. This playbook describes, using a handful
of practical examples, how local leaders across the country are using Moneyball for Government
principles to improve outcomes for their citizens.
RESULTS FOR AMERICA: INVEST IN WHAT WORKS 3
1. COMMIT
Public Commitment to Drive Results Through Data and Evidence
The first step in playing Moneyball is for city leaders to develop
citywide strategic goals and make powerful, public commitments
to achieving them through the increased use of data and evidence.
As a practical matter, this means publicly setting expectations on
the measurable progress a mayor intends to make. Local leaders
who play Moneyball speak to residents regularly about progress
on chosen priorities and use proven strategies with data and
evidence to illustrate opportunities and drive results. Presenting
concrete strategic goals—and measurable targets aligned with
those goals—sends a strong signal about a mayor’s vision for the
city and holds the mayor accountable for turning that vision into
reality.
Example:
Mayor Greg Fischer
Louisville Mayor Greg Fischer is committed to playing Moneyball.
Speaking about Louisville’s data-driven approach to government, Mayor Fischer stated, “Not
too long ago, ‘data’ was a four-letter-word around Louisville’s City Hall. No one talked about
it, no one understood it and most importantly no one benefited from it. But in 2011, we started
rethinking the way we used data in city government, and we’re already seeing compelling
results.” 1
Committed to establishing a culture and practice around results-driven management, Mayor
Fischer has defined 21 strategic priorities that serve to anchor his administration, including:
»»
Participate in the development and preservation of 5,000 new or rehabilitated quality
and affordable housing units by fiscal year 2018;
»»
Increase shared bike lanes threefold, from 20 miles to 60 miles, by 2019;
»»
Reduce the number of uninsured Louisville residents to 0; and
»»
Divert 90% of solid waste away from the landfill by 2042.2
Early in his first term in 2012, Mayor Fischer established the Office of Performance Improvement.
He appointed Theresa Reno-Weber as Louisville’s first ever Chief of Performance Improvement
and equipped her with the charge and resources to deliver. According to Reno-Weber, “With
the right support, data enables meaningful conversations about strategy and planning, which,
when aligned with the right incentives and skill-building opportunities, can create a culture of
continuous improvement. That is the true goal of government reform and the driving mission
of our work in Louisville.”3
RESULTS FOR AMERICA: INVEST IN WHAT WORKS 4
Local Moneyball All-Stars
The following mayors support the Moneyball for Government principles and have agreed to be
publicly identified as local Moneyball for Government All Stars (as of April 21):
»» Richard Berry, Mayor of Albuquerque
»» Greg Fischer, Mayor of Louisville
»» Kasim Reed, Mayor of Atlanta
»» Mitch Landrieu, Mayor New Orleans
»» Stephanie Rawlings-Blake,
Mayor of Baltimore
»» Bill De Blasio, Mayor of New York City
»» Martin Walsh, Mayor of Boston
»» Michael Bloomberg,
Former Mayor of New York City
»» Michael Hancock, Mayor of Denver
»» Michael Nutter, Mayor of Philadelphia
»» Karen Freeman-Wilson, Mayor of Gary
»» Angel Taveras, Former Mayor of Providence
»» Steven Goldsmith,
Former Mayor of Indianapolis
»» Ben McAdams, Mayor of Salt Lake County
»» Sly James, Mayor of Kansas City, Missouri
»» Eric Garcetti, Mayor of Los Angeles
»» Julian Castro, Former Mayor of San
Antonio, Current Secretary U.S. Department
of Housing and Urban Development
»» Ed Murray, Mayor of Seattle
2. MEASURE
Cities that play Moneyball advance their goals by measuring progress and outcomes, prioritizing
transparency, and using appropriate tools. At its core, this means cities are systematically
collecting information on key performance metrics relevant to city operations and services.
The type of metrics used matters. While the collection of local input and output metrics is
most common (e.g., providers of after-school programs report on the amount of funds spent
or number of teens completing the program), it is impossible to play Moneyball unless a city is
also collecting outcome metrics (e.g., providers of afterschool programs report annually on the
number of teens served who demonstrated improved achievement or graduated high school).
Stat
When local leaders play Moneyball, they participate in regular and consistent performance
management meetings to examine key output and outcome indicators.4 Effective citywide
performance management systems—often called “stat”—equip decision makers to understand
temporal trends, spot opportunities to scale, and take action when outcomes are unsatisfactory.5
While there is no one-size-fits-all approach, the most lauded stat or performance management
systems:
»»
Focus on established goals and outcome targets;
»»
Analyze and present updated and accurate information;
»»
Are regularly scheduled, cross-agency meetings convened by the mayor or his or her
senior team;
RESULTS FOR AMERICA: INVEST IN WHAT WORKS 5
»»
Are supported by dedicated staff who can collect data from multiple sources, analyze
it in advance of each meeting, and present it in compelling ways; and
»»
Include relentless follow-up and continuing assessment between meetings.
Example:
New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu announced an aggressive goal of reducing the number
of dilapidated or “blighted” properties by 10,000 in four years. “Blighted properties represent
a remarkable opportunity for community development, economic growth, and neighborhood
stability, but it’s going to take a holistic, all hands-on-deck approach to successfully tackle,” said
Mayor Landrieu.6
To advance Mayor Landrieu’s goals on blight, the city launched BlightStat, a citywide crossdepartmental performance management process modeled after the NYPD’s CompStat. At
monthly meetings, top city leaders and managers from various departments get together
to monitor progress, identify trends in the data, and determine the likelihood of meeting
performance targets. If the city is not meeting a particular target, the group collaboratively
identifies strategies and resources to improve performance.
According to Oliver Wise, New Orleans Director of the Office of Performance and
Accountability, before the launch of BlightStat, “the data was in shambles. It was very hard
to get any meaningful data about the state of the problem nor was there good visibility on
the city’s enforcement process with those problem properties.”7 Now the city can track key
outcome metrics using BlightStat, including the response time for inspections in response
to property code complaints, the number of demolitions completed each period, and the
number of properties brought into compliance through
owner-initiated property improvements. Following each
monthly meeting, BlightStat reports are published on the
Office of Performance and Accountability’s website.
Mayor Mitch Landrieu
Driven by this disciplined performance management process,
New Orleans reduced the number of blighted properties by
30% in less than three years. In January 2014, Mayor Landrieu
announced that the city exceeded its goal of reducing the
blight count by 10,000 units, remarking that “Together, we
have accomplished that goal, and we’re now fighting blight
faster than anywhere else in the country.”8
Open Data
Cities that play Moneyball don’t keep information about outcomes and progress under wraps.
Operational data and performance metrics are publicly shared through city websites and
Open Data portals.9 Cities are increasingly taking steps in this direction. As of January 2015,
37 municipalities have passed open data legislation and now share data publicly on their
websites.10 Open Data includes raw datasets that can be downloaded and analyzed, as well
as “dashboards” that present key outcome metrics geared toward an audience that is neither
proficient in data analytics nor familiar with the subject matter at hand. The most sophisticated
and robust municipal Open Data systems:
»»
Make data publicly available in one centralized location or portal;
»»
Make bulk downloads of entire datasets available;
»»
Release data in machine-processable, structured, and nonproprietary formats
RESULTS FOR AMERICA: INVEST IN WHAT WORKS 6
»»
Designate a person or team to manage the effort; and
»»
Have an established process for continuously updating reliable data releases.
Example
Albuquerque launched its Open Data portal in 2012. Since then, the data has been embraced
enthusiastically and put to many valuable uses. For example, working with information released
through the Open Data portal, developers have launched
eight websites and smartphone applications that provide
information about the city’s bus system, which provides over
13 million rides each year and serves as the city’s primary mass
transit option. ABQ RIDE is the most widely downloaded
transit app, with over 17,000 users. This app displays the
location of the bus within 30 seconds’ accuracy, and features
up-to-date bus schedules and fares. The bus apps have had
surprising and helpful unintended consequences: since release
of the apps, calls to the city’s 311 call center on transit-related
issues decreased by more than 25% (representing a decrease
Mayor Richard Berry
of 420,000 calls per year)—saving the city approximately
$160,000 annually.11
3. REVIEW
City leaders who play Moneyball consistently review data and evidence to assess progress
toward goals, reflect on results, and support continuous improvement. Central to success in
this regard is the review of outcomes achieved by service providers—including the city—using
standard, objective metrics.
When it comes to reviewing data, findings, and evidence, it is often helpful for city leaders to
engage the public in a dialogue about citywide goals and ongoing progress toward achieving
them. Some cities open up performance management meetings to the public either by allowing
residents to attend the meetings in person or by posting coverage of the meetings online.
Critical, too, is the disciplined assessment of new programs and policies to determine impact or
efficacy. There is a common misperception that outcome evaluations require years and millions
of dollars to complete. Yet more and more cities are executing fast, reliable evaluations at a
minimal cost, and they are using the findings to inform the deployment of scarce human and
fiscal resources.12
Low-cost evaluation tools, like rapid-cycle evaluation, are cost-effective strategies for improving
the delivery of services.13 Similar to randomized control trials, one group of program participants
acts a control group and continues to receive services while another group receives slightly
modified services. Following a test period, the city assesses any differences in outcomes
between the two groups and considers the prospective policy implications. This differs from
randomized control trial experiments because the city is not assessing the full impact of a
program, but rather the empirical implications of a specific modification in delivery.14
Example:
The Philadelphia Police Department regularly partners with local universities to conduct low- or
no-cost evaluations of its programs. In exchange for key city data that is not often available to
the public, academic researchers lend their expertise, supported by their own research interests,
to work with department personnel to review and analyze important policy questions.
RESULTS FOR AMERICA: INVEST IN WHAT WORKS 7
For example, the department invited researchers from Temple University to help them assess
the effectiveness of foot patrols, a police technique designed to increase public safety through
the visible presence of officers in neighborhoods. Regional Operational Commanders identified
a set of high-crime neighborhoods and designated half of the areas for foot patrol, leaving the
other half of the areas to serve as a control group with no officers on foot patrol. Over the course
of twelve weeks, violent crime decreased 22% in the patrolled areas. These findings convinced
the department not only of the importance of foot patrols as a crime control strategy, but
also of the importance of evaluating new practice approaches.15 The department now trains
a select group of officers to serve as data analysts in districts
throughout the city.
Mayor Michael A. Nutter
“The Philadelphia Police Department uses data, analysis and
evaluation to inform daily operations. This reliance on a datadriven approach has supported significant reductions in crime,
including a 36% reduction in homicides and 17% reduction in
violent crime since 2007,” says Maia Jachimowicz, Mayor Michael
A. Nutter’s Policy Director. “PPD is not alone in its reliance on
data to drive decision making. Several city departments use
performance management and rigorous external evaluation to
promote continuous improvement in city services.”16
4. ACT
Cities that play Moneyball embed data and evidence in major decisions and use it to take action.
This means leaders rely on data to drive the city’s budget, funding, and management decisions.
When local leaders play Moneyball, they draw on evidence from a range of sources to assess
new policies and program investments, improve or expand existing programs that work, and
scale back those that persistently fail to deliver results.
Predictive Analytics
One tool that cities are using to drive management decisions is predictive analytics.17 Taking a
page from the private sector’s playbook, cities like New York and Chicago are applying statistical
modeling to predict future outcomes and make services more responsive.
Example:
In New York City, one area where predictive analytics has proved
especially useful is in dealing with illegal conversions, a problem
that occurs when people modify a home illegally to enable
more people to live within the building. Illegal conversions are
often associated with increased fire hazards, crime, disease, and
pest infestation, and they are often difficult to uncover. Using
predictive analytics, New York City zeroed in on the properties
where data suggested illegal conversions were most likely and
prioritized the order of inspections. Using this method, the
city appreciated a fivefold increase in the number of vacating
orders issued, meaning that the inspectors were looking in the
right places and using data to make a substantial dent in the
number of illegal conversions shut down.
RESULTS FOR AMERICA: INVEST IN WHAT WORKS 8
Mayor Bill De Blasio
Outcomes-Based Budgeting / Performance-Based Budgeting
Contracts can also be a critical tool to align municipal investments with the achievement of
outcomes. Instead of requiring vendors to reach output objectives (e.g., the number of people
served in a workforce development program), more cities are requiring vendors to report
on outcome metrics (e.g., the number of people who obtain jobs following enrollment in a
workforce development program). Some cities condition contract payments upon a vendor’s
performance toward stated outcome goals. Many cities use evidence of past performance to
inform future contract or procurement decisions.
Cities that use “outcomes-based” or “results-oriented” budgeting rely on evidence and outcomes
to inform development of a holistic, citywide budget. This is in contrast to the prospective
budgeting methodology most cities use. Prospective budgets are extrapolated from the
previous year with little consideration of which programs have been most impactful. There is no
exact science to outcomes-based budgeting, but it is important that the city increases funding
for departments that provide superior results and redirect resources away from programs that
do not achieve measurable impact.
Example:
Baltimore’s Outcome Budgeting process starts with the mayor establishing Priority Outcomes
and measurable indicators of success. For example, the Healthier City Priority Outcome seeks
to reduce the rate of heart disease. Each Priority Outcome is connected to a “Results Team”—
comprised of city agency leaders, budget analysts, nonprofit/
community leaders, and members of the mayor’s internal
team—that is responsible for collecting and analyzing budget
proposals from the various agencies that contribute to
moving the needle in each priority area. City agencies submit
budget proposals to the Results Team, each of which has been
allocated a share of available General Fund dollars. Results
Teams rank the proposals and recommend an “investment
portfolio” —a set of funding service proposals that they
Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake
believe will make the most impact—to the mayor.
Speaking about Baltimore’s Outcome Budgeting process, Baltimore Mayor Stephanie RawlingsBlake stated “[t]raditional budgeting is easy, but it often produces budgets that protect
underperforming services and punish services that deliver results and advance priorities most
important to residents. In Baltimore, we turned that old model on its head by first seeking to
better understand what the needs of our citizens were and then building our budgets to reflect
their priorities and achieve those outcomes.”18
Importantly, to play Moneyball, local leaders take steps to redirect funds away from programs
that are unable to demonstrate measurable outcomes and invest it in programs that can. In 2011,
for example, Baltimore faced a significant budget shortfall—$121 million, or about 15 percent of
projected discretionary General Fund spending. Instead of taking out the red pen to cut and slash,
the budget team leveraged an outcome-based effort to ensure high-value activities received
more money and low-return activities were reduced or eliminated. For example, the budget
dedicated new funding for youth violence prevention programs, which were losing funding from
other sources. They showed great evidence of effectiveness and therefore received general
fund money for the first time, despite the budget shortfall. Likewise, libraries were funded at
current levels because their proposals presented strong evidence demonstrating their success
with helping job-seekers find employment. On the other hand, a wide variety of activities took
more substantial cuts than others based on relative considerations of value, performance and
effectiveness.19
RESULTS FOR AMERICA: INVEST IN WHAT WORKS 9
According to Andrew Kleine, Baltimore’s budget director, one of the advantages of Outcome
Budgeting is that “the Mayor is getting information about every single service, hearing input
from the teams about how the service is performing, and making decisions based on how
services help to achieve priority outcomes.”20 Outcome Budgeting has targeted resources to
more effective programs and practices, helping to move the needle on key issues facing the city.
CONCLUSION
City leaders across the country are increasingly using data, evidence, and evaluation to make
critical operations and resource decisions—they are playing Moneyball. These leaders are
investing in the collection and review of data and evidence, and asking hard questions about
what it means. These leaders are reinforcing a culture of accountability, publishing data about
performance, and setting expectations that measurable outcomes are not optional. These
leaders are demanding facts and data before they make tough calls about program direction
and resource allocation. And they are making better decisions as a result.
It’s important to emphasize that playing Moneyball involves all four of the steps outlined above.
Cities just getting started might be tempted to pick one or two components, including those
that are easier to implement. But leaders in the field are pressing on all fronts to put Moneyball
into action.
The examples highlighted in this playbook do not comprehensively detail the ways in which
city leaders are playing Moneyball; rather, we intend here to inspire city leaders to question the
ways they are currently using data and evidence and ask whether they can do more. There are
opportunities to learn from others, including the leaders profiled in this playbook.
If you are interested in learning more about how to play Moneyball or becoming a Moneyball
All-Star, please visit www.moneyballforgov.com.
RESULTS FOR AMERICA: INVEST IN WHAT WORKS 10
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Funding for this report was provided by the Laura and John Arnold Foundation.
laura and john arnold foundation ®
ABOUT THE INVEST IN WHAT WORKS POLICY SERIES
This report is part of Results for America’s Invest in What Works Policy Series, which provides
ideas and supporting research to policymakers to drive public funds toward evidence-based,
results-driven solutions. Results for America is committed to improving outcomes for young
people, their families, and communities by shifting public resources toward programs and
practices that use evidence and data to improve quality and get better results.
Invest in
What Works
Policy
Series
RESULTS FOR AMERICA: INVEST IN WHAT WORKS 11
END NOTES
1. Fischer, Greg. “Data Drives Innovation in Louisville.” CNNMoney. Cable News Network, 16
Dec. 2014. Web. 18 Mar. 2015.
2. For the full list of Mayor Fischer’s strategic priorities, visit http://www.louisvilleky.gov/
government/mayor-greg-fischer/strategic-plan
3. Niblock, Beth, and Theresa Reno-Weber. “Beyond Transparency: Louisville’s Strategic Use
of Data to Drive Continuous Improvement.”Beyond Transparency: Open Data and the
Future of Civic Innovation. San Francisco: Code for America, 2013.
4. Robert Behn, of the Harvard Kennedy School of Government, has written extensively
about stat programs in both his Performance Leadership Reports http://www.hks.harvard.
edu/thebehnreport/ and in his recent book, The PerformanceStat Potential: A Leadership
Strategy for Producing Results.
5. Former Maryland StateStat Director Beth Blauer has also produced a step-by-step guide
for building a successful government performance system. http://discover.socrata.com/
Open-Performance-Whitepaper.html
6. “New Orleans Tackles Blight Crisis with New Strategy.” Community Progress Media
Highlights. Center for Community Progress, n.d. Web. 18 Mar. 2015.
7. Allinger, Chelsea. “Raising the Bar in The Big Easy: Remediating 10,000 Blighted Properties
in Less than Four Years.” Community Progress Blog. Center for Community Progress, 27
Feb. 2014. Web. 18 Mar. 2015.
8. Blight Reduction Report. Publication. New Orleans: n.p., 2014. Print.
9. Code for America, a national nonprofit organization, has released an open data playbook
that further explains how a city can release data to the public: http://www.codeforamerica.
org/governments/principles/open-data/
10. The Sunlight Foundation, an advocate for open government and using technology to make
government more accountable, also has tools available for cities who want to improve
accountability and transparency: http://www.sunlightfoundation.com
11. Montano, Gilbert. Email interview. 18 Jan. 2015.
12. The Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab (J-PAL) at the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology is dedicated to conducting impact evaluations and building capacity for
others to carry out their own evaluations. To learn more, visit: http://www.povertyactionlab.
org/
RESULTS FOR AMERICA: INVEST IN WHAT WORKS 12
13. For an overview of rapid cycle evaluation, see Scott Cody and Andrew Asher, “Smarter,
Faster, Better: The Potential for Predictive Analytics and Rapid-cycle Evaluation to
Improve Program Development and Outcomes” (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution,
2014), accessed at http://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2014/06/19-predictiveanalytics-rapid-cycle-evaluation-improve-program-cody-asher.
14. The Behavioral Insights Team is one of the world’s leading organizations working to apply
ideas from behavioral economics, psychology, and social anthropology to improve public
policy. The B.I.T. team usually employs interventions that are simple, highly cost-effective,
and often yield surprising results. To learn more visit: http://www.behaviouralinsights.
co.uk/
15. Joyce, Nola. Telephone interview. 30 Jan. 2015.
16. Jachimowicz, Maia. Email interview. 18 Mar. 2015.
17. See Cody and Asher, “Smarter, Faster, Better.”
18. Mayor Rawlings-Blake Releases New Study Naming Baltimore as National Leader in Using
Data and Evidence to Improve Community. Baltimore City, 13 Nov. 2013. Web. 18 Mar. 2015.
19. Chrisinger, Jim. “Results from Baltimore’s Budget.” Governing, 7 Dec. 2010. Web. 18 Mar.
2015.
20.Lanzerotti, Laura, Jeff Bradach, Stephanie Sud, and Henry Barmeier. Geek Cities: How
Smarter Use of Data and Evidence Can Improve Lives. Publication. New York: Bridgespan
Group, 2013. Print.
RESULTS FOR AMERICA: INVEST IN WHAT WORKS 13