New ICMA White Paper Shows How Common Data from Local Governments Can Help Determine Effects of Stimulus Funding, Demonstrate Value of Local Governments

The mammoth $787 billion stimulus legislative package passed in February 2009 included $280 billion in programs and projects administered through states and localities. Officially known as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, this initiative is an intergovernmental partnership of historic scale. Now that the first projects have been funded, the debate has shifted to judging the effectiveness and the outcomes from the investment. 

Questions remain about the effects of the stimulus and whether we have developed the right way to catalog and assess the outcomes of our government expenditures. A new paper from ICMA provides a framework to the challenge of evaluating such investments. Measuring the Results of Economic Stimulus Investments: Local Government Leading the Way proposes that local governments rely upon uniform outcome measures that draw upon commonly collected data at the local level and offers specific metrics to help evaluate related outcomes.

“The stimulus presents city and county officials with an opportunity to improve their communities, benefit their citizens, and demonstrate the value of local government as a partner in an endeavor of major importance to the nation,” said report author David Ammons, Albert Coates Professor of Public Administration and Government at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.  “But to do so, the framework of performance measurement must be established now.” 

The ICMA paper comes at an important time in the ongoing debate about the stimulus. This month, the recipients of stimulus funds must submit their initial reports on how the money they received has been spent. This reported data will focus on jobs created or retained, project oversight, and the avoidance of waste, fraud, and abuse, with relatively little attention directed to actual outcomes. The ICMA paper, by contrast, proposes specific metrics in the following data categories already collected by many local governments:

• Avoiding Homelessness
• Broadband Initiatives
• Crime and Public Safety
• Energy Efficiency
• Housing
• Public Housing
• Public Transit
• Street Resurfacing
• Water & Sewer: Service Expansion and Line Replacement
• Water Reuse and Desalination Projects.

The ICMA paper also calls for the appointment of a committee of local government executives that would review the set of recommended measures; perhaps clarifying, expanding, reducing, or otherwise modifying the set, if necessary; endorsing the set; and monitoring the results.

“The scale and attention afforded to the stimulus and the prominent role of local government in its implementation makes this a rare opportunity for local governments to demonstrate their value as an intergovernmental partner,” said ICMA Executive Director Robert O’Neill. “The ability of cities and counties, individually and collectively, to answer the question of lasting benefits not only will allow them to demonstrate progress on persistent local concerns but it also will enhance the value of local governments as program partners with the federal government.”