Skip to main content

Performance Metrics in a Results-Driven Environment: Use of Performance-Based Budgeting to Improve Accountability

  • Chapter
  • 108 Accesses

Part of the book series: International and Development Education ((INTDE))

Abstract

For the first time in history, there is an acute demand for higher education accountability spurred on by increased costs, student request for program relevancy, and accrediting agencies pressure from government to improve and monitor higher education. In the form of budget performance measures, it increasingly commands the attention of community college leaders. Recently, various performance metrics have been utilized as community colleges struggle with defining a transparent and accountable measurement of budget allocation that balances the various needs of each user group that relies on these resources to perform functions necessary for students to obtain quality education. This chapter will (a) define the limitations of traditional measurements, (b) describe new measurement metrics and their role in program development, (c) compare the two metrics, and (d) provide a model of how new metrics were applied in a two-college district in California.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Cokins, Gary. 1999. “Learning to Love ABC.” Journal of Accountancy 188 (2): 37–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cokins, Gary. 1996. Activity Based Cost Management: Making it Work. New York: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, Robin, and Régine Slagmulder. 2000a. “ABCM System Architecture-Part III.” Strategic Finance 81(8): 63–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, Robin, and Régine Slagmulder. 2000b. “Activity Based Budgeting-Part2.” Strategic Finance 82(4): 26–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, Patricia, and Sheila Bellamy. 1995. “Performance Evaluation in the Australian Public Sector: The Role of Management and Cost Accounting Control Systems.” International Journal of Public Sector Management 8(6): 30–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geiger, Donald R. 1993/1994. “An Experiment in Federal Cost Accounting and Performance Measurement.” Government Accountants Journal 42(4): 39–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldsmith, Stephen. 1999. The Twenty-First Century City: Resurrecting urban America. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hicks, Douglas T. 1998. Activity Based Costing: Making It Work for Small and Mid-Sized Companies. Somerset, NJ: John Wiley and Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, Robert S. and Matt Ridenour. 1996. Indianapolis: Activity-Based Costing of City Services (A), HBS, 9–196-115. Rev. March 22, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  • Key, V.O. Jr., 1940. “The Lack of a Budgetary Theory.” American Political Science Review 34 (6): 1137–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kidwell, Linda A., Shih-Jen Kathy Ho, John Blake, Philip Wraith, Raafat Roubi, and William Richardson. 2002. “New Management Techniques: An International Comparison.” The CPA Journal 72 (2): 64–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, Laura M 1995. “Operating and Capital Budget Reform in Minnesota: Managing public finances like the future matters.” Government Finance Review 11 (1): 5–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinsella, Steven. 2002. “Activity-Based Costing: Does It Warrant Inclusion in a Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide)?” Project Management Journal 33 (2): 49–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • LaPlante, Alice, and Allen E. Alter. 1994. “U.S. Department of Defense: Activity Based Costing.” Computerworld 28 (44): 84–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, Verne. 1952. “Toward a Theory of Budgeting.” Public Administration Review 12 (4): 43–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melkers, Julia E., and Katherine G. Willoughby. 1998. “The State of the States: Performance-Based Budgeting Requirements in 47 Out of 50.” Public Administration Review 58 (1): 66–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, Harvey. 1998. “Indianapolis Speeds Away.” Journal of Business Strategy 19 (3): 41–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Guin, Michael C. 1991. The Complete Guide to Activity Based Costing. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, Helen L. 2000. “The New Shape of ABC.” Transportation and Distribution 41(5): 111–116.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Stewart E. Sutin Daniel Derrico Rosalind Latiner Raby Edward J. Valeau

Copyright information

© 2011 Stewart E. Sutin, Daniel Derrico, Rosalind Latiner Raby, and Edward J. Valeau

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Kinsella, S.M., Valeau, E.J., Raby, R.L. (2011). Performance Metrics in a Results-Driven Environment: Use of Performance-Based Budgeting to Improve Accountability. In: Sutin, S.E., Derrico, D., Raby, R.L., Valeau, E.J. (eds) Increasing Effectiveness of the Community College Financial Model. International and Development Education. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230120006_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics