PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT FRAMEWORK:

GROWTH PLAN FOR THE GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE

APRIL 8, 2010

ADVANCED PLANNING STUDIO

Todays Agenda
Project Overview Context Our Methodological Approach Key Performance Indicators Conclusions/Framework Limitations Recommendations/Next Steps Questions

Project Overview
1) Comprehensive Literature Review and Jurisdictional Scan 2) Developed a Methodological Framework 3) Preliminary Key Performance Indicators 4) Formulated Recommendations

Section 5.4.3 Monitoring Growth

Context

The Greater Golden Horseshoe Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe Smart Growth/Growth Management Performance Measurement

Our Methodological Approach

1) Jurisdictional Scan 2) Lessons Learned 3) Guiding Principles 4) Selection Criteria 5) Indicator Development 6) Identify Strengths and Limitations 7) Formulate Recommendations
Copyright Queen's Printer for Ontario, photo source: Ontario Growth Secretariat, Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure

Jurisdictional Scan
Exhaustive

review of related performance measurement programs employed across North America and the World

Lessons Learned
1) Strong Data Sources
Effective performance monitoring programs are heavily reliant on a steady source of reliable and transparent data.

2) Adaptive Monitoring As inefficiencies within the monitoring program are identified, the program can be adjusted to address those inefficiencies. 3) Engage Community/Stakeholders Conducting public and key stakeholder consultations can be an extremely valuable tool to assist with the development of performance indicators.

Lessons Learned
4) Multi-Level Monitoring
While indicators should be collected for the whole of the region, there is merit in developing indicators at more fine grained sub-regional spatial scales. 5) Frequent & Thorough Review Utilizing and applying results of performance measurement on a frequent basis works to enhance the effectiveness of any performance measurement program. 6) Easily Understandable Performance measurement programs work to inform policy direction as well as allow the public to view progress of government policies; it is therefore critical that performance indicators are easily understood by most.

Guiding Principles
4 guiding principles overarch this framework for

developing performance indicators for the Growth Plan

1) Region-Level Monitoring 2) Progress Oriented Measurement 3) Recognize Ambiguity & Complexity 4) Adaptive Monitoring

Selection Criteria
General
Validity Reliability
Enlightened Use Instrumental Use

Region-Specific
Evaluation Utilization
Opportunity for stakeholder engagement

Relevance

Attribution
Communicability Flexibility

Ease of Understanding

Ability to Aggregate

Evaluation Capacity Building

Sensitivity to Data Collection Demands

Conceptual Use

Process Use

Indicator Development
Wong's Four-Step Methodological Framework

Source: (Wong, 2006)

Key Performance Indicators

Reflect the 3 broad objective categories of the Growth Plan:

Where and How to Grow

Key Performance Indicator #5
Percent change in density of jobs and population in urban growth centres (in relation to the Growth Plans minimum gross density targets).

Copyright Queen's Printer for Ontario, photo source: Ontario Growth Secretariat, Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure

Infrastructure to Support Growth

Key Performance Indicator #12
Percent change in the value of goods shipped on priority routes.

Copyright Queen's Printer for Ontario, photo source: Ontario Growth Secretariat, Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure

Protecting What is Valuable

Key Performance Indicator #16
Number of hectares of land originally designated for agricultural uses which were re-designated for other uses during the reporting year.

Copyright Queen's Printer for Ontario, photo source: Ontario Growth Secretariat, Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure

Framework Limitations

INFANCY

CAUSALITY SCOPE

Recommendations
1) Employ Regional Partnership Mechanisms 2) Modify Municipal Data Collection Processes 3) Develop a Composite Index 4) Facilitate Data Sharing 5) Adopt a Quality of Life Measurement Framework 6) Survey and Interview Key Informants 7) Expand Framework to include CrossJurisdictional Comparative Analysis

Recommendations
1) Layer data sharing through regional partnership mechanisms with the Ontario Growth Secretariat acting as the central body for coordinating and overseeing data collection.

(Moveonnet Conference, 2009)

Recommendations

2) Modify existing data collection processes at the municipal and provincial level to satisfy the data requirements for monitoring growth management in the Greater Golden Horseshoe.

Recommendations

3) Develop a composite index to capture the multivariate policy objectives of growth management into one discrete measure of progress.

Concluding Remarks

Preliminary Framework
Starting Point for Ontario Growth Secretariat Ontario A Smart Growth Leader

QUESTIONS & COMMENTS THANK YOU

APRIL 8, 2010

ADVANCED PLANNING STUDIO

Performance Monitoring Timeframe

Regional performance measurement must rely on a co-ordinated, multi-participant system of data aggregation. The Minister of Energy & Infrastructure is required to review the Plan at least every 10 years. A Five-Year Interim Review Schedule is recommended

Performance Monitoring Timeframe

Key Performance Indicators

Key Performance Indicator #1
Amount of growth and rate of growth between the baseline distribution and the interim distribution of population and employment figures per municipality.

Key Performance Indicator #2

The difference between the interim distribution and the forecasted distribution for each municipality, expressed as a percent of the forecasted distribution.

Key Performance Indicator #3

Change in housing mix (expressed as a percentage of total occupied private dwellings) across a range of housing types.

Key Performance Indicators

Key Performance Indicator #4
General Intensification Rate: All new residential development built inside the built boundary (intensification) divided by all new development (greenfield + intensification).

Key Performance Indicator #5

Percent change in density of jobs and population in Urban Growth Centers (in relation to the Growth Plans minimum gross density targets).

Key Performance Indicator #6

Percent change in commercial vacancy rates in Urban Growth Centres.

Key Performance Indicators

Key Performance Indicator #7
Percent change in area of designated employment lands and percent change in employees per employment land hectare, within the built boundary.

Key Performance Indicator #8

Percent change in density of new development in designated greenfield areas.

Key Performance Indicator #9

Average daily commute time (from home to work).

Key Performance Indicators

Key Performance Indicator #10
Share of travel mode as a percent of total trips made by residents.

Key Performance Indicator #11

Percent change in capital investment in public transit systems compared to percent change in capital investment in private transportation infrastructure.

Key Performance Indicator #12

Percent change in the value of goods shipped on priority routes.

Key Performance Indicators

Key Performance Indicator #13
Average travel time on designated priority routes for goods movements.

Key Performance Indicator #14

Percent of households paying 30% or more of gross annual income on housing.

Key Performance Indicator #15

Rate of increase in land being used for urban open space systems.

Key Performance Indicators

Key Performance Indicator #16
Number of hectares of land originally designated for agricultural uses which was re-designated for other uses during the reporting year.