Access the essential membership for Modern Managers
When Baltimore’s new mayor took office in 1999, he faced an overwhelming challenge. Crime was spiraling out of control, city departments were suffering from rampant absenteeism and public confidence in the city’s ability to provide even the most basic services was poor. Inspired by New York’s innovative CompStat system, a performance management tool which revolutionized the city’s policing, Mayor O’Malley applied this approach in Baltimore. This article investigates how Baltimore’s CitiStat system produced dramatic improvements in public service provision and policing, and saved $350 million in the process. [1]
A City on The Edge
In the late 1990s, Baltimore’s city administration was in a state of disarray. Chronic absenteeism of up to 14% in some city departments was resulting in crippling overtime costs and reduced efficiency, as well as draining the city finances. [2] Baltimore’s violent and drug related crime was well above the national average. Delivery of basic services such as rubbish collection, street repairs and snow removal was erratic. Citizen satisfaction surveys showed that problems such as illegal dumping, rubbish collection, sewage overflows and graffiti were not being dealt with efficiently. [3]
CitiStat – Much More Than a Performance Tool
O’Malley knew that radical action was needed in order to restore public confidence in the city’s administration. Based on the New York Police Department’s CompStat tool, O’Malley introduced CitiStat, a similar data-tracking and operational performance management tool. [4] However, CitiStat is much more than a stand-alone piece of technology. It is an ongoing organizational performance strategy which enables city agencies to produce results in relation to specific government performance indicators. O’Malley’s vision was that although CitiStat could be used to monitor and improve policing, it could also be implemented across other departments. The effective operation of the CitiStat approach is based on four key principles: [5]
- accurate and timely intelligence shared by all
- rapid deployment of resources
- effective tactics and strategies
- relentless follow-up and assessment
Through regular provision of operational data, CitiStat has meant that:
- departmental managers are accountable for underperformance
- persistent problems can be identified and prioritized
- targeted improvement strategies can be quickly implemented by allocating appropriate financial and operational resources
- results are compared and measured on a ‘real time’ basis [6]
CitiStat in Practice
The implementation of CitiStat had three distinct phases:
1. Setting Targets
CitiStat began with the development of performance targets for every city department. Targets were designed to reflect the requirement for improvements within a given period of time. Many of Baltimore’s targets were based upon key issues from O’Malley’s election campaign, such as reducing overtime costs and sick leave. Other notable performance improvement targets from Mayor O’Malley’s campaign included the 48 hour pothole repair target, and a four day target for fixing broken streetlights.
2. Measuring Performance
An key aspect of the CitiStat model is its link to Baltimore’s non-emergency service telephone line. By dialing the free 311 number, members of the public can request a city service, which can be anything from graffiti removal to pothole repair. Now known as ‘one call to City Hall’, Baltimore’s 311 call center is engineered for response to as many as 5,000 calls a day. [7] Every call and the subsequent actions taken to resolve the issue is logged by CitiStat. This information is used to inform each department’s activities and drive performance improvements.
CitiStat became operational in 2000 on a shoestring budget of $285,000. [8] The measurement system relies on four interlinked technologies:
- the 311 non-emergency telephone system
- an off-the-shelf data tracking and monitoring system known as CitiTrack [9]
- Excel and Access templates for data analysis
- computers and projectors to display data, charts and maps during CitiStat meetings
These elements were integrated with Baltimore’s pre-existing payroll and personnel systems and GIS digital mapping software. A small team of CitiStat analysts was recruited to assist department managers and a dedicated CitiStat meeting room was created at City Hall.
3. CitiStat Meetings
Every fortnight, senior managers from each department meet at City Hall to report their latest CitiStat performance figures. In the beginning, O’Malley attended all meetings, together with the deputy mayor and key city officials. Progress towards departmental targets is discussed, and managers often face hard-hitting questions about the reasons for underperformance. Some commentators argue that these ‘cross-examination’ sessions can be tough on managers. For example, Jim Inch, Director of Corporate Services for Edinburgh Council points out that the process:
“…takes people out of their comfort zone and certainly gives them a wake-up call.” [10]
However, the heightened sense of accountability has improved the problem-solving capability and resourcefulness of managers, resulting in considerable operational improvements. Before each meeting, the CitiStat analyst for each department prepares a briefing based on the latest performance data. Briefings comprise: [11]
- in-depth data analysis to identify trends and highlight problem hotspots
- results of field research interviews conducted with city residents
- trends in customer satisfaction surveys
- charts, tables, maps and photographs which are used to illustrate key points
The CitiStat process creates a continuous cycle of improvement. Performance is constantly measured, evaluated and adjusted to enable ‘smarter’ deployment of operational and financial resources.
The importance of Leadership Commitment
O’Malley’s role in the CitiStat project has undoubtedly been a key factor in its unprecedented success. Without O’Malley’s unwavering commitment and regular high-profile presence at CitiStat meetings, the project could easily have been interpreted as the latest management fad.
Revolutionary Results [12]
CitiStat has led to a wide-range of operational public service improvements, as well as impressive financial savings of over $350 million since its inception. [13] During its first year of implementation, CitiStat more than paid for itself, as it resulted in total savings of around $13 million. Around half of this figure ($5.8 million) resulted from reduced overtime costs, which fell by up to 50% in some areas. Other benefits include:
- The violent crime rate fell by 14% during the first year of CitiStat’s operation and Baltimore is now leading the US in the reduction of violent crime by more than 40% over the period to 2003. [14]
- Delivery of core public services has improved considerably. For example, all potholes are now repaired with 48 hours, and by 2002 the city removed four times more graffiti than it did prior to CitiStat’s introduction.
- The success of the CitiStat approach resulted in the Innovations in American Government Award in 2004, presented by the Ash Institute for Democratic Governance and Innovation at Harvard University. [15]
CitiStat’s Universal Appeal
To date, the CitiStat approach has been adapted for use by 11 US cities, including Los Angeles, Chicago, Boston and Washington. CitiStat has also been the focus of a number of pilot projects in the UK, notably in the Scottish government and the NHS. [16] O’Malley predicts that CitiStat will become the accepted performance management model of local authorities and other public sector bodies, as it provides a blueprint for effective city management.
“With off-the-shelf software and a few good people, you can revolutionize city government.” [17]
Find out More
This YouTube video provides a detailed overview of Baltimore’s CitiStat program: www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0YDKgpAtOg
Further Reading
Balanced Scorecard Basics
References[1] Teresita Perez and Reece Rushing, 'The CitiStat Model' (2007). p1. Available
here (Accessed 03 August 2023)
[2] Teresita Perez and Reece Rushing, Available
here' (17 March 2009).(Accessed 03 August 2023)
[3] Ibid.
[4] Introduced in 1994, CompStat is a tool used by the New York City Police Department to track crime and identify problem areas. At fortnightly crime strategy meetings, this information is used to inform policing strategies and tactics across New York’s eight patrol boroughs.
[6] Prior to the introduction of CitiStat, departmental performance was only reviewed and compared on a quarterly or even annual basis.
[8] Ibid.
[9] Based on customer relationship management (CRM) systems in the private sector, CitiTrack was originally developed by Motorola to meet the city of Baltimore’s needs. However, it can now be purchased as an off-the-shelf solution for around $20,000.
[10] ACCA, Public Eye magazine, 'CitiStat' (17 March 2009). Edinburgh Council took part in a pilot study to test the applicability of CitiStat to Scottish public service bodies in 2006.
[12] Carl Fillichio, 'Getting Ahead of the Curve: Baltimore and CitiStat' (17 March 2009).
[13] Robert D. Behn, as above.
[14] FBI crime reports. Formerly available at: www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm (17 March 2009). No longer available (7 December 2016).
[16] 'What Do We Measure and Why? An Evaluation of the CitiStat Model of Performance Management and its Applicability to the Scottish Public Sector, July 2006'. Available
here . (Accessed 03 August 2023)
[17] Carl Fillichio, as above.
