Rundbrief Nr. 111 - Arbeitskreis für Wirtschafts- und ...

systems. They were also asked about challenges they faced in developing these efforts and thelessons that they had learned. Where possible, HFRP staff also attended planning meetingsaround RBA work. For each case study, HFRP interviewed at least 30 individuals with a varietyofaffiliations to obtain a comprehensive and varied view ofthe state’s efforts.Given the variety of RBA efforts in states, the multiple entities and actors involved, and themany components of these efforts, HFRP staff developed a multi-level analytic framework toexamine the data. This framework enabled HFRP to code interview data by four categories: thesystem (for example, strategic planning, performance budgeting, performance contracting); thegovernance level (for example, statewide, inter-agency, agency, local entity); the aspect of thesystem (for example, history, design and implementation, uses, barriers and opportunities,sustainability); and the actor (for example, governor’s staff; legislators/staff agency staff;advocacy groups). In some cases, these dimensions were further refined. This multiple codingenabled HFRP staff to compile comprehensive descriptions of efforts in each state based on avariety of perspectives. This framework also enabled staff to examine a variety of cross-casethemes (for example, the use ofbudgeting systems by legislatures across states and the processesagencies in different states have used to choose goals and indicators). A qualitative softwarepackage, NUD*IST~,facilitated analysis of the data.We recognize that RBA systems are evolving and will continue to evolve in response to bothimplementation challenges and state and national policy changes. Therefore, we stress that theinformation contained in these case studies describes these states’ RBA initiatives as ofNovember 1997.40