Governance Analysis: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
* Governance Gaps; Governance Gaps; --[[Heat Maps]] | * Governance Gaps; Governance Gaps; --[[Heat Maps]] | ||
* Governance Gaps; Governance Gaps; -- | * Governance Gaps; Governance Gaps; --[[Interesting Takeaways]] | ||
= | === Identification of Governance Gaps === | ||
The identification of Governance Gaps was a simple, but tedious process. It began with an observation of a county practice or behavior. The practice or behavior was then compared to the Green Book as a standard, which included 17 Principles and 196 Attributes. ACV noted a governance gap each time the practice or behavior applied to the attribute but was not fulfilled. In other words, the GAO's Green Book expected a certain practice or behavior to a situation, and the county did not fulfill that expectation. | |||
No governance gap was identified for when the County's practice or behavior satisfied the attribute OR the attribute wasn't applicable to the observed practice or behavior. | |||
This comparison of county practices and behaviors to performance gaps was <u>not</u> a one-to-one relationship, meaning only one governance gap could be found from one observation. Many times, multiple performance gaps could be identified from one observation. | |||
=== Sources of Observations === | |||
The preferred source of observation was a written record (e.g., formal report, email) originating from a government employee, which were considered objective sources. News articles were not used for observation because of the inherent bias that occurs. | |||
Some portions of Jamie's Examples relied on her personal account to the interface between her and a county employee. | |||
=== Cross-Referencing between Observations and Governance Gaps === | |||
The process | |||
__NOTOC__ | __NOTOC__ | ||
Revision as of 15:48, 8 September 2026
This page will explain how we assessed county governance gaps using the U.S. GAO's Green Book as the standard.
You are here: Governance Gaps; Governance Gaps; -- Governance Analysis
After learning about Governance Gaps additional supporting details are available from the following web pages:
- Governance Gaps; Governance Gaps; --Heat Maps
- Governance Gaps; Governance Gaps; --Interesting Takeaways
Identification of Governance Gaps
The identification of Governance Gaps was a simple, but tedious process. It began with an observation of a county practice or behavior. The practice or behavior was then compared to the Green Book as a standard, which included 17 Principles and 196 Attributes. ACV noted a governance gap each time the practice or behavior applied to the attribute but was not fulfilled. In other words, the GAO's Green Book expected a certain practice or behavior to a situation, and the county did not fulfill that expectation.
No governance gap was identified for when the County's practice or behavior satisfied the attribute OR the attribute wasn't applicable to the observed practice or behavior.
This comparison of county practices and behaviors to performance gaps was not a one-to-one relationship, meaning only one governance gap could be found from one observation. Many times, multiple performance gaps could be identified from one observation.
Sources of Observations
The preferred source of observation was a written record (e.g., formal report, email) originating from a government employee, which were considered objective sources. News articles were not used for observation because of the inherent bias that occurs.
Some portions of Jamie's Examples relied on her personal account to the interface between her and a county employee.
Cross-Referencing between Observations and Governance Gaps
The process
