While it’s easy to take shots at the General Assembly for how tax dollars are budgeted — and the past session saw plenty of that, from in and outside the Legislative Building — a new study says North Carolinians are better off than most.
A study dubbed the first of its kind by the Pew-MacArthur Results First Initiative — a project of the Pew Charitable Trusts — analyzed how states get the best results by using cost-benefit analyses during a period from 2009 to 2013.
North Carolina is one of 10 “leading states” selected, which according to the study, “generally released more studies than mixed or trailing states, systematically assessed the costs and benefits of multiple program alternatives, and used results to inform policy or budget decisions.”
One incident, recalled by Initiative Director Gary Vanlandingham, involved a program to increase high school graduation rates.
“In 2010, after the Program Evaluation Division of the legislature did a study on that the costs of the statewide high school graduation project requirements, that study found the requirements of the initiative would not be covered by the costs of it,” Vanlandingham said. “The legislature did suspend that requirement after the study found the state wouldn’t get much bang for the buck.”
Overall, he wouldn’t say that necessarily you could say the Top 10 states are doing a qualitatively good job managing state revenue, but they’re doing it better than others.
“I think that states that do more of these studies are better stewards of taxpayer dollars than states that are not doing the studies,” Vanlandingham said. “I think that all states could be doing much more of this work, and doing it more systematically to really help assure citizens that money is being directed toward resources that do produce the most bang for the buck.”
The PED mentioned by Vanlandingham is a key component of how legislators evaluate state spending. But, its recommendations can come into conflict with other factors weighing on legislative decisions.
The study cites a PED evaluation of vehicle inspection programs, which found a lack of oversight and no noticeable transportation safety increase, but was scrapped by the Senate for political concerns.
PED Director John Turcotte — who it was reported is out of the office until Aug. 5 — said soon after taking the job, in a 2008 column in Governing magazine, that programs and needs change over time and they need to be regularly evaluated.
Turcotte told the story of his father who in the early part of the 20th century, pushed for state intervention to prevent species extinction, and the subsequent establishment of fish and game commissions.
“They knew precisely the outcomes they wanted and a valid means to get there,” Turcotte said. “But while conditions changed, old interventions and outdated premises persisted. We now have overpopulation of deer, drastic loss of habitat, and global warming.
He added, “You get second- and third-generation workers who are not as zealous and are more interested in sameness and keeping their jobs. You need legislators and the governor’s office to question the interventions and shake things up.”
While cost-benefit analyses can address many things, Vanlandingham noted that certain laws, like those on civil rights, are passed because of needs that cannot be quantified.
The PED website listed that during the 2013-2015 period, it’s working on studies looking into cuts to the UNC System administration, the feasibility of a “local governance model” of K-12 education, effectiveness and efficiency at the Department of Public Instruction, administration of state fire, rescue and EMS funds, and effectiveness and efficiency of local child support enforcement programs.
We Wolfe can be reached at 252-559-1075 and Wes.Wolfe@Kinston.com. Follow him on Twitter @WolfeReports.