Rethinking government KPIs in the DOGE era

The presidential administration's focus on efficiency is prompting a fundamental reexamination of how government agencies define and measure success. This shift isn't merely administrative. It represents a deeper philosophical inquiry into the purpose of government. 

This new chapter in our nation’s history is an open call for leaders who can clearly articulate the purpose of their agency and back it with irrefutable evidence of impact.

In the face of DOGE, agency leaders must ask themselves a slate of crucial introspective questions: Why does our agency exist? What is our core purpose? And perhaps most importantly — how do we know if we're succeeding?

In Pursuit of Efficacy and Efficiency: Discerning “Signal” From Meaningful Measurement

Government initiatives typically aim to create sustained, long-term impact. For example, education programs equip individuals with knowledge, skills, and behaviors necessary to contribute to society in both the workforce and civic life, while public health initiatives aim to establish lasting wellness patterns. 

Measuring efficacy is inherently multifaceted and requires a clearly-defined objective function that captures the full spectrum of intended program outcomes. A distinct advantage government has over the private sector is its extensive history of data developed to meet federal and other reporting requirements. This rich data repository enables analysis across decades — a perspective rarely available to commercial enterprises. 

However, agency leaders often attempt to measure efficacy and efficiency from a narrower perspective. This isn't usually by choice, but rather limited access to the comprehensive data needed to properly quantify true impact. The result? Metrics that look good on paper but don’t speak to whether the agency is succeeding in accomplishing its core objective function.

For example: education agencies prioritizing standardized test scores while overlooking longer-term workforce readiness indicators. When test performance becomes a primary metric, we risk optimizing for the measurement itself rather than the true objective: preparing students to be successful and contributory members of society.

A common misconception is that efficiency is created through doing activities better, faster and cheaper. Efficiency isn't simply about minimizing waste. It's inefficient to excel at activities that won't yield meaningful results, regardless of how few of those resources go to waste. Genuine efficiency is only accomplished by driving the multidimensional outcomes a program was intended to create — with minimal spend for maximum impact.

To transparently demonstrate agency efficacy and efficiency, leaders must rethink measurement "signals" by developing key performance indicators that showcase meaningful long-term impact on citizens and communities. Doing so will necessitate widening the “measurement aperture” — seeking data that exists beyond departmental boundaries — as well as refining KPIs that showcase outcomes over time. This will create a more comprehensive picture of program impact that reflects its true efficacy and efficiency.

Defining Meaningful KPIs: Focus on Outcomes

Meaningful measurement begins by distinguishing between inputs (information entering the agency), outputs (activities performed) and outcomes (actual impact created). Inputs might include the number of permits processed, students enrolled, or benefits distributed — essentially tallying up what the agency does. Outputs might include jobs created, skills certifications earned, or career advancement rates — essentially measuring the direct results produced by the agency's activities. 

While important for operational insights, these metrics reveal little about whether the agency is fulfilling its core purpose. Outcomes, on the other hand, measure tangible improvements in citizens' lives. These reflect the ultimate value government delivers to society. Examples of outcomes include: increased economic mobility, improved health, enhanced public safety, or strengthened community resilience.

However, achieving visibility into this information often means crossing traditional agency boundaries. Measuring true impact requires both longitudinal data tracking and more thoughtfully designed metrics that capture the multidimensional nature of program outcomes.

This means developing interoperable data systems (i.e. systems that “talk to each other”) and shared metrics across departments that can track outcomes over extended timeframes. When agencies collaboratively yet securely share data, they can track holistic citizen journeys rather than fragmented service encounters. 

Workforce development and education offers one example. Few would argue that the core purpose of the education system is for “students to achieve good grades.” Instead, education is meant to prepare students to meaningfully participate in and contribute to society. 

By bringing education and workforce outcomes data together, agency leaders can measure the education outcomes that actually matter: post-graduation employment rates, career mobility patterns, wage progression, and other multifaceted indicators that collectively provide a more complete picture of program efficacy than any single metric could capture.

Balance Leading and Lagging Indicators that Enable Iterative Improvement

Effective measurement frameworks incorporate both leading and lagging indicators through a process of experimentation and refinement. Lagging indicators measure past performance and confirm long-term trends, but arrive too late to influence current programs. Leading indicators predict future performance and provide early feedback, enabling timely interventions. For instance, regular monitoring of third-grade reading proficiency serves as an early indicator of high school graduation likelihood.

The development of meaningful measurement requires iteration and evolution. Consider following this step-by-step process to refine KPIs over time:

• Launch pilot KPIs at manageable scale. Starting small will allow for test measurement approaches without disrupting entire systems or overwhelming staff with sweeping changes.
• Gather feedback from frontline staff and citizens. Those closest to program delivery often possess invaluable insights about which metrics truly capture meaningful outcomes and what contextual factors might influence measurement validity.
• Analyze initial results for unexpected patterns. Surprising correlations or outliers in early data can reveal overlooked dimensions of program effectiveness
• Refine metrics to address discovered limitations. Initial measurement attempts almost always surface shortcomings that require adjustment, whether in data collection methods or interpretation frameworks.
• Gradually expand successful efforts. Methodically scaling proven measurement practices builds buy-in and allows time for developing the necessary infrastructure and expertise to support broader implementation.

The Opportunity at Hand

Transformative agencies are already reimagining KPIs as powerful storytelling tools that illuminate their direct contributions to citizens' lives over years and decades. In breaking down data silos and establishing collaborative measurement frameworks, these leaders can construct a more complete picture of government impact that no single agency could achieve in isolation. 

Those who master this balance and cultivate partnerships across agency boundaries won't just survive the next four years — they'll redefine what it means to govern effectively and efficiently.

John Roach is the president of Resultant, a leading consulting firm shaping how local, state and federal government agencies use data. Follow John on LinkedIn.