City audit finds San Diego’s performance indicators underused, urges validation and public dashboard

The San Diego City Auditor on Tuesday presented a performance audit finding that the city underuses and inconsistently verifies key performance indicators, limiting the council’s ability to make data-driven budgeting and policy decisions. The informational report, discussed at the March 3 council meeting, included two formal findings and five recommended actions that city management agreed to implement.

Auditor Andy Henhouse and the audit team said survey results showed only one of seven council offices and nine of 27 departments routinely use KPIs to inform budget, policy or operational choices. The audit team found limited controls for ensuring KPI accuracy and noted that departments do not consistently provide explanations when measures miss targets, as Council Policy 0-02 requires.

The auditors recommended developing and publishing an annual performance report that consolidates KPIs separate from the budget document; creating a KPI data validation process to ensure reliability; publishing KPI calculation methodologies; and improving the city’s online KPI dashboard by adding historical data and visuals to help identify trends.

The audit’s second finding flagged a missing citywide KPI philosophy: departments currently mix “aspirational” and “realistic” targets without a consistent policy, making cross-department comparison and public interpretation difficult. The auditors recommended a formal KPI policy that requires departments to label targets as aspirational or realistic and to report at least one of each type.

PANDA (the Performance and Analytics Department) Director Alex Hampton said the department is releasing the first volumes of a comprehensive citywide performance report and is working with the IBA and Race and Equity staff to improve outcome-oriented metrics despite constrained staffing. The Office of the Independent Budget Analyst (IBA) said KPIs are essential to prioritize programs and urged outcome-focused measures rather than raw outputs.

Members of the public raised concerns during the item’s public comment period about KPI accuracy in specific departments, citing examples in planning and stormwater. Council members praised the audit and emphasized that improved KPIs should be actionable for budget decisions. Several members said committees should review major-department KPIs and that the city should involve front-line workers and race and equity staff in metric development.

Because the item was informational, no council action was required. Councilmember Vivian Moreno, chair of the Audit Committee, said the recommendations — especially a public dashboard with historical trends and a validation process — are important steps to make KPI reporting actionable for both the public and policymakers.