Tuesday, October 13th, 2009 at 8:07 pm
Peter R. Orszag, Director OMB
Tonight, the Senate confirmed Danny Werfel as Controller, Office of Federal Financial Management (OFFM). This is great news for OMB, as Danny brings broad experience and financial acumen to the table. His skills will be tested, as there are serious challenges facing the federal government to improve transparency and drive better results for the American people.
I’ve written before about Danny’s essential role in implementing the President’s ambitious agenda through the transition as Acting Controller, and particularly his work in implementing — with unprecedented accountability and openness — the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
I look forward to his leadership in furthering President’s agenda and in our work going forward; he is, as he has been, vital to what we do.
I thank his wife, Beth, and their children, Sean and Molly, for sharing Danny with us. I join everyone at OMB in congratulating Danny and his family on his confirmation.
P.S. A point of clarification: OMB’s Danny Werfel is not to be confused with Danny Wuerffel, who won the 1996 Heisman trophy as quarterback at the University of Florida, last seen in Washington as a member of the ‘Skins in 2002.
PUBLISHERS NOTE: Congratulations, Danny - Well Deserved!!!
Are you sure you don't want to play QB on the weekends, as well?
Showing posts with label PART. Show all posts
Showing posts with label PART. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Wednesday, September 02, 2009
Senior agency leaders focus on measuring success of their programs
In keeping with what the Obama administration sees as a high priority, officials at the Labor, Agriculture and Veterans Affairs departments are making program and performance evaluation a key focus in their strategic planning. Agencies already have been working hard narrow down their top objectives -- like the Agriculture Department's push to ensure all children in America have access to safe and nutritious meals -- and now they are tackling the even more difficult task of determining how to measure success.
Well into the process of submitting high-priority performance goals to the Office of Management and Budget, senior officials say they are identifying their program objectives and designing ways to evaluate progress toward those outcomes.
Labor will create a new position -- chief evaluation officer -- and a corresponding office within the policy office. The chief evaluation officer will develop a strategic approach that ties together the diverse goals and priorities of the department's many agencies and offices.
At Agriculture, Deputy Secretary Kathleen Merrigan's staff aims to establish metrics that can accurately measure success and to make sure each metric involves multiple agencies and mission areas.
Veterans Affairs Deputy Secretary W. Scott Gould said the elevator test applies to budgetary questions as well as metrics.
"There are three basic questions when you go see an appropriator -- what are you buying, how much does it cost and what do I get for it," he said. "If you can't answer that question in 30 seconds, it's on to the next line item."
Gould, Merrigan and Harris all anticipate the budget environment will be increasingly Spartan in the coming years, making program evaluation even more important.
-Elizabeth Newell, GovExec.com
READ MORE...
Well into the process of submitting high-priority performance goals to the Office of Management and Budget, senior officials say they are identifying their program objectives and designing ways to evaluate progress toward those outcomes.
Labor will create a new position -- chief evaluation officer -- and a corresponding office within the policy office. The chief evaluation officer will develop a strategic approach that ties together the diverse goals and priorities of the department's many agencies and offices.
At Agriculture, Deputy Secretary Kathleen Merrigan's staff aims to establish metrics that can accurately measure success and to make sure each metric involves multiple agencies and mission areas.
Veterans Affairs Deputy Secretary W. Scott Gould said the elevator test applies to budgetary questions as well as metrics.
"There are three basic questions when you go see an appropriator -- what are you buying, how much does it cost and what do I get for it," he said. "If you can't answer that question in 30 seconds, it's on to the next line item."
Gould, Merrigan and Harris all anticipate the budget environment will be increasingly Spartan in the coming years, making program evaluation even more important.
-Elizabeth Newell, GovExec.com
READ MORE...
Monday, July 13, 2009
Groups Warn Against Reinventing Wheel on Management Reform
The Obama administration should modify, but not scrap, existing performance measurement systems, according to a report released on July 6 by good government and watchdog groups. While the 1993 Government Performance and Results Act and the Bush administration's Program Assessment Rating Tool have increased the focus on performance and accountability, the report said, the tools are limited in their effectiveness because of a lack of high-level leadership, insufficient involvement from Congress and other stakeholders, and uncoordinated mandates. "This suggests that PART should be revised and updated to address problems evident in both its design and its implementation," stated the report, released by Accenture's Institute for Public Service Value, the Georgetown Public Policy Institute and OMB Watch, a Washington-based watchdog group.
-Robert Brodsky, Government Executive. Read more.
-Robert Brodsky, Government Executive. Read more.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
OMB would toughen how agencies measure program value
Agencies can expect changes in how they evaluate the effectiveness of their major programs and recommendations in the fiscal 2010 budget proposal to eliminate some programs, said Peter Orszag, President Barack Obama’s nominee to be director of the Office of Management and Budget.
Among the changes that he outlined for senators at a hearing considering his nomination, Orszag said he would seek tighter integration of government performance and budgeting. During the transition, Obama said his team already had begun to go through agency programs to identify programs that are ineffective or duplicative.
Agencies use the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) to evaluate the management and performance of individual programs, but it has not been very effective, said Orszag, former director of the Congressional Budget Office.
PART was developed without consultation by Congress and the agencies, and Orszag said he plans to revamp it with their involvement. An effective measurement process must also involve transparency and civic engagement, he said.
Orszag said as OMB director, he would seek to further integrate crosscutting issues into the government’s performance management process. The most significant challenges that the country faces require coordination of multiple agencies and programs, and OMB can play an important role in examining program areas that address common goals. OMB and agencies need to rely on a more risk-based approach in which to improve programs that are of the greatest importance, interest or need, Orszag said.
-Mary Mosquera, FCW.com
READ MORE...
Among the changes that he outlined for senators at a hearing considering his nomination, Orszag said he would seek tighter integration of government performance and budgeting. During the transition, Obama said his team already had begun to go through agency programs to identify programs that are ineffective or duplicative.
Agencies use the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) to evaluate the management and performance of individual programs, but it has not been very effective, said Orszag, former director of the Congressional Budget Office.
PART was developed without consultation by Congress and the agencies, and Orszag said he plans to revamp it with their involvement. An effective measurement process must also involve transparency and civic engagement, he said.
Orszag said as OMB director, he would seek to further integrate crosscutting issues into the government’s performance management process. The most significant challenges that the country faces require coordination of multiple agencies and programs, and OMB can play an important role in examining program areas that address common goals. OMB and agencies need to rely on a more risk-based approach in which to improve programs that are of the greatest importance, interest or need, Orszag said.
-Mary Mosquera, FCW.com
READ MORE...
Monday, January 12, 2009
CPO pick signals emphasis on accountability
President-elect Barack Obama’s creation of a chief performance officer probably in the White House means he’s serious about pushing agencies to perform better, be accountable and transparent, and deliver significant results, say experts in federal management.
His choice of Nancy Killefer to be the first person to hold the position only amplifies that commitment.
Obama also indicated that program performance would be linked with budget reform as he warned of the possibility of trillion-dollar deficits for years to come.
Killefer, a senior director at McKinsey and Co., will help scour the federal budget line by line, “eliminating what we don’t need or what doesn’t work, and improving the things that do,” Obama said in announcing his choice.
He also intends to nominate her as the Office of Management and Budget’s deputy director for management.
Killefer’s track record spans government and the private sector. She served in three high-level positions — assistant secretary for management, chief financial officer and chief operating officer — in the Clinton administration’s Treasury Department.
She also led technology modernization efforts at the Internal Revenue Service and prepared Treasury’s computer systems for the Year 2000.
The CPO would lead a team to set ambitious performance targets and hold managers accountable for progress. However, Obama has not yet spelled out all the details of the position.
There will be some challenges in implementing Obama’s plans, Forman said.
The White House usually deals with agency leadership, but program managers are more directly involved in the performance and budget of individual programs, he said.
If Obama succeeds in making Killefer both CPO and OMB’s deputy director for management, she will have legal authority to tighten the link between program performance improvement and the budget, he said.
Bob Behn, a lecturer at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government, said agencies must also attack performance gaps at lower levels of management. Agencies need to invest more in middle managers through training and mentoring because they must motivate their line staff to accomplish the strategies to improve performance.
-Mary Mosquera, FCW.com
READ MORE...
His choice of Nancy Killefer to be the first person to hold the position only amplifies that commitment.
Obama also indicated that program performance would be linked with budget reform as he warned of the possibility of trillion-dollar deficits for years to come.
Killefer, a senior director at McKinsey and Co., will help scour the federal budget line by line, “eliminating what we don’t need or what doesn’t work, and improving the things that do,” Obama said in announcing his choice.
He also intends to nominate her as the Office of Management and Budget’s deputy director for management.
Killefer’s track record spans government and the private sector. She served in three high-level positions — assistant secretary for management, chief financial officer and chief operating officer — in the Clinton administration’s Treasury Department.
She also led technology modernization efforts at the Internal Revenue Service and prepared Treasury’s computer systems for the Year 2000.
The CPO would lead a team to set ambitious performance targets and hold managers accountable for progress. However, Obama has not yet spelled out all the details of the position.
There will be some challenges in implementing Obama’s plans, Forman said.
The White House usually deals with agency leadership, but program managers are more directly involved in the performance and budget of individual programs, he said.
If Obama succeeds in making Killefer both CPO and OMB’s deputy director for management, she will have legal authority to tighten the link between program performance improvement and the budget, he said.
Bob Behn, a lecturer at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government, said agencies must also attack performance gaps at lower levels of management. Agencies need to invest more in middle managers through training and mentoring because they must motivate their line staff to accomplish the strategies to improve performance.
-Mary Mosquera, FCW.com
READ MORE...
Wednesday, January 07, 2009
Obama pledges to take on entitlement spending
WASHINGTON (AP) - President-elect Barack Obama said Wednesday that reforming massive government entitlement programs _ such as Social Security and Medicare _ would be "a central part" of his effort to control federal spending.
Obama made the pledge but provided few details as he named Nancy Killefer as his administration's chief performance officer, creating a new White House position aimed at eliminating government waste and improving efficiency.
Noting that the Congressional Budget Office had just estimated he would inherit a $1.2 trillion federal deficit for fiscal 2009, Obama promised to cut unnecessary spending.
READ MORE...
Obama made the pledge but provided few details as he named Nancy Killefer as his administration's chief performance officer, creating a new White House position aimed at eliminating government waste and improving efficiency.
Noting that the Congressional Budget Office had just estimated he would inherit a $1.2 trillion federal deficit for fiscal 2009, Obama promised to cut unnecessary spending.
READ MORE...
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
Obama outlines government reform plan
President-elect Barack Obama has already laid out a comprehensive set of government reform plans, including major changes to the Bush administration’s Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART), sweeping ethics reform and a new approach toward financial regulation.
Obama laid out his plans in an 11-page memo released last month. It calls for a new chief performance officer in the White House, who will oversee a strengthened PART. Under the new program, the president would have the authority to use poor PART assessments to replace agency heads, demand improvement plans, and reduce or eliminate program budgets.
The Bush administration has said repeatedly that PART assessments do not directly correlate to an agency’s budget.
Obama would restructure many federal agencies under the plan, thinning the ranks of what he calls “Washington middle managers” and boosting staffing levels in field offices. But Obama’s government reform memo doesn’t provide specifics on how many management jobs would be cut, and which agencies would be most affected.
Obama also hopes to increase transparency, through steps like creating a searchable database of lobbyist contacts and posting complete government contracts on the Internet. His team hopes those efforts will eliminate ethical lapses like those at the Interior Department’s Minerals Management Service, where employees accepted gifts and meals from oil companies they regulated.
The plan also addresses another set of regulatory agencies making headlines: financial regulators.
“The large, complex institutions that dominate the financial landscape today no longer fit into discrete categories,” it says. “We need a streamlined system of oversight, one that reflects 21st century markets.”
Obama’s plan calls for consolidating some of the agencies, and requiring more detailed disclosures from financial institutions.
-Gregg Carlstrom, FederalTimes.com
READ MORE...
Obama laid out his plans in an 11-page memo released last month. It calls for a new chief performance officer in the White House, who will oversee a strengthened PART. Under the new program, the president would have the authority to use poor PART assessments to replace agency heads, demand improvement plans, and reduce or eliminate program budgets.
The Bush administration has said repeatedly that PART assessments do not directly correlate to an agency’s budget.
Obama would restructure many federal agencies under the plan, thinning the ranks of what he calls “Washington middle managers” and boosting staffing levels in field offices. But Obama’s government reform memo doesn’t provide specifics on how many management jobs would be cut, and which agencies would be most affected.
Obama also hopes to increase transparency, through steps like creating a searchable database of lobbyist contacts and posting complete government contracts on the Internet. His team hopes those efforts will eliminate ethical lapses like those at the Interior Department’s Minerals Management Service, where employees accepted gifts and meals from oil companies they regulated.
The plan also addresses another set of regulatory agencies making headlines: financial regulators.
“The large, complex institutions that dominate the financial landscape today no longer fit into discrete categories,” it says. “We need a streamlined system of oversight, one that reflects 21st century markets.”
Obama’s plan calls for consolidating some of the agencies, and requiring more detailed disclosures from financial institutions.
-Gregg Carlstrom, FederalTimes.com
READ MORE...
Friday, October 17, 2008
Bush performance rating tool draws plaudits, pans
As the Bush presidency winds down, performance reviews of the administration's Program Assessment Rating Tool are mixed.
Proponents of PART, which uses a standard questionnaire to assess and improve every federal program, laud the tool for providing a wealth of new performance data, while critics argue that it fails to recognize the diversity of individual programs, among other things.
The two groups made their respective cases in Washington on Wednesday and Thursday.
Beryl Radin, a professor at American University, argued at the American Bar Association's Administrative Law Conference on Thursday that PART and the 1993 Government Performance and Results Act were too narrow in scope to meet their goals.
Both concepts, she said, focused on holding federal employees accountable for outcomes and results, but did not incorporate the cause of those outcomes -- such as air quality or the number of drunk driving fatalities -- into their analyses.
The difficulty of measuring how well programs and individual agencies are meeting their statutory missions is not new.
Sid Shapiro, a law professor at Wake Forest University, said GPRA -- passed during the Clinton administration -- has failed to promote effective regulatory government because its inherent goal is to ferret out waste, fraud and abuse and then punish underperforming agencies by cutting their budgets. Consequently, agencies attempt to protect themselves by devising "euphemistic performance goals in order to assure that they can pass their own grading criteria," Shapiro wrote in an essay presented at the forum.
Annual GPRA reports, he said, rarely mention the agency's lack of funding or staff reductions, and how those challenges may affect their performance.
Robert Shea, OMB's former associate director of administration and government performance and one of the architects of PART, addressed the merits and relative successes of the tool during a virtual forum on Wednesday hosted by Cognos, an IBM company.
After more than six years, PART now has evaluated every federal program -- more than 1,000 in total -- and suggested specific management, legislative or regulatory improvements.
When PART began in 2002, 50 percent of all federal programs evaluated could not demonstrate their results and only 6 percent were rated "effective." Now, nearly 50 percent of all programs are rated as "effective" or "moderately effective" while less than 20 percent are ranked as "results not demonstrated."
The focus of these evaluations also has evolved, Shea said. For example, until recently small business development centers only measured the number of small businesses they counseled or trained. Now the centers look at the number of jobs created. Likewise, community health centers previously measured how many people they provided service to; now the target is health outcomes such as low birth weight in babies.
-Robert Brodsky, GovExec.com
READ MORE...
Proponents of PART, which uses a standard questionnaire to assess and improve every federal program, laud the tool for providing a wealth of new performance data, while critics argue that it fails to recognize the diversity of individual programs, among other things.
The two groups made their respective cases in Washington on Wednesday and Thursday.
Beryl Radin, a professor at American University, argued at the American Bar Association's Administrative Law Conference on Thursday that PART and the 1993 Government Performance and Results Act were too narrow in scope to meet their goals.
Both concepts, she said, focused on holding federal employees accountable for outcomes and results, but did not incorporate the cause of those outcomes -- such as air quality or the number of drunk driving fatalities -- into their analyses.
The difficulty of measuring how well programs and individual agencies are meeting their statutory missions is not new.
Sid Shapiro, a law professor at Wake Forest University, said GPRA -- passed during the Clinton administration -- has failed to promote effective regulatory government because its inherent goal is to ferret out waste, fraud and abuse and then punish underperforming agencies by cutting their budgets. Consequently, agencies attempt to protect themselves by devising "euphemistic performance goals in order to assure that they can pass their own grading criteria," Shapiro wrote in an essay presented at the forum.
Annual GPRA reports, he said, rarely mention the agency's lack of funding or staff reductions, and how those challenges may affect their performance.
Robert Shea, OMB's former associate director of administration and government performance and one of the architects of PART, addressed the merits and relative successes of the tool during a virtual forum on Wednesday hosted by Cognos, an IBM company.
After more than six years, PART now has evaluated every federal program -- more than 1,000 in total -- and suggested specific management, legislative or regulatory improvements.
When PART began in 2002, 50 percent of all federal programs evaluated could not demonstrate their results and only 6 percent were rated "effective." Now, nearly 50 percent of all programs are rated as "effective" or "moderately effective" while less than 20 percent are ranked as "results not demonstrated."
The focus of these evaluations also has evolved, Shea said. For example, until recently small business development centers only measured the number of small businesses they counseled or trained. Now the centers look at the number of jobs created. Likewise, community health centers previously measured how many people they provided service to; now the target is health outcomes such as low birth weight in babies.
-Robert Brodsky, GovExec.com
READ MORE...
Friday, September 12, 2008
Bush administration publishes its final evaluation of program performance
The Bush administration on Friday published its final round of program performance ratings, leaving detailed assessments of more than 1,000 federal initiatives for its successors.
"The information ... should serve as a baseline and beginning for the next administration," said Robert Shea, the Office of Management and Budget's associate director for administration and government performance.
The final Bush administration evaluation indicated that 20 percent of programs are either ineffective or unable to provide meaningful information on their performance. The other 80 percent, OMB assessors concluded, are adequate or better. This round included scores for 67 programs that hadn't been rated before or had requested a reevaluation.
For the first time, agencies administering programs the Government Accountability Office has designated as high-risk outlined steps they are taking to address the watchdog agency's concerns. That information is included along with the program assessments on ExpectMore.gov.
Scores have improved significantly since the Bush administration introduced the Program Assessment Rating Tool. In February 2003, when OMB released the PART grades for the first major chunk of programs it planned to evaluate (20 percent), half couldn't demonstrate results, and just 44 percent were adequate or better.
"For the past seven years, OMB and federal agencies have done a tremendous job at assessing how well programs are working and where we fall short," Shea said.
-Amelia Gruber, GovExec.com
READ MORE...
"The information ... should serve as a baseline and beginning for the next administration," said Robert Shea, the Office of Management and Budget's associate director for administration and government performance.
The final Bush administration evaluation indicated that 20 percent of programs are either ineffective or unable to provide meaningful information on their performance. The other 80 percent, OMB assessors concluded, are adequate or better. This round included scores for 67 programs that hadn't been rated before or had requested a reevaluation.
For the first time, agencies administering programs the Government Accountability Office has designated as high-risk outlined steps they are taking to address the watchdog agency's concerns. That information is included along with the program assessments on ExpectMore.gov.
Scores have improved significantly since the Bush administration introduced the Program Assessment Rating Tool. In February 2003, when OMB released the PART grades for the first major chunk of programs it planned to evaluate (20 percent), half couldn't demonstrate results, and just 44 percent were adequate or better.
"For the past seven years, OMB and federal agencies have done a tremendous job at assessing how well programs are working and where we fall short," Shea said.
-Amelia Gruber, GovExec.com
READ MORE...
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
OMB government performance official to step down in September
Robert Shea, Office of Management and Budget associate director for administration and government performance, will step down in September, he announced to fellow OMB employees on Tuesday.
In his current role, Shea manages OMB's internal affairs, leads the president's Performance Improvement Initiative and administers the Program Assessment Rating Tool, among other responsibilities.
Shea told Government Executive on Wednesday that he is joining Grant Thornton's Global Public Sector. The firm is a worldwide accounting, tax and business advisory organization. Shea said he was proud to be joining Grant Thornton and expected to do work similar to what he's been doing at OMB.
An OMB spokeswoman Tuesday called Shea "[OMB Deputy Director for Management] Clay Johnson's right hand man, pushing for greater accountability in program performance and federal funding."
Shea said two OMB deputies -- Dustin Brown, deputy assistant director for management, and Lauren Wright, assistant director for management and operations -- will take on his duties after his departure.
-Elizabeth Newell, GovExec.com
READ MORE...
In his current role, Shea manages OMB's internal affairs, leads the president's Performance Improvement Initiative and administers the Program Assessment Rating Tool, among other responsibilities.
Shea told Government Executive on Wednesday that he is joining Grant Thornton's Global Public Sector. The firm is a worldwide accounting, tax and business advisory organization. Shea said he was proud to be joining Grant Thornton and expected to do work similar to what he's been doing at OMB.
An OMB spokeswoman Tuesday called Shea "[OMB Deputy Director for Management] Clay Johnson's right hand man, pushing for greater accountability in program performance and federal funding."
Shea said two OMB deputies -- Dustin Brown, deputy assistant director for management, and Lauren Wright, assistant director for management and operations -- will take on his duties after his departure.
-Elizabeth Newell, GovExec.com
READ MORE...
Thursday, June 19, 2008
OMB still wants agencies to be proud in 2009, 2010
The Office of Management and Budget is changing more than competitive sourcing under the President's Management Agenda.
Clay Johnson, OMB's deputy director for management, sent a memo, obtained by FederalNewsRadio, to agency deputy secretaries May 22 detailing the administration's new expectations for e-government, human capital management, improper payments and other functions.
OMB wants agencies to submit where they expect to be under each initiative as of July 2009, and provide a brief explanation of the goals they want to achieve by July, 2010.
Agencies must do these two things and provide OMB with the name and contact information of a senior official responsible for the PMA beyond January 2009, when this administration leaves office.
Beyond the new requirements under the Commercial Services Management area (what used to be competitive sourcing) OMB is asking agencies to reduce by at least 50 percent their improper payments on high risk programs, and reduce improper payments for all programs within three years to 2.5 percent.
"[The Environmental Protection Agency] and [the National Science Foundation] have documented two years of minimal improper payments and have received relief from annual reporting per the guidelines established in Appendix C of OMB Circular A-123," the memo states.
OMB - Proud to Be Memo
OMB - Memo: Attachment 1
OMB - Memo: Attachment 2
-Jason Miller, FederalNewsRadio.com
READ MORE...
Clay Johnson, OMB's deputy director for management, sent a memo, obtained by FederalNewsRadio, to agency deputy secretaries May 22 detailing the administration's new expectations for e-government, human capital management, improper payments and other functions.
OMB wants agencies to submit where they expect to be under each initiative as of July 2009, and provide a brief explanation of the goals they want to achieve by July, 2010.
Agencies must do these two things and provide OMB with the name and contact information of a senior official responsible for the PMA beyond January 2009, when this administration leaves office.
Beyond the new requirements under the Commercial Services Management area (what used to be competitive sourcing) OMB is asking agencies to reduce by at least 50 percent their improper payments on high risk programs, and reduce improper payments for all programs within three years to 2.5 percent.
"[The Environmental Protection Agency] and [the National Science Foundation] have documented two years of minimal improper payments and have received relief from annual reporting per the guidelines established in Appendix C of OMB Circular A-123," the memo states.
OMB - Proud to Be Memo
OMB - Memo: Attachment 1
OMB - Memo: Attachment 2
-Jason Miller, FederalNewsRadio.com
READ MORE...
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
Performance management likely will get a makeover in the next administration
Improving government performance is not exactly the kind of topic that packs 20,000-seat stadiums and stirs voters into a frenzy. So it's not surprising that the leading candidates for the White House generally discuss performance management only in terms of broader policy goals, such as responding more efficiently to disasters or mandating that all large federal contracts are competitively bid.
While specifics may be lacking on the campaign trail, the challenges and nuances of performance management will be unavoidable by the time the 44th president takes office -- and they could go a long way in determining the next administration's success, suggested professionals in the field.
Among the first priorities for the new government will be what to do with the Bush administration's Program Assessment Rating Tool, which uses the answers to a simple questionnaire to rate the effectiveness of all federal programs.
While critics suggest PART is a politically biased tool designed to promote the administration's ideological policies, most agree that the system itself has provided a great deal of useful data and appears to have improved the performance of hundreds of programs previously unable to demonstrate results.
And while the next administration may change the questionnaire or scrap the program's name, PART's increased focus on critical evaluations and program results will be difficult to dismiss completely, said Jon Desenberg, senior policy director for the Performance Institute, a nonpartisan think tank.
Desenberg directs the Transitions in Governance Project, a coalition of major federal organizations that is developing management recommendations for the next administration. The group, which has contacted the campaigns of all three remaining presidential hopefuls, also plans to issue a white paper on performance management recommendations this summer.
Those suggestions likely will include eliminating the subjectivity of program examiners, developing common performance outcomes across federal agencies, and expanding the boundaries of government to include state and local officials, as well as the private sector.
The next president, he said, also must move the proverbial performance management ball so the goal goes beyond measuring ability to measuring results.
Despite the improved transparency, agency heads rarely apply this performance data in their larger decision-making process, Desenberg said.
Porter Shomo, director of Cognos Federal, an IBM company that provides the government with performance management solutions, said government has a "rear view mirror" approach to program data in which the focus is on how things were done in the past, rather than on how to accomplish them in the future.
Changing that approach, he said, will involve navigating one of the most controversial aspects of performance management: tying program performance to the annual budget appropriations process.
-Robert Brodsky, GovExec.com
READ MORE...
While specifics may be lacking on the campaign trail, the challenges and nuances of performance management will be unavoidable by the time the 44th president takes office -- and they could go a long way in determining the next administration's success, suggested professionals in the field.
Among the first priorities for the new government will be what to do with the Bush administration's Program Assessment Rating Tool, which uses the answers to a simple questionnaire to rate the effectiveness of all federal programs.
While critics suggest PART is a politically biased tool designed to promote the administration's ideological policies, most agree that the system itself has provided a great deal of useful data and appears to have improved the performance of hundreds of programs previously unable to demonstrate results.
And while the next administration may change the questionnaire or scrap the program's name, PART's increased focus on critical evaluations and program results will be difficult to dismiss completely, said Jon Desenberg, senior policy director for the Performance Institute, a nonpartisan think tank.
Desenberg directs the Transitions in Governance Project, a coalition of major federal organizations that is developing management recommendations for the next administration. The group, which has contacted the campaigns of all three remaining presidential hopefuls, also plans to issue a white paper on performance management recommendations this summer.
Those suggestions likely will include eliminating the subjectivity of program examiners, developing common performance outcomes across federal agencies, and expanding the boundaries of government to include state and local officials, as well as the private sector.
The next president, he said, also must move the proverbial performance management ball so the goal goes beyond measuring ability to measuring results.
Despite the improved transparency, agency heads rarely apply this performance data in their larger decision-making process, Desenberg said.
Porter Shomo, director of Cognos Federal, an IBM company that provides the government with performance management solutions, said government has a "rear view mirror" approach to program data in which the focus is on how things were done in the past, rather than on how to accomplish them in the future.
Changing that approach, he said, will involve navigating one of the most controversial aspects of performance management: tying program performance to the annual budget appropriations process.
-Robert Brodsky, GovExec.com
READ MORE...
Monday, March 03, 2008
Comment: New tools improve government transparency
Today, there is more public information available about federal finances and program performance than ever before. Agency Web sites contain detailed reports on just about every aspect of how taxpayer funds are spent. These reports include the nuts and bolts of agency finances such as debt collection, assets and liabilities, and the “who, what, where and when” of federal payments. Beyond these basics, agency reports provide volumes of detailed data and information that shed light on what results we get for taxpayer dollars.
However, transparency is not achieved through quantity alone. We cannot expect taxpayers to wade through thousands of pages of reports and make sense of them all. A report released by the Association of Government Accountants last month confirmed that citizens not only want more government transparency, but they also want simplicity.
The government has been continuing to make important advances in improving how information is made available to the public. “The Citizens’ Guide to the 2007 Financial Report of the United States” transmitted to Congress last week is one example. (See www.omb.gov/part/agency_performance_addresses.html .) Instead of poring through 182 pages of the government’s 2007 financial report, readers can use the eight-page guide to quickly pull up the key results of the report. The guide provides an overview of the government’s short-term and long-term financial outlook, with emphasis on the government’s biggest fiscal challenge, the unsustainable growth in entitlement programs. This is the first time such a summary has been issued, and it is expected such summary reports will be published annually.
Other user-friendly Web search tools and summary reports are available to help citizens find information that is important to them:
While there is no shortage of financial and performance information available to the public, federal leaders are committed to making that information continually more accessible. In the meantime, we can do a better job educating citizens about the many tools available and solicit their feedback on how to improve and expand these tools. Citizens can help by sending comments on how to improve the transparency and simplicity of government reports to statements@omb.eop.gov. Include the title “transparency” in the subject line of your e-mail. Through this collaboration, citizens will be better positioned to hold federal leaders accountable for spending taxpayer money more effectively every year.
- Robert Shea is associate director of management and Danny Werfel is acting controller at the Office of Management and Budget.
READ MORE...
However, transparency is not achieved through quantity alone. We cannot expect taxpayers to wade through thousands of pages of reports and make sense of them all. A report released by the Association of Government Accountants last month confirmed that citizens not only want more government transparency, but they also want simplicity.
The government has been continuing to make important advances in improving how information is made available to the public. “The Citizens’ Guide to the 2007 Financial Report of the United States” transmitted to Congress last week is one example. (See www.omb.gov/part/agency_performance_addresses.html .) Instead of poring through 182 pages of the government’s 2007 financial report, readers can use the eight-page guide to quickly pull up the key results of the report. The guide provides an overview of the government’s short-term and long-term financial outlook, with emphasis on the government’s biggest fiscal challenge, the unsustainable growth in entitlement programs. This is the first time such a summary has been issued, and it is expected such summary reports will be published annually.
Other user-friendly Web search tools and summary reports are available to help citizens find information that is important to them:
- http://www.usaspending.gov/
- http://www.earmarks.gov/
- http://www.expectmore.gov/
- http://www.results.gov/
While there is no shortage of financial and performance information available to the public, federal leaders are committed to making that information continually more accessible. In the meantime, we can do a better job educating citizens about the many tools available and solicit their feedback on how to improve and expand these tools. Citizens can help by sending comments on how to improve the transparency and simplicity of government reports to statements@omb.eop.gov. Include the title “transparency” in the subject line of your e-mail. Through this collaboration, citizens will be better positioned to hold federal leaders accountable for spending taxpayer money more effectively every year.
- Robert Shea is associate director of management and Danny Werfel is acting controller at the Office of Management and Budget.
READ MORE...
Thursday, February 07, 2008
PIOs to help agencies meet performance goals
Performance improvement officers will play a key part in steering agencies toward program performance goals in the coming years, according to administration budget officials.
Officials touted the role of the newly created PIO in improving agency performance in the Bush administration’s “Analytical Perspectives” on its fiscal 2009 budget request. In November, President Bush issued Executive Order 13450 mandating that agencies appoint PIOs. Their task is to coordinate performance plans and reports, make sure that program goals are aggressive, realistic and accurately measured, and meet regularly with managers to assess performance.
The executive order also called for the establishment of a Performance Improvement Council, composed of PIOs and headed by the deputy director for management of the Office of Management and Budget. The council is charged with setting performance standards and evaluation criteria and facilitating the exchange of information among agencies.
Outlining other next steps for the President’s Performance Improvement Initiative, formerly the Budget and Performance Integration Initiative, officials said the administration also plans to put the hard work done through the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) to good use in the next year.
In addition, the administration wants to ramp up accountability to the public for program performance by the maximizing the impact of Expectmore.gov, a Web tool that provides PART-based data on how programs are faring and what agencies are doing to improve them.
-Richard Walker, GovernmentLeader.com
READ MORE...
Officials touted the role of the newly created PIO in improving agency performance in the Bush administration’s “Analytical Perspectives” on its fiscal 2009 budget request. In November, President Bush issued Executive Order 13450 mandating that agencies appoint PIOs. Their task is to coordinate performance plans and reports, make sure that program goals are aggressive, realistic and accurately measured, and meet regularly with managers to assess performance.
The executive order also called for the establishment of a Performance Improvement Council, composed of PIOs and headed by the deputy director for management of the Office of Management and Budget. The council is charged with setting performance standards and evaluation criteria and facilitating the exchange of information among agencies.
Outlining other next steps for the President’s Performance Improvement Initiative, formerly the Budget and Performance Integration Initiative, officials said the administration also plans to put the hard work done through the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) to good use in the next year.
In addition, the administration wants to ramp up accountability to the public for program performance by the maximizing the impact of Expectmore.gov, a Web tool that provides PART-based data on how programs are faring and what agencies are doing to improve them.
-Richard Walker, GovernmentLeader.com
READ MORE...
Friday, November 16, 2007
Bush orders agencies to appoint 'performance improvement officers'
President Bush has issued an executive order requiring heads of federal agencies to set clear annual goals, lay out specific plans for achieving them, and designate "performance improvement officers" to assess progress toward meeting the goals and report on it to the public.
With the order, issued Tuesday and detailed at a press briefing today, the Bush administration hopes to establish a lasting legacy for its management improvement agenda.
The performance improvement officers will be required to oversee agencies' "strategic plans, annual performance plans and annual performance reports as required by law," the order states. The officers also will review the goals of agency programs to determine if they are "sufficiently aggressive toward full achievement of the purposes of the program," and "realistic in light of authority and resources assigned to the specified agency personnel."
Robert Shea, OMB's associate director for management, said the position of performance improvement officer could be assigned to a career employee in order to establish continuity through the next administration, although a final decision has not been made. If a political appointee is named to the role, Shea said, there must be a career official in place that is capable of carrying on the initiative during the next administration.
The order stipulates only that the officer should be a "member of the Senior Executive Service or equivalent service."
The order, which OMB hopes to fully implement by the end of 2008, also mandates the creation of a Performance Improvement Council, chaired by Johnson and including all performance improvement officers and other relevant agency officials.
The impetus for the executive order, Johnson said, was a meeting last year in which President Bush explained that his goal was not only for agencies to earn high grades on his administration's management score card -- which uses a stoplight system of green, yellow or red ratings to assess performance -- but for federal officials to use these tools to "make sure agencies are working better."
The order would formalize many of the administration's performance improvement efforts, some of which have been carried out informally for the past several years, and would build upon initiatives such as the Program Assessment Rating Tool.
-Robert Brodsky, GovExec.com
READ MORE...
With the order, issued Tuesday and detailed at a press briefing today, the Bush administration hopes to establish a lasting legacy for its management improvement agenda.
The performance improvement officers will be required to oversee agencies' "strategic plans, annual performance plans and annual performance reports as required by law," the order states. The officers also will review the goals of agency programs to determine if they are "sufficiently aggressive toward full achievement of the purposes of the program," and "realistic in light of authority and resources assigned to the specified agency personnel."
Robert Shea, OMB's associate director for management, said the position of performance improvement officer could be assigned to a career employee in order to establish continuity through the next administration, although a final decision has not been made. If a political appointee is named to the role, Shea said, there must be a career official in place that is capable of carrying on the initiative during the next administration.
The order stipulates only that the officer should be a "member of the Senior Executive Service or equivalent service."
The order, which OMB hopes to fully implement by the end of 2008, also mandates the creation of a Performance Improvement Council, chaired by Johnson and including all performance improvement officers and other relevant agency officials.
The impetus for the executive order, Johnson said, was a meeting last year in which President Bush explained that his goal was not only for agencies to earn high grades on his administration's management score card -- which uses a stoplight system of green, yellow or red ratings to assess performance -- but for federal officials to use these tools to "make sure agencies are working better."
The order would formalize many of the administration's performance improvement efforts, some of which have been carried out informally for the past several years, and would build upon initiatives such as the Program Assessment Rating Tool.
-Robert Brodsky, GovExec.com
READ MORE...
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
OMB finds performance of federal programs improving
More than three-quarters of federal programs assessed by the Bush administration for management and effectiveness are performing at least adequately, new data indicates.
On Wednesday, the Office of Management and Budget released the results of its sixth annual Program Assessment Rating Tool evaluations. The agency looked at 48 programs for the first time, with 77 percent receiving grades of effective, moderately effective or adequate.
OMB also reevaluated 73 programs, including 30 that originally received grades of ineffective or results not demonstrated, the latter indicating a lack of meaningful data or performance goals. Of those programs, more than 93 percent are now ranked as having an adequate or better performance.
Overall, OMB has evaluated 1,016 programs -- accounting for $2.6 trillion in federal spending -- finding that 78 percent are operating at least somewhat effectively. Those figures represent a 3 percent uptick from last year.
Typically OMB releases the results of program assessments along with its budget request in early February. But the administration released the evaluations early this year to get a head start on the process.
The latest data shows the majority of all programs (60 percent) falling somewhere in the middle of the pack, performing well enough but leaving significant room for advancement.
The PART ratings are determined through agency answers to 25 standard questions detailing the program's performance, management and design. OMB assigns a point to each answer and the accumulated score represents the final grade. Program managers can appeal their grade. This year, 45 such appeals were filed, with a third upheld.
The assessments are a significant tool for the administration when making funding decisions for individual programs. President Bush has used the rating tool, in part, to justify cuts in his annual budget requests to Congress. Administration officials note that the rankings are not the only consideration in determining if a program should be cut or eliminated.
The public can view the PART evaluations at www.Expectmore.gov. A new option allows citizens to search through the rankings of all programs for an entire agency. The tool provides viewers with a cumulative look at how the successes or failures of individual programs fit into an agency's overall performance.
-Robert Brodsky, GovExec.com
READ MORE...
On Wednesday, the Office of Management and Budget released the results of its sixth annual Program Assessment Rating Tool evaluations. The agency looked at 48 programs for the first time, with 77 percent receiving grades of effective, moderately effective or adequate.
OMB also reevaluated 73 programs, including 30 that originally received grades of ineffective or results not demonstrated, the latter indicating a lack of meaningful data or performance goals. Of those programs, more than 93 percent are now ranked as having an adequate or better performance.
Overall, OMB has evaluated 1,016 programs -- accounting for $2.6 trillion in federal spending -- finding that 78 percent are operating at least somewhat effectively. Those figures represent a 3 percent uptick from last year.
Typically OMB releases the results of program assessments along with its budget request in early February. But the administration released the evaluations early this year to get a head start on the process.
The latest data shows the majority of all programs (60 percent) falling somewhere in the middle of the pack, performing well enough but leaving significant room for advancement.
The PART ratings are determined through agency answers to 25 standard questions detailing the program's performance, management and design. OMB assigns a point to each answer and the accumulated score represents the final grade. Program managers can appeal their grade. This year, 45 such appeals were filed, with a third upheld.
The assessments are a significant tool for the administration when making funding decisions for individual programs. President Bush has used the rating tool, in part, to justify cuts in his annual budget requests to Congress. Administration officials note that the rankings are not the only consideration in determining if a program should be cut or eliminated.
The public can view the PART evaluations at www.Expectmore.gov. A new option allows citizens to search through the rankings of all programs for an entire agency. The tool provides viewers with a cumulative look at how the successes or failures of individual programs fit into an agency's overall performance.
-Robert Brodsky, GovExec.com
READ MORE...
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
Measuring program performance is a global issue
For the past six years, Bush administration officials have been trying to measure federal programs’ performance using the Performance Assessment Rating Tool (PART). But only now can the Office of Management and Budget make a connection between program ratings and funding levels.
Clay Johnson, OMB’s deputy director for management, said agency program PART scores is one factor in funding decisions made by the administration and Congress
OMB’s ongoing education of Congress and agencies on evaluating programs was a common theme at a meeting June 11 and 12 of about 75 people from more than 20 countries in Washington. The meeting, sponsored by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and the Council for Excellence in Government, brought together budget directors and other officials from the participating countries to exchange ideas about measuring results, said Barry Anderson, head of the Budgeting and Public Expenditures Division of OECD’s Public Government and Territorial Development Directorate.
The participants heard from several countries that are implementing different ways to measure performance.
-Jason Miller, FCW.com
READ MORE...
Clay Johnson, OMB’s deputy director for management, said agency program PART scores is one factor in funding decisions made by the administration and Congress
OMB’s ongoing education of Congress and agencies on evaluating programs was a common theme at a meeting June 11 and 12 of about 75 people from more than 20 countries in Washington. The meeting, sponsored by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and the Council for Excellence in Government, brought together budget directors and other officials from the participating countries to exchange ideas about measuring results, said Barry Anderson, head of the Budgeting and Public Expenditures Division of OECD’s Public Government and Territorial Development Directorate.
The participants heard from several countries that are implementing different ways to measure performance.
-Jason Miller, FCW.com
READ MORE...
Friday, April 06, 2007
Biggest spenders are least accountable agencies, report finds
Agencies with the biggest budgets are the least transparent when it comes to explaining their results to the public, according to a study released April 3.
The Mercatus Center at George Mason University, a government watchdog, has analyzed the annual performance and accountability reports issued by 24 major federal agencies for the last eight years. The group rates whether the reports are easy to find and read, communicate the benefits of agency work and help drive management changes.
Nearly 90 percent of federal funds in 2006 were spent by agencies with unsatisfactory performance reports, according to Mercatus. The four lowest-ranking agencies alone — the Office of Personnel Management and the Housing and Urban Development, Homeland Security, and Health and Human Services departments — accounted for almost $800 billion in federal spending in 2006.
That’s a problem since trust and transparency are essential in a democracy, said Comptroller General David Walker at a press conference announcing the results.
According to the ratings, agencies had the most trouble with linking results to costs, explaining why they failed to achieve major goals and resolving major management challenges.
- Mollie Ziegler, FederalTimes.com
READ MORE...
The Mercatus Center at George Mason University, a government watchdog, has analyzed the annual performance and accountability reports issued by 24 major federal agencies for the last eight years. The group rates whether the reports are easy to find and read, communicate the benefits of agency work and help drive management changes.
Nearly 90 percent of federal funds in 2006 were spent by agencies with unsatisfactory performance reports, according to Mercatus. The four lowest-ranking agencies alone — the Office of Personnel Management and the Housing and Urban Development, Homeland Security, and Health and Human Services departments — accounted for almost $800 billion in federal spending in 2006.
That’s a problem since trust and transparency are essential in a democracy, said Comptroller General David Walker at a press conference announcing the results.
According to the ratings, agencies had the most trouble with linking results to costs, explaining why they failed to achieve major goals and resolving major management challenges.
- Mollie Ziegler, FederalTimes.com
READ MORE...
Monday, March 26, 2007
OMB Receives Leadership Award for Improving Government Performance and Accountability
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) was awarded the 2007 Organizational Leadership Award by the American Society of Public Administration (ASPA) in recognition of its Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART). Presented by ASPA’s Center for Accountability and Performance, the award recognizes outstanding approaches to performance measurement that have resulted in sustained improvements in government performance and accountability. The award was presented on Monday, March 26, 2007 during the ASPA Awards ceremony held in conjunction with its 68th Annual Conference.
READ MORE...
READ MORE...
Tuesday, January 02, 2007
Federal Financial Management is the Most Read Topic of 2006
Today's eNewsletter from FCW.com caught my attention because of the spotlight on the "Most-read stories of 2006". All five of the stories listed concerned Federal Financial Management and Performance Based Management topics. The list included:
OMB Web site lists federal program ratings
[FCW.com, Feb. 6, 2006] ExpectMore.gov provides clear evaluations of programs.
Property of the U.S. government
[Federal Computer Week, May 8, 2006] As attitudes about property management shift, agencies and IT rush to catch up.
Platts: Financial management business line needs clear rules
[FCW.com, June 29, 2006] Some members of Congress asked for better explanations of what a shared service center is and how OMB designates one.
Congress questions financial management consolidation
[Federal Computer Week, March 20, 2006] OMB called to answer for lack of guidance on shared services initiative.
DHS looks for new financial management plan
[Federal Computer Week, April 3, 2006] Following collapse of EMERGE2, department needs a new strategy, officials say.
OMB Web site lists federal program ratings
[FCW.com, Feb. 6, 2006] ExpectMore.gov provides clear evaluations of programs.
Property of the U.S. government
[Federal Computer Week, May 8, 2006] As attitudes about property management shift, agencies and IT rush to catch up.
Platts: Financial management business line needs clear rules
[FCW.com, June 29, 2006] Some members of Congress asked for better explanations of what a shared service center is and how OMB designates one.
Congress questions financial management consolidation
[Federal Computer Week, March 20, 2006] OMB called to answer for lack of guidance on shared services initiative.
DHS looks for new financial management plan
[Federal Computer Week, April 3, 2006] Following collapse of EMERGE2, department needs a new strategy, officials say.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)