Federal agencies' first-ever performance reports have received little fanfare on Capitol Hill and in the media, but will soon be the subject of intense scholarly scrutiny.
The George Mason University Mercatus Center has formed a research team to analyze the 24 largest federal agencies' annual reports for strengths, weaknesses and usefulness.
"We have decided to measure the value of each report by judging whether it demonstrates (a) transparency, (b) benefits to the community and (c) forward-looking leadership," said Maurice McTigue, director of the Public Sector Leadership program at the Mercatus Center. McTigue and senior research fellow Jerry Ellig are leading the research team and have developed a scorecard to rate the fiscal 1999 annual performance reports.
The Mercatus Center, based in Arlington, Va., crafted criteria for judging the reports with input from congressional staff, representatives from the General Accounting Office and other academics.
The review team will ask four questions in each of the three rating areas.
-
Transparency is the most important of the criteria, the review team said. "Without a high degree of transparency, benefits to the community and forward-looking leadership will remain secret to all but a few insiders," the team said.
1. Is the report easily accessible and easily identified as the agency's Annual Performance Report?
2. Is the report easy for a layperson to read and understand?
3. Are the performance data reliable, credible and verifiable?
4. Did the agency provide baseline and trend data to put its performance measures in context? -
Benefits to the community show how taxpayer dollars are put to use, the team said. The research team will be looking to see if a clear cause and effect relationship exists between agency outputs and outcomes.
1. Are the goals and objectives stated as outcomes?
2. Are the performance measures focused on results or activities?
3. Does the agency demonstrate that its actions have actually made a significant contribution toward its stated goals?
4. Did the agency link its goals and results to costs? -
Forward-looking leadership looks for proof that the agency is attempting to solve its problems. "The whole idea is to gather information that informs future action-and use it," the team explained.
1. Does the report show how the agency's results will make this country a better place to live?
2. Does the agency explain failures to achieve targets outlined in its strategic plan?
3. Does the report identify major management challenges?
4. Does it describe changes in policies or procedures to do better next year?
The results of the research team's work will be published in May.
So far, 16 major federal agencies have made their performance reports available online. Recently, the Environmental Protection Agency, Commerce Department, and Health and Human Services Department posted their 1999 annual performance reports.
The EPA's report, organized around its ten strategic goals, noted that the agency met 44 of 69 goals in 1999. The agency is working on improving data collection for future reports. The Department of Health and Human Services issued an upbeat report, but also reported imperfect data collection. HHS expressed confidence that as data trends develop, future years' reports will improve. The Commmerce Department reported achieving 60 percent of its goals, and substantially meeting another 38 percent, leaving only 2 percent unmet.
Click here to view all agency performance reports available online.
NEXT STORY: IRS tries to balance service, enforcement roles