Bill may address GAO concern about program evaluations

Legislation proposed by House lawmakers last month would address some concerns raised by the General Accounting Office in a 10-year retrospective of the Government Performance and Results Act released last week.

Besides requiring regular evaluations of all federal programs at least every five years, a GPRA amendment drafted in February by Rep. Todd Platts, R-Pa., chairman of the House Government Reform Subcommittee on Efficiency and Financial Management, asks agencies to revise long-term strategic plans every four years. In last week's report (GAO-04-38), GAO researchers evaluating GPRA urged Congress to consider mandating performance plan updates following presidential elections.

The amendment introduced by Platts asks agencies to rethink long-range plans by Sept. 30 of the year following a presidential election. Such a requirement encourages agencies to continuously adjust policy goals to match those of the administration in power, GAO said in the report.

Enacted in 1993, GPRA requires agencies to set broad performance goals and compile annual reports illustrating progress toward meeting these goals. The law contains language recommending that agencies periodically evaluate program performance, but does not mandate reviews by the Office of Management and Budget.

Platts proposed his GPRA amendment mainly in hopes of ensuring that future administrations continue some form of program evaluations similar to those currently conducted by OMB. The amendment, introduced as the "Program Assessment and Results Act," does not dictate any particular method of performing the assessments.

While Platts included in his amendment language requiring agencies to update strategic plans toward the beginning of each presidential term, he saw no need to incorporate a separate GAO recommendation to require presidents to write governmentwide strategic plans, said Tabetha Mueller, a subcommittee spokeswoman. "We were more concerned with the legislation being about programs," she explained.

The subcommittee will take up Platts' amendment later this month, but has not set a date. Lawmakers on the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee have not expressed an interest in introducing companion legislation. Members of the Senate committee are still looking into the issues raised by GAO auditors and have not decided whether to introduce the legislative language recommended by the watchdog agency, said Andrea Hofelich, a committee spokeswoman.

The review of GPRA implementation also contained some recommendations for OMB. For instance, GAO researchers suggested that administration officials clarify the relationship between GPRA and the Program Assessment Rating Tool, a questionnaire OMB developed to evaluate a sampling of programs each year. OMB should emphasize that GPRA provides a broad framework for improving agency performance, while the PART is a lens for identifying programs needing management attention, GAO said.

Administration officials told GAO that they plan to follow that suggestion, and noted that they also will also take steps to ensure agency managers receive adequate training and share strategies for measuring success at meeting performance goals. Agencies have experienced some difficulties in designing appropriate measures of progress, GAO found.

Despite these challenges, agency managers are increasingly apt to use some type of performance measures, a survey completed by GAO as part of the 10-year retrospective showed. For instance, 47 percent of managers questioned in 2003 said they gauged progress in customer service. By contrast, 32 percent of managers surveyed in 1997, and 38 percent surveyed in 2000, said they measured improvements in customer service.

GAO's review demonstrates that "GPRA has led to better agency planning, measurement and reporting of results," said Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., ranking member of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee and one of the lawmakers who requested the report.