Loading in 2 Seconds...
Loading in 2 Seconds...
Budgeting for Performance in the U.S. Using the Program Assessment Rating Tool. J. Kevin Carroll U.S. Office of Management and Budget July 2008. Overview of U.S. R&D spending Budget Players and Process in the U.S. Why PART Was Created PART Basics How OMB Uses PART Results
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
Program Assessment Rating Tool
J. Kevin Carroll
U.S. Office of Management and Budget
R&D/ Discretionary, Civilian
Civilian R&D share, excluding Apollo
R&D/ Discretionary, Total
Total R&D share, excluding ApolloR&D as a Share of Discretionary SpendingIt’s approximately constant over the last 30 years!
* Cabinet rank members
Oversees the implementation, coordination, and management of agency programs.What does OMB do?
– U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 9Congress
~250 Committees and Subcommittees
About a dozen appropriations subcommittees in both the House and the Senate
Oct 1, 2007
Oct 1, 2006
OMB oversees agency budget execution and evaluates performance
On FY 2008 Budget
On FY 2009 Budget
We are here
Performance measures not outcome-oriented and not tied to agency mission
Performance results not integrated into agency decisions and budget requests.
How do we incorporate program performance into funding and management decisions?The Challenge in 2001
PART is a tool for assessing agency performance in this initiative
The “stoplight” scoring system used to assess agency progress in the BPI initiative includes criteria related to PARTBudget – Performance Integration
credit - block/formula grant
competitive grant - direct federal
regulatory - research and development
capital assets & service acquisitions
Questions in the “Direct Federal” version are common to all PARTs
Other versions include extra questions tailored for program type
Question weighting can be adjusted
Issue: Definition of a ProgramPARTs Tailored to Program Type
Collect and use performance info?
Federal managers and contractors held accountable for cost, schedule, performance?
Funds spent for intended purpose?
Effective collaboration and coordination?
Strong financial management practices?
Address management deficiencies?Section III: Program Management
Effective - Ineffective
Moderately Effective - Results Not Demonstrated
Specific follow-up actions aimed at improving performance
Data to inform decision making processes, including both budget and management decisionsWhat Do We Get Out of PART?
A good PART score does not necessarily mean more funding.
A bad PART score does not necessarily mean less funding.
PART helps identify needed planning and management improvements.(b) Data for Budget Decision Making
% BA, FY 2004
Non-R&DPortion of Discretionary funds spent on R&D by OMB division
2RD2) Does the program use a prioritization process to guide budget requests and funding decisions?
3RD1) For R&D programs other than competitive grants programs, does the program allocate funds and use management processes that maintain program quality?R&D Specific Questions
Performance measures are key to:
assessing program effectiveness
incentivizing the right behavior
Performance measures should be:
Salient and meaningful
Capture the most important aspects of a program’s purpose and prioritiesPerformance Measures
Outcomes: Intended result, effect, or consequence of program. Public benefit should be clear. External factors influence.
Outputs: What the program produced or provided.
The PART strives for measures of outcomes.
Output or process measures should clearly tie to outcomes.Outcomes and Outputs
PART response vs. PART guidance
NOT PART response vs. other PART response
Assessing quality and content of Explanation and Evidence
Generally no review of evidentiary documentsConsistency Check Purpose