Thompson Letter on GPRA - NSF
August 17, 1999
The Honorable Rita R. Colwell
Director
National Science Foundation
4201 Wilson Boulevard
Arlington, VA 22230
Dear Director Colwell:
As you know, the Congress is focused on ensuring that the federal government delivers better results to its citizens and taxpayers. The Congress has enacted a statutory framework to achieve these results. This statutory framework includes the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA); financial management statutes, such as the Chief Financial Officers Act; and information resources management statutes, such as the Clinger-Cohen Act. Each of these reforms aims at achieving more efficient and effective performance throughout the federal government.
As part of our oversight agenda, the Committee has developed information on how effectively the National Science Foundation (NSF) is using the above statutory tools to improve its performance in several key areas such as becoming more results-oriented and resolving long-standing problems of fraud, waste, and mismanagement. The purpose of this letter is to share with you the information we have developed and obtain your response to certain questions pertaining to it. With this dialog as a start, we hope to work with you on a continuing basis to ensure that NSF delivers the best possible results for the American people.
Performance plan assessment
The Congress continues to look closely at how well departments and agencies are implementing GPRA. At the request of this Committee and others, GAO recently completed an assessment of NSF’s annual performance plan for fiscal year (FY) 2000. According to GAO, NSF’s plan for FY 2000 is moderately improved over its FY 1999 plan and generally should be useful to decision makers. The major strengths of the plan are that it:
- uses an alternative format to describe the type and level of performance (a particularly appropriate feature for evaluating basic and applied research programs);
- provides additional outcome-oriented goals;
- links strategies to specific program goals and describes how the strategies will contribute to achieving those goals; and
- identifies crosscutting efforts with other related federal programs.
However, GAO also identified several key weakness in the NSF plan. Specifically, the plan:
- provides limited discussion of capital, human and financial resources;
- lacks clear linkages between the budget and performance goals; and
- provides limited confidence in the validation and verification of performance data.
In developing performance plans for future years, I hope that you will build on the strengths of this year’s version and address the areas that need improvement.
Need to implement audit recommendations on major management problems
One area where there have been too few results and where there remains much room for improvement is solving major management challenges that seem to persist year after year at most agencies. Enclosed with this letter is a list of 16 audit reports by the NSF Inspector General (IG) that contain open recommendations over six months old. Most of these recommendations relate to spending funds efficiently and effectively or clarifying institutional accountability for cost sharing.
Need for specific performance goals to address major management problems
It is essential that agency heads and other managers commit themselves to tangible steps that will lead to solutions and that agency heads accept accountability for following through on these commitments. One obvious way to do this is to establish specific and measurable goals in your annual GPRA performance plans. Indeed, Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidance implementing GPRA states:
Performance goals for management problems should be included in the annual plan, particularly for problems whose resolution is mission-critical, or which could potentially impede achievement of program goals . . .
GAO’s evaluation of the NSF’s FY 2000 performance plan included an analysis of the extent to which the plan contains specific performance goals to address the ten most serious management problems confronting NSF that your IG has identified. According to the GAO analysis, which is detailed in another enclosure, NSF’s plan contains such performance goals for only two of these ten problem areas. I am concerned over the absence of specific goals for the other major problem areas. Without specific and measurable performance goals, it is difficult if not impossible to assess progress in addressing major management problems and to hold agencies accountable.
Congressional follow-up
With so many tax dollars being wasted, this Committee expects agencies to take every opportunity to use the many tools available to them, such as GPRA plans, to resolve major management problems. Furthermore, the GAO and your own IG exist to work in partnership with you to solve longstanding issues of waste, fraud, and abuse.
I hope that the information provided with this letter will stimulate you to make greater use of these tools and resources. In this regard, I ask that you review the enclosed information and respond to the following questions:
- Do you disagree with any of the IG recommendations referenced in the enclosure? If so, what is the basis for your disagreement?
- Where you agree with the recommendations, what specific actions are you taking to implement each one and how long will it take to complete them?
- Do you disagree with any of the IG designations of management problems facing NSF? If so, which ones and why?
- Where you agree with the problem designations, are you prepared to establish specific and measurable commitments to address each one of them in your next performance plan?
- If so, could you outline preliminarily what approach you plan to take for each problem?
- If you believe that any of these problems do not lend themselves to specific and measurable performance plan goals, please explain why. Please also explain what alternative steps you are taking to solve the problem and to ensure accountability for doing so.
I would appreciate your early attention to this letter. After receiving your response, I will ask Committee staff to arrange a meeting with your representatives to discuss it. My Governmental Affairs Committee staff contact is Robert Shea.
Sincerely,
Fred Thompson
Chairman
FT:rs
Enclosures
