GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: Link between programs' funding, performance ratings is tenuous

• 44441
  

  The problem with these programs is they aren't the Feds responsibility. Fire fighting and police are local issues and need to funded locally. Enough with wasting my money

  dan m ketter Posted February 26, 2008 2:12 PM
• 44311
  

  The PART process while valuable in concept, does have its limitations in practice. The process itself has been criticized for introducing subjectivity or potential political values that can affect ratings. A lower or indeterminate rating may be due to chronic underfunding, not inherently poor management. No clear distinction is made between the two in characterizing the program's evaluation. There are cases where a program receives little or no funding and must be operated on a collateral basis. This raises the question of whether the program is necessary or why it has otherwise been allowed to founder. Congress may have created the problem in the first place by legislating a program as an unfunded mandate. Conversely, Congress may continue to fund a favored program regardless of its performance profile. So it is feasible that a poorer rated program may need more funding than less. And in some cases, a high performing program could redirect dollars gained through efficient management to another program in need if, for example, the higher performing program is reaching the end of its purpose or has no sound reason for doing more of what it has been doing. I would not advocate using PART ratings in a vacuum without understanding the underlying factors contributing to its rating, nor would I rely on PART exclusively for making resource allocation decisions.

  Anonymous 2 Posted February 25, 2008 9:28 AM
• 44110
  

  PART is a very well laid out program assessment tool, but like other accounting tools integrity is paramount in their usefulness. The same individuals responsible for our fiscal integrity are typically involved in final PART ratings. These decades old problems will persist the result of Congress and the Administration's tolerance of ineffective internal controls, disingenuous Inspector General's Offices, failure of the Justice Department to act on criminal fraud, program recipient's lobbying efforts and maintaining the general absence of honest public service. Truth in numbers, truth in performance and truth in national priorities remains secondary in many policy discussions, discretionary decisions and appropriations. A wise man should not depend on ANY information coming from such non-credible sources no matter how convenient for journalism purposes.

  Put as much faith in PART data as you would any fiscal information coming from the federal government. Its just a little silly to use this data in establishing anything more than the most general of inferences regarding program management, performance and funding trends.

  Anonymous Posted February 22, 2008 8:00 AM
• 44069
  

  This administration is the worst on record for cuts in programs that were designed to assist people. The largest reason I can see is pure politics.

  iggy Posted February 21, 2008 9:45 PM