Science agencies get mixed signals on Results Act

Federal science agencies are making a "good faith effort" to comply with the 1993 Government Performance and Results Act, but often get conflicting instructions from Congress on how to implement the law, according to a new report from the government's top scientific academies. The five major agencies that fund federal science and engineering research have tried to comply with GPRA, but oversight bodies, including Congress, have provided contradictory feedback about tying performance results to their annual budgets, the report said. A committee operating under the auspices of the National Academy of Science, the National Academy of Engineering, the Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council prepared the report. "Unless the agency responses to GPRA are useful to Congress in the urgent task of setting priorities and budgeting, the value of the act might not warrant the time and effort it requires of the federal government," said the committee's report, which focused on the compliance efforts of the National Science Foundation, the National Institutes of Health, the Defense and Energy departments, and NASA. According to the report, one agency tried to tie its GPRA reports more closely to its annual budget, only to be told by a congressional committee to use a previous format. But another agency was told to stop using the old format and do a better job linking its performance goals to its annual budget. Agencies lack a strong incentive to link results with their budgets, according to the report, since Congress has not yet integrated GPRA into the annual budget process. During a House Government Reform subcommittee hearing in June, Office of Management and Budget Deputy Director Sean O'Keefe said President Bush's chief management priority is linking the performance goals of federal programs to agency budgets.

O'Keefe said agencies will be required to submit performance-based budgets for selected programs during the fiscal 2003 budget cycle, the first time agencies have been forced to tie their spending decisions to performance goals.

The new report urged scientific agencies and oversight groups to develop more realistic reporting schedules for their research. GPRA was designed to enable the administration and Congress to connect agencies' performance plans and reports to their annual budgets, but often basic research on programs must be monitored over several years to accurately gauge results, the report said.

"The timing [of GPRA] is unfortunate for several reasons …. Neither agencies nor the public receive a benefit when agencies create detailed performance plans before they have sufficient recent information on the performance of current programs," the report said. The report encouraged agencies and GPRA oversight bodies, such as Congress, the General Accounting Office and the Office of Management and Budget, to communicate more regularly and in a more collaborative fashion. Agencies had complained to the committee that oversight groups are often "quicker to criticize shortcomings than to suggest improvements."

Stay up-to-date with federal news alerts and analysis — Sign up for GovExec's email newsletters.
Close [ x ] More from GovExec

Thank you for subscribing to newsletters from
We think these reports might interest you:

  • Sponsored by G Suite

    Cross-Agency Teamwork, Anytime and Anywhere

    Dan McCrae, director of IT service delivery division, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

  • Data-Centric Security vs. Database-Level Security

    Database-level encryption had its origins in the 1990s and early 2000s in response to very basic risks which largely revolved around the theft of servers, backup tapes and other physical-layer assets. As noted in Verizon’s 2014, Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR)1, threats today are far more advanced and dangerous.

  • Sponsored by One Identity

    One Nation Under Guard: Securing User Identities Across State and Local Government

    In 2016, the government can expect even more sophisticated threats on the horizon, making it all the more imperative that agencies enforce proper identity and access management (IAM) practices. In order to better measure the current state of IAM at the state and local level, Government Business Council (GBC) conducted an in-depth research study of state and local employees.

  • Sponsored by Aquilent

    The Next Federal Evolution of Cloud

    This GBC report explains the evolution of cloud computing in federal government, and provides an outlook for the future of the cloud in government IT.

  • Sponsored by LTC Partners, administrators of the Federal Long Term Care Insurance Program

    Approaching the Brink of Federal Retirement

    Approximately 10,000 baby boomers are reaching retirement age per day, and a growing number of federal employees are preparing themselves for the next chapter of their lives. Learn how to tackle the challenges that today's workforce faces in laying the groundwork for a smooth and secure retirement.

  • Sponsored by Hewlett Packard Enterprise

    Cyber Defense 101: Arming the Next Generation of Government Employees

    Read this issue brief to learn about the sector's most potent challenges in the new cyber landscape and how government organizations are building a robust, threat-aware infrastructure

  • Sponsored by Aquilent

    GBC Issue Brief: Cultivating Digital Services in the Federal Landscape

    Read this GBC issue brief to learn more about the current state of digital services in the government, and how key players are pushing enhancements towards a user-centric approach.


When you download a report, your information may be shared with the underwriters of that document.