OMB deputy supports performance reviews for federal programs

An Office of Management and Budget official on Wednesday endorsed lawmakers' attempts to draft legislation requiring regular performance reviews of federal programs.

Such legislation, as long as it is not too restrictive, would be a "welcome complement" to the 1993 Government Performance and Results Act, OMB Deputy Director for Management Clay Johnson told members of the House Government Reform Subcommittee on Efficiency and Financial Management. GPRA requires federal agencies to develop strategic plans for meeting concrete performance goals.

While broad performance plans are helpful, agencies also benefit from reviews of specific programs, Johnson said. These assessments can in turn help administration officials and Congress make better informed budget decisions.

"One of the most visible factors affecting a program's performance is funding," Johnson testified before the subcommittee. "But I believe far too much attention is devoted to how much we are spending rather than how much we are getting for what we spend."

The House subcommittee is holding a series of hearings looking at the Bush administration's method of grading federal programs. OMB evaluators currently use a 25- to-30-part questionnaire called the Program Assessment Rating Tool to classify programs as effective, moderately effective, adequate, ineffective, or results not demonstrated.

In preparation for the fiscal 2005 budget, OMB rated 40 percent of federal programs. Administration officials expect to rate all federal programs in time for the fiscal 2008 budget cycle. Members of the House subcommittee plan to introduce a bill that would institutionalize some form of program evaluations similar to the PART.

During the Wednesday hearing, lawmakers gathered input from Johnson and Deputy Secretary of Energy Kyle McSlarrow. Both warned subcommittee members to make the legislation broad enough so that future administrations can develop their own methods of rating programs.

Johnson suggested that lawmakers require administrations to give programs ratings in various categories, such as the program's ability to help meet the agency's mission, but leave the details up to OMB. McSlarrow also supported the concept of institutionalizing regular program evaluations, but said he would not want to feel "hamstrung" by one particular rating tool.

"It is important that OMB and the agencies have the flexibility to determine how assessments are to be conducted," McSlarrow said. "This will accommodate changing needs, and allow the use of evolving methodologies in measuring performance."

Subcommittee Chair Rep. Todd Platts, R-Pa., said he sees the PART as a "proven and effective management tool," but one that is still evolving. Lawmakers do not intend to write a bill that would require future administrations to use PART as it stands today.

Rep. Edolphus Towns, D-N.Y., remained skeptical, expressing concern that executive branch officials would use regular program evaluations to promote a political agenda, rather than as an objective management tool. The administration could give pet programs high ratings and claim that unpopular programs do not work, he said. Officials could then use those biased assessments to justify funding requests.

But Johnson said that OMB does not play favorites. "It's about our ability to accomplish the overall goal, not about our commitment to a program," he said.

For instance, President Bush places a high priority on improving education, but OMB has deemed student loan and adult literacy programs ineffective, Johnson said. The White House's fiscal 2005 budget request recommends eliminating the Federal Perkins Loan program, which grants colleges and universities money to disburse need-based student loans, and Even Start, a literacy program, based on performance evaluations.

OMB assessors found that the Perkins loan program is "redundant and duplicative, given the broad availability of need-based, subsidized, relatively low-interest loans available through two larger student loan programs." Studies of Even Start have shown that the program "has no impact on the children and parents served," OMB's evaluation stated.

In addition, poor performance ratings do not necessarily result in recommended budget cuts, Johnson noted. "A PART rating does not today, nor should it ever, result in an automatic funding decision," he testified.

"In my view, there's no hidden agenda here," McSlarrow said. Renewable energy development programs generally received better PART scores than programs promoting the use of oil and gas, he noted. "Ideologically, that's not where I stand," he said.

Agency officials have little motivation to use program evaluations as political tools, McSlarrow added. "I don't need the PART to make a policy decision," he said.