Legacy of program assessment tool unclear

While the Bush administration's Program Assessment Rating Tool has been a controversial pillar of the President's Management Agenda, elements of it -- such as transparency and solid performance measures -- are likely to survive the upcoming political transition, an Office of Management and Budget official and outside observer said this week.

OMB released its last round of performance ratings on Friday, providing detailed assessments of more than 1,000 federal programs. The final evaluation, which incorporated ratings for 67 programs that were reviewed for the first time or reassessed in the past year, found that 80 percent of initiatives were performing adequately or better.

Adam Hughes, director of federal fiscal policy at the nonprofit OMB Watch, credited the administration for making the assessments available online.

"The effort to publicize the data, particularly on the ExpectMore.gov Web site, the transparency initiatives and access they've given to the process and the data is positive … and that needs to continue," Hughes said. "There are parts of PART that could be more transparent and open, which is where we get to some of our criticisms, but the Web site and data are excellent."

Dustin Brown, OMB deputy assistant director for management, said increased transparency would be one of PART's most significant legacies. "The fact that we made …over 1,000 assessments available online with sometimes painstaking detail attached … to anyone with an Internet connection is a tremendous accomplishment," Brown said.

He added that he is passionate about ensuring the more than 5,000 performance measures developed and implemented through the tool remain an integral element of the next administration.

"We know so much more about outcomes and outputs and efficiency measures now, and that's what program managers use and live by," Brown said. "It's how we link higher level 'how is [Health and Human Services] doing?' assessments with 'how is Bob the program manager with HHS doing?' [It's] how we are making that linkage with organizational and individual performance. That's what I and performance managers across government will ensure live on."

Scores have improved significantly since OMB published evaluations for the first 20 percent of programs to be rated in February 2003. Of the programs assessed at that time, half could not demonstrate results and only 44 percent were adequate or better. Despite the progress agencies have made in evaluating their programs, Hughes and Brown said there is endlessly more potential in how performance data could be used.

Many critics point out that PART has limited value if Congress does not use it as a budgetary tool. Congress has been minimally, if at all, engaged in the assessments, Hughes said.

"If the next administration wants to … continue to make improvements they have to engage Congress far more," he said. "It's going to be difficult because Congress feels this is their jurisdiction, their job. They can make the argument that they have a good system already."

Brown said data mined through PART could be extremely helpful in improving interagency coordination and understanding federal investments in broad categories of programs, such as those to address homelessness or unemployment.

"We have horizontal problems and a vertical bureaucracy," Brown said. "Looking ahead there is a great opportunity that awaits career civil servants in a new administration to do cross-cutting reviews and analyses of issues that are important to next administration and the American public."

Regardless of the benefits, it is unlikely PART will continue by name. "Every administration has their own spin on how to evaluate programs," Hughes noted.

Brown said OMB has gone to great lengths to ensure the evaluations are as objective as possible, but Hughes argued that the results remain tainted because OMB is political and the performance levels are subjective.

"The simplistic nature of the tool is a problem because it allows for broad stroke manipulation -- 'effective' or 'ineffective,' that rating can mean tons of different things," Hughes said.

Brown acknowledged that "nothing's going to be 100 percent objective," but noted that OMB makes clear "the type of evidence that's required for each question" that contributes to the rating. "Looking through the questions PART asks, it's hard to argue any of them really are political in nature," he said.

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 GovExec.com.
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.