[Budget of the United States Government]
[V. Investing in the Common Good: Program Performance in Federal Functions]
[10. Restoring Trust in Government]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]
[[Page 159]]
[[Page 161]]
10. RESTORING TRUST IN GOVERNMENT
----------------------------------------------------------------------
When I became President, I knew we had to change old policies and old ways of doing things . . . the American
people had a very low level of confidence in the Government . . . We wanted to change all that. We knew it was
important for our economy . . . We knew it was important for the integrity of our democracy.
President Clinton
January 1999
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Americans believe that Government can deliver better results and
improve their quality of life and the lives of their families. A
generation ago, when the University of Michigan's Institute for Social
Research asked ``Do you trust the Federal Government to do the right
things most of the time?'' 76 percent of Americans expressed confidence
in the Federal Government. By 1994, that number had declined to only 21
percent. Analyses of the underlying causes of distrust of Government by
The Pew Charitable Trusts, the Council for Excellence in Government,
leading universities and other groups suggest there is a key link
between confidence in Government and Government's performance.
President Clinton and Vice President Gore recognized this and set
about improving the responsiveness and performance of the Federal
Government. The success of these efforts is reflected in the significant
changes in the way Government does its business and the new confidence
on the part of the American public. In the second term of this
Administration, public trust in the Federal Government nearly doubled in
the course of only four years, reaching 40 percent when last measured by
the University of Michigan in 1998 (see Chart 10-1).
Recent studies show that many people base their decisions about how
much they trust their Government on their assessment of how well they
believe Federal agencies perform. When Governments work for the people--
when citizens receive good basic services and have faith in the
Government that is providing them--a large measure of stability and
community naturally follows. In the past seven years, President Clinton
and Vice President Gore have made substantial efforts to improve
Government performance with demonstrable results.
Any organization that seeks to perform at a high level must have clear
expectations, along with the necessary resources, the flexibility, and
the management capacity to improve performance and get results. In 1993,
Congress passed the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) which
established a framework to set expectations, measure the progress toward
meeting these goals, and report on results. For the first time this
year, agencies will report upon these results in light of the
performance goals they established in their 1999 plans. Later in 2000,
agencies will update their strategic plans to cover activities for the
next three to five years. Each year, agencies are more and more making
performance measures a key part of their basic decisions, resulting in
better budgeting and better programs.
The Administration's Stewardship is Making a Difference
In 1993, President Clinton and Vice President Gore launched the
longest running management reform effort in the Federal Government's
history, the Reinventing Government initiative. This effort has created
a Government that works better, costs less, and gets results Americans
care about. In the past seven years, the Administration has streamlined
the work force, eliminated obsolete programs and agencies, empowered its
employees to cut red tape, and used partnerships to get results.
[[Page 162]]
Between 1993 and 1999, the Administration reduced the size of the
Federal civilian work force by 17 percent, or 377,000 full-time
equivalent employees. As Chart 10-2 shows, this is the smallest Federal
work force in 39 years. This reduction has been accomplished almost
entirely through voluntary separations. Almost all of the 14 Cabinet
Departments and large independent agencies have reduced their work force
(see Chart 10-3). For example, the Office of Personnel Management
reduced its work force by 55 percent during this period. And the growth
in the Justice Department's work force, running contrary to the overall
trend, specifically reflects the Administration's commitment to
expanding the fight against crime and drugs, while the Commerce
Department has hired additional employees on a temporary basis to meet
the demands of the decennial census.
To enable agencies to downsize and restructure so that they can better
achieve their overall goals and missions, the Administration proposed
and Congress enacted legislation in 1999 authorizing agencies to target
offers of voluntary, early retirement to particular segments of the work
force. The Administration will seek Government-wide authority to offer
such voluntary separation incentives (buyouts) where justified through
cost benefit analysis and will also continue to support agencies needing
separate buyout authority to restructure their work force.
The Administration is Improving Performance
While reducing costs and cutting red tape are important management
objectives, the highest priority objective is for Federal agencies to
deliver results that Americans care about. Studies show that high
performing organizations use a balanced set of measures to determine how
they are doing in achieving ``bottom line'' mission results, maintaining
strong employee morale, and satisfying their customers. These three
elements are related. Research shows that when employee satisfaction
grows, so too does the satisfaction of the customers they serve. This,
in turn, contributes to improved mission (or operational) results.
Together, such results-ori
[[Page 164]]
ented measures give a more comprehensive picture of how programs are
performing and prevents managers from making improvements in one area at
the expense of another.
Customer satisfaction: In 1999, the Administration sponsored the
first-ever Government-wide survey of the customers of agencies that deal
the most with the public. The Government-wide American Customer
Satisfaction Index was 68.6 on a 100-point scale. With an index of
nearly 72, private sector services are in a similar range. In fact,
certain Federal agencies do as well or better than the private sector in
a number of areas. For example, Federal customers receiving earned
benefits rated their agencies at 77 while the comparable private sector
area had the same rating. Similarly, Veterans Health Administration
outpatient services ranked 79; private sector hospitals ranked 70. As
might be expected, there is considerable variation between agencies that
provide benefits or services and those that collect taxes or regulate.
The activities of regulatory agencies benefit the public at large, but
may not be perceived as benefiting those subject to the regulation.
Chart 10-4 shows customer satisfaction with selected Federal services
compared to average satisfaction for private sector services. For
details, see the website www.npr.gov. In addition, 60 percent of those
surveyed thought service had improved in the past two years. Each
participating agency has committed to improve its customer satisfaction
in the coming year. The agency plans are available at the website
www.customersurvey.gov. In 2000 and 2001, agencies will repeat the
survey and expand the services covered.
Employee satisfaction: A second 1999 Government-wide survey--of the
Federal work force--showed that job satisfaction in Federal agencies is
similar to the private sector. It also showed a dramatic leap in the
number of Government employees who see customer service as an essential
component of their jobs. Today, this is true for 72 percent of Federal
Government employees. Less than a decade ago, shortly before this
Administration came to of
[[Page 165]]
fice, only 36 percent of supervisors considered customer service to be
important. In addition, the survey showed that employees in
organizations where reinvention has been a priority were twice as
satisfied with their jobs, felt they were more empowered to serve their
customers, and faced less red tape than other employees.
To recognize that Federal employees are the key to effective
Government performance, and to enable the Government to attract and
retain a high-quality work force, the President proposes to enhance the
current compensation package. First, the President proposes a 3.7
percent pay raise for civilian employees, an increase greater than the
recent wage growth in the private sector. Second, the Administration
will request that Congress reverse action taken last year to delay into
2001 the last 2000 paycheck of many Federal employees and to repeal,
effective January 2001, the higher retirement contributions required of
Federal employees by the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. Third, the
President will enable Federal employees to pay their annual health
insurance premiums out of pre-tax income, a benefit already available to
most employees in the private sector and State and municipal
Governments.
Getting Results: The commitment of the President and the Congress to
balance the budget--and keep it in balance--has rightly prompted
increased focus on the allocation of resources to programs that advance
each agency's mission. Therefore, agencies are increasingly justifying
funds for programs in terms of performance. The Executive Branch and the
Congress are asking the key questions: ``What are we getting for what we
are spending?'' and ``How will we know if we are successful?''
The bottom line for Government organizations is their mission: the
goals and outcomes that can indicate success. For example, a major
performance goal for the Environmental Protection Agency is to reduce
air toxics emissions. The Department of Education's Student Financial
Assistance Program has a major goal to ensure that low- and middle-
income students will have the same access to post- secondary education
that high-income students do. The Social Security Administration seeks
to deliver customer-responsive world-class service.
Often performance is examined only across single organizational units,
such as a Department or agency. In Chapters 11 (National Security)
through 27 (General Government) that follow, program performance is
described according to budget functions. The functional presentation
reflects comprehensive coverage of the major accounts in the budget,
grouping together similar programs to show the interrelationships among
their goals. The chapters include illustrative accomplishments in 1999
and other recent years, and also highlight performance goals for 2001.
Additional detail will be available when the agencies distribute their
2001 performance plans and their first-ever annual performance reports
assessing operational results for 1999.
The material that follows, together with Section III, ``Sustaining Our
Economic Prosperity,'' constitutes the third comprehensive Government-
wide Performance Plan. Together these sections, which highlight fiscal
performance and operating performance, contain an integrated view of the
measures and descriptions of program activity contemplated by the GPRA.
In addition, OMB is separately submitting its third Report to Congress
on the Costs and Benefits of Federal Regulations. This report is
required by Section 638(a) of the 1999 Omnibus Consolidated and
Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act. The report updates
information on the costs and benefits of Federal regulations in the
aggregate, by agency and agency program, and by major rule. It also
presents an analysis of impacts of Federal regulation on State, local,
and Tribal governments, small business, wages, and economic growth.
Finally, the report provides recommendations for reform of specific
regulations.
[[Page 166]]
Table 10-1. FEDERAL RESOURCES BY FUNCTION
(In billions of dollars)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimate
Category 1999 -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Actual 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NATIONAL DEFENSE:
Spending:
Discretionary Budget 288.1 294.1 306.3 310.1 316.4 324.1 332.4
Authority..............
Mandatory Outlays:
Existing law.......... -0.6 -0.5 -0.9 -0.8 -0.8 -0.7 -0.7
Credit Activity:
Direct loan .......... * .......... N/A N/A N/A N/A
disbursements..........
Guaranteed loans........ * * .......... N/A N/A N/A N/A
Tax Expenditures:
Existing law............ 2.1 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2
INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS:
Spending:
Discretionary Budget 41.5 23.9 22.8 23.2 23.5 24.1 24.6
Authority..............
Mandatory Outlays:
Existing law.......... -4.3 -4.8 -4.1 -3.7 -3.7 -3.7 -3.7
Credit Activity:
Direct loan 2.8 1.8 1.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A
disbursements..........
Guaranteed loans........ 9.5 12.8 12.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Tax Expenditures:
Existing law............ 14.4 15.6 16.7 17.0 17.6 18.8 20.1
Proposed legislation.... .......... 0.1 0.2 0.1 * -* -*
GENERAL SCIENCE, SPACE, AND
TECHNOLOGY:
Spending:
Discretionary Budget 18.8 19.2 20.8 21.2 21.5 22.1 22.5
Authority..............
Mandatory Outlays:
Existing law.......... * 0.1 0.1 * * * *
Tax Expenditures:
Existing law............ 3.6 2.9 5.2 5.7 5.1 4.8 3.9
ENERGY:
Spending:
Discretionary Budget 2.9 2.6 2.9 3.3 3.1 3.2 3.3
Authority..............
Mandatory Outlays:
Existing law.......... -2.2 -4.5 -3.8 -3.9 -3.7 -4.0 -4.0
Credit Activity:
Direct loan 1.1 1.7 1.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A
disbursements..........
Guaranteed loans........ * 0.1 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Tax Expenditures:
Existing law............ 1.9 1.9 1.9 2.0 1.3 1.4 1.4
Proposed legislation.... .......... .......... 0.2 0.4 0.7 1.1 1.6
NATURAL RESOURCES AND
ENVIRONMENT:
Spending:
Discretionary Budget 23.8 24.0 24.9 25.1 25.4 26.0 26.5
Authority..............
Mandatory Outlays:
Existing law.......... 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.9 0.8 0.8
Proposed legislation.. .......... .......... -0.2 -0.1 -0.5 -0.4 -0.3
Credit Activity:
Direct loan * * * N/A N/A N/A N/A
disbursements..........
Guaranteed loans........ .......... .......... 0.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Tax Expenditures:
Existing law............ 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.8
Proposed legislation.... .......... .......... * * 0.1 0.2 0.3
AGRICULTURE:
Spending:
Discretionary Budget 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.6 4.5 4.7 4.7
Authority..............
Mandatory Outlays:
Existing law.......... 18.4 26.1 14.3 9.8 9.7 7.6 6.6
Proposed legislation.. .......... 0.7 3.4 3.3 .......... .......... ..........
Credit Activity:
Direct loan 10.0 12.2 10.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A
disbursements..........
Guaranteed loans........ 2.6 6.6 6.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A
[[Page 167]]
Tax Expenditures:
Existing law............ 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.1
COMMERCE AND HOUSING CREDIT:
Spending:
Discretionary Budget 3.8 7.2 3.5 3.3 3.3 3.2 3.3
Authority..............
Mandatory Outlays:
Existing law.......... -0.9 -1.6 -0.8 -1.0 -1.5 -1.3 -0.7
Proposed legislation.. .......... .......... -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1
Credit Activity:
Direct loan 2.1 1.8 2.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A
disbursements..........
Guaranteed loans........ 306.6 264.0 273.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Tax Expenditures:
Existing law............ 227.9 235.6 247.1 255.3 264.4 274.7 284.4
Proposed legislation.... .......... .......... 0.3 0.5 0.5 0.7 0.8
TRANSPORTATION:
Spending:
Discretionary Budget 13.7 13.3 14.5 14.5 15.0 15.6 16.3
Authority..............
Mandatory Outlays:
Existing law.......... 1.9 2.4 2.1 1.6 2.0 1.9 1.9
Proposed legislation.. .......... .......... * * * * *
Credit Activity:
Direct loan 0.2 1.0 0.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A
disbursements..........
Guaranteed loans........ 1.8 2.8 0.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Tax Expenditures:
Existing law............ 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.5 2.6
COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL
DEVELOPMENT:
Spending:
Discretionary Budget 11.0 11.5 12.3 12.3 12.5 12.8 13.1
Authority..............
Mandatory Outlays:
Existing law.......... -* -0.5 -0.6 -0.8 -0.9 -0.9 -1.1
Proposed legislation.. .......... .......... -0.1 * 0.1 0.2 0.2
Credit Activity:
Direct loan 1.7 2.1 2.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A
disbursements..........
Guaranteed loans........ 1.6 2.4 2.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Tax Expenditures:
Existing law............ 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.4 1.2 1.1 1.1
Proposed legislation.... .......... .......... 0.1 0.5 1.0 1.3 1.6
EDUCATION, TRAINING,
EMPLOYMENT, AND SOCIAL
SERVICES:
Spending:
Discretionary Budget 46.6 44.4 61.5 61.6 62.3 63.4 64.6
Authority..............
Mandatory Outlays:
Existing law.......... 11.3 11.3 15.4 14.0 15.5 16.2 17.2
Proposed legislation.. .......... -0.1 -2.8 -0.2 -0.2 -0.2 -0.2
Credit Activity:
Direct loan 18.1 14.7 15.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A
disbursements..........
Guaranteed loans........ 21.9 25.3 26.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Tax Expenditures:
Existing law............ 34.1 36.0 37.6 38.7 41.2 42.4 44.7
Proposed legislation.... .......... 0.1 1.4 3.7 3.8 5.0 5.5
HEALTH:
Spending:
Discretionary Budget 30.2 33.8 35.0 34.8 35.2 36.1 36.8
Authority..............
Mandatory Outlays:
Existing law.......... 114.1 123.3 132.3 143.2 155.1 167.5 181.3
Proposed legislation.. .......... .......... 1.1 2.8 5.3 8.1 9.8
Credit Activity:
Guaranteed loans........ .......... 0.1 0.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A
[[Page 168]]
Tax Expenditures:
Existing law............ 82.9 89.3 95.2 101.7 107.4 114.2 122.0
Proposed legislation.... .......... .......... 0.1 1.3 2.8 3.9 4.7
MEDICARE:
Spending:
Discretionary Budget 2.8 3.1 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.1 3.2
Authority..............
Mandatory Outlays:
Existing law.......... 187.7 199.5 218.3 223.7 241.9 255.4 277.5
Proposed legislation.. .......... .......... -0.7 2.6 -2.7 6.5 6.1
INCOME SECURITY:
Spending:
Discretionary Budget 32.7 29.8 41.3 41.3 41.8 42.9 43.8
Authority..............
Mandatory Outlays:
Existing law.......... 197.8 207.4 217.2 229.7 240.9 251.1 263.3
Proposed legislation.. .......... 2.2 -1.6 0.9 1.5 3.0 3.1
Credit Activity:
Direct loan * * * N/A N/A N/A N/A
disbursements..........
Guaranteed loans........ * 0.1 0.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Tax Expenditures:
Existing law............ 140.3 147.7 153.1 159.3 165.6 172.1 178.8
Proposed legislation.... .......... * 2.6 4.6 7.9 10.4 16.4
SOCIAL SECURITY:
Spending:
Discretionary Budget 3.2 3.2 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.6 3.7
Authority..............
Mandatory Outlays:
Existing law.......... 387.0 403.3 422.2 443.0 465.3 489.7 516.2
Proposed legislation.. .......... .......... .......... 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2
Tax Expenditures:
Existing law............ 23.3 24.5 25.8 27.3 29.0 30.8 23.3
VETERANS BENEFITS AND
SERVICES:
Spending:
Discretionary Budget 19.3 20.9 22.1 22.1 22.3 22.9 23.4
Authority..............
Mandatory Outlays:
Existing law.......... 23.8 25.1 25.6 26.3 27.6 28.4 31.0
Proposed legislation.. .......... 1.8 -1.5 0.8 1.0 1.5 2.0
Credit Activity:
Direct loan 1.7 2.0 0.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A
disbursements..........
Guaranteed loans........ 43.1 32.1 29.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Tax Expenditures:
Existing law............ 3.1 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.7 3.9 4.1
ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE:
Spending:
Discretionary Budget 26.5 26.6 29.0 30.0 30.1 30.3 30.9
Authority..............
Mandatory Outlays:
Existing law.......... 0.9 1.5 1.5 0.8 0.7 2.1 2.2
Proposed legislation.. .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... -1.5 -1.5
GENERAL GOVERNMENT:
Spending:
Discretionary Budget 13.7 12.6 14.7 14.5 14.6 14.8 15.0
Authority..............
Mandatory Outlays:
Existing law.......... 3.3 1.7 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.6 1.4
Proposed legislation.. .......... * * 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4
Credit Activity:
Direct loan .......... * * N/A N/A N/A N/A
disbursements..........
Tax Expenditures:
Existing law............ 63.0 65.8 68.3 70.8 73.8 77.0 80.3
Proposed legislation.... .......... .......... * 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4
[[Page 169]]
NET INTEREST:
Spending:
Mandatory Outlays:
Existing law.......... 229.7 220.3 208.3 198.6 189.2 177.4 163.6
Proposed legislation.. .......... .......... * * 0.1 0.1 0.1
Tax Expenditures:
Existing law............ 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.4
ALLOWANCES:
Spending:
Discretionary Budget .......... .......... -0.2 -0.2 -0.3 -0.3 -0.3
Authority..............
UNDISTRIBUTED OFFSETTING
RECEIPTS:
Spending:
Discretionary Budget .......... .......... -0.2 -0.2 -0.2 -0.2 -0.2
Authority..............
Mandatory Outlays:
Existing law.......... -40.4 -43.1 -45.7 -49.1 -47.3 -46.9 -48.6
Proposed legislation.. .......... .......... 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TOTAL:
Spending:
Discretionary Budget 583.1 574.7 622.2 627.7 637.5 652.1 667.5
Authority..............
Mandatory Outlays:
Existing law.......... 1,128.1 1,167.4 1,203.2 1,233.5 1,292.3 1,342.3 1,404.2
Proposed legislation.. .......... 4.6 -2.1 10.7 5.3 18.1 20.0
Credit Activity:
Direct loan 37.7 37.3 35.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A
disbursements..........
Guaranteed loans........ 388.2 348.3 354.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* $50 million or less.
N/A Not available.