[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 1]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 135-136]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




       THE INTRODUCTION OF THE PROGRAM ASSESSMENT AND RESULTS ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                        HON. TODD RUSSELL PLATTS

                            of pennsylvania

                    in the house of representatives

                        Tuesday, January 4, 2005

  Mr. PLATTS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce important 
legislation to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of our Federal 
government--the Program Assessment and Results Act, or PAR Act, which 
establishes a statutory requirement that the Office of Management and 
Budget, OMB, working with agencies, review and assess the effectiveness 
of each federal program at least once every five years. As elected 
representatives of the people, we have a responsibility to use taxpayer 
dollars in the most effective way possible. As Congress formulates its 
budget each year, we must have the best information available to us on 
which to base our spending decisions.
  The Government Performance and Results Act, or GPRA, has laid a solid 
foundation for agencies working with Congress to set strategic goals 
and begin to utilize performance based information. Building on GPRA, 
we must take the next step toward reforming the way the government 
conducts business.
  One of the key aspects of any reform effort is to change the 
prevailing mindset. If our emphasis is on creating a more results-
oriented government, then we must change our mindset from outputs to 
outcomes. It takes time to achieve this type of cultural shift. The 
reforms of the early 1990s--the CFO Act, GPRA and others--are just 
beginning to work as intended.
  Prior efforts to make the federal government more effective--the 
Hoover Commission, Zero-Based Budgeting, the Planning-Programming-
Budgeting System, Reinventing Government--have come and gone with 
little lasting effect. Federal managers have learned that if they wait, 
each new administration is likely to attempt yet another broad based 
reform. From a management standpoint, it is difficult in that type of 
environment to make long-range plans; and it's next to impossible to 
achieve the kind of cultural shift needed to reform the management of 
the federal government.
  By enacting GPRA, Congress put government reform in statute. Because 
of this statutory framework, federal managers now look at the 
requirements for performance plans and strategic plans required by GPRA 
and know they are here to stay regardless of changes in Congress and 
the Executive Branch. When the first agency strategic plans fell short 
of expectations, the reform effort was not scrapped--it was improved. 
Now, ten years after GPRA was enacted, we have strategic plans that are 
more in line with what was envisioned. We have seen slow, sustainable 
improvement.

[[Page 136]]

  GPRA requires that agencies focus attention on program evaluation as 
one of six aspects of their strategic plans. Unfortunately, according 
to a 2004 report from the Government Accountability Office, program 
evaluation is the one area where departments consistently come up 
short. Not only have agencies failed to comply with this requirement, 
the valuable information that stands to be gained from these 
evaluations is not culled, coordinated, or presented in a useful way.
  We have seen great progress in meeting other objectives set out in 
GPRA. In 1997, only 76 percent of federal managers had developed 
performance measures. By 2003, that number had risen to 89 percent. It 
is now time to strengthen GPRA to address the shortfall we see in 
program evaluation.
  By creating and using the Program Assessment Rating Tool, or PART, 
this Administration has gone a step beyond the strategic plans required 
by GPRA and implemented a system for evaluating the performance and 
results of federal programs. The next logical step is to codify the 
requirement for a coordinated evidence-based review of programs.
  The PAR Act does not seek to codify the use of the PART specifically. 
Rather, this bill amends GPRA by establishing a requirement for program 
reviews. Specifically, the Office of Management and Budget, working 
with agency heads, would be required under the Act to review each 
program activity at least once every five years. By requiring OMB to 
coordinate this effort with the agencies we will take a great step 
forward in making the federal government more efficient and results 
oriented.
  Information gleaned from these program reviews needs to be useful 
across the board to all stakeholders. Members of Congress, taxpayers, 
federal managers and the Executive Branch need to know if programs are 
being managed effectively and if they are achieving the desired result. 
Further, this legislation, once enacted, will allow us to compare data 
among different agencies, to see how different programs with similar 
goals are achieving results. Members of Congress can use the 
information to make informed budget decisions and conduct more 
effective oversight. It will help the taxpayers see what they are 
getting for their money. Most important, federal managers will use the 
information to improve the way they manage programs. The results will 
be a more effective and efficient government for the good of all 
Americans.

                          ____________________