Results Act: Comments on Justice's August Draft Strategic Plan
(Testimony, 09/30/97, GAO/T-GGD-97-184).

GAO discussed the Department of Justice's August 1997 draft strategic
plan developed in compliance with the Government Performance and Results
Act of 1993, focusing on the plan's compliance with the Act's
requirements and on the extent to which it covered crosscutting program
activities, management challenges, and Justice's capacity to provide
reliable performance information.

GAO noted that: (1) Justice's plan discusses, to some degree, five of
the six required elements--mission statement, goals and objectives, key
external factors, a program evaluation component, and strategies to
achieve the goals and objectives; (2) the plan does not include a
required discussion on the relationship between Justice's long-term
goals/objectives and its annual performance plans; (3) the draft plan
could better address how Justice plans to: (a) coordinate with other
federal, state, and local agencies that perform similar law enforcement
functions, such as the Defense and State Departments regarding
counter-terrorism; (b) address the many management challenges it faces
in carrying out its mission, such as internal control and accounting
problems; and (c) increase its capacity to provide performance
information for assessing its progress in meeting the goals and
objectives over the next 5 years.

--------------------------- Indexing Terms -----------------------------

 REPORTNUM:  T-GGD-97-184
     TITLE:  Results Act: Comments on Justice's August Draft Strategic 
             Plan
      DATE:  09/30/97
   SUBJECT:  Strategic planning
             Congressional/executive relations
             Program evaluation
             Agency missions
             Intergovernmental relations
             Interagency relations
             Law enforcement
             Internal controls
             Federal agency accounting systems
             Management information systems
IDENTIFIER:  GPRA
             Government Performance and Results Act of 1993
             
******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO report.  Delineations within the text indicating chapter **
** titles, headings, and bullets are preserved.  Major          **
** divisions and subdivisions of the text, such as Chapters,    **
** Sections, and Appendixes, are identified by double and       **
** single lines.  The numbers on the right end of these lines   **
** indicate the position of each of the subsections in the      **
** document outline.  These numbers do NOT correspond with the  **
** page numbers of the printed product.                         **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
** A printed copy of this report may be obtained from the GAO   **
** Document Distribution Center.  For further details, please   **
** send an e-mail message to:                                   **
**                                                              **
**                                            **
**                                                              **
** with the message 'info' in the body.                         **
******************************************************************


Cover
================================================================ COVER


Before the Committee on the Judiciary
House of Representatives

For Release on Delivery
Expected at
9:30 a.m.
on Tuesday
September 30, 1997

RESULTS ACT - COMMENTS ON
JUSTICE'S AUGUST DRAFT STRATEGIC
PLAN

Statement of Norman J.  Rabkin
Director, Administration of Justice Issues
General Government Division

GAO/T-GGD-97-184

GAO/GGD-97-184T


(182046)


Abbreviations
=============================================================== ABBREV


RESULTS ACT:  COMMENTS ON
JUSTICE'S AUGUST DRAFT STRATEGIC
PLAN
====================================================== Chapter Summary

Under the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993, executive
agencies are to develop strategic plans in which they define their
missions, establish results-oriented goals, and identify strategies
they will use to achieve those goals for the period 1997 through
2002.  The Act specifies that strategic plans should contain six
elements:  (1) a mission statement; (2) agencywide long-term goals
and objectives; (3) approaches (or strategies) and the various
resources needed to achieve the goals and objectives; (4) a
description of the relationship between the long-term
goals/objectives and the annual performance plans; (5) an
identification of key external factors; and (6) a description of how
program evaluations were used to establish and revise strategic
goals. 

GAO's July 1997 report--The Results Act:  Observations on the
Department of Justice's February 1997 Draft Strategic Plan
(GAO/GGD-97-153R, July 11, 1997--analyzed the February 1997 version
of Justice's plan.  Justice prepared a revised plan in August. 

Justice's August plan discusses, to some degree, five of the six
required elements--a mission statement, goals and objectives, key
external factors, a program evaluation component, and strategies to
achieve the goals and objectives.  The August plan does not include a
required discussion on the relationship between Justice's long-term
goals/objectives and its annual performance plans. 

The draft plan could better address how Justice plans to (1)
coordinate with other federal, state, and local agencies that perform
similar law enforcement functions, such as the Defense and State
Departments regarding counter-terrorism; (2) address the many
management challenges it faces in carrying out its mission, such as
internal control and accounting problems; and (3) increase its
capacity to provide performance information for assessing its
progress in meeting the goals and objectives over the next 5 years. 


RESULTS ACT:  COMMENTS ON
JUSTICE'S AUGUST DRAFT STRATEGIC
PLAN
==================================================== Chapter Statement

Mr.  Chairman and Members of the Committee: 

I am pleased to be here today to discuss our observations on the
Department of Justice's August draft of its strategic plan.  The
Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (the Results Act)\1

requires that all executive branch agencies submit their plans to
Congress and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) by September
30, 1997.  My statement focuses on Justice's August draft strategic
plan, which builds on our July comments regarding Justice's February
draft plan.\2 Specifically, my statement will focus on the August
plan's compliance with the Act's requirements and on the extent to
which it covered crosscutting program activities, management
challenges, and Justice's capacity to provide reliable performance
information.\3

In summary, Justice's February draft of its strategic plan was
incomplete in that of the six elements required by the Act,
three--the relationship between long-term goals/objectives and the
annual performance plans, the key factors external to Justice that
could affect Justice's ability to meet its goals, and a program
evaluation component--were not specifically identified in the draft
plan.  The remaining three elements--the mission statement, goals and
objectives, and strategies to achieve the goals and objectives--were
discussed.  The August plan includes two of the three missing
elements but the plan does not include a required discussion on a
third element--how the long-term goals and objectives are tied to
Justice's annual performance plans.  In addition, the revised plan
would better meet the purposes of the Act if it provided more
complete coverage of crosscutting programs, management challenges,
and performance information. 


--------------------
\1 P.L.  103-62. 

\2 The Results Act:  Observations on the Department of Justice's
February 1997 Draft Strategic Plan (GAO/GGD-97-153R, July 11, 1997). 

\3 Justice also revised its February 1997 plan on July 21, 1997. 


   BACKGROUND
-------------------------------------------------- Chapter Statement:1

In the 1990s, Congress put in place a statutory framework to address
long-standing weaknesses in federal government operations, improve
federal management practices, and provide greater accountability for
achieving results.  This framework included as its essential elements
financial management reform legislation, information technology
reform legislation, and the Results Act. 

In enacting this framework, Congress sought to create a more focused,
results-oriented management and decisionmaking process within both
Congress and the executive branch.  These laws\4 seek to improve
federal management by responding to a need for accurate, reliable
information for congressional and executive branch decisionmaking. 
This information has been badly lacking in the past, as much of our
work has demonstrated.  Implemented together, these laws provided a
powerful framework for developing fully integrated information about
agencies' missions and strategic priorities, data to show whether or
not the goals are achieved, the relationship of information
technology investment to the achievement of those goals, and accurate
and audited financial information about the costs of achieving
mission results. 

The Results Act focuses on clarifying missions, setting goals, and
measuring performance toward achieving those goals.  It emphasizes
managing for results and pinpointing opportunities for improved
performance and increased accountability.  Congress intended for the
Act to improve the effectiveness of federal programs by fundamentally
shifting the focus of management and decisionmaking away from a
preoccupation with tasks and services to a broader focus on results
of federal programs. 


--------------------
\4 The primary financial management reform legislation Congress
enacted is the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990, as expanded by
the Government Management Reform Act of 1994.  These laws provide the
basis for identifying and correcting financial management weaknesses
that have cost the federal government billions of dollars and leave
it vulnerable to waste, fraud, and mismanagement.  They also set
expectations for agencies to deploy modern systems to replace
existing, antiquated, often manual processes; develop better
performance and cost measures; and design results-oriented reports on
the government's financial condition and operating performance by
integrating budget, accounting, and program information.  Information
technology reform legislation, including the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 and the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996, was based on the best
practices used by leading public and private organizations to more
effectively manage information technology. 


      REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE
      RESULTS ACT
------------------------------------------------ Chapter Statement:1.1

Under the Results Act, executive agencies are to develop strategic
plans in which they define their missions, establish results-oriented
goals, and identify strategies they will use to achieve those goals
for the period 1997 through 2002.  The Act specifies that all
agencies' strategic plans should have six critical components:  (1) a
comprehensive agency mission statement; (2) agencywide long-term
goals and objectives for all major functions and operations; (3)
approaches (or strategies) to achieve the goals and objectives and
the various resources needed; (4) a description of the relationship
between the long-term goals/objectives and the annual performance
plans required by the Act; (5) an identification of key factors,
external to the agency and beyond its control, that could
significantly affect achievement of the strategic goals; and (6) a
description of how program evaluations were used to establish and
revise strategic goals and a schedule for future program evaluations. 


   JUSTICE'S PLAN CONTAINS ALL BUT
   ONE CRITICAL ELEMENT
-------------------------------------------------- Chapter Statement:2

Justice's strategic plan is organized around what Justice has
identified as its seven core functions:  (1) investigation and
prosecution of criminal offenses; (2) assistance to state and local
governments; (3) legal representation, enforcement of federal laws,
and defense of federal government interests; (4) immigration; (5)
detention and incarceration; (6) protection of the federal judiciary
and improvement of the justice system; and (7) management. 

Justice's February draft of its strategic plan was incomplete and did
not provide Congress with critical information for its consultations
with Justice.  Justice's August version added two of the three
required elements that were missing in the February plan.  As a
result, the August plan includes, to some degree, a discussion on
five of the six required elements--a mission statement, goals and
objectives, key external factors, a program evaluation component, and
strategies to achieve the goals and objectives.  The August plan does
not include a required discussion of a sixth element--the
relationship between Justice's long-term goals/objectives and its
annual performance plans. 


      MISSION STATEMENT
------------------------------------------------ Chapter Statement:2.1

Justice's plan contains a mission statement that is results oriented
and generally defines the Department's basic purpose with emphasis on
its core programs and activities.  Justice's mission statement is as
follows: 

     "Our mission at the United States Department of Justice is to
     enforce the law and defend the interests of the U.S.  according
     to the law, provide Federal leadership in preventing and
     controlling crime, seek just punishment for those guilty of
     unlawful behavior, administer and enforce the Nation's
     immigration laws fairly and effectively and ensure fair and
     impartial administration of justice for all Americans."

Justice's mission statement covers six of the seven core functions
that Justice identified but does not specify the detention and
incarceration function, which is one of Justice's largest budget
items.  The plan does incorporate the detention and incarceration
function in the discussion of goals and objectives and in its
strategies to achieve those goals and objectives.  Justice officials
said that it was their intent to cover the detention and
incarceration function by the phrases "seek just punishment .  .  ."
and "ensure fair and impartial administration of justice .  .  ."

While we agree that mission statements may vary in the extent to
which they specify particular activities, we believe that it would be
helpful to explicitly include the detention and incarceration
function in this case.  Our belief is based on Justice's decision to
specify all of the other major functions in its mission statement and
our concern that the Department's stakeholders may not interpret the
phrases cited by Justice officials as indicating that the detention
and incarceration component is part of its mission. 


      GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
------------------------------------------------ Chapter Statement:2.2

Justice's goals and objectives cover its major functions and
operations and are logically related to its mission.  However, they
are not as results oriented as they could be and some focus on
activities and processes.  For example, one set of results-oriented
goals involves reducing violent, organized, and gang-related crime;
drug-related crime; espionage and terrorism; and white collar crime. 
However, goals in other areas are more process oriented, such as
"Represent the United States in all civil matters for which the
Department of Justice has jurisdiction," "Promote the participation
of victims and witnesses throughout each stage of criminal and
juvenile justice proceedings at the Federal, State, and local
levels," and "Make effective use of information technology."

Another concern we have with some of the goals is that they are not
always expressed in as measurable a form as intended by OMB guidance. 
For example, two of Justice's goals in the legal representation,
enforcement of federal laws, and defense of U.S.  interests core
function are to protect the civil rights of all Americans and
safeguard America's environment and natural resources.  It is not
clear from the August plan how Justice will measure its progress in
achieving these goals. 


      STRATEGIES TO ACHIEVE GOALS
      AND OBJECTIVES
------------------------------------------------ Chapter Statement:2.3

The Results Act and OMB Circular A-11 indicate that agency strategic
plans should describe the processes the agencies will use to achieve
their goals and objectives.  Our review of Justice's strategic plan,
specifically the strategies and performance indicators, identified
areas where the plan did not fully meet the Act's requirements and
OMB Circular A-11 guidance. 

Some of the strategies did not clearly explain how and to what extent
Justice programs and activities will contribute to achieving the
goals and how Justice plans to assess progress in meeting those
goals.  For example, because Justice has limited ability to control
criminal activities, it is not clear how Justice will be able to
determine the degree to which its programs and activities have
contributed to changes in violent crime, availability and abuse of
illegal drugs, espionage and terrorism, and white collar crime. 
Similarly, in its immigration core function, Justice has a goal to
maximize deterrence to unlawful migration by reducing the incentives
of unauthorized employment and assistance.  It is likewise unclear
how Justice will be able to determine the effect of its efforts to
deter unlawful migration, as differentiated from the effect of
changes in the economic and political conditions in countries from
which illegal aliens originated.  The plan does not address either
issue. 

Some of Justice's performance indicators are more output than outcome
related.  For example, one cited strategy for achieving the goal of
ensuring border integrity is to prevent illegal entry by increasing
the strength of the Border Patrol.  One of the performance indicators
Justice is proposing as a measure of how well the strategy is working
is the percentage of time that Border Patrol agents devote to actual
border control operations.  While this measure may indicate whether
agents are spending more time controlling the border, it is not clear
how it will help Justice assess its progress in deterring unlawful
migration. 

The Act requires that agencies' plans discuss the types of resources
(e.g., human skills, capital, and information technology) that will
be needed to achieve the strategic and performance goals and OMB
guidance suggests that agencies' plans discuss any significant
changes to be made in resource levels.  Justice's plan does not
include either discussion.  This information could be beneficial to
Justice and Congress in agreeing on the goals, evaluating Justice's
progress in achieving the goals, and making resource decisions during
the budget process. 


      KEY EXTERNAL FACTORS
------------------------------------------------ Chapter Statement:2.4

In its August plan, Justice added a required discussion on key
external factors that could affect its plan outcomes.  Justice
discusses eight key external factors that could significantly affect
achievement of its long-term goals.  These factors include
emergencies and other unpredictable events (e.g., the bombing of the
Alfred P.  Murrah building), changing statutory responsibilities,
changing technology, and developments overseas.  According to
Justice, isolating the particular effects of law enforcement activity
from these eight factors that affect outcomes and over which Justice
has little control is extremely difficult.  This component of the
plan would be more helpful to decisionmakers if it included a
discussion of alternatives that could reduce the potential impact of
these external factors. 


      PROGRAM EVALUATION
------------------------------------------------ Chapter Statement:2.5

In its August plan, Justice added a required discussion on the role
program evaluation is to play in its strategic planning efforts. 
Justice recognizes that it has done little in the way of formal
evaluations of Justice programs and states that it plans to examine
its evaluation approach to better align evaluations with strategic
planning efforts.  The August plan identifies ongoing evaluations
being performed by Justice's components.  OMB guidance suggests that
this component of the plan include a general discussion of how
evaluations were used to establish and revise strategic goals, and
identify future planned evaluations and their general scope and time
frames.  Justice's August plan does neither. 


      THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
      LONG-TERM GOALS AND
      OBJECTIVES AND THE ANNUAL
      PERFORMANCE PLANS IS NOT
      DESCRIBED IN THE PLAN
------------------------------------------------ Chapter Statement:2.6

Under the Results Act, Justice's long-term strategic goals are to be
linked to its annual performance plans and the day-to-day activities
of its managers and staff.  This linkage is to provide a basis for
judging whether an agency is making progress toward achieving its
long-term goals.  However, Justice's August plan does not provide
such linkages. 

In its August plan, Justice pointed out that its fiscal year 1999
annual performance planning and budget formulation activities are to
be closely linked and that both are to be driven by the goals of the
strategic plan.  It also said that the linkages would become more
apparent as the fiscal year 1999 annual performance plan and budget
request are issued. 


   PLAN COULD BETTER ADDRESS
   CROSSCUTTING PROGRAM ACTIVITIES
-------------------------------------------------- Chapter Statement:3

Many law enforcement organizations--international and domestic (e.g.,
other federal, state, and local)--perform either similar or the same
activities as Justice.  The draft plan includes a goal to coordinate
and integrate law enforcement activities wherever possible and to
cooperate fully with other federal agencies.  However, the plan could
better serve the purposes of the Results Act by discussing how
Justice plans to coordinate with external organizations' activities
and how it plans to measure and asses inputs, outputs, and outcomes. 
For example, the plan does not discuss

  -- how Justice plans to work with the Departments of Defense and
     State, the intelligence agencies, and foreign governments in
     fighting international terrorism;

  -- how Justice's drug enforcement activities will relate to the
     Office of National Drug Control Policy, which has
     government-wide planning responsibilities for drug control
     activities;

  -- how Justice and the Department of the Treasury, which have
     similar responsibilities concerning the seizure and forfeiture
     of assets used in connection with illegal activities (e.g.,
     money laundering) will coordinate and integrate their
     operations;

  -- how INS will work with the Bureau of Prisons and state prison
     officials to identify criminal aliens; and

  -- how INS and the Customs Service, which both inspect arriving
     passengers at ports of entry to determine whether they are
     carrying contraband and are authorized to enter the country,
     will coordinate their resources.\5

Along these lines, certain program areas within Justice have similar
or complementary functions that are not addressed or could be better
discussed in the strategic plan.  For example, both the Bureau of
Prisons and INS detain individuals, but the plan does not address the
interrelationship of their similar functions or prescribe comparable
measures for inputs and outcomes.  As a second example, the plan does
not fully recognize the linkage among Justice's investigative,
prosecutorial, and incarceration responsibilities. 


--------------------
\5 We discussed this issue in our report--Customs Service and INS: 
Dual Management Structure for Border Inspections Should Be Ended
(GAO/GGD-93-111, June 30, 1993). 


   THE AUGUST PLAN DOES NOT
   ADDRESS SOME MAJOR MANAGEMENT
   CHALLENGES
-------------------------------------------------- Chapter Statement:4

One purpose of the Results Act is to improve the management of
federal agencies.  Therefore, it is particularly important that
agencies develop strategies that address management challenges that
threaten their ability to achieve both long-term strategic goals and
this purpose of the Act. 

Over the years, we as well as others, including the Justice Inspector
General and the National Performance Review (NPR), have addressed
many management challenges that Justice faces in carrying out its
mission.  In addition, recent audits under the Chief Financial
Officers Act of 1990 (CFO Act), expanded by the Government Management
Reform Act,\6 have revealed internal control and accounting problems. 
Justice's draft strategic plan is silent on these issues. 

Justice's February plan contained a section on "Management," which is
one of its seven core functions.  In addition, Justice's August draft
plan contains a new section on "Issues and Challenges in Achieving
Our Goals," which was not in its February plan.  This new section
discusses Justice's process for managing its information technology
investments, steps taken to provide security over its information
systems, and its strategy to ensure that computer systems accommodate
dates beyond the year 2000.  However, neither this new section nor
the "Management" core function addresses some of the specific
management problems that have been identified over the years and the
status of Justice's efforts to address them. 

In its August draft plan, Justice also added a discussion on
"accountability," which points out that Justice has an internal
control process that systematically identifies management weaknesses
and vulnerabilities and specifies corrective actions.  This section
also recognizes the role of Justice's Inspector General.  However,
the plan would be more helpful if it included a discussion of
corrective actions Justice has planned for internally and externally
identified management weaknesses, as well as how it plans to monitor
the implementation of such actions.  In addition, the plan does not
address how Justice will correct significant problems identified
during the Inspector General's fiscal year 1996 financial statement
audits, such as inadequate safeguarding and accounting for physical
assets and weaknesses in the internal controls over data processing
operations. 


--------------------
\6 This legislation requires agencies to have their agencywide
financial statements audited annually beginning with the fiscal year
1996 financial statements.  The first year financial audits of
Justice and its components focused primarily on evaluating their
control structures and environments and did not include auditing of
their statements of operation, which include the entities' operating
costs.  The fiscal year 1996 audit reports are expected to be issued
before the September 30, 1997, submission date for strategic plans. 


   DISCUSSION OF CAPACITY TO
   PROVIDE RELIABLE PERFORMANCE
   INFORMATION COULD BE IMPROVED
-------------------------------------------------- Chapter Statement:5

To efficiently and effectively operate, manage, and oversee its
diverse array of law enforcement-related responsibilities, Justice
needs reliable data on its results and those of other law
enforcement-related organizations.  Further, Justice will need to
rely on a variety of external data sources (e.g., state and local law
enforcement agencies) to assess the impact of its plan.  These data
are needed so that Justice can effectively measure its progress and
monitor, record, account for, summarize, and analyze crime-related
data.  Justice's August strategic plan contains little discussion
about its capacity to provide performance information for assessing
its progress toward its goals and objectives over the next 5 years. 

However, in its strategic plan, under the immigration core function,
Justice states that one of its priorities is to improve the
reliability and integrity of its data systems to enforce immigration
laws.  Justice's August plan added a goal and corresponding
strategies and performance indicators to address this priority. 
Similarly, Justice added a new goal--achieving excellence in
management practices--that includes a strategy for (1) obtaining
useful and reliable budget, accounting, and performance data to
support decisionmaking, and (2) integrating the planning, reporting
and decisionmaking processes.  These strategies could assist Justice
in producing results-oriented reports on its financial condition and
operating performance. 


------------------------------------------------ Chapter Statement:5.1

Mr.  Chairman, this concludes my prepared statement.  I would be
pleased to answer any questions. 


*** End of document. ***