Veterans' Affairs: Veterans Benefits Administration's Progress and
Challenges in Implementing GPRA (Testimony, 05/14/97, GAO/T-HEHS-97-131).

GAO discussed the progress made and challenges faced by the Veterans
Benefits Administration (VBA) in implementing the Government Performance
and Results Act (GPRA).

GAO noted that: (1) VBA has taken an important first step in
implementing GPRA, but this process is an evolving one; (2) to date, VBA
has developed a strategic plan with a mission and goals and has begun
consultation with the Congress and other stakeholders to obtain their
views on its plan; (3) for the compensation and pension program, VBA has
identified specific performance measures for such factors as timeliness
and accuracy in processing claims; (4) however, these measures are
primarily process-oriented; (5) as it continues through the planning
process, VBA also needs to ensure that its strategic plan focuses on
results, as required by GPRA, such as those related to the overall
purpose of the program, and not merely on the process used to administer
the benefits; (6) in addition, to help ensure quality service, VBA needs
to integrate its strategic plan with VA's overall plan and with the
plans of other key federal agencies, such as the Department of Defense
and the Department of Labor's Veterans' Employment and Training Service;
(7) down the road, VBA will also need to ensure that it effectively
measures and assesses its performance, as mandated by GPRA, to determine
how well its programs are meeting their goals and making improvements;
and (8) GAO's prior work suggests that VBA will be challenged in
implementing GPRA because it has had difficulties in the past in
bringing about program improvements.

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

 REPORTNUM:  T-HEHS-97-131
     TITLE:  Veterans' Affairs: Veterans Benefits Administration's 
             Progress and Challenges in Implementing GPRA
      DATE:  05/14/97
   SUBJECT:  Strategic planning
             Veterans benefits
             Congressional/executive relations
             Mission budgeting
             Agency missions

             
**************************************************************************
* 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.                                          *
*                                                                        *
* A printed copy of this report may be obtained from the GAO Document    *
* Distribution Facility by calling (202) 512-6000, by faxing your        *
* request to (301) 258-4066, or by writing to P.O. Box 6015,             *
* Gaithersburg, MD 20884-6015. We are unable to accept electronic orders *
* for printed documents at this time.                                    *
**************************************************************************


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


Before the Subcommittee on Benefits, Committee on Veterans' Affairs,
House of Representatives

For Release on Delivery
Expected at 8:30 a.m.
Wednesday, May 14, 1997

VETERANS' AFFAIRS - VETERANS
BENEFITS ADMINISTRATION'S PROGRESS
AND CHALLENGES IN IMPLEMENTING
GPRA

Statement of Stephen P.  Backhus, Director
Veterans' Affairs and Military Health Care Issues
Health, Education, and Human Services Division

GAO/T-HEHS-97-131

GAO/HEHS-97-131T


(105752)


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

  GPRA - Government Performance and Results Act
  OMB - Office of Management and Budget
  VA - Department of Veterans Affairs
  VBA - Veterans Benefits Administration

VETERANS' AFFAIRS:  VETERANS
BENEFITS ADMINISTRATION'S PROGRESS
AND CHALLENGES IN IMPLEMENTING
GPRA
============================================================ Chapter 0

Mr.  Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: 

We are pleased to be here today to provide our views on the progress
made and challenges faced by the Veterans Benefits Administration
(VBA) in implementing the Government Performance and Results Act
(GPRA).  As you know, over the past several years, the Congress has
taken steps to fundamentally change the way federal agencies go about
their work.  The Congress took these steps in response to management
problems so common among federal agencies that they demanded
governmentwide solutions.  GPRA was passed in 1993 to require
agencies to clearly define their missions, set goals, measure
performance, and report on their accomplishments. 

VBA is responsible for administering the Department of Veterans
Affairs' (VA) nonmedical programs that provide financial and other
benefits to veterans, their dependents, and survivors.  These
benefits include disability compensation, pensions, rehabilitation
assistance, education benefits, home loan benefits, and insurance
coverage.  As requested by the Subcommittee, my statement will center
primarily on VBA's largest program--the compensation and pension
program--which accounts for more than 90 percent of VBA's $20 billion
appropriation for fiscal year 1996 and provides compensation and
pensions to over 3 million veterans and their survivors.  My
statement will address the purpose and requirements of GPRA, the
progress VBA has made, and challenges it faces in implementing the
act.  The information in this statement is based on our past work in
the area, a review of VBA's strategic plan, and discussions with VBA
officials. 

In summary, VBA has taken an important first step in implementing
GPRA, but this process is an evolving one.  To date, VBA has
developed a strategic plan with a mission and goals and has begun
consultation with the Congress and other stakeholders to obtain their
views on its plan.  For the compensation and pension program, VBA has
identified specific performance measures for such factors as
timeliness and accuracy in processing claims.  However, these
measures are primarily process oriented.  As it continues through the
planning process, VBA also needs to ensure that its strategic plan
focuses on results, as required by GPRA, such as those related to the
overall purpose of the program, and not merely on the process used to
administer the benefits.  In addition, to help ensure quality
service, VBA needs to integrate its strategic plan with VA's overall
plan and with the plans of other key federal agencies, such as the
Department of Defense and the Department of Labor's Veterans'
Employment and Training Service.  Down the road, VBA will also need
to ensure that it effectively measures and assesses its performance,
as mandated by GPRA, to determine how well its programs are meeting
their goals and making improvements.  Our prior work suggests that
VBA will be challenged in implementing GPRA because it has had
difficulties in the past in bringing about program improvements. 


   PURPOSE AND REQUIREMENTS OF
   GPRA
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:1

GPRA is the centerpiece of a statutory framework provided by recent
legislation to bring needed improvements to federal agencies'
management activities.  (Other parts of the framework include the
1990 Chief Financial Officers Act, the 1995 Paperwork Reduction Act,
and the 1996 Clinger-Cohen Act.) Under GPRA, executive branch
agencies are to set strategic goals, measure their performance, and
use that performance information to make improvements. 

GPRA was designed to focus federal agencies' attention on the results
of the programs they administer--not just on program operations. 
Instead of focusing on the amounts of money they spend or the size of
their workloads, agencies are expected to rethink their missions in
terms of the results they provide, develop goals based on their
results-oriented missions, develop strategies for achieving their
goals, and measure actual performance against the goals. 

Our reviews of federal programs have found numerous examples of
management problems that GPRA is intended to correct.\1 Several
examples follow: 

  Some agencies do not have clear understandings or statements of
     what their missions are.  GPRA requires agencies to articulate
     their missions. 

  In some program areas, responsibilities are fragmented among
     several agencies, which wastes scarce funds, confuses and
     frustrates customers, and limits the overall effectiveness of
     federal efforts to serve customers.  GPRA aims to help agencies
     to address the fragmentation of program areas, and to coordinate
     their strategic planning efforts with other agencies. 

  Many agencies measure performance on the basis of their workloads,
     rather than on the results of their programs.  Instead of the
     more difficult task of measuring how well programs are serving
     customers and achieving the results intended by the Congress,
     agencies focus on such measures as how many applications they
     process and how quickly they process them.  Thus, agencies do
     not know, and cannot inform the Congress, how well their
     programs are actually achieving their purposes.  GPRA requires
     agencies to develop results-oriented performance measures. 

  Many agencies lack coherent strategies for achieving their
     missions.  In a time of budget constraints, agencies need to
     rethink how they manage their programs, and they need strategies
     for achieving their missions more efficiently and effectively. 
     GPRA requires agencies to develop such coherent strategies. 

  Many agencies lack adequate information on program results and
     costs.  Without such information, the Congress has difficulty
     making informed policy and budget decisions.  GPRA requires
     agencies to develop results-oriented performance measures and to
     report annually on their performance.  As we noted in a recent
     report, GPRA aims for a closer and clearer linkage between
     spending decisions and the results of federal programs.\2

Also, GPRA requires agencies to consult with the Congress in
developing their strategic plans.  This gives the Congress the
opportunity to work with agencies to ensure that their missions and
goals are focused on results; consistent with the Congress' intent in
establishing programs; and reasonable, in light of fiscal
constraints.  The products of this consultation should be clearer
guidance to agencies on their missions and goals and better
information to help the Congress make choices among programs,
consider alternative ways to achieve results, and assess how well
agencies are achieving the results the Congress intended for
programs. 

GPRA requires VA and other agencies to complete their strategic plans
by September 30, 1997.  Future actions required under GPRA include
the following: 

  Beginning in the fall of 1997 (for the fiscal year 1999 budget
     cycle), agencies will submit an annual performance plan to the
     Office of Management and Budget (OMB). 

  Beginning with the fiscal year 1999 budget, OMB will include a
     governmentwide performance plan in the President's budget
     submission to the Congress. 

  On March 31 of each year, beginning with 2000, agencies will submit
     annual performance reports, comparing their actual performance
     with their goals, to the Congress and OMB. 


--------------------
\1 Managing for Results:  Using GPRA to Assist Congressional and
Executive Branch Decisionmaking (GAO/T-GGD-97-43, Feb.  12, 1997). 

\2 Performance Budgeting:  Past Initiatives Offer Insights for GPRA
Implementation (GAO/AIMD-97-46, Mar.  27, 1997). 


   PROGRESS VBA HAS MADE IN
   IMPLEMENTING GPRA
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:2

In implementing GPRA, VBA's planning process has been evolving.  VBA
first developed a strategic plan in December 1994 covering fiscal
years 1996-2001.  The plan laid out VBA's mission, strategic vision,
and goals.  For example, the compensation goal was to provide
compensation benefits to veterans who were disabled while in the
service and to their eligible dependents upon the veterans' death. 
The pension goal was to provide pension benefits to veterans of
wartime periods who are disabled and do not meet minimum income
requirements, and to their eligible dependents upon the death of the
veterans.  However, in a 1995 report, VA's Inspector General stated
that the goals in the strategic plan could not be measured because
the plan did not contain specific performance information.\3

In fiscal year 1995, VBA established a new GPRA strategic planning
process.  VBA began developing five "business line" plans
corresponding with its major program areas:  compensation and
pension, educational assistance, loan guaranty, vocational
rehabilitation and counseling, and insurance.  These business plans
were to supplement the overall strategic plan and to specify program
performance objectives and measurements. 

In VA's fiscal year 1998 budget submission, VBA has set forth its
business goals and measures.  VBA has identified seven goals for the
compensation and pension program that are oriented toward the
efficiency of claims processing and customer satisfaction. 

  Be responsive to customer and stakeholder needs. 

  Maintain a 97-percent accuracy rate for claims processing. 

  Reduce the time required to process claims. 

  Reduce operating costs. 

  Ensure the best value for the taxpayers' dollar. 

  Maintain a highly skilled, motivated, and adaptable workforce. 

  Improve communications and outreach. 

VBA has also identified specific performance measures for the
compensation and pension program.  For instance, the measures include
reducing processing time for original compensation claims from 144
days to 53 days and achieving a 97-percent accuracy rate for claims
processing by fiscal year 2002. 


--------------------
\3 Office of the Inspector General, Review of the Implementation of
VBA's Strategic Plan and Performance Measurements, 5R1-B18-100
(Washington, D.C.:  VA, Aug.  25, 1995). 


   CHALLENGES VBA FACES
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:3

As VBA continues its process of implementing GPRA, it faces some
difficult challenges.  If the full intent of GPRA is to be achieved,
VBA will need to develop a strategic plan with a clear mission,
goals, and performance measures that are truly results oriented.  In
addition, VBA will need to integrate its strategic plan with those of
VA and other federal agencies to ensure quality service, since VBA is
not the only agency providing veterans' benefits.  Furthermore, VBA
will need to effectively measure and assess its performance to fully
complete the process that GPRA mandates for improved federal
programs. 


      FOCUSING ON RESULTS
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:3.1

VBA has identified specific goals and measures in its current
strategic plan, but again, they tend to be process oriented.  While
these goals and measures are important, they do not reflect program
results.  For example, the purpose of the disability compensation
program is to compensate veterans for the average loss in earning
capacity in civilian occupations that results from injuries or
conditions incurred or aggravated during military service.  Given
this program purpose, results-oriented goals would focus on issues
such as whether disabled veterans are indeed being compensated for
average loss in earning capacity and whether VBA is providing
compensation to all of those who should be compensated.  VBA has not
yet tackled these types of difficult questions and will need to do so
in consultation with the Congress in order to develop a truly
results-oriented strategic plan.  VA officials told us that these
issues are particularly sensitive and that they have begun
consultations with the Congress and other stakeholders about the
purpose of the compensation and pension program.  However, no final
agreements have been made to date. 

In the past, VBA has not focused on results.  For example, in 1984,
1992, and again in 1996, we reported that VBA's vocational
rehabilitation program did not focus on helping disabled veterans
find jobs, despite a 1980 law (P.L.  96-466) requiring it to do so.\4

Instead, VBA continued to focus on sending veterans to training, an
intermediate step in finding jobs.  Consequently, VBA has placed
relatively few disabled veterans in jobs. 

VBA is aware that it needs to focus more on its benefits programs'
outcomes for veterans rather than only on the process used to
administer the benefits.  In its fiscal year 1998 budget submission,
VBA stated that, historically, VA has engaged in little policy or
program analysis of its benefits programs and that this work is
needed if the intended results of GPRA are to be fully achieved.  VBA
acknowledges that additional data and research will be required,
including formal program evaluations and extensive consultation with
stakeholders. 


--------------------
\4 VA Can Provide More Employment Assistance to Veterans Who Complete
Its Vocational Rehabilitation Program (GAO/HRD-84-39, May 23, 1984);
Vocational Rehabilitation:  Better VA Management Needed to Help
Disabled Veterans Find Jobs (GAO/HRD-92-100, Sept.  4, 1992); and
Vocational Rehabilitation:  VA Continues to Place Few Disabled
Veterans in Jobs (GAO/HEHS-96-155, Sept.  3, 1996). 


      INTEGRATING STRATEGIC PLANS
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:3.2

As VBA continues its strategic planning, it will need to integrate
its plan with those of the rest of VA and those of other federal
agencies that support the veterans' benefits programs.  For example,
in determining the eligibility of a veteran for disability
compensation, VBA usually requires the veteran to undergo a medical
examination, which is generally performed by a Veterans Health
Administration physician.  Similarly, VBA looks to the Department of
Defense for information about the medical conditions of veterans
while they were in the military and to the Department of Labor for
veterans' employment and training experiences.  VBA will need to
determine what impact these other entities will have on the success
of VBA's performance. 

Currently, VA is in the process of developing a departmentwide
strategic plan.  VBA is participating in this planning effort.  In
addition, VA has initiatives under way to improve its information
exchange with the Department of Defense.  Furthermore, as we recently
testified before this Subcommittee, the Department of Labor's
Veterans' Employment and Training Service has developed a draft
strategic plan and performance measures.\5 VBA will need to continue
to coordinate with these agencies that are critical to veterans'
benefits programs to ensure overall high quality service to veterans. 


--------------------
\5 Veterans' Employment and Training Service:  Focusing on Program
Results to Improve Agency Performance (GAO/T-HEHS-97-129, May 7,
1997). 


      MEASURING AND ASSESSING
      PERFORMANCE
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:3.3

Once VBA has identified results-oriented goals, it will need to
effectively measure and assess its performance.  As mandated by GPRA,
federal agencies are required to link their performance measures to
their annual budget requests.  Federal agencies are expected to limit
their performance measures to a few that

  best demonstrate how the agency's goals are met;

  allow agency managers to balance quality, costs, customer
     satisfaction, stakeholder concerns, and other matters; and

  are linked directly to the offices in each agency that are directly
     responsible for making programs work. 

The Congress, in enacting GPRA, recognized that measuring the results
of many federal programs will be difficult and, as a result,
permitted GPRA to be phased in over several years.  Measuring results
will be a challenge because the link between program operations and
results can be difficult to establish.  Also, a result may occur
years after an agency has completed a task (for example, awarding a
research grant).  Nevertheless, agencies are expected to use the
performance and cost data they collect to continuously improve their
operations, identify gaps between their performance and their
performance goals, and develop plans for closing performance gaps. 

VBA will need to develop appropriate performance measures and collect
adequate and reliable performance and cost data to effectively
measure and assess its performance.  VBA will have to balance the
costs of data collection against the need for complete, accurate, and
consistent data. 


   CONCLUSION
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:4

VBA is aware that it has much work to do to fully implement GPRA. 
VBA's success in implementing the act will depend on how successful
it is in ensuring that its strategic plan focuses on results, how
well it integrates its plan with the plans of VA and other key
agencies, and how effectively it measures and assesses its
performance in meeting its goals and bringing about program
improvements.  The Congress will play an important role in consulting
with VBA in developing results-oriented goals and overseeing VBA's
efforts to implement GPRA. 


-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:4.1

Mr.  Chairman, this completes my testimony this morning.  I would be
pleased to respond to any questions you or Members of the
Subcommittee may have. 


   CONTRIBUTORS
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:5

For more information on this testimony, call Cynthia M.  Fagnoni,
Acting Associate Director, at (202) 512-7202 or Irene P.  Chu,
Assistant Director, at (202) 512-7102.  Gregory D.  Whitney and Mark
Trapani also contributed to this statement. 


*** End of document. ***