PERFORMANCE PLAN SUMMARY

FY 2016 Annual Performance Report and FY 2018 Annual Performance Plan—U.S. Department of Education 85

Goal 6. U.S. Department of Education Capacity: 

Improve the organizational capacities of the Department to 

implement the Strategic Plan. 

Goal Leader: Assistant Secretary, Office of Management (OM) 

Objective 6.1: Effective Workforce. Continue to build a skilled, diverse, and engaged 

workforce within the Department. 

Objective 6.2: Risk Management. Improve the Department’s program efficacy through 

comprehensive risk management, and grant and contract monitoring. 

Objective 6.3: Implementation and Support. Build Department capacity and systems to 

support states’ and other grantees’ implementation of reforms that result in improved outcomes, 

and keep the public informed of promising practices and new reform initiatives. 

Objective 6.4: Productivity and Performance Management. Improve workforce productivity 

through information technology enhancements, telework expansion efforts, more effective 

process performance management systems, and state-of-the-art leadership and knowledge 

management practices. 

Public Benefit 

The Department continues to focus on acquiring and developing its workforce through human 

capital management; increasing diversity and inclusion and improving employee engagement; 

rethinking how it monitors and intervenes with high-risk grantees and contractors; enhancing 

workforce productivity through IT; safeguarding its assets and stakeholders from cybersecurity 

threats; continuing to improve and integrate effective performance management; and 

transforming the way the Department interacts with states, districts, institutions of higher 

education, and other grantees and stakeholders. These efforts aim to improve performance 

results, increase stakeholder collaboration, and lead to greater employee engagement. 

The Department continues to build Department capacity and systems to support states’ and 

other grantees’ implementation of reforms that result in improved outcomes, and keep the public 

informed of promising practices and new reform initiatives. By consolidating processes, the 

Department has been able to more effectively customize its outreach to individual states and 

model the critical partnerships states should have with their respective districts. 

Beyond building Department capacity to support states and other grantees, throughout 

FY 2016, the Department provided strategic training courses to strengthen leadership and 

knowledge management throughout the Department, with a special emphasis on ensuring 

managers and supervisors have the essentials they needed to effectively manage and lead. The 

Department also recognized the important role that technology and facilities contribute to 

supporting productivity. As a result, the Department continued to build on the success of its ED 

Space Modernization plan, including the deployment of critical IT to support telework and 

leverage wireless connectivity.
PERFORMANCE PLAN SUMMARY

FY 2016 Annual Performance Report and FY 2018 Annual Performance Plan—U.S. Department of Education 86

Goal 6 Discretionary Resources

$0 $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500

FY 2016

FY 2017

FY 2018

$491

$490

$499

(Dollars in millions)

Major Discretionary Programs and Activities83 Supporting Goal 6 Performance 

Metrics [Dollars in Millions] 

POC Account Obj. Program

FY 2016

Appropriation 

FY 2017 

Annualized 

CR84

FY 2018 

President’s 

Budget 

OIG OIG Office of Inspector General 59 59 61

DM/PA DM/PA Program Administration: Building 

modernization 1 -- --

DM/PA DM/PA Program Administration: Salaries and 

expenses 431 431 438

TOTAL, GOAL 6 491 490 499

POC = Principal Operating Component. 

CR = Continuing Resolution. 

NOTES: Many programs may have sub-activities that relate to other goals. Detail may not add to total due to rounding. 

83 All the programs listed are discretionary programs, as distinct from mandatory programs. These include both competitive and 

noncompetitive/formula programs. 

84 A full-year 2017 appropriation was not enacted at the time the FY 2018 Budget was prepared; therefore, the Budget is built off of 

the Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2017 (P.L. 114–254). The amounts included for 2017 reflect the annualized level 

provided by the continuing resolution.
PERFORMANCE PLAN SUMMARY

FY 2016 Annual Performance Report and FY 2018 Annual Performance Plan—U.S. Department of Education 87

Goal 6: Details

U.S. Department of 

Education 

Indicators of Success

Baseline 

Actuals 

Current 

Year 

Target 

Current 

Year 

Results 

Actual-to-Target 

2016 Out-Year Targets 

Trend Line 

Indicator (Actuals) 

Measurement 

Direction 

2014 2015 2016 2016 2016

Missed85 Exceeded86 2017 2018

6.1.A. Percent of 

selections made per job 

opportunity 

announcement (JOA) 

FY: 

2015

46.4% 

NA FY: 2015 

46.4% 

FY 2016: 

70.0% 

FY: 2016

48.7% 

MET 

 

51.2% 53.7% 

INCREASE 

 

6.1.B. EVS Employee 

Engagement Index 

FY: 2012 

64.7% 

FY: 2014 

67.0% 

FY: 2015 

68.0% 

FY 2016: 

67.0% 

FY: 2016 

71.0% 

NOT 

MET

 72.0% 73.0% 

INCREASE 

 

6.1.C. Time to hire FY: 2013 

65.0% 

FY: 2014 

85.0% 

FY: 2015 

67.6% 

FY: 2016 

79.1% 

FY: 2016 

69.0% 

MET

 

70.0% 71.0% 

 

INCREASE 

85 Missed target by <=1, or if percentage, <=1.3 percentage points. 

86 Surpassed target; not just met the target. If a diminishing target, the actual was below the reduction target set.
PERFORMANCE PLAN SUMMARY

FY 2016 Annual Performance Report and FY 2018 Annual Performance Plan—U.S. Department of Education 88

U.S. Department of 

Education 

Indicators of Success

Baseline

Actuals 

Current 

Year 

Target 

Current

Year 

Results

Actual-to-Target 

2016 Out-Year Targets 

Trend Line 

Indicator (Actuals) 

Measurement 

Direction 

2014 2015 2016 2016 2016

Missed85 Exceeded86 2017 2018

6.1.D. Effective 

Communication Index 

FY: 2012 

48.0% 

FY: 2014 

50.0% 

FY: 2015 

51.0% 

FY: 2016 

50.0% 

FY: 2016 

51.0% 

NOT 

MET

 

52.0% 53.0% 

 

INCREASE 

6.2.A. Percentage of 

A-133 Single Audits 

Overdue for resolution87

FY: 2012 

57.0% 

FY: 2014 

37.0% 

FY: 2015 

20.0% 

FY: 2016 

10.0% 

FY: 2016 

37.0% 

MET

 

NA NA

DECREASE 

 

 

87 Retiring metric at conclusion of FY 2016. Please see appendix B for additional information pertaining to the metric’s retirement. The FY 2017 and 2018 targets were 31.0% and 

25.0%, respectively. If a new metric is being proposed, the new metric will be directly below the indicator measurement direction of the metric being retired. 
PERFORMANCE PLAN SUMMARY

FY 2016 Annual Performance Report and FY 2018 Annual Performance Plan—U.S. Department of Education 89

U.S. Department of 

Education 

Indicators of Success

Baseline 

Actuals 

Current

Year 

Target 

Current 

Year 

Results 

Actual-to-Target 

2016 Out-Year Targets 

Trend Line 

Indicator (Actuals) 

Measurement 

Direction 

2014 2015 2016 2016 2016

Missed85 Exceeded86 2017 2018

New Metric: Percentage 

of Department Grant 

Recipients without any 

Single Audit Findings

FY: 2014–

2016 

Average 

85.4%88

NA NA 86.1% NA NA NA 86.1% 86.6% NA

6.2.B. Compliance rate of 

contractor evaluation 

performance reports 

FY: 2013 

85.0% 

FY: 2014

97.0% 

FY; 2015 

98.0% 

FY: 2016 

95.8% 

FY: 2016 

100.0% 

NOT 

MET

 

100.0% 100.0% 

 INCREASE 

 

88 The baseline data is based on an average of Department grantees with no single audit findings over the past three fiscal years, 2014–16.
PERFORMANCE PLAN SUMMARY

FY 2016 Annual Performance Report and FY 2018 Annual Performance Plan—U.S. Department of Education 90

U.S. Department of 

Education 

Indicators of Success

Baseline 

Actuals 

Current 

Year 

Target 

Current

Year 

Results

Actual-to-Target 

2016 Out-Year Targets 

Trend Line 

Indicator (Actuals) 

Measurement 

Direction 

2014 2015 2016 2016 2016

Missed85 Exceeded86 2017 2018

6.3.A. Overall average 

impact score of the 

Department’s technical 

assistance in helping 

build State capacity to 

implement education 

reforms89

FY: 2015 

7.73 

NA FY: 2015 

7.73 

FY: 2016 

7.58 

FY: 2016 

8.00 

NOT 

MET

 

7.75 8.00 

 

INCREASE 

 

89 Metric has been revised from tracking the “percentage of states” to tracking the “overall average impact score” of the states that rate the Department’s technical assistance via the 

Grantee Satisfaction Survey, which is a more meaningful metric for the Department. The baseline and subsequent data points have been revised from the 2015 APR to reflect the 

change in the metric. 
PERFORMANCE PLAN SUMMARY

FY 2016 Annual Performance Report and FY 2018 Annual Performance Plan—U.S. Department of Education 91

U.S. Department of 

Education 

Indicators of Success

Baseline

Actuals

Current 

Year 

Target 

Current

Year 

Results

Actual-to-Target 

2016 Out-Year Targets

Trend Line 

Indicator (Actuals) 

Measurement 

Direction 

2014 2015 2016 2016 2016

Missed85 Exceeded86 2017 2018

6.4.A. Number of ED IT 

security incidents 

FY: 2012 

756

FY: 2014 

445

FY: 2015 

580

FY: 2016 

291

FY: 2016 

551

MET

 

29190 27791

 

DECREASE 

6.4.B. EVS ResultsOriented Performance 

Culture Index 

FY: 2012 

53.0% 

FY; 2014 

56.0% 

FY: 2015 

57.0% 

FY: 2016 

56.0% 

FY: 2016 

57.0% 

NOT 

MET

 

58.0% 59.0% 

 

INCREASE 

 

90 FY 2017 target was reduced significantly to aim at a continual decrease in incidents by more than the 5 percent reduction from the initially proposed FY 2016 target in the 2015 APR. 

91 Reduction of 5 percent from previous year’s actual to align with a more aggressive approach to reducing security incidents. 
PERFORMANCE PLAN SUMMARY

FY 2016 Annual Performance Report and FY 2018 Annual Performance Plan—U.S. Department of Education 92

U.S. Department of 

Education 

Indicators of Success

Baseline 

Actuals 

Current

Year 

Target 

Current

Year 

Results

Actual-to-Target 

2016 Out-Year Targets 

Trend Line 

Indicator (Actuals) 

Measurement 

Direction 

2014 2015 2016 2016 2016

Missed85 Exceeded86 2017 2018

6.4.C. EVS Leadership 

and Knowledge 

Management Index

FY: 2012 

60.0% 

FY: 2014 

61.0% 

FY: 2015 

62.0% 

FY: 2016 

61.0% 

FY: 2016 

63.0% 

NOT 

MET

 64.0% 65.0% 

 

INCREASE 

6.4.D. Total usable 

square footage 

FY: 2012 

1,563,641 

FY: 2014 

1,533,239 

FY: 2015 

1,530,864 

FY: 2016 

1,367,000 

FY: 2016 

1,459,937 

MET

 

TBD TBD 

 

DECREASE 

6.4.E. Rent cost FY: 2014 

$74.3M 

FY: 2014 

$74.1M 

FY: 2015 

$72.7M 

FY: 2016 

72,149,82

8 

FY: 2016 

$80.3M 

MET

 

$74,470,439 TBD 

DECREASE 

 
PERFORMANCE PLAN SUMMARY

FY 2016 Annual Performance Report and FY 2018 Annual Performance Plan—U.S. Department of Education 93

Goal 6 FY 2016 Indicator Performance Summary 

 

NA = Not applicable. 

TBD = To be determined. 

Academic Year (AY) is a collegiate year spanning August–May; School Year (SY) spans August–July and is aligned with a P–12 school year; Fiscal Year (FY) corresponds to a federal 

fiscal year; Calendar Year (CY) spans January–December. 

Data Sources and Frequency of Collection: 

6.1.A. EDHires (Monster’s electronic hiring management system); annually 

6.1.B. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS); annually 

6.1.C. Federal Personnel/Payroll System (FPPS) Datamart; annually 

6.1.D. OPM FEVS; annually 

6.2.A. Office of the Chief Financial Officer’s (OCFO) Audit Accountability & Resolution Tracking System (AARTS); annually

6.2.B. Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) www.ppirs.gov “PPIRS Compliance Report”; annually

6.3.A. Annual Grantee Satisfaction Survey; annually 

6.4.A. Cyber Security Assessment and Management (CSAM) and RSA Security Operations management (SecOps); quarterly 

6.4.B. OPM FEVS; annually 

6.4.C. OPM FEVS; annually 

6.4.D. Department’s Master Space Management Plan; annually 

6.4.E. Department’s Master Space Management Plan; quarterly 

Note on performance metrics and targets: These metrics were established as a part of the FY 2014–18 Strategic Plan. Metrics may be updated or revised to 

reflect awareness of more accurate data or clarifications. Such updates or revisions are identified in footnotes. 
PERFORMANCE PLAN SUMMARY

FY 2016 Annual Performance Report and FY 2018 Annual Performance Plan—U.S. Department of Education 94

Analysis and Next Steps by Objective

Objective 6.1: Effective Workforce

FY 2016 Implementation Strategy 

In FY 2016, the Department continued to improve its time-to-hire performance, fill missioncritical positions, and offer viable options to the competitive process while ensuring hiring 

managers continue to receive a high caliber of applicants from which to select. These 

successes continue to be relayed during Supervisor Training 101, at collaboration meetings with 

hiring managers and HR Specialists, and in meetings with the Department’s Senior Leaders. 

The Department’s enhanced engagement activities resulted in the Department exceeding the 

government average Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS) response rate by 

30.4 percentage points. The Department’s 2016 response rate increased 3.5 points to 

76.2 percent. Nine offices met or exceeded the Department’s 2016 response rate goal of 

80 percent. Fourteen offices exceeded their prior year participation rate; seven exceeded by 

double digits. The Department’s unwavering and focused championing of engagement has 

resulted in the Department achieving a 1 percent increase in the Employee Engagement Index 

annually since 2012. 

Diversity and inclusion has been empirically and positively associated with greater talent 

utilization, better employee retention, increased innovation, and higher performance. The 

Department continues to build capacity at all levels of the Department, working through the 

Department’s Diversity and Inclusion Council, the Diversity Change Agent Program, and various 

training opportunities. The Department has designed a “Diversity and Inclusion Dashboard” for 

internal use that serves as a tool to provide senior leaders with demographic diversity data 

about hiring, attrition, retention, and a host of other data-driven accountability measures to 

assist in diversity planning. The Department continues to participate in the governmentwide 

Federal Diversity in Government Council. 

FY 2016 Barriers to Success 

There are challenges to educating managers on the numerous hiring flexibilities of the 

recruitment process and engaging subject matter experts (SMEs) where it would be most 

beneficial. Some hiring managers found reworking recruitment packages to include 

strengthening specialized experience statements or reworking self-assessment questions to be 

a challenge. The Department mitigates this risk by building partnerships up front, utilizing other 

avenues to hire, and providing consistent briefings from top to bottom. 

The Department’s employee engagement initiative relies heavily on principal office prioritization 

and implementation. The Office of Management (OM) offered and will continue to offer training 

courses, access to expert consultants, and senior-level engagement meetings to assist principal 

offices in successfully implementing employee engagement programs and activities. OM also 

communicated to principal offices about the support services available to the principal offices to 

assist them in the engagement planning and implementation process. 

Key Milestones and Future Actions 

The Department has entered into an agreement with Monster Government Solutions to utilize 

the assessment tool and position classification modules within its hiring system. This agreement 

expands the Department’s ability to standardize position descriptions and provide more support 
PERFORMANCE PLAN SUMMARY

FY 2016 Annual Performance Report and FY 2018 Annual Performance Plan—U.S. Department of Education 95

in the efforts to shorten timeframes. In addition, the Department will continue to promote the 

effective use of noncompetitive hiring authorities and advocate HR Specialists directly 

partnering with hiring officials at the onset of the process. 

In the area of employee engagement, OM will continue outreach to principal offices and work 

through the Monthly Operations Forum to shape annual engagement focus areas, raise 

awareness of best practices and information sharing, incorporate engagement best practices 

into day-to-day operations, and strive to increase the Department’s Employee Engagement 

Index. 

Currently, the Department plans to continue hosting regularly scheduled Diversity and Inclusion 

Council meetings, participating in the governmentwide Diversity and Inclusion Council, and 

providing diversity and inclusion training opportunities. 

Objective 6.2: Risk Management 

FY 2016 Implementation Strategy 

Through risk management, the Department identifies, sets priorities, and takes action on 

challenges affecting the successful use of grant, loan, and contract funds, in order to forward 

the achievement of its mission and strategic goals. During FY 2016, the Department’s risk 

management work included improving the audit resolution process, conducting grantee risk 

assessments, increasing oversight and technical assistance with targeted grantees, recording 

past performance information on contractors, and monitoring grants and contracts. 

This year, the Department improved its use of audit data to identify grantee management 

challenges. Our continued improvement in the audit resolution and closure process enables the 

Department to provide feedback and technical assistance to audited grantees that helps them 

improve the management and outcomes of their grant-funded activities. 

During FY 2016, the Department conducted a preaward risk review of all organizations slated 

for new awards or continuation awards from competitive grant programs. This process helped 

identify grantees that had not completed audits, as required for all grantees expending $750,000 

or more during the fiscal year, and resulted in many organizations completing their audits. The 

number of grantees the Department identified as missing audits declined by two-thirds between 

2012 and 2015. In addition, the Department’s program officers provided targeted oversight of 

and technical assistance to grantees to address issues identified during the preaward risk 

reviews. The Department formula grant programs reviewed the financial management and 

performance information of grantees and used this information to guide technical assistance to 

the field, as well as monitoring and oversight of specific grantees. 

Contract monitoring was improved this year by partnership between the contracts office and 

program staff to ensure that both the contractor fulfillment of requirements and successful 

outcomes and deliverables were achieved. Program offices conducted ongoing monitoring of 

grants, targeting programs and grantees that pose the greatest risk to program success. 

FY 2016 Barriers to Success 

Although the Department did not encounter barriers to success in risk management, there are 

ongoing challenges that must be addressed on a regular basis. These include the resources 

available for monitoring and the agency’s dependence on direct grant recipients to monitor the 

ultimate recipients, who spend the grant funds. 
PERFORMANCE PLAN SUMMARY

FY 2016 Annual Performance Report and FY 2018 Annual Performance Plan—U.S. Department of Education 96

The staff levels in Department program offices, FSA, the contracts office, and other Department 

offices largely determine the limits of monitoring and oversight activities. To address this 

challenge, the Department continues to explore ways to make the process more efficient, such 

as targeting oversight based on risk, automating the analysis of audit and past performance 

information, and using telecommunication and web-based technology to communicate with 

grantees. 

Because most Department funds flow through direct grant recipients to the agencies and 

individuals who ultimately use the funds, good oversight of Department funds depends on the 

“pass through agency” that distributes funds to the ultimate recipient agencies and beneficiaries. 

State agencies that sub-award Department grants to local agencies are crucial participants in 

grant oversight. Control over student aid funds is dependent on participating institutions. Most of 

these partners in administering Department programs are also challenged to find sufficient staff 

resources to conduct rigorous oversight of grant programs. 

Key Milestones and Future Actions 

In 2016, the Department launched Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) to meet the 

requirements of OMB Circular No. A-123, “Management’s Responsibility for Enterprise Risk 

Management and Internal Control.” Over the next year, the Department will formulate ERM 

plans by coordinating and expanding current risk management activities into an agencywide 

strategy to address its highest priority risks. 

To address capacity for grant, contract, and student financial aid oversight, the Department will 

continue to improve upon its risk-based monitoring planning and provide professional 

development for contract and grant officers. The number and skills of the staff responsible for 

monitoring will be assessed through ERM. 

To improve the usefulness of audits to the Department as well as the audited organization, the 

Department will continue to work toward improving the audit process. The Department is 

developing guidance for grantees on audit readiness, and plans to continue to promote quality 

audits by working with the national auditor community. The Department will continue to improve 

the process for resolving audits and will revise its procedures for audit resolution and closure. 

Objective 6.3: Implementation and Support 

FY 2016 Implementation Strategy 

The OSS within OESE is designed to provide more transparent, higher quality, and better 

differentiated support to states. The matrix organization model adopted by the OSS ensures that 

a state has two primary contacts within the office, and these individuals serve as the liaisons 

across key state-administered grant programs and major federal funding streams that flow to 

each state and district. By consolidating processes and technical assistance, the Department 

will be able to more effectively customize its outreach to individual states and model the critical 

partnerships that states should have with their respective districts. 

In FY 2016, the office focused on continuing professional learning and increasing staff 

knowledge and capacity in the program areas and office functions, as well as supporting states 

in implementing programs administered by the OSS. The OSS is working to deepen staff 

knowledge and build and pilot systems and routines that allow staff to support states with 

implementation through a systemic approach to performance review, policy coordination, data 

review, and technical assistance. In early 2016, the OSS launched staff Professional Learning 

Communities to provide OSS staff opportunities to deepen knowledge of new ESSA provisions. 
PERFORMANCE PLAN SUMMARY

FY 2016 Annual Performance Report and FY 2018 Annual Performance Plan—U.S. Department of Education 97

The OSS is also working to create a culture of data use. In FY 2016, OSS staff reviewed and 

validated state data reported on the consolidated state performance report (CSPR). Staff used 

this and other outcome data from the state to better understand state context when conducting 

performance progress review calls. Additionally, leadership used data from the employee 

viewpoint survey, as well as focus group findings, to determine areas of strength and 

weaknesses of the OSS. As a result of these data, leadership began a strategic planning 

process, with input from staff. 

The OSS continued implementing its performance review system. This new system covers all 

OSS programs through a single, streamlined process that encourages SEAs to develop and 

effectively implement integrated and coherent state plans. OSS restructured the comprehensive 

performance review system implementation timeline by elevating support to SEAs preparing for 

full implementation of the ESSA and its requirements in SY 2017–18. As a result, during this 

transition period the OSS implemented, in phases, a comprehensive performance review 

system. 

In FY 2016, OSS implemented several new routines to ensure ongoing coordination with 

internal and external partners. OSS began monthly conversations with the CCSSO to increase 

information sharing and coordination of ESSA transition support to states. Additionally, OSS and 

School Support and Rural Programs have regular meetings to increase coordination and 

communication between state program officers and Department-funded Comprehensive 

Centers. 

FY 2016 Barriers to Success 

Transitioning to the new OSS structure is a significant change that will take time to implement 

fully. OESE and OSS leadership are still establishing new processes and procedures, and the 

transition will take place gradually. Continuing challenges include staffing, appropriate 

professional development and support for staff, and relevant outreach and communication 

internally and externally. Additional challenges for the upcoming year include the launch of an 

updated state performance review and implementing against a new strategic technical 

assistance plan. State capacity to implement new ESSA provisions also continues to be a 

challenge. 

Key Milestones and Future Actions 

In launching the OSS performance review system, the Department deepened its collaborative 

relationship with the states with the quarterly progress checks on a common topic, piloted a riskbased fiscal review, conducted several shadowing trips to better understand the work of SEA 

staff, and hosted two collaborative calls that brought several states together to discuss common 

problems and share their approaches. To support continuous improvement of this process, OSS 

surveyed each fiscal review pilot state to gather feedback on the prototype tiered protocol that 

was developed in partnership with the Management and Support Unit of OESE. 

The OSS kicked off the State Support Network, a new four-year, $10 million technical 

assistance contract that will support states as they intervene in the lowest-achieving schools. 

The State Support Network continues to work collaboratively with the Comprehensive Centers 

and other partners to help states. In FY 2017, the State Support Network will provide universal 

support through broadly shared school improvement resources organized in a user-friendly 

website; collective support for technical assistance delivered in person, virtually, and shared by 

multiple organizations; and individual support focused on direct technical assistance from 

providers delivered in person and virtually to address specific state and district needs. 
PERFORMANCE PLAN SUMMARY

FY 2016 Annual Performance Report and FY 2018 Annual Performance Plan—U.S. Department of Education 98

The OSS restarted an assessment peer review process. After a four-year hiatus, and releasing 

new guidance in fall 2015, the OSS led a peer review process for 38 states in spring and 

summer 2016. From those reviews, the OSS began to develop feedback to states, with the goal 

of providing peer review notes and feedback letters to all reviewed states by the first quarter of 

FY 2017. Having good, actionable data from the assessment system is paramount to having a 

strong accountability system and providing schools, teachers, parents, and the public with the 

information they need to help all kids reach their potential. 

Objective 6.4: Productivity and Performance Management 

FY 2016 Implementation Strategy 

Cybersecurity continues to be a priority at the Department with the implementation of new, and 

the optimization of existing, capabilities to control the flow of sensitive information and prevent 

access to information systems, data, and critical information and infrastructure by unauthorized 

individuals. The ongoing measurement and analysis of cybersecurity incidents and privacy 

breaches, in accordance with OMB and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) guidelines, 

identifies areas for improvement and working with critical stakeholders to implement best 

practices. 

The Department continued its focus on the implementation and utilization of new security tools, 

and fine-tuning existing tools to meet the security needs of the IT environment. Our progress 

demonstrated the effectiveness of the installed capabilities by identifying unauthorized business 

practices and inappropriate handling of sensitive information. The Department increased its 

emphasis on the training of the cybersecurity workforce, to address identified discrepancies, 

and published new standard operating procedures (SOPs). In another effort to expand and 

strengthen its IT security posture, the Department implemented Two-Factor Authentication 

(2FA) for external users of the Grant Management System (G5), in compliance with Homeland 

Security Presidential Directive 12 (HSPD-12). 

The Department continued its implementation efforts to maximize the utilization of electronic 

signature functionality for discretionary and formula grants. The Department performed 

continuous monitoring of discretionary and formula grant activities in the G5 system to evaluate 

adoption of the electronic signature functionality by the program offices. 

The Department focused on applying the lessons learned, testing of the automation changes, 

and implementation of additional process to improve the Department’s overall incident 

response. To reduce the response time, additional resources were assigned and a surge 

capacity has been identified using Department and DHS assets. 

The Department also continues to improve the performance management system to strengthen 

and clarify performance expectations and ensure alignment with organizational goals to support 

a results-oriented performance culture. This effort keeps performance management at the 

forefront of Departmental news on a regular and recurring basis. 

Ensuring staff have the facilities and space to perform is an important part of supporting 

productivity. Through an aggressive strategy of relocating staff and reconfiguring space, as well 

as leveraging wireless connectivity, telework, desk sharing, and “hoteling” seating 

arrangements, the Department achieved the FY 2016 goals in reducing overall footprint (Usable 

Square Feet/USF) and rent costs. The immediate reductions in FY 2016 were mainly due to the 

Rapid Rent Reduction initiative (R3), which compressed personnel into existing Lyndon B. 

Johnson (LBJ) and Potomac Center Plaza (PCP) locations, allowing the release of three 
PERFORMANCE PLAN SUMMARY

FY 2016 Annual Performance Report and FY 2018 Annual Performance Plan—U.S. Department of Education 99

commercial leases: 1990 K Street, Capitol Place, and L’Enfant Plaza. This strategy supported 

an overall plan that will further reduce the overall USF and rent costs in FY 2017, FY 2018, and 

beyond. Significant progress was made in FY 2016 that will generate further reductions in space 

and commercial leases. 

FY 2016 Barriers to Success 

During FY 2016, the Department continued to address challenges that included the availability 

of a skilled cybersecurity workforce, and the ability to rapidly implement automated 

cybersecurity capabilities. Additionally, OCIO is working with its IT services provider to provide 

qualified staff and accelerate planned implementations. 

While data assurance and visibility increased, processes and technology continually need to be 

refined to reduce the risk to the Department. The Department met the FY 2016 performance 

target of 234 for IT security incidents and 120 for IT security breaches. To reduce the response 

time, additional resources were assigned and a surge capacity has been identified using 

Department and DHS assets. The Department’s efforts resulted in reducing the cybersecurity 

response time to 22 minutes for the final quarter of FY 2016. 

The use of the electronic signature functionality was heavily promoted during the fourth quarter 

of FY 2016. The outcome was an increase in use by program offices. The Department found 

that only through continued change management efforts will the use of the functionality be fully 

accepted. Change management is an important theme in the Department’s efforts in leadership 

and knowledge management and maintaining a results-oriented performance culture. However, 

employees need time to participate in training opportunities, even online learning opportunities. 

Managers and employees need to be engaged in training and performance management; risks 

are mitigated by senior leadership emphasis and support for the program. Also, risks are 

mitigated by holding managers accountable for completing the process. 

In the areas of space and rent, while the commitment is strong to reduce the amount of space 

and the rent bill, there are several factors that affect the Department’s implementation of these 

plans. One challenge is the availability of funds in the near term, as it will require an initial 

investment to realize the longer-term savings. 

Another challenge is identifying program areas that may grow or shrink in coming years, based 

on both policy and changes in resources and environment. One way to mitigate this is to provide 

flexibilities both in furnishings and layout, but also to leverage increased telework, desk sharing, 

and technology to increase the flexibility and usage of space. 

Key Milestones and Future Actions 

As noted earlier, the Department achieved a 97 percent establishment rate for performance 

plans. The Department continues to make strides toward 100 percent completion of 

performance plans. The involvement and commitment from senior leaders was essential to the 

increase in the percentage of performance plans completed this year and is essential moving 

forward. Performance management and training are critical to employees and supervisors. 

Throughout FY 2016, OM continued to market and educate supervisors on the initial and annual 

requirements for supervisory/managerial training. This effort and the provision of a robust set of 

course offerings for employees will continue in FY 2017. 

In the area of space and rent, the Department will continue with projects and plans to 

consolidate our footprint. The General Services Administration (GSA) is currently performing the 

PCP/LBJ Program of Requirements (POR)/Feasibility study for the renovation, space 
PERFORMANCE PLAN SUMMARY

FY 2016 Annual Performance Report and FY 2018 Annual Performance Plan—U.S. Department of Education 100 

optimization, and consolidation of a significant portion of the PCP-leased space into the LBJ 

Headquarters Building. The consolidation will reduce the overall utilization rate by reducing 

space allocations in the two locations. Once the Department has the study results, it will 

incorporate the space reductions into its out-year space plan.