FY 2003 Annual 

Performance Plan and 

Revised Plan for

FY 2002

United States

Department of

Agriculture

March 2002
Additional copies of this Annual Performance Plan 

can be downloaded at www.usda.gov/ocfo

Much of the information referenced in this Annual Performance Plan 

can be accessed from USDA’s Home Page at www.usda.gov

If you have comments or questions, please submit

via email to pm@cfo.usda.gov

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis

of race, color, National origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or

family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative

means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s

TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).

To file a compliant of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten

Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and

TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan

and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Table of Contents

1

Section Page

Message from the Secretary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

Revisions to the USDA Strategic Plan for FY’s 2000-2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

Performance Goals

Strategic Goal 1: Expand Economic and Trade Opportunities 

for U.S. Agricultural Producers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

Strategic Goal 2: Promote Health by Providing Access to 

Safe, Affordable and Nutritious Food . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26

Strategic Goal 3: Maintain and Enhance the Nation’s 

Natural Resources and Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42

Strategic Goal 4: Enhance the Capacity of All Rural Residents,

Communities and Businesses to Prosper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58

Strategic Goal 5: Operate an Efficient, Effective and 

Discrimination-Free Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .65

Fiscal Years 2003 Program Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .80

Fiscal Years 2002 Program Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .85

Appendix A: Data Verification and Validation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .90

Appendix B: FY 2003 Program Evaluations and Other Analyses . . . .116 

Appendix C: Major Management Challenges and Program Risks . . . 118

Message from the Secretary

The Department of Agriculture (USDA) is pleased to present our Annual Performance Plan

for Fiscal Year (FY) 2003 and Revised Plan for FY 2002 as required by the Government

Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA). GPRA mandates that this Plan be based on

the Department’s current strategic plan for FY 2000-2005, which was prepared by the

previous Administration.

This plan sets targets for USDA’s performance based on the resources USDA is requesting

in FY 2003. USDA’s FY 2003 budget request makes the following commitments.

• Ensures that the new Farm Bill will be generously funded by providing an additional

$73.5 billion in mandatory funding between 2002-2011 to develop sound policies for

farm commodity and income support, conservation, trade, food assistance research

and other programs. 

• Supports the Administration’s goal of opening new markets overseas and expanding

United States (U.S.) agricultural exports by providing over $6 billion in export

program support.

• Fully funds the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and

Children (WIC) thereby supporting 7.8 million program participants.

• Provides support for over 20 million food stamp participants including legislation to

allow more legal immigrants to participate and other changes to simplify complex

rules, support working families and improve program delivery.

• Makes major investments in the Department’s infrastructure including, among other

things, ensuring food safety, protecting agriculture from pests and diseases and

unanticipated events, conducting research and data collection critical to agriculture

sector performance, and improving the delivery of services to farmers and other

customers at less cost.

• Improves the stewardship of our soil, water and forests by making more resources

available for conservation uses with less money spent for overhead expenses.

• Maintains funding to support loans, grants, and technical assistance to address a

diversity of rural development needs including financing electric and

telecommunications systems, water and waste disposal systems, rural housing, and

business and industry. 

Homeland security will continue to be a key priority for the Department. We will focus our

efforts on protecting the food supply and the agricultural infrastructure that supports it. Efforts

will include increasing security at our laboratories and improving our inspection and

emergency management systems to prevent widespread damage from natural or intentional

terrorist introductions of foreign animal diseases. We have established a Homeland Security

Council to provide policy oversight and coordination of our efforts and to develop performance

measures to ensure that our investments in homeland security meet priority needs.

3

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002
Strategic planning is critical for meeting this Administration’s policy and management

objectives. Upon taking office last year, one of my first actions was to work with my

Subcabinet to develop a long-term policy agenda for Federal food and agriculture programs

entitled Food and Agricultural Policy: Taking Stock for the New Century. We are now

working to build a strong management infrastructure to support this agenda and provide a

foundation for future improvements in USDA’s performance. 

Ann M. Veneman

Secretary

4

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002
Introduction

5

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

In this Annual Performance Plan, submitted in accordance with the Office of Management

and Budget’s (OMB) Circular A-11, the USDA presents its FY 2003 Annual Performance

Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002. This document supports USDA’s Revised Strategic

Plan for Fiscal Years 2000-2005 by laying out annual performance goals and targets,

planned activities to pursue those goals, a description of efforts to verify and validate

performance data, and initiatives to address the management challenges faced by USDA.

Through these efforts, USDA is advancing year-to-year goals in support of the broader 5-

year strategic plan.

The Department’s revised strategic plan was the beginning of a corporate approach to

performance management. This document represents USDA’s second Department-wide

Annual Performance Plan and builds upon that effort. 

Also, the President’s Management Initiatives are addressed in this document. They are: 1)

Strategic Management of Human Capital, 2) Competitive Sourcing, 3) Improved Financial

Performance, 4) Expanded Electronic Government (Federal Assistance), and 5) Budget and

Performance Integration. These initiatives are for the most part strategic in nature.

However, this plan provides performance information on the Department’s current progress

and plans to improve in these areas.
Revisions to the USDA Strategic Plan for

FY’s 2000 - 2005

This plan refines the USDA Strategic Plan for FY’s 2000 - 2005. The most significant

changes include:

• The first key outcome under objective 1.1 has been revised to “Improve market income

for U.S. farmers,” in order to more explicitly reflect the fact that stronger farm markets

reduce the necessity of government payments. To align with this change, percentage of

gross cash farm income from the market has been added as an indicator to support this

revision.

• Domestic market opportunities were added to the first key outcome under objective 1.2

to reflect the Department’s commitment to expanding markets for U.S. agriculture both

domestically and abroad.

• The second and third key outcomes under objective 2.1 were consolidated due to the

similarity between these two outcomes. 

• The key outcomes under objective 2.3 were consolidated and additional performance

goals and indicators were added to align the Department’s food safety strategy with the

inter-agency National Food Safety Plan.

• A new key outcome was added under objective 3.3, with its own performance goal and

indicators, to support the Department’s strategy of fostering natural resource

development to improve the economies of rural communities.

• A new key outcome was added under objective 5.2, with its own performance goals, to

support the Department’s strategy to acquire recurring commercial services costeffectively.

6

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002
7

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Overview

Goal 1:

USDA’s mission is to enhance the quality of life for the American people by supporting

production agriculture; ensuring a safe, affordable, nutritious, and accessible food supply;

caring for public lands and helping people care for private lands; supporting sound

sustainable development of rural communities; providing economic opportunities for farm

and rural residents; expanding global markets for agricultural and forest products and

services; and working to reduce hunger in America and throughout the world.

The Annual Performance Plan (APP) is structured to transform this mission into measured

strategies and goals for which the Department can be held accountable, if given appropriate

resources. Only federal employees were involved in the preparation of this APP.

The strategic goals, objectives, and key outcomes contained in this plan are depicted in the

following table. 

Fiscal Year 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Summary Strategic Goals, Objectives, and Key Outcomes 

Expand economic and trade opportunities for United States (U.S.)

agricultural producers.

Objective 1.1: Provide an effective safety net and promote a strong, sustainable U.S. farm

economy.

Key Outcomes:

• Improve market income for U.S. farmers.

• Reduce the number and severity of pest and disease outbreaks in the U.S.

• Improve fair, open, and competitive marketing of U.S. agricultural products. 

• Improve the economic sustainability of family farms. 

Allocation of FY 2003 Program Level

to Program Goals

Allocation of FY 2003 Staff Years

to Program Goals

GOAL 1

39%

GOAL 3

8%

GOAL 2

41%

GOAL 4

11%

GOAL 1

31%

GOAL 3

46%

GOAL 2

14%

GOAL 4

9%
8

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Goal 2:

Goal 3:

Fiscal Year 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Summary Strategic Goals, Objectives, and Key Outcomes 

Objective 1.2: Expand market opportunities for U.S. agriculture.

Key Outcomes:

• Expand sales opportunities for U.S. agriculture in the increasing competitive 

international and domestic markets.

• Expand the market for biobased products and biofuels. 

Promote health by providing access to safe, affordable and nutritious food.

Objective 2.1: Reduce hunger and improve nutrition among children and low-income

people in the U.S.

Key Outcomes:

• Significantly improve food security for children and low-income people.

• Support real improvement in the diets of those served by USDA nutrition assistance 

programs.

• Improve the nutritional quality of USDA food benefits.

• Improve stewardship of Federal nutrition assistance programs. 

Objective 2.2: Reduce hunger and malnutrition around the world.

Key Outcome:

• Make a significant contribution to reducing world hunger and malnutrition. 

Objective 2.3: Protect the public health by significantly reducing the prevalence of

foodborne hazards.

Key Outcome:

• Reduce the incidence of foodborne illness related to meat, poultry, and egg products 

in the U.S. 

Objective 2.4: Improve public health through nutrition education, promotion, and research.

Key Outcome:

• Improve diets among the general public. 

Maintain and enhance the Nation’s natural resources and environment.

Objective 3.1: Maintain the productive capacity of the natural resource base for future

generations.

Key Outcomes:

• Maintain the resource health and productive capacity of non-Federal cropland,

grazing lands, and forestlands.

• Reduce erosion damage on cropland.

• Reduce risk of fire. 
9

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Goal 4:

Goal 5:

Fiscal Year 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Summary Strategic Goals, Objectives, and Key Outcomes 

Objective 3.2: Protect the quality of the Nation’s environment.

Key Outcomes:

• Protect air and water quality, as well as watershed health.

• Enhance urban environments.

• Maintain wetlands values and wildlife habitat.

• Clean up contaminated sites on USDA-managed facilities and lands, and restore 

affected ecosystems and watersheds. 

Objective 3.3: Provide multiple benefits to people from the Nation’s natural resources.

Key Outcomes:

• Provide sustainable production of goods and services from the National Forests and 

Grasslands. 

• Improve the satisfaction of visitors to the National Forests and Grasslands.

• Maintain benefits from watershed protection infrastructures.

• Foster natural resource development to improve the economies of rural communities. 

Enhance the capacity of all rural residents, communities, and businesses

to prosper.

Objective 4.1: Expand job opportunities and improve the standard of living in rural

communities.

Key Outcomes:

• Create and save jobs in rural areas.

• Increase rural homeownership.

• Provide safe drinking water to rural residents.

Objective 4.2: Ensure the neediest rural residents and communities have equal access to

USDA programs that will help them succeed.

Key Outcome:

• Increase assistance to the neediest rural communities.

Operate an efficient, effective, and discrimination-free organization.

Objective 5.1: Ensure that USDA provides fair and equitable service to all of its customers

and upholds the civil rights of its employees.

Key Outcomes:

• Conduct civil rights impact analyses of all significant USDA regulations to assess 

their effects on underserved customers.

• Provide full and equal access to USDA programs in a discrimination-free 

environment.

• Establish in every agency effective outreach programs that target underserved 

customers.

• Ensure timely resolution of program and equal employment civil rights complaints. 
10

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Fiscal Year 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Summary Strategic Goals, Objectives, and Key Outcomes 

Objective 5.2: Improve organizational productivity, accountability and performance.

Key Outcomes:

• Ensure USDA has the information systems needed to allow customers to securely 

share data and receive services electronically.

• Ensure USDA has a financial information system that can produce auditable financial 

statements and provide reliable and useful information for decision-making.

• Ensure USDA has a skilled, satisfied workforce and strong prospects for retention of 

its best employees.

• Ensure USDA has a facilities environmental management system that can produce 

reliable data on the Department’s environmental performance.

• Ensure USDA acquires recurring commercial services in the most cost effective way. 
11

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Expand economic and trade opportunities

for U.S. agricultural producers

USDA Resources FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003

Dedicated to Goal 1 Actual Estimate Estimate

Program Level ($ Mil) 45,463.6 34,293.6 41,102.0

Staff Years 32,108 33,230 34,001 

The landscape for U.S. farmers and ranchers is being rapidly transformed by a number of

convergent forces, such as quick changes in biological and information technology,

environmental and conservation concerns, greater threats of agricultural pests and diseases

spreading across continents, and the recent spate of natural disasters. U.S. producers also

are deeply affected by the continuing industrialization of agriculture and globalization of

markets. 

These trends, coupled with recent dramatic changes in U.S. farm policy and ongoing efforts

to trim Federal spending, make creative solutions necessary to ensure the long-term

profitability of U.S. agriculture. The Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of

1996 overhauled 60 years of National farm policy, placing a greater emphasis on

conservation and increased planting flexibility for farmers. However, it also left U.S.

farmers and ranchers with an imperfect safety net at a time when they are being buffeted by

destructive forces beyond their control – from powerful storms to weak markets. The

Agricultural Risk Protection Act of 2000, to make crop insurance more affordable to

farmers, including those who suffer multi-year losses, has provided additional protection.

This legislation also redoubles USDA’s effort to develop new and effective risk management

tools by expanding research and development and improving existing insurance products.

Congress has provided emergency funding to fill in the gaps, but alternatives must be put in

place.

Strategic Goal 1

Percent of FY 2003 USDA Resources Dedicated to this Goal

Program Level Staff Years

GOAL 1

39.0%

61.0%

GOAL 1

31.0%

69.0%
12

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

The FY 2003 President’s Budget includes additional funding of $73.5 billion over 10 years

for new farm legislation to replace the 1996 Act. The majority of this funding will be

expended to address stresses and risks experienced by the farming sector in recent years

that have been covered by emergency funding. In addition, the budget provides for a tax

incentive known as Federal Farm and Ranch Risk Management accounts, which would

allow farmers and ranchers to reserve a substantial percentage of their net farm income in a

tax deferred account that could be drawn on during economic downturns.

A critical component of any safety net and a priority of this Administration are to expand

access to global markets. Every $1 billion in U.S. agricultural exports supports 15,200 U.S.

jobs and generates more than $1.25 billion in additional domestic economic activity. Twothirds of the jobs supported by farm exports are located in urban and suburban areas due to

the many steps (processing, packaging, storage, and transport) required to move products

from the farm to markets around the globe. While agricultural trade presents tremendous

opportunities to the U.S. farm economy, global competitiveness has grown much more

intense, cutting into U.S. dominance of world agricultural markets. Achieving a level

playing field for global agricultural trade must be a high national priority in order to

promote a strong, market-driven U.S. farm economy.
13

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Objective 1.1

Provide an effective safety net and promote a strong, sustainable 

U.S. farm economy

Maintaining profitable operations is the only avenue to running a successful farm or ranch.

While factors such as market conditions, weather, and plant and animal diseases can play an

important role, the efficiency of a farm’s production system largely determines whether the

operation is economically viable. For this reason, helping farmers and ranchers increase the

profitability of their operations is important not only to a strong farm economy, but also to

the Department’s goal of decreasing farmers’ and ranchers’ dependence on government

assistance. 

In difficult times, a farm safety net helps to protect the men and women who feed this

country and much of the world. Today, the primary components of the safety net are farm

loans and income support, as well as crop insurance and other risk management tools

designed to help mitigate the inherent risks of farming that lie outside a producer’s control.

A 21st-century farm safety net also needs to be responsive to the rapidly changing nature of

global markets, and must recognize the interdependencies of the food chain. An appropriate

safety net needs to include a broader range of activities, from increasing the efficiency and

sustainability of farming and ranching operations to protecting U.S. agriculture from

invasive species and diseases that can threaten regional farm economies. Many of these

activities are heavily dependent upon USDA’s efforts to develop new production practices

and technologies that help farmers and ranchers mitigate the risks and seize the

opportunities of modern production agriculture. In particular, when appropriately used,

biotechnology holds great promise in terms of helping U.S. agriculture address major

concerns, from pests and diseases to extreme drought conditions. In addition, the Secretary

of Agriculture co-chairs the Interim National Drought Council, which was established to

coordinate Federal drought programs to ensure that government response is provided

effectively, efficiently, and in a customer-oriented manner.

The majority of farm income assistance is provided through production flexibility contracts,

loan deficiency payments, and marketing assistance loans. Production flexibility contracts,

established in FY 1996 and ending in FY 2002, provide eligible producers with annual

fixed but declining payments. These payments are aimed at easing farmers’ transition to a

more market-oriented consumer-driven U.S. farm economy. Approximately 1.2 million

producers will receive an estimated $4 billion worth of these payments in FY 2002.

Commodity Credit Corporation’s (CCC) marketing assistance loans provide producers with

interim financing to store eligible commodities until market conditions improve, so that

cash-strapped producers are not forced to sell immediately after harvest when commodity

prices are typically lowest. Loan deficiency payments compensate producers of major field

crops for the difference between the marketing loan repayment rates and the marketing

assistance loan rates. 

By using its traditional income support programs and expanding its risk management

efforts, USDA will work to promote a more market-oriented consumer-driven U.S. farm

economy. This will include work with the Congress in the formulation of new farm

programs to replace the expiring 1996 Act. The Department’s efforts to support the longterm success of U.S. agriculture also will encompass efforts to reduce the number and

severity of pest and disease outbreaks; ensure fair, open, and competitive marketing

practices; and secure a strong future for America’s small, family farmers through targeted

efforts to address their unique needs.
14

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Key Outcome: Improve market income for U.S. farmers.

The U.S. government provides assistance to farmers and ranchers during difficult times. If

USDA is to achieve its strategic goal of promoting a strong farm economy that is less

dependent on government support, then the Department must also place a heavy emphasis

on helping farmers and ranchers pro-actively manage the risks inherent in agriculture. For

this reason, discussion of this key outcome measure is divided into two sections: direct

government income assistance and USDA’s risk management efforts. 

Direct Farm Income Assistance

USDA will continue to use agricultural commodity, income support, and other programs to

help farms and ranches weather the highs and lows that are a fact of life in agriculture. The

Department will also aggressively use research and education efforts to help producers

lower costs and improve efficiency in order to enhance their farm income. In addition,

USDA will explore options to further expand growing markets for biobased products,

opening up another vein of economic opportunity on the farm. 

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target

1.1.1 Farmers’ total cash receipts from 188 194 202 204 209

the sale of farm products ($ Bil).* 

1.1.2 Gross cash farm income from cash 225 230 237 229 232 

receipts, government payments, and other 

farm income sources ($ Bil).* 

1.1.3 Percentage of gross cash farm 83.5 84.3 85.2 89.1 90

income from the market (%).* 

* Actual data is subject to historical revision over a 5-year period.

Strategies:

• Use agricultural commodity, income support, and other USDA programs within the

flexibility allowed by the law to accommodate changing production, market, trade, and

environmental conditions facing producers.

• Enhance the competitiveness of American agriculture through research and education

efforts that help farmers and ranchers reduce production costs, improve production

efficiency, and enhance environmental stewardship.

• Provide timely and impartial agricultural statistics – including information on

production, cash receipts, and farm product demand – to illuminate USDA’s efforts to

support a strong, market-oriented U.S. farm economy.

Risk Management 

One responsibility of USDA is to administer the Crop Insurance Program. The program is

expected to provide over $34.3 billion in risk protection on about 207 million insured acres

in 2003. This represents about 77% of the Nation’s planted acres of principal crops that are

insured.
15

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Significant reforms to the program were enacted in the Agricultural Risk Protection Act of

2000 (ARPA). Provisions of ARPA are strengthening the safety net for agricultural

producers by providing greater access to more affordable risk management tools and

improved protection from production and income loss. Increased premium subsidies to

make crop insurance more affordable were implemented beginning with the 2001 crop. In

response, farmers have already begun to buy higher levels of coverage. Revenue insurance

products that protect against reduced prices, reduced yields, or a combination of both are

now available to producers. Participation in these new products has increased significantly.

The decline in the projected target levels for insured acres is based on the USDA’s

Agricultural Baseline Projections of planted acreage for major agricultural crops. The

USDA projections show a decline in planted acreage for the major crops resulting in the

decline shown in total crop insurance premium and total insurance in force.

Revenue insurance programs such as Income Protection and Indexed Income Protection

were developed by Risk Management Agency (RMA) – led teams including representatives

of the public and private sector, and were implemented as pilot programs. Other revenue

insurance plans developed by private insurance companies were submitted to and approved

by RMA, and include Group Risk Income Protection, Crop Revenue Coverage, and

Revenue Assurance. All plans of insurance are offered through private insurance

companies.

USDA will expand the use of contracts and partnerships with public and private entities to

develop and deliver a variety of products to help U.S. agricultural producers manage yield,

market, and other risks faced in their operations. In the future, expanded education and

outreach efforts will increase agricultural producers= awareness of new risk management

opportunities. USDA will work to improve insurance availability to producers residing in

underserved states and to specialty crop producers nationwide by funding projects that

provide them with education and information. Already, new opportunities cover a range of

strategies and programs, such as risk management clubs, the Adjusted Gross Revenue crop

insurance program, and the Dairy Options Pilot Program. Risk management clubs are

groups of agricultural producers and business people who meet regularly for the purpose of

risk management education. 
16

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target 

1.1.4 Producers have economically 

sound risk management tools available,

and they use them to meet their needs:

• Number of insurance plans available 138 146 147 149 154

(crop year* data).

• Total crop insurance premium 2,304 2,526 2,885 2,801 2,776

($ Mil – crop year* data).

• Total insurance in force 30,862 34,277 35,834 34,948 34,382

($ Mil – crop year* data).

• Participation rate for all plans of 73.0 78.0 78.0 77.7 77.0

insurance** (% - crop year* data).

• Participation rate for acres covered 

by revenue insurance plans***

(NEW MEASURE):

– Underserved States (%) 8.2 18.2 23.8 23.9 23.9

– Nationwide (%) 27.0 31.8 42.2 42.4 42.5

• Number of producers participating N/A N/A 1,376 5,600 6,000

in risk management education 

activities being facilitated or

coordinated in underserved States

(NEW MEASURE).

* For most crops, crop year is defined as: The period within which the insured crop is normally grown and

designated by the calendar year in which the insured crop is normally harvested.

** This data will compare insured versus NASS planted acres (other than hay).

*** Revenue plans: Crop Revenue Coverage, Group Risk Income Protection, Income Protection, Revenue

Assurance – Underserved States: CT, DE, ME, MD, MA, NH, NJ, NY, NV, PA, RI, UT,VT, WV, WY

Strategies:

• Increase public and private involvement in all aspects of USDA’s risk management

efforts through contracting and partnerships for the research and development of policies

and other risk management tools.

• Identify and reach underserved areas and producers with risk management education and

outreach activities through farm publications, education courses, public and private

partnerships, and other effective means.

• Increase producer options for managing risk by providing insurance coverage for more

crops and by making other innovative risk management tools available.

• Expand pilot programs to include two or more livestock programs, a wild salmon

program, a premium rate reduction program, and a cost share program.

• Increase risk management education through information technology, such as web-based

distance learning.

• Evaluate and improve process for private companies submitting and gaining

approval/disapproval of alternative products.

• Online premium calculation software to compare plans of insurance for total revenue

coverage.
17

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Key Outcome: Reduce the number and severity of pest and disease outbreaks in the U.S.

A key way that USDA helps to ensure a strong U.S. farm economy is by safeguarding the

Nation’s animal and plant resources from invasive pests and diseases. These pests and

diseases often threaten U.S. agriculture, but also human health, trade opportunities, and

national security. The Department works to exclude exotic pests from the U.S. and to

quickly detect and respond to those that are introduced – minimizing production losses,

maintaining market viability, and containing environmental damage. As a key member of

the National Invasive Species Council, USDA works with other countries and Federal

agencies to deploy a range of strategies to safeguard the many pathways by which exotic

pests and diseases may enter the U.S. The Department also partners with Federal and State

agencies, industries, and professional organizations to maintain an effective, science-based

ability to quickly detect, respond to, and eliminate outbreaks. As more and more travel and

trade occurs across international borders, the management of these activities has become

increasingly complex. 

USDA will devote increased resources to inspecting passenger baggage and cargo at U.S.

ports of entry. The Department also will continue its vigilance abroad, closing loopholes at

key points of entry for invasive species to reduce the chances of harm caused to U.S.

agriculture. By enforcing existing penalties, pursuing the potential of science and new

technologies, and working to enhance the Nation’s preparedness to deal promptly and

effectively with pest and disease outbreaks, USDA will advance its efforts to provide this

vital protection. USDA will maintain a high degree of compliance with restrictions, despite

growing numbers of international air travelers.

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Target Target Target 

1.1.5 Reduce the number and severity 

of pest and disease outbreaks in the U.S.:

• International air travelers complying 95.8 95.2 96.6 96.7 97

with restrictions to prevent entry of 

pests and diseases (%).*

• States and Territories meeting standards 0 0 1 10 30

for state animal health emergency 

management systems (# Cumulative).

* Actual compliance rates may vary as much as 0.5% due to the margin of error associated with statistical

sampling.

Strategies:

• Devote additional resources to inspection of incoming people and cargo.

• Assess which agricultural products are likely to carry exotic pests and diseases and

establish appropriate, science-based quarantine regulations. Promote awareness of the

value of these regulations to help the public and importers understand the need for

compliance.

• Inspect passenger baggage and cargo at points of origin as well as aircraft, ships, trains,

and other vehicles, at U.S. Ports of Entry. 

• Enforce penalties for those who are caught carrying prohibited products to deter future

violations. 
18

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

• Maintain an adequate team of animal and plant health experts to address emergencies

quickly and effectively.

• Develop appropriate mechanisms to promptly deploy resources to address pest and

disease emergencies.

• Assist states in meeting national standards for state animal health emergency

management systems. 

• Develop new technologies and processes that will protect the U.S. agricultural

production system and American consumers from pests and diseases.

• Ensure adequate funding for the costs of animal and plant health safeguarding activities

through user fees where feasible.

Key Outcome: Improve fair, open, and competitive marketing of U.S. agricultural

products.

USDA in recent years has expanded its economic, legal, and computer expertise to address

industry structure and competition issues, and to better enforce the fair trade practice

provisions of the Packers and Stockyards Act. Investigations focusing on preventing anticompetitive behavior are complex and often demand sophisticated analyses. Timely

completion of these investigations requires significant human and capital resources. 

USDA will keep a watchful eye over new procurement and sales practices in order to

prevent anti-competitive behavior. It also will conduct vigorous and more complex

investigations and, where appropriate, file administrative actions to seek to halt anticompetitive practices. Additionally, USDA will investigate and take appropriate

enforcement actions when there are allegations of financial or prompt payment violations

affecting producer compensation.

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 

and Indicators Actual Actual Target Target Target 

1.1.6 Promote fair and competitive 

marketing for livestock, meat and 

poultry:

• Investigations (#). 1,218 1,898 1,619 1,800 1,700

• Violations corrected/issues resolved 98 96 97 96 96

within 1 year of investigation’s 

starting date (%).

• Monetary recovery to livestock 12.6 17.1 20.4 19.0 18.2

producers and poultry growers 

resulting from enforcement of the 

Packers and Stockyards Act ($ Mil).

Strategies:

• Monitor and analyze new and evolving procurement and sales practices to prevent anticompetitive behavior.

• Strengthen actions to identify and take enforcement action against anti-competitive

practices in the livestock, meat, and poultry industries. 
19

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

• Investigate the trade practices of packers, live poultry dealers, livestock dealers, and

market agencies to detect fraudulent, discriminatory, or unfair practices.

• Ensure accurate weighing and accounting procedures for the purchase and sale of

livestock, meat, and poultry. 

Key Outcome: Improve the economic sustainability of family farms.

Family farms have been critical to the fabric of American society throughout the Nation’s

history. Today, as has been true through U.S. history, the vast majority of the Nation’s farms

are small. The continued viability of these family farms is important to the wise stewardship

of our biological and natural resources, and to the social fabric and sustainability of rural

communities. 

USDA’s farm loan programs are an important source of credit to family farmers who cannot

obtain commercial credit at reasonable rates and terms. Often, these borrowers are

beginning and/or socially disadvantaged farmers who have limited resources. Frequently,

these also are farmers who have suffered financial setbacks over which they had no control

– often due to natural disasters or adverse market or production conditions. To assist these

producers, USDA offers direct and guaranteed farm ownership and operating loans.

Guaranteed loans are made by conventional agricultural lenders and guaranteed by USDA

for up to 95% of any loss. Applicants unable to qualify for a guaranteed loan may be

eligible for a direct loan from USDA. Demand for USDA direct and guaranteed loans

increased greatly in the past few years as a result of the economic downturn in the

agricultural sector. Demand is expected to remain high in FY 2002 and 2003. 

In addition to farm ownership and operating loans, emergency loans are offered by USDA

to restore or replace essential property, pay all or part of production costs associated with

the disaster year, pay living expenses, reorganize the farming operation, and refinance

debts.

Because USDA serves small and family-sized farmers, its direct farm loan portfolio carries

a high degree of risk. As such, it has been identified as a major management challenge for

the Department. A key indicator of the program’s financial integrity is the loss rate on direct

loans. This indicator also provides valuable information on the financial status of borrowers.

A low loss rate indicates that producers are able to meet their financial obligations and are

likely to continue farming. Despite continued low commodity prices and numerous natural

disasters, the loss rates have remained low in recent years. This positive trend can be

attributed to increased government assistance, which helped maintain farm income and

temper financial hardships for producers. Maintaining low loss rates will be a significant

challenge in the coming years, as commodity prices remain weak and many producers

continue to recover from the effects of recent natural disasters.
20

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target

1.1.7 Maintain the percentage of small 93 93 93 93 93

farms in relation to total U.S. farms at 

the 1999 level (%).

1.1.8 Increase the amount of farm 984.9 993.3 996 1,120 1,260

operating and ownership loans made or 

guaranteed to beginning and socially 

disadvantaged farmers ($ Mil).

1.1.9 Maintain a low loss rate on direct 3.5 4.2 5.2 5.8 5.4

loans (%).

Strategies:

• Support research, development, regulatory and outreach efforts that focus on small

farmers’ needs; for example, by helping small and family-sized farms develop alternative

enterprises, value-added products and marketing cooperatives.

• Foster marketing, development, credit, and outreach programs that improve the

competitiveness of family farms and give priority to farmer-owned and farm-based

businesses, especially those that encourage local and regional competition and that

directly channel consumer dollars to small farmers through, for example, farmers

markets.

• Encourage all USDA agencies and partners to emphasize through their programs that

sustainable agriculture helps ensure that small farmers operate in environmentally sound

ways and are successful in the long run.

• Enhance understanding of small farm financial success by examining the relative

contributions of these farms’ natural resource endowments, production practices, and

government assistance.

• Continue to work with commercial lenders to expand lending to creditworthy

underserved producers.

• Continue aggressive outreach efforts, targeting beginning and socially disadvantaged

farmers and ranchers with financial and technical assistance to help them establish and

maintain profitable farming operations.

• Maintain an aggressive supervised credit program through quality farm assessments,

which are essentially long-range business plans summarizing a producer’s goals and

strategies to achieve them. A primary goal is to move the producer from direct loans to

guaranteed loans and then to private financing.

• Continue to use prudent underwriting practices, borrower supervision, and loan servicing

tools to maintain low loss rates.

• Continue to streamline direct and guaranteed loan regulations so that more resources can

be focused directly on helping farmers succeed in the marketplace.
21

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Objective 1.2

Expand market opportunities for U.S. agriculture

Expanding market opportunities for U.S. agriculture is central to USDA’s goal of improving

the economic livelihood of farmers and ranchers. USDA must work to expand U.S.

agriculture’s export markets by enforcing existing trade agreements and pursuing greater

access to world markets for American agricultural products; and by enhancing domestic

marketing endeavors–from promoting farmers markets to exploring the potential of new

biobased products.

Given that 96% of American agriculture’s potential customers reside outside the Nation’s

borders, international trade presents an immense opportunity to strengthen the U.S. farm

economy. Yet in recent years, global agricultural markets have grown far more competitive.

Foreign governments and their agricultural companies have almost doubled their market

development funding, while similar resources from the U.S. government and U.S.

companies have remained essentially flat. Best estimates from 1998 have foreign

competitors investing approximately $700 million more in market development activities

than the U.S.

International agricultural trade negotiations provide a critical avenue for expanding access

to overseas markets. USDA is working closely with the U.S. Trade Representative’s office

to secure agreements that ensure fairness and improve U.S. access to global agricultural

markets. The World Trade Organization (WTO) began a new round of multilateral

agricultural trade talks in 2001. U.S. objectives for these negotiations include the

elimination of export subsidies; greater limitations on trade-distorting domestic supports;

substantial reductions in all import tariffs; increases in tariff-rate quotas; disciplines on state

trading enterprises; and rules to ensure market access for products of new technologies.

Negotiations also are continuing to establish a Free Trade Area of the Americas by 2005. A

major objective for these negotiations is the elimination of export subsidies for trade in the

Western Hemisphere.

Biotechnology is one of the fastest growing and most sensitive trade issues in U.S.

agriculture today, and is presenting U.S. agriculture with some of its most trade-threatening

issues. The use of biotechnology in the U.S. has greatly outpaced its use in any other

country in the world. This has created an experience gap between the U.S. and the rest of

the world, presenting some very complex access and intelligence challenges in the

marketing of U.S. products abroad. 

USDA also seeks to improve the domestic marketing of agricultural products. To ensure a

level playing field, USDA makes critical market data available to all producers to inform

their selling and marketing decisions. In addition, USDA provides protections to producers

selling highly perishable commodities. A key way to improve domestic marketing is by

tailoring food and fiber products to satisfy niche markets. USDA works to help producers

and processors learn how to respond to new consumer demands and seize more

opportunities to grow their bottom line.

USDA also will work in the coming years to create more opportunities for direct

agricultural marketing in order to keep a greater share of the consumer’s food dollar on the
22

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

farm. In addition, the Department will work to enhance domestic markets for agricultural

commodities and by-products. Through research and other efforts, USDA can assist in the

development and promotion of new value-added, biobased products, expanding market

opportunities for American agriculture and enhancing business activity, especially in rural

areas. 

Key Outcome: Expand sales opportunities for U.S. agriculture in the increasing

competitive international and domestic markets.

USDA will continue to work aggressively to regain U.S. agriculture’s share of global food

and fiber markets. The Department will work to strengthen and expand domestic markets

for U.S. agricultural products and to provide timely and accurate market information to

assist producers with marketing decisions.

International Markets 

The year 2001 was another growth year for U.S. agricultural exports; with U.S. exporters

registering $2 billion in sales growth. This continues the rise in US agricultural exports

begun in FY 2000, which reversed a 3-year downward trend that followed poor global

economics conditions. This upward trend in US exports is expected to continue in 2001,

with agricultural exports forecast to reach $54.5 billion – up $1.5 billion over FY 2001.

Much of the gain in 2001 was expected in the Asian markets, as this region’s economic

growth continues to rebound from the financial crisis of 1997-99. In FY 2002, China and

Hong Kong are expected to account for much of the growth. Export prospects are promising

in both value and volume for most major commodities, yet there still remains much work

ahead to reverse the long-term decline in U.S. share of global food and fiber markets. For

instance, excellent market prospects exist in Latin America for US agricultural exports,

especially in high-value consumer-ready products, but recent economic uncertainties in

Argentina may have temporary negative repercussions in Brazil and neighboring countries.

USDA has set a goal to increase the U.S. market share of global agricultural trade from

18.2% in FY 1999 to 22% by 2010. To meet this aggressive goal, USDA will develop a

global long-range marketing plan that enlists the Department’s vast network of domestic

and foreign field offices in an unprecedented effort to expand market opportunities for U.S.

producers. Assisting US agriculture reclaim its share of global agricultural trade, at 22%

held in the early 1990’s, is an ambitious but attainable goal, a goal that is a key outcome of

USDA’s mission. 

A focus on emerging markets must be balanced with the need to maintain a strong U.S.

presence in mature markets that American companies have established over the last 20

years. Exporters, for example, will continue to attend established trade shows in mature

markets, but USDA will shift its support of U.S. firms to shows in emerging markets to help

U.S. exporters offset the initial costs and risks involved in capturing these new

opportunities. The benefits of this strategy will be substantial. Given the expected level of

global agricultural trade by 2010, a 3.8% increase in U.S. market share will translate into a

gain of $14 billion in U.S. exports and an estimated $3.5 billion rise in farm income. 

USDA will pursue expanded access to foreign markets through the enforcement of existing

trade agreements and the pursuit of more free and fair agricultural trade, with a particular

emphasis on reducing trade barriers for products of biotechnology that have met stringent

U.S. safety requirements. Additionally, USDA will complement its efforts to expand foreign

market access with a global marketing campaign aimed at recapturing the U.S. share in

world agricultural markets. 
23

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target 

1.2.1 Increase the U.S. market share of

global agricultural trade.

• Estimated trade opportunities preserved 1,995 837 1,329 2,200 2,200

annually by assuring implementation of

existing trade agreements by signatory

countries through the WTO notification

process ($ Mil).1

• Gross trade value of markets created, 2,527 4,3492 2,684 2,700 2,700

expanded, or retained annually due to

market access activities other than

WTO notifications and/or standards 

($ Mil).1

• Annual sales reported by U.S. 315 367 360 250 250

exporters from on-site sales at 

International trade shows ($ Mil).

• U.S. agricultural exports supported by 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.9 4.2

USDA export credit guarantee 

programs ($ Bil).

1 These key performance goals illustrate the impact of trade negotiations and enforcement monitoring upon

USDA’s high-level goal of expanding U.S. access to foreign markets. Constant monitoring and negotiating new

agreements add tremendous value to current and U.S. exports. Intercessions by USDA’s overseas field offices on

behalf of U.S. exporters experiencing in-country problems also add significant value to U.S. exports. 

2 Includes $2.0 billion attributed to negotiations on China’s accession to the WTO in FY 2000.

Strategies:

• Develop a global long-range marketing plan that enlists USDA’s vast network of

domestic and foreign field offices in an unprecedented effort to assist U.S. producers in

capturing new market opportunities. 

• Partner with private U.S. market development groups to leverage resources aimed at

expanding market opportunities abroad for U.S. food and agricultural products.

• Expand U.S. access to foreign markets through active participation in the World Trade

Organization and other international trade forums.

• Continue to monitor existing international trade agreements and negotiate new

agreements to open overseas markets to U.S. food and agricultural products.

• Support free and open trade in biotechnology products that have met stringent U.S.

regulatory requirements.

• Develop educational programs for U.S. producers, processors, and exporters to

strengthen their marketing skills and export finance knowledge, including “Learn how to

export your product” workshops.

Domestic Markets

Critical to USDA’s efforts to expand sales opportunities is its work to enhance consumer

access to safe, affordable, high-quality food and fiber. USDA facilitates the efficient

marketing of U.S. agricultural products through marketing standards and by carrying out a

variety of information, technical assistance, grading, certification, inspection, and laboratory

services. The Department will continue to deliver timely market information, even as the

number of markets covered dramatically increases under newly instituted mandatory
24

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

livestock price reporting. More sophisticated grain quality measurement methods will be

implemented. USDA will work to improve wholesale and other direct marketing facilities to

encourage farmers markets and other endeavors that connect consumers directly with those

who produce their food, keeping a larger percentage of America’s food dollar on the farm.

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target

1.2.2 Increase the efficiency of U.S.

grain marketing:

• Critical grain quality measurement 94 107 971

100 110

methods evaluated for improvement (%).

• Number of new or improved grain 49 18 39 40 40

quality measurement methods 

implemented (#).

1.2.3 Improve market efficiency by 

reporting timely and accurate market 

information:

• Market News reports released on 90 92 93 93 93

time (%).

• National Agricultural Statistics 99.8 99.8 99.0 100 100

Service reports released on time (%).

1.2.4 Improve food marketing efficiency

by providing research and technical

assistance on new and upgraded 

wholesale, collection and farmers market

facilities, food distribution, and marketing

methods:

• Number of projects completed (#). 7 10 10 10 10

1 Estimated to conduct 30 method evaluations and completed 29.

Strategies:

• Improve the accessibility of inspection and weighing information; develop new

streamlined inspection and weighing processes; and develop new or improved objective

measures of end-use grain quality.

• Collect and disseminate time-sensitive market information for domestic and foreign

markets and ensure the data is accurate and consistent with market needs.

• Provide commodity quality grading/certification services, including third-party

assessments of product quality and condition (paid for by interested buyers and sellers)

and a national certification program for organic foods.

• Improve wholesale and other direct marketing facilities and commodity handling to

enhance opportunities for farmers, emphasizing facility-based markets such as

wholesale, farmers, collection, and public markets.

• Provide timely and impartial agricultural statistics, including data on total cash receipts

and number of farms.
25

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Key Outcome: Expand the market for biobased products and biofuels.

USDA research has historically developed technologies to enhance the industrial uses of

agricultural commodities and byproducts. Producing these new industrial products creates

new markets for agricultural crop and animal feedstocks, reduces dependence on imported

petroleum, and helps meet environmental needs.

Research into new post-harvest, value-added products continues at USDA, and funding

levels are increasing. These USDA-developed technologies are being transferred to the

private sector for commercialization. To facilitate commercialization, USDA is working

with industry to create Federal market demand for these products, which range from

biofuels to lubricants, compostable plant-based plastics and polymers, and a whole range of

paints, coatings, inks, cleaners, and other products. USDA has been charged with

developing a list of biobased industrial products by category available for purchase by

Federal procurement officials. Additionally, USDA is accelerating outreach and education

efforts to other Federal agencies to promote the Federal purchase and use of these products

on an ongoing basis. USDA is leading by example; on August 7, 2001 the Secretary

declared that USDA fleet vehicles would use biodiesel and ethanol to the maximum extent

practicable. 

The Department is also facilitating increased production of biofuels (ethanol and biodiesel)

by providing cash payments to eligible energy producers who utilize agricultural raw

materials to increase their production of bioenergy.

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target

1.2.5 The number of categories of N/A 1 3 6 13

commercially available industrial products

reviewed by USDA that is available

for Federal purchase (# Cumulative).

Strategies:

• Accelerate the compilation of a list of commercially available biobased products by

category and increase Federal marketing efforts.

• Utilize USDA research to increase manufacturing production efficiencies, making

products more cost-effective and reducing consumer costs.

• Initiate methods to determine life cycle costs of biobased products as contrasted with

their fossil-based alternatives to determine true product costs.

• Work with major Federal procurement agencies to make sure performance standards for

biobased products are consistent with what those agencies require.

• Conduct research for the continuing development of a wider range of industrial biobased

products from commodities and undervalued byproducts of agricultural production and

processing. 

• Support the development of new industrial crops and the reestablishment of old crops,

such as flax.
Reducing hunger, promoting good nutrition, and ensuring food safety form an integral part

of USDA’s mission and commitment of responsibility to every American. The Department

strives to ensure that America’s agricultural abundance, and the latest science and

technology, work together to support the nutrition and health of people domestically and

abroad.

USDA partners with public and private groups to pursue a broad strategy to reduce hunger

and improve nutrition through food stamps, school meals, nutrition assistance to women,

infants, and children, and other efforts. USDA will advance these efforts by ensuring that

eligible people have access to nutrition assistance programs, and by improving the nutrient

content of food packages and school meals.

The Department also plays a leading role in the international war on hunger through efforts

ranging from direct commodity donations to advocating policies that promote global

economic and food security. Working closely with other Federal agencies and with partners

around the world, USDA will seek long-term solutions to world hunger and malnutrition by

pursuing promising scientific breakthroughs – especially in the field of biotechnology – and

by promoting sustainable food production in food insecure nations.

26

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Strategic Goal 2

Promote health by providing access to safe,

affordable and nutritious food

USDA Resources FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003

Dedicated to Goal 2 Actual Estimate Estimate

Program Level ($ Mil) 36,538.6 41,078.6 43,406.2 

Staff Years 15,072 15,439 15,575 

Percent of FY 2003 USDA Resources Dedicated to this Goal

Program Level Staff Years

GOAL 2

41.0%

59.0%

GOAL 2

14.0%

86.0%
27

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

In partnership with the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) and the

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), USDA is building a science-based national system

to ensure food safety from farm-to-table. While America has one of the safest food supplies

in the world, foodborne diseases cause 325,000 serious illnesses resulting in

hospitalizations, 76 million cases of gastrointestinal illnesses, and 5,000 deaths each year.

The USDA strategic goal is to contribute to the health of the Nation’s citizens by

significantly reducing the prevalence of foodborne hazards from meat, poultry, and egg

products. Through stronger coordination among government food safety agencies and

greater investments in scientific advances, USDA intends to make additional progress on

this vital public health issue. 

USDA also makes a significant contribution to America’s health through nutrition education

and research. While the scientific advances of recent decades have strengthened our

understanding of the powerful ties between nutrition and health, only about 12% of

Americans eat a diet that is consistent with the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. Through

a variety of means (nutrition education; policy guidance to State and local government

agencies; and partnerships with America’s schools, various public and private entities, and

families), USDA will work to help more Americans understand the critical relationship

between diet and long-term health and well-being.

By working to reduce hunger and improve nutrition in America and around the world, by

protecting public health through advances in food safety, and by promoting nutrition to

improve the Nation’s well-being, the USDA plays an invaluable role in the health and food

security of every American family and for people around the globe.
28

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Objective 2.1

Reduce hunger and improve nutrition among children and low-income

people in the United States

USDA’s domestic nutrition assistance programs work in communities across the country to

reduce hunger and improve nutrition by providing children and low-income people with

access to food, a healthful diet, and nutrition education. These efforts touch the lives of one

in six Americans and account for nearly one-half of USDA’s expenditures. The largest

programs include: Food Stamps, the Child Nutrition Programs (such as the National School

Lunch Program), and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and

Children (WIC). 

In FY 2003, USDA will continue its results-oriented efforts to improve the diets of children

and low-income people by delivering targeted nutrition assistance to people in need. The

Department will carry out nutrition education programs and encourage dietary choices

consistent with the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. Finally, USDA will strengthen its

commitment to responsible stewardship of tax dollars.

Key Outcome: Significantly improve food security for children and low-income people. 

USDA nutrition assistance programs constitute the lion’s share of the Federal government’s

effort to reduce hunger, and are major sources of food for children and adults from lowincome households. 

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target* Target* 

2.1.1 Expand program access and 

benefit delivery for USDA nutrition 

assistance programs (Mil):

• Food Stamp Program participation. 18.2 17.2 17.3 19.8 20.6

• Special Supplemental Nutrition 7.31 7.20 7.30 7.51 7.8

Program for Women, Infants and 

Children participation.

• National School Lunch Program 26.9 27.2 27.4 28.0 28.4

participation.

• School Breakfast Program 7.4 7.8 7.8 8.1 8.36

participation.

• Child and Adult Care Food 1,638 1,670 1,678 1,754 1,816

Program meals served.

• Summer Food Service Program 2.17 2.09 2.1 2.09 2.40

participation.

* USDA uses projected annual participation levels as a proxy measure of performance in maintaining program

access and benefit delivery for nutrition assistance programs. These projections reflect the Department’s best

estimates of voluntary program participation, rather than targets per se.
29

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Strategies:

• Effectively deliver assistance to eligible people by: providing benefits to certified

program participants; reimbursing appropriate State administrative costs; improving

program management; monitoring compliance with program rules; and providing States

and other partners with technical assistance and flexibility to ensure program

effectiveness.

• Continue efforts to assure that the Food Stamp Program (FSP) is accessible to all those

eligible, including non-participating persons, – particularly the working poor, elderly,

and immigrants who may not realize that they are eligible. 

• As part of the FSP Reauthorization, propose legislative changes to simplify program

rules, better support work, strengthen the nutrition safety net, and improve

accountability.

• Continue efforts to increase access to the Summer Food Service Program by encouraging

providers and sponsoring organizations to join the program.

• Seek a funding level for WIC that will assist 7.8 million women, infants and children in

FY 2003.

• Maximize the availability of WIC benefits by: reallocating funds throughout the fiscal

year so that adequate resources are available in areas with high demand; assisting States

in using infant formula rebates to stretch program dollars; promoting electronic benefits

transfer; and collaborating with States to ensure consistent program access across the

Nation.

Key Outcome: Support real improvement in the diets of those served by USDA

nutrition assistance programs.

The Nation faces significant public health issues related to the quality of America’s diet.

For this reason, USDA is working to integrate science-based nutrition education in all of its

programs. In FY 2003, efforts will focus on: promoting practices consistent with the

Dietary Guidelines for Americans through USDA nutrition education materials and

interventions; providing training on behavior-focused nutrition education approaches;

enhancing efforts to increase the rate of breastfeeding in WIC, supporting local program

partners in promoting healthy eating environments in schools; and encouraging the

comprehensive implementation of Team Nutrition.
30

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target 

2.1.2 Promote better diet quality

among children and caregivers 

eligible for federal assistance 

programs

• USDA nutrition education N/A 1,578,400 2,737,638 4,800,000 4,500,000

materials and education 

interventions disseminated (#)

• Training programs on N/A N/A N/A 3 5

nutrition education methods

and materials (NEW 

MEASURE).

• WIC mothers initiating N/A N/A N/A 45% (data

breastfeeding (%) collected

(NEW MEASURE). biennially)

• WIC State agencies trained on N/A N/A N/A 30 58

revised Nutrition Services 

Standards (NEW MEASURE).

• State/regional dairy councils (assess

promoting implementation of 2002

Changing the Scene at the local outcomes

level (NEW MEASURE). –consider

expansion)

• Comprehensive implementation N/A N/A N/A 4 Disof Team Nutrition (NEW States seminate

MEASURE). complete Implepilot mentation

project Guide

and kit

Strategies:

• Develop and disseminate nutrition education materials and education interventions

targeting children and their caregivers who are participating or are eligible to participate

in federal nutrition assistance programs, including the cross-program Eat Smart. Play

Hard.TM campaign.

• Conduct train-the-trainer programs on techniques that foster behavior change and that

increase the effective use of USDA nutrition education materials.

• Provide regional/national training to WIC State agencies on updated WIC Nutrition

Services Standards so that State agencies will be informed on ways that the standards

can enhance the provision of nutrition services.

• Continue to promote breastfeeding through WIC as the preferred infant feeding practice.

As part of this effort, provide technical assistance to eight states to implement the

Loving Support breastfeeding campaign.

• Involve communities in promoting healthy eating environments in schools by reinforcing

the use of Changing the Scene resource kit. Work with State and regional dairy councils

to deliver training to the local level.
31

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

• Strengthen program-specific nutrition education efforts and nutrition services that

promote positive changes in dietary behavior, such as Team Nutrition, Food Stamp

Nutrition Education and WIC nutrition education. Team Nutrition efforts would be

enhanced by the comprehensive implementation at the local level. Four states will

complete such implementation on a pilot project basis in 2002.

• Advance crosscutting mechanisms to advance more comprehensive and integrated

nutrition education by finalizing a long-term plan for nutrition education in federal

nutrition assistance programs.

Key Outcome: Improve the nutritional quality of USDA food benefits.

USDA sets two key goals to ensure that its low-income program participants, as all

Americans, have access to a healthy diet. First, the Department will encourage consumption

of fruits and vegetables – a critical part of a healthy diet in need of improvement across the

Nation – by providing fruits and vegetables to schools participating in the School Meals

Programs and by increasing access to fresh produce through the Food Distribution Program

on Indian Reservations (FDPIR). Second, USDA will continue to work with its State and

local partners to ensure that Federal benefits reflect a balanced diet, particularly when it

comes to school meals that help children form healthy eating habits at an early age.

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target 

2.1.3 Improve access to fruits and 

vegetables:

• All fruits and vegetables provided 155 221 245 171* 171*

to schools ($Mil).*

• Sites on Indian reservations receiving 58 59 82 83 84

fresh fruits and vegetables (#).

2.1.4 Monitor and support State and 

local efforts to ensure that USDA food 

benefits meet national nutrition standards:

• School Meals Initiative monitoring 2,937 3,939 4,073 2,900 2,900

reviews conducted by State agencies.

* Measure is changed from FY 2002 Plan. The targets include planned purchases of commodity fruits and

vegetables for schools, but do not include possible bonus purchases.

Strategies:

• Continue to purchase and distribute fruits and vegetables to schools participating in the

National School Lunch Program.

• Increase the number of Indian Tribal organizations that receive fresh fruits and

vegetables from USDA.

• Continue to support USDA’s School Meals Initiative to ensure nutrition education and

school meals that reflect a balanced diet. Monitor schools’ progress in carrying out this

important initiative.

• Develop a dietary assessment tool to screen WIC participants for unhealthy eating

patterns, so that tailored dietary advice as well as general nutrition education can be

administered through the program.
32

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Key Outcome: Improve stewardship of Federal nutrition assistance programs.

USDA is strongly committed to preventing loss of taxpayer dollars due to fraud, error, and

inefficiency, and to optimizing the use of each Federal, State, and local dollar to ensure that

nutrition programs serve those in need at the lowest possible cost.

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target

2.1.5 Improve program design and 

delivery:

• Food stamp benefits issued 70.3 76.3 82.8 89 97

electronically (%).

• Annual milestones met for N/A N/A 90 100 100

significant commodity program 

initiatives in the School and 

Indian Programs (%).

• Number of States that have N/A N/A N/A 15 25

initiated commodity program 

computer connectivity with 

school districts (NEW 

MEASURE).

2.1.6 Maintain benefit accuracy in

the food stamp and school meals 

programs:

• Food stamp benefit accuracy 90.1 91.1 Available 5/02 91.3 91.5

rate (%).

• School Food Authorities in N/A 86.8 Available 9/02 87 87

compliance with school meals 

counting and claiming rules (%).

2.1.7 Strengthen State and local 

management of the Child and 

Adult Care Food Program:

• USDA management evaluations N/A 100 98 100 50*

of State agencies administering 

the program (%).

• State agencies offering sponsor N/A 100 0 100 100

training that uses new USDAdeveloped program management 

materials (%).

* Reflects change to more in-depth management evaluations conducted on a two-year cycle.
33

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Strategies:

• Expand electronic delivery of benefits in the food stamp and WIC programs by:

providing technical assistance on EBT to States; working with less active States to more

aggressively implement EBT; continuing to improve USDA’s own EBT-related systems;

and addressing related cost and service challenges.

• Continue initiatives that improve the commodity programs for schools and Indian

programs.

• Continue promoting program activity between State agencies and School districts

including moving forward with the development of a national prototype system for

improving the ordering and tracking of USDA commodities between school districts and

State agencies.

• Support State efforts to improve food stamp benefit accuracy through technical

assistance and “best practices” information-sharing.

• As part of FSP Reauthorization, propose reforms to the Food Stamp Quality Control

(QC) system and propose performance bonuses for payment accuracy and customer

service.

• Work with State agencies and local School Food Authorities to improve counting and

claiming accuracy and certification procedures in school meals programs.

• Enlist the support of other users of school meals certification data in order to ensure that

State and Federal resources can be properly targeted to those most in need.

• Continue improving management of the Child and Adult Care Food Program by

evaluating the success of new rules and management efforts, and by working with State

agencies to train program sponsors on the new regulations.
Objective 2.2

Reduce hunger and malnutrition around the world

More than 800 million people worldwide suffer from hunger and malnutrition – most of

them children. In response, more than 180 countries at the 1996 World Food Summit agreed

to work together to cut in half the number of hungry and malnourished people in the world

by 2015. The U.S. Action Plan on Food Security provides a detailed strategy for how the

U.S. can lead the world war on hunger. Working with the U.S. Agency for International

Development (USAID), non-profit organizations, and American universities, USDA will put

these strategies into action both to meet immediate emergency food aid needs and to seek

long-term solutions to global food insecurity.

Key Outcome: Make a significant contribution to reducing world hunger and

malnutrition.

The U.S. is the world’s leader in international food aid, providing over 50% of total

worldwide assistance. During the past year, the Administration has carried out a

management review of all U.S. foreign food assistance activities in order to rationalize and

reform their administration and to strengthen their effectiveness. As a result of the review,

the Administration has reaffirmed its commitment to continued U.S. leadership in providing

international food assistance and recognized the importance of that assistance for meeting

U.S. humanitarian and global food security objectives. Also, the Administration intends to

reduce the number of programs through which assistance is provided and to redefine roles

to eliminate overlap. As a result, USDA will continue to carry out government-togovernment programs, while USAID will assume responsibility for all programs carried out

in cooperation with private voluntary organizations, cooperatives, and the World Food

Program. Finally, the Administration will reduce the reliance of food aid activities on the

year-to-year availability of surplus U.S. commodities. Accordingly, donations by USDA

that rely on the purchase of surplus commodities by CCC will be phased out by 2003, while

funding for donations under P.L. 480 Title II (administered by USAID) will be increased.

The results of the Administration’s review are reflected in the 2003 budget and program

proposals. The 2003 program level for P.L. 480 Title I credit agreements is continued near

the 2002 level. CCC-funded Food for Progress programs that traditionally have been carried

out through private voluntary organizations and cooperatives will not be funded, as those

types of programs will be the exclusive responsibility of USAID. Accordingly, the

performance indicator for U.S. food assistance provided under P.L. 480 Title I and Food for

Progress in the following table declines in 2003 to reflect the absence of CCC-funded Food

for Progress. However, the overall level of U.S. food assistance will be bolstered by an

increase in funding for the USAID-administered P.L. 480 Title II program of $350 million

above the 2002 request level.

34

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002
35

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target 

2.2.1 U.S. food aid exports under P.L. 727 307 247 224 132

480 Title I and Food for Progress 

supporting world food security ($ Mil).* 

2.2.2 Promote research, training and 

technical assistance activities that support 

sustainable food supplies worldwide.

• Projects underway (#). 789 967** 1,005 1,000 1,000

• Amount invested ($ Mil). 39.9 53.8 56.0 56.0 56.0

* The decline from FY 1999 and FY 2000 to FY 2001 and FY 2002 is primarily related to the reduction of food

aid need in Russia. 

** The rise in the number of projects between FY 1999 and FY 2000 is primarily related to the additional

reconstruction work in Central America following Hurricanes Mitch and Georges.

Strategies:

• Prioritize international food donations based on greatest need and positive development

environment. 

• Strengthen food security research and programs that share vital agricultural knowledge

with producers around the world in order to expand the productivity and nutritional

impact of global agriculture.
36

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Objective 2.3

Protect the public health by significantly reducing the prevalence of

foodborne hazards

USDA ensures that the commercial supply of meat, poultry, and egg products is safe,

wholesome, and properly marked, labeled, and packaged. The Department is responsible for

ensuring sanitation, humane slaughter, pathogen reduction, food safety, and product labeling

at all establishments under Federal inspection. USDA assesses the effectiveness of State

inspection programs to assure that their standards are equal to those under the Federal Acts.

Also, the Department is responsible for reviewing foreign inspection systems that export

meat and poultry products to the U.S., and for inspecting imported products at Ports of

Entry to assure that standards are equivalent to those of the U.S. The goals outlined in this

plan will require coordination with USDA food safety partner agencies, including, the

DHHS and the EPA.

Key Outcome: Reduce the incidence of foodborne illness related to meat, poultry, and

egg products in the U.S.

Continuing the Nation’s historic progress in recent years in reducing foodborne illness will

require continued, science-based advances in the USDA approach to food safety. There are

three distinct aspects of the U.S. food safety strategy: 1) assessing risks and monitoring

emerging and potentially high-risk threats to the U.S. food supply; 2) managing these risks

through science-based performance standards, regulatory requirements, and other efforts;

and 3) communicating these risks so that all Americans are aware of ways to reduce the risk

of foodborne illness. 

Risk Assessment

There is a clear need to strengthen scientific understanding of food safety. USDA will focus

on new research and better scientific methods to answer critical questions such as new tools

to reduce or eliminate food hazards, and how the root causes of food safety problems can

be quickly detected and eliminated. 

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target 

2.3.1 Provide worldwide leadership 

towards the creation and utilization of 

risk assessment capacity for meat, 

poultry, and egg products supported 

by the latest research and technology:

• Risk assessments used to inform risk 2 2 2 4 5 

management decision-making and 

policy (# Cumulative).
37

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Strategies:

• Conduct rigorous risk assessments to identify emerging potential high-risk pathogens,

risk management gaps, and other food safety threats.

• Develop a risk-based, problem-solving research and technology agenda that will enable

USDA to meet its risk assessment and risk management objectives to improve food

safety.

• Update and expand estimates of the costs of foodborne illness using current Centers for

Disease Control and Prevention estimates relating to 28 pathogens, including 21 not

currently covered by USDA cost estimates.

• Provide the scientific knowledge to enable policymakers and regulators as well as food

producers, processors, handlers, and consumers to minimize the risks of pathogen or

chemical contamination of the U.S. food supply.

• Analyze microbial/chemical residue data, performance data, and regulatory and

biotechnology issues.

• Conduct targeted slaughter epidemiological surveys.

Risk Management

Delivering safe food to the dinner table is the culmination of the work of many people.

Producers, shippers, processors, distributors, handlers, and others perform actions every day

that impact food safety. The challenge is to perform these activities in such a way that the

food eaten within the U.S. and shipped abroad is free from physical hazards and dangerous

levels of pathogens and harmful chemicals. Government plays an important role in

managing foodborne risks through regulations, incentive programs, voluntary efforts,

compliance inspection, and enforcement activities that influence those who produce,

process, transport, and prepare food. This helps reduce the incidence of harmful pathogens

on U.S. meat and poultry. The FY 2003 budget maintains 7,600 in-plant meat and poultry

inspectors to ensure that the demand for inspection services can be met. Additional funding

is included to improve the information technology infrastructure to support implementation

of improved risk management systems and resource allocation to maximize food safety.

Funding is also included to conduct slaughter epidemiological surveys and risk prevention

activities for small and very small establishments. 

In 1994, FSIS conducted baseline testing of Salmonella in broiler chickens and determined

that there was an average industry-wide Salmonella prevalence of 20%. In July 1996, the

Agency finalized the PR/HACCP rule that established a performance standard for the

industry of 20% for broiler chickens based on the 1994 baseline. In 1999, prevalence was

11.3%, an approximate 50% reduction from the performance standard. FSIS established

targets for FY 2000 through FY 2005 based on being able to accomplish a further reduction

in the prevalence of Salmonella from 11.3% to 7.5% in FY 2005. The interim target for FY

2000 was expected to be 10.1%. The final test results of 8.7% were lower than the interim

target for that year, and revealed fluctuations in Salmonella prevalence in this product

category. This natural variability is expected to continue for some years as the HACCP

system fully matures. FSIS expects further declines in the coming years along the line of

the interim targets, which would culminate in the outcome measure of 7.5% reflected in the

FSIS Strategic Plan.
38

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target

2.3.2 Create a coordinated national and 

international food safety risk management 

system to ensure the safety of U.S. meat 

and poultry products from farm to table.

• Reduction in the prevalence of Salmonella

on raw meat and poultry products as 

illustrated by:

- Prevalence of Salmonella on broiler 11.3 8.7 11.9 9.01

8.81

chickens (%).

- Prevalence of Salmonella on market 6.6 7.6 4.5 5.51

5.01

hogs (%).

- Prevalence of Salmonella on ground 4.4 3.6 2.6 3.01

3.51

beef (%).

• Reduction in the prevalence of Listeria

monocytogenes in ready-to-eat meat and 

poultry products:

- Samples testing positive for Listeria 1.91 1.45 1.32 1.401

1.341

monocytogenes (%).

1 Due to the variability found in pathogen prevalence data, FSIS is re-evaluating the targets and may establish

alternative performance indicators as a better understanding of the factors as they become known.

Strategies:

• Establish national performance standards for ready-to-eat meat and poultry products and

establish additional standards for raw products, as appropriate.

• Monitor slaughter and processing plants to ensure that food safety requirements are met.

• Identify, investigate, and respond to food safety emergencies and monitor foodborne

illnesses resulting from the consumption of unsafe meat, poultry, and egg products.

• Expand access to overseas markets by seeking internationally recognized laboratory

accreditation and by expanding U.S. laboratory capacity to meet EU residue testing

requirements.

• Ensure that meat, poultry, and egg products imported into the U.S. are safe by increasing

reviews and audits to ensure the continued equivalence of foreign inspection systems.

• Strengthen and promote the usage of humane slaughter and handling practices by

industry.

Risk Communication

To improve food safety, the collection and analysis of research and risk assessment data on

food safety hazards must be followed by the prompt distribution and use of this

information. Increased access to this information allows for its practical application to

ensure food safety in a variety of contexts. Increased knowledge helps prevent future risks.

USDA will work to expand the number of people who are reached with effective

communications that encourage consumer food safety practices and inform the decisions

and actions of public health professionals, retail workers, and regulators.
39

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target

2.3.3 Conduct a comprehensive national 

and international communication program 

that is an open exchange of information 

and opinions about food safety risks:

• People reached with food safety 83 85 150 89 89

information through media stories, 

circulation reports, USDA FSIS 

website visits, and USDA Meat & 

Poultry Hotline calls (# Mil).

• Stakeholder activities held to improve 19 41 51 51 66

food safety related decision-making 

and public policy (# Cumulative).

Strategies:

• Emphasize both education and explanation of food safety issues.

• Develop information for and deliver information to at-risk populations.

• Incorporate risk communication objectives into risk management strategies.

• Increase seminars and technical training on science-based food safety standards for U.S.

and foreign delegates to the Codex Alimentarius Commission.

• Expand Risk Prevention for Small and Very Small plants through education.
40

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Objective 2.4

Improve public health through nutrition education, promotion, and

research

Promoting healthy eating is a critical component of a healthy lifestyle. USDA conducts

comprehensive nutrition research and education domestically and through coordination with

international organizations. USDA is also a leader in producing the scientific knowledge

that helps all people understand the powerful ties between nutrition and health. Perhaps the

greatest challenge ahead is finding effective ways to communicate the information that

USDA has developed to the American people. Clearly, the Department’s nutrition education

efforts will have to compete with other consumer messages. But by arming America with

the facts, reaching children early, and ensuring access to healthy food, USDA can make a

major contribution to the Nation’s health. 

A 1996 USDA analysis found that on any given day, only about 12% of the U.S. population

ate a diet that reflected the healthy eating habits promoted in the Dietary Guidelines for

Americans. Dietary changes could result in improving the health of the American people.

Through its nutrition assistance programs, partnerships with America’s schools, cuttingedge research, and other efforts, USDA’s work promoting nutrition and health will become

increasingly important in the years to come, as scientists and all Americans better

understand the strong connection between healthy eating habits and healthy lives.

Key Outcome: Improve diets among the general public.

USDA’s efforts to improve diets among the general public encompass a number of

education, promotion, and research programs. The Dietary Guidelines for Americans, the

cornerstone of Federal nutrition policy, ensure consistency of the nutrition messages

provided by these varied programs. The Guidelines are reviewed and released every 5 years,

with the latest version released in 2000. Nutrition education tools developed by USDA,

such as the Food Guide Pyramid, are widely used in nutrition programs across the Nation.

The Pyramid, which translates nutrient recommendations into food intake, provides an easy

reference to help individuals select the kinds and amounts of foods that create a balanced

diet. The Healthy Eating Index assesses the nutritional status of Americans and provides

nutrition educators and policymakers with information on aspects of the Nation’s diet that

need improvement. The Interactive Healthy Eating Index allows members of the general

public to assess their own diet and receive tailored recommendations for improvement via

the Internet. USDA focuses its efforts on providing consistent nutrition education messages

to as many Americans as possible, to encourage changes that will improve their diet and

health.
Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target

2.4.1 Individuals using the N/A 100,000 110,000 120,000 125,000

Interactive Healthy Eating Index

to assess and improve their diet (#).

2.4.2 Copies of the 2000 Dietary N/A 140,800 2,212,656 550,000 550,000

Guidelines disseminated to help 

individuals improve their diet.

Strategies:

• Provide consumers and professionals with nutrition guidance tools that can help them

identify and make improvements in their diets.

• Ensure that nutrition assessment and nutrition guidance tools are updated to keep them

current and to improve their usefulness.

• Provide decision-makers with food consumption and nutrient content of food data to

help shape nutrition education efforts and policy.

• Enhance the nutritional quality of America’s diet through intervention strategies that

emphasize the strong ties between exercise, diet, and health.

41

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002
42

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Maintain and enhance the Nation’s natural

resources and environment

USDA Resources FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003

Dedicated to Goal 3 Actual Estimate Estimate 

Program Level ($ Mil) 8,839.3 8,276.7 8,974.8 

Staff Years 51,368 51,379 50,152 

USDA manages and helps land users to protect the Nation’s soil, water, and ecosystem

resources across public and private lands – from mountaintops to valleys, rivers, and coastal

areas downstream. Within this landscape, high-quality soils and abundant supplies of clean

water provide the essential building blocks for production agriculture, many rural

economies, and all life. Because so much of the Nation is farm and forest land, sustainable

management of these areas is essential to ensuring that all Americans have abundant food,

clean air and water, and pleasant places in which to live and enjoy America’s great

outdoors. 

USDA’s work in this regard focuses on balancing three key priorities: ensuring the future

productivity of the Nation’s natural resources; protecting the environment; and providing

for the responsible use of land and other natural resources to meet the needs of people

today. In the years ahead, USDA will work to improve the condition and management of

the Nation’s natural resources; help producers manage their working crop and rangelands in

a more sustainable manner; reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfires; and continue to help

producers ensure that their activities do not cause problems downwind or downstream (with

particular attention to animal feeding operations). 

The Forest Service (FS) and Department of Interior (DOI) agreed to develop a consistent

prioritization process that DOI and FS would use to coordinate land acquisitions. This

prioritization process would tie land acquisitions to the respective strategic plans and would

replace the “acres acquired” performance measure.

Strategic Goal 3

Percent of FY 2003 USDA Resources Dedicated to this Goal

Program Level Staff Years

GOAL 3

 8.0%

92.0%

GOAL 3

54.0% 46.0%
43

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Objective 3.1

Maintain the productive capacity of the natural resource base for future

generations

One of the most important responsibilities of the USDA is safeguarding the productive

capacity of America’s natural resources. Success in this regard is interrelated with USDA’s

work protecting the environment and ensuring the benefits of responsible land use. USDA

helps ensure that the Nation’s crop, grazing, and forestlands are used sustainably to produce

adequate food, fiber, and forest products today without sacrificing the needs of future

generations. 

The continuation of current trends, however, would result in a decline in the quality and

productive capacity of America’s land. Less than half of the Nation’s cropland and

pastureland today are managed to ensure long-term productivity. Little more than one-third

of non-Federal rangeland is healthy and well managed. Productive cropland is being lost to

soil erosion. Forest and rangeland ecosystems face significant threats from fire, insects,

disease, and other invasive species. Drought weakens plants, increasing the risk of erosion,

fires, and other hazards. Appropriate management can mitigate these threats and enhance

the quality of America’s natural resources. For this reason, USDA efforts in the years ahead

– from helping farmers reduce erosion to helping maintain the health of working croplands

and rangelands to reducing the risk of catastrophic wildfires – are of vital and enduring

importance to the Nation.

Key Outcome: Maintain the resource health and productive capacity of non-Federal

cropland, grazing lands, and forestland.

Healthy cropland, grazing lands, and forestland are essential to the Nation's agricultural

economy. Maintaining and improving the quality of the Nation’s soils and plant

communities can increase farm productivity, mitigate the effects of drought, minimize the

use of excess nutrients and pesticides, improve water and air quality, and sequester

greenhouse gases from the atmosphere. To encourage agricultural producers and other

natural resource managers to maintain the productive capacity and health of the Nation’s

natural wealth, USDA will continue to offer technical assistance, share the costs of

conservation practices, provide rental payments in return for placing highly erodible and

other environmentally sensitive land in long-term protective cover, and conduct related

inventories, research, and technology development activities. 

USDA’s technical assistance on private lands will be delivered to solve problems identified

at local level, as provided by the mutual agreements signed by the Secretary, local

conservation districts, and State governors. USDA will also give priority to land where

producers need assistance to meet the conservation compliance requirements of the Farm

Bill or to comply with State or Federal environmental laws. USDA's financial assistance

will continue to be targeted to maximize environmental benefits per dollar expended. The

acreage of working cropland and grazing land protected against degradation is based on the

workload supported by the budget, not the identified need for conservation. The National

Conservation Partnership Workload Analysis indicated that a significantly higher level of

investment would be required to protect the entire cropland and grazing land base. In any

given year, the number of producers requesting conservation assistance far exceeds the

number who can be serviced. 
44

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target 

3.1.1 Maintain the productivity and 

health of the Nation’s non-Federal 

cropland and grazing lands:

• Acres of working cropland and N/A 15.6 16.22

17.0 17.0

grazing land protected against 

degradation by application of 

improved conservation systems 

(Mil. annually).1

• Acres of highly erodible and 29.8 31.5 33.6 34.2 34.9

environmentally sensitive cropland

and grazing land retired and

retired from production and

protected against degradation

under Conservation Reserve

Program (CRP) contracts (Mil.

cumulative)(NEW MEASURE).3

1 Acres are those on which systems were applied during a single fiscal year. Cropland does not include acres

enrolled in the CRP.

2 Includes 0.3 million acres of non-Federal forestland.

3 Includes only lands enrolled in the CRP.

Strategies:

• Provide one-on-one technical assistance to farmers and ranchers in the development of

conservation plans that address all resource concerns on their property.

• Certify that conservation planners meet basic and advanced skill levels.

• Cooperate with conservation partners to increase adoption of an approach that combines

conservation tillage, nutrient management, pest management, and conservation buffers

into effective resource management systems.

• Continue to work with farmers and ranchers to identify and place in long-term retirement

critical environmentally sensitive cropland and grazing land.

• Promote watershed or regional approaches to grazing and forest land conservation.

Strengthen cooperation with other government agencies and partners. In the West, where

grazing land often is a mixture of private and public ownership, promote cooperative

efforts to control noxious and invasive species and manage resource concerns.

• Make information on soils as well as land use and condition available in forms tailored

to customer needs.

• Through research, develop the use of biotechnology to increase the sustainable

production of food and fiber, reduce the adverse impact of agriculture on the

environment, and minimize pressure on marginal farmland.

• Through research, develop new management practices, computer-based decision aids,

and other tools that enhance production of food and fiber; reduce the adverse impact of

agriculture on the natural resource base; and help prevent, detect, and eliminate invasive

diseases and pests.

• Enhance understanding of the potential of agriculture to reduce greenhouse gases in the

atmosphere by reducing emissions from agricultural production and increasing carbon

sequestration on agricultural soils.
45

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Key Outcome: Reduce erosion damage on cropland.

Soils support biological processes such as plant growth. They help distribute the flow of

water through the landscape; filter and break down wastes; and store and cycle nutrients and

other compounds such as carbon dioxide. While many factors affect soil quality, erosion is

the single best indicator for assessing whether soils are stable, improving, or degrading.

Conserving and enhancing soil quality is fundamental to sustainable resource use.

The danger of damaging erosion is greatest on lands where the protective vegetation is

disturbed, as it must be for cultivating crops. In the 1980s and early 1990s, farmers, with

help from USDA and its partners, made a concerted effort to reduce erosion and to protect

their most erodible cropland from damage. Yet progress in controlling erosion has leveled

off in recent years. USDA helps producers reduce erosion on cropland by providing

conservation technical assistance through nearly 3,000 conservation districts nationwide. In

addition, the Department, through the CRP, provides rental payments to retire 33.6 million

acres of land (2001) from crop production and protected under permanent vegetation, of

which 24.7 million acres are highly erodible land from crop production and protect it under

permanent vegetation. 

In FY 2002 and FY 2003, USDA will focus on maintaining the progress against erosion

made in previous years. To more fully report these efforts, USDA is revising its erosion

indicators. One indicator includes all working cropland on which erosion reduction

practices are applied during the year. A second indicator reports the total tons of soil

erosion reduced on CRP land, which is protected by permanent cover. To reduce erosion

damage on land planted to crops, USDA will provide technical assistance in planning and

applying practical solutions to erosion problems. The Department will seek to use financial

incentives and technical assistance and education to transition the most fragile land out of

production, while presenting the landowners with other farm-income related opportunities.

The Department will also pay special attention to ensuring that small and limited resource

farmers have feasible options for reducing erosion.

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target

3.1.2 Reduce erosion damage on 

cropland:

• Erosion reduction measures applied N/A 4.3 4.1 5.4 5.4

on working cropland (Mil. acres).

(NEW MEASURE).1

• Erosion reduced from cropland N/A 406.8 427.8 430.5 433.3

protected under permanent vegetation 

cover under the CRP (Mil. tons, 

annually)(NEW MEASURE).

1 Last year, USDA reported only the most severely eroding acres where protection was applied to the tolerable

level, thus underreporting erosion reduction.
46

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Strategies:

• Focus on the most serious soil health problems and tailor work to specific State needs. In

some States, this will mean intensifying work on non-highly erodible cropland. In others,

attention will go to highly erodible land.

• Ensure erosion is minimized on productive working land.

• Maintain and extend the protection of environmentally sensitive cropland using the CRP.

• Help USDA farm program participants meet requirements to protect the 140 million

acres of highly erodible cropland they operate. 

• Ensure small, limited-resource producers have access to erosion reduction technology

that is effective and feasible for their operations.

• Help farmers examine revenue-producing alternatives to crop production on

environmentally fragile lands, such as enterprise diversification or conversion to hay or

grazing.

• Help producers’ transition to lower impact activities (e.g., biomass production or creation

of wildlife habitat) on lands where effective soil management is not economically

feasible. 

Key Outcome: Reduce risk of fire.

The risk of wildfires increasingly threatens U.S. communities and the environment. During

the summer of 2000, USDA and the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) jointly released

a report, Managing the Impact of Wildfires on Communities and the Environment. The

report laid out a national strategy to reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfires, and increase

U.S. preparedness for fighting them. The report made clear the necessity of committing

adequate resources to firefighting and prevention efforts; the importance of restoring

landscapes and rebuilding communities devastated by fire; the urgent need to invest in

projects to reduce fire risks, and the value of working closely with local communities. In

FY 2003, funding for the National Fire Plan will be maintained for priority activities,

including increasing efforts to fight wildfires; reducing natural fuels; and assisting

communities. This National Fire Plan will guide USDA’s efforts in the time ahead, as the

Department continues efforts to natural fuels and overstocked forests that pose major fire

risks on and around the 192 million acres of National Forests and Grasslands managed by

the USDA FS. These actions are also consistent with the National Drought Policy

Commission’s recommendation that the Nation develop national drought policy with

preparedness as its core. USDA also will pay particular attention to the wildland-urban

interface, where the risks to life and property often are greatest.

Congress directed the Secretaries of USDA and DOI to work with the Governors to develop

a 10-year Comprehensive Strategy (P.L. 106-291) in FY 2001. The 10-year comprehensive

strategy was completed in August 2001. The strategy reflects the views of a broad crosssection of governmental and non-governmental views in a collaborative approach for

reducing wildland fire risks to communities and the environment. An implementation plan

is currently being developed and coordinated for release in the Third Quarter of FY 2002.

Significant changes may be made to the performance measures at that time.
47

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target 

3.1.3 Treat wildlands with high fire 

risks on National Forests and 

Grasslands to reduce the risk of 

loss of life, property, and natural 

resources from catastrophic 

wildfire:

• Hazardous fuel treatments 1,412,281 772,375 1,384,769 1,750,496 1,596,890

(acres).

• Maximize firefighting 69 74 97 100 N/A4

production capability - Most 

Efficient Level (MEL)(%).

• Assist communities and 2,450 2,9902

3,062 9,23237,157

volunteer fire departments –

Communities and volunteer 

fire departments assisted.1

1 A change in data tracking methodology occurred between 2000 and 2001. Data from 1999 and 2000 did not

distinguish between communities and volunteer fire departments assisted, thus leading to underreporting.

Beginning in 2001, these items are being tracked separately and added together to produce this performance

measure.

2 Estimate based on 8 of 9 Regions reporting from the USDA Forest Service (FS).

3 These figures include State and Private activities and National Fire Plan activities.

4 An interdisciplinary team consisting of members from both the USDA FS and DOI has been formed to conduct

an interagency review of the fire planning system. The new system will include a more comprehensive measure of

preparedness performance.

Strategies:

• Carry out the National Fire Plan to reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfires due to

natural fuels and overstocked forests, bolster firefighting management and preparedness,

and enhance local community coordination and outreach. 

• Place a particular emphasis on mitigating fire risks at the wildland-urban interface and

key watersheds.

• Focus efforts on areas with a moderate to high risk of wildfires and conduct prescribed

burns, mechanical and manual methods, forest thinning, and selective removal of

undergrowth and non-native plant species.

• Support neighborhoods that host Firewise or similar training sessions.
48

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Objective 3.2

Protect the quality of the Nation’s environment

Americans expect their environment to provide adequate supplies of clean water, clean air,

and pleasant and healthy places to live. USDA plays a vital role in ensuring that these

expectations are met through its programs that affect the Nation’s forest ecosystems,

agricultural lands, and both rural and urban communities. The Department works with

private landowners and natural resource managers to ensure that their activities do not

create hazards that impact human health or the health of the Nation’s lands and

environment. In meeting its responsibilities for environmental protection, USDA manages

the National Forests and Grasslands, assists private land users, and works closely with other

government and non-government entities. In addition to mitigating or averting damage to

the environment, USDA also is committed to restoring lands adversely affected by past

activities, particularly abandoned mines on and near the National Forests and Grasslands.

Clean-up of these sites is imperative to the health of local ecosystems.

In the years to come, USDA will continue its important work protecting water and air

quality, as well as watershed health, enhancing urban environments, maintaining the value

of wetlands and other wildlife habitat, and cleaning up contaminated sites on USDA

managed facilities and lands. Through these efforts to protect and restore the Nation’s

environment, the Department will improve the lives of people today and leave a lasting

legacy to generations of Americans yet to come.

Key Outcome: Protect air and water quality, as well as watershed health. 

To protect water and air quality, people must work together to solve problems over a wide

area of the landscape. Agricultural production involves activities that can affect air and water

quality: leaving fields without plant cover for extended periods accelerates soil erosion, often

into nearby waterways. The use of chemicals on the farm also presents the risk that they will

enter local water resources. Livestock operations produce large amounts of waste that, if not

properly managed, can threaten human health and that of America’s waterways.

To counteract these risks, USDA provides technical and financial assistance to help

producers, other land users, and communities apply conservation systems to protect the

quality of their water and air. USDA and the Environmental Protection Agency jointly

developed a national strategy for protecting the environment against pollution from animal

feeding operations. Comprehensive nutrient management plans, applied with USDA

assistance, enable producers to manage collection, storage and disposal of animal wastes in

ways that minimize environmental harm. Conservation buffers as well as nutrition and pest

management techniques (again applied with USDA assistance) also can reduce the negative

environmental impacts of agricultural production. Conservation buffers are areas maintained

in permanent vegetation along waterways, field edges, headlands and other sensitive spots

to intercept runoff and pollutants. 

In FY 2002 and FY 2003, USDA will focus on promoting its voluntary, incentive-based

conservation programs, such as CRP, Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP),

and the Agricultural Management Program (AMA), that help farmers and ranchers do their

part to improve air and water quality. USDA will work with producers to maintain

conservation cover on land in the CRP and continuing to promote and provide incentives

for CRP continuous signup, including lands enrolled under the Conservation Reserve

Enhancement Program (CREP). These programs assist producers wishing to implement
49

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

specified conservation practices that provide significant environmental benefits, including

riparian buffers, filter strips, grass waterways, field windbreaks, wellhead protection areas,

shallow water areas, and saline seep control. Outcomes include reduced sediment reaching

waterways, less particulate material in the air, and increased sequestration of carbon. USDA

will increase emphasis under the EQIP and Conservation Technical Assistance programs on

working to help animal feeding operations to develop and apply comprehensive nutrient

management systems to protect nearby waterways and air. USDA also will work to restore

and improve watersheds on and near the National Forests and Grasslands to secure all of

the benefits healthy watersheds provide—from contributions to clean air and water to

opportunities for abundant wildlife habitat.

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target

3.2.1 Protect water and air quality:

• Animal feeding operations with 6,170 11,000 10,520 7,854 8,600

comprehensive nutrient management facilities systems systems CNMPs CNMPs

plans (CNMP) developed or applied.1

applied planned planned systems systems

or or planned planned

applied applied or or

applied applied

• Acres with conservation measures 2.7 4.3 5.4 4.6 4.6

applied to reduce potential for off-site 

pollution by nutrients (Mil) (Annually).

• Acres with pest management improved N/A 4 5.4 4.2 4.2

(Mil) (Annually).

• Acres in conservation buffers (Mil).2

1.2 1.5 1.75 2.35 2.95

• Reduced sheet and rill erosion from N/A 240.6 249.8 250.6 251.6

cropland and grazing land entered into 

CRP (Mil. tons, annually) 

(NEW MEASURE).

• Reduced wind erosion from cropland N/A 166.2 178.0 179.9 181.8

and grazing land entered into CRP

(Mil. tons, annually) (NEW MEASURE).

• Carbon sequestered in soil and 14.6 15.4 16.0 16.4 17.0

vegetation through long-term retirement

of crop and grazing land (Mil. metric

tons, annually) (NEW MEASURE).

3.2.2 Restore or improve rangeland and 

forestland watersheds in the National 

Forests and Grasslands:

• Soil and watershed improvements 35,562 29,899 31,836 21,256 22,006

(acres).

• Terrestrial habitat restored or 266,774 192,373 241,123 284,738 286,572

enhanced (acres).

• Abandoned mine sites reclaimed. 15 N/A 154 20 88

1 FY 2002 is the first year for implementation of the new technical guidance for CNMPs. The targets were set on

the basis of workload data for less comprehensive treatment than CNMPs involve. The target for FY 2003 will be

revised after the cost and capability study currently underway is completed. 

2 Includes both FSA cumulative and NRCS annual data.
50

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Strategies:

• Continue to carry out the USDA-EPA Unified National Strategy for Animal Feeding

Operations by providing technical and financial assistance to accelerate efforts to install

nutrient management systems; investing in technology and standards to improve animal

waste management; fostering greater private sector capacity to develop related

technology; and encouraging cooperative efforts where production is concentrated.

• Provide area-wide planning assistance in watersheds with non-point source pollution

problems to help residents work across boundaries to reduce pathogen and bacteria

contamination.

• Evaluate the potential to improve air quality and reduce greenhouse gas emissions by

addressing such issues as emissions from animal feeding operations, fugitive dust from

erosion, and agricultural burning.

• Help agricultural producers to install riparian buffers, filter strips, grass waterways, field

windbreaks, wellhead protection areas, shallow water areas, and saline seep control on

sensitive agricultural land.

• Provide statistical data on agricultural chemical use, production practices, land use, and

integrated pest management practices.

• Develop new practices and technologies to better manage agro-chemicals and nutrients

and to reduce erosion for the purpose of protecting and enhancing soil, water, and air

quality.

• Enhance the capacity of decision-makers to coordinate trade and environmental policies

by analyzing the environmental impacts of proposed trade policies and the trade effects

of achieving specific environmental goals.

• Promote natural resource protection and restoration on the National Forests and

Grasslands through soil and watershed improvements and restoration or enhancement of

habitats for threatened species.

• Work with Federal and State agencies to identify and prioritize abandoned mine sites for

cleanup. 

• Increase the amount of carbon sequestration on CRP lands by expanding the

conservation buffers on sensitive lands enrolled in the continuous CRP.

• Continue to work with farmers and ranchers to identify and place in long-term retirement

critical environmentally sensitive cropland and grazing land.

Key Outcome: Enhance urban environments.

Urban forests and green space are increasingly at risk from development. To appropriately

manage and safeguard natural resources in urban and urbanizing areas, local communities

must address a wide array of challenges, from erosion to sediment control to storm water

management. In many developing areas, the Nation’s best farmland is being lost at a rapid

rate due to urban sprawl. In other areas, population increases in fragile ecosystems can

create risks for people and the environment. Many communities fear loss of farmland for

the attendant rise in congestion, disappearance of open space, and decrease in recreation

opportunities and other amenities. In FY 2002 and FY 2003, USDA will work with local

and State agencies in developing areas, providing soil information and other technical data

on resource conditions, and helping local leaders develop plans to address their resource

needs and concerns. USDA helps local jurisdictions address the Farmland Protection Policy

Act in Federal grants programs through the use of local land evaluation and site assessment

systems. In addition, USDA will use its Forest Legacy Program to help State and local

governments protect their forestland and other open spaces by purchasing conservation

easements from willing landowners.
51

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target

3.2.3 Enhance urban environments:

• Legacy Project Acquisition (acres): 19,281 32,130 84,709 200,000 250,000

• Group and area plans developed to N/A N/A 365 539 539

address farmland protection and the 

effects of non-agricultural activities 

on ground water and surface water 

quality. (# of plans).

Strategies:

• Support State efforts to use the USDA Forest Legacy Program to acquire urban forest

lands and green space. 

• Help communities develop land evaluation and site assessment processes to plan orderly

growth and protect the quality of their environment.

• Provide information and tools to help local authorities plan sensible development that

will maintain the quality of life that attracts people to small towns and rural

communities. 

Key Outcome: Maintain wetlands values and wildlife habitat.

Wetlands are among the most biologically diverse areas on earth. They provide habitat for a

rich mixture of plants and animals – including many rare, threatened, and endangered

species. They protect shorelines, filter impurities from water, help control floodwaters and

regulate water flow, and help reduce soil erosion. As a result, destruction of wetlands can

lead to serious consequences, like increased flooding, species extinction, and decline in

water quality. Maintaining existing wetlands and restoring others can help avoid these

negative consequences. USDA assists in protecting wetlands through rental contracts

offered under the Department’s CRP and through easements or cost-share agreements under

its Wetlands Reserve Program. In addition, producers who receive benefits from other

USDA farm programs are required to protect wetlands on their property. 

Beyond wetlands, USDA also provides technical and financial assistance in developing,

restoring, and enhancing other critical wildlife habitat. USDA provides both assistance to

remove land from production and improve habitat quality on land used for agricultural

production. Farmers removing cropland from production under the CRP are encouraged to

consider wildlife when selecting vegetative cover. While all 33.6 million acres of land now

enrolled in CRP provide some wildlife benefits, 18.6 million acres were retired from

cropping and planted to vegetative cover best suited to wildlife. In addition, 2.3 million

acres were restored critical and declining ecosystems providing high benefits for wildlife,

including threatened and endangered species. In additions to these habitat restorations,

many of the conservation practices applied on working lands to protect soil, water, and air

quality also enhance the quality of the habitat that these lands provide for wildlife. By

continuing to support these critical efforts, USDA will play a pivotal role in ensuring

healthy ecosystems and the benefits this provides to people. 
52

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target

3.2.4 Maintain, restore, or enhance 

wetland ecosystems and fish and 

wildlife habitat (Mil. acres):

• Wetlands and associated upland 2.185 2.434 2.674 2.875 2.975

protected or enhanced under multiyear contracts or easements with 

USDA (Cumulative).

• Land retired from cropping and 1.6 2.0 2.3 2.6 2.9 

grazing and restored to ecosystems 

with high benefits for wildlife, including

threatened and endangered species

(Cumulative)(NEW MEASURE).

• Habitat for fish and wildlife improved N/A 7.5 8.1 6.2 6.2

on working cropland, grazing land, 

forest, and other land (Annually).

Strategies:

• Work with other government agencies and partners to identify priority wetlands that

could benefit from conservation practices in the surrounding landscape. 

• Ensure continued compliance with wetlands protection laws. 

• Promote restoration of streambanks and the establishment of riparian areas to reduce

sediment load and stream temperature, filter out pollutants, make streams more resilient,

and improve fish and wildlife habitat.

• Encourage landowners to voluntarily protect and restore wetlands and other ecosystems

with high benefits for wildlife, including threatened and endangered species.

• Work with partners to develop and enhance habitat for all species, including rare and

declining species.

Key Outcome: Clean up contaminated sites on USDA-managed facilities and lands,

and restore affected ecosystems and watersheds.

More than 2000 of the sites requiring environmental cleanup under Comprehensive

Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and Resource

Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) have been identified on USDA-managed facilities

and lands, many of them resulting from the activities of others. In 1995, USDA established

the goal of cleaning up and restoring all contaminated sites by 2045. The working cost

estimate for the cleanup program is over $4 billion. Cleanup and restoration of hazardous

materials and waste sites is complex, expensive, and time consuming, generally requiring

the involvement of other Federal agencies, States, and stakeholders. The work often takes

several years to complete.
53

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target

3.2.5 Continue to cleanup CERCLA 

sites and all regulated underground 

storage tanks (UST) under USDA 

custody and control:

• CERCLA cleanups completed (#).3

39 24 47 17 48

• UST and other RCRA cleanups 13 5 701

1526

completed (#).

1 The value 70 represents 16 UST cleanups and 54 other RCRA cleanups, 53 of which were at a former DOD

facility to address units in which hazardous waste may have been managed in the past.

2 The value 15 includes 11 UST cleanups at a former DOD facility that were not completed in FY 2000 or 2001.

The continuing UST cleanup program represents a) a follow-on to the UST compliance program substantially

completed in 1998, and b) occasional discoveries of additional USTs requiring cleanup. Of the more than 1500

old USTs addressed in the compliance program, a small percentage had caused environmental contamination

requiring years of cleanup and monitoring activities that have, at most sites, now drawn to a close.

3 CERCLA cleanups require over 90% of the resources.

Strategies:

• Promote partnerships with Federal, State and tribal entities, and private parties.

• Promote natural resource protection and restoration after hazardous materials cleanups.

• Work with Federal and State agencies to identify prioritized cleanup action partnerships.

• Conduct cleanups, supporting investigations, and related work in a manner consistent

with the Superfund National Contingency Plan (i.e., NCP), codified at Title 40, Code of

Federal Regulations, Part 300.

• Conduct cleanups in a manner that enhances and restores water quality, environmental

health, fish and wildlife habitat, recreational opportunities, forest health, public safety,

and the economic viability of resource lands.
54

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Objective 3.3

Provide multiple benefits to people from the Nation’s natural resources

USDA is committed to helping the Nation to enjoy the benefits of the Nation’s natural

resources while sustaining their future capability and the quality of the environment. The

benefits that the Nation’s soil, water, and ecosystems provide to people today are rich and

varied. They include traditional commodities such as crops, livestock, timber, forest

products, and minerals. These benefits also include opportunities for outdoor recreation.

The National Forest has more than 200 million recreation visitors each year alone.

Well-managed cropland, grazing lands, and forests can help address a wide array of

environmental challenges, not solely those that originate from agricultural operations. For

example, some conservation practices increase the organic matter in cropland soils. This

reduces carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, helping to reduce greenhouse gases. 

One of the most important benefits that well-managed lands provide is clean water.

Protecting water supplies was one of the original reasons for the creation of the National

Forests and Grasslands. To derive the greatest benefits from the limited water supplies of

the arid West, farmers and the managers of public reservoirs depend on the predictions of

annual streamflow that USDA provides by monitoring snowpack and snowmelt. 

From farms to cities to forest communities, USDA will continue its work helping

individuals and communities expand their economic opportunities by developing their

natural resources into products and services for the marketplace. USDA watershed planners

will help communities trying to plan the use of watersheds and floodplains to provide

increased benefits and protect local property values. Finally, the Department will commit

itself to ensuring a continued high level of satisfaction among visitors to the National

Forests and Grasslands.

Key Outcome: Provide sustainable production of goods and services from the National

Forests and Grasslands. 

Measuring what constitutes sustainable levels of goods and services from the National

Forest and Grasslands requires having adequate baseline data upon which to make resource

allocation decisions. Significant data gaps currently exist, and both inventory and

monitoring activities are underway to fill them. Research efforts to develop protocols and

sampling methods also are in progress. These steps should lead to appropriate performance

goals and indicators to assess economic opportunities that exist in the National Forests and

Grasslands that preserve the long-term health of these resources. 

Key Outcome: Improve the satisfaction of visitors to the National Forests and

Grasslands.

Visitor satisfaction is closely related to the condition of developed recreational facilities.

The National Forest System operates and maintains a multi-billion dollar recreation

infrastructure that includes visitor centers, campgrounds, swimming areas, picnic grounds,

and boating sites. Operating developed recreation facilities includes providing appropriate

amenities such as electricity, water, and sanitation; providing for the security and safety of

visitors; and providing an enjoyable environment for the recreation of families. The USDA

FS determines how much of its recreational facility capacity is meeting full meaningful

measure standards for health, safety, security, and aesthetics using an indicator that
55

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

estimates the number of persons at one time (PAOT) days operated to standard. This

indicator takes into account both the capacity and quality of recreational facilities managed

by the FS.

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target 

3.3.1 PAOT days operated to standard (Mil). NA 75 230* 96 95

* Due to a definition problem, data was collected both on sites operated to standard and sites operated to less than

standard.

Strategies:

• Recreation fee efforts will continue to address increased visitor satisfaction, reduction in

the maintenance backlog, and environmental improvements.

• Continue implementation of the Accessibility Action Plan and National Partnership

Strategy.

• Conduct scientifically credible user surveys to gather information for use in priority

setting and decision-making.

• Research methods must be established for estimating recreation capacity and demand

using ecological capabilities and social factors.

Key Outcome: Maintain benefits from watershed protection infrastructures.

USDA watershed planners’ help communities plan the use of watersheds and floodplains to

provide benefits and protect property values. USDA has offered technical and financial

assistance to local sponsors in the development of water resources since the 1940s. Nearly

2,000 watershed projects covering 160 million acres and including 10,000 small floodcontrol dams have been implemented across the Nation with USDA assistance. These

projects help prevent and mitigate flooding. They also improve water quality and supply,

create wildlife habitat, and provide recreational opportunities. USDA’s water resource

programs help local organizations develop plans for small watersheds and conduct river

basin and floodplain management studies. USDA also provides technical and financial

assistance to local groups to install watershed improvement measures. In addition, USDA

provides emergency assistance to reduce threats to life and property in watersheds damaged

by severe natural disasters. 

In FY 2002 and 2003, USDA will provide assistance in completing structures and

implementing non-structural measures in watershed project areas. The performance

indicator for this assistance will focus on structural measures, including dams, smaller

grade-stabilization structures, and channel work. In addition, in FY 2002, USDA will

implement a new program of Rehabilitation of Structural Measures (P.L.106-472) to

rehabilitate aging dams originally installed with Federal assistance through USDA water

resources programs. Dam rehabilitation offers opportunities to improve safety and provide

increased benefits such as enhancement of wildlife habitat and wetlands, and increased

municipal water supplies and fire protection in rural areas.
Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target

3.3.2 Provide benefits to property and

safety through flood damage reduction:

• Watershed protection structures N/A N/A 51 115 0

completed (#).*

*Projects are supported by a combination of Federal, State, and local funds. Unexpected fluctuations in nonFederal funding may alter the schedule for completing these structures.

Strategies:

• Assist in assessing conditions, conducting river basin surveys and flood hazard analyses,

and providing flood plain management assistance.

• Provide the information and tools communities need to reduce potential damage from

natural disasters.

• Carry out water supply forecasting to reduce potential damages from flooding or drought

in western states.

• Help individuals and communities identify resource concerns and carry out watershedbased flood management plans.

• Ensure that government and private organizations have the data needed to guide

responsible growth.

• Strengthen local partnerships and other mechanisms to increase the availability of

technical assistance in rapidly developing areas – for example, along the U.S.-Mexico

border.

Key Outcome: Foster natural resource development to improve the economies of rural

communities. 

Many rural communities possess natural resources that can enhance their local economy –

if the community is able to realize these benefits. USDA provides technical assistance to

local entities in drawing up and carrying out sustainable resource development strategies.

The Department helps local conservation districts make land use and community

development decisions. It also works closely with local and State agencies to provide

technical information on resource conditions and to help develop plans to achieve local

resource-related goals, including efforts to protect and enhance community forests. In

particular, USDA partners closely with local Resource Conservation and Development

(RC&D) councils. These volunteer councils, representing government and civic

organizations, seek public and private resources to put in place projects to ensure the

orderly conservation, development, and sustainable use of local natural resources to

generate local economic opportunities. In FY 2001, USDA authorized 33 new RC&D areas

to help more rural communities develop the benefits of their natural resources and 20 new

areas in FY 2002. 

56

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002
57

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target 

3.3.3 Produce benefits to communities

through enhanced natural resources

development and utilization:

• Projects completed through the N/A N/A 3,043 2,908 2,908

Resource Conservation and

Development Program that improved

communities (#).

• Number of communities participating 11,101 10,547 10,650 10,500 10,500

in the Urban and Community 

Forestry Program (#).

Strategies:

• Through the locally led process, help communities identify opportunities for natural

resource development that improve their community’s economy and environment.

• Provide each RC&D area with a coordinator who can provide technical resource

development assistance.

• Ensure each RC&D area has community improvement plans that: develop natural

resource-based industries, protect rural industries from natural resource hazards, ensure

adequate rural water and waste disposal systems, improve recreational facilities, enhance

rural housing, provide adequate health and educational facilities, and meet essential

transportation and communication needs.

• Help conservation district and RC&D council members improve their ability to develop

local leadership.

• Help local communities build their capacity to manage their forest resources and

promote civic involvement, commitment, and action through USDA’s Urban and

Community Forestry Program which enhances the health and sustainable management of

the nation’s urban forests and related economies in partnership with State and local

organizations.

• Help mitigate the effects of air, water, soil, and noise pollution, reduce energy use, and

beautify communities by encouraging tree planting.
Enhance the capacity of all rural residents,

communities and businesses to prosper

USDA Resources FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003

Dedicated to Goal 4 Actual Estimate Estimate 

Program Level ($ Mil) 12,244.6 15,665.6 12,117.1

Staff Years 9,662 10,158 10,186

One of USDA’s core missions is ensuring that the 20% of our Nation residing in rural areas

is offered the same opportunities for a high quality of life and economic growth as other

Americans. Life in a small town offers many advantages – less crime, cheaper housing, and

a strong sense of community among the residents. There is, however, a downside to having

a limited number of people living over a large geographical area. Rural America has fewer

job opportunities and the jobs available are often at lower pay and with fewer benefits. This

has resulted in significant out-migration in some parts of the Nation, and a lower standard

of living for many who remain behind. 

Rural communities also often lack the most basic services. Many rural residents have no

primary care physician in their community, putting them at greater risk when they are sick

or injured. In addition, the high cost per user of bringing utility services to a dispersed rural

population base often serves as an impediment to affordable, quality service and prevents

businesses from locating in rural areas. 

USDA’s Rural Development (RD) efforts work to enhance economic opportunities in rural

areas, while protecting the unique qualities of country living. The Department invests in

housing, telecommunications, community facilities, rural utilities, and rural businesses.

Whenever possible, USDA assistance is provided in cooperation with other sources of help

to leverage limited resources. USDA also provides technical assistance to strengthen the

capacity of rural communities to build a vibrant future. 

58

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Percent of FY 2003 USDA Resources Dedicated to this Goal

Program Level Staff Years

GOAL 4

11.0%

89.0% 91.0%

GOAL 4

9.0%

Strategic Goal 4
The FY 2003 Budget provide funding for the most urgent needs of rural America including

home ownership, water and waste systems, and support for business development and jobs

in rural area. However, budgets for some of the guaranteed credit, particularly in the area of

electricity and telecommunications are down because loan demand is down, or because it

appears that a substantial portion of the demand can be met by private sector credit without

Federal guarantees. In addition, the costs of some of the programs are increasing. This is

particularly true in housing where our efforts to strengthen our financial management of

these programs have uncovered that the subsidies involved in these programs are higher

than previously estimated. There are also programs where we need to conduct a thorough

review of alternatives for managing our existing projects before making loans for new

projects. This is particularly true of the multi-family housing program. A substantial portion

of the projects is over 20 years old and the demand for loans to repair and rehabilitate

existing projects has been increasing.

59

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002
60

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Objective 4.1

Expand job opportunities and improve the standard of living in 

rural communities

Rural America is characterized by great diversity in the resources and needs of its

communities. USDA, in partnership with a variety of public and private organizations, is a

key provider of technical and financial assistance tailored to the specific needs of a rural

community. From helping create and save jobs in America’s rural communities, to helping

rural citizens buy their first home, to providing essential services like safe running water,

USDA’s efforts reflect the Nation’s commitment to ensuring a vibrant future for rural

America.

Key Outcome: Create and save jobs in rural areas.

In order for any community to succeed, it must have a healthy economy. Rural communities

are more financially vulnerable than urban communities because there are often a limited

number of businesses forming the community’s economic base. As a result, the loss of just

one business can be devastating. Thus, saving existing jobs and creating new jobs is

essential to ensuring strong, diverse rural economies. If these jobs are to be helpful to the

community in the long term, they must be in businesses that have a future. Since many rural

communities have an agricultural base, businesses that add value to local agricultural

products have a good chance of success and can stimulate growth in the local economy.

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target

4.1.1 Jobs created or saved through 79,8391

73,502 105,222 96,264 100,057 

USDA financing of businesses in 

rural areas.

1 Revised to include 74,379 jobs reported in the Strategic Plan plus 5,490 jobs created by the Rural Economic

Development program loans and grants.

Strategies:

• Enhance understanding of the changing geography of low-skill employment by

researching characteristics of rural labor markets and identifying changes in the

distribution of low-skill employment.

• Conduct the U.S. Census of Agriculture to provide economic data on prices, labor,

production costs, farm numbers, and farm income to inform policy decisions for

agriculture-related industries.

• Develop profitable alternative crops, management practices that reduce costs, and

processes that add value to farm products in order to keep and create more agriculturerelated jobs.

• Develop innovative strategies to help rural communities diversify their economic base

through public and private sector interventions.
61

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Key Outcome: Increase rural homeownership.

The purchase of a home in a rural area is an investment in that community. A family’s

interest in seeing their town succeed is greatly increased when they own their home. USDA

provides homeownership opportunities to families with low to moderate incomes that

cannot obtain commercial financing on reasonable terms. There was a general downturn in

mortgage loan originations in 2000 due to higher rates. In FY 2002 and 2003, the

Department hopes to provide the opportunity for homeownership to more rural families.

This will be accomplished by working closely with USDA partners who also have an

interest in rural housing, and by streamlining and improving the processes required of

guaranteed lenders who want to work with USDA to help more rural residents achieve

homeownership. While USDA funding cannot, by itself, noticeably change the

homeownership rate in rural areas on an annual basis, it will contribute to an increase in

that rate over the long term.

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target 

4.1.2 Rural households receiving 55,941 45,420 44,073 55,800 46,000

USDA financial assistance to purchase 

a home.

Strategies:

• Restructure USDA-guaranteed mortgages by standardizing forms and processes and

increasing their acceptance by commercial creditors.

• Provide electronic access to mortgage applications.

• Receive periodic reports from guaranteed lenders electronically.

Key Outcome: Provide safe drinking water to rural residents.

A decent standard of living also requires access to safe, clean drinking water that is

constantly available and provided at a reasonable cost. Many rural communities, because of

their small size and the high cost per user of building public water systems, do not have a

continuous supply of clean drinking water. Families and businesses in these communities

rely on private wells, many of which are contaminated or dry up during periods of extended

drought.
62

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target 

4.1.3 Rural water systems developed 579 590 613 600 540

or expanded to provide safe drinking 

water.

Strategies:

• Give priority to projects that provide safe drinking water to low-income families with

unsafe or poor quality drinking water in their homes, or who have unsanitary waste

disposal facilities. 
63

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Objective 4.2

Ensure the neediest rural residents and communities have equal access to

USDA programs that will help them succeed

Economic growth in rural areas has not occurred evenly throughout the country. Across

America, there are pockets of severe poverty. Specifically, there are 535 rural counties that

have had poverty rates above 20% in every census since 1960. An estimated 8.5 million

rural residents live in poverty and more than 2.5 million rural residents live in physically

inadequate housing. While clean water is immediately available to most Americans, an

estimated 690,000 rural residents have no running water in their homes. Without a strong

effort to reach those rural residents and communities most in need of their government’s

help, the American dream in these impoverished areas will remain just that – a dream.

USDA is committed in the years to come to making that dream a reality.

Key Outcome: Increase assistance to the neediest rural communities. 

One pivotal answer to persistent poverty is greater investment in public services and jobs in

these communities. If persistent-poverty communities are to develop economically, then

they need substantial financial and technical help tailored to each community’s unique

challenges. USDA is committed to providing this assistance and helping ensure that all

rural communities are given an equal opportunity to prosper.

A key tool in this effort is the Empowerment Zone and Enterprise Communities (EZ/EC)

initiative. This effort targets the very neediest communities in the country and channels

large amounts of assistance to areas where local citizens demonstrate their initiative to work

together to draw up and carry out strong economic development strategies. EZ/EC

designees receive targeted financial and technical assistance from USDA and other

government entities. The communities then work to turn this Federal seed money into large

pools of capital that can finance needed community improvements and establish a

foundation for strong, sustainable economic growth.

USDA’s water and electric programs in FY 2002 and 2003 will allow the Department to

assist needy communities. Increased outreach targeted toward persistent poverty

communities will help ensure that these underserved areas will have equal access to USDA

RD resources.
64

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target

4.2.1 Assist the neediest rural 

communities:

• Communities located in persistent- 247 219 236 230 210

poverty rural counties receiving 

financial assistance to establish or 

improve a system for drinking water 

or water disposal (#).

• Borrowers serving persistent- 72 72 98 138 87

poverty counties receiving financial 

assistance to establish or improve the 

local electric service (#).

• Borrowers serving counties 83 73 97 136 86

experiencing out-migration receiving 

financial assistance to establish or 

improve the local electric service (#).

• Ratio of non-EZ/EC grants to EZ/EC 8.4:1 10.7:1 17:77:1 7:1 or 7:1 or

grants invested in EZ/EC communities. greater greater

Strategies:

• Use special initiatives, such as EZ/EC, to reach needy areas, encourage strategic

planning at the local level, provide technical assistance, and target limited Federal

resources.

• Encourage the participation of underserved communities in USDA RD programs by

tailoring services to specific community needs, earmarking resources, and removing

barriers to access. 

• Strengthen relations with minority organizations, especially colleges and universities,

and partner with them to see more USDA funds and technical help reach underserved

minority communities to foster economic growth.
65

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Operate an efficient, effective and 

discrimination-free organization

USDA needs a strong infrastructure made up of skilled employees, fair and effective

administrative processes, modern management practices, advanced information systems,

and safe and efficient facilities. USDA has more than 100,000 employees around the world.

The Department’s programs touch people in every school, in every household, and in many

nations. Not surprisingly, USDA faces many of the same challenges as large corporations –

how to deliver the best customer service, how to attract and retain the best employees,

where to invest limited resources, how to comply with regulatory requirements, how to

disseminate information to a global organization providing a wide array of services, and

how to improve the environmental record of its facilities. 

The Department takes seriously its responsibility to provide fair and effective programs and

services while minimizing costs to taxpayers. During FY 2002 and 2003, the Department

will be undertaking initiatives to implement the President’s Management Agenda and make

agency-specific management improvements. Highlights of these initiatives include the

following.

• The Department will streamline and restructure the FS and the Service Center agencies

(FSA, NRCS and RD) to improve efficiency and customer service. Efforts to provide

electronic services to USDA customers will also continue. A key element in these plans

is the completion of a common computing environment for the Service Center agencies

and acceleration of efforts to acquire and use geographic information systems.

• The Department will continue to make improvements needed to process employment and

program civil rights complaints in a fair and timely manner and promote a working

environment in which discrimination against employees or customers is not tolerated. 

• The Department will continue to develop department-wide administrative information

systems so that decision makers can receive timely and reliable information on the

Department’s finances, people and purchases. These systems will also make the

Department’s administrative operations more efficient by eliminating redundant, stovepiped and aging information systems. They are critical to the Department’s ability to

achieve and maintain a clean opinion on its financial statements and adequate computer

security.

• The Department will complete an Enterprise Architecture, which is a key planning and

risk management tool for information technology investments, and establish costeffective information security controls to protect our systems from intrusion.

• More of the Department’s work will be put up for competition and increased use of

performance-based contracting will generate savings and efficiencies.

• The Department will undertake initiatives to improve the integration of performance

information in its decision making processes.

These initiatives are reflected in the two objectives for this goal: 1) ensuring fair and

equitable treatment of customers and employees, and improving organizational productivity,

accountability and performance–particularly through the use of technology.

Strategic Goal 5
66

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Objective 5.1

Ensure that USDA provides fair and equitable service to all of its 

customers and upholds the civil rights of its employees

Ensuring that all employees and managers comply with civil rights policies is difficult in a

large, decentralized organization. However, USDA will continue its journey to becoming a

Federal civil rights leader. With adequate resources, the Department will become a better

place to work and customers who were underserved in the past will receive quality service

in the future – service that proves USDA is a 21st century “people’s department.”

USDA will work to ensure that program and administrative regulations are written to be fair

and inclusive. The Department also will establish a better review process for major USDA

programs, improve outreach to underserved groups, and work to achieve more timely and

fair resolutions to civil rights complaints.

Key Outcome: Conduct civil rights impact analyses of all significant USDA regulations

to assess their effects on underserved customers.

Civil rights impact analyses of major new and revised regulations help ensure the fairness

and equity of USDA programs. A thorough review of how the regulations affect program

participation can help guarantee that underserved groups are not excluded. In a similar

manner, a civil rights impact analysis of the Department’s administrative regulations can

make certain that employees, too, are treated fairly and equitably. Ensuring that all

significant Department regulations are subject to a civil rights review will advance the fair

and equitable treatment of all members of the USDA community.

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target 

5.1.1 Significant USDA regulations N/A 100 100 100 100 

subjected to civil rights impact analyses (%).

Strategies:

• Ensure that every significant USDA regulation is subjected to a civil rights review before

approval. 

• Enforce civil rights laws, rules, and regulations.

• Provide civil rights training for all USDA employees on possible barriers to the

participation of underserved groups and on civil rights issues in general.

Key Outcome: Provide full and equal access to USDA programs in a discriminationfree environment.

Complex USDA programs operate nationwide with participants in all economic and cultural

groups. Constant surveillance and periodic major reviews can help ensure that these

programs reach all who are eligible for them. These reviews will examine how programs are

carried out, along with their impact on traditionally underserved groups. Major reviews

will be scheduled for every USDA program at least once every 5 years. 
67

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target 

5.1.2 Major USDA programs reviewed N/A 20 20 20 20

each year (%).

Strategies:

• Review the fairness and equity of USDA program delivery and its impact on socially

disadvantaged customers.

• Continually monitor USDA activities to identify civil rights violations and ensure

appropriate remedies.

• Listen to customer and employee opinions about fair treatment in USDA employment

and program delivery. 

• Conduct evaluations to hold USDA mission areas and senior managers accountable for

progress on civil rights.

Key Outcome: Establish in every agency effective outreach programs that target

underserved customers.

As part of USDA’s ongoing efforts to improve its civil rights record, outreach plans were

established in every USDA agency during FY 1999. Efforts now are underway to increase

participation of traditionally underserved customers in all Department programs. Each

agency’s plan will be used to establish performance baselines that can gauge the success of

that agency’s efforts to increase the participation of underserved customer groups. Regular

reports will be required to ensure accountability for progress and to keep managers

informed of their agency’s outreach efforts.

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target

5.1.3 Improvement in minority N/A N/A Baseline Complete TBD

participation in USDA programs (%). Not Baseline

Completed

Strategies:

• Establish baselines for measuring increased participation by underserved populations in

all USDA programs.

• Monitor trends in USDA program participation of historically underserved populations

and coordinate outreach in all USDA activities through mission area strategic plans,

agency liaisons, and state outreach councils. 

• Continue to assist underserved farmers through USDA’s Outreach for Socially

Disadvantaged Farmers Program.

• Build relationships with community-based organizations to further enhance USDA’s

outreach efforts.

• Develop initiatives for farm workers with other Federal agencies and non-government

organizations. 
68

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

• Provide training and education on outreach strategies to USDA employees and

stakeholders.

• Emphasize the advantages of using small businesses to provide goods and services;

improve outreach to small businesses; and establish partnerships to deliver technical

assistance to small rural and/or agricultural businesses.

Key Outcome: Ensure timely resolution of program and equal employment civil rights

complaints.

Effective systems to process program and employment civil rights complaints will enable

USDA to carry out its investigations in a manner that is timely and fair to all parties

involved. It is USDA’s goal that the Department will complete the processing of every civil

rights complaint case to the point of issuance of a report of investigation within a 180-day

time frame. Fair and efficient resolutions to civil rights complaints are essential to the

overall improvement of USDA’s civil rights record. The Department’s customers and

employees deserve to know that their grievances will be heard and a fair resolution arrived

at within a reasonable timeframe. The President’s FY 2003 budget seeks an increase of $2

million to provide staffing and other resources needed to make substantial reductions in

complaint processing time.

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target 

5.1.4 Reduction in the average number N/A N/A 1 5 15 

of days it takes to resolve USDA civil 

rights complaints (%).

Strategies:

• Improve processing for program and employment complaints every year until the target

of 180 days for the issuance of a report of investigation is reached.

• Improve tracking and reporting mechanisms to provide better information and

management assessment.

• Promote awareness of alternative dispute resolution and provide model conflict

management training packages to facilitate training of supervisors and managers. 
69

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Objective 5.2

Improve organizational productivity, accountability and performance

Rapid growth in electronic service delivery alternatives by the private sector have raised

customers’ expectations for more, better, faster, and cheaper service in every facet of their

lives. They expect no less from USDA. Developing a quality electronic government

(eGovernment) capability in USDA requires fundamental change to USDA’s traditional

approaches to planning, funding, designing, and presenting its information and services to

the public. It requires greater collaboration among USDA agencies and new skill sets in

USDA employees. Done properly, eGovernment has significant potential for transforming

interactions with customers, employees, and partners, and creating vastly more efficient and

less costly business practices. 

Automation is a key to achieving our potential. The acquisition of new tools requires

significant upfront investment. Many of USDA’s information systems are rapidly becoming

obsolete, and upgrading or replacing them is an expensive proposition. Accordingly, USDA

must leverage its investments in new technology and tools to support interagency and

interdepartmental approaches to providing information and services on a customer-centric

basis rather than an organization basis. 

Automation also can contribute to meeting President Bush’s goal of building a more citizenbased, results-oriented, and market-driven Federal government. To improve the efficiency

and function of government operations, USDA will work to do its part to realize the

Administration’s government-wide goals to make greater use of performance-based

contracts, increase online procurement, and expand public-private competition for a portion

of the work currently done by Federal employees.

If USDA is to fully leverage the power of technology to improve its services, then

Department employees also must be highly skilled. Unfortunately, USDA is facing a

potential “brain drain.” By 2005, 77% of the Department’s senior executives will be eligible

for regular retirement, and another 17% could take early retirement. This is one of the

highest retirement eligibility rates in the Federal government. As USDA jobs become

increasingly technical, skill gaps are emerging in key areas such as information technology.

As employees retire and new workers are hired, USDA must maintain and grow a talented,

flexible, and diverse workforce that can thrive in the digital era.

Recognizing the correlation between employee and customer satisfaction, the Department

also must ensure that its employees have the tools and work environment needed to serve

customers effectively. This includes: sound leadership; efficient work processes; modern,

efficient and safe workplaces; fair treatment; and adequate incentives for performance,

customer service, teamwork, and innovation. In USDA, strategic human capital

management is part of an integrated goal to build a more corporate, efficient, and effective

management infrastructure. Integrating administrative silos is a positive step. Strategic

human capital management embraces all aspects of attracting, developing, and retaining a

quality workforce. The USDA workforce is becoming a more scientifically-trained and

computer-enabled workforce. It continues to be highly dispersed in many small offices and

non-traditional work-sites. In line with the President's Management Agenda, USDA has

developed its Strategic Human Capital Management Plan. This plan includes a five-year

restructuring plan that enables USDA to deliver mission critical services in a cost-effective

way. In addition, our plan promotes all of the President's Management Initiatives-- citizencentered e-government, competitive sourcing and Homeland security. Our plan describes
70

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

measures we will take to assure a USDA workforce that is rich in talent and diversity. We

will close the skills gaps, develop leaders and a performance culture that is results oriented.

As part of the Department's efforts to improve organizational productivity, accountability,

and performance to better serve its clientele, the Department has been involved in

government-wide interagency efforts to implement the new requirements of P.L. No. 106-

107, the Federal Financial Assistance Management Improvement Act of 1999, for agencies

that provide financial assistance to simplify the administration of Federal financial

assistance programs. The purposes of the Act are to: (1) improve the effectiveness and

performance of Federal financial assistance programs; (2) simplify Federal assistance

application and reporting requirements; (3) improve the delivery of services to the public;

and (4) facilitate greater coordination among those responsible for delivering the services.

Federal financial assistance includes grants, cooperative agreements, loans, loan guarantees,

scholarships, and other forms of assistance.

Key Outcome: Ensure USDA has the information systems needed to allow customers

to securely share data and receive services electronically.

The Department is working to improve customer service and operational efficiency by

building a modern information technology (IT) infrastructure and moving many of its

common transactions online. Efforts at the Service Center agencies – Farm Service Agency

(FSA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), and RD – to implement a

Common Computing Environment (CCE) and to meet the requirements of the Freedom to

E-File Act are integral to achieving this outcome. These efforts will provide a model for the

rest of the Department in transforming all practicable customer processes to a user-friendly

Internet environment. The Freedom to E-File Act requires the RMA and the Service Center

agencies to develop Internet-based systems that allow agricultural producers to conduct

program transactions online. The remaining customer base is being addressed under the

Government Paperwork and Elimination Act (GPEA), which require the entire Department

to meet similar functions. The Service Center agencies will make all program forms

available online to the extent practicable, and initial GPEA plans will be developed by all

relevant USDA agencies. The Service Center agencies and RMA, through private insurance

providers, will make all practicable program transactions for agricultural producers

available online.

Service Center Modernization Initiative

As one of the cornerstone efforts of the Service Center Modernization Initiative, the Service

Center Modernization Initiative-Information Technology (SCMI-IT) effort will enable

USDA to meet its commitment to transform field operations. Central to USDA’s efforts to

build a strong, modern infrastructure is its work to establish a CCE across its field level

Service Centers. CCE will serve as the technological foundation for implementing

reengineered business processes across the Service Center agencies. 

When fully deployed, the CCE will optimize data, equipment, and personnel sharing

opportunities among the Service Center agencies, and will overcome the limitations of

existing legacy systems. The CCE also will allow the Service Centers to use commonly

available information technology, such as the Internet, to deliver services and conduct

business with customers and partners. CCE will also provide the technical infrastructure

necessary for the use of Geographical Information Systems (GIS) in the Service Centers. A

modern technology infrastructure will allow USDA’s field presence to better leverage

information to achieve 21st -century efficiencies and customer service.
71

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target

5.2.1 Establish a common computing 

environment for USDA Service Centers 

which includes hardware, software, 

security, web sites, telecommunications 

and databases:

• Workstations deployed (%). 74 86 86 100 N/A

• FSA connectivity solution and network N/A N/A 50 100 N/A

servers deployed (%).

• Application/GIS servers and software N/A N/A N/A 50 100

deployed (%).

• Telecommunications upgrade (%) N/A N/A N/A 50 100

(NEW MEASURE).

Strategies:

• Plan, procure, and deploy the hardware to support reengineered business processes and

common information systems in all USDA Service Centers.

• Plan, procure, and deploy the software necessary to support common information

systems and reengineered business processes, obtaining enterprise-wide licenses where

feasible.

• Plan, procure, and deploy the telecommunications infrastructure to support the current

and future information technology needs of USDA Service Centers.

• Plan, develop, and implement the data architecture necessary to support USDA’s vision

for a strong, shared information infrastructure. This effort should include identifying

optimum geographic placement of databases and database management systems.

• Develop common security plans and oversee agency implementation.

• Plan and execute the migration of older agency information systems to the new common

computing environment.

• Ensure that an orderly configuration management and change management process is

established and adhered to.

eGovernment Environment

Advances in enabling IT and increasing public awareness and use of the Internet have

raised expectations for government information and services to be available online. The

President’s Management Agenda identifies Expanding Electronic Government as one of five

mutually reinforcing government-wide reform goals. GPEA, P.L. 105-277, requires all

Federal agencies to allow individuals or entities the option to submit information, transact

business, and maintain records electronically by October 2003. The Freedom to E-File Act,

P.L. 106-222, requires USDA's county-based agencies (FSA, NRCS, and RD) to establish

an Internet-based system that enables agricultural producers to access all forms. By June

2002, the system should enable producers to access and file all forms and selected records,

and to have electronic access to USDA farm-related information already available to the

public in paper form. Freedom to E-File also requires the RMA and Insurance Providers to

allow agricultural producers to obtain Federal Crop Insurance electronically by December

2001. The USDA Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) is charged with the

responsibility to coordinate and facilitate the Department’s eGovernment planning and

implementation. The USDA eGovernment Executive Council and Working Group, together
72

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

with OCIO, are currently developing the Department’s eGovernment readiness assessment

and the USDA eGovernment strategic and tactical plans. This effort is expected to build

collaborative management approaches among USDA agencies and leverage investments in

enabling information technologies to support the delivery of information and services on a

customer-centric basis.

The OCFO is charged with the responsibility to coordinate and facilitate the planning and

implementation of the Federal Financial Management Improvement Act. OCIO will provide

education and enterprise-wide policy and facilitate the use of common IT solutions. OCIO

will provide leadership to develop a coherent comprehensive e-business strategy supported

by Departmental guidance and policy that will be understood and utilized by business and

IT leaders to integrate e-Government concepts into information and service delivery

processes. USDA’s goal is to provide online services 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365

days a year in a way that is accessible (Section 508 compliant), secure, and privacy

protected. The OCFO and the OCIO will collaboratively provide leadership in

implementing simplification/streamlining requirements of PL 106-107 for USDA’s financial

assistance programs.

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target 

5.2.2 Transition to a fully integrated 

e-Government environment.

• Meet legislative mandates of the N/A N/A Yes Yes Yes

Freedom of E·File Act and GPEA.

• Reduce duplicative investments N/A N/A N/A Yes Yes

for enabling information technologies

and related services (NEW MEASURE).

5.2.3 Simplify and reduce financial 

assistance program forms (NEW

MEASURE): Establish

• Reduce number of USDA forms and N/A N/A N/A Baseline TBD

application kits.

5.2.4 Improve electronic processes for 

USDA financial assistance programs

(NEW MEASURE): Establish

• Increase number of USDA financial N/A N/A N/A Baseline TBD

assistance program announcements

and application kits on the web sites

of USDA.

Strategies:

• Provide remote customers with electronic access to USDA information and applications.

• Reevaluate program delivery by examining the potential of enabling technologies to

deliver services via the Internet and to appropriately allow online access to and

collection of information.
73

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

• Examine internal policies and processes to ensure electronic privacy and strict policies

for electronic services.

• Integrate eGovernment concepts into USDA IT investment processes.

• Develop a plan to implement simplification and streamlining federal assistance forms

and application kits.

Information and Cyber Security

As USDA modernizes its infrastructure and increases public access to more online services,

it is critical that the Department has an effective and comprehensive information security

program. Protection of information assets and maintaining the availability, integrity, and

confidentiality of USDA IT systems and telecommunications resources are vital in meeting

USDA’s program delivery requirements. Information security has emerged as a top priority

for the Department. As technology has enhanced the ability to share information

instantaneously between computers and networks, it has also made USDA organizations

more vulnerable to unlawful and destructive penetration and disruptions. 

USDA’s mandate for securing its information systems arises from the Computer Security

Act of 1987. This law along with guidance from the OMB provides the department with

basic security requirements. In addition, Presidential Decision Directive 63 (PDD 63) was

released, explaining key elements of policy on critical infrastructure protection. The

Directive calls for a national effort to assure the security of the U. S. increasingly

vulnerable and interconnected infrastructure, particularly its cyber systems. 

The Department is currently revising its information security strategy to ensure the

confidentiality, integrity, and availability of information systems and services, with

particular attention to mission-critical information assets. This strategy and associated

tactical plans will be in line with ‘best practice’ guidance from National Institute of

standards and Technology, the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO), and other Federal

agencies.

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target

5.2.5 Develop, implement, and maintain

a secure and confident IT environment

while protecting privacy (NEW MEASURE):

• Implement a Risk Management N/A 10 25 100 N/A

Methodology (%).

• Develop and implement information and N/A N/A 10 50 100

telecommunications security architecture

(%).

• Develop and implement an Information N/A N/A 5 20 50

Survivability Program (%).

• Develop and implement a Sensitive N/A N/A 5 20 50

System Certification Program (%).
74

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Strategies:

• Develop a comprehensive methodology for evaluating the technical and non-technical

security features of an information system.

• Develop security requirements that can be used for implementation of new computer

systems as well as changes to existing systems.

• Identify levels of certification analysis for systems, regardless of life-cycle phase or type

of acquisition and/or development.

• Update appropriate contingency plans for USDA’s 52 mission critical systems.

• Test mission critical contingency plans.

• Perform independent testing of contingency plans.

Key Outcome: Ensure USDA has a financial information system that can produce

auditable financial statements and provide reliable and useful information for

decision-making.

The Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) works with USDA agencies to ensure

that the Department’s financial policies reflect sound business practices. Achieving a clean

audit opinion on the Department’s Consolidated Financial Statements and agency specific

financial statements will assure the users of USDA’s financial information and constituents

that USDA’s financial systems are sound and generate consistent, reliable, and useful

information.

USDA has been working on automating the statement preparation process to improve the

efficiency and consistency of data processing within the USDA Consolidated Financial

Statements. USDA produces six stand-alone audited financial statements in addition to a

consolidated statement. Four of the five USDA agencies that had stand-alone audits for

fiscal year 2001 have largely clean opinions. The last remaining agency, the Forest Service,

is a primary focus for corrective actions already underway. A sixth agency, Food and

Nutrition Service, had a waiver from a stand-alone audit in fiscal year 2001 because they

consistently had a clean opinion. USDA has made significant progress in reconciling

USDA’s fund balances with the Department of the Treasury. The OCFO led the effort to

identify and correct the systemic problems that cause out-of-balances with Treasury, and

has institutionalized a new Department-wide methodology for dealing with cash

reconciliation. The OCFO continues to work closely with Treasury to re-engineer the cash

reconciliation and reporting process. These efforts are expected to result in an unqualified

USDA consolidated financial statement audit opinion for FY 2002.

In FY 2003, President’s budget requests increased funding to enable OCFO to compare the

strategies needed to achieve and maintain an unqualified audit opinion and produce reliable

and useful financial information.
75

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target 

5.2.6 Achieve an unqualified Disclaimer Disclaimer Disclaimer Unqual- Unqualopinion on USDA’s Consolidated ified ified 

Financial Statements. Opinion Opinion

Strategies:

• Implement a financial management reporting strategy for USDA that addresses various

user needs and Departmental requirements.

• Employ tools to improve estimates of program cost.

• Adhere to Departmental financial procedures to ensure prompt resolution of financial

management issues.

In FY 2003, USDA will complete implementation of the Foundation Financial Information

System (FFIS), which is a Joint Financial Management Improvement Program and U.S.

Standard General Ledger compliant financial management information system. This

financial management system will provide the integration and capabilities to improve the

delivery of timely and meaningful financial management information, and will allow USDA

to comply with external legislation, including the CFO Act of 1990. Furthermore, the

implementation of this information system will provide auditable financial data that can be

used to prepare the USDA Consolidated Financial Statements.

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target

5.2.7 Implement the Foundation Financial

Information System USDA-wide:

• Total USDA workforce served (%). 31 46 78 98 100

Strategies:

• Configure the FFIS and Financial Data Warehouses to meet USDA agency financial

processing requirements.

• Develop and implement data conversion methodologies to ensure that data converted

from legacy systems is supportable and reconciled.

• Provide ongoing financial management reviews to ensure compliance with government

mandates and financial management best practices.

• Re-engineer legacy, financial processing systems to integrate and improve financial data.

• Provide and assure corporate administrative financial management infrastructure and

security solutions to ensure and protect integrity and confidentiality of USDA financial

management data.
76

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Key Outcome: Ensure USDA has a skilled, satisfied workforce and strong prospects

for retention of its best employees.

USDA’s strategic human capital management goals are directed at restructuring and

competing for talent. The greatest tools for attracting talent are USDA’s mission, locations,

student employment programs, outreach to diverse groups, and use of hiring flexibilities.

The greatest tools for developing talent include access to continuous learning, mentoring,

and leadership development programs. The greatest tools for retaining talent are the quality

of USDA managers, success in helping employees balance work and personal

responsibilities, and performance management and recognition practices. 

Employee engagement and satisfaction

Staffing and retaining a strong workforce is critical to USDA’s ability to achieve its goals.

USDA, like other employers, is in a war for talent. People want to work for organizations

that offer challenging work, opportunities for professional growth, inspiring leadership,

quality work-life balance, and fair treatment. In the time ahead, USDA will work to

improve its competitive standing in these categories in order to recruit and retain a quality

workforce. USDA’s five-year restructuring plan addresses how we plan to increase citizencenteredness, to include the following: reducing the number of managers, organizational

layers, and time it takes to make decisions; increasing the span of control; redirecting

positions to ensure that the largest number of employees possible are in direct service

delivery positions that interact with citizens; and retraining and/or redeploying employees

as part of restructuring efforts. More detailed plans and decisions will be made over the

next year. During that time we will identify a measure of citizen-centeredness. 

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target 

5.2.8 USDA employee work satisfaction N/A 3 4 5 6 

rate above U.S. Government worker

satisfaction (%).

Strategies:

• Align performance and incentive systems (recognition measurement) to support the

accomplishments of the Department’s Strategic Plan.

• Provide a safe and modern workplace.

• Improve areas employees identify as lowering satisfaction.

• Reengineer hiring and other human resource processes to improve employee satisfaction. 

• Institute family-friendly policies to boost employee morale and productivity.

• Explore ways to share training and development resources across USDA.

• Develop training and development initiatives that will give employees skills of the

future.

• Develop and implement rigorous leadership development programs, including

continuous development of incumbent managers and executives.

• Develop a multi-level leadership-training program.

• Develop a Departmental Mentoring Program.

• Develop effective approaches to identifying and addressing root causes to organizational

and individual conflicts.
• Create basic, integrated, and consistent automated HR infrastructure and operating

systems that meet the needs of all mission areas.

Key Outcome: Ensure USDA has a facilities environmental management system that

can produce reliable data on the Department’s environmental performance.

Currently, internal USDA facility inspections and program reviews do not produce

consistent data on the Department’s overall environmental performance. USDA is taking

action to integrate performance measurement and accountability into its day-to-day

decision-making and long-term planning. A strong environmental management system will

improve USDA’s business decisions.

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Target Target Target 

5.2.9 Develop and implement a N/A Launch 15-20% 50-60% 70-80%

Department-wide environmental Effort In Place In Place In Place

management system.

Strategies:

• Develop a formal USDA policy for facilities environmental management.

• Conduct environmental management system training and briefings for all USDA

agencies.

• Implement environmental management systems through pilot projects at selected agency

facilities.

• Building on the pilots, implement full-scale systems.

Key Outcome: Ensure USDA acquires recurring commercial services in the most costeffective way.

Performance-Based Service Contracting

Performance-based service contracting represents a major change from traditional

contracting methods where agencies specify contract inputs, such as number of contractor

staff assigned to a particular project or the processes the contractor must use. Performancebased service contracting requires the development of objective measures and standards for

the contractor's performance. 

USDA will be promoting performance-based contracting throughout the Department,

focusing first on identifying those contracts where making an investment in developing

performance-based standards can yield big improvements in contractor performance. USDA

has already made strides in converting traditional service contracts to performance-based

ones. In recent years, the value of USDA contracts eligible for service-based contracting

has been over $700 million. Achieving the goal of awarding 20% of USDA’s service

contacts as performance-based will be challenging, as USDA has many relatively small

contracts that would need to be converted performance-based contracts to reach the goal.

A pilot of the new Integrated Acquisition System (IAS) did not occur in FY 2001 due to

critical security deficiencies detected in the candidate software. As a result, in FY 2001,

77

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002
market research was conducted to determine the viability of current commercial-off-the-self

(COTS) procurement applications in meeting USDA’s needs. The results of the market

research indicated that several new COTS applications would meet USDA’s needs, and

consequently an acquisition was conducted during FY 2001. For FY 2002, plans include a

pilot of the selected IAS, an evaluation of the IAS pilot, and subsequent implementation

planning. For FY 2003, USDA-wide implementation beyond the limited pilot is planned.

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target 

5.2.10 Use of performance-based

service contracts:

• Total eligible service contracts (%). 1.9 4.6 13 20 30

• Completion of IAS pilot/implementation N/A N/A N/A 100 TBD*

(%) (NEW MEASURE).

* Pilot evaluation will help develop the methodology for the follow-on USDA-wide implementation during FY

2003.

Strategies:

• Identify barriers to greater use of PBSC methods and to develop a strategic plan with

specific action steps and time-frames for FY 2002 and beyond to address these issues.

E-Business

FedBizOpps is a single point of entry electronic posting system that permits persons

interested in government business opportunities to obtain consolidated information on

procurements and other actions from many Federal agencies from one central site. A

Federal Acquisition Regulation interim rule made the use of FedBizOpps mandatory for

synopses of proposed contract actions and the posting of solicitations, effective 

October 1, 2001.

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target 

5.2.11 Procurement actions in excess of N/A N/A N/A 100 100

$25,000 posted to FedBizOpps (%)

(NEW MEASURE).*

* Agencies will post (a) all synopses for acquisitions valued at over $25,000 for which widespread notice is

required and (b) all associated solicitations unless covered by an exemption in the Federal Acquisition Regulation.

Strategies:

• Train agency personnel in setup and use of FedBizOpps.

• Use a monthly reporting system to monitor their progress.

78

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002
Commercial Services

The Federal Activities Inventory Reform (FAIR) Act of 1998 requires Federal agencies to

provide an annual inventory of all commercial activities, and Federal guidelines require that

such activities be considered for contracting out to the private sector. USDA already

contracts with private sources for a wide array of services and will continue to consider

whether commercial activities could be performed more effectively and efficiently by the

private sector. In keeping with the Administration’s goal of promoting competition and

making government more market-based, USDA will use its inventory of commercial

activities to develop and implement a plan that will achieve the goal of competing 15% of

the commercial positions on the inventory by the end of FY 2003.

Fiscal Year

Annual Performance Goals 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

and Indicators Actual Actual Actual Target Target 

5.2.12 Reduction in cost and/or increased

productivity of commercial activities:

• Provide timely annual update of FAIR Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Act inventory.

• Develop plan for incremental N/A N/A No Yes Yes

competitions/conversion of FAIR Act

inventory.

• Competition/conversion of FAIR Act N/A N/A N/A — 15

inventory (%).

Strategies:

• Submit complete and accurate FAIR Act inventory by due date.

• Train appropriate personnel in cost comparison studies.

• Identify needed contract, budget, or other resources.

• Solicit input from commercial and employee representatives, the OMB, and other

Federal agencies to identify best practices for cost comparison studies.

79

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002
80

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Fiscal Years 2003 Program Levels

The following table depicts the component agencies and staff offices of the Department of

Agriculture with total program level dollars for each account allocated to the USDA

objectives. The program levels have been rounded to the nearest million dollars. Many

USDA accounts support multiple objectives. An account’s funding was allocated to more

than one objective when the amount for each objective was significant and could be

identified. As a result, the table provides a general indication of the funding dedicated to

each program goal. For example, although all USDA agencies contribute to Goal 5, for the

most part only the funding provided to the Department’s administrative offices in direct

support of this goal is reflected in the funding allocations for this goal. For display purposes

in this document, Goal 5 allocations have been reallocated equally among the four program

goals.
81

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

OSEC

FY 2003

Program Level

($ in Millions)

USDA FY 2003 Program Level

Agency Account Goal 1

Office of the Secretary

Homeland Security

Streamlining for

Service Center Agencies

Gifts and Bequests

Executive Operations

OCFO

CCE

HMMG

Buildings, Facilities, and

Rental Payments

OC

OIG

OGC

ERS

NASS

ARS

Buildings and Facilities

Integrated Activities

EO

OCFO

OCIO

DA

OC

OIG

OGC

ERS

NASS

ARS

CSREES

Outreach for Socially

Disadvantaged Farmers

Research and Education

Activities

14

Goal 2 Goal 3 Goal 4 Program Level Subtotal

3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 14.0

28 7 7 7 7 28.0

5 1.3 1.2 1.3 1.2 5.01 .2 .3 .2 .3 1.0

36 9 9 9 9 36.0

8.4 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 8.4

21 5.3 5.2 5.3 5.2 21.032 8 8 8 8 32.0

133 33.2 33.3 33.2 33.3 133.0

48 12 12 12 12 48.0

15.7 .1 .1 15.4 .1 15.7

71 17.7 17.8 17.7 17.8 71.0

3 .8 .7 .8 .7 3.0

10 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 10.087 21.7 21.8 21.7 21.8 87.041 10.3 10.2 10.3 10.2 41.082 36.6 25 10.2 10.2 82.0

149 87 4 8 50 149.0

1,049 334 355 178 182 1,049.0

17 4.3 4.2 4.3 4.2 17.045 5 22 5 13 45.0

566 254.7 131.3 66 114 566.0421 147 61 160 53 421.0

Corporate Information

Systems

OCIO

DA

Extension Activities
82

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

FY 2003

Program Level

($ in Millions)

USDA FY 2003 Program Level

Agency Account Goal 1

Energy Conservation Program

1,056

Goal 2 Goal 3 Goal 4 Program Level Subtotal

1,056 1,056.0

13 13 13.014 14 14.0

804 804 804.0101 101 101.0

43 43 43.042 42 42.078 72 6 78.0

1 1 1.09 9 9.0

26 26 26.0

615 615 615.0188 188 188.0

76 76 76.0

2,825 2,825 2,825.01,344 1,181 163 1,344.0

4 4 4.0

49 49 49.0

32,062 29,817.7 2,244.3 32,062.0

3,966 3,966 3,966.0

APHIS Salaries and Expenses

Buildings and Facilities

Misc. Trust Funds

Salaries and Expenses

Trust Funds

Marketing Services

FCIC

State mediation grants

FSIS

GIPSA

AMS

RMA

FSA

Sect. 32 Funds for

Salaries and Expenses

Strengthening Markets

Payments to States &

Possessions

Perishable Ag.

Commodities Act

Sect. 32 Admin.

Trust Funds

Administrative and

Operating Expenses

Salaries and Expenses

Ag. Credit Insurance

Program Account

Inspection and Weighing

CCC1
83

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

FY 2003

Program Level

($ in Millions)

USDA FY 2003 Program Level

Agency Account Goal 1

897

Goal 2 Goal 3 Goal 4 Program Level Subtotal

897.0

111 111 111.0

52 52 52.0

685 685.0

2,767 2,767.0

43 43 43.0

712 712 712.0

53 53 53.034 34 34.0

3,924 3,924 3,924.0

3 3 3.07 7.0

40 40.015 15.0

3,116

157188 150 188.0

28 28 28.0

1,185 1,185 1,185.0

132 132 132.0

Rural Housing Assistance Grants

Farm Labor Program Account

Administrative Expenses

NRCS Conservation Operations

RD

Rural Economic

Development Loans

Rural Community

Advancement Program

Mutual and Self-Help Grants

Rural Cooperative

Development Grants

Rural Development Loan

Fund Program Account

RHS

RBCS

Emergency Watershed Operations

Rental assistance

Housing Insurance Fund

Program Account

897

Resource Conservation

and Development

685

2,767

Additional Rural

Development Grants 7

4015

RUS

P.L. 480 Program Account

FAS

Rural Electrification and Telecommunications Loans Program Account

Distance Learning and Telemedicine

Foreign Ag. Services &

General Sales Manager

P.L. 480 Title I Ocean Freight

Differential Grants

P.L. 480 - Title II

3,116 3,116.0

157 157.0

38
84

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

FNS Food Program Admin.

Food Stamp Program

WIC

Commodity Assistance

Food Donations

Child Nutrition Program

FY 2003

Program Level

($ in Millions)

USDA FY 2003 Program Level

Agency Account Goal 1

156

Goal 2 Goal 3 Goal 4 Program Level Subtotal

156.0

24,32610,925

4,712

255

1 1.0

568 568.0254282

1,4261,430

131

10

582194

TOTALS BY GOAL

156

568

24,326 24,326.010,925 10,925.0

4,712 4,712.0

255 255.0

1

FS

National Forest System

Forest and Rangeland Research

Wildland Fire Management

State, Private and

International Forestry

Capital Improvement and

Permanent Appropriations

Maintenance

Land Acquisition Accounts

Trust Funds

254 254.0282 282.0

1,426 1,426.01,430 1,430.0

131 131.0

Other Accounts 10 10.0

582 582.0194 194.0

USDA TOTAL PROGRAM LEVEL

Percent of USDA Total Resources

41,102.0 43,406.2 8,974.8 12,117.1

105,6042 105,6042

39% 41% 8% 11% 99%

1 Includes Farm Bill estimates of $4.64 billion for FY 2002 and $7.825 billion for FY 20032 Totals may not add due to rounding.
85

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Fiscal Years 2002 Program Levels

The following table depicts the major accounts of the Department of Agriculture with total

program level dollars for each account allocated to the four program goals. The program

levels have been rounded to the nearest million dollars. An account’s funding was allocated

to more than one goal when the amount for each goal was significant and could be

identified. As a result, the table provides a general indication of the funding dedicated to

each program goal. Although all USDA agencies contribute to Goal 5, the funding

provided to the Department’s administrative offices in direct support of this goal would be

reflected in the funding allocations for the program goals. For display purposes in this

document, Goal 5 allocations have been reallocated equally among the four program goals.
86

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

1,103 1,103 1,103.0

21 21 21.013 13 13.0

APHIS Salaries and Expenses

Buildings and Facilities

Misc. Trust Funds

OSEC

FY 2002

Program Level

($ in Millions)

USDA FY 2002 Program Level

Agency Account Goal 1

Office of the Secretary

Homeland Security

Gifts and Bequests

Executive Operations

OCFO

CCE

HMMG

Buildings, Facilities, and

Rental Payments

OC

OIG

OGC

ERS

NASS

ARS

Buildings and Facilities

Integrated Activities

EO

OCFO

OCIO

DA

OC

OIG

OGC

ERS

NASS

ARS

CSREES

Outreach for Socially

Disadvantaged Farmers

Research and Education

Activities

12

Goal 2 Goal 3 Goal 4 Program Level Subtotal

3333 12.0

81 21 20 20 20 81.030 7 7 8 8 30.0

1 .2 .3 .2 .3 1.0

29 8 7 7 7 29.0

6 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 6.0

11 2 3 3 3 11.059 14 15 15 15 59.043 10 11 11 11 43.0

15.7 .1 .1 15.4 .1 15.7

61 16 15 15 15 61.0

3 .8 .7 .8 .7 3.09 3 2 2 2 9.0

80 20 20 20 20 80.036 9 9 9 9 36.076 31 25 10 10 76.0

122 74 5 7 36 122.0

1,097 335 363 191 208 1,097.0

119 30 30 29 30 119.0

45 2 23 5 15 45.0

556 255 128 61 112 556.0441 155 62 169 55 441.0

OCIO

DA

Extension Activities

Fund for Rural America
87

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

FY 2002

Program Level

($ in Millions)

USDA FY 2002 Program Level

Agency Account Goal 1 Goal 2 Goal 3 Goal 4 Program Level Subtotal

791 791 791.0101 101 101.0

36 36 36.042 42 42.075 69 6 75.0

1 1 1.09 9 9.0

25 25 25.0

673 673 673.0181 181 181.0

80 80 80.0

2,955 2,955 2,955.01,295 1,152 143 1,295.0

3 3 3.0

33,946 22,509 1,437 33,946.0

4,280 4,280 4,280.0

Salaries and Expenses

Trust Funds

Marketing Services

FCIC

State mediation grants

FSIS

GIPSA

AMS

RMA

FSA

Sect. 32 Funds for

Salaries and Expenses

Strengthening Markets

Payments to States &

Possessions

Perishable Ag.

Commodities Act

Sect. 32 Admin.

Trust Funds

Administrative and

Operating Expenses

Salaries and Expenses

Ag. Credit Insurance

Program Account

Inspection and Weighing

CCC1

847 847.0

12 12.0

111 111 111.0

51 51 51.010 10.0

6.8 6.8 Agricultural Management Assistance

NRCS Conservation Operations

Watershed Surveys and Planning

Rehabilitation of Aging Infrastructure

Emergency Watershed Operations

847

Resource Conservation

and Development

1210

6.8

653 653.0

3,495 3,495.0

Administrative Expenses RD

Rural Community

Advancement Program

653

3,495
88

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

FY 2002

Program Level

($ in Millions)

USDA FY 2002 Program Level

Agency Account Goal 1 Goal 2 Goal 3 Goal 4 Program Level Subtotal

54 54 54.0

707 707 707.0

52 52 52.056 56 56.0

4,549 4,549 4,549.0

15 15 15.0

4 4.08 8.01 1.0

4,741

432178 144 178.0

20 20 20.0

1,039 1,039 1,039.0

155 155 155.0

Rural Housing Assistance Grants

Farm Labor Program Account

Rural Economic

Development Loans

Mutual and Self-Help Grants

Rural Cooperative

Development Grants

Rural Development Loan

Fund Program Account

RHS

RBCS

Rental assistance

Housing Insurance Fund

Program Account

481

RUS

P.L. 480 Program Account

FAS

Rural Electrification and Telecommunications Loans Program Account

Distance Learning and Telemedicine

Foreign Ag. Services &

General Sales Manager

P.L. 480 Title I Ocean Freight

Differential Grants

P.L. 480 - Title II

38 38.015 15.0

34

EZ/EC Grants

Additional Rural Development Grants

Sheep Center

3815

4,747 4,747.0

432 432.0

Local Television Loans 258 258 258.0

FNS Food Program Admin.

Food Stamp Program

WIC

Commodity Assistance

Food Donations

Child Nutrition Program

148 148.0

22,82410,329

4,465

264

152.0

148

22,824 22,824.010,329 10,329.0

4,465 4,465.0

264 264.0152 152
89

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002 1 Includes Farm Bill estimates of $4.54 billion for FY 2002 and $7.825 billion for FY 2003 2 Totals may not add due to rounding.

FY 2002

Program Level

($ in Millions)

USDA FY 2002 Program Level

Agency Account Goal 1 Goal 2 Goal 3 Goal 4 Program Level Subtotal

562 562.0253295

1,6121,394

152

10

587191

TOTALS BY GOAL

562 FS

National Forest System

Forest and Rangeland Research

Wildland Fire Management

State, Private and

International Forestry

Capital Improvement and

Permanent Appropriations

Maintenance

Land Acquisition Accounts

Trust Funds

253 253.0295 295.0

1,612 1,612.01,394 1,394.0

152 152.0

Other Accounts 10 10.0

587 587.0191 191.0

USDA TOTAL PROGRAM LEVEL

Percent of USDA Total Resources

34,293.6 41,078.6 8,276.7 15,665.6

109,3522 109,352.02

35% 41% 8% 16% 100%
90

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Appendix A

Data Verification and Validation

The following table identifies quality of performance data reported in the Annual

Performance Plan. The performance goals/indicators from the Plan are contained in the first

column. The Data Source column identifies from where this data is collected (i.e., the

source). The Verification/Validation Method column provides information on the method

used for assessment of data completeness, accuracy, consistency, timeliness, and related

quality control practices; and whether data are appropriate for the performance measures

used in the Annual Performance Plan. The Data Limitations column describes limitations of

data to evaluate performance, and indicates unavailable or low-quality data.
91

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Appendix A Data Verification and ValidationPerformance Goal/Indicator Data Source Verification/Validation Method Data Limitations

Agricultural Outlookmagazine Agricultural Incomeand Finance Situationand Outlook Report.Economic ResearchService website—FarmIncome Briefing RoomMeasures valuesdealing with expandingrisk management toolsand total insurance inforce are derived fromUSDA’s database offinancial and programdata.Values for the numbersof producers attendingrisk managementeducation (RME)activities are extracted

Data to produce estimates of farm incomecome from a variety of sources. Cashreceipts are either drawn directly fromNational Agricultural Statistics Service(NASS) reports of income and dispositionor are produced by the ERS fromproduction and price data released byNASS. Government payment data are fromadministrative records. Crop commodityloan data are obtained from the FSA. Othersources of income such as custom hire areobtained from the Agricultural ResourceManagement Study, a survey conducted inpartnership between ERS and NASS.The Data Acceptance System (DAS) andAccounting Report System (ARS) are twointegrated data processing systems. Togetherthey provide a mechanism to ensure thatdata received is accurate, that errors arecorrected timely, that information containedon monthly accounting reports submitted bythe insurance providers is accurate andappropriate entries are made in the financialaccounting systems. All transactions arevalidated for data accuracy and compliancewith processing requirements. Monthlysubmission is mandatory if any activityoccurred during the month.

Estimates of receipts are based on surveysand other information and are subject torevision as new data become available. Datafor receipts and other sources of gross farmincome estimation are drawn from samplesurveys and are subject to survey andmeasurement error.There are no limitations for DAS and ARSsystems.Values for the numbers of producersattending risk management educationactivities may be limited under thefollowing: First, the data reflect only thoseeducational activities funded directly byRMA or for which RMA plays a significanteducational role. Therefore, the measurerepresents only part of the overall riskmanagement training effort of all public andprivate organizations. Second, the reportedactivities fit a relatively narrow definition of 

1.1.1 Farmers’ total cash receipts fromthe sale of farm products.

1.1.2 Gross cash farm income from cashreceipts, government payments, and otherfarm income sources.1.1.3 Percentage of gross cash farmincome from the market.1.1.4 Producers have economically soundrisk management tools available, and theyuse them to meet their needs:• Number of insurance plans available. • Total crop insurance premium.• Total insurance in force.• Participation rate for all plans of

insurance.

• Participation rate for acres covered by

revenue insurance plans (NEWMEASURE):- Underserved States- Nationwide

• Number of producers participating in
92

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Appendix A Data Verification and ValidationPerformance Goal/Indicator Data Source Verification/Validation Method Data Limitations

from activity logs thatare maintained byRMA’s RegionalOffices and submittedquarterly toheadquarters. Activitylogs were createdspecifically for thepurpose of collectingdata for the USDAAnnual PerformanceReport. RegionalOffices are instructedto report only activitieseither funded directlyby RMA or activities inwhich RMA plays asignificant educationalrole.AgriculturalQuarantine Inspection(AQI) MonitoringSystem

RME activity log data provided by regionaloffices are checked by RMA headquartersstaff to determine if the data are generallyconsistent with established guidelines. For the international traveler complianceindicator, Compliance Rate refers to thepercentage of international travelers clearingthe Federal Inspection Service at US portsof entry who meet Federal agriculturalregulations. Through its AQI MonitoringSystem, the APHIS estimates thecompliance rates by using a statisticallyvalid sampling procedure that involves athorough inspection of passenger baggage,vehicles, and cargo at ports of entry. A fulltime staff officer coordinates the collection,analysis, and quality control of the data.In FY 2001, the National Animal HealthEmergency Management SteeringCommittee sponsored a self-assessment of

risk management, specifically limited toprograms on crop insurance, marketing, andfinancial risk management tools. Third, insome instances the reporting can besubjective. For instance, RMA oftensucceeds in getting risk management topicsincluded on the programs of farmorganization meetings. In reporting suchactivities, Regional Offices must determinewhether the resulting activity focusesenough on risk management to beconsidered a “risk management educationalactivity.”Despite a small percentage of poor dataquality (due to port personnel changes,equipment failure, etc.), the AQI Monitoringsystem enables officers to more accuratelyestimate approaching prohibited agriculturalitems that could lead to pest and diseaseoutbreaks. Actual compliance rates mayvary as much as 0.5 percent due to themargin of error associated with statisticalsampling.

Risk Management education activitiesbeing facilitated or coordinated inunderserved States (NEWMEASURE).

1.1.5 Reduce the number and severity ofpest and disease outbreaks in the U.S.:• International air travelers complying

with restrictions to prevent entry ofpests and diseases.

• States and Territories meeting

standards for state animal healthemergency management systems.
93

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Appendix A Data Verification and ValidationPerformance Goal/Indicator Data Source Verification/Validation Method Data Limitations

Agency’s internalprocedures.Farms and Land inFarms, report releasedin February of eachyear by the AgriculturalStatistics Board,National AgriculturalStatistic Service(NASS), USDA.

state animal health emergency managementsystems. The state veterinarian and theAPHIS area veterinarian in charge willcomplete these assessments jointly for eachstate. In FY 2002, when the data from theassessment is complete there will be peerreviews of the results of the assessments ina number of states.The Agency has a complaints investigationlog designed to track and processinvestigations in a timely fashion.Information tracked includes staff yearsexpended on each investigation, the natureof the investigation, and the assessment ofthe dollar amount of recovery to theproducer as the result of the investigation.Each quarter, the information recorded inthe complaint/investigation log maintainedin each regional office is compiled andreviewed. The review includes selection of arepresentative sample of the investigationsfor verification and validation with theinvestigator directly involved in theinvestigation. This process promotesconsistency and accuracy in reporting theresults of investigations.Data collected during the June AgriculturalSurvey and the Fall Agricultural Surveyusing sampling procedures to ensure everyfarm operator had a chance of beingselected. Two samples of farm operators areselected for June, while only the areasample is surveyed in the Fall. First, NASSmaintains a list of farms that are classifiedand sampled by size and type. Larger

The complaints investigation log hasimproved tracking of investigations that areclosed by the regional office but remainopen while undergoing review by theheadquarters staff. These improved procedures will also trackinvestigations forwarded to the Office of theGeneral Counsel requesting enforcementaction or consultation.Two types of errors, sampling andnonsampling, are possible in an estimatebased on a sample survey. Both types affectthe “precision” of the estimates. Samplingerror occurs because a complete census isnot taken. The sampling error measures thevariation in estimates from the average ofall possible samples. Nonsampling errorscan occur in complete censuses as well as

1.1.6 Promote a fair and competitivemarketing environment for livestock,meat, and poultry:• Investigations.• Violations corrected/issues resolved

within 1 year of investigation’s startingdate.

• Monetary recovery to livestock

producers and poultry growersresulting from enforcement of thePackers and Stockyards Act.

1.1.7 Maintain the percentage of small

farms in relation to total U.S. farms atthe 1999 level.
94

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Appendix A Data Verification and ValidationPerformance Goal/Indicator Data Source Verification/Validation Method Data Limitations

FSA accountingsystem.Automated systemscapture data required.

Farms are selected with greater frequencybut all farms are represented. A secondsample, used in June and the Fall consists ofarea segments of land scientifically selectedfrom aerial photography. Transactions are entered by FSA servicecenter staff and processed through theAgency’s Finance Office. Since these dataflow through the Agency’s accountingsystem, it is subject to both internal andexternal audits. USDA employs a mix of manual andautomated procedures and systems to verifyand validate the performance goals andUSDA indicators. Foreign agriculturalService (FAS) managers have developedverification and validation procedures foreach measure to ensure the validity ofinformation reported to for inclusion in itsAnnual Performance Report.FAS also has developed a performancemanagement and reporting system, in whicheach manager is required to report his/hersuccesses in meeting annual targets on aquarterly basis. Senior management officialsreview these reports. The FAS ComplianceReview staff has audited the procedures forcompleteness and accuracy, and annuallyaudits the data reported for accuracy, aswell.

sample surveys. They are caused by theinability to obtain correct information fromeach person sampled, differences ininterpreting questions or definitions andmistakes in coding or processing the data.Special efforts are taken at each step of thesurvey to minimize nonsampling errors.There are no known limitations to the data.Due to the lack of sufficient staff resourcesto address U.S. commitments to WTO tradeissues and other trade barrier activities byforeign markets, data collection suffers anderrors occur. Verification follow-up activitiesnecessary to collect and verify 100 percentof market access successes are beyond FASresource availability. Recent computertechnology has improved data collection,storage and access; however, insufficientstaff resources will continue to be asignificant limiting factor in data recordingand success verification.

1.1.8 Increase the amount of farmoperating and ownership loans made orguaranteed to beginning and sociallydisadvantaged farmers.1.1.9 Maintain a low loss rate on directloans.1.2.1 Increase the U.S. market share ofglobal agricultural trade.• Estimated trade opportunities

preserved annually by assuringimplementation of existing tradeagreements by signatory countriesthrough the WTO notification process.
95

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Appendix A Data Verification and ValidationPerformance Goal/Indicator Data Source Verification/Validation Method Data Limitations

Agency’s internalprocedures.

Internal Agency procedures are used totrack the percentage of critical grain qualitymeasurement methods evaluated forimprovement and the number of new orimproved grain quality measurementmethods implemented. At the start of eachfiscal year, the Agency’s Technical ServicesDivision (TSD) establishes a prioritized listof those methods, which, in its assessment,need to be evaluated. Throughout the year,

Due to the lack of sufficient staff resourcesto address U.S. concerns regarding NonWTO trade issues and other trade barrieractivities by foreign markets, data collectionsuffers and errors occur. Verification followup activities necessary to collect and verify100 percent of market access successes arebeyond FAS resource availability. Recentcomputer technology has improved datacollection, storage and access; however,insufficient staff resources will continue tobe a significant limiting factor in datarecording and success verification.Data collection is reported on a voluntarybasis by private sector U.S. firms andtherefore data errors on sales are likelybelow actual sales.Data errors are minimized during the FY byquarterly adjusting initial sales registrationsto reflect actual sales. However, the 4thquarter FY actual sales may be an estimatebased on past and current year initialregistrations compared to actual purchasesby foreign countries and situation outlook.Determining the information for this goal isnot dependent on external or internalinformation systems. The information isdetermined using a tracking systemdeveloped specifically for this task.Consequently, there are no data limitationsexpected in this area.

• Gross trade value of markets created,

expanded, or retained annually due tomarket access activities other thanWTO notifications and/or standards.

• Annual sales reported by U.S. 

exporters from on-site sales at International trade shows.

• U.S. agricultural exports supported by 

USDA export credit guarantee programs.

1.2.2 Increase the efficiency of U.S. grainmarketing:• Critical grain quality measurement

methods evaluated for improvement.

• Number of new or improved grain

quality measurement methodsimplemented.
96

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Appendix A Data Verification and ValidationPerformance Goal/Indicator Data Source Verification/Validation Method Data Limitations

Agricultural MarketingService (AMS)program personnelcollect and maintainperformance data fortheir programs.NASS Headquarters’personnel on theMarketing andInformation ServicesOffice (MISO) staff 

TSD tracks whether the listed methods havebeen evaluated and calculates the percentageof planned evaluations that have beencompleted.TSD and the Agency’s Policies andProcedures Branch (PPB), shareresponsibility for tracking new and/orimproved methods or tests. Shortly after thestart of the new fiscal year, TSD and PPBsubmit the validated list to the Office of theDeputy Administrator for the GrainProgram. Existing documentation within theAgency validates and verifies that actionitems were completed.Agency program review staffs areresponsible for reviewing the collection ofperformance measure data to ensure that theaccomplishment data being collected isbased on actual performance and that thesystem to collect that data can be trackedand verified. AMS’ Compliance staff willinclude the review of performance measuredata collection in any program reviewactivities they conduct. They are responsiblefor ensuring that the performanceaccomplishment data collected for agencylevel performance measures, especiallythose that include multiple agencycomponents, can be verified and validated.The NASS Agricultural Statistics Board(ASB) Calendar is published several monthsprior to the next calendar year. The ASBCalendar contains the time and dates for allNASS releases for the calendar year January 

AMS does not have any data limitations onthe measures included in the plan.NASS does not have any data limitations onthe measures included in the plan.

1.2.3 Improve market efficiency byreporting timely and accurate marketinformation:• Market News reports released on time.• National Agricultural Statistics Service

reports released on time.
97

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Appendix A Data Verification and ValidationPerformance Goal/Indicator Data Source Verification/Validation Method Data Limitations

maintain performancedata.AMS programpersonnel collect andmaintain performancedata for their programs.Companies seekinglistings of theirproducts submit dataon biobased productsto USDA.Reports from Stateagencies.

through December. The MISO staffcompares actual release times with the ASBcalendar release date and times forverification and validation of performancedata.See the description of verification andvalidation at Objective 1.2.3 for MarketNews reports.Working on behalf of USDA, a privatesector firm with technical expertise willreview and verify the submittal of thirdparty certification, life cycle analysis, andother information submitted by companiesseeking product inclusion on the lists ofbiobased products.Program data is submitted by States andentered into two "parent systems", the FoodStamp Program Integrated InformationSystem (FSPIIS) and the Special NutritionProgram Integrated Information System(SNPIIS). Regional offices follow up withStates to resolve issues of missing orquestionable data. Once reviews arecomplete, and any questions or concernsregarding data are resolved, the data aremoved from a “preload system” into theNational Data Bank production system, andbecomes USDA’s official program data. 

AMS does not have any data limitations onthe measures included in the plan.There are no known data limitations.Because USDA relies on this data for anumber of important administrative andbudget preparation functions, as well as forperformance planning and reporting, itemploys multiple reviews, monitoring,editing and analysis to ensure that final datais complete, consistent, and accurate.However, the data show absolute levels ofprogram delivery, rather than participationrates of eligible populations. Participationdata must be supplemented with estimatesof eligible populations, measures of foodsecurity, and other information to more fullyevaluate program effectiveness. The latterdata are generally not available in atimeframe useful for preparing annual 

1.2.4 Improve food marketing efficiencyby providing research and technicalassistance on new or upgraded wholesale,collection and farmers market facilities,food distribution, and marketing methods:• Number of projects completed.1.2.5 The number of categories ofcommercially available industrialproducts reviewed by USDA that isavailable for Federal purchase.2.1.1 Expand program access and benefitdelivery for USDA nutrition assistanceprograms:• Food Stamp Program participation.• Special Supplemental Nutrition

Program for Women, Infants andChildren participation.

• National School Lunch Program

participation.

• School Breakfast Program

participation. 

• Child and Adult Care Food Program

meals served.

• Summer Food Service Program

participation.
98

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Appendix A Data Verification and ValidationPerformance Goal/Indicator Data Source Verification/Validation Method Data Limitations

Agency administrativerecords/Commerce Department’s NationalTechnical InformationServices (NTIS).Agency administrativerecords.WIC Participant andProgramCharacteristics studiesAgency administrativerecords

Monthly distribution reports are provided tothe agency, and can be verified throughmanagement evaluations and other reportingmechanisms as resources permit.The Department’s administrative structureand records provide the accountabilitynecessary to verify completion of the workas a performance indicator. These biennial studies, conducted by FNS,include data on breastfeeding initiation.Since these studies are census datacollections, they are not subject to samplingerror; in addition, non-response is very low,thus minimizing bias in the data. Thesedata will be verified as practicable by otherstudies.The Department’s administrative structureand records provide the accountabilitynecessary to verify completion of this workas performance indicators. 

performance reporting, but have beenincorporated in strategic plan measures andwill be reported periodically.While this data tracks the overall number ofmaterials disseminated as a result of thecampaign, it does not relate this back to thenumber or proportion of participantsreached by these events.FNS is not aware of any significantlimitations on the validity or accuracy ofthis data.Data is only available biennially. Inaddition, continued ability to collect thisdata is contingent upon funding to conductthese studies; without adequate funding atFNS for this work, the data may not beavailable.FNS is not aware of any significantlimitations on the validity or accuracy ofthis data.

2.1.2 Promote better diet quality amongchildren and caregivers eligible for federalnutrition assistance programs:• USDA nutrition education materials

and education interventionsdisseminated.

• Training programs on nutrition

education methods and materials(NEW MEASURE).

• Percentage of WIC mothers initiating

breastfeeding (NEW MEASURE).

• WIC State agencies trained on revised

Nutrition Services Standards (NEWMEASURE).

• State/regional dairy councils

promoting implementation ofChanging the Scene at the local level(NEW MEASURE).

• Comprehensive implementation of

Team Nutrition (NEW MEASURE).
99

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Appendix A Data Verification and ValidationPerformance Goal/Indicator Data Source Verification/Validation Method Data Limitations

Agency administrativerecordsDefense Departmentbilling information.State reports,supplemented andverified by reviews andmanagementevaluations conductedby FNS.Contact with Stateagencies, NationalData Bank, andreconciliation reportsfor the Food StampProgram (FSP) benefitissuance and Redemption.Agency administrativerecords.

Processed Commodities InventoryManagement System (PCIMS), whichtracks commodity purchases for nutritionassistance programs. PCIMS data isreconciled monthly and annually byprogram analysts to ensure accuracy.Data is verified through FNS administrativerecords.Data is collected, compiled, and reviewedgenerally for consistency by USDA. The Department’s administrative structureand records provide the accountabilitynecessary to verify completion of the workas a performance indicator. USDA will compare the milestonesdeveloped for its significant commodityprogram initiatives for Schools and IndianPrograms against what is actuallyaccomplished as reflected in its programoperations records and data to determineprogress in achieving its performance goals.

FNS is not aware of any significantlimitations on the validity or accuracy ofthis data.USDA’s ability to ensure complete andaccurate data reported by State agencies onlocal school compliance with programnutritional requirements is limited by thefact that data collection is voluntary,informal, and without standardizedprocedures. These limitations result fromthe strong opposition from the school foodservice community to a more formal datacollection process.FNS is not aware of any significantlimitations on the validity or accuracy ofthis data.

2.1.3 Improve access to fresh fruits andvegetables:• All fruits and vegetables provided to

schools.

• Sites on Indian reservations receiving

fresh fruits and vegetables.

2.1.4 Monitor and support State and localefforts to ensure that USDA food benefitsmeet national nutrition standards:• School Meals Initiative monitoring

reviews conducted by State agencies.

2.1.5 Improve program design anddelivery:• Food stamp benefits issued

electronically.

• Annual milestones met for significant

commodity program initiatives in theSchool and Indian Programs.
100

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Appendix A Data Verification and ValidationPerformance Goal/Indicator Data Source Verification/Validation Method Data Limitations

Reports/ongoingcommunication withState agencies.Annual Quality Controlstatistical reports.Reports from Stateagencies.Internal Agencyrecords/reviews ofState agency activities.Automated systemscapture data required.

The Department’s administrative structureand records provide the accountabilitynecessary to verify completion of the workas a performance indicator. These reports are based on a sample of60,000 actual State FSP cases, and areverified through Federal sub-sampling andreview, regression analysis, and on-sitereviews of State operation.FNS reviews State data for consistency.While no verification method is planned,OIG or GAO reports on meal countingcould be used if such audits are undertaken.FNS will verify achievement of the Childand Adult Care Food Program (CACFP)training and evaluation goals through itsdirect involvement in training activities. TheAgency will measure State reviews ofCACFP sponsors through managementevaluation reviews and audits of Stateactivities.USDA employs a mix of manual andautomated procedures and systems to verifyand validate the performance indicators.For example, USDA uses automatedsystems to capture data required to verify 

FNS is not aware of any significantlimitations on the validity or accuracy ofthis data.USDA reviews cannot verify the overallaccuracy of data supplied, only consistencywith other State data. In addition, reviewactivity is targeted to selected SFAs, so thecompliance rate does not represent allschools. States frequently target large SFAsand problem areas, so actual compliancemay be better than the indicator shows. FNS is not aware of any significantlimitations on the validity or accuracy ofthis data.No data limitations are foreseen beyond thescope of the accuracy of those individualsresponsible for reporting the data.

• Number of States which have initiated

commodity program computerconnectivity with school districts(NEW MEASURE).

2.1.6 Maintain benefit accuracy in thefood stamp and school meals programs:• Food stamp benefit accuracy rate.• School Food Authorities in compliance

with school meals counting andclaiming rules.

2.1.7 Strengthen State and localmanagement of the Child and Adult CareFood Program:• USDA management evaluations of

State agencies administering theprogram.

• State agencies offering sponsor

training that uses new USDAdeveloped program managementmaterials. 

2.2.1 U.S. food aid exports under P.L.480 Title I and Food for Progresssupporting world food security.
101

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Appendix A Data Verification and ValidationPerformance Goal/Indicator Data Source Verification/Validation Method Data Limitations

Automated systemscapture data required.

and validate the performance indicators forfoodassistance, including the Automated PL480 Umbrella System (APLUS) and varioussmall databases. The APLUS system ismaintained by the Farm Services Agencyunder the auspices of the CCC and is jointlyused by FSA and the FAS to providecomplete financial management andaccounting for this program.Each manager is required to reportaccomplishments against annual targets on aquarterly basis. Senior management officialsreview these reports. FAS managers havedeveloped verification and validationprocedures for each measure to ensure thevalidity of information reported. The FASCompliance Review Staff has reviewedthese procedures for completeness andaccuracy, and also performs periodic auditsof reports from the performance trackingsystem to monitor accuracy of informationreported.Each manager is required to reportaccomplishments against annual targets on aquarterly basis. Senior managementofficials review these reports. FASmanagers have developed verification andvalidation procedures for each measure toensure the validity of information reported.The FAS Compliance Review Staff hasreviewed these procedures for completenessand accuracy, and also performs periodicaudits of reports from the performancetracking system to monitor accuracy ofinformation reported.

No data limitations are foreseen beyond thescope of the accuracy of those individualsresponsible for reporting the data.

2.2.2 Promote research, training andtechnical assistance activities that supportsustainable food supplies worldwide:• Projects underway.• Amount invested.
102

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Appendix A Data Verification and ValidationPerformance Goal/Indicator Data Source Verification/Validation Method Data Limitations

Internal Agencydocumentation.Automated system(MARCIS) providesinformation onmicrobiological,chemical andpathological analysesof meat and poultryand their processedproducts.Automated system(PREP) used forscheduling andrecording Salmonellacompliance data.

USDA has requested the National Academyof Sciences (NAS), Institute of Medicine, toconduct a comprehensive review of its riskassessment of the microbial pathogen E.coli0157:H7 in ground beef. The NAS review includes evaluations of theoverarching logical structure of the model,the validity and appropriateness of all inputdata used in the model, the reasonablenessof the assumptions made in the assessment,the reasonableness of the anchoringapproach that was taken, and the model’smathematics and equations. Samples are collected in inspectedestablishments and shipped to fieldlaboratories for analysis. Results fromlaboratory analysis are used to verify theachievement of pathogen reduction targetsand compliance with national baselinestandards. The primary sources for thisinformation are the Microbiological andResidues Contamination InformationSystem (MARCIS) and the PathogenReduction Enforcement Program (PREP).USDA is also conducting a comprehensiveevaluation of the impact of the HazardAnalysis and Critical Control Point(HACCP) final rule. This multi-year project,started in FY 1999, parallels the HACCPimplementation dates for large, small, andvery small plants. This is in addition tointernal USDA assessments of HACCPimpact, technical and procedural SanitationStandard Operating Procedures 

While the intent of this indicator is toformalize and strengthen the science-baseddecision-making process within the Agency,scientists use data from many sources andthe Agency may want to measure the impactof risk assessment on risk management withalternative indicators in the future.The three products (broiler chickens, markethogs, and ground beef) have been chosen tobe representative samplings of how well theAgency is meeting this performanceindicator.There are no known limitations to the dataat this point in time.

2.3.1 Provide worldwide leadershiptowards the creation and utilization of riskassessments for meat, poultry, and eggproducts that is supported by the latestresearch and technology:• Risk assessments used to inform risk

management decision-making andpolicy.

2.3.2 Create a coordinated national andinternational food safety risk managementsystem to ensure the safety of U.S. meatand poultry products from farm-to-table.Reduction in the prevalence of Salmonella

on raw meat and poultry products asillustrated by:• Prevalence of Salmonella on broiler

chickens.

• Prevalence of Salmonella on market

hogs.

• Prevalence of Salmonella on ground

beef.

Reduction in the prevalence of Listeriamonocytogenes in ready-to-eat meat andpoultry products:• Samples testing positive for Listeria

monocytogenes.
103

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Appendix A Data Verification and ValidationPerformance Goal/Indicator Data Source Verification/Validation Method Data Limitations

Internal estimatesbased on newspaperarticles, publicationcirculation, televisedadvertisements toconsumers, telephonecall logs for the meatand Poultry Hotline,and electronic tallyingof the number of “hits”onto the AgencyWebsite.Number of publicmeetings conducted bythe Agency andadvertised through theFederal Register.Website usage data.

and HACCP implementation. These reviewsalong with others conducted, or beingconducted, by OIG and GAO, shouldprovide the tools to enhance Agencyoperations that are used to verify the data.USDA relies on periodic surveys, usually incooperation with other Federal agenciesinvolved in food safety, in verifying riskcommunication performance. Unfortunately,much of this information cannot be usedbecause the surveys are not conducted on anannual basis. Therefore, USDA alsoestimates that its newspaper articles andother publications reach four percent of thepapers’ circulation, and scientific estimationfor predicting the penetration of its televisedadvertisements to consumers as a basis toindicate the number of people reached withfood safety information. USDA also utilizesfocus-group studies to measure impact ofrisk communication on safe food practicesamong consumers. USDA conducted sixfocus group studies in FY 1999, eight in FY2000, and planned eight for 2001.Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion’s(CNPP) Website tracks the overall numberof users that complete a dietary assessmentusing the Interactive Healthy Eating Index(IHEI).

While the Department can estimate thenumber of people reached, the number ofpeople who follow safe food handlingpractices can only be determined byperiodic surveys that are not conducted onan annual basis.CNPP relies on Web Trends, an externalsource, for all information regarding itsWebsite. Should this source no longerprovide such information, CNPP willidentify another source.

2.3.3 Conduct a comprehensive nationaland international communication programthat is an open exchange of informationand opinions about food safety risk:• People reached with food safety

information through media stories,circulation reports, USDA FSIS website visits, and USDA Meat & PoultryHotline calls.

• Stakeholder activities held to improve

food safety related decision-makingand public policy.

2.4.1 Individuals using the InteractiveHealthy Eating Index to assess andimprove their diet.
104

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Appendix A Data Verification and ValidationPerformance Goal/Indicator Data Source Verification/Validation Method Data Limitations

Internal tracking byCNPP will validate thedownload of materialsfrom the CNPPWebsite.Natural ResourcesConservation Service(NRCS) Performanceand ResultsMeasurement System(PRMS).CRP data is uploadedfrom the USDAService Centers to theautomated CRP datafiles monthly. CRPoffer data files are 

Internal tracking by CNPP will validate thedownload of materials from the CNPPwebsite, and the requests for printedpublications that are filled.PRMS was designed to ensure the datawould be collected accurately andconsistently nationwide. Internal controls toensure data quality include:• On-line definitions and help screens for

all performance data collection items

• Telephone hotline• A formal data quality assurance plan that

outlines specific responsibilitiesassociated with quality control of allagency performance data

• Special surveys and reviews conducted

by the national oversight and evaluationstaff. 

• On-going quality assurance activities

conducted by NRCS state offices.Program and functional appraisals arealso carried out. Performance data willbe reviewed as part of each of theseefforts.

Data limitations primarily result from (1)the time lag from when signups are held andcontracts signed and when the data is inputinto the automated systems at the ServiceCenter, (2) continual updating of the CRPcontract data, and (3) periodic 

CNPP relies on Web Trends, an externalsource, for all information regarding itsWebsite. Should this source no longerprovide such information, CNPP willidentify another source. While CNPP willbe able to track the number of printedpublications sent from its office, it cannottrack what other departments, agencies, oroffices send.Agency employees and partners in eachfield office report data across the Nation.Data for FY 1999 were collected in asample of field offices and expanded toestimate performance. FY 2000 was thefirst year in which the reporting system wasfully operational. Because the system isnew, there is likely less consistency in dataquality than will be true in future years. 

2.4.2 Copies of the 2000 DietaryGuidelines disseminated to helpindividuals improve their diet.3.1.1 Maintain the productivity andhealth of the Nation’s non-Federalcropland and grazing lands:• Acres of working cropland and grazing

land protected against degradation byapplication of improved conservationsystems.

• Acres of highly erodible and

environmentally sensitive cropland andgrazing land retired from productionand protected against degradationunder CRP contracts (NEWMEASURE).
105

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Appendix A Data Verification and ValidationPerformance Goal/Indicator Data Source Verification/Validation Method Data Limitations

uploaded followingeach general signupperiod. These files areevaluated to determinethe environmentalbenefits of CRP, andupon contract approval,the data is updated toreflect land use, landtreatment, andenvironmental benefits.To help ensure programintegrity, service centeremployees conduct onsite spot checks andreview producer filesprior to annualpayment issuance toensure conservationpractices aremaintained inaccordance withprogram requirements.NRCS PRMS.FSA National CRPContract and OfferData Files and NationalResources InventoryData.

changes in the data that is reported in thecontract and offer data files.See above for PRMS.See the description of the CRP Contract andOffer Data Files at Objective 3.1.1. Theerosion impacts of CRP are estimated basedon 1997 National Resources Inventory(NRI) erosion rates on CRP lands in 1997compared with the erosion rates on the sameland in 1982. Average soil savings by State,type of erosion, and erodibility

See above description of data limitation.See statement on CRP Contract and OfferData Files at objective 3.1.1. The erosion isestimated using a sample of data pointsfrom the NRI. While this is a large samplethat can be used to represent erosionreductions, it is an estimate. Future CRPgeneral signups will gather information thatwill permit the estimation of erosion 

3.1.2 Reduce erosion damage oncropland:• Erosion reduction measures applied on

cropland (NEW MEASURE).

• Erosion reduced cropland protected

under permanent vegetation coverunder CRP (NEW MEASURE).
Appendix A Data Verification and Validation

Performance Goal/Indicator Data Source Verification/Validation Method Data Limitations

Budget Formulation &Execution System(BFES).NRCS PRMS.NRCS PRMS and FSANational CRP Contractand Offer Data Files.

index category from the NRI are applied tocurrent CRP lands using CRP contract data.This process accounts for the differentcharacteristics of lands currently enrolled inthe CRP relative to that of lands enrolled inthe CRP when the 1997 NRI wasconducted.The newly implemented BFES will be usedto report on actual accomplishments. Fieldreviews will be conducted to review thereporting of performance data. Postimplementation reviews will be conductedto ensure that documentation exists tosupport the reported accomplishments.See the description of PRMS at Objective3.1.1. Field-level training is planned in FY2001 to ensure that the new standard for“comprehensive nutrient management plan”is consistently understood and applied.See the description of PRMS at Objective3.1.1. See description of CRP Contract andOffer Data Files at Objective 3.1.2.

reductions for each CRP contract, resultingin improved performance reporting. FS is in the process of revising definitions,developing standards and guidelines for datareporting, and implementing field reviews toensure effective internal controls over thedata related to accomplishment reporting.Anticipate completion by September 2002.See Objective 3.1.1. For the indicator forcomprehensive nutrient management plans,data for FY 1999 and FY 2000 are notcomparable to following years because ofchanges in the definition.See statement of PRMS at Objective 3.1. 1.See statement on CRP Contract and OfferData Files at Objective 3.1.2. 

Acres reported by FSA are the cumulativenumber currently enrolled. Acres reported by NRCS are notcumulative, but represent activity for thefiscal year.

3.1.3 Treat wildlands with high fire riskson National Forests and Grasslands toreduce the risk of loss of life, property,and natural resources from catastrophicwildfire:• Hazardous fuel treatments.• Assist communities and volunteer fire

departments – Communities andvolunteer fire departments assisted. 

• Fire plan easements (NEW

MEASURE). 

3.2.1 Protect water and air quality:• Animal feeding operations with

comprehensive nutrient managementplans developed or applied.

• Acres with conservation measures

applied to reduce potential for off-sitepollution by nutrients.

• Acres with pest management 

improved. 

• Acres in conservation buffers.

106

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002
107

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Appendix A Data Verification and ValidationPerformance Goal/Indicator Data Source Verification/Validation Method Data Limitations

FSA National CRPContract and OfferData Files and NationalResources InventoryData.FSA National CRPContract and OfferData Files, ARS andFS research data.

See the description of the CRP Contract

and Offer Data Files at Objective 3.1.1.The erosion impacts of CRP are estimatedbased on 1997 National ResourcesInventory (NRI) erosion rates on CRP landsin 1997 compared with the erosion rates onthe same land in 1982. Average soil savingsby State, type of erosion, and erodibilityindex category from the NRI are applied tocurrent CRP lands using CRP contract data.This process accounts for the differentcharacteristics of lands currently enrolled inthe CRP relative to that of lands enrolled inthe CRP when the 1997 NRI wasconducted. See the description of the CRP Contract andOffer Data Files at Objective 3.1.1.Carbon sequestration is estimated using CRPcontract data and current global changeresearch data. The CRP contract data issorted to identify the area in grass and treecover. The tree data are then sorted by regionand age. For grasslands, estimates of thecarbon sequestered per acre are obtainedfrom the Agricultural Research Service andmerged with CRP contract data used toestimate total carbon sequestered by CRPgrasslands. FS estimates of the carbonsequestered per acre by region, tree speciesand age are merged with the correspondingdata from CRP contract data to estimate totalcarbon sequestered by CRP forestlands.Total carbon sequestered is the sum of thegrassland and forestland estimates.

See statement on CRP Contract and Offerdata files at objective 3.1.1.Erosion is estimated using a sample of datapoints from the NRI. While this is a largesample that can be used to represent erosionreductions, it is an estimate. Future CRPgeneral signups will gather information thatwill permit the estimation of erosionreductions for each CRP contract, resultingin improved performance reporting.See statement on CRP Contract and OfferData Files at Objective 3.1.1.The data for estimating the amount ofcarbon sequestered is still underdevelopment. Current estimates rely onextrapolation of regional parameters.Additional research may lead to improvedmeasurement capabilities, resulting in moreaccurate estimates. The data currentlyreported represents the best estimatesavailable at this time. 

• Reduced sheet and rill erosion from

cropland and grazing land entered intoCRP (New Measure).

• Reduced wind erosion from croplandand grazing land entering into CRP(NEW MEASURE).• Carbon sequestered in soil and

vegetation through long-termretirement of crop and grazing land(NEW MEASURE).
108

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Appendix A Data Verification and ValidationPerformance Goal/Indicator Data Source Verification/Validation Method Data Limitations

Budget Formulation &Execution System(BFES).NRCS Performanceand ResultsMeasurement System(PRMS)NRCS WRP ProgramManager's database and FSA National CRPContract and OfferData Files.FSA National CRPContract and OfferData Files.NRCS PRMS.

See Objective 3.1.3.See description of PRMS at Objective 3.1.1.See the description of the CRP Contract andOffer Data Files at Objective 3.1.2.WRP data provided by field and stateoffices are reviewed for accuracy thenational program manager.See the description of the CRP Contract andOffer Data Files at Objective 3.1.2.See the description of PRMS at Objective 3.1. 1.

See Objective 3.1.3.Employees in NRCS state offices reportdata. Limitations are few. Only minimalanalysis has been completed of the data forindicator. In FY 2001, additional guidancewas developed to ensure consistency ininterpretation of the definition of theindicator.Data are for acreages enrolled under twoseparate programs with different rules andpractice definitions. Ratio of wetlands tobuffer areas differs between the programs.See statement for data limitation on theCRP Contract and Offer Data Files atObjective 3.1.2.See the description of data limitations atObjective 3.1.1. The land reported includes both land on which habitat improvement isthe primary goal and land on which it is asecondary effect of actions taken to achieveother goals.

3.2.2 Restore or improve rangeland andforestland watersheds in the NationalForest and Grasslands:• Soil and watershed improvements.• Terrestrial habitat restored or

enhanced.

• Abandoned mine sites reclaimed.

3.2.3 Enhance urban environments:• Legacy Project Acquisitions.• Group and area plans developed to

address farmland protection and theeffects of non-agricultural activities onground water and surface waterquality.

3.2.4 Maintain, restore, or enhancewetland ecosystems and fish and wildlifehabitat:• Wetlands and associated upland

protected or enhanced under multi-yearcontracts or easements with USDA.

• Land retired from cropping and

planted to vegetative cover best suitedto wildlife.

• Habitat for fish and wildlife improved

on working cropland, grazing land,forest, and other land.
109

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Appendix A Data Verification and ValidationPerformance Goal/Indicator Data Source Verification/Validation Method Data Limitations

Hazardous MaterialsManagement Program(HMMP)AccomplishmentReports.Budget Formulation &Execution System(BFES).NRCS WatershedsFuture Obligationsdatabase.Budget Formulation &Execution System(BFES).

Each agency with HMMP projects preparesand submits an annual accomplishmentreport to the USDA Hazardous MaterialsManagement Group. These reports arecompilations of data from the level of theagency responsible for performing theneeded work (e.g., the forest or region levelof the FS). The complete report is reviewedand certified by the agency head. CERCLAcleanups are “completed” once the leadregulatory agency, pursuant to the NationalContingency Plan (NCP, codified as Title40, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 300),has made a final determination that noadditional cleanup work is required and theperson or organization responsible for thecleanup work has “closed the books” on thatpart of the project.See Objective 3.1.3.NRCS employees in 52 NRCS state officesenter data on watershed protectionstructures completed in the fiscal year in thedatabase.See Objective 3.1.3.

There are no known data limitations.The time lag between physical completionof a cleanup and securing final approvalfrom the lead regulatory agency may beconsiderable.As provided in the NCP, one or more typesof environmental monitoring may berequired after a cleanup is completed toprove that the response action was effective.USDA considers cleanup and monitoring tobe two distinct activities. Should monitoringshow that a cleanup failed to perform asdesigned and approved, additional cleanupcould be required.Site cleanups are an output or anintermediate outcome; the larger outcome ofrestored lands and facilities is managed andprioritized by the agency with jurisdiction,custody, or control.See Objective 3.1.3.The database was originally intended toprovide information at the project level,extracting information at a lower level, suchas separate structures, is difficult.See Objective 3.1.3.

3.2.5 Continue to cleanup CERCLA sitesand all regulated underground storagetanks (UST) under USDA custody andcontrol:• CERCLA cleanups completed. • UST and other RCRA cleanups

completed.

3.3.1 PAOT days operated to standard.3.3.2 Provide benefits to property andsafety through flood damage reduction:• Watershed protection structures

completed.

3.3.3 Produce benefits to communitiesthrough enhanced natural resourcesdevelopment and utilization:
110

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Appendix A Data Verification and ValidationPerformance Goal/Indicator Data Source Verification/Validation Method Data Limitations

The Rural CommunityFacilities TrackingSystem (RCFTS), anon-accountingmanagement systemwhich tracks a varietyof data related tospecific projectsfinanced by the missionarea.Program LoanAccounting Systemand the GuaranteedLoan System. The Rural CommunityFacilities TrackingSystem (RCFTS), anon-accountingmanagement system. 

Information in RCFTS is input by fieldstaff. The National Office staff reviews dataand obvious data errors are resolved.Both of these systems contain a variety ofdata edits to minimize the risk of inaccuratedata being placed in the systems. Thesystems are audited annually by OIG as apart of the development of an auditedfinancial statement.Information in RCFTS is input by fieldstaff. The National Office staff reviews dataand obvious data errors are resolved.

This system is not audited and the systemdoes not contain edits to verify the accuracyof the data. This information is less reliablesince it is manually obtained and input byfield staff and cannot be verified.Confidence in this data, however, is highenough to be acceptable for the purposes forwhich it is being used. RD is planningenhancements to this system that willeliminate many of the potential problemsrelated to the accuracy of the data.Performance data is being extracted fromaccounting systems and verified by OIG;therefore, no foreseen limitations areexpected.This system is not audited and the systemdoes not contain edits to verify the accuracyof the data. This information is less reliablesince it is manually obtained and input byfield staff and cannot be verified.Confidence in this data, however, is highenough to be acceptable for the purposes forwhich it is being used. RD is planningenhancements to this system that willeliminate many of the potential problemsrelated to the accuracy of the data.

• Community improvement projects

completed through ResourceConservation and DevelopmentProgram.

• Number of communities participating

in the Urban and Community ForestryProgram.

4.1.1 Jobs created or saved throughUSDA financing of businesses in ruralareas.4.1.2 Rural households receiving USDAfinancial assistance to purchase a home.4.1.3 Rural water systems developed orexpanded to provide safe drinking water.
111

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Appendix A Data Verification and ValidationPerformance Goal/Indicator Data Source Verification/Validation Method Data Limitations

The Program LoanAccounting System,the Guaranteed LoanSystem, and the RuralUtilities Service (RUS)Loan ServicingSystem. Agency and StaffOffice regulationsclearance records.Records of civil rightsreviews.Agency OutreachPlans: Semi-AnnualReports.Civil Rights DataTracking System forProgram andEmployment.

Data regarding the number of ruralcommunities assisted in the persistentpoverty or out-migration counties is drawnfrom the loan accounting systems. Thesesystems contain a variety of data edits tominimize the risk of inaccurate data beingplaced in the systems and are auditedannually by OIG as a part of thedevelopment of an audited financialstatement. Data regarding grants invested in EZ/ECcommunities is drawn from the automatedBenchmark Management System.Management Review.Management Review.Management Review.Management Review.

Data regarding grants invested in EZ/ECcommunities is input into the automatedsystem by leaders in the EZ/ECcommunities, which causes the informationto be less than fully reliable. Theinformation is not audited and cannot beeasily verified. Confidence in this data,however, is high enough to be acceptablefor the purposes for which it is being used.None.USDA programs may be changed from timeto time.Because USDA programs are complex andvaried, participation data may be subject todifferent interpretations.Cases referred to EEOC are not withinUSDA control and may affect totalprocessing time.

4.2.1 Assist the neediest ruralcommunities:• Communities located in persistentpoverty rural counties receiving

financial assistance to establish orimprove a system for drinking water orwater disposal.

• Cooperatives serving persistentpoverty counties receiving financial

assistance to establish or improve thelocal electric service.

• Cooperatives serving counties

experiencing out-migration receivingfinancial assistance to establish orimprove the local electric service.

• Ratio of non-EZ/EC grants to EZ/EC

grants invested in EZ/EC communities.

5.1.1 Significant USDA regulationssubjected to civil rights impact analyses.5.1.2 Major USDA programs reviewedeach year.5.1.3 Improvement in minorityparticipation in USDA programs.5.1.4 Reduction in the average number ofdays it takes to resolve USDA civil rightscomplaints.
112

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Appendix A Data Verification and ValidationPerformance Goal/Indicator Data Source Verification/Validation Method Data Limitations

Direct contact withProject Managers whotrack and maintainperformance data.Survey regardingUSDA’s compliancewith GPEA and E-FileAct, informationcollection packagesdescribing electronicdata collection from itssurvey participants andmeetings with USDAagencies.TBDTBD

OCIO Program/Project Managers workingin partnership with agency staff to ensuresound practices are being used for theplanning, procurement and deployment ofcommon computer infrastructures.Monitor the increase use of USDA’sbusiness being conducted via the Internetand electronic data interchange.OCIO will compare and monitor USDAagencies timelines with timelines identifiedin the E-file Act. USDA is required to submit an annual statusreport to OMB on the E-File Act, whichwill report the progress of agencies efforts.TBDTBD

OCIO does not have any data limitations forthis performance goal/indicator.OCIO needs to develop and implement datamanagement tools to integrate informationcollection approval processes with ITinvestment processes to track and monitorprogress.TBDTBD

5.2.1 Establish a common computingenvironment for USDA Service Centerswhich includes hardware, software,security, websites, telecommunications,and databases:• Workstations deployed.• FSA connectivity solution and network

servers deployed.

• Application/GIS servers and software

deployed. 

• Telecommunications upgrade (NEW

MEASURE).

5.2.2 Transition to a fully integrated eGovernment environment.• Meet legislative mandates of the

Freedom of E-File Act and GPRA.

• Reduce duplicative investments for

enabling information technologies andrelated services (NEW MEASURE).

5.2.3 Simplify and reduce financialassistance program forms (NEWMEASURE):• Reduce number of USDA forms and

application kits.

5.2.4 Improve electronic processes forUSDA financial assistance programs(NEW MEASURE):• Increase number of USDA financial

assistance program announcements andapplication kits on the web sites ofUSDA.
113

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Appendix A Data Verification and ValidationPerformance Goal/Indicator Data Source Verification/Validation Method Data Limitations

Agency selfassessments,Departmental andOMB reviews,independent third-partyevaluations, along withOIG and GAO audits. Annual OIG AuditOpinion Report forUSDA’s consolidatedFinancial Statements.Total FTEEmployment: MaxSchedule Q Detail.Source: BudgetDivision/OCFO.U.S. Office ofPersonnelManagement’s (OPM)OrganizationalAssessment Survey(OAS). 

OCIO information security staff working inpartnership with agency staff will ensuresound practices are being used to implementinformation security controls andevaluations.The Inspector General issues a written auditopinion on USDA’s consolidated financialstatements. The annual report for eachfiscal year is issued at the conclusion of thefinancial statement audit that takes place thefollowing fiscal year. The source of the data to compile thenumber of employees and calculate thepercentage of the total USDA workforceserved by FFIS is a budget report entitled“Total FTE Employment: Max Schedule QDetail”, which was run as of 12/27/00. Thisreport provides the total number of FTEs inUSDA and the number of FTEs by agency.The employee satisfaction rate will bemeasured by the Human CapitalManagement scorecard survey that theOffice of Personnel Management isdeveloping and will be administering to asample of federal employees with validity tothe bureau (Mission Area) level. The OPM 

USDA information security staff willrequire time to learn new informationsecurity and evaluation processes. There are no data limitations.There are no known data limitations.Data is reported for select USDA agenciesand “other Agriculture.” The differentsampling rates limit the ability to aggregatethe data into “all Agriculture” or to breakout the data for all agencies.

5.2.5 Develop, implement, and maintaina secure and confident IT environmentwhile protecting privacy (NEWMEASURE):• Implement a Risk Management

Methodology.

• Develop and implement information

and telecommunications securityarchitecture.

• Develop and implement an Information

Survivability Program.

• Develop and implement a Sensitive

System Certification Program.

5.2.6 Achieve an unqualified opinion onthe USDA’s Consolidated FinancialStatements for FY 2002.5.2.7 Implement the FoundationFinancial Information System USDAwide:• Total USDA workforce served.5.2.8 USDA employee work satisfactionrate above U.S. Government workersatisfaction.
114

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Appendix A Data Verification and ValidationPerformance Goal/Indicator Data Source Verification/Validation Method Data Limitations

Executive Order 13148Annual Reports fromUSDA Agencies.OMB will monitoragency achievements.Agencyimplementation reports.

survey will be based in large part on theOAS. The OAS is a professionallydeveloped, valid survey instrument that isviewed as the government gold standard andis widely used within the government andother organizations. Within USDA, twoagencies have contracted with OPM toadminister the OAS to a full census of theiremployees. Other agencies have thesoftware to self-administer the OAS to all ora sample of their employees, as well. Whenthe OAS is administered to all employees,results can be reported out to individualwork units. In a separate metric, USDA hasdeveloped a standard measure for thetimeliness of staffing. Mission areas reporttheir data on a quarterly basis to theDepartment for aggregation into a USDAwide average. Agencies attest to the accuracy andcompleteness of the data they report.OMB will provide feedback on theseachievements.Signed certification from agencies of fullimplementation.

There are no known data limitations.There are no known data limitations.There are no known data limitations.

5.2.9 Develop and implement aDepartment-wide environmentalmanagement system.5.2.10 Use of performance-based servicecontracts:• Total eligible service contracts.• Completion of IAS pilot/

implementation. (NEW MEASURE).

5.2.11 Procurement actions in excess of$25,000 posted to FedBizOpps.
115

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Appendix A Data Verification and ValidationPerformance Goal/Indicator Data Source Verification/Validation Method Data Limitations

FTEs listed ascommercial activitiesin the FAIR ActInventory for USDA.

OMB will monitor USDA achievements.OCFO will verify that agency plans andgoals are met through review of USDAagencies’ annual FAIR Act InventoryReports, cost studies, contracts forcompetition, and direct conversions.

There are no known data limitations. 5.2.12 Reduction in cost and/or increased

productivity of commercial activities.• Provide timely annual update of FAIR

Act inventory.

• Develop plan for incremental

competitions/conversion of FAIR Actinventory.

• Competition/conversion of FAIR Act

inventory. 
116

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Appendix B

FY 2003 Program Evaluations and Other

Analyses

USDA will be undertaking new evaluations during this fiscal year. Information about these

evaluations is periodically published in the USDA Study Agenda. The following table

highlights some of the studies as they related to the relevant performance goals.

Program evaluations are relevant to the planning process and can include: 1) assessments

of the manner and extent of program objectives; 2) assessment of program policies,

practices, and processes; 3) program or management analyses; 4) comprehensive reviews;

5) cost-benefit studies; 6) research to provide baseline data; and 7) demonstration research.
117

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Appendix B Program Evaluations and Other Analyses

Start End

Performance Goals Studies/Analyses Proposed Achievement Date Date2.1.1 Expand program access and benefit deliveryfor USDA nutrition assistance programs:• Food Stamp Program participation.• Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for

Women, Infants, and Children participation.

• National School Lunch Program participation.• School Breakfast Program participation. • Child and Adult Care Food Program meals served.• Summer Food Service Program participation.2.1.2 Promote better diet quality among children andcaregivers eligible for federal nutrition assistanceprograms:• USDA nutrition education materials and education

interventions disseminated.

• Training programs on nutrition education methods

and materials.

• WIC mothers initiating breastfeeding.• WIC State agencies trained on revised Nutrition

Services Standards.

• State/regional dairy councils promoting

implementation of Changing the Scene at thelocal level. 

2.1.6 Maintain benefit accuracy in the food stampand school meals programs:• Food stamp benefit accuracy rate.• School Food Authorities in compliance with

school meals counting and claiming rules.

WIC Staffing andAdministrative Grant perParticipant Issues StudyWIC Participant/ProgramCharacteristics 2002Breastfeeding PromotionEnhancement ExperimentalStudyFSP Quality Control

This study will be used to develop standards forappropriate staffing levels in local WIC agencies.This data collection will include tabulations of dataon breastfeeding in WIC.This study will compare the costs and effectivenessof regular WIC breastfeeding promotion activitieswith a number of potential enhancements.This analysis of a statistically valid sample of foodstamp cases from each State is used to determine therate of benefit accuracy in the Food Stamp Program.

9/20023/20029/20029/2001 

2007200520075/2003
118

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

To ensure strong performance throughout USDA, clearly the Department must address its

most significant management challenges and program risks. These areas of vulnerabilities

were identified by the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) in its January, 2001 report

entitled Major Management Challenges and Program Risks for the Department of

Agriculture, and USDA’s Office of the Inspector General’s (OIG) Major Management

Challenges. In the following table, the Department shares its near-term strategies for

addressing these concerns as well as specific performance targets that it has set to ensure

accountability toward real progress in these vital areas. 

Appendix C

Major Management Challenges and Program

Risks
119

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Appendix C Major Management Challenges and Program RisksMajor Management Challengesand Program Risks Planned Actions/Performance Measures FY 2003Farm Loan Programs Vulnerable to Losses(GAO)Farm Credit(OIG)Service Delivery to Farmers Must Improve(GAO)Food Assistance Must Reach Eligible People WhileMaintaining Program Integrity(GAO)Food Stamp ProgramChild and Adult Care Food Program(OIG)Fundamental Changes are Needed to MinimizeFoodborne Illnesses(GAO)Food Safety Issues(OIG)

Because USDA often serves as the lender of last resort to farmers, its direct farm loan portfolio carries ahigh degree of risk. Fortunately, USDA’s direct loan losses remained low in recent years, despite sustainedweak commodity prices and a series of natural disasters. USDA will continue to use prudent underwritingpractices, borrower supervision, and loan servicing tools to help maintain low loss rates for its farm loanprograms in the future. In the Department’s Annual Performance Plan, USDA sets a goal of maintaining alow loss rate of its direct loan portfolio. However, maintaining low loss rates will be a significant challengein FY 2002 and FY 2003, as commodity prices remain weak and many producers are still recovering fromthe devastating effects of recent natural disasters. Objective 1.1 addresses maintaining the low loss rate ondirect loans.During FY 2002 and 2003, the Department will be undertaking a number of reviews aimed at improvingservice delivery to farmers. Office locations, and business processes such as farm loan servicing will beexamined. The Department will also accelerate its efforts to use reengineered business processes based onGIS. Electric filing is already available for most crop insurance customers and will be available for loanprograms and other services in 2002. See Objective 5.2 for more information.Given the size and scope of USDA nutrition assistance programs, the Department faces a significantchallenge in providing help to eligible people who need it, while protecting the programs from those whowould abuse them. GAO identifies five key management challenges or program risks as part of the generalcharacterization of the challenge of Federal nutrition assistance program management: 1) the recent declinein FSP participation; 2) FSP payment accuracy; 3) trafficking of FSP benefits; 4) Child and Adult CareFood Program integrity; and 5) certification accuracy in the National School Lunch Program. USDA addresses four of these five issues directly in its annual performance plan under Objective 2.1,“Reduce Hunger and Improve Nutrition Among Children and Low-Income People in the U.S.” The fifth,FSP benefit trafficking, is part of USDA’s outcome to improve stewardship of Federal nutrition assistanceprograms, and is reflected in the strategies in USDA’s strategic plan; specific performance metrics forretailer management are tracked by the Food and Nutrition Service. For the future, the Department isexploring the feasibility of a periodic, outcome-based measure of FSP trafficking.In the Federal government, food safety responsibilities are shared among several entities, most notablyUSDA, the DHHS and the EPA. Concerns about the need for fundamental changes in food safety programsand about overcoming perceived food safety fragmentation, are being addressed through crossDepartmental partnerships and program coordination activities. Recent collective statistics from the Centersfor Disease Control and Prevention show a drop in the incidences in foodborne illness. Though thesefigures represent the efforts of several Departments and Federal agencies, State and local governments,regulated industries, and schools, the USDA FSIS contribution to the reduction of foodborne illnesses, such
120

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

as the Pathogen Reduction/Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point rule, cannot be ignored.Additionally, the creation of a single food safety organization addressing all foods, as suggested by GAO, isbeyond the legal scope of USDA or any Federal department. The FSIS is a Federally mandated program. Itcan take no independent action to dismantle itself, absorb, or to merge itself with other agencies. Therefore,there is no mention of any merger, in any form in either the USDA Plan or the FSIS Plan. The links toObjective 2.3.The OIG reported that, “FSIS needs to identify and halt criminal activity involving the intentionalcontamination of food products.” Over the last few years FSIS has enhanced its process to identify andreview high-risk firms. FSIS has proceeded with a number of enhancements and prioritized its effortsconsistent with available resources. FSIS makes every effort to identify and halt all activity involvingcontamination of meat, poultry, and egg products.The Department is actively engaged in identifying and addressing information security issues in policiesand procedures, training, day-to-day network management, monitoring and reporting. We continue tostrengthen our Cyber Security strategic and implementation plans, while working systematically to buildthe kind of model program capable of addressing the significant systemic issues that exist at USDA.The USDA Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) Cyber Security Program is addressing the issueof risk management on two fronts: 1) to help USDA agencies meet their requirement to assess risks to theinformation systems they use and manage, standard risk assessment tools are being developed for each ofthe computer platforms in use throughout the Department, and 2) risk assessment training and counseling isbeing provided to agency security managers by both Cyber Security Program Staff and contracted riskmanagement specialists.At the same time, Cyber Security Program staff is following a risk-based facility review program to fullyassess USDA’s critical infrastructure. This strategy involves on-site reviews of major USDA informationmanagement facilities based on their relative criticality to the organization. Facilities of the highest prioritywill be review twice each year, and less critical facilities will be review once each year. This approachallows Security Program staff to witness first-hand existing security controls, security management andadministration, and computing environments to identify security weaknesses and provide guidance andcounseling.The Cyber Security Program is working closely with the USDA agency IT community to revise existingsecurity policies and procedures, draft new ones, and develop implementation plans to mitigate problemsand systematically improve security practices. Fundamentally, USDA has changed its approach to cybersecurity management and operation across the Department’s backbone telecommunications network.

Appendix C Major Management Challenges and Program RisksMajor Management Challengesand Program Risks Planned Actions/Performance Measures FY 2003Need to Strengthen Department-wide InformationSecurity(GAO)Information Resources Management(OIG)
121

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Appendix C Major Management Challenges and Program RisksMajor Management Challengesand Program Risks Planned Actions/Performance Measures FY 2003Lack of Financial Accountability at USDA(GAO)Financial Management(OIG)

Instead of permitting all electronic data and flows to enter our networks and run on our systems, we nowpermit access only to authorized services related to USDA business needs. At the same time, OCIO isestablishing standards and department-wide tools and techniques to ensure the safety of USDA’s computingenvironment. These standards apply to both physical and logical security controls that provide assurancethat computing environments are secure and available.OCIO recognizes the critical importance of conducting ongoing awareness and training activities to educateemployees, contractors, and clients who affect USDA’s information security. Although some USDAagencies have fulfilled their requirement for annual security awareness requirements, there is noconsistency across the Department in what training is provided. The Cyber Security Program has identifiedthe need for a uniform and comprehensive awareness program that includes a Department-widecommunication effort specifically designed to educate all employees about the security risks facing theDepartment. OCIO also recognizes the need to establish a rigorous measurement process to determine the effectivenessand efficiency of USDA’s Cyber Security Program. The USDA Cyber Security Certification Process, forwhich funding has been requested in OCIO’s FY 2003 budget proposal, will meet this requirement. It willensure that appropriate and cost-effective security mechanisms and controls are implemented andmaintained in accordance with established policy and standards.OCIO takes its responsibility for overall security of USDA’s information assets seriously. Whereappropriate, we are changing security policies and procedures, implementing mitigation actions whenvulnerabilities are discovered, developing and implementing standard security tools and techniques, andmanaging USDA’s information security program from an enterprise perspective.This Management Challenge links to Objective 5.2 of USDA’s Annual Performance Plan.USDA has made significant progress in reconciling USDA’s fund balances with the Department ofTreasury. OCFO institutionalized a sustainable cash reconciliation process and implemented an automatedworksheet tool to improve the cash reconciliation process. Another major factor in USDA’s goal to obtain aclean audit opinion is its implementation of credit reform. RD qualification on their financial statement lineitem “Estimated Losses on Loan Guarantees” was lifted by the OIG due to the completion, testing, anddocumentation of a new guaranteed loan model. RD also completed the programming for a new Single andMulti-Family Loan Model during FY 2001. RD devised new methodologies for reestimating the value ofsome loan subsidies for the financial statements based on examining model assumption trends. The FSAcompleted new direct and guaranteed loan models and will continue to improve the out year projectedmodel assumption curves during FY 2002. CCC, FSA, and RD, developed new methods for valuing their
122

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Appendix C Major Management Challenges and Program RisksMajor Management Challengesand Program Risks Planned Actions/Performance Measures FY 2003The Need to Provide Congress and the Public With aMore Clear Understanding of What Is Accomplishedwith FS Funds(GAO)FS Management and Program Delivery IssuesFS Land Exchange Program Grant and AgreementAdministration(OIG)Problems Persist in Processing DiscriminationComplaints(GAO)Civil Rights Complaints(OIG)

pre-1992 loan portfolios and related allowances. Significant analysis and documentation efforts were madeby all agencies to ensure a complete, accurate valuation of their entire loan portfolio, including both creditreform and liquidating loans. Corrective action by FS include the completion and implementation of a kit of corporate financial reports,evaluation of the reconciliation procedures for FFIS interfaces with subsidiary systems, and continuedassessment of the subsystems against Joint Management Improvement Program Standards as necessary.The Rural Utilities Service's (RUS) Electric program has had high losses in the past and lacked detailedwritten criteria for determining when loans should be removed from its list of financially troubledborrowers. In FY 2001 RUS reviewed and revised staff instructions to identify and monitor financiallystressed borrowers. The Administrator signed the staff instructions on June 18, 2001. In FY 2002 RUS willreview the Settlement of Debt regulations and revise as appropriate. Objective 5.2 addresses achieving aclean audit of USDA financial statements.In FY 2001 and FY 2002, the FS will transition to a new, outcome-oriented budget and planning structurethat will show linkages between resources, program activities and results. This process began in January2001, and will make its formal debut in the FY 2003 budget cycle. The process will be driven by aperformance plan that articulates annual performance targets that support the FS’ long-term objectives, aslaid out in its strategic plan. Future budgets will integrate data from the Land and Resource ManagementPlanning process along with Strategic goals and objectives. This new approach will allow the FS to providetimely, credible data that demonstrates the impact of funding on actual on-the-ground work accomplished.This fundamental change to a results-oriented budget and planning structure will provide Congress and theAmerican people with a clear understanding of the many benefits attained through taxpayer dollars thatfinance the sound management of the Nation’s forests.In October 2000, USDA completed a Long Term Improvement Plan (LTIP) on processing of civil rightscomplaints. During FY 2001, the recommendations of the report were implemented as permitted byavailable resources. This included some changes in business processes, training, and improvements to thecase tracking process. For FY 2003, the processing time will be further reduced by 20%. See Objective 5.1of USDA's Annual Performance Plan for more details.
123

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Appendix C Major Management Challenges and Program RisksMajor Management Challengesand Program Risks Planned Actions/Performance Measures FY 2003Crop Insurance(OIG)

Crop Insurance has become a major USDA “farmer safety net.” The Manual 14, “guidelines andexpectations for delivery of the Federal Crop Insurance Program” establishes the minimum training andquality control review procedures required by all insurance providers in the delivery of any policy insuredor reinsured under the Federal Crop Insurance Act, as amended. The RMA conducts reviews of theinsurance providers to determine their adherence to Manual 14 requirements. The results of these reviewsare presented to RMA officials and insurance provider representatives in an effort to improve companyoperations and program integrity. Manual 14 is part of the Standard Reinsurance Agreement (SRA) withthe insurance providers and has not been renegotiated since 1998. The SRA can only be renegotiated oncebetween 2001 and 2005. The new SRA, will, when renegotiated, contain new procedures and language toimprove insurance providers quality control operations. The topic of conflict of interest amongpolicyholders, sales agents, claims adjusters, and insurance provider’s employees is one of the areas to beaddressed.Therefore, RMA is proceeding with a study of the cost-sharing arrangements between the Federal CropInsurance Corporation and each private insurance provider. The decision to proceed at this time in theabsence of a permanently appointed Administrator is largely due to the amount of time needed to conductthis study and renegotiate the SRA. RMA anticipates this study will take at least one year to complete. Thisstudy will be comprehensive encompassing all obligations of each insurance provider including Manual 14requirements.As a result of prevention efforts, RMA has stopped close to $15 million in improper payments from beingmade in FY 2001 with many more dollars still being investigated. Although implementation of theAgriculture Risk Protection Act of 2000 (ARPA) provisions and prevention activities have been RMACompliance major priorities throughout the fiscal year, traditional investigation and criminal, civil andadministrative processes have generated recoveries of about $29 million. This year RMA Compliancereviewed over 10,000 crop insurance policies that represent over $1 billion in liability. The referrals (to andfrom FSA) that support prevention/deterrence efforts alone now encompass over 3,000 policies. Thisrepresents an increase of more than 500 percent over just last year. RMA believes this will again increasesubstantially for 2002. These partial first year results represent a dramatic increase in feedback systems andare extremely optimistic from the positive results of ARPA implementation efforts.
124

USDA FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan and Revised Plan for FY 2002

Appendix C Major Management Challenges and Program RisksMajor Management Challengesand Program Risks Planned Actions/Performance Measures FY 2003Research Funding Accountability (OIG)Competitive Grants Program Compliance(OIG)

CSREES has established the implementing regulations, policies, guidelines, and procedures for the newrequirements provided by the Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 1998(AREERA). In FY 2002 and FY 2003, CSREES plans to evaluate the implementation of the stakeholderrequirements (i.e., 7 CFR 3418) as stated in the preamble to the Final Rule for Stakeholder InputRequirements [65 FR 5993-5998]. CSREES also will evaluate and revise the review processes for theAnnual Report of Accomplishments and Results for the 5-Year Plans of Work. These evaluations shouldassist the Agency in strengthening overall accountability of the CSREES grant funds, including the researchfunds. The USDA OIG also is in the process of conducting a survey of the Agency’s implementation of theAREERA requirements for CSREES formula grant programs (i.e., Smith-Lever Act, Hatch Act, andSections 1444 and 1445 funds). In December 2000, CSREES hired a staff accountant to conduct administrative reviews of CSREES grantprograms. For FY 2002 and FY 2003, this staff accountant will conduct administrative reviews of the 1994Land-Grant Institutions and any other grantees that the Agency considers vulnerable or high-risk.During the latter part of 2001, the USDA OIG conducted an audit survey of CSREES internal controls andaccountability over expenditures of competitive grant funds. When the results of this survey are known,CSREES will implement any recommended internal controls and procedures, if feasible, to provide betteraccountability and control over these grant funds.