Annual Performance Report

Dep a r tment o f the treasur y

2009

e b r u a r y 1 , 2 0 1 0
Department of the Treasury

The United States

Our Vision

Set the global standard in financial and economic leadership

Our Mission

Maintain a strong economy and create economic and job opportunities by promoting 

the conditions that enable economic growth and stability at home and abroad, strengthening 

national security by ensuring the safety, soundness and integrity of the financial system, 

and managing the U.S. Government’s finances and resources effectively.

Our Values

SERVICE

Work for the benefit of the American people

INTEGRITY

Aspire to the highest levels ethical standards of honesty, trustworthiness, and dependability

EXCELLENCE

Strive to be the best, continuously improve, innovate, and adapt

OBJECTIVITY

Encourage independent views

ACCOUNTABILITY

Responsible for our conduct and work

COMMUNITY

Dedicated to excellent customer service, collaboration, 

and teamwork while promoting diversity
F I S C A L 

YEAR 2009

Annual Performance Report

D par tm e n o th

F br ary 1,
DEpARtmEnt oF thE tREASuRY • AgEnCY pERFoRmAnCE REpoRt • FISCAL YEAR 2009

ii

This page left intentionally blank
Table of Con

te

s

Table of Contents i

Table of Contents

Message from the Secretary of the Treasury v

Message from the Assistant Secretary, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Performance Officer vii

Annual Performance Report vs. Management’s Discussion and Analys

Overview .

Organization 4

The Treasury Department’s 2007-2012 Strategic Framework 5

Fiscal Year 2009 Summary of Performance by Strategic Goal 6

How Well is Treasury Performing? .

High Risk Areas—As Identified by GAO 10

Completeness and Reliability of Performance Data 13

Strategic Goal: Effectively Managed U.S. Government’s Finance  

Strategic Goal: U.S. and World Economies Perform at Full Economic Potentia  

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 . 

Strategic Goal: Prevented Terrorism and Promoted the Nation’s Security 

Through Strengthened International Financial Systems . 

Strategic Goal: Management and Organizational Excellence 111

List of Acronyms . .

Appendi

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 

Performance Measures by Focus and Strategic Goal 129
Department of th Treasury •  gency Performance Report  • Fiscal Year 2009 DEpARtmEnt oF thE tREASuRY • AgEnCY F

iv

This page left intentionally blank

Table of ConTenTs
Message froM The seCreTary of The Treasury

Message froM The seCreTary of The Treasury v

Message from the Secretary of the Treasury

February 1, 201

The Treasury Department has spent the past year confronting the worst economic 

and financial crisis in generations. 

While policy interventions at the end of 2008 succeeded in achieving the vital, 

but narrow, objective of preventing a catastrophic systemic meltdown, by the time 

President Obama took office, the financial system remained extremely fragile and

the Administration faced a rapidly evolving set of challenges.

In the financial sector the flow of credit to businesses and families had frozen; the 

issuance of new asset-backed securities had essentially come to a halt; and liquidity 

in a broader range of securities markets had fallen sharply. In addition, the broader 

economy was in a free fall. In January 2009 we lost 741,000 nonfarm jobs, the 

largest single monthly decline in 60 years. Our Gross Domestic Product was contracting at rates not seen i

decades. American families lost $17-1/2 trillion in household wealth between the spring of 2007 and early 2009.

And there was genuine concern we were headed toward a second Great Depression

The Obama Administration responded with a comprehensive strategy unprecedented in size and scope

First, we worked with Congress to enact the most sweeping economic recovery package in our nation’s history.

The Recovery Act included a program of immediate tax incentives for businesses and households, support fo

state and local governments, and investments in critical economic priorities, from infrastructure and energy to 

health care and education. More than 110 million families – 95 percent of working families – received hundreds 

of dollars in the Making Work Pay tax benefit. 

Second, we moved quickly to stabilize our financial system with as much private capital as possible. Following th

release of the “stress test” results, our nation’s largest banks were able to raise over $80 billion in private capital 

and, as of September 30, 2009, have paid roughly $70 billion back to the government for previous investments.

More broadly, last December, 70 percent of corporate bond issuance was supported by the government. In 

September of this year, corporations raised over $100 billion in debt, 82 percent of which was issued without a

government guarantee.

Third, we jump-started channels of credit that are critical for American families and businesses. Our Term AssetBacked Securities Loan Facility (TALF) has helped to improve conditions substantially. Issuance of s

backed by consumer and business loans has averaged $14 billion per month since the government launched T

in March, compared to about $1.6 billion per month in the six months prior to the program’s launch.

Fourth, we created a public-private investment program to purchase legacy assets to help clean up the balance

sheets of major financial institutions and re-liquefy key markets. Program announcements helped improve prices 

for these assets in advance of actual purchases. And due to continued improvements in financial market conditions, we are able to proceed with the program at a scale smaller than initially envisioned.
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

D

EpARtmEnt oF thE tREAS

uRY • A

g

E

nCY pERF

o

RmAnCE REpo

Rt • FISCAL YEAR 2009

vi Message froM The seCreTary of The Treasury

Fifth, we worked to ease the housing crisis by helping to bring mortgage rates to historic lows and establishing

new programs to allow responsible homeowners to refinance into affordable mortgages or modify at-risk loans to 

lower monthly mortgage payments. 

And finally, we worked with the major economies of the world on a coordinated program of macroeconomic

stimulus and financial stabilization, alongside regulatory reform.

Because of these steps, an economy that was in free-fall in January is now on the road to recovery. It grew at an

annual rate of 2.2 percent in the third quarter, and private economists generally expect moderate growth over the 

next year. Business and consumer confidence has started to improve. The housing market is showing some signs

of stabilizing. Home prices have increased modestly since April, and sales of existing single-family homes rose b

42 percent over the year ending in November. The cost of credit in securities markets has fallen substantially for

businesses, and credit is flowing again in these markets. 

These early signs of progress have allowed us to begin evolving our strategy from rescuing the economy to repairing and rebuilding the foundation for future growth.

As we enter this new phase we are winding down some of the extraordinary support put in place for the financial

system. But we are also mindful that unemployment is still too high and that small businesses, an important

engine of job growth in America, still face enormous difficulty accessing credit.

Because of the economic and financial stewardship role the Department plays for the Nation, the performance o

the Treasury is never more important. This year, the Department met or exceeded 64 percent of its performance 

targets, a reduction of three percentage points compared to last year, reflecting the challenges the Department 

faced in confronting the financial and economic crisis. While the percentage of unmet targets increased over last 

year, on average the unmet performance targets were within 19 percent of desired results. Discretionary budget 

resources increased 4.8 percent over 2008. 

The Department has validated the accuracy, completeness, and reliability of the performance data contained in 

this report. 

Timothy F. Geithn

Secretary of the Treasur
Message froM The assisTanT seCreTary for ManageMenT anD Chief finanCial offiCer

Message froM The assIsTanT seCreTary for ManageMenT anD ChIef fInanCIal offICer vii

Message from the Assistant Secretary for Management 

and Chief Financial Officer

February 1, 201

The message from Secretary Geithner describes the extraordinary actions taken b

the Department of the Treasury to help stabilize the nation’s financial system and 

build the foundations for a sustainable economic recovery. Following enactment

of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act in July 2008 and the Emerg

Economic Stabilization Act in early fiscal year 2009, Treasury took bold a

aggressive action to restore confidence in our financial system and ease the housing 

crisis.

With the enactment of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and wit

weeks of the new Administration taking office, Treasury built on its other rescue

efforts by quickly launching new programs to help revive the economy. These 

efforts included:

•	 Tax benefits to more than 110 million families, or 95 percent of working 

families, and tax incentives for businesses and households;

•	 Aid for revenue-strapped state and local governments

•	 New methods for low cost borrowing; an

•	 Investments in renewable energy, low-income housing, and health care.

In fiscal year 2009, Treasury met or exceeded 64% of the measureable targets that it set for itself. That was down 

from 68% in fiscal year 2008. The Department came close, however, to meeting the Y 2009 targets it did no

attain, getting, on average, more than three-fourths of the way to achieving them. Much of the change in performance between the two fiscal years was due to the extraordinary circumstances that the Department faced in 

confronting the financial and economic crises.

The Department is working to improve the value of all of our products and services.  Department-wide effort is

seeking to identify key goals and objectives to be achieved through 2011; to establish meaningful measures and 

reporting to gauge progress toward achievement, and to drive improvement through formal review and followup. Among these goals and objectives will be continuing to repair and reform the financial system, improving

voluntary tax compliance, and achieving management excellence. An important new initiative is moving the

Department towards paperless operation, which is environmentally responsible, saves money, and provides faster, 

better service to our customers.
DEpARtmEnt oF thE tREASuRY • AgEnCY pERFoRmAnCE REpoRt • FISCAL YEAR 2009 DEpARtmEnt oF thE tREASuRY • AgEnCY pERFoRmAnCE REpoRt • FISCAL YEAR 200

9

viii Message froM The assIsTanT seCreTary for ManageMenT anD ChIef fInanCIal offICer

The Department will continue devoting special attention to programs on the Government Accountability Office

High Risk List and to management and performance challenges identified by the Department’s Inspecto

General.

In the past year, Treasury has taken an extraordinary set of actions to rescue and reform the financial system, 

revive the economy and ease the housing crisis. In the coming year, we will continue to pursue our efforts in all 

of these areas while improving the operations of the Department. Our ultimate aim is to restore this nation’s

economy and expand economic opportunity for all Americans

Dan Tangherlini

Assistant Secretary for Managemen

Chief Financial Officer, and Chief Performance Offi
Annual Performance Report vs.

Management’s Discussion & Analysis

inTroDuCTion

InTroDuCTIon 3

Overview

The annual Performance report (aPr) provides 

information that enables the public to assess the 

Department’s performance relative to its mission 

and stewardship of the resources entrusted to it. 

The report is organized by strategic goal, objective, 

and outcome, and provides detail on how each of 

the metrics contributes to the Department’s overall 

mission. a performance statement is provided for each 

objective, along with charts and tables for cost, budget 

and performance. Progress is calculated based on active 

performance measures for which targets were exceeded, 

met, improved, or not met. baseline and discontinued 

measures are not included in the calculations. While 

baseline measures are not counted in the calculation, 

they are shown as “met” in the following performance 

tables. several measures were discontinued and/or 

base-lined this year as a result of the ongoing analysis 

of Treasury’s performance measures as they relate to 

outcomes. 

The table of key performance measures in each goal 

section includes data from the last four years; a performance rating for 2009; the percent of target achieved; 

the fiscal year 2010 targets, and trends in both performance and targets. Trends are indicated by colored 

arrows, with red indicating an unfavorable direction, 

green a favorable direction, black indicating no change 

and “b” for a baseline measure.

In addition to analyzing the Department’s performance 

relative to the targets it sets for itself, the Department 

also considers external factors. In some cases, underlying causes are not clear or the measures may be weak 

in describing the performance of an outcome, and this 

is discussed. This is particularly true in the case of the 

office of financial stability (ofs), an office that was 

stood-up in the fall of 2008 in support of the Troubled 

asset relief Program (TarP). While ofs played a 

major role in the economic rescue for the nation, other 

government organizations contributed as well, and it 

is difficult to determine direct attribution for ofs’s 

efforts on broad-based market or credit indicators. 

regardless, this report utilizes some of these broadbased indicators because they do provide some measure 

of progress against important outcomes for the nation’s 

economy.

each section of the aPr concludes with a “Moving 

forward” piece that describes future action to be 

taken. actions could include closing performance gaps, 

developing new measures, or drafting new polices and/

or regulations. 

Throughout the report, cost is stated as “Performance 

Cost,” and represents imputed costs, depreciation, 

losses, and other expenses not requiring budgetary 

resources. Performance Cost was used rather than net 

Cost because it more accurately represents the total 

cost to achieve a result or outcome. for instance, while 

the net Cost to manufacture coins and currency for 

non-appropriated bureaus such as the u.s. Mint and 

the bureau of engraving and Printing is zero because 

it is essentially self-funded, the real cost of operating 

these organizations is over $2 billion once all imputed 

costs, depreciation, losses and other expenses are 

included. While performance cost is more than net 

Cost, it is less than the gross Cost reported on the 

statement of net Cost because it excludes accounts 

that do contribute to the cost of achieving performance 

for the agency, such as the exchange stabilization 

fund and the federal financing bank. fiscal year 

2009 is the third year that Treasury has included this 

information.
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

4 Organiza

Organization

The DeparTMenT of The Treasury organizaTion CharT

Secretary

Deputy Secretary

Treasury Inspector General 

for Tax Administration

Special Inspector General 

for Troubled Asset 

Relief Program

Office of the Chief of Staff

Internal Revenue 

Service

Bureau of Engraving 

and Printing

Assistant Secretary 

Tax Policy

Alcohol and Tobacco 

Tax and Trade

Assistant Secretary 

Economic Policy

Assistant Secretary 

Public Affairs & Director 

of Policy Planning

Assistant Secretary 

Legislative Affairs

Assistant Secretary 

for Management and 

Chief Financial Officer

General Counsel

Treasurer

Director Office of Small 

& Disadvantaged 

Business Utilization

United States Mint

Office of the 

Comptroller of the 

Currency

Office of Thrift 

Supervision

Bureau of 

the Public Debt

Financial 

Management 

Service

Inspector General

Undersecretary Domestic 

Finance

Assistant Secretary 

Financial Markets

Assistant Secretary 

Financial Institutions

Assistant Secretary 

Financial Stability

Community Development 

Financial Institutions Fund

Assistant Secretary 

Fiscal

Undersecretary Terrorism 

Financial Intelligence

Assistant Secretary 

Terrorist Financing

Assistant Secretary 

Intelligence and Analysis

Financial Crimes 

Enforcement Network

Undersecretary 

International Affairs

Assistant Secretary 

International Affairs 

Financial Markets & 

Investment Policy

Assistant Secretary 

International Affairs 

International Economics 

& Development
The Treasury Departm

t's 2007-2012 

tr

teg

c fr

mewor

The Treasury Department's 2007-2012 strategic f

The Treasury Department’s 

2007-2012 Strategic Framework

The Treasury Department’s Strategic Framework is a summary of our goals, objectives, and outcomes. This framework provides the basis for performance planning and continuous improvement. 

Strategic Goals Strategic Objectives Value Chains** Value Chain Out

Financi

Effectively Managed

U.S. Government

Finances

Available cash resources to operate

the government

Collect

Disburse

Borrow

Account

Invest

•	Revenue collected when due through a fair and

uniform application of the law at the lowest

possible cost

•	Timely and accurate payments at the lowest

possible cost

•	Government financing at the lowest possible cost

over time

•	Effective cash management

•	Accurate, timely, useful, transparent, and

accessible financial information

Eco

m

U.S. and World

Economies Perform at

Full Economic Potential

Improved economic opportunity,

mobility and security with robust,

real, sustainable economic growth

at home and abroad

Strengthen

Regulate

•	Strong U.S. economic competitiveness

•	Free trade and investment

•	Decreased gap in global standard of living

•	Competitive capital markets

•	Prevented or mitigated financial and economic

crises

Trust and confidence in U.S. currency

worldwide

Manufacture •	Commerce enabled through safe, secure U.S.

notes and coins

Secur

Prevented Terrorism

and Promoted the

Nation’s Security

Through Strengthened

International Financial

Systems

Pre-empted and neutralized threats

to the international financial system

and enhanced U.S. national security

Secure •	Removed or reduced threats to national security

from terrorism, proliferation of weapons of mass

destruction, narcotics trafficking ,and other

criminal activity on the part of rogue regimes,

individuals, and their support networks

•	Safer and more transparent U.S. and international

financial systems

Manage

me

Management and

Organizational

Excellence

Enabled and effective Treasury

Department

Manage •	A citizen-centered, results-oriented, and

strategically aligned organization

•	Exceptional accountability and transparency

** Value Chains – Programs grouped by a common purpose.
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

6 Fiscal Year 2009 Summary of Perormance  by

Fiscal Year 2009 Summary of Performance 

by Strategic Goal

Strat

Goal Key Accomplishments Key Challe

Effectively 

Managed U.S. 

Government 

Finances

Cost*: 

2008:$14.0 Billion

2009: $14.4 Billion

•	Collected $2.3 trillion in tax revenue and $20.6 billion

in federal excise taxes on tobacco, alcohol, firearms,

and ammunition

•	Processed over 144.4 million individual returns and

issued over 111.4 million refunds

•	Increased individual electronic tax returns processed

by 8 percentage points, from 58 to 66 percent

•	Issued over 54.8 million payments valued at more

than $13.7 billion under the American Recovery and 

Reinvestment Act of 2009 

•	Converted over one million federal benefit check

recipients to direct deposit

•	Conducted more than 290 auctions resulting in the

issuance of more than $8 trillion in marketable

Treasury securities

•	Began the monthly issuance of the three and seven

year notes

•	Collected $5.07 billion in delinquent debt

•	Continue to work toward the Congressional

goal of having 80 percent of tax returns filed

electronically

•	Continue to convert from paper to electronic

savings bonds

•	Process 90 percent of Treasury payments and

associated information electronically

•	Reduce the use of illegal international tax

shelters

•	Reduce the erroneous payments rate within the

Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) program

•	Continue on path to complete CADE

implementation by 2011

•	Improve audit coverage of high net-worth/highincome taxpayers

•	Reduce average taxpayer telephone wait time

•	Accurately forecast government receipts

Performance 

Budget 

Cost 

U.S. and World 

Economies 

Perform at 

Full Economic 

Potential

Cost: 

2008: $3.7 Billion

2009: $4.4 Billion

•	Supported stabilization of the financial system

through implementation of the Emergency Economic 

Stabilization Act of 2008 and the Financial Stability

Plan

•	Improved mortgage availability and stability of the

housing market through implementation of the

Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008

•	Implemented economic stimulus measures under the

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009

•	Issued “Financial Regulatory Reform: A New

Foundation” and drafted legislation for fundamental

financial regulatory reform

•	Contributed to stabilization of the money market

through implementation of a Temporary Guarantee

Program for Money Market Funds

•	Implemented measures to bolster regulation of

national banks and thrifts

•	Expanded international economic partnerships to

better manage the financial crisis

•	Hosted G-20 meetings and supported elevation of

the G-20 to premier international economic forum

•	Supported trebling resources for the International

Monetary Fund and restructuring of the Financial

Stability Forum into the Financial Stability Board

•	Coordinated the Economic Track of the U.S.-China

Strategic and Economic Dialogue

•	Provided grants, investments, financial services and

technical support for underserved and low-income

communities through the CDFI Fund

•	Repair and reform the regulatory system to

improve supervision of financial markets and

institutions

•	Continue to mitigate risks at national banks and

thrifts

•	Reduce mortgage delinquency and foreclosure

rates

•	Reduce direct government support for

securitization and other financial markets

•	Maintain open economies despite rising

protectionist interests

•	Reform Medicare and Social Security to ensure

long-term solvency

•	Continue international movement towards a

global agreement on climate change

•	Increase financial knowledge and access,

especially in low-income and underserved

communities

•	Improve productivity management related to coin

and currency production

•	Improve supply management for bullion coin

production

•	Manage cost issues related to the penny and

nickel

•	Encourage robust circulation of the $1 coin

cost-effectively

•	Increase financial literacy and access to financial

services in low-income and underserved

communities

Performance 

Budget 

Cost 
Fi

cal

Year 2009

ummary o

Perfo

ma

ce by S

teg

Goa

Fiscal Year 2009 Summary of Perormance  by S

sTraTegiC 

goal key aCCoMplishMenTs key Challenges TrenD

Prevented •	Strengthened	measures	against	Iran	to	protect	U.S.	 •	Modernize Bank Secrecy Act	(BSA)	information	 Performance 

Terrorism and national	security and	analysis

Promoted •	Enhanced	mechanisms	to	combat	mortgage	and	loan	 •	Encourage	Pakistan	to	make	its	anti-money	

the Nation’s modification	fraud laundering	law	permanent Budget 

Security Through •	Lifted	sanctions	on	125	individuals	or	entities	from	 •	Continue	to	provide	additional	guidance	to	the	 Strengthened the	list	of	Specially	Designated	Nationals	(SDNs) charitable	sector International Cost 

•	Retired	magnetic	media	filing •	Establish	external	performance	measure	 Financial 

evaluation Systems •	Strengthened	the	review	process	for	foreign	

investment	in	the	United	States

Cost: 

2008:	$555	Million

2009:	$570	Million

Management •	Treasury	OIG	completed	10	Material	Loss	Reviews	 •	Continue	to	complete	an	increased	number	of	 Performance 

and (MLRs) MLR

Organizational •	Treasury	OIG	issued	68	audit	products	related	to	 •	Continue	to	improve	management	of	information	

Excellence Treasury	operations technology Budget 

•	Treasury	Inspector	General	for	Tax	Administration	

issued	142	audit	reports	of	the	IRS	that	could	 Cost 

Cost: produce	$14.7	billion	in	financial	benefits	

2008:	$508	Million •	Employed	dynamic	new	approach	to	the	2011	

Treasury	budget	process 2009:	$296	Million

•	Expanded	human	capital	initiatives

*Cost	is	stated	as	“Performance	Cost,”	and	in	addition	to	budgetary	resources,	includes	imputed	costs,	depreciation,	losses,	and	other	expenses	not	requiring	

budgetary	resources.	

TrenD syMbol

Favorable	upward	trend 

Favorable	downward	trend 

Unfavorable	upward	trend 

Unfavorable	downward	trend 

No	change	in	trend,	no	effect 

No	change	in	trend,	favorable	effect 

No	change	in	trend,	unfavorable	effect 
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

8 How Well is Treasury Perfor

How Well is Treasury Performing?

figure a. Treasury performance Cost Trend Dollars in Thousands

$0

$5,000,000

$10,000,000

$15,000,000

$20,000,000

$25,000,000

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

$16,822,622

$17,436,584

$17,843,729

$18,820,586

$19,644,803

figure b. Treasury Total (Direct and non-appropriated) 

budget Trend Dollars in Thousands

0

$5,000,000

$10,000,000

$15,000,000

$20,000,000

$25,000,000

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

$14,732,430

$16,224,763$16,989,508

$18,133,476

$19,562,620

figure g. Treasury Department Cost per person in the united states Dollars

$52.0

$54.0

$56.0

$58.0

$60.0

$62.0

$64.0

$66.0

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

$56.96

$58.24

$59.09

$61.61

$63.80

figure h. Treasury performance vs. performance Cost Trends Percent

1%

10%

Year-over-year growth in performance cost

Performance Results (Percent of Performance Targets Exceeded or Met)

64% 72% 70% 60% 60%

9.60%

3.30% 3.50%

5.50% 4.40%

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

figure C. fiscal year 2009 Treasury-wide performance results 

including Discontinued and baseline Measures 

13%

Baseline

7%

Discontinued

1%

Improved

15%

Unmet

11%

Met

53%

Exceeded

figure D. fiscal year 2009 Treasury-wide performance results 

excluding Discontinued and baseline Measures 

2%

Improved

18%

Unmet

14%

Met

66%

Exceeded

figure e. Treasury actual performance Trends 2006–2009 

16%

No Significant

Change

23%

Unfavorable

61%

Favorable

figure f. Treasury Target performance Trends 2006–2009 

27%

No Significant

Change

31%

Unfavorable

42%

Favorable

Please see next page for explanation of charts.
How

Well is Treasury

Perfo

ming

How Well is Treasury Performi

how well is Treasury

perforMing DisCussion

perforManCe CosT anD buDgeT 

TrenDs

Performance cost represents the best indication of the 

total actual cost to operate the Treasury Department. 

It includes normal operating expenses from the 

Department’s statement of net Cost, but also includes

adjustments for costs which do not require budgetary 

resources such as imputed costs, depreciation, amortization, losses, and other non-budgetary expenses. 

Performance cost in fiscal year 2009 was $19.6 billion 

(see figure A), a 4.4 percent increase from fiscal year 

2008, and has risen 4 percent per year since fiscal 

year 2005. The Department’s total enacted budget, 

however, which includes direct appropriations, nonappropriated, and reimbursable amounts, rose by an 

average of 7.4 percent per year since fiscal year 2005 

(see figure B). 

perforManCe To TargeT

In fiscal year 2009, the Treasury Department continued reporting using the revised performance rating 

system implemented in 2008. Performance to target 

is rated as: exceeded, Met, Improved from the prior 

year (but not met), unmet, baseline, or Discontinued. 

Prior to 2008, performance measures were rated only 

as met or unmet. results are shown in two pie charts, 

one including all performance measures, and one not 

including baseline and discontinued measures. While 

64 percent of targets were exceeded, met, or improved 

based on all measures (see figure C), 80 percent of 

targets were exceeded, met, or improved based on 

measures that were not baselined or discontinued (see 

figure D).

aCTual anD TargeT perforManCe 

TrenDs

Trends in actual performance and targets have 

been analyzed since 2005 where data was available. 

Trends can move upward, downward, or remain flat. 

Depending on the type of measure, a trend can be 

favorable, unfavorable, or remain unchanged. results 

indicate that 61 percent of actual performance trends 

were favorable (see figure E), 23 percent were unfavorable, and 16 percent were unchanged. Target trends 

were 42 percent favorable, 31 percent unfavorable, and 

27 percent unchanged (see figure F).

Treasury CosT per person

The chart reflecting the approximate cost of the 

Treasury Department per person in the united states is 

based on calculations determined by dividing Treasury 

Performance Cost by an estimate of the u.s. population at the end of fiscal year 2009. This ratio attempts 

to describe the estimated cost of operating the Treasury 

Department borne by everyone in the united states 

on a per person basis. The estimated cost per person 

for fiscal year 2009 is $63.80, up from $61.61 in fiscal 

year 2008 (see figure G).

Treasury perforManCe anD real

CosT 

This chart provides information on Treasury’s performance to target trends compared with the year-to-year 

increase in the Department’s performance cost. The 

percent of targets met or exceeded dropped by six 

percentage points compared to the prior fiscal year, 

while performance cost increased by 4.4 percent (see 

figure H).
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

10 High Risk Areas—As Iden

High Risk Areas–As Identified by GAO

Enforcement Of The Ta

Problem: The IRS needs to improve its enforcement 

tax laws, not only to catch tax cheats, but also to 

promote broader compliance by giving taxpayers 

confidence that others are paying their fair share.

Goal: Improve research on noncompliance, increase the

use of third party information reporting, focus 

on improving standards among tax return preparers, and increase emphasis on international 

noncompliance. 

Challenges and Actions Taken/Planne

Reduce the opportunity for evasion

•	 The IRS placed extraordinary focus on detectin

and bringing to justice those who hide assets 

overseas to avoid paying tax. As part of an overall

strategy to improve offshore compliance, initiatives were implemented to identify U.S. taxpayers that engaged in offshore tax evasion schemes

In August 2009, the IRS reached agreement wi

the Swiss authorities that will result in the 

receiving an unprecedented amount of information on taxpayers who evaded their tax obligations by hiding money offshore at Union Ban

of Switzerland (UBS). This represents a ma

step forward for the IRS in its efforts to comba

offshore tax evasion and sends a clear message 

to people hiding income and assets offshore that 

the IRS will vigorously pursue tax cheats, n

matter how remote or secret the location. 

At the same time, the IRS established an offsho

voluntary disclosure/penalty framework for 

taxpayers to voluntarily disclose their offshore 

activities. As a result of this program which ran

through October 15, 2009, more than 14,700

taxpayers with offshore accounts came forward 

to disclose information bringing them back 

into the U.S. tax system A key aspect of futu

international offshore work will be mining the 

information from people who came forward 

to identify financial institutions, advisors, and 

others who promote or otherwise helped U. S

taxpayers hide assets and income.

Target specific areas of noncompliance and improve 

voluntary compliance with extensive research

•	 The IRS maintained its focus on high-net wort

individuals, flow through entities, and large 

corporations (assets > $10 million). The I

conducted over 145,000 high-net worth audits, 

an increase of 11.2 percent. Audits of large

corporations including flow through returns 

increased by 3.6 percent.

•	 In fiscal year 2010, IRS will continue to expan

its efforts to address international tax evasion, 

to expand the focus on corporate and high 

net-worth returns, to integrate significant 

new information reporting authorities into 

compliance programs, and to implement higher 

standards within the practitioner community to 

ensure that the proper amount of tax is paid.
high risk areas—as iDenTifieD by ga

o

hIgh rIsk areas—as IDenTIfIeD by gao 11

IS 

MOD

Problem: The Business Systems Modernizati

(BSM) program is developing and deliverin

a number of modernized systems to replace 

the aging business and tax processing systems 

currently in use. This effort is highly complex 

and scheduled to be carried out over a numbers 

of years, ultimately creating a more efficient 

and effective IRS. Though the IRS experien

delays and cost overruns in the early years of the 

effort, improved practices and oversight are now 

contributing to better delivery of outcomes.

Goal: Meet all BSM project milestones within a co

and schedule variance of 10 percent of the initial 

estimate.

Challenges and Actions Taken/Planne

Fully implement all projects and programs for the 

BSM program

•	 • In fiscal year 2009, the IRS revised its 

Customer Account Data Engine (CA

strategy. BSM will continue the revised 

strategy to implement the new taxpayer account 

database by the end of 2011 for the 2012 filing 

season. The new database will result in the 

migration of all 140 million individual taxpayers 

to a modernized, relational database that will 

support daily processing and result in faster 

refunds for all individual refund filers. Daily 

updating of all individual taxpayer accounts 

by 2012 also will improve taxpayer service and 

accuracy, reduce interest paid on late refunds, 

improve data security, and create new tools 

to combat fraud and improve enforcement 

activities. Completion of the taxpayer account 

database is the prerequisite for other major 

initiatives, including significant expansion of 

online services and transactions and the next 

generation of enforcement technologies.

Modernizing the O

U.S. Regulatory

(newly identified in 20

Problem: The current financial system is a fragmented,

complex arrangement of federal and state regulators that arose over the past 150 years, often in 

response to past crises.

Goal: Establish regulatory reform goals and a measurement pla

Challenges and Actions Taken/Planne

Promote robust supervision and regulation of 

financial firms

•	  new Financial Services Oversight Council

financial regulators to identify emerging systemic risks and improve interagency cooperation.

•	 New authority for the Federal Reserve to supervise all firms that could pose a threat to financi

stability, even those that do not own banks. 

•	 Stronger capital and other prudential standards

for all financial firms, and even higher standards 

for large, interconnected firms. 

•	  new National Bank Supervisor to supervise 

federally chartered banks. 

•	 Elimination of the federal thrift charter and

other loopholes that allowed some depository 

institutions to avoid bank holding company 

regulation by the Federal Reserve

•	 The registration of advisers of hedge funds and 

other private pools of capital with the Securities

and Exchange Commission

Establish comprehensive supervision of financial 

markets

•	 Enhanced regulation of securitization markets,

including new requirements for market transparency, stronger regulation of credit rating 

agencies, and a requirement that issuers and 

originators retain a financial interest in securitized loans.
DEpARtmEnt oF thE tREASuRY • AgEnCY pERFoRmAnCE REpoRt • FISCAL YEAR 2009

12 hIgh rIsk areas—as IDenTIfIeD by gao

•	 Comprehensive regulation of all over-thecounter derivatives.

•	  new regime to resolve nonbank financial

institutions whose failure could have serious 

systemic effects.

•	 Revisions to the Federal Reserve’s emergen

lending authority to improve accountability.

•	 New authority for the Federal Reserve to overs

payment, clearing, and settlement systems.

Protect comprehensive supervision of financial 

markets

•	  new Consumer Financial Protection Agen

to protect consumers across the financial sector 

from unfair, deceptive, and abusive practices.

•	 Stronger regulations to improve the transparency, fairness, and appropriateness of consumer

and investor products and services.

•	  level playing field and higher standards for

providers of consumer financial products and 

services, whether or not they are part of a bank.

Provide the government with the tools it needs to 

manage financial crises

•	  new regime to resolve nonbank financial

institutions whose failure could have serious 

systemic effects.

•	 Revisions to the Federal Reserve’s emergen

lending authority to improve accountability.

Raise international regulatory standards and 

improve international cooperation

•	 International reforms to support our efforts 

at home, including strengthening the capital 

framework; improving oversight of global 

financial markets; coordinating supervision of 

internationally active firms; and enhancing crisis 

management tools.
Co

mpl

teness a

Reliabil

ty of

Perfo

ma

ce D

a

Completeness and Reliability of Perform

Completeness and Reliability of Performance Data 

Accuracy of Perfo

Measures 

Measures are classified for accuracy as follows:

•	 Reasonable Accuracy: Judged to be sufficientl

accurate for program management and performance reporting purposes (specified in Office of

Management & Budget Circular A-11, Secti

230-4(f)) 

•	 Questionable or Unknown Accuracy: Judged t

be materially inadequate (specified in Office of

Management & Budget Circular A-11, Secti

230-4(f) as “materially inadequate”) 

Procedures for Condu

Review of the Departm

Performance Measure D

The Department of the Treasury’s Office of Strategi

Planning and Performance Management prepares the 

annual report on performance measures and monitors component-submitted performance information. 

Based on an audit finding in fiscal year 2006, it was

determined that improvements to the internal control process for performance measures were needed. 

Improvements to the process included: 

•	 All measures are now categorized by audit priority

as high, medium, or low, based on the relationship 

to achieving the Department’s goals 

•	  representative sample of measures are selected

for review every fiscal quarter 

•	 Supporting documentation from that sample is

reviewed for accuracy, reliability, and completeness 

•	 All measure calculations are verified, data sources

are validated, and comparisons are made to prior 

year results 

•	 Information related to the measure audit is maintained in hard-copy form and can be reviewed at 

any time 

As a result, performing this process will uncover any

potential data or calculation error and will provide 

additional assurances on the integrity of the information and data presented in the annual Performance and 

Accountability Report

Completeness of Da

Not Available: Data was available for all measures i

fiscal year 2009.

Discontinued: The following performance measures 

were discontinued in fiscal year 2009 and 

will not have data available for this report. 

Explanations for why these measures were

discontinued can be found in the Appendix

Bureau Performance Mea

BPD Percentage of retail customer service transactions

completed within 11 business days

DO Increase the number of outreach engagements

with the charitable and international financial

communities

DO Number of open civil penalty cases that are resolved

within the Statute of Limitations period

DO Number of countries that are assessed for

compliance with the Financial Action Task Force

(FATF) 40+9 recommendations

DO Injury and illness rate Treasury-wide including DO

Mint Conversion costs per 1000 coin equivalents

Mint Conversion costs per 1000 CE (% deviation from

target)

Franchise Fund Operating expenses as a percentage of revenue—

Financial Systems, Consulting and Training

Franchise Fund Operating expenses as a percentage of

revenue—Consolidated/Integrated Administrative

Management

OIG Number of investigations referred for criminal

prosecution, civil litigation or corrective

administrative action

TTB Percentage of instances where the utilization of

International Trade Database System (ITDS) results

in identifying importers without permits as a

percentage of total permits on file at TTB’s National

Revenue Center
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

14 Completeness and Reliability of Perf

Baseline: The following measures established baseline

values and targets in fiscal year 2009:

Bureau Performance Mea

BPD Percentage of retail customer service transactions

completed with 5 business days

DO Percentage of Congressional correspondence

responses drafted within 48 hours

DO Impact of TFI programs and activities

DO Percentage of customers satisfied with

FinancialStability.gov

DO Clean audit opinion of TARP financial statements

DO Percentage of SIGTARP and GAO oversight

recommendations responded to on time

DO Average days to close a FOIA case

DO Percentage of statutorily-mandated reports

submitted on time

Mint Absolute value of production percent deviation from

net pay

Mint Customer satisfaction index

OIG Percentage of all cases closed during fiscal year

that were referred for criminal/civil prosecution or

Treasury Administrative action

OIG Percentage of all cases that were accepted by

prosecutors, referred for agency action, or closed

during the fiscal year and were completed within 18

months of case initiation

SIGTARP Number of completed audit products

SIGTARP Percent of recommendations implemented

SIGTARP Congressional requests for testimony completed

SIGTARP Percentage of investigations accepted by

prosecutors

SIGTARP Percentage of preliminary investigations that are

converted into full investigations

SIGTARP Percentage of all cases that are joint agency/task

force investigations

SIGTARP Percentage of hotline complaints referred for

investigation or to OFS within 14 days of receipt

Data Reliability: Performance data presented in this

report meets the standards for reliability set forth 

in Office of Management & Budget Circula

A-11, Section 230-5(f). There is neither a refusa

nor a marked reluctance by agency managers or 

government decision makers to use the data in 

carrying out their responsibilities.
sTraTegiC goal: effeCTiVely ManageD u.s. goVernMenT finanCes

sTraTegIC obJeCTIve: Cash resourCes are avaIlable To oPeraTe The governMenT 15

Strategic Goal: 

Effectively Managed U.S. Government Finances 

Strategic Ob

Cash Resources are Available

to Operate the Government

The Treasury Department manages the nation’s finances 

by collecting money due to the United States, making its payments, managing its borrowing, investin

when appropriate, and performing central accounting 

functions. Sound fiscal management enables continual

operation of essential government services and allows 

the Department to meet its financial obligations while 

minimizing borrowing costs. Accurate projections of

the U.S. Government’s cash requirements ensure th

funds are available to cover federal payments on a 

continual basis. The ability of the Treasury to manage 

the nation’s finances is essential to maintaining the 

stability and integrity of the financial system.

The bureaus and policy offices responsible for the 

achievement of this objective are the following:

•	 alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade bureau (TTb)

•	 bureau of the Public Debt (bPD)

•	 financial Management service (fMs)

•	 Internal revenue service (Irs)

•	 office of Domestic finance

The outcomes associated with this objective are the 

following:

•	 revenue collected when due through a fair and 

uniform application of the law

•	 Timely and accurate payments at the lowest possible cost

•	 government financing at the lowest possible cost 

over time

•	 effective cash management

•	 accurate, timely, useful, transparent and accessible 

financial information

budget Trend: Cash resources are available to 

operate the government Dollars in Thousands

$0

$2,000,000

$4,000,000

$6,000,000

$8,000,000

$10,000,000

$12,000,000

$14,000,000

$16,000,000

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

$10,759,020

$11,599,999

$12,024,656

$12,642,310

$13,785,364

performance Cost Trend: Cash resources are available to 

operate the government Dollars in Thousands

$12,000,000

$12,500,000

$13,000,000

$13,500,000

$14,000,000

$14,500,000

$15,000,000

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

$13,111,129

$12,979,117

$13,354,531

$14,042,171

$14,425,866

fiscal year 2009 results: Cash resources are available to operate 

the government

25%

Unmet

17%

Met

58%

Exceeded

performance Cost by outcome

95%

2%

2%

1%

0.1%

Revenue collected when due 

through a fair and uniform 

application of the law. 

Timely and accurate payments 

at the lowest possible cost.

Effective cash management.

Accurate, timely, useful, transparent 

and accessible financial information. 

Government financing at the lowest 

possible cost over time.
DEpARtmEnt oF thE tREASuRY • AgEnCY pERFoRmAnCE REpoRt • FISCAL YEAR 2009

16 sTraTegIC goal: effeCTIvely ManageD u.s. governMenT fInanCes

appliCaTion of The law

based on performance results, Treasury was generally successful in achieving this strategic outcome for fiscal year 

2009, though performance was dropped somewhat relative to fiscal year 2008.

Fiscal Year 2009 Results

revenue Collected when Due Through fair and uniform application 

of the law

27%

Unmet

10%

Met

63%

Exceeded

Summary of Actual Trends for the Prior Four Years

Trend Symbol Cou

Favorable upward trend  22 54%

Favorable downward trend  1 2%

Unfavorable upward trend  1 2%

Unfavorable downward trend  7 17%

No change in trend, no effect  10 24%

No change in trend, favorable effect  0 0%

No change in trend, unfavorable effect  0 0%

Baseline B 0 0%

Total 41 100%

Discontinued DISC 0

Key Performance Measure Table

The following table contains only key performance measures associated with this outcome. Actual and target trends represent four years of data

where available. The full suite of measures with detailed explanations is available in the Appendix.

% of 

key perforManCe Measure bureau

2008 

aCTual

2009 

TargeT

2009 

aCTual

TargeT 

aChieVeD

% Change 

in aCTual

perforManCe 

raTing

2010 

TargeT

TargeT 

TrenD

aCTual 

TrenD

Amount	of	delinquent	debt	collected	per	$1	spent	

($)	(E)

FMS $54.76 $43 $53.76 125.0% 0.9% Exceeded 43  

Amount	of	delinquent	debt	collected	through	all	

available	tools	($	billions)	(Ot)

FMS $4.41 $3.9 $5.03 129.0% 114.1% Exceeded 4.65  

Percentage	collected	electronically	of	total	dollar	

amount	of	Federal	government	receipts	(%)	(Oe)

FMS 80% 80% 84% 105.0% 105.0% Exceeded 80  

Percentage	of	delinquent	debt	referred	to	FMS	for	

collection	compared	to	amount	eligible	for	referral	

(%)	(Ot)

FMS 99% 97% 100% 103.1% 101.0% Exceeded 97  

Unit	cost	to	process	a	Federal	revenue	collection	

transaction	($)	(E)

FMS $1.195 $1.27 $1.57 76.4% 68.6% Unmet 1.25  

Customer	Contacts	Resolved	per	Staff	year	(E) IRS 12,634 10,386 12,918 124.4% 102.2% Exceeded 9398  

Customer	Service	Representative	(CSR)	Level	of	

Service	(%)	(Oe)

IRS 52.8% 70% 70% 100.0% 132.6% Met 71  

Examination	Quality	(LMSB)	-	Industry	(%)	(Oe) IRS 88% 88% 88% 100.0% 100.0% Met 89  

Field	Collection	National	Quality	Review	Score	(Oe) IRS 79% 80% 80.5% 100.6% 101.9% Exceeded 81  

Field	Examination	National	Quality	Review	Score	

(%)	(Oe)

IRS 86% 87% 85.1% 97.8% 99.0% Unmet 86.3  

Percent	of	Business	Returns	Processed	Electronically	

(%)	(Oe)

IRS 19.4% 21.6% 22.8% 105.6% 117.5% Exceeded 24.3  

table continued on next page
St

teg

Goal: Effectively M

U.S

o

ver

me

t Fin

ce

Strategic Objective: Cash Resources are Available to Ope

% of 

2008 2009 2009 TargeT % Change perforManCe 2010 TargeT aCTual 

key perforManCe Measure bureau aCTual TargeT aCTual aChieVeD in aCTual raTing TargeT TrenD TrenD

Percent	of	Individual	Returns	Processed	 IRS 57.6% 64% 65.9% 103.0% 114.4% Exceeded 70.2  

Electronically	(%)	(Oe)

Refund	Timeliness	-	Individual	(paper)	(%)	(E) IRS 99.1% 98.4% 99.2% 100.8% 100.1% Exceeded 98.4  

Taxpayer	Self	Assistance	Rate IRS 66.8% 64.7% 69.3% 107.1% 103.7% Exceeded 61.3  

Amount	of	revenue	collected	per	program	dollar	($)	 TTB $313 $300 $427 142.3% 136.4% Exceeded 400  

(New	data	compilation	methodology,	2008)

Percent	of	Voluntary	Compliance	from	large	 TTB 94% 92% 94% 102.2% 100.0% Exceeded 92  

taxpayers	in	filing	tax	payments	timely	and	

accurately	(in	terms	of	revenue)

Legend Sy

Favorable upward trend 

Favorable downward trend 

Unfavorable upward trend 

Unfavorable downward trend 

No change in trend, no effect 

No change in trend, favorable effect 

No change in trend, unfavorable effect 

Baseline B

Discontinued DISC

Analysis of Performance Resu

The table above is a sample of the measures associated with the achievement of the revenue collection 

outcome. Analysis of fiscal year 2009 performance is

based on the best data available. Based on the full suite

of measures relating to this outcome, during fiscal year 

2009, Treasury met or exceeded targets Departmentwide for 73 percent of its performance measures 

relative to this strategic outcome (30 measures out of 

41). This was a decrease from fiscal year 2008 when 

targets for 79 percent of performance measures were 

either met or exceeded. In 2009, Treasury exceeded 63 

percent of its targets, met 10 percent, and missed 27 

percent. No measures were discontinued in fiscal year

2009.

IRS is the largest contributor to this outcome. F

fiscal year 2009, IRS achieved an overall success rate o

69 percent, meeting or exceeding the target for 22 of 

its 32 performance measures. This is a drop from the 

75 percent success rate achieved in fiscal year 2008. In 

fiscal year 2009, IRS met or exceeded 100 percent o

its Taxpayer Service targets (12 of 12), 50 percent (9 of

18) of its Enforcement targets, and 50 percent (one of

two) of its Business System Modernization targets

Performance at FMS continues to be generally positive, and FMS continues to aggressively increase 

performance targets. FMS exceeded 86 percent of it

performance targets in fiscal year 2009 relative to this 

strategic outcome (six of seven measures). Performance 

targets for each of these six measures were exceeded 

in fiscal year 2008, but during fiscal year 2009, the 

performance measure “Unit cost to process a federal

revenue collection transaction” was the only F

performance metric for this outcome that failed to 

meet its target. This was largely due to a decrease in 

the number of collection transactions as a result of the 

economic downturn. 

Both TTB measures for this outcome, “Amou

of Revenue per Program Dollar” and “Percent of

Voluntary Compliance from large taxpayers in filing tax payments timely and accurately (in terms of

revenue)” exceeded their fiscal year 2009 performance 

targets by 42 and two percent, respectively. Voluntary

compliance results held constant with the prior year, 

while Amount of Revenue per Program Dollar delivered even greater program efficiency than targeted

achieving a significant 36 percent improvement over 

fiscal year 2008 results.
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

18 Strategic Goal: Effectively Managed U.S. 

Taxpayer Service and Revenu

Processin

Internal Revenue Serv

The IRS delivered a another successful filing season i

2009, rising to challenges posed by the residual effects 

of the 2008 Economic Stimulus Payment program an

the implementation of the American Reinvestmen

and Recovery Act. In fiscal year 2009, the total revenu

collected by the IRS was $2.345 trillion. Percent o

Individual Returns Processed Electronically increase

14 percent over 2008 and Percent of Business Return

Processed Electronically increased 17.5 percent.

Individual returns filed electronically reached 65.9 percent of all returns, with the total number of individual 

returns filed electronically reached 95 million returns, 

up six percentage points over the prior fiscal year and 

reaching 103 percent of the year’s target, largely due 

to increased IRS advertising and marketing. Busine

returns filed electronically reached 22.8 percent, 106 

percent of the year’s target and an increase of 700 

thousand returns over 2008 due to new electronic filing mandates for certain businesses. Taxpayer filing via 

home computer increased by 19 percent over 2008 to 

nearly 32 million returns, and tax professionals’ use of 

electronic filing also increased to 63.2 million returns, 

an increase of 2.27 percent over 2008.

The Customer Service Representative Level of Serv

increased significantly over 2008 levels by nearly 

33 percent due to the completion of the Account

Management Services initiative and its automated

inventory and workflow capabilities such as electronic 

transcript capabilities. Customer Contacts Resolved

per Staff Year reached 124 percent of target an

increased by two percent over 2008 as well, exceeding 

all expectations due to a large increase in taxpayer use 

of self-service applications, translating into reduced call 

volume. IRS achieved a 70 percent level of telephon

service answering 39 million assistor calls and 29 million automated calls compared to over 40 million assistor calls and 52 million automated calls in fiscal year 

2008, and correctly responded to nearly 93 percent of 

tax law questions and 95 percent of account questions. 

The IRS continues to focus on accuracy of informatio

provided to taxpayers as both Toll-Free Tax Law an

Toll-Free Accounts Accuracy performance surpass

last year’s record breaking numbers. Taxpayers called to 

obtain information regarding economic stimulus payments, new American Recovery and Reinvestment 

of 2009 (ARRA) credits, and prior year adjusted gr

income (AGI) numbers needed for electronic filing

The decrease in total call volume in fiscal year 2009 

was due to fewer taxpayers inquiring about stimulus 

payments than the prior year. 

IRS efficiency in delivering its tax filing products t

the public also improved, as the Timeliness of Critical 

Individual Filing Season Tax Products to the Publi

and the Timeliness of Critical Tax Exempt (TE/

and Business Tax Products to the Public metrics

improved over 2008 by four and six percentage points, 

respectively. The Taxpayer Self-Assistance rate increase

over 2008 by nearly 4 percent, due to increased usage 

41 percent higher than planned, of the web services 

“Economic Stimulus Payment” and “Where’s M

Refund?”. During fiscal year 2009, IRS process

144.4 million individual returns, a 7 percent decrease 

versus 2008; issued 111.4 million refunds, an increase 

of over 3 percent, totaling $339.6 billion, a decrease of 

8 percent; and completed 29 million automated calls 

compared to 52 million in 2008). These decreases in 

fiscal year 2009 resulted from abnormally high individual return filing in fiscal year 2008 to claim economic 

stimulus payments.

In fiscal year 2009, taxpayers continued to use the website IRS.gov resulting in more than 1.7 billion views o

the web page by taxpayers compared to 2.2 billion in 

fiscal year 2008, a 23 percent reduction due largely to 

fewer people accessing the web to obtain information 

on the Economic Stimulus Program versus 200

More than 54 million taxpayers used the IRS.go

tool “Where’s My Refund?” an increase of 39 percent

over the prior year. Over 453,000 taxpayers used the

Spanish version. More than 3.0 million tax returns

were prepared and submitted through the IRS Free F

program during fiscal year 2009, a 36 percent decrease 
St

teg

Goal: Effectively M

U.S

o

ver

me

t Fin

ce

StraTegIC obJeCTIve: Cash resourCes are avaIlable To oPeraTe The governMenT 

versus fiscal year 2008. reasons for the decreased participation in free file can be attributed to fewer people 

qualifying for economic stimulus payments and filing 

electronic returns solely to establish eligibility and 

income limitations introduced by many partners in the 

free file alliance.

The Irs also improved assistance to international 

taxpayers to improve voluntary compliance. actions 

taken in fiscal year 2009 included:

•	 updating a “one-stop” tax page on Irs.gov for the 

more than seven million non-military americans 

living outside the u.s.

•	 Creating an “International Tax gap series” on Irs.

gov to educate the public on a variety of international issues

•	 releasing a new form for non-resident entertainers 

and athletes who plan to work in the u.s, providing the ability to calculate the correct amount of 

withholding based upon net income at graduated 

rates

•	 expanding the Irs network for providing tax 

assistance to international taxpayers by opening a 

new Tax attaché office in beijing, China, which 

will serve as the asian regional office for all Irs 

activities and will support tax treaty administration 

with other significant economic partners including 

Japan and korea

With many people facing financial difficulties in the 

current economic environment, Irs took several steps 

to provide service to taxpayers who owed delinquent 

taxes, especially those who have filed previously and 

were facing unusual hardships. These steps included:

•	 suspending collection actions in certain hardship 

cases where taxpayers were unable to pay

•	 allowing lien relief for homeowners trying to 

refinance or sell: In an effort to raise taxpayer 

awareness of the availability of the discharge and 

lien subordination process, Irs conducted various 

outreach efforts and sought feedback from the 

national society of accountants, the american 

•	 Providing greater flexibility for missed payments, 

where previously compliant taxpayers in current 

installment agreements in certain cases were allowed to skip payments or pay a reduced monthly 

payment amount without automatic suspension of 

the Installment agreement

•	 Preventing offer in Compromise (oIC) defaults, 

where taxpayers unable to meet the payment terms 

of an accepted oIC received a letter outlining 

options to avoid default

•	 expediting levy releases, where Irs released levies 

in an expedited manner for taxpayers suffering 

financial hardships

•	 offering installment agreements to taxpayers 

experiencing difficulties paying their tax liability 

upon completion of audits

The earned Income Tax Credit (eITC) is a refundable 

federal income tax credit for low-income working 

individuals and families. The Irs continued to reach 

out to taxpayers eligible for the earned Income Tax 

Credit (eITC) to increase participation. This included 

efforts such as:

•	 Creating eITC products and services designed to 

target underserved groups such as rural taxpayers, filers with limited proficiency in the english 

language, and childless workers whose incomes 

is just over the poverty line and are unaware that 

they qualify for the credit

•	 Conducting a third annual eITC awareness Day 

to promote the eITC as a critical financial lifeline 

for many taxpayers. Community coalitions and 

Irs partners across the nation marked the day 

with a series of local news conferences and news releases promoting eITC to low-wage taxpayers free 

tax preparation sites for low and moderate-income 
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

20 Strategic Goal: Effectively Managed U.S. 

individuals, seniors and other eligible taxpayers 

were held in every state

•	 Increasing electronic filing of eITC returns by 8 

percent over 2008

TTB collects excise taxes associated with the sale of

alcohol, tobacco, firearms, and ammunition through 

its Collect the Revenue program. In fiscal year 2009,

TTB collected $20.6 billion in federal taxes from

nearly 6,800 excise taxpayers. This represents a 41 

percent increase in tax revenue compared with fiscal 

year 2008, collected from a taxpayer base that grew by 

only four percent. TTB collected $427 in revenue for

every dollar spent on its revenue collection program, a 

36 percent increase over the prior year. TTB collections

dramatically increased following the enactment of The 

Children’s Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act 

(CHIPRA) legislation which raised the excise tax rate 

on tobacco products. 

CHIPRA was signed into law in February 2009, 

imposed the most significant tax rate increase on 

tobacco products in history and introduced requirements for permits and taxes on products which had not 

previously been taxed or regulated. The statute includes 

a new permit requirement for processed tobacco 

manufacturers and importers. The Act also expands the

definition of “roll-your-own” tobacco to include cigar 

materials. CHIPRA also levies a floor stocks tax (F

a one-time excise tax placed on a commodity subject 

to a tax increase, on all tobacco products held for sale 

as of April 1, 2009. Pursuant to the Act, TTB collect

a record $1.2 billion in FST from tobacco wholesalers and retailers, working closely with state agencie

and some of the largest tobacco manufacturers and 

distributors to identify industry members and retailers 

likely to have substantial quantities of tobacco products 

in inventory. TTB collected $6 billion in additional

tobacco revenue in 2009 due to the increased tax rate. 

The passage of CHIPRA magnified the need for

world-class research and testing facility at TTB for

tobacco products, as history has shown that higher tax 

rates spur the illicit trade due to the incentive of greater 

profit. To earn international recognition of its quality 

results, TTB applied for and achieved international

accreditation of its Tobacco Laboratory within one

year of the lab’s establishment. In September 2009, the

American Association for Laboratory Accreditat

(A2LA), an accreditation body that uses international

accepted criteria for competence in its evaluations, notified the Tobacco Laboratory that it met all standards

for ISO 17025 accreditation. TTB also complet

A2LA assessment of its Beverage Alcohol Labor

and its Compliance Laboratory, maintaining 

17025 accreditation for both labs. 

A contributing factor to TTB’s 427:1 return o

program investment was a 45 percent increase in 

firearms and ammunition excise tax (FAET) collections compared to fiscal year 2008, the largest sing

year increase in FAET collections in TTB’s history

sales of firearms and ammunition have grown in recent 

years, TTB has targeted enforcement efforts to ensure

revenue collection from these taxpayers.

TTB continued its efforts to promote voluntary

compliance among industry members in 2009 through 

educational outreach efforts and promotion of electronic filing options. During the current economic 

climate, TTB successfully maintained a voluntary

compliance rate of 94 percent for timely filing of tax 

returns by large excise taxpayers, matching the rate 

achieved in fiscal year 2008. In 2009, TTB expanded

its electronic tax filing program to enable all excise 

taxpayers to file and pay taxes electronically through 

the Web-based Pay.gov system. TTB increased the

number of registered Pay.gov users by 36 percent over 

fiscal year 2008, and more than 4,900 TTB taxpayers

are now registered to use Pay.gov to file and pay excise 

taxes and file monthly operational reports. 

Financial Management Servi

As the government’s financial manager, FMS overse

a daily cash flow in excess of $60 billion, disbursing 

85 percent of the federal government’s payments, 

including income tax refunds, social security benefits, 
St

teg

Goal: Effectively M

U.S

o

ver

me

t Fin

ce

Strategic Objective: Cash Resources are Available to Ope

veterans’ benefits and other federal payments to individuals and businesses. FMS administers the world’

largest collection system, with nearly $2.9 trillion collected in fiscal year 2009. It also provides cash management guidance to Federal Program Agencies, maintain

the government’s accounting books, and compiles 

and publishes government-wide financial information 

used to monitor the government’s financial status. 

FMS serves as the government’s central debt collectio

agency for delinquent non-tax debt.

The FMS is responsible for managing the federa

government’s collection system, which collects revenues 

needed to operate the federal government. In fiscal year 

2009, FMS collected nearly $2.9 trillion through a network of more than 9,000 financial institutions. Durin

fiscal year 2009, 83 percent of these dollars were 

collected electronically as compared with 80 percent 

collected electronically in fiscal year 2008. The unit 

cost to process a Federal revenue collection transaction

was up during fiscal year 2009 to $1.57 compared to 

$1.20 in fiscal year 2008. This can largely be attributed 

to the decrease in the number of collection transactions 

associated with the economic downturn. The percentage of Federal agency customers indicating an overall

service rating of satisfactory or better rose to 91 percent 

during fiscal year 2009, up three percentage points 

from 88 percent in fiscal year 2008.

The Electronic Federal Tax Payment System (E

is a tax payment system that allows businesses and 

individuals to more conveniently make their federal tax 

payments electronically 24 hours a day, seven days a 

week. In fiscal year 2009, EFTPS collected more th

$1.89 trillion through more than 97.9 million transactions, increasing the percentage of total taxes collected 

electronically to 81% from 79% in 2008, despite an 

overall net reduction of 16 percent in tax revenue 

related to economic conditions. 

Several important programs to enhance electronic

non-tax collections include Pay.gov, Payment Check 

Conversion over the Counter, and Electronic Check

Processing. Pay.gov is a system that allows individuals 

and businesses to make non-tax payments to federal 

agencies over the internet. Pay.gov responds to the 

increasing demands of consumers and businesses for 

electronic alternatives by providing the opportunity 

to complete forms and applications, make payments, 

and submit queries online 24 hours a day, seven days a 

week. Pay.gov has been implemented with 134 federal 

agencies representing 565 cash flows, and collected 

$68.91 billion and processed 18.69 million transactions for fiscal year 2009, versus $48.7 billion collected 

in fiscal year 2008, a change of 41.5 percent. Since

inception in 2005, it has processed approximately 57.2 

million transactions valued at $204.2 billion. As one

example, TTB has incorporated Pay.gov into its e-filing

program to allow excise taxpayers to file and pay 

taxes, as well as file monthly operational reports. TT

increased the number of registered Pay.gov users by 

36 percent over fiscal year 2008, and more than 4,900 

TTB taxpayers are now registered to use Pay.gov to pay

excise taxes and to file excise tax returns and monthly 

operational reports.

FMS is also responsible for the collection of delinquen

government and child support debt. FMS’ Deb

Collection program provides centralized debt collection management and operational services to federal 

agencies and to state governments as required by the 

Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996 and related 

legislation. In fiscal year 2009, FMS collected $5.07 billion in delinquent debt including Economic Stimu

Payments and Economic Recovery Payments. Of th

amount, $2.07 billion in past-due child support, $2.13 

billion in federal non-tax debt, and $368 million in 

state tax offsets and $497 million in tax levies was 

collected. The amount of delinquent debt collected per 

one dollar spent for fiscal year 2009 was $53.76, a slight 

decrease from the prior year’s result of $54.76.

Agencies referred 100 percent of their eligible delinquent debt at the end of fiscal year 2009. In calendar

year 2009, IRS referred an additional $51.6 billio

of tax debts for continuous levy, a 17 percent increase 

from calendar year 2008.
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

22 Strategic Goal: Effectively Managed U.S. 

Improving Voluntary Compliance and

Narrowing the Tax G

During 2009, IRS continued research studies on publi

compliance with tax return filing, tax payment and tax 

reporting requirements. These include the National

Research Program (NRP), and provide a comprehensive picture of overall taxpayer compliance level

Research results allow IRS to target specific areas 

improve voluntary compliance and to allocate resources 

more effectively to reduce the tax gap. In 2009, the 

NRP included analysis of individual income tax return

for tax years 2006 through 2008 as part of an ongoing 

study on reporting compliance, employment taxes, and 

their contribution to the tax gap. The IRS also implemented an NRP study to address cases with the high

compliance risk by providing an identification process 

for returns filed by U.S. persons living abroad. In lat

2009, a random sample of businesses was audited and 

results will be used to develop additional approaches 

to address the tax gap. IRS is also studying the effect

of its taxpayer services (internet, walk-in sites, and 

toll-free hotline) on voluntary compliance including 

identifying why taxpayers make errors, and exploring 

the relationships between errors made and unclear 

correspondence. Results will be used to develop new

approaches to service. As part of its continuing effort

to measure the burden associated with meeting federal 

tax obligations, IRS surveyed 7,000 individual an

self-employed taxpayers to measure time and expense 

in meeting filing requirements. Efforts are underway to

develop models to measure time and expenses for small 

business taxpayers who file income and employment 

tax returns. Estimates are scheduled to be released

early in fiscal year 2010. While understanding taxpayer 

needs and minimizing taxpayer administrative burden 

are important, another important element in improving compliance is enforcement.

Enforcemen

Enforcement of the tax laws is an integral component

of the IRS effort to enhance voluntary compliance wit

tax laws. In fiscal year 2009, IRS collected $48.9 billion through examination and collection enforcemen

activities, a decrease of 13 percent versus 2008. 

decrease was anticipated due to recent economic 

conditions. 

irs enforcement revenue Dollars (in billions)

0

$10

$0

$20

$30

$40

$50

$60

$70

$80

FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09

$34.1 $37.6

$59.2

$48.7 $47.3 $43.1

$56.4

$48.9

During fiscal year 2009, IRS met or exceeded 5

percent (nine of 18) examination and enforcement 

performance measure targets. Nine measures failed

to meet their targets. Among the examination performance measures, 64 percent (nine of 14 measures) met

or exceeded their targets; none of the investigations 

measures met their performance targets in 2009. 

Total enforcement metrics: 18

Average percent of targets achieved for all 18 measures

for enforcement: 99.8%

Measures met or exceeded: 9

Average percent of targets achieved for 9 measures met

or exceeded: 102.1%

Measures not met: 9

Average percent of targets achieved for 9 measures not

met: 97.8%

Of the nine measures failing to meet targets, only

two were related to quality – the Field Examinatio

National Quality Review Score metric and t

Examination Quality for Large and Mid-Siz

Businesses in Coordinated Industry metric. Results fo

these metrics fell within 2.2 and 1.1 percent of their 

targets, and had year-end results drop by one and two 

percent versus 2008, respectively. This is actually an 

improvement in quality metric results compared with 

2008, when IRS had four quality measures that faile

to meet targets. For the Field Exam Quality Rev
St

teg

Goal: Effectively M

U.S

o

ver

me

t Fin

ce

Strategic Objective: Cash Resources are Available to Ope

Score metric, IRS has case quality improvement tea

working to address area specific quality deficiencies. 

Quality targets will be reestablished in fiscal year 2010 

with specific emphasis on improving the weakest 

attributes. For Exam Quality, Coordinated Industry

improvement efforts will focus on audit quality and 

stronger adherence to audit quality standards.

The only examination or enforcement metric that 

achieved less than 96 percent of target was the 

Conviction Rate metric at 94.8 percent of its target,

which saw year-end results drop by more than five 

percent relative to 2008. Although the number of

convictions per year changed little since 2006, in 2009 

the number of dismissals increased due to increases in 

fugitive subjects, uncooperative subjects, and unavailability of witnesses, which resulted in the five percent 

year over year drop. IRS plans to tighten coordinatio

with the U.S. Department of Justice and the U

Attorney’s Offices on this matter

Other IRS enforcement and examination metri

that did not meet their targets include Criminal 

Investigations completed, where actual results dropped 

by nearly five percent versus 2008. This drop was due 

to an increased focus on more complex tax and legal 

cases which usually require a longer cycle time to 

completion. The Conviction Efficiency Rate percent o

target achieved dropped nearly four percent from last 

year. Even though additional reimbursable funding was

received by the IRS Criminal Investigations division

costs increased beyond any offsetting reimbursable 

amounts. Collection Coverage was down almost two 

percent due to a delay in the full implementation of 

the Business Master File Case Creation Non-Fi

Identification process. The Collection Efficiency Rat

was down more than four percent as a result of a the 

hiring of a large number of new employees in fiscal year 

2009 who had yet to reach the levels of productivity of 

more experienced caseworkers. Although Examinatio

Coverage for Business Corporations greater than $10

Million fell short of the planned 13,582 examinations, 

results exceeded fiscal year 2008 closures of 13,366 

examinations. Actual return filings reached 242,037,

surpassing estimates of 237,315 used to compute the 

coverage percentage, causing the drop in examination 

coverage. The disappointing investigations metric 

results largely stem from a double digit increase in 

IRS tax and legal cases compared with the prior year

Collection coverage and collection efficiency failed to 

meet their targets because a delay in return delinquency 

notice processing earlier in the 2009 fiscal year resulted 

in a corresponding delay in notice closures. For examination coverage for business corporations, actual filings

came in higher than previously projected, resulting in a 

missed coverage rate target where only 96.6 percent of 

the year’s target was achieved. 

During fiscal year 2009, IRS put significant effort int

continued operational improvement in the enforcement arena by enhancing analytics in critical programs, 

improving workload identification and selection 

methods, and implementing systems that target highrisk cases. IRS expanded its enforcement presence i

the international field, continued to pursue high wealth 

and high income noncompliant taxpayers, and initiated action to better leverage the tax return preparer 

community. As a result, in fiscal year 2009, IRS ma

improvements over fiscal year 2008 by:

•	 Increasing audits of taxpayers with high incomes 

and high wealth. audits of taxpayers with incomes 

greater than $200,000 increased by more than 

11.2 percent, and audits of taxpayers with incomes 

greater than $1,000,000 increased nearly 30 

percent

•	 Increasing self-employed audits by 22 percent, 

•	 auditing over 13,000 large corporations for the 

fifth consecutive year, a significant achievement 

given the size (assets greater than $10 million) and 

complexity of these corporate entities

•	 Increasing collection case closures by 1.7 percent

•	 Increasing tax exempt and government entities 

examinations by 17 percent

•	 Increasing automated underreporter (aur) 

contact closures by 2.6 percent
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

24 Strategic Goal: Effectively Managed U.S. 

In fiscal year 2009, the IRS placed extraordinary focu

on detecting and bringing to justice those who hide 

assets overseas to avoid paying tax. As part of an overall

strategy to improve offshore compliance, initiatives 

were implemented to identify U.S. taxpayers that engaged in offshore tax evasion schemes. In August 200

the IRS reached agreement with Swiss authoriti

that will result in the IRS receiving an unprecedente

amount of information on taxpayers who evaded their 

tax obligations by hiding money offshore at UB

This represents a major step forward for the IRS i

its efforts to combat offshore tax evasion and sends 

a clear message to people hiding income and assets 

offshore that the IRS will vigorously pursue tax cheats

no matter how remote or secret the location. As part

of a second initiative, the Offshore Merchant Accoun

Initiative, a summons was issued to a large processor 

of merchant accounts to identify U.S. businesses tha

deposit unreported business receipts from debit and 

credit card sales in accounts in banks domiciled in 

secrecy jurisdictions.

At the same time, the IRS established an offsho

voluntary disclosure/penalty framework for taxpayers 

to voluntarily disclose their offshore activities. As a

result of this program which ran through October 15,

2009, more than 14,700 taxpayers with offshore accounts came forward to disclose information bringing 

them back into the U.S. tax system A key aspect 

future international offshore work will be mining the 

information from people who came forward to identify 

financial institutions, advisors, and others who promote or otherwise helped U. S. taxpayers hide asset

and income.

As part of the effort to detect and deter aggressive tax

shelters, IRS launched a settlement initiative for Lea

In/Lease Out (LILO) and Sale-in/Lease 

transactions in fiscal year 2009. These transactions 

involve complex leasing agreements in which some of 

the nation’s largest corporations leased or purchased 

large assets such as rail systems, sewer systems and 

other large infrastructure, mostly overseas, and immediately leased them back to the original owners. These 

arrangements allowed taxpayers to defer billions of dollars in tax liabilities for many years. In fiscal year 2009, 

corporate entities who accepted the settlement offer 

had more than 80 percent of the total leases and dollars 

in dispute. The settlements required the corporations 

to concede billions of dollars in tax deferrals.

In fiscal year 2009, thousands of taxpayers were victimized by dozens of fraudulent investment schemes. 

These too-good-to-be-true investment opportunities 

often take the form of so called “Ponzi schemes” where 

the perpetrator of the fraud promises returns which 

turn out to be fictitious. In fiscal year 2009, one such 

scheme affected a large and diverse pool of investors, 

some of whom are reported to have lost most of their 

life savings. These cases raise numerous tax and pension 

implications for the victims. 

To assist taxpayers IRS issued guidance designed t

provide “safe-harbor” procedures for taxpayers who 

sustained losses in investment arrangements that were 

determined to be criminally fraudulent. The guidance provides a uniform approach to calculate the 

timeframe and amount of the theft loss, avoids the 

difficult problem of proof in determining how much 

of the income the taxpayer reported was fictitious, and 

alleviates the compliance burden on taxpayers and the 

administrative burden on IR

The Compliance Assurance Process (CAP), in plac

since 2005, identifies and resolves tax issues through 

open and transparent interaction between IRS an

large corporations. CAP participation has grown from

17 corporations in 2005 to 102 in 2009. The CAP

program benefits both IRS and the taxpayer by fostering compliance, reducing the time to process a return

and improving customer and employee satisfaction 

while maintaining a high level of quality. CAP involves

some of the largest U.S. corporation

In fiscal year 2009, IRS developed a comprehensiv

set of potential recommendations to ensure consistent 

standards for tax preparer qualifications, ethics and 

service. The recommendations were developed using information obtained from a large and diverse 
St

teg

Goal: Effectively M

U.S

o

ver

me

t Fin

ce

Strategic Objective: Cash Resources are Available to Ope

constituent community that included those licensed by 

state and federal authorities, unlicensed tax preparers, 

software vendors, consumer groups and taxpayers. 

Over 450 taxpayers and tax professionals along with

600 employees responded to the IRS request fo

comments that help IRS better leverage the tax retur

preparer community and achieve the increased taxpayer compliance as well as uniform and high ethical 

standards of conduct for tax preparers.

The IRS continued to vigorously investigate egregiou

tax, money laundering, and other financial crimes 

which adversely affect tax administration. Improved 

case development and selection methods, coupled with 

heightened fraud awareness resulted in the successful 

prosecution of taxpayers involved in significant abusive 

tax schemes, high-income non-filers, employment tax 

evasion cases, and other flagrant forms of tax evasion. 

During fiscal year 2009, IRS completed 3,848 crimina

investigations, achieved a conviction rate of 87.2 percent, maintained a Department of Justice acceptance 

rate of 91.7 percent with a U.S. Attorney acceptan

rate of 88.7 percent, and obtained 2,105 convictions, a 

1.8 percent decrease over the prior year.

TTB targets non-compliant industry members through

a risk model using data received from audits and 

investigations, statistical analysis, and intelligence 

received from internal and external sources. In 2009, 

TTB completed 171 audits, down slightly from 179

audits in 2008, and completed audit fieldwork for 94 

percent of its revised audit plan. TTB audits resulted in

collections of an additional $8 million in tax liabilities, 

penalties, and interest, 56 percent less than the prior 

year but consistent with additional collections from 

previous years. Repeat audits of industry members

with significant past violations and additional liabilities 

show they are now operating in compliance with 

federal regulations. Although traditional on-premises

audit work was down in 2009, TTB redeployed

resources to conduct more than 200 field visits associated with the collection of the tobacco FST. TTB al

initiated 397 revenue-related investigations, 39 percent 

more than 2008, many of which involved small 

producers, tobacco importers, and claims verification. 

These investigations resulted in additional collections 

of $613,000. 

In fiscal year 2009, TTB was charged under CH

with conducting a study of federal revenue loss from 

tobacco smuggling and diversion, and providing 

recommendations to Congress to address the illegal 

tobacco market. This federal tax loss study is the 

first of its kind, no previously established studies or 

methodologies had existed to evaluate the extent of 

tobacco diversion in the United States. TTB is modeling its study after a gap analysis conducted in Uni

Kingdom, which involves evaluation of total consumption versus taxes paid to arrive at a net revenue

loss. TTB coordinated this effort with 32 federal and

state agencies to solicit ideas on improved tobacco 

smuggling deterrence, and will present its findings to 

Congress in fiscal year 2010. 

Prior to the tobacco tax rate increase, some estimates 

of annual tax revenue lost due to alcohol and tobacco 

diversion were as high as $1 billion. Product diversion 

includes tax evasion, theft, distribution of counterfeit 

products, and distribution inside the United State

of products marked for export or for use outside the 

U.S. TTB has criminal enforcement authority ov

the commodities it taxes and regulates, but in order to 

combat excise tax fraud, TTB is heavily dependent on

the availability of other agencies to supply law enforcement resources to pursue criminal tax cases. Tax fraud 

in these industries, whether through unlawful product 

diversion or other means, simultaneously poses a high 

risk to federal revenue collection as well as a lucrative 

funding source for terrorists and organized crime. 

TTB’s need to rely on other agencies’ cooperation in

this area challenges its ability to collect all revenue lawfully due the federal government. Since 2003 TTB ha

requested funding and resources to establish a comprehensive law enforcement program to combat alcohol 

and tobacco diversion, but thus far, none of TTB’s

proposals have received funding in light of federal 

government fiscal constraints. Without these resources, 

TTB is limited in its ability to address this significant
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

26 Strategic Goal: Effectively Managed U.S. 

tax collection issue, although specific cases conducted 

in partnership with other law enforcement agencies 

have proven successful. During fiscal year 2009, TT

carried out 46 joint investigations, including 17 with 

state agencies, resulting in the seizure of more than 

33,500 cases of alcohol and more than 201,000 cartons 

of cigarettes having an estimated value of $1.6 million. 

TTB closed 42 investigations involving diversion of

products having an estimated tax liability of more than 

$9.7 million. As a result of these activities, TTB assessed or collected roughly $7.6 million in taxes owe

TTB also was active in conferences and negotiations

with its regulatory and law enforcement partners to 

combat illicit tobacco trade. At the request of the

U.S. Department of State, TTB served as the prim

representative for the United States at the Octob

2008 and June 2009 World Health Organizationsponsored negotiations in Geneva, Switzerland,

help develop an international protocol for combating 

illicit tobacco trade under the Framework Convention

on Tobacco Control International Negotiating Body

TTB has begun work in support of probable provisions

of the protocol, such as a study on track and trace 

technology, gathering additional information on hightechnology tax stamps, and researching possibilities for 

a national tobacco data system. In September 2009,

TTB also participated in the seventh U.S. - Cana

Tobacco Diversion Workshop in September 2009,

which included participants from the World Customs 

Organization, the European Anti-Fraud Office,

European Police Office, Italy, Mexico, Paraguay

France, and Australi

Business Systems Modernizati

In fiscal year 2009, the IRS Business Syst

Modernization (BSM) program met schedule estimate

for most releases, and delivered significant business 

value. Fiscal year 2009 successes include:

•	 The Customer Account Data Engine (CADE):

IRS successfully deployed CADE Release 4.

January 2009. With this release, CADE adde

capabilities to process prior year and decedent 

returns, remittances, estimated tax payments, 

requests for extensions and surname changes. 

In fiscal year 2009, CADE processed 40 millio

returns, issued more than 34.9 million refunds 

using a modernized account database, processing 

more than seven million payments totaling $58.6 

billion. 

•	 Modernized e-File (MeF): IRS deployed 

Release 5.5 that included the redesigned Form 99

(Return of Organization Exempt from Inco

Tax) in time for the filing season. MeF processed

Form 1120 and 990 returns at much higher

volumes than expected. Compared with 2008, the 

volume of Form 1120 returns increased by 38 percent, and Form 990 returns increased 307 percent

Returns submitted through MeF have on averag

a seven percent processing error rate, compared to 

19 percent for transcription-based paper processing. MeF return receipts increased to about 4.5

million, a 22 percent increase over 2008, 

•	 Account Management Services (AMS): IRS completed the 2009 releases of AMS providing additio

real-time address changes to CADE by the conversion of account transcripts from paper to electroni

format. More than 2.2 million electronic transcript 

cases were distributed. In addition, AMS delivere

the capability to update account address data on 

a daily cycle. AMS added a new component to it

organization in fiscal year 2009, the Integrated 

Automation Technologies (IAT) branch. The I

developed tools to support implementation of 

the Recovery Act, including the First Time H

Buyer Credit tool, which systematically researches

amended returns for specific criteria to identify 

unallowable or fraudulent claims.

Protection of Sensitive Informati

The IRS collects a tremendous amount of sensitiv

information and protecting this information is vital to 

maintaining the public trust. Public trust encourages 

voluntary compliance with the tax law and enables 

IRS to conduct business effectively. The IRS takes 

issue of identity theft very seriously. In fiscal year 2009, 

to preserve and enhance public confidence, the I
St

teg

Goal: Effectively M

U.S

o

ver

me

t Fin

ce

Strategic Objective: Cash Resources are Available to Ope

advocated the protection and proper use of identity 

information by: 

•	 opening Identity Protection specialized units 

(IPsus) and establishing a dedicated toll-free 

number to provide guidance and assistance to 

taxpayers affected by identity theft. These units 

assist taxpayers who have experienced tax administration issues or problems as a result of identity 

theft. In the first year, Irs responded to more than 

120,000 calls and opened nearly 34,000 cases for 

further action.

•	 Placing markers on more than 231,300 taxpayer 

accounts to alert employees that the account 

belongs to a substantiated identity theft victim. 

Irs also provided a portfolio of identity protection

services for taxpayers, including letters to individuals triggered by the account marker informing 

taxpayers that their personal information was used 

by another individual to file a return or may have 

been compromised through phishing scams. In fiscal year 2009, Irs sent nearly 79,600 such letters 

•	 eliminating the use of social security numbers 

(ssns) on over 8 million notices of Intent to levy 

issued by the automated Collection system. This 

is the first large-scale effort to eliminate and reduce 

the use of ssns on taxpayer correspondence. over 

the next 2 to 5 years, Irs will eliminate the use of 

ssns on more than 90 million notices and forms. 

The office of online fraud Detection and Prevention 

(ofDP) protects the Irs and taxpayers from increasing and evolving online threats. Through the ofDP, 

Irs shut down 3,444 phishing Web sites (1,578 

domestic sites and 1,866 international sites), compared 

to 2,926 sites in 2008. The median shut down time for 

phishing sites was 2.35 hours for domestic sites and 

6.85 hours for international sites. by monitoring, identifying, and mitigating fraudulent sites and phishing 

scams, ofDP helps to reduce the number of taxpayers 

who fall victim to online fraud schemes.

alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade 

bureau (TTb)

TTb developed software updates to its tax database, 

which are collectively called the Integrated revenue 

Information system (IrIs). IrIs is TTb’s central 

repository for permit, tax, and operational report data. 

IrIs provides a single repository for all TTb employees 

to access this data, saving them substantial time in 

carrying out assigned tasks. keeping IrIs up to date 

is essential to supporting TTb’s revenue collection 

mission. The updates included significant functionality 

enhancements, most of which were required due to 

ChIPra’s passage. The updates were completed on 

schedule and required no additional funding through 

TTb reprioritizing other development efforts and 

redeploying personnel.

TTb began development of the “Permits online” 

Web-based permit application system to improve 

efficiency in permit issuance to qualified applicants. 

TTb’s shrinking workforce and increasing workload 

make this IT initiative critical to improving turnaround times for timely permit application processing. 

after intensive requirements gathering and market 

research, TTb determined that a commercial product 

would provide the required capability 25 percent faster 

at a cost 25 percent lower than custom application 

development. The commercial off-the-shelf solution, 

which is scheduled to be deployed in fiscal year 2010 

and fully operational by fiscal year 2011, should 

substantially improve TTb’s ability to both collect the 

revenue and protect the public, since TTb’s issuance 

of permits and registrations are a critical starting point 

in helping authorize industry members to commence 

new business operations sooner, and also serve as the 

foundation for TTb’s excise tax collection efforts.

TTb implemented a new online tool for management 

monitoring of key workload and performance metrics. 

TTb’s performance dashboard provides a consistent 

and efficient means of calculating, collecting, and 

maintaining key agency performance metrics. The results are readily available to TTb managers through an 

online portal. This system automates the reporting and 
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

28 Strategic Goal: Effectively Managed U.S. 

presentation of metrics related to collections, permit 

and label application processing times, and customer 

service. The system will ensure increased accuracy 

in TTB reporting and help management monitor

bureau performance and industry compliance trends to 

facilitate strategic decision making.

TTB Fiscal Year 2009 Cost Saving Efforts inc

•	 TTB reviewed rental agreements and procurement

contracts and realized rental cost savings by closing 

the Seattle field office and transitioning Seattl

staff into full-time telecommuting status. TTB also

achieved $600,000 in cost savings by negotiating 

a fixed price contract for imaging, indexing, mail 

service, file management, and customer service 

requirements at the National Revenue Cente

(NRC

•	 TTB implemented a Voice over Internet Protoco

(VoIP) phone system in 2009, and set up customer

call centers at headquarters and the NRC offices

The new system transforms TTB computers into

mobile offices through a digital network that 

provides access to all TTB resources, including

data, fax, phone, and video conferencing capabilities. VoIP also includes standard features such

as voicemail, call forwarding, call waiting, caller 

ID, and call return which ordinarily would result 

in added costs for non-standard features. The 

VOIP system is expected to cost TTB about 

percent less than its previous phone system. VoIP

capability at the NRC was critical for TTB 

meet CHIPRA requirements. Passage of 

resulted in an unprecedented flood of phone calls 

to the NRC. The new system’s capacity, advance

voicemail system, and call management features 

allowed NRC personnel to immediately answer o

return every call received, and ultimately helped 

in the collection of more than $1 billion in FS

revenue. TTB accelerated the VoIP rollout t

include all personnel working at remote locations, 

enabling TTB employees to make calls securely

from any geographical location that has access 

to the Internet. Once the rollout is completed,

full-time telecommuters, which make up one-third 

of TTB’s workforce, will no longer need costly

dedicated phone and fax lines in their home 

offices. TTB expects to discontinue dedicated

telephone service for all telecommuting employees, 

and which should result in substantial fiscal year 

2010 savings. 

•	 In April 2009, TTB completed testing and bega

the implementation of a commercial product for 

server virtualization. This application allows TT

to replace physical servers with virtual servers at 

both TTB data centers. Without ordering any new

hardware, TTB rapidly deployed multiple systems

on a single hardware platform. The bureau implemented 41 virtual servers and retired 17 physical 

servers. This will result in substantial recurring 

savings as it significantly reduces the need for 

space, power, cooling, and hardware refresh. With 

the success of the server virtualization program, 

TTB has targeted a 50 percent reduction in the

physical server footprint. An added benefit to

server virtualization is the improved TTB disaster

recovery capabilities due to the high availability 

features found in server virtualization.

Conclusion

The Treasury Department, through its bureaus IRS

FMS, and TTB, was relatively successful in achievi

its strategic outcome of Revenue collected when due

through a fair and uniform application of the law. In 

fiscal year 2009, 72.5 percent of the targets were met 

or exceeded. Going forward, target setting by all three

bureaus in fiscal year 2010 for 19 of 40 metrics (47.5 

percent) were more aggressive than in 2009, while for 

the other 21 metrics (52.5 percent) targets were not 

more aggressive.

Despite missing some key performance targets for fiscal 

year 2009 such as its investigations metrics, IRS generally met or exceeded its performance targets. In som

cases measure targets were significantly exceeded, such 

as Customer Contacts Resolved per Staff Year (1

percent of target), HCTC Cost per Taxpayer Serve

(123 percent), Percent of Business Returns Processe
St

teg

Goal: Effectively M

U.S

o

ver

me

t Fin

ce

Strategic Objective: Cash Resources are Available to Ope

Electronically and Percent of Individual Return

Processed Electronically (106 percent and 103 percent

of target, respectively), and Taxpayer Self-Assistanc

Rate (107 percent). Performance results for 2009 averaged within approximately one and one-half percent of

program targets. Overall, IRS exceeded performan

targets for 18 of its 32 metrics (56 percent), met targets 

for four metrics (13 percent), and missed targets for 

10 metrics (31 percent). No IRS metrics were discontinued during fiscal year 2009, and none were 

the unmet but improved category. As the IRS push

ahead with its strategic plan for fiscal year 2010, it will 

continue to focus its performance measurement on 

voluntary compliance, customer satisfaction, taxpayer 

perception, enforcement, modernization of its systems 

and processes, and on employee engagement.

FMS exceeded 80 percent (four of five) of its performance targets for fiscal year 2009 related to this outcome. The bureau’s success in surpassing these target

supports the conclusion that Treasury has succeeded 

in achieving this strategic outcome. FMS exceeded it

targets for the amount of delinquent debt collected 

per dollar spent, the total amount of delinquent debt 

collected through all available tools, and the dollar 

amount of transactions through Pay.gov. Over the past

four years the bureau has exceeded targets for those 

three measures by averages of 29.61, 20.98 and 51.22 

percent respectively, with comparatively modest increases in those targets from year to year. This suggests 

that the bureau should work to set more aggressive 

targets for each measure going forward. 

In fiscal year 2009, TTB’s Collect the Revenue program delivered impressive performance results, mos

notably its collection of $427 in excise tax revenue for 

every dollar expended on program activities. Attaining

a 427:1 return on program investment was largely attributable to an increase in tobacco revenue collections 

of $6 billion. The increase in FAET collections due 

the rise in firearms and ammunition sales and TTB’s

intensive education and audits of this industry segment also contributed to the exceptional rate of return 

that exceeded the performance target by 43 percent 

and improved on fiscal year 2008 performance results 

by 36 percent. Additionally, TTB’s drive to improv

educational outreach to the industries it regulates, and 

its push to increase the use of electronic filing options, 

resulted in a voluntary compliance rate among large 

taxpayers of 94 percent, exceeding its targeted performance in this area for the fiscal year by two percent.

Moving Forwar

In fiscal year 2010, the IRS anticipates facing a variet

of challenges such as legislative changes and the prevalence and increasing complexity of abusive tax avoidance transactions. Tax law changes have a significant 

impact on the IRS, which affects the cost, scope an

effectiveness of its service, and on taxpayer perception 

of the quality and efficiency of the service provided. 

IRS aims to minimize complexity and taxpayer burden

as well as the cost of administering the tax code. Going

forward, the IRS needs to

•	 Increase online transactions and taxpayer account access – the IRS plans to implement a ne

taxpayer account database for the 2012 filing 

season that will support daily processing resulting 

in faster refunds for all individual refund filers. 

Daily updates of individual taxpayer accounts will 

improve taxpayer service and accuracy, reduce 

interest paid on late refunds, improve data security, 

and create new tools to combat fraud. Completion 

of the taxpayer account database is the pre-requisite for other major initiatives including significant 

expansion of online services and transactions.

•	 Increase coverage of the most strategically important international issues, including complex 

enterprise structures and transactions to reduce 

offshore tax evasion - The IRS plans to develo

products and services to assist international taxpayers in complying with tax laws. In addition, the 

IRS will use audit results and intelligence from it

ongoing offshore initiatives to identify promoters, 

facilitators and participants in abusive offshore 

arrangements allowing for improved identification 

of compliance risks in large, complex global businesses and high wealth individuals.
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

30 Strategic Goal: Effectively Managed U.S. 

•	 Promote of compliance in high net worth individuals and large enterprises, including those with 

international components - The IRS will increas

enforcement efforts in the international arena, 

while continuing to provide timely guidance 

and service to both large multinational entities 

and U.S. citizens abroad, expand the focus o

corporate and high net-worth returns to integrate 

significant new information reporting authorities.

•	 Promote higher standards among the practitioner 

community - In January 2010, the IRS announce

multiple recommendations to increase oversight 

of federal tax returns preparers including new 

registration, testing, and continuing education 

requirements. The recommendations are intended 

to better leverage the tax return preparer community with the twin goals of increasing taxpayer 

compliance and ensuring uniform and high ethical 

standards of conduct for tax return preparers. 

•	 Propose legislation to attack areas of high compliance risk - The IRS is considering a number o

legislative proposals intended to improve tax 

compliance with minimum taxpayer burden. 

These proposals will specifically target the tax gap 

and generate significant revenue over the next 

ten years. The IRS will also propose legislation t

expand information reporting, improve compliance by businesses, strengthen tax administration, 

and expand penalties. 

•	 Maintain and increase coverage in key areas (high 

net worth, large corporate, flow-through entities - The IRS will continue to develop and tes

business rules and alternative methods of workload 

selection for individual, business and corporate 

taxpayers to identify returns that are likely to have 

significant reporting noncompliance.

•	 In fiscal year 2010, IRS plans to increase th

Customer Service Representative Level of Serv

(CSR LOS) to 71% by adding resources to 

the ever increasing demand and continuing to 

make efficiency improvements like automated 

self-service applications that allow taxpayers to 

obtain information on less complex issues such 

as refund inquiries. These improvements free-up 

staff to deal with the more complex tax law issues 

stemming from the passage of the American

Recovery and Reinvestment Act and the Worke

Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act

2009. Both Acts had a number of new tax credit

with complex qualification requirements and are 

expected to result in another year of unprecedented 

demand from taxpayers calling for assistance in 

claiming the credits during the 2010 filing season. 

Beginning in 2008, the number of taxpayers calling

the IRS for assistance has grown to above averag

levels due to the number of new legislations affecting taxpayers as shown in the table below.

Total system Demand vs. level of service Calls in Millions

Level of Service

Customer Service Representative (CSR) Level of Service

Total System Demand

0

100

200

300

400

500

0

20%

0%

40%

60%

80%

100%

FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09

In fiscal year 2010, TTB expects to achieve its target of

a voluntary compliance rate of 92 percent or higher for 

large taxpayers due to its targeted, risk-based audit plan 

and outreach efforts. Going forward, efforts to promote voluntary compliance will focus on education of

industry, both on premises through guidance provided 

by audit and investigative staff and through industry 

seminars. In the next year, educational programs 

will aim to build on progress achieved as a result of 

TTB Expo 2009, which enabled TTB staff to provi

advanced instruction to broad groups of users on the 

reporting and payment of excise taxes and regulatory requirements. The Expo, TTB’s second nationa

industry seminar, was held in Kentucky during June

2009. The Expo offered 78 educational sessions and 30

booths covering relevant topics for each industry group 
St

teg

Goal: Effectively M

U.S

o

ver

me

t Fin

ce

Strategic Objective: Cash Resources are Available to Ope

that TTb taxes and regulates, and was attended by 

approximately 700 people. To boost the industry’s rates 

of electronic filing, TTb offered an e-gov hall where 

participants could receive hands-on training in each of 

TTb’s Web-based initiatives. 

revenue collections are expected to increase in 2010, 

the first full year of collections under the new tobacco 

excise tax law. In its efforts to collect the revenue, TTb 

implemented an aggressive annual audit plan that 

incorporates a risk model that took effect in fiscal year 

2009. The fiscal year 2010 audit plan incorporates a 

refined risk model that accounts for prior year findings 

and statistical trends. audits will continue to emphasize industrial distilled spirits plants (DsP) and DsP 

storage terminals, as these entities move significant 

amounts of un-denatured alcohol throughout the supply chain. by continuing to focus on these and other 

high risk areas, TTb can potentially detect and collect 

millions in additional revenue. 

since 2003, TTb has requested funding and resources 

to establish a comprehensive law enforcement program 

to combat alcohol and tobacco diversion. The fiscal 

year 2010 enacted budget for TTb includes $3 million 

for TTb to hire, train and equip special agents and 

related personnel.

fMs will continue to focus on security oversight efforts 

at financial agent processing facilities and banking 

institutions. This allowed the bureau to proactively 

identify security control weaknesses and to detect and 

deter fraud, waste, theft and unauthorized access associated with the collection of government remittances 

and protection of sensitive information. 

In addition, fMs is implementing a comprehensive 

effort to streamline, modernize and improve the 

processes and systems supporting Treasury’s collections 

and cash management program. Through the expanded 

use of web-based technologies, this effort supports the 

integration of financial and performance information 

government-wide by providing data on a daily basis.

Timely and accurate payments at the lowest p

Based on performance results, Treasury was successful in achieving timely and accurate payments at the lowest

possible cost during fiscal year 2009.

Fiscal Year 2009 Results

Timely and accurate payments at the lowest possible Cost

67%

Met

33%

Exceeded

Summary of Actual Trends for the Prior Four Years

Trend Symbol Cou

Favorable upward trend  1 33%

Favorable downward trend  0 0%

Unfavorable upward trend  0 0%

Unfavorable downward trend  0 0%

No change in trend, no effect  1 33%

No change in trend, favorable effect  1 33%

No change in trend, unfavorable effect  0 0%

Baseline B 0 0%

Total 3 100%

Discontinued DISC 0
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

32 Strategic Goal: Effectively Managed U.S. 

Key Performance Measure Table

The following table contains only key performance measures associated with this outcome. Actual and target trends represent four years of data

where available. The full suite of measures with detailed explanations is available in the Appendix.

Key Performance Measure B

2008 

Act

2009 

Targe

2009 

Act

% of 

Targe

Achi

% Change 

in Act

Performan

Rati

2010 

Targe

Targe

Tren

Actu

Tren

Percentage of paper check and electronic funds

transfer (EFT) payments made accurately and on-time

(%) (Oe)

FMS 100% 100% 100% 100.0% 100.0% Met 100  

Percentage of Treasury payments and associated

information made electronically (%) (Oe)

FMS 79% 80% 81% 101.3% 102.5% Exceeded 81  

Unit cost for federal government payments ($) (E) FMS $0.394 $0.4 $0.37 107.5% 106.1% Met 0.4  

Legend Sy

Favorable upward trend 

Favorable downward trend 

Unfavorable upward trend 

Unfavorable downward trend 

No change in trend, no effect 

No change in trend, favorable effect 

No change in trend, unfavorable effect 

Baseline B

Discontinued DISC

Analysis of Performance Resu

In fiscal year 2009, Treasury exceeded targets for 33 

percent (one of three) and met targets for 67 percent 

(two of three) of its measures related to this outcome. 

Financial Management Servi

In fiscal year 2009, through the FMS, Treasury met o

exceeded targets for 100 percent (three of three) of its 

performance measures relative to this strategic outcome. This was in line with fiscal year 2008 when the 

bureau met or exceeded 100 percent of its targets. 

The first of the three performance measures for this 

strategic outcome concerns accuracy and timeliness 

of payments. During fiscal year 2009, 100 percent 

of paper check and electronic funds transfer (EFT

payments were made accurately and on time, matching 

the performance target and actual performance results 

from fiscal year 2008.

The second among these measures is the percentage of 

Treasury payments and associated information made 

electronically. Over the last several years, FMS h

steadily processed increasingly greater percentages of 

payments electronically as the percent of paper check 

payments steadily decreased. In fiscal year 2009, F

continued to expand and market the use of electronic 

funds transfer to deliver federal payments, improve 

service to payment recipients, and reduce government 

program costs. Overall, 81 percent of Treasury payments and associated information were made electronically in fiscal year 2009 versus 79 percent in fiscal year

2008, a two percentage point increase. This helped 

decrease the number of paper checks issued and minimized costs associated with postage, the re-issuance of 

lost, stolen and misplaced checks, and inefficiencies associated with the non-electronic delivery of payments. 

FMS’s Go Dire campaign, which encourages current 

federal benefit check recipients to switch to direct 

deposit, concluded an extremely successful fourth year 

in 2009, as more than one million conversions to direct 

deposit were attributed to the Go Direct campaign. 

The current number of total conversions obtained since 

the inception of the campaign is over three million.

The third performance measure, Unit Cost of Federa

Government Payments, came to $0.37 per payment in

fiscal year 2009, an improvement over $0.39 in fiscal 

year 2008 and its performance target of $0.40.
St

teg

Goal: Effectively M

U.S

o

ver

me

t Fin

ce

Strategic Objective: Cash Resources are Available to Ope

FMS has also undertaken considerable efforts t

modernize its payment systems, incorporating new 

technologies and the internet.

Conclusion

During fiscal year 2009, Treasury, through the FMS, successfully achieved timely and accurate payments at th

lowest possible cost by having met or exceeded each of 

its performance measure targets. The unit cost for federal 

government payments had been increasing since fiscal 

year 2005; 2009 was the first year since in which the actual trended downward year over year. As the acceptance

of electronic payments continues to expand, increased 

efficiency should result in further cost reductions. 

Moving Forwar

FMS will continue its efforts to increase the percentage of Treasury payments and associated informatio

made electronically. The fiscal year 2010 target is 81 

percent which is an increase from the 2009 target of 80 

percent. FMS also plans to continue the success of it

Go Direct campaign. For fiscal year 2010, FMS pla

to continue issuing 100 percent of payments accurately 

and on-time. The Secure Payment System used b

program agencies to certify check and electronic funds 

transfer to recipients in a secure environment is critical 

to achieving performance goals going forward.

Government financing at the lowest possible c

The Bureau of the Public Debt (BPD) conducts the Department’s debt financing operations by issuing an

servicing Treasury securities. In fiscal year 2009, Public Debt conducted more than 290 auctions resulting in 

the issuance of more than $8 trillion in marketable Treasury bills, notes, bonds and Treasury Inflation Protected 

Securities. BPD’s Government Agency Investment Services (GAIS) program supports federal, state and local government agency investments in non-marketable Treasury securities and also manages over $4 trillion in c

assets. 

Based on performance results, through the Bureau of the Public Debt, Treasury was successful in achieving o

exceeding government financing at the lowest possible cost over time during fiscal year 2009.

Fiscal Year 2009 Results

government financing at the lowest possible Cost over Time

14%

Unmet

29%

Met

57%

Exceeded

Summary of Actual Trends for the Prior Four Years

Trend Symbol Cou

Favorable upward trend  0 0%

Favorable downward trend  1 14%

Unfavorable upward trend  3 43%

Unfavorable downward trend  1 14%

No change in trend, no effect  0 0%

No change in trend, favorable effect  1 14%

No change in trend, unfavorable effect  0 0%

Baseline B 1 14%

Total 7 100%

Discontinued DISC 1
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

34 Strategic Goal: Effectively Managed U.S. 

Key Performance Measure Table

The following table contains only key performance measures associated with this outcome. Actual and target trends represent four years of data

where available. The full suite of measures with detailed explanations is available in the Appendix.

Key Performance Measure B

2008 

Act

2009 

Targe

2009 

Act

% of 

Targe

Achi

% Change 

in Act

Performan

Rati

2010 

Targe

Targe

Tren

Actu

Tren

Cost per debt financing operation ($) (E) BPD $220,732 $256,336 $170,214 133.6% 122.9% Exceeded 193962  

Cost per federal funds investment transaction

($) (E)

BPD $64.98 $69.11 $41.71 139.6% 135.8% Exceeded 45.7  

Cost per TreasuryDirect assisted transaction

($) (E)

BPD $8.19 $9.34 $8.72 106.6% 93.5% Exceeded 8.57  

Cost per TreasuryDirect online transaction ($) (E) BPD $4.34 $4.34 $5.21 80.0% 80.0% Unmet 5.69  

Percent of auction results released in two

minutes +/- 30 seconds (%) (Oe)

BPD 100% 95% 100% 105.3% 100.0% Exceeded 95  

Legend Sy

Favorable upward trend 

Favorable downward trend 

Unfavorable upward trend 

Unfavorable downward trend 

No change in trend, no effect 

No change in trend, favorable effect 

No change in trend, unfavorable effect 

Baseline B

Discontinued DISC

Analysis of Performance Resu

The Bureau of the Public Debt (BPD) exceeded 5

percent (four of seven) of its performance measures 

associated with this outcome, met 29 percent (two of 

seven) and failed to meet 14 percent (one of seven) 

metrics related to this outcome. These results were less 

favorable compared to the results of fiscal year 2008, 

when BPD met or exceeded all seven of its targets (86

percent were exceeded and 14 percent were met).

In order to cost effectively finance the U.S

Government, Treasury must efficiently execute its securities auctions. By minimizing the time that bidder

are exposed to the risk of adverse market movements, 

participants are likely to bid at more favorable rates 

and yields to the federal government. BPD consistently

releases securities auction results within two minutes, 

plus or minus 30 seconds, of the auction close.

In fiscal year 2009, the Department conducted 

over 290 government securities auctions. This large 

number of auctions contributed to the significantly 

lower cost per debt financing operation compared to 

previous years ($170,214 in fiscal year 2009 relative 

to $220,732 in fiscal year 2008). Additionally, during

the fiscal year, the results of each auction were released 

within the target time of two minutes plus or minus 

30 seconds after the auction close 100 percent of the 

time, exceeding the performance target of 95 percent. 

Treasury also successfully began monthly issuance of 

three and seven year notes in order to meet the demand 

for borrowing, and to allow for greater flexibility in 

borrowing options.

Treasury’s Retail Securities Services program serv

more than 50 million retail customers who have 

invested in marketable and savings securities directly 

with Treasury.  key component of Treasury’s Retai

Securities programs is TreasuryDirect. This online

system, with nearly 300,000 accounts, is integral in 

positioning Treasury to issue savings bonds in electronic form only. In fiscal year 2009, BPD completed

more than 99 percent of retail customer service transactions within 11 business days, exceeding its target of 90 

percent. The cost per TreasuryDirect online transaction 

increased 20 percent in fiscal year 2009 to $5.21 from 

$4.34 in 2008, costing 20 percent more than the year’s 

$4.34 target. The increase is partly due to the number 

of online transactions falling significantly below 
St

teg

Goal: Effectively M

U.S

o

ver

me

t Fin

ce

Strategic Objective: Cash Resources are Available to Ope

projections. Also, some design and development costs

have shifted from assisted to online activities as more 

online features are available to customers.

Public Debt is currently in the process of consolidating all GAIS functions into a single integrated contr

environment by fiscal year 2012. This will result in 

lower operational risks, more timely and accurate data 

and standardized system, business and data elements. 

Conclusion

In fiscal year 2009, Treasury met or exceeded 86 percent of the targets that were established to demonstrate 

the achievement of financing the government at the 

lowest possible cost over time. There was a nearly 23 

percent year over year decrease in cost per debt financing operation associated with the increased number 

of auctions. While cost metrics provide some view of 

operations, adding measures for cycle time and quality 

management would provide additional information 

regarding Treasury’s ability to achieve this outcome.

Moving Forwar

Treasury will continue to look for ways to improve its 

operations related to this outcome. It is essential that 

BPD maintains comprehensive contingency plans and

strong security controls to manage government borrowing activities. In its Wholesale Securities Services area

BPD is working with primary dealers to ensure that at

least 90 percent of dealers submit auction bids from 

their disaster recovery site on two separate auction 

dates by fiscal year 2012. Operational testing of these

contingency plans will ensure the overall readiness of 

the system as well as the continuity of the Treasury 

auction process.

For the Retail Securities Services program, a multi-y

vision is to create a new service environment known 

as Treasury Retail EServices. This initiative betwe

Treasury and Federal Reserve Banks will rely on common systems, databases and a multichannel custom

relationship desktop tool to manage telephone, email 

and paper requests. Once complete, a fully integrated

view of customer interactions will be available at 

Treasury and Federal Reserve site

Although a date has not yet been set for the withdrawal

of paper savings bonds from sale, BPD is working

towards a time when all Treasury securities will be 

issued electronically. For retail investors, BPD is encouraging investors to purchase their securities throug

the TreasuryDirect system. The main challenge in this 

effort is communicating the benefits to customers of 

purchasing securities and managing their holdings 

online in TreasuryDirect.

Treasury still needs to develop an improved measure 

for evaluating the Department’s progress in minimizing 

the cost of financing the government over time.
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

36 Strategic Goal: Effectively Managed U.S. 

Effective cash ma

Based on performance results, Treasury did not meet its only target relative to the performance measure for this

strategic outcome. The economic and financial market climate during fiscal year 2009 made success in achieving 

this outcome more challenging than in years past.

Fiscal Year 2009 Results

effective Cash Management

100%

Unmet

Summary of Actual Trends for the Prior Four Years

Trend Symbol Cou

Favorable upward trend  0 0%

Favorable downward trend  0 0%

Unfavorable upward trend  1 100%

Unfavorable downward trend  0 0%

No change in trend, no effect  0 0%

No change in trend, favorable effect  0 0%

No change in trend, unfavorable effect  0 0%

Baseline B 0 0%

Total 0 100%

Discontinued DISC 0

Key Performance Measure Table 

The following table contains only key performance measures associated with this outcome. Actual and target trends represent four years of data

where available. The full suite of measures with detailed explanations is available in the Appendix.

Key Performance Measure B

2008 

Act

2009 

Targe

2009 

Act

% of 

Targe

Achi

% Change 

in Act

Performan

Rati

2010 

Targe

Targe

Tren

Actu

Tren

Variance between estimated and actual receipts

(annual forecast) (%) (Oe)

DO 4.6% 5% 5.5% 90.0% 80.4% Unmet 5  

Legend Sy

Favorable upward trend 

Favorable downward trend 

Unfavorable upward trend 

Unfavorable downward trend 

No change in trend, no effect 

No change in trend, favorable effect 

No change in trend, unfavorable effect 

Baseline B

Discontinued DISC

Analysis of Performan

The Department of the Treasury, through its Office of

Fiscal Projections (OFP), manages the federal government’s central operating account and cash positio

supporting gross annual transactions totaling $24 

trillion in fiscal year 2009. OFP also provides forecast

of federal receipts, outlays, and debt transactions to 

ensure that funds are available on a daily basis to cover 

federal payments. By increasing the accuracy of fiscal

projections, the Department is able to maximize earnings on investments of operating cash and minimize 

borrowing costs, having a direct and material impact 

on the government’s net operating cost. 

To analyze the effectiveness of the cash management 

techniques employed, the Department measures the 

variance between actual and projected receipts. In 

fiscal year 2009, Treasury did not meet the target of 

the performance measure associated with this strategic 

outcome. Treasury missed its performance target of a 

5 percent maximum variance between estimated and 
St

teg

Goal: Effectively M

U.S

o

ver

me

t Fin

ce

Strategic Objective: Cash Resources are Available to Ope

actual fiscal receipts in fiscal year 2009, with an actual 

variance of 5.5 percent. This is largely due to the fact 

that the financial and economic crisis made fiscal year 

2009 an extremely challenging year to forecast government tax receipts. In response to the faltering economy, 

Congress enacted the Recovery Act, which include

many initiatives directly impacting government tax 

receipts. One such provision was the “Making Work

Pay” tax credit which revised federal income tax withholding tables and lowered the amount of tax withheld. 

The timing and value of the impact of this tax credit 

on daily withheld tax flows was difficult to forecast. 

Simultaneously, declining employment levels reduced

withheld taxes further and increased volatility. The 

Recovery Act also included provisions that increase

Earned Income Tax, as well as Child Care, Healt

Care, and Alternative Minimum Tax credits, and added

a First-Time Homebuyer Credit, all of which affecte

tax refunds.

Conclusion 

Effective management of daily cash positions and

minimizing borrowing costs over time is essential to 

ensure that government activities and services continue 

uninterrupted. Although Treasury did not meet the

fiscal year 2009 target for measuring the accuracy of 

cash receipt projections, the 0.5 percent overage should 

be considered a creditable result given the extraordinary factors impacting this measure in fiscal year 2009. 

Going forward, Treasury will consider the development

of additional measures that can provide a more comprehensive assessment of Treasury’s success in its cash 

management operations.

Moving Forwar

Forecasting government receipts and outlays during

the depth and severity of the current recession in fiscal 

year 2009 has been difficult. It is likely that forecasting 

these cash inflows and outflows, as the United State

looks forward to economic recovery, will be just as 

challenging. If Congress adds additional programs and 

initiatives that impact the economy, Federal receipts

will be even harder to forecast. For fiscal year 2010,

the Department will maintain its target at 5 percent 

variance for forecasting estimated versus actual receipts.

Accurate, timely, useful, transparent and accessibl

informatio

Based on performance results, Treasury was generally successful in achieving accurate, timely, useful, transparent

and accessible financial information during fiscal year 2009.

Fiscal Year 2009 Results

accurate, Timely, useful, Transparent, and accessible financial 

information

60%

Met

40%

Exceeded

Summary of Actual Trends for the Prior Four Years

Trend Symbol Cou

Favorable upward trend  0 0%

Favorable downward trend  2 40%

Unfavorable upward trend  0 0%

Unfavorable downward trend  0 0%

No change in trend, no effect  1 20%

No change in trend, favorable effect  2 40%

No change in trend, unfavorable effect  0 0%

Baseline B 0 0%

Total 5 100%

Discontinued DISC 0
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

38 Strategic Goal: Effectively Managed U.S. 

Key Performance Measure Table 

The following table contains only key performance measures associated with this outcome. Actual and target trends represent four years of data

where available. The full suite of measures with detailed explanations is available in the Appendix.

Key Performance Measure B

2008 

Act

2009 

Targe

2009 

Act

% of 

Targe

Achi

% Change 

in Act

Performan

Rati

2010 

Targe

Targe

Tren

Actu

Tren

Cost per summary debt accounting transaction ($) (E) BPD $9.11 $10.01 $8.66 113.5% 104.9% Exceeded 11.81  

Release federal government-wide statements on

time (Oe)

DO Met Met Met 100.0% 100.0% Met 0  

Unit cost to manage $1 million dollars of cash flow (E) FMS $8.96 $12.38 $7.08 142.8% 121.0% Exceeded 11.77  

Percentage of government-wide accounting reports

issued accurately (%) (Oe)

FMS 100% 100% 100% 100.0% 100.0% Met 100  

Percentage of government-wide accounting reports

issued timely (%) (E)

FMS 100% 100% 100% 100.0% 100.0% Met 100  

Legend Sy

Favorable upward trend 

Favorable downward trend 

Unfavorable upward trend 

Unfavorable downward trend 

No change in trend, no effect 

No change in trend, favorable effect 

No change in trend, unfavorable effect 

Baseline B

Discontinued DISC

Analysis of Performance Resu

Treasury, through the FMS, met or exceeded all fiv

of its performance targets for this strategic outcome 

during fiscal year 2009. The unit cost to manage one 

million dollars of cash flow was $7.08 in fiscal year 

2009, nearly 43 percent lower than the cost target of 

$12.38 and also 21 percent lower than the actual cost 

of $8.96 in fiscal year 2008. This decrease in unit cost 

can largely be attributed to the increase in Treasury’s 

daily cash flow for 2009, which has increased 29 

percent over fiscal year 2008.

The percentage of government-wide accounting reports 

issued accurately was 100 percent for fiscal year 2009, 

as was the percentage of government-wide accounting 

reports issued on-time, continuing the historically 

highest level of performance over the past several years 

for both of these metrics.

The FMS Government-wide Accounting 

Reporting program maintains the federal government’s books and accounts for its monetary assets

and liabilities by operating and overseeing the government’s central accounting and reporting system. 

In fiscal year 2010, the Office of Management and

Budget (OMB) extended the deadline for the fisc

year 2009 Consolidated Financial Report (FR) of 

United States Government. Te FR presents a pic

of government-wide finances that complements the 

traditional federal government budget information. 

It is invaluable when assessing the long-term impact 

of the government’s policy decisions and the timely 

availability of this additional information is critical to 

a fully informed budget process. FMS, in coordinatio

with OMB, continues to make improvements to it

policies, procedures, information systems, and internal 

controls associated with compiling and issuing the FR

These improvements resulted in the elimination of 16 

of 56 open Government Accountability Office 

findings and recommendations in a report associated 

with GAO’s fiscal year 2008 audit report. FMS

coordination with OMB and requisite federal agencies

will continue to resolve the preparation issues that are 

within Treasury’s sphere of control. However, other

preparation data integrity issues also exist, that depend 

on accurate and consistent data being submitted by the 

federal agencies.
St

teg

Goal: Effectively M

U.S

o

ver

me

t Fin

ce

Strategic Objective: Cash Resources are Available to Ope

To complement and support the accelerated release 

of the FR, Treasury continues to release the Monthl

Treasury Statement, the monthly public source of

budgetary results on the eighth business day of each 

month. This release schedule allows Treasury to provide 

agency financial managers complete and accurate financial data on a timely basis for use in the preparation of 

their financial statements. 

FMS also performs the accounting for the federal government’s operating cash, and provides critical suppor

related to government-wide cash forecasting and cash 

management functions.

Bureau of the Public De

BPD exceeded the target for its measure associated with

this outcome. The cost per summary debt accounting 

transaction for fiscal year 2009 was $8.66, nearly 13.5 

percent lower than the targeted unit cost, and representing a 4.9 percent decrease from fiscal year 2008. 

Conclusion

For fiscal year 2009, Treasury was successful in providing accurate, timely, useful, transparent and accessible

financial information. The unit cost to manage one 

million dollars of cash flow improved significantly from 

fiscal year 2008, and this can largely be attributed to 

the significant increase in Treasury daily cash flows in 

fiscal year 2009. Additionally, Treasury has continued

to reduce the cost per summary debt accounting 

transaction on an annual basis, reducing the cost by 

31.4 percent since the measure was adopted in 2005.

Moving Forwar

Public Debt will continue to accurately account for and 

report on federal debt. BPD will modernize its current

summary debt accounting system and has established a 

goal to migrate to a shared service solution by fiscal year 

2013. The goal is to standardize business, system and 

data elements and reduce operational risk and costs. 

One of FMS’ major initiatives, which aims to modernize long standing federal accounting processes a

provide agencies with methodologies and tools to 

improve the accuracy and consistency of their financial 

data, is the Government-wide Accounting (G

Modernization Program. This multi-year effort is 

designed to improve the reliability, usefulness, and 

timeliness of the government’s financial information, 

provide agencies and other users with better access to 

that information, and will eliminate duplicate reporting and reconciliation burdens by agencies, potentially 

resulting in significant government-wide savings. It will 

also improve the budgetary information being collected 

from the agencies at the transaction level. In 2009, a 

provisional account statement was implemented to 

provide agencies the ability to view their transactions on 

a daily basis. The ability to reclassify these transactions 

daily will be available in late 2009. The program has 

scheduled the implementation of a common government-wide accounting code during fiscal year 2010.
DEpARtmEnt oF thE tREASuRY • AgEnCY pERFoRmAnCE REpoRt • FISCAL YEAR 2009

40 sTraTegIC goal: u.s. anD WorlD eConoMIes PerforM aT full eConoMIC PoTenTIal

Strategic Goal: 

U.S. and World Economies Perform 

at Full Economic Potential 

Strategic Obj

Improved economic opportunity, 

mobility, and security with robust, 

real, sustainable economic

growth at home and abroad

Economic growth stimulates economic opportunity,

mobility, and security for Americans and others around

the world. Promoting the development of new markets 

in the U.S. ensures that all Americans benefit fr

economic growth. The expansion of underdeveloped 

economies abroad opens markets, enhances regional 

stability, reduces the spread of disease, creates opportunities for profitable trade, and demonstrates democracy 

in action. Treasury promotes economic growth through 

direct and indirect regulation of financial markets; 

regulation of national banks and thrifts; implementation of policies promoting international trade, investment and economic security; programs encouraging 

investment in economically distressed communities; 

and policy initiatives directed at expanding the capacity 

of financial institutions to provide affordable credit, 

capital and financial services to the American people

The bureaus and offices responsible for achievement of 

this objective are:

•	 alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade bureau

•	 Community Development financial Institutions 

fund

•	 The office of the Comptroller of the Currency

•	 The office of Domestic finance

•	 The office of economic Policy

•	 The office of International affairs

•	 The office of Thrift supervision

The outcomes associated with this objective are:

•	 strong u.s. economic competitiveness

•	 Competitive capital markets

•	 free trade and investment

•	 Prevented or mitigated financial and economic 

crises

•	 Decreased gap in global standard of living

budget Trend by objective: improved economic opportunity, 

Mobility, and security with robust, real, sustainable economic 

growth at home and abroad Dollars in Thousands

$0

$200,000

$400,000

$600,000

$800,000

$1,000,000

$1,200,000

$1,400.000

$1,600,000

$1,800,000

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

$874,059 $975,283 $1,057,863

$1,383,230

$1,678,247

performance Cost Trend: improved economic opportunity, Mobility, 

and security with robust, real, sustainable economic growth at 

home and abroad Dollars in Thousands

$0

$200,000

$400,000

$600,000

$800,000

$1,000,000

$1,200,000

$1,400,000

$1,600,000

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

$927,076 $1,016,696 $1,077,080 $1,162,382

$1,423,847
sTraTegiC goal: u.s. anD worlD eConoMies perforM aT full eConoMiC poTenTial

sTraTegIC obJeCTIve: IMProveD eConoMIC oPPorTunITy aT hoMe anD abroaD 41

fiscal year 2009 results: improved economic opportunity, Mobility, 

and security with robust, real, sustainable economic growth at 

home and abroad

14%

Unmet

2%

Improved

18%

Met

66%

Exceeded

performance Cost by outcome

74%

23%

1%

1%

1% Competitive capital markets.

Decreased gap in global standard 

of living.

Free trade and investment.

Prevented or mitigated financial 

and economic crisis.

Strong U.S. economic 

competitiveness.

Assessing the Effectiveness o

Economic Poli

The Department’s economic policy efforts can be 

separated into two categories: policy initiatives and 

established programs. Differences between them largely 

correspond to timing in the policy process. Policy 

initiatives are efforts to influence economic growth 

and financial market activity through new legislative 

proposals or government-wide policy. Substantial

analytical effort is directed towards understanding a 

problem, developing strategies to address the problem, 

and ultimately proposing a legislative or administrative 

solution. Established programs are typically already

defined by law or administrative function and have 

specific objectives and management scope. For performance management, it is generally easier to assess

the performance of established programs, given their 

clearer objectives and scope. Most of the Department’s 

performance measures consequently assess established 

programs and not policy initiatives. The Department is 

currently working to develop performance measures to 

better assess policy performance, gauging effectiveness 

based on traction (how efficiently and effectively policy 

offices work with other government offices and/or the 

extent to which the office influences progress towards 

an outcome) and impact (whether or not the policy 

initiative had a positive outcome). 
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

42 Strategic Goal: U.S. and World Economies Perform a

Strong U.S. Economic Com

Strong U.S. economic competitiveness is crucial for robust economic growth worldwide, continued investme

in the United States, and job creation. The Treasury Department develops policies and programs intended to promote a prosperous financial infrastructure, a balanced macro economy, market efficiency, technological readiness

and innovation. For fiscal year 2009, Treasury generally met or exceeded its performance targets for established

programs promoting U.S. economic competitivenes

Fiscal Year 2009 Results

strong u.s. economic Competitiveness 

5%

Unmet

4%

Met

86%

Exceeded

5%

Improved

Summary of Actual Trends for the Prior Four Years

TrenD s M T

	 	

	 	

	 	

	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

y bol Coun %

Favorable upward trend  10 45%

Favorable downward trend  4 18%

Unfavorable upward trend  1 5%

Unfavorable downward trend  2 9%

No change in trend, no effect  5 23%

No change in trend, favorable effect  0 0%

No change in trend, unfavorable effect  0 0%

Baseline B 0 0%

Total 22 100%

Discontinued DISC 1

Key Performance Measure Table 

The following table contains only key performance measures associated with this outcome. Actual and target trends represent four years of data

where available. The full suite of measures with detailed explanations is available in the Appendix.

Key Performance Measure B

2008 

Act

2009 

Targe

2009 

Act

% of 

Targe

Achi

% Change 

in Act

Performan

Rati

2010 

Targe

Targe

Tren

Actu

Tren

Administrative cost per number of Bank Enterprise

Award (BEA) applications processed ($) (E)

CDFI $3,070 $1,455 $2,366 37.4% 122.9% Improved DISC  

Administrative costs per financial assistance (FA)

application processed (E)

CDFI $7,200 $6,920 $3,283 152.6% 154.4% Exceeded DISC  

Administrative costs per number of Native American

CDFI Assistance (NACA) applications processed ($) (E)

CDFI $10,990 $9,090 $3,162 165.2% 171.2% Exceeded DISC  

Administrative costs per number of New Markets Tax

Credit (NMTC) applications processed ($) (E)

CDFI $7,400 $4,875 $3,254 133.3% 156.0% Exceeded DISC  

Annual percentage increase in the total assets of

Native CDFIs (%) (Oe)

CDFI 19% 15% 23% 153.3% 121.1% Exceeded 15  

Community Development Entities' annual

investments in low-income communities ($ billion)

CDFI $3.3 $2.5 $3.6 144.0% 109.1% Exceeded 2.5  

Increase in community development activities over

prior year for all BEA program applicants ($ millions)

(Oe)

CDFI $232 $202 $292 144.6% 125.9% Exceeded 210  

Increase in the percentage of eligible areas served

by a CDFI

CDFI 17.8% 15% 25.1% 167.3% 141.0% Exceeded 21  

Number of small businesses located in underserved

communities financed by BEA Program applicants

CDFI 906 288 640 222.2% 70.6% Exceeded 252  

table continued on next page
St

teg

Goal:

U.S. 

Wor

d Ec

mies

Perfo

m 

t Full E

m

o

te

tia

Strategic Objective: Improved economic opportu

Key Performance Measure B

2008 

Act

2009 

Targe

2009 

Act

% of 

Targe

Achi

% Change 

in Act

Performan

Rati

2010 

Targe

Targe

Tren

Actu

Tren

Percent of CDFIs that increased their total assets

(cumulative)

CDFI 87% 70% 88% 125.7% 101.1% Exceeded 72  

Percentage of loans and investments that went into

severely distressed communities

CDFI 73% 66% 81% 122.7% 111.0% Exceeded 66  

Average number of days to process an original

permit application at the National Revenue Center (E)

TTB 64 72 64 111.1% 100.0% Exceeded 72  

Percent of electronically filed Certificate of Label

Approval applications (%) (E)

TTB 62% 53% 74% 139.6% 119.4% Exceeded 78  

Percentage of importers identified by TTB as illegally

operating without a Federal permit

TTB 22% 20% 15% 125.0% 131.8% Exceeded 19  

Legend Sy

Favorable upward trend 

Favorable downward trend 

Unfavorable upward trend 

Unfavorable downward trend 

No change in trend, no effect 

No change in trend, favorable effect 

No change in trend, unfavorable effect 

Baseline B

Discontinued DISC

Analysis of Performance Resu

Performance for established programs promoting 

strong U.S. economic competitiveness exceeded targe

levels for 86 percent of measures, met target levels for 

four percent of measures, did not meet target levels 

but showed improvement over 2008 for five percent 

of measures, and did not meet target levels for five 

percent of measures. (One performance measure was

discontinued.) Thirty-two percent of performance 

targets showed trend improvement, 23 percent showed 

trend decline, and 46 percent showed neither decline 

nor improvement. For actual result trends, 63 percent

of measures showed improvement, 14 percent showed 

trend declines, and 23 percent showed neither decline 

nor improvement. (One new measure was baselined in

2009.) These results indicate that these programs generally succeeded in achieving their performance goals, 

although targets may need to be set more aggressively 

in some cases.

Community Development Financial

Institutions Fu

The CDFI Fund provides grants and loans to financia

institutions (Community Development Financial

Institutions or CDFIs) which provide capital, credit

and financial services to underserved populations and 

economically distressed communities. During fiscal 

year 2009, performance results were good. Fifteen

measures exceeded targets, one measure did not meet 

its target but was improved over 2008 and one measure 

fell short of target.

The CDFI Fund’s activities can be broken up int

four areas: Financial and Technical Assistance (CD

Program), Native American Financial and Technic

Assistance (NACA), New Markets Tax Cre

(NMTC), and the Bank Enterprise Award

programs. To provide capital to distressed communities 

during the recession, the Fund received an additional

$100 million for disbursement in fiscal year 2009 

through the Recovery Act

•	 In fiscal year 2009, the CDFI Program competitively awarded $52.7 million in funding under

regular appropriations and $90 million under the 

Recovery Act to CDFIs for providing loans, investments, financial services and technical assistance 

underserved populations and low-income communities. Administrative cost per financial assistance

application processed was $3,283, less than half of 

the target of $6,920, largely due to improved cost 

accounting for the actual direct and imputed costs 
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

44 Strategic Goal: U.S. and World Economies Perform a

for processing applications and the higher volume 

of applications due to Recovery Act awards. CDF

were able to attract $1.3 billion from private 

investors leveraging their participation in the 

CDFI Program, more than double the target of

$635 million, due largely to commitments made 

before the onset of the financial crisis. In support 

of economic recovery, CDFIs helped provide

funds for projects that created or maintained 

70,260 jobs, far exceeding the target of 30,000 

jobs. With the recession, the percentage of loans 

and investments that went into severely distressed 

communities rose to 81 percent, far exceeding 

the target of 66 percent and the previous year’s 

actual result (73 percent). The CDFI program also

exceeded targets for the following measures largely 

due to increased funding: percentage of eligible 

areas served by one or more CDFI (increased to

14.8 percent versus a target of 3 percent) and an 

increase in the percentage of eligible areas served 

by a CDFI (25.1 percent versus a target of 15

percent). The one unmet measure corresponded 

to the percent of CDFIs that increased their total

assets over the previous year. For the measure, the

actual result of 69 percent was slightly below the 

target of 70 percent. The reason for this shortfall is 

mainly associated with the economic climate and 

financial crisis. 

•	 Native Initiatives components of the CDFI Fu

provide financial assistance, technical assistance, 

and training to CDFIs and other entities seeking

to become CDFIs in Native American communities. The NACA program registered a 23 pe

increase in the total assets at Native CDFIs, beating the target increase of 15 percent. The figur

surpassed the 19 percent increase in fiscal year 

2008. Administrative cost per financial assistance

application processed was $3,162, substantially 

below the target of $9,090, due largely to improved cost accounting for application processing 

and a higher volume of applications associated 

with Recovery Act awards

•	 The NMTC Program facilitates investment in

low-income communities by permitting taxpayers 

to receive a credit against Federal income taxes for

making qualified equity investments in designated 

Community Development Entities (CDEs)

Substantially all of the qualified equity investments

are in turn used by CDEs to provide qualified

low-income community investments, principally 

consisting of investments in businesses and real 

estate developments in low-income communities. 

The NMTC Program competitively awarded $6.5

billion in NMTC allocation authority to CDEs i

fiscal year 2009, including Recovery Act allocations. Administrative costs per application we

$3,254, substantially below the target of $4,875. 

The improvement was largely due to improved cost 

accounting for application processing and a higher 

volume of applications as a result of Recovery Ac

awards. Cumulative investments in low-income 

communities by CDEs rose to $12.5 billion,

exceeding the performance target of $11.4 billion 

by $1.1 billion. The annual increase over fiscal year 

2008 was $3.6 billion, exceeding the target of $2.5 

billion. 

•	 The Bank Enterprise Award Program provides ca

awards to banks which increase their investment 

in low-income communities and CDFIs. The

BEA Program registered an increase in community development activities for al BEA pr

applicants from $232 million to $292 million 

between fiscal years 2008 and 2009, with a $214.2 

million increase in loans and investments, $74.6 

million increase in loans, deposits, and technical 

assistance to CDFIs, and $3.5 million increase

in the provision of financial services in distressed 

communities. The administrative cost per application processed was $2,366, 61 percent higher than 

the target of $1,455, but significantly below the 

2008 cost of $3,070. Higher costs were largely due

to the procurement of additional services to assist 

in processing high volumes of applications. The 

number of small businesses located in underserved 

communities financed by EA program applican
St

teg

Goal:

U.S. 

Wor

d Ec

mies

Perfo

m 

t Full E

m

o

te

tia

Strategic Objective: Improved economic opportu

was 640, relative to a target of 288. The number of 

commercial real estate properties financed by 

Program applicants that provide access to essential 

community products and services in underserved 

communities increased to 500 from 287 in fiscal 

year 2008.

Alcohol and tobacco industry

regulation

TTB protects consumers of alcohol and tobacco

products from fraud and deception through industry 

regulation. TTB grants authorization to operate in

alcohol and tobacco-related businesses under the authority of the Federal Alcohol Administration Act 

the Internal Revenue Code. During fiscal year 2009,

TTB processed 5,500 original and 17,800 amended

permits to persons engaged in the alcohol and tobacco 

industries, or approximately four percent and nine 

percent more than in fiscal year 2008, respectively. 

TTB averaged 64 days to process original permit applications, consistent with 2008, despite a four percent

increase in the number of original permits processed. 

Effectiveness and efficiency in processing permit

applications is important for consumer protection and 

reducing obstacles to market entry. 

TTB investigators initiated more than 1,300 field

investigations, including investigations of 380 high-risk 

permit applications, to meet TTB’s public protection

objectives. Cease and desist letters were issued to 

more than 200 entities that illicitly imported tobacco 

products, and TTB followed up to ensure they either

complied with TTB permit requirements or ended

operations. TTB exceeded its target in fiscal year 2009

for reducing the number of imports made by entities 

operating without a Federal permit.

TTB conducts product integrity investigations to

ensure that the country’s alcohol beverages are safe for 

consumption. TTB carried out 492 product integrity

investigations in fiscal year 2009. These investigations 

require the laboratory analysis of alcohol beverages for 

harmful adulterants or contaminants, such as heavy 

metals, pesticides, and other toxins, as well as the 

screening of imported products prior to their entry 

into U.S. commerce. The analytical work performe

by the TTB laboratories in support of alcohol and

tobacco regulatory enforcement involve collaboration with the U.S. Food and Drug Administrati

the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the 

National Institutes of Health, the Food Emerge

Response Network (FERN), and other organizat

Of the alcohol beverage samples secured by investigators from industry members suspected of violations,

laboratory analysis found almost 30 percent (192) to 

be out of compliance in either alcohol content, bottle 

fill, or other issues. TTB is taking appropriate actions

to address instances of non-compliance. 

Importers and bottlers of alcohol beverages are required 

by law to obtain a Certificate of Label Approva

(COLA) or certificate of exemption from label approval from TTB for most alcohol beverages prior

their introduction into the market. In fiscal year 2009, 

TTB approved 99,400 COLAs, or 80 percent of 

approximately 125,000 COLA applications receive

COLAs received decreased by 6 percent from 2008 

2009, due largely to the economic downturn. At year

end, 74 percent of COLA applications received we

filed electronically through TTB’s COLAs On

system, a significant improvement from 62 percent in 

2008, helping TTB gain processing efficiencies. These

increases in online applications are due in large part to 

outreach efforts by TTB through educational workshops, one-on-one demonstrations to large filers, and

the 2009 TTB Expo

TTB’s international trade program helps to ensure

products entering the U.S. are properly produced an

labeled, and strengthens the U.S. economy by facilitating import and export trade in alcohol and tobacc

products. TTB made progress on several international

agreements designed to facilitate trade by increasing 

mutual understanding of each country’s alcohol and 

tobacco production, labeling and licensing standards. 

These agreements also advance the government’s aim of 

protecting federal revenue by establishing partnerships 

with appropriate counterparts to combat alcohol and 
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

46 Strategic Goal: U.S. and World Economies Perform a

tobacco diversion as well as other forms of smuggling 

activity. During fiscal year 2009, TTB worked with

counterparts in China, France, Italy, the Republic o

Georgia, Brazil, Argentina, Australia, Canada, Chi

New Zealand and South Africa on various international projects to improve industry oversi

Office of Financial Educat

Treasury, through the Office of Financial Educati

(OFE), coordinates government efforts to promo

financial education via national outreach activities. 

Particular emphasis in 2009 was placed on “banking the unbanked,” or helping those without bank 

accounts establish their first accounts. The First

Account Program management byOFE provi

information and outreach and has helped 37,000 

people set up savings and checking accounts since its 

inception. To better institutionalize financial literacy 

programs, Treasury’s proposal for a Consumer Financial

Protection Agency under financial regulatory reform

initiatives includes provisions to expand and promote 

financial literacy. On an inter-agency basis,

supports initiatives by the President’s Advisory Council

on Financial Literacy, including management of th

National Financial Literacy Challenge, a web-bas

contest to promote knowledge of personal finance concepts open to high school students across the country. 

Over 75,000 students participated in the voluntary

exam for the Challenge in November-December

2008, where students scoring in the top 25th percentile 

received certificates of recognition and 362 students 

earned the National Financial Literacy Award me

for exceptional test scores. 

Conclusion

The CDFI Fund provided essential financial suppor

in fiscal year 2009 for distressed communities coping 

with the effects of the recession. Additional funding

from the Recovery Act contributed to a greater role fo

the CDFI Fund in mitigating impact from the recession and contributed to lower administrative costs pe

application than in typical years. By filling gaps left by

credit contraction and providing incentives for private 

investment and greater job creation, the Fund has

provided an essential economic backstop. This work 

will continue in fiscal year 2010.

TTB’s Protect the Public program exceeded all of its

performance targets in fiscal year 2009. TTB’s efforts to

boost electronic filing of label applications resulted in 

performance results that exceeded the fiscal year target 

by 40 percent and improved upon 2008 performance 

results by 19 percent. The bureau’s rate of customer satisfaction with the permit and claims processing services 

at the National Revenue Center (NRC) dropped

one percent compared to the prior year, but efforts to 

improve turnaround times still helped TTB achieve a

level of customer satisfaction four percent greater than 

its target. TTB’s push for greater processing efficiency

resulted in an average cycle time of 64 days to process 

an original permit application, exceeding its target of 

72 days. TTB’s ongoing mission to protect the public

through improved enforcement is further evidenced by 

TTB’s identification of only 15 percent of importers

operating without a permit, five percent lower than its 

target of 20 percent and an improvement over 2008 of 

32 percent. With several new measures now in place, 

TTB will have greater means to review operations and

improve results going forward.

Moving Forwar

CDFI faces several key challenges in fiscal year 2010.

First, given the current turmoil in the debt and equities

markets, CDFIs and CDEs are encountering significant contraction of capital support. This is coming at 

time when many of these entities are seeing increased 

demand for their products, as traditional mainstream 

lenders reduce lending activities. Second, increased

demand for financial products and services for lowincome communities supported by CDFI initiatives

has increased need for refinement of CDFI’s assistance

strategies. CDFI is currently assessing program impact

and realigning resources to help meet demands. To 

address this and other needs, the CDFI Fund is takin

steps to enhance its IT capabilities to ensure sufficient 

capacity and capability to handle increased application 

workloads and new programs. 
St

teg

Goal:

U.S. 

Wor

d Ec

mies

Perfo

m 

t Full E

m

o

te

tia

Strategic Objective: Improved economic opportu

TTb will continue working to improve processing 

times through the automation of its manual processes 

and encourage use of online systems already in place. 

Through individual outreach and educational seminars, 

TTb aims to achieve an electronic Cola filing rate of 

78 percent in fiscal year 2010. To improve efficiency 

and improve customer satisfaction, TTb explored 

options to develop an automated permit application 

system, aimed at reducing permit application processing and turnaround time. TTb currently processes 

original application packets for 23 types of permits 

or registrations for the alcohol, tobacco and firearms 

industries. over the past five years, the volume of 

paper applications has increased 25 percent while 

TTb authorized staffing levels have decreased by 

four percent, making it difficult to maintain current 

service levels. after extensive research, TTb acquired 

a web-based technology that will provide the required 

capability 25 percent faster, at a cost 25 percent lower, 

than could be achieved through customary application procedures. The commercial product, which will 

be deployed in fiscal year 2010 and fully operational 

in fiscal year 2011, will substantially improve TTb’s 

ability to process applications in a timely fashion, 

helping permit and registration holders bring products 

to market faster.

CoMpeTiTiVe CapiTal MarkeTs

Prosperous capital markets play an important role in 

facilitating economic growth by inspiring investor confidence and ensuring fair asset pricing. Treasury strives 

to preserve the integrity of the u.s. market, which is 

essential to maintaining effectiveness.

Treasury does not currently have performance measures 

to assess promotion of competitive capital markets. The 

most direct initiatives at the Department in 2009 were 

associated with maintenance of capital market stability, as discussed under the financial regulatory repair 

and reform sections in the “Prevented and Mitigated 

financial and economic Crises” outcome. robust 

supervision and regulation of financial firms, more 

comprehensive supervision of financial markets, provisions to protect consumers and investors from financial 

abuse, and establishment of viable government tools to 

manage financial crises are fundamental to a thriving 

and competitive financial system. Treasury’s efforts 

to obtain regulatory reform legislation and improve 

market function will continue into 2010. 

The Department will seek to implement suitable performance measures in the near future to assess progress 

in maintaining competitive capital markets.
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

48 Strategic Goal: U.S. and World Economies Perform a

Free trade and in

Open foreign and domestic markets for goods and services are vital for a robust, growing and sustainable U.

economy. While protectionism has strengthened over the last year, Treasury continues to work to maintain open 

markets for American products and services. For fiscal year 2009, Treasury exceeded its performance targets fo

programs seeking to promote free trade and investment.

Fiscal Year 2009 Results

free Trade and investment

100%

Exceeded

Summary of Actual Trends for the Prior Four Years

Trend Symbol Cou

Favorable upward trend  2 100%

Favorable downward trend  0 0%

Unfavorable upward trend  0 0%

Unfavorable downward trend  0 0%

No change in trend, no effect  0 0%

No change in trend, favorable effect  0 0%

No change in trend, unfavorable effect  0 0%

Baseline B 0 0%

Total 2 100%

Discontinued DISC 0

Key Performance Measure Table

The following table contains only key performance measures associated with this outcome. Actual and target trends represent four years of data

where available. The full suite of measures with detailed explanations is available in the Appendix.

Key Performance Measure B

2008 

Act

2009 

Targe

2009 

Act

% of 

Targe

Achi

% Change 

in Act

Performan

Rati

2010 

Targe

Targe

Tren

Actu

Tren

Number of New Trade and Investment Negotiations

Underway or Completed (Oe)

DO 14 6 15 250.0% 107.1% Exceeded 2  

Number of specific new trade actions involving

Treasury interagency participation in order to

enact, implement and enforce US trade law and

international agreements

DO 68 30 98 326.7% 144.1% Exceeded 40  

Legend Sy

Favorable upward trend 

Favorable downward trend 

Unfavorable upward trend 

Unfavorable downward trend 

No change in trend, no effect 

No change in trend, favorable effect 

No change in trend, unfavorable effect 

Baseline B

Discontinued DISC

Analysis of Performance Resu

Performance for programs aimed at promoting free 

trade and investment greatly exceeded target levels for 

both measures. Target trends for both measures were 

lower, if actual performance results are used as baseline 

targets for the prior fiscal year. Actual results were

higher than 2008 levels, though, so that percent of 

target achieved for both measures was excessively high. 

While implying that Treasury succeeded in meeting its 

performance objectives, the results suggest that performance targets for fiscal year 2010 need to be evaluated 

to ensure they better match performance results. 
St

teg

Goal:

U.S. 

Wor

d Ec

mies

Perfo

m 

t Full E

m

o

te

tia

Strategic Objective: Improved economic opportu

Managing financial crises, trade flows, financial security, climate change, and aid for developing economies 

in a global economy requires coordination with 

international partners. In all of these areas, Treasury 

worked with international partners to improve joint 

stewardship of the global economy. Throughout the 

financial crisis, Treasury officials have been in constant 

communication with international colleagues, showing 

clear and compelling results. Treasury helped facilitate 

international cooperation in responding to the global 

financial crisis, averting a more serious economic 

downturn, and anchored the largest, most coordinated 

global fiscal and monetary stimulus ever undertaken.

Demonstrated U.S. leadership at G-

meetings

The G-20 is a multilateral forum bringing together the

leaders from the 20 largest economies in the world, 

accounting for 85 percent of world output. At the

G-20 Summits in Washington (November 2008

London (April 2009), and Pittsburgh (Septemb

2009), Treasury took the leading role in developing a 

dynamic global recovery formula and securing G-20

leaders’ commitments on measures to combat the 

economic and financial crisis. Through these summits, 

G-20 members agreed to pursue a globally-coordinated

policy response to stabilize the financial system and 

provide monetary policy support, fiscal stimulus, and 

emergency capital for emerging and developing economies. In addition to coordinating national fiscal and 

monetary policies, major accomplishments included 

decisions to:

•	 Treble resources for the International Monetary 

fund (IMf) from $250 billion to $750 billion, 

enabling it to provide emergency loans to countries 

adversely affected by the financial crisis

•	 Restructure the Financial Stability Forum into 

Financial Stability Board, adding G-20 memb

not previously part of the Financial Stabilit

Forum, broadening its capacity to manage global

banking regulation and supervision

•	 establish a Framework for Strong, Sustainable, and 

Balanced Growth, formulated around peer reviews 

of national economic policies and regulatory 

standards to collaboratively identify and prevent 

imbalances in the global economy

•	 Establish processes to ensure that all systemically

important financial institutions, markets and 

instruments are subject to appropriate regulation

•	 Improve coordination in international crisis 

management

•	 Determine common rules for compensation 

practices at large financial institutions

•	 Improve international accounting standards

•	 Jointly manage concerns related to tax havens and 

non-cooperative jurisdictions

•	 Jointly manage oversight of credit rating agencies

At the G-20 summit in Pittsburgh, the leaders announced that the G-20 would replace the G-7 as 

main economic council of wealthy nations. Through 

the G-20 process, Treasury has participated in developing a strong multilateral system to coordinate a global

policy response to reverse the economic slide and to 

do what is necessary to restore public confidence, 

economic growth, and job creation.

Promoted free international trade and

investment

Treasury promoted open investment policies at home 

and for U.S. investors abroad through bilateral an

multilateral outreach efforts. Announcement of the

intention to complete the Doha Round of World

Trade Organization negotiations by the end of 2010

increased activity in fiscal year 2009 surrounding trade 

negotiations. Treasury staff participated in the launching, negotiation or implementation of 15 trade and 

investment agreements, including free trade agreements 

with Oman, Costa Rica and Peru; the Trans-Pacifi

Agreement; the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperati

cross-border services initiative; and the Mauritius 

Bilateral Investment Treaty. In efforts to achieve

completion of the Doha Round by 2010, Treasury
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

50 Strategic Goal: U.S. and World Economies Perform a

has continued to suggest new approaches for round 

negotiations to overcome difficult impediments. To 

minimize the impact of the global recession, Treasury 

has supported efforts by G-20 leaders to refrain from

new protectionist measures and keep markets open. 

As part of these efforts, Treasury supported limitations

on export financing subsidies that Organization for

Economic Co-operation and Development member

states can provide to developing countries, to forestall 

unnecessary competition. Treasury’s role in establishing 

the U.S.-EU Investment Dialogue and the U.S.-

Investment Forum has helped expand dialogue over a

range of high-priority investment issues. 

Deepened U.S. engagement wit

key emerging market and priority 

countries

Given that the global economy is increasingly impacted

by emerging market countries, more inclusive representation in international bodies is essential for long-term 

global recovery and growth. Treasury strongly supported the transition from the G-7 to the G-20 process

the trebling of the IMF’s resources, and creation of

the Financial Stability Board. Treasury also support

quota reforms at the World Bank and IMF to allo

greater participation by developing nations and increased financial support for multilateral development 

banks (MDBs) to enable them to boost lending by

$100 billion over the next three years. To manage key 

partnerships, the Treasury Department has established 

bilateral strategic dialogues with China, India, Russia,

Afghanistan, Pakistan, Israel, Iraq and Haiti. The following are a few events associated with those dialogues

(The U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue

discussed separately in a following section.)

•	 In October 2008, Treasury hosted the Iraqi

Minister of Finance and Central Bank Govern

in a Forum on Iraqi Financial Issues to discus

strategies to promote economic growth and price 

stability, develop the financial sector, and integrate 

Iraqi into the global financial system.

•	 Treasury and the State Department co-hosted an

Israeli Government delegation at a meeting of the

U.S. – Israel Joint Economic Development Gr

in July 2009. The group discussed U.S. and Israel

macroeconomic outlooks and long-term fiscal 

policy challenges and agreed on fiscal year 2010 

and 2011 loan guarantees to Israel.

Established a U.S. – China Strate

and Economic Dialogu

In April 2009, President Barack Obama and Chine

President Hu Jintao announced the establishment

of the U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialo

(S&ED). The Dialogue provides an overarching framework bringing together the two countries’ highest-leve

officials to address a range of critical bilateral and 

global economic, environmental and diplomatic 

issues. In fiscal year 2009, the Dialogue contributed 

to coordinated monetary and fiscal policy actions 

to restore growth and the successful restructuring of 

multilateral economic institutions. The S&ED build

on its predecessor, the Strategic Economic Dialogu

(SED), which was created in 2006

The first meeting of the S&ED took place over tw

days at the end of July and included one of the largest 

delegations in the history of U.S.-China relations. Th

Economic Track of the Dialogue, chaired by Secretar

Geithner and China’s Vice Premier Wang Qishan

involved twelve Cabinet officials and agency heads 

and 15 Chinese Ministers, Vice Ministers and agency

heads. Both sides laid out a framework for U.S.-Chi

cooperation on economic issues based on four pillars: 1. promoting a strong recovery and achieving 

more sustainable, balanced growth, 2. promoting 

more resilient, open, and market-oriented financial 

systems, 3. strengthening trade and investment, and 4. 

strengthening the international financial architecture. 

The Strategic Track of the Dialogue, the new addition

that distinguishes the S&ED from the prior five SE

was led by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and St

Councilor Dai Bingguo and focused on political and

foreign policy issues in the U.S.-China relationshi
St

teg

Goal:

U.S. 

Wor

d Ec

mies

Perfo

m 

t Full E

m

o

te

tia

Strategic Objective: Improved economic opportu

Improved transparency at sovereign

wealth funds

Treasury has undertaken outreach efforts to build 

support for multilateral initiatives improving understanding and communication regarding sovereign 

wealth fund (SWF) investment practices. In late 2007

Treasury proposed creation of a large multilateral effort 

to develop voluntary best practices for SWFs. Creatio

of the International Working Group of Sovereig

Wealth Funds (IWG) in coordination with the IMF 

March 2008 and issuance by the IWG of the “Santiag

Principles” in October 2008, outlining 24 voluntary

principles governing sovereign wealth fund investment 

practices, have been key in improving transparency 

in SWF investment practices. Establishment of t

International Forum of Sovereign Wealth Funds 

April 2009, the successor to the IWG, has additionall

provided an important institutional base for addressing 

issues related to SWF practices. Treasury will continu

to provide support for International Forum initiatives

to define and codify sovereign investment practices and 

improve operational transparency.

Supported a Global Agreement 

Climate Change

Preceding the United Nations Framework Conventi

on Climate Change meeting in Copenhagen in 

December 2009, Treasury worked closely with other 

federal agencies and international partners to secure an 

effective global agreement. Treasury’s efforts were critical 

to establishing and launching the Climate Investment 

Funds in fiscal year 2009, two new multilateral trust

funds hosted by the World Bank that promote clean

energy in developing countries, and establishment of 

an Experts Group on Climate Finance at the G-

The Clean Technology Fund (CTF), the first of the tw

new funds, aims to reduce global emissions growth by 

helping to close the price gap in developing countries 

between dirtier conventional technologies and commercially available cleaner alternatives. The CTF is

currently co-chaired by the Treasury’s Deputy Assistant

Secretary for Environment and Energ

Conclusion

Improving trade and investment linkages with international partners is essential to sustaining the U.S

economy in a global market. The global recession 

in 2009 increased tensions associated with market 

access. The number of new trade actions increased 

significantly over 2008, associated with efforts to enact, 

implement and enforce U.S. trade law and international agreements. Management of economic relation

with key partners, through bilateral and multilateral 

arrangements, helps to mitigate this tension by facilitating an open and balanced exchange of perspectives. 

Elevation of the G-20 as a premier global leadershi

forum, announcement of a decision to conclude the 

Doha Round of WTO negotiations in 2010, creatio

of the Financial Stability Board, expansion of t

funding capacity of the IMF, and other achievements

point to continued success in promoting free trade and 

investment, despite a weak economic environment. 

This progress is evident in the 2009 results of the 

performance measure “Number of new trade and investment negotiations underway or completed”, where

the number of agreements and trade actions greatly 

outpaced expectations. Continuing efforts to promote 

free trade and investment will deepen the global market 

and expand economic growth.

Moving Forwar

Tensions over impediments to trade and investment associated with the global recession are likely to continue 

well into 2010. However, the positive achievements of

2009, during the height of the recession, allow for some 

optimism that tensions will remain contained. The 

Copenhagen climate change negotiations and continuing Doha negotiations are expanding global dialogue 

over environmental and trade issues. Greater coordination of monetary and regulatory policy through the

Financial Stability Board and other venues has help

promote stability in financial markets and increase 

confidence in global market management. While lingering effects of the recession will continue to provide 

challenges for financial management, the current trend 

towards expanded market negotiations is encouraging.
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

52 Strategic Goal: U.S. and World Economies Perform a

Prevented or mitigated financial and e

Treasury has been at the forefront of the U.S. Government’s response to the financial crisis and economic recession. Through implementation of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (HERA), Emergency Ec

Stabilization Act of 2008 (EESA), American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act), coordin

with federal, state and international partners, regulation of national banks and thrifts, temporary measures to stabilize money markets, and various other initiatives Treasury made concerted efforts in fiscal year 2009 to stabilize 

the financial system and restore economic growth.  description of these programs and their performance follows.

Fiscal Year 2009 Results

prevented or Mitigated financial and economic Crises

22%

Unmet

39%

Met

39%

Exceeded

Summary of Actual Trends for the Prior Four Years

Trend Symbol Cou

Favorable upward trend  2 11%

Favorable downward trend  1 6%

Unfavorable upward trend  1 6%

Unfavorable downward trend  5 28%

No change in trend, no effect  3 17%

No change in trend, favorable effect  0 0%

No change in trend, unfavorable effect  0 0%

Baseline B 6 33%

Total 18 100%

Discontinued DISC 0

Key Performance Measure Table

The following table contains only key performance measures associated with this outcome. Actual and target trends represent four years of data

where available. The full suite of measures with detailed explanations is available in the Appendix.

Key Performance Measure B

2008 

Act

2009 

Targe

2009 

Act

% of 

Targe

Achi

% Change 

in Act

Performan

Rati

2010 

Targe

Targe

Tren

Actu

Tren

Average days to close a FOIA case DO N/A B 67 100.0% B Met 64 B B

Changes that result from project engagement

(Impact)

DO 3.1 3.1 3.1 100.0% 100.0% Met 3.1  

Clean audit opinion on TARP financial statements DO N/A B Met 100.0% B Met 1 B B

Percentage of Congressional correspondence

responses drafted within 48 hours

DO N/A B 87% 100.0% B Met 90 B B

Percentage of Customers satisfied with

FinancialStability.gov

DO N/A B 65% 100.0% B Met 70 B B

Scope and intensity of engagement (Traction) DO 3.6 3.6 3.7 102.8% 102.8% Exceeded 3.6  

Percent of national banks with composite CAMELS

rating of 1 or 2 (%) (Oe)

OCC 92% 90% 82% 91.1% 89.1% Unmet 90  

Percentage of national banks that are categorized as

well capitalized (%) (Oe)

OCC 99% 95% 86% 90.5% 86.9% Unmet 95  

Rehabilitated national banks as a percentage of

problem national banks one year ago (CAMELS 3, 4

or 5) (%) (Oe)

OCC 47% 40% 29% 72.5% 61.7% Unmet 40  

table continued on next page
St

teg

Goal:

U.S. 

Wor

d Ec

mies

Perfo

m 

t Full E

m

o

te

tia

Strategic Objective: Improved economic opportu

key perforManCe Measure bureau

2008 

aCTual

2009 

TargeT

2009 

aCTual

% of 

TargeT 

aChieVeD

% Change 

in aCTual

perforManCe 

raTing

2010 

TargeT

TargeT 

TrenD

aCTual 

TrenD

Total	OCC	costs	relative	to	every	$100,000	in	bank	

assets	regulated	($)	(E)

OCC $8.39 $9.22 $8.81 104.4% 95.0% Exceeded 9.22  

Percent	of	thrifts	that	are	well	capitalized	(%)	(Oe) OTS 98.4% 95% 97% 102.1% 98.6% Exceeded 95  

Percent	of	thrifts	with	composite	CAMELS	ratings	of	

1	or	2	(%)	(Oe)

OTS 90% 90% 84% 93.3% 93.3% Unmet 80  

Total	OTS	costs	relative	to	every	$100,000	in	savings	

association	assets	regulated	($)	(E)

OTS $15.1 $23.04 $19.88 113.7% 68.3% Exceeded 22  

Legend Sy

Favorable upward trend 

Favorable downward trend 

Unfavorable upward trend 

Unfavorable downward trend 

No change in trend, no effect 

No change in trend, favorable effect 

No change in trend, unfavorable effect 

Baseline B

Discontinued DISC

Analysis of Performance Resu

Performance for established programs aimed at 

preventing or mitigating financial and economic crises 

exceeded target levels for 39 percent of measures, met 

target levels for 39 percent of measures, and did not 

meet target levels for 22 percent of measures. Target 

trends were generally flat, except for cost measures 

which were favorable for OCC and OTS. Actual tre

were generally lower, with 17 percent of measures 

showing favorable trends, 34 percent unfavorable 

trends, and 17 percent no change in trend. Six new

measures were baselined in fiscal year 2009 for OF

The measures assess management of program operations and are intended to complement performance 

indicators used by the Department to track financial 

market conditions. Performance results for this 

outcome generally reflect the challenges associated with 

a tenuous financial system. However, the fact that all

but one measure had either unfavorable or unchanged 

target trends suggests that target levels and measures 

may need to be reevaluated. (OFS measures excepte

as they are baseline for 2009.)

Troubled Asset Relief Progr

Financial Stability P

On October 3, 2008, Congress passe EE

prevent a potentially catastrophic failure of the 

financial system. Under the legislation, the Office o

Financial Stability (OFS) was created within Trea

to purchase and insure up to $700 billion in certain 

types of assets under the Troubled Asset Relief Progra

(TARP). Operating in conjunction with Fede

Reserve and Federal Depository Insurance Corporatio

(FDIC) programs, TARP has provided resourc

facilitating stabilization of the financial system and 

restoration of credit to businesses and consumers. For

the period ended September 30, 2009, the face value of

the amounts obligated under TARP was $454 billio

and funds disbursed totaled $364 billion.

The incoming Obama Administration faced a

extremely fragile financial system and deep ongoing 

economic recession. On February 10, 2009, Secreta

Geithner announced a series of new financial programs

under a Financial Stability Plan (FSP), most of wh

relied on TARP, that were designed to help rebuil

confidence in the financial system, draw in private capital, and restart critical channels of credit supply. These 

programs helped bolster confidence in financial markets 

on the state of the country’s financial institutions and 

ensure the availability of essential capital support for 

small businesses, consumers and home owners.

To provide transparency and accountability for TAR

and other programs designed to repair and reform the 

financial system, Treasury created FinancialStability.

gov. The website includes reports and information 
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

54 Strategic Goal: U.S. and World Economies Perform a

Table 1: TARP Summary As of Septembe

$ in billions

Total $ 

Obligate

Total $ 

Disbursed

Investment

Repayment

Outstanding

Balanc

Income on

Investment

Capital Purchase Program $204.6 $204.6 $70.7 $133.9 $9.7

Target Investment Program $40.0 $40.0 $0.0 $40.0 $1.9

Asset Guarantee Program $5.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.5

AIG Investments $69.8 $43.2 $0.0 $43.2 $0.0

Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility $20.0 $0.1 $0.0 $0.1 $0.0

Public Private Investment Program $6.7 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0

Automotive Industry Financing Program $81.1 $75.9 $2.1 $73.8 $0.7

Home Affordable Modification Program $27.1 $0.0 NA NA $0.0

Totals $454.3 $363.8 $72.8 $291.0 $12.7

on Treasury programs, including transaction reports, 

program guidelines, speeches, press releases and 

other information. additional information on the 

Making home affordable program can be found at 

MakingHomeAffordable.gov.

TarP operations are managed with four primary goals:

goal 1 – ensure the overall stability and liquidity of 

the financial system

a. Make capital available to viable institutions

b. Provide targeted assistance as needed

c. Increase liquidity and volume in securitization 

markets

Contributing programs:

•	Capital Purchase Program

•	 Public-Private Investment Program

•	Consumer and business lending Initiative

•	Term asset-backed securities loan 

facility

•	unlocking Credit for small business 

Initiative

•	Targeted Investment Program

•	american International group (aIg) 

Investment Program

•	asset guarantee Program

•	automotive Industry financing Program

goal 2 – Prevent avoidable foreclosures by providing 

an affordable, sustainable, mortgage modification 

option for up to 4 million at-risk homeowners 

Contributing program: 

•	 home affordable Modification Program 

goal 3 – Protect taxpayer interests

goal 4 – Promote transparency
St

teg

Goal:

U.S. 

Wor

d Ec

mies

Perfo

m 

t Full E

m

o

te

tia

Strategic Objective: Improved economic opportu

figure 1. Total Tarp funds obligated in fiscal year 2009 

(in billions)

6.7

Public Private

Investment Program

81.1

Automotive Industry

Financing Program

27.1

Home Affordable

Modification Program

69.8

AIG Investments

5.0

Asset Guarantee

Program 20.0

Term Asset-Backed

Securities Loan Facility

204.6

Capital Purchase

Program

40.0

Targeted Investment

Program

Capital Purchase Program (CPP)

Treasury created the Capital Purchase Program (CPP) 

in October 2008 to stabilize the financial system by

providing capital to viable financial institutions of all 

sizes across the country. The program was intended 

to strengthen banks’ capital base to enable them to 

absorb losses from bad assets while continuing to lend 

to consumers and businesses. As of September 30

2009, Treasury had provided capital to 685 financial 

institutions across 48 states, the District of Columbia, 

and Puerto Rico, including more than 300 small and

community banks.

Treasury provided capital to qualified financial institutions through the purchase of senior preferred equity or 

subordinated debentures. Obligations were structured

to encourage repayment, with dividends set at five percent for the first five years and nine percent thereafter. 

In addition, to participate in financial gains, Treasury 

received warrants from participating institutions to 

purchase common equity, additional preferred shares, 

or additional subordinated debentures. All funding

recipients were subject to limitations on executive pay 

to protect taxpayers and encourage early repayment. 

Treasury initially committed over a third of total TAR

funding, $250 billion, to the CPP; which was lowered 

to $218 billion in March 2009.  total of $204.6

billion was disbursed in fiscal year 2009. Treasury 

is continuing to monitor CPP investments, collect 

dividends, and ensure compliance with contractual 

obligations.

As of September 30, 2009, more than 40 banks ha

repaid TARP investments made by Treasury, includin

over $70 billion in repayments. The repayments had reduced program commitments to below $135 billion. In 

addition, dividends and interest from CPP participants 

was over $6.8 billion and proceeds from the repurchase 

of warrants and stock was $2.9 billion. Many investments aimed at stabilizing banks are expected to deliver 

returns for taxpayers.

Capital Purchase Program information on 

FinancialStability.gov.

Capital Assistance Program (CAP) 

and the Supervisory Capital Assessment 

Program (SCAP)

In early 2009, the Federal Reserve, OCC and F

conducted a one-time, forward-looking assessment or 

“stress test” (the SCAP) on the 19 largest U.S. b

holding companies. The goal was to determine whether 

these banks, which hold two-thirds of U.S. banking system assets, had sufficient capital to withstan

losses and sustain lending through a severe economic 

downturn. Participant banks were encouraged to raise 

needed capital from private investors, with a backstop 

financial arrangement available through Treasury’s 

Capital Assistance Program. The CAP was also available to all non-SCAP banks that wished to ap

For the assessment, supervisors used historically high

loss estimates on securities and loans and historically 

low estimates on potential earnings to determine 

baseline capital levels. The stress test results published 

on May 9, 2009 revealed that nine of the 19 banks had 

sufficient capital buffers while the remaining 10 banks 

needed to raise their capital buffers by a combined $75 

billion. As of September 30, 2009, U.S. banks 

raised $54 billion in common equity and $55 billion 

in non-government guaranteed debt. Treasury did not 

fund any investments through CAP

Capital Assistance Program information on 

FinancialStability.gov.
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

56 Strategic Goal: U.S. and World Economies Perform a

Public-Private Investment Program (PPIP)

To help clean up the balance sheets of major financial 

institutions and restore liquidity to financial markets, Treasury proposed creation of a Public-Private 

Investment Program to purchase legacy loans and 

securities under the Financial Stability Plan. Under t

legacy securities PPIP program, Treasury is investing 

equity on a dollar-for-dollar basis with private investors 

in qualified Public-Private Investment Funds and providing access to debt financing for up to 100 percent

of the fund’s total equity. Funds are required to obtain

commitments of at least $500 million in private capital 

to qualify and are expected to employ a predominately 

long-term buy-and-hold strategy. Treasury will receive 

pro rata any profits or losses in the funds alongside 

private investors.  total of nine asset managers were

designated to establish funds for the program in July 

2009 (selected out of 100 applicants) and the first 

fund closing occurred on September 30, 2009. The

maximum capital commitment for the first round is 

$30 billion. As of September 30, 2009, no private fun

managers had made any investments and Treasury had 

not disbursed any funds.

After announcement of the program, non-agency

mortgage-backed securities (MBS) rose substantiall

in price. Prime fixed rate securities issued in 2006 that 

traded as low as $60 in March had increased in value 

by over 40 percent by the end of September. That

improvement in financial market condition created 

the positive backdrop to enable introduction of the 

program at a smaller scale than originally envisioned. 

The Department will assess the need for additional 

rounds following the results of the first round.

Public-Private Investment Program information on 

FinancialStability.gov.

Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility 

(TALF)

Treasury and the Federal Reserve announced creatio

of TALF in November 2008 to help unlock cre

markets for households and small businesses. Under

TALF, the Federal Reserve announced intentio

lend up to $200 billion to eligible investors purchasing 

AAA-rated asset-backed securities (ABS) collatera

by newly and recently originated consumer and small 

business loans. (Including securities backed by auto 

loans, student loans, credit card loans, equipment 

loans, floorplan loans, loans guaranteed by the Small

Business Administration, insurance premium financ

loans, residential mortgage servicing advances, and 

commercial mortgage loans.) Borrowers are eligible to

borrow up to the market value of the ABS, less a fix

percentage, ensuring they take the first loss if the securities lose value. Under TALF, Treasury provided up

$20 billion to the Federal Reserve in credit protectio

to be employed in the event of borrower default.

Prior to introduction of the program, the market for 

newly-issued BS had largely shut down. Interest ra

spreads on the most highly-rated AA tranches 

ABS and CMBS rose to levels outside their histor

range, in certain cases well over seven to 15 times their 

average, respectively. The disruption of these markets 

contributed to the lack of credit to households and 

businesses of all sizes, impacting U.S. economic activity. Through September 30, 2009, the TALF pr

had supported nearly $80 billion of new consumer 

and small business credit, including over 3.6 million 

consumer and small business loans and leases, and over 

132 million active credit card accounts. TALF has al

provided liquidity for $4.1 billion of legacy CM

securities. This aid to the securitization market has had 

a clear impact on liquidity, spreads and the availability 

of consumer and small business credit. Since the peak

of the crisis, spreads for the asset classes backed by 

the program have come down by 60 percent or more, 

including a reduction in credit card and auto loan 

rates from six percentage points above the benchmark 

to only one percentage point above the benchmark.

In August 2009, Treasury and the Federal Reserve announced extension of TALF through March 31,

for newly-issued BS and legacy commercial mortgagebacked securities (CMBS) and through June 30, 

for newly-issued CMB
St

teg

Goal:

U.S. 

Wor

d Ec

mies

Perfo

m 

t Full E

m

o

te

tia

Strategic Objective: Improved economic opportu

Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility information on the Federal Reserve website.

figure 2. issuance of abs backed by Consumer and small 

business loans (us$, billions) Dollars (in billions)

Standard ABS TALF-Eligible ABS

$0

$5

$10

$15

$20

$25

2007 2008 2009

Average Pre-TALF 

(Sep. 2008 - Feb. 2009)

Average Post-TALF 

(Mar. 2009 - Oct. 2009)

AUGJUNJULAUGSEPOCTNOVDECJANFEBMARAPRMAYJUNJULAUGSEPOCT

Unlocking Credit for Small Business Initiative

To help restore the confidence needed for financial 

institutions to increase lending to small businesses, 

Treasury announced an initiative to expand securitization of small business loans on March 16, 2009. 

Securitization of small business loans provides community banks and other lenders with an important

source of capital for additional loans. However, as a

result of the severe dislocations in the credit markets, 

both lenders that originate loans under BA progra

and the “pool assemblers” that package such loans for 

securitization experienced significant difficulty selling 

SBA loans or securities in the secondary market. Thi

in turn, significantly reduced the ability of such lenders 

and pool assemblers to obtain funds to make new small 

business loans. Under the program, Treasury planned to

make up to $15 billion in TARP resources available t

purchase securities backed by the BA guaranteed portions of loans made under the SBA’s 7(a) loan pro

as well as first-lien mortgage securities made by private 

sector lenders in connection with SBA’s 504 communi

development loan program. (The SBA’s 7(a) program 

the SBA’s most basic and widely used loan program.)

of September 30, 2009, $3.1 billion had been apportioned for the program but no funds disbursed

Since Treasury’s announcement of this program, the

credit markets for small businesses have improved 

somewhat. The secondary market for guaranteed 

loans, for example, had essentially ceased working last 

fall and had only $86 million in January re-sales. That 

market improved notably this spring in the wake of 

Treasury’s announcement, with $399 million settled 

from lenders to broker-dealers in September 2009. A

a result of this improvement, as well as reluctance on 

the part of market participants to accept TARP funds

Treasury found that demand for its proposed program 

declined. As of September 30, 2009, no funds ha

been disbursed under the program, although funding 

remains available. 

Unlocking Credit for Small Business Initiative on 

FinancialStability.gov.

Targeted Investment Program (TIP)

Treasury provided assistance on a case-by-case basis to 

stabilize key financial institutions during the height of 

the financial crisis. Through TIP, Treasury sought to 

prevent a loss of confidence in critical financial institutions which could have resulted in significant financial 

market disruption. Assistance was provided through

the purchase of preferred shares paying an annual 

dividend of eight percent. These investments impose 

greater reporting requirements and harsher restrictions 

on the companies than under CPP terms, including 

restrictions on dividend payments to $0.01 per share 

per quarter, limits on executive compensation and 

corporate expenses, and other measures. In addition, 

Treasury received warrants from participant companies 

to purchase common shares.

Under the TIP, Treasury purchased $20 billion in

preferred shares from Citigroup in December 2008 and 

$20 billion in preferred shares from Bank of Americ

in January 2009. Treasury has exchanged the preferred 

shares for Citigroup received under the TIP and CPP 

programs into common shares and trust preferred 

securities to strengthen Citigroup’s capital base. As of

September 30, 2009, Treasury had received $1.9 billion

in dividends, interest and fees from holdings under the 

TIP program.
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

58 Strategic Goal: U.S. and World Economies Perform a

Targeted Investment Program information on 

FinancialStability.gov.

AIG Investment Program

In November 2008, Treasury purchased $40 billion in

cumulative preferred shares from AIG. In April 200

the $40 billion in cumulative shares were exchanged 

for $41.6 billion in non-cumulative preferred shares 

paying a 10 percent dividend. At the same time, an equity capital facility was created providing an additional

$29.8 billion as needed, of which $3.2 billion had been 

drawn as of September 30, 2009. The Federal Reser

provided loans to AIG and a public trust was create

to hold convertible preferred shares representing 77.9 

percent of the current voting power of AIG commo

shares. These shares are held in trust for the sole benefit 

of taxpayers. (The Department of the Treasury does not 

control the trust and cannot direct the trustees.) As of

September 30, 2009, AIG had not made any divide

payments on any of the perpetual preferred stock. 

Subsequently, AIG failed to make a dividend payme

on November 2, 2009. Per the terms of the preferred

stock, if AIG misses four dividend payments, Treasur

may appoint to the AIG board of directors the greate

of two members or 20 percent of the total number of 

directors of the Company.

AIG Program information on the Federal Reserve

website.

Asset Guarantee Program (AGP)

The Asset Guarantee Program was created in Novemb

2008 to stabilize the financial system by providing 

guarantees against severe credit losses by large financial 

institutions. The AGP has been applied with extrem

discretion and Treasury does not anticipate wider use 

of this program. Announced in January 2009, Treasury

guaranteed up to $5 billion of potential losses on a 

$301 billion pool of loans for Citigroup. Under the

program, Citigroup will absorb the first $39.5 billion 

of losses on the pool, with Treasury taking second loss 

on the next $5 billion. Additionally, FDIC will absor

$10 billion in third losses and the Federal Reserve wil

provide secured loans for 90 percent of the remaining value of the pool, following FDIC and Treasury

payments. The guarantee will expire in 2014 for 

non-residential assets and 2019 for residential assets. In 

return, Treasury received $4 billion in preferred shares 

and warrants, which have since been converted into 

trust preferred securities.

In January 2009, Treasury, the Federal Reserve an

FDIC announced agreement to share potential losses

on a $118 billion pool of loans at Bank of America

Bank of America terminated the request prior to funding, paying $425 million in fees to Treasury, FDIC a

the Federal Reserv

Asset Guarantee Program information on 

FinancialStability.gov.

Automotive Industry Financing Program (AIFP)

Treasury established the Automotive Industry

Financing Program on December 19, 2008, to help

prevent a significant disruption to the American automotive industry, which would have posed a systemic

risk to financial market stability and had a negative 

effect on the economy. AIFP loans and equity investments (purchases of preferred and common shares

totaling $76 billion were provided to General Motors

(GM), Chrysler and their respective financing entities.

GM and Chrysler were provided funds with the requirement that they develop plans to achieve long term

viability. Following finalization of the plans, GM an

Chrysler conducted orderly bankruptcies (40 days for 

GM and 42 days for Chrysler). The U.S. Governm

currently holds 61 percent of common stock in GM

and 10 percent of common stock in Chrysler under the 

program.

As an extension of AIFP, in March 2009 Treasu

created an Auto Supplier Support Program providing qualified automotive supply companies financi

protection on their receivables from domestic auto 

manufacturers. Treasury also established a Warranty 

Commitment Program designed to give consumers 

considering new car purchases confidence that their 
St

teg

Goal:

U.S. 

Wor

d Ec

mies

Perfo

m 

t Full E

m

o

te

tia

Strategic Objective: Improved economic opportu

warranties from GM and Chrysler would be honored.

As of July 10, 2009, the Warranty Commitment

program was terminated after New GM and N

Chrysler completed the purchase of substantially all 

of the assets of GM and Chrysler from their respective

bankruptcies.

Automotive Industry Financing Program information 

on FinancialStability.gov.

Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP)

To mitigate foreclosures and help ensure homeownership preservation, Treasury announced the Home

Affordable Modification Program in February 2009 t

provide incentives for mortgage servicers, borrowers 

and investors to modify loans that are delinquent or 

at imminent risk of default. Funded with $50 billion

from TARP and $25 billion from Fannie Mae a

Freddie Mac, HAMP provides financial support f

loan modifications which reduce a borrower’s monthly 

mortgage payment to no more than 31 percent of their 

monthly gross income. Modifications are intended 

to provide sustainably affordable mortgage payments 

for responsible mortgage holders, and mitigate the 

spillover effects of preventable foreclosures on neighborhoods, communities, the financial system and the 

economy. With over 85 percent of mortgage loans 

in the country covered by the program, HAMP i

expected to help up to four million eligible homeowners modify their mortgages on more affordable terms 

before the end of 2012.

At a meeting between Treasury and participating

servicers on July 28, 2009, the servicers committed 

to reaching a cumulative target of 500,000 trial loan 

modifications by November 1, 2009. As of Octob

31, 2009, 650,994 HAMP trial and permanen

modifications were active, and 728,408 HAMP tria

and permanent modifications were active by November

30, 2009. Servicers have also agreed to work with

Treasury to implement actions designed to improve 

program effectiveness, including streamlining application procedures. To provide transparency and servicer 

accountability, servicer-specific results are reported 

on a monthly basis on FinancialStability.gov and 

MakingHomeAffordable.gov. Treasury is also establishing specific performance metrics to measure the performance of each servicer, such as average borrower wait 

time in response to inquiries and the response time 

for completed applications, and has implemented a 

“second look” review of samples of rejected applications 

to ensure borrower applications are not inadvertently 

or incorrectly denied.

Home Affordable Modification Program information 

on MakingHomeAffordable.gov.

figure 3. haMp active Trial and permanent Modification 

(Cumulative by Month) Modifications

Permanent Modifications

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

800,000

50,130

143,276

253,673

386,865

487,081

650,994

728,408

MAY &

PRIOR

JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV

TARP accomplishments in fiscal year 2009

Viewed in conjunction with other Federal Governme

programs, TARP should be evaluated primarily on it

impact on stabilizing the financial system. Today, the 

financial system and the economy are showing signs of 

stability. The economy grew in the third quarter and 

private economists generally expect moderate growth 

in the remainder of this year and next. The cost of borrowing has declined to pre-crisis levels for many banks, 

non-financial corporations, states and local governments, and the government-sponsored enterprises 

(GSEs). U.S. equity markets have surged, and pr

for bank securities have improved significantly. Credit 

creation in securities markets has increased, facilitating 

new credit for consumers and businesses. Housing

markets are also stabilizing. Home prices, as measured

by the national LoanPerformance index, increased by

five percent over the last six months, reversing three 
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

60 Strategic Goal: U.S. and World Economies Perform a

straight years of decline. While clear challenges remain, 

particularly with continuing bank failures, high 

foreclosure rates, high unemployment and concerns in 

commercial real estate markets, the worst of the crisis 

has passed.

The ultimate return on the TARP investments tha

remain outstanding will depend on how the economy 

and financial markets evolve. The improvement in economic and financial prospects that has already occurred 

has had a significant impact on the expected cost. As

of September 30, 2009, the estimated deficit impact of

TARP programs is $110 billion lower than the initia

estimates made at the time the programs were initiated. 

(See table 2.) About $10 billion of that decline in cost

stems from early repayments of TARP funds. The res

of the decline is primarily a function of improvements 

in the economic and financial environment since TAR

programs were initiated.

Table 2: Estimated Change in Cost for 

Progra

$ in billions

Original

Estimate

Current 

Estimat

Net

Change

Capital Purchase Program - 57.4 + 15.0 + 72.4

Targeted Investment Program - 19.6 + 1.9 + 21.5

Asset Guarantee Program + 1.0 + 2.2 + 1.2

AIG Investments - 31.5 - 30.4 + 1.1

Automotive Industry Financing

Program

- 43.7 - 30.4 + 13.3

Term Asset-Backed Securities

Loan Facility

+ 0.1 + 0.3 + 0.2

Subtotal - 151.1 - 41.4 + 109.7

Home Affordable Modification

Program

- 27.1 - 27.1 0.0

Total - 178.2 - 68.5 + 109.7

1 Original estimates completed on or near the initiation of each program.

Amounts shown based on total program disbursements through fiscal year

2009.

Measuring the impact of TARP in isolation is challenging. Most TARP programs were part of a coordina

government response to restore confidence in the 

financial system. The health of the overall system and 

its impact on the U.S. economy are therefore th

most important metrics by which the effectiveness of 

these policies can be assessed. However, a few TA

programs were uniquely targeted to specific markets 

and institutions, allowing for more direct assessment of 

performance.

Below are several accepted indicators of financial

market stress. The London Inter-Bank Offered Rat

Overnight Index Swap (LIBOR-OIS) spread m

the difference between short-term borrowing rates 

between banks and expected short-term borrowing 

rates for banks from the Federal Reserve. The sprea

reflects the additional risk banks perceive when lending 

to other banks, versus borrowing costs from the Federal

Reserve. Historically, LIBOR-OIS spreads ha

0.1 percent or less. With greater stress in financial markets in October 2008, the three-month LI

spread spiked to 3.64 percent. At the end of the fiscal

year, LIBOR-OIS spreads were 0.25 percent, w

reach of historical levels.

figure 4. libor-ois spread (basis points) Basis Points

Lehman FSP

1-Month 3-Month

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

2006 2007 2008 2009

Credit-default swap spreads for financial institutions, 

which measure investor confidence in their health, have 

also fallen significantly.  measure of credit-default

swaps for the largest U.S. banks reached 450 basi

points last fall, as shown in Figure 5, and is just over

100 basis points today. The TARP was a necessary step

but not the only step, to achieving this recovery. 
St

teg

Goal:

U.S. 

Wor

d Ec

mies

Perfo

m 

t Full E

m

o

te

tia

Strategic Objective: Improved economic opportu

figure 5. Credit Default spreads for financial institutions 

(basis points) Basis Points

Lehman FSP

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

2006 2007 2008 2009

Notes: Includes Bank of America, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan,

Morgan Stanley, and Wells Fargo.

In conjunction with lower credit default swap rates, 

borrowing costs have declined for many businesses. 

Investment-grade corporate bond rates have fallen by 

over 70 percent since last fall, and high-yield bond 

rates have fallen by more than half. Businesses have

issued about $900 billion in investment-grade debt 

and over $100 billion in high-yield debt this year. 

While much of the new issuance earlier in the year was 

supported by the government, private investors have 

funded most new corporate debt in recent months.

figure 6. Corporate bond spreads (basis points) Basis Points

AA 5-Year BBB 5-Year

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

2006 2007 2008 2009

An indicator of borrowing costs for homeowners is

the spread between the 30-year fixed mortgage rate 

and 10-year Treasuries. Higher spreads indicate that

banks perceive greater risks in issuing mortgages and 

homeowners face higher borrowing costs. In midDecember 2008, the 30-year mortgage to 10-year 

Treasury spread reached almost 3.3 percent, its highest 

level since January 2002. On September 30, 2009, th

spread was 1.85 percent, well below its height during 

the crisis.

figure 7. spread between 30 year Mortgage and 10 year Treasury 

rates

2007 2008 2009

JAN 1MAR 1MAY 1JUL 1SEP 1NOV 1JAN 1MAR 1MAY 1JUL 1SEP 1NOV 1JAN 1MAR 1MAY 1JUL 1SEP 1

0

50

100

150

200

250

350

300

Finally, the Chicago Board Options Exchange Volati

Index (VIX) is a gauge of the expected volatility of the

S&P 500 equity index. The VIX is often referred t

as the “Fear Index”, since high levels imply investors

“fear” sharp moves in the market in either direction (up 

or down). Historically, the VIX has ranged between 1

and 30. In November 2008 the VIX reached nearly 81

its highest level on record. On September 30, 2009

the VIX was nearly 26, still relatively high by historic

levels, but well below its height during the crisis.

figure 8. Market Volatility index of s&p 500 (Vix)

2007 2008 2009

JAN 1MAR 1MAY 1JUL 1SEP 1NOV 1JAN 1MAR 1MAY 1JUL 1SEP 1NOV 1JAN 1MAR 1MAY 1JUL 1SEP 1

0

20

10

30

40

60

50

70

90

80
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

62 Strategic Goal: U.S. and World Economies Perform a

Taxpayer protection and promoting 

transparency

In implementing EESA, Treasury has sought to carefully and assertively manage taxpayer resources

investments have been made unless they are compliant 

with statutory requirements, necessary for restoring 

or maintaining financial stability, and structured to 

protect the taxpayer. Programs have been designed to 

achieve these objectives by:

•	 setting commercial terms and conditions on 

financial assistance;

•	 taking warrants to capture gains from assistance;

•	 requiring private capital or risk sharing;

•	 restricting executive compensation and other 

related activities;

•	 minimizing self-dealing and other conflicts of 

interest;

•	 managing the role of the U.S. Government as

shareholder, but only a “reluctant shareholder”.

Given its unusual position in managing financial

market stress, ESA designated four reviewing bodies to oversee TARP operations: a Financial St

Oversight Board, a Special Inspector General for

(SIGTARP), a Congressional Oversight Panel (

and the Government Accountability Office (

The Assistant Secretary for Financial Stability me

weekly with the SIGTARP and makes frequent repo

and/or updates to Congress and the COP to ensure

transparency and accountability for FS activitie

OFS involves the oversight bodies early in the desi

process for new programs or investments to benefit 

from any suggestions.

Treasury has made every effort to communicate program activities in a fully transparent and timely manner, through correspondence with oversight authorities, 

activity reports, testimony, speeches and publication 

of program information. To provide transparency and 

accountability for TARP and other programs designe

to repair and reform the financial system, Treasury 

created FinancialStability.gov. The website includes 

reports and information on Treasury programs, 

including transaction reports, program guidelines, 

speeches, press releases and other information. As

of September 30, 2009, Treasury had published 86

Transaction Reports, 10 Section 105(a) monthl

Congressional Reports, seven Tranche Reports, thre

dividend and interest reports, and two MHA Progra

Reports, all of which are posted on FinancialStability

gov. This information is intended to answer the basic 

questions many Americans have about how TA

monies are invested. In keeping with principles of good 

stewardship, Treasury has never missed a deadline for 

a report. Additionally, Treasury posts program guidelines on the website within two business days of any

program launch, all obligations made under TARP, an

all contracts with Treasury service providers involved 

with TARP programs. Additional information on t

Making Home Affordable Program can be found a

MakingHomeAffordable.gov.

Managing TARP assets

Treasury manages TARP investments under several cor

principles:

First, the U.S. government is a shareholder reluctant

and out of necessity. The government intends to 

dispose of its interests as soon as practicable, with the 

dual goals of achieving financial stability and protecting taxpayer interests.

Second, there is no intention to be involved in the

day-to-day management of any company. Government

involvement in daily management of a company could 

possibly reduce the value of these investments, impede 

the ability of companies to return to full private ownership, and frustrate attainment of broader economic 

policy goals.

Third, consistent with these goals, the Department 

takes a commercial approach to the exercise of shareholder rights. Voting participation only corresponds

to four core matters: board membership; amendments 

to the charter and by-laws; liquidations, mergers and 

other substantial transactions; and significant issuances 

of common shares.
St

teg

Goal:

U.S. 

Wor

d Ec

mies

Perfo

m 

t Full E

m

o

te

tia

Strategic Objective: Improved economic opportu

While some new investments are still being made 

to support financial markets and the economy, the 

Administration intends to exit TARP investments 

soon as prudent judgment allows.

Exiting TARP

TARP was designed as an emergency response to 

major financial crisis. Because financial conditions have

started to improve, Treasury has begun the process 

of exiting from some emergency programs. As of

September 30, 2009, Treasury had received over $73

billion in principal repayments and warrant repurchases from CPP participants. For banks that have

elected not to repurchase their CPP warrants, Treasury 

began auctioning their warrants in December 2009. In 

addition, many programs were structured to encourage 

early repayment of funds, including interest rates on 

preferred stock and subordinated debentures which 

increase over time and restrictions on executive compensation. Most TARP programs also have defined live

with clear end dates. For example, new investments

under CPP are scheduled to end December 31, 2009 

and TALF is scheduled to end in June 30, 2010. 

investments in the automobile industry and for other 

companies that have received exceptional assistance, 

clear principles have been outlined ensuring support 

is limited and temporary. Specifically under AIF

Chrysler Financial has already repaid its assistance, and

an initial public offering for GM is expected next year

The financial and economic recovery is fragile and faces 

significant headwinds. The unemployment rate reached 

10.2 percent in October and may remain elevated

for some time. Delinquencies of subprime residential 

mortgages reached over 26 percent and conforming 

mortgages nearly seven percent in the third quarter. 

contraction in bank lending, particularly for smaller 

businesses which do not have access to bond markets, 

has had a significant impact on economic growth. The 

number of bank failures and “problem institutions” 

as classified by FDIC has increased significantly, and

will likely remain elevated through 2010. Financial

stability is a necessary precondition for the resumption 

of economic growth. Treasury and other institutions 

of government have accomplished a great deal in a 

short amount of time. Still, there is more work ahead.

While a number of TARP initiatives have begun t

wind down, Treasury continues to focus on stabilizing housing markets as well as improving access to 

credit for small businesses. For these reasons, Treasury

determined in December 2009 to extend TAR

spending authority beyond the initial expiration date of 

December 31, 2009. The authority to make new TAR

investments will now expire on October 3, 2010, two

years from the enactment of EESA, under provisions

the Act’s Section 120(b

Assessment of OFS operational performance

OFS established six performance measures in 200

Separate from performance indicators, such as the

LIBOR-OIS spread or corporate bond spreads, 

are influenced by other U.S. Government program

the six measures correspond directly to TARP progra

execution. Results for 2009 show thatOFS successfu

managed TARP operations. (Measure results can b

found in the Key Performance Measure Table and 

Appendix.)OFS obtained clean audit opinions

TARP financial statements an OFS internal con

over financial reporting, despite challenges associated 

with setting up FS under a short timeframe wi

complex program operations. Timely responses were 

made to SIGTARP/GAO inquiries and 90 p

of Congressional correspondence, and all statutorilymandated reports were submitted on time. The average 

number of days to close a FOIA case, which had be

substantially higher than the average rate for Treasury 

at the beginning of the fiscal year, was below the 

Department’s average by the end of September. Finally

the percentage of customers self-reporting they were 

satisfied with their experience using FinancialStabilit

gov was 65 percent. All measures where target improvement was possible have more aggressive targets for

2010.
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

64 Strategic Goal: U.S. and World Economies Perform a

Financial Regulatory Ref

On June 17, 2009, the President announced a comprehensive plan to reform an outdated and ineffective

financial regulatory system. Treasury submitted proposed legislative text to implement the plan in July and 

August 2009, and is currently working with Congress

to promulgate legislation by the end of the calendar 

year. The plan has five key objectives: promote robust 

supervision and regulation of financial firms; establish 

comprehensive regulation of financial markets; protect 

consumers and investors; provide the government with 

the ability to manage financial crises; and improve 

international cooperation.

Promote robust supervision and regulation of 

financial firms

Financial institutions that are critical to market

functioning should be subject to strong oversight. No

financial firm that poses a significant risk to the financial system should be unregulated or weakly regulated.

•	 Create a Financial Services Oversight Council. The 

Administration’s regulatory reform plan will create

a Financial Services Oversight Council to facilita

the coordination of financial regulatory policy, 

provide a forum for the resolution of jurisdictional 

disputes, and identify emerging risks in financial 

markets. This Council would include the heads 

of the principal federal financial regulators and be 

chaired by Treasury. The Council will replace the 

President’s Working Group on Financial Market

and have a permanent, full-time staff at Treasury.

•	 Supervise and regulate all of the largest, most 

interconnected financial firms. Under the reform

plan, the largest, most interconnected financial 

firms will be subjected to strong, comprehensive and consolidated oversight by the Federal

Reserve, regardless of whether the firm owns an

insured depository institution. Larger and more

interconnected firms will be subjected to higher 

prudential standards and prompt corrective action 

will be required should their capital levels decline. 

Shareholders and creditors should bear the risks

and the ultimate costs of failure, ending the 

implicit guarantee of public support for the largest, 

most interconnected financial firms.

•	 Raise standards for all financial firms. Tougher 

standards should be imposed on all financial firms 

so that the system is not compromised by the 

failure of one firm. Capital and liquidity requirements must be raised and exposures between 

financial firms should carry added capital charges. 

These tougher standards should incentivize 

firms to shrink, increase their capacity to absorb 

losses, and reduce their leverage, complexity and 

interconnectedness.

•	 Establish a National Bank Supervisor and eliminate 

loopholes in banking regulation. Merging the Office

of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) and

the Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) int

National Bank Supervisor (NBS) and eliminating the federal thrift charter would strea

the regulatory system and reduce potential for 

regulatory arbitrage. The proposed legislation 

also requires the Federal Reserve, the FDIC, a

NBS adopt joint rules on bank regulatory fees 

eliminate arbitrage between regulators based on 

bank examination fees.

•	 Establish an Office of National Insurance. The 

regulatory reform legislation includes a proposal to 

establish an Office of National Insurance (ONI)

serve as an advisor to the Secretary and coordinate

and develop federal policy in the insurance sector. 

As part of Treasury, ONI will monitor all aspects 

the insurance industry, including identifying issues 

and gaps in the regulation of insurers that could 

contribute to a systemic crisis in the insurance 

industry or within the broader financial system. 

ONI would also assist the Secretary in negotiati

international insurance agreements on prudential 

measures.

•	 Register hedge funds. Hedge funds and other private

pools of capital, including private equity and 

venture capital funds, will be required to register 

with the Securities and Exchange Commissio
St

teg

Goal:

U.S. 

Wor

d Ec

mies

Perfo

m 

t Full E

m

o

te

tia

Strategic Objective: Improved economic opportu

(SEC). Due to insufficient oversight and regulatio

prior to the financial crisis, the government lacked 

the data necessary to monitor these funds’ activities 

and assess potential risks in the market. The legislation would help to protect investors from fraud 

and abuse, provide increased transparency, and 

supply the information necessary to assess whether 

risks in the aggregate or risks in any particular fund 

pose a threat to our overall financial stability.

•	 Realign executive compensation. Treasury delivered 

draft “say-on-pay” legislation to Congress that 

would require all publicly traded companies 

establish non-binding shareholder votes on executive compensation packages, encouraging greater 

accountability and disclosure of compensation 

practices. In addition, the draft legislation would 

help ensure the independence of board compensation committees. Overall, federal standards and

guidelines should better align executive compensation practices of financial firms with long-term 

shareholder value and prevent these practices from 

providing incentives that could threaten the safety 

and soundness of supervised institutions.

Regulatory reform information at FinancialStability.

gov.

Establish comprehensive supervision of 

financial markets

New requirements for transparency and improved risk

management capacity should be built into the financial 

market infrastructure to improve understanding of 

the risks associated with new financial instruments. 

In addition, regulation of financial markets should be 

enhanced to better manage system-wide stress and the 

failure of one or more large institutions.

•	 Strengthen supervision and regulation of securitization markets. Securitization, by breaking down the

traditional relationship between borrowers and 

lenders, created conflicts of interest that market 

discipline failed to correct. To better align investor and issuer interests, regulation should require 

that originators or sponsors retain an economic 

stake in a material portion of the credit risk of 

these securitized credit exposures. The SEC shoul

continue its efforts to increase the transparency 

and standardization of securitization markets and 

be given clear authority to require robust reporting 

by issuers of asset-backed securities. 

•	 Strengthen credit rating agency regulation. The 

Administration’s financial regulatory reform effort

includes legislation to increase transparency, 

improve oversight, and reduce reliance on credit 

rating agencies. Credit rating agencies often failed 

to accurately describe the risks associated with 

certain products, preventing investors from understanding the underlying risks which contributed 

to the severity of the crisis. The legislation includes 

provisions expanding transparency and disclosure 

requirements for credit rating agencies, establishing 

mandatory registration with the SEC, institutin

tougher examination of internal controls and 

processes, and ending the practice of firms providing consulting services to companies they rate. 

•	 Regulate over-the-counter derivatives markets, including credit default swaps. One of the most significant

developments in the financial sector in recent 

decades has been the growth and rapid innovation 

in credit default swaps and other over-the-counter 

(OTC) derivatives. The proposed legislation will

regulate OTC derivative markets for the first

time. This legislation will provide regulation and 

transparency for all OTC derivative transactions,

stronger prudential and business conduct regulation of all major participants in OTC derivative

markets, and improved regulatory and enforcement tools to prevent manipulation, fraud and 

other abuses. 

•	 Strengthen oversight of systemically important payment, clearing and settlement systems. To mitigate 

systemic risk and promote financial stability, the 

plan proposes giving the Federal Reserve stronge

statutory authority to oversee systemically important payment, clearing and settlement systems. The 

Federal Reserve is the only agency with sufficientl

broad and deep knowledge of financial institutions 
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

66 Strategic Goal: U.S. and World Economies Perform a

and capital markets to effectively assume this 

responsibility. Under the Administration’s plan, th

Federal Reserve will be required to consult with th

Financial Services Oversight Council to identi

systemically important systems and set appropriate 

standards. In the case of clearing and settlement 

systems for regulated markets, the Federal Reserv

will be required to coordinate its risk management 

oversight with the CFTC or the SEC, which wi

remain the primary regulators for these markets.

•	 Harmonize futures and securities regulation. The 

legislation proposes to harmonize statutory and 

regulatory regimes for futures and securities markets to better address gaps in regulation between 

the CFTC and S

Protect consumers and investors from financial 

abuse

To rebuild trust in U.S. markets, it is critical to ensur

strong, consistent regulation and supervision of 

consumer financial services and investment markets. 

•	 Create a Consumer Financial Protection Agency.

Failure of the consumer protection regime significantly contributed to the financial crisis. On Jun

30, 2009, the President proposed creation of the 

Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA)

protect consumers against deceptive and unscrupulous financial practices and improve innovation, efficiency and access in the marketplace. This agency 

will consolidate the current fragmented regulatory 

regime into a single, independent federal consumer 

protection agency with the authority to write rules, 

oversee compliance, and address violations by nonbank and banking institutions. 

•	 Strengthen investor protection. The Administration’s

financial regulatory reform legislation includes 

a provision to strengthen the SEC’s authority t

protect investors. The legislation outlines steps 

to establish consistent standards of conduct and 

accountability for broker-dealers and investment 

advisors, and improve the timing and the quality of 

disclosures. The proposed legislation also establishes 

a permanent Investor Advisory Committee to

ensure investor representation at the SE

Provide the government with the tools it needs 

to manage financial crises

The government should have the tools necessary to address the potential failure of a bank holding company 

or other non-bank financial firm when the stability of 

the financial system is at risk.

•	 Enhance resolution authority. Plans should be in 

place to resolve the failure of any large interconnected financial firm which could threaten the 

stability of the financial system. Bankruptcy will

remain the primary option, but the recent financial 

crisis demonstrates the need for enhanced resolution capacity. Major financial firms will be required 

to develop rapid resolution plans to better prepare 

for the potential of failure. This authority will also 

give Treasury the ability to appoint FDIC as conservator for a failing firm that poses a threat to the

system. Under the legislation, the Federal Reser

would be required to receive prior written approval 

from the Secretary of the Treasury before providing

emergency lending under its “unusual and exigent 

circumstances” authority.

Raise international regulatory standards and 

improve international cooperation

As witnessed during the financial crisis, problems in

any single country can easily and quickly spread across 

borders. As financial regulatory reform progresses

within the United States, stronger standards need t

be established across global markets to ensure international financial stability.

•	 Enhance international cooperation and reform 

of global financial markets. To ensure that U.S

safeguards are not undermined abroad, the 

U.S. Government has taken the lead in calli

for strong, modern regulation and supervision 

around the world through the G-20, the Financia

Stability Board, the Basel Committee on Bank

Supervision, and other organizations. Led by th
St

teg

Goal:

U.S. 

Wor

d Ec

mies

Perfo

m 

t Full E

m

o

te

tia

Strategic Objective: Improved economic opportu

United States, the leaders of the Group of Twen

(G-20) pledged to take action to build a stronger,

more globally consistent supervisory and regulatory framework to oversee today’s international 

markets. The United States is seeking consensu

on four core issues: regulatory capital standards, 

oversight of global financial markets, supervision 

of internationally active financial firms, and crisis 

prevention and management.

Treasury Housing GovernmentSponsored Enterprise Pro

To provide stability to the financial markets, increase 

the availability of mortgage finance and protect taxpayer interests, Treasury implemented three emergency 

programs in September 2008 with respect to Fanni

Mae, Freddie Mac and the Federal Home Loan B

(FHLBs). Authority for the action was provide

Section 1117 of the Housing and Economic Recov

Act of 2008, which authorized Treasury to purchase

obligations and other securities issued by Fannie Mae,

Freddie Mac and any FHLB. The programs incl

•	 Preferred Stock Purchase Agreements (PSPAs) w

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac providing backsto

funding for program operations

•	  Mortgage-Backed Securities (MBS) Purc

Program limited to securities issued by Fannie Mae

and Freddie Ma

•	 An emergency credit facility for Fannie Mae

Freddie Mac and the 

Preferred Stock Purchase Agreements

The PSPAs were created to instill confidence in investors that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would rem

viable entities critical to the functioning of the housing 

and mortgage markets. Investors purchased securities 

issued or guaranteed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Ma

in part because ambiguities in their Congressional 

charters created a perception of government backing. 

These ambiguities fostered enormous growth in the 

obligations issued or guaranteed by Fannie Mae and

Freddie Mac, which by the scale and breadth of public

holdings eventually posed a systemic risk to global 

financial markets in the event of their failure. The focus 

of the PSPAs is to enhance market stability by providing additional security to holders of Fannie Mae a

Freddie Mac securities to avoid a mandatory triggering

of receivership. Because the U.S. government creat

these ambiguities, it had a responsibility to both avert 

and ultimately address this systemic risk. In February

2009, the PSPAs were increased from $100 billion pe

GSE to $200 billion pr GSE to provide addit

security for financial markets. This agreement was 

further amended on December 24, 2009, to allow the 

cap on Treasury’s funding commitment to increase as 

necessary to accommodate any cumulative reduction in 

net worth over the next three years. At the conclusion

of the three year period, the remaining commitment 

will then be fully available to be drawn down per the 

terms of the agreements. As of December 31, 2009,

Treasury’s payments to Freddie Mac and Fannie Ma

were $50.7 billion and $59.9 billion, respectively.

GSE MBS Purchase Program

The SE MBS Purchase Program was created to 

support the availability of mortgage credit by temporarily providing additional capital to the mortgage 

market. By purchasing these securities, Treasury has

sought to broaden access to mortgage funding for current and prospective homeowners as well as to promote 

market stability.

Program priorities:

•	 Support mortgage availability for both current and

prospective homeowners

•	 Promote secondary market stability

•	 Ensure zero principal loss on outlay

As of September 30, 2009, Treasury had purchase

$192.2 billion in agency MBS and received back $22.

billion in principal and $5.0 billion in interest. The 

program expired on 12/31/2009; as of that time, the 

Treasury Department had purchased approximately 

$225.5 billion in Mortgage Backed Securitie
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

68 Strategic Goal: U.S. and World Economies Perform a

GSE Credit Facility

The gse Credit facility was created to ensure credit 

availability to fannie Mae, freddie Mac, and the 

fhlbs by providing secured funding on an as-needed 

basis under terms and conditions established by the 

Treasury secretary. funding is provided directly by 

Treasury from its general fund held at the federal 

reserve bank of new york in exchange for eligible 

collateral limited to guaranteed Mbs issued by fannie 

Mae and freddie Mac and advances made by the 

fhlbs. loans will be for short-term durations, but 

would in general be expected to be for between one 

week and one month. The facility was terminated on 

December 31, 2009, and was never used.

Temporary guarantee program for 

Money Market Mutual funds

at the height of the crisis in september 2008, Treasury 

established a Temporary guarantee Program for Money 

Market Mutual funds to provide stability in the wake 

of the failure of lehman brothers and well-publicized 

troubles at several large funds. Program participants 

were charged a fee of four to six basis points on an 

annualized basis, with coverage provided to guarantee 

maintenance of each fund’s typical stable share price of 

$1. eligibility was open to all money market mutual 

funds regulated under rule 2a-7 of the Investment 

Company Act of 1940 and registered with the seC, 

upon payment of an up-front participation fee and 

satisfaction of certain criteria related to their net asset 

value on september 19, 2008. shortly after its inception, the program provided guarantees to 93 percent 

of the money market mutual fund market, covering 

$3.62 trillion in assets. at its expiration, utilization 

had fallen to 68 percent of the market. Treasury had no 

losses under the program and in fact earned the u.s. 

government $1.2 billion in fees.

The program expired on its scheduled end date of 

september 18, 2009 under improved general market 

conditions and restored confidence in the money 

market industry.

regulation of banks and thrifts

oCC and oTs are the primary regulators of national 

banks and thrifts, respectively. given continuing 

concerns about the soft economy and bank solvency 

following the financial crisis, both made extensive 

efforts to monitor evolving conditions at financial 

institutions they regulate and implement measures 

intended to restore financial health. In fiscal year 2009, 

the Inspector general again indicated regulation of 

national banks and thrifts as a Management Challenge. 

Despite efforts to identify and correct potential issues 

at an early stage, a number of national banks and 

thrifts were closed by federal regulators in fiscal year 

2009 due to difficult market conditions. In total, 107 

financial institutions regulated by fDIC with $111.3 

billion in deposits failed over the year. of these, 13 

were national banks with $14.8 billion in deposits, 

14 were federal thrifts with $35.8 billion in deposits, 

and 80 were state banks with $60.8 billion in deposits. 

Work-out solutions, whereby some or all deposits and 

assets were assumed by another existing bank, were 

arranged by fDIC and regulators for almost all failed 

institutions. 

oCC and oTs supervisory activities in fiscal year 

2009 focused on monitoring and responding to adverse 

conditions in credit and financial markets. oCC’s 

on-site supervisory assessments focused on the quality 

of national banks’ credit risk management practices (including effective credit risk rating systems and problem 

loan identification), adequacy of loan-loss reserves, and 

effective loan work-out strategies. Primary emphasis 

was placed on ensuring the strength of capital buffers 

to weather earnings pressures and asset quality deterioration. other critical areas included sound liquidity 

risk management through diversified funding sources 

and realistic contingency funding plans, and maintenance of consistent underwriting standards regardless 

of intent to hold or sell a loan. oTs examinations 

emphasized assessment of risk management structures, 

liquidity plans, capital management, concentration risk 

and maintenance of strong underwriting standards. 

given the natural exposure of thrifts to the real estate 
St

teg

Goal:

U.S. 

Wor

d Ec

mies

Perfo

m 

t Full E

m

o

te

tia

Strategic Objective: Improved economic opportu

market, OTS utilized the Net Portfolio Value mo

(enhanced in 2008) extensively to value financial instruments and evaluate interest risk related to real estate 

and other investments. (Thrifts are required to hold 65 

percent of their holdings in mortgages.) For troubled

institutions, OCC and OTS employed a number of remedial measures, including Prompt Corrective Act

determinations when institution capital deteriorated 

below specified thresholds, requirements to increase 

available capital and liquidity, required changes in 

bank management, and required approval for changes 

in business plans. To combat mismanagement, formal 

enforcement actions such as cease-and-desist orders, 

removal or prohibition orders, civil money penalties 

and formal agreements were utilized. In severe cases, 

financial institutions were required to enter into sales, 

mergers, liquidation or enter FDIC receivership.

To minimize real estate losses and avoid unnecessary 

foreclosures, both agencies encouraged financial institutions and at-risk mortgage holders to work constructively to find effective work-out solutions. Both OC

and OTS urged adoption of loan modification programs and other foreclosure mitigation practices an

provided information for consumers on ways to identify and avoid foreclosure fraud. In November 2008,

the federal banking agencies issued the Interagency 

Statement on Meeting the Needs of Creditworthy 

Borrowers, providing guidance to financial institutions 

on managing mortgage delinquency. OCC and 

worked closely with HUD and other Treasury official

to develop the Making Home Affordable Program

including establishing transparent capital standards 

for treatment of mortgage loans modified under the 

program to encourage bank participation. OCC was

also actively involved in identifying potential bank 

responses to the foreclosure crisis, including working 

with community development organizations to rehabilitate foreclosed properties and working with HU

to stabilize neighborhoods. During the year, the federal 

financial agencies issued proposed rules requiring 

mortgage loan originators register with the Nationwide

Mortgage Licensing System, as provided under th

Secure and Fair Enforcement for Mortgage Licensing 

Act of 2008. OCC and OTS also continued to joint

issue the Mortgage Metrics Report, providing detailed

information on 34.7 million mortgages serviced by 

their regulated institutions, including new sections 

in 2009 on the performance of modified loans, the 

sustainability and changes in payments that resulted 

from loan modifications, and the types of actions taken 

to modify loans.

In fiscal year 2009, OCC’s Annual Survey of Cred

Underwriting Practices indicated a continuation of

tighter underwriting standards begun in mid-2007. In 

contrast with the period of “originate and sell”, where 

banks originated loans and then sold them to other 

investors, survey results showed that the majority of 

banks applied the same tight underwriting standards 

regardless of intent to hold or sell. With increased 

weakness in commercial real estate markets, both 

agencies warned of accumulating risks in small and 

medium-sized institutions’ portfolios. At an interagency level, both OCC and OTS have worked direc

with the Federal Reserve and FDIC to review lar

syndicated loans held by multiple banks through the 

Shared National Credit Program. This year’s revie

covered 8,955 credit facilities with commitments 

totaling $2.9 trillion. OCC and OTS will continue 

coordinate their licensing and supervisory procedures 

with other federal agencies to keep regulations current, 

transparent and supportive of financial industry stability and growth.

OCC and OTS have issued direct warnings to financi

institutions of the risks posed by excessive asset or liability concentrations in their portfolios. During the last 

four years, OCC has conducted asset quality reviews

of all the OCC community and mid-sized banks with

significant commercial real estate concentrations, to 

ensure they have adequate credit underwriting, problem loan identification, and loan-loss reserves. More 

recently, the federal banking agencies issued guidance 

on managing concentration risks that may emerge from 

correspondent banking relationships, to reduce any carryover effect to other bank from one bank’s failure.
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

70 Strategic Goal: U.S. and World Economies Perform a

Given the global nature of the financial crisis, OC

and OTS have worked closely with both domestic an

international banking supervisors to identify problems 

and coordinate actions to restore functioning markets 

and strengthen risk management. The Federal Reserve

OCC and SEC worked with key global regulators a

market participants to strengthen operational infrastructure and processes used to oversee OTC derivatives. OCC was actively involved in developing an

implementing a package of measures announced by the 

Basel Committee of Banking Supervisors in July 20

to capture the credit risk of complex trading activities 

and institute higher capital requirements for certain 

activities. OCC and OTS also joined other global supervisors in endorsing the Basel Committee’s Princip

for Sound Liquidity Risk Management and Supervision, 

underscoring the importance of liquidity management. Through the Financial Stability Board’s Worki

Group of Provisioning, chaired by the Comptroller

of the Currency, OCC has actively promoted use of

credit valuation processes to reduce the pro-cyclicality 

of loan-loss requirements. During the year, OCC and

OTS provided significant support for TARP, including reviewing financial institutions’ Capital Purch

Program (CPP) applications; participating on the 

TARP CPP Council (which provides advisory suppor

to OFS); conducting “stress tests” for regulated entitie

providing legal analysis on financial institution participation in TARP; and establishing credit rules promoting use of the Making Home Affordable Progr

To strengthen its unfair or deceptive acts and practices 

rules, OTS, Federal Reserve and National Cr

Union Association issued final rules in Decembe

2008 governing practices for credit cards and overdraft 

protection programs. For credit cards, these addressed

unfair practices in the areas of providing reasonable 

time periods for making payments, payment allocations, interest rate increases on outstanding balances, 

security deposits and fees charged to an account prior 

to the issuance of credit. OCC and OTS also work

with the Financial Accounting Standards Board

develop accounting and disclosure guidance related to 

mortgage loan modifications, fair value measurement 

in illiquid markets, and accounting for asset-backed 

commercial paper and structured financial instruments.

OCC and OTS evaluate banks’ compliance with B

Secrecy Act / Anti-Money Laundering (

requirements as a part of their on-site examinations. In 

fiscal year 2009, OCC developed a Money Launderin

Risk System for BSA/AML risk assessment. Usi

data, OCC revised national bank examination procedures in 2009 to improve their effectiveness in identifying BSA/AML infractions. OCC is planning to d

their findings and results with other federal banking 

agencies for possible broader use of the system.

Challenges in the economy and financial markets had 

a significant impact on OCC and OTS performan

results. The OCC exceeded three of its performance

targets and did not meet three of its performance 

targets. Most directly impacted were measures of 

national bank condition, including capitalization, 

CAMELS ratings and rehabilitated national banks a

percentage of problem banks. None of these measures

met their target for 2009 and were substantially below 

2008 results. OTS exceeded four of their performanc

targets and did not meet one of their targets. The 

unmet measure corresponded to lower CA

ratings at thrifts, similar to OCC. (For details, see K

Performance Measure Table and the APR Appendix

For administrative measures, both OCC and

exceeded their targets. In particular, OCC and 

exceeded their targets for total costs for every $100,000 

regulated, although both had 2009 targets which were 

significantly higher than 2008 actual results. (In the 

case of OTS, the target was 53 percent higher tha

2008, due largely to the failure or merger of large 

thrifts with banks in 2008 and 2009.) OCC and 

are making concerted efforts to manage conditions at 

the financial institutions they regulate, such as reviewing liquidity risk management, risks posed by complex 

financial investments, and concentration risks related 

to commercial real estate, to ensure problems are identified and addressed early. Historical precedent suggests

that 2010 will continue to be challenging for national 
St

teg

Goal:

U.S. 

Wor

d Ec

mies

Perfo

m 

t Full E

m

o

te

tia

Strategic Objective: Improved economic opportu

banks and thrifts, as the financial industry copes with 

the after-effects of the recession. 

Technical assistance for developing 

countries

The Office of Technical Assistance provides economi

and financial advice to developing countries. OTA ha

two performance measures to assess the effectiveness 

of assistance programs for client countries: the first 

evaluates the traction advisors establish with country 

leadership, the second evaluates the impact of client 

country programs implemented with U.S. assistance

The measures determine traction and impact along four 

dimensions: country integration into the international 

community, country progress towards strategic goals, 

human and systems capacity building, and program 

effectiveness across government and the private sector. 

For 2009, OTA exceeded their performance target f

traction and met their performance target for impact. 

Targets for 2010 are set to match 2009 levels.

Consumer protection against 

mortgage fraud

In April 2009, the Obama Administration announc

a multi-agency effort to crackdown on foreclosure 

rescue scams and loan modification fraud designed to 

protect homeowners from predatory financial practices. 

In September, Secretary Geithner met with leaders 

HUD, FTC, FinCEN and 12 states’ attorneys ge

to discuss emerging trends and proactive strategies 

to combat fraud against consumers in the housing 

markets as well as best practices to bolster coordination 

across state and federal agencies. Treasury (including 

FinCEN), DOJ, HUD, and FTC have commit

taking proactive measures to curb abuse by coordinating information and resources across agencies to 

maximize targeting and efficiency in fraud investigations. This includes alerting financial institutions to 

emerging schemes, stepping up enforcement actions, 

and educating consumers to help those in financial 

trouble avoid becoming the victims of a loan modification or foreclosure rescue scam.

Contributions of the Office of

Economic Poli

As a part of Departmental Offices at Treasury, th

Office of Economic Policy contributed to severa

Administration initiatives aimed at stabilizing the

housing market and shoring up the broader economy.

•	 Economic Policy provided sound and timely analysis to support the formulation of the Recovery Ac

Working with staff at the Council of Economic

Advisers, Economic Policy developed estimates o

the economic impact and potential effectiveness of 

the various policy measures under consideration.

•	 In the early part of the fiscal year, Economic Policy

devoted significant time to designing and making 

operational the reverse auction component of 

EESA, as well as understanding and communicating the myriad accounting, valuation and procurement issues associated with the project. Th

efforts were marked by their intellectual contribution and mix of practicality and timeliness.

•	 Economic Policy staff monitored and analyzed a

number of trends and economic developments 

throughout the year, including the ongoing housing correction and bank lending.

•	 Economic Policy provided support to a number

of TARP initiatives, including providing desig

and implementation assistance. These activities 

included developing and implementing credit 

subsidy and budget scoring models that allowed 

the timely completion of early TARP initiative

and development and analysis of other initiatives 

considered for inclusion in TAR

•	 Economic Policy led the development of key

initiatives aimed at providing relief to struggling 

homeowners and stabilizing the housing market. 

One such initiative was the HAMP component 

the Making Home Affordable initiativ
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

72 Strategic Goal: U.S. and World Economies Perform a

Conclusion

Treasury dedicated considerable resources to management of the recession and financial crisis in fiscal year 

2009. At the end of the fiscal year, restored credit

availability in most bond and securities markets, stable 

interbank lending rates, expanded availability of mortgage financing, stabilizing housing prices, reduced market volatility, and other indicators suggested that the 

worst of the crisis and recession had passed. Legislation

to reform the financial system to avoid a similar 

financial crisis is likely to achieve passage in early 2010. 

Treasury programs to ensure financial market stability 

are being wound down as conditions permit, including 

TARP, the temporary guarantee program for mone

market mutual funds and MBS purchase program, bu

threats to the country’s financial system and restored 

economic growth necessitate preservation of limited 

TARP capacity through October 20

OCC and OTS have made concerted efforts to foresta

additional bank failures through early identification of 

difficulties at national banks and thrifts and implementation of mitigation plans for problem institutions. To 

help support stabilization of the economy and financial 

markets, OCC and OTS worked closely with financial institutions to implement TARP programs

facilitate mortgage refinancing for at-risk homeowners. 

Reports such as the Mortgage Metrics Report an

other new data sources have improved visibility into 

market conditions and helped identify key focus areas. 

While performance metrics for OCC and OTS refle

difficult conditions in financial markets, they remain 

deficient for use in improving supervisory practices. 

This challenge will be addressed by Treasury in 2010.

Moving Forwar

Ahead is a process of repairing and reforming the

financial system to close the gaps and weaknesses in 

supervision and regulation of financial firms, continuing economic stabilization and stimulus, and defining 

an appropriate path for unwinding the government 

programs which have been put in place to support 

the economy. The Secretary extended TARP authority through October 3, 2010 to preserve capacity

address potential dislocations in financial markets and 

continue to provide essential support to homeowners, 

small businesses and constrained securitization markets. 

History suggests that exiting prematurely from policies

designed to contain a financial crisis can significantly 

prolong an economic downturn.Treasury policies will 

continue to be directed at ensuring the stability of the 

financial system and supporting the nascent recovery.

OCC, OTS and the banking industry continue to operate in a highly challenging and volatile environmen

The financial condition and performance of national 

banks and thrifts continue to be adversely affected 

by deterioration in the housing and commercial real 

estate markets and the decline in general economic 

conditions. Responding to deteriorating credit quality

and ensuring adequate liquidity, loan loss reserves, 

and capital buffers are maintained will continue to be 

major focal points in the coming year. To address these 

challenges, OCC and OTS are identifying those ban

which are the most vulnerable to the impact of current 

economic conditions, and coordinating and allocating 

bank supervision resources to the areas and institutions 

with highest risk. Still, despite these efforts, given current market conditions it is likely that there will be an

increase in the number of problem institutions in 2010 

requiring in-depth supervisory attention. OCC and

OTS will continue to work with these institutions t

develop appropriate solutions to mitigate problems and 

ensure the safety and soundness of the financial system. 
St

teg

Goal:

U.S. 

Wor

d Ec

mies

Perfo

m 

t Full E

m

o

te

tia

Strategic Objective: Improved economic opportu

Decreased gap in global standard of 

A decreased gap in the global standard of living, associated with improved economic conditions in emerging

markets, improves economic opportunity for Americans. For the two performance measures associated wit

decreasing the gap in the global standard of living, Treasury exceeded the 2009 performance target for one and 

did not meet the target for the other.

Fiscal Year 2009 Results

Decreased gap in global standard of living

50%

Exceeded

50%

Unmet

Summary of Actual Trends for the Prior Four Years

Trend Symbol Cou

Favorable upward trend  1 50%

Favorable downward trend  0 0%

Unfavorable upward trend  0 0%

Unfavorable downward trend  1 50%

No change in trend, no effect  0 0%

No change in trend, favorable effect  0 0%

No change in trend, unfavorable effect  0 0%

Baseline B 0 0%

Total 2 100%

Discontinued DISC 0

Key Performance Measure Table

The following table contains only key performance measures associated with this outcome. Actual and target trends represent four years of data

where available. The full suite of measures with detailed explanations is available in the Appendix.

Key Performance Measure B

2008 

Act

2009 

Targe

2009 

Act

% of 

Targe

Achi

% Change 

in Act

Performan

Rati

2010 

Targe

Targe

Tren

Actu

Tren

Improve International Monetary Fund (IMF)

Effectiveness and Quality Through Periodic Review

of IMF Programs (%) (Oe)

DO 93% 90% 23% 25.6% 24.7% Unmet 90  

Percentage of Grant and Loan Proposals Containing

Satisfactory Frameworks for Results Measurement

(%) (Oe)

DO 94% 90% 94% 104.4% 100.0% Exceeded 90  

Legend Sy

Favorable upward trend 

Favorable downward trend 

Unfavorable upward trend 

Unfavorable downward trend 

No change in trend, no effect 

No change in trend, favorable effect 

No change in trend, unfavorable effect 

Baseline B

Discontinued DISC

Analysis of Performance Resu

Performance for programs seeking to decrease the gap 

in the global standard of living was mixed, with one 

measure exceeding its target and the other significantly 

under-performing its target. The measure related to 

IMF program effectiveness and quality was significantly

affected by the IMF’s increased activity in 2009 related

to special lending provisions. Loans provided to developing and developed market economies to manage the

financial crisis increased program activities substantially 

over 2008, limiting time available for outside review of 

lending programs prior to introduction. Consequently, 

only 23 percent of IMF programs were reviewed in
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

74 Strategic Goal: U.S. and World Economies Perform a

2009, versus a target of 90 percent and a 2008 result 

of 93 percent. (This also resulted in an unfavorable 

four-year actual trend for the measure.) For Percentage

of grant and loan proposals containing satisfactory 

frameworks for results measurement, the actual result 

has exceeded the target result over the last four years, 

and the margin between target and actual result has 

continued to grow. As the target for this measure has

remained unchanged over the last four years, a review 

of target levels may be necessary.

Foreign Assistance and reform o

International Financial Institutions 

Treasury has worked diligently to help fulfill President 

Obama’s goal to double foreign assistance during the

coming years and help ensure IFI funding is used

effectively. Specific areas of performance improvement

have included reforms to the International Monetary 

Fund (IMF) and improved management frameworks a

multilateral development banks (MDBs)

In response to the financial crisis, the G20 committed

in April 2009 to increase available resources for the I

from $250 billion to $750 billion and established a goal 

for the MDBs to boost lending by $100 billion over the

next three years. The IMF has also undertaken a major

realignment of voting authority to increase representation of major emerging market countries to improve 

program effectiveness, with strong U.S. Governme

support. Legislation to increase the U.S. IMF nomi

quota and approve governance reforms was proposed by 

the Administration and passed by Congress in 2009, in

accords with the agreement. Treasury is committed to supporting the IMF’s reform initiatives and emergency lending programs to ensure broad financial market stability

Lending by the MDBs has increased significantl

since the announcement in April 2009 to increase

lending and Treasury will continue to monitor efforts 

to achieve the three year goal. To improve operations 

management, Treasury has advocated strong accountability at the MDBs by working closely with the U.

Executive Directors at these institutions to lead reform

and improve performance. Examples of this work, in

addition to monitoring programs associated with the 

$100 billion lending increase, include:

•	 Advancing the performance management agenda at 

all MDBs. Treasury has sought to improve performance management frameworks at the MDBs

in the course of negotiations over replenishments 

of concessional windows. All of these institutions now have results measurement frameworks

that measure country outcomes, selected project 

outputs, and institutional effectiveness and efficiency. These frameworks provide management 

at the MDBs mechanisms to identify performance

deficiencies and design corrective actions, as well 

as provide shareholders and other stakeholders an 

accountability tool to gauge management effectiveness. Using the frameworks, particular progress has

been made in improving project design and quality 

at entry. Treasury has employed a strategy of prioritizing allocation of IFI resources to countries that

can put it best to use, to ensure resources are used 

as effectively as possible. Treasury will continue 

to press for increased general use of performance 

management practices at the MDBs.

•	 Reforms at the Asian Development Bank. The U.S

successfully negotiated a general capital increase for 

the Asian Development Bank, including provision

for reforms at the bank including updates to its 

safeguard policy, professionalization of the bank’s 

human resources management, and enhancements 

to internal controls and risk management practices.

•	 Obtaining endorsement of the Extractive Industries 

Transparency Initiative. Following strong Treasury

advocacy, the MDBs have endorsed the Extractiv

Industries Transparency Initiative. The Initiative 

requires that countries served by the banks provide 

transparency on resource flows derived from 

extractive industry exports.

As part of reducing debt burdens in developing countries, the U.S. has supported debt relief for the Centr

African Republic, Cote D’Ivoire, Haiti and Liber

In addition to debt relief, Liberia benefited from an

agreement which leveraged $38 million in donor funds, 
St

teg

Goal:

U.S. 

Wor

d Ec

mies

Perfo

m 

t Full E

m

o

te

tia

Strategic Objective: Improved economic opportu

including a $5 million contribution from the u.s., to 

eliminate approximately $1.2 billion in outstanding 

private sector debt. at the summit of the americas in 

april 2009, President obama announced a new fund 

backed by the Inter-american Development bank and 

overseas Private Investment Corporation and promoted by Treasury to provide stable, long-term sources 

of finance to microfinance lenders to mitigate negative 

effects of the financial crisis. Treasury has also worked to 

monitor the impact of the financial crisis on the most 

vulnerable countries to ensure their concerns are heard. 

In august 2009, Treasury joined the national security 

Council in hosting a meeting of african finance ministers and central bankers in nairobi to discuss g-20 

arrangements and ways to address african priorities.

support for Central and eastern 

european emerging markets

The emerging markets of Central and eastern europe 

were among the hardest hit by the financial crisis. 

Treasury pushed for prompt, flexible action by the 

IMf, the World bank and the european bank for 

reconstruction and Development (ebrD) to provide 

assistance adapted to country needs which could be deployed in rapid and effective fashion. During fiscal year 

2009, the IMf launched over $85 billion in new support programs in the region, the World bank provided 

crucial budget support to protect social expenditures 

(helping mitigate political instability in many countries), and the ebrD provided support for systemically 

important financial institutions and coordinated 

groundbreaking, voluntary agreements with private, 

foreign banks to maintain financing for economies 

facing the most difficult conditions. Treasury engaged 

with european union and eu member states to coordinate support for the region and established a technical assistance response team to provide support in 

latvia, ukraine, serbia and kazakhstan. for georgia, 

Treasury played a leading role in developing a $1 billion u.s. bilateral assistance package and in catalyzing 

IfI support for payments, fiscal and banking systems 

to bolster market confidence. for kosovo, Treasury 

worked closely with kosovar counterparts, and within 

the u.s. government interagency process, to develop 

and implement a strategy for kosovo’s membership in 

the IMf and World bank. kosovo joined both organizations in May 2009.

Conclusion

The financial crisis severely restricted the flow of capital 

to emerging market countries. Programs providing 

emergency support through the IMf, MDbs, World 

bank and other institutions were critical to minimizing 

the impact of the crisis and ensuring access to necessary 

capital. While reviews of IMf programs were temporarily curtailed, performance management in general at the 

MDbs has improved substantially over the last several 

years. Through replenishment negotiations, selective 

allocation of funding, coordination with the MDbs and 

other mechanisms, Treasury has been a strong advocate 

for more effective performance management at the IfIs. 

These efforts will continue as lending at these institutions responds to support the global recovery. 

While one of the two performance measures for the 

outcome was unmet, this shortfall was largely due 

to extenuating circumstances. nevertheless, it may 

be beneficial to reevaluate measure target levels for 

both outcome measures to ensure correspondence to 

Treasury objectives.

Moving forward

restoring normal growth in emerging markets will 

require increased commitments from global governments to provide funding which is currently unavailable from private markets. IMf and MDb programs 

to expand lending are likely to continue through 2011, 

as credit markets for higher-risk investments remain 

constrained. reforms at the IMf and World bank to 

better integrate emerging market perspectives in policymaking are essential to ensure program effectiveness 

and broader global representation. Treasury will continue to support inter-governmental funding strategies 

which extend finance in productive areas shunned by 

capital markets and which contribute to the expansion 

of economic growth opportunities globally.
DEpARtmEnt oF thE tREASuRY • AgEnCY pERFoRmAnCE REpoRt • FISCAL YEAR 2009

76 sTraTegIC goal: u.s. anD WorlD eConoMIes PerforM aT full eConoMIC PoTenTIal

Strategic Ob

Trust and Confidence in 

U.S. Currency Worldwide

Continued trust and confidence in the integrity of 

United States currency, and the ready acceptance o

U.S. currency as a secure medium of exchange for conducting business transactions, enable the free flow o

domestic and global commerce, and contribute to the 

security and stability of the world’s monetary system. 

To instill high levels of trust and confidence in the 

integrity of U.S. currency, the Department’s currenc

products are designed to achieve the maximum possible 

levels of counterfeiting deterrence, product quality, user 

acceptance, and cost-effectiveness. To achieve these levels, BEP and the United States Mint manufacture 

deliver high-quality U.S. currency notes, coins, and security documents to the United States Federal Re

and to federal agencies. In addition to producing notes, 

coins, and security documents, the Department also 

secures the nation’s precious metals reserves. 

The bureaus and policy offices responsible for the 

achievement of this objective are:

•	 The Bureau of Engraving and Printi

•	 The United States Mi

•	 The Office of the Treasurer of the United Sta

The outcome associated with this strategic objective is:

•	 Commerce enabled through safe, secure U.S. note

and coins

budget Trend by objective: Trust and Confidence in u.s. Currency 

worldwide Dollars in Thousands

$0

$500,000

$1,000,000

$1,500,000

$2,000,000

$2,500,000

$3,000,000

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

$1,505,143

$2,012,017

$2,370,208

$2,705,326 $2,686,145

performance Cost Trend: Trust and Confidence in u.s. Currency 

worldwide Dollars in Thousands

$0

$500,000

$1,000,000

$1,500,000

$2,000,000

$2,500,000

$3,000,000

$3,500,000

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

$1,541,046

$2,099,429 $2,139,937

$2,552,998

$2,929,234

fiscal year 2009 results: Trust and Confidence in u.s. Currency 

worldwide

24%

Unmet

29%

Met

47%

Exceeded

performance Cost by outcome

100%

Trust and Confidence in U.S. 

Currency Worldwide. 
sTraTegiC goal: u.s. anD worlD eConoMies perforM aT full eConoMiC poTenTial

sTraTegIC obJeCTIve: TrusT anD ConfIDenCe In u.s. CurrenCy WorlDWIDe 77

Commerce enabled through safe, secure U.S. note

Based on performance results, Treasury was generally successful at achieving this strategic objective and its associated strategic outcome during fiscal year 2008

Fiscal Year 2009 Results

Commerce enabled Through safe, secure u.s. notes and Coins

50%

Exceeded

50%

Unmet

Summary of Actual Trends for the Prior Four Years

Trend Symbol Cou

Favorable upward trend  0 0%

Favorable downward trend  7 41%

Unfavorable upward trend  1 6%

Unfavorable downward trend  1 6%

No change in trend, no effect  1 6%

No change in trend, favorable effect  1 6%

No change in trend, unfavorable effect  1 6%

Baseline B 5 29%

Total 17 100%

Discontinued DISC 2

Key Performance Measure Table

The following table contains only key performance measures associated with this outcome. Actual and target trends represent four years of data

where available. The full suite of measures with detailed explanations is available in the Appendix.

Key Performance Measure B

2008 

Act

2009 

Targe

2009 

Act

% of 

Targe

Achi

% Change 

in Act

Performan

Rati

2010 

Targe

Targe

Tren

Actu

Tren

Currency shipment discrepancies per million notes

(%) (Oe)

BEP 0.01% 0.01% 0% 200.0% 200.0% Exceeded 0.01  

Maintain ISO certification BEP Met Met Met 100.0% 100.0% Met 1  

Manufacturing costs for currency (dollar costs per

thousand notes produced) ($) (E)

BEP $29.47 $37 $32.77 111.4% 88.8% Exceeded 37  

Percent of currency notes delivered to the Federal

Reserve that meet customer quality requirements

(%) (Oe)

BEP 100% 99.9% 99.9% 100.0% 99.9% Met 99.9  

Security costs per 1000 notes delivered ($) (E) BEP $5.63 $5.65 $5.76 98.1% 97.7% Unmet 5.6  

Absolute Value of Production Percent Deviation from

net Pay

Mint N/A B 6.5% 100.0% B Met DISC B B

Customer Satisfaction Index Mint DISC 88% 88.3% 100.3% N/A Exceeded 88 B B

Employee Confidence in Protection Mint 81% 83% 81% 97.6% 100.0% Unmet DISC  

Numismatic Customer Base (Ot) Mint N/A 1.398 1.055 75.5% B Unmet 0.9 B B

Numismatic Net Margin (E) Mint N/A 15% 9.4% 0.6% B Unmet DISC B B

Protection Cost Per Square Foot ($) (E) Mint $31.76 $31.75 $31.57 100.6% 100.6% Exceeded 31.7  

Seigniorage per Dollar Issued ($) Mint N/A $0.54 $0.55 101.9% N/A Exceeded 0.53 B B
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

78 Strategic Goal: U.S. and World Economies Perform a

legenD syMbol

Favorable	upward	trend

Favorable	downward	trend





Unfavorable	upward	trend

Unfavorable	downward	trend





No	change	in	trend,	no	effect

No	change	in	trend,	favorable	effect

No	change	in	trend,	unfavorable	effect

Baseline







B

Discontinued DISC

Analysis of Performance Resu

In fiscal year 2009, 17 measures were reported for this 

objective, five of which were new measures. Of all 17

measures, 12 measures (70 percent) either exceeded 

or met their performance targets, four measures (24 

percent) did not meet targets, and one measure was 

baselined (6 percent). 

While the reported metrics indicate that Treasury met 

most of its performance targets for this objective and its 

associated outcome for fiscal year 2009, performance 

trends over the past four fiscal years require closer 

examination. Of these measures, eight (47 percent)

showed a positive actual performance trend over time, 

three (18 percent) showed a negative actual performance trend over time, and one (six percent) showed 

relatively flat performance over time. Five measures (29

percent) were baselined over this time period. Overall,

the actual results of the performance measures over 

time appear to show a trend of improvement when 

averaged across all measures. Considering that two 

measures were discontinued in 2009 and five measures 

were introduced, further evaluation will be needed to 

determine current trends.  greater effort to reduce the

volatility in performance measures from year to year 

would also yield better bureau performance. 

Target trends over the past four fiscal years shows a 

similar pattern to actual performance: seven targets had 

a positive direction (41 percent), three (18 percent) 

displayed a negative direction, and two targets (12 

percent) exhibited a fairly flat trend. Five (29 percent)

measures were baselined. Averaging these trends across

all measures, it can be concluded that the overall trend 

in target-setting for this objective and its outcome 

improved slightly over time. Taken together, the actual 

performance and target trends over time may suggest 

that, either more aggressive target-setting is needed 

to stimulate improved performance, or perhaps new 

measures may need to be established.

The Bureau of Engraving and Printi

The manufacturing of currency notes experienced a 

1.5 billion unit (19.5 percent) reduction in quantity 

ordered by the Federal Reserve, a drop from 7.7 billio

notes in 2008 to 6.2 billion notes in fiscal year 2009. 

This reduction in the Federal Reserve order was larg

enough to affect a 7 percent drop in BEP’s productivit

between fiscal years 2008 and 2009.

In fiscal year 2009, BEP met Federal Reserve product quality standards and exceeded its performa

target for cost per 1,000 notes produced. However,

BEP manufacturing costs increased from $29.47 pe

thousand units in 2008 to $32.77 in 2009, an 11 

percent increase. The increase was due, in part, to 

the annual Federal Reserve order for paper currenc

shifting toward proportionally greater production of 

higher denomination notes, which are more costly 

to manufacture and deliver. In addition, there was a 

19.5 percent reduction in total currency notes ordered 

in 2009 as compared to 2008. Any highly capitalintensive manufacturing operation will tend to incur

relatively high proportion of fixed costs; therefore, as 

production volume decreases, the same level of costs 

are spread over fewer units making each unit produced 

more costly. 

To maintain trust and confidence in U.S. currency

today’s operating environment requires BEP to engag

in continuous efforts to improve note design, since 

rapid developments in reprographic technologies and 

computer-driven printing pose increased challenges to 

counterfeit deterrence. BEP continues to collaborat

with other members of the Advance Counterfeit

Deterrent Steering Committee, and other organizations
St

teg

Goal:

U.S. 

Wor

d Ec

mies

Perfo

m 

t Full E

m

o

te

tia

Strategic Objective: Trust and Confidence in U.S

within the Department of the Treasury to determine 

the effectiveness of counterfeit deterrent features and 

evaluate possible future currency designs.  notable

effort in the currency manufacture area during this 

fiscal year included the finalization and presentation for 

approval of a redesigned $100 note, a product redesigned to keep the nation’s currency a step ahead of the 

counterfeiting threat.

BEP efforts related to protection and accountabilit

over government assets continued to meet performance 

expectations, as did measures of shipment accuracy. 

However, security costs, on average, exceeded the 2009

target and increased slightly more than 2 percent over 

fiscal year 2008 level. As previously explained, the

failure to meet this target was due in large part to the 

reduction in total currency notes produced. In 2009 as 

in years past, BEP reported nearly 100 percent of th

currency notes delivered to the Federal Reserve me

its product quality requirements. As it has for the past

seven years, in fiscal year 2009 BEP again maintaine

ISO 9001 certification in its quality managemen

system for currency production. ISO certification indicates an ongoing commitment to continuous proces

and quality improvement. In 2009, BEP also continued efforts to maintain ISO 14001 certification, wh

indicates a commitment to high-quality environmental 

management. 

In 2009, as it has for the past 24 consecutive years, 

BEP received an unqualified audit opinion on it

financial statements from an independent certified 

public accounting firm. The bureau also received an 

unqualified opinion in 2009, as it has for the past four 

years, on the effectiveness of its internal controls over 

financial reporting.

The United States Min

The economic environment significantly impacted 

the United States Mint’s financial results in fiscal yea

2009. Total revenue reached $2.91 billion in fiscal 

year 2009, up roughly four percent from total revenue 

of $2.80 billion in fiscal year 2008. Record sales of

bullion coins drove most of the revenue growth as both 

circulating and numismatic revenue declined from the 

prior fiscal year. Since the Mint manages the bullion

program to a nominal net margin, revenue growth did 

not translate into higher earnings in fiscal year 2009. 

As a result, the United States Mint returned $475 million to the Treasury General Fund in fiscal year 2

down from $750 million (36.7 percent) from fiscal 

year 2008. 

Slow economic activity adversely affected the Unite

States Mint’s circulating operations by reducing coin

demand in cash transactions. Individuals and businesses returned an increased number of coins to the 

banking system, further reducing the need for newly 

minted coin in fiscal year 2009. The United State

Mint produced 5.4 billion circulating coins and 

shipped 5.2 billion coins to the Federal Reserve Ban

(FRB). Likewise, circulating revenue fell from $1

billion in fiscal year 2008 to $777.6 million in fiscal 

year 2009 (39.9 percent). Seigniorage declined 39.4

percent to $427.8 million in fiscal year 2009 from 

$706.2 million last year, although seigniorage per 

dollar issued remained unchanged at $0.55 in fiscal 

year 2009, surpassing the bureau’s target of $0.54. This 

result was attributed to lower metal costs and stronger 

relative demand for the $1 coin compared to the 

prior year; $1 coins generated the vast majority (74.5 

percent) of seigniorage in fiscal year 2009 and made up 

58.9 percent of the total value of the coins shipped to 

Federal Rerserve Banks (FRB). Weakened deman

only reduced seigniorage, but also reduced the gross 

cost of circulating operations as costs fell to $349.8 

million in fiscal year 2009 from $588.3 million in fiscal 

year 2008.

Prices of copper, nickel and zinc remained below prior 

fiscal year highs but exhibited upward trends during 

the later months of the fiscal year. While per-unit 

metal and supplier fabrication costs decreased for all 

denominations, the unit cost of certain denominations 

(penny, dime, quarter and $1 coin) increased from 

last fiscal year because the United States Mint had t

allocate cost over fewer units. The unit cost for penny 

and nickel denominations remained above face value 
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

80 Strategic Goal: U.S. and World Economies Perform a

for the fourth consecutive fiscal year. Low demand for

the five-cent coin largely reduced the overall loss the 

United States Mint incurred from producing thes

denominations in fiscal year 2009. One-cent and fivecent coins were produced at a loss of $22.0 million,

down 53.2 percent from the fiscal year 2008 loss of 

about $47.0 million. 

In response to the 45-year low in circulating production, the United States Mint implemented a comprehensive plan to achieve long-term efficiency gains b

performing overdue maintenance and capital upgrades 

and investing heavily in employee training. The bureau 

instituted an organization-wide hiring freeze to minimize labor costs, ramped up maintenance work, and 

accelerated capital improvements only possible when 

production lines are idle. Low production volumes

also afforded time to provide additional skill and safety 

awareness training to employees. 

The state of the economy in 2009, in part, increased 

demand for the United States Mint’s bullion products

The United States Mint sold 27.6 million ounces o

gold, silver and platinum bullion coins in fiscal year 

2009, up 9.2 million ounces from last fiscal year. 

Uncertainty regarding traditional investments and

concerns about future inflation drove investor demand 

for bullion coins to unprecedented highs. Total bullion 

revenue neared $1.7 billion, a $746.0 million (78.6 

percent) increase from fiscal year 2008 and a 249 

percent increase over average annual bullion revenue 

since fiscal year 2004. However, these record-breaking

demand levels and successful sales efforts in the bullion product line posed a new set of challenges. The 

number of bullion coins produced by the U.S. Min

was constrained in fiscal year 2009 by limited availability of precious metal blanks from suppliers. These 

constraints compelled the U.S. Mint to suspend th

sale of certain bullion coins during the fiscal year. In 

order to satisfy its legislative mandate to fulfill public 

demand for bullion products, the U.S. Mint shifte

available blank supply to production of bullion coins, 

suspended production of numismatic proof coins and 

worked with suppliers to augment blank volumes and 

sources. Subsequent increases in allocation and ordering limits towards the end of the year allowed the U.

Mint to satisfy all investor demand for 22-karat gold 

and silver one-ounce bullion coins by the third quarter 

of fiscal year 2009. However, at the end of the fiscal

year, 22-karat gold and silver one-ounce proof coins 

remained unavailable. 

Retail sales of numismatic versions of the United Stat

Mint’s circulating and commemorative coins declined 

in fiscal year 2009. Numismatic revenue totaled $440.0

million, down 21 percent from last fiscal year’s record 

revenue of $557.2 million. The United States Min

offered fewer numismatic products in fiscal year 2009 

because precious metal planchets were diverted to fulfill 

demand for bullion products. Poor economic conditions may also have suppressed consumer spending on 

collectibles, reducing the numismatic customer base to 

only 75 percent of the targeted value. The raw material 

and production costs of numismatic products declined 

from last fiscal year but made up a greater proportion 

of numismatic revenue. Consequently, net income and 

seigniorage from numismatic sales declined to $41.1 

million in fiscal year 2009 from $82.4 million in fiscal 

year 2008. 

The United States Mint is responsible for protectin

over $240 billion in United States assets stored a

its facilities. The Protection Department safeguards 

non-United States Mint assets in the bureau’s custody

including gold and silver reserves held at the United

States Bullion Depository at Fort Knox, Kentucky

well as United States Mint assets, such as the bureau’

products, employees, facilities and equipment. During 

fiscal year 2009, the United States Mint achieved it

target protection cost per square foot metric by reducing expenses for rent, communications and utilities and 

other supplies from last fiscal year. However, employee

confidence in protection remained below the target 

performance for the fourth year in a row.
St

teg

Goal:

U.S. 

Wor

d Ec

mies

Perfo

m 

t Full E

m

o

te

tia

Strategic Objective: Trust and Confidence in U.S

Conclusion 

Based on the analysis of the results, the current suite

of measures only partially gauges the success of the 

objective associated with trust and confidence in U.S

coins and notes. Improved measures are needed to 

determine if commerce is effectively enabled for the 

nation. Dynamically adjusting production rates to 

forecasted demand and maintaining inventory targets 

will minimize costs related to the entire supply chain. 

Continued improvement in communication and 

collaboration between the Mint, BEP and the Feder

Reserve could yield significant gains for effectively enabling commerce. Management of numismatic product

inventory also needs to be addressed to minimize the 

costs of obsolescence and disposal while meeting public 

demand. Measures providing even more information about process and product quality (such as cycle 

time and Six Sigma quality measures) could reduc

manufacturing costs even further for both BEP and th

Mint.

BEP and Mint measures currently in place are strongl

influenced by larger economic conditions both at 

home and abroad.  comprehensive review of the

performance measures to try to disassociate the connection between the economic conditions and bureau 

productivity is a significant challenge, but one worthy 

of further investigation. The soft economy does provide 

the bureaus an opportunity to more closely examine 

their operations and capture administrative efficiencies implement, capital improvements, and increase 

employee cross-training. 

Moving Forwar

To improve efficiency, BEP is engaged in a multiyear project to retool its manufacturing processes t

improve BEP capabilities; the new equipment wil

include intaglio presses, electronic inspection systems, 

and finishing equipment. BEP is also investing in ne

technologies which will integrate various disparate 

information technology systems and applications 

used at BEP. The program is intended to optimize th

reliability, integration, and timely collection of online 

real-time performance data. Having this data on hand

will enable program managers to proactively manage 

manufacturing overhead costs, production efficiency, 

and resource productivity. 

Because the improved overt security features in redesigned currency are most effective when the public

knows about and uses the features to authenticate their 

currency, a broad, public education program is crucial 

to the anti-counterfeiting effort. In cooperation with 

the Federal Reserve, BEP administers a public education program to support the introduction of new currency designs. The goal of this program is to build

adequate threshold of awareness to support commerce 

and ensure seamless, “business as usual” transactions 

as new currency designs are introduced to the public. 

Overall, counterfeiting of U.S. currency remains at l

levels – due primarily to a combination of improvements in the notes’ security features, aggressive law 

enforcement and public education efforts. Statistics

continue to indicate that the amount of counterfeit 

U.S. currency worldwide is less than one percent o

genuine U.S. currency in circulation

In order to ensure smooth introduction of the redesign 

of the $100 note, communication and outreach about 

note redesign and counterfeit deterrence features is 

imperative. BEP has developed a public educatio

strategy to inform target industries and key stakeholder 

groups about the new $100 note design. To avoid 

confusion over the notes’ authenticity when issued 

by the Federal Reserve, it is critical users of U

currency worldwide should be made aware of design 

changes. While no timetable has been set for future 

redesigned currency, the next step in currency redesign 

will include improvements to the Nation’s currency to

better serve the needs of Americans and others around

the world, including the blind and visually impaired. 

In coordination with the Department of Treasury, BE

announced the results of a study analyzing options to 

assist the blind and visually impaired in denominating 

U.S. currency (available at: http://www.moneyfactor
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

82 Strategic Goal: U.S. and World Economies Perform a

gov/images/ARINC_Final_Report_7-26-09.pdf). The 

information gathered in the study will be used to help 

establish a direction for the Department of the Treasury 

in providing access to U.S. currency for all cash user

To monitor ongoing product quality and asset accountability, BEP employs comprehensive securit

and product accountability programs. BEP has implemented a risk-based management approach to augmen

and improve these programs, designed to identify and 

rank risks and vulnerabilities by order of priority, so 

attention and resources are allocated to areas of greatest 

vulnerability. To boost IT security, BEP has evaluated

certified, and accredited all of its IT systems to meet 

applicable federal requirements. 

BEP is actively evaluating how to optimize the size an

capability of its workforce so as to operate as costeffectively as possible. During the past several years, the 

bureau streamlined the organization by realigning and 

grouping similar functions together. This has improved 

efficiency, reduced response time, and facilitated currency redesign efforts.

The bureau remains strongly committed to the 

development of its workforce with focus on training 

that has been identified to prepare the workforce for 

increasingly sophisticated technology that is integrated 

into 21st century manufacturing processes. Strategic

investment in people and technology will continue to 

be critical factors in maintaining the bureau’s status as a 

world class securities manufacturer.

BEP strives to provide its customers with superio

products for the lowest possible price. BEP continuously looks for ways to cut costs without compromising quality. Significant capital investments are bei

implemented that will enhance productivity and lessen 

BEP’s environmental impact

Although the Mint has successfully worked to reduce

its manufacturing costs, base metal prices continue 

to make up the largest portion of circulating coinage production cost. Changing the composition of 

circulating coins to less expensive alternatives can 

generate significant cost savings and mitigate further 

reductions in seigniorage should metal market prices 

again increase for copper, nickel, and zinc. Although

metals prices fell from prior peaks in fiscal year 2009, 

market prices for metals in recent months all started to 

increase towards fiscal year 2007 levels. The Secretary

of the Treasury has the authority to select the metal 

composition of the $1 coin, as well as alter the percentage of copper and zinc in the one-cent coin. The 

compositions of five-cent, dime, quarter-dollar and 

half-dollar coins are codified by statute. Any authority

to change the metal composition of these denominations requires legislative action. The United States Min

and the Department continue to advocate congressional approval for changes in circulating coin material 

composition. This could enable more effective control 

over the cost of raw materials used to manufacture coin 

products and ultimately result in significant savings. 

The Presidential $1 Coin Act (Public Law 109-145

mandates that the United States Mint identify, analyz

and overcome barriers to the robust circulation of $1 

coins. Likewise, the Native American $1 Coin 

(Public Law 110-82) requires the United States Mi

to carry out an aggressive, cost-effective, continuing 

campaign to encourage commercial enterprises to accept and dispense Native American $1 coins. Althou

past advertising campaigns fell short and Federal

Reserve Bank inventories have continued to rise

research conducted as a part of a United States Min

2008 four-month, four-city pilot, focusing on new 

messaging ($1 coins are 100 percent recyclable, last for 

decades and save the nation money) and retail activation, showed that over 90 percent of Americans accept

$1 coins when offered. In the pilot cities, acceptance 

rose to 94 percent, and overall coin payments increased 

by 24 percent. Promoting circulating usage of $1 

coins also affords potential cost-savings for the Federal

government since $1 coins last longer than $1 notes 

and generate higher seigniorage than any other coin. 

Treasury is actively engaged in developing a follow-up 

pilot that targets activation at the large retailer level 

that is cost-effective and increases circulation. 
St

Tegi

C

goal: 

u.s. an

D

worl

D eCono

Mies 

perfor

M a

T full eCono

MiC

p

o

Ten

Tial

sTraTegIC obJeCTIve: TrusT anD ConfIDenCe In u.s. CurrenCy WorlDWIDe 83

as beP and the Mint both continue to plan to meet 

coin and note demand, Treasury will need to evaluate 

the costs and benefits of co-circulation of the $1 coin 

and note. given historical precedent, sustainability 

of $1 coin demand is questionable in the medium 

to long-term, especially if it is co-circulated with the 

$1 note. looking to the future, Treasury plans to 

evaluate this area in the context of overall currency 

demand to satisfy the needs of the federal reserve 

and the american public. While the Mint does have a 

Congressional mandate to increase circulation of $1, 

it is not yet clear what the optimal strategic path is related to this issue. additional data and discussion with 

the federal reserve, the Mint, beP and Treasury senior 

leadership will help to arrive at an informed decision. 

after considerable consultation with Treasury, the 

united states Mint will significantly revise their suite 

of performance measures for fiscal year 2010. Three 

measures will be discontinued due to ineffectiveness 

and/or repetitiveness. The metric measuring manufacturing efficiency (“Production Percent Deviation 

from net Pay”) will be replaced by a new measure, 

“shipments Completed on Time”. The Mint will be 

able to control the outcome of this new measure to 

a much greater degree as opposed to being subjected 

to the fluctuating federal reserve order. overall, the 

four remaining measures will compose the base of 

a new suite of measures that will be added to in the 

future in order to better measure bureau performance, 

disassociate the influence of the larger economy, and 

incorporate the overall goal of effective supply chain 

management. 
DEpARtmEnt oF thE tREASuRY • AgEnCY pERFoRmAnCE REpoRt • FISCAL YEAR 2009

84 aMerICan reCovery anD reInvesTMenT aCT of 2009

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009

The Department of the Treasury played a pivotal 

role in implementing the American Recovery an

Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) this p

year. By quickly providing targeted investments and

implementing tax provisions to benefit both businesses 

and individuals, the Department provided a key role 

in supporting economic recovery. Specific measures

provided direct relief to low income and vulnerable 

households including distribution of $250 one-time 

economic payments to help retirees and individuals 

with disabilities meet living expenses, and cash assistance in lieu of tax credits designed to provide affordable housing and make resources available to develop 

alternative sources of energy and get Americans back

to work. The goal of these programs is to stimulate 

the U.S. economy, create and sustain jobs, and buil

the foundation for long-term economic growth. The 

Department of the Treasury administers nine Recovery

Act programs:

•	 Community Development financial Institutions 

(CDfI) Program

•	 native american CDfI assistance Program

•	 new Markets Tax Credit Program

•	 economic recovery act Payments

•	 Tax Provision Implementation Program

•	 Cash assistance to states for low-Income housing 

Projects in lieu of Tax Credits

•	 Cash assistance for specified energy Property in 

lieu of Tax Credits

•	 health Insurance Tax Credit administration 

Program

•	 Tax Provision oversight Program

Community Development Financial

Institutions Progr

The Treasury Department’s CDFI Fund awards grants

loans and other investments on a competitive basis 

to community banks, credit unions, loan funds and 

venture capital funds that work in low-income communities or serve individuals or businesses that lack access 

to mainstream financial institutions. CDFIs provide

capital to small businesses and micro-enterprises, 

mortgage loans to first-time homebuyers, financing to 

support the development of affordable housing projects 

and community facilities, and retail banking services 

for the unbanked. 

The Recovery Act appropriated $90 million to th

Fund to make awards through the CDFI Program. I

2009, Treasury announced CDFI program awards to

59 Community Development Financial Institutions

in 26 states and Puerto Rico. The primary goal of the

Recovery Act is to ensure that critical financial resources are provided as quickly as possible to stimulat

the economy and create jobs; the Fund selected the following three measures to track this program’s success

•	 Number of days between the effective application 

due date and the date of award notification: During 

2009, the CDFI Fund sought to make Recove

Act awards within 120 days of enactment of the

Recovery Act. Although CDFI did not m

its target, the notice of award was provided to 

awardees within 133 days of enactment. This is an 

improvement of 167 days, nearly 50 percent faster 

than fiscal year 2008.

•	 Number of days between the date of award notification and the date by which at least 85 percent of 

award dollars have been disbursed: During 2009, 

the CDFI Fund exceeded its goal to disburse 8

percent of all Recovery Act awards within 60 day

of the date of award notification; 100 percent of 

awards were made in this time frame. This represents a 70 percent improvement from fiscal year 

2008, going from 210 days to 60 days.

•	 Number of full-time equivalent jobs created or 

maintained by businesses financed by CDFI Program 

awardees that receive Recovery Act funds: The CDFI

Fund has calculated that CDFI Program Recove
aMeriCan reCoVery anD reinVesTMenT aCT of 2009

aMerICan reCovery anD reInvesTMenT aCT of 2009 85

Act awardees will create or maintain approximately

75,000 full time jobs through direct funding of 

loans to businesses that pay salary and wages. 

Native American CDFI Assist

(NACA) Pro

Through the NACA Program, the CDFI Fund m

grants, loans, and other investments to CDFIs such

as community banks, credit unions, loan funds and 

venture capital funds that deploy the funds in Native

American communities or to Native American populations. The Recovery Act appropriated $8 million to

Fund to make awards through the NACA Prog

Treasury awarded NACA program financial assistan

to 10 CDFIs committed to serving economically

distressed Native American, Alaska Native, and Na

Hawaiian communities across the nation. Recover

Act resources enabled the Fund to increase the siz

of awards from $650,000 to $750,000 in Financial

Assistance awards and $150,000 in Technical

Assistance or capacity building awards to high quality

Native American CDFIs. In addition to increas

funding for NACA, the Recovery Act waived

requirement for applicants to match the funds for fiscal 

year 2009 to ensure that current economic conditions 

did not impose a barrier to receiving NACA fund

Non-federal matching funds are required by statute

to be in place to match the amount of the requested 

NACA award. The Fund selected the following th

metrics to measure performance of this program:

•	 Number of days between the effective application 

due date and the date of award notification: During 

fiscal year 2009, CDFI did not meet its goal of

making Recovery Act awards within 120 days o

the enactment of the Recovery Act. Awards we

provided to awardees within 134 days of the law’s 

enactment. However this marked an improvement

of 121 days, or nearly 50 percent, over the fiscal 

year 2008 level. 

•	 Number of days between the date of award notification and the date by which at least 85 percent of 

award dollars have been disbursed: The CDFI Fun

disbursed 100 percent of all Recovery Act award

within 60 days of the date of award notification, 

an improvement of 210 days (78 percent) over the 

fiscal year 2008 result of 270 days. 

•	 Number of full-time equivalent jobs created or 

maintained by businesses financed by NACA Program 

awardees that receive Recovery Act funds: The CDFI

fund anticipates that its Recovery Act awardee

will create or maintain approximately 250 full time 

jobs through direct funding of loans to businesses 

that directly pay salary and wages. These loans 

are typically provided to very small businesses or 

micro-enterprises. Native CDFIs typically us

awards to increase their net assets or loan loss 

reserves so that they may borrow additional private 

capital and significantly increase their lending 

capacity. 

For the performance measures shown above for the

CDFI and NACA programs related to job creati

the number of full-time equivalent jobs created or 

maintained is using a leveraged ratio, which reflects the 

normal bank leveraging of additional private capital to 

expand lending. Through December, 2009 approximately 1,000 jobs were created or maintained with the 

help of Recovery Act funds (this estimate excludes an

leveraging effects). This information is based on reports 

from the Recovery Act recipients that are poste

quarterly on FederalReporting.gov.

New Markets Tax Credit (NMTC

Progra

NMTC facilitates investment in low-income communities by permitting taxpayers to receive a credit against

Federal income taxes for making Qualified Equit

Investments in designated Community Development 

Entities (CDEs) certified by the Department of th

Treasury. The CDEs must, in turn, use substantially all

NMTC-sourced financing to make loans and investments in businesses and real estate developments in

low-income communities. 
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

86 American Recovery and Rinvestm

The Recovery Act provided $3 billion of NM

allocation authority; $1.5 billion to be made available 

to applicants that had applied under the calendar year 

2008 NMTC allocation round; and $1.5 billion to

be made available under the 2009 NMTC allocation

round. With this $3 billion, CDFI increased the

volume of NMTC investments in low-income communities by 30 percent, and made NMTC awards to 5

CDE’s across the country. The Fund uses the followin

3 measures to track this program’s performance:

•	 Number of days between the date of award notification and the date by which at least 85 percent of 

allocation agreements have been signed by awardees: 

The Fund’s 2009 goal was to enter into allocation

agreements with CDEs within 60 days of providing them with a notice of award, an improvement

of 70 days (around 50 percent) better than the 

2008 result of 130 days. The Fund exceeded this

goal by having the awardees that were announced 

on May 21, 2009 sign agreements within 60 days. 

The second NMTC announcement results have

not been finalized.

•	 Percentage of total dollars that were invested by 

CDEs in “severely distressed” communities: “Severely

distressed” refers to census tracts with a poverty 

rate of a least 30 percent and/or a median family 

income at or below 60 percent of area median family income, and/or an unemployment rate at least 

1.5 times the national average. The Fund estimates

that at least 75 percent of NMTC proceeds

invested by CDEs were invested in these severely

distressed communities. Competition for tax credit 

authority is extremely high and faces a rigorous 

application process. The Fund selects CDEs willin

to focus on severely distressed communities, to 

provide the most preferential rates and terms to 

borrowers, to commit to investing more than the 

required minimum 85 percent of proceeds into 

low-income communities. 

•	 Number of jobs (construction jobs and full-time 

equivalent jobs) created or maintained by businesses 

or real estate projects financed by NMTC investors.

CDFI is tracking its progress for the awardees

that are able to create or maintain approximately 

60,000 jobs through the leveraged funding of 

loans and investments to businesses and real estate 

developers. The Fund collects data on jobs created

and maintained, including construction jobs, 

at each of the businesses and real estate projects 

financed by the CDE

Economic Recovery Paymen

Progra

The Department of the Treasury’s Financial

Management Service (FMS) issued one-time paymen

of $250 to individuals who were, or are found to be, 

eligible for Social Security, Supplemental Secur

Income, Railroad Retirement Board, and Veter

Affairs benefits during November and Decembe

2008, as well as January 2009. For people that became

eligible after the initial payments were distributed, 

catch-up payments will be made through December 

31, 2010. Treasury disbursed over $13.7 billion by 

issuing more than 55 million $250 Recovery Act payments. This accounts for 100 percent of the estimate

payment volume. FMS processed almost 46.4 millio

(85 percent) of these payments electronically rather 

than by paper check, saving taxpayers over $17 million. 

The remaining 8.4 million payments (15 percent) were 

disbursed issuing paper checks. FMS also offset over 

million Recovery Act payments for delinquent non-tax

state tax and child support debts valued almost $239 

million. FMS developed the following performanc

measures to assess the impact of the funding provided to disburse the one-time Economic Recover

payments: 

•	 Percent of paper check and Electronic Funds Transfer 

(EFT) payments disbursed accurately and on-time:

Refers to the percentage of check and EFT payments that FMS disburses which are not dupli

or double payments. The term “on-time” means 

that FMS releases checks to the U.S. Postal Ser

and EFT payments to the Federal Reserve 

so that normal delivery results in timely receipt 

by payees. During 2009 FMS set a target of 10
Ame

can

R

o

very a

Rei

vest

tAct of 

American Recovery and Rinvestment

percent of payments disbursed accurately and ontime, and met this target at fiscal year’s end. 

•	 Percent of Electronic Payments: Refers to that

portion of the total volume of FMS payments tha

were disbursed electronically. Electronic payments

include transfers through the Automated Clearing

House. FMS set a 2009 target of 82 percent f

this measure. The actual result at fiscal year’s end 

was almost 85 percent. 

•	 Unit Cost for Federal Government Payments: This 

cost measure combines both paper and electronic 

payments, and includes the aftermath processes 

(reconciliation and claims) for both types of 

payment processes. FMS set a 2009 target of $0.4

per payment for this measure, and exceeded this 

target with a cost of $0.36.

Payments for Specified Ener

Property in Lieu of Tax Credi

Designed in collaboration with the U.S. Departmen

of Energy, the Payments for Specified Energy Proper

in Lieu of Tax Credits program provides direct payments in lieu of tax credits for qualified renewable

energy projects. Treasury Department assistance is 

equal to 30 percent of the qualifying cost basis of a 

renewable energy property, and payments are made 

within sixty days of the facility being placed in service. 

Projects funded under this program included fuel cell 

power plants and micro-turbines which convert fuel 

into electricity, projects that use solar power to generate 

electricity, small and large wind projects, geothermal 

property that generates electricity and thermal energy, 

and combined heat and power system property that 

generate electricity. Projects vary in size and capacity. Through December, Treasury had approved and 

awarded nearly $2 billion to 190 recipients, with these 

awards Treasury exceeded its public goal outlined by 

the Vice President to power 900,000 homes

To measure the success of this program, the 

Department selected the following two performance 

metrics:

•	 Cycle time in days between receipt of application and 

date of award: The target for fiscal year 2009 was 

60 days; the result achieved was 31.46 days, or 191 

percent of target.

•	 Cycle time in days between notification date and 

funding: The target for fiscal year 2009 was five 

days; the result achieved was three days, or 167 

percent of target.

Payments to States for Low-Inc

Housing Projects in Lieu of T

Credits

The Payments to States for Low-Income Housi

Projects in Lieu of Tax Credits program provides direct

payments to state housing agencies for investments in 

low income housing projects in place of existing lowincome housing tax credit allocation. States may elect

to receive all or a portion of their 2009 low-income 

housing tax credit allocation in the form of direct 

payments. Upon receiving notice of these awards, state

housing authorities manage a competitive process to 

issue sub-awards to qualified developers. These subawards are subject to the same requirements as the 

low-income housing tax credit program including rent, 

income, and use restrictions. Through December, 92 

applications had been received from 51 designated 

housing agencies.  total of $4 billion was awarded and

$235 million has been drawn down by 31 states. Initial 

feedback to the Department suggests that the relatively 

low level of drawdown exists because state governments 

are evaluating their financial capacities and determining how to best provide funding needed to complete 

qualifying projects. 

To measure the success of this program, the 

Department has selected the following two performance metrics:

•	 Cycle time in days between receipt of application and 

date of award: The fiscal year 2009 was 15 days; 

the result achieved was 7.15 days, or 209 percent 

of target.
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

88 American Recovery and Rinvestm

•	 Cycle time in days between notification date and funding: The fiscal year target was five days; the result 

achieved was three days, or 167 percent of target.

Tax Provision Implementatio

Progra

The Recovery Act includes over 50 tax provision

providing over $300 billion in tax relief to households 

and businesses. These provisions are intended to reduce 

tax burden during a time of economic stress, and to 

spur economic growth. The provisions range from 

individual tax credits to renewable energy and energy 

conservation incentives, insurance premium benefits 

providing separated employees with assistance in 

meeting COBRA payments, tax incentives for businesses, and tax benefits for specified state and lo

government bonds. The most prominent tax provisions 

include:

•	 Making Work Pay Credit:  credit that provided

$400 to $800 for many Americans through

reduced payroll withholdings or refundable credit.

•	 First-Time Homebuyer Credit Expansion: Allows

eligible first-time homebuyers to claim a refundable credit up to $8,000 without a payback 

requirement. 

•	 Build America Bonds: Enables state and local

governments to more readily be able to finance 

education, utility, transportation, and other public 

projects by issuing direct payment or tax credit 

bonds with deeper federal subsidy.

•	 Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Incentives: 

Allowed energy users and producers who utilize

renewable energy sources or improve energy efficiency possible eligibility for tax incentives.

•	 Net Operating Loss Carry-back for Small Businesses: 

Eligible small businesses can claim 2008 business

losses against tax liabilities incurred up to five years 

ago.

•	 Sales Tax Deduction for New Vehicle Purchases: 

Enables taxpayers who bought certain new vehicles

in 2009 to deduct the state and local sales taxes.

•	 Enhanced Credits for Tax Years 2009 and 2010: 

Included enhancements to the earned income tax 

credit, additional child tax credit and the American

Opportunity Tax Credit for higher education.

•	 Up to $2,400 in Unemployment Benefits Tax Free in 

2009: Provided additional benefits for taxpayers 

that lost their jobs due to the recession.

•	 COBRA: Health Insurance Continuation Premium 

Subsidy: Provided expanded health insurance 

coverage for unemployed workers.

The IRS, goal has been to prepare systems and product

in a timely manner, enabling taxpayers to take advantage of the Recovery Act’s tax provisions and provid

benefits to the economy as soon as possible. The 

Recovery Act appropriated $123 million to cover th

administrative expenses needed to carry out implementation of this program. Implementation was accomplished via education and outreach, guidance and 

instructions, IRS programming and processing, compliance and reporting. Education and outreach assist

taxpayers with determining if provisions applied to 

them through issuance of news releases, publishing upto-date information and posting questions and answers 

on IRS.gov, providing forums such as conference call

for discussion with targeted groups such as professional 

tax preparers, providing toll-free telephone assistance 

to taxpayers on the Recovery Act, and publishing fac

sheets on the various provisions. Guidance and instruction informed taxpayers how to claim applicable credits

through updating the appropriate tax forms, schedules, 

instructions, and publications, and issuance of Internal 

Revenue Bulletin Notices and Revenue Procedures. 

IRS outreach efforts were designed to ensure that ta

credits were correctly claimed, and that benefits were 

only going to those eligible. 

IRS measured performance results of this progra

using the following metric: 

•	 Completion of plan activities affecting the 2009 and 

2010 filing season: Refers to the percentage of activities completed needed to implement Recover

Act provisions affecting the 2009 and 2010 filing
Ame

can

R

o

very a

Rei

vest

tAct of 

American Recovery and Rinvestment

season. For 2009, the IRS completed 100 perce

of its activities that were planned. 

Tax Provision Progra

Accomplishments through 200

Through the end of November 2009, $92.8 billion of

tax relief was made available to taxpayers through the 

Recovery Act

Making Work Pay Cred

In 2009 and 2010, the Making Work Pay provision 

of the Recovery Act provided a refundable tax credi

of up to $400 for working individuals and up to $800 

for married taxpayers filing joint returns. The credit 

is calculated at a rate of 6.2 percent of earned income 

and phases out for taxpayers with modified adjusted 

gross income in excess of $75,000, or $150,000 for 

married couples filing jointly. Taxpayers benefit either 

by claiming the credit on their tax returns or through a 

reduction in the amount of federal income tax withheld from their paychecks. It is estimated that over 120 

million households will benefit from this provision 

through 2010.

First-Time HomeBuyer Tax Cre

The Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2

established a tax credit for first-time homebuyers to 

claim on their tax returns up to $7,500. . The Recovery

Act expanded this credit by increasing the amount to

$8,000 for purchases made in 2009 before December 

1, 2009. The estimated benefit claimed by 630,045 

taxpayers through November was over $4.6 billion.

As a result of this program’s success, the Worker,

Homeownership and Business Assistance Act of 2

was signed into law on November 6, 2009, which

extended and expanded the tax credit. Eligible taxpayers must buy, or enter into a binding contract to buy,

a principal residence on or before April 30, 2010 and

close on the home by June 30, 2010.

Build America Bo

These bonds are tax credit bonds that provide a refundable credit or direct payment subsidy to State and local

governments for 35 percent of their interest costs on 

taxable governmental bonds issued in 2009 and 2010 

to finance capital expenditures, in order to promote 

economic recovery and job creation. Since the program’s inception in early April through December, ove

$64 billion of Build America Bonds have been sold 

45 states in 779 separate issues representing roughly 22 

percent of municipal debt sold in that time frame.

Recovery Zone Bo

These bonds are new tax-preferred bond programs 

created under the Recovery Act which are a modifie

type of Build America Bond. They provide a deep

federal direct payment subsidy of 45 percent of state 

and local governmental borrowing costs for eligible 

governmental projects in 50 states, over 3,000 counties, 

and over 250 large municipalities based on individual 

employment declines in 2008. Through November

2009, $565 million of Recovery Zone Econom

Development Bonds were issued. The Recovery A

established allocation caps of $10 billion and $15 billion for these bonds for 2009 and 2010, respectively.

Indian Tribal Economic Developmen

Bond

The Recovery Act added $2 billion in bond-issuin

authority for Indian Tribal Governments. The new

bond program gives Indian Tribal Governments

the same broad flexibility afforded to state and local governments to use tax-exempt bonds to finance 

economic development projects, excluding certain 

gaming facilities, and helps to reduce associated borrowing costs. Two award rounds of $1 billion each were 

conducted; Treasury’s Deputy Secretary Neal Woli

and New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson announ

$1 billion in stimulus bond authority for 58 tribes 

across the country on September 15 in Albuquerque

New Mexico. The application deadline for the second

round was January 2, 2010.
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

90 American Recovery and Rinvestm

Qualified school Construction bond 

allocation 

The recovery act established an allocation cap of $11 

billion for Qualified school Construction bonds in 

2009 to provide a federal subsidy for school construction financing to states and the 100 largest educational 

agencies based on school funding data. The bonds 

provide a federal tax credit to investors designed to 

cover 100 percent of the interest. Through December, 

2009, $2.5 billion of Qualified school Construction 

bonds were issued. 

Qualified energy Conservation bonds 

and Clean renewable energy bonds

The recovery act established a cap of $3.2 billion for 

Qualified energy Conservation bonds. These bonds 

provide a subsidy for energy conservation-oriented 

repair and rehabilitation of public schools through 

a federal tax credit to investors intended to cover 

70 percent of the interest on the bonds. new Clean 

renewable energy bonds (“new Crebs”) provide 

incentives for entities not eligible for renewable energy 

tax credits, such as public power providers, government 

bodies, and cooperative electric companies, to invest in 

renewable electricity generation. new Crebss may be 

issued by qualified issuers to finance renewable energy 

projects. The recovery act expanded new Crebs by 

adding an additional $1.6 billion in bond issuing authority to bring total allocation to $2.4 billion. based 

on applications received by august, 15th only $2.2 

billion was allocated due to eligibility requirements. 

net operating loss Carry back

The recovery act extended the period from two to five 

years for business taxpayers to carry back a 2008 net 

operating loss (nol) to offset taxable income in those 

preceding taxable years. This applies to business taxpayers that incurred an nol for a taxable year ending 

December 31, 2007 and beginning January 1, 2010. This 

provision was extended and changed under the Worker, 

homeownership, and business assistance act of 2009 to 

include all businesses.

sales Tax Deduction for Vehicle 

purchases

The recovery act authorized taxpayers to deduct state 

and local sales and excise taxes paid on the purchase of 

new cars, light trucks, motor homes, and motorcycles 

through 2009.

enhance Credits for 2009 and 2010 – 

american opportunity Tax Credit

The recovery act, through the american opportunity 

Tax Credit, expanded the number of parents and 

students that qualify for a tax credit to pay for college 

expenses for 2009 and 2010. The recovery act modified the existing hope Credit by making the american 

opportunity Tax Credit available to a broader range 

of taxpayers, including many with higher incomes 

and those who owe no tax; by adding required course 

materials to the list of qualifying expenses; and by 

allowing the credit to be claimed for four years of postsecondary education instead of just two. The full credit 

is available to individuals, whose modified adjusted 

gross income is $80,000 or less, or married couples filing joint returns whose modified adjusted gross income 

is $160,000 or less. The credit phases out for taxpayers 

with incomes above these levels. The maximum annual 

credit is $2,500 per student. The total 2009 benefit by 

fiscal year’s end was estimated at $328 million. 

Cobra health insurance Continuation 

premium subsidy

The recovery act provides a 65 percent subsidy for 

up to nine months to help involuntarily terminated 

workers maintain their health care coverage through 

payment of Cobra continuation premiums for 

themselves and their families. eligible workers are 

required to pay 35 percent of the premium to their 

former employers. The employers are required to pay 

the full premium, but are entitled to a credit of 65 

percent of that premium on their payroll tax returns. 

To qualify, a worker must have been involuntarily 

terminated between september 1, 2008 and December 
Ame

can

R

o

very a

Rei

vest

tAct of 

American Recovery and Rinvestment

31, 2009. Through November, more than $803 million

in COBRA credits had been claimed by employ

Health Insurance Tax Credi

Administration Progr

Funding for the Health Insurance Tax Credi

Administration program enabled the IRS to upda

systems and products for implementation of the Health

Coverage Tax Credit (HCTC). The credit helps workers and retirees that lost their jobs as a result of trade

agreements to continue to receive affordable health 

care. The Recovery Act increased the tax credit to 8

percent of qualified health insurance premiums, up 

from 65 percent, beginning in April 2009. The HCT

is administered by the IRS, but the U.S. Departm

of Labor, state workforce agencies and the Pension

Benefits Guaranty Corporation determine eligibility fo

HCTC recipients. The Recovery Act changed H

in several other ways including: 

•	 Reimbursement for premiums paid while enrolling in the monthly HCTC Program, beginnin

August 200

•	 Allowing workers’ and retirees’ family members

to continue receiving the HCTC after certain life

events, beginning January 2010

•	 Expanding eligibility to a wider range of people,

beginning May 2009 

IRS uses the following two metrics to gauge performance of this progra

•	 Cost per Taxpayer Served: The cost per taxpayer 

served was $16.94 in fiscal year 2008. The target 

set by IRS for fiscal year 2009 was $17.00. Th

fiscal year 2009 actual was $13.79. Thus, 123 

percent of target was achieved, a decrease of 18.6 

percent versus 2008. IRS’s goal is to maintai

current performance despite increased volumes due 

to program expansion. IRS plans to establish a ne

baseline for this measure in fiscal year 2010.

•	 Sign-up Time: Reflects the median number of days

between the day the IRS sends program kits t

potential recipients and the day recipients enroll 

and remit their first payments to the IRS. The sig

up time was 94 days in fiscal year 2008, and I

set a target for fiscal year 2009 of 97 days. 106 

percent of the target was achieved at 91.3 days, a 

nearly three percent improvement over the prior 

year. IRS’s goal is to maintain current performanc

despite increased volumes due to program expansion, and establish a new baseline for this measure 

in 2010. 

Tax Provision Oversig

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS), in managing 

collection and provision of tax credits, has a substantial role in the successful implementation of the 

Recovery Act. The Treasury Inspector General for T

Administration (TIGTA), in its oversight role of t

IRS, has been tasked with monitoring and evaluatin

the IRS’s administration of Recovery Act progra

grants, contracts, and funding. The Recovery Ac

authorized an appropriation of $7 million to TIGTA

available through September 2013, to be used for

oversight of IRS programs. TIGTA’s role, an extension of its customary duties, includes accounting 

IRS monies expended, pursuing those who seek t

defraud the Government, holding government officials

accountable for administering Recovery Act funds

and conducting analysis contributing to program 

transparency. TIGTA will perform audits to ensure tha

IRS’s systems and programs are operating effectively

efficiently, and economically in their activities related 

to this legislation. TIGTA developed an Oversig

Program Plan to address the many tax law provisions 

that IRS is charged with administering. TIGTA w

continue to provide oversight to IRS’s Recovery 

implementation through 2013.
DEpARtmEnt oF thE tREASuRY • AgEnCY pERFoRmAnCE REpoRt • FISCAL YEAR 200

9

92 sTraTegIC goal: PrevenTeD TerrorIsM anD ProMoTeD The naTIon’s seCurITy

Strategic Goal: 

Prevented Terrorism and Promoted the Nation’s Security 

Through Strengthened International Financial Systems

Strategic Obj

Pre-empted and neutralized threats

to the international financial system

and enhanced U.S. national security

The Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligenc

(TFI) is the only organization solely devoted to using

financial means to track, degrade, and disrupt threats 

to U.S. national security. TFI impairs potenti

threats to U.S. national security from financial an

other support networks of terrorists, weapons of mass 

destruction (WMD) proliferators, drug traffickers, 

rogue regimes, and other criminals. In order to ensure 

confidence in U.S. and world financial systems, th

office works to keep them accessible to legitimate users 

and avoid exploitation by others. Its unique capabilities leverage intelligence, law enforcement, sanctions, 

regulatory, and diplomatic tools to achieve Treasury’s 

strategic objective. This is accomplished through the 

unification of four offices and a bureau within the 

Department:

•	 The Office of Foreign Assets Control (

administers and enforces economic and trade 

sanctions 

•	 The Office of Terrorist Financing and Financi

Crimes (TFFC) is the policy and outreach apparatus for T

•	 The Office of Intelligence and Analysis (O

provides all-source intelligence analysis, leads 

the Department’s integration into the larger 

Intelligence Community, and provides support to 

Department leadership on a full range of economic, political, and security issues

•	 The Financial Crimes Enforcement Netwo

(FinCEN) is responsible for administering t

Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) and other regulatory functions; supporting law enforcement investiga

and prosecutions, sharing information domestically and with counterpart foreign financial intelligence units, enhancing financial anti-fraud efforts, 

and improving international money laundering 

and counter-terrorist financing efforts 

•	 The Treasury Executive Office of Asset Forfeit

administers the Treasury Forfeiture Fund, whic

is the receipt account for the deposit of non-tax 

forfeitures 

budget (Direct & non-appropriated): prevented Terrorism and 

promoted the nation’s security Through strengthened international 

financial systems Dollars in Thousands

$0

$250,000

$500,000

$750,000

$1,000,000

$1,250,000

$1,500,000

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

$455,108

$602,332 $697,774 $778,960

$987,668

performance Cost: prevented Terrorism and promoted the nation’s 

security Through strengthened international financial systems Dollars in Thousands

$0

$200,000

$400,000

$600,000

$800,000

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

$270,553

$478,764 $505,209 $555,144 $570,087
sTraTegiC goal: preVenTeD TerrorisM anD proMoTeD The naTion’s seCuriTy 

Through sTrengTheneD inTernaTional finanCial sysTeM

s

sTraTegIC obJeCTIve: Pre-eMPTeD anD neuTralIzeD ThreaTs 93

fiscal year 2009 results: pre-empted and neutralized threats to the 

international financial system and enhanced u.s. national security

17%

Unmet

5%

Improved

11%

Met

67%

Exceeded

performance Cost by outcome

78%

22%

Removed or reduced threats to 

national security from terrorism, 

proliferation of weapons of mass 

destruction, narcotics trafficking and 

other criminal activity on the part of 

rogue regimes, individuals, and their 

financial and other support 

networks.

Safer and more transparent U.S. and 

international financial systems.

The outcomes associated with this objective are:

•	 Removed or reduced threats to national security

from terrorism, proliferation of weapons of mass 

destruction, drug trafficking and other criminal 

activity on the part of rogue regimes, individuals, 

and their support networks

•	 Safer and more transparent U.S. and internation

financial systems

Removed or reduced threats to national security 

proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, drug tra

and other criminal activity on the part of rogu

individuals, and their support n

Based on the performance results Treasury was generally successful in achieving this outcome in fiscal year 2009

Fiscal Year 2009 Results

removed or reduced Threats to national security

50%

Exceeded

50%

Met

Summary of Actual Trends for the Prior Four Years

Trend Symbol Cou

Favorable upward trend  1 50%

Favorable downward trend  0 0%

Unfavorable upward trend  0 0%

Unfavorable downward trend  0 0%

No change in trend, no effect  0 0%

No change in trend, favorable effect  0 0%

No change in trend, unfavorable effect  0 0%

Baseline B 1 50%

Total 2 100%

Discontinued DISC 3
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

94 Strategic Goal: Prevented Terrorism and Promoted

Key Performance Measure Table

The following table contains only key performance measures associated with this outcome. Actual and target trends represent four years of data

where available. The full suite of measures with detailed explanations is available in the Appendix.

Key Performance Measure B

2008 

Act

2009 

Targe

2009 

Act

% of 

Targe

Achi

% Change 

in Act

Performan

Rati

2010 

Targe

Targe

Tren

Actu

Tren

Impact of TFI programs and activities DO N/A B 7.81 100.0% B Met 7.4 B B

Percent of forfeited cash proceeds resulting from

high-impact cases (%)

T

Forfeiture

Fund

86.91% 75% 87.65% 116.9% 100.9% Exceeded 75  

Legend Sy

Favorable upward trend 

Favorable downward trend 

Unfavorable upward trend 

Unfavorable downward trend 

No change in trend, no effect 

No change in trend, favorable effect 

No change in trend, unfavorable effect 

Baseline B

Discontinued DISC

Analysis of Performance Resu

TFI discontinued all of its previously reported performance measures and began applying its composite

performance metric “Impact of TFI programs and

activities” during fiscal year 2009. This metric consists 

of four overall focus areas, with additional detailed 

focus area components. These components align to 

performance goals established by TFI. In fiscal year

2009 this metric achieved a 7.81 rating out of 10 possible points. The rating is determined by taking each 

focus area components score and averaging across TFI.

The external review process for this performance metric 

still needs to be developed, but the implementation 

of this measure is a large step in the effort to measure 

performance for a policy office that also has operational 

responsibilities.

Treasury Outcomes Performance Goals

Removed or reduced threats to

national security from terrorism,

proliferation of weapons of mass

destruction, drug trafficking and

other criminal activity on the part of

rogue regimes, individuals, and their

support networks

Safer and more transparent U.S. and

international financial systems

TFI effectively employed tools and authorities to further U.S.

Government policy objectives and mitigate national security threats.

Impact of policymaking, outreach,

and diplomacy

Impact of Economic Sanctions

Support the formulation of Treasury policy and the execution of

departmental authorities through all-source analysis of the global

financial network.

Impact of information and analysis Provide Treasury Department decision makers with timely, accurate, and

relevant intelligence support on the full range of economic, political,

and security issues.

Anti-money laundering and combating financing of terrorism regulations

are administered effectively and efficiently.

Impact of regulatory activity on

transparency of financial systems
St

teg

Goal:

Pr

ve

ted Terror

m a

Pr

o

t

the

a

tion’s

Secu

ty

Through Stre

then

d 

tern

tional Fin

cial

Sy

t

s

Strategic Objective: Pre-empted and ne

Designated Individuals and Entiti

OFAC designated 319 individuals and entities duri

fiscal year 2009, pursuant to sanctions programs it 

administers. Designations constitute the identification 

of foreign adversaries and the networks of companies, 

other entities, and individuals that are associated. 

Pursuant to an Executive Order or statute, U

persons are then prohibited from conducting transactions, providing services, and having other dealings 

with those designated. The designations made this 

year varied across a range of sanctions programs and 

areas across the globe, including narcotics, WMD 

proliferation, terrorism, Zimbabwe, Burma, and th

Democratic Republic of the Congo. In fiscal year 2009

some key designations included:

•	 The financial networks of Mexican drug traffickers 

and the designation of 20 individuals and 22 entities, including four leaders of the Gulf Cartel, Lo

Zetas and a Mexican financial network.

•	 Continuing to target the Revolutionary Arme

Forces of Colombia (FARC), a narco-terror

group, three of the FARC’s international representatives as well as a FARC financial network

designated. 

•	 Two entities owned or controlled by the Cali-based 

Rodriguez Orejuela drug trafficking organization

This designation assisted a Colombian law enforcement investigation that resulted in the arrest 

and ultimate guilty pleas by key members of the 

Rodriguez Orejuela organizatio

•	 Twenty-five individuals and entities pursuant 

to the Junta’s Anti-Democratic Efforts Act a

Executive Orders 13448 and 13464 with respec

to Burma were designated to continue targeting

business associates of the Burmese government and

their financial networks in Burma and Singapor

•	 Twenty-eight individuals and entities under 

Executive Order 13224 with respect to terrorism

including Al Qaeda operatives in Iran and Iraq,

four Pakistani targets supporting Al Qaeda and

Lashkar-e-Tayyiba, and Hizballah’s main construction company

•	 Concluding a nearly six-year investigation of the 

international freight forwarder DHL, OFAC

the Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry

and Security entered into a global settlement

agreement with the company, resulting in OFAC

biggest settlement or penalty to date. 

Private Sector Cooperati

The extent to which private sector entities cooperate 

with Treasury in administering targeted financial measures is a key indicator of TFI’s success. Many members

of the international banking community voluntarily exceed their own legal security requirements because they 

do not want to handle illicit business. Such institutions

do this in the spirit of good corporate citizenship and 

out of a desire to protect their reputations. As a result,

foreign private sector voluntary actions have amplified 

the effectiveness of government-imposed measures. 

As private sector institutions sever relationships with

an entity targeted by Treasury, other institutions 

face increasingly high reputational risks when doing 

business with that entity. Consequently, many foreign 

banks tend to follow the lead of their peers. In turn, 

such voluntary implementation makes it even more 

palatable for their own governments to impose similar 

measures, thus creating a mutually-reinforcing cycle of 

public and private action. 

Examples of private sector cooperation in fiscal year

2009 include:

•	 Regulated financial institutions demonstrated a

high level of awareness of and compliance with 

OFAC sanctions programs, blocking or rejecti

5,856 items involving more than half a billion 

dollars in assets. 

•	 In the securities industry, the Securities &

Exchange Commission and the Depository Trust

& Clearing Corporation issued a final rule on 

September 11, 2009, providing that all those

who utilize the Depository Trust Company, the 

National Securities Clearing Corporation, and th

Fixed Income Clearing Corporation must now
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

96 Strategic Goal: Prevented Terrorism and Promoted

file biannual reports certifying that they maintain 

active OFAC compliance progra

•	 On October 2, 2008, OFAC designate

individuals and six companies connected to the 

Amezcua Contreras drug trafficking organization,

including a pharmaceutical company that diverted 

pseudoephedrine to drug traffickers for the production of methamphetamine. Following OFA

designation, a Mexico’s office of the Attorney

General blocked bank accounts of those identified. Mexican authorities acted again to block

accounts when OFAC followed up with eight n

designations. In the United States, $2.7 millio

was blocked and a $2 million aircraft purchase was 

cancelled. 

•	 Many non-U.S. banks have, as a routine practice, closed the accounts of all individuals an

entities on the OFAC SDN list as a pruden

and business matter. For example, many Lati

American banks have advised OFAC that they r

on the SDN list as part of their due diligence i

identifying high-risk account holders. Non-U.

companies that are not required to comply with 

U.S. sanctions often refuse to work for, supply

or otherwise do business with SDN commercia

enterprises or employ persons on the SDN list

thereby further isolating them commercially. As

a result, designated persons are impeded from 

functioning effectively in the legitimate economy 

or business world. As of September 2009, publi

records in Colombia and other countries show 

that hundreds of companies named as SDNs hav

dissolved, are in the process of dissolution, or are 

inactive. 

•	 In response to OFAC actions, the private sect

has taken upon itself to increase transparency in 

the payment system by developing a new payment 

type requiring full transparency in cover payments, 

a payment method that had previously made it 

possible to easily transfer funds through the U.S

financial system in violation of U.S. sanction

Treasury’s success in conducting outreach through 

industry counterparts, charitable organizations, and 

financial institutions to ensure awareness of money 

laundering threats and vulnerabilities also helps create a 

positive response by the private sector. The Department 

has incorporated a high-level of private sector engagement with these entities around the world, raising 

awareness of these risks and encouraging financial 

institutions to remain vigilant. Thanks in part to this 

comprehensive effort, the international community has 

become increasingly sensitive to these risks, as shown 

by a number of actions taken over the past few years. 

One initiative completed is the series of private sector

anti-money laundering/counter-terrorist financing 

(AML/CFT) dialogues that link the U.S. ban

sector with those from the Latin American and th

Baltic regions, with the support of relevant financial

and regulatory authorities. TFFC continued to wor

closely with Baltic banking authorities in the context

of the U.S-Baltic Private Sector Dialogue (PSD).

U.S. financial community has demonstrated significan

support for this initiative, which seeks to facilitate the 

exchange of information and promote strong AM

CFT practice in the region. The U.S.-Baltic PSD

October 2-3, 2008 in Vilnius, Lithuania and 

held an event that focused on the PSD issues with the

Association of Latvian Commercial Banks in Ma

2009.  second event is organized for the U.S.-Bal

PSD, in fiscal year 2010 in Tallinn, Estonia

In June 2006, TFFC launched the U.S.-Latin Am

Private Sector Dialogue to establish a permanent dialogue between the United States and Latin Amer

financial sectors. This initiative, which began as a 

roundtable in Washington, D.C, seeks to achieve better 

relations and coordination between correspondent 

financial institutions in these regions. Several events

have taken place, with the most recent being in Buenos

Aires, Argentina from October 1-2, 2009. Over 

participants from 20 different countries representing 

regulators and the financial sector in the United State

and Latin America attended this conference. Privat

sector entities throughout the region remain heavily 
St

teg

Goal:

Pr

ve

ted Terror

m a

Pr

o

t

the

a

tion’s

Secu

ty

Through Stre

then

d 

tern

tional Fin

cial

Sy

t

s

Strategic Objective: Pre-empted and ne

engaged in these discussions and continue to play a 

proactive role in defining the U.S.-LA PSD age

particularly through their domestic and regional 

banking associations. The dialogues raised awareness 

of terrorist financing and money laundering risks, 

facilitate a better understanding of effective practices 

and programs to combat such risks, and strengthen 

implementation of effective AML/CFT contro

Charitable Outreac

Direct private sector outreach is a particularly important element of the U.S. approach to safeguardin

charities from terrorist abuse. The government and 

the charitable sector share fundamental interests in 

promoting and protecting charitable giving. TFF

spearheads a Muslim-American outreach initiative,

which includes meeting with a variety of MuslimArab American community organizations in order t

raise awareness of the risk of terrorist financing and 

measures to minimize such risks. TFFC participate

in several interagency outreach efforts, hosted by the 

Department of Justice as well as the Department of 

Homeland Security. Following the President’s Ju

address in Cairo, which cited the need to facilitate 

charitable giving, or zakat, for Muslim-Americans,

Treasury held meetings with approximately 19 

Muslim-American community leaders, representing

over a dozen organizations, to discuss ways in which 

Treasury could work cooperatively with the community 

to protect and facilitate charitable giving in certain key 

regions. Throughout fiscal year 2009, TFFC held 1

separate outreach events or meetings related to terrorist 

financing with Muslim-American and Arab-Americ

community leaders. 

Another way Treasury initiates its outreach to the

private sector is by issuing guidance to the charitable 

sector. It is a critical part of Treasury’s comprehensive 

strategy to raise awareness and minimize the risk of terrorist exploitation of charities. During 2009 Treasury 

met with the Treasury Guidelines Working Group

which represents major U.S.-based charities, foundations and philanthropic groups, and began revising it

Anti-Terrorist Financing Guidelines: Voluntary Be

Practices for U.S-Based Charities. It is expected that the 

group will submit a proposal concerning revision of the 

guidelines by the end of the 2009 calendar year. 

Enforcement and Civil Penaltie

In fiscal year 2009, OFAC increased its collaborati

with law enforcement agencies and the Intelligence 

Community through its participation in Immigration 

and the Customs Enforcement’s National Expo

Enforcement Coordination Network. OFAC is

34 Cease & Desist Orders, 507 Cautionary Letters

96 referrals to a special Financial Sector Evaluati

Committee, and 28 Blocking Notices A total of 5

financial institution cases were brought to closure; 340 

OFAC license history checks were conducted for oth

agencies and nearly 30 criminal referrals were made to 

law enforcement.

The imposition of civil monetary penalties is an 

important function of enforcing sanctions. In fiscal 

year 2009, OFAC’s Civil Penalties Division issued civ

penalties totaling nearly $14 million, including major 

penalties against DHL, an ANZ Bank, and se

cases involving Iranian shipping. This is $10 million 

more than last year.  total of 191 open civil penalty

cases were resolved within the statute of limitation 

period, compared to 233 closed in fiscal year 2008. The 

decrease was attributed to Treasury’s focus on larger, 

more complex cases that take more time to process.

Licensing and Regulatio

OFAC’s licensing authority serves to carve out exceptions to the broad prohibitions imposed und

sanctions programs, ensuring that only transactions 

consistent with U.S. policy are permitted. Th

Licensing Division reviews, analyzes, and responds to

thousands of requests each year for specific licenses covering a broad range of trade, financial and travel-related 

transactions, including exporting and importing goods 

and services. In fiscal year 2009, OFAC employed i

licensing discretion and outreach function to ensure 

the focused impact of sanctions. 
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

98 Strategic Goal: Prevented Terrorism and Promoted

OFAC issued a final rule to amend Cuban Ass

Control Regulations that eased restrictions on family

visits, family remittances, and telecommunications in 

Cuba to effectuate the President’s policy and an act of 

Congress. Within hours of the law’s effect, OFAC h

posted the general license on its website. OFAC play

a direct role in effectuating foreign policy goals by 

writing and quickly publishing regulations to loosen or 

tighten sanctions as appropriate, including alleviating 

humanitarian situations or supporting foreign policy 

goals. For example, OFAC drafted general licenses 

Sudan to remove certain requirements for sales of food

and medicine to South Sudan and to expand a genera

license for diplomatic missions of the Government of

South Sudan to the United Stat

OFAC closed approximately 30,000 licensing matte

in fiscal year 2009 and reduced its pre-2009 licensing 

backlog by approximately 69 percent. An almost 50

percent reduction was achieved in processing times for 

licensing cases involving wire transfers and transactional licensing.

Lifted sanctions on 125 individuals or

entities from the SDN lis

OFAC deployed new automation that accelerates t

publication of the SDN list dramatically, reducing th

amount of time it takes to prepare an SDN-relate

publication. OFAC took several actions to lift sanctio

on 124 individuals and one entity, where the designated person had changed behavior or severed ties and no 

longer fit the criteria of designation. As a result, dozens

of front companies within the target networks have 

been liquidated and no longer facilitate illicit business 

activities. The impact of designations often changes the 

targets’ behavior. Costly or time-intensive evasive steps 

to divest or transfer their property interests, change 

company names and/or create new companies to hide 

their property interest in order to avoid OFAC sanctions are also taken. For example, in November 2

21 individuals were removed from OFAC’s SDN lis

a result of their severing ties with Colombia’s notorious 

Cali drug cartel and assisting Colombian authorities. 

This action resulted from close cooperation with the 

Colombian Government. These actions represent a success for OFAC’s targeting efforts as they stemmed f

a change of behavior by the targeted parties or a change 

of ownership of targeted entities. This type of information provided by Treasury reveals the cartels’ support 

network, allowing law enforcement to dismantle these 

entities.

Strengthened measures against Ira

to protect U.S. national securi

Since taking action against a large Iranian bank, Ban

Saderat, in September 2006, Treasury has led an ongoing effort to warn the world about the threat Iran pose

to U.S. security and the integrity of the internationa

financial system. This effort has developed a global 

consensus. In fiscal year 2009, the Financial Actio

Task Force (FATF), the global standard-setting body

combat money laundering and terrorist financing, issued its fourth warning alerting countries to strengthen 

measures to protect their financing sectors. Treasury has 

continued to strengthen its efforts to ensure that Iran is 

restricted from the U.S. financial system, while encouraging other countries to do the same. The Departmen

of the Treasury responded to the FATF warning o

month after it was issued. Treasury hindered Iran’s 

ability to financially support illicit activities by revoking an existing “U-turn” license for Iran, further

restricting Iran’s access to the U.S. financial system

This license had allowed certain Iran-related funds 

transfers involving offshore parties to pass through the 

U.S. financial system. Treasury maintained its designations of Iranian financial institutions and individual

due to proliferation concerns and implemented several 

new designations. The Department, through the FAT

will continue to strengthen its measures and encourage 

other countries to enhance vigilance over all business 

with Iran. 

Treasury has continued to take actions and implement preventive measures to protect the international 

financial sector from the illicit finance risk posed by 

Iran. As part of this effort, Treasury has incorporated a
St

teg

Goal:

Pr

ve

ted Terror

m a

Pr

o

t

the

a

tion’s

Secu

ty

Through Stre

then

d 

tern

tional Fin

cial

Sy

t

s

Strategic Objective: Pre-empted and ne

high-level of private sector engagement with banks all 

around the world, raising awareness of these risks and 

encouraging financial institutions to remain vigilant. 

Thanks in part to this comprehensive effort, the international community has grown increasingly sensitized 

to these risks, manifested by a number of actions 

taken over the past few years. The FATF support

its previous statements issued on Iran by reaffirming 

the February 2009 call for members to apply effective

countermeasures to protect their financial sectors from 

risks posed by Iran. 

Numerous international banks in Europe, China, an

the Middle East have reduced or terminated business

involving Iran. They are refusing to issue new letters 

of credit to Iranian businesses. In addition, many 

European export credit agencies have stopped approving new credit guarantees for projects in Iran, directly

impacting European foreign direct investment in Iran.

As a result of economic sanctions, the Governmen

of Iran has been forced to engage in evasive strategies 

in order to bypass the many prohibitions on trade 

and commercial transactions with U.S. persons. Th

Government of Iran has been forced to rely on front

companies, mostly located in the Persian Gulf area, and

smugglers in order to access U.S. goods and service

Demonstrated action in key regions 

TFFC worked with key regions to promote stron

anti-money laundering and counter financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) regimes worldwid. A key asp

of strengthening AML/CFT regimes is conducti

country assessments to determine the level of those 

countries’ compliance with international AML/C

standards. These evaluation reports identify deficiencies and ways to strengthen each country’s AML/C

regime. In fiscal year 2009, TFFC staff participated a

an assessor in four mutual evaluations, including South

Korea, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Serb

Adoption of the mutual evaluation triggers a followup review, which establishes an avenue for TFFC 

encourage additional measures to strengthen a country’s AML/CFT regime. For example, building u

mutual evaluation feedback, the South Korean government revised its basic money laundering law, expande

AML/CFT supervision and inspections, adopted

stronger stance on non-compliance sanctions, established a counterterrorism coordination committee and 

strengthened Financial Intelligence Unit analysis an

human resources. In response to the 2008 Montenegro 

mutual evaluation feedback, Montenegro took specific 

steps during 2009 to improve its AML/CFT regim

including issuing instructions on risk analysis, knowyour-client procedures and guidance on recognizing 

suspicious transactions. 

Treasury’s efforts throughout fiscal year 2009 raised the 

profile of illicit finance with Saudi Arabia counterparts

through bilateral engagement at both senior and staff 

levels and enhanced information sharing, helping 

to cause a sea change in the U.S.-Saudi relationsh

and the Saudi approach to terrorist financing.A ne

Riyadh Treasury Attaché position was filled durin

fiscal year 2009, directly contributing to a greater U.S

Embassy and Saudi focus on illicit finance. This in tur

has helped strengthen overall U.S.-Saudi counterterrorism cooperation, which has fostered a greater Sa

commitment to combat al Qaida in the public realm, 

demonstrated by publication of a list of 85 mostwanted al Qaida associated individuals located outside 

the Kingdom, and by prosecuting over 300 individuals

on terrorism charges, including terrorism financing. 

In fiscal year 2009 TFFC established a whole-of-government interagency Illicit Finance Task Force, bringing together the intelligence and policy communit

to coordinate initiatives targeting illicit finance flows in 

Afghanistan and Pakistan. Working groups and senior

leadership of this task force met roughly 15 times 

between August and the close of the fiscal year, and carried out extensive electronic communication to execute

group work products. TFFC detailed a policy adviso

to the State Department’s Special Representative f

Afghanistan and Pakistan office in June, with the

result of substantially enhancing coordination between 

Treasury and State and amplifying U.S. governme

efforts to combat illicit finance in the Afghanistan and
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

100 Strategic Goal: Prevented Terrorism and Promoted

Pakistan region. TFFC also deploys attaché officers t

Kabul and Islamabad to strengthen the focus on combating illicit financial activities within U.S. Emba

operations and among counterparts in the region. 

International Training and Worksho

TFFC conducted several regional workshops in 200

to enhance awareness around AML/CFT legal a

regulatory deficiencies, and build national capacity to 

counter illicit financial activity. TFFC hosted and le

a regional Targeted Financial Sanctions Workshop i

Rabat, Morocco in January 2009. The purpose of the

workshop was to address implementation challenges, 

listing processes and enforcement activities for United

Nations Security Council Resolution (UNSCR

sanctions among North African countries. Morocco

Libya, and Algeria each contributed representatives t

the event and the U.S. delegation also conducted bilateral meetings with each country. The event provided a

opportunity for engagement among the region on issues that had not been addressed in such detail before. 

Other workshops similar to this were held throughout

fiscal year 2009 to enhance countries awareness and 

increase their ability to implement recommendations.

Treasury also provides assistance to countries regarding 

development and implementation of effective sanctions regimes. For example, in January 2009 TF

implemented a regional workshop in Rabat, Morocco

to assist North African governments in strengthenin

their sanctions regimes against terrorist threats, and in 

particular their targeting and pre-designation authorities and processes in order to submit more successful 

proposals to the N 1267 Committee for designatio

of al Qaida and Taliban-related threats. Participating 

countries included Morocco, Egypt, Algeria and Liby

In May 2009, Treasury led a presentation for a series of 

expert-level U.S.-EU workshops on combating terrorism finance. About 120 participants rom EU 

states and institutions, the U.S., and th UN 1

Monitoring Team attended the workshop. In addition 

to discussions on sanctions, this workshop addressed 

U.S.-EU cooperation in three new areas of counter

terrorist financing.

The United Nations Al-Qaida a

Taliban Sanctions Committe

The UNSCR 1267 Sanctions Regime on al Qaid

the Taliban was further strengthened through U

1822 adopted on June 30, 2008, and for which 

implementation began in the Fall of 2008 and is ongoing. Treasury plays a central role in implementation of

many of these enhancements, in addition to ongoing 

listing of new individuals and entities to this list. Key

UNSCR 1822 reforms include: (1) a comprehens

review of the approximately 500 names on the 1267 

Consolidated List to be completed by June 2010; (2)

following completion of the comprehensive review, a 

review of each name on the 1267 Consolidated List

at least every three years; (3) the establishment and 

posting on the 1267 Committee’s website of narrative 

summaries of reasons for the listing of each designated 

individual and entity; and (4) updates to the 1267 

Committee’s listing and de-listing procedures. To date, 

Treasury has reviewed approximately 250 names in the 

first 3 tranches under the Consolidated List comprehensive review; and 43 persons have been de-listed

from the Consolidated List (as of September 23, 2009)

The 1267 Committee began posting narrative summaries on its website in March 2009 and 123 narrative 

summaries had been posted on the Committee’s web 

site through September 30, 2009. Additionally, i

response to legal challenges of sanctions designations in 

Europe in particular, Treasury has been very responsive

in providing counterparts information on specific 

designations over the past year to help support maintenance of these listings.

Protecting the international financial

system from abuse by North Kor

North Korean provocations in the spring of 2009, including a second nuclear test and missile launches, ar

a clear violation of UNSCR 1718. On June 12, 2

the Security Council adopted a new resolution 1874,

which established broader measures to address North

Korea’s WMD program and other illicit activities.

Working to fully implement the financial provisions in 

UNSCR 1874, Treasury has worked closely with 
St

teg

Goal:

Pr

ve

ted Terror

m a

Pr

o

t

the

a

tion’s

Secu

ty

Through Stre

then

d 

tern

tional Fin

cial

Sy

t

s

Strategic Objective: Pre-empted and neu

international community to impose sanctions against 

additional North Korean targets, including the firstever asset freeze against a key North Korean nucl

procurement entity.

Similarly, Treasury on June 18, 2009, issued an advisory to alert U.S. financial institutions to their obligations under the North Korea UNSCR and oth

they should take to protect themselves from risks posed 

by North Korea’s illicit financial conduct. Treasur

also participated in interagency delegation visits to key 

countries led by U.S. Coordinator for Implementin

UNSCR 1874 Ambassador Philip Goldberg

interagency team met with senior officials and relevant 

bank representatives to discuss the implementation of 

the resolution and encourage countries to alert their 

financial sector of the need for enhanced scrutiny of 

North Korean customers, transactions, and banks

These visits included: China, Malaysia, Russia,

Singapore, Thailand, South Korea, Japan, the Uni

Arab Emirates, and Egypt. Treasury will continue 

build strong international cooperation on these issues 

and to amplify efforts currently underway to mitigate 

the increased risk that North Korea and North Kor

entities pose to the international financial systems.

Timely, accurate, relevant 

intelligence support

OIA’s mission is to support the formulation of polic

and execution of Treasury authorities. It executes its 

mission by providing expert intelligence analysis and 

production on financial and other support networks for 

terrorist groups, proliferators, and other key national 

security threats and by providing timely, accurate, 

and focused intelligence support on the full range of 

economic, political, and security issues. 

To further these objectives, in fiscal year 2009 O

established the Office of Reports and Requirement

significantly improving its ability to drive collection of 

intelligence in response to Departmental requirements 

– particularly on key terrorist finance, licit and illicit 

activities, and proliferation finance. 

In fiscal year 2009, OIA implemented its Glob

Finance Initiative, which addresses the Global Financi

Network through a comprehensive approach to

financial intelligence. This allows the U.S. Governme

to better confront national security challenges and 

protect the integrity of the financial system. This initiative strengthens analysis, collection, and intelligence 

integration on licit and illicit activities related to the 

Global Financial Network, including emerging a

high-priority threats. 

OIA is in its third year of conducting its annual surve

to measure customer satisfaction with the timeliness, 

accuracy, and relevance of intelligence products. 

Survey results for fiscal year 2007 showed that 83

percent of customers were strongly satisfied with 

OIA’s counterterrorism-related products. In fiscal yea

2008, the survey was refined and results showed that 

82 percent of OIA’s customers were strongly satisfie

with the accuracy, timeliness, and relevance of finished 

intelligence products and intelligence support on the 

full-range of issues. The fiscal year 2009 results showed 

a 94 percent customer satisfaction rating. For fiscal

year 2010, the survey base will be expanded to other 

Intelligence Community customers outside of the 

Treasury Department.

Conclusion

In fiscal year 2009, the Department discontinued using 

all of its performance measures that were previously 

reported. These measures are now used as indicators 

for the new composite measure that was developed in 

fiscal year 2009. Previously, the Department’s measures 

were output oriented and did not reveal the impact of 

the organization, only recognizing the workload. The 

newly developed measure is a better indication of how 

well Treasury is achieving its national security strategic 

goal and objective. With an external validation process 

and methodology for collecting the performance 

information this measure will create a strong basis for 

determining TFI’s performance
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

102 Strategic Goal: Prevented Terrorism and Promoted

Moving Forward

In fiscal year 2010, OIA will expand its analysis, t

include additional regions/areas of interest such as 

Mexico, corruptions, terrorist use of the Internet, and 

international organized crime and further contribute to 

interagency intelligence products such as the President’s 

Daily Briefing, National Terrorism Bulletins, a

Economic Intelligence Briefings. OIA will dr

the Intelligence Community collection on financial 

intelligence issues through its Office of Reports an

Requirements and launch an official reporting program, allowing Treasury to author reports containing

information it obtains overtly through its unique access 

and authorities and disseminate this information to the 

Intelligence Community.

Targeting the financing of proliferation networks, 

including those associated with terrorists seeking 

WMD, is a key component to deter, disrupt, and 

prevent the spread of WMD. OIA leads Treasury’

effort to identify, monitor, and assess the evolution of 

proliferation finance networks and supports the use 

of targeted financial measures against them. In fiscal 

year 2010, OIA proposes to expand these activitie

to ensure Treasury’s continued progress in disrupting 

proliferation networks as they evolve and adapt, as well 

as to respond to emerging proliferation threats posed 

by nation-states that challenge the U.S. interests suc

as Iran and North Kore

In the next year, OIA will also continue to play 

leading role in the Afghanistan Threat Finance Cell, 

Kabul-based interagency task force charged to enhance

the collection, exploitation, analysis, and dissemination of intelligence to combat funding and support for 

the Taliban and other terrorist/insurgent networks in 

Afghanistan. OIA is also expanding its analytic effor

on official corruption in Afghanistan.

Additionally, OIA will continue to develop i

Counterintelligence and Security Initiative, implemented this past year, to support the Department’s

ability to detect and thwart threats to Treasury personnel, programs, and information, and prevent espionage, 

as well as identify and neutralize or mitigate threats 

from compromise. 

In fiscal year 2009, TFFC contributed, with interagency partners, to the published FATF typology stu

on money laundering through the football sector and 

vulnerabilities of casinos and the gaming sector. In its 

on-going work to help law enforcement and financial 

institutions identify trade based money laundering, 

TFFC is co-chairing an additional typologies repor

on Free Trade Zones for the FATF. Through this re

TFFC is exploring other vulnerabilities in the trad

system, with a view to identifying other measures that 

could be considered in combating illicit use of the 

trade system. In particular, TFFC is working with th

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to ensu

that Trade Transparency Units are being utilized to

investigate criminal offenses such as money laundering 

and terrorist financing.

Despite the work Treasury has done in and prior to 

fiscal year 2009, there is still room for improvement 

to implement AML/CFT laws in key countries. 

particular, the Administration is working to encourage

Pakistan to build on the progress it made as a result 

of its mutual evaluation. Its anti-money laundering 

law should be made permanent and investigations 

and prosecutions for money laundering and terrorist 

financing offenses must occur. Additionally, many Gul

countries have yet to adequately protect against vulnerabilities from cash courier systems. 

TFFC will create and execute strategies to comba

the funders, facilitators and enablers of financing for 

terrorism, proliferation, financial crime and other illicit 

activity, while continuing to provide policy guidance 

and financial intelligence to national security and law 

enforcement agencies. TFFC will build upon existin

programs for targeted financial actions to isolate violent 

extremist groups, including al-Qaida and the Taliban, 

as well as state sponsors of terror, such as Iran. TFF

will develop policies to reinforce OFAC’s designatio

to disrupt and dismantle financial networks underlying WMD proliferation, including those associated 

with Iran and North Korea. Continuing to advanc
St

teg

Goal:

Pr

ve

ted Terror

m a

Pr

o

t

the

a

tion’s

Secu

ty

Through Stre

then

d 

tern

tional Fin

cial

Sy

t

s

Strategic Objective: Pre-empted and neu

discussions within the faTf on existing aMl/CfT 

international standards will also be a priority for TffC, 

including a specific focus on how standards should be 

augmented, altered or applied to increase effectiveness. 

TffC will also work to promote global implementation of the standards through the eight faTf-style 

regional bodies. 

In fiscal year 2010, ofaC will strengthen its capacity 

to investigate effectively terrorist networks and statesponsored terrorism, proliferators of WMDs, foreign 

narcotics trafficking organizations, and other sanction 

targets. It will continue to aggressively target and 

designate individuals and entities of interest and block 

their assets in order to further a broad variety of u.s. 

sanctions policies. 

ofaC will further its comprehensive improvements 

to the performance of its divisions to ensure that its 

sanctions programs are transparent and responsive to 

inquiries from the public, industry, and members of 

Congress. ofaC will continue to strive to improve 

the efficiency and speed with which it issues licenses 

and publishes regulations or other guidance. ofaC 

also will analyze its licensing, compliance, designation, 

and enforcement capacity, based on the level of new 

executive orders and evolving national security and 

foreign policy demands, to ensure that its programs 

are calibrated correctly and appropriate personnel are 

assigned to the areas with greatest demand.

Safer and more transparent U.S. and international

syste

Based on the performance results, Treasury was successful in achieving this outcome in fiscal year 2009

Fiscal Year 2009 Results

safer and more transparent u.s. and international financial systems

69%

Exceeded

6%

Unmet

6%

Improved

6%

Met

Summary of Actual Trends for the Prior Four Years

Trend Symbol Cou

Favorable upward trend  9 56%

Favorable downward trend  3 19%

Unfavorable upward trend  0 0%

Unfavorable downward trend  2 13%

No change in trend, no effect  1 6%

No change in trend, favorable effect  0 0%

No change in trend, unfavorable effect  1 6%

Baseline B 0 0%

Total 16 100%

Discontinued DISC 0
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

104 Strategic Goal: Prevented Terrorism and Promoted

Key Performance Measure Table

The following table contains only key performance measures associated with this outcome. Actual and target trends represent four years of data

where available. The full suite of measures with detailed explanations is available in the Appendix.

Key Performance Measure B

2008 

Act

2009 

Targe

2009 

Act

% of 

Targe

Achi

% Change 

in Act

Performan

Rati

2010 

Targe

Targe

Tren

Actu

Tren

Average time to process enforcement matters (in

years)

FinCEN 0.7 Met Met 100.0% 57.1% Met 1  

Percent of federal and state regulatory agencies with

memoranda of understanding/information sharing

agreements

FinCEN 41% 45% 43% 95.6% 104.9% Improved 46  

Percent of FinCEN's compliance MOU holders finding

FinCEN's information exchange valuable to improve

the BSA consistency and compliance of the financial

system

FinCEN 64% 66% 82% 124.2% 128.1% Exceeded 68  

Percentage of bank examinations conducted by the

Federal Banking Agencies indicating a systemic

failure of the anti-money laundering program rule.

FinCEN 2.5% 5.2% 2.1% 159.6% 116.0% Exceeded 5.2  

Percentage of customers satisfied with the BSA

E-Filing

FinCEN 93% 90% 94% 104.4% 101.1% Exceeded 90  

Percentage of FinCEN's Regulatory Resource

Center Customers rating the guidance received as

understandable

FinCEN 94% 90% 94% 104.4% 100.0% Exceeded 90  

The percentage of domestic law enforcement and

foreign financial intelligence units finding FinCEN's

analytical reports highly valuable

FinCEN 83% 80% 81% 101.3% 97.6% Exceeded 81  

Legend Sy

Favorable upward trend 

Favorable downward trend 

Unfavorable upward trend 

Unfavorable downward trend 

No change in trend, no effect 

No change in trend, favorable effect 

No change in trend, unfavorable effect 

Baseline B

Discontinued DISC

Analysis of Performance Resu

FinCEN has 16 measures, for fiscal year 2009 

percent of their targets were achieved. Four key

performance measures are used for the overall composite measure for TFI mentioned previously. The

following measures; average time to process enforcement matters; percentage of FinCEN’s Regulat

Resource Center customers rating the guidance

received as understandable; percentage of domestic 

law enforcement and foreign intelligence units finding 

FinCEN’s analytic reports highly valuable; percentage of customers satisfied with te BSA e-filing

percentage of customers satisfied with WebCBRS a

secure outreach. These four measures are used to score 

the focus area, “impact of activities to create safer and 

more transparent financial systems” for the overall TFI

measure, with the results from these measures Fin

achieved a 7.4 out of 10 possible points. 

In the regulatory area, FinCEN continued to increa

awareness by state and federal regulators that examine 

for Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) compliance by negotiating Memorandums of Understanding (

information sharing. In 2009, FinCEN reached a lev

of 43 percent of federal and state regulatory agencies 

with MOU/information sharing agreements, bu

did not meet its target of 45 percent. FinCEN finalized an MOU with the Commodity Futures Tr

Commission, the last remaining federal regulator 
St

teg

Goal:

Pr

ve

ted Terror

m a

Pr

o

t

the

a

tion’s

Secu

ty

Through Stre

then

d 

tern

tional Fin

cial

Sy

t

s

Strategic Objective: Pre-empted and neu

with SA examination authority to sign an agreeme

and the Public Corporation for the Supervision and

Insurance of Cooperatives in Puerto Rico, but Fi

was not able to execute three additional agreements. 

FinCEN will continue collaborating with state insurance agencies and other regulatory agencies to sign additional agreements to meet future targets. In fiscal ye

2008, FinCEN surveyed its compliance MOU hol

to determine the impact of the information exchange 

to improve the SA consistency and compliance of t

financial system, and established a 64 percent benchmark for respondents rating the information exchange 

valuable to improving SA consistency and compliance. In fiscal year 2009, FinCEN surpassed its t

of 66 percent rating the information as 82 percent 

valuable. FinCEN attributes a portion of this success 

the distribution of analytic information to the M

holders throughout the fiscal year. To achieve future 

targets, FinCEN will continue to facilitate routi

discussions with the MOU holders

FinCEN’s goal to provide financial institutions wi

understandable guidance is critical to institutions 

establishing anti-money laundering programs that 

comply appropriately with the BSA. FinCEN’s go

to maintain at least a 90 percent satisfaction level and 

FinCEN surpassed its target at 94 percent. 

attained this success by responding timely (within 24 

hours of the inquiry), providing a high level of service, 

and improving the organization of information on 

its public website. In order to achieve future targets, 

FinCEN will continue to make guidance available 

the Internet, accept and analyze customer feedback, 

and conduct surveys to measure customer satisfaction. 

FinCEN also works closely with its regulatory partne

to take enforcement action against financial institutions 

that systemically and egregiously violate the provisions 

of the BSA, including imposing civil money penalti

when appropriate. Timely enforcement action is essential to deter non-compliance with the BSA. In fisc

year 2009, FinCEN met its target of 1 year. 

will continue to actively manage casework to meet 

future targets. 

In the analytical area, FinCEN supports domest

law enforcement and international FIU partners b

providing analyses of SA information, and measur

the percentage of customers finding FinCEN’s analyt

reports highly valuable. This measure closely ties to 

how SA information is used by law enforcement a

international FIUs to identify, investigate, and preven

abuse of the financial system. In fiscal year 2009, 

FinCEN surpassed its target of 80 percent with 81 percent. FinCEN will continue its efforts to solicit 

from its customers on types of products they would 

like to see produced and possible ways to improve the 

structure of its reports to meet future targets. 

In the efficient management, safeguarding, and use of 

BSA information, FinCEN conducts a survey of the users o the BSA E-Filing system to determine t

satisfaction level and to identify where improvements 

are needed. The fiscal year 2009 target was to maintain 

at least a 90 percent satisfaction level, and Fin

surpassed its target with 94 percent. FinCEN wi

continue outreach to E-Filers and ensure the technology supports to the demand to achieve future targets

Improvements to theBSA E-fi

Syste

The SA requires financial institutions to file repor

and maintain records on certain types of financial 

activity to establish appropriate internal controls to 

guard against financial fraud, money laundering, terrorist financing, and other types of illicit finance. These 

reports and records have a high degree of usefulness 

in criminal, tax, and regulatory matters. Law enforcement agencies useBSA information, domestically 

through exchanges with international counterparts, to 

identify, detect and deter financial fraud and money 

laundering. Regulatory authorities useBSA information to promote the safety and soundness of financ

institutions and markets.

FinCEN focused its efforts on improving and increasing electronic filing in fiscal year 2009 aimed 

providing faster feedback to the filing community 

and improving data quality for regulators and law 
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

106 Strategic Goal: Prevented Terrorism and Promoted

enforcement. Additional field and business rule validations to batch data for e-filing Currency Transaction

Report (CTR) forms and CTRs for casinos we

introduced. Together these accounted for approximately 90 percent of all filings. These enhancements 

aim to improve data quality by providing detailed error 

notifications to filers upon submission. 

In keeping with the effort to make SA filing requirements more secure, efficient, and effective, 

successfully transitioned all financial institutions 

submitting SA data via media tapes and diskett

to e-filing. This increased the number of filings 

electronically by 11 percent. The Magnetic Media 

Program retirement moved the SA program towa

a cost savings for industry filers by eliminating the 

mailing of diskettes and tapes which in turn reduced 

the costs of processing and submitting SA data. T

BSA E-Filing program is more secure, cost-effici

and user-friendly since it is a web-based system that 

requires a user-ID and password and does not require 

storage media. It supports the filing of both single and 

multiple SA reports. As there are no tapes or disket

to mail, SA E-Filing will be able to reduce repor

costs. Reporting institutions will also see a decrease in

the time it takes to file a wide range of SA forms a

will obtain a more rapid receipt of acknowledgements. 

These initiatives are expected to improve efficiencies 

through eliminating the paper review process, better 

facilitation of the compliance review process, and 

long-term cost savings to the government through 

reductions in filing errors due to the verification and 

validation of the submitted data. 

Approximately 82 percent ofBSA reports were electronically filed during fiscal year 2009, up from

percent in fiscal year 2008. The cost per e-filed report 

was $0.16 in fiscal year 2009, just above the target of 

$0.15. This slight increase was due to higher operation 

and management support costs associated with several 

BSA e-filing system improvements implemented 

fiscal year 2009. 

Collaboration with Financial

Intelligence Uni

FinCEN also serves as the nation’s financial intelligence unit (FU). A FIU serves as a national

to collect, analyze, disseminate, and exchange information pursuant to a country’s anti-money laundering/

counter-terrorist financing (AML/CFT) legislation a

regulations. This includes information about suspicious 

or unusual financial activity reported by the financial 

sector. FinCEN has a unique authority to facilita

law enforcement investigations involving transnational 

criminal activity and financial flows, by exchanging 

lead information with FIU counterparts in over 10

countries around the world.

In fiscal year 2009, the U.S. Government ma

renewed commitments to disrupt arms smuggling 

and money laundering across the U.S. Mexico border

target narcotic cartels, and combat other cross-border 

crime. FinCEN continued to support this effo

related to Mexico through close collaboration with 

the Mexican FIU and coordination with other federa

government agencies. FinCEN and the Mexica

have undertaken a strategic study designed to develop 

a more complete picture of currency flows between 

the United States and Mexico that has involved bot

information and analyst exchanges and coordination 

with U.S. law enforcement

In fiscal year 2009, FinCEN completed its sponsorship of the Saudi Arabia into the Egmont Gr

FIUs, the world’s organization of financial intelligenc

units. The Saudi Arabian FIU became a member of 

Egmont Group in May 2009, allowing it to engage th

other 115 units that form the global network for sharing financial intelligence. The multi-year sponsorship 

process culminated with FinCEN’s on-site assessme

to ensure the unit was suitable to join the Egmont

Group. FIUs in the Egmont Group share informa

relating to thousands of investigations per year; in 

fiscal year 2009, FinCEN received over 1,000 reques

from 89 other FIUs. The increased number of request

and responses can be attributed to FinCEN’s proacti

outreach efforts.
St

teg

Goal:

Pr

ve

ted Terror

m a

Pr

o

t

the

a

tion’s

Secu

ty

Through Stre

then

d 

tern

tional Fin

cial

Sy

t

s

Strategic Objective: Pre-empted and neu

Enhanced mechanisms to combat

mortgage and loan modification fraud

A series of initiatives have been announced to help

American homeowners and address the housing crisis.

The United States government continues to intensify it

efforts to ensure predatory scams do not rob Americans

of their savings and potentially their homes.

On April 6, 2009 Secretary Geithner announce

coordinated proactive effort to be led by Treasury, to 

combat fraudulent loan modification schemes and 

coordinate ongoing efforts across a range of federal 

and state agencies that investigate fraud and assist with 

enforcement and prosecutions. Treasury simultaneously 

issued an advisory to alert financial institutions to the 

risks of emerging schemes related to loan modification. 

These efforts are designed to facilitate the detection, 

deterrence, investigation and prosecution of those who 

would exploit consumers facing possible home foreclosures, in particular to target fraudulent scams against 

consumers seeking loan modification assistance. 

This advisory was intended to identify “red flags” that 

may indicate a loan modification or foreclosure rescue 

scam and warrant the filing of a Suspicious Activit

Report (SAR). These red flags alert financial institutions to scams victimizing their customers and prov

an opportunity to stop predatory loan modification. 

The advisory reminded financial institutions of the 

requirement to implement appropriate risk-based policies, procedures and processes. Financial institutions

must conduct customer due diligence on a risk-assessed 

basis to prevent fraudulent actors from accessing the 

financial system and to aid in the identification of 

potentially suspicious transactions. 

The advisory required the term “foreclosure rescue 

scam” to be included in the narrative sections of all relevant SARs. This inclusion allowed law enforcement 

more easily search for and identify fraudulent activity 

when reviewing AR information, improving the foc

of investigative resources. Utilizing the initiative’s advanced targeting methods, 58 case referrals were made

to law enforcement investigators involving hundreds 

of suspects, and more than 1000 SA reports were referred to law enforcement investigators. Also,

opened 88 loan modification and foreclosure rescue 

scam cases involving approximately 500 suspects. These 

results have illustrated the benefits of proactive threat 

identification and preemption of fraudulent activity. 

Other efforts to combat mortgage fraud, foreclosure

rescue scams, and loan modification fraud included 

FinCEN issuing an advance notice of propos

rulemaking. This notice was to solicit public comment 

on a wide range of questions pertaining to the possible application of anti-money laundering and 

requirements to non-bank residential mortgage lenders 

and originators. The application of such rules would 

require them to guard against and report on illicit actors engaging in financial transactions much the same 

way banks do now. FinCEN also issued two addition

mortgage fraud reports, Filing Trends in Mortgage 

Loan Fraud and Mortgage Loan Fraud Connections 

with Other Financial Crime that revealed a 44 percent 

increase in SARs filed on suspected mortgage fraud 

a year ending in June 2008 compared with the prior 

year, and a relationship between mortgage loan fraud 

and other financial fraud. 

Regulatory Effor

In the regulatory area, FinCEN’s policy efforts foc

on efficient and effective SA administration. Th

includes improving the consistency in the application 

of SA regulations to regulated financial institution

providing guidance regarding regulatory expectations, 

conducting studies to provide feedback to stakeholders, 

and initiating enforcement actions when appropriate.

In fiscal year 2009 FinC

•	 Issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking t

re-designate and reorganize the SA regulatio

in a new chapter within the Code of Federal

Regulations. The re-designation and reorganization of the regulations in a new chapter was not

intended to alter regulatory requirements. The 

regulations will be organized in a more consistent 

and intuitive structure that more easily allows 
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

108 Strategic Goal: Prevented Terrorism and Promoted

financial institutions to identify their specific 

regulatory requirements under the BS

•	 Published a final rule that simplifies the current 

requirements for depository institutions to exempt 

their eligible customers from currency transaction reporting. The final rule was developed in 

accordance with the Government Accountabilit

Office’s recommendations, FinCEN’s independ

research, and after considering valuable industry 

feedback received during the public comment 

process.

•	 Issued a SA examination manual for money services businesses (MSBs), in collaboration with

Internal Revenue Service, state agencies responsibl

for MSB regulation, the Money Transmitte

Regulators Association, and the Conference o

State Bank Supervisors. The manual’s risk-bas

approach empowers the examiner to decide what 

examination procedures are necessary to evaluate 

whether the MSB’s AML program is compli

with SA requiremen

•	 Proposed revised rules and guidance that would 

permit certain affiliates of depository institutions 

as well as broker-dealers in securities, mutual 

funds, futures commission merchants, and introducing brokers in commodities, to share SA

within a corporate organizational structure for 

purposes consistent with Title II of the BSA. T

revised rules will help financial institutions better 

facilitate compliance with the applicable 

requirements and more effectively implement 

enterprise-wide risk management. 

Analytic efforts in support of

detection and deterrence of money 

laundering

FinCEN’s efforts in the analytical area focus 

developing products and services to enhance law 

enforcement’s detection and deterrence of domestic 

and international financial fraud, money laundering, 

terrorism financing, and other illicit activity. Fin

intends to improve its expert analysis of SA data 

provide early warning of emerging trends of fraud 

and other criminal abuse. This includes information 

exchange with counterpart FIUs in 116 countries tha

are members of the Egmont Grou

Additional analytical accomplishments that have not

been mentioned previously include:

•	 Became a member of the new multi-agency task

force lead by the Special Inspector General for th

Troubled Asset Relief Program to deter, detect, an

investigate instances of fraud in the Term AssetBacked Securities Loan Facility and the PublicPrivate Investment Pro

•	 Held several inter-agency information sharing

events to discuss sensitive data with the private sector. These events combined analytical findings and 

related law enforcement presentations for financial 

industry personnel, and provided an opportunity 

for industry personnel to share information on 

vulnerabilities and suspicious activities identified 

through their operations.  recent event included

information sharing on money laundering and 

other financial crimes in Mexico and on the 

Southwest Border with representatives from bank

that provide financial services to Mexico and the 

Southwest border region

•	 Produced a series of strategic international studies 

addressing complex money laundering schemes 

and examining money flows related to illicit 

activities.

•	 Composed and disseminated 1,027 tactical reports 

to the other Egmont FIUs. These intelligen

products are integral to investigations of money 

laundering and terrorist financing around the 

world

•	 Continued outreach and liaison activities that 

enhance the quality and quantity of financial intelligence exchanged between FinCEN and forei

FIUs. These efforts included training and technica

assistance programs that strengthen the global 

network of FIU
St

teg

Goal:

Pr

ve

ted Terror

m a

Pr

o

t

the

a

tion’s

Secu

ty

Through Stre

then

d 

tern

tional Fin

cial

Sy

t

s

Strategic Objective: Pre-empted and neu

Conclusion

While FinCEN experienced a decrease in meeting i

fiscal year 2009 targets from 94 percent in 2008 to 

75 percent for this year, actual results for the missed 

targets were within 10 percent. Some targets were

exceeded by large margins and trends for 50 percent of 

the targets showed increases year over year.

Moving Forwar

Treasury developed a strategy in fiscal year 2007 to 

modernize the SA data architecture to better serve i

internal and more than 10,000 external users that rely 

on accurate, timely, and reliable SA data to identi

money laundering, terrorist financing, tax evasion, and 

vulnerabilities in the financial industry. The current 

technology environment has not kept pace with today’s 

USA PATRIOT Act requirements. The number of 

financial institutions falling under the purview of the 

BSA has grown exponentially in the last six years a

will continue to experience robust growth in the future. 

The current technology environment is ill-equipped to 

meet 21st century realities and unable to quickly adapt 

to changing financial indicators and patterns of illicit 

activity. 

After two years of conducting analysis on this initiative,

the Department anticipates it will begin to implement 

the modernization in fiscal year 2010. The modernization will reengineer the SA data architectur

update antiquated infrastructure required to support 

data capture and dissemination, implement innovative web-services and enhanced electronic-filing, and 

provide analytical tools. This investment will begin to 

enrich and standardize SA data to maximize valu

evaluate and deploy advanced analytical technologies, 

and establish more effective security technologies to 

enhance data confidentiality and integrity. The benefits 

of this centralized investment will be leveraged across 

the hundreds of federal, state, and local agencies that 

rely on FinCEN ad BSA

FinCEN’s future plans in the regulatory area will improve its ability to strengthen financial system securi

and enhance U.S. national security. To ensure financia

systems are resistant to abuse by money launderers, 

terrorists and other perpetrators of financial fraud and 

crimes, FinCEN wi

•	 Clarify the scope of the MSB definitions to th

extent consistent with appropriately managing 

money laundering risks in this industry, and 

continue to review the appropriate regulatory 

treatment of stored value providers within the 

MSB framework, consistent with the requirement

of the Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility

and Disclosure Act.

•	 Continue the outreach initiative to the financial 

services industry, which expanded from visits to 

the largest fifteen depository institutions in the 

U.S. to large MSBs, and will continue to exp

to additional financial service industries.

•	 Implement a simplified, revised regulatory structure, proposed in fiscal year 2009, to reorganize 

BSA regulations under Chapter 10 of the Code 

Federal Regulation

•	 Conduct analysis in support of efforts to combat 

mortgage loan fraud, building off prior analysis 

efforts to identify emerging trends, and continue 

to consider appropriate regulatory options. 

•	 Strengthen oversight of recently-covered industries

under the BSA, by beginning to sign informati

sharing agreements with state insurance regulators 

and working cooperatively with the IRS and stat

regulators on consistent, risk-based examination 

procedures.

FinCEN’s future plans in the analytical area will improve its ability to strengthen financial system securi

and enhance U.S. national security. To detect and dete

financial fraud, money laundering, terrorism financing, 

and other illicit activity, FinCEN wi

•	 Implement a process to capture and gauge analytic 

product relevance to support law enforcement. 

•	 Advance collaborative relationships with investigative and intelligence agencies to exploit SARs 

proactive evaluation.
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

110 Strategic Goal: Prevented Terrorism and Promoted

•	 Expand working agreements with the government agency customer community and financial

institutions’ AML compliance personnel on issue

of strategic importance to FinCEN’s analytic

objectives. 

•	 Improve analytical products and responsiveness to 

foreign government counterparts to strengthen the 

effectiveness of international AML/CFT effor

•	 Increase joint analytical projects with foreign 

FIU counterparts through intensified operationa

engagements with key strategic partner FIU

FinCEN’s future plans include improving its abili

to strengthen financial system security and enhance 

U.S. national security. To ensure efficient management

safeguarding and use of SA information, FinCEN

modernize SA information management and analys

to equip law enforcement and financial industry regulators with better decision-making abilities and increase 

the value of SA information through increased da

integrity and analytical tools. This multi-year program 

will accomplish several items for example; provide 

advanced analytical and SA data storage technologie

implement innovative Web-services and E-Filing technologies; enrich and standardiz BSA data to maxi

value for state and federal partners; integrate SA da

with other state and federal sources; and deploy proven 

customer relationship technologies to capture data 

usage and access patterns and solicit/provide feedback 

to partners. 
sTraTegiC goal: ManageMenT anD organizaTional exCellenCe

sTraTegIC obJeCTIve: enableD anD effeCTIve Treasury DeParTMenT 111

Strategic Goal: 

Management and Organizational Excellence 

Strategic Obj

Enabled and effective Treasury 

Department 

The Department of the Treasury strives to maintain 

public trust and confidence through exemplary leadership and creating a culture of excellence, integrity, and 

teamwork. The Department is dedicated to serving 

the public interest and focused on delivering results 

that align with its strategic objectives. Management 

enables this through a strong institution that is citizencentered, focused on achieving results, and is accountable and transparent to the American people. Strategie

to achieve this objective are aligning and managing 

resources, investing in people and technology, and 

conducting independent audits and investigations. The 

Treasury Department is committed to planning and 

assessing performance, reviewing results, and working 

towards continuous improvement.

The bureaus and offices responsible for achievement of 

this objective are:

•	 The Treasury Inspector General for Tax

Administratio

•	 Office of the Treasury Inspector Gener

•	 Office of the Treasury Assistant Secretary f

Management and Chief Financial Officer (

CFO) which includes the Deputy Chief Financi

Officer, Budget, Planning, Human Capita

Information Technology, Procurement, Privacy, 

and Operations

•	 Office of the Special Inspector General for t

Troubled Assets Relief Program (SI

The outcomes associated with this objective are:

•	  citizen-centered, results oriented and strategically aligned organizatio

•	 Exceptional accountability and transparenc

budget Trend by objective: enabled and effective Treasury 

Department Dollars in Thousands

$0

$200,000

$400,000

$600,000

$800,000

$1,000,000

$1,200,000

$1,400,000

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

$1,138,100

$935,132 $839,007

$622,649

$425,196

performance Cost Trend: enabled and effective Treasury Department Dollars in Thousands

$0

$200,000

$400,000

$600,000

$800,000

$1,000,000

$1,200,000

$1,400,000

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

$1,032,818

$862,578 $766,972

$507,891

$295,769
DEpARtmEnt oF thE tREASuRY • AgEnCY pERFoRmAnCE REpoRt • FISCAL YEAR 2009

112 sTraTegIC goal: ManageMenT anD organIzaTIonal eXCellenCe

fiscal year 2009 results: enabled and effective Treasury Department

42%

Exceeded

58%

Met

performance Cost by outcome

70%

30%

A citizen-centered, results-oriented 

and strategically aligned 

organization.

Exceptional accountability and 

transparency.

A citizen-centered, results oriented and strateg

organizatio

Key Performance Measure Table

The following table contains only key performance measures associated with this outcome. Actual and target trends represent four years of data

where available. The full suite of measures with detailed explanations is available in the Appendix.

Key Performance Measure B

2008 

Act

2009 

Targe

2009 

Act

% of 

Targe

Achi

% Change 

in Act

Performan

Rati

2010 

Targe

Targe

Tren

Actu

Tren

Complete Investigations of EEO Complaints Within

180 Days (%) (Oe)

DO 56% 50% 65% 130% 116% Exceeded 65  

Percent of complainants informally contacting EEO (for

the purpose of seeking counseling or filing a complaint)

who participate in the ADR Process (%) (Oe)

DO 45% 30% 35% 116.7% 77.8% Exceeded 30  

Customer Satisfaction Index - Financial Mgmt Admin

Support Services (%) (Oe)

T

Franchise

Fund

97% 80% 89% 111.3% 91.8% Exceeded 80  

Operating expenses as a percentage of revenue–

Financial Management Administrative Support (%) (E)

T

Franchise

Fund

3.6% 12% 4.72% 160.7% 68.9% Exceeded 12  

Fiscal Year 2009 Results

a Citizen-Centered, results-oriented and strategically aligned 

organization

100%

Exceeded

Summary of Actual Trends for the Prior Four Years

Trend Symbol Cou

Favorable upward trend  3 75%

Favorable downward trend  1 25%

Unfavorable upward trend  0 0%

Unfavorable downward trend  0 0%

No change in trend, no effect  0 0%

No change in trend, favorable effect  0 0%

No change in trend, unfavorable effect  0 0%

Baseline B 0 0%

Total 4 100%

Discontinued DISC 3
St

teg

Goal: Manag

me

t a

Organiz

tional 

celle

c

Strategic Objective: Enabled and effective Tre

legenD syMbol

Favorable	upward	trend

Favorable	downward	trend





Unfavorable	upward	trend

Unfavorable	downward	trend





No	change	in	trend,	no	effect

No	change	in	trend,	favorable	effect

No	change	in	trend,	unfavorable	effect

Baseline







B

Discontinued DISC

Analysis of Performance Resu

The following table contains only key performance 

measures associated with this outcome. Actual and target trends represent four years of data where available.

The full suite of measures with detailed explanations is 

available in the Appendix

Treasury successfully achieved its tracked targets for 

this outcome in fiscal year 2009. The data suggests 

that while the Department successfully achieved goals 

for priorities related to this outcome, targets for these 

measures may not be sufficiently aggressive. Moreover, 

the link between this strategic outcome and its associated measures is weak.

Three of eight performance measures which were 

reported for fiscal year 2008 have been discontinued 

in fiscal year 2009. In 2009 Treasury exceeded all of its 

performance goals for this strategic outcome based on 

the remaining measures. 

Human Capita

The Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary f

Human Resource is responsible for Department-wid

policy and oversight in all areas of human capital management, including equal employment opportunity. 

There are two Equal Employment performance goal

included in Treasury’s 2009 performance budget.

In fiscal year 2008 the Office of the Deputy Assistan

Secretary of Human Resources-Chief Human Capi

Officer (DASHR-CHCO) identified two perfo

measures to assess the effectiveness of human capital at 

the Treasury Department.

The first measure “Results-Oriented Performanc

Cultures” includes the following components:

Component Measure Definit

FY 200

Act

FY 200

Act

Relationship of Senior Executive Service

performance ratings and awards to the

accomplishment of the agency’s strategic

goals

100.0% 62.7%

Degree of linkage between all employee’s

performance appraisal plans and agency

missions, goals, and outcomes (PAAT score)

38.0% 73.0%

Performance Culture Index - from 2008

Federal Human Capital Survey

54.0% 56.8%

The second measure “Talent Management” includes 

the following components:

Component Measure Definit

FY 200

Act

FY 200

Act

Competency Gap Closure in Mission Critical

Occupations - the difference between

competencies needed by the organization and

competencies possessed by employees

97.0% N/A

Talent Management Index - from 2008

Federal Human Capital Survey

59.0% 59.9%

Job Satisfaction Index- from 2008 Federal

Human Capital Survey

67.0% 65.7%

There was a change in the fiscal year 2008 actual figure 

for the ES relationship between performance a

awards based on a change in the metrics. In this report, 

Treasury used the Office of Personnel Management’s

most recent Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient of .627 

based 2008 performance data. (The 2009 performance 

data has not been received yet.) This is a standard metric across Federal Government provided by an objectiv

third party. Using this metric provides consistency year

to year in terms of assessment as well as relativity in 

terms of performance of other federal agencies. 

The Performance Appraisal Assessment Tool is 

government-wide metric utilized by the Office

of Personnel Management (OPM) to assess the
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

114 Strategic Goal: Management and Organiza

effectiveness of performance management systems 

and programs. OPM considers 80 points or greater

as an indicator of an effective performance appraisal 

program. The Department’s bureaus have multiple performance management programs and their respective 

PAAT scores are weighted based on their populatio

to derive the overall Department weighted score. The 

Department’s PAAT’s were scored in fiscal year 200

(reflecting the 2008 performance management cycles). 

Because OPM does not score every year, the score fo

fiscal year 2008 is a roll-over of the score reported in 

fiscal year 2007. The Department’s overall score was 

73.0 percent.

The aforementioned Results Oriented Performanc

Culture, Talent Management, and Job Satisfaction

index scores are derived from the fiscal year 2008 

Federal Human Capital Survey results. Comparab

Treasury-wide index scores do not exist for fiscal year 

2009 since the Federal Human Capital Survey is n

administered annually. The next set of similar index 

scores will be available when fiscal year 2010 Employee

Viewpoint Survey results are release

In fiscal year 2008 Treasury measured competency gap 

closures in selected occupations utilizing the Federal

Competency Assessment Tool (FCAT) administer

by OPM. In fiscal year 2009, OPM did not administe

the FCAT. Thus Treasury lacked a comprehensiv

competency assessment tool to measure skill gap 

closures. In fiscal year 2010, Treasury will revisit what 

constitutes a mission critical occupation and develop a 

refined strategy to track competency gap closures. 

Information Technolog

The Office of the Chief Information Officer (OC

provides leadership to the Department and its bureaus 

in the areas of information and technology management, including development of the Department’s IT 

strategy, management of IT investments, and leadership of key technology initiatives including management of the R Line of Busines, HR Con

OCIO facilitates and coordinates the implementatio

and maintenance of a wide array of applications and 

networks Department-wide that enable the mission of 

the Treasury. OCIO provides forward-thinking initiatives to provide new web, security and collaboratio

technologies. The OCIO’s adoption and delivery of a

enhanced Treasury IT infrastructure promotes information networks that eliminate stove-pipe systems, foster 

innovation and collaboration, and provide consistent 

data across the organization. No performance goals

related to Information Technology are included in 

Treasury’s 2009 performance budget.

To facilitate maximum return on Treasury IT investments, OCIO uses an IT dashboard provided by th

Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to ga

the health of its IT portfolio. Each month, the C

evaluates the Department’s 59 major investments on 

cost and schedule performance metrics. During fiscal 

year 2009, the Department’s IT portfolio performance 

has been positive, noting that a few investments 

required executive management attention:

Measure

Fisca

Year

2008

Fisca

Year

2009 Change

Percent of IT investments reported

as “red” for cost variance (greater

than +/- 10% from target)

40.33% 1.70% -38.63%

Percent of IT investments reported

as “red” for schedule variance

(greater than +/- 10% from target)

19.40% 0.00% -19.40%

It is important to note that during fiscal year 2008, 

the dashboard allowed investments to be reported as 

“green,” “yellow,” or “red.” During fiscal year 2009, 

investments could only be reported as “green” or “red.” 

Changing this scale likely impacted results between the 

two years. Regardless, there was significant improvement in the achieving cost and schedule targets for

these investments.

Over the course of the last year, OCIO has ma

improvements in terms of enhancing the qualifications 

of the staff managing major IT investments:
St

teg

Goal: Manag

me

t a

Organiz

tional 

celle

c

Strategic Objective: Enabled and effective Tre

fisCal fisCal 

year year 

Measure 2008 2009 Change

Percent	investments	reported	that	 77.42% 83.05% 5.63%

the	Project	Manager	(PM)	was	

validated	according	to	Federal	

Acquisition	Certification	for	Program	

and	Project	Managers	(FAC-P/PM)	

or	Defense	Acquisition	Workforce	

Improvement	Act	(DAWIA)	criteria	

as	qualified

During fiscal year 2009, oCIo met unique challenges 

posed by the emergency economic stabilization act 

(eesa) and the american recovery and reinvestment 

act (arra) by:

•	 obtaining clearance under the Paperwork 

reduction act to conduct information collection 

requirements to support eesa’s Troubled assets 

relief Program (TarP), including the Capital 

Purchase Program (CPP), as well as two cash 

assistance programs under arra. In sum, oCIo 

worked to clear 145 Information Collection 

requests under arra and 20 requests under 

eesa

•	 Deploying public-facing websites critical to the 

recovery effort including financialstability.gov and 

Makinghomesaffordable.gov

•	 upgrading collaboration, encryption and disaster 

recovery tools to allow the office of financial 

stability (ofs) to access applications specific to its 

mission creating efficiency and transparency

Procuremen

The Office of the Procurement Executive (OPE)

responsible for providing Department-wide acquisition 

management, improving guidance for procurement programs and systems, bureau-level procurement operation 

evaluation, and facilitating strategic procurement. No

performance goals for agency-wide procurement were 

included in Treasury’s 2009 performance budget.

On November 2, 2009, the Department submitte

its Acquisition Improvement Plan to meet the 

mandate to deliver 3.5 percent in procurement savings 

in both fiscal years 2010 and 2011, and to achieve a 

10 percent reduction in high risk contracting in fiscal 

year 2010. The Department has already taken steps to 

ensure the required savings of 3.5 percent in fiscal year 

2010 (estimated at $158 million) through active management of acquisition operations. The Department 

will achieve these savings in non-appropriated bureaus 

through active management of procurement activities and examination of high dollar/risk acquisition 

contracts. 

The Department developed its plan with the Bureau

Chief Procurement Officers, conducted several

Treasury-wide governance meetings, set individual 

bureau goals, and inventoried current and planned 

savings and improvement activities. This draft inventory identified possible savings of approximately $91 

million in fiscal year 2010 and $135 million in fiscal 

year 2011. The inventory also identified a possible 

reduction in high risk contracts of $170 million against 

a goal of $244 million. 

The Department plan includes specific strategic sourcing activities that were initiated in fiscal year 2009 to 

be further developed in fiscal year 2010 and beyond. 

These Treasury-wide initiatives include, but are not 

limited to, consolidation and acquisition of software 

and subscriptions; participation in the Microsoft 

Software Assurance Program; and, purchase of office supplies and overnight delivery services throug

the General Services Administration’s (GSA) F

Strategic Sourcing Initiative (FSSI) prog

As required by the National Defense Authorizati

Act for fiscal year 2009 and the Office of Feder

Procurement Policy (OFPP), Treasury will develop a

Acquisition Workforce Strategic Plan that will be use

to guide the growth in capacity and capability of its 

acquisition workforce over the next five years.

The agency’s plan will be submitted to OFPP by Marc

31, 2010 (and annually thereafter) and will reflect 

specific hiring and training needs for fiscal year 2011. 

In addition the plan will serve as a component of the 
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

116 Strategic Goal: Management and Organiza

agency’s budget preparation beginning with the fiscal 

year 2012 budget cycle.

Performance Management and

Budgetin

The Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary f

Management and Budget (DASMB) conducts strate

planning and performance, budget formulation and execution, program evaluation and leads special projects, 

such as RRA coordination for the Department

performance goals related to DASMB are included 

Treasury’s 2009 performance budget.

In fiscal year 2009, the Department’s fiscal year 2011 

budget submission was meticulously reviewed and 

prepared to establish funding based on key priorities. 

Treasury also worked to realize savings during this fiscal 

year by only funding the top priority needs and reallocated savings towards programs aligned with Treasury 

and Administration priorities

Departmental Operation

The Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary f

Departmental Offices Operations provides management and administrative support for the offices an

employees in Treasury’s departmental, or headquarters, 

offices. No performance goals related to Departmental

Operations are included in Treasury’s 2009 performance budget.

Two key Departmental Operations accomplishments

for fiscal year 2009 are:

•	 Standing up the Office of Financial Stability

and Special Inspector General for the Trouble

Assets Relief Program (SIGTARP) at their permanent Washington, DC duty loc

•	 Establishing and maintaining “all green” on the

Environment and Energy Scorecard for two reporting periods covering six months ea

Conclusion

The Department exceeded its targets for its strategic 

outcome: “A Citizen Centered, Results Oriented a

Strategically Aligned Organization” for fiscal ye

2009. Because current performance measures do not

effectively capture all of Treasury’s management functions, Treasury will revisit its selection of performance 

measures relative to this outcome. Development of 

measures that appropriately gauge the performance of 

Treasury management would ensure greater internal 

effectiveness and efficiency. 

Moving Forwar

During fiscal year 2010, Treasury will revise its strategic 

plan, review its performance measures as they relate to 

the new plan, undertake a number of new initiatives 

to improve management operational efficiencies, and 

develop improved metrics for management functions. 

Some of the key goals are

•	 Reducing paper usage across Treasury by one third

over two years

•	 Reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 33 percent by 2020, exceeding the projected Treasury

goal - from the Office of Federal Environment

Executive - of 22 percen

•	 Formalization of performance metrics in all

management functions, taking into consideration 

stakeholder satisfaction

•	 Achieving a ten percent improvement in positive

response rate for each of the major categories of 

the Employee Viewpoint Survey by 2

•	 Reducing the average time to hire for mission critical occupations (GS positions) by 15 perc

•	 Reducing the percentage of employees leaving

Treasury within three years of being hired

•	 Ensuring all new supervisors will receive new

supervisor training before or within six months of 

appointment by the end of 2010

•	 Developing competency gaps for all organizations 

by the end of 2010 
St

teg

Goal: Manag

me

t a

Organiz

tional 

celle

c

Strategic Objective: Enabled and effective Tre

•	 exceeding the two percent government-wide hiring goal for individuals with targeted disabilities

•	 re-engineering of the headquarters local area 

network (lan) by 12/31/2010

•	 achieving $180 million in savings (3.5 percent) in 

procurement

•	 achieving a clean opinion on Treasury financial 

statements

•	 Closing material weaknesses and significant 

deficiencies identified by Treasury oversight bodies 

in accordance with resolution plan timelines 

achieving a ten percent reduction in freedom 

of Information act (foIa) requests by making 

information available online

•	 Implementing hsPD-12 for physical access at 50 

percent of Treasury facilities and computer systems 

by the end of fiscal year 2012

Exceptional accountability and tr

Achieving and maintaining exemplary accountability and transparency is critical for the Treasury Department

as the primary financial agency for the U.S. Government. The Department follows proper internal controls th

serve to deter and eliminate fraud, waste and abuse, while increasing efficiency and effectiveness.

Fiscal Year 2009 Results

exceptional accountability and Transparency

27%

Exceeded

73%

Met

Summary of Actual Trends for the Prior Four Years

Trend Symbol Cou

Favorable upward trend  4 27%

Favorable downward trend  0 0%

Unfavorable upward trend  0 0%

Unfavorable downward trend  1 7%

No change in trend, no effect  0 0%

No change in trend, favorable effect  1 7%

No change in trend, unfavorable effect  0 0%

Baseline B 9 60%

Total 15 100%

Discontinued DISC 1

Key Performance Measure Table

The following table contains only key performance measures associated with this outcome. Actual and target trends represent four years of data

where available. The full suite of measures with detailed explanations is available in the Appendix.

% of 

2008 2009 2009 TargeT % Change perforManCe 2010 TargeT aCTual 

key perforManCe Measure bureau aCTual TargeT aCTual aChieVeD in aCTual raTing TargeT TrenD TrenD

Number	of	material	weaknesses	closed	(significant	 DO 2 0 0 100.0% -100.0% Met 1  

management	problems	identified	by	GAO,	the	IGs	

and/or	other	bureaus)	(Oe)

Number	of	completed	audit	products	 OIG 64 60 68 113.3% 106.3% Exceeded 62  

Number	of	investigations	referred	for	criminal	 OIG 93 DISC DISC DISC DISC DISC DISC DISC DISC

prosecution,	civil	litigation	or	corrective	

administrative	action	

table continued on next page
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

118 Strategic Goal: Management and Organiza

key perforManCe Measure bureau

2008 

aCTual

2009 

TargeT

2009 

aCTual

% of 

TargeT

aChieVeD

% Change 

in aCTual

perforManCe 

raTing

2010 

TargeT

TargeT

TrenD

aCTual 

TrenD

Percent of statutory audits completed by the required

date (%)

OIG 100% 100% 100% 100.0% 0.0% Met 100  

Percentage of all cases closed during fiscal year

that were referred for criminal/civil prosecution or

Treasury Administrative action

OIG N/A B 100% 100.0% B Met 70 B B

Percentage of all cases that were accepted by

prosecutors, referred for agency action, or closed

during fiscal year and were completed within 18

months of case initiation

OIG N/A B 92% 100.0% B Met 70 B B

Percentage of audit products delivered when

promised to stakeholders

TIGTA 65% 65% 81% 124.6% 124.6% Exceeded 65  

Percentage of recommendations made that have

been implemented

TIGTA 85% 83% 91% 109.6% 107.1% Exceeded 83  

Percentage of results from investigative activities TIGTA 78% 78% 83% 106.4% 106.4% Exceeded 78  

Number of completed audit products (Ot) SIGTARP N/A B 3 100.0 B Met 12 B B

Percent of recommendations implemented (Oe) SIGTARP N/A B 100% 100.0% B Met 70 B B

Congressional requests for testimony completed (Ot) SIGTARP N/A B 9 100.0 B Met 4 B B

Percentage of hotline complaints referred for

investigation or to OFS within 14 days of receipt (E)

SIGTARP N/A B 77% 100.0% B Met 60 B B

Legend Sy

Favorable upward trend 

Favorable downward trend 

Unfavorable upward trend 

Unfavorable downward trend 

No change in trend, no effect 

No change in trend, favorable effect 

No change in trend, unfavorable effect 

Baseline B

Discontinued DISC

Analysis of Performance Resu

Fiscal year 2009 data suggests that Treasury has achieved

its goals for this outcome. The Department met or 

exceeded all targets for the fiscal year and exhibited desirable trends in all but one measure. Treasury discontinued one measure during this fiscal year and established 

a baseline for nine. Seven of these baseline measures are

for SIGTARP, which was established in 2008. On

the two OIG baseline measures, “Percentage of all case

closed during fiscal year that were referred for criminal/

civil prosecution or Treasury” began at the highest 

possible level, 100 percent. The measure “Number of

material weaknesses (identified by OIG, TIGTA,

GAO) closed” exhibited an unfavorable downwa

trend.

Deputy Chief Financial Offic

The Deputy Chief Financial Officer’s office is responsible for financial accountability of the Department

financial reporting, maintaining effective internal 

controls, improving the efficiencies of the Working 

Capital Fund, and the effectiveness of asset management. In fiscal year 2009, the office led the effort to

achieve a clean audit opinion for the seventh consecutive year, a huge accomplishment given the magnitude 

and complexity of programs that were introduced to 

stabilize the Nation’s financial systems and enable economic recovery. To view the Agency Financial Repo

please click here.

Office of the Inspector Gene

The Office of Inspector General (OIG) is responsi

for the audit and investigation of all non-IRS an

non-TARP Treasury programs and operations. OIG auditors conduct financial, performance and informat
St

teg

Goal: Manag

me

t a

Organiz

tional 

celle

c

Strategic Objective: Enabled and effective Tre

technology audits. These audits are intended to save 

taxpayer dollars, improve the effectiveness and efficiency of Treasury programs and operations, help 

prevent waste, and detect fraud and abuse in Treasury 

programs and operations. OIG investigators conduc

a variety of investigations, covering financial crimes, 

corruption, other crimes, and employee misconduct. 

The OIG implemented two new performance measure

during fiscal year 2009: 

The first measure is “Timeliness of Investigations 

requiring both judicial and non-judicial cases to be 

closed within a 12-month period.” This measure was 

baselined in fiscal year 2009, but a review of investigation information indicates that eight judicial and eight 

non-judicial cases were opened and closed during the 

fiscal year. Judicial cases were open for an average of 

131 days and non-judicial cases open for an average of 

138 days.

The second measure is “Effectiveness of Investigative

Results requiring reportable results for 75 percent of

the investigations that are opened.” Reportable results

include the following outcomes: 

•	 Criminal indictment

•	 Criminal declination

•	 Civil resolution

•	 Civil declination

•	 Administrative resolutio

•	 Exoneration of an employe

•	 Determination that an allegation is unfounded

During fiscal year 2009, OIG successfully addressed 

number of difficult challenges. OIG devoted nearly it

entire audit resources to mandated work. Some limited

resources were devoted to work associated with nonInternal Revenue Service Treasury programs authorize

and funded by ARRA. During fiscal year 200

Office of Audit completed 100 percent of statutor

audits timely and completed 68 products. 

The mandated work most impacting the office were 

material loss reviews (MLRs) of failed banks. Thes

reviews are required by the Federal Deposit Insurance

Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 when the

failure of an institution supervised by Treasury causes 

a loss to the Deposit Insurance Fund that exceeds

the greater of $25 million or two percent of the 

institution’s assets. During fiscal year 2009, 107 banks 

failed of which 13 were regulated by the Office of the

Comptroller of the Currency and 14 were regulated by 

the Office of Thrift Supervision. Such a high numb

of failures has not occurred since the savings and loan 

crisis of the late 1980s and early 1990s. 

OIG provided oversight of two ne ARRA pro

administered by Treasury totaling an estimated $20 billion. These two new programs provide cash payments 

to businesses and individuals for partial reimbursement 

of specified energy properties placed in service and to 

the states for the development of low income housing. 

Additional grant fund and tax credit authorization for

the CDFI Fund as well as payments to Puerto Rico a

other U.S. territories for distribution to their citizen

also fell under OIG oversight during the fiscal year

Furthermore, the Treasury Inspector General serves as 

statutory member of the Recovery Accountability an

Transparency Board, which was established to coordinate and conduct oversight of Recovery Act cover

funds to prevent fraud, waste, and abuse, during fiscal 

year 2009.

It should also be noted that former Secretary Paulson

asked OIG to provide interim oversight of the $70

billion Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) un

the office of the Special Inspector General (SIG

was operational. As part of that interim oversight,

OIG began the information collection process for th

SIGTARP’s reporting responsibilities and conduc

a case study of a national bank that received TAR

funds.

Treasury Inspector General for Ta

Administration

The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administratio

(TIGTA) audits and investigates the Internal Reven

Service (IRS) to ensure that it is managed fairly a

effectively and is accountable for more than $2 trillion 

in tax revenues 
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

120 Strategic Goal: Management and Organiza

During fiscal year 2009, TIgTa exceeded all of its 

performance measures. TIgTa was responsible for 

successful investigations of entities and individuals who 

threatened the nation’s tax system and issued many 

high-profile audit reports that received considerable 

coverage by the media and others. Cumulatively, these 

efforts resulted in $14.7 billion in potential financial 

accomplishments from audit recommendations and 

$95.1 million in potential savings from investigative 

recoveries in embezzlements, thefts, court order fines, 

penalties and restitution.

TIgTa actions potentially impacted approximately 

14.9 million taxpayers’ accounts and achieved the 

following year-over-year results: 

•	 Issuance of 142 audit reports in fiscal year 2009, as 

compared with 180 reports in 2008

•	 Produced total financial accomplishments of 

$14.68 billion as a result of a range of audits, 

investigations, inspections, and evaluations; this 

compares with $2.57 billion in total financial 

accomplishments in fiscal year 2008, an increase of 

571 percent

•	 In fiscal year 2009, there were 197 cases of employee misconduct versus 171 cases in fiscal year 

2008, an increase of 26 cases or 15 percent

•	 Percentage of investigations generating results 

increased from 78 percent in fiscal year 2008 to 83 

percent in fiscal year 2009, an increase of 6 percent

•	 Cases accepted for criminal prosecution remained 

the same at 171 cases in both fiscal years 2008 and 

2009

•	 TIgTa opened 403 unauthorized access cases in 

fiscal year 2009 versus 434 in fiscal year 2008, a 

decrease of 7.1 percent

•	 unauthorized access cases closed decreased from 

491 cases in fiscal year 2008 to 419 cases in fiscal 

year 2009, a decrease of 14.7 percent

•	 Personnel actions against Irs employees decreased 

from 471 actions in fiscal year 2008 to 401 actions 

in fiscal year 2009, a difference of 14.9 percent

special inspector general for Trouble 

assets relief program

Treasury’s office of the special Inspector general for 

the Troubled asset relief Program (sIgTarP) advances economic stability by promoting transparency, 

efficiency and effectiveness in Treasury’s management 

of the Troubled asset relief Program (TarP) through 

coordinated oversight and robust enforcement against 

waste, theft, or abuse of TarP funds. 

The american taxpayer has been asked to provide 

hundreds of billions of dollars to fund the stabilization of the financial system and to promote economic 

recovery. In this context, the public has a right to know 

how their money is being spent. Transparency is a 

powerful tool to ensure that all those managing TarP 

funds will act appropriately, consistent with the law 

and in the best interests of the country.

sIgTarP advises TarP managers on internal controls and oversight, assesses the effectiveness of TarP 

activities over time, and makes recommendations for 

positive change in TarP management. sIgTarP 

closely coordinates its oversight activities with other 

TarP oversight bodies to ensure maximum coverage 

and to avoid redundancy and undue burden.

In their oversight activities, sIgTarP carries out both 

audits and investigations, ensuring the satisfaction of 

the public’s right to know how Treasury decides to 

invest their money, how Treasury manages the assets it 

obtains, and how TarP recipients use these funds. 

The audit Division (aD) conducts, supervises, and 

coordinates programmatic audits with respect to 

Treasury’s operation of TarP and the recipients’ 

compliance with their obligations under relevant law 

and contracts; evaluates TarP policies and procedures; 

and provides technical assistance to Treasury. In fiscal 

year 2009, aD issued three audit reports and initiated 

13 audits. 

aD also reviewed TarP policies and procedures. 

sIgTarP’s March 6th and april 21st reports to 
St

teg

Goal: Manag

me

t a

Organiz

tional 

celle

c

Strategic Objective: Enabled and effective Tre

Congress (http://www.sigtarp.gov/reports.shtml) detail 

the results of these reviews and recommendations. 

SIGTARP had 100 percent of their recommendati

implemented in fiscal year 2009. Among the policies

that SIGTARP reviewed and commented upon w

TARP agreements, TALF, Public-Private Invest

Program (PPIP), Capital Assistance Program, and

Making Home Affordable programs. For examp

•	 TARP Agreements: SIGTARP recommende

Treasury require program participants to account 

for their use of TARP funds and to report periodically to Treasury concerning such use. Treasury ha

not yet fully implemented this recommendation. 

SIGTARP is testing Treasury’s response with an audit that includes a survey of 364 financial institutions’ use of TARP assistance. The audit is no

complete, and the survey responses need to be fully 

analyzed. Many of the 364 financial institutions 

that responded generally provided a reasonable 

level of detail regarding their use of TARP funds

•	 Public Private Investment Program (PPIP): 

SIGTARP recommended that Treasury imp

conflict of interest rules on PPIP fund managers; 

require PPIP fund managers to screen and identify 

investors; and mandate that PPIP fund managers 

acknowledge a fiduciary duty to the taxpayer. 

SIGTARP also recommended that Treasury clar

SIGTARP’s right of access to all PPIP books 

records. Senate Amendment 1043 to Senate B

No. 896, which passed the Senate by a unanimou

vote and was later enacted in P.L. 111-22, incorporated these recommendations.

The Investigations Division (ID) supervises and 

conducts criminal and civil investigations inside and 

outside of government, regarding waste, theft, or 

abuse of TARP funds. In fiscal year 2009, SI

opened over 61 investigations and closed two. As of

December 31, 2009, SIGTARP had also proces

over 9,900 Hotline contacts and referred 77 percent of

hotline complaints for investigation or to the Office of

Financial Stability within 14 days of receipt

ID employs experienced financial and corporate fraud 

investigators, special agents, forensic analysts and attorney advisors. This structure provides SIGTARP w

a broad array of expertise and perspectives in developing sophisticated investigations. SIGTARP coordina

closely with other law enforcement agencies; forms 

law enforcement partnerships and task force relationships across the Federal government; and implements

the SIGTARP Hotline, which abides by all applic

whistleblower protections when processing the telephone, e-mail, website, and in-person complaints the 

hotline receives.

Privacy and Recor

The Office of Privacy and Treasury Records (PT

was established in fiscal year 2008 to strengthen the 

Department’s privacy programs by combining key 

privacy functions and elevating the privacy program 

to directly report to the Assistant Secretary fo

Management and Chief Financial Officer (ASM/

The realignment of information privacy, civil liberties, 

records management, library and disclosure functions 

into one office promotes an integrated, corporate 

approach to information management and protection 

across the Department. 

PTR continued to strengthen corporate governance

activities pertaining to privacy and records by accomplishing some key milestones. Privacy training 

was updated and made available across Treasury on the 

Treasury Learning Management Platform, enabling the

timely training of 22 percent more employees than the 

previous year. The Department reduced its Freedom of

Information Act (FOIA) backlog by 19 percent dur

fiscal year 2009. PTR’s records management team

effectively scheduled 100 percent of the Department’s 

electronic records systems ahead of the required 

September 30, 2009 deadline set by the Nationa

Archives and Records Administration 
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

122 Strategic Goal: Management and Organiza

Conclusion

Treasury has been successful in achieving this outcome. 

It met or exceeded all associated performance goals and 

exhibited positive trends in all but one measure. 

Moving Forwar

In fiscal year 2010, OIG will complete implementation of its two new performance metrics. Althou

OIG was not appropriated funds to oversee Treasur

operations related to RRA it plans to devote resour

to provide oversight of critical, non-IRS, Treasuryadministere ARRA pro

TIGTA will continue to provide critical audit, investigative, and inspection and evaluation services whil

promoting the integrity of tax administration on behalf 

of the Nation’s taxpayers.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act authorized an appropriation of $7 million to T

available through September 2013, to be used in

oversight activities of IRS programs and designate

TIGTA as a member of the Recovery Accountabil

and Transparency Board. TIGTA will perform audits 

ensure that the IRS’s systems and programs are operating effectively, efficiently, and economically in thei

activities related to this legislation. TIGTA develope

an Oversight Program Plan to address the many tax law

provisions that the IRS is charged with administering

TIGTA will continue to provide oversight to IR

ARRA implementation through fiscal year 2

TIGTA concluded that it is doubtful that the IRS’s 

gap estimate includes the entire international tax gap 

primarily because identifying hidden income within 

international activity is very difficult and time-consuming. TIGTA will continue to work with the IRS

identify other opportunities to reduce the tax gap and 

improve the efficiency and effectiveness of America’s tax

system.

As the IRS continues to modernize and automate i

operations, TIGTA auditors and investigators must b

appropriately trained to operate in this environment. 

TIGTA will build upon actions initiated in fiscal yea

2009 throughout the coming fiscal year.

SIGTARP will continue to build infrastructure, s

as securing office space and equipment for staff, to 

enable SIGTARP to carry out its mission to condu

supervise, and coordinate audits and investigations of 

TARP. SIGTARP will also complete implementati

its seven new performance metrics.
lisT of aCronyM

s

123

List of Acronyms

List of Acr

ABS Asset-Backed Securities

AFR Agency Financial Report

AGP Asset Guarantee Program

AIFP Automotive Industry Financing Program

AIG American International Group

AIIP Automotive Industry Investment Program

APR Annual Performance Report

ARC Administrative Resource Center

ASC Accounting Standards Codification

ASM/CFO Assistant Secretary for Management & Chief Financial Officer

BEP Bureau of Engraving and Printing

BPD Bureau of the Public Debt

BSA Bank Secrecy Act

BSM Business Systems Modernization

CADE Customer Account Data Engine

CAP Competitiveness Assessment Process

CAP Capital Assessment Program

CBLI Consumer and Business Lending Initiative

CDDB Custodial Detail Database

CDE Community Development Entities

CDFI Community Development Financial Institutions

CDS Credit Default Swaps

CFPA Consumer Financial Protection Agency

CFO Chief Financial Officer

CFS Consolidated Financial Statements

CFTC Commodities Futures Trading Commission

CMBS Commercial Mortgage Backed Securities

CO Contracting Officer

COP Congressional Oversight Panel

CPP Capital Purchase Program

CSRS Civil Service Retirement System

CTF Clean Technology Fund

DASHR/CHCO Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Human Resources/Chief Human Capital Officer

continued on next page

lIsT of aCronyMs
DEpARtmEnt oF thE tREASuRY • AgEnCY pERFoRmAnCE REpoRt • FISCAL YEAR 2009

124

Lit of Acrs

DCAA Defense Contract Auditing Agency

DCP Office of D.C. Pensions

DIP Debtor-in-Possession

DO Departmental Offices

DHS Department of Homeland Security

EESA Emergency Economic Stability Act of 2008

EFTPS Electronic Federal Tax Payment System

EGTRRA Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act

EITC Earned Income Tax Credit

ESF Exchange Stabilization Fund

Fannie Mae Federal National Mortgage Association

FARS Financial Analysis and Reporting System

FASAB Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board

FATF Financial Action Task Force

FCDA Foreign Currency Denominated Assets

FCRA Federal Credit Reform Act

FDIC Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

FECA Federal Employees’ Compensation Act

FERS Federal Employees’ Retirement System

FEGLI Federal Employees Group Life Insurance

FEHBP Federal Employees Health Benefits Program

FFB Federal Financing Bank

FFMIA Federal Financial Management Improvement Act

FHFA Federal Housing Finance Agency

FHLB Federal Home Loan Bank

FinCEN Financial Crimes Enforcement Network

FMFIA Federal Managers’ Financial Integrity Act

FMIS Financial Management Information System

FMS Financial Management Service

FRB Federal Reserve Bank

FRBNY Federal Reserve Bank of New York

Freddie Mac Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation

FTO Fine Troy Ounce

FY Fiscal Year

G-7 Group of Seven

G-20 Group of Twenty

continued on next page

effeCTIvely ManageD u.s. governMenT fInanCes
Li

t of Acr

s

125

List of Acr

GAAP Generally Accepted Accounting Principles

GAB General Arrangement to Borrow

GAO Government Accountability Office

GFRA General Fund Receipt Account

GM General Motors

GMAC General Motors Acceptance Corporation

GSA General Services Administration

GSE Government Sponsored Enterprises

GSECF Government Sponsored Enterprise Credit Facility

HAMP Home Affordable Modification Program

HCTC Health Coverage Tax Credit

HERA Housing and Economic Recovery Act

HUD Department of Housing and Urban Development

IAP International Assistance Programs

IFS Integrated Financial System

IMF International Monetary Fund

IPIA Improper Payments Information Act

IRACS Interim Revenue Accounting Control System

IRS Internal Revenue Service

IT Information Technology

JAMES Joint Audit Management Enterprise System

LIBOR-OIS London Inter-Bank Offered Rate-Overnight Index Swap

MBS Mortgage-Backed Securities

MDB Multilateral Development Banks

MeF Modernized Electronic File

MINT U.S. Mint

MRADR Market Risk Adjusted Discount Rate

MV&S Modernization, Vision, and Strategy

NAB New Arrangement to Borrow

NACA Native American CDFI Assistance

NMTC New Markets Tax Credit

NRC National Revenue Center

NRP National Research Program

OCC Office of the Comptroller of the Currency

OFS Office of Financial Stability

OIG Office of Inspector General

continued on next page

List of Ac
Department of th Treasury •  gency Perf

126

Lit of Acrs

OMB Office of Management and Budget

ONI Office of National Insurance

OPEB Other Post Employment Benefits

OPM Office of Personnel Management

ORB Other Retirement Benefits

OTC Over-the-Counter

OTS Office of Thrift Supervision

PB President’s Budget

PCA Planned Corrective Actions

PP&E Property, Plant, and Equipment

PPIF Public-Private Investment Fund

PPIP Public-Private Investment Program

PSPA Preferred Stock Purchase Agreements

QEO Qualified Equity Offering

QFI Qualified Financial Institution

RRACS Redesign Revenue Accounting Control System

SAR Suspicious Activity Report

SBA Small Business Administration

SBR Statement of Budgetary Resources

SCAP Supervisory Capital Assessment Program

SDR Special Drawing Rights

SEC Securities and Exchange Commission

SED Strategic Economic Dialogue

SFFAS Statement of Federal Financial Accounting Standards

SFP Supplementary Financing Program

SIGTARP Special Inspector General for TARP

SOMA System Open Market Account

SPSPA Senior Preferred Stock Purchase Agreements

SPV Special Purpose Vehicle

SSP Shared Service Provider

SSP Stable Share Price

TAIFF Troubled Assets Insurance Financing Fund

TALF Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facilities

TARP Troubled Asset Relief Program

TFF Treasury Forfeiture Fund

TIER Treasury Information Executive Repository

continued on next page

Effectively Ma.S.Govermet Fice
Li

t of Acr

s

127

List of Acr

TIGTA Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration

TIP Targeted Investment Program

TIPS Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities

TRES Treasury Retail E-Services

TRIA Terrorism Risk Insurance Act

TTB Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau

UBS Union Bank of Switzerland

USSGL United States Standard General Ledger

VITA Volunteer Income Tax Assistance

List of Ac
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

128

This page left intentionally blank

Effectively Managed U.S. Govern
Appendix

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 

Performance Measures by Focus and Strategic Goal

appenDix

full rePorT of The Treasury DeParTMenT’s fIsCal year 2009 PerforManCe Measures 131

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s 

Fiscal Year 2009 Performance Measures 

by Focus and Strategic Goal

Fiscal Year 2009 Performanc

This section reports the results of the Department of the Treasury’s official performance measures by focus and 

strategic goal, and further by bureau/organization, for which targets were set in the Fiscal Year 2009 Performance 

Plan, as presented in the Fiscal Year 2011 Congressional Justification for Appropriations and Performance Plans. For

each performance measure, there is a definition of the measure, performance levels and targets for three previous 

fiscal years (where available), the performance target and actual for the reporting year, and proposed performance 

targets for the next fiscal year (where available). The report examines unrealized performance targets and presents 

actions for improvement. 

The purpose of the Treasury Department’s strategic management effort is to develop effective performance measures to achieve the Department’s goals and objectives, and provide recommendations that will improve results 

delivered to the American public

Overall, the Department of the Treasury had 166 performance targets in fiscal year 2009; 22 of these measures

were baseline, and 11 were discontinued, resulting in 133 measures. Targets exceeded, met, improved and unmet 

are shown below for two calculations: 1) excluding baseline and discontinued measures, and 2) including baseline 

and discontinued measures.

Fiscal Year 2009 Treasury-wide Performance Summary for A

(Excluding Baseline and Disco

Total Measures Target Exceeded Target Met Target Unmet Target Impro

133 88 (66%) 19 (14%) 24 (18%) 2 (2%)

Fiscal Year 2009 Treasury-wide Performan

(Including Baseline and Disco

Total Measures Target Exceeded Target Met Target Unmet Target Improved Baselin

166 88 (53%) 19 (11%) 24 (14%) 2 (1%) 22 (13%) 11 (7%)

Definitions and Other Important I

Determination of Official Measures:A rigorous process is followed to maintain internal controls when establishing or modifying performance measures. If a performance measure is in the performance budget for th

year in question, it must be included in the Performance and Accountability Report, and must be approved 

by the Performance Reporting System administrator. Performance measures that are not in the performanc

budget may also be included in the Performance and Accountability Repor

Actual: For most of the measures included in this report, the fiscal year 2009 actual data is final. Some of the actual data for fiscal year 2009 are estimates at the time of publication, which are indicated by an asterisk (*
DEpARtmEnt oF thE tREASuRY • AgEnCY pERFoRmAnCE REpoRt • FISCAL YEAR 2009

132

Actual data for these estimated measures will be presented in the Fiscal Year 2012 Congressional Justification

for Appropriations and the Fiscal Year 2010 Performance and Accountability Report. The actual data for previous years throughout this report is the most current data available and may not reflect previous editions of 

the Performance and Accountability Report and the Congressional Justificatio

Target: The targets shown for fiscal year 2010 are proposed targets and are subject to change. The final targets 

will be presented in the Fiscal Year 2012 Congressional Justification for Appropriations. Also included in this

report are the previous year’s final targets for each performance measure.

Target Met: For each fiscal year that there is a target and an actual number, the report tells the reader whether the

target was met or not. If the target is exceeded or met, “Y” will be shown. If the target has improved from

the prior year (but was not met), or was not met, “N” will be shown.

Definition: All performance measures in this report have a detailed definition describing the measure and summarizing the calculation

Source: The basis for the data is included in this report.

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: If a performance target is not met, the report includes an explanation

to why Treasury did not meet its target, and what it plans to do to improve performance in the future. If 

a performance target is met, the report includes what future plans Treasury has to either match fiscal year 

2009 performance, or improve on that performance in future years. Explanations may also include justification for any expected degradation in performance.

Discontinued: Some measures will be discontinued in the Fiscal Year 2011 Congressional Justification for

Appropriations and the Fiscal Year 20010 Performance and Accountability Report. New measures are sometimes developed in order to better measure performance; when this happens, the measure being replaced is

discontinued, and an explanation is provided. 

Baseline Measures: There are 19 new measures in fiscal year 2009 included in this report. Baseline value

facilitate target-setting in the future. The target value for a new measure is “baseline,” and the actual value 

is the initial data point. These targets are considered met since the objective was to establish the initial value 

in the first year of measurement. Targets are then established for subsequent years.

Additional Information: Additional Information relating to Treasury’s performance management can be found 

Office of Performance Budgeting and Strategic Planning webpage.

Lege

* Indicates actual data is estimated and subject to change

Oe Outcome Measure

E Efficiency Measure

Ot Output

aPPenDIX
Appe

di

133

*These tables do not include measures that were discontinued prior to fiscal year 2010.

Cash Resources are Available to Operate th

Performance Measure Bure

2009 

Target

2009 

Actua

Performance

Ratin

Percent

of Target 

Achieve

Year over

Year Percen

Change in 

Actua

2010 

Target

Target 

Trend

Actual

Trend

Revenue Collected When Due Through a Fair and Uniform Application of the Law

Amount of delinquent debt collected per $1 spent

($) (E)

FMS $43 $53.76 Exceeded 125% 1% $43  

Amount of delinquent debt collected through all

available tools ($ billions) (Ot)

FMS $3.9 $5.03 Exceeded 129% 114% $4  

Dollar amount of collections processed through

Pay.gov governmentwide Internet collections

portal ($ billions)

FMS $43 $68.8 Exceeded 160% 141% $44  

Percentage collected electronically of total dollar

amount of Federal government receipts (%) (Oe)

FMS 80% 84% Exceeded 105% 105% 80%  

Percentage of delinquent debt referred to FMS for

collection compared to amount eligible for referral

(%) (Ot)

FMS 97% 100% Exceeded 103% 101% 97%  

Percentage of Federal agency customers indicating

an overall service rating of satisfactory or better

FMS 87% 91% Exceeded 105% 103% 88%  

Unit cost to process a Federal revenue collection

transaction ($) (E)

FMS $1.27 $1.57 Unmet 0.8% 0.7% $1.25  

Automated Collection System (ACS) Accuracy

(%) (Oe)

IRS 92% 94.3% Exceeded 103% 99% 92.5%  

Automated Underreporter (AUR) Coverage (%) (E) IRS 2.5% 2.6% Exceeded 104% 102% 3%  

Automated Underreporter (AUR) Efficiency (E) IRS 1,855 1,905 Exceeded 103% 96% 1,868  

Collection Coverage - Units (%) (Oe) IRS 54.4% 54.2% Unmet 100% 98% 50.5%  

Collection Efficiency - Units (E) IRS 1,872 1,845 Unmet 99% 96% 1,898  

Conviction Efficiency Rate (Cost per Conviction)

($) (E)

IRS $317,100 $327,328 Unmet 97% 96% $331,000  

Conviction Rate (%) (Oe) IRS 92% 87.2% Unmet 95% 94% 92%  

Criminal Investigations Completed (Ot) IRS 3,900 3,848 Unmet 99% 95% 3,900  

Customer Accuracy - Customer Accounts (Phones)

(%) (Oe)

IRS 93.5% 94.9% Exceeded 101% 101% 93.7%  

Customer Accuracy - Tax Law Phones (%) (Oe) IRS 91% 92.9% Exceeded 102% 102% 91.2%  

Customer Contacts Resolved per Staff year (E) IRS 10,386 12,918 Exceeded 124% 102% 9,398  

Customer Service Representative (CSR) Level of

Service (%) (Oe)

IRS 70% 70% Met 100% 133% 71%  

Examination Coverage - Business Corporations >

$10 million (%) (Oe)

IRS 5.8% 5.6% Unmet 97% 92% 5.1%  

Examination Coverage - Individual (%) (Oe) IRS 1% 1% Met 100% 100% 1.1%  

Examination Efficiency - Individual (1040 Form) (E) IRS 132 138 Exceeded 105% 100% 132  

Examination Quality (LMSB) - Coordinated Industry

(%) (Oe)

IRS 96% 95% Unmet 99% 98% 96%  

Examination Quality (LMSB) - Industry (%) (Oe) IRS 88% 88% Met 100% 100% 89%  

table continued on next page

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

134

Cash Resources are Available to Operate th

Performance Measure Bure

2009 

Target

2009 

Actua

Performance

Ratin

Percent

of Target 

Achieve

Year over

Year Percen

Change in 

Actua

2010 

Target

Target 

Trend

Actual

Trend

Field Collection National Quality Review Score

(Oe)

IRS 80% 80.5% Exceeded 101% 102% 81%  

Field Examination National Quality Review Score

(%) (Oe)

IRS 87% 85.1% Unmet 98% 99% 86.3%  

HCTC Cost per Taxpayer Served IRS $17 $13.79 Exceeded 119% 119% B  

HCTC Sign-up Time (days) IRS 97 91.3 Exceeded 106% 103% B  

Number of Convictions (Oe) IRS 2,135 2,105 Unmet 99% 98% 2,135  

Office Examination National Quality Review Score

(%) (Oe)

IRS 90% 92.1% Exceeded 102% 102% 90.9%  

Percent of BSM projects within +/- cost variance IRS 90% 60% Unmet 67% 65% 90%  

Percent of BSM projects within +/- schedule

variance

IRS 90% 90% Met 100% 98% 90%  

Percent of Business Returns Processed

Electronically (%) (Oe)

IRS 21.6% 22.8% Exceeded 106% 118% 24.3%  

Percent of Individual Returns Processed

Electronically (%) (Oe)

IRS 64% 65.9% Exceeded 103% 114% 70.2%  

Refund Timeliness - Individual (paper) (%) (E) IRS 98.4% 99.2% Exceeded 101% 100% 98.4%  

Taxpayer Self Assistance Rate IRS 64.7% 69.3% Exceeded 107% 104% 61.3%  

TEGE Determination Case Closures (Ot) IRS 94,000 96,246 Exceeded 102% 96% 140,465  

Timeliness of Critical Individual Filing Season Tax

Products to the Public (%) (E)

IRS 92% 96.8% Exceeded 105% 105% 94%  

Timeliness of Critical TE/GE and Business Tax

Products to the Public (%) (Oe)

IRS 89% 95.2% Exceeded 107% 106% 90%  

Amount of revenue collected per program dollar

($) (New data compilation methodology, 2008)

TTB $300 $427 Exceeded 142% 136% $400  

Percent of Voluntary Compliance from large

taxpayers in filing tax payments timely and

accurately (in terms of revenue)

TTB 92% 94% Exceeded 102% 100% 92%  

Timely and Accurate Payments at the Lowest Possible Cost

Percentage of paper check and electronic funds

transfer (EFT) payments made accurately and

on-time (%) (Oe)

FMS 100% 100% Met 100% 100% 100%  

Percentage of Treasury payments and associated

information made electronically (%) (Oe)

FMS 80% 81% Exceeded 101% 103% 80%  

Unit cost for federal government payments ($) (E) FMS $0.4 $0.37 Met 108% 106% $0.4  

Government Financing at the Lowest Possible Cost Over Time

Cost per debt financing operation ($) (E) BPD $256,336 $170,214 Exceeded 134% 123% $193,962  

Cost per federal funds investment transaction

($) (E)

BPD $69.11 $41.71 Exceeded 140% 136% $45.7  

Cost per TreasuryDirect assisted transaction ($) (E) BPD $9.34 $8.72 Exceeded 107% 94% $8.57  

Cost per TreasuryDirect online transaction ($) (E) BPD $4.34 $5.21 Unmet 80% 80% $5.69  

table continued on next page

Ap
Appe

di

135

Cash Resources are Available to Operate th

Performance Measure Bure

2009 

Target

2009 

Actua

Performance

Ratin

Percent

of Target 

Achieve

Year over

Year Percen

Change in 

Actua

2010 

Target

Target 

Trend

Actual

Trend

Number of Government Agency Investment

Services control processes consolidated

BPD 0 0 Met 100% 100% 5  

Percent of auction results released in two minutes

+/- 30 seconds (%) (Oe)

BPD 95% 100% Exceeded 105% 100% 95%  

Percentage of retail customer service transactions

completed within 5 business days (%) (Ot)

BPD B 86% Met 100% B 86% B B

Effective Cash Management

Variance between estimated and actual receipts

(annual forecast) (%) (Oe)

DO 5% 5.5% Unmet 90% 80% 5%  

Accurate, Timely, Useful Transparent and Accessible Financial Information

Cost per summary debt accounting transaction

($) (E)

BPD $10.01 $8.66 Exceeded 113% 105% $11.81  

Release federal government-wide statements on

time (Oe)

DO Met Met Met 100% 100% Met  

Percentage of government-wide accounting

reports issued accurately (%) (Oe)

FMS 100% 100% Met 100% 100% 100%  

Percentage of government-wide accounting

reports issued timely (%) (E)

FMS 100% 100% Met 100% 100% 100%  

Unit cost to manage $1 million dollars of cash

flow ($)

FMS $12.38 $7.08 Exceeded 143% 121% $11.77  

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

136

Improved Economic Opportunity, Mobility, and Security with Robust, 

Growth at Home an

Performance Measure Bure

2009 

Target

2009 

Actua

Performance

Ratin

Percent

of Target 

Achieve

Year over

Year Percen

change in 

Actua

2010 

Target

Target 

Trend

Actual

Trend

Strong U.S. Economic Competitiveness

Administrative cost per number of Bank Enterprise

Award (BEA) applications processed ($) (E)

CDFI $1,455 $2,366 Improved 37% 123% DISC  

Administrative costs per financial assistance (FA)

application processed (E)

CDFI $6,920 $3,283 Exceeded 153% 154% DISC  

Administrative costs per number of Native

American CDFI Assistance (NACA) applications

processed ($) (E)

CDFI $9,090 $3,162 Exceeded 165% 171% DISC  

Administrative costs per number of New Markets

Tax Credit (NMTC) applications processed ($) (E)

CDFI $4,875 $3,254 Exceeded 133% 156% DISC  

Annual percentage increase in the total assets of

Native CDFIs (%) (Oe)

CDFI 15% 23% Exceeded 153% 121% 15%  

Commercial real-estate properties financed by

BEA Program applicants that provide access to

essential community products and services in

underserved communities

CDFI 285 500 Exceeded 175% 174% DISC  

Community Development Entities’ annual

investments in low-income communities ($ billion)

CDFI $2.5 $3.6 Exceeded 144% 109% $2.5  

Community Development Entities’ cumulative

investments in low-income communities ($ billion)

CDFI $11.4 $12.5 Exceeded 110% 140% $10  

Dollars of private and non-CDFI Fund investments

that CDFIs are able to leverage because of their

CDFI Fund Financial Assistance ($ in millions) (Oe)

CDFI $635 $1,298 Exceeded 204% 209% $600  

Increase in community development activities

over prior year for all BEA program applicants ($

millions) (Oe)

CDFI $202 $292 Exceeded 145% 126% $210  

Increase in the percentage of eligible areas served

by a CDFI

CDFI 15% 25.1% Exceeded 167% 141% 21%  

Number of full-time equivalent jobs created

or maintained in underserved communities by

businesses financed by CDFI program awardees

(Oe)

CDFI 30,000 70,260 Exceeded 234% 238% 85,000  

Number of small businesses located in

underserved communities financed by BEA

Program applicants

CDFI 288 640 Exceeded 222% 71% 252  

Percent of CDFIs that increased their total assets

(cumulative)

CDFI 70% 88% Exceeded 126% 101% 65%  

Percent of CDFIs that increased their total assets

over the previous year

CDFI 70% 69% Unmet 99% 86% 66%  

Percentage of eligible areas served by one or

more CDFI

CDFI 3% 14.8% Exceeded 493% 435% 5%  

Percentage of loans and investments that went

into severely distressed communities

CDFI 66% 81% Exceeded 123% 111% 66%  

Percentage of licensing applications and notices

completed with established timeframes (%) (Oe)

OCC 95% 95% Met 100% 100% 95%  

table continued on next page

Ap
Appe

di

137

Improved Economic Opportunity, Mobility, and Security with Robust, 

Growth at Home an

Performance Measure Bure

2009 

Target

2009 

Actua

Performance

Ratin

Percent

of Target 

Achieve

Year over

Year Percen

change in 

Actua

2010 

Target

Target 

Trend

Actual

Trend

Average number of days to process an original

permit application at the National Revenue Center

(%) (E)

TTB 72 64 Exceeded 111% 0% 72  

National Revenue Center (NRC) customer

satisfaction survey

TTB 85% 89% Exceeded 105% 99% 85%  

Percent of electronically filed Certificate of Label

Approval applications (%) (E)

TTB 53% 74% Exceeded 140% 119% 78%  

Percentage of importers identified by TTB as

illegally operating without a Federal permit

TTB 20% 15% Exceeded 125% 132% 19%  

Free Trade and Investment

Number of New Trade and Investment

Negotiations Underway or Completed (Oe)

DO 6 15 Exceeded 250% 107% 2  

Number of specific new trade actions involving

Treasury interagency participation in order to

enact, implement and enforce US trade law and

international agreements

DO 30 98 Exceeded 327% 144% 40  

Prevented or Mitigated Financial and Economic Crises

Average days to close a FOIA case DO B 67 Met 100% B 64 B B

Changes that result from project engagement

(Impact)

DO 3.1 3.1 Met 100% 100% 3.1  

Clean audit opinion on TARP financial statements DO B Met Met 100% B Met B B

Percentage of Congressional correspondence

responses drafted within 48 hours

DO B 87% Met 100% B 90% B B

Percentage of Customers satisfied with

FinancialStability.gov

DO B 65% Met 100% B 70% B B

Percentage of SIGTARP and GAO oversight

recommendations responded to on time

DO B 100% Met 100% B 100% B B

Percentage of statutorily-mandated reports

submitted on time

DO B 100% Met 100% B 100% B B

Scope and intensity of engagement (Traction) DO 3.6 3.7 Exceeded 103% 103% 3.6  

Percent of national banks with composite CAMELS

rating of 1 or 2 (%) (Oe)

OCC 90% 82% Unmet 91% 89% 90%  

Percentage of national banks that are categorized

as well capitalized (%) (Oe)

OCC 95% 86% Unmet 91% 87% 95%  

Percentage of national banks with consumer

compliance rating of 1 or 2 (%) (Oe)

OCC 94% 97% Exceeded 103% 100% 94%  

Rehabilitated national banks as a percentage of

problem national banks one year ago (CAMELS 3,

4 or 5) (%) (Oe)

OCC 40% 29% Unmet 73% 62% 40%  

Total OCC costs relative to every $100,000 in bank

assets regulated ($) (E)

OCC $9.22 $8.81 Exceeded 104% 95% $9.22  

Percent of safety and soundness exams started as

scheduled (%) (Oe)

OTS 90% 94% Exceeded 104% 100% 90%  

table continued on next page

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

138

iMproVeD eConoMiC opporTuniTy, MobiliTy, anD seCuriTy wiTh robusT, real, susTainable eConoMiC 

growTh aT hoMe anD abroaD

year over 

percent year percent 

2009 2009 performance of Target change in 2010 Target 

performance Measure bureau Target actual rating achieved actual Target Trend

actual 

Trend

Percent	of	thrifts	that	are	well	capitalized	(%)	(Oe) OTS 95% 97% Exceeded 102% 99% 95%  

Percent	of	thrifts	with	a	compliance	examination	 OTS 90% 95% Exceeded 106% 99% 90% 

rating	of	1	or	2	(%)	(Oe)



Percent	of	thrifts	with	composite	CAMELS	ratings	 OTS 90% 84% Unmet 93% 93% 80% 

of	1	or	2	(%)	(Oe)



Total	OTS	costs	relative	to	every	$100,000	in	 OTS $23.04 $19.88 Exceeded 114% 68% $22 

savings	association	assets	regulated	($)	(E)



Decreased Gap in Global Standard of Living

Improve	International	Monetary	Fund	(IMF)	

Effectiveness	and	Quality	Through	Periodic	Review	

of	IMF	Programs	(%)	(Oe)

DO 90% 23% Unmet 26% 25% 90%  

Percentage	of	Grant	and	Loan	Proposals	

Containing	Satisfactory	Frameworks	for	Results	

Measurement	(%)	(Oe)

DO 90% 94% Exceeded 104% 100% 90%  

Ap
Appe

di

139

Trust and Confidence in U.S. Notes 

Performance Measure Bure

2009 

Target

2009 

Actua

Performance

Ratin

Percent

of Target 

Achieve

Year over

Year Percen

change in 

Actua

2010 

Target

Target 

Trend

Actual

Trend

Commerce Enabled Through Safe, Secure U.S. Notes and Coins

Currency Production BEP 6.2 6.2 Met 100% 81% 8  

Currency shipment discrepancies per million notes

(%) (Oe)

BEP 0.01% 0% Exceeded 200% 200% 0.01%  

Improper and/or erroneous payments or puchases BEP $500 $0 Exceeded 200% N/A $300  

Maintain ISO certification BEP Met Met Met 100% 100% Met  

Manufacturing costs for currency (dollar costs per

thousand notes produced) ($) (E)

BEP $37 $32.77 Exceeded 111% 89% $37  

Other financial losses BEP $0 $0 Met 100% 100% $0  

Percent of currency notes delivered to the Federal

Reserve that meet customer quality requirements

(%) (Oe)

BEP 99.9% 99.9% Met 100% 100% 99.9%  

Security costs per 1000 notes delivered ($) (E) BEP $5.65 $5.76 Unmet 98% 98% $5.6  

Total financial losses BEP $20,500 $16,000 Exceeded 122% N/A $15,300  

Total regulatory fines and claims paid BEP $20,000 $16,000 Exceeded 120% N/A $15,000  

Absolute Value of Production Percent Deviation

from net Pay

Mint B 6.5% Met 100% B DISC B B

Customer Satisfaction Index - A measure of

the satisfaction of customers with numismatic

products

Mint 88% 88.3% Exceeded 100% N/A 88% B B

Employee Confidence in Protection Mint 83% 81% Unmet 98% 100% DISC  

Numismatic Customer Base (Ot) Mint 1.398 1.055 Unmet 75% B 0.9 B B

Numismatic Net Margin (E) Mint 15% 9.4% Unmet 1% B DISC B B

Protection Cost Per Square Foot ($) (E) Mint $31.75 $31.57 Exceeded 101% 101% $31.7  

Seigniorage per Dollar Issued ($) Mint $0.54 $0.55 Exceeded 102% N/A $0.53 B B

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

140

Pre-empted and Neutralized threats to the international financial system and 

securi

Performance Measure Bure

2009 

Target

2009 

Actua

Performance

Ratin

Percent

of Target 

Achieve

Year over

Year Percen

change in 

Actua

2010 

Target

Target 

Trend

Actual

Trend

Removed or Reduced Threats to National Security from Terrorism, Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction, Drug Trafficking and Other Criminal 

Activity on the Part of Rogue Regimes, Individuals, and Their Support Networks

Impact of TFI programs and activities DO B 7.81 Met 100% B 7.4 B B

Percent of forfeited cash proceeds resulting from

high-impact cases (%)

T

Forfeiture

Fund

75% 87.65% Exceeded 117% 101% 75%  

Safer and More Transparent U.S. and International Financial Systems

Average time to process enforcement matters (in

years)

FinCEN Met Met Met 100% 57% Met  

Cost Per BSA Form E-Filed FinCEN $0.15 $0.16 Unmet 93% 77% $0.15  

Median time taken from date of receipt of

Financial Institution Hotline Tip SAR to transmittal

of a written analytical report to law enforcement

or the intelligence community (days)

FinCEN 15 3 Exceeded 180% 100% 5  

Number of largest BSA report filers using E-Filing FinCEN 454 486 Exceeded 107% 126% 534  

Number of users directly accessing BSA data FinCEN 10,000 10,072 Exceeded 101% 104% 10,000  

Percent of federal and state regulatory agencies

with memoranda of understanding/information

sharing agreements

FinCEN 45% 43% Improved 97% 105% 46%  

Percent of FinCEN’s compliance MOU holders

finding FinCEN’s information exchange valuable to

improve the BSA consistency and compliance of

the financial system

FinCEN 66% 82% Exceeded 124% 128% 68%  

Percentage of bank examinations conducted by the

Federal Banking Agencies indicating a systemic

failure of the anti-money laundering program rule.

FinCEN 5.2% 2.1% Exceeded 160% 116% 5.2%  

Percentage of complex analytical work completed

by FinCEN analysts

FinCEN 39% 44% Exceeded 113% 163% 39%  

Percentage of customers satisfied with the BSA

E-Filing

FinCEN 90% 94% Exceeded 104% 101% 90%  

Percentage of customers satisfied with WEBCBRS

and secure outreach

FinCEN 81% 74% Unmet 91% 91% 74%  

Percentage of FinCEN’s Regulatory Resource

Center Customers rating the guidance received as

understandable

FinCEN 90% 94% Exceeded 104% 100% 90%  

Share of BSA filings submitted electronically FinCEN 67% 82% Exceeded 122% 115% 71%  

The percent of countries/jurisdictions connected

to the Egmont Secure Web within one year of

Egmont membership

FinCEN 98% 99% Exceeded 101% 101% 98%  

The percentage of domestic law enforcement and

foreign financial intelligence units finding FinCEN’s

analytical reports highly valuable

FinCEN 80% 81% Exceeded 101% 98% 81%  

The percentage of private industry or financial

institution customers finding FinCEN’s SAR Activity

Review products valuable

FinCEN 76% 73% Unmet 96% 97% 75%  

Ap
Appe

di

141

Enabled and Effective Treasury 

Performance Measure Bure

2009 

Target

2009 

Actua

Performance

Ratin

Percent

of Target 

Achieve

Year over

Year Percen

change in 

Actua

2010 

Target

Target 

Trend

Actual

Trend

A Citizen-Centered, Results-Oriented and Strategically Aligned Organization

Complete Investigations of EEO Complaints Within

180 Days (%) (Oe)

DO 50 65 Exceeded 130% 116% 65  

Percent of complainants informally contacting EEO

(for the purpose of seeking counseling or filing a

complaint) who participate in the ADR Process

(%) (Oe)

DO 30% 35% Exceeded 117% 78% 30%  

Customer Satisfaction Index - Financial Mgmt

Admin Support Services (%) (Oe)

T

Franchise

Fund

80% 89% Exceeded 111% 92% 80%  

Operating expenses as a percentage of revenue-

-Financial Management Administrative Support

(%) (E)

T

Franchise

Fund

12% 4.72% Exceeded 161% 69% 12%  

Exceptional Accountability and Transparency

Number of material weaknesses closed

(significant management problems identified by

GAO, the IGs and/or other bureaus)(Oe)

DO 0 0 Met 100% -100% 1  

Number of completed audit products (Ot) SIGTARP B 3 Met 100% B 12 B B

Percent of recommendations implemented (Oe) SIGTARP B 100% Met 100% B 70% B B

Congressional requests for testimony completed

(Ot)

SIGTARP B 9 Met 100% B 4 B B

Percentage of investgations accepted by

prosecutors (Oe)

SIGTARP B 95% Exceeded 100% B 50% B B

Percentage of preliminary investigations that are

converted into full investigations (Oe)

SIGTARP B 50% Met 100% B 35% B B

Percentage of all cases that are joint agency/task

force investigations (Oe)

SIGTARP B 60% Exceeded 100% B 30% B B

Percentage of hotline complaints referred for

investigation or to OFS within 14 days of receipt (E)

SIGTARP B 77% Exceeded 100% B 60% B B

Number of completed audit products OIG 60 68 Exceeded 113% 106% 62  

Percent of statutory audits completed by the

required date (%)

OIG 100% 100% Met 100% 100% 100%  

Percentage of all cases closed during fiscal year

that were referred for criminal/civil prosecution or

Treasury Administrative action

OIG B 100% Met 100% B 70% B B

Percentage of all cases that were accepted by

prosecutors, referred for agency action, or closed

during fiscal year and were completed within 18

months of case initiation

OIG B 92% Met 100% B 70% B B

Percentage of audit products delivered when

promised to stakeholders

TIGTA 65% 81% Exceeded 125% 125% 65%  

Percentage of recommendations made that have

been implemented

TIGTA 83% 91% Exceeded 110% 107% 83%  

Percentage of results from investigative activities TIGTA 78% 83% Exceeded 106% 106% 79%  

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

142

Legend Symb

Favorable upward trend 

Favorable downward trend 

Unfavorable upward trend 

Unfavorable downward trend 

No change in trend, no effect 

No change in trend, favorable effect 

No change in trend, unfavorable effect 

Baseline B

Estimate *

Data does not include offset collections from the stimulus package +

Percent of target achieved is calculated as (Actual/Target) for measures where a rising trend is favorable (e.g. efficiency measures, customer

satisfaction measures). Percent of target achieved is calculated as [1 - {(Actual-Target)/Target}] for measures where a declining trend is

favorable (e.g. cost measures or measures related to losses). Using this latter formula, measures with an actual result of zero and positive trend

will show percent of target as 200 percent; more than double the target will produce a negative result.

^

Ap
Appe

di

143

STRAT

Effectively Managed U.S. Government Finances

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE: Cash Resources are Available to Operate th

OUTCOME: Revenue Collected When Due Through a Fair and Uniform Application of the

Financial Management Servi

Measure: Dollar amount of collections processed through Pay.Gov government-wide internet collections porta

($ billions) (Ot)

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 15 30 40 

Actual 29.5 37.94 48.7

Targetme?   

Definition: Pay.gov is a financial management transaction. It offers a suite of online electronic financial services that FA can use to meet their responsibilities

towards the public.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Pay.Gov has been developed to meet the FMS commitment to process collections electronically using Internet technologies. Pay.

Gov is a secure government-wide collection portal. The application is web-based allowing customers to access their accounts from any computer with

Internet access. The Pay.Gov application is comprised of four services: Collections (ACH and Credit Card), Forms, Billing/Notification, and Reporting.

Data Verification and Validation: Data isverified and validated on a monthly, quarterly, and yearly basis. Reporting is presented from the Federal Reserve Bank

of Cleveland, as well as through CA$H-Link and Fifth Third Bank (credit Card only). These numbers are cross checked to verify accuracy.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: FMS exceeded the anticipated target performance measure for fiscal year 2009. FMS fiscal year 2010 goal is $

billion.

Measure: Percentage collected electronically of total dollar amount of Federal government receipts (O

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 83 80 79 

Actual 79 79 

Target met?

Definition: Electronic collections data are retrieved from the CA$H-LINK system, which encompasses eight collection systems.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: This measure considers the percentage of government collections that are collected by electronic mechanisms (Electronic Federal

Tax Payment System, Plastic Card, FEDWIRE Deposit System, Automated Clearinghouse (ACH))compared to total government collections. The system

receives deposit and accounting information from local depositories and provides detailed accounting information to STAR, FMS’ central accounting and

reporting system.

Data Verification and Validation: The agencies that report collections are responsible for ensuring the deposit reports are correct. Financial institutions and

Federal agencies report deposits into the CA$H-LINK deposit reporting system using an Account Key which identifies the collection mechanism (lockbox,

which is non-electronic or ACH, electronic) through which the collection was made. FMS analysts gather deposit information from CA$H-LINK reports

and then report totals and percentages on a monthly Collections Summary Report and on the Total Government Collections Report. The Total Government

Collections Report totals all deposits divided into electronic/non-electronic mechanisms and tax and non-tax totals within the mechanisms.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: FMS exceeded the anticipated target performance measure for fiscal year 2009. FMS fiscal year 2010 goal is 81%

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

144

Measure: Unit cost to process a Federal revenue collection transaction ($) (

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 1.37 1.33 1.3 1.27

Actual 1.1 1.19 1.195

Target met?

Definition: The unit cost to process a revenue collection transaction.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The cost data is captured through an activity based costing process. The unit cost is the calculated ratio of total direct and indirect

costs over total governmentwide collection transactions.

Data Verification and Validation: At the end of each year actual costs for collections are accumlated and calculated for electronic and non-electronic

collections. In addition, the number of transactions is calculated for each collection system. This information is calculated in conjunction with and verified

by the program office, and is reviewed by senior level executives.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: In fiscal year 2009, total dollar collections decreased from $3.2 Trillion to $2.9 Trillion as a result businesses and

individuals impacted by the economic downturn. Both EFT and paper collections decreased; however, non-EFT collections decreased at a higher rate than

EFT collections, resulting in an overall increase in EFT collections. The primary driver for the increased EFT percentage was the significant decrease in

non-EFT tax receipts for fiscal year 2009. Non-EFT tax receipts collected through the lockbox network and Federal Tax Deposits decreased over 28% from

the prior fiscal year. Electronic tax collections only decreased 11%. The considerable decrease in non-EFT tax receipts caused the total EFT percentage

to post a sizeable increase. Therefore, FMS did not meet the fiscal year 2009 target because the unit cost to process collections increased by 30 cents.

FMS constantly strives to increase the amount of Federal government receipts collected electronically. Currently, FMS is working with the banking

community to promote electronic collections. In conjunction with the banking effort, FMS is also implementing marketing efforts which promote non-EFT

based collections migrating to EFTPS or Pay.gov. Finally, FMS has proposed 2 EFT initiatives to the Department. The first initiative would eliminate paper

coupons for employment taxes and transfer them to EFTPS in fiscal year 2011. The second initiative would require certain classes of non-tax collections

be paid electronically. Both of these proposals will provide significant support for increasing EFT. FMS will continue to look for ways to increase electronic

collections and move towards the common goal for an all electronic treasury. FMS fiscal year 2010 goal is $1.70.

Measure: Amount of delinquent debt collected per $1 spent ($) (E

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 36.4 36.5 40 

Actual 39.97 53.55 54.76 

Target met?

Definition: This measure shows the efficiency of the Debt Collection program. The costs include all debt collection activities and all funding sources.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Collection of data and reporting on the cost of the debt collection program are performed on an annual basis.

Data Verification and Validation: Data fromFMS’collection programsystemsisvalidated against data contained in FMS’ DebtManagement Accounting System

by program staff and verified by senior management. Program costs are derived from FMS’ accounting system and budget reports. The methodology and

the origin of the data are consistent from year to year.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: FMS has exceeded the target performance measure for fiscal year 2009. This performance measure will be calculated

on an annual basis by A/C Management’s, Finance Division. While costs may be evenly distributed throughout the fiscal year, a majority of the collections

occur during the second and third quarters (tax season) of the fiscal year; therefore, calculating this measure quarterly would result in an inaccurate

reflection of the return on investment of the debt collection program. In fiscal year 2010, FMS anticipates collecting $43.00 per $1 spent.

Ap
Appe

di

145

Measure: Amount of delinquent debt collected through all available tools ($ billions) (Ot

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 3.1 3.2 3.4 

Actual 3.34 3.76 4.41

Target met?

Definition: This measure provides information on the total amount collected, in billions, through debt collection tools operated by Debt Management

Services.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The process of collecting and reporting the debtcollection data is performed on a monthly basis. The methodology and the origin of

the data are consistent from month to month. The collection data is generated bythe program systems(TOP and DMSC) and isreported on a monthly basis.

The tools include: tax refund offset, administrative offset, private collection agencies, demand letters, and credit bureau reporting. FMS also collects debt

through the State debt program and tax levy.

Data Verification and Validation: The data from the program systems is validated against the data contained in the Debt Management Account System

(DMAS).

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall:FMS has exceeded the target performance measure for fiscalyear 2009. In fiscalyear 2010,FMS anticipatescollecting

$4.00 billion in delinquent debt.

Measure: Percentage of delinquent debt referred to FMS for collection compared to amount eligible for referral (

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 93 94 95 

Actual 95 100 9

Target met?

Definition: The measure tracks the percentage of the dollar volume of debt referred to the total dollar volume that is eligible for referral.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The process of collecting and reporting the debt collection data is performed on a monthly basis. The methodology and the origin

of the data are consistent from month to month. The referral data is contained in the program systems (TOP and DMSC). The referral data is loaded from

the files received from Federal Program Agencies (AFPAs).

Data Verification and Validation: The agencies are responsible for certifying the debt referrals to Treasury.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall:FMS has exceeded the target performance measure for fiscalyear 2009. In fiscalyear 2010,FMS istargeted to receive

97% of the delinquent debt eligible to be referred to FMS for collection. Over the past few years, FMS has exceeded the performance target due to highperforming agency outreach and education efforts and improvements made to debt collection systems.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

146

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bure

Measure: Amount of revenue collected per program dollar (E

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Taet Baselin

Acal 

Target met? N/A

Definition: Represents the amount of federal excise taxes collected divided by the amount of resources expended to collect the taxes.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Taxes collected are captured by the Federal Excise Tax database; expense data are maintained in Oracle Financials.

Data Verification and Validation: Both of these components represent information that is subject to annual audits and routine reconciliation.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: TTB surpassed its fiscal year 2009 target for this measure due to the increase in the federal excise tax (FET) rate on

tobacco products imposed under the Children’s Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009, passed by Congress and signed by the President

in February 2009. TTB collected an additional $6 billion in tobacco FET compared to fiscal year 2008 revenue collections. TTB expects that the return on

every dollar expended under its Collect the Revenue program will increase in fiscal year 2010, as that will be the first full year of collections under the new

tax rate.

Measure: Percent of voluntary compliance from large taxpayers in filing tax payments timely and accurately (in terms

of revenue) (Oe)

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Taet Basel

Acal 

Target met? N/A

Definition: The percentage of total revenue dollars from taxpayers who file over $50,000 in tax payments annually collected on or before the scheduled due

date (without notification of any delinquency from the National Revenue Center).

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The NRC maintains all tax return and payment information in the FET system.

Data Verification and Validation: The National Revenue Center (NRC) generates reports to identify late-filed returns and payments in the Fedearl Excise Tax

(FET) system.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: TTB surpassed its target for this measure, due in large part to educational efforts of our auditors and investigators on

industry premises, and as a result of our outreach efforts at TTB seminars, which offer guidance related to TTB filing and reporting requirementsfor alcohol

and tobacco federal excise taxpayers. TTB’s revised aggressive audit plan, and continued outreach efforts, will prove critical in ensuring the bureau meets

its fiscal year 2010 targeted performance level for voluntary compliance.

Ap
Appe

di

147

Internal Revenue Serv

Measure: Automated Collection System (ACS) Accuracy (%)

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 88 91 92 92

Actual 91 92.9 95.3

Target met?

Definition: Percent of taxpayers who receive the correct answer to their ACS question.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The Centralized Quality Review System (CQRS) monitors the calls as they are reviewed. Data is input to the Quality Review

Database for product review and reporting.

Data Verification and Validation: 1.CQRS management samples QRDbv2 records and validates that sample plans have been followed. 2.CQRS management

reviews QRDbv2 employee input DCIs for consistency and coding. 3.CQRS tracks and reviews rebuttals quarterly, and an annual sample of each product

line’s rebuttals are performed. 4.A rebuttal web site is used to share technical and coding issues in CQRS.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The IRS will leverage the process improvements made in prior years and use prior year accuracy statistics to better

focus managerial reviews.

Measure: Automated Underreporter Coverage (%) (

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 2.3 2.5 2.5 

Actual 2.4 2.5 2.5

Target met?

Definition: The sum of all individual returns closed, by SB/SE and W&I AUR divided by the total individual return filings for the prior calendar year. Effective:

10/2006

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: NUMERATOR: The sum of all individual returns closed will be extracted as follows: SB/SE AUR: AUR MISTLE Report W&I AUR:

AUR MISTLE Report DENOMINATOR: The source for the total individual return filings for the prior calendar year is the Office of Research Projections of

return filings as shown in IRS Document 6187 (Table 1A ). AUR MISTLE AUR Management Information System for Top Level Executives (MISTLE)

Data Verification and Validation: 1.AUR run controls are reviewed to see if the weekend processing has been completed and are accurate. 2.MISTLE reports

are reviewed with other AUR reports to see if processing has been completed and are accurate. 3.MISTLE reports are reviewed to see if information is

complete and accurate.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The IRS plans to leverage prior process improvements implemented to improve workload selection and productivity,

reducing the number of cases closed without taxpayer contact.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

148

Measure: Automated Underreporter (AUR) Efficien

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 1759 1932 1961 1855

Actual 1832 1956 1982

Target met?

Definition: The sum of all individual returns closed by AUR in SB/SE and W&I divided by the Total staff years expended in relation to those individual returns.

Effective: 10/2006

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Each case initiated in AUR resultsin a closure either in the pre-notice or notice phases. Allclosing actions are posted on the system

through the use of process codes that describe the reason& type of closure. Pre-notice closures (no taxpayer contact) include screenouts (discrepancy

accounted for on the return), transfers and referrals. Pre-notice closures are included in the Efficiency Measure numerator. Notice phase closures can be

posted at the CP2501, CP2000 or Statutory phases. Tax examiners evaluate taxpayer/practitioner responses to the notice and close cases using process

codes that denote the respondent’s full or partial agreement or disagreement, no change to the original tax liability, transfer or referral. Time: Examiners

complete Form 3081 to record time charged to each program code. The Form 3081 is input onto the WP&C system and a Resource Allocation Report

generated. Source: Management Information System for Top Level Executives (MISTLE).

Data Verification and Validation: Closures – 1.AUR run controls are reviewed to see if the weekend processing has been completed and are accurate.

2.MISTLE Reports are reviewed with other AUR reportsto see if processing has been completed and are accurate. 3.MISTLE reports are reviewed to see if

information is complete and accurate. Time - 1.Managers review Form 3081 prior to input to verify that time is appropriately charged. 2.WP&C monitored

to ensure appropriate time usage.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The IRS will leverage the process improvements implemented in fiscal year 2009 to improve workload selection and

productivity and reduce the number of cases closed with taxpayer contact.

Measure: Percent of BSM Projects within +/- Cost Variance

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Taet Basel

Acal 

Target met? N/A

Definition: The percent of projects that were within +/- 10% cost variance by release/sub-release of a Business Systems Modernization (BSM) funded

project’s initial, approved cost estimate versus current, approved cost estimate. Cost variances less than or equal to +/- 10% are categorized as being

within acceptable tolerance thresholds. Cost variances greater than +/- 10% of the variance are categorized as being outside of acceptable thresholds.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The data is collected from the approved and enacted Expenditure Plan and subsequent modifications resulting from changes to

project cost plans as approved via the BSM Governance Procedures and documented by the Resource Management Office.

Data Verification and Validation: The baseline datawill be reviewed/validated bythe ProgramPerformanceManagement (PPM) TeamandManager. To indicate

the baseline is valid and approved, the manager will send a notification that the data (Excel spreadsheets) may be placed in the PPM shared library. Before

the measure is reported, the PPM Team and Manager will review/ validate the report. The PPM Manager will provide the monthly report to the Deputy

Associate CIO for Business Integration for approval. Concurrence will be obtained from the Associate CIO for BSM. To indicate the report is validated and

approved, the manager will send a notification to store the report in the PPM shared library and report on Improvement Measure externally.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Development costs for several Account Management Services (AMS) releases exceeded initial estimates.

Ap
Appe

di

149

Measure: Percent of BSM Projects within +/- Schedule Varianc

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Taet Basel

Acal 

Target met? N/A

Definition: The percent of projects that were within +/- 10% schedule variance by release/sub-release of a BSM funded project’s initial, approved schedule

estimate versus current, approved schedule estimate. Schedule variances less than or equal to +/- 10% will be categorized as being within acceptable

tolerance thresholds. If schedule variances are greater than +/- 10%, the variance will be categorized as being outside of acceptable thresholds.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The data is collected at the time of Expenditure Plan creation and subsequent modifications resulting from changes to project

schedule plans as approved via the BSM Governance Procedures and documented by the Resource Management Office.

Data Verification and Validation: The baseline datawill be reviewed/validated bythe ProgramPerformanceManagement (PPM) TeamandManager. To indicate

the baseline is valid and approved, the manager will send a notification that the data (Excel spreadsheets) may be placed in the PPM shared library. Before

the measure is reported, the PPM Team and Manager will review/ validate the report. The PPM Manager will provide the monthly report to the Deputy

Associate CIO for Business Integration for approval. Concurrence will be obtained from the Associate CIO for BSM. To indicate the report is validated and

approved, the manager will send a notification to store the report in the PPM shared library and report on Improvement Measure externally.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Variance exceeding the +/- 10 percent threshold is subject to IRS change notification process review, Executive

Steering Committee approval and, if applicable, Modernization and Information Technology Services Enterprise Governance Committee approval. Schedule

variances exceeding +/- 10 percent or $1 million require Congressional notification. At each review juncture, management ensures that proposed project

changes as reported in the BSM expenditure plan are valid and that mitigation plans are in place when applicable.

Measure: Collection Coverage - Units (Oe

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 52 54 53 54.4

Actual 54 54 55.2

Target met?

Definition: The volume of collection work closed as compared to the volume of collection work available.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The data comes from the Collection Activity Report (CAR.)

Data Verification and Validation: 1. Changes to programming of Collection Activity Reports are generally made once a year. Those changes are tested and

verified by program analysts at headquarters before the first new report is released. Monthly spot checks are also done to verify they match the data sent

to the DataMart. 2. Accuracy of Automated Offer in Compromise database is validated by management checks in the operating units.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: A slight delayin the full implementation of BMFCCNIP caused the delayin processing the notices. Enterprise Collection

organizations have worked together throughout the year to identify and assign suitable inventory from the Queue to Campus Collection in order to mitigate

the notice disposition shortfall.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

150

Measure: Collection Efficiency - Units (

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 1650 1723 1835 1872

Actual 1677 1828 1926

Target met?

Definition: The total work disposed (sum of all modules) by the Automated Collection System and the Collection field function divided by the totalFTE realized

for those areas (Total work disposed = delinquent accounts, investigations, offer-in-compromise, automated substitution for return).

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The data comes from the Collection Activity Report (CAR) and the Integrated Financial System (IFS).

Data Verification and Validation: 1.Changes to programming of Collection Activity Reports are generally made once a year. Those changes are tested and

verified by program analysts at headquarters before the first new report is released. Monthly spot checks are also done to verify they match the data sent

to the DataMart. 2.Accuracy of Automated Offer in Compromise database is validated by management checks in the operating units.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: A large number of new-hires brought on in late fiscal year 2009 were not as productive as experienced caseworkers,

contributing to the shortfall. Notice dispositions were also down 1.0 million (6.5%) over last year. Factors in the notice decreases included: 1. Delays in

return delinquency notice processing earlier in the year resulted in a corresponding delay in notice closures. 2. A programming change in January 2009

accelerated notice accounts directly to revenue officers with related cases.

Measure: Conviction Efficiency Rate (cost per conviction) ($) (

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 339565 314008 317625 317100 3

Actual 328750 301788 315751 3

Target met?

Definition: The cost of CI’s program divided by the number of convictions. The number of convictions is the total number of cases with the following CIMIS

statuses: guilty plea, nolo contendere, judge guilty or jury guilty. The Criminal Investigation financial plan includes all appropriations and reimbursements

for the entire year. It is the fully loaded cost, including employees’ salaries, benefits, and vacation time, as well as facility costs (office space, heating,

cleaning, computers, security, etc.), and other overhead costs.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The final fiscalyear-end expenses as documented in IFS pluscorporate costs as determined bythe ChiefFinancial Officer divided by

the number of convictions reported for the year. The source: CI Management Information System (CIMIS) and theIntegrated Financial System (IFS)

Data Verification and Validation: Criminal Investigation management dictates that the lead agent assigned to the investigation and/or the agent’s manager(s)

input investigation data directly into CIMIS. Agents and management are to enter status updates into CIMIS within five calendar days of the triggering

event. Further, upper management directs first line managers to review individual work group CIMIS reports for accuracy each month to ensure any

system input errors or omissions are corrected within 30 days of the initial issuance of the monthly data tables. The CFO, Associate CFO for Internal

Financial Management, and Associate CFO Corporate Performance Budgeting ensure the functionality and accuracy of the Integrated Financial System-the

Service’s core accounting system of records. (Rev. 1-07)

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Higher than expected reimbursable amounts from asset forfeitures increased the overall CI financial plan, causing the

efficiency rate to exceed plan.

Ap
Appe

di

151

Measure: Conviction Rate (%) (Oe

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 92 92 92 

Actual 92 90.2 92.3

Target met?

Definition: The percent of adjudicated criminal cases that result in convictions. The conviction rate is defined as the total number of cases with CIMIS status

codes of guilty plea, nolo-contendere, judge guilty, or jury guilty divided by these status codes and nolle prosequi, judge dismissed and jury acquitted.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Cases are tracked in CIMIS with frequent updates to the status code.

Data Verification and Validation: Criminal Investigation management dictates that the lead agent assigned to the investigation and/or the agent’s manager(s)

input investigation data directlyinto CIMIS. Agents and management directs first line managersto review individual work group CIMIS reportsfor accuracy

each month to ensure any system input errors or omissions are corrected within 30 days of the initial issuance of the monthly data tables. (Rev. 1-07)

Standardized reports extract data related to the status codes sited above on a monthly basis. This calculation is performed monthly.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Tax-based and Legal Sourced Cases were the focus this year. While the number of convictions has not changed much

over the last three years, the number of dismissals increased. Reasons for dismissal include fugitive subjects, uncooperative subjects, and unavailability

of witnesses. Monitoring of performance and ensuring appropriate and consistent contact with Department of Justice and the U.S. Attorney’s Office

regarding prosecutorial priorities and quality investigations is planned.

Measure: Criminal Investigations Completed (Ot

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 3945 4000 4000 3900

Actual 4157 4269 4044

Target met?

Definition: The total number of subject criminal investigations completed during the fiscal year, including those that resulted in prosecution recommendations

to the Department of Justice as well as those discontinued due to a lack of prosecution potential.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Criminal Investigations Management Information System (CIMIS)

Data Verification and Validation: The guidance and direction given by upper management to first line managers is that the first line managers should review

their individual work group CIMIS data tables at the beginning of each month. The use of this procedure will assure that system input errors are corrected

no later than 30 days after the error is initially reported in the monthly CIMIS data tables. Additionally, national standard monthly reports and statistical

information are circulated among the senior staff and headquarter analysts for their review and use. If the published information on the official critical

measure appears to be out of line with what is normal or expected, headquarters analysts or senior staff request that the CI research staff verify that

the published and circulated information and/or report is accurate. If the published and circulated information is not accurate, then the CI research staff

corrects the error and issues revised data for the month.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Legal Source Investigations Initiated were 13.3% above last fiscal year and Tax-related Investigations increased

14.4%. The increased focus on legal and tax cases (which are more complex and have a higher cycle time) coupled with additional time spent on reducing

cases in the pipeline resulted in a lower number of Investigations Completed. For fiscal year 2010, increases in the number of investigations initiated in

fiscal year 2009 will contribute to achievement of planned Investigations.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

152

Measure: Customer Accuracy - Customer Accounts (Phones) (%) (

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 92 93.3 93.5 93.5

Actual 93.2 93.4 93.7

Target met?

Definition: The percentage of correct answers provided by a telephone assistor. The measure indicates how often customers receive the correct answer to

their account inquiry and/or had their case resolved correctly based upon all available information and Internal Revenue Manual required actions.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Quality reviewers on the Centralized Quality staff complete a data collection instrument as calls are reviewed. Data is input to the

Quality Review Database for product review and reporting.

Data Verification and Validation: Field 715 on the DCI is coded by the CQRS monitor as calls are reviewed. Data is input to the NQRS. The NQRS contains

several levels of validation that occur as part of the review process. The input records are validated requiring entries and combinations of entries based

upon the relationships inherent in different product lines or based upon an entry in a quality attribute. The national reviews conducted by CQRS site staff

on telephone product lines are sampled by local management and management officials at the CQRS site. In addition, every review is available on-line to

the site for verification purposes. Sites monitor their review records daily and have a small rebuttal period to contest any review.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Incremental improvement in performance is expected in fiscal year 2010 and beyond from continued improvement

efforts such as the development of new online tools for assistors to research taxpayer questions.

Measure: Customer Accuracy - Tax Law Phones (%) (

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 90 91 91 91

Actual 90.9 91.2 91.2

Target met?

Definition: The percentage of correct tax law answers provided by a telephone assistor. The measure indicates how often customers receive the correct

answer to their tax law inquiry based upon all available information and Internal Revenue Manual required actions.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Quality reviewers on the Centralized Quality staff complete a data collection instrument as calls are reviewed. Data is input to the

Quality Review Database for product review and reporting.

Data Verification and Validation: Field 715 on the DCI is coded by the CORS monitor as calls are reviewed. Data is input to the NQRS. The NQRS contains

several levels of validation that occur as part of the review process. The input records are validated requiring entries and combinations of entries based

upon the relationships inherent in different product lines or based upon an entry in a quality attribute. The national reviews conducted by CORS site staff

on telephone product lines are sampled by local management and management officials at the CORS site. In addition, every review is available on-line to

the site for verification purposes. Sites monitor their review records daily and have a small rebuttal period to contest any review.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The IRS will maintain Tax Law Accuracy above 90 % in fiscal year 2010. The type and complexity of tax law questions

changes each year as new and often complex tax laws are enacted.

Ap
Appe

di

153

Measure: Customer Contacts Resolved per Staff Year 

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 7477 7702 8000 10386

Actual 7414 7648 12634 

Target met?

Definition: The number of Customer Contacts resolved in relation to time expended based on staff usage. Customer Contacts Resolved are derived from all

telephone and paper inquiries received by Accounts Management, in which all required actions have been taken, and the taxpayer has been notified as

appropriate. The measure includes all self-service, Internet-based applications, such as the “Where’s My Refund?” service available on www.irs.gov.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Contacts resolved volumes are derived from internal telephone management systems and modernization project websites. Staff

year data is extracted from the weekly Work Planning & Control report and consolidated and included in the weekly resource usage report.

Data Verification and Validation: 1. Data is compiled from several sources (see individual components below). Each area is responsible for component

accuracy: Enterprise Telephone Data (ETD) Snapshot Report, Accounts Management Information Report (AMIR), Internet Refund/Fact of Filing, MIS

Reporting Tool, Electronic Tax Administration (ETA) Website, Work Planning & Control (WP&C) Report, Resource Allocation Report (RAR)

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Exceeded plan by more than 5% because of large increase in taxpayers self-service. Web Services increased 41%

to 118.7 million, Economic Stimulus Payment increased 71% to 58.1 million, Transcript Delivery System increased 48% to 3.2 million, and “Where’s My

Refund?” increased 21% to 54.3 million.

Measure: Customer Service Representative (CSR) Level of Service (%

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 82 82 82 

Actual 82 82.1 52

Target met?

Definition: The number of toll-free callers that either speak to a Customer Service Representative or receive automated informational message divided by

the total number of attempted calls.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Enterprise Telephone Database (ETD)

Data Verification and Validation: 1. Validation of monthly report data by W&I P&A staff. 2. The JOC validates CSR LOS data prior to publication of the weekly

official Snapshot report. Independent weekly CSR LOS source data is also gathered and validated by comparing data with the data used to produce the

offical Snapshot report.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The IRS will continue to properly staff toll-free sites in order to maintain the CSR Level of Service target.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

154

Measure: Examination Coverage - Business Corporations >$10 million(%) (O

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 7.3 8.2 6.6 5.

Actual 7.4 7.2 6.

Target met?

Definition: The number of Large and Mid-Size Business customer returns with assets greater than $10 million examined and closed during the current fiscal

year, divided by filing of the same type returns from the preceding calendar year.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The number of returns examined and closed during the Fiscal Year isfrom the Audit Information Management System (AIMS)closed

case database, accessed via A-CIS (an MS Access application). Filings are from Document 6186, which is issued by the Office of Research, Analysis and

Statistics.

Data Verification and Validation: 1. Examination Support & Processing (ESP) group (SBSE) validates data on AIMS (Detroit server) and makes necessary

correction. 2. LMSB picks closing codes and downloads data down to (A-CIS) Access database (Atlanta server). Charles Johnson (Plantation, FL) validates

data, uploadsto A-CIS. 3. (LMSB - Chicago) downloadsLMSB version of data and performs data validation before providing data to CPP. 4. The information

is Document 6186 is validated by the Office of Research, Analysis and Statistics before it is released.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Actual Large Business return closures totaled 13,582. Although this fell slightly short of planned closures of 13,725, it

exceeded prior year closures of 13,366. Actual return filings were 242,037, far surpassing estimated return filings of 237,315 used to compute the coverage

percentage. The increased return filings were primarily in the 1120 and 1120S categories. The drop in coverage was primarily caused by increased return

filings.

Measure: Examination Coverage - Individual (O

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target .9 1 1 

Actual 1 

Target met?

Definition: The sum of all individual returns closed by SB/SE, W&I, and LMSB (Field Examination and Correspondence Examination) divided by the total

individual return filings for the prior calendar year. In fiscal year 2005, Automated Underreported (AUR) cases were included as part of this measure. In

fiscal year 2006, AUR is covered as a separate measure.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The data comes from the Audit Information Management System (AIMS) closed case data base, the automated underreporter

Management Information System for Top Level Executives (MISTLE) reports and Research projections for individual return filings.

Data Verification and Validation: new measure - verification and validations will be supplied

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The IRS will continue to balance its audit coverage to emphasize reduction of the tax gap.

Ap
Appe

di

155

Measure: Examination Efficiency – Individual (1040 form) 

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 121 136 133 13

Actual 128 137 13

Target met?

Definition: The sum of all individual returns closed by SB/SE, W&I, and LMSB (Field Examination and Correspondence Examination) divided by the Total Full

Time Equivalents (FTE) expended in examining those individual returns. In fiscal year 2005, Automated Underreporter (AUR) cases were included as part

of this measure.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The data comes from the Audit Information Management System (AIMS) closed case data base, the automated underreporter

Management Information System for Top Level Executives (MISTLE) reports and Exams time reporting system and the Integrated Financial System.

Data Verification and Validation: Closures and AIMS Closures - 1.Case closing documents are reviewed for accuracy during sample reviews by managers and

quality reviewers. 2.AIMS data is validated prior to distribution. 3.Queries used to retrieve data are reviewed for thoroughness and accuracy. Frivolous

Filers (Non-AIMS Closures): 1. Cases are reviewed by managers for accuracy, timeliness and completeness at any point in the process. 2.Headquarters

Analyst reconciles WP&C data to Summary Report in order to validate data. SB/SE AUR: Closures – 1.Managerial review samples (phone calls, open and

closed cases). 2.Checks and balances exist in the AUR Control System to validate the input. 3.Sample physical review of cases closed on the AUR Control

System by Program Analysis System (“PAS”) for accuracy and appropriateness of actions.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Future plans include leverage National Research Program (NRP) data to improve return selection criteria, streamline

automation, emphasis on multi-year non-compliance and utilization of risk analyis/assessment in all business processes.

Measure: Examination Quality - Coordinated Industry (%) (O

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 92 97 96 

Actual 96 96 

Target met?

Definition: The average of the percentage of critical elements passed on Coordinated Industry cases reviewed.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The Large & Mid-Size Business (LMSB) Quality Measurement System (LQMS) database.

Data Verification and Validation: The Examination Teams make a reasonable effort to keep the CEMIS database accurate and timely with milestone completion

information. The LQMS Industry Review Team Managers regularly review the work being performed by the Reviewers. Each Review Group has two senior

Review Team Leaders (GS-14 employees) and they are actively involved in overseeing the reviews being conducted by their team members. The groups

have regularly scheduled meetings at which consistent determinations on issues is reviewed by the entire group of Reviewers. The team of Managers

and Analysts that prepare the quarterly reports are involved in reviewing the conclusions for mistakes and inconsistencies. The Coordinated Industry

LQMS Program Managers also performs reviews of the work processes in the Coordinated Industry LQMS Groups. The review of Specialty issues (such as

International, Engineering, Economist, etc.) is done by Specialists in those areas.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Workpapers did not adequately document audit techniques used and conclusions reached, and the reports did not

adequately document the issue, fact, law, arguments and conclusions in the Examination Report. In addition, the Administrative Procedures Documen

were missing or not signed by the Team Coordinator and/or the Team Manager. Continuing to focus on the importance of meeting the Auditing Standar

through direct feedback to field teams, partnering with the industries in Quality Improvement Efforts, Quality Quotes, Quarterly Reports and outreach

efforts.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

156

Measure: Examination Quality - Industry (%) (O

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 80 88 88 

Actual 85 87 

Target met?

Definition: The average of the percentage of critical quality attributes passed on Industry cases (corporations, S-corps (pass through corporations) and

partnerships with assets over $10 million) reviewed.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The Large & Mid-Size Business (LMSB) Quality Measurement System (LQMS) database.

Data Verification and Validation: There are controls and validity checks built into the ERCS database that ensure that is captures all closed cases. The LQMS

Industry Review Team Managers regularly review the work being performed by the Reviewers. Each Review Group has two senior Review Team Leaders

(GS-14 employees) and they are actively involved in overseeing the reviews being conducted by their team members. The groups have regularly scheduled

meetings at which consistent determinations on issuesisreviewed bythe entire group of Reviewers. The team of Managers and Analysts that prepare the

quarterlyreports are involved in reviewing the conclusionsfor mistakes and inconsistencies. The IndustryLQMS Program Managers also performsreviews

of the work processes in the Industry LQMS Groups.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The IRS continues to review work papers to ensure quality.

Measure: Field Collection National Quality Review Score 

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 84.2 86 86 

Actual 84.2 84 79

Target met?

Definition: The number of EQ quality attributes that are scored as “met” by an independent centralized review staff divided by the total attributes measured

(mets + not mets) in a sample of closed cases. All measured attributes have the same weight when calculating the score.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Monthly reports supplied from the EQMS database.

Data Verification and Validation: Cases are sent to the review sites to be reviewed. The cases are then reviewed and results are recorded into the CQMS

EQ database. A validity check is conducted by EQ review site management. Once the data has been validated the information is transmitted to the EQ

website.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The IRS will continue to improve case quality through improve job aids, conducting quarterly reviews and conducting

annual Quality Summits that focus on specific quality attributes in need of improvement.

Ap
Appe

di

157

Measure: Field Examination National Quality Review Score

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 85.9 87 87 87

Actual 85.9 85.9 86

Target met?

Definition: The score awarded to a reviewed Field Examination case by a Quality Reviewer using the Examination Quality Measurement System (EQMS)

quality standards.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Monthly reports supplied from the EQMS database.

Data Verification and Validation: A manual validation for inconsistencies in the data inut is completed at the end of each monthly cycle. Potential errors

are sent to the EQMS site managers for either verification or correction. Monthly consistency meetings are held with EQMS management, analyst and

reviewers to ensure consistent application of the quality ratings.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Actions underway to address quality weaknesses include: The National Quality Review Staff issued Quality Alerts

to the Field to address the decline in the Solicit Payment attribute; Income Toolkit training began in the final quarter of fiscal year 2009; Area case quality

improvement teams continue to work to address Area specific quality deficiencies; Area level quality targets will be reestablished in fiscal year 2010, with

specific emphasis on improvement within the weakest attributes.

Measure: HCTC Cost per Taxpayer Served (

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target Baseline 14.25 14.25 17 Bas

Actual 13.71 14.93 16.94 

Target met?

Definition: Costs associated with serving the taxpayers including program kit correspondence, registration and program participation. [IFS Monthly

Disbursement – (83% IT Cost + 60% Program Management Costs + Special Projects and Costs + (IRS Non-Labor Costs – Printing))] divided by Taxpayers

Served * 1.6 Where Taxpayers Served is the unique count of SSNs for primary candidates that are enrolled, and/or interact with the customer contact

center including correspondence and program kits, 1.6 is a factor attributed to the average number of taxpayers served per primary enrollee, to reflect

affected Qualified Family Members.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: IRS costs and exclusions: IFS disbursement report Accenture costs and exclusions: Monthly Work Request report. Taxpayers

served: Health Care Tax Credit Siebel system provides data extracts to the HCTC reporting database, and further queries and reports are created from

there.

Data Verification and Validation: 1.Health Care Tax Credit Program office reviews IFS disbursement, 2.Health Care Tax Credit PMO team reviews and checks

Contractor costs and exclusions 3.PMO reporting team verifies the source data against previous months of IFS data and Work Request data

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Baseline - In fiscal year 2010, HCTC will re-baseline targets, as fiscal year 2010 will represent the first full year of

operation under the expanded HCTC Program, estimated at nearly 400% of the fiscal year 2008 level.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

158

Measure: Number of Convictions (Oe

 Y 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 2260 2069 2135 2135

Actual 2019 2155 2144

Target met?

Definition: Convictions are the total number of cases with Criminal Investigation Management Information System (CIMIS) status codes of guilty plea, nolocontendere, judge guilty, or jury guilty.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Standardized reports extract data related to the status codes sited above on a monthly basis.

Data Verification and Validation: Cases are tracked in CIMIS with frequent updates to the status code.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Convictions from Legal Sourced Investigation, an area of increased focus, rose 2% over the prior year. Dismissals

lowered the conviction rates and contributed to an 11% drop in Illegal Tax Case convictions and a 5% drop in Narcotics case convictions. Monitoring of

performance and ensuring appropriate and consistent contact with Department of Justice and the U.S. Attorney’s Office regarding prosecutorial priorities

and quality investigations is planned.

Measure: Office Examination National Quality Review Score

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 88.2 89 90 90

Actual 88.2 89.4 90

Target met?

Definition: The score awarded to a reviewed Office Examination case by a Quality Reviewer using the Examination Quality Measurement System (EQMS)

quality standards.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Examination Quality Measurement System

Data Verification and Validation: A manual validation for inconsistencies in the data inut is completed at the end of each monthly cycle. Potential errors

are sent to the EQMS site managers for either verification or correction. Monthly consistency meetings are held with EQMS management, analyst and

reviewers to ensure consistent application of the quality ratings.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: For fiscal year 2010 and beyond, the IRS will use results to drive improvements in work products and help improve the

taxpayer’s experience.

Ap
Appe

di

159

Measure: Percent of Business Returns Processed Electronically

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 18.6 19.5 20.8 21.6

Actual 16.6 19.1 19.4

Target met?

Definition: The number of electronically filed business returns divided by the total business returns filed.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Work Planning and Control reports from W&I Submission Processing campuses.

Data Verification and Validation: 1. At each Submission Processing Center, managerial oversight is used to ensure that the balancing instructions for the

Balance Forward Listing are followed and that necessary adjustments are made. 2. Management Officials review Program Analysis Reports prior to its

release to Headquarters personnel. 3. Headquarters Personnel release preliminary data for peer and managerial review prior to releasing data for the

measure.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The IRS expects the percentage of business returns filed electronically to slowly increase as previous mandates take

effect.

Measure: Percent of Individual Returns Processed Electronically

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 55 57 61.8 64

Actual 54.1 57.1 57.6

Target met?

Definition: Number of electronically filed individual tax returns divided by the total individual returns filed.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Working Planning and Control reports from W&I Submission Processing campuses.

Data Verification and Validation: 1. At each Submission Processing Center, managerial oversight is used to ensure that the balancing instructions for the

Balance Forward Listing are followed and that necessary adjustments are made. 2. Management Officials review “II” Report prior to its release to

Headquarters personnel. 3. Headquarters Personnel release preliminary data for peer and managerial review prior to releasing data for the measure.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The E-file participation rate is projected to increase to 70.2 percent in fiscal year 2010 based on current experience,

historical growth, increased advertising, marketing, and expanded e-file programs and do not reflect gains from any mandates.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

160

Measure: Refund Timeliness - Individual (paper) (%) (

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 99.2 99.2 98.4 98.4

Actual 99.3 99.1 99.1

Target met?

Definition: Percentage of refunds from paper returns processed within 40 days.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Submission Processing Measures Analysis and Reporting Tool (SMART). Data is extracted from a Generalize Mainframe Framework

computer run that processes data input by the processing centers.

Data Verification and Validation: The calculation for Refund Timelinessis a ratio of untimelyIMF paper refundsin a sample compared against the total number

of IMF paper refunds reviewed in a sample. The result of the ratio is weighted against the entire volume of refund returns a center has processed on a

monthly basis. The monthly results are tabulated to determine the performance rating at the corporate and site level.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The IRS expectsits performance for refund timelinessto remain stable under the current processing system and within

resource constraints.

Measure: HCTC Sign-up Time (days) (O

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target Baseline 97 97 97 Bas

Actual 98.7 93.3 94

Target met?

Definition: The calculation of this measure is the median number of calendar days that elapse per registration from the date the Program Kit is mailed to the

date the first payment is received from the participant. This is calculated based on queries and reports from system data.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: 1.Dates captured in system during operations, 2.Data queried by Health Care Tax Credit Program Evaluation and Reporting team,

3.Measure calculated by Health Care Tax Credit Program Evaluation and Reporting team. Source: Siebel via Microsoft Systems Reporting.

Data Verification and Validation: 1.Data is reviewed by Health Care Tax Credit Program Evaluation and Reporting function and compared with previous

months, 2.Diagnostic reports will be available for further review

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Baseline - In fiscal year 2010, HCTC will rebaseline targets, as fiscal year 2010 will represent the first full year of

operation under the expanded HCTC Program, estimated at nearly 400% of the fiscal year 2008 level.

Ap
Appe

di

161

Measure: Taxpayer Self Assistance Rate 

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 45.7 48.6 51.5 64.7

Actual 46.8 49.5 66.8

Target met?

Definition: The percent of contacts that are resolved by automated self-assistance applications.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Enterprise Telephone Data (ETD) Snapshot Report, Accounts Management Information Report (AMIR), Internet Refund/Fact of

Filing Project Site, MIS Reporting Tool, Electronic Tax Administration (ETA) Website, Microsoft Excel Spreadsheet tracking (Kiosk Visits)

Data Verification and Validation: Automated Calls Answered + Web Services Completed Divided by: Assistor Calls Answered + Automated Calls Answered +

Web Services Completed + ElectronicInteractions + Customer Accounts Resolved (Paper) Taxpayer Assistance Centers Contact. This measure summarizes

the following self-service activities: telephone automated calls answered, and web services(IRFOF, Internet EIN, Disclosure Authoriztion, P-TIN)compared

to the volume of all interactions, including correspondence and amended returns, electronicinteractionssuch asfrom electronicinteractionssuch as ETLA,

& I-EAR and assistor calls answered.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The IRS expects performance to continue to increase after stimulus related contact are excluded as more taxpayers

choose to use automated applications to resolve issues and questions instead of more traditional methods such as contact with the IRS by telephone and

correspondence.

Measure: TEGE Determination Case Closures (

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 112400 118200 100600 94000 1

Actual 108462 109408 100050 

Target met?

Definition: Cases established and closed on the Employee Plans-Exempt Organizations Determination System (EDS) includes all types of tax exempt and

employee plan application cases.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Tax Exempt and Government Entities (TE/GE) Determination System (EDS) Table 2A

Data Verification and Validation: 1. Group managers review data entered on closing documents by determination specialists prior to approving the case for

closing. 2. Error registers/reports are generated for data not meeting system consistency checks

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The IRS continues to help pension plans, exempt organizations, and government entities comply with the laws.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

162

Measure: Timeliness of Critical Individual Filing Season Tax Products to the Public (%

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 92 85.2 86 

Actual 83 83.5 92.4

Target met?

Definition: This measure will assess the percentage of Critical Individual Filing Season (CIFS) tax products available to the public by the fifth workday in

January. CIFS tax products are those taxforms,schedules, instructions, publications, tax packages, and certain noticesrequired by a large number of filers

to prepare a complete and accurate individual income tax return by April 15th.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Publishing Services Data (PSD) System

Data Verification and Validation: Nightly processes provide analysts and management with reports concerning production status, missing data problems,

and past due situations.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The IRS expects to continue to timely deliver tax products to the public in fiscal year 2010.

Measure: Timeliness of Critical TE/GE and Business Tax Products to the Public (

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 85 79.6 86 

Actual 61.2 84 89.5

Target met?

Definition: The percentage of Critical Other Tax Products, paper and electronic, made available to the public timely. Critical Other Tax Products are business

tax products, Tax Exempt and Government Entities and miscellaneous tax products. This measure contains two components: (1) percentage of paper tax

products that meet the scheduled start to ship date within five business days of the actual start to ship date and (2) percentage of scheduled electronic

tax products that is available on the Internet within five business days of the ok-to-print date. The intent is to have the tax products available to the public

30 days before the form is required to be filed.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Publishing Services Data System (PSD)

Data Verification and Validation: Nightly processes provide analysts and management with reports concerning production status, missing data problems,

and past due situations.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The IRS expects to continue to timely deliver tax products to the public in fiscal year 2010.

Ap
Appe

di

163

OUTCOE:  Timely and Accurate Payments at the Lowest Possible 

Financial Management Servi

Measure: Percentage of paper check and Electronic Funds Transfer (EFT) payments made accurately and on time

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 100 100 100 10

Actual 100 100 10

Target met?

Definition: Accurately refers to the percentage of check and EFT payments that FMS makes which are not duplicated or double payments. On time means

that FMS releases checks to the U.S. Postal Service and EFT payments to the Federal Reserve Bank such that normal delivery by them results in timely

receipt by payees.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Accuracy data is captured through FMS’ Regional Financial Centers which submit statistics on duplicate payments and data for the

performance measure. The payments are balanced with paymentcertificationssubmitted to FMS byFederal Program Agencies. On time data on check and

EFT volumes are captured monthly in a report from FMS’ Production Reporting System.

Data Verification and Validation: Accuracy is ensured through payment processes and accounting systems that are subject to numerous internal controls

and audit reviews. RFC managers validate payment controls. Systems and accounting reports are used to independently validate payment accuracy and

identify the number of duplicate payments. RFCs balance the input to the PRS with a payment control file. The volume of checks released to the USPS

is verified against the volume of checks listed on Postal Form 3600. USPS timeliness is ensured through Form 3600, which contains the time and date of

release ofchecksfrom RFCsto the USPS.For EFT timelinessverification, the volume of paymentsreleased isverified against the volume of paymentslisted

on the transmission report which also states the time and date of transmission from an RFC to the Federal Reserve Bank.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: FMS has met its fiscal year 2009 performance goal. FMS expects the measure to stay at 100%.

Measure: Percentage of Treasury Payments and associated information made electronically (O

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 78 78 79 

Actual 77 78 

Target met?

Definition: The portion of the total volume of payments that is made electronically by FMS. Electronic payments include transfers through the automated

clearinghouse and wire transfer payments through the FEDWIRE system.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The volume of payments is tracked through FMS’ Production Reporting System. The amount and number of payments are also

maintained under accounting control.

Data Verification and Validation: Accounting controls provide verification that the number of payments, both checks and EFT, is accurately tracked and

reported. The number of inquires made against Federal check payments, whether disbursed by FMS or by other agencies, is separately tracked and

reported. Additionally, payment files are balanced with payment authorizations that are electronically certified and submitted to FMS by Federal program

agencies. The Federal Reserve Banks also validate the payment files.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: FMS has met its fiscal year 2009 performance goal and expects the measure to increase by one percent each year at

least through fiscal year 2012.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

164

Measure: Percentage of federal agency customers indicating an overall rating of satisfactory or better

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 81 81 85 

Actual 80 88 

Target met?

Definition: The percentage of customers who utilize our collections network who are at least satisfied with the process.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The survey is sent out via e-mail with a link to a specially designed website to complete the survey. Data is captured in the

website.

Data Verification and Validation: FMS’ Agency Relationship Management Division sends out a survey every year to all the agencies (approximately 100

CFO and non-CFO agencies) asking for their feedback on a number of things such as people, policies, products, etc. These agencies are asked to rate

these categories as very satisfied, satisfied, neutral, dissatisfied and very dissatisfied. The satisfied and very satisfied responses are added to give the

satisfaction measure.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: FMS exceeded the anticipated target performance measure for fiscal year 2009. FMS fiscal year 2010 goal is 88

Measure: Unit cost for Federal Government payments ($) 

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target .35 .39 .4 

Actual .37 .39 .39

Target met?

Definition: Unitcostcombines both paper and electronic payment mechanisms and includesthe aftermath processes(reconciliation and claims) for both types

of payment mechanisms.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The cost data is captured through an activity based costing process. The unit cost is the calculated ratio of cost per payment.

Data Verification and Validation: At the end of each fiscal year, actual costs for issuing payments are accumulated and calculated for checks and EFT

payments. Thisinformation iscalculated in conjunction with and verified bythe program office and isreviewed bysenior executives. Additional accounting

controls provide verification that the number of payments is accurately tracked and reported.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Final cost unit data will be available at the end of November 2009.

Ap
Appe

di

165

OUTCOME: Government Financing at the Lowest Possible Cost Over 

Bureau of the Public De

Measure: Cost per debt financing operation ($) (E)

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 133683 228409 263306 256336 1

Actual 148926 235172 220732 1

Target met?

Definition: This performance measure divides debt financing operations costs, determined by an established cost allocation methodology, by the number of

auctions and buybacks.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The number of debt financing operations is captured on-line at TreasuryDirect.gov. Costs are captured in BPD’s administrative

accounting system.

Data Verification and Validation: Analysts determine the number of debt financing operations from TreasuryDirect.gov. Senior management regularly reviews

the cost allocation methodology and the allocations are updated at least annually.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The final cost per debt financing operation for fiscal year 2009 is below the fiscal year 2009 target of $256,336, as a

result of an unanticipated 31 percent increase in the number of auctions in fiscal year 2009 held to meet government financing requirements. The increase

from fiscal year 2009 actual costs of $170,214 to the projected cost for fiscal year 2010 to $193,962 reflects an estimated decline in the number of auctions

anticipated, as well as increases for inflation and upgrades to the TAAPS system. The upgrades to TAAPS are planned to keep pace with changes in

technology that will ensure financing operations are conducted timely and with 100 percent accuracy.

Measure: Cost per federal funds investment transaction ($) (E)

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 90.15 72.33 75.55 69.11

Actual 62.64 68.53 64.98 

Target met?

Definition: This performance measure divides the federal funds investment costs, determined by an established cost allocation methodology, by the number

of issues, redemptions, and interest payments for more than 200 trust funds, as well as the Treasury managed funds.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The automated investment accounting system captures and reports transaction counts. Costs are captured in Public Debt’s

administrative accounting system.

Data Verification and Validation: Accountants review transaction reports for reasonableness and any unusual trends are investigated. Senior management

regularly reviews the cost allocation methodology and the allocations are updated at least annually.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The final cost per federal funds investment transaction for fiscal year 2009 is below the target of $69.11. Decreased

support charges, the addition of one new customer and a significant increase in volumes from an existing customer resulted in a large increase in

transactions. Due to inflationary cost increases, projected constant transaction volumes and a reduction in the number of systems used to support GAIS,

Public Debt established a target for fiscal year 2010 of $45.70.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

166

Measure: Percent of auction results released in Two minutes +/- 30 seconds (Oe

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 95 95 95 

Actual 100 99.1 10

Target met?

Definition: This measures the elapsed time from the auction close to the public release of the auction results. The annual percentage of auctions meeting the

release time target of 2 minutes plus or minus 30 seconds is calculated for the fiscal year.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: BPD’s automated auction processing systems

Data Verification and Validation: For each auction, analysts verify and validate the system time stamps that record the auction close and auction posting

times.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: In fiscal year 2009, the Bureau of the Public Debt achieved an auction release time performance of 100 percent,

exceeding the stated goal of 95 percent of timely releases. For the upcoming fiscal year, Public Debt will continue to focus on identifying and correcting

any auction system defects in order to ensure ongoing success with this performance metric.

Measure: Cost per TreasuryDirect assisted transaction ($) (E)

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 7.75 6.16 9.25 9.34

Actual 4.97 6.65 8.19

Target met?

Definition: This performance measure divides TreasuryDirect customer service transaction costs, determined by an established cost allocation methodology,

by the number of customer requests completed with assistance by a customer service representative.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: For customer service transactions received by mail and for some requests received by phone or internet, Public Debt (BPD) obtains

volumes from an automated tracking system. Simple phone and internet requests are manually counted. Costs are captured in BPD’s administrative

accounting system.

Data Verification and Validation: The accuracy of the system-generated volumes is verified twice a year by customer service staff performing manual counts.

Senior management regularly reviews the cost allocation methodology and the allocations are updated at least annually.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The final fiscalyear 2009 cost per TreasuryDirect assisted transaction is below the target of $9.34. The fiscalyear 2010

target is $8.57. Public Debt will continue to realign resources to handle a changing mixture of customer transactions that result from a growing number of

accounts and an expansion of services available in TreasuryDirect.

Ap
Appe

di

167

Measure: Cost per TreasuryDirect online transaction ($) (E)

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 2.99 2.96 4.34 4.34

Actual 3.06 3.24 4.34

Target met?

Definition: This performance measure divides TreasuryDirect online transaction costs, determined by an established cost allocation methodology, by the

number of TreasuryDirect online transactions.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Workload figures are captured from information stored in TreasuryDirect. Costs are captured in Public Debt’s administrative

accounting system.

Data Verification and Validation: Workload figures are electronically verified by the Treasury Direct system. Senior management regularly reviews the cost

allocation methodology and the allocations are updated at least annually.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The final fiscal year 2009 cost per TreasuryDirect online transaction exceeded the target of $4.34. Low interest

rates—0 percent for Series I Bonds and 0.7 percent for Series EE Bonds—have dampened customer demand, driving the number of online transactions

significantly below projections. At the same time, costs have increased. The TreasuryDirect system is being deployed in phases over the course of a few

years, with specific functionality provided in each release. As the system nears full functionality, some design and development costs have shifted from

assisted to online activities as more online features are available to customers. In addition, in fiscal year 2009 the Federal Reserve took on the task of

regression testing, causing costs to increase slightly. The fiscal year 2010 target is $5.69. Public Debt will continue to promote customer self-sufficiency in

TreasuryDirect—a 24/7 online account system that provides one-stop shopping, account management, and product information.

Measure: Number of Government Agency Investment Services control processes consolidated

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Taget Baselin

Acual 

Target met? N

Definition: Government Agency Investment Services (GAIS), one of the Bureau of Public Debt’s primary Lines of Business, is responsible for the accounting

of the Federal Investments, Special Purpose Securities, and Loans Receivable programs. In July 2005, Public Debt management announced a strategic

direction to reduce the number of systems used to support GAIS. Through systems reduction, Public Debt will streamline the diversity of technology

involved in supporting this business line. Additionally, this effort will allow Public Debt to consolidate and standardize the internal controls over processes

common to all GAIS programs. The control environment consists of 18 processes that will be transformed into 6 standardized processes. The processes

are funds management, investment accounting, standard reporting, customer interface, account maintenance, and enhanced reporting.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The Project Manager (PM) is responsible for tracking the status of the project using a project plan detailing all stages of the

System Development Life Cycle. This plan includes milestones that help to measure significant accomplishments. This information is routinely shared with

management of the program areas as part of an established and well-documented IT governance and change management process.

Data Verification and Validation: The Project Manager (PM) for the systems consolidation project is responsible for keeping management informed of the

project plan and implementation dates of the system consolidation effort. The PM coordinates with program areas on all system related efforts to ensure

the control environment is reduced with each system consolidation effort. With each milestone achieved in the systems consolidation project, there is a

corresponding standardization and reduction of controls in the GAIS program. For example, in fiscal year 2007 the loans receivable program consolidated

funds management, investment accounting, and standard reporting. Thisreduced the total processesfrom 18 to 15 with the ultimate goal of 6 standardized

processes by fiscal year 2012.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: During fiscal year 2009, the Bureau of the Public Debt went through a developmental period in which there was no

process reduction. Future plans for fiscal year 2010 include consolidating five common processes within the Special Purpose Securities program, leaving only

8 Government AgencyInvestment Services(GAIS) processesremaining. The control environment originallyconsisted of 18 processesthat will be transformed

into 6 standardized processes. Through systems reduction, Public Debt will streamline the diversity of technology involved in supporting this business line.

Additionally, this effort will allow Public Debt to consolidate and standardize the internal controls over processes common to all GAIS programs.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

168

Measure: Percentage of retail customer service transactions completed within 11 business days (Ot) [DIS

FY 2009

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 90 90 90 Discontinued Discont

Actual 98 99.43 99.86 

Target met? Y

Definition: The length of time to complete a customer service transaction is measured from the date each transaction is received to the date it is completed.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: For customer service transactions received by mail and for some requests received by phone or e-mail, Public Debt uses an

automated tracking system that measures the length of time it takes to complete the transactions. Simple phone and internet requests are manually

tracked.

Data Verification and Validation: The accuracy of system-generated data is crosschecked at least twice a year by customer service staff performing manual

counts.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: In fiscal year 2009, Public Debt met its target for completing 90 percent of time-sensitive retail customer service

transactions within 11 business days. Public Debt also culminated its long-term goal of completing 90 percent of those transactions within 10 business

days, one year ahead ofschedule. (The long-term goal was originally planned for fiscalyear 2010.) The culmination allows Public Debt to transition to a new

performance measure in fiscal year 2010 - to complete 86 percent of time-sensitive retail customer service transactions within 5 business days.

Measure: Percentage of Retail Customer Service Transactions Completed within 5 Business D

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Tat 

Acl 

Target met? N/A N

Definition: By fiscal year 2014, significantly improve the number of Retail customer service transactions completed within 5 business days. The length of time

to complete a customer service transaction is measured from the date each transaction is received to the date it is completed.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: For customer service transactions received by mail and for some requests received by phone or e-mail, Public Debt uses an

automated tracking system that measures the length of time it takes to complete the transactions. Simple phone and internet requests are manually

tracked.

Data Verification and Validation: The accuracy of system-generated data is cross-checked at least twice a year by customer service staff performing manual

counts.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: In fiscal year 2010, Public Debt will transition to a new performance measure for retail securities services. The fiscal

year 2010 measure is to complete 86 percent of time-sensitive retail customer service transactions within 5 business days. Public Debt will incrementally

increase the percentage of these transactions completed through fiscal year 2014. In fiscal year 2011 and fiscal year 2012, the measure will be to complete

87 percent of time-sensitive retail customer service transactions within 5 business days. The goal rises to 88 percent in fiscal year 2013 and fiscal year

2014. These goals will be achieved by continually streamlining work processes and increasing the volume of electronic business transactions.

Ap
Appe

di

169

OUTCOE:  Effective Cash Manage

Departmental Office

Measure: Variance between estimated and actual receipts (annual forecast)(%)(Oe)

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 5 5 

Actual 3.9 2.1 4.

Target met?

Definition: Percentage error measures the accuracy of the Mark receipt forecasts produced monthly by the Office of Fiscal Projections. It measures the

relative amount of error or bias in Office of Fiscal Projection receipt forecasts.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The Office of Fiscal Projections within the Office of the Fiscal Assistant Secretary compiles receipts data by major categories (i.e.,

withheld income taxes, individual taxes, FICA, corporate, customs deposits, estate and excise) as well as by types of collection mechanisms (electronic

and paper coupons). The Office of Fiscal Projections is also responsible for forecasting the daily tax receipts in order to manage the federal government’s

cash flow. Data on monthly and daily federal tax receipts of actual and forecasts are compiled by the office and are used to report on the United States’

monthly, weekly, and daily cash position in addition to determining the optimal financing for cash management.

Data Verification and Validation: The percentage error is computed by subtracting the forecast value of tax receipts from the actual (At -Ft), and dividing this

error of forecast by the actual value, and then multiplying it by 100. PEt = ((At - Ft)/At) *100 At is actual value of receipts at time t, and Ft is forecasted

value of receipts at time t. The average percentage error is more general measure that will be used to compare the relative error in the forecasts. This

measure adds up all the percentage errors at each point and divides them by the number of time point APE = |(?t=1TPEt)|/T where PEt is the percentage

error of forecasts in (1) and T is the total number of time point. The absolute value of the average percentage error will be used to measure the magnitude

of error or bias in the receipts forecasts.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The Office of Fiscal Projections creates forecasts of the Federal government’s daily cash flows used to make shortterm financing decisions and to manage the Treasury’s daily cash position, including the investment of excess cash balances. The metric variance between

estimated and actual receipts measures the accuracy of the office’s monthly forecast of budget receipts over the entire year. In fiscal year 2007, the Office

of Fiscal Projections continued to improve its receipt forecasts and exceeded its targeted variance level of 5 percent. In fiscal year 2008 and fiscal year

2009, the office will add new analytical functionalityto make additional improvements in receipt projections. Combining improved receipt projections with

more accurate projections of outlays and other cash flow components will allow Treasury to reach it’s primary goals of cash and debt management: (1)

lowestcost of borrowing over time; (2) adequate cash balancesto meetFederal obligations at all times; (3) investment of excesscash balancesto increase

the rate of return and lower even further the net cost of borrowing; and (4) efficient capital markets. In fiscal year 2008, the targeted variance level will

remain at 5 percent. In fiscal year 2009, the targeted variance level will be reduced to 4.5 percent.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

170

OUTCOE:  Accurate, Timely, Useful, Transparent and Accessible Financial Informa

Bureau of the Public De

Measure: Cost per summary debt accounting transaction ($) (E)

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 11.59 10.98 9.91 10.01 

Actual 10.96 9.29 9.11

Target met?

Definition: This performance measure divides summary debt accounting transaction costs, determined by an established cost allocation methodology, by the

number of summary debt accounting transactions.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Public Debt’s investment accounting systems capture and report transaction counts. Costs are captured in Public Debt’s

administrative accounting system.

Data Verification and Validation: Accountants review transactional activity reports for reasonableness and any unusual trends are investigated. Senior

management regularly reviews the cost allocation methodology and the allocations are updated at least annually.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The final cost per summary debt accounting transaction for fiscal year 2009 is below the target of $10.01. Due to

inflationary cost increases and constant transaction volumes, Public Debt established a target for fiscal year 2010 of $11.81. Public Debt will continue to

maintain and support strong accounting controls to ensure integrity of the operations and accuracy of the information provided to the public.

Departmental Office

Measure: Release Federal Government-wide financial statements on time (

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 1 1 

Actual Met Met Met

Target met?

Definition: This report is the audited consolidated financial report of the Federal Government required by the Government Management Reform Act.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Data are collected from the audited financial results of all federal agencies and is audited by GAO.

Data Verification and Validation:

Data Accuracy: Reasonable Report isreleased to the public with a release date thatcan be independentlyverified. The due date is established by OMB polic

The statutory deadline is March 31st.

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: OMB revised the accelerated December 15, 2009 deadline to February 16, 2010 and we are on target to meet the

revised deadline for the fiscal year 2009 Financial Report of the United States Government (FR). The statutory deadline for the FR is March 31, 2010.

+

Ap
Appe

di

171

Financial Management Servi

Measure: Percentage of Governmentwide accounting reports issued accurately (O

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 100 100 100 10

Actual 100 100 10

Target met?

Definition: All Governmentwide financial data that FMS publishes relating to U.S. Treasury cash-based accounting reports (i.e., the Daily Treasury Statement,

the Monthly Treasury Statement, and the Annual Combined Report) will be 100% accurate.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: A monthly tracking system reports on the various published statements and monitors errata as it pertains to this data.

Data Verification and Validation: There are no errata in any of the published governmentwide financial information.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: GWA will continue to issue reports with 100% accuracy.

Measure: Percentage of Governmentwide accounting reports issued timely (

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 100 100 100 10

Actual 100 100 10

Target met?

Definition: All Governmentwide financial data that FMS publishes relating to U.S. Treasury cash-based accounting reports (i.e., the Daily Treasury Statement,

the Monthly Treasury Statement, and the Annual Combined Report) will be on time 100% of the time.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: A monthly reporting system is used to track the release dates to the public of all of the various governmentwide statements.

Data Verification and Validation: Procedures are in place to validate that the statements are released on time to the public 100% of the time.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: GWA will continue to issue reports on time 100%.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

172

Measure: Unit Cost to Manage $1 Million Dollars of Cash Flow (

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target Baseline 10.69 11.72 12.38 

Actual 8.5 10.36 8.958

Target met?

Definition: This Unit Cost Measure assesses Government Wide Accounting’s (GWA’s) Cost to Manage Government Operations. The Government Operations

consists of total GWA costs which consist of all Directorates, Systems, Administrative Overhead, and major initiatives performed within GWA. On a

monthly basis the Cost-per-Million of Cash Flow managed by GWA is calculated.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The Total GWA Cost data is retrieved from the year ending Cost Accounting Report. The Operating Cash, which is rounded in

millions, is determined from the final DTS of each month for the fiscal year. The ratio of total costs to GWA per month over Deposits and Withdrawals

(Excluding Transfers) gives us the cost to manage $1 Million dollars of cash flow. This ratio is calculated for GWA alone to determine controllable costs,

and using Information Resources / TWAI and Management Overhead to determine the uncontrollable costs attributed to GWA.

Data Verification and Validation: At the beginning of each month, the actual operating cash of the United States in the form of Deposits and Withdrawals is

obtained from the Last Daily Treasury Statement (DTS) of the previous month. GWA total costs are broken down and retrieved from the Cost Accounting

Report that is prepared at the end of the fiscal year. This information is verified and excludes Financial Services. Additional data is retrieved from this

source and included in the report and is reviewed by senior executives.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The fiscal year TD cash flow for the US has increased by 39% from last year. Assuming linear growth in IR and

Overhead costs, our estimates for Unit Cost for fiscal year 2009 show a significant decrease from the original estimates.

Ap
Appe

di

173

Community Development Financial Institution F

Measure: Administrative costs per number of Bank Enterprise Award (BEA) Applications processed

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 1280 1455 1455 1455 Discont

Actual 1630 1950 3070

Target met?

Definition: The fixed and variable cost per application for Bank Enterprise Award (BEA) applications.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The Fund will analyze the cost of materials as well as staff time and contractor’s time to determine the total cost per application.

Data Verification and Validation: The Fund willconduct an analysis of the totalcost of processing a single BEA application. The analysis will include both fixed

and variable costs for the project.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The system to account for administrative costs was modified to provide more accurate estimates and it is noteworthy

that BEA has the lowest per application processing cost, $2,366, compared to the other Fund programs (which averaged about $3,200 per application

processed for CDFI, NACA and NMTC). Nevertheless, it is unfortunate that the target administrative cost for fiscal year 2009 did not reflect prior year cost

trends and was set to unrealistically low levels. This administrative efficiency measure is being phased out in fiscal year 2010.

Measure: Administrative costs per Financial Assistance (FA) application processe

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 5130 6920 6920 6920

Actual 8710 7180 7200

Target met?

Definition: The cost per application for Financial Assistance (FA) applications.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The Fund will analyze the cost of materials as well as staff time and contractor’s time to determine the total fixed and variable

cost per application.

Data Verification and Validation: The Fund will conduct an analysis of the total cost of processing a single FA application. The analysis will include both fixed

and variable costs for the project.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The system to account for administrative costs was modified to provide more accurate estimates, leading to a more

accurate measure of the administrative costs per application processed as compared to the initial target. This measure is being discontinued in fiscal year

2010.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

174

Measure: Administrative costs per number of Native American CDFI Assistance (NACA) applications process

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 10050 9090 9090 9090 Discont

Actual 8130 13510 10990

Target met?

Definition: The Fund will determine the total cost associated with Native American CDFI Assistance (NACA) applications based on fixed and variable costs.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The Fund will capture this information through budget documentation.

Data Verification and Validation: The Fund will determine the total cost of a single NACA application based on material costs as well as the amount staff and

contractor time per application.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The system to account for administrative costs was modified to provide more accurate estimates, leading to a more

accurate measure of the administrative costs per application processed as compared to the initial target. This measure is being discontinued in fiscal year

2010.

Measure: Administrative costs per number of New Markets Tax Credit (NMTC) applications processed ($) 

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 5390 4875 4875 4875 Discont

Actual 4360 5320 7400

Target met?

Definition: The cost per application for New Markets Tax Credit (NMTC) applications.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The Fund will analyze the cost of materials as well as staff time and contractor’s time to determine the total fixed and variable

cost per application.

Data Verification and Validation: The Fund will conduct an analysis of the total cost of processing a single NMTC application. The analysis will include both

fixed and variable costs for the project.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The system to account for administrative costs was modified to provide more accurate estimates, leading to a more

accurate measure of the administrative costs per application processed as compared to the initial target. This measure is being discontinued in fiscal year

2010.

Ap
Appe

di

175

Measure: Annual percentage increase in the total assets of Native CDFIs (%) 

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 33 33 15 

Actual 182 19 

Target met?

Definition: Measure the percent change in total assets that Native CDFIs report from one year to the next. The Fund will calculate: [Total Assets in Current

Year - Total Assets in Previous Year] / [Total Assets in Previous Year]

Indicator Type: Indicator

Data Capture and Source: The Native CDFIs financial data is captured through the annual Institution Level Report.

Data Verification and Validation: Native CDFIs report their total assets to the Fund in their Institution Level Report. The Fund verifies the total assets reported

against the organization’s submitted balance sheet. Organizations are contacted regarding any discrepancies in the data reported. The Fund compares the

total assets of CDFIs from year-to-year.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The capacity building efforts of NACA CDFIs have been increased, leading to an increased focus on Technical

Assistance. We will review background data in computing future targets and final measure data.

Measure: Commercial real-estate properties financed by EA program applicants that provide access to essenti

community products and services in underserved communities (Oe)

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Taget Baseline 285 285 Disco

Acual 301 

Target met? N

Definition: Number of commercial real-estate projects financed by BEA applicants.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Each BEA Program applicant is required to submit an application containing a Report of Transactions. The BEA Program Unit

administers the BEA application. All reports are submitted electronically and the data is stored in the Fund’s databases.

Data Verification and Validation: The data is self-reported by applicants during the application process.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The number of commercial real estate loans increased as BEA applicants sought to meet the increased demand for

property acquisition as the market contracted for other types of lending due to the credit crunch in financial markets. We will reevaluate background data

and compute new targets and final measure data.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

176

Measure: Community Development Entitites’(CDEs) annual investments in low-income communities ($ billions) (O

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 1.6 2.1 2.5 2.

Actual 2 2.5 3.

Target met?

Definition: Amount of investments in Low Income Communities that Community Development Entitites have made with capital raised through their New

Markets Tax Credits (NMTC)allocations. The Fund will report NMTC Qualified Low-Income Community Investments (QLICIs) that are supported by NMTC

Qualified Equity Investments (QEIs).

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The Fund will capture the data in the CDEs’ annual Institution Level and Transaction Level Reports.

Data Verification and Validation: CDEs will attract private sector equityin the form of QEIs. CDEs will have 12 monthsto invest these QEIsin QLICIs. The CDEs

will self-report QLICIs in their annual Transaction Level Report. The Fund uses these reports for research, reporting, and compliance. The Fund is confident

that CDEs will accurately report, as the consequence of misinformation may be recapture of the New Markets Tax Credits.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: CDEs have become increasingly focused on making investments in severely distressed communities. We will review

background data in computing future targets and final measure data.

Measure: Community Development Entities’ cumulative investments in low-income communities (Oe) ($billions

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 2 4 6 11

Actual 3.1 5.6 8.9

Target met?

Definition: Amount of cumulative investments in Low Income Communities that Community Development Entitites have made with capital raised through

their New Markets Tax Credits (NMTC)allocations in billions. The Fund will report NMTC Qualified Low-Income Community Investments (QLICIs) that are

supported by NMTC Qualified Equity Investments (QEIs).

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The Fund will capture the data in the CDEs’ annual Institution Level and Transaction Level Reports.

Data Verification and Validation: CDEs will attract private sector equityin the form of QEIs. CDEs will have 12 monthsto invest these QEIsin QLICIs. The CDEs

will self-report QLICIs in their annual Transaction Level Report. The Fund uses these reports for research, reporting, and compliance. The Fund is confident

that CDEs will accurately report, as the consequence of misinformation may be recapture of the New Markets Tax Credits.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: CDEs have become increasingly focused on making investments in severely distressed communities. We will review

background data in computing future targets and final measure data.

Ap
Appe

di

177

Measure: Dollars of private and non-CDFI Fund investments that CDFIs are able to leverage because of their CD

Financial Assistance ($ millions) (O

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 1100 861 750 635

Actual 1400 778 621

Target met?

Definition: This measure representsthe dollars of private and non-CDFI Fund investments that CDFIs are able to leverage because of their CDFIFund Financial

Assistance (FA) award. For CDFIs, leverage is defined as the one-to-one non-federal match (as required by the FA program), plus funds the CDFI is able to

leverage with CDFI Fund FA grant and equity dollars, plus dollars that the awardees’ borrowers leverage for projects. (Project leverage example - Of the

total financing needed for a housing development is $5 million and the awardee lends $1 million, while other investors lend the remaining $4 million, then

the $4 million is the project leverage).

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: FA award disbursements are made once CDFIs provide documentation showing that they have received or been committed

matching funds. Disbursements of FA are tracked by the Financial Manager and are used as the proxy for matching funds raised. The CDFI Program annual

Institution Level Report captures the leverage ratio for FA grants and equity dollars, as well as project level leverage.

Data Verification and Validation: CDFI awardees’ one-to-one match is equal to the amount disbursed to awardees. The FA grant and equity dollar leverage

ratio is taken from the awardees’ financial statements. (In most cases, the financial statements have been audited.) Project level leverage is reported by

the awardee and is not verifiable by the Fund.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: An increase in award funds distributed through the CDFI program led to an increase in private sector match in fiscal

year 2008 this measure above the target. Please note that this metriccannot be reported for 2010 because Congress has waived the matching requirement

for 2009 and 2010 due to the economic crisis. Thus a new metric needs to be finalized. The CDFI Fund has proposed a replacement metric of the number of

loans originated by CDFIs. This metric needs to be approved by OMB.

Measure: Increase in community development activities over prior year for allBEA program applicants ($ millions) 

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 81 100 180 20

Actual 318 227 23

Target met?

Definition: This measures the Bank Enterprise Award (BEA) applicants’ increase in qualified community development activites over prior year.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Each BEA Program applicant is required to submit an application containing a Report of Transactions. The BEA Program Unit

administers the BEA application. All reports are submitted electronically and the data is stored in the Fund’s databases.

Data Verification and Validation: The data is self-reported by applicants during the application process.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: There wasincrease in CDFIs who were BEA applicants, resulting in an increased emphasis on community development

outcomesin this pool of applicantscompared to past trends Thisled to an increase in this measure above lastyear’stargets. We will revaluate background

data and compute new targets and final measure data.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

178

Measure: Increase in the percentage of eligible areas served by a CDFI (

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 5 8 15 

Actual 13.5 19.5 17.8

Target met?

Definition:From 2000 census data, there are 24,795 geographictractsin the U.S. that are designated as elgible to be served by CDFIs. The CDFIFund captures

portfolio data at the specific project addresslevel from organizationsreceiving awards. By having thisinformation, itcan be determined how many elgibile

tracts CDFIs are serving in an annual reporting year.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Each awardee collects and tracts their portfolio data in its own management information system(s). It is then uploaded into the

CDFI Fund’s Community Investment Impact System (CIIS). This information is self-reported by the awardees.

Data Verification and Validation: The CDFIFundwillcollect portfolio data thru the annual transaction level reports. Data provided iscompared to the awardees’

actual financial statements for accuracy and “reasonableness” as defined by the CDFI Fund. Awardees are contacted regarding any discrepancies.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: An increase in award funds distributed through the CDFI program led to an increase in this measure relative to fiscal

year 2008. We will revaluate background data and compute new targets and final measure data.

Measure: Number of full-time equivalent jobs created or maintained in underserved communities by businesses

financed by CDFI Program Awardees 

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 29158 34009 28676 30000 

Actual 22329 35022 29539 

Target met?

Definition: Jobs maintained are jobs at the business at the time the loan or investment is made. Jobscreated are new jobscreated after the loan or investment

is made. Total jobs are derived from all business loans outstanding in the CDFI portfolio. Jobs created and maintained serve as an important indicator of

the economic vitality of underserved areas. Underserved communities are those that qualify as CDFI Program Target Markets (which include a specific

geography called an Investment Area or a specific community of people with demonstrated lack of access to credit, equity, or financial services called a

Low-Income Targeted Population or an Other Targeted Population).

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Each awardee and allocatee collects and tracks job data in its own management information system(s). The information is selfreported by awardees and allocatees. Many organizations track the number of jobs projected to be created. A smaller number collect annual information

on actual number of jobscreated. Some do notcollect the data and respond “don’t know.” Each CDFIFinancial Assistance awardee and NMTC Allocatee is

required to complete a Transaction Level Report. CDFI awardees report FTE data in the Institution Level Report or Transaction Level Report, while NMTC

Allocatees report FTE data in the Transaction Level Report only.

Data Verification and Validation: The Fund will collect FTE through the annual Institution Level and Transaction Level Reports. Data provided is compared

to the awardees’ and allocatees’ actual financial statements for accuracy and “reasonableness” as defined by the Fund. Awardees and allocatees are

contacted regarding any discrepancies.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Increasingly CDFIs are using Transactional Level Reporting to calculate jobs created or maintained through their

lending activities. Previous job reporting used only Institutional Level Report data, which accounts for the increase in jobs reported. We will revalue the

baseline in computing future targets and final measure data.

Ap
Appe

di

179

Measure: Number of small businesses located in underserved communities financed byBEA Program Applicant

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Taget Baseline 329 

Acual 375 

Target met? N

Definition: Number of loans provided to small businesses financed by BEA applicants.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Each BEA Program applicant is required to submit an application containing a Report of Transactions. The BEA Program Unit

administers the BEA application. All reports are submitted electronically and the data is stored in the Fund’s databases.

Data Verification and Validation: The data is self-reported by applicants during the application process.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The number of loans provided to small businesses in distressed areas by BEA applicants increased more than

anticipated as BEA applicants sought to meet the increase in demand as affordable housing lending contracted due to the credit crunch in financial

markets. We will revaluate background data and compute new targets and final measure data.

Measure: Percent of CDFIs that increased their total assets (cumulative) (

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 70 70 70 

Actual 84 82 

Target met?

Definition: Measure the # of CDFIs that reported an increase in total assets in the current year compared to the original year that was first reported to the

CDFI Fund.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: CDFIs financial data is captured through the annual Institutional Level Report.

Data Verification and Validation: CDFIs report their total assets to the CDFI Fund in their Institutional Level Report. The CDFI Fund verifies the total assets

reported against the organization’s submitted balace sheet. Organizations are contacted regarding any discrepancies in the data reported.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Most CDFIs have been able to increase their asset base, when compared to their initial year of reporting to the CIIS

database. We will review background data in computing new targets and final measure data.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

180

Measure: Percent of CDFIs that increased their total assets over the previous year (annual) (

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 69 70 70 7

Actual 82 74 

Target met?

Definition: Measure the # of CDFIs that reported an increase in total assets over the previous year.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The CDFIs financial data is captured through the annual Institution Level Report.

Data Verification and Validation: CDFIs report their total assets to the CDFI Fund in their Institutional Level Report. The CDFI Fund verifies the total assets

reported against the organization’s submitted balance sheet. Organizations are contacted regarding any discrepancies in the data reported. The CDFIFund

compares the total assets of CDFIs from year-to-year.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The financial crisis has likely had an impact on CDFI’s asset base. We will review background data and consider the

current financial situation in computing future targets and final measure data.

Measure: Percentage of eligible areas served by one or more CDFI (

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 1 1 3

Actual 1.6 4.2 3.4

Target met?

Definition: Same definition as the measure “CDFI - Increase in the pct. of eligible areas served”. The difference is that this measure focuses on one or more

CDFI serving the same geographic tract, which would indicate demand for CDFIs.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Each awardee collects and tracts their portfolio data in its own management information system(s). It is then uploaded into the

CDFI Fund’s Community Investment Impact System (CIIS). This information is self-reported by the awardees.

Data Verification and Validation: The CDFIFundwillcollect portfolio data thru the annual transaction level reports. Data provided iscompared to the awardees’

actual financial statements for accuracy and “reasonableness” as defined by the CDFI Fund. Awardees are contacted regarding any discrepancies.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: An increase in award funds distributed through the CDFI program led to an increase in this measure relative to fiscal

year 2008. We will revaluate background data and compute new targets and final measure data.

Ap
Appe

di

181

Measure: Percentage of loans and investments that went into severely distressed communities (Oe

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 66 66 66 

Actual 71 76 

Target met?

Definition: Porfolio data being reported by allocatees’ at the project level is used to determine the percentage of loans going into a distressed community.

A distressed community is composed of any of the following criteria: 1)Poverty > 30% 2)Median Income < 60% 3)Unemployment Rate 1.5x National

Average

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Each allocatee collects and tracts their portfolio data in its own management information system(s). It is then uploaded into the

CDFI Fund’s Community Investment Impact System (CIIS). This information is self-reported by the awardees.

Data Verification and Validation: The CDFI Fund will collect portfolio data thru annual transaction level reports. Data provided is compared to the awardees’

actual financial statements for accuracy and “reasonableness” as defined by the CDFI Fund. Awardees are contacted regarding any discrepancies.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: CDEs have become increasingly focused on providing loans in severely distressed communities. We will review

background data in computing future targets and final measure data.

Office of the Comptroller of the Currenc

Measure: Percentage of licensing applications and notices completed within established timeframes (Oe

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 95 95 95 

Actual 94 96 

Target met?

Definition: This measure reflects the extent to which OCC meets its established timeframes for reaching decisions on licensing applications and notices. The

OCC’s timely and effective approval of corporate applications and notices contributes to the nation’s economy by enabling national banks to engage in

corporate transactions and introduce new financial products and services.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The Chief Counsel’s office usesthe Corporate ActivityInformation System (CAIS) to identify applicationscompleted during the fiscal

year.For each filing, the actual decision date iscompared to the target action date to determine whether the application wascompleted within established

standards. The percentage is determined by comparing the number of licensing applications processed within the required timeframes to the total number

of licensing applications processed during the fiscal year. The processing time is the number of calendar days from the date of OCC receipt to the date of

OCC’s decision. The established processing timeframe depends on the application type and if the application qualifies for expedited processing.

Data Verification and Validation: The Licensing Department tracks processing of all applications and notices through the Corporate Activity Information

System (CAIS). The analyst who is assigned the application will verify the accuracy of the CAIS data as the application is processed. The senior analyst or

manager who approves the final decision also verifies the accuracy of the CAIS data.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: On Target. OCC plans to maintain its high level of timeliness in completing licensing applications and notices by hiring

qualified staff as vacancies arise; providing staff training through annual conferences and rotational assignments; revising licensing manuals to address

new circumstances and changed policies; and maintaining frequent communications between Headquarters office management and licensing analysts

and District Office staff.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

182

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bure

Measure: Percentage of importers identified by TTB as illegally operating without a Federal permit (%)(

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Taet Basel

Acal 

Target met? N/A

Definition: This measure estimates the rate of occurrences in which an individual or business imports alcohol or tobacco illegally (i.e., without a Federal

permit) in the United States by dividing the number of illicit importers, as determined by a comparison of data in U.S. Customs’ International Trade

Database System (ITDS) and TTB’s Integrated Revenue Information System (IRIS), by the total number of importers operating, as captured in ITDS. TTB

revised the methodology for this measure in September 2008, finding that the use of data from ITDS on active importers in a given reporting period better

reflectsthe level of illicit activityin the marketplace. The reported fiscalyear 2008 result of 22 percent in the TTB PAR was based on historic data retrieved

from ITDS, which was not completed until after the close of the Treasury performance reporting cycle.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Data is captured through the ITDS and compared with that of the NRC permit database. There are periodic statistical reports,

searches, and queries that are generated.

Data Verification and Validation: Supervisor reviews report developed based on the comparison of data from ITDS and IRIS, the TTB permit database.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: TTB completed its baseline of this measure in December 2008 after revising the methodology and language. TTB

retrieved historic data from ITDS after the close of the fiscal year to calculate a final result of 22 percent for fiscal year 2008. In fiscal year 2009, TTB

exceeded its goal in improving the rate of importer compliance by contacting all importers operating without a permit; all ceased their illegal operations.

TTB intends to employ this same method of issuing cease and desist letters in fiscal year 2010 to deter non-compliance.

Measure: Average number of days to process an original permit application at the National Revenue Center 

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Taet Basel

Acal 

Target met? N/A

Definition: The average number of days to process an original permit application (including those rejected) at the National Revenue Center (NRC). An

application is stamped when received and recorded when processed.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The NRC generates statistical reports, searches, and queries from the IRIS system.

Data Verification and Validation: The NRC maintains data in the Integrated Revenue Information System (IRIS) database that reflects the receipt date of the

application and the permit issue or close date. The IRIS system contains built-in data integrity controls to validate the information.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: TTB exceeded its performance target by improving business processes, effectively using temporary personnel, and

implementing permit database improvements. In fiscal year 2009, TTB streamlined the application review process through targeted field investigations

for permit approval. The National Revenue Center (NRC) also hired summer interns to perform clerical work, freeing specialists to focus on application

processing. TTB also deployed enhancements to the permit database, which enabled increased efficiency in processing. To meet the fiscal year 2010

performance target, TTB intends to implement the initial release of its electronic permit filing and processing system, Permits Online. TTB expectsthat the

new system will return significant improvements in processing time once it is fully deployed in fiscal year 2011.

Ap
Appe

di

183

Measure: National Revenue Center (NRC) customer satisfaction survey results (%)

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Taet Basel

Acal 

Target met? N/A

Definition: The NRC will conduct a customer survey to determine satisfaction levels among industry members applying for a permit or filing a claim with TTB.

The questions used in this survey will be standardized for each commodity.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Data is captured from clients through a survey mechanism. Results are posted to a detailed Excel spreadsheet. There are periodic

reports generated for management.

Data Verification and Validation: Supervisor reviews report developed summary data developed by National Revenue Center (NRC) staff.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: TTB surpassed its goal of sustaining a customer satisfaction rating of 85 percent on the processing of permits and

claims at the National Revenue Center (NRC) through management initiatives and IT enhancements. NRC managers incorporated performance measures

into employees’ mission commitment element on their annual evaluations.Further, the NRC hired 10 summer internsto perform clerical work, thus allowing

the specialists to concentrate on processing applications and customer service standards. Ongoing improvements to the bureau’s Integrated Revenue

Information System (IRIS), a central repository of tax and permit information, allowed specialists to be more proficient in processing applications and

requests. In fiscal year 2010, the NRC will again include this performance measure as a component of employees’ annual evaluation, and support the

development of additional enhancements to IRIS. The bureau also will implement the first release of the Permits Online e-filing system for original and

amended permit applications, which should increase customer satisfaction through improved turnaround times.

Measure: Percent of electronically filed Certificate of Label Approval applications (%) 

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 27 47 52 

Actual 38 51 

Target met?

Definition: Calculated by dividing the number of e-filed applications by the total Certificate of Label Approval applications (COLA) submissions (paper and

electronic). The quarterly results are cumulative.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Data is captured through the COLAs Online database system. There are periodic statistical reports, searches, and queries that are

generated.

Data Verification and Validation: Supervisor reviews canned report developed from COLAs Online database.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: TTB will continue its outreach efforts to educate industry members regarding the benefits of filing label applications

electronically versus on paper. COLAs Online cuts processing time in half in most cases, and saves the applicant in terms of cost of materials and mailing.

In fiscal year 2010, TTB will offer targeted one-on-one demonstrations to our largest paper filers. The bureau also will return to monthly publication of a

COLAs Online e-newsletter that provides system news and user tips, available by e-mail subscription on TTB.gov.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

184

Measure: Percentage of instances where the utilization of International Trade Database System (ITDS) result

identifying importers without permits as a percentage of total permits on file at TTB’s National Revenue Center (

[DISCOTINUED

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Taet 15 Discontinued Dis

Acal 

Target met? N/A N

Definition: The percentage of occurrences in which any individual or business importer has no known authorization (e.g., permit) to operate in the alcohol or

tobacco industries in the U.S. where instances in the ITDS fail to match those within the NRC’s integrated Revenue System (IRIS). The results reported

quarterly are cumulative findings for the year up through the reporting date.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Data is captured through the ITDS and compared with that of the NRC permit database. There are periodic statistical reports,

searches, and queries that are generated.

Data Verification and Validation: Supervisor reviews report developed from ITDS compared to National Revenue Center (NRC) permit database.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: TTB revised the methodologyfor this measure late in September 2008, finding that the use of data from ITDS on active

importers in a given reporting period, rather than year-to-date records on permitted importers in TTB’s database, better reflects the level of illicit activity

in the marketplace. This revision took place after the Treasury performance reporting cycle closed, but was included in the fiscal year 2008 bureau annual

performance report. TTB reported an actual result of 22 percent for fiscal year 2008 based on historic data retrieved from ITDS in November 2008. TTB

then completed its baseline for this measure in December 2008.

Ap
Appe

di

185

OUTCOE:  Free Trade and Invest

Departmental Office

Measure: Number of New Trade and Investment Negotiations Underway or Completed

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Taet Bas

Acal 

Target met? N/A

Definition: The number of international trade or investment agreements underway or completed during the period and the number of those that reflect

commitments to high standards, including new commitments by a foreign goverenment to open its financial services markets to U.S. providers. It

includes bilateral agreements such as Free Trade Agreements, Bilateral Investment treaties and multilateral undertaking (e.g., WTO) from which the U.S.

benefits.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: International Affairs staff and U.S. Trade Representative’s office reporting.

Data Verification and Validation: Based upon a count by International Affairs staff responsible for such negotiations and verifiable by reference to U.S. Trade

Representative.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Rising protectionist sentiment around the globe is impeding efforts to complete both bilateral and multilateral

negotiations that are underway. Progress towards Department goals could be slowed if weaker economic conditions exacerbate this protectionist trend.

The Department will make every effort to complete additional negotiations for 2010.

Measure: Number of Specific New Trade Actions Involving Treasury interagency Participation in order to e

implement, and enforce U.S. Trade Law and International Agreements

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Taet Basel

Acal 

Target met? N/A

Definition: Specific trade actions involving Treasury interagency participation under legislation, decision whether to initiate trade disputes, review of country

eligibility for preference programs, and review of specific trade petitions and recommendations (under perference programs, Section 301, CITA, Section

337, etc.)

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: International Affairs staff and U.S. Trade Representative’s (USTR) office, USTIC, and the Federal Register.

Data Verification and Validation: Based upon a count by International Affairs staff responsible for such negotiations and verifiable by reference to USTR,

Federal Register notices, USTIC notices, and other official websites.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Challenging economic conditions increased the number of new trade actions for 2009 beyond initial expectations. The

chances for similar economic conditions in 2010 are not likely; therefore the target for 2010 has been adjusted to 40.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

186

OUTCOE:  Prevented or Mitigated Financial and Economic Cr

Departmental Office

Measure: Changes that result from project engagement (Impact) (Oe

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Taet Baselin

Acal 

Target met? N/A

Definition: The extent to which a Technical Assistance project objective contributes to the achievement of the goal(s) described in the Terms of Reference

and addresses the country problem describe

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Generated by the Financial Technical Assistant Advisor who manage the project in the countries were technical assistant project

exist.

Data Verification and Validation: The data isverified bythe five contracting office representatives, the Associate Director of OTA and approved bythe director

of OTA.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The measure met the target for fiscal year 2009 for Impact. The measure exceeded the target for Traction by .1. This

was the first year for which data could be compared against the baseline. OTA collects and reports program measurement results on an annual basis. The

Target for 2010 is the same as has been reported in the past: Impact: 3.1; Traction 3.6.

Measure: Scope and intensity of engagement Traction (E

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Taet Baselin

Acal 

Target met? N/A

Definition: The degree to which a Technical Assistance project brings about changes in behavior among the counterparts and other country participants.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Generated by the Financial Technical Assistant Advisor who manage the project in the countries were technical assistant project

exist.

Data Verification and Validation: The data is verified and validated by the five contracting office representatives, the Associate Director of OTA and approved

by the Director of OTA.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The actual resultsfor fiscalyear 2008 were miscalculated and reported as 3.7 in the fiscalyear 2008 PAR. Recalculation

showed an actual result of 3.6. The actual result has consequently been revised in the performance management database and the target for fiscal year

2009 changed to 3.6.

Ap
Appe

di

187

Measure: Percentage of statutorily-mandated reports submitted on time

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Tat B

Acl 

Target met? N/A N

Definition: Timely submission ofstatutorily required reportsto the Congress: • §105 Report: bythe 10th of each month • Transaction Report: 2 business days

following a TARP transaction. • Tranche Report: 7 calendar days after each interval of $50b commitment of TARP funds is reached.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: OFS posts all statutorily-mandated reports submitted to the Congress on FinancialStability.gov.

Data Verification and Validation: The submission date for each report is posted alongside each report link on FinancialStability.gov.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: OFS will continue to publish and submit all reports to the Congress by statutorily-mandated deadlines.

Measure: Percentage of congressional correspondence responses drafted within 48 hours

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Tat 

Acl 

Target met? N/A N

Definition: This measure tracks the percentage of congressional correspondence letters sent to OFS that have a response letter drafted within 48 hours of

receipt.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Correspondence is logged in Main Treasury’s TACT system. OFS staff maintains a subsidiary tracking report in Excel to monitor

and calculate the response time.

Data Verification and Validation: The OFS team lead confirms all correspondence response times by reviewing TACT-generated and COO response emails to

verify dates and lapsed time.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: OFS will continue to improve our response time to all incoming Congressional correspondence.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

188

Measure: Percentage of customers satisfied with FinancialStability.g

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Tat 

Acl 

Target met? N/A N

Definition: This measure tracks the percentage of customers that are sufficiently satisfied with the information provided on our website as well as the ease

of navigating the site itself.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The survey presents randomly to 60% of the visitors who have viewed at least 2 pages of the web site. Respondents are asked

to evaluate a series of questions around the website’s content, functionality, look &feel, navigation, transparency, and performance. The results are

combined into a single customer satisfaction score.

Data Verification and Validation: ForeSee employs random sampling and seeks a response rate in excess of 8% to ensure data validity.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: In fiscal year 2010, OFS will use the user survey analysis provided by ForeSee Results Inc to identify opportunities for

implementing new layouts and/or functionality that will improve the experience of visitors to the FinancialStability.gov website.

Measure: Clean audit opinion on TARP financial statemen

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Tat 

Acl

Target met? N/A N

Definition: This measure identifies whether OFS receives a clean audit opinion from the GAO on its TARP financial statements.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The OFS Office of the Chief Financial Officer generates the TARP financial statements and will receive and communicate the audit

opinion from GAO.

Data Verification and Validation: TARP financial statements are subject to an audit conducted by GAO.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: OFS will continue to seek a clean audit opinion on its financial statements.

Ap
Appe

di

189

Measure: Percentage of SIGTAP and GAO oversight recommendations responded t

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Tat B

Acl 

Target met? N/A N

Definition: This measure tracks the percentage of SIGTARP and GAO oversight recommendations that were responded to within the required timeframes.

SIGTARP: 30 days. GAO: 60 days.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Upon completion of an audit, SIGTARP and GAO have the opportunity to issue recommendations to which OFS provides responses

detailing actions, if any, taken by Treasuryto remedythe SIGTARP and GAO recommendations. OFS staff inputs GAO recommendations and OFS responses

into Treasury’s Joint Management Enterprise System (JAMES). SIGTARP inputs SIGTARP recommendations into JAMES and OFS inputs the associated

responses.

Data Verification and Validation: The data in the periodic reports are compared to data entered into JAMES. The number of recommendations and their

associated statuses are tallied and analyzed by OFS analysts.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: OFS willcontinue working with the oversight bodiesto make sure that all recommendations are responded to efficiently

and effectively.

Measure: Average days to close aFOIA 

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Tat 

Acl 

Target met? N/A N

Definition: This measure tracks the average number of days it takes to close a FOIA case after it is received by OFS.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The OFS analysts log all incoming FOIA requests upon receipt and update the status of each case in the FOIA database.

Data Verification and Validation: OFS analysts ensure that OFS program office staff respond promptly and accurately to all FOIA cases and update the status

of each case in the FOIA database.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: OFS will continue to improve our response time to all incoming FOIA requests.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

190

Office of the Comptroller of the Currenc

Measure: Percent of national banks with composite CAMELS rating 1 or 2

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 90 90 90 

Actual 95 96 

Target met?

Definition: This measure reflects the overall condition of the national banking system at fiscal year-end. Bank regulatory agencies use the Uniform Financial

Institutions Rating System, CAMELS, to provide a general framework for assimilating and evaluating all significant financial, operational and compliance

factors inherent in a bank. Evaluations are mde on: Capital adequacy, Asset quality, Management, Earnings, Liquidity, and Sensitivity to Market Risk. The

rating scale is 1 through 5 where 1 is the highest rating granted.

Indicator Type: Indicator

Data Capture and Source: The Supervisory Information office identifies the current composite ratings from Examiner View (EV) and Supervisory Information

System (SIS) at fiscal year-end. The number of national banks at fiscal year-end is obtained from the Federal Reserve Board’s National Information Center

database. The percentage is determined by comparing the number of national banks with current composite CAMELS ratings of 1 or 2 to the total number

of national banks at fiscal year-end.

Data Verification and Validation: Either quarterly orsemi-annually, an independent reviewercompares a sample of Reports of Examination to the Examiner View

(EV) and Supervisory Information System (SIS) data to ensure the accuracy of the recorded composite ratings. Any discrepancies between the supporting

documentation and the systems data are reported to the respective Assistant Deputy Comptroller or Deputy Comptroller for corrective action.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Target was not met. This is primarily due to the difficult economic situation the entire financial industry is facing. OCC

will continue to closely monitor the performance of all our banks and when necessary, initiate formal and informal agreements to enhance our level of

supervision.

Measure: Percentage of national banks that are categorized as well capitalized (Oe

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 95 95 95 

Actual 99 99 

Target met?

Definition: This measure reflects whether the national banking system is well capitalized at fiscal year-end. The Federal Deposit Insurance Act established

a system of prompt corrective action (PCA) that classifies insured depository institutions into five categories (well capitalized; adequately capitalized;

undercapitalized, significantly undercapitalized; and critically undercapitalized) based on their relative capital levels. The purpose of PCA is to resolve the

problems of insured depository institutions at the least possible long-term cost to the deposit insurance fund.

Indicator Type: Indicator

Data Capture and Source: National banks file quarterly Reports of Condition and Income with the Federal Finance Institution Examination Council through

the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’s data processing center. The Supervisory Information office reviews the Reports of Condition and Income (i.e.,

call reports) for each quarter to identify national banks that meet all of the criteria for a well capitalized institution. The number of national banks at fiscal

year-end is obtained from the Federal Reserve Board’s National Information Center database. The percentage is determined by comparing the number of

national banks that meet all of the established criteria for being well capitalized to the total number of national banks at fiscal year-end.

Data Verification and Validation: The banks’ boards of directors attest to the accuracy of the reported data. The reliability of these quarterly reports is

evaluated by OCC examiners during bank examinations.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Target was not met. This is primarily due to the difficult economic situation the entire financial industry is facing. OCC

will continue to closely monitor the capital levels of all our banks and when necessary, initiate formal and informal agreements to enhance our level of

supervision.

Ap
Appe

di

191

Measure: Percentage of national banks with consumer compliance rating of 1 or 2 (Oe

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 94 94 94 

Actual 94 97 

Target met?

Definition: This measure reflects the national banking system’s compliance with consumer laws and regulations. Bank regulatory agencies use the Uniform

Financial Institutions Rating System, Interagency Consumer Compliance Rating, to provide a general framework for assimilating and evaluating significant

consumer compliance factors inherent in a bank. Each bank is assigned a consumer compliance rating based on an evaluation of its present compliance

with consumer protection and civil rights statutes and regulations, and the adequacy of its operating systems designed to ensure continuing compliance.

Ratings are on a scale of 1 through 5 in increasing order of supervisory concern.

Indicator Type: Indicator

Data Capture and Source: The Supervisory Information office identifies the number of banks with current consumer compliance ratings of 1 or 2 and the

total number of national banks from Examiner View (EV) and Supervisory Information System (SIS) subject to consumer compliance examinations at fiscal

year-end. The percentage is determined by comparing the number of national banks with current consumer compliance ratings of 1 or 2 to the total number

of national banks subject to consumer compliance examinations at fiscal year-end.

Data Verification and Validation: Consumer compliance ratings are assigned at the completion of each consumer compliance examination. These ratings are

entered into OCC’s management information systems, Examiner View (EV) and Supervisory Information System (SIS), by the banks’ Examiner-in-Charge

and reviewed and approved by the Supervisory Offices’ Assistant Deputy Comptroller (Mid-Size/Community banks) or Deputy Comptroller (Large banks).

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Target Exceeded. To sustain thislevel of achievement, the OCC willcontinue to execute its Bank Supervision Operating

Plan that encourages and ensures that national banks have strong compliance management functions in place. The OCC also will continue its recruiting of

entry-level examiners, aligning supervision resources to the areas of greatest risk, training the examiner staff, and enhancing examination guidance.

Measure: Rehabilitated national banks as a percentage of problem national banks one year ago (CAMEL 3,4, or 5) 

(Oe)

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 40 40 40 

Actual 46 52 

Target met?

Definition: This measure reflects the successful rehabilitation of problem national banks during the past twelve months. Problem banks can ultimately reach

a point where rehabilitation is no longer feasible. The OCC’s early identification of and intervention with problem banks can lead to successful remediation

of problem banks.

Indicator Type: Indicator

Data Capture and Source: The Supervisory Information office in OCC’s headquarters office uses Examiner View (EV) and the Supervisory Information System

(SIS) to identify and compare the composite CAMELS ratings for problem banks from twelve months prior to the current period composite CAMELS ratings

for the same banks. The percentage is determined bycomparing the number of national banksthat have upgraded composite CAMELS ratings of 1 or 2 from

composite CAMELS ratings of 3, 4 or 5 to the total number of national banks that had composite CAMELS ratings of 3, 4 or 5 twelve months ago.

Data Verification and Validation: Either quarterly orsemi-annually, an independent reviewercompares a sample of Reports of Examination to the Examiner View

(EV) and Supervisory Information System (SIS) data to ensure the accuracy of the recorded composite ratings. Any discrepancies between the supporting

documentation and the systems data are reported to the respective Assistant Deputy Comptroller or Deputy Comptroller for corrective action.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Target was not met. This is primarily due to the difficult economic situation the entire financial industry is facing.

OCC will continue to closely monitor the performance of all our problem national banks and when necessary, increase formal and informal agreements to

enhance our level of supervision.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

192

Measure: Total OCC costs relative to every $100,000 in bank assets regulated ($) (E

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target Baseline 9.55 9.55 9.22

Actual 8.84 8.89 8.39

Target met?

Definition: This measure reflects the efficiency of OCC operations while meeting the increasing supervisory demands of a growing and more complex national

banking system.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: OCC costs are those reported astotal program costs on the annual audited Statement of Net Cost. Banks assets are those reported

quarterly by national banks on their Reports of Condition and Income.

Data Verification and Validation: OCC’s financial statements and controls over the data are audited by an independent accountant each year. National banks

file quarterly Reports on Condition and Income with the FFIEC through the FDIC’s data processing center. The banks’ boards of directors attest to the

accuracy of the reported data. The reliability of these quarterly reports is evaluated by OCC examiners during bank examinations.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Target Exceeded. The OCC costs are those reported as total program costs on the annual audited Statement of Net

Cost. Bank assets are those reported quarterly by national banks on their Reports of Condition and Income. Total national bank assetsrepresent the growth

and complexity of the national banking system. This measure supportsthe OCC’s strategic goal of efficient use of agencyresources. The OCC will continue

to control its costs while ensuring the safety and soundness of the national banking system benefits all national bank customers.

Office of Thrift Supervisi

Measure: Percent of safety and soundness exams started as scheduled (Ot

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 90 90 90 

Actual 94 95 

Target met?

Definition: OTS examines savings associations every 12-18 months for safety and soundness, compliance and consumer protection laws. OTS performs

safety and soundness examinations of its regulated savings associations consistent with the requirements in the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

Improvement Act of 1991 (FDICIA) as amended by the Riegle Community Development and Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994. When safety and

soundness or compliance issues are identified during its risk-focused examinations, OTS acts promptly to ensure association management and directors

institute corrective actions to address supervisory concerns. OTS staff often meets with the savings association’s board of directors after delivery of the

Report of Examination to discuss findings and recommendations.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: When a savings association is examined, OTS staff enters into the Examination Data System the examination type, examination

beginning and completion dates, report of examination mail date, and CAMELS or equivalent ratings. The percentage success rate for this measure is

calculated by dividing the number of examinations that were started by the number of examinations that were scheduled to be started during the review

period.

Data Verification and Validation: Data regarding safety and soundness examinations started as scheduled are available from the Examination Data System.

The System reports assist in scheduling examinations and monitoring past performance. When necessary, management determines whystandards are not

being met and will initiate steps to improve performance.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The fiscalyear 2010 Performance Budget describesthe goals,strategies, and prioritiesthatwill guide OTS’s operations.

The fiscal year 2010 budget enables OTS to continue tailoring supervisory examinations to the risk profile of the institutions, while effectively allocating

resources to oversee and assess the safety and soundness and consumer compliance record of the thrift industry.

Ap
Appe

di

193

Measure: Percent of thrifts that are well capitalized (Oe

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 95 95 95 

Actual 99.9 99 98

Target met?

Definition: Capital absorbs losses, promotes public confidence and provides protection to depositors and the FDIC insurance funds. It provides a financial

cushion that can allow a savings association to continue operating during periods of loss or other adverse conditions. The Federal Deposit Insurance Act

established a system of prompt corrective action (PCA) that classifies insured depository institutions into five categories (well-capitalized; adequately

capitalized; undercapitalized, significantly undercapitalized; and critically undercapitalized) based on their relative capital levels. The purpose of PCA is to

resolve the problems of insured depository institutions at the least possible long-term cost to the deposit insurance fund.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: PCA ratings are stored in the Examination Data System and can also be found in the Thrift Overview Report and off-site financial

monitoring reports. OTS calculates this measure by dividing the number of savings associations that are well capitalized by the total number of OTSregulated institutions.

Data Verification and Validation: The Assistant Managing Director, Examinations and Supervision – Operations monitors and validates the capital measures.

Quarterly press releases provide capital measures to the public.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The fiscalyear 2010 Performance Budget describesthe goals,strategies, and prioritiesthatwill guide OTS’s operations.

The fiscal year 2010 budget enables OTS to continue tailoring supervisory examinations to the risk profile of the institutions, while effectively allocating

resources to oversee and assess the safety and soundness and consumer compliance record of the thrift industry.

Measure: Percent of thrifts with a compliance examination ratings of 1 or 2 (Oe

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 90 90 90 

Actual 93 97 95

Target met?

Definition: A uniform, interagency compliance rating system was first approved by the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC) in 1980. The

FFIEC rating system was designed to reflect, in a comprehensive and uniform fashion, the nature and extent of an association’s compliance with consumer

protection statutes, regulations and requirements. The Compliance Rating System is based upon a scale of 1 through 5 in increasing order of supervisory

concern. OTS began to combine safety and soundness and compliance examinations in 2002 to attain exam efficiencies and to improve risk assessment.

Using comprehensive exam procedures,compliance with consumer protection lawsisreviewed at more frequent intervals, which hasimproved the quality

of the examination process.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Compliance examination ratings are stored in the Examination Data System. OTS calculates this measure by dividing the number

of OTS-regulated savings associations that received a compliance examination rating of 1 or 2 on their most recent examination by the total number of

OTS-regulated savings associations that have been assigned a compliance examination rating.

Data Verification and Validation: Summary and detail reporting ofcompliance ratings are available online through the Examination Data System. The Assistant

Managing Director, Examinations and Supervision – Operations monitors the status of compliance exam ratings.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The fiscalyear 2010 Performance Budget describesthe goals,strategies, and prioritiesthatwill guide OTS’s operations.

The fiscal year 2010 budget enables OTS to continue tailoring supervisory examinations to the risk profile of the institutions, while effectively allocating

resources to oversee and assess the safety and soundness and consumer compliance record of the thrift industry.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

194

Measure: Percent of thrifts with composite CAMELS ratings of 1 or 2

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 90 90 90 

Actual 93 93 

Target met?

Definition: On December 9, 1996, the FFIEC adopted the CAMELS rating system as the internal rating system to be used by the Federal and State regulators

for assessing the safety and soundness of financial institutions on a uniform basis. The CAMELS rating system puts increased emphasis on the quality of

risk management practices. “CAMELS” stands for Capital adequacy, Asset quality, Management, Earnings, Liquidity and Sensitivity to market risk. OTS

assigns a composite CAMELS rating to savings associations at each examination and may adjust the rating between examinations if the association’s

overall condition has changed. New savings associations are typically not assigned a composite CAMELS rating until the first examination. OTS adjusts

the level of supervisory resources devoted to an association based on the composite rating. The CAMELS rating is based upon a scale of 1 through 5 in

increasing order of supervisory concern.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Composite CAMELS ratings are stored in and retrieved from the online Examination Data System. OTS calculates this measure by

dividing the number of savings associations having a composite CAMELS rating of 1 or 2 by the total number of OTS-regulated savings associations that

have been assigned a composite CAMELS rating.

Data Verification and Validation: Summary and detail reporting of CAMELS ratings are available online through the Examination Data System and are provided

to each association at the conclusion of an exam. The composite rating is used semi-annuallyin the assessment process. The Assistant Managing Director,

Examinations and Supervision – Operations continuously monitors the status of exam ratings. Quarterly press releases provide a summary of the thrift

industry’s CAMELS ratings to the public.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Percent of thrifts with COMPOSITE ratings of “1” or “2,”is six percent short of the fiscal year 2009 performance

goal– 84% compared to the goal of 90%. The target will not be met due to the challenging economic environment, a housing market downturn, rising

unemployment, and lower real estate values. As a result, the banks are reporting increases in troubled assets, delinquencies, charge-offs, and reserves,

which have adversely impacted earnings and return on equity. Although we did not meet this performance measure in fiscal year 2009, the target will

remain the same for fiscal year 2010. We expect to meet this target with the industry’s improvement in earnings, asset quality, delinquencies, and chargeoffs.

Ap
Appe

di

195

Measure: Total OTS costs relative to every $100,000 in savings association assets regulated ($) (

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target Baseline 14.33 15.08 23.

Actual 13.46 13.9 15.1 

Target met?

Definition: Beginning in fiscal year 2006, OTS included a performance measure that reflects the efficiency of its operations while meeting the increasing

supervisory demands of a growing and more complex thrift industry. This measure supports OTS’s ongoing efforts to efficiently use agency resources. The

efficiency measure is impacted by the relative size of the savings associations regulated. As of June 30, 2006, 63% of all savings associations have total

assets of less than $250 million and are generally community-based organizations that provide retail financial services in their local markets. In addition,

the measure does not include over $7 trillion in assets of holding company enterprises regulated by OTS.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The OTS expenses published in OTS’s annual audited financial statement are used in this calculation. If the performance measure

calculation is provided before the audited financial statement is available, the estimated expenses are derived from OTS’s Budget Variance System. The

OTS regulated assets are published in the OTS quarterly press release of thrift industry financial highlights and are derived from the institutions’ quarterly

Thrift Financial Reports. The measure is calculated by dividing total fiscal year expenses by total thrift assets.

Data Verification and Validation: OTS expenses are verified during the annual CFO audit and reflect those published in the OTS annual audited financial

statements. The industry’s assets are reported by OTS’s regulated institutions in the quarterly Thrift Financial Report, edited and verified by OTS staff,

and then published in the OTS quarterly press release and available to the public on the OTS Internet site. OTS allows amendments from the industry for

six months after the filing date.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The fiscalyear 2010 Performance Budget describesthe goals,strategies, and prioritiesthatwill guide OTS’s operations.

The fiscal year 2010 budget enables OTS to continue tailoring supervisory examinations to the risk profile of the institutions, while effectively allocating

resources to oversee and assess the safety and soundness and consumer compliance record of the thrift industry.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

196

OUTCOME: Decreased Gap in Global Standards of Li

Departmental Office

Measure: Improve International Monetary Fund (IMF) effectiveness and quality through periodic review

programs (%)(Oe) [DISCNTINUE

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 90 90 90 

Actual 100 100 

Target met?

Definition: This measure tracks efforts byInternational Affairs(IA)staff to monitor quality of IMFcountry programs and ensure the application of appropriately

high standards. IA staff endeavors to review each country program and provide a synopsis, analysis, and recommendation for action at least one week

before each program is voted on by the IMF Board. The measure tracks the percentage of times the staff review is completed in a timely manner (at least

one week before Board action) to allow for alterations in language if deemed necessary. Note: IA has modified this measure beginning in fiscal year 2010

such that the staff review must be completed prior to the IMF Board date rather than one week in advance (see below).

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: International Affairs staff tracks and accounts for actions undertaken during the reporting period.

Data Verification and Validation: Publicly available accounts of meetings (press, etc.), communiqués issued following multilateral or bilateral meetings.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Semi-Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The ongoing international economic and financial crisis will continue to result in significant IMF program activity

for emerging market and developing countries. Normally, IMF program documents are distributed to the Executive Board at least two weeks in advance

of the Board date. In fiscal year 2009, however, the IMF regularly activated “emergency procedures” to facilitate rapid IMF Board approval of country

lending programs (i.e., Board discussion 2-3 days after program documents are circulated by the IMF). The shortened review period in many cases made

it impossible for IA staff to complete the staff review of the country program one week before the Board date. The Office of International Affairs will

continue to closely monitor IMF program activities and conduct thorough reviews of IMF country programs in a timely fashion in advance of IMF Board

discussions.

Measure: Percentage of grant and loan proposals containing satisfactory frameworks for results measurement (%) (Oe

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 90 90 90 

Actual 88 92 

Target met?

Definition: The percentage of grant and loan project proposalsthatcontain a satisfactoryframeworkformeasuring project results(such as outcome indicators,

quantifiable and time-bound targets, etc.) This information is measured on an annual basis.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: MDB monthly operational report, special requests to MDBs for loan and grant approvals, MDB annual reports and U.S. voting

positions

Data Verification and Validation: Data provided by the MDB is compared with Treasury MDB Office vote history database and internal supporting

memoranda.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Semi-Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Results measurement for grant and loan proposals at the MDBs remains a challenge. Long-term Millennium

Development Goals exist, but short-term measures of progress against these goals are weak or non-existent. Greater transparency and accountability at

the MDBs has permitted a somewhatclearer insight into theircontribution to growth and alleviation of poverty, butstronger interim measures are needed.

The Department will continue to closely monitor MDB financing programs.

Ap
Appe

di

197

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE: Trust and Confidence in U.S. Curren

OUTCOME: Commerce Enabled Through Safe, Secure U.S. Notes and C

Bureau of Engraving and Print

Measure: Manufacturing costs for currency (dollar costs per thousand notes produced) ($) (E)

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 28.5 32.5 33 

Actual 27.49 28.71 29.47 

Target met?

Definition: An indicator of currency manufacturing efficiency and effectiveness of program management. This standard is developed annually based on the

past year’s performance, contracted price factors, and anticipated productivity improvements. Actual performance comparison against the standard

depends on BEP’s ability to meet annual spoilage, efficiency, and capacity utilization goals established for this product line.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Cost data is collected through BEP’s accrual-based cost accounting system.

Data Verification and Validation: BEP’s accrual-based cost accounting system is audited annually as part of the financial statement audit.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: In 2009 BEP was able to exceed its target for cost of currency for the fifth consecutive year despite a change in the

currency production program to deliver a different amount and mix of currency notes due to changes in the demand for currency. In 2010, BEP will produce

and deliver the Federal Reserve order while continuing to monitor design and overhead costs related to the manufacture of currency to ensure the most

efficient production and distribution of future denomination.

Measure: Maintain SO Certification (

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 1 1 

Acual Met 

Target met? N

Definition: The effectiveness of the manufacturing program is also demonstrated by the attainment of ISO 9001 certification. ISO is an internationally

recognized quality assurance programaimed at promoting the adoption of amanagementsystemthat establishes a processthat governsthe transformation

of inputs into outputs to meet customer requirements. Components of the Bureau’s ISO certified system include elements of the accountability activity in

that the identification and traceability of product tracking procedures are tested for consistency and reliability.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: ISO compliance is verified by periodic audits of the Bureau’s quality management system by an independent ISO designated firm.

Periodically the International Organization for Standardization updates the quality standards, thereby, requiring organizations already ISO certified to

upgrade their quality management systems in order to maintain certification.

Data Verification and Validation: Certification is achieved based on a successfulcompliance audit by an independent firmunder the auspices of the International

Organization for Standardization.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Certification standards are updated by ISO and ISO registered organizations must implement the revised standards

to maintain ISO certification. The BEP was initially certified under 1996 standards which were subsequently revised. In 2010, BEP will work towards

incorporating new revisions in its quality management system to maintain certification.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

198

Measure: Currency Production (Ot

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 8.2 9.1 7.7 

Actual 8.2 9.1 7.

Target met?

Definition: A measure of BEP’s ability to meet customer order delivery schedule. The customer considers this measure satisfied when complete shipments of

finished currency are received in the Federal Reserve vault where it is held prior to final distribution to Federal Reserve district banks.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Product delivery data is collected and verified through various through various BEP’s product accountability systems.

Data Verification and Validation: Product delivery data is reconciled to invoices generated by BEP, and confirmed by the customer.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: During fiscal year 2009, BEP responded to the Federal Reserves need to change the 2009 currency production order

due to worldwide changes in the demand for currency, BEP delivered a reduced program as well as a different mix of currency donomination notes.

BEP was able to meet this new order on time and under budget. In fiscal year 2010, BEP will produce and deliver the Federal Reserves order while

continuing to monitor design and overhead costs related to the manufacture of currency to ensure the most efficient production and distribution of future

denominations.

Measure: Percent of currency notes delivered to the Federal Reserve that meet customer quality and requirements (

(Oe)

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9

Actual 99.9 100 100

Target met?

Definition: A qualitative indicator reflecting the Bureau’s ability to provide a quality product. All notes delivered to the Federal Reserve go through rigorous

quality inspections. These inspections ensure that all counterfeit deterrent features, both overt and covert are functioning as designed.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Quality inspections are performed at each Federal Reserve Bank. Any discrepancies found are reported to BEP on a per shipment

basis.

Data Verification and Validation: Quality review audits are performed by internal BEP auditors on all Federal Reserve inspection systems as well as the

procedures followed in reporting data to BEP. These audits are conducted on an annual basis with additional audits performed upon request by Federal

Reserve Banks.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: : During 2009, BEP was able to maintain its high level of quality requirements and met our target for the delivery of

qualitycurrency notesto ourcustomer.For 2010 BEP plansto continue to ensure that proper qualitystandards are addressed during each stage ofcurrency

production and delivery.

Ap
Appe

di

199

Measure: Currency shipment discrepancies per million notes (%) (Ot)

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target .01 .01 .01 .0

Actual .01 .01 

Target met?

Definition: A qualitative indicator reflecting BEP’s ability to provide effective product security and accountability. This measure refers to product overages or

underages of as little as a single currency note in shipments of finished notes to the Federal Reserve Banks.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The customer captures this data and report to BEP on a monthly basis.

Data Verification and Validation: BEP reports product discrepancy data based on monthly information provided by the customer.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The BEP has met the 2009 target for this performance measure, and fully anticipatesto continue meeting or exceeding

this measure’s target in the future.

Measure: Security costs per 1000 notes delivered ($) (E

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 6.25 6 5.65 5.6

Actual 6 5.92 5.63

Target met?

Definition: An indicator reflecting the cost of providing effective and efficient product security and accountability. This standard is developed annually based

on the past year’s cost performance and anticipated cost increases. The formula used to calculate this measure is the total cost of security divided by the

number of notes produced divided by 1000.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Cost data is collected through BEP’s accrual-based cost accounting system. This standard is developed annually based on the past

year’s cost performance and anticipated cost increases.

Data Verification and Validation: BEP’s accrual-based cost accounting system is audited annually as part of the financial statement audit.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: In 2009 BEP was not able to meet its target for cost of security due to an unanticipated reduction in the currency

production program late in the fiscal year. The timing of the change occurred after a significant amount of obligations had already occurred for the fiscal

year and did provide enough time to implement reductions in other areas of the program without compromising the security posture of the Bureau. Internal

budget formulation processes develop the annual allocations to this program based on a review of the prior-year results and any known current-year

changes to operations. BEP continually strives to keep security costs at the lowest level possible without compromising the Bureau’s security posture.

Security costs are comprised of the following activities: 1) Personnel Security 2) Physical Protection 3) Product and Inventory control. Guarding against

theft is the top priority of the BEP security program, going forward, BEP will produce and deliver the 2010 currency order while continuing to monitor the

cost of providing effective and efficient product security and accountability.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

200

Measure: Total Regulatory Fines and Claims Paid (

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 70000 30000 27500 20000 

Actual 48693 8304 0 

Target met?

Definition: The annual amount of all regulatory fines and tort claims paid by the BEP.

Indicator Type: Indicator

Data Capture and Source: BEP Management Information System (BEPMIS)

Data Verification and Validation: BEP Annual Financial Audit, the CFO Performance and Accountability Report

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: In 2009, the Bureau met this target; the annual amount of all regulatory fines and tort claims paid by the BEP was

$16,000 against a target of $20,000. For 2010, the Bureau will strive to adhere to all safety, health and environmental processes.

Measure: Improper and/or Erroneous Payments or Purchases 

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 1000 500 500 50

Actual 2126 

Target met?

Definition: An indicator reflecting the ability of the Bureau of Engraving and Printing to make payment for goods and services for only authorized expenses

and in a timely manner.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: BEP Management Information System (BEPMIS)

Data Verification and Validation: BEP Annual Financial Audit, The CFO Performance and Accountability Report

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: In 2009, BEP met this goal with no improper or erroneous payments made. fiscal year 2010 plans include continued

internal evaluations to ensure that payments are made in a timely manner in accordance with prompt payment act standards.

Measure: Other Financial Loss

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 0 0 

Actual 15500 

Target met?

Definition: The face value of product theft that has been reported, investigated as unrecoverable, and verified, during the production, delivery and destruction

process.

Indicator Type: Indicator

Data Capture and Source: BEP Management Information System (BEPMIS)

Data Verification and Validation: BEP Annual Financial Audit, the CFO Performance and Accountability Report

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The BEP has met the 2009 target for this performance measure, and fully anticipates to continue meeting this

measure’s target in the future.

Ap
Appe

di

201

Measure: Total Financial Losses (O

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 71000 30500 28000 20500 

Actual 66319 8304 0 

Target met?

Definition: The aggregate amount of annual financial losses that have been reported, investigated, and verified as unrecoverable, as a result of the following:

improper and/or erroneous payments or purchases (including late payment penalties); total regulatory fines and claims paid; and other financial losses.

Indicator Type: Indicator

Data Capture and Source: BEP Management Information System (BEPMIS)

Data Verification and Validation: BEP Annual Financial Audit, the CFO Performance and Accountability Report

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The BEP has met the 2009 target for this performance measure, and fully anticipatesto continue meeting or exceeding

this measure’s target in the future.

United States Mi

Measure: Conversion Costs per 1000 Coin Equivalents ($)(E) [DISONTINU

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 6.62 7.27 7.09 Discontinued Discont

Actual 7.55 7.23 

Target met? N

Definition: Cost per 1000 coin equivalentsisthe cost of production (conversion cost) divided bythe number of products made. Conversion costs are controllable

costs within manufacturing. Those costs include manufacturing payroll, non-payroll, and depreciation costs. To determine the coin equivalents, an

equivalency factor is assigned to each circulating denomination and numismatic product based on the resources it takes to make the product (indexed

against the resourcesit takesto make one product – the quarter). The production quantityfor each product is multiplied bythe equivalencyfactor, resulting

in a coin equivalent quantity. Thus, all denominations and products are equivalized to a quarter.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Conversion costs are pulled from financial reports from the accounting system. Production data is pulled from the enterprise

resource planning system via queries and converted to coin equivalents.

Data Verification and Validation: United States Mint analysts review the data pulled from the accounting system for reasonableness and accuracy on a

monthly basis.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: This measure is being Discontinued in fiscal year 2009.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

202

Measure: Conversion Costs Per 1000 CE ( % deviation from target) (E) [DICONTIN

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Taet 0 Discontinued Dis

Acal 

Target met? N/A N

Definition: The United States Mint’s costs vary by product, and the product mix has been variable over time. This makes it difficult to compare operating

results from year to year. The coin equivalent calculation converts the production output to a common denominator based on the circulating quarter.

Production costs, excluding metal and fabrication, are then divided by this standardized production level, thus resulting in “conversion costs per 1,000 coin

equivalents.” This allows comparison of performance over time by negating the effects of changes in the product mix. Starting in fiscal year 2008, the

target and results will be presented as a percentage difference from the baseline. By showing the target and performance as a percentage, this allows for

the impact of fixed costs as they get spread over varying levels of production.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Conversion costs are pulled from financial reports from the accounting system. Production data is pulled from the enterprise

resource planning system via queries and converted to coin equivalents

Data Verification and Validation: United States Mint analysts review the data pulled from the accounting system for reasonableness and accuracy on a

monthly basis.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Monthly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The United States Mint will report on this performance measure for PART reporting until the Mint’s new suite of

performance measures are approved and the old measures are fully discontinued. Until then the Mint’s fiscal year 2009 target for this performance

measure should be 0%.

Measure: Protection Cost Per Square Foot ($)

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 32 32.99 32.5 31.75

Actual 32.49 31.75 31.76 

Target met?

Definition: Protection cost per square foot is the Protection Department’s operating costs divided by the area of usable space in square feet that the United

States Mint Police protects. Usable space is defined as 90% of total square footage. The year-to-date result is then annualized on a straight-line basis.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The Protection costs are automatically pulled from the United States Mint’s accounting system on a quarterly basis. The square

footage is relatively stable and is monitored by the Protection office and United States Mint management.

Data Verification and Validation: United States Mint analysts review the data for reasonableness and accuracy on a quarterly basis.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Protection cost per square foot is the Protection Department’s total operating cost divided by the area of usable

space of the United States Mint. Usable space is defined as 90% of total square footage. Operating costs exclude depreciation. Total square footage of

usable space is relatively constant and only changes with major events such as the addition or removal of a facility. The measure indicates the Protection

Department’s cost efficiency in safeguarding United States Mint facilities, employees and assets. Protection cost per square foot decreased to $31.57 in

fiscalyear 2009 from $31.76 lastyear. The fiscalyear 2009 result was $0.18 below the target of $31.75. The Protection Department reduced total operating

cost by approximately $250,000 (0.6 percent) from fiscal year 2008 by curtailing expenses for other services and supplies and materials. The Protection

Department will continue efforts to contain costs while fulfilling protection responsibilities in fiscal year 2010.

Ap
Appe

di

203

Measure: Employee Confidence in Protection (O

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 86 86 86 83 Discont

Actual 82 81 

Target met?

Definition: Percentage of United States Mint employees reporting a favorable response to their confidence in the Office of Protection to safeguard United

States Mint assets and assets in the custody of the United States Mint.

Indicator Type: Indicator

Data Capture and Source: Contractor administered quarterly Employee Pulse Check survey which assesses the attitudes of United States Mint employees

concerning their work environment.

Data Verification and Validation: Results and data are captured and verified by a professional survey consultant.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The Protection Department isresponsible for providing a safe and secure workplace for United States Mint employees.

The Employee Confidence in Protection measure indicates how well the Protection Department is achieving this objective. It is the percentage of United

States Mint employeesreporting a favorable response to theirconfidence in the Protection Department’s performance in safeguarding United States Mint

assets and assets in the custody of the United States Mint. Survey results indicated that 81 percent of employees reported confidence in the Protection

Department’s ability to safeguard the United States Mint in fiscal year 2009. This was consistent with fiscal year 2008 performance but below the 83

percent target. The Protection Department is working to automate employee entry and exit at all United States Mint facilities. This is the most visible role

that police officers play in the typical workday of most employees. The Protection Department plans to increase communication about these and other

efforts that the police offers undertake to serve and protect employees while safeguarding assets under United States Mint control.

Measure: Seigniorage per Dollar Issued ($)(

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Tat B

Acl 

Target met? N/A N

Definition: Seigniorage per total face value of circulated coinage shipped to Federal Reserve Banks.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The data is captured in Oracle Financials system and reported through Oracle’s Discoverer Reporting system.

Data Verification and Validation: External auditors perform routine audits of financial statements. Numismatic program net income and total revenue are

included in the financial statements.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Seigniorage per dollar issued is the return to circulating operations, calculated as seigniorage divided by the total face

value of circulated coinage shipped to Federal Reserve Banks (FRB). Seigniorage per dollar issued was $0.55 in fiscal year 2009, above the target of $0.54.

Weakened demand reduced the United States Mint’s return from circulating operations in fiscal year 2009. Base metal expenses and the mix of circulating

coin ordered by the FRB largely determine seigniorage per dollar issued performance. Toward the end of fiscal year 2009, market prices for copper, nickel

and zinc all started to increase to fiscal year 2007 levels. The United States Mint expects production volumes to remain low and per-unit metal prices to

increase as market prices escalate in fiscal year 2010.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

204

Measure: Absolute Value of Production Percent Deviation from Net-Pay (%

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Tat Baseline D

Acl 

Target met? N/A N

Definition: The absolute value of the percentage deviation of cumulative fiscal year total circulating coin production from cumulative fiscal year total net-pay

less any inventory adjustment planned and agreed upon by the Federal Reserve Banks or needed to fulfill the United States Mint contingency stock

requirements. Monthly production targets are set to smooth production over the fiscal year and ensure cumulative production is sufficient to satisfy

Federal Reserve demand.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: United States Mint analysts receive Federal Reserve net-pay and inventory data reports by denomination. Coin production data is

maintained in Oracle manufacturing system.

Data Verification and Validation: Results and data are captured and verified by United States Mint and Federal Reserve Bank analysts.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Production percent deviation from net pay is the absolute value of the percent cumulative fiscal year total circulating

coin production difference from the total net pay less any FRB inventory adjustment. The United States Mint is responsible for providing the nation’s

coinage in sufficient quantity to meet the needs of commerce. The FRB is responsible for distributing coinage to the commercial banking sector. To

accomplish its mission, the FRB maintains coin inventories, which commercial banks can withdraw from or deposit into. The difference between coins

withdrawn and coins deposited is referred to as net-pay, and represents the demand for coinage. In order to ensure inventories are adequate to meet

demand, the United States Mint producescoinage in sufficient quantitiesto replenish the system. The deviation ofcirculating coin production from net pay

indicates how well the United States Mint fulfills its core mission of minting and issuing coins to enable commerce. Total production deviated 6.5 percent

from net pay in fiscal year 2009. This was a baseline year for the performance measure so no target was set. Monthly net-pay figures remained at 30-year

lows for nearly all denominations. In the first quarter of fiscal year 2009, the FRB significantly reduced forecasted orders for the remainder of the fiscal

year. The United States Mint cut production accordingly.

Measure: Numismatic Net Margin (%)(

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Tat Baseline D

Acl 

Target met? N/A N

Definition: The return to Numismatic (non-bullion) operations, calculated as program net income divided by total program sales.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The data is captured in Oracle Financials system and reported through Oracle’s Discoverer Reporting system.

Data Verification and Validation: External auditors perform routine audits of financial statements. Numismatic program net income and total revenue are

included in the financial statements.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Numismatic net margin is the return to numismatic operations, calculated as program net income divided by total

program sales revenue. The statutory framework for United States Mint numismatic items provides for cost recovery (i.e., avoiding any indirect taxpayer

burden on these programs) and for sales to the public as a service to the public. Therefore the numismatic program is managed to a 15 percent net margin

to ensure sale prices are as low as practicable and returns are sufficient to fund numismatic operating costs. Numismatic net margin was 9.4 percent in

fiscal year 2009, below the target of 15 percent. Statutorily the United States Mint was prevented from selling one of its core products in fiscal year 2009

significantly inhibiting its ability to meet numismatic net margin. A reduced margin means that the bureau offered numismatic products to customers at

lower sales prices than sufficient to achieve the 15 percent margin. This is not an unfavorable result for the United States Mint’s numismatic operations.

The United States Mint will review pricing practices in fiscal year 2010 to ensure that numismatic sales revenue is sufficient to fund long-term operations

while also maintaining reasonable prices for customers.

Ap
Appe

di

205

Measure: Numismatic Customer Base (Units)(

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Tat 

Acl 

Target met? N/A N

Definition: Total number of unique purchasers over a fiscal year, where a unique purchaser consists of an account number and address/name without a prior

purchase in the fiscal year.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Customer account data for each Numismatic product purchase is maintained on CW Direct, a real time system. Daily automatic

queries of CW Direct populate a data warehouse. Contracted analystsidentifythe number of unique purchasersfrom this data warehouse based on United

States Mint defined criteria.

Data Verification and Validation: Results and data are captured and verified by a professional data analyst consultant.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The numismatic customer base consists of the total number of unique purchasers within a fiscal year. A unique

purchaser consists of an account number and address and name combination without a prior purchase in the fiscal year. The numismatic customer based

totaled 1.06 million in fiscal year 2009, below the target of 1.40 million. The United States Mint customer retention and acquisition performance declined

because the bureau was unable to offer several core numismatic products for sale after January 2009. In particular, popular American Eagle and American

Buffalo numismatic products were unavailable because precious metal planchets were diverted to the bullion program in accordance with the United

States Mint’s statutory requirement to fulfill bullion demand. Economic conditions may have also curtailed customer spending on collectibles from prior

years. The United States Mint began to fully satisfy bullion demand in the later months of the fiscal year. Consequently, the bureau expects to offer some

numismatic products for sale in fiscal year 2010 that were unavailable in fiscal year 2009. The United States Mint is also planning a national advertising

campaign and outreach related to the upcoming America the Beautiful QuartersTM and America the Beautiful Silver Bullion CoinsTM in fiscal year 2010.

Measure: Customer Satisfaction Index (%)(O

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Tat 

Acl 

Target met? N/A N

Definition: The United States Mint conducts a quarterly Customer Satisfaction Measure (CSM) Tracking Survey among a random sample of active customers.

The CSM Survey is intended to capture customer satisfaction with the United States Mint’s performance as a coin supplier and the quality of specific

products. The CSI is as a single quantitative score of CSM Survey results.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: A professional survey consultant administers quarterly CSM survey to a random sample of active customers.

Data Verification and Validation: Results and data are captured and verified by the professional survey consultant.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The United States Mintconducts a quarterly Customer Satisfaction Measure Tracking Survey among a random sample

of active customers. The survey is intended to capture customer satisfaction with the United States Mint’s performance as a coin supplier and the quality

of specific numismatic products. CSI is as a single quantitative score of survey results. CSI was 88.3 percent in fiscal year 2009, exceeding the target of

88.0 percent and increasing slightly from the fiscal year 2008 result of 87.5 percent. Customer satisfaction with product quality remained strong with 96.1

percent of respondents highly satisfied with the quality of products. About 80.5 percent of respondents reported high overall satisfaction with the United

State Mint’s performance, up somewhat from 79.5 percent in fiscal year 2008. The United States Mint expects to improve upon customer service in fiscal

year 2010 bycontinuing to collaborate with and monitor the bureau’scallcenter and order fulfillment provider to maintain and exceed standards ofservice.

The bureau is also implementing an initiative to integrate and consolidate the United States Mint’s public information and e-commerce catalog sites. The

improved single Web site will be easier for customers to navigate and obtain desired information.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

206

Departmental offices

Measure: Number of open civil penalty cases that are resolved within the Statute of Limitations period (

[DISCOTINUED

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 85 85 120 Discontinued Discont

Actual 85 296

Target met? Y

Definition: Timely imposition of civil penalties plays a major role in deterring and appropriately punishing violations of sanctions by U.S. persons. OFAC

receives a very high volume of law enforcement referrals regarding potential violations. It is devising strategies to reduce the backlog of civil penalty

and enforcement actions and increase efficiency in drafting warning and cautionary letters, assessing penalties, negotiating penalty resolutions and

processing monetary penalties.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Penalty case information is recorded in OFAC’s main Oracle database (FACDB). That database has a Report function that allows

us to query the database and generate reports according to a number of variables such as status, date of action, etc. Informaiton generated from these

reports is used to calculate the number of cases that were closed during a given time frame. Additionally, we have implemented a processs to check a

representative sampling of the closed cases to verify that the data within the system matches our hard copy records.

Data Verification and Validation: The Assistant Director for Civil Penalties Cases reviews every case that is closed. Cases that involve a settlement, an

assessment, or penalty come under additional review by OFAC’s Chief Counsel’s Office. Cases that result in settlement or an assessment or penalty are

also posted on OFAC’s public website.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Discontinued measure in fiscal year 2009.

Ap
Appe

di

207

Measure: Impact of TFI programs and activiti

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Tat B

Acl 

Target met? N/A N

Definition: This measure is used to assess TFI’s impact as an organization through its sanctions, law enforcement, intelligence, regulatory and diplomatic

programs to reduce threats to U.S. national security. The Office of Terrorist Financing and Financial Crimes is responsible for the impact of policymaking,

outreach and diplomacy. The Office of Foreign Assets Control is responsible for the impact of economic sanctions. The Office of Intelligence and Analysis

is responsible for the impact of information and analysis used by Department decision makers. The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network is responsible

for the impact of activities that create safer and more transparent financial systems.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: An annual survey is conducted by OIA. Performance measure actuals are captured in PRS to determine the rating for FinCEN’s

performance measures. OFAC and TFFC provide documentation of activities, and use a self assessment rating, all information is kept by OSPPM as the

outside validator.

Data Verification and Validation: The Office of Strategic Planning and Performance Management validates all final information. TFFC and OFAC provide a

self-assessed rating and supporting documentation. OIA uses an internal (within the Department)customersatisfaction surveyto achieve it’s performance

rating. The survey and raw data are provided, and validated at the SECRET level to ensure reliability of the data. The Department reviews/validations, and

gives suggestions and recommendations to each office, with a chance to provide additional information.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: TFI will examine methods of externalvalidation of measure results. The Office of Intelligence and Analysis will expand

its customer satisfaction survey base to IC customers outside of the Treasury Department. Both OFAC and TFFC will be examining their measures to make

sure they cover a broad range of priorities.

Measure: Number of countries that are assessed for compliance with the Financial Action Task Force (FATF

recommendations (Ot) [DISCNTINUE

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 45 6 12 Discontinued Discont

Actual 5 

Target met? N

Definition: TFFC is the lead Treasury component and representative to the Financial Action Task Force (FATF). As such, TFFC is responsible for leading

international efforts to identify and close money laundering and terrorist financing vulnerabilities in the international financial system, and to ensure that

countries throughout the world comply with international anti-money laundering/counter-terrorist financing standards. In concert with the international

community, Treasury is deploying a three-prong strategy that 1) objectively assesses all countries against the FATF 40+9, 2) provides capacity-building

assistance for key countries in need and 3) isolates and punishes those countries and institutions that facilitate terrorist financing. TFI is working with

international bodies like FATF, IMF (International Monetary Fund) and World Bank to ensure compliance. The IMF and World Bank have adopted the FATF

40+9 and they use those standards to assess countries for compliance.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Data collected bythe Department of Treasury’s Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence (TFI); TerroristFinancing and Financial

Crimes (TFFC).

Data Verification and Validation: TFFC data undergoes multiple quality checks to ensure accuracy.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: DO is currently implementing a rigorous approach to develop more meaningful performance measures which align

to Treasury’s Strategic Plan. This initiative will lead to significant improvements in the current suite of performance measures within the Departmental

Offices, and so result in measures which are more reflective of Treasury’s mission. Therefore, Treasury has made the decision to discontinue many

performance measures while it works to develop new ones for future budget submissions.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

208

Measure: Increase the number of outreach engagements with the charitable and international financial communities

(Ot) [DISCNTINUE

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 105 70 70 Discontinued Discont

Actual 45 8

Target met? N

Definition: The effectiveness of the USG’s efforts to combat terrorist financing and other forms of illicit finance depends upon the understanding and

cooperation of the domestic and international private sector, particularly the financial services industries and other vulnerable sectors such as charities.

The Office of Terrorist Finance and Financial Crimes (TFFC) outreach engagements allows the USG to assess first-hand domestic and international Antimoney Laundering and Combating the Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT) practices by governments and private institutions alike and engage with these

entities to ensure that they safeguard themselves and the financial system against illicit activity. When followed-up consistently, this outreach has proven

to be one of our most efficacious tools for changing behavior, raising awareness, and improving capacity among foreign governments as well as domestic

and foreign institutions with gaps in their AML/CFT programs.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Data collected bythe Department of Treasury’s Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence (TFI); TerroristFinancing and Financial

Crimes (TFFC).

Data Verification and Validation: Department of the Treasury’s TFI data based on outreach events.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Discontinue measure in fiscal year 2009.

Treasury Forfeitur

Measure: Percent of forfeited cash proceeds resulting from high-impact cases (Oe

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 75 75 75 

Actual 72.93 84.18 86.91 

Target met?

Definition: A “high impact case” is a case, based on designation or executive order, resulting in a cash forfeiture equal to or greater than $100,000. This

measure is calculated by dividing the amount of cash forfeited in amounts equal to or greater than $100,000 (as measured by individual deposits that are

equal to or greater than $100,000) divided by the total amount of cash forfeitures to the Fund (as of the end of the year, or other reporting period.)

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The Treasury Forfeiture Fund is able to capture this data on a monthly basis and the source of the data is the Detailed Collection

Report (DCR).

Data Verification and Validation: The source of the data that supports our performance calculation comes from the general ledger of the Treasury Forfeiture

Fund which data is audited annually pursuant to our financial statement audit. Therefore, the annual financial statement audit process serves to “verify

and validate” the data used to support our performance measure on an annual basis.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: With an emphasis on high-impact forfeitures by Treasury Forfeiture Fund management, our member law enforcement

bureaus worked hard to exceed the target of 75%, achieving 87.65% high-impact currency forfeitures for fiscal year 2009. Forfeiture Fund management

will continue to focus resources on member bureau initiatives, including training, that emphasize high-impact forfeiture. Through high-impact forfeiture,

federal law enforcement can do the most damage to criminal syndicates by dismantling their financial infrastructure.

Ap
Appe

di

209

OUTCOME: Safer and More Transparent U.S. and International Financial Sys

Financial Crimes Enforcement Netw

Measure: Average time to process enforcement matters (in Years) (

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 1 1 

Actual 1 1.1

Target met?

Definition: The average time to process an enforcement matter is determined from the date a case is referred from the Office of Compliance to the date the

charging (or action) letter is issued.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The data for this measure iscaptured through an internal database thatstores enforcement matters. The database recordsthe date

cases are received, the analyst assigned, the statute of limitations date, and the date each case was closed.

Data Verification and Validation: The enforcement matters are entered into the automated log and evaluated to determine whether there is enforcement

potential through a civil monetary penalty or otherwise. FinCEN has established time management guidelines to reduce the average processing time for

civil penalty cases.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: In fiscal year 2009, FinCEN met its target for the average time to process enforcement matters in one year with an

average time of 1.0 year. FinCEN will continue to actively manage casework.

Measure: Percentage of bank examinations conducted by the Federal Banking Agencies indicating a systemic fail

of the anti-money laundering program rule (Oe)

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Taget Baseline 5.2 

Acual 5.2 

Target met? N

Definition: The percentage of bank examinations that reveal the existence of systemic compliance failure (i.e., demonstrated by cited violations of the

anti-money laundering program rule) is a meaningful measure because it provides an intermediate assessment of the effectiveness of the efforts of the

Regulatory Policy and Programs Division’s three officesin providing policy guidance and taking formal and informalcompliance and enforcement actionsto

increase financial industry compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act. At the present time, the only financial sector from which we are receiving useful data to

quantify this measure is the banking sector supervised and examined for Bank Secrecy Act compliance by the Federal Banking Agencies.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The Federal Banking Agencies aggregated information provided pursuant to the Memorandum of Understanding executed in 2004

with FinCEN.

Data Verification and Validation: This information can be validated from the quarterly aggregate reports provided to FinCEN by each agency pursuant to the

Memorandum of Understanding of 2004. Under the terms of the MOU, the FBAs have 45 days from the end of a quarter to submit their data to FinCEN.

Since quarterly results must be calculated within 30 days of the end of a quarter, we must use data from the prior quarter. Due to this lag in data, the

year-end figure is based on the three fiscal year 2009 quarters available at the fiscal year-end.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: In fiscal year 2009, the percentage of banking institutions cited for program failures during examinations was

significantly below the 5.2 percent indicator level, only 2.1 percent were cited. This is primarily attributable to greater consistency among bank regulators

in citing instances of program failures. FinCEN will continue to collaborate with the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council and conduct

outreach to the banking industry.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

210

Measure: Percentage of FinCEN’s Regulatory Resource Center Customers rating the guidance receiv

understandable (Oe)

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target Baseline 90 90 

Actual 94 91 

Target met?

Definition: The percentage of financial institution customers who contact the Resource Center and respond to a survey, who find the information/response/

guidance received was understandable. Providing guidance that is understandable is a desired result and is critical for financial institutions to establish

programs that comply with the BSA.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Resource Center customer records and survey data.

Data Verification and Validation: Results and data will be captured and verified by a professional survey consultant.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The fiscal year 2009 goal was to maintain a 90 percent satisfaction level for customers rating the guidance as

“understandable,“ and FinCEN surpassed its goal with 94 percent. FinCEN attained this success by responding timely (within 24 hours of the inquiry),

providing a high level of service, and improving the organization of information on its public website. In order to achieve future targets, FinCEN will

continue to make guidance available on the Internet, accept and analyze customer feedback, and conduct surveys to measure customer satisfaction.

Measure: Median time taken from date of receipt of Financial Institution Hotline Tip SARs to transmittal o

information to law enforcement or the intelligence community (E)

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 30 25 16

Actual 19 

Target met?

Definition: The purpose of the Financial Institution Hotline Tip is to facilitate the transmission of potential terrorism-related activity to law enforcement

in a more expeditious manner than through the normal manual or electronic filing of a Suspicious Activity Report. The median time taken to transmit

the information from a Financial Institution Hotline Tip SAR will be computed using the Julian date of the Hotline Tip receipt and the transmittal date.

Statistical data for fiscalyear 2003 and fiscalyear 2004 is not available asthe Julian datesfound on SARs was not tracked and converted to calendar dates

for comparison with referral dates in the current management information system.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Date of receipt of Hotline Tip and the date of referral in an analytical product, asrecorded in the FinCEN Database. Manual records,

spreadsheets and/or Access databases will be maintained to record the dates for all Hotline Tips referred.

Data Verification and Validation: Verification of receipt and report dates and medians can be accomplished using the FinCEN Database, paper and/or other

electronic records developed to record dates.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: In fiscalyear 2009,FinCEN surpassed itstarget of 15 days with a median time of 3 days. To meet future targets,FinCEN

will continue to process Hotline Tips in an expeditious manner.

Ap
Appe

di

211

Measure: Percentage of complex analtyic work completed by FinCEN analysts 

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 0 38 38 

Acual 3

Target met? N

Definition: Comparison of total number of work products generated versus those products that required complex anlaysis, graphical display of data

relationships, analytical findings, comments and recommendations. “Complex” as used in this measure refers to the application of analytic resources to

assist law enforcement clients in perfecting investigations that they consider significant due to geographic scope, large data sets, use of multiple or little

understood money laundering methodologies or involving financial relationships, products or systems not adequately understood by investigators.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The FinCEN database currently tracks assignments and includes a complexity ranking on each assignment. Management reports

can be generated outlining the number of such projects and the number of reports prepared and distributed on an annual basis.

Data Verification and Validation: Production levels can be verified by a review of the paper or electronic file copies of analytical reports generated.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: In fiscal year 2009, FinCEN surpassed its target of 39 percent with 44 percent of complex analytical products

completed by FinCEN analysts. FinCEN will continue efforts to reduce the number of discretionary non-complex projects undertaken and increase the

number of complex products produced for foreign FIUs.

Measure: The percent of countries/jurisdictions connected to the Egmont Secure Web with in one year of Egm

membership (Oe)

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 98 98 98 

Actual 97 98 

Target met?

Definition: The percent of EgmontFinancial Intelligence Unit members connected to the Egmont Secure Web. The goal isto maintain a 98% percent user rate.

As new members are admitted to Egmont, we will work to connect them to the Egmont Secure Web.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Egmont Member data base and Egmont Secure Web User database.

Data Verification and Validation: Compare the list of Egmont Secure Web Users to the list of of Egmont members.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: In fiscal year 2009, FinCEN reached a level of 99 percent of countries/jurisdictions connected to the Egmont Secure

Web and surpassed its target of 98 percent. To continue to meet this target, FinCEN will work to ensure continued connectivity for countries that have

access to the Egmont Secure Web and will connect new Egmont Group members as soon after admission as possible.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

212

Measure: Percentage of domestic law enforcement and foreign financial intelligence units finding FinCEN’s analyti

reports highly valuable (Oe)

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target Baseline 78 79 

Actual 77 82 

Target met?

Definition: The percentage ofcustomers(domesticlawenforcement and foreign financial intelligence units) finding FinCEN’s analytical reports highlyvaluable.

This is a composite measure compiled from survey results. The survey looks at the impact of FinCEN’s analysis products, such as whether the product was

used to open a new investigation, whether it generated new leads, or whether it provided information previously unknown.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Annual Surveys

Data Verification and Validation: The vendorsurveyteam developed questionnairesforcustomers, with FinCEN input. Theyconducted e-mail and/or telephone

surveys of FinCEN’s customers in the investigative/intelligence community, financial community and inhouse customers. A comprehensive report and

presentation was provided at the conclusion of the survey.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: In fiscal year 2009, FinCEN surpassed its target of 80 percent with 81 percent finding the analytic reports highly

valuable. FinCEN will continue its efforts to solicit input from its customers on types of products they would like to see produced and possible ways to

improve the structure of its reports to meet future targets.

Measure: Percentage of private industry or financial institution customers finding FinCEN’s Suspicious Activity 

(SAR) products highly valuable (

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target Baseline 72 74 

Actual 70 71 

Target met?

Definition: This measure tracks the percentage of customers that find FinCEN’s SAR activity review products useful. The measure is a composite measure

compiled from survey results. The surveys look at whether regulated industries find the products useful to improving their BSA/anti-money laundering

programs and whether the products provide useful guidance on filing requirements.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Annual Surveys

Data Verification and Validation: The vendorsurveyteam developed questionnairesforcustomers, with FinCEN input. Theyconducted e-mail and/or telephone

surveys of FinCEN’s customers in the investigative/intelligence community, financial community and inhouse customers. A comprehensive report and

presentation was provided at the conclusion of the survey.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: In fiscal year 2009, 73 percent of private industry or financial institution customers found FinCEN’s SAR Activity

Review products highly valuable. FinCEN took a slightly different approach to the SAR Activity Review and this could account for FinCEN just missing its

target of 76 percent. In May 2009, in an attempt to expand readership of the publication in other relevant industries, FinCEN issued an industry specific

SAR Activity Review. Historically these publications focused on issues related to depository institutions – the single largest survey base representing

nearly 98% of allcurrentcontact. In order to continue to receive appropriate feedbackfrom ourconstituents,FinCEN willcontinue to seekinformation from

its regulatory partners and other entities in an effort to expand the population of survey respondents to include other relevant industries.

Ap
Appe

di

213

Measure: Cost per SA form E-File

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target .19 .15 .15 .1

Actual .22 .14 .1

Target met?

Definition: This measure tracks the government reoccuring operations and maintenance costs associated with E-Filing against the number of BSA forms

E-Filed. As more financial institutions E-File, it is anticipated that the cost per BSA form E-Filed will decrease.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: E-Filing cost records and BSA Direct E-Filing Records.

Data Verification and Validation: Results can be verified against E-Filing operations and maintence cost records and BSA Direct E-Filing records.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: In fiscal year 2009, the cost per form e-filed was .16. FinCEN did not meet its target of .15. This was due to higher than

expected operations and maintenance (O&M) support costs associated with several BSA E-Filing system improvements implemented in fiscal year 2009.

Filing volume increases did not offset the increase in O&M costs. To meet future targets, FinCEN will balance operational costs with the filing volume.

Measure: Number of largestBSA report filers using E-Filin

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 342 302 374 45

Actual 383 297 38

Target met?

Definition: FinCEN has identified the 650 largest filers of Bank Secrecy Act reports and has established the goal of assisting and encouraging members of

this group who are not already using the BSA Direct E-filing system to begin E-filing reports. E-filing by this group is seen as a means of achieving FinCEN’s

long-term goal.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: A list compiled and maintained in the Office of BSA Data Services.

Data Verification and Validation: Magnitude of report filing and method of filing can be checked against records at he IRS Detroit Computing Center and

automated records from the BSA Direct E-Filing system.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: In fiscal year 2009, FinCEN surpassed its target of 454 with 486 largest BSA report filers using E-Filing. To increase

the number of largest BSA report filers using E-filing, FinCEN plans to conduct additional, targeted outreach and marketing of the BSA E-Filing System to

meet future targets.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

214

Measure: Number of users directly accessingBSA data 

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 4000 6000 8000 10000 

Actual 4683 8402 9649 

Target met?

Definition: The number of individuals with current passwords who have accessed the Bank Secrecy Act data through the Secure Outreach network in the

past 90 days.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The list can be checked through the Profile function at the Detroit Computing Center

Data Verification and Validation: The system generates a list of users.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: In fiscal year 2009, FinCEN surpassed its target of 10,000 with 10,072 users directly accessing BSA data. FinCEN will

continue its efforts to support law enforcement related to access to the BSA data.

Measure: Percentage of customers satisfied with theBSA E-Filin

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target Baseline 90 90 

Actual 92 94 

Target met?

Definition: This measure assesses the customer satisfaction with BSA E-Filling. Feedback will be used to improve the system and customize it for user

populations. The measure is meaningful because it tracks the satisfaction with technology used to facilitate analysis of BSA information.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Active status user survey

Data Verification and Validation: Survey information is captured in a database.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The fiscal year 2009 target was to maintain at least a 90 percent satisfaction level, and FinCEN surpassed its target

with 94 percent. FinCEN will continue outreach to E-Filers and ensure the technology.

Ap
Appe

di

215

Measure: Percentage of customers satisfied with WebCBRS and secure outreach

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Taet Basel

Acal 

Target met? N/A

Definition: This measure tracks FinCEN’s progress toward serving the number of law enforcement and regulatory agency users accessing BSA information.

These technologies (WebCBRS and Outreach Secure) allow authorized persons to more readily access BSA information and better enable them to conduct

investigations more efficiently and effectively.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Data are captured via a survey.

Data Verification and Validation: Raw data are received from the survey vendor and results are calculated and verified.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: In fiscal year 2009, FinCEN had a rating of 74 percent of its customers satisfied with WEBCBRS and secure outreach.

FinCEN did not meet its target of 81 percent. In fiscal year 2009 the WebCBRS user base experienced an increase that created a higher level of data

traffic. This unexpected level of data traffic congested the existing communication cables causing system freezes and slow performance. FinCEN has

since upgraded the cables to allow for greater data flow. Additionally, FinCEN has implemented an automated online registration system that has reduced

new and reissue ID turnaround time from four weeks to approximately one week. FinCEN will continue to provide timely and effective support to users of

WEBCBRS and secure outreach to help ensure customer satisfaction.

Measure: Share of Bank Secrecy Act filings submitted electronically 

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 60 58 63 

Actual 48 59 

Target met?

Definition: The number of Bank Secrecy Act filings submitted via the web-based system, as a percent of the total filings.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Reports are generated weekly by the PACS contractor based on automated tracking

Data Verification and Validation: Checked against reports from the Detroit Computing Center

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: In fiscalyear 2009,FinCEN surpassed itstarget of 67 percent with 82 percent of BSA filings E-Filed. To meet the target

FinCEN retired Magnetic Media.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

216

Measure: Percentage of federal and state regulatory agencies with memoranda of understanding/information sharing

agreements (Ot)

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Taet Basel

Acal 

Target met? N/A

Definition: This measure tracksthe percentage of the examining universe thatFinCEN supports and oversees. Oversight is established pursuant to Memoranda

of Understanding Agreements established with federal and state regulators. The examining universe is the number of federal and state regulators with

constituents subject to BSA rules. This measure is meaningful because it tracks our progress toward improving our ability to consistently examine industry

compliance.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The Office of Compliance maintained list of Memoranda of Understanding agreements with targeted regulators and the list of the

examining universe.

Data Verification and Validation: List can be checked against signed Memoranda of Understanding agreements in files.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: In 2009, FinCEN reached a level 43 percent of federal and state regulatory agencies with MOU/information sharing

agreements, but did not meet itstarget of 45 percent.FinCEN finalized an MOU with the CommodityFutures Trading Commission (CFTC), the last remaining

federal regulator with BSA examination authority to sign an agreement and the Public Corporation for the Supervision and Insurance of Cooperatives in

Puerto Rico. However, FinCEN was not able to execute three additional agreements partially due to budget restraints at the state regulators. FinCEN will

continue collaborating with state insurance agencies and other regulatory agencies to sign additional agreements to meet future targets.

Measure: Percentage of FinCEN’s compliance MOU holders finding FinCEN’s information exchange valuable to

the SA consistency and compliance of the financial system (

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Taet Basel

Acal 

Target met? N/A

Definition: This is a composite measure that examines the survey responses of compliance MOU holders. The questions and measure were designed to track

the outcome of improved BSA consistency and compliance of the financial system.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Data are captured via survey.

Data Verification and Validation: Raw data are received from the survey vendor and results are calculated and verified.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: In fiscalyear 2008,FinCEN surveyed itscompliance MOU holdersto determine the impact of the information exchange

to improve the BSA consistency and compliance of the financial system, and established a 64 percent baseline of respondents rating the information

exchange valuable to improving BSA consistency and compliance. In fiscal year 2009 FinCEN surpassed its target of 66 percent rating the information

exchange valuable with 82 percent. FinCEN attributes a portion of this success to the distribution of analytic information to the MOU holders throughout

the fiscal year. To achieve future targets, FinCEN will continue to facilitate routine discussions with the MOU holders.

Ap
Appe

di

217

Departmental offices

Measure: Percent of complainants informally contactingEEO (for the purposes of seeking counseling or filin

complaint) who participate in the ADR process (O

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 25 30 30 

Actual 25 29 

Target met?

Definition: Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) contact means an instance where an EEO Counselor or an ADR Intake Officer performs the counseling duties

described in Chapter 2 of MD 110 (Government-wide managing directive on EEO). This is the same information which is reported in Part One, Section one

of 462 report (Government-wide EEO report). Participation means both parties agree to enter an ADR process.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Treasury’s automated Complaint Tracking System.

Data Verification and Validation: Data is periodically reviewed to ensure accuracy.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: We have been successful in meeting all established goals in fiscal year 2009. We accredit this to Treasury Service

Level Standards developed to monitor specific formal complaint processes, including investigations, to ensure TCC staff is efficiently processing cases.

Service Level Standards are submitted quarterlyto the Office of Civil Rights and Diversityfor review. In addition, our bureaus actively promote the benefits

of utilizing ADR to resolve disputes and promote the use of conflict resolution through training and special programs (Treasury Dispute Prevention Week

and Treasury Shared Neutrals Program). No change in our established goals for fiscal year 2010.

Measure: Complete investigations of EO complaints within 180 days (%) (

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 50 50 50 

Actual 20 51.6 

Target met?

Definition: The average time it takes to complete investigations of Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) complaints.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The Annual Federal EEO Statistical Report of Discrimination Complaints and the Department’s Complaint Tracking System are the

primary sources of data.

Data Verification and Validation: Data is reviewed quarterly to ensure accuracy.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: We have been successful in meeting all established goals in fiscal year 2009. We accredit this to Treasury Service

Level Standards developed to monitor specific formal complaint processes, including investigations, to ensure TCC staff is efficiently processing cases.

Service Level Standards are submitted quarterlyto the Office of Civil Rights and Diversityfor review. In addition, our bureaus actively promote the benefits

of utilizing ADR to resolve disputes and promote the use of conflict resolution through training and special programs (Treasury Dispute Prevention Week

and Treasury Shared Neutrals Program). No change in our established goals for fiscal year 2010.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

218

Measure: Injury and illness rate Treasurywide-including DO (Oe) [DICONTIN

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 2.8 2.6 1.4 Discontinued Discont

Actual

Target met? Y Y

Definition: The number of reported work-related injuries and illnesses Treasury-wide.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Safety and Health Information Management System

Data Verification and Validation: Data are collected from the Safety and Health Information Management system

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Discontinued measure in fiscal year 2009.

Treasury Franchise Fu

Measure: Customer Satisfaction Index - Financial Mgmt Admin Support Services (%

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 71 74 80 

Actual 75 0 

Target met?

Definition: Shared service customers satisfaction level with service offerings, service level competence and responsiveness and overall value.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Results are submitted by the management of each franchise business and are obtained from internal or external customer

satisfaction reviews.

Data Verification and Validation: Customersatisfaction processes and resultsfor the Franchise businesses are reviewed bythe Fund’s management to ensure

objectivity.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Annually

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: In fiscal year 2010, we plan to review our processes for obtaining customer satisfaction information and identify

improvements that will provide actionable feedback from customers.

Ap
Appe

di

219

Measure: Operating Expenses as a percentage of revenue--Financial Management Administrative Support (%

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 12 12 12 

Actual 17 15.1 3.6

Target met?

Definition: The Franchise Fund will either maintain or decrease their operating (administrative) expenses as a percentage of revenue year to year.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The data iscaptured in Oracle Financialssystem and reported through Oracle’s Discoverer Reporting system. Measure iscalculated

as Operating Expenses divided by Total Revenue.

Data Verification and Validation: External auditors perform routine audits of financial statements. Operating Expenses are part of the financial statements.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: In fiscal year 2010, we will continue to strive to lower our operating expense rate to ensure that customers are

provided quality services at the lowest possible cost.

Measure: Operating expenses as a percentage of revenue--Consolidated/Integrated Administrative Management (%)

[DISCOTINUED

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 12 12 12 Discontinued Discont

Actual 4 4.3 

Target met? Y

Definition: The Franchise Fund will either maintain or decrease their operating (administrative) expenses as a percentage of revenue year to year.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The data iscaptured in Oracle Financialssystem and reported through Oracle’s Discoverer Reporting system. Measure iscalculated

as Operating Expenses divided by Total Revenue.

Data Verification and Validation: External auditors perform routine audits of financial statements. Operating Expenses are part of the financial statements.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The measure was discontinued for fiscal year 2009.

Measure: Operating expenses as a percentage of revenue--Financial Systems, Consulting and Training (%) 

[DISCOTINUED

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 12 12 12 Discontinued Discont

Actual 10 6.7 

Target met? Y

Definition: The Franchise Fund will either maintain or decrease their operating (administrative) expenses as a percentage of revenue year to year.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The data iscaptured in Oracle Financialssystem and reported through Oracle’s Discoverer Reporting system. Measure iscalculated

as Operating Expenses divided by Total Revenue.

Data Verification and Validation: External auditors perform routine audits of financial statements. Operating Expenses are part of the financial statements.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: This measure was discontinued for fiscal year 2009.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

220

OUTCOME: Exceptional Accountability and Transpar

Departmental Office

Measure: Number of material weaknesses closed (significant management problems identified by GAO, the IGs a

the bureaus) (Oe)

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 2 1 

Actual 1 

Target met?

Definition: Treasury seeks to reduce and eventually eliminate the material weaknesses that currently exist within Treasury, while simultaneously taking

actions which will serve to avoid new material weaknesses. Material weaknesses are significant problems with an organization’s internal controls,

systems’ reliability, controls on waste, fraud or abuse, mission performance, and compliance with laws and regulations.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Identified by the Government Accountability Office, Treasury’s Inspectors General, and/or Treasury bureaus.

Data Verification and Validation: Certification statement issued by head of bureau. Independent review to validate material weaknesses has been

corrected.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: During fiscal year 2009, no material weaknesses were scheduled to close, and none were closed. We met our

expectations.

Office of the Inspector Gene

Measure: Number of completed audit products (Ot

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 56 56 56 

Actual 57 64 

Target met?

Definition: Audits, attestation engagements, and evaluations: (1)promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness of Treasury programs and operations; (2)

prevent and detect fraud, waste, and abuse in those programs and operations; (3)keep the Secretary and the Congress fully informed; and (4)help the

Federal government to be accountable to the public.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: OIG audits, attestation engagements, and evaluations result in sequentially numbered written products.

Data Verification and Validation: Official audit files support the performance data.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: The number of additional material loss reviews required may impact OIG’s ability to complete products, but OIG

anticipates it will meet the nest fiscal year target.

Ap
Appe

di

221

Measure: Number of investigations referred for criminal prosecution, civil litigation or corrective administrative

action. (Oe) [DISCNTINUE

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 85 105 105 Discontinued Discont

Actual 144 18

Target met? Y

Definition: In order to protect the integrity and efficiency of Treasury programs it is important that findings of criminal or civil misconduct be referred to the

Justice Department, state and/or local governments for prosecution and litigation in a timely manner. Criminal and civil convictions have a greater impact

and carry a greater deterrent effect when they are prosecuted expeditiously. Some investigations will identify violations of the Ethical Standards of

conduct, Federal Acquisition Regulations, or other administrative standards, which do not rise to the level of criminal or civil prosecution. In these cases

it is important that OIG findings are reported to the bureau or office in a timely manner to allow them to take administrative action against the individuals

engaging in misconduct.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: This data will be retrieved from the Investigations case management system.

Data Verification and Validation: Allcase filesfrom fiscalyear 2003 and fiscalyear 2009 will be reviewed to ensure that the case data iscorrect and supported

by documentation.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Continue to aggressively investigate reports of fraud, waste and abuse.

Measure: Percent of statutory audits completed by the required date (E

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 100 100 100 10

Actual 100 100 10

Target met?

Definition: Legislation mandating certain audit work generally prescribes, or authorizes OMB to prescribe, the required completion date for recurring audits

and evaluations, such as those for annual audited financial statements. For other types of mandated audit work, such as a Material Loss Review (MLR) of

a failed financial institution, the legislation generally prescribes a timeframe to issue a report (6 months for an MLR, as an example) from the date of an

event that triggers the audit.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The date OIG issues an audit, attestation engagement, or evaluation report is printed on the cover. The required dates may vary

each year and are specified in different legislation.

Data Verification and Validation: Official audit files and the dates on the reports themselves support the performance data.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: OIG will continue to dedicate resources as required to ensure all mandatory audit deadline are met.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

222

Measure: Percentage (%) of all cases closed during fiscal year that were referred for criminal/civil prosecution or

Treasury Administrative action.

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Tat 

Acl 

Target met? N/A N

Definition: In order to protect the integrity and efficiency of Treasury programs it is important that findings of criminal or civil misconduct be referred to the

Justice Department, state and/or local governments for prosecution and litigation in a timely manner. Criminal and civil convictions have a greater impact

and carry a greater deterrent effect when they are prosecuted expeditiously. Some investigations will identify violations of the Ethical Standards of

conduct, Federal Acquisition Regulations, or other administrative standards, which do not rise to the level of criminal or civil prosecution. In these cases

it is important that OIG findings are reported to the bureau or office in a timely manner to allow them to take administrative action against the individuals

engaging in misconduct.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: This data will be retrieved from the Investigations case management system.

Data Verification and Validation: All case files will be reviewed to ensure that the case data is correct and supported by documentation.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: fiscal year 2009 was the first year for the measure, and OIG will continue to evaluate it through the next fiscal year to

gain a longer term perspective on its value as an effective performance indicator.

Measure: Percentage (%) of all cases that were accepted by prosecutors, referred for agency action, or closed during

the fiscal year and were completed within 18 months of case initiation. 

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Tat 

Acl 

Target met? N/A N

Definition: In order to protect the integrity and efficiency of Treasury programs it is important that findings of criminal or civil misconduct be referred to the

Justice Department, state and/or local governments for prosecution and litigation in a timely manner. Criminal and civil convictions have a greater impact

and carry a greater deterrent effect when they are prosecuted expeditiously. Some investigations will identify violations of the Ethical Standards of

conduct, Federal Acquisition Regulations, or other administrative standards, which do not rise to the level of criminal or civil prosecution. In these cases

it is important that OIG findings are reported to the bureau or office in a timely manner to allow them to take administrative action against the individuals

engaging in misconduct.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: This data will be retrieved from the Investigations case management system.

Data Verification and Validation: All case files will be reviewed to ensure that the case data is correct and supported by documentation.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: fiscal year 2009 was the first year for this measure, and OIG will continue to evaluate it through the next fiscal year to

gain a longer term perspective on its value as an effective performance indicator.

Ap
Appe

di

223

Office of Special Inspector General for the Troubled Assets Relief 

Measure: Number of Completed Audit Products (Ot)(Un

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Tat 

Acl

Target met? N/A N

Definition: Completed audit products includes audit reports that promote the efficiency and effectiveness of the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP).

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Capture - Issued audit reports are posted on http://www.sigtarp.gov/reports.shtml. Source - Undetermined

Data Verification and Validation: Undetermined.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: SIGTARP’s audit team will be fully staffed in fiscal year 2010, which will improve the number of audits completed in

fiscal year 2010.

Measure: Percent of Recommendations Implemented (Oe)

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Tat 

Acl 

Target met? N/A N

Definition: SIGTARP makes recommendations to promote the efficiency and effectiveness of TARP management. The Office of Financial Stability (OFS) must

implement these recommendations in order for SIGTARP’s work to produce financial or non-financial benefits. This measure tracks ESSA’s implementation

of SIGTARP recommendations.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: SIGTARP inputs their recommendations into the Joint Management Enterprise System (JAMES). The Office of Financial Stability

inputs the findings and corresponding recommendations into JAMES, and SIGTARP uses the information in JAMES to track whether or not their

recommendations have been implemented. The data for this measure is stored in JAMES.

Data Verification and Validation: Undetermined.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: FY 2009 was the first year for this measure, and 100% of SIGTARP’s recommendations were implemented. SIGTARP

will continue to make recommendations to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of TARP and anticipates that the Office of Financial Stability will

continue to implement the majority of SIGTARP’s recommendations. SIGTARP will continue to monitor the implementation of these recommendations.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

224

Measure: Congressional Requests for Testimony Completed (Ot)(Unit

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Tat 

Acl

Target met? N/A N

Definition: The number of testimonies that SIGTARP provides to Congress.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Capture - SIGTARP lists all of their testimonies to date on http://www.sigtarp.gov/reports.shtml. Source - Undetermined.

Data Verification and Validation: Undetermined.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Fiscal year 2009 was the first year for this measure, and SIGTARP completed 9 Congressional testimonies. SIGTARP

anticipates that Congress will continue to have interest in SIGTARP’s work and will continue to requests testimonies.

Measure: Percentage of Investigations Accepted by Prosecutors (Oe

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Tat 

Acl 

Target met? N/A N

Definition: This metric measures the percentage of SIGTARP criminal or civil investigations that a federal, state, or local prosecutor has formally accepted

to prosecute.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The case agent assigned to the case updates the status of investigations as necessary. The data originates from the assigned case

agent and is stored on the Case Management System.

Data Verification and Validation: Undetermined

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: In fiscal year 2009, SIGTARP’s Investigations Division presented 17 cases and had one formally declined. This is an

acceptance rate of 95%. As a start up law enforcement organization, it is difficult to draw a baseline from a partial year as to what percentage this will

be in the future. There are a number of conflicting factors that play an important role here, such as prosecutorial thresholds & resources, sensitivity of the

case etc. At this time, there is significant interest among prosecutors in Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) related cases, which plays an important

factor in the acceptance rate. In the future, as other prosecutorial priorities increase in importance, prosecutors will likely devote less resources to TARP

related cases, and correspondingly, the acceptance rate will fall. Going forward, it will be almost impossible to gain a 100 percent acceptance rate, and

SIGTARP’s Investigations Division expects that the acceptance rate will decline from what was reported in fiscal year 2009. SIGTARP’s Investigations

Division expects that the acceptance rate will be somewhere near 50 percent.

Ap
Appe

di

225

Measure: Percentage of Preliminary Investigations Converted to Full Investigations (O

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Tat 

Acl 

Target met? N/A N

Definition: This metric measures the percentage of “preliminary” investigations that are converted to “full” investigations during the reporting period. A

“preliminary” investigation is a limited investigation during which the investigator gathers fundamental information to determine the need to continue,

pursue other remedies, or close the case. A “full” investigation is where the case agent accumulates all additional evidence needed to successfully

complete the investigation.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: When an investigator or supervisor assesses the information contained in an allegation of wrongdoing, a number of factors are

considered prior to determining what type of case should be opened. For example, if the allegation includes significant supporting documentation or

witness testimony showing illegal activity, then a case, or “full” investigation, would be opened immediately. However, if the allegation has only brief

details, a “preliminary” investigation can be opened to provide a mechanism to develop further information regarding the allegation. The data originates

with the case agent and the official case file. The data used to track this metric comes from the ID Case Management System.

Data Verification and Validation: Undetermined

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: In fiscal year 2009, SIGTARP’s Investigations Division was hampered by the lack of a formal Case Management

System, and this made it incredibly difficult to track this statistic. The Case Management System is being deployed to all ID personnel in February 2010,

and as the fiscal year progresses, the measure will be easier to track. In addition, as the division was being stood up, a number of preliminary cases were

opened and the division lacked enough investigative resources to quickly resolve the allegations. In addition, as the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP)

has expanded, the numbers of allegations worthy of follow-up has expanded. As a consequence, lower priorityinvestigations are taking longer to complete

than we had initially anticipated. Given these circumstances, SIGTARP requested that a performance target of 35 percent in fiscal year 2010 to allow

SIGTARP to absorb the full utility of the Case Management System and to fully staff SIGTARP’s Investigations Division. SIGTARP plans to increase this

performance target to 40 percent in fiscal year 2011 and will reassess that target based on SIGTARP’s experiences in fiscal year 2010.

Measure: Percentage of cases that are joint agency/task force investigations (Oe)(%

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Tat 

Acl 

Target met? N/A N

Definition: This is the overall percentage of cases during the reporting cycle that are joint with other law enforcement agencies.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The Data originates from the assigned Case Agent and is stored on the Case Management System.

Data Verification and Validation: Undetermined

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: Given the high profile of many of the cases SIGTARP’sInvestigations Division initially opened, SIGTARP partnered with

many other law enforcement agencies and had 60 percent of cases as joint agency/ task force investigations in fiscal year 2009. A number of factors will

determine whether SIGTARP can sustain a rate of 60 percent over the long term, and lacking more detailed data, SIGTARP expects that the percentage of

joint agency/ task force investigation cases will drop.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

226

Measure: Percentage of Hotline Complaints Referred for Investigation orto OFS within 14 days of Receip

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Tat 

Acl 

Target met? N/A N

Definition: This metric tracks the time taken to resolve citizen complaints to SIGTARP’s Investigations Division’s hotline.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The data originates from calls, emails, faxes and letters received from citizens and are processed in SIGTARP’s Investigations

Division’s Case Management System.

Data Verification and Validation: Undetermined

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: With procedures created and in place, SIGTARP was able to refer 77 percent of Hotline complaints for investigation or

to the Office ofFinancial Stability within 14 days of receipt. SIGTARP anticipatesthat an increased volume ofcalls and improved mechanismsto screen the

allegations for different indicators of fraud may impact the time taken to process the allegations. Therefore, the percentage may drop slightly. Therefore,

SIGTARP projects targets of 60 percent in fiscal year 2010 and 65 percent in fiscal year 2011.

Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administrat

Measure: Percentage of Audit Products Delivered When Promised to Stakeholder

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Taget Baseline 6

Acual 6

Target met? N

Definition: The likelihood that our products will be used is enhanced if they are delivered when needed to support Congressional and Internal Revenue Service

(IRS) decision making. To determine whether our products are timely, we track the percentage of our products that are delivered on or before the day we

committed to (Contract date) because it is critical that our work be done on time for it to be used by the IRS or the Congress.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: Information regarding Contract dates and actual delivery dates for audits is maintained on the TCMIS. MIS Coordinators in the

Office of Audit’s Operating/Business Units monitor overall data accuracy and maintain secure controls over key milestone and “Contract” data entries.

Data Verification and Validation: Summary data used for purposes of reporting on this measure are extracted, from the Office of Audit’s TeamCentral

Management Information System (TCMIS), analyzed and summarized by personnel in our Office of Management and Policy. A qualified staff member

independent of the processvalidatesthe progressrelated statistics. TCMIS data are reviewed and validated monthly by MIS Coordinators, Audit Managers

and Directors.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: At the end of the 4th quarter, TIGTA Office of Audit (OA) exceeded this goal by 16 percentage points or 124 percent.

Since this is only TIGTA OA’s third year reporting on this measure, the measure is still relatively new and TIGTA will not be increasing its goal. TIGTA plans

for fiscal year 2010 is to work to match its fiscal year 2009 results.

Ap
Appe

di

227

Measure: Percentage of Recommendations Made That Have Been Implemented

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Taget Baseline 8

Acual 90 

Target met? N

Definition: The Office of Audit (OA) makes recommendations designed to improve administration of the Federal tax system. The Internal Revenue Service

(IRS) must implement these recommendations in order for our work to produce financial or non-financial benefits. This measure assesses our effect

on improving the IRS’s accountability, operations, and services. Because the IRS needs time to act on recommendations, we track the percentage of

recommendations that we made four (4) years ago that have since been implemented, rather than the results of our activities, during the fiscal year in

which the recommendations are made. This timeframe is used because four (4) years is the point at which TIGTA-OA believes that if a recommendation

has not been implemented, it is not likely to be.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The IRS records recommendations in the Department’s JAMES as they are issued. Summary data regarding the status of the IRS’s

corrective actions taken in response to our recommendations are provided to the Office of Audit via JAMES reports. Our Office of Management and Policy

monitors implementation of recommendations as the IRS submits updated information to the JAMES.

Data Verification and Validation: Through a formal process, each audit team identifies the number of recommendations included in each report and the IRS

enters the findings and corresponding recommendations into the Department of the Treasury’s (the Department) Joint Audit Management Enterprise

System (JAMES). The database is updated frequently. Our Office of Management and Policy receives summary data and monitors the data regularly to

make sure the recommendations reported as implemented have been accurately recorded, as well as to accumulate data in regard to progress in meeting

this measure. A qualified staff member independent of the process validates the progress related statistics.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: At the end of the 4th quarter, TIGTA Office of Audit (OA) exceeded this goal by 8 percentage points or 109 percent. For

Fiscal Year 2010, TIGTA OA expectstomeet itstargeted goal of 83 percent. However, because the IRS isresponsible for implementing the recommendations

and not TIGTA, the achievement of this goal depends on IRS management. Therefore, TIGTA OA will not be increasing its goal for fiscal year 2010.

A This number has been updated since the Fiscal Year 2008 Department of the Treasury Performance and Accountability Report.

Measure: Percentage of Results from Investigative Activities 

FY 200 FY 207 FY2008 Y 200

Target 70 73 76 

Actual 79 81 

Target met?

Definition: Investigative reports resulting in Criminal, Civil or Administrative adjudication or the identification of matters of security or investigative

interest.

Indicator Type: Measure

Data Capture and Source: The total number of investigative cases closed along with the total number of completed Criminal, Civil and Administrative Actions

is extracted from the Performance and Results Information System (PARIS).

Data Verification and Validation: Reports of Investigation and PARIS are reviewed forconsistency by Special Agentsin Charge prior to closing the investigation.

Additionally, independent reviews are conducted periodically of each field office where a sample of closed investigations are quality reviewed by the

Operations Division Inspection Team to ensure accuracy of the PARIS data. Periodic tests of PARIS data are also conducted to ensure accuracy.

Data Accuracy: Reasonable

Data Frequency: Quarterly

Future Plans/Explanation for Shortfall: At the end of the 4th quarter, TIGTA exceeded this goal by 5 percentage points or 106 percent. Although some

investigative statistics declined, the Office of Investigations (OI) assisted TIGTA in meeting its overall performance measures. OI believes that with the

mission enhancement of the Armed Escort Program some future outcomes may adjust downward as this increased workload strains the operational

capabilities of the office. Similarly, future investigative outcomes may degrade in pure statistical counts as OI focuses its scarce resources on higher

impact investigations, which require greater work-hours per investigation and corresponding outcome. Nevertheless, TIGTA OI is increasing its fiscal year

2010 performance goal as it believes its high quality workforce can meet this goal while facing the twin challenges of an austere budget environment and

increased mission responsibility.

Full Report of the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2009 Perfo
D

par

ent 

f t

e

ury   

nc

o

m

nce

ep

rt • Fiscal 

228

Lege

* Current year end data is projected actual.

** Refers to Proposed Target.

Key: Oe - Outcome Measure, E - Efficiency Measure, Ot - Output/Workload Measure

Ap
Website Information

Treasury On-line www.treas.gov

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax 

and Trade Bureau www.ttb.gov

Community Development 

Financial Institutions Fund www.treas.gov/cdfi

Comptroller of the Currency www.occ.treas.gov

Bureau of Engraving & Printing www.bep.treas.gov

Financial Crimes 

Enforcement Network www.treas.gov/fincen

Financial Management Service www.fms.treas.gov

Internal Revenue Service www.irs.gov

U.S. Mint www.usmint.gov

Bureau of the Public Debt www.publicdebt.treas.gov

Office of Thrift Supervision www.ots.treas.gov

The Financial Stability Plan www.financialstability.gov

Help for America’s Homeowners www.makinghomeaffordable.gov

Recovery Act Spending www.recovery.gov
www.treas.gov