Source: https://sourcebook.acus.gov/index.php?title=Government_Performance_and_Results_Act&oldid=337
Timestamp: 2020-08-09 02:24:18
Document Index: 651409361

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 306', '§ 1105', '§ 2801', '§ 1120', '§ 105', '§ 1122', '§ 1120', '§ 2804', '§ 2805']

Revision as of 15:05, 22 August 2018 by Frank (talk | contribs) (→‎Purposes)
5 U.S.C. § 306; 31 U.S.C. §§ 1105(a)(29), 1115–1119, 3515(a), 9703–9704; 39 U.S.C. §§ 2801–2805; enacted August 3, 1993, by Pub. L. No. 103-62, 107 Stat. 286. Added 31 U.S.C. §§ 1120-1125, as amended on Jan. 4, 2011, by Pub. L. No. 111-352, 124 Stat. 3866.
3.3 Books, Reports, and Articles
Within the federal government, GPRA applies to all federal entities defined by 5 U.S.C. § 105 as being an “agency,” with a few exceptions. It covers 14 Cabinet departments, virtually all independent establishments (agencies), and all government corporations. The U.S. Postal Service is covered by the Act, but under a special provision designed to recognize its special status. Certain provisions in GPRAMA, however, only apply to the 24 so-called CFO Agencies, i.e., those with Chief Financial Officers.
A requirement that OMB prepare annual federal government performance plans based on the agency annual performance plans, develop federal government priority goals, and establish a single, performance-related website (performance.gov). The governmentwide performance plan is to be a part of the President’s budget and transmitted to Congress. In the agency and governmentwide performance plans, the levels of program performance to be achieved is to correspond with the program-funding level in the budget.
A codification of the Performance Improvement Council (established by Executive Order 13,450), which is responsible for facilitating agency coordination, resolving any “crosscutting” performance issues, and advancing federal government priority goals.
Under GPRAMA, OMB must submit an annual report on “unmet goals” to every agency, two congressional committees, and the Government Accountability Office. If OMB finds that an agency has failed to meet its performance goals for one fiscal year, that agency must submit a performance improvement plan to OMB. If such failure persists for two consecutive fiscal years, the “Administration” is required to provide Congress with a prescription for improvement. In cases of failure for three consecutive fiscal years, the Act requires OMB to submit to Congress its recommendations for punitive or corrective action, including budget reduction and statutory restructuring.
An interagency council originally established by President George W. Bush’s Executive Order 13,450 in 2007, PIC was officially codified by GPRAMA and mainly comprises performance improvement officers: career or politically appointed senior executives at an agency who largely serve as advisers within a given agency and report directly to an agency’s COO. The Council is designed to harmonize any crosscutting performance issues and assist OMB in achieving federal government priority goals. GPRAMA also authorizes OMB to create a cadre of performance-monitoring personnel by hiring up to two people for each CFO agency to serve at the direction of OBM’s Deputy Director for Management. OMB’s Deputy Director for Management also chairs the Council, determines its agenda, and directs its work. The Council is primarily tasked with assisting the Director of OMB in achieving federal government priority goals. There appears to be nothing in the new legislation that expressly requires PIC’s activities to be publicly or even congressionally transparent.
Finalized in February of 2014 and concurrent with the President’s 2015 budget, performance.gov is the OMB-run website that consolidates and publishes “readily accessible” information on cross-agency priority goals, agency priority goals, agency strategic plans, annual performance plans, and annual performance updates (31 U.S.C. § 1122(b); OMB Circular A-11 (2017)). The site’s URL and infrastructure predated GPRAMA’s effectuation date. The Obama Administration launched it on August 25, 2011, in part, to “provide a window” into the Administration’s own executive improvement plan—the Accountable Government Initiative.
Under GPRAMA, OMB must develop and update federal government priority goals at least every four years and make them available during the President’s budget proposal at the beginning of the second year of a President’s term. Interim FGPGs were required to be submitted beginning with the President’s budget proposal for fiscal year 2013. Required to be long-term in scope, the goals are of two types: (1) outcome-centric goals that are designed to be crosscutting in nature and cover certain policy areas (these are also referred to as mission-oriented or cross-agency priority goals (CAP goals)), and (2) goals for management improvement in areas such as financial management and procurement (mission-support goals). In crafting these goals, OMB must consult with specific committees listed in the Act and any other committees “as determined appropriate.” Like agency-level performance goals, each federal government goal is required to have a goal leader and is subject to “quarterly priority progress reviews” each fiscal year.
GPRA, by comparison, was created as a law, unlike its predecessors, which were presidential directives. Its origin can primarily be traced to two separately conceived proposals. One proposal was described in the Management Report (January 1989) of then-President Reagan; his report contained a chapter, prepared by OMB staff, titled “Government of the Future,” which outlined the basic structure of what would become GPRA four years later. Another proposal came from Senator William Roth (R-DE), who in 1990 first introduced the legislation that would eventually become the Government Performance and Results Act. In addition, the Chief Financial Officers Act (Pub. L. No. 101-576) became law in 1990. Several features of this Act also helped lay a foundation for GPRA.
Several executive and legislative agency documents lay out requirements for most federal agencies’ activities to fulfill the Act’s provisions. These include OMB Circular A-11, Preparation, Submission, and Execution of the Budget (2018), and Congressional Research Service, Changes to the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA): Overview of the New Framework of Product and Processes (2012).
Optimizing government performance is also the defining mission of the Administrative Conference of the United States. Accordingly, ACUS has commissioned a report and issued a recommendation on improving GPRAMA’s implementation.
S. Report No. 102-429, Senate Comm. on Governmental Affairs, 102d Cong., 2d Sess. (1992).
S. Report No. 103-58, Senate Comm. on Governmental Affairs, 103d Cong., 1st Sess. (1993).
Call up by Unanimous Consent in House of Representatives, Cong. Rec. H4734-4737 (July 15, 1993).
H. Rep. No. 111-504, House Comm. on Oversight and Government, 111th Cong., 2d Sess. (2010).
S. Rep. No. 111-372, Senate Comm. on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 111th Cong., 2d Sess. (2010).
Senate Amendment Agreed to by House, 216-139 (Roll no. 660), Cong. Rec. H8852-8857 (Dec. 21, 2010).
Office of Management and Budget, Primer on Performance Management (Feb. 1995).
Office of Management and Budget, Circular A-11, Preparation, Submission, and Execution of the Budget (July 2017).
Admin. Conf. of the U.S., Recommendation 2013-7, GPRA Modernization Act of 2010: Examining Constraints To, and Providing Tools For, Cross-Agency Collaboration, 78 Fed. Reg. 76,269 (Dec. 17, 2013).
Chief Financial Officers Council, Streamlining Governmentwide Statutory Reports (1995).
Chief Financial Officers Council, Implementation of the Government Performance and Results Act (1995).
Chief Financial Officers Council, Guiding Principles for Implementing GPRA (1995).
Department of the Navy, Archester Houston & Steven L. Dockstader, Total Quality Leadership Office, Total Quality Leadership: A Primer (1997) (and sources cited in bibliography), available at http:// www.balancedscorecard.org/portals/0/pdf/primer.pdf.
U.S. General Accounting Office, GAO/T-GGD-95-193, Managing for Results: Status of the Government Performance and Results Act (1995).
General Accounting Office, GAO/GGD-96-118, Executive Guide: Effectively Implementing the Government Performance and Results Act (1996).
General Accounting Office, GAO/T-GGD-96-79, Managing for Results: Achieving GPRA’s Objectives Requires Strong Congressional Role (1996).
General Accounting Office, GAO/GGD/AIMD-98-52, Managing for Results: The Statutory Framework for Performance-Based Management and Accountability (1998), available at http://www.gao.gov/ assets/230/225188.pdf.
General Accounting Office, GAO-04-38, Results-Oriented Government: GPRA Has Established a Solid Foundation for Achieving Greater Results (2004), available at http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d0438.pdf.
Government Accountability Office, GAO-11-617T, GPRA Modernization Act Implementation Provides Important Opportunities to Address Government Challenges (2011), available at http://www.gao.gov/ assets/130/126150.pdf.
Government Accountability Office, GAO-14-268, Reexamining Regulations: Agencies Often Made Regulatory Changes; but Could Strengthen Linkages to Performance Goals (2014).
Government Accountability Office, GAO-13-356, Agencies have Elevated Performance Management Leadership Roles, but Additional Training is Needed (2013), available at http://www.gao.gov/assets/ 660/653789.pdf.
Government Accountability Office, GAO-13-518, Executive Branch should more fully Implement the GPRA Modernization Act to Address Pressing Government Challenges (2013), available at http:// www.gao.gov/assets/660/655541.pdf.
Government Accountability Office, GAO-13-517, Managing for Results: Leading Practices Should Guide the Continued Development of Performance.gov (2013), available at http://www.gao.gov/assets/660/ 655059.pdf.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA Strategic Management Handbook (1996).
Books, Reports, and Articles
Jerry Ellig, Mercatus on Policy, No. 49, Measuring GPRA’s Results (Apr. 2009), available at http://mercatus.org/sites/default/files/publication/
Jane Fountain, The GPRA Modernization Act Of 2010: Examining Constraints To, And Providing Tools For, Cross-Agency Collaboration (Dec. 5, 2013) (report to the Admin. Conf. of the U.S.), available at www.acus.gov/report/gpra-modernization-act-2010-examining-constraintsand-providing-tools-cross-agency-0.
John Griffith & Gadi Dechter, Center for American Progress, Performance Reviews that Work: Four Case Studies of Successful Performance Review Systems in the Federal Government (Feb. 2011), available at http:// www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/issues/2011/02/pdf/ rww_case_studies.pdf.
OMB Watch, GPRA Process Needs More Stakeholder Involvement (1997).
Paul R. Verkuil & Jane E. Fountain, The Administrative Conference of the United States: Recommendations to Advance Cross-Agency Collaboration under the GPRA Modernization Act, 74 PUB. ADMIN. REV. (2014).
§ 1120. Federal Government and priority goals
§ 2804. Program performance repots
§ 2805. Inherently government functions
Retrieved from "https://sourcebook.acus.gov/index.php?title=Government_Performance_and_Results_Act&oldid=337"