Transcript GPRA: Destined to be a Miserable Failure

GPRA: Destined to be a
Miserable Failure
Paper Prepared for LBSC 708Z:
Issues in Information Policy,
Spring 2002 by
Christina Kirk Pikas
Overview
GPRA: Government Performance and Results
Act (1993)
Purpose of Paper




Review existing literature
Review factors required for success
Discuss success and likelihood of future success
Provide suggestions for next steps and further
research
Existing Literature on GPRA
Compliance of various agencies
Evaluative and planning skills
Critical analyses of results
Reviews of historical programs and
similar programs of other governments
Best practices and how-tos
General Points From Literature
GPRA is not substantially different from
previous unsuccessful efforts
The budgetary process makes success
extremely unlikely
Widespread well-documented cynicism
in the government is a huge barrier
Historical Programs
Hoover Commission – 1950’s
Planning-Programming-Budgeting
System


Long-range program planning, cost benefit
analysis of alternative programs
Pre-existing resource commitments,
congressional/presidential allocation of
funds for political reasons, difficulty of
analysis
More Historical Programs
Management By Objectives – 1973


Face-to-face meetings, 10-15 objectives
per agency to be achieved within a year
without additional resources.
Upper-level support evaporated,
administrations changed
Zero-Base Budgeting – 1977


Start from zero – eliminate incrementalism
Too much paperwork, lack of commitment
Budgetary Process:
Complexity
Never-ending process with cumulative,
conflicting requirements
Incremented from previous year’s
budget
Timeline wickets are almost never met


Funding is uncertain
Funding is slow
Budgetary Process: Politics
and Fragmentation
Politicians prioritize programs according
to the perceived needs of constituency
Public support and moral factors
No one group really knows what’s going
on across the government
Conflicts:




Authorizing vs. Appropriations committees
Executive vs. Legislative
Bureau vs. Department vs. Branch
Local vs. State vs. Federal (and non-profits)
Budgetary Process: Control
Per Schick (1966) budgeting a balance
of control, planning, and management
measures
Control prioritized over time to combat
fraud, waste, abuse
Performance management relies on the
devolution of control to the program
manager
Governmental Cynicism:
Agencies
Some agencies are doing better than
others
See GAO, Mercatus, OMB, and GPP
reports for reviews of agency progress
My reviews
Veterans Affairs
Education
Transportation
State
Governmental Cynicism:
People
Aging and very experienced workforce
Survey results

GAO (1997)
 Results information not available/not used
 No change in agencies since GPRA

GAO (2000)
 Lower % of managers use performance info than in 1997
 Greater responsibility not linked to greater authority

Light/Brookings Institution (2002)
 Only 1/3 of those surveyed could identify how their job
contributes to agency’s mission
 “If federal employees do not like the reform of the
moment, all they have to do is wait a year or two…”
Conclusions
There are huge, foreseeable barriers to
the success of GPRA
Evaluations show that it is not
successful
A successful GPRA would alter the
balance of power – not a good thing for
those currently on top
Recommendations
Use performance management at department
level at the highest
Train more people in evaluation skills –
require in administrators
Enforce requirements regarding
appropriations only for authorized programs
Determine a better mechanism for
experimental programs
Recommendations
Further Research


Role of faulty guidance from OMB in poor
reports (insistence on incorporation of
trendy goals)
Statistical analysis to see if actual
correlation between age or years of service
and application of new management
strategies