Federal Program Performance Review: Program Assessment and Results Act and Other Developments (CRS Report for Congress)
Premium Purchase PDF for $24.95 (16 pages)
add to cart or
subscribe for unlimited access
Pro Premium subscribers have free access to our full library of CRS reports.
Subscribe today, or
request a demo to learn more.
| Release Date |
Revised Feb. 28, 2006 |
| Report Number |
RL32671 |
| Report Type |
Report |
| Authors |
Virginia A. McMurtry, Government and Finance Division |
| Source Agency |
Congressional Research Service |
| Older Revisions |
-
Premium Nov. 15, 2004 (14 pages, $24.95)
add
|
Summary:
On January 4, 2005, H.R. 185 , the Program Assessment and Results Act (PARA), was
introduced, to require the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to review government programs
at least once every five years for purposes of evaluating their performance. The bill would amend
the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 ( P.L. 103-62 , known as GPRA), to create a
statutory process resembling the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART), first used by OMB
during preparation of the FY2004 budget. H.R. 185 would not, however, mandate the use
of PART specifically.
On March 10, 2005, the House Government Reform Committee held a business meeting to
mark up H.R. 185 . The committee voted to report the bill favorably (19 yeas-14 nays),
and the written report followed on March 17 (House Report 109-26). H.R. 185 is very
similar to H.R. 3826 as reported in the 108th Congress (House Report 108-768) and to
S. 2898 , a companion bill in the 108th Congress. H.R. 185 would amend
GPRA to require the OMB director to review, to the maximum extent practicable, each federal
program (as defined by OMB) at least once every five years. In conducting each assessment, OMB
would coordinate with the relevant agency head to determine the programs to be reviewed, and to
evaluate the purpose, design, strategic plan, management, and results of the program. In developing
criteria for identifying programs to be assessed each year, the director would consider the advantages
of reviewing programs with similar purposes or functions the same year. At least 90 days prior to
completing the annual assessments, a listing of programs under review and the criteria being used
would be available on the OMB website, and OMB would also "provide a mechanism" for public
comment on the programs and criteria. The assessments would be performed only by federal
employees, and the results would be transmitted to Congress along with the next budget submission
of the President. PARA would further amend GPRA to require submission of strategic plans
covering four years, to be submitted by September 30 following a year when there is a presidential
election.
Various subjects are of potential interest in considering H.R. 185 . One issue is its
relationship with GPRA and PART. Some suggest that PARA builds and improves upon the GPRA
framework and is needed to ensure that coordinated program reviews continue. Others point out that
the PART process, which PARA resembles, is not well integrated with GPRA, and that PARA,
unlike GPRA, does not require consultation with Congress and other stakeholders. Additional
concerns include avoiding partisanship in the review process and protecting the role of Congress.
Finally, frameworks for systematic review of federal programs developed previously in sunset bills
may be of interest in PARA deliberations. For example, in 1978, S. 2 (95th Congress), as
passed by the Senate, devised a 10-year schedule for review and reauthorization of most federal
programs based on categories of function and subfunction in the FY1979 federal budget.
This report will be updated as events warrant.
