1 / 11

Budget and Performance Integration

Budget and Performance Integration. DOI Business Management Conference Plenary Session May 24, 2006 Dr. Richard Beck, Director of Planning and Performance Management John Trezise, Director of Budget. Agenda. Overall goal OMB-specified objectives Status Value for us Our efforts Your role.

andrew
Download Presentation

Budget and Performance Integration

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Budget and Performance Integration DOI Business Management Conference Plenary Session May 24, 2006 Dr. Richard Beck, Director of Planning and Performance Management John Trezise, Director of Budget

  2. Agenda • Overall goal • OMB-specified objectives • Status • Value for us • Our efforts • Your role

  3. Overall Goal • Practice & Demonstrate: • Consideration of achieving greater performance and efficiency in decision making • Achievement of results (performance) and increased efficiency

  4. OMB-specified objectives • Promote a more accountable, transparent, and managerially effective government • Efforts are posted publicly • www.Results.gov describes progress being made across all the Presidential Management Agenda initiatives • www.ExpectMore.gov provides a description of the performance assessment (PART) of government programs; posted as achieving results or not

  5. OMB-specified objectives • Report the full cost of achieving performance goals and accurately estimate the marginal cost of changing performance goals • Use PART evaluations to direct program improvements, hold managers accountable for those improvements; no more than 10% of programs rated Results Not Demonstrated • Use PART ratings findings and performance information consistently to justify funding requests, management actions, and legislative proposals • Have at least one efficiency measure for all PARTed programs • Use marginal cost analysis to inform resource allocations • Improve efficiency each year/achieve efficiency targets

  6. Status • Rating • Progress: Green • Overall: Yellow • Shortcomings • Unable to adequately link incremental changes in performance with changes in funding • Need to reduce number of Results Not Demonstrated programs to less than 10% (presently 35%) • lack of performance measures and /or data • Lack of programs employing efficiency measures

  7. Value for Us • Demonstrates our expertise • planning, managerial, and technical • concerted effort to reach pre-determined, defined goals • ability to achieve results with commitment to achieve more • Conveys information about our pursuits/challenges • Justifies funding requests in terms of what you produce, not just what you buy • Quantifying the funding used to accomplish a level of achievement provides a historical justification for future funding requests • Provides insight into challenges, differences in prices or need • Provides a basis for comparisons • Look for efficiencies among regions, programs, etc. • Compete in tight fiscal environment

  8. Value for Us • Increases Credibility • Demonstrates that we have a organized process for determining our future goals, regularly tracking if we are getting there, and deciding on what we need to adjust to ensure success • Results, not just activity, is the focus of our efforts • OMB and other oversight organizations (e.g. GMU Mercatus Center) are interested in the magnitude of our success and understanding the costs of specific achievements

  9. Our Efforts • Constructing the framework that brings financial and performance information together • Activity Based Costing being extended to relate work activities to performance measures • provides incremental cost/performance information • Integrate budget and performance planning processes • Goal performance table requests total-cost and per-unit-cost for each performance measure • Examine trends for performance-based explanations of funding decisions • Working to provide funding of performance measures and cost-per-unit of performance from ABC/M

  10. Our Efforts • Track progress of bureaus in completing PART follow-up actions and increasing PART scores • Future • Bring ABC/M financial and performance module information together with budget formulation information into a single automated system

  11. Your Role • Success is dependent upon the involvement of bureaus and programs in • participating in integrated process-formulation activities • Financial community • Activity Based Costing Oversight Team (AOT) • Performance Management Council • Budget Officers • establishing the internal routine processes that collect, examine, assess, and utilize this information during the year • ensuring accuracy and traceability of financial, performance, and budget information • ensure programs use performance and efficiency measures, and actively participate in PART process especially follow-up actions • making this information useful to managers and decision makers • Make budget and performance integration concepts a part of our everyday business in planning and implementing our programs to better ensure effectiveness and to help ensure the future for our program pursuits

More Related