1 / 48

Accountability Matters!

Accountability Matters!. Illinois All Employee Training Conference March 1, 2005 Decatur, Illinois. Dan D. Lawson, Director Strategic and Performance Planning Division. Objectives. Driving forces – Why? Agency priorities – What? Field office business tools - How? The future.

orsin
Download Presentation

Accountability Matters!

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. Accountability Matters! Illinois All Employee Training Conference March 1, 2005 Decatur, Illinois Dan D. Lawson, Director Strategic and Performance Planning Division

  2. Objectives • Driving forces – Why? • Agency priorities – What? • Field office business tools - How? • The future

  3. 10,000 ft. Perspective

  4. Driving Forces “First and most critically is the President’s very clear signal that he wants his administration and our government to be results-oriented.” June 20, 2001 GOVEXEC.COM (Government Executive)

  5. GPRA – Government Performance and Results Act • PMA – President’s Management Agenda • PART – Program Assessment Rating Tool • Budgets • Congress and Oversight • Leadership commitment

  6. GPRA The Bush administration is determined to put teeth behind the 1993 Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) Sean O’Keefe, deputy director of the Office of Management and Budget.

  7. President’s Management Agenda(PMA) • Strategic Management of HumanCapital • Competitive Sourcing • Improved Financial Performance • Expanding e-government • Budget and Performance Integration

  8. PART -Evaluates Programs in Four Critical Areas • Program Purpose and Design – 20% • Strategic Planning – 10% • Program Management – 20% • Program Results and Accountability – 50%

  9. Does the program have a limited number of specific, ambitious long-term performance goals that focus on outcomes and meaningfully reflect the purpose of the program? Outcomes-based goals! PART Key Questions

  10. Does the program have a limited number of annual performance goals that demonstrate progress toward achieving the long-term goals? Demonstratable Progress! PART Key Questions

  11. So what? - Possible PART Impacts • Program will be fully funded or, • Program will be funded, pending improvements or, • Program will be transferred to a more efficient agency with similar programs or, • Program will be terminated.

  12. NRCS PART Scores ProgramScoreYear • EQIP 72% 2004 • EWP 56% 2004 • RC&D 41% 2004 • Snow Survey 82% 2004 • Watershed Prot & Flood Prevention 65% 2004 • CTA 59% 2003 • Plant Materials 63% 2003 • NRI 69% 2003 • Soil Survey 71% 2003 • FRPP 66% 2002 • WHIP 60% 2002

  13. PART Scores – CTA/RC&D

  14. Efficiency Measures • Technical assistance cost per acre • Estimated average cost per CNMP assisted • Average per-acre cost for 30-year and permanent easement acquisition • Reduction in average annual technical assistance cost per active participant

  15. Congress and Oversight “If implemented as currently planned, [the system] will provide NRCS with the means to set agency-wide goals, determine the resources and strategies needed to achieve them, hold the different parts of the agency responsible for achieving the goals, and report on its performance.” Government Accountability Office (GAO)

  16. “The Congress has placed great trust in NRCS to handle the massive farm bill investment. And they will expect greater accountability. We will have to work with our partners to document the accomplishments coming out of the Federal investment. That will require better planning, budgeting, and reporting, both within NRCS and partner organizations.” Bruce Knight – Feb 2003

  17. Agency Priorities It’s not good enough to do something - It has to be the something! right

  18. Agency Priorities • Streamline and implement conservation programs • Implement President’s management initiatives (strategic management of human capital, competitive sourcing, improved financial performance, expanding e-government, and budget and performance integration) • Increase outreach activities and workforce diversity • Enable conservation delivery by modernization and expansion of technical capacity. • Revision of NRCS Strategic Plan

  19. NRCS Strategic Goals • Enhance natural resource productivity to enable a strong agricultural and natural resource sector. • Reduce unintended adverse effects of natural resource development and use to ensure a high quality environment • Reduce risks from flooding and drought to protect public health and safety • Deliver high quality services to the public to enable natural resource stewardship

  20. USDA Strategic Goals* • Conservation plans written on cropland and grazing land (ac.) (CTA) • Grazing lands with conservation applied (ac.) (CTA, EQIP) • Reduction in the acreage of cropland soils damaged by erosion (ac.) (CTA, CRP) • CNMPs applied (no.) (CTA, EQIP) • Agricultural wetlands created, restored, or enhanced (ac.) (CTA, CRP, WRP) * Measures that NRCS are directly responsible for.

  21. Workload, Workforce & Performance Data Resource Inventory & Assessment Locally Led Input & Consultations Customer Service Feedback Performance Measures Annual Performance Plan National Business Plan Annual Budget State Performance Plans State Business Plans State Budget Accountability System NRCS Strategic Plan Performance Report FO Business Tools Total Cost Accounting System (TCAS) ProTracts Customer Service Toolkit Performance Measurement CSGs Performance Results System (PRS) POINTS Oversight & Evaluation Budget Allocation Process

  22. Field-based tools

  23. Field Operations to Performance Outcomes Customer Contact Technical Assistance Provided PHYSICAL EFFECT OUTPUTS PERFORMANCE MEASURES OUTCOMES

  24. Field Operations to Performance Outcomes Customer Contact Technical Assistance Provided Customer Service Toolkit, WebTCAS, Protracts, PRS PHYSICAL EFFECT exported from CRA, Conservation Guide Sheets NRI-CEAP utilizes information to refine outcome models OUTPUTS (Ex. Tons of sediment Planned to be reduced) PERFORMANCE MEASURES (Ex. Reduced soil erosion on ___ acres of working lands) OUTCOMES (Ex. By 2007, reduce sedimentation to avoid $___ of on-site and off-site damages.)

  25. Customer Service Toolkit 5.0

  26. CSG Status • 16,000 guides, containing 32,000 conservation systems have been entered into the system. • 1,000 Common Resource Areas (CRA) have been established.

  27. ProTracts – NRCS Contract Manager • Current supports EQIP, AMA, WHIP, and CSP • More than 150,000 cost-share agreement applications have been loaded into ProTracts • In Sept. 2004, about $34 million in CSP payments were made, using ProTracts • More than 100,000 EQIP contracts were migrated from FSA to ProTracts, and reconciled

  28. Performance Results System (PRS) • Captures and reports inputs, outputs, and outcomes for Agency strategic and performance plan goals. • Harvests information directly from Conservation Toolkit and ProTracts, or through direct entry into PRS. • Utilized to analyze and monitor performance. http://ias.nrcs.usda.gov

  29. POINTS • A collection of data, web-based applications, and resources for State and National Program Managers • EQIP and Watersheds currently available • RC&D and other remaining programs to be deployed in FY2005

  30. Total Cost Accounting System (TCAS) • Employees record program and activities worked • Feeds pay system • Provides program and activity cost information

  31. How we spent our time in FY2004

  32. Conservation Information System (CIS)

  33. The future …….

  34. Outputs to Outcomes • Healthy Watersheds • Clean Water • Sedimentation Reduced • Tons of Soil Saved • Number of Acres Treated • Number of People Served OUTCOMES INTERMEDIATE OUTCOMES OUTPUTS

  35. Natural Resource Issue NRCS Logic Model Activity Work Product Indicators Conservation Practices and Contracts Outputs Annual Performance Measures Outcomes

  36. Soil Erosion Conservation Planning Residue Management Tons of sediment Planned to be reduced Reduced soil erosion on ___ acres of working lands By 2007, reduce sedimentation to avoid $___ of on-site and off-site damages. NRCS Logic Model Planning ($) Application ($) Maintenance And Follow-up ($) Tech. Development And Transfer ($)

  37. CIS Next Generation “Executive Dashboards”

  38. Farm Bill - 2007 • Streamline programs • Maximize contracts • Increase accountability for CTA • Improve strategic planning

  39. Revision of the Strategic Plan • Current plan last updated in 2003 • The new strategic plan is to be completed by the end of 2005 • Strategic Planning Teams will represent cross organizational and functional levels of the agency and will involve significant input from the field

  40. Sept. Feb. Mar. Aug. May April July June Form Plan Scan SWOT, Issues Vision,Mission Goals Strategies Draft Timeline for Strategic Planning Process

  41. Back to the Field

  42. Customer Satisfaction ResultsPRELIMINARY FINDINGSFrom the American Customer Satisfaction Index What are the results for NRCS? Your Score for the recipients of Conservation Technical Assistance in the past year is: 81 Here’s how it compares: • Your Segment Score 81.0 • Private Sector Comparable Score 71.2 • Federal Government-wide Score 68.6

  43. FY 2004 Performance

  44. Providing High Quality Assistance in Conserving Natural Resources

  45. Thank you!dan.lawson@usda.gov202-720-5322

More Related