Office of Research & Development Budget Status

1. Office of Research & Development Budget Status Howard Cantor Acting Director, Office of Resources Management and Administration

2. Overview • Budget Overview • FY 2009 Continuing Resolution • FY 2010 Areas of Emphasis • FY 2011 Planning • Evaluation and Accountability Overview

3. Example Oversize Graphic Template Budget Trends

4. S&T funds primarily ORD ORD is funded primarily by S&T Congressional Appropriation Accounts, FY 2009 President’s Budget S&T Approp. by EPA Office ORD by Approp. Includes revision to the FY 2009 President’s Budget for Homeland Security Budget Trends

5. ORD Budget Trends: By Component, No FTE Cut $61.2 $58.0 $57.2 $242.8 Budget Trends

6. Budget Trends: EPA & ORD’s Relative Position Source: OMB, 2/5/2008, http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2009/pdf/hist.pdf Includes revision to FY 2009 President’s Budget for Homeland Security Budget Trends

7. Example Oversize Graphic Template Budget Trends

8. FY 2009 Continuing Resolution • Continuing Resolution (CR) remains in effect until: • The enactment of the appropriation into law or. • The end of the current CR on March 6, 2009. • ORD may continue current programs or activities as authorized under the conditions of the FY 2008 Appropriations Act. • New programs or activities not funded in FY 2008 may not be started under a CR. • Programs with increases in the FY 2009 President’s Budget should still be funded at the FY 2008 enacted level, even if the increase is a restoration of an FY 2008 enacted reduction. • The Agency is carefully monitoring spending with particular attention to program projects that differ significantly between FY 2008 enacted levels and the FY 2009 President’s Budget. • ORD is centrally managing Payroll; Travel, Operating Expenses and Extramural allocations have been provided to the LCOs for operating under the period of the CR. FY 2009 status

9. FY 2010 Planning and Formulation • The Agency submitted a current services budget for FY 2010 to OMB in September 2008, including performance targets. • There will be no formal OMB budget hearing, nor will there be an OMB passback. • After the new Administration takes office in January 2009, the Agency expects to prepare a transition/policy budget reflecting the priorities of the new administration. FY 2010 Status

10. FY 2010 Planning and Formulation 1 • In preparation for a transition budget, EPA established four areas of potential investment and associated resource ranges as part of the FY2010 planning and budgeting process. The four areas include: • Clean Energy & Climate Change • Contaminants • Homeland Security • Management Efficiencies • Cross-Agency teams were established for the development of the investment initiatives. ORMA analysts worked with NPDs and program leads to develop ORD’s input to the initiatives. • This information is part of a host of materials that will be provided to EPA’s new administration. 1. Resource Levels Embargoed until release of President’s Request FY 2010 Status

11. FY 2011 Planning: A Year in Transition • Administration Transition • 2010 President’s Budget will likely be delayed & include shifting priorities, which could have potentially significant implications for 2011 planning. • 2010 discussions in the Agency are currently focused on large, thematic areas, which could impact framing of 2011 discussions. • ORMA’s intent is to conduct a 2011 process that minimizes burden on ORD stakeholders (NPDs, ALDs/ACDs) while preparing ORD for the future and ensuring appropriate client input. FY 2011 Status

12. ORD Progress in Accountability Improving ORD performance • Updates and briefing materials from Accountability Road Show available on ORMA’s Accountability intranet site. Much progress has been made and new areas of work are underway: • Achieved “Green” on President’s Management Agenda (PMA) Scorecard. • BOSC ratings: qualitative performance rating assessments. • Eco and SP2 scored Moderately Effective on 2007 PARTs. • ORD is shifting focus to tools that track the extent to which our research is having an impact on regulatory decision making, including decision-document analyses, partner surveys, and bibliometric analysis. Scorecards • A meaningful ORD-level scorecard for managing performance (research improvement and accountability) and communicating results was needed. • All Labs/Centers/Offices recently provided ORMA with draft 2009 scorecards to facilitate dialog. Efficiency • EPA sponsored an NAS study on efficiency measurement for research programs.The January 2008 reportrecommended R&D programs focusing on Investment and Process Efficiency. Evaluation and Accountability

13. Managers’ Roles: Accountability & Performance Implementing Scorecard • LCOs should be reviewing, discussing, working to refine, and cascading/aligning their scorecard measures with PARS to be meaningful. Enhancing Efficiency • LCOs should seek research efficiencies that can be used to improve cost effectiveness. Partner Engagement • Results from partner surveys indicate increased value of ORD research, but that communication in research planning and notification of product completion is lacking. ORD needs to improve communication and product delivery with partners. Utilizing Science Inventory • LCOs should enter all publications/products in TIMS/Science Inventory to improve accuracy in decision-document and bibliometric analysis, which inform the BOSC. Responding to BOSC • Managers should read BOSC reports and focus on the key areas for improvement highlighted in the rating summaries. Evaluation and Accountability