Performance‐Based Budgeting: The Contribution of the Program Assessment Rating Tool

Under the President's Management Agenda for performance and budget integration, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) designed the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) to breath new life into performance‐based budgeting as envisioned by the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA). This article discusses what PART is designed to do and how the PART process works. Based on recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports addressing implementation of PART in the last four fiscal years, the article answers such questions as: Has PART made a difference in program operations? What is the relationship between PART and GPRA? Has progress been made in improving the evidence base for PART assessments? How well does PART assess programs related to a common goal? What has been congressional reaction to the PART process? Are PART and performance budgeting making a difference in government?     

How Credible Is the Evidence,and Does It Matter? An Analysis of the Program Assessment Rating Tool

This research empirically assesses the quality of evidence that agencies provided to the Office of Management and Budget in the application of the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART), introduced in 2002 to more rigorously, systematically, and transparently assess public program effectiveness and hold agencies accountable for results by tying them to the executive budget formulation process and program funding. Evidence submitted by 95 programs administered by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services for the PART assessment is analyzed using measures that capture the quality of evidence and methods used by programs and information on characteristics of agencies that might relate to program results and government funding decisions. The study finds that of those programs offering some evidence, most was internal and qualitative, and about half did not assess how their performance compared to other government or private programs with similar objectives. Programs were least likely to provide externally generated evidence of their performance relative to long‐term and annual performance goals. Importantly, overall PART and results scores were (statistically) significantly lower for programs that failed to provide quantitative evidence and did not use long‐term measures, baseline measures or targets, or independent evaluations. Although the PART program results ratings and overall PART scores had no discernible consequences for program funding over time, the PART assessments appeared to take seriously the evaluation of evidence quality, a positive step forward in recent efforts to base policy decisions on more rigorous evidence.     

From analyst to negotiator: The OMB's new role

Dramatic changes in the executive and legislative budget processes over the last ten years have elevated the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to a new position of power and importance. Within the executive branch the budget process has become more highly centralized in the president's office; and within the Congress a similar centralization has occurred. In both branches the OMB has become the key institution for coordinating the actions of the budget-making powers. At the same time, the much-discussed “iron triangles” explored by analysts of the budgetary system have lost much of their power to control the process. Although the OMB's active involvement in the congressional budget process diminished in 1983, the institutional relationships necessary for a more centralized budget process remain and can be reactivated to deal with the predicted enormous deficits.     

Congressional Use of the Program Assessment Rating Tool

This paper seeks to advance knowledge about congressional use of the program assessment rating tool (PART) in the 109th Congress. The research suggest that both congressional chambers use PART on a limited basis; affirms that congressional committees are exposed to PART scores through congressional budget justification score inclusion and in federal agency testimony; and that use was primarily driven by non‐congressional actors.     

OMB and the Budget Examiner: Changes in the Reagan Era

This is the first of a two-part retrospective on the role of the OMB budget examiner during the Reagan administration. Changes in the federal budget process, historical federal deficits and the inability of Congress to meet appropriation deadlines have significantly altered the role of OMB and its budget examiners, undermining the examiner's traditional role as program analyst and controler. This part focuses on the preparation of the president's budget and budget execution, and the compressed time in which OMB must respond to "top-down" budget requirements. The summer of 1987 is presented as a case study of the demands now placed on OMB.
Part Two, in the next issue, will focus on the budget examiner in the congressional budget process and in advocacy roles for the president.     

Government Reform,Political Ideology,and Administrative Burden: The Case of Performance Management in the Bush Administration

This article examines how ideological differences between political officials and agencies may have affected the implementation of an ostensibly nonpartisan, government‐wide administrative initiative: the George W. Bush administration's Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) review of federal programs. The analysis reveals that managers in agencies associated with liberal programs and employees (“liberal agencies”) agreed to a greater extent than those in agencies associated with conservative programs and employees (“conservative agencies”) that PART required significant agency time and effort and that it imposed a burden on management resources. Further analysis reveals that differences in reported agency effort can be explained partly by objective differences in the demands that PART placed on agencies—liberal agencies were required to evaluate more programs and implement more improvement plans relative to their organizational capacity—and partly by the ideological beliefs of employees—on average, liberal managers reported more agency effort, even after accounting for objective measures of administrative burden.     

The Budget Enforcement Act of 1990: The Path to No Fault Budgeting

The Budget Enforcement Act of 1990, included in the controversial and comprehensive budget legislation passed by Congress in October, makes a number of significant changes in federal budgeting. It shifts the focus of the budget process from deficit reduction to spending control, provides five-year spending totals and mini-sequesters for defense, international and domestic appropriations, and puts entitlements and revenue expenditures on a pay-as-you-go basis. The Gramm-Rudman-Hollings deficit targets have been raised substantially, Social Security surpluses taken out of the deficit calculation and allowance made for further adjustments for inflation, Operation Desert Shield, and other emergency spending, minimizing the prospect for general sequestration. OMB has been given important new estimating authority and the roles of the congressional committees involved in budgeting have been altered.     

Budgeting Rules and Program Outcomes

It is not efficient for a budget system either to enable excessively frequent changes in programs and tax policies or to be rigid and unresponsive. Program durability is one measure of how a budget system weighs the competing goals of resoluteness and responsiveness. The federal budget has different processes—mandatory and discretionary spending and tax expenditures—each based in separate congressional committees and relying on separate procedures. This article examines the budget systems' durability. One finding is that mandatory spending programs and tax expenditures are more durable than programs backed by discretionary spending. However, while programs targeted to vulnerable populations and supporting long‐term planning, such as in income support and health, might benefit from durability, these programs display shorter durability, not longer. While displaying greater durability, tax expenditures do respond to changes in different economic sectors, based on the changes in spending of other budget systems.     

Bias in OMB's economic forecasts and budget proposals

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) annually submits the President's budget for the U.S. government to the Congress. The economic forecasts and revenue and outlay proposals contained in the budget have been criticized as biased, especially during the 1980s. Tests for bias in one year ahead proposals for the 1963–89 period show no bias in economic forecasts and revenue estimates, but substantial bias in outlay proposals. Most outlay proposals are consistently less than actual outcomes, accounting for underprediction of the Federal deficit. OMB outlay proposals appear to be influenced by politics. Republican administrations show more significant proposal biases, with defense proposals higher and domestic outlay proposals lower than outcomes. The Office of Management and Budget consistently understates the deficits by resorting to the most optimistic economic assumptions it can credibly — and now sometimes even incredibly — employ. — Senator James SasserWall Street Journal, 25 January 1990     

Improving the Budget Process in Fragile and Conflict‐Ridden States: Two Modest Lessons from Afghanistan

Both the donor community and scholars have created a cottage industry studying “fragile” states. International nongovernmental organizations that have developed indexes measuring corruption or governance have been unkind to Afghanistan. One index suggests a different and more optimistic story. The International Budget Partnership measures transparency every two years with its Open Budget Index. Afghanistan demonstrated dramatic improvement on this index between 2008 and 2012. The authors use the improvement in Afghanistan's transparency score as an entry point to explore how donors try to intervene and promote transparency as part of broader efforts in public financial management development and how legislative strengthening has also contributed to budget reform. The analysis offers a modest corrective to the overly pessimistic assessments of fragile states by showing that a fragile state can improve its budgetary transparency and enhance governance by strengthening the legislature's involvement in the budget process.     

PART in Retrospect: An Examination of Legislators' Attitudes Toward PART

This research adds insight into the congressional reaction to the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) by exploring the influence of individual legislators' personal experiences and ideological position on their attitude toward PART. Specifically, the factors explored include ideological position held by legislators, level of business experience, level of campaign financing received from political action committees (PACs), years spent in Congress, seniority, and congressional chamber. The results indicate that legislators with higher levels of business experience generally were more supportive of PART and that the length of time they had served in Congress and the amount of campaign contributions they had received from PACs were negatively related to PART support. The study also provides insights into legislators' overall exposure and sentiment toward PART. The data indicates that only a small proportion of legislators clearly expressed positive or negative opinions toward PART, despite widespread exposure to the tool. These findings are important in that they contribute toward a more comprehensive understanding of the congressional reaction to PART and offer further insights into the challenges of securing congressional buy‐in for executive performance budgeting initiatives.     

The Evolution of the Office of Management and Budget Under President Reagan

This article introduces a series of retrospective articles on the Reagan administration. The Office of Management and Budget became a major actor in the budget debate over the last eight years. The Reagan administration has seen a change in OMB's role from that of an advisor to the president, to an agency with a central role to play in the development of the president's foreign and domestic policy within budgetary constraints. The article focuses on how OMB has reacted to these changes producing budget conventions and techniques unique to the 1980s.     

Congressional Budget Reform: Impact on the Appropriations Committees

The congressional budget process has undergone several major reforms in the last twenty years: the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 and 1987 (Gramm-Rudman-Hollings I and II) and the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990 (BEA) that have had a direct impact on the Appropriations Committees and the appropriations process. This article evaluates that impact on the decision-making capacity and power of the Appropriations Committees.     

The OMB Budget Examiner and The Congressional Budget Process

This is the second of a two-part retrospective on the evolving role of the OMB budget examiner. The examiner has become more active in negotiations with the legislative branch and tracking the legislative status of various fiscal measures. A new central budget management system was created to monitor appropriation bills. The OMB budget examiner has also been increasingly used to provide information for advocacy purposes before Congress and the public. The institutional effect on OMB of these changing roles is examined and suggestions for organizational reform are made.     

Congress, the Deficit, and Budget Reconciliation

President Clinton's veto of the 1995 reconciliation bill, the largest and most ambitious such legislation ever passed by Congress, was the first time a reconciliation bill was ever rejected by a president. It was also the first reconciliation bill in two decades to include a tax reduction rather than a tax increase. The fate of this bill, and its scope and contents, suggest the need to assess the evolution of reconciliation within the congressional budget process. In the early 1980s, Congress altered budget reconciliation procedures, putting in place a powerful new capability for deficit reduction. Reconciliation became the primary means within the budget process of restraining entitlement spending and increasing taxes as part of congressional efforts to reduce the deficit. Gramm-Rudman-Hollings magnified certain problems Congress encountered in using reconciliation to control entitlements, producing increased pressure to cut discretionary spending. While the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990 included new authority to use reconciliation to restrain entitlements, congressional spending priorities combined with the Peace Dividend to maintain the relative sanctuary entitlement programs have enjoyed. The limits of reconciliation as a deficit reduction tool, both in terms of increasing revenues and curtailing entitlements, are detailed. The inherent procedural advantages accorded to entitlements are contrasted with the treatment of discretionary programs, explaining in part the widening gulf between these two categories of spending. Congress has attempted, without success, to find alternatives to reconciliation. The failure of the seven-year, deficit-eliminating reconciliation bill of 1995 may indicate that certain Limits on the use of reconciliation may have been reached.     

Does Performance Budgeting Work? An Examination of the Office of Management and Budget’s PART Scores

In this paper, the authors use the Bush administration's management grades from the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) to evaluate performance budgeting in the federal government—in particular, the role of merit and political considerations in formulating recommendations for 234 programs in the president's fiscal year 2004 budget. PART scores and political support were found to influence budget choices in expected ways, and the impact of management scores on budget decisions diminished as the political component was taken into account. The Bush administration's management scores were positively correlated with proposed budgets for programs housed in traditionally Democratic departments but not in other departments. The federal government's most ambitious effort to use performance budgeting to date shows both the promise and the problems of this endeavor.     

Appropriations Politics in Congress: The House Appropriations Committee and the Executive Agencies

In the topsy-turvy world of congressional budgeting, last year's analysis is often out of date this year. How, then, could a work as old as most college sophomores have any relevance today? Richard Fenno's The Power of the Purse is a classic that passes the most challenging test of all time. Despite the very significant changes that have occurred in the congressional budget and appropriations processes, more than mere historical interest is to be found in Fenno's masterful study. While there are many relevant parts of the book, the following selection is from Fenno's exploration of the interplay between agency budget officials and the appropriations subcommittees. It was a pleasure to read these chapters again and I suspect that many other readers will be surprised at how insightful and fresh the study remains.     

Extending the Theory of Goal Ambiguity to Programs: Examining the Relationship between Goal Ambiguity and Performance

One of the main assumptions of empirical studies conducted on the influence of goal ambiguity in public management is that goal ambiguity relates negatively to performance. However, this relationship has rarely been tested at the program level because common goal ambiguity and performance measures for disparate government programs have been scant. The availability of Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) results for a number of federal programs provides the opportunity for an analysis testing the foregoing assumption. Measures of program goal ambiguity—target, timeline, and program evaluation—are shown to have negative relationships with different program performance scores, taking into account alternative influences or biases on performance. This analysis extends the theory of goal ambiguity by providing the first analysis of large‐sample federal programs. The theoretical and practical implications are presented in the discussion and conclusion.     

The Obama Administration and PBB: Building on the Legacy of Federal Performance‐Informed Budgeting?

The administration of President Barack Obama, like those of his immediate predecessors, is focused on trying to improve the quality of, and use of, performance data. The federal government has been pursuing performance‐informed budget reforms for more than 50 years. Most recently, the Bush administration reforms included the President’s Management Agenda and the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART). The Obama administration reforms include: measuring the effects of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act; reducing or eliminating poorly‐performing programs; setting a limited number of short‐term, high‐priority performance goals; and funding detailed program evaluations. The administration is taking a more agency‐driven approach than the Bush administration, but continues to find it challenging to move beyond production of performance data to its use. There should be opportunities to show how performance information can be used for decision making, given the change in the political climate and the needs to reduce spending and the deficit. Historically, there has been little appetite in the Congress for evidence‐based decision making. The administration, however, can continue to demonstrate how federal agencies can use performance information to more effectively manage programs.     

中国地方财政稳定机制研究

传统财政理论认为,中央政府是稳定政策唯一合适的承担者,然而,Gramlich得出地方政府的财政政策至少在短期内是有效的结论,并提倡地方政府实施稳定的财政政策。本文利用1995—2008年中国30个省、市、自治区(西藏除外)的财政收支面板数据和GDP面板数据,运用固定效应模型和Prais-Winsten PCSE方法实证分析了地方财政收支行为与宏观经济波动的关系,得出在宏观经济处于繁荣阶段时,地方财政收支违反了"逆周期"操作规则,是"顺周期"的结论。认为,地方政府职能转变不到位,财政纪律松弛,财政约束缺失,以及《预算法》的缺陷是导致"顺周期"的原因。为此,本文最后提出了通过建立地方财政预算稳定基金和中期预算制度,修订预算法等相关措施来构建中国地方财政稳定机制的设想。