{
  "id": "RL32663",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "RL32663",
  "active": false,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 305820,
      "date": "2004-11-05",
      "retrieved": "2016-04-07T20:04:59.143559",
      "title": "The Bush Administration's Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART)",
      "summary": "Federal government agencies and programs work to accomplish widely varying missions. These\nagencies and programs employ a number of public policy approaches, including federal spending,\ntax laws, tax expenditures, and regulation. Given the scope and complexity of these efforts, it is\nunderstandable that citizens, their elected representatives, civil servants, and the public at large\nwould have an interest in the performance and results of government agencies and programs.\n  Evaluating the performance of government agencies and programs has proven difficult and\noften controversial. In spite of these challenges, in the last 50 years both Congress and the President\nhave undertaken numerous efforts -- sometimes referred to as performance management,\nperformance budgeting, strategic planning, or program evaluation -- to analyze and manage the\nfederal government's performance. Many of those initiatives attempted in varying ways to use\nperformance information to influence budget and management decisions for agencies and programs. \nThe George W. Bush Administration's release of the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) is\nthe latest of these efforts.\n  The PART is a set of questionnaires that the Bush Administration developed to assess the\neffectiveness of different types of federal executive branch programs, in order to influence funding\nand management decisions. A component of the President's Management Agenda (PMA), the\nPART focuses on four aspects of a program: purpose and design; strategic planning; program\nmanagement; and program results/accountability. The Administration submitted PART ratings for\nprograms along with the President's FY2004 and FY2005 budget proposals, and plans to continue\ndoing so for FY2006 and subsequent years. \n  This report discusses how the PART is structured, how it has been used, and how various\ncommentators have assessed its design and implementation. The report concludes with a discussion\nof potential criteria for assessing the PART or other program evaluations, which Congress might\nconsider during the budget process, in oversight of federal agencies and programs, and in\nconsideration of legislation that relates to the PART or program evaluation generally.\n  Proponents have seen the PART as a necessary enhancement to the Government Performance\nand Results Act (GPRA), a law that the Administration views as not having met its objectives, in\norder to hold agencies accountable for performance and to integrate budgeting with performance. \nHowever, critics have seen the PART as overly political and a tool to shift power from Congress to\nthe President, as well as failing to provide for adequate stakeholder consultation and public\nparticipation. Some observers have commented that the PART has provided a needed stimulus to\nagency program evaluation efforts, but they do not agree on whether the PART validly assesses\nprogram effectiveness. \n  This report will be updated as events warrant.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "encoding": "utf-8",
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/RL32663",
          "sha1": "4d3a4dacae5be48ee84b7d29507af77eff7e7eb5",
          "filename": "files/20041105_RL32663_4d3a4dacae5be48ee84b7d29507af77eff7e7eb5.html",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/RL32663",
          "sha1": "2d7ab8a83d848ef391fc6770b6bd7569c02d6973",
          "filename": "files/20041105_RL32663_2d7ab8a83d848ef391fc6770b6bd7569c02d6973.pdf",
          "images": null
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    }
  ],
  "topics": []
}