In our past reviews of its implementation, we found that GPRA provided a  solid foundation to achieve greater results in the federal government, but  several key governance challenges remained—particularly related to: addressing crosscutting issues; ensuring performance information was useful and used by agency  leadership and managers and the Congress;  strengthening the alignment between individual performance and  agency results as well as holding individuals and organizations  responsible for achieving those results; measuring performance for certain types of programs; and providing timely, useful information about the results achieved by  agencies. The website—implemented by OMB  as Performance.gov—is required to make available information on  APGs and CAP goals, updated on a quarterly basis; agency strategic  plans, annual performance plans, and annual performance reports;  and an inventory of all federal programs. As another positive development, OMB and agencies have also put into  place key aspects of the act’s performance management leadership roles. Even among the CAP goals, OMB and agencies are missing  opportunities to identify tax expenditures as contributors. The only statistically significant  change from 2007 to 2013 was a decline in the percentage of managers  that agreed to a great or very great extent that their agencies’ top  leadership demonstrates a strong commitment to achieving results, from  67 percent to 60 percent. Agencies Have Taken Steps to Align Daily Operations with Agency Results, but Some Continue to Face Difficulties Measuring Performance

			Agencies Have Taken Steps to Align Individual Performance with Results

It is important for individuals to see a connection between their daily  operations and results to help understand how individual performance  can contribute to organizational success. Without a comprehensive examination, it will be difficult for the  PIC and agencies to fully understand these measurement issues and  develop a crosscutting approach to help address them, which will likely  result in agencies experiencing difficulties in measuring program  performance in the future. Communication of Performance Information Could Better Meet Users’ Needs

			Federal Managers Reported that Performance Information Is Not Always Available or Easily Accessible to Federal Managers or the Public

According to our 2013 survey of federal managers, 34 percent reported  that performance information is easily accessible to agency employees to  a great or very great extent, while 17 percent reported that their agency’s  performance information is easily accessible to the public to a great or  very great extent. OMB staff agreed with these recommendations. To help ensure agency performance information is useful for  congressional decision making, GPRAMA strengthens the consultation  requirement. In addition, our recent work indicated that the performance information  provided on Performance.gov also may not be meeting congressional  needs. GPRAMA provides a  number of tools that could help address these challenges. Since  enactment in 2011, the executive branch has taken a number of important  steps to implement key provisions of the act, by developing interim CAP  goals and APGs, conducting quarterly reviews, assigning key  performance management roles and responsibilities, and communicating  results more frequently and transparently through Performance.gov. However, the executive branch needs to do more to fully implement and  leverage the act’s provisions to address these challenges. In addition, examples  from our past work along with the most recent results from our survey of  federal managers show that the executive branch has made little  progress addressing long-standing governance challenges related to  improving coordination and collaboration to address crosscutting issues,  using performance information to drive decision making, measuring the  performance of certain types of federal programs, and engaging  Congress in a meaningful way in agency performance management  efforts to ensure the resulting information is useful for congressional  decision making. Of particular concern, OMB has yet to develop a framework for reviewing  the performance of tax expenditures, which represented approximately $1  trillion in forgone revenue in fiscal year 2012. To help ensure that the contributions made by tax expenditures toward  the achievement of agency goals and broader federal outcomes are  properly recognized, we recommend that the Director of OMB take the  following three actions:
Revise relevant OMB guidance to direct agencies to identify relevant  tax expenditures among the list of federal contributors for each  appropriate agency goal. Given the common, long-standing difficulties agencies continue to face in  measuring the performance of various types of federal programs and  activities—contracts, direct services, grants, regulations, research and  development, and tax expenditures—we also recommend the Director of  OMB work with the PIC to develop a detailed approach to examine these  difficulties across agencies, including identifying and sharing any  promising practices from agencies that have overcome difficulties in  measuring the performance of these program types. Our specific objectives for this report were to assess the executive  branch’s (1) progress in implementing the act and (2) effectiveness in  using tools provided by the act to address challenges the federal  government faces. To address both objectives, we reviewed GPRAMA,  related congressional documents and Office of Management and Budget  (OMB) guidance, and our past and recent work related to managing for  results and the act. We also interviewed OMB staff.
Why GAO Did This Study

The federal government faces significant and long-standing fiscal, management, and performance challenges. The acts implementation offers opportunities for Congress and the executive branch to help address these challenges. This report is the latest in a series in which GAO, as required by the act, reviewed the acts initial implementation. GAO assessed the executive branchs (1) progress in implementing the act and (2) effectiveness in using tools provided by the act to address key governance challenges. To address these objectives, GAO reviewed the act, related OMB guidance, and past and recent GAO work related to federal performance management and the act; and interviewed OMB staff. In addition, to determine the extent to which agencies are using performance information and several of the acts requirements to improve agency results, GAO surveyed a stratified random sample of 4,391 federal managers from 24 agencies, with a 69 percent response rate which allows GAO to generalize these results.

What GAO Found

The executive branch has taken a number of steps to implement key provisions of the GPRA Modernization Act (the act). The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) developed interim cross-agency priority (CAP) goals, and agencies developed agency priority goals (APG). Agency officials reported that their agencies have assigned performance management leadership roles and responsibilities to officials who generally participate in performance management activities, including quarterly performance reviews (QPR) for APGs. Further, OMB developed Performance.gov, a government-wide website, which provides quarterly updates on the CAP goals and APGs.
However, the executive branch needs to do more to fully implement and leverage the acts provisions to address governance challenges.
OMB and agencies have identified many programs and activities that contribute to goals, as required, but are missing additional opportunities to address crosscutting issues. For example, few have identified tax expenditures, which represented about $1 trillion in forgone revenue in fiscal year 2012, due to a lack of OMB guidance and oversight. Therefore, the contributions made by tax expenditures towards broader federal outcomes are unknown.
Ensuring performance information is useful and used by federal managers to improve results remains a weakness. GAO found little improvement in managers reported use of performance information or practices that could help promote this use. There was a decline in the percentage of managers that agreed that their agencies top leadership demonstrates a strong commitment to achieving results. However, agencies QPRs show promise as a leadership strategy for improving the use of performance information in agencies.
Agencies have taken steps to align daily operations with agency results, but continue to face difficulties measuring performance. Agencies have established performance management systems to align individual performance with agency results. However, agencies continue to face long-standing issues with measuring performance across various programs and activities. The Performance Improvement Council (PIC) could do more to examine and address these issues, given its responsibilities for addressing crosscutting performance issues and sharing best practices. Without a comprehensive examination of these issues and an approach to address them, agencies will likely continue to experience difficulties in measuring program performance.
Communication of performance information could better meet users needs. Federal managers and potential users of Performance.gov reported concerns about the accessibility, availability, understandability, and relevance of performance information to the public. Further outreach to key stakeholders could help improve how this information is communicated.
Agency performance information is not always useful for congressional decision making. Consultations with Congress are intended, in part, to ensure this information is useful for congressional decision making. However, GAO found little evidence that meaningful consultations occurred related to agency strategic plans and APGs. GAO also found that the performance information provided on Performance.gov may not fully be meeting congressional needs.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends OMB improve implementation of the act and help address challenges by ensuring that the contributions of tax expenditures to crosscutting and agency goals are identified and assessed, and developing a detailed approach for addressing long-standing performance measurement issues. OMB staff agreed with these recommendations. GAO also reports on the status of existing recommendations related to CAP goals, APGs, QPRs, the PIC, agency performance management training, and Performance.gov.