	Background

Our work has repeatedly shown that mission fragmentation and program  overlap are widespread in the federal government. In either situation, implementation of federal crosscutting  programs is often characterized by numerous individual agency efforts that  are implemented with little apparent regard for the presence of efforts of  related activities. To identify the agencies involved in each area we relied on our previous  work and confirmed the agencies involved by reviewing the fiscal year 2001  Results Act performance report and fiscal year 2003 Results Act  performance plans for each agency identified as contributing to the  crosscutting program area. We did not independently verify or assess the information we obtained  from agency performance reports and plans. For fiscal year 2001, all the agencies we reviewed—Justice, State,  Transportation, and Treasury—discussed coordination with other agencies  in the area of drug control, although the level of detail varied. Data that did not meet  this standard were not included in the report and plan. The agencies we reviewed generally discussed in their performance reports  and plans their efforts to coordinate with other federal agencies on  programs that address family poverty. The agencies we reviewed reported varied progress in achieving their fiscal  year 2001 goals and measures. In addition, these agencies generally provided strategies that  appeared reasonably linked to achieving the unmet goals in the future. However, each of the three  agencies provided a reasonable explanation for not achieving the goal. On the basis of their fiscal year 2003 performance plans, three of the five  federal depository institution regulators designed strategies to achieve  their performance goals that appear to be reasonable.
Why GAO Did This Study

GAO's work has repeatedly shown that mission fragmentation and program overlap are widespread in the federal government. Implementation of federal crosscutting programs is often characterized by numerous individual agency efforts that are implemented with little apparent regard for the presence and efforts of related activities. GAO has in the past offered possible approaches for managing crosscutting programs, and has stated that the Government Performance and Results Act could provide a framework for addressing crosscutting efforts. GAO was asked to examine the actions and plans agencies reported in addressing the crosscutting issues of drug control, family poverty, financial institution regulation, and public health systems. GAO reviewed the fiscal year 2003 performance plans for the major agencies involved in these issues.

What GAO Found

GAO did not independently verify or assess the information it obtained from agency performance reports and plans. On the basis of the reports and plans, GAO found the following: (1) Most agencies involved in the crosscutting issues discussed coordination with other agencies in their performance reports and plans, although the extent of coordination and level of detail provided varied considerably; (2) Most of the agencies we reviewed reported mixed progress in achieving their fiscal year 2001 goals--meeting some goals, missing others, or not reporting on progress. Some of the agencies that did not meet their goals provided reasonable explanations and/or strategies that appeared reasonably linked to meeting the goals in the future; and (3) The agencies GAO reviewed generally planned to pursue goals in fiscal year 2003 similar to those in 2001, although some agencies added new goals, dropped existing goals, or dropped goals altogether. Many agencies discussed strategies that appeared to be reasonably linked to achieving their fiscal year 2003 goals.