This standard statement notes that each appropriations subcommittee “takes (the annual performance plan) requirement of the Results Act very seriously and plans to carefully examine agency performance goals and measures during the appropriations process.”

	Most Plans Lacked Some Required Elements

A significant amount of work remains to be done by executive branch agencies before their strategic plans can fulfill the requirements of the Results Act, serve as a basis for guiding agencies, and help congressional and other policymakers make decisions about activities and programs. Although all 27 of the draft plans included a mission statement, 21 plans lacked 1 or more of the other required elements. Specifically, of the 27 draft strategic plans:
2 did not include agencywide strategic goals and objectives,
6 did not describe approaches or strategies for achieving those goals and
19 did not describe the relationship between long-term goals and objectives and annual performance goals,
6 did not identify key factors that are external to the agency and beyond its control that could affect the achievement of the goals and objectives, and
16 did not discuss program evaluations that the agency used to establish or revise goals and objectives or provide a schedule of future program evaluations. Moreover, while all but six of the plans were missing at least one required element, one-third were missing two required elements. Just over one-fourth of the plans failed to cover at least three of the required elements. Critical Strategic Planning Issues Most in Need of Sustained Attention

Many agencies showed progress in developing comprehensive mission statements upon which they can build strategic goals and strategies for achieving those goals. However, our reviews of draft strategic plans for 27 agencies found several critical strategic planning issues that are in need of sustained attention to ensure that those plans better meet the needs of agencies, Congress, and other stakeholders and that agencies shift their focus from activities to results. These issues were: the lack of linkages among required elements in the draft plans, the weaknesses in long-term strategic goals, the lack of fully developed strategies to achieve the goals, the lack of evidence that agencies’ plans reflect coordination with other federal agencies having similar or complementary programs, the limited capacity of agencies to gather performance information, and the lack of attention to program evaluations. Under the Results Act, all of an agency’s strategic goals do not need to be explicitly results oriented, although the intent of the Act is to have agencies focus on results to the extent feasible. Although most agencies attempted to articulate agencywide strategic goals and objectives in their plans, many of those goals and objectives tended to be weak. The Results Act: Observations on the Draft Strategic Plan of the U.S. Executive Guide: Effectively Implementing the Government Performance and Results Act (GAO/GGD-96-118, June 1996).
Why GAO Did This Study

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed individual agencies' draft strategic plans, as required by the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993, focusing on: (1) summarizing the overall results of GAO's reviews of those plans; and (2) identifying, on the basis of those reviews, the strategic planning issues most in need of sustained attention.

What GAO Found

GAO noted that: (1) a significant amount of work remained to be done by executive branch agencies if their strategic plans are to fulfill the requirements of the Results Act, serve as a basis for guiding agencies, and help congressional and other policymakers make decisions about activities and programs; (2) although all 27 of the draft plans included a mission statement, 21 plans lacked 1 or more of 5 other required elements; (3) overall, one-third of the plans were missing two required elements; and just over one-fourth were missing three or more of the required elements; (4) GAO's reviews of agencies' draft strategic plans also revealed several critical strategic planning issues that are in need of sustained attention if agencies are to develop the dynamic strategic planning processes envisioned by the Results Act; (5) most of the draft plans did not adequately link required elements in the plans; (6) these linkages are important if strategic plans are to drive the agencies' daily activities and if agencies are to be held accountable for achieving intended results; (7) furthermore, 19 of the 27 draft plans did not attempt to describe the linkages between long-term strategic goals and annual performance goals; (8) long-term strategic goals often tended to have weaknesses; (9) although the Results Act does not require that all of an agency's strategic goals be results oriented, the intent of the Act is to have agencies focus their strategic goals on results to the extent feasible; (10) many agencies did not fully develop strategies explaining how their long-term strategic goals would be achieved; (11) most agencies did not reflect in their draft plans the identification and planned coordination of activities and programs that cut across multiple agencies; (12) the questionable capacity of many agencies to gather performance information has hampered, and may continue to hamper, efforts to identify appropriate goals and confidently assess performance; (13) the draft strategic plans did not adequately address program evaluations; and (14) evaluations are important because they potentially can be critical sources of information for ensuring that goals are reasonable, strategies for achieving goals are effective, and that corrective actions are taken in program implementation.