printable banner

U.S. Department of State - Great Seal

U.S. Department of State

Diplomacy in Action

Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) Status


FY 2003 Performance and Accountability Report
Bureau of Resource Management
December 2003
Report
Share

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) uses the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) to assess federal programs. Through the use of in-depth, diagnostic questions, the PART is employed to assess and evaluate programs across a set of performance-related criteria. PART results are then used to help improve program management and ensure that the American taxpayers receive the best value for their tax dollars.

In the fall of 2002 and summer of 2003, OMB reviewed approximately 40% of State's programs and plans to review an additional 20% in the spring/summer of 2004. The results of these reviews are used to inform the planning and budgeting process and are published in the annual President's Budget, which is submitted to Congress. Information depicted in Table 1 shows that most of the Department's FY 2004 PARTs[1] demonstrated evidence of improvement when reassessed in 2003. As shown in Table 1, all of the Department's reassessed PARTs are now rated Moderately Effective or above. Finally, the Department has created efficiency measures for all PART programs reviewed to-date.

The results from the PART reviews conducted by OMB are summarized on the following pages by strategic goal. Information in Table 2 describes how bureaus have addressed and implemented findings and recommendations for FY 2004 PARTs. In contrast to the FY 2004 PARTs, for the FY 2005 PARTs, "major findings/recommendations" and "actions taken/planned" were not yet final at the time of publication and thus are not shown. The FY 2005 PARTs are shown on Table 3.

Table 1: Status of Re-assessed PARTs

2003 RATINGS REFLECT IMPROVEMENT
Rating 2002 Results 2003 Results
Effective 0 3
Moderately Effective 4 6
Adequate 2 0
Results Not Demonstrated 3 0
Totals 9 9
Percentage of PARTs Rated "Moderately Effective" or Better
2002 2003
66% 100%

Table 2: PART Summaries by Strategic Goal

Strategic Goal 1: REGIONAL STABILITY
Program Name Military Assistance to New NATO and NATO Aspirant Nations
Score and Rating
  • FY 2004: Moderately Effective
  • FY 2005: Moderately Effective
Lead Bureau
  • European and Eurasian Affairs (EUR)
Major Findings/ Recommendations
  • There is no regularly scheduled evaluation of program effectiveness by independent parties.
  • The Department of State and Defense differ on priorities and do not produce coinciding budget schedules.
Actions Taken/Planned
  • DoD goals are discussed in interagency meetings to balance DoD requirements with Department goals. This will produce a single, agreed-upon recommendation.
Program Name Peacekeeping Operations OSCE
Score and Rating
  • FY 2004: Results Not Demonstrated
  • FY 2005: Moderately Effective
Lead Bureau
  • European and Eurasian Affairs (EUR)
Major Findings/ Recommendations
  • Does not contain adequate annual targets or baseline information.
  • Performance goals are overly broad and dependent on numerous factors.
  • Information in performance reports is not linked to performance plan measures or compared against baseline data.
  • Program managers not held accountable for program performance.
Actions Taken/Planned
  • USOSCE, EUR and PM developed detailed performance indicators for PKO-funded OSCE Missions and Activities.
  • Performance indicators developed for OSCE-brokered political settlements in Moldova, Nagorno-Karabakh conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan and US initiatives to improve financial management of the OSCE Secretariat.
  • FY 2005 USOSCE Mission Performance Plan (MPP) praised by OMB as a model for clarity of performance-based foreign policy objectives.
Program Name Security Assistance to Sub-Saharan Africa
Score and Rating
  • FY 2004: Results Not Demonstrated
  • FY 2005: Moderately Effective
Lead Bureau
  • African Affairs (AF)
Major Findings/ Recommendations
  • Programs did not differentiate between annual and long-term goals, or include targets and baseline information.
  • Performance goals are overly broad and dependent on numerous factors.
  • Information in performance reports is not linked to performance plan measures or compared against
    baseline data.
  • Program managers not held accountable for program performance.
Actions Taken/Planned
  • Provided proposed measures to OMB for review.
  • Provided performance data for use in Department's Performance and Accountability Report.
  • Incorporated responses to recommendations in FY 2005 BPP.

 

Strategic Goal 2: COUNTERTERRORISM
Program Name Anti-Terrorism Assistance
Score and Rating
  • FY 2004: Moderately Effective
  • FY 2005: Effective
Lead Bureau
  • Diplomatic Security (DS)
Major Findings/ Recommendations
  • Long-term goals do not have performance indicators or other long-term targets.
  • Program should establish measures to gauge progress toward long-term goals.
Actions Taken/Planned
  • Establish long term goals and targets.
  • Establish measures to gauge progress toward long-term goals.

 

Strategic Goal 3: HOMELAND SECURITY
Program Name Visa and Consular Services/ Border Security
Score and Rating
  • FY 2004: Moderately Effective
  • FY 2005: Moderately Effective
Lead Bureau
  • Consular Affairs (CA)
Major Findings/ Recommendations
  • Annual goals and targets do not adequately link to the long-term goals or provide relevant
    performance data.
Actions Taken/Planned
  • CA is working with OMB to ensure that annual goals and targets link to the long-term goals and provide relevant performance data. Revised goals and targets will be reflected in next year's PART.

 

Strategic Goal 10: HUMANITARIAN RESPONSE
Program Name Refugee Admissions to the U.S.
Score and Rating
  • FY 2004: Adequate
  • FY 2005: Moderately Effective
Lead Bureau
  • Population, Refugees and Migration (PRM)
Major Findings/ Recommendations
  • Program managers at the Department closely collaborate with grantees and state governments to ensure effective use of funds.
  • Management should focus on strategic planning. 2003 and prior performance plans had overly broad goals that made it difficult to measure effectiveness.
  • Overlap was found between functions of DoS and HHS programs.
Actions Taken/Planned
  • OMB will review the relationship between the Refugee Admissions program at the Department of State and the Office of Refugee Resettlement at HHS.
  • The Department will continue ongoing efforts to improve strategic planning and ensure that goals are measurable and mission-related.
Program Name Humanitarian Migrants to Israel
Score and Rating
  • FY 2004: Adequate
  • FY 2005: Moderately Effective
Lead Bureau
  • Population, Refugees and Migration (PRM)
Major Findings/ Recommendations
  • Program needs continued focus on strategic planning; needs more ambitious targets.
  • PRM has been working with the United Israel Appeal (UIA) and the Jewish Agency for Israel to create annual performance goals that meaningfully reflect program purpose.
  • The program is making some progress toward achieving its long-term and short-term goals.
Actions Taken/Planned
  • In FY 2003, the Department and UIA developed an agreed upon set of long-term and short term goals for UIA.

 

Strategic Goal 11: PUBLIC DIPLOMACY AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS
Program Name Educational Exchanges in Near East Asia and South Asia
Score and Rating
  • FY 2004: Results not Demonstrated
  • FY 2005: Effective
Lead Bureau
  • Education and Cultural Affairs (ECA)
Major Findings/ Recommendations
  • Interim FY 2004 Finding: Program needs to strengthen strategic planning by taking the following actions:
  1. Set long-term goals relative to baseline,
  2. Clearly define targets and timeframes to measure annual progress,
  3. Create regional long-term goals, and
  4. Tailor its planning by regional/country to effectively reach target audiences.
Actions Taken/Planned
  • Department provides proposed performance measures and goals as well as a proposed planning process to OMB for review.
  • Long-term and annual goals are set to established baselines, targets and timeframes now included in performance indicators.
  • Regional goals are established through coordination with regional bureaus.
  • Program planning tailored by region/country and target audience. Partnerships for Learning (P4L) initiative launched.
  • A performance measurement system, based on PART recommendations in development, FY 2003 pilot testing includes NEA and SA exchanges.
  • Hired an exchanges coordinator, started an exchange working group, and hired a Middle East Initiatives evaluation officer.

 

Strategic Goal 12: MANAGEMENT AND ORGANIZATIONAL EXCELLENCE
Program Name Capital Security Construction
Score and Rating
  • FY 2004: Moderately Effective
  • FY 2005: Effective
Lead Bureau
  • Overseas Buildings Operations (OBO)
Major Findings/ Recommendations
  • At the time of the FY 2004 PART review, the effects of management changes undertaken in OBO were not yet known. However, the effects of management changes were fully documented in the FY 2005 PART and were shown to be highly successful as evidenced by outstanding results demonstrated by the Capital Security Construction program.
Actions Taken/Planned
  • The Department developed annual and long-range performance goals, which are closely integrated with the budget - one of the positive results from management changes made over the past two years in OBO.

 

Table 3: FY 2005 PART Summaries by Strategic Goal[2]

FY 2005 PART Summaries
Strategic Goal Program Name Rating Lead Bureau
Regional Stability Foreign Military Financing Moderately Effective Western Hemisphere Affairs
Counterterrorism Terrorist Interdiction Program Results Not Demonstrated Counterterrorism
Weapons of Mass Destruction Nonproliferation and Disarmament Fund Results Not Demonstrated Non Proliferation

Democracy and Human Rights and Economic Prosperity and Security

Support for East European Democracy (SEED) and Assistance for the Independent States of the Former Soviet Union (FSA) Results Not Demonstrated European and Eurasian Affairs
Economic Prosperity and Security United Nations Development Program Results Not Demonstrated International Organizations
Humanitarian Response United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Moderately Effective Political-Military Affairs
Humanitarian Demining Effective Population, Refugees
and Migration

Management and Organizational Excellence

Worldwide Security Upgrades

Moderately Effective

Diplomatic
Security

The tables below summarize the ratings for the Department's eight FY 2005 PART reviews. The Department's goal is to have all of these PARTs rated Moderately Effective or better by 2004.

RATING SUMMARY
Rating Distribution
Effective 1
Moderately Effective 3
Adequate 0
Results Not Demonstrated 4
Totals 8
PERCENTAGE OF PARTs RATED "MODERATELY EFFECTIVE" or BETTER
2003 Actual 2004 Target
50% 100%

 

Note 1: Those programs reviewed for the first time in FY 2002 for the FY 2004 budget and then reassessed in FY 2003 for the FY 2005 budget.

Note 2: For FY 2005 PARTs "major findings/recommendations" and "actions taken/planned" were not yet final at the time of this printing and thus are not shown.



Back to Top
Sign-in

Do you already have an account on one of these sites? Click the logo to sign in and create your own customized State Department page. Want to learn more? Check out our FAQ!

OpenID is a service that allows you to sign in to many different websites using a single identity. Find out more about OpenID and how to get an OpenID-enabled account.