5th Annual Performance Report Scorecard: Which Federal Agencies Best Inform the Public?

By Maurice McTigue, Henry Wray, and Jerry Ellig

AGENDA

Welcome Maurice McTigueDirector, Government Accountability Project

Study Results Jerry ElligSenior Research Fellow

Remarks David WalkerU.S. Comptroller General

Q&A

How we score the reports

• 3 categories:

TransparencyPublic BenefitsForward-Looking Leadership

• 4 criteria in each category, 1-5 scale

Fails to meet expectations

1

Partially complete2

Adequate3

Shows innovation and creativity

4

Sets a standard for best practice

5

A caveat…

This Scorecard evaluates only the quality of agency reports, not the quality of the results they produced for the public. Actual agency performance may or may not be correlated with report rankings in this Scorecard.

3 best reports

3 36 3 47Veterans

Affairs

2 39 1 48DOT

1 40 1 48Labor

FY 2002 Rank

FY 2002 Score

FY 2003 Rank

FY 2003 Score

Biggest changes in rank

12

5

21

18

12

11

Fiscal 2002 rank

20NASA

16Commerce

12Energy

10HUD

4Agriculture

4State

Fiscal 2003 rank

Agency

Common strengths

• Accessibility

• Clarity

• Outcome-oriented goals

• Explanation of how the agency makes the

country a better place to live

• Discussion of major management

challenges

Common weaknesses

• Lack of outcome-oriented performance measures

• Failure to link results to costs

• Failure to explain failures

• Failure to explain plans for improving performance in the future

Plan-Do-Check-Act

Internal scrutiny

• Identify programs that fail to meet goals

• Assess cost-effectiveness of all programs

• Develop plans to remedy shortfalls and improve performance

• Identify barriers that other parts of the government can fix

External scrutiny

Conclusion

“It was the best of times, it was the worst of times.”

- Charles Dickens

“We’ve got a long way to go, and a short time to get there.”

- Theme song from Smokey and the Bandit

www.mercatus.org