The Environmental Protection Agency used the “business
reference model” to develop a performance framework and budget,
and presented its initial challenge at the AABPA session as
one of “defining programs and projects that would provide
stability as performance budgets and strategic plans were
developed and revised, and at the same time define what EPA
does, taking into account the many programs that are
statutorily mandated and the differences in support programs
versus direct programs,” according to the association.
It said such program definitions allowed EPA to link resources
and performance by sub-objectives for the agency, as well as
to link performance components for the programs and work in
measures from the PART reviews — though it noted a consensus
on the panel that once a framework is in place, the agency
would have to remain vigilant about keeping these processes
integrated.
The panel also agreed that EPA’s PART reviews do not need to
result in additional agency goals, said AABPA, which
recommended that EPA limit and complement them with its
program measures.
The Department of State “integrated various strategic and
program planning processes into one system that links each
program to a performance goal for the agency, and performance
goals to major strategic goals, each contributing up to a
major mission of the agency,” said the association.
It said the entire agency could use the system for ongoing
management and facilitating justification to Congress as well
as the production of internal planning documents.
“The PART has also been incorporated into the system,
allowing the agency to drill down to the performance targets
for each program and at the same time see how program
performance measures relate up to the mission of the agency,”
according to AAPBA.
