The Bush administration’s budget proposal released last
week includes an attempt to make a connection between
assessments of programs and budgetary recommendations for
them-a link that good management advocates have urged for
years but which the government has had trouble making.
The Bush administration’s major initiative in that area is
the Program Assessment Rating Tool, dubbed PART, which is
designed to evaluate a program’s purpose, design, planning,
management, results and accountability. The initiative
covered 234 programs for the fiscal 2004 budget proposal
and another 173 for the current proposal, about 40 percent
of the programs subject to those reviews. Of those, about
a fourth were rated “ineffective” or only “adequate” and
40 percent were unable to demonstrate results.
The budget recommends abolishing nearly 20 programs, most
of them grant or loan programs, most of which got “results
not demonstrated” or “ineffective” ratings. It notes that
while PART ratings “do not result in automatic decisions
about funding,” over time “funding should be targeted for
programs that can prove they achieve measurable results.”
However, in some cases such ratings “may suggest that
greater funding is necessary to overcome identified
shortcomings, while a program rated effective may be in
line for proposed funding decreases,” it says.