Table of Contents

Next

OVERALL APPROACH

Commerce followed a very clear "bottom-up" approach in creating this Strategic Plan. The Plan was created by, and is supported by, people representing every bureau and ranging from interns to Deputy Under Secretary. This active Strategic Plan Task Force continues to refine the Plan, in order to ensure that:

o the Mission Statement (and the three interrelated Strategic Themes which support it) combines enough flexibility to encompass our programs with enough specificity to describe Commerce clearly;

o the set of goals and objectives represents all of Commerce's key programs, and that the set is refined as needed;

o the narrative sections of each Strategic Theme's presentation describe our programmatic activities related to the Theme accurately and measurably;

o the Mission Statement and Strategic Themes provide a basis for the development and use of a consistent series of bureau performance measures, to be used in the annual budget process;

o on an ongoing basis, the Strategic Plan is both a management tool for the Secretary and bureau managers to use in channeling the Department's activities, and a communication device for ensuring that our programs are clear to our customers and the Congress.

The Strategic Plan was also shared with bureau stakeholder groups and Congress, in order to ensure that these key organizations had an opportunity to comment on bureau goals and objectives, prior to the draft Plan being provided to OMB in the Summer of 1997 (in preparation for delivery of the final version to the Congress in the Fall). Many bureaus are in routine and ongoing contact with the Congress and with stakeholder groups, and that dialogue is an important element in Commerce's capacity to keep the Plan and its contents reflective of Congressional and stakeholder concerns.

The ability to plan strategically in an environment which involves shrinking staffs and budgets, but constant or increasing programmatic demands, is a most significant challenge, yet the need to do so is clearly necessary. On an ongoing basis, Commerce bureaus will use the opportunity presented by GPRA, and the challenge presented by resource constraints, to evaluate their core functions. This will help determine the relevance of their programs to long-term mission requirements, priorities and goals, while at the same helping to identify and plan for new work which will position the Department to meet the demands of the 21st century. Bureaus increasingly will need to coordinate resources, talent and program objectives (within the Department and with other agencies) to achieve outcomes, and ensure that broader societal goals can be met as effectively as possible.

During the period in which this Strategic Plan was created, three dozen Commerce people, representing every Commerce bureau and ranging from interns to Deputy Under Secretary, participated in the planning process by attending work sessions, providing policy guidance, and/or participating on the teams that created the three Strategic Themes. (Staff from the Office of Inspector General participated as observers in this process.) This group will continue to refine the Strategic Plan as needed, and will be supported by the Department's and bureaus' public affairs and Congressional liaison professionals.

LINKAGES TO ANNUAL ACTIVITIES

The most important word to the Commerce Department in GPRA is "strategic". It is our intention throughout all of our GPRA activities to differentiate between truly strategic functions (of planning and long-term priority setting), and annual or short term (budgeting, operational planning, and program implementation) activities. This differentiation is important in order to ensure a focus on the larger intents of the GPRA legislation, and to avoid becoming diverted to technical issues surrounding specific performance measurements.

GPRA creates a sequence of activities and documentation through which our programs can be observed quite clearly. The Strategic Plan provides a basic, long-term framework addressing our overall and ongoing purposes; the annual budget process and the GPRA-required Annual Performance Plan will provide information on one year "slices" of the Strategic Plan, and will allow for focusing on specific priorities and emerging initiatives; and the Annual Performance Report, also required by GPRA, will provide the opportunity to match actual accomplishments against planned ones. The Commerce Department feels strongly that this chain of documentation must be examined in sequence, so that the true concepts behind our programs, and our capacities to implement that vision, are revealed.

The Commerce Strategic Plan has been structured to ensure that the linkages between strategic and annual activities are clear: the Plan starts with the Mission Statement and Strategic Themes for our Department, and then moves to the goals, strategies, objectives, and illustrative performance measures used to support all of our bureaus' major programs. Users of the Plan can easily utilize this information in parallel with our complete annual budget requests and program activities, which reveal annual priorities and performance measures/targets. Following full implementation of the Act, we will conduct annual assessments of our accomplishments by comparing performance targets with actual levels of achievements, and we will use the results of that assessment in fine-tuning our program activities.

We also look to an annual evolution in the government-wide implementation of GPRA. Over time, we know that agencies across the Federal government will sharpen their capacity to identify the most useful performance measures, to enunciate goals that support National needs, and most importantly, to work in close collaboration with related agencies. We actively are participating in government-wide initiatives to establish measures and measurement process that will help underscore critical inter-agency linkages, and we seek to work with stakeholders and the Congress to identify and implement ways of working through the challenging aspects of the GPRA implementation process.

THE ROLE OF PROGRAM EVALUATIONS IN SELECTING PERFORMANCE MEASURES

Current Evaluation Activities

In preparing to create this Strategic Plan, Commerce bureaus undertook a comprehensive inventory of programs which identifies and describes strategic goals, operational and measurable objectives, and (for the FY 1999 budget) specific performance measures which can be used to determine annual progress in meeting those objectives. All Commerce programs operate under legislation or Executive Orders which carry with them specific mandates, and in setting goals and objectives, Commerce officials looked to those foundations as the principal source of items that were important to measure. Many Commerce programs have used performance measurements for some time, as management tools yielding vital guidance on program impact, but all programs are preparing to do so now, in support of GPRA's implementation. The challenge in selecting performance measures is to develop a balanced set of output ("how many") and outcome ("what result") measures, which address the relatively few key indicators that can illuminate program accomplishments.

Program evaluations, as cited in the GPRA legislation, are one tool that can be used both in selecting useful performance measures, and in ensuring that the selected measures are valid. However, over the last several years, most Federal agencies -- including the Commerce Department -- have experienced a serious and steady decline in staff and funds available for conducting program evaluations, and important program information simply ceased to be available. (In some ways, this erosion may have been one factor leading to the creation of GPRA, because of weakened agencies' capacities to describe program accomplishments as thoroughly as desired.) Therefore, during the initial period covered by this Strategic Plan, Commerce bureaus must rely more on available evaluation information in developing performance measures.

The larger Commerce bureaus have been able to support reduced staff with ongoing evaluation responsibilities, while bureaus lacking this staff entirely (but still recognizing the importance of evaluations) have sought other ways to gather and use evaluation information, including contract evaluations, or evaluations of specific programs or projects. As appropriate, bureaus make use of evaluation studies by the General Accounting Office, the Congressional Budget Office, the Office of Inspector General, and program-oriented organizations (such as the Trade Promotion Coordinating Committee, in the case of ITA and BXA) in making management decisions.

Stakeholder feedback is another source of evaluation information which bureaus have used (and will continue to use) in selecting performance measures. GPRA recognizes this by requiring stakeholder consultations in the formulation of strategic plans, and Commerce bureaus -- including those with structured, ongoing stakeholder input vehicles -- conducted consultations specifically in the process of preparing this Plan. For example: NTIA received agreement on its goals from the Interdepartment Radio Advisory Committee; BXA has placed a greater emphasis on the national security aspects of their functions; EDA's regional offices sponsored conferences that resulted in clarified terminology of performance measures; PTO stakeholders (including the American Intellectual Property Law Association, and others) led PTO to emphasize more clearly its direct contribution to the Nation's economy, and; ITA stakeholders suggested an even greater emphasis on helping new-to-export firms. These and other stakeholder comments were used in establishing the Commerce Strategic Plan's goals, strategies, objectives, and performance measures.

Examples of the current bureau-specific and often independent evaluations of our activities include;

o NIST's programs are evaluated generally by its legislatively mandated Visiting Committee on Advanced Technology, which meets regularly with NIST management to review developments in each main program areas. In addition, NIST's Measurements and Standards Program is evaluated annually by National Research Council (NRC) expert peer-review panels assessing each laboratory's performance. The new National Advisory Board of the Manufacturing Extension Partnership program will be a similar peer-review activity to assess MEP programs. The Advanced Technology Program is the focus of a new evaluation program, initiated by the Secretary, to study its impact on the economy. NIST's National Quality Program evaluation criteria focus on the program's serving of the National interest.

o As one of the Federal government's early leaders in outcome-oriented management, NOAA follows a rigorous and ongoing approach to evaluation. The close link between evaluations, goal setting, and program measuring was one reason why NOAA's GPRA Pilot Project was identified as among the 10 best out of 70+ projects developed.

o NOAA's annual strategic planning and budgeting process provides for the development of operating plans and regular reviews of the work accomplished under these plans. Work requirements outlined in a previous year's plans are adjusted to be consistent with funding made available through Congressional appropriations. Managers report on progress at quarterly reviews, and adjustments are made to help ensure that any missed milestones are accomplished. In addition, NOAA's strategic planning teams participate in the 4th Quarter review by providing an independent assessment of how well the agency addressed overall strategic objectives.

o NOAA has conducted a far-reaching evaluation of its Weather Service Modernization program, including technology, program direction, and resource needs, and has used the results both in selecting performance measures and making management decisions supporting the Strategic Plan.

o NOAA is using the results of NRC reports of their nautical charting mission to focus the direction to be taken in meeting the needs of the navigational community, responsible for moving billions of goods across the Nation and the world ever year. NOAA has also completed a review of its science enterprise, specifically within the context of the Strategic Plan, which examines such topics as the adequacy of identifying and linking science goals, and evaluating the effectiveness of linkages with external partners.

o NOAA has formulated its climate change programs to respond to NRC evaluations, which help identify basic needs and guide future activities. NOAA evaluated its National Marine Fisheries Service programs to determine their contributions toward defining specific measurable outcomes.

o EDA developed a comprehensive, ongoing program performance measurement system to gather performance data on projects approved after October 1, 1997. To complement this system, EDA is conducting a retroactive evaluation of its infrastructure investments and defense adjustment programs. EDA granted an award to a consortium led by Rutgers University to analyze the economic impacts that result from these programs. The Rutgers study demonstrated robust program performance and impact.

o A consortium led by the University of Michigan is evaluating the impact of EDA's small business incubator programs on local economies. EDA is studying the disaster assistance after the Midwest Flood of 1993, to assess whether communities had a better chance to enhance their economic recovery beyond their immediate emergency needs. EDA is also supporting a peer review of University Centers, developing performance measures for them, and gathering performance data under those measures.

o The NRC conducted a study of the fundamental requirements for the 2000 Census, including alternative census-taking methodologies. The results of this evaluation led directly to the formulation of strategic objectives for Census 2000.

o The Census Bureau has also conducted and used the results of an extensive series of user surveys evaluating its products and programs. For the Census 2000 alone, 70,000 non-Federal user were surveyed, to ensure that no legally required items were omitted from the questionnaire.

Future Evaluation Plans

With the benefit of program evaluations already clear, and now further emphasized under GPRA, Commerce bureaus are developing plans for future program evaluations. In a few instances, those future plans are already set through the mechanisms of legislation, ongoing professional and peer-review activities, interagency activities, and related approaches, and examples are provided below. In most cases, however, year-by-year competition for funds makes it difficult to specify the level and focus of program evaluation activities in the future. As a result, future evaluations for many bureaus will be included in Annual Performance Plans and budgets. This competition for funds -- but with an outcome only known on a year-to-year basis -- will make the program manager's responsibilities for gathering and using evaluation information about their programs even more important.

Specific examples of our plans for future evaluations include:

o The Census Bureau will conduct a Dress Rehearsal in advance of the 2000 Decennial Census, and will evaluate the results of this Dress Rehearsal in preparing for the Decennial.

o EDA, as cited above, is engaging in a new performance measurement system which will establish baseline evaluation information (for the near term) and will extend to focused evaluation approaches in the longer term.

o ITA will continue working to establish linkages which can yield new information sources about the longer-term positive impacts on the economy of their trade promotion efforts.

o Commerce bureaus, including NOAA, TA, and NTIA, are among the agencies that are working with other science agencies in the Research Round Table to focus on alternative ways of measuring and evaluating long-term science and technology initiatives.

o NOAA is designing an agency-wide performance evaluation process linked to their internal strategic plan, which will review progress made towards achieving each of NOAA's seven strategic goals. This evaluation process will enable NOAA's senior management to evaluate and document the progress and value of work undertaken to meet the objectives under each strategic planning goal. The performance evaluation will stress relevance, effectiveness and impact, as compared with the more traditional, monitoring-type focus on compliance, efficiency and work measures. The evaluations will provide agency leaders with the necessary information to set priorities, make resource allocations, and improve NOAA's ability to meet its vision.

o On a long-term basis, NIST will continue to work with the Visiting Committee on Advanced Technology, the NRC, and the related peer-review bodies to provide for future evaluations of key programs.

o NTIA has established a special position which will be used for evaluating the longer-term contributions made by its telecommunications grant program.

o Other bureaus will continue to seek funding in support of program evaluation capacities which can be used, in conjunction with outside sources, to serve as a long-term evaluation capability.

Table of Contents

Next