Assessing federal program performance: observations on the U.S. Office of Management and Budget's Program Assessment Rating Tool and its use in the budget process

Through its development and use of the Program Assessment Rating Tool, the U.S. Office of Management and Budget promises to turn performance from a strategic instrument of government to a more instrumental accountability strategy through linking performance with consequences for funding and program design. The administration hopes to highlight the relative value of a program and--presumably, by extension--to exert pressure to use this information in congressional deliberations to make resource decisions. However, the linkage of performance metrics with the budget and policy agendas of particular political actors carries its own risks and challenges as well. It is unlikely that the broad range of actors whose input is critical to decisions will use performance information unless they believe it is credible and reliable and reflects a consensus about performance goals among a community of interested parties. Similarly, the measures used to demonstrate progress toward a goal, no matter how worthwhile, cannot appear to serve a single set of interests without potentially discouraging use of this information by others. KEYWORDS: Government Performance and Results Act of 1993, performance measures, performance metrics, U.S. Office of Management and Budget