Budget 2009 Per

BUDGET OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT

Fiscal Year 2009

ANALYTICALPERSPECTIVES

THE BUDGET DOCUMENTS

Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2009 contains the Budget Message of the President, information on the Presidents priorities, and budget overviews organized by agency.

Analytical Perspectives, Budget of the United States Govern-ment, Fiscal Year 2009 contains analyses that are designed to high-light specified subject areas or provide other significant presentations of budget data that place the budget in perspective. This volume includes economic and accounting analyses; information on Federal receipts and collections; analyses of Federal spending; information on Federal borrowing and debt; baseline or current services estimates; and other technical presentations.

The Analytical Perspectives volume also contains supplemental ma-terial with several detailed tables, including tables showing the budg-et by agency and account and by function, subfunction, and program, that is available on the Internet and as a CD-ROM in the printed document.

Historical Tables, Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2009 provides data on budget receipts, outlays, sur-pluses or deficits, Federal debt, and Federal employment over an extended time period, generally from 1940 or earlier to 2009 or 2013. To the extent feasible, the data have been adjusted to provide consist-ency with the 2009 Budget and to provide comparability over time.

Appendix, Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2009 contains detailed information on the various appropria-tions and funds that constitute the budget and is designed primarily for the use of the Appropriations Committees. The Appendix contains more detailed financial information on individual programs and ap-propriation accounts than any of the other budget documents. It

includes for each agency: the proposed text of appropriations lan-guage; budget schedules for each account; legislative proposals; expla-nations of the work to be performed and the funds needed; and proposed general provisions applicable to the appropriations of entire agencies or group of agencies. Information is also provided on certain activities whose transactions are not part of the budget totals.

AUTOMATED SOURCES OF BUDGET INFORMATION

The information contained in these documents is available in electronic format from the following sources:

Internet. All budget documents, including documents that are re-leased at a future date, spreadsheets of many of the budget tables, and a public use budget database are available for downloading in several formats from the Internet. Links to documents and materials from budgets of prior years are also provided. To access these docu-ments use the following address:

www.budget.gov/budget

Budget CD-ROM. The CD-ROM contains all of the budget docu-ments in fully indexed PDF format along with the software required for viewing the documents. The CD-ROM has many of the budget tables in spreadsheet format and also contains the materials that are included on the separate Analytical Perspectives CD-ROM.

For more information on access to electronic versions of the budget documents (except CD-ROMs), call (202) 5121530 in the D.C. area or toll-free (888) 2936498. To purchase the budget CD-ROM or print-ed documents call (202) 5121800.

GENERAL NOTES

1. All years referred to are fiscal years, unless otherwise noted.

2. Detail in this document may not add to the totals due to rounding.

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON 2008

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: (202) 5121800 Toll-Free 18665121800 Fax: (202) 5122104

Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 204020001

ISBN 978-0-16-079690-6

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

List of Charts and Tables ............................................................................................. v

Introduction

1. Introduction ....................................................................................................... 3

Performance and Management Assessments

2. Performance Improvement Initiative ............................................................... 9

Crosscutting Programs

3. Homeland Security Funding Analysis ............................................................. 19

4. Strengthening Federal Statistics ..................................................................... 37

5. Research and Development .............................................................................. 45

6. Federal Investment ........................................................................................... 57

7. Credit and Insurance ........................................................................................ 69

8. Aid to State and Local Governments ............................................................... 107

9. Integrating Services with Information Technology ........................................ 157

10. Federal Drug Control Funding ......................................................................... 163

11. California-Federal Bay-Delta Program Budget Crosscut (CALFED) ............ 165

Economic Assumptions and Analyses

12. Economic Assumptions ...................................................................................... 169

13. Stewardship ....................................................................................................... 179

14. National Income and Product Accounts .......................................................... 207

Budget Reform Proposals

15. Budget Reform Proposals .................................................................................. 215

Federal Borrowing and Debt

16. Federal Borrowing and Debt ............................................................................ 229

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTSContinued

Page

Federal Receipts and Collections

17. Federal Receipts ................................................................................................ 245

18. User Charges and Other Collections ............................................................... 271

19. Tax Expenditures .............................................................................................. 287

Dimensions of the Budget

20. Comparison of Actual to Estimated Totals ..................................................... 331

21. Outlays to the Public, Gross and Net .............................................................. 339

22. Trust Funds and Federal Funds ...................................................................... 341

23. Off-Budget Federal Entities and Non-Budgetary Activities .......................... 357

24. Federal Employment and Compensation ........................................................ 363

Current Services Estimates

25. Current Services Estimates .............................................................................. 371

The Budget System and Concepts

26. The Budget System and Concepts ................................................................... 391

Detailed Functional Tables

27. Budget Authority and Outlays by Function, Category, and Program .......... CDROM

Federal Programs by Agency and Account

28. Federal Programs by Agency and Account ...................................................... CDROM

iii

LIST OF CHARTS AND TABLES

v

LIST OF CHARTS AND TABLES

LIST OF CHARTS

Page

21. Program Ratings are Improving ........................................................................................................ 14 41. ICSP Statistical Quality and Program Performance Dimensions ................................................... 38 42. Most Recent PART Summary Ratings for Statistical Programs ..................................................... 40 51. American Competitiveness Initiative Research ................................................................................ 45 52. 2008 ACI Research Funding .............................................................................................................. 46 53. Scores of R&D PART Assessments .................................................................................................... 48 71. Financial Services Regulatory Systems Top 15 Non-U.S. Financial Centers ................................ 73 72. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Combined Retained Mortgage Portfolios Year-End 2006 ............. 79 73. Mortgage Purchases and Securitization by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and Change in Fed-

eral Home Loan Bank Advances as a Share of Single-Family Mortgage Originations, First Three Quarters of 2007 ................................................................................................................... 80

74. Face Value of Federal Credit Outstanding ....................................................................................... 93 131. The Financial Condition of the Federal Government and the Nation ............................................ 181 132. Net Federal Liabilities ........................................................................................................................ 184 133. Health Care Cost Alternatives ........................................................................................................... 189 134. Effect of Entitlement Savings ............................................................................................................ 189 135. Alternative Receipts Projections ........................................................................................................ 190 136. Alternative Productivity Assumptions .............................................................................................. 190 137. Alternative Fertility Assumptions ..................................................................................................... 191 138. Alternative Immigration Assumptions .............................................................................................. 191 139. Alternative Mortality Assumptions ................................................................................................... 192

1310. Sources of the Gross Tax Gap ............................................................................................................ 197 171. Major Provisions of the Tax Code Under the 2001, 2003, 2004 and 2006 Enacted Tax Relief .... 246 201. Illustrative Range of Budget Outcomes ............................................................................................ 337 241. 2009 Budget Executive Branch Civilian FTE ................................................................................... 366 261. Relationship of Budget Authority to Outlays for 2009 .................................................................... 402

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Crosscutting Programs Homeland Security Funding Analysis:

31. Homeland Security Funding by Agency .................................................................................. 20 32. Policy EstimatesHomeland Security Funding by National Strategy Mission Area ......... 21 33. Intelligence and Warning Funding .......................................................................................... 22 34. Border and Transportation Security Funding ........................................................................ 24 35. Domestic Counterterrorism Funding ....................................................................................... 26 36. Protecting Critical Infrastructure and Key Assets Funding ................................................. 27 37. Defending Against Catastrophic Threats Funding ................................................................ 28 38. Emergency Preparedness and Response Funding .................................................................. 29 39. Discretionary Fee-Funded Homeland Security Activities by Agency ................................... 32

310. Mandatory Homeland Security Funding by Agency .............................................................. 32 311. Baseline EstimatesTotal Homeland Security Funding by Agency .................................... 33 312. Homeland Security Funding by Budget Function .................................................................. 34 313. Baseline EstimatesHomeland Security Funding by Budget Function .............................. 35

vi ANALYTICAL PERSPECTIVES

LIST OF TABLESContinued

Page

AppendixHomeland Security Mission Funding by Agency and Budget Account ............. CD-ROM Strengthening Federal Statistics:

41. 20072009 Budget Authority for Principal Statistical Agencies ........................................... 43 Research and Development:

51. *COM041*Federal Research and Development ...................................................................... 52 52. Federal Science and Technology Budget ................................................................................. 54 53. Agency Detail of Selected Interagency R&D Efforts .............................................................. 55

Federal Investment: 61. Composition of Federal Investment Outlays .......................................................................... 59 62. Federal Investment Budget Authority and Outlays: Grant and Direct Federal Programs 60 63. Summary of PART Ratings and Scores for Direct Federal Investment Programs .............. 63 64. Net Stock of Federally Financed Physical Capital ................................................................. 66 65. Net Stock of Federally Financed Research and Development ............................................... 67 66. Net Stock of Federally Financed Education Capital .............................................................. 68

Credit and Insurance: Text Tables:

Summary of PART Scores ..................................................................................................... 71 Regulators of Financial Institutions .................................................................................... 74 Largest Ten Claims Against the PBGCs Single-Employer Insurance Program, 19752006 .............................................................................................................................. 89

71. Estimated Future Cost of Outstanding Federal Credit Programs ........................................ 93 72. Reestimates of Credit Subsidies on Loans Disbursed Between 19922007 ......................... 95 73. Direct Loan Subsidy Rates, Budget Authority, and Loan Levels, 20072009 ..................... 97 74. Loan Guarantee Subsidy Rates, Budget Authority, and Loan Levels, 20072009 .............. 98 75. Summary of Federal Direct Loans and Loan Guarantees ..................................................... 99 76. Direct Loan Write-offs and Guaranteed Loan Terminations for Defaults ........................... 100 77. Appropriations Acts Limitations on Credit Loan Levels ....................................................... 102 78. Face Value of Government-Sponsored Lending ...................................................................... 103 79. Lending and Borrowing By Government-Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs) ............................ 104

710. Direct Loan Transactions of the Federal Government ........................................................... CD-ROM 711. Guaranteed Loan Transactions of the Federal Government ................................................. CD-ROM

Aid to State and Local Governments: 81. Federal Grant Outlays by Agency ........................................................................................... 107 82. Summary of PART Ratings and Scores for Grants to State and Local Governments ........ 111 83. Trends in Federal Grants to State and Local Governments ................................................. 113 84. Federal Grants to State and Local GovernmentsBudget Authority and Outlays ............ 116 85. Summary of Programs by Agency, Bureau, and Program ..................................................... 125 86. Summary of Programs by State ............................................................................................... 126 87. School Breakfast Program ........................................................................................................ 127 88. National School Lunch Program .............................................................................................. 128 89. Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) ......... 129

810. Child and Adult Care Food Program ....................................................................................... 130 811. State Administrative Matching Grants for Food Stamp Program ........................................ 131 812. Title I Grants to Local Educational Agencies ......................................................................... 132 813. Improving Teacher Quality State Grants ............................................................................... 133 814. Special EducationGrants to States ...................................................................................... 134 815. Rehabilitation ServicesVocational Rehabilitation Grants to States .................................. 135 816. State Childrens Health Insurance Program .......................................................................... 136 817. Grants to States for Medicaid .................................................................................................. 137 818. Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)Family Assistance Grants ................ 138

vii LIST OF CHARTS AND TABLES


Page

819. Child Support EnforcementFederal Share of State and Local Administrative Costs and Incentives ........................................................................................................................ 139

820. Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program ..................................................................... 140 821. Child Care and Development Block Grant ............................................................................. 141 822. Child Care and Development FundMandatory ................................................................... 142 823. Child Care and Development FundMatching ...................................................................... 143 824. Head Start ................................................................................................................................. 144 825. Foster CareTitle IV-E ............................................................................................................ 145 826. Adoption Assistance .................................................................................................................. 146 827. Social Services Block Grant ..................................................................................................... 147 828. Public Housing Operating Fund .............................................................................................. 148 829. Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers ........................................................................................ 149 830. Public Housing Capital Fund ................................................................................................... 150 831. Community Development Block Grants .................................................................................. 151 832. HOME Investment Partnerships Program ............................................................................. 152 833. Airport Improvement Program ................................................................................................ 153 834. Highway Planning and Construction ...................................................................................... 154 835. Federal Transit Formula Grants and Research ..................................................................... 155 836. Universal Service Fund E-Rate ............................................................................................... 156

Integrating Services with Information Technology: 91. Effectiveness of Agencys IT Management and E-Gov Processes .......................................... CD-ROM 92. Management Guidance ............................................................................................................. CD-ROM 93. Management Watch List for FY 2008 ..................................................................................... CD-ROM 94. High Risk IT Project List As of September 30, 2007 ............................................................. CD-ROM 95. Agencies with IT Investments on the Management Watch List ........................................... CD-ROM 96. FY 2009 Exhibit 300 Evaluation Criteria ............................................................................... CD-ROM 97. Comparison of the Management Watch List by Fiscal Year ................................................. CD-ROM 98. Number of Recurring Investments on the Management Watch List .................................... CD-ROM 99. Lines of Business (LoB) Update ............................................................................................... CD-ROM

910. Status of E-Government Initiatives ......................................................................................... CD-ROM Federal Drug Control Funding:

101. Federal Drug Control Funding, FY 20072009 ...................................................................... 163 California-Federal Bay-Delta Program Budget Crosscut (CALFED):

Text Table: CALFED-Related Federal Funding Budget Crosscut ..................................................... 165 CALFED FY 19982009 Budget Crosscut Methodology ................................................. CD-ROM CALFED Federal Agency FundingSummary by Category and Agency Breakout .... CD-ROM CALFED Project Descriptions .......................................................................................... CD-ROM CALFED Fiscal Years 20062007 Federal Funding ....................................................... CD-ROM CALFED Fiscal Years 20082009 Funding Under New and Old Authority ................ CD-ROM CALFED State Agency Funding ....................................................................................... CD-ROM Department of the Interior Certification of Budget Numbers ....................................... CD-ROM

Economic Assumptions and Analyses Economic Assumptions:

121. Economic Assumptions ............................................................................................................. 172 122. Comparison of Economic Assumptions .................................................................................... 173 123. Comparison of Economic Assumptions in the 2008 and 2009 Budgets ................................ 175 124. Adjusted Structural Balance .................................................................................................... 175 125. Sensitivity of the Budget to Economic Assumptions .............................................................. 177

Stewardship: 131. Government Assets and Liabilities .......................................................................................... 185

viii ANALYTICAL PERSPECTIVES


Page

132. Long-Run Budget Projections ................................................................................................... 188 133. Scheduled Benefits in Excess of Future Taxes and PremiumsActuarial Present Values 196 134. Sources of the Tax Gap from Income Underreporting ........................................................... 198 135. National Wealth ........................................................................................................................ 200 136. Trends in National Wealth ....................................................................................................... 201 137. Economic and Social Indicators ............................................................................................... 202

National Income and Product Accounts: 141. Federal Transactions in the National Income and Product Accounts, 19982009 .............. 209 142. Relationship of the Budget to the Federal Sector, NIPAs .................................................... 211

Budget Reform Proposals Budget Reform Proposals:

151. Mandatory Proposals Subject to PAYGO ................................................................................ 215 152. Discretionary Caps and Adjustments ...................................................................................... 217 153. Program Integrity Base and Cap Adjustments ...................................................................... 218 154. Direct Savings Estimated from 2009 Program Integrity Funding ........................................ 219 155. Transportation Category for Highways and Mass Transit Spending ................................... 220

Federal Borrowing and Debt Federal Borrowing and Debt:

161. Trends in Federal Debt Held by the Public ............................................................................ 229 162. Federal Government Financing and Debt ............................................................................... 232 163. Agency Debt ............................................................................................................................... 234 164. Debt Held by Government Accounts ....................................................................................... 236 165. Federal Funds Financing and Change in Debt Subject to Statutory Limit ......................... 240 166. Foreign Holdings of Federal Debt ............................................................................................ 240

Federal Receipts and Collections Federal Receipts:

171. Receipts by SourceSummary ................................................................................................ 245 172. Effect on Receipts of Changes in the Social Security Taxable Earnings Base .................... 245 173. Effect of Proposals on Receipts ................................................................................................ 265 174. Receipts by Source .................................................................................................................... 268

User Charges and Other Collections: 181. Gross Outlays, User Charges, Other Offsetting Collections and Receipts from the Public,

and Net Outlays .................................................................................................................... 271 182. Total User Charge Collections ................................................................................................. 274 183. User Fee and Other User Charge Proposals .......................................................................... 276 184. Offsetting Collections and Receipts from the Public .............................................................. 282 185. Offsetting Receipts by Type ..................................................................................................... 283

Tax Expenditures: 191. Estimates of Total Income Tax Expenditures ......................................................................... 288 192. Estimates of Tax Expenditures for the Corporate and Individual Income Taxes ............... 293 193. Income Tax Expenditures Ranked by Total 20092013 Projected Revenue Effect ............. 298 194. Present Value of Selected Tax Expenditures for Activity in Calendar Year 2007 .............. 301

Appendix A: Treasury Review of the Tax Expenditure Presentation ...................................................... 315 Appendix Tables:

1. Comparison of Current Tax Expenditures with Those Implied by a Comprehensive In-come Tax ................................................................................................................................ 324

2. Comparison of Current Tax Expenditures with Those Implied by a Comprehensive Con-sumption Tax ......................................................................................................................... 325

3. Revised Tax Expenditure Estimates ....................................................................................... 325 Appendix B: Performance Measures and the Economic Effects of Tax Expenditures ............................ 325

ix LIST OF CHARTS AND TABLES


Page

Dimensions of the Budget Comparison of Actual to Estimated Totals:

201. Comparison of Actual 2007 Receipts with the Initial Current Services Estimates ............. 331 202. Comparison of Actual 2007 Outlays with the Initial Current Services Estimates ............. 332 203. Comparison of the Actual 2007 Deficit with the Initial Current Services Estimate ........... 333 204. Comparison of Actual and Estimated Outlays for Mandatory and Related Programs

Under Current Law ............................................................................................................... 334 205. Reconciliation of Final Amounts for 2007 ............................................................................... 335 206. Comparison of Estimated and Actual Surpluses or Deficits Since 1982 .............................. 336 207. Differences Between Estimated and Actual Surpluses or Deficits for Five-Year Budget

Estimates Since 1982 ............................................................................................................ 337 Outlays to Public, Gross and Net:

211. Total Outlays, Gross and Net of Offsetting Collections and Receipts from the Public, by Agency, 20072009 ................................................................................................................ 340

Trust Funds and Federal Funds: 221. Receipts, Outlays, and Surplus or Deficit by Fund Group .................................................... 342 222. Income, Outgo, and Balances of Trust Funds Group ............................................................. 343 223. Comparison of Total Federal Fund and Trust Fund Receipts to Unified Budget Receipts,

Fiscal Year 2007 .................................................................................................................... 344 224. Income, Outgo, and Balances of Major Trust Funds .............................................................. 346 225. Income, Outgo, and Balances of Selected Federal Funds ...................................................... 353

Off-Budget Federal Entities and Non-Budgetary Activities: 231. Comparison of Total, On-Budget, and Off-Budget Transactions ........................................... 358

Federal Employment and Compensation: Text Table:

Overseas Staffing Under Chief of Mission Authority ......................................................... 364 241. Federal Civilian Employment in the Executive Branch ........................................................ 365 242. Total Federal Employment (as measured by Full-Time Equivalents) .................................. 367 243. Personnel Compensation and Benefits .................................................................................... 368

Current Service Estimates Current Service Estimates:

251. Baseline Category Totals .......................................................................................................... 371 252. Impact of Budget Policy ............................................................................................................ 372 253. Alternative Baseline Assumptions ........................................................................................... 374 254. Summary of Economic Assumptions ....................................................................................... 374 255. Beneficiary Projections for Major Benefit Programs .............................................................. 375 256. Impact of Regulations, Expiring Authorizations, and Other Assumptions in the Baseline 376 257. Baseline Receipts by Source ..................................................................................................... 383 258. Change in Baseline Outlay Estimates by Category. .............................................................. 384 259. Current Services Outlays by Function .................................................................................... 385

2510. Current Services Outlays by Agency ....................................................................................... 386 2511. Current Services Budget Authority by Function .................................................................... 387 2512. Current Services Budget Authority by Agency ....................................................................... 388 2513. Current Services Budget Authority by Function, Category and Program ........................... CD-ROM 2514. Current Services Outlays by Function, Category and Program ............................................ CD-ROM

The Budget System and Concepts The Budget System and Concepts:

261. Totals for the Budget and the Federal Government .............................................................. 395 Detailed Functional Tables

Detailed Functional Tables: 271. Budget Authority and Outlays by Function, Category and Program ................................... CD-ROM

x ANALYTICAL PERSPECTIVES


Page

Federal Programs by Agency and Account Federal Programs by Agency and Account:

281. Federal Programs by Agency and Account ............................................................................. CD-ROM

1

INTRODUCTION

3

1. INTRODUCTION

Purpose of This Volume

The Analytical Perspectives volume presents analyses that highlight specific subject areas or provide other significant data that place the budget in context. This volume presents crosscutting analyses of Government programs and activities from several perspectives.

Presidential budgets have included separate analyt-ical presentations of this kind for many years. The 1947 Budget and subsequent budgets included a separate section entitled Special Analyses and Tables that cov-ered four or more topics. For the 1952 Budget, the section was expanded to ten analyses, including many subjects still covered today, such as receipts, invest-ment, credit programs, and aid to State and local gov-ernments. With the 1967 Budget this material became a separate volume entitled Special Analyses, and in-cluded 13 chapters. The material has remained a sepa-rate volume since then, with the exception of the Budg-ets for 19911994, when all of the budget material was included in one large volume. Beginning with the 1995 Budget, the volume has been named Analytical Perspec-tives.

The Analytical Perspectives volume this year con-tinues to reflect an interest in publishing more informa-tion on program performance, so that Executive agen-cies, the Congress, and the public will become increas-ingly informed about how well programs are per-forming. Increased performance information can help managers improve program effectiveness, and can help Executive and Congressional policymakers improve the allocation of public resources. On November 13, 2007, President Bush issued an Executive Order that formal-izes the commitment of the U.S. government to spend the taxpayers money wisely and more effectively every year. The performance assessment information is sum-marized in Chapter 2, Performance Improvement Ini-tiative, and is discussed in many other chapters, espe-cially those in the section, Crosscutting Programs. One-page summaries of each program assessment are available at www.ExpectMore.gov and further informa-tion on the PART process is available at www.omb.gov/ part.

Again this year, several large tables are included at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2009/ spec.html for the electronic version of this volume and on the Analytical Perspectives CD-ROM enclosed with the printed version of this volume. A list of these items is in the Table of Contents.

Overview of the Chapters

Introduction 1. Introduction. This chapter discusses each of the

subsequent chapters briefly and highlights the empha-sis on performance in a crosscutting context.

Performance and Management Assessments 2. Performance Improvement Initiative. This chapter

summarizes the performance and management assess-ments that have been completed to date using the Pro-gram Assessment Rating Tool (PART). One-page sum-maries of the program evaluations, as well as detail on each of the assessments can be found at www.ExpectMore.gov.

Crosscutting Programs 3. Homeland Security Funding Analysis. This chapter

discusses homeland security funding and provides infor-mation on homeland security program requirements, performance, and priorities. Additional detailed infor-mation is available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/ omb/budget/fy2009/spec.html for the electronic version of this volume and on the Analytical Perspectives CD- ROM enclosed with the printed version of this volume.

4. Strengthening Federal Statistics. This chapter dis-cusses the development of standards that principal sta-tistical programs can use to assess their performance and presents highlights of their 2009 Budget proposals.

5. Research and Development. This chapter presents a crosscutting review of research and development funding in the Budget, including discussions about pri-orities, performance, and coordination across agencies.

6. Federal Investment. This chapter discusses feder-ally-financed spending that yields long-term benefits. It presents information on annual spending on physical capital, research and development, and education and training, and on the cumulative capital stocks resulting from that spending. Also included in this chapter is material on the PART assessments related to direct Federal investment spending.

7. Credit and Insurance. This chapter provides cross-cutting analyses of the roles, risks, and performance of Federal credit and insurance programs and Govern-ment-sponsored enterprises (GSEs). It covers the cat-egories of Federal credit (housing, education, business including farm operations, and international) and insur-ance programs (deposit insurance, pension guarantees, disaster insurance, and insurance against security-re-lated risks). Two detailed tables, Table 710. Direct Loan Transactions of the Federal Government and Table 711. Guaranteed Loan Transactions of the Fed-eral Government, are available at http:// www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2009/spec.html for

4 ANALYTICAL PERSPECTIVES

the electronic version of this volume and on the Analyt-ical Perspectives CD-ROM enclosed with the printed version of this volume.

8. Aid to State and Local Governments. This chapter presents crosscutting information on Federal grants to State and local governments, including highlights of Administration proposals. This chapter also includes material on the PART assessments related to grants. An Appendix to this chapter includes State-by-State spending estimates of major grant programs.

9. Integrating Services with Information Technology. This chapter presents a crosscutting look at invest-ments in information technology (IT). It describes var-ious aspects of the Administrations information tech-nology agenda, with special emphasis on the perform-ance, efficiency, and effectiveness of the Governments IT investments. Several detailed tables are available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2009/ spec.html for the electronic version of this volume and on the Analytical Perspectives CD-ROM enclosed with the printed version of this volume.

10. Federal Drug Control Funding. This chapter pre-sents estimated drug control funding for Federal de-partments and agencies.

11. California-Federal Bay-Delta Program Budget Crosscut (CALFED). This chapter presents information on Federal and State funding for the California-Federal Bay-Delta Program, in fulfillment of the reporting re-quirements for this program. Detailed tables on funding and project descriptions are available at http:// www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2009/spec.html for the electronic version of this volume and on the Analyt-ical Perspectives CD-ROM enclosed with the printed version of this volume.

Economic Assumptions and Analyses 12. Economic Assumptions. This chapter reviews re-

cent economic developments; presents the Administra-tions assessment of the economic situation and outlook, including the effects of macroeconomic policies; and compares the economic assumptions on which the Budg-et is based with the assumptions for last years budget and those of other forecasters. This chapter also covers topics related to the effects on the budget of changes in economic conditions and assumptions.

13. Stewardship. This chapter assesses the Govern-ments financial condition and sustainability in an inte-grated framework that includes Federal assets and li-abilities; 75-year projections of the Federal budget under alternative assumptions; actuarial estimates for the shortfalls in Social Security and Medicare; a discus-sion of tax compliance; a national balance sheet that shows the Federal contribution to national wealth; and a table of economic and social indicators. Together these elements serve similar analytical functions to a businesss accounting statements.

14. National Income and Product Accounts. This chapter discusses how Federal receipts and outlays fit into the framework of the National Income and Product Accounts (NIPAs) prepared by the Department of Com-

merce. The NIPA measures are the basis for reporting Federal transactions in the gross domestic product (GDP) and for analyzing the effect of the budget on aggregate economic activity.

Budget Reform Proposals 15. Budget Reform Proposals. This chapter includes

a brief description of the Administrations budget re-form agenda for addressing the need for responsible budgeting and other reforms.

Federal Borrowing and Debt 16. Federal Borrowing and Debt. This chapter ana-

lyzes Federal borrowing and debt and explains the budget estimates. It includes sections on special topics such as the trends in debt, agency debt, investment by Government accounts, and the debt limit.

Federal Receipts and Collections 17. Federal Receipts. This chapter presents informa-

tion on receipts estimates, enacted tax legislation, and the receipts proposals in the Budget.

18. User Charges and Other Collections. This chapter presents information on receipts from regulatory fees and on collections from market-oriented activities, such as the sale of stamps by the Postal Service, which are recorded as offsets to outlays rather than as Federal receipts.

19. Tax Expenditures. This chapter describes and pre-sents estimates of tax expenditures, which are defined as revenue losses from special exemptions, credits, or other preferences in the tax code. An appendix dis-cusses possible alternatives to the current tax expendi-ture baselines.

Dimensions of the Budget 20. Comparison of Actual to Estimated Totals. This

chapter compares the actual receipts, outlays, and def-icit for 2007 with the estimates for that year published two years ago in the 2007 Budget. It also includes a historical comparison of the differences between re-ceipts, outlays, and the deficit as originally proposed with final outcomes.

21. Outlays to the Public, Gross and Net. This chapter provides information on outlays gross and net of offset-ting collections and offsetting receipts by agency. Out-lays are a measure of Government spending. Offsetting collections and offsetting receipts are netted against gross outlays and result primarily from the Govern-ments business-like activities, such as the sale of stamps by the Postal Service.

22. Trust Funds and Federal Funds. This chapter provides summary information on Federal funds and trust funds, which comprise the entire budget. For trust funds the information includes income, outgo, and bal-ances.

23. Off-Budget Federal Entities and Non-Budgetary Activities. This chapter discusses off-budget Federal en-tities (Social Security and Postal Service) and non-budg-etary activities (such as cash flows for credit programs, deposit funds, and regulation).

5 1. INTRODUCTION

24. Federal Employment and Compensation. This chapter provides summary data on the level and recent trends in civilian and military employment, personnel compensation and benefits, overseas staffing, and the full compensation of military personnel.

Current Services Estimates 25. Current Services Estimates. This chapter presents

estimates, based on rules similar to those contained in the Budget Enforcement Act (BEA), of what receipts, outlays, and the deficit would be if no changes were made to laws already enacted. It discusses the concep-tual framework for these estimates and describes dif-ferences with the BEA requirements. Two detailed ta-bles, Table 2513. Current Services Budget Authority by Function, Category, and Program and Table 2514. Current Services Outlays by Function, Category, and Program, are available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/ omb/budget/fy2009/spec.html for the electronic version

of this volume and on the Analytical Perspectives CD- ROM enclosed with the printed version of this volume.

Budget System and Concepts 26. The Budget System and Concepts. This chapter

includes a basic reference to the budget process, con-cepts, laws, and terminology, and includes a glossary of budget terms.

Other The following materials are available at http://

www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2009/spec.html for the electronic version of this volume and on the Analyt-ical Perspectives CD-ROM enclosed with the printed version of this volume.

Detailed Functional Tables. Table 271. Budget Authority and Outlays by Function, Category, and Program.

Federal Programs by Agency and Account. Table 281. Federal Programs by Agency and Account.

7

PERFORMANCE AND MANAGEMENT ASSESSMENTS

9

2. PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT INITIATIVE

I. INTRODUCTION

The American people expect the Federal government to implement programs that will ensure the Nations security, provide critical national level services and produce meaningful results. To hold government ac-countable for its performance, taxpayers must have clear and candid information about the successes and failures of all Federal programs. For the third straight year, the Administration is providing this type of infor-mation to the public on ExpectMore.gov, a user-friendly government website that allows public access to govern-ment programs. ExpectMore.gov describes which gov-ernment programs are performing, which ones are not, and in both situations, what is being done to improve them.

The objective of the Presidents Performance Improve-ment Initiative (PII) (formerly the Budget and Perform-ance Integration Initiative) is to ensure that Federal dollars produce the greatest results possible. The Initia-tive provides information on program performance to help the President and Congress make better, more informed decisions about the programs.

The PII focuses on performance in two principal ways:

Improved Program Performance: The initiative re-quires each agency to identify opportunities to im-prove program management and design, and then develop and implement clear, aggressive plans to get more from tax dollars every year. Agencies have ready access to program performance infor-mation from a variety of sources such as the Pro-gram Assessment Rating Tool (PART) and other independent program evaluations, investigations, audits, and analyses.

Greater Investment in Successful Programs: Al-though performance is not the only factor used to decide the size of a programs budget, Congress and the President can utilize information about a programs effectiveness and efficiency in deci-sion-making so that taxpayer dollars are invested in programs that provide the greatest return to the Nation. If poorly performing programs are un-able to demonstrate improved results, then their resources may be reallocated to programs that can demonstrate greater success and returns to the taxpayer.

Currently, the PII is showing great progress toward helping programs become more efficient and more effec-tive through implementation of meaningful improve-ment plans.

Many programs are demonstrating improved results. For example:

Social Security Administration (SSA): SSA in-creased agency productivity by 15.5 percent since 2001 through increased use of information tech-nology and improved business processes. SSA would have required $980 million more in 2007 to process the same work if productivity improve-ments had not been realized.

High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas (HIDTA): The HIDTA program improved the way it measures success by implementing a system for tracking and analyzing performance data. Using this information, more drug trafficking organiza-tions were dismantled for less money. In 2005, 2,183 Drug Trafficking Organizations were dis-mantled for $80,000 each. By 2006, 2,332 were dismantled for $76,000 each.

Administration on Aging (AoA): AoA improved its outreach and services to elderly Americans who suffer from disease and disability. In 2006, there were 18 States that improved targeting to those living below the poverty level, serving an addi-tional 80,000 elderly individuals who lived in pov-erty. Over 345,000 elderly and disabled individ-uals, who due to their physical conditions would otherwise be living in nursing homes, can continue to live in their own homes and stay connected to their communities. This is an increase of more than 52,200 nursing home-eligible individuals since 2003.

Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP): In 2006 as a part of its Greening Prisons initiative, the BOP piloted renewable energy technologies in sev-eral prisons and generated savings of $1.1 million. As a result, in 2006 and 2007, BOP entered into 18 new national Energy Savings Performance Con-tracts with energy services companies to generate additional savings.

Agencies are identifying additional actions to improve the performance of each of their programs. For exam-ple:

Progress toward the second PII goal of improving resource allocation has been limited, but this year, the Administration had more success in terminating some low-performing programs and targeting those resources to well-performing programs. In 2008 seven programs were terminated, saving $156 million and six programs were reduced, saving $1.120 billion. Though no decision is based purely on performance, overall, high per-forming programs received larger funding increases than those that did not perform as well.


II. HOW THE PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT INITIATIVE WORKS

Several aspects of the Performance Improvement Ini-tiative are designed to maximize program performance. They include:

Comprehensively assessing performance using the PART;

Publishing quarterly Scorecards to hold agencies accountable for managing for results, addressing PART findings, and implementing improvement plans;

Broadcasting results to the public on ExpectMore.gov; and

Facilitating program improvement through inter-agency collaboration and cooperation.

Comprehensive Assessment with the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART)

How do we ensure that Federal programs are improv-ing every year? First, we assess their current perform-ance. In order to improve a programs outcomes, it is critical to have a good understanding of how the pro-gram is currently performing. To date, we have as-sessed the performance of more than 1,000 programs, comprising 96 percent of all Federal programs, using the PART.

History of the PART

The Federal Government spends trillions of dollars on programs annually, but until the advent of the PART, there was not a uniform basis for assessing how well these programs actually work. For example, are the billions of taxpayer dollars the Federal Government spends on foster care actually preventing the maltreat-ment and abuse of children? Are Federal efforts to re-duce air pollution successful? Previous administrations from President Johnson to President Clinton and Con-gress have grappled with this problem. Each prior ad-ministration has tried to come up with means by which government programs can be measured for results. The most significant advance in bringing accountability to government programs was the Government Perform-

ance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA). This law requires Federal agencies to identify both annual and long-term goals and to collect and report performance data. For the first time, agencies were required to explicitly iden-tify measures and goals for judging the performance of each of their programs and to collect information on an annual basis in order to determine whether they were meeting those goals.

This Administration built upon GPRA requirements by creating the PART (Program Assessment Rating Tool), an objective, evidence-based and easy-to-under-stand questionnaire about program design, planning, management, and performance. Objectivity is para-mount to a PART rating. For example, when the devel-opment of the PART began in 2002, the first draft included a question relating to whether a particular program served an appropriate federal role. Because many people believed that the answer to that question would vary depending on the reviewers philosophical outlook, the question was removed.

Public and private sector entities have reviewed the PART. Private sector reviewers have praised the PART assessment process for its transparency and objectivity and also have raised concerns that OMB has striven to address. For instance, some reviewers found that assessments of different programs lacked consistency in the answers to the same questions. OMB now audits all draft assessments to correct any obvious inconsist-encies. Reviewers also found that agencies did not al-ways agree with the final assessment of their programs. Agencies can now appeal to a high level subcommittee of the Presidents Management Council to dispute an-swers with which they disagree. To address concerns that OMB and agencies were not doing enough to in-volve Congress in the assessment process, agencies are now required to brief and consult their Congressional appropriators, authorizers, and overseers before the an-nual assessments begin.

The accompanying timeline provides a history of the development of the PART.

11 2. PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT INITIATIVE

July 2005

*NAPA = National Academyof Public Administration

PCIE = President's Councilon Integrity and Efficiency

PMAC = PerformanceMeasurement AdvisoryCouncil

PMC = President'sManagement Council

**20% of Programs Assessedin each Spring/Summer2002 - 2006

Aug. 2005

Feb. 2006

Jan. 2004

June 2003

Nov. 2002

Sept. 2002

Aug. 2002

July 2002

May 2002

April 2002

Feb. 2003

PMC Approves Final PART/First List of Programsto be Assessed*

Draft PART Tested on 67 ProgramsPublic Input Requested

External Review of PART -NAPA/PCIE/PMAC*

PART Assessments Conducted with Agencies**

First Congressional Hearing HeldPMAC Met

First Interagency Review Panel ConductedConsistency Audit & Appeals Review

Published First Set of PARTs

Established Annual OMB Consistency Check

GAO Conducted Latest Review of PART

PART received Harvard's Innovations in AmericanGovernment AwardOnline Tool - PARTWeb Launched

Established Formal Annual AppealsProcess

Online Tool - ExpectMore.gov LaunchedEstablished Annual Consultation with Congress


What is the PART and How is it Used?

The PART helps assess the management and performance of individual programs. With the PART, agencies and OMB evaluate a programs purpose, design, planning, management, results, and accountability to determine its overall effectiveness. Agencies then identify and complete follow-up actions to improve program results.

To reflect the fact that Federal programs deliver goods and services using different mechanisms, the PART is customized by program type. The seven PART types are: Direct Federal, Competitive Grant, Block/Formula Grant, Research and Development, Capital Assets and Service Acquisition, Credit, and Regulatory. The PART types apply to both discretionary and mandatory pro-grams. ExpectMore.gov also classifies each program by its specific program area (such as environment, transportation, edu-cation, etc.) to facilitate comparison and accelerate the improved performance of programs with similar missions.

Each PART includes 25 basic questions and additional questions tailored to the different program types. The questions are di-vided into four sections. The first section of questions gauges whether a program has a clear purpose and is well designed to achieve its objectives. The second section evaluates strategic planning, and weighs whether the agency establishes outcome-ori-ented annual and long-term goals for its programs. The third section rates the management of an agencys program, including the quality of efforts to improve efficiency. The fourth section assesses the results programs can report with accuracy and con-sistency.

The answers to questions in each of the four sections result in a numerical score for each section from 0 to 100 (100 being the best score). Because reporting a single weighted numerical rating could suggest false precision, or draw attention away from the very areas most in need of improvement, numerical scores are combined and translated into qualitative ratings. The bands and associated ratings are as follows:

Rating Range

Effective ................................................................... 85100

Moderately Effective ............................................... 7084

Adequate ................................................................. 5069

Ineffective ................................................................ 049

Regardless of overall score, programs that do not have acceptable performance measures or have not yet collected perform-ance data generally receive a rating of Results Not Demonstrated. This rating suggests that not enough information and data are available to make an informed determination about whether a program is achieving results.

PART ratings do not result in automatic decisions about funding. Clearly, over time, funding should be targeted to programs that can prove they achieve measurable results. In some cases, a PART rating of Ineffective or Results Not Demonstrated may suggest that greater funding is necessary to overcome identified shortcomings, while a funding decrease may be proposed for a program rated Effective if it is not a priority or has completed its mission. However, most of the time, an Effective rating is an indication that the program is using its funding well and that major changes are not needed.

Publish a Scorecard to Hold Agencies Accountable

Agencies are achieving greater results with the help of the habits and disciplines established through the Performance Improvement Initiative (PII). These agen-cies recognize that the PART can be a useful tool to drive improvement in the performance of their pro-grams.

Agency success is judged by clear, Government-wide goals or standards consistent with the Program Im-provement Initiative. Agencies have developed and are implementing detailed, aggressive improvement plans to achieve these goals. Most importantly, agencies are

held publicly accountable for adopting these disciplines. To meet the Standards for Success for the PII, an agen-cy must:

Demonstrate that senior agency managers meet at least quarterly to examine reports that inte-grate financial and performance information that covers all major responsibilities of the Depart-ment;

Have strategic plans that contain a limited num-ber of outcome-oriented goals and objectives. An-nual budget and performance documents incor-porate measures identified in the PART and focus


on the information used in the senior management report described in the first criterion;

Report the full cost of achieving performance goals accurately in budget and performance documents and accurately estimate the marginal cost of changing performance goals;

Have at least one efficiency measure for all PART-ed programs;

Use PART evaluations to direct program improve-ments and hold managers accountable for those improvements, and PART findings and perform-ance information are used consistently to justify funding requests, management actions, and legis-lative proposals; and

Have less than 10 percent of agency programs receive a Results Not Demonstrated rating for two years in a row.

Each quarter, agencies receive two ratingsstatus and progress. First, they are rated on their status in achieving the overall goals for each initiative. They are given a green, yellow or red rating to clearly announce their performance. Green status is for success in achiev-ing each of the criteria listed above; yellow is for an intermediate level of performance; and red is for unsat-isfactory performance.

Second, agency progress on the Program Improve-ment Initiative standards is assessed separately. Agen-cy progress is reviewed on a case-by-case basis against the work plan and related time lines established for each agency. Progress is also given a color rating. Green is given when implementation is proceeding according to plans agreed upon with the agencies; yellow for when some slippage or other issues require adjustment by the agency in order to achieve the initiative objectives on a timely basis; and red when the Initiative is in serious jeopardy of not realizing its objectives without significant management intervention.

As of September 30, 2007, fourteen agencies achieved green status on the Program Improvement Initiative Scorecard. The agencies at green are:

1. Department of Agriculture 2. Department of Commerce 3. Department of Education 4. Department of Energy 5. Environmental Protection Agency 6. Department of Justice 7. Department of Labor 8. Department of Transportation 9. General Services Administration

10. National Aeronautics and Space Administration 11. National Science Foundation 12. Small Business Administration 13. Smithsonian Institution 14. Social Security Administration

The Scorecard is an effective accountability tool to ensure agencies manage the performance of their pro-grams. Although a scorecard rating is not directly linked to any specific consequences, it is quickly under-stood at the highest levels of the Administration as an indicator of an agencys strength or weakness.

The Government-wide scorecard reporting on indi-vidual agency progress is published quarterly at www.results.gov/agenda/scorecard.html.

Broadcast Results on ExpectMore.gov

ExpectMore.gov provides Americans with candid in-formation about which programs work, which do not, and what all programs are doing to get better every year.

Up until the launch of ExpectMore.gov last year, Americans had limited access to information on how well the Federal Government performed. Now, Ameri-cans can see for themselves how their government pro-grams are performing. In many cases, the Federal Gov-ernment performs well. In some cases, it performs bet-ter than the private sector.

ExpectMore.gov contains summaries of PART results for all programs that have been assessed to date. The site provides program information that a concerned cit-izen could use to assess a programs performance. Each assessment includes a brief description of the programs purpose, its overall rating, some highlights about its performance and the steps it will take to improve in the future. For individuals interested in more informa-tion, the site also provides links to the detailed program assessment, as well as that programs website and the assessment summaries of other similar programs. The detailed PART assessment includes the answer to each PART question with an explanation and supporting evi-dence. It also includes the performance measures for the program along with current performance informa-tion. In addition, there is an update on the status of follow-up actions to improve program performance.

A visitor to the site may find, at least initially, that programs are not performing as well as they should or program improvement plans are not sufficiently am-bitious. We expect this site to help change that. The website has a variety of benefits, including:

Increased public attention to performance; Greater scrutiny of agency action (or inaction) to

improve program results: Improvement plans are transparent Statements about goals and achievements are

clearer; and Demand for better quality and more timely per-

formance data.

Implement Inter-Agency Program Improvement

The Administration continues to look for new ways to improve the performance of programs with similar purposes or designs by using the PART to analyze per-formance across agencies (i.e., cross-cutting analysis) and State and local levels. Cross-cutting analysis can improve coordination and communication by encour-aging managers from multiple agencies to agree to a common set of goals and by placing the focus on quan-tifiable results. Cross-cutting analysis breaks down bar-riers across the Federal, State, and local levels so that all entities work toward the same goal. Only topics that are expected to yield meaningful results are se-


lected for cross-cutting analyses. To date, the Adminis-tration completed cross-cutting analyses of the govern-ments math and science programs, community and eco-

nomic development programs, import and food safety programs, and others.

III. RESULTS

As mentioned above, the PII measures its progress according to two key principles:

Improved Program Performance; and Greater Investment in Successful Programs

There has been greater success in leading agencies to think more systematically about how they measure and improve program performance. Though there are many factors that impact program performance, it is clear that the PII has framed the discussion around results. Agencies have developed ways to measure their efficiency so they can figure out how to achieve more with Americans tax dollars.

2009 marks the sixth year that the PART was used to (1) assess program performance, (2) take steps to

improve program performance, and (3) help link per-formance to budget decisions. To date, the Administra-tion has assessed more than 1,000 programs, rep-resenting approximately 96 percent of the Federal budget. The Administration will use the PART to assess the performance and management of the remaining Federal programs.

With the help of the PART, we have improved pro-gram performance and transparency. There has been a substantial increase in the total number of programs rated either Effective, Moderately Effective, or Ade-quate. This increase came from both re-assessments and newly PARTed programs. The chart below shows the percentage of programs by ratings category.

6% 11% 15% 15% 17% 18%

24%26%

26% 29% 30% 31%

15%

20%26%

28%28% 29%

5%

5%

4%4% 3%

3%

50%

38%

29%24% 22%

19%

2002 (234) 2003 (407) 2004 (607) 2005 (793) 2006 (977) 2007 (1011)

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Effective

Moderately Effective

Adequate

Ineffective

Results not Demonstrated

Chart 2-1. Program Ratings are ImprovingCumulative Program Results by Ratings Category

These results demonstrate that the PII has been very successful in focusing Agencies attention on program performance. For example, approximately:

89 percent of programs established or clarified their long-term and annual performance goals to focus on the outcomes that are important to the American people.

82 percent of programs are achieving their per-formance goals.

73 percent of programs are measuring their effi-ciency, a relatively new activity for Government programs.

70 percent of programs are improving efficiency annually, producing more value per dollar spent.

55 percent of programs that were initially unable to demonstrate results have improved their overall performance rating.

Unfortunately, there has not been a similar level of accomplishment in the second measure: Greater Invest-ment in Successful Programs. Though Congressional use of performance information has been limited, most in the Congress are aware of the PART. This topic was discussed extensively in recent debates in the Sen-ate.


Senator Wayne Allard introduced an amendment to cut funding for programs funded in the Labor, HHS, and Education 2008 Appropriations Bill rated as Inef-fective by 10 percent across the board. In advocating his amendment, Senator Allard said:

These assessments represent the combined wis-dom of career officials. This is not a political process. These are objective evaluations done by career officials at agencies and OMB, and are based on evidence of that programs perform-ance. While a programs overall rating should not be the sole determinant of funding, Con-gress should prioritize funding programs that perform well. Ineffective programs in particular should be scrutinized to determine whether the resources they use could be better spent else-where and whether their goals could be achieved through other means.

Senator Allard brought warranted focus on programs that arent performing as they should. In arguing against the amendment, Senator Tom Harkin said:

The Program Assessment Rating Tool . . . is in-tended to help assess the management and per-formance of individual programs. So it is not just a question of whether the program works, it also evaluates whether Congress has designed the program in a clear manner and whether

Federal agencies do a good job managing the program.

Both Senators went on to have a substantive debate about how programs were performing and how to get them to perform better. And soon thereafter, in arguing for his own amendment, Senator John Cornyn said:

The Office of Management and Budget has re-cently reviewed over a thousand programs. As this chart indicates, upon a review of 1,016 Federal Government programs, they have con-cluded that 22 percent of those programs rated either as ineffective or they are unable to deter-mine whether they are effective. In other words, they are unable to find evidence that they are effective. They have not conclusively determined them as ineffective, but they have concluded that 22 percent of the Federal Government pro-grams are either ineffective or the results are not demonstrated. Anybody who is interested anywhere in the worldcertainly in the United Statescan look at the information on this ExpectMore.gov Web site and inform them-selves, as I am sure they would want to, about what the Federal Government is doing and not doing on their behalf.

This debate on Senator Allards amendment was an important one. It shows increasing attention to the ob-jective rating of program performance.

IV. NEXT STEPS

The PII has identified several activities to improve program effectiveness over the coming year:

Ensure Program Goals are Adequate and Improve-ment Plans are Aggressive and Result in Improved Per-formance.Review of all completed PARTs and pro-gram goals, as well as rigorous follow-up on rec-ommendations from the PART will accelerate improve-ments in the performance of Federal programs. This will ensure that the hard work done through the PART produces performance and management improvements. Additionally, implementation of improvement must be tracked and reported.

Appoint Agency Performance Improvement Officers. To ensure successful implementation of the new policy of the Federal Government embodied in Executive Order 13450 to spend taxpayer dollars effectively, and more effectively each year, each agency will appoint Performance Improvement Officers. Performance Im-provement Officers are responsible for coordinating the performance improvement activities of their agencies, including:

Developing and improving the agencys strategic plans, annual performance plans, and annual per-formance reports, as well as ensuring the use of such information in agency budget justifications;

Ensuring program goals are aggressive, realistic, and accurately measured;

Regularly convening agency program management personnel to assess and improve program perform-ance and efficiency; and

Assisting the head of the agency in the develop-ment and use within the agency of performance measures in personnel performance appraisals, particularly those of program managers, to ensure real accountability for greater effectiveness.

Expand Cross-Cutting Analyses.Use the PART to facilitate cross-cutting analysis where there is a higher return than approaching programs individually. The goal of these efforts is to increase efficiency and save dollars, building on the success of previous cross-cutting analyses. Congressional guidance will be a factor in choosing topics for the next group of cross-cutting anal-yses.

Maximize ExpectMore.gov Impact.The Federal Gov-ernment should be accountable to the public for its performance. This web-based tool provides candid infor-mation on how programs are performing and what they are doing to improve. The PII Initiative will work to increase the reach and impact of this valuable informa-tion to improve program performance and account-ability for results.


Note.A table with summary information for all pro-grams that have been reviewed using the Program As-sessment Rating Tool (PART) is available at: www.whitehouse.gov/omb/expectmore/part.pdf. This table provides program ratings, section scores, funding levels, and other information. Additionally, a complete

data file and data model of all assessments on ExpectMore.gov is available at: www.whitehouse.gov/ omb/expectmore/whatsnew.htm. This is a comma-sepa-rated values file that academics and researchers can use to analyze performance data.

17

CROSSCUTTING PROGRAMS

19

1 All data in the Federal expenditures section are based on the Presidents policy for the 2009 Budget. Additional policy and baseline data is presented in the Additional Tables section. Due to rounding, data in this section may not add to totals in other Budget volumes.

2 Federal homeland security activities are currently defined by OMB in Circular A11 as, activities that focus on combating and protecting against terrorism, and that occur within the United States and its territories (this includes Critical Infrastructure Protection

(CIP) and Continuity of Operations (COOP) data), or outside of the United States and its territories if they support domestically-based systems or activities (e.g., visa processing or pre-screening high-risk cargo at overseas ports). Such activities include efforts to detect, deter, protect against, and, if needed, respond to terrorist attacks.

3 The 2009 gross homeland security funding request level excludes $2.2 billion for Bio-Shield.

3. HOMELAND SECURITY FUNDING ANALYSIS

Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the Federal Government, with State, local and private sector partners, has engaged in a concerted national effort to prevent terrorist attacks within the United States, reduce Americas vulnerability to terrorism, and minimize the damage and recover from any attacks that do occur. Accordingly, we have identified and pur-sued terrorists abroad, and implemented an array of measures to secure our citizens and resources at home. We have worked with the Congress to reorganize the Federal Government; acquire countermeasures to chem-ical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) weap-ons; enhance the security of our borders; protect our critical infrastructure and key resources; and strength-en Americas response and recovery capabilities in our cities and local communities. Elements of our National Strategy for Homeland Security involve every level of government as well as the private sector and individual citizens. Since September 11th, homeland security has continued to be a major policy focus for all levels of government, and the U.S. government has no more im-portant mission than securing the Homeland.

Underscoring the importance of homeland security as a crosscutting Government-wide function, section 889 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 requires a home-land security funding analysis to be incorporated in the Presidents Budget. This analysis addresses that legislative requirement. This analysis covers the home-land security funding and activities of all Federal agen-cies, not only those carried out by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), but also State, local, and private sector expenditures. Since not all activities car-ried out by DHS constitute homeland security funding (e.g. response to natural disasters and Coast Guard search and rescue activities), DHS estimates in this section do not represent the entire DHS budget.

Data Collection Methodology and Adjustments

The Federal spending estimates in this analysis uti-lize funding and programmatic information collected on the Executive Branchs homeland security efforts. 1 Throughout the budget formulation process, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) collects three-year funding estimates and associated programmatic infor-mation from all Federal agencies with homeland secu-

rity responsibilities. These estimates do not include the efforts of the Legislative or Judicial branches. Informa-tion in this chapter is augmented by a detailed appen-dix of account-level funding estimates, which is avail-able on the Analytical Perspectives CD-ROM.

To compile this data, agencies report information using standardized definitions for homeland security. 2 The data provided by the agencies are developed at the activity level, which is a set of like programs or projects, at a level of detail sufficient to consolidate the information to determine total Governmental spend-ing on homeland security.

To the extent possible, this analysis maintains pro-grammatic and funding consistency with previous esti-mates. Some discrepancies from data reported in earlier years arise due to agencies improved ability to extract homeland security-related activities from host programs and refine their characterizations. As in the Budget, where appropriate, the data is also updated to reflect agency activities, Congressional action, and technical re-estimates. In addition, the Administration may re-fine definitions or mission area estimates over time based on additional analysis or changes in the way specific activities are characterized, aggregated, or disaggregated.

Federal Expenditures

Total funding for homeland security has grown sig-nificantly since the attacks of September 11, 2001. For 2009, the Presidents Budget includes $66.3 billion of gross budget authority for homeland security activities, a $4.5 billion (7.3 percent) increase over the 2008 en-acted level. 3 Excluding mandatory spending, fees, and the Department of Defenses (DOD) homeland security budget, the 2009 Budget proposes a net, non-Defense, discretionary budget authority level of $40.1 billion, which is an increase of $3.9 billion (10.7 percent) over the 2008 level (see Table 31).

A total of 32 agency budgets comprise Federal home-land security funding in 2009. Of those, five agencies the Departments of Homeland Security, Defense, Health and Human Services (HHS), Justice (DOJ) and Energy (DOE)account for approximately $60.7 billion (91 percent) of total Government-wide gross discre-tionary homeland security funding in 2009.


Table 31. HOMELAND SECURITY FUNDING BY AGENCY (Budget authority, in millions of dollars)

Budget Authority 2007 Enacted

2007 Supplemental/

Emergency

2008 Enacted

2008 Supplemental/ Emergency 1

2009 Request

Department of Agriculture ....................................................................................................................... 540.5 ........................ 570.0 ........................ 690.9 Department of Commerce 2 ..................................................................................................................... 205.0 ........................ 206.9 ........................ 262.3 Department of Defense ........................................................................................................................... 16,538.3 ........................ 17,374.4 ........................ 17,645.9 Department of Education ........................................................................................................................ 26.2 ........................ 27.1 ........................ 30.3 Department of Energy ............................................................................................................................. 1,719.2 ........................ 1,828.7 ........................ 1,942.9 Department of Health and Human Services .......................................................................................... 4,327.0 ........................ 4,300.6 ........................ 4,456.7 Department of Homeland Security .......................................................................................................... 26,857.9 2,695.6 30,100.6 2,639.7 32,817.1 Department of Housing and Urban Development .................................................................................. 1.9 ........................ 1.9 ........................ 4.1 Department of the Interior ....................................................................................................................... 47.8 ........................ 49.6 ........................ 43.5 Department of Justice ............................................................................................................................. 3,306.4 211.3 3,273.5 249.5 3,794.9 Department of Labor ............................................................................................................................... 49.4 ........................ 47.5 ........................ 51.4 Department of State ................................................................................................................................ 1,241.6 ........................ 1,961.5 ........................ 2,465.6 Department of Transportation ................................................................................................................. 205.7 ........................ 205.3 ........................ 221.2 Department of the Treasury .................................................................................................................... 126.8 ........................ 116.0 ........................ 126.6 Department of Veterans Affairs .............................................................................................................. 259.8 ........................ 271.7 ........................ 348.1 Corps of Engineers ................................................................................................................................. 42.0 ........................ 42.0 ........................ 42.0 Environmental Protection Agency ........................................................................................................... 166.7 ........................ 138.1 ........................ 170.3 Executive Office of the President ........................................................................................................... 20.8 ........................ 21.2 ........................ 20.7 General Services Administration ............................................................................................................. 168.2 ........................ 143.0 225.0 119.4 National Aeronautics and Space Administration .................................................................................... 199.2 ........................ 205.2 ........................ 203.0 National Science Foundation .................................................................................................................. 385.4 ........................ 373.9 ........................ 379.0 Office of Personnel Management ........................................................................................................... 2.8 ........................ 2.3 ........................ 2.5 Social Security Administration ................................................................................................................. 194.0 ........................ 212.6 ........................ 221.5 District of Columbia ................................................................................................................................. 8.5 ........................ 3.4 ........................ 15.0 Federal Communications Commission ................................................................................................... 2.3 ........................ 2.3 ........................ 2.3 Intelligence Community Management Account ...................................................................................... 56.0 ........................ 122.0 ........................ 12.6 National Archives and Records Administration ...................................................................................... 17.9 ........................ 17.7 ........................ 18.8 Nuclear Regulatory Commission ............................................................................................................. 72.2 ........................ 72.1 ........................ 72.8 Securities and Exchange Commission ................................................................................................... 14.3 ........................ 16.4 ........................ 15.9 Smithsonian Institution ............................................................................................................................ 80.7 ........................ 93.1 ........................ 96.6 United States Holocaust Memorial Museum .......................................................................................... 7.8 ........................ 8.0 ........................ 9.0 Corporation for National and Community Service ................................................................................. 33.6 ........................ .................... ........................ ....................

Total, Homeland Security Budget Authority ...................................................................................... 56,925.9 2,906.9 61,808.4 3,114.3 66,302.5 Less Department of Defense .................................................................................................................. 16,538.3 ........................ 17,374.4 ........................ 17,645.9

Non-Defense Homeland Security BA, excluding Mandatory PSIC Grants and BioShield .......... 40,387.5 2,906.9 44,434.0 3,114.3 48,656.6 L