The Performance Institute's Felipe Monroig and Jeffrey Bergin work with federal program managers year-round on improving their strategic plans and Program Assessment Rating Tool scores.

To submit a question about the PART to be answered here, send an e-mail to [email protected] with "Ask the PART Experts" in the subject line.

With the release of the President's FY05 Budget, it became increasingly transparent again, that the Program Assessment Rating Tool was being used as an aide in making the tough budgetary decisions. With the announcement of the FY05 budget, the FY06 process now begins in earnest. With 40 percent of federal programs PARTed by February 3, 2004, FY06 will now see another 20 percent get reviewed for the upcoming fiscal year. With the new assessments come common questions to the difficulty, accuracy, applicability and impact of PART.

Since it was released in 2002, PART has evoked a serious of questions that deal with the fundamental foundation of a program-its purpose, its planning, its management, and the results. The questions addressed in the analysis are some of the most fundamental questions that have been asked by program managers, budget directors, employees, and other stakeholders in the field.

1. What are OMB assumptions for PART?
The PART is broken into four categories and those categories address the areas of program purpose, planning, management and results. By addressing these four areas, OMB expects programs to have the pieces essential to programmatic success: strong mission statement, strategic plans, effective management, and results-oriented performance measures. Without these core areas, a program cannot effectively show results and integrate budget and performance. To ensure that PART is applicable to your program, it is essential that a results-oriented strategic plan not only be in existence, but also that it is aligned to the overall agency strategic plan, and the performance goals and measures within are results-oriented and achievable.

2. How do I improve my PART score?
The FY05 budget details how programs that were assessed in FY04 were again rescored to examine if there was an improvement in overall performance. One of the most common questions asked is "How Do I Improve my PART Score?" FY04 showed that programs that could not show results, not only did not have an adherence to a strategic plan, but did not have long-term performance goals and measures.

While the results have changed over the last two years on average, the best practices behind PART remain constant due to the nature of the questionnaire, and the essentials to effective program management. Through best practices such as the National Weather Service in FY04, it is evident the best way to improve the score is to create a performance management framework that details annual and long-term performance goals and measures. Following that, ensure that it is owned by managers and communicated to the rest of the organization. By integrating our performance goals and measures into our program's culture, linking resources to results and showing results becomes easier.

3. How do I avoid getting my budget cut?
With PART as an aid in the budget decisions, many program managers not only want to improve their program's score, but want to illustrate how to avoid getting their budget cut. PART is an extension of the core management framework of a program, which asks us to make a strong case for the funding we request. With the adherence to limited outcome oriented performance goals and measures, programs can detail workload that is done to influence their outcomes and be measured in their performance measures. This logical alignment of resources to results allows program managers to illustrate the role that those key resources play in influencing the outcome and making our programs more performance-based.

4. How does PART improve my program's performance?
In the same way that OMB uses the PART questionnaire to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of a specific program, PART is a valid tool for helping program managers to assess the strengths and weaknesses of their individual programs. This greater understanding of strong planning and management practices is useful in helping managers to focus efforts on improving in those specific areas of deficiency.

5. Can my PART score really affect my program's budget allocation?
Absolutely. In the FY05 Budget, programs deemed "ineffective" were cut by an average of 37.68 percent! "Results Not Demonstrated" programs lost an average of 3.69 percent. "Effective" programs, meanwhile, enjoyed an average budget increase of 7.18 percent, and "moderately effective" programs were increased by 8.27 percent. There are circumstances, however, where an "ineffective" program will be given a budget increase because it was clear a lack of funding factored heavily in the low PART score and that additional funding could improve performance.