Archived Information

Demonstrating Results, An Introduction to Government Performance and Results Act, Spring 1999

Introduction

There is a significant change in the public's attitude toward government. The American public wants a government that is more effective, more efficient, and more accountable to those who support it. This has resulted in a series of reform efforts – the National Performance Review of 1993 (renamed the National Partnership for Reinventing Government), the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990, the Government Management Reform Act, the Information Technology Management Reform Act of 1996 (known as the Clinger-Cohen Act), and the 1994 Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act, among others. The most far reaching, however, is the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (referred to as GPRA or the Results Act).

The Results Act has the potential to substantially enhance the management and accountability of federal agencies, and to improve the effectiveness of every major program in the federal government. The strength of GPRA lies in the logic of its requirements: federal agencies are to establish agency-wide strategic plans, develop performance goals for their programs, link those plans and goals to their budgets, measure program performance against the goals, and report publicly on the results. These requirements are causing federal agencies to dramatically transform their management approaches, bring improved public accountability for the expenditure of federal funds, and make federal programs more effective in achieving the purposes for which they were enacted.

Although GPRA does not directly address individuals and organizations who receive grants from federal agencies, the only way that the Department of Education and its Office of Higher Education Programs (HEP) can conduct effective programs that meet the expectations of Congress is if HEP and its grantees work toward the same goals.

This booklet was written to assist HEP grantees in understanding the requirements and implications of GPRA, advise them of the benefits that will result from effective planning and performance measurement, and provide a basis for improved collaboration between grantees and the HEP staff.

-###-

[Foreword]

[Background]