Detailed Information on the
Contributions to the International Atomic Energy Agency Assessment

Continue to seek refinements in IAEA performance planning to clarify budget year targets with a goal of demonstrating clear links between expected results and U.S. contributions to the IAEA.

Measure: Ratio of IAEA Management costs to Program costs.

Explanation:This uses the %age of budget spent on management, as an efficiency indicator. Both assessed and voluntary contributions are considered.

Measure: Credible assurances to the International community that states are honoring their safeguard obligations

Explanation:This is an IAEA Long term measure related to Promoting Safeguards and Verification (pillar 1). It is tracked via the following annual measure.

Measure: Number of countries that have Safeguards and Additional Protocols in force.

Explanation:This indicator measures the IAEA Long Term Goal, which is to "provide credible assurances to the international community that States are honoring their safeguards obligations". The strength of the NPT regime is closely tied to the degree the IAEA is able to implement an effective safeguards system, and that system is in force in all states with significant nuclear activities.

Measure: Global acceptance of international safety standards.

Explanation:This is an IAEA Long term measure related to Promoting Safety and Security (pillar 2). It is tracked by the following annual measure.

Measure: Number of countries that have agreed to the Code of Conduct on the Safety and Security of Radioactive Sources.

Explanation:This indicator measures the IAEA long term Goal which is to achieve global acceptance of international safety standards.

Is the program purpose clear?

Explanation: The purpose of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is to promote the peaceful use of nuclear energy and to inhibit its use for military purposes. The IAEA has three main pillars or areas of work: (1) Promoting Safeguards and Verification: IAEA inspectors monitor nuclear facilities and material in more than 150 states with safeguards agreements to verify that safeguarded nuclear material and activities are not used for military purposes. (2) Promoting Safety and Security: The IAEA protects people and the environment against radiation exposure, while responding to safety and security needs in transporting, storing, and using nuclear and radioactive material. (3) Promoting Science and Technology for sustainable development: The IAEA is the world's focal point to mobilize peaceful applications of nuclear science and technology for critical needs in developing countries, contributing to the goals of sustainable development by fighting poverty, disease, and pollution of the environment. U.S. assistance to the IAEA supports its work to promote the peaceful benefits of nuclear energy in a safe and secure manner and under sound nonproliferation conditions.

Evidence: Report to Congress Pursuant to Section 601 of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act of 1978 as Amended by the Nuclear Proliferation Prevention Act of 1994 (601 Report to Congress). The IAEA??s mission statement (and a link to the Statute of the IAEA) can be found at http://www.iaea.org/About/mission.html. The IAEA Annual Report Medium Term Strategy 2006-2011 (GOV/2005/8).

Does the program address a specific and existing problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: The U.S. assessed and voluntary contributions to the IAEA support the IAEA's three pillars: Promoting Safeguards and Verification, Promoting Safety and Security, and Promoting Science and Technology for sustainable development. The IAEA inspectors perform verification activities for more than 150 States that have concluded Safeguards Agreements with the Agency, in order to confirm that nuclear material in these States is not diverted from peaceful use and verify that states' nuclear declarations are correct and complete. Without IAEA safeguards, it would be nearly impossible to tell if countries with peaceful nuclear programs were misusing them to produce nuclear weapons. The IAEA also responds to urgent nuclear proliferation problems such as Iran and opportunities such as Libya and, potentially, North Korea. Following the nuclear accident at Chernobyl, the IAEA stepped up its efforts to protect people and the environment against radiation exposure, while responding to safety and security needs in transporting, storing, and using nuclear and radioactive material. After September 11, the IAEA substantially increased its nuclear security programs to help countries prevent acts of nuclear terrorism. The IAEA, as the world's focal point to mobilize peaceful applications of nuclear science and technology, has instituted a new Program Action for Cancer Therapy (PACT) and has an Innovative reactor Program (INPRO).

Evidence: Chapters 4, 5, 6, and 8 in 601 Report to Congress. IAEA Medium-Term Strategy for 2006-2011, http://www.iaea.org/About/mts2006_2011.pdf. IAEA Programme and Budget for 2006-2007, http://www.iaea.org/About/Policy/GC/GC49/Documents/gc49-2.pdf. Nuclear Security Plan for 2006-2009, GOV/2005/50, August 15, 2005, Restricted Distribution (provided to the United States and other members of the Board of Governors but not available to the public). GC(49)/17 - Nuclear Security - Measures to Protect Against Nuclear Terrorism: Progress Report and Nuclear Security Plan for 2006-2009, http://www.iaea.org/About/Policy/GC/GC49/Documents/gc49-17.pdf. GC(49)/INF/7. Measure to Strengthen International Cooperation in Nuclear, Radiation and Transport Safety and Waste Management - Nuclear Safety Review for the Year 2004, http://www.iaea.org/About/Policy/GC/GC49/Documents/gc49inf-7.pdf. 1997 Technical Cooperation Strategy report, http://tc.iaea.org/tcweb/tcprogramme/ginf824.pdf. 2002 Strategy Review, http://tc.iaea.org/tcweb/strategy/ginf2002-8mod1.pdf. Technical Cooperation Program 2005-2006 (GOV/2004/80), November 3, 2004,Technical Cooperation Annual Report 2004 (GC(49)/INF/2), http://www.iaea.org/About/Policy/GC/GC49/Documents/gc49inf-2.pdf and http://www.iaea.org/About/Policy/GC/GC49/Documents/gc49inf-2_sup.pdf. Program and Budget for 2006-2007 (GC(49)/2), http://www.iaea.org/About/Policy/GC/GC49/Documents/gc49-2.pdf.

Is the program designed so that it is not redundant or duplicative of any other Federal, state, local or private effort?

Explanation: The State Department chairs the interagency IAEA Steering Committee, which coordinates U.S. policy toward the IAEA. Through the Steering Committee and its subcommittees and by working with individual agencies, the State Department coordinates funding with other agencies to ensure complementarity rather than duplication of efforts. For example, the Department of Energy funds IAEA radiological security activities and supports the return of spent research reactor fuel to Russia, while the State Department directs nuclear security funding to other elements of the IAEA nuclear security program, such as comatting illicit nuclear trafficking and physical protection of nuclear facilities. The IAEA also ensures that its efforts do not duplicate other international efforts, hosting a biennial Member States Support Program Coordinators' Meeting to harmonize contributions from Members. The IAEA is the sole organization with the authority and resources to conduct inspection and verification of nuclear material and nuclear facilities worldwide, and there is no feasible alternative for meeting the contribution of IAEA safeguards to U.S. security.

Evidence: USSP Priorities: http://www.bnl.gov/ISPO/ussp.asp. IAEA??s mission statement: http://www.iaea.org/About/mission.html. IAEA Steering Committee org chart IAEA's "areas of work" web pages: Safeguards & Verification, http://www.iaea.org/OurWork/SV/index.html, Safety & Security, http://www.iaea.org/OurWork/SS/index.html, Science & Technology, http://www.iaea.org/OurWork/ST/index.html.

Is the program design free of major flaws that would limit the program's effectiveness or efficiency?

Explanation: There is no evidence of design flaws. There is no indication that any other program could achieve the same or better outcome with fewer resources or through different planning and implementation. The IAEA is a diverse organization, and, while complicated, it has clear management structures and programs with established goals and purposes. U.S. involvement is coordinated through the IAEA Steering Committee, chaired by the State Department, which continuously reviews the IAEA's activities to ensure that its programs are free of major technical, management or administrative flaws. The IAEA also has both internal and external auditors and independent external evaluation groups for specific issues. IAEA programs are subject to international review and approval by the IAEA's governing bodies, the Board of Governors and the General Conference, normally by consensus. IAEA programs are also reviewed by Standing Advisory Groups established by the Director General to advise the IAEA on each Major Program. US experts participate in all the Groups.

Evidence: The IAEA is subject to selective annual program reviews by its external auditor. See http://www.iaea.org/About/Policy/GC/GC49/Documents/gc49-7.pdf for the Agency's accounts for 2004 and GOV/2006/20, April 6, 2006 (not yet available on the web) for the Agency's Accounts for 2005 and by its internal auditor (Office of Internal Oversight Services): Program Evaluation Report (GOV/INV/2006/6, April 4, 2006, Restricted Distribution), Evaluation of Technical Cooperation Activities in 2005, GOV/INF/2005/14, November 15, 2005, Restricted Distribution,. GOV/2004/86 - Reviews of the Safeguards Programme and Criteria, November 2, 2004, Restricted Distribution. The U.S. GAO has completed a review of IAEA safeguards and security programs, "NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION: IAEA Has Strengthened Its Safeguards and Nuclear Security Programs, but Weaknesses Need to Be Addressed," GAO-06-93, October 2005, http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d0693.pdf.

Is the program design effectively targeted so that resources will address the program's purpose directly and will reach intended beneficiaries?

Explanation: Each of the IAEA's three pillars is designed to benefit the global community in a specific manner. For example, IAEA Safeguards benefit the global community by tracking nuclear material and monitoring nuclear facilities worldwide and by focusing on problem states such as Iran and Libya. The IAEA was able to respond quickly and effectively to questions raised about unreported nuclear activities in Libya, Iran, Iraq, Egypt and South Korea, addressing significant proliferation problems in some cases while providing assurances that problems are being corrected in other cases. IAEA Safety and Security programs protect the world community from the risks of nuclear accidents and nuclear terrorism by providing assistance to states to help them reduce those risks. IAEA programs in nuclear energy, science and technology help expand the benefits of nuclear energy and nuclear applications worldwide, including the PACT to help meet radiation therapy needs worldwide and the use of the Sterile Insect Technique (SIT) to control the tsetse fly, medflies, screwworm and other insect pests. These in turn help sustain international support for the IAEA's nonproliferation, safety and security programs.

Evidence: http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Statements/2004/ebsp2004n003.html. For Science and Technology, see http://tc.iaea.org/tcweb/strategy/default.asp and http://www-naweb.iaea.org/na/index.html. For safeguards and verification, see http://www.iaea.org/worldatom/Programmes/Safeguards. For nuclear safety and security - http://www-ns.iaea.org/security. The IAEA Annual Report can be found at http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Reports/index.html, the Technical Cooperation Program 2005-2006 (GOV/2004/80), November 3, 2004,the Technical Cooperation Annual Report 2004 (GC(49)/INF/2), http://www.iaea.org/About/Policy/GC/GC49/Documents/gc49inf-2.pdf and http://www.iaea.org/About/Policy/GC/GC49/Documents/gc49inf-2_sup.pdf, and the Program and Budget for 2006-2007 (GC(49)/2) at http://www.iaea.org/About/Policy/GC/GC49/Documents/gc49-2.pdf.

Does the program have a limited number of specific long-term performance measures that focus on outcomes and meaningfully reflect the purpose of the program?

Explanation: The IAEA has long-term goals and performance measures for each of its programmatic areas: to achieve more effective use of current nuclear technologies and advance nuclear science and technology and catalyze innovation or reactor technology; to achieve global acceptance of international safety standards and to establish and achieve global acceptance of an agreed international framework for nuclear security and support its application; and to provide credible assurances to the international community that States are honoring their safeguards obligations. U.S. priorities for the IAEA closely match the IAEA's own long-term goals. For example, the Bureau Performance Plan (BPP) for the Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation (ISN) for FY2006 identifies the following indicators 1. Status of the nonproliferation treaty regime. 2. Strength of IAEA safeguards system 3. Funding of safeguard system and security programs. These broad goals carry through to outcomes and performance indicators that guide program implementation and assessment at every level of the program hierarchy: major program, program, sub program and project.

Evidence: ISN BPP, IO BPP and UNVIE MPP The IAEA's Medium-Term Strategy for 2006-2011,http://www.iaea.org/About/mts2006_2011.pdf.

Does the program have ambitious targets and timeframes for its long-term measures?

Explanation: The IAEA has developed a specific set of goals and objectives for the period 2006-2011. For example, it has a goal of providing assurances to the international community of the peaceful use of nuclear energy by continuing activities to encourage States to conclude safeguards agreements and additional protocols. The IAEA has incorporated these long-term goals in developing performance indicators and in planning its future programs and budgets.

Evidence: ISN BPP The IAEA's Medium-Term Strategy 2006-2011, http://www.iaea.org/About/mts2006_2011.pdf Planning for the 2008-2009 and 2010-2011 Program and Budget Proposals, GOV/2006/21, April 6, 2006, Restricted Distribution.

Does the program have a limited number of specific annual performance measures that can demonstrate progress toward achieving the program's long-term goals?

Explanation: The IAEA has performance indicators through out its Program and Budget. These are adopted biennially and reviewed annually and biennially in the Mid-Term Progress Report and the Program Performance Report, respectively. In safeguards, a key indicator is the number of states that have safeguards agreements and Additional Protocols in force. Other important indicators for safeguards performance include technical goals for timely detection of possible diversion of significant quantities of nuclear material and the number of states for which it can draw broad conclusions about the absence of undeclared nuclear activities. Similarly, in the area of safety and security, a key indicator is the number of countries that have adopted the Code of Conduct on the Safety Security of Radioactive Sources. In promoting peaceful uses of nuclear energy through its Technical Cooperation Program, a key indicator is the portion of new projects that are clearly linked to a Country Program Framework specifying development goals for the country in question. The Bureau Performance Plan for the International Security and Nonproliferation Bureau includes three specific annual performance measures that track progress toward the outcomes expected from the U.S. Government's contribution to the IAEA. For example, the BPP includes an indicator tracking the number of States with safeguards for the peaceful use of nuclear material.

Evidence: ISN BPP GC(49)/2 - The Agency's Programme and Budget. For 2006-2007, http://www.iaea.org/About/Policy/GC/GC49/Documents/gc49-2.pdf IAEA Medium Term Strategy 2006-2011 Program Performance Report for 2002-2003, GOV/2004/22, March 31, 2004, Restricted Distribution. Mid-term Progress Report for 2004 (GOV/INF/2005/1), March 29, 2005, Restricted Distribution.For a description of the structure and goals of IAEA safeguards, see http://www.iaea.org/OurWork/SV/Safeguards/safeg_system.pdf.

Does the program have baselines and ambitious targets for its annual measures?

Explanation: The performance measures in the IAEA's Program and Budget are reviewed and reported on both annually (in the Mid-Term Progress Report) and biennially (in the Program Performance Report) and provide clear baselines. In safeguards, the IAEA aims each year to improve its attainment of its technical goals detecting diversions and to increase annually the number of states for which it can draw broad conclusions about the absence of undeclared nuclear activities. U.S. targets for these indicators are specified in the relevant bureau performance plans. The IAEA began using a results-based management approach with the 2002-2003 budget cycle, which it first evaluated in 2004 in the Programme Performance Report. This contains an assessment of the achievement of outcomes ?? the effects or changes brought about in Member States as a result of the work of the Agency ?? on the basis of predetermined performance indicators. The IAEA Programme Performance Report also details the resources utilized and the lessons learned through an appraisal of program implementation in 2002-2003. These lessons, along with those learned from the reviews and in-depth evaluations conducted on certain parts of the Agency's program, were applied to the formulation of the draft program and budget for 2006-2007. Using the results-based approach, the Secretariat is able more effectively to view its program holistically ?? the 'one house' approach ?? and has established mechanisms for coordinating 'cross-cutting' subject areas that would formerly have come under the responsibility of a number of different organizational units. This approach ?? used initially for work related to the environment, quality assurance, knowledge management, research reactors and security ?? is now being applied to other areas such as reactor decommissioning, public information, and innovative reactors and fuel cycles.

Evidence: ISN and IO BPP's Safeguards Implementation Report for 2004, GOV/2005/32, May 13 2005, Restricted Distribution. The executive summary is available at http://www.iaea.org/OurWork/SV/Safeguards/es2004.html.The status of safeguards agreements and Additional Protocols is available on the IAEA web site: http://www.iaea.org/OurWork/SV/Safeguards/sg_protocol.html and http://www.iaea.org/OurWork/SV/Safeguards/sir_table.pdf.See GOV/2004/22 - Programme Performance Report for 2002-2003, March 31, 2004, Restricted Distribution, Mid-term Progress Report for 2004 (GOV/INF/2005/1), March 29, 2005, Restricted Distribution.Safeguards Implementation Report for 2005.

Do all partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) commit to and work toward the annual and/or long-term goals of the program?

Explanation: State Department's in-kind assistance to the IAEA is governed by three Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) with DoE, supplemented by annual Interagency Acquisition Agreements, and by one contract with Argonne National Lab. Decisions regarding these programs are made by the coordinated interagency through the appropriate subcommittees and subgroups of the IAEA Steering Committee. The United States shares the cost of funding the IAEA with 138 other member states. The United States is the largest donor, paying 25% of the regular budget and roughly 38% of all voluntary contributions. The IAEA's Program and Budget, which sets out the IAEA's annual goals and funding levels, is adopted by the IAEA Board of Governors (the IAEA's executive body, with 35 designated and elected member states on which the U.S. is a member) and then approved by the General Conference (an annual meeting open to all member states), normally by consensus. . The Medium Term Strategy was developed by a Working Group of the Board of Governors with the support of the Secretariat, and the Secretariat is using this Strategy in formulating proposals for the biennial programs and budgets. The IAEA Technical Cooperation Program, which provides development assistance to IAEA member states, requires active support from recipients both through agreement on country program frameworks and through cost-sharing in the form of national participation costs. The IAEA Safeguards Research and Development Program is the vehicle for coordinating assistance to IAEA safeguards from the U.S. and other Member State Support Programs. Regular meetings with the IAEA and among U.S. partners ensure that all are working toward common goals.

Evidence: Board of Governors and General Conference decisions adopting the Program and Budget. Summaries of Argonne National Lab (ANL)/ International Nuclear Technology Liaison Office (INTLO) and U.S. Support Program (USSP) meetings. Medium-Term Strategy for 2006-2007,Planning for the 2008-2009 and 2010-2011 Program and Budget Proposals, GOV/2006/21, April 6, 2006, Restricted Distribution. POTAS, ESA and HPSOP MOUs, ANL Contract. Research and Development Programme for Nuclear Verification 2006-2007, Department of Safeguards, January 2006.

Are independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality conducted on a regular basis or as needed to support program improvements and evaluate effectiveness and relevance to the problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: The IAEA has standing advisory groups of outside experts to advise the Director General on the proper implementation of each of its programs. For example, the Standing Advisory Group on Safeguards Implementation (SAGSI) meets twice a year to advise the IAEA on technical issues related to safeguards. SAGSI also conducted a comprehensive review of safeguards technical standards in 2003-2004. . The GAO has conducted three reviews of IAEA safeguards (1993, 1998, 2005). The U.S. Support Program for IAEA safeguards was subject to an external audit in 2002-2003, which recommended improvements in consistency of financial reporting and in information security. ANL support program is critically evaluated by a panel of national experts appointed by the University of Chicago every three years, and is also continuously evaluated in quarterly reviews by State/ISN/MNSA. Evaluations by the IAEA's Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) of various IAEA programs are presented annually to the Program and Budget Committee and to the Technical Assistance and Cooperation. In recent years these have included reviews the safeguards program, the Member State safeguards support programs and management of technical cooperation management. The annual report by the IAEA's external auditor provides not only a financial audit but also selective reviews of program management and implementation.

Evidence: On GAO website: http://www.gao.gov: - GAO-06-93, October 2005: IAEA Has Strengthened Its Safeguards and Nuclear Security Programs, but Weaknesses Need to Be Addressed - GAO/NSIAD/RCED-98-184, July 1998: Uncertainties With Implementing IAEA's Strengthened Safeguards System - GAO/NSIAD/RCED-93-284, September 1993: Challenges Facing the International Atomic Energy Agency See GOV/INF/2005/2 - 2004 Programme Evaluation Report, Restricted Distribution, for evaluation of "Management of the Agency's Safeguards Member State Support Programmes (MSSPs)". Evaluation of Technical cooperation Activities in 2005, GOV/INF/2005/14, November 15, 2005, Restricted Distribution.See GOV/2004/86 - Reviews of the Safeguards Programme and Criteria, Restricted Distribution, for reviews of the safeguards program conducted by a panel of independent external evaluators and the Review of the Safeguards Criteria carried out by the Standing Advisory Group on Safeguards Implementation (SAGSI). The External Auditor's report is included in "The Agency's Accounts for 2005," - GOV(2006/20), April 6, 2006, Restricted Distribution. Once approved by the General Conference, the Agency's Accounts are available to the public on the IAEA web site. See "The Agency's Accounts for 2004," GC(49)/7, http://www.iaea.org/About/Policy/GC/GC49/Documents/gc49-7.pdf.

Are Budget requests explicitly tied to accomplishment of the annual and long-term performance goals, and are the resource needs presented in a complete and transparent manner in the program's budget?

Explanation: The IAEA has clear long-term goals that and reports on accomplishments. The assessed contribution is linked to activities that support the long-term goals. Voluntary contributions are similiarly linked to progress on various efforts but the IAEA does not set specific future annual targets for program areas in detail. Thus annual budget requests thus can be linked to future achievement but the effects of funding changes on specific future year results are not always clear. For example, voluntary contributions for the IAEA's nuclear science program will support the IAEA's long term goals but specific annual results expected are not identified in advance. In general, the State Department's integrated budget and performance planning process allows ISN and IO to link performance information to its annual resource request. Guidance in ISN and IO Bureau Performance Plans (BPPs) and the UNVIE Mission Performance Plan (MPP) instructs Washington and field offices to utilize the State Department's strategic goals to justify individual project requests and include performance and resource information in MPP account justifications. These BPPs and MPP tie requested resources to U.S. objectives and performance measures and include goal papers and performance indicators tied to the Department's Performance Goals (WD.02 and WD.03). Annual and long-term goals are also included in the ISN and IO Congressional Budget Justifications as well as in the President's Budget Justification for Foreign Operations. The IAEA adopted results-based budgeting beginning with its 2002-2003 budget cycle. Key elements of this process are the Medium-Term Strategy, the Program and Budget, the Mid-Term Progress Report, and the Program Performance Report. The Medium-Term Strategy establishes the Agency's goals over a six-year period (currently 2006-2011). The Program and Budget establishes budgets linked to specific outcomes and performance indicators derived from the Medium Term Strategy and taking into account other decisions by the IAEA's policy-making bodies, the Board of Governors and the General Conference. The Mid-Term Progress Report sets out progress in implementing the biennial program. The Program Performance Report evaluates performance during the previous biennium for input to the coming biennium.

Evidence: ISN BPP, IO BPP, UNVIE MPP Department of State Joint Performance Plan (Volume I of the Congressional Budget Justification) GC(49)/2 - The Agency's Programme and Budget. For 2006-2007, http://www.iaea.org/About/Policy/GC/GC49/Documents/gc49-2.pdf The Agency's Draft Programme and Budget, 2006-2007, Management Part, Restricted Distribution, December 2004.IAEA Medium Term Strategy 2006-2011 http://www.iaea.org/About/mts2006_2011.pdf GOV/2005/1.Program Performance Report.Mid-Term Progress Report.

Has the program taken meaningful steps to correct its strategic planning deficiencies?

Explanation: First, the IAEA adopted results-based budgeting beginning with the 2002-2003 budget cycle, in response to concerted efforts by the United States and other like-minded member states. In addition, the IAEA's Technical Cooperation (TC) Department corrected its limited strategic planning activities by establishing a formal strategy, which included major planning elements and standards, in 1997. These standards include Country Program Frameworks, to ensure that individual projects fit into a country's development plans, model projects, to ensure that each project is based on best practices, and the central criterion that each recipient country must demonstrate a commitment to a project. The U.S. provided substantial guidance and support for this effort. The TC Strategy is designed to be revised and updated every five years. A revision of the TC Strategy - linked to the Medium Strategy - was accomplished as scheduled in 2002.

Evidence: For TC: 1997 report: http://tc.iaea.org/tcweb/tcprogramme/ginf824.pdf. 2002 Review: http://tc.iaea.org/tcweb/abouttc/strategy/ginf2002-8mod1.pdf. USSP Priorities: see ISPO website at http://www.bnl.gov/ISPO/ussp.asp

Does the agency regularly collect timely and credible performance information, including information from key program partners, and use it to manage the program and improve performance?

Explanation: The Department annually collects and reviews the performance information that the IAEA provides to the United States as a member of the IAEA Board of Governors (cited below under Evidence), and uses this information as the basis for U.S. positions on the IAEA's overall program and budget and to seek improvements in the IAEA's results-based budgeting process. U.S. officials meet regularly with the IAEA and with other partners to assess program implementation across the board. For example, representatives of the U.S. Support Program meet twice annually with IAEA safeguards officials and undertake annual site visits to U.S. contractors that support IAEA safeguards. In efforts to promote adherence to IAEA safeguards agreements and Additional Protocols (a target in the ISN BPP), the Department reviews progress with the IAEA on an annual basis to decide on funding for IAEA outreach efforts. U.S. and IAEA officials meet regularly to discuss progress on U.S. priorities such as the Nuclear Security Program and the Program of Action on Cancer Therapy (PACT).

Evidence: The most recent versions of regular IAEA performance documents: - The Agency's Accounts for 2004, GC(49)7, August 2005, http://www.iaea.org/About/Policy/GC/GC49/Documents/gc49-7.pdf. - Safeguards Implementation Report for 2005 (SIR), GOV/2006/31, May 8 2006,, Restricted Distribution. The executive summary of the SIRfor 2004 is available at http://www.iaea.org/OurWork/SV/Safeguards/es2004.html/. - Program Performance Report for 2002-2003, GOV/2004/22, March 31, 2004, Restricted Distribution. - Mid-Term Progress Report for 2004-2005, GOV/INF/2005/1, March 29, 2005, Restricted Distribution. - 2005 Program Evaluation Report, GOV/INF/2006/6, April 4, 2006, Restricted Distribution. This is the annual report of the IAEA's internal auditor. - The Agency's Programme and Budget for 2006-2007, see http://www.iaea.org/About/Policy/GC/GC49/Documents/gc49-2.pdf

Are Federal managers and program partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) held accountable for cost, schedule and performance results?

Explanation: Federal managers are held accountable through the Department's annual BPP and budget process. Performance targets are established in individual employee evaluation reports and bureau senior leaders are held accountable for bureau performance against BPP targets during the annual Senior Program, Policy and Budget Reviews chaired by the Secretary of State. The IAEA is held accountable through review by its policy-making bodies (the Board of Governors and General Conference) in response to performance reporting provided by the Secretariat and independent evaluations by the internal and external auditor. Partners are held accountable through annual reviews of performance. These include annual reviews of the contract with Argonne National Laboratory, annual reviews of the budget for the International Safeguards Project Office at Brookhaven National Laboratory, and annual program reviews with Oak Ridge National Laboratory for the environmental sample analysis program.

Evidence: BPPs for ISN and IO, MPP for UNVIE Do we have any documentation on the Senior Review of the Department's budget? See IAEA performance documents cited under 3.1 Argonne contract MOU for the Program of Technical Assistance to IAEA Safeguards MOU for the Environmental Sample Analysis program

Are funds (Federal and partners') obligated in a timely manner, spent for the intended purpose and accurately reported?

Explanation: Once the U.S. budget has been approved, it typically takes three months from the time the Secretary of State has allocated the NADR account funds to when the U.S. Voluntary Contribution funds are obligated. The United States pays its assessed contribution to the IAEA regular budget (Contributions to International Organizations account) on a deferred payment basis, as is the case with many international organizations. For example, payments for CY 2005 are made in FY 2006. Funds are obligated in a timely manner??typically initial payments to organizations are processed within four weeks from the time we receive our appropriation. The IAEA's financial rules require that regular budget funds be spent in accordance with the approved Program and Budget. The annual U.S. pledge of voluntary contribution to the IAEA spells out how the voluntary contribution is to be spent. The IAEA publishes annual reports on budget expenditures, audited by an independent external auditor, in the Agency's Accounts. The IAEA also provides semi-annual reports on expenditures of voluntary contribution funds.

Evidence: Decision memorandum for the Deputy Secretary allocating the NADR account. Pledge cable to Vienna Memo to EX to obligate and transfer funds Interagency Acquisition Agreements for POTAS, ESA, HPSOP Argonne Contract IAEA Financial Rules and Regulations. Agency's Accounts for 2005. Most recent IAEA financial report on U.S. voluntary contribution Cables authorizing regular budget payments to the IAEA

Does the program have procedures (e.g. competitive sourcing/cost comparisons, IT improvements, appropriate incentives) to measure and achieve efficiencies and cost effectiveness in program execution?

Explanation: The IAEA, Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL)-International Safeguards Program Office (ISPO) and Argonne National Laboratory (ANL)-International Nuclear Technology Liaison Office (INTLO) all have financial and procurement regulations and rules they must follow for competitive bidding. For each organization, procurement is conducted through open competition and competitive sourcing. For example, the IAEA held a lengthy competition and selection process for the roughly $30M contract to replace its Safeguards Information System. Moreover, the U.S. Voluntary Contribution to the IAEA requires the IAEA to procure goods and services from U.S. sources wherever practical. The IAEA's results-based budget process allows it to track funding for each program and project and thereby to identify cost trends and seek cost efficiencies. As a result, the IAEA has achieved significant reductions in overall program management cost that have allowed it to expand key programs, while improving the efficiency of those programs. For example, while the number of safeguarded facilities increased by over 25% from 1990 to 2000, the overall safeguards budget increased by less than 9%, an efficiency gain of over 13%.

Evidence: IAEA Financial Rules IAEA Procurement Rules (these are not on the web, but for relevant information see http://www.iaea.org/About/Business/index.html). USSP rules on competitive sourcing are at http://www.bnl.gov/ISPO/docs/(1)SSTS_POLICY_SERIES.htm Voluntary Contribution pledge cable

Does the program collaborate and coordinate effectively with related programs?

Explanation: The IAEA Steering Committee and its subcommittees and subgroups coordinate U.S. assistance to the IAEA with other U.S. programs to ensure that efforts are complementary and not duplicative. However, more can be done to improve coordination within the IAEA, and between the IAEA and the multiple U.S. Government agencies and other organizations that are involved in enhancing nuclear security. The U.S. is working with the IAEA to ensure continued progress in this regard. For example, the Subgroup on Safeguards Technical Support (SSTS) coordinates all U.S. assistance to IAEA safeguards, and ensures that Department of Energy programs to provide assistance to various countries on domestic safeguards and nuclear material accountancy work hand-in-hand with support to IAEA safeguards. ISPO and the SSTS meet with other MSSPs to share information and discuss opportunities for collaboration. The IAEA Nuclear Security Program works with and receives some funding from the Department of Energy's Global Threat Reduction Initiative on the removal of dangerous materials worldwide. The IAEA has also received some funding from the private Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI) to complement funding received through DoE's Global Threat Reduction Initiative (GTRI). The U.S. Centers for Disease Control coordinates with the IAEA on efforts to apply the sterile insect technique (SIT) to the control of malarial mosquitoes, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture supports IAEA efforts to apply SIT to agricultural pests. The IAEA systematically coordinates with other international organizations in any area of overlapping responsibility. For instance, it collaborates with the Food and Agriculture Organization on the use of nuclear techniques in agriculture through a joint FAO/IAEA Division, and is working with the World Health Organization on the Program of Action on Cancer Therapy. The IAEA and UNESCO jointly fund the Abdus Salam International Center for Theoretical Physics in Trieste, Italy. On nuclear energy, the IAEA's innovative reactor program Innovative reactor Program (INPRO) coordinates with the OECD/Nuclear Energy Agency and Generation IV International Forum on innovative reactors, and the U.S., which recently joined INPRO, is providing a Cost Free Expert to this IAEA program. In applying safeguards, the IAEA seeks to verify independently the conclusions of domestic and regional safeguards organizations such as Euratom in Europe and Argentina-Brazil Agency for Accounting and Control of Nuclear Material (ABACC) in South America without unnecessarily duplicating the efforts of these organizations. The IAEA also coordinates with other international organizations in Vienna and shares responsibility for certain common management services, such as building maintenance and information systems.

Evidence: IAEA Program and Budget SSTS minutes Nuclear Security Plan for 2006-2009, GOV/2005/50, August 15, 2005, Restricted Distribution Announcement of NTI contributions to IAEA

Does the program use strong financial management practices?

Explanation: The Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA) requires agencies to establish management control and financial systems that provide reasonable assurance that the integrity of federal programs and operations are protected. It also requires that the head of the agency, based on an evaluation, provide an annual Statement of Assurance on whether the agency has met this requirement. The State Department evaluated its management control systems and financial management systems for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2005. This evaluation provided reasonable assurance that the objectives of the FMFIA were achieved in FY 2005, and formed the basis for the Secretary's Statement of Assurance. The IAEA operates within established financial rules and regulations. Each year its accounts are audited by an external auditor and a report is reviewed by the Board of Governors and presented to the General Conference. The most recent External Auditor's Report found that the Agency's accounts for 2005 were correct in all material respects and in accordance with applicable rules, resulting in an "unqualified opinion on the financial statements." Key domestic partners at Brookhaven National Laboratory and Argonne National Laboratory offices are also audited and reviewed regularly and managed by the Department of Energy and its contractors in accordance with high standards.

Evidence: ISPO (see http://www.bnl.gov/ISPO/Capsule_Summary/capsule_summary.asp) quarterly reports to ISN/MNSA. IAEA Financial Rules, IAEA Financial Regulations,Agency's Accounts for 2005, GOV(2006/20), April 6, 2006, Restricted Distribution.

Has the program taken meaningful steps to address its management deficiencies?

Explanation: When management of the U.S. voluntary contribution to the IAEA was transferred to the Nonproliferation Bureau in 1999, the Bureau undertook to formalize and document management and financial procedures for the voluntary contribution. This led to the creation of a Voluntary Contribution Handbook. In the process, financial practices were strengthened and deficiencies corrected. In particular, Memoranda of Understanding and Interagency Acquisition Agreements were established with the Department of Energy to govern several of the in-kind elements of the voluntary contribution. Funding for the Program of Technical Assistance to IAEA Safeguards (POTAS) activities was not systematically expended from the correct year's account, which was corrected through improved tracking by year of obligation. The IAEA was the first international organization to adopt a results-based budget, beginning with its 2002-2003 budget cycle. Further, the IAEA restructured its implementation of the Technical Cooperation Program from an approach that was largely reactive and responded on an ad hoc basis to requests from institutions in Member States to one based on Country Program Frameworks and Thematic Planning. The previous approach had insufficient controls to ensure that the Technical Cooperation program was systematically and effectively addressing national development needs. The country program framework ensures that projects take place within the context of a coherent plan for the country, and thematic planning based on model projects ensures that assistance is focused on areas where nuclear technology can be expected to provide a significant and lasting benefit.

Evidence: GC(49)/7 - The Agency's Accounts for 2004; the report of the External Auditor which contains recommendations for improvement in the way the Agency operates, http://www.iaea.org/About/Policy/GC/GC49/Documents/gc49-7.pdf 1997 Technical Cooperation Strategy report, http://tc.iaea.org/tcweb/tcprogramme/ginf824.pdf . 2002 Strategy Review, http://tc.iaea.org/tcweb/abouttc/strategy/ginf2002-8mod1.pdf . Voluntary Contribution Handbook MOUs and IAAs

Does the program have oversight practices that provide sufficient knowledge of grantee activities?

Explanation: In addition to the comprehensive program and financial reports cited above, U.S. officials meet annually with IAEA officials on matters of importance to the United States related to IAEA programs across the board, including safeguards, safety, security, and priority nuclear energy and technology programs. For in-kind assistance to the IAEA, program managers meet regularly with contractors in Washington and at contractor sites.

Evidence: Various reporting cables (e.g. USSP review meeting). SSTS minutes. INTLO minutes Meeting agenda for ESA annual review Agency's Accounts (external auditors report) - GOV(2006/20). Programme Evaluation Reports

Does the program collect grantee performance data on an annual basis and make it available to the public in a transparent and meaningful manner?

Explanation: Much of the IAEA's performance reporting is provided for official use to members of the IAEA Board of Governors. In addition, the State Department has taken steps to provide a link from its website to the IAEA web site, directing members of the public to the IAEA's published annual reporting.

Evidence: Links from State and UNVIE websites to IAEA website http://www.iaea.org/About/index.html http://www.iaea.org/Publications/index.html http://www.iaea.org/DataCenter/index.html

Has the program demonstrated adequate progress in achieving its long-term performance goals?

Explanation: As a result of its work at the forefront of nuclear nonproliferation, the IAEA and its Director General Mohamed ElBaradei shared the Nobel Peace Prize in 2005 for "their efforts to prevent nuclear energy from being used for military purposes and to ensure that nuclear energy for peaceful purposes is used in the safest possible way." The IAEA safeguards program has achieved record or near-record levels of attainment for its technical safeguards goals. The IAEA has been able to draw strong conclusions that nuclear material has not been diverted from declared activities, as well as the broader but inherently less certain conclusions when it finds no indication of undeclared nuclear material and activities. The IAEA has drawn such conclusions in an increasing number of countries; in seeking to draw such conclusions it has carefully followed up on potential problems (e.g. in Egypt and South Korea) and real ones (e.g. in Iran and Libya). At the same time, the number of countries with safeguards agreements and Additional Protocols in force has risen steadily to 156 and 75, respectively. The IAEA's first Program Performance Report (for 2002-2003) indicates substantial progress in meeting the goals established in the Medium-Term Strategy for 2001-2005 in all major programs. This includes drawing strong safeguards conclusions in some countries, implementation of safety recommendations, and better linkage of technical cooperation to national development plans.

Evidence: For information on the Nobel Peace Prize see http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Booklets/Nobel/nobel2005.pdf Program Performance Report for 2002-2003 Safeguards Implementation Report for 2004, GOV/2005/32, Restricted Distribution. The executive summary is at http://www.iaea.org/OurWork/SV/Safeguards/es2004.html/. Strengthening the Effectiveness and Improving the Efficiency of the Safeguards System including Implementation of Additional Protocols, GC(49)9, http://www.iaea.org/About/Policy/GC/GC49/Documents/gc49-9.pdf Evaluation of Technical Cooperation Activities in 2005, GOV/INF/2005/14, Restricted Distribution.

Does the program (including program partners) achieve its annual performance goals?

Explanation: The IAEA aims to maintain high performance and achieve annual increases in key performance indicators. In safeguards, the IAEA has steadily increased the number of countries for which it is able to draw stronger conclusions about the absence of undeclared nuclear activities, and has achieved steady increases in the number of countries with comprehensive safeguards agreements and Additional Protocols. Since 2002, the IAEA has consistently achieved over 90% of its safeguards technical goals for detecting diversions, particularly for the most sensitive nuclear materials, and each year has increased the number of countries in which it can draw conclusions on undeclared nuclear activities and materials. In safety and security, the IAEA aims to increase the number of countries that adhere to key international conventions and subscribe to codes of conduct. For example, the number of countries that have subscribed to the new code of conduct on radioactive sources has grown to more than 70. In Technical Cooperation, the IAEA aims to increase the percentage of new TC projects in the 2007-2008 program that are clearly linked to a Country Program Framework and/or to Millennium Development Goals. The IAEA has demonstrated an increase in each of these measures. As the Department of State's FY 2005 Performance and Accountability Report makes clear, the IAEA has met or exceeded performance expectations. For example, through training, education, evaluation and provision of equipment the IAEA's nuclear security program improved States' ability to deal with malicious acts involving nuclear or radiological material, enhance radiation monitoring at borders, improve physical security at nuclear facilities, and secure some vulnerable radioactive sources. In addition, the Committee on Safeguards and Verification was approved by the IAEA Board of Governors in June 2005. This Bush Administration initiative has further strengthened safeguards and bolstered the IAEA's role in enforcement.

Evidence: Safeguards Implementation Report for 2005.ISN/NP past BPP's.Nuclear Security Plan for 2006-2009, GOV/2005/50, August 15, 2005, Restricted Distribution.1997 Technical Cooperation Strategy report, http://tc.iaea.org/tcweb/tcprogramme/ginf824.pdf. 2002 Strategy Review, http://tc.iaea.org/tcweb/abouttc/strategy/ginf2002-8mod1.pdf.U.S. Department of State FY 2005 Performance and Accountability Report: http://www.state.gov/s/d/rm/rls/perfrpt/2005/

Does the program demonstrate improved efficiencies or cost effectiveness in achieving program goals each year?

Explanation: : By any measure, the IAEA is a small and efficient organization. With roughly 2000 employees, its overall budget is comparable to that of the city of Dayton, Ohio. The IAEA international safeguards program has roughly 250 inspectors and spends less per year than Montgomery Country, Maryland spends on police. For nearly two decades, from the mid-1980s to 2003, the IAEA was subject to a zero real growth budget policy. Despite this, the IAEA significantly expanded its programs in safeguards, safety, security and technical cooperation. Its ability to carry out expanded programs within fixed resources results from a general reduction in management and overhead costs. In response to a U.S. effort to expand funding for safeguards, the Agency's annual budget level is being increased by roughly $25M over a four year period, 2004-2007. In the area of technical cooperation, annual TC expenditures have grown from $44.6 million in 1990 to $92.0 million in 2005 (not accounting for inflation), while funding for TC management has risen only from $8.9M (20.0%) to $15.7M (17.1%). For the overall budget, the portion appropriated for program management and support services fell from $66.5M (29.7%) to $73.7M (28.1%) from 2002 - 2005 (because this includes general services it is not a measure of management overhead, but it is a reasonable efficiency measure) . The safeguards budget increased by less than 9% from 1990 to 2000, largely through cuts in management costs, while the number of facilities where the IAEA had to apply safeguards increased by over 25%, from 515 to 649. At the same time, the IAEA was asked to undertake more rigorous inspections, implement the new authorities of the Additional Protocol, and develop new technical measures such as environmental sampling and satellite imagery.

Evidence: IAEA budget tables for the years cited above Safeguards Implementation Reports for 1990 and 2000

Does the performance of this program compare favorably to other programs, including government, private, etc., with similar purpose and goals?

Explanation: IAEA safeguards provide a unique contribution to international security and the peaceful development of nuclear energy. Without safeguards, we would have no confidence that other countries were not misusing peaceful nuclear programs for military purposes. The IAEA safeguards budget is comparable to, but somewhat larger than, the budgets of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), at $95.1M and the Provisional Technical Secretariat the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organization (CTBTO), at $106.8 million. Both the OPCW and CTBTO are focused exclusively on treaty verification and monitoring, while the IAEA has a much broader mission. With expenditures of roughly $11M/year, the IAEA nuclear safety and security program has undertaken over 100 missions to assess the nuclear security measures and capabilities of member states. It has developed and promoted best practices regarding the safety and security of radioactive sources, including the Code of Conduct that now has over 70 adherents. No other organization has the international scope and credibility to achieve such results on a worldwide scale. By establishing standards and developing capacity, IAEA programs provide an essential framework that facilitates U.S. bilateral nuclear security efforts such as the Department of Energy's Global Threat Reduction Initiative, Material Protection, Control and Accountancy and Second Line of Defense programs, which together are budgeted at $520M for FY2007.

Evidence: CTBTO 2006 Program and Budget, CTBT/PC-25/3/Annex V*, http://www.ctbto.org/bin/DeliverDoc?cmd=DisplayPDFFile&docid=1176.OPCW 2006 Program and Budget, C-10/DEC.5, http://www.opcw.org/docs/csp/csp10/en/c10dec05.pdf FY 2007 budget request http://www.nnsa.doe.gov/docs/congressional/2006/2006-03-29_SASC_Nuclear_Nonprolif_Hearing_Statement_(Paul).pdf Programme Evaluation Reports.

Do independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality indicate that the program is effective and achieving results?

Explanation: The IAEA External Auditor's report for 2005 found no material weaknesses in the IAEA's financial management and provided an unqualified (positive) opinion of the IAEA's financial accounting. It contains several new recommendations for improvements in financial and program management and reports on the steps the IAEA has taken to respond to past recommendations, including by updating its performance indicators regularly. External experts who reviewed the IAEA safeguards program concluded that "the [Safeguards] Department has done a very good job of implementing the safeguards strengthening measures despite budgetary and other constraints" and that "the Department has made very satisfactory progress toward achieving its strategic objectives." The Standing Advisory Group on Safeguards Implementation (SAGSI) concluded that "The Agency's safeguards system and the way it is implemented have undergone many improvements in recent years, and change is ongoing. While many of SAGSI's recommendations are new, SAGSI notes that in a number of cases its recommendations are endorsing and encouraging changes that are already under way." A GAO review of IAEA safeguards noted that the "IAEA has taken steps to strengthen safeguards by more aggressively seeking assurances that countries have not engaged in clandestine nuclear activities," while acknowledging that "the agency still cannot be certain that countries are not developing secret weapons programs." It added that the "IAEA is trying to improve the efficiency of its efforts" and "is also taking a number of steps to strengthen its management of the safeguards program.

Evidence: GC(49)/7 - The Agency's Accounts for 2004; the report of the External Auditor which contains recommendations for improvement in the way the Agency operates, http://www.iaea.org/About/Policy/GC/GC49/Documents/gc49-7.pdf "NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION: IAEA Has Strengthened Its Safeguards and Nuclear Security Programs, but Weaknesses Need to Be Addressed," GAO-06-93, October 2005, http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d0693.pdf. Reviews of the Safeguards Program and Criteria, Restricted Distribution, GOV/2004/86, November 2, 2004, Restricted Distribution.