ACF OPRE: ACF Annual Performance Plans and Reports

FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan

Appendix A.4

A.4 PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT LINKAGES

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PLANNING

During the past fiscal year, ACF has actively utilized the ACF Information Technology Review Board (ITRB) in accordance with intent of the Clinger-Cohen Act (also known as the Information Technology Management Reform Act (ITMRA). The overall purpose of the ACF ITRB is to monitor (1) the performance of selected ongoing major ACF information technology investments or to consider proposed new major investments and (2) matters that concern ACF IT policies and issues. The ACF ITRB completed or is in the process of implementing ten priority Investment Technology policies:

IT procurements: ACF will implement annual, centralized replacement planning and purchasing for PC's and related equipment. Replacement budget plans will be presented annually to the ACF ITRB for approval.
Standard desktop PC hardware: ACF implements a standard desktop PC hardware configuration.
Standard PC software: ACF implements and maintains a standard desktop PC software configuration.
IT training: ACF has centralized its plans and budgets for training for all ACF standard-PC desktop software training and for local LAN systems administrator training. Training for all ACF standard PC software is available through our Distance Learning initiative. Limited classroom training is available centrally, and training in each software is provided through centralized budgets.
Internet/intranet technologies: ACF will provide enhanced support for Internet and Intranet publishing by operating state-of-the-art web servers and related technologies. Central Office/Regional Office Internet web page content is subject to Office of Public Affairs review to ensure compliance with applicable policies and procedures.
ACF network remote access: ACF will expand and enhance its remote access services agency-wide to meet the 21st Century work environment. The results of feasibility studies and analyses of alternatives will be presented for review by the ITRB, when available.
Desktop video conferencing: ACF will continue to improve capabilities for point-to-point video conferencing within ACF, and/or Internet-based video conferencing within ACF and/or with outside parties (within available budgets including, possibly, program funds). Future recommendation will be presented to the ITRB under the leadership of the videoconferencing team and Region VI.
DHHS-wide administrative systems: ACF working with the Department to create uniform administrative systems, which will begin with a new Web-based HR/Payroll system that will provide the Department with higher quality HR service and integrated functionality.
On-line Data Collection (OLDC): ACF will implement a next generation of electronic grant making through the OLDC capability to enable grantees and potential grantees to enter all grants information on-line over the Internet. Plans and designs presented to the ITRB are consistent with the new Government Paperwork Elimination Act.
Electronic file storage: ACF is planning for efficient archiving of documents from paper and/or electronic originals through Electronic document management technology. ACF will collaborate with the Department to accomplish this initiative.

In addition, ACF continues to monitor the following IT investments:

IT support activities associated with the Expanded Federal Parent Locator Service, mandated by Welfare Reform Legislation: the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA);
Completion of Business Process Reengineering of the Grants Administration Process through the use of the Grants Administration Tracking and Evaluation Systems (GATES);
Continued implementation of IT support activities associated with Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF); and
ACF successfully completed all Y2K internal and outreach systems required for human service delivery programs.

COST ACCOUNTING

Beginning in FY 1998, all government reporting entities were required to implement, and be audited on, full cost accounting (also known as managerial cost accounting) as part of the annual financial statements audit process. Beginning with the FY 1998 audit process, ACF was required to present all costs directly associated with a program, as well as all costs indirectly supporting that program. Based on Federal law and OMB guidance, the programs against which these costs had to be reported were ACF's major program areas as identified in the GPRA Annual Performance Plan.

To implement a credible and auditable method to fulfill the full cost accounting requirements for the FY 1999 audit, ACF allocated its Federal Administration budget indirect costs proportionately among the major program areas on the basis of direct FTE. (Indirect costs include salaries and benefits for staff not working directly on one of the fourteen program activities; costs of training, personnel, budget, travel, systems, facilities, supplies, and rent.) To accomplish this, ACF senior staff in headquarters and the regions completed a Staff Resource Survey providing the total number of staff working directly on program activities in one or more of the major program areas; and the total number of staff not working directly on program activities. Staff in this category included planning, administrative, and front office staff. Fractions of staff were indicated for those working in more than one major program area. Contractors and detailees out of an organization were excluded from a manager's count while detailees into an organization from another office were included.

Where an organization encompassed one entire major program area, e.g., Developmental Disabilities, Child Support, Native Americans Program, only the total number of on-board staff for that organization were indicated. Staff offices that provided cross-cutting activities reported on-board staff as "Other staff not working directly on program activities." Offices where program distinctions could be made (e.g., ACYF, OCS) reported on both items.

Completed survey data were collated and analyzed in an automated spreadsheet and provided to the DHHS Program Service Center (PSC) to allocate the indirect costs in proportion to the resulting direct staff ratio. These data supported PSC's development of ACF's Statement of Net Cost. ACF managers were advised to retain documentation that explains how they arrived at their numbers in the event that auditors requested to review this process.

Our cost accounting strategy was accepted by the auditing firm (Clifton Gunderson), PSC, ASMB and the OIG. Other OPDIVs also requested copies of our methodology and survey instrument. ACF continues to use the same strategy for each audit cycle, adding new program areas as appropriate.

WORKFORCE ANALYSIS PLAN

ACF is committed to being a customer-focused, citizen-centered organization. It is an organization that focuses on results, provides high quality, cost-effective and efficient services, meets customers' needs and expectations, and uses state-of-the-art information technology to improve management and data systems. ACF's workforce analysis plan will provide a demographic summary of ACF's permanent workforce, an evaluation of the skills of the workforce, and an assessment of the organization's structure.

PROGRAM EVALUATION

While States have been given increasing latitude in administering programs, they depend on national leadership and partnership in developing reliable information, technical assistance, and the development and dissemination of proven or promising methods for achieving and measuring success. Extant research and early results of major studies underway helped shape significant changes in Federal and State policy and legislation affecting low-income families and children. The effects of programmatic changes and increases in State flexibility are not fully understood. For example, the TANF legislation limits the duration of eligibility for public assistance, the percentage of the caseload who may be excluded from work requirements, and the conditions for teen parent assistance for which States may expect Federal support. The statute also allows States wide discretion in designing services to meet these and other provisions. Effective State decision-making requires timely and reliable information on the consequences of alternative policy and program choices and the experiences of other States. As policy and program design has devolved to States and localities, it is vital that these levels of government have reliable information for decision-making and that the effects of different policy and program choices on quality and accessibility are understood. Documenting, understanding, interpreting and facilitating the exchange of information and experiences among States is essential to providing high quality services to promote the well being of families and children.

As ACF continues to focus on results-oriented management, evaluations play an increasingly important role in program improvement. Program evaluations are directed at evaluating effectiveness, assessing the achievement of performance results, assessing the impacts of human services, and improving program management. Program evaluations are largely directed at assessing the effectiveness of individual projects within a program. The ACF performance measurement system is the primary mechanism used to monitor annual progress in achieving ACF's strategic and performance goals.

Specific Examples of Ongoing Evaluations that Support Major Goals in ACF Performance Plan

Goal One: Improve the economic independence and productivity for families: Data from a variety of national, State and program-specific sources provided valuable insights and information for developing strategies, measures and targets for Goal One and attendant strategies.

A number of implementation strategies support Goal One objectives and focus on identifying best practices and effective program practices and disseminating these to other service providers through Federal technical assistance and capacity-building activities. Evaluations of these efforts point to the success of many of these strategies. ACF is funding research to provide more information on the role of fathers in strengthening family formation and functioning to identify and eliminate barriers that impede involvement with their children.

Goal 2: Improve Healthy Development, Safety and Well Being of Children and Youth: Evaluations demonstrate the success of working through programs, such as Head Start and Child Care, to link children to health care, e.g. Descriptive Study of Head Start Health Services (a 1996 study of a representative sample of 1200 children in 40 Head Start programs) and current Head Start Program Information Report data and Child Care State plans. A study issued in October 1999, Access to Child Care for Low-Income Working Families, examined the availability of child care subsidies to eligible families and a NICHD Study of early child care examined the outcomes of children attending centers that meet professional standards. The Family and Child Experiences Survey, a longitudinal study of a nationally representative sample, provides valuable data on child performance in areas of cognitive and social skills indicating readiness to learn more in kindergarten. Research and evaluation studies of child care services assist in promoting effective practices and provide a better understanding of child care supply, demand, unmet need, quality and cost for those transitioning from welfare to work.

Additionally, State and program administrative data are particularly useful in assessing trends and establishing targets for child welfare, abuse and neglect, early learning (Head Start) and child care.

Future Evaluations that will inform performance measures:

Objective	Subject	Methodology	End Date	Agency
1.1 Increase Employment	Evaluation of Employment Retention and Advancement strategies; impact of welfare reform on child outcome measures; rural welfare to work strategies; effectively serving special populations	Impact Analyses (experimental or non-experimental design)	Variable (late 2000-2005)	ACF/OPRE
3.1 Increase Parental Responsibility	Evaluation of the role of both parents in providing financial and emotional support to their children	blank cell	blank cell	ACF/OCSE
4.1 Increase affordable child care	Evaluations of changing dynamics of the child care system in the larger framework of welfare reform	blank cell	blank cell	ACF/OPRE/CCB
5.1 Healthy Development and Learning Readiness of Children	Continuation of "A National Study of Child Care for Low-Income Families"	Surveys, Site Visits	2002	ACF/OPRE/CCB
5.2 Head Start	Continuation of the Family and Child Experiences Survey (FACES) to provide outcome-based information on the social and cognitive progress of Head Start Children	Interviews, Observations, Assessments & Surveys	Every 3 years; Each cohort followed through kindergarten	ACF/HSB
7.1 Safety, Permanency and Well- Being of Children and Youth	Continuation of national longitudinal study of child welfare; complimentary studies concerning structural decision making and effectiveness of services provided for families and children	Surveys, interviews	On-going in 3-5 year cycles	ACF/OPRE/CB
7.1	Systematic review of child welfare outcomes in areas of safety, permanency and child and family well-being	Monitoring, State RO-CO partnership monitoring visits, pre-visit statewide assessments, analysis and use of existing data from NCANDS and AFCARS	On-going	ACF/CB
7.1	Evaluation technical assistance to grantees to improve local evaluations and encourage cross-site cooperation and consensus on data elements	Contracts	Second phase 10/1/00 to 9/29/02	ACF/CB
7.1	Evaluation of the impact of family preservation and support services	Contracts (surveys, site visits, research and evaluation)	Date-phased	ACF/CB, CORE, OPRE, ASPE

LINKAGE WITH BUDGET

ACF has identified eight program objectives to provide a framework for individual programs and program activities to collaborate and direct their efforts to achieve ACF-wide cross-cutting program goals. This approach enables ACF partners in State, Tribal, and local governments and nonprofit and private agencies to use the various program resources within ACF to provide early childhood enrichment, and to increase the economic and social well-being and productivity of families. ACF does not have a direct relationship with beneficiaries and in many cases has a tertiary relationship through States and State grantees.

The following Program & Financing (P&F) schedules have been aggregated:

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
Child Support Enforcement
Low Income Home Energy Assistance
Refugee and Entrant Assistance
Social Services Block Grant

The following activities within the Children and Families Services Programs P&F schedule have been aggregated:

Community Services Block Grant programs: Community Services Block Grants, Community Services Discretionary programs
Developmental Disabilities: State grants, Protection and Advocacy, Special Projects; University Affiliated Projects

The following activities within a P&F schedule are freestanding:

Individual Development Accounts
Family Violence Prevention/battered women's shelters and domestic violence hotline;
Head Start
Native Americans Programs

The following have been consolidated combining activities from more than one P&F schedule:

Child Care: combining Child Care Entitlement to States and Child Care and Development Block Grant
Child Welfare: combining Children's Research and Technical Assistance and Child Welfare (Child Abuse State grants; Child Abuse discretionary grants, Community based Resource Centers, Abandoned Infants); Child Welfare Services (Foster Care, Adoption Assistance, and Independent Living); Promoting Safe and Stable Families, Child Welfare Training; Adoption Opportunities; Adoption Incentives
Youth Programs: Runaway and Homeless Youth; Runaway Youth Transitional Living, education and prevention grants to reduce sexual abuse of runaway, homeless and street youth

The Administration for Children and Families is committed to integrating performance information into its processes of budget decision-making, a key component of the President's Management Agenda. In fact, ACF continues to play a leading role in budget-performance integration and has been recognized by the Governmental Accounting Office as a model for its efforts to link specific program activities to specific goals, objectives and measures. ACF's performance-based budgeting (PBB) initiative highlights the relationships between resource investments and activities carried out at the program and OPDIV level and the outcomes achieved by these activities in the longer term. The purpose of this initiative is to lay the groundwork for informing more effective, efficient decisions for resource allocation; improving internal management; and providing greater accountability through more integrated financial and performance reporting.

ACF faces a number of challenges as it moves toward fuller integration. Among the most pressing challenges are:

The difficulty of linking budget with program outcomes. Linkage can be made more directly to inputs, outputs and program activities.
Meaningful alternative budget scenarios and choices depend on selecting performance measures that drive programs toward improved performance. Most ACF programs are administered by States and local communities so measures and targets must be useful at that level to improve performance.
Lack of timely performance data for budget cycle planning. Administrative data are not available and cannot be verified and reported until the second, third and sometimes not until the fourth quarter after the end of the fiscal year. Therefore critical performance information is not available until two to three years after the next budget cycle begins.

ACF has taken a number of actions to improve linkage between budget and performance information:

Aggregating more than 60 line-item programs into 14 broad program activity areas and aligning them with the corresponding strategic goals and objectives, enabling ACF to more accurately identify the investments necessary to achieve outcomes.
Encouraging ACF programs to develop performance plans and reports that make a clearer connection between requested budgetary resources, planned activities and projected performance targets in the narrative sections. In FY 2003, Head Start was selected as a first-year pilot to begin the process of providing analyses related to the relationship among resources, outputs and outcomes to improve and document efficiency and effectiveness.
Developing a budget-performance cross-walk link budget activities (budget line items and program accounts) with specific performance goals, objectives and representative targets.

Table of Contents | Previous | Next