Performance Goals and Results
USPTO Strategic Plan
The Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) requires that agencies plan and measure the performance of their programs. In carrying out GPRA, the USPTO prepares a Performance Report and a Strategic Plan, which can be found on our website: (2007-2012 Strategic Plan). By design, the performance plan is linked to the budget submissions and reflects the priorities of the Under Secretary and the goals contained in the 21st Century Strategic Plan. The budget can be found at: (USPTO President's Budget Budget Request).
The USPTO began FY 2005 guided by the five year 21st Century Strategic Plan , most recently updated in February 2003 and covering the period through FY 2008. Technology has been increasingly complex and customer demands for high quality products and services have escalated. At the same time, the number of pending patent applications in the world's examination pipeline continues to increase significantly. Congress has voiced concerns about the agency's ability to effectively fulfill our mission in the future if we continue to operate in a traditional business model. The 21st Century Strategic Plan addresses these challenges and concerns. It is a far-reaching and aggressive plan designed to transform the USPTO into an organization that is truly responsive to the global economy. The Plan facilitates tailoring products and services to customer needs and focusing our expertise on examination. Three long-term, cross-cutting strategic themes comprise the Plan's core:
- Agility: Address the 21st century economy by becoming a more agile organization—We will create a flexible organization and work processes that can handle the increasing expectations of our markets, the growing complexity and volume of our work, and the globalization that characterizes the 21st century economy. We will work, both bilaterally and multilaterally, with our partners to create a stronger, better-coordinated, and more streamlined framework for protecting intellectual property around the world. We will transform the USPTO workplace by radically reducing labor-intensive paper processing.
- Capability: Enhance quality through workforce and process improvements—We will make patent and trademark quality our highest priority by emphasizing quality in every component of this Strategic Plan. Through the timely issuance of high-quality patents and trademark registrations, we will respond to market forces by promoting advances in technology, expanding business opportunities and creating jobs.
- Productivity: Accelerate processing times through focused examination—We will control patent and trademark pendency, reduce time to first office action, and recover our investments in people, processes, and technology.
The USPTO has developed supporting performance goals and measures to implement our strategic themes. The three supporting performance goals tracked through 16 measures include:
GOAL 1: Improve the quality of patent products and services and optimize patent processing time.
GOAL 2: Improve the quality of trademark products and services and optimize trademark processing time.
GOAL 3: Create a more flexible organization through transitioning patent and trademark operations to an e-Government environment and participate in intellectual property development worldwide.
The Agility theme is linked to the third performance goal and incorporates ongoing initiatives in e-government. As a first priority, the USPTO has made electronic end-to-end processing of both patents and trademarks the centerpiece of its business model by deploying critical automated information systems. In addition, the USPTO is currently working on ways to improve delivery schedules, reliability, performance, security, and monitoring of the cost of all our automated information systems. Further, the USPTO is enhancing existing and establishing new alliances with our friends in other national and international intellectual property organizations to strengthen intellectual property rights around the world.
The Capability theme crosses all performance goals, emphasizing the quality and process improvement elements within the USPTO and permeating our activities and operations. Quality will be assured throughout the process by hiring the people who make the best patent and trademark examiners, certifying their knowledge and competencies throughout their careers at the USPTO, and focusing on quality throughout the examination of patent and trademark applications.
The Productivity theme is linked to performance goals 1 and 2 and addresses the planned longer-term reduction in patent and trademark pendency, as measured by the average first action pendency and the average total pendency.
In FY 2005, the USPTO continued implementing goals and objectives put forth in the Plan , to the extent they were consistent with congressional intent and supported by our stakeholders and applicants.
Performance Data Verification and Validation
I n accordance with GPRA requirements, the USPTO is committed to making certain that performance information reported is complete, accurate, and consistent. To ensure the highest quality data, the USPTO has developed a strategy to validate and verify the quality, reliability, and credibility of USPTO performance results and has undertaken the following:
Accountability – Responsibility for providing performance data lies with the management of USPTO programs. The USPTO holds program managers accountable for ensuring procedures are in place regarding the accuracy of their data and that the performance measurement source is complete and reliable.
Quality Control – Automated systems and databases that collect, track, and store the performance indicators are monitored and maintained by the management of USPTO programs, with systems support provided by the Chief Information Officer's organization. Each system, such as the Patent Application Location and Monitoring (PALM) or Trademark Reporting and Monitoring (TRAM), incorporates internal program edits to control the accuracy of supporting data. The edits typically evaluate data for reasonableness, consistency, and accuracy. Cross–checks against other internal automated systems also provide assurances of data reasonableness and consistency. In addition to internal monitoring of each system, experts outside of the business units routinely monitor the data collection methodology. The Chief Financial Officer's organization is responsible for monitoring the agency's performance, providing direction and support on data collection methodology and analysis, ensuring that data quality checks are in place, and reporting performance management data.
Financial Statement Audit – During the FY 2005 financial statement audit, various tests and reviews of the primary accounting system and internal controls were conducted, as required by the Chief Financial Officers'; Act. In their FY 2005 report, the auditors reported no material weaknesses in internal controls or material compliance violations. The auditors issued an unqualified opinion on the USPTO's FY 2005 financial statements. Additionally, as required by OMB Bulletin Number 01-02, the auditors reported that they had "obtained an understanding of the design of significant internal controls relating to the existence and completeness assertions" with respect to the performance measures reported in the Management Discussion and Analysis section.
Data Accuracy – The USPTO conducts verification and validation of performance measures periodically to ensure quality, reliability, and credibility. At the beginning of each fiscal year, and at various points throughout the reporting or measurement period, sampling techniques and sample counts are reviewed and adjusted to ensure data are statistically reliable for making inferences about the population as a whole. Data analyses are also conducted to assist the business units in interpreting the program data, such as the identification of statistically significant trends and underlying factors that may be impacting a specific performance indicator. For examination quality measures, the review programs themselves are assessed in terms of reviewer variability, data entry errors, and various potential biases.
Members of the Annual Performance Review Team. The team received the "Certificate of Excellence in Accountability Reporting Award," from the Association of Government Accountants for the USPTO FY 2004 Performance and Accountability Report.
Performance AUDITS AND EVALUATIONS
The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) also contributes to the USPTO's efforts to assure audit and evaluation coordination and coverage of USPTO goals.
One evaluation was completed in FY 2005. In this case, the OIG evaluated whether required information technology (IT) security clauses have been incorporated into IT service contracts and whether the clause requirements have been properly implemented. ( Information Security in Contracts Needs Better Enforcement and Oversight, OSE-17455/September 2005 ). While most of the contracts contained the required clauses, the OIG found that the clauses are not being properly implemented and in some cases requirements are not being enforced, placing USPTO IT systems at risk.
The performance of the USPTO's two major program activities was assessed in FY 2003 using the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART). The Patent organization received a rating of "adequate" with a score of 68, and the Trademark organization received a rating of "moderately effective" with a score of 73. In response to PART recommendations, the USPTO has implemented efficiency measures as unit cost measures for the Patent and Trademark organizations.
The Government Accounting Office (GAO) issued two reports this year. The USPTO agreed with the recommendations in the report entitled Intellectual Property: USPTO Has Made Progress in Hiring Examiners, but Challenges to Retention Remain and has taken steps to develop a communication plan and labor management strategy to inform employees about progress on initiatives, successes and lessons learned. The USPTO also is developing a more formalized technical program for patent examiners to ensure their skills are fresh and ready to address state-of-the-art technology in patent applications.
In the second GAO report, Intellectual Property: Key Processes for Managing Patent Automation , the USPTO generally agreed with the GAO's recommendations and with the need for key improvements, such as developing architectural linkages to the planning process, implementing a capital planning and investment control guide, and completing planned organizational changes. The USPTO disagreed with the GAO finding related to project management and cost accounting. However, weaknesses associated with the "select phase" of the Capital Planning and Investment Control (CPIC) process are being refined to better support selection of USPTO investments. As noted in the response to the draft report, the USPTO already has started implementing many of the GAO recommended improvements.
In addition, the USPTO received the results of a study conducted by the National Academy of Public Administration entitled U.S. Patent and Trademark Office: Transforming to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century . The USPTO currently is considering the findings and recommendations in the report.
