Overview
Title
An Act To improve performance and accountability in the Federal Government, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
The Federal Agency Performance Act of 2023 is a plan to help the government do a better job by checking and improving how things are being done in different offices and sharing more information about what's happening. It makes sure someone is in charge of watching over these jobs to keep everything running smoothly.
Summary AI
The Federal Agency Performance Act of 2023 aims to enhance the performance and accountability of federal agencies. It requires agencies to conduct annual strategic reviews to assess progress toward their strategic goals, identify risks, and improve strategies for achieving these goals. The Act mandates updates to federal reporting websites for increased transparency and requires agencies to designate senior officials responsible for coordinating and achieving performance goals. Additionally, outdated pilot projects are repealed, and responsibilities and reporting structures are clarified.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
The "Federal Agency Performance Act of 2023" aims to enhance the performance and accountability of federal agencies. The legislation proposes mechanisms for regular reviews of agencies' strategic goals, mandates updates to federal performance websites, revises goals for the federal government, and establishes roles such as performance co-leaders and deputy performance improvement officers. The goal is to create a structured approach for federal agencies to measure and report their progress toward achieving specific objectives, thereby increasing transparency and improving government operations.
Summary of Significant Issues
Several significant issues emerge from the proposed bill. A primary concern is the complexity of language in sections like "Strategic Reviews and Reporting," which may impede stakeholder understanding and operational efficiency. Ambiguities in terms such as "recent sources of evidence" could also lead to inconsistent application across different agencies.
The bill lacks clear accountability mechanisms. Without defined consequences for not meeting goals, the motivation for rigorous compliance might be diminished. Similarly, the requirement for federal website updates and archiving lacks detailed guidance, leading to potential inconsistencies.
Moreover, the bill introduces potential conflicts of interest concerning co-leadership roles in performance goals between the Executive Office and other agencies. This setup might lead to power imbalances or competing interests.
Another issue is the potential financial implications of establishing both a Performance Improvement Officer and a Deputy Performance Improvement Officer, with concerns about redundancy and resource allocation efficiency. Lastly, the timeline for the GAO report on the bill's effectiveness, set at 18 months, raises concerns about timeliness, especially for addressing urgent issues.
Impact on the Public Broadly
The bill may have a mixed impact on the public. By improving the performance and accountability of federal agencies, it could lead to more efficient government operations, ultimately benefiting citizens through enhanced public services. Greater transparency might also increase public trust in government operations.
However, the lack of explicit accountability measures and the potential for administrative complexity or inefficiencies might counteract these benefits. If not properly implemented, there is a risk that bureaucratic processes could slow down government service delivery, affecting the public's daily interactions with federal agencies.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For federal agencies, the bill introduces new roles and responsibilities that may require adjustments in internal processes and reporting frameworks. While this could lead to improvements in goal achievement and interagency coordination, it might also impose additional burdens, especially if inadequately funded or supported.
For government employees, particularly those involved in performance management roles, the legislation offers an opportunity to impact their agencies positively. However, the requirements might demand extra work and expertise, potentially causing strain if proper training or resources are not provided.
For legislators and policymakers, the bill's emphasis on data-driven performance assessment aligns with broader goals for improved governance. However, the need for clarity in implementation and evaluation processes may require further legislative refinement.
In conclusion, while the "Federal Agency Performance Act of 2023" seeks to strengthen federal agency performance, its success will depend on addressing the highlighted issues, ensuring clear guidance, and effective implementation.
Issues
The language in Section 2, regarding 'Strategic Reviews and Reporting', is overly complex and might benefit from simplification to ensure clarity for all stakeholders. This complexity can hinder implementation and understanding, making it a significant political and operational concern.
Section 2 also presents potential ambiguity in terms like 'recent sources of evidence', which could affect legal interpretations and the consistency of reviews across agencies, highlighting an area of concern for legal precision.
Section 3, which pertains to revisions to the Federal Performance Website, lacks clarity on the mechanisms for archiving and preserving information. This could lead to inconsistencies across agencies, a significant issue for transparency and accountability.
There is a general lack of accountability mechanisms across several sections (e.g., Sections 2, 4, 5), which could lead to issues with follow-through and enforcement of goals and objectives, raising ethical and operational concerns.
The requirement in Section 5 for designating co-leaders for Federal Government performance goals from both the Executive Office of the President and other agencies could result in conflicts of interest or power imbalances. This is a significant concern for both political and operational reasons.
Section 6 may incur additional costs by establishing both a Performance Improvement Officer and a Deputy Performance Improvement Officer without a clear demonstration of necessity, raising financial concerns regarding potentially wasteful spending.
The timeline for the GAO report in Section 9, set at 18 months, may be considered lengthy, especially if urgent issues arise, which raises concerns about the timeliness and responsiveness of governmental oversight.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The act is formally titled the "Federal Agency Performance Act of 2023".
2. Establishment of Strategic Reviews and Reporting Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section amends the United States Code to establish a framework for federal agencies to regularly review their progress toward strategic goals. It outlines specific roles and responsibilities for agency leaders and designated officers to ensure these goals are met, and requires a summary of these review findings to be included in agency reports.
3. Revisions to the Federal Performance Website Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section updates the Federal Performance Website requirements by specifying what information must be included, how it should be organized and archived, and ensures compliance with digital experience standards. It also outlines expectations for reporting the achievements towards agency and government priority goals, comparing current results with planned performance over specific time periods.
4. Federal Government Priority Goals Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section amends a law to specify that Federal Government Priority Goals must be updated at least once every Presidential term, made publicly available with the U.S. Government budget each new term, include plans for achieving each goal within a term, and reference budget contents that help achieve these goals.
5. Federal Government Priority Goal Co-Leaders Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section amends a part of the United States Code to require that for each Federal Government performance goal, at least two lead officials must be assigned the responsibility of coordinating efforts to achieve the goal. These officials must include one from the Executive Office of the President and one from a contributing agency.
6. Establishment of Deputy Performance Improvement Officers Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section amends U.S. law to require that each government agency's leader, in consultation with the agency's Chief Operating Officer, appoint a Performance Improvement Officer from its senior executives. If this officer is not a career member of the Senior Executive Service, a Deputy Performance Improvement Officer, who must be a career member, will also be designated to assist in fulfilling the officer's responsibilities.
7. Repeal of Outdated Pilot Projects Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section repeals outdated pilot projects by removing sections 1118 and 1119 from Chapter 11 of title 31 in the U.S. Code, amends section 9704 by redesignating subsection (d) as (c), and updates the table of sections to reflect these changes.
8. Clarifying Amendments Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section amends existing laws to clarify requirements for government agencies. It specifies when agencies must reference their evidence-building activities in strategic plans and updates the deadline for submitting performance reports to not later than 150 days after the fiscal year ends.
9. GAO report Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) must submit a report within 18 months of this Act's enactment to specific Senate and House committees, evaluating how effective this Act and its amendments are.