Appendixes



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 67
Prospective Evaluation of Applied Energy Research and Development at DOE (Phase Two) Appendixes

OCR for page 67
Prospective Evaluation of Applied Energy Research and Development at DOE (Phase Two) This page intentionally left blank.

OCR for page 67
Prospective Evaluation of Applied Energy Research and Development at DOE (Phase Two) A PART Assessment Questions 1. PROGRAM PURPOSE AND DESIGN 1.1 Is the program purpose clear? 1.2 Does the program address a specific and existing problem, interest or need? 1.3 Is the program designed so that it is not redundant or duplicative of any other Federal, state, local or private effort? 1.4 Is the program design free of major flaws that would limit the program’s effectiveness or efficiency? 1.5 Is the program effectively targeted, so that resources will reach intended beneficiaries and/or otherwise address the program’s purpose directly? 2. STRATEGIC PLANNING 2.1 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? 2.2 Does the program have ambitious targets and timeframes for its long-term measures? 2.3 Does the program have a limited number of specific annual performance measures that can demonstrate progress toward achieving the program’s long-term goals? 2.4 Does the program have baselines and ambitious targets for its annual measures? 2.5 Do all partners (including grantees, subgrantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) commit to and work toward the annual and/or longterm goals of the program? 2.6 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? 2.7 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? 2.8 Has the program taken meaningful steps to correct its strategic planning deficiencies? 2RD1 If applicable, does the program assess and compare the potential benefits of efforts within the program and (if relevant) to other efforts that have similar goals? 2RD2 Does the program use a prioritization process to guide budget requests and funding decisions? 3. PROGRAM MANAGEMENT 3.1 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? 3.2 Are federal managers and program partners (including grantees, subgrantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) held accountable for cost, schedule and performance results? 3.3 Are funds (federal and partners’) obligated in a timely manner and spent for the intended purpose? NOTE: This appendix is based on Department of Energy PART Assessments, available at <http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2006/pma/energy.pdf>.

OCR for page 67
Prospective Evaluation of Applied Energy Research and Development at DOE (Phase Two) 3.4 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? 3.5 Does the program collaborate and coordinate effectively with related programs? 3.6 Does the program use strong financial management practices? 3.7 Has the program taken meaningful steps to address its management deficiencies? 3RD1 For R&D programs other than competitive grants programs, does the program allocate funds and use management processes that maintain program quality? 4. PROGRAM RESULTS/ACCOUNTABILITY 4.1 Has the program demonstrated adequate progress in achieving its long-term performance goals? 4.2 Does the program (including program partners) achieve its annual performance goals? 4.3 Does the program demonstrate improved efficiencies or cost effectiveness in achieving program goals each year? 4.4 Does the performance of this program compare favorably to other programs, including government, private, etc., with similar purpose and goals? 4.5 Do independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality indicate that the program is effective and achieving results?