User:Rutledge004/sandbox

Annotated Bibliography

U.S. Congress. Senate. Committee on the Budget Task Force. Silo Busting: Effective Strategies for Government Reorganization. Enhancing Accountability and Increasing Financial Transparency. 113^th Cong., 1^st sess., May 16, 2013. September 18, 2013.

One of the most important things the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) is its need for accountability. Meaning it created a system where the executive made other government agencies more accountable by requiring them to produce their overall plans to enhance performance and get results. With this came special groups to monitor this enhancement and performance such as this task force from the committee on the budget. This hearing allows the GAO to present to this task force their findings thanks to the GPRA. It discusses testimony given by the GAO about their reports to reduce areas that hinder performance in government agencies and how they affect the budget. They also talk about the effects acts of congress and the executive have had on the budget and agency performance. This piece of research is important to the wiki pages development because it shows the overall intent of the GPRA and its effects in action.

U.S. Government Accountability Office. Managing for Results: OMB Should Strengthen Reviews of Cross-Agency Goals. GAO-14-526. Washington, DC, June 2014. www.gao.gov/assets/670/664022.pdf

The GAO is the main driver behind pulling tangible results from the GPRA. It is what manages and keeps account of the information that the GPRA produces by agencies, as well as, analyzing that information to present to the executive and legislative bodies of government. This report discusses the updated GPRA modernization act and the effects it has on the Office of Management and Budget. The OMB is a part of the executive branch and is its go between to organize the information created by agencies because of the GPRA. The OMB requires agencies to set CAP goals and set quarterly priorities and milestones to enhance goal accomplishment. This is important for my research because it discusses how performance is monitored and evaluated and how the GPRA is put into practice.

Office of Management and Budget. Management. The Whitehouse. Washington, DC, 2016. https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/management                        (accessed Oct 25, 2016)

I thought this would be an important article to add to our research because it lists to separate entities in the OMB. The OMB has a management function of the executive. This management function focuses on Federal policy procurement, information tech and finances, and most importantly, as relating to our research, personnel management and performance monitoring. Another important piece of information on this site is that the OMB has four separate offices: Office of Federal Financial Management, Office of Procurement Policy, Office of E-Gov and Information technology, and the Office of Performance and Personnel Management. Knowing the OPPM is a separate office within the OMB is important to know who leads the performance and goal setting in the OMB.

U.S. Government Accountability Office. Managing for Results: Leading Practices Should Guide the Continued Development of Performance.gov. GAO-13-517. Washington, DC, June 2013. http://www.gao.gov/assets/660/655059.pdf

This is also a GAO report that mentions key things that develop the GPRA into what it functions as today. This also connect key themes from the source above this linking back to the OMB’s function of E-Government and online technologies. This Source mainly refers to the use of performance. Gov as a tool that needs to be applied more thoroughly but also has flaw and needs to be developed. With the GPRAMA expanding powers to the executive and updating the original GPRA tools such as performance.gov became a helpful tool to implement these acts. It allows performance information that is collected by the OMB to be more transparent. This allows both houses of congress and the executive to scrutinize agencies performance, which in turn give congressmen a better idea of where to direct new policy. This is all very important because it relates back to the big picture of what the GPRA created and what improvements are still being added.

United States Department of Agriculture / Forest Service. The American public’s objectives and beliefs regarding forests and grasslands. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-210. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. June 2008.             http://permanent.access.gpo.gov/LPS106004/LPS106004/www.fs.fed.us/rm/pubs/rmrs_gtr210.pdf

This report does not follow the other resources gathered here. This is at the periphery of the central focus of the GPRA. It describes the findings of a report from 2004 put together by the department of agricultures forest service. The report is ultimately a survey of compiled information from the public and their thoughts and ideas on the management of national forests. The importance of this report is not the publics thought on forest management. For this resource it’s about what the GPRA has created in government agencies. In this report it is seen that a government agency created a survey to adjust its overall strategic plan for the forest service division of the department of agriculture. To adhere to the GPRA this agency has created a plan and is updating that plan to improve performance and accountability and that will be a helpful research example.    

Article Evaluation

The Government Results and Performance Act Wikipedia article has been a work in progress since 2007. For almost a decade of work and revisions the article does not have much sustenance. It lays out the very basic information of the GPRA and what its purpose is. Since this article does not have much information its clear its not a very discussed topic. In the talk section of the article only two posts have been made; asking about what OMB (office of Budget management) referred to. Though the article is short it shows a very neutral point of view, listing facts from neutral sources. The structure is clear and the lead section is understandable. I do believe the lead section could be edited to make it read more smoothly. As it is now it reads like it is segmented and choppy. Balanced coverage is the biggest issue with the article. It needs more explaining the importance of the act and examples of what the act has done. As the article is now it reads like an extended definition instead of a thorough and informative article. The external links at the bottom need to be edited as well. Not all the articles link to up to date webpage’s. Overall the article needs work and is neither good nor bad. The definition of GPRA is good but its ideas need to be expanded. The article needs more background on why the act was created and needed. Why congress felt it necessary to vote it into law and what effect the act has had since it was created.