who are there an opportunity to indicate where we should be doing things better.

The hearings are primarily focused on ways in which the Public Health Service or the Secretary of Health and Human Services can improve their contribution.

Senator ROTH. But I gather as a result, it makes the organization much more performance-conscious.

Dr. MCGINNIS. Absolutely. We have required that each of the lead agencies form working groups that consist of not only their own personnel, but people who are able to participate from other sectors as well-for example, in the injury control area, we have very active participation by the Department of Transportation and the Consumer Product Safety Commission-and they meet in turn on a regular basis in order to ensure that there is a rational and systematic division of responsibility for moving toward the objectives.

Senator ROTH. Have you other two gentlemen had similar or differing experience?

Mr. UHALDE. Senator, every year we do two things to sort of get the system involved. I would agree that those who participate in the system must buy into the goals and the measurement and the level of performance expectations that are set. Everybody is willing to play if they think the game is fair, and they have had participation in setting the objectives and standards. So we use a combination of Federal Register; we bring in technical work groups to help establish the measurement level each year, and we put out comments, and we have extensive regional training sessions to involve the delivery system in the actual operation of the standards and to understand changes each year.

Senator ROTH. One concern that has been expressed is that in setting the goals, the agencies will set goals that are relatively easily reached so that they are not meaningful. As I recall, Dr. McGinnis, in your testimony you stated that in setting your goals, you tried to establish goals that were reachable, if I recall. But how do we avoid the danger that we go through a very time-consuming and even expensive procedure, that it doesn't result in setting up false standards?

Dr. MCGINNIS. I think the notion of not setting up false standards is critical, and that's why it is important that these targets that are established not be targets that try to accomplish the perfect. Achievability is an important component, as I said earlier, of our approach to this effort-achievability, but nonetheless one that extends our reach.

The assumption that we had to use in setting our particular targets both for 1990 and the year 2000 was that there would not be large new sources of moneys, nor would there be necessarily major scientific breakthroughs, but that we through better and more efficient allocation of existing resources could accelerate the progress. That is a key element. While I have noted that we did achieve the broad goals substantially, and they were hefty goals-a 35 percent reduction in death rates for infants over a relatively short decade, and so forth-we didn't achieve every one of our targets,

10 percent of the targets we found ourselves moving in the wrong direction as a society.

So it is important to point out that while we were not seeking the perfect, we also were not shooting for something easy to accomplish.

Senator ROTH. To what extent in your goals of mortality can you say that what your agency did had a direct impact?

Dr. MCGINNIS. It is impossible. It really is impossible to note a "cause and effect" relationship between the actual establishment of the target and the accomplishment of the target. What we are trying to do in effect is change the decisional milieu for people at every level-for public health people at every level, for individuals at every level-to give them a sense that if they apply their resources effectively at each of those levels, the Nation has opportunities it can accomplish.

We are confident based on the testimony we received when we solicited comments from the Governors and from the State health officials that the existence of the objectives and their own efforts to establish targets at their own levels has helped to accelerate the progress. But I can only give you a qualitative, not a quantitative statement.

Senator ROTH. Mr. Morris, what plans does FMS have to help Federal agencies develop performance measurement systems?

Mr. MORRIS. In addition to the survey and trying to develop a research base, there are two things that we are currently working on. One is working hand-in-glove with the General Management Division of the Office of Management and Budget, in linking performance measurement to quality initiatives, and trying to work with and consult with program agencies and develop some pilots in performance measurement as related to total quality management approach.

Another thing we have been doing is working with the Marshals Service and the Customs Service, doing an analysis of seized and forfeited assets to see if it is possible to develop performance measures within that kind of program that might be useful to all Federal agencies that are in the seized and forfeited assets business.

We had some success a little over a year ago in trying to use this approach in guaranteed loan management programs, where we developed a guidebook for guaranteed loan programs that was based on a philosophy of performance measurement and looking at the management approaches for achieving that.

We're trying to look at areas of the Government where there seem to be particularly difficult or complex problems and bring people together who share those problems and try to develop some guidelines and approaches that are performance-based.

Senator ROTH. One last question. Each of you is a civil servant at the highest level of Government. Do you feel that performance goals along the lines of the proposed legislation would be helpful in making Government more effective?

Dr. McGinnis?

Dr. MCGINNIS. Well, I must confess that I'm not familiar enough with the proposed legislation to comment on that particular piece

Dr. MCGINNIS. but I will note that, obviously, from the perspective of the Public Health Service, we have found the existence of our national goals and objectives to be a very useful tool, both in our own internal management and in terms of rallying the public health community at large around targets of opportunity that should be achieved.

Senator ROTH. Mr. Uhalde?

Mr. UHALDE. Senator Roth, we clearly in the areas that we operate in-and that doesn't just cover our Department, but othersbelieve that the performance standards are an effective way to have people focused and manage against a common objective; that it is helpful, that it is doable, that it is a very complicated process but necessary.

Senator ROTH. Mr. Morris?

Mr. MORRIS. As Comptroller General Bowsher discussed earlier, I am a definite convert to the total quality management concept. I believe that clearly performance measurement and measurementspecific goals are a very important part of the total quality management concept, as is a commitment to continuous improvement and customer service.

I'd go back to your previous question. It seems to me that, and our experience is that goals are made to be meaningful to the extent that your customers and your clients are able to participate in setting them and to negotiate those goals; they become meaningful because you are serving a client who can give you feedback both on their needs and on your ability to meet those needs.

Senator ROTH. I noted with interest that that permeated all the testimony.

Well, gentlemen, I thank you very much for being here today. I'm sure the Chairman has a number of questions that he'll want to submit in writing.

Thank you very much for your participation.

The Committee is in recess.

[Whereupon, at 12:05 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]

APPENDIX

102D CONGRESS 2D SESSION

S. 20

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 2, 1992

Referred jointly to the Committees on Government Operations and Rules

AN ACT

To provide for the establishment, testing, and evaluation

1

of strategic planning and performance measurement in

the Federal Government, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa

2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

2

2

This Act may be cited as the "Government Perform

3 ance and Results Act of 1992".

4 SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.

(a) FINDINGS.-The Congress finds that

(1) waste and inefficiency in Federal programs undermine the confidence of the American people in the Government and reduces the Federal Govern

ment's ability to address adequately vital public needs;

(2) Federal managers are seriously disadvantaged in their efforts to improve program efficiency and effectiveness, because of insufficient articulation

of program goals and inadequate information on

program performance; and

(3) congressional policymaking, spending decisions and program oversight are seriously handicapped by insufficient attention to program performance and results.

(b) PURPOSES.-The purposes of this Act are to

(1) improve the confidence of the American people in the capability of the Federal Government, by systematically holding Federal agencies accountable for achieving program results;

(2) initiate program performance reform with a

series of pilot projects in setting program goals,