Department of CommercePresident’s Management Agenda

PMA Scorecard March 31, 2007

31-M

ar-0

7

31-D

ec-0

6

30-S

ep-0

6

30-J

un-0

6

31-M

ar-0

6

31-M

ar-0

7

31-D

ec-0

6

30-S

ep-0

6

30-J

un-0

6

31-M

ar-0

6

Agriculture ● ● ● ● ● DOT ● ● ● ● ●Commerce ● ● ● ● ● Treasury ● ● ● ● ●Defense ● ● ● ● ● VA ● ● ● ● ●Education ● ● ● ● ● AID ● ● ● ● ●Energy ● ● ● ● ● CORPS ● ● ● ● ●EPA ● ● ● ● ● GSA ● ● ● ● ●HHS ● ● ● ● ● NASA ● ● ● ● ●DHS ● ● ● ● ● NSF ● ● ● ● ●HUD ● ● ● ● ● OMB ● ● ● ● ●Interior ● ● ● ● ● OPM ● ● ● ● ●Justice ● ● ● ● ● SBA ● ● ● ● ●Labor ● ● ● ● ● SMITHSONIAN ● ● ● ● ●State ● ● ● ● ● SSA ● ● ● ● ●

Of the 26 agencies included in the Scorecard (23 CFO Act agencies plus 3 others), DOC is 1 of 8maintaining a “Green” rating in Financial Performance from March 31, 2006 to March 31, 2007.

PMA ScorecardDOC Current Status Scores – Q4/FY06 and Qs1&2 FY07

31-M

ar-0

7

30-D

ec-0

6

30-S

ep-0

6

Human Capital ● ● ●

Competitive Sourcing ● ● ●

Financial Performance ● ● ●

E-Government ● ● ●

Budget/Performance Integration ● ● ●

Department of CommercePMA Human Capital Initiative

Overview, Results, & Planned Actions

Janice L. Guinyard

Director, Office of Corporate Human Capital Strategy and Workforce Initiatives

Department of CommercePMA Human Capital Initiative

Overview, Results, & Planned Actions

Executive Scorecard Overview

Actions Taken To Produce Results

Strengths, Weaknesses, & Vulnerabilities

Leadership Priorities for Improvement

Questions & Answers

Executive Scorecard Overview

Human Capital Plan Organizational Structures Succession Strategies Performance Appraisal and Awards Systems Under Representation Competency Gaps 45-day Time to Hire Standard SES Hiring Timelines Accountability Reviews

Actions Taken to Produce Results

• Launched the Career Assistance Program• Closed Skill Gaps with Leadership Development

and Certificate Programs for GS-4 through SES• Conducted Commerce-wide Training Sessions

- Tools and Techniques for Finding the Best Talent

- How to Deal with Poor Performers

- Supervisory Training open to Team Leaders

- Building IDPs

- Conflict Management • Launching new Commerce Learning Center

Actions Taken to Produce Results

• Conducted Commerce HR Summits • Conducted HR 4 U Sessions with Newsletters • Launched Commerce HR Performance

Measurement Survey• Reduced non-SES Hiring Cycle Time from 146 days

to 31 days• Implemented Commerce-wide Multi-tier

Performance Management System• Conducted Performance Management Training

Sessions at the Bureau-level• Received full certification for the Commerce SES

Performance Appraisal System for FY 2007-2008

Actions Taken to Produce Results

• Implemented Commerce-wide SES All Hands Sessions

• Implemented Bureau-level Employee All Hands Sessions

• Implemented Deputy Secretary Quarterly Organizational Performance Reviews with PMA Executive Scorecard Scoring for Bureaus

Department of Commerce2006 Federal Human Capital Survey Results

Strengths Creating continuous learning environment where employees

are given opportunities to improve skills Promoting teamwork as a means of working with others to

get the job doneWeaknesses

Lack of communication regarding accomplishments, challenges, and issues in the organization

Need to improve performance management, specifically holding employees accountable for producing results and

dealing with poor performers Vulnerabilities

Implementing strategies to attract and retain a high performing workforce

Effectively communicating the vision for the future

Department of Commerce Leadership Priorities

Ensure effective and ongoing communication at the bureau-level from the top to line managers to entire workforce

Effective performance management that includes holding employees accountable for producing results appropriate to their level of responsibility, differentiating between various levels of performance, and providing consequences based on performance

Create continuous learning environment to equip

employees with skills to perform jobs now and in the future based on organizational priorities

Competitive Sourcing Program at DoC - Highlights

Mr. Al Sligh, Jr.2007 Finance Conference

What is Competitive Sourcing Competitive Sourcing is the method for

competing “commercial in nature” activities It is based on:

The revised A-76 circular competition process The FAIR Act inventory process

• Annual statutory requirement to review and publish a list of our commercial functions

• The Act does not make it mandatory to compete or outsource our commercial functions

DoC’s Vision for Competitive Sourcing

Effective management tool to provide better, more efficient government programs and services that: Support DOC’s mission Provide best value to taxpayers Occur in a way that is fair to employees

DoC Budget at a Glance

Internal DoC

Financial Assistance

IAA/MOU

Procurement

DOC Approach: Feasibility Studies Use inventory as tool to identify feasibility study

opportunities each year Conduct feasibility studies to determine:

Is workload data readily available/quantifiable? Is there a commercial market available and

interested? Is there a good return on investment? Are there high risks that cannot be mitigated?

If study results are favorable, recommend move to competition pre-planning phase

DOC Competitive Sourcing Six-Step Model

Goal

AccomplishmentsTo Date and Ongoing Strategy

ExpectedResults

Carefully consider commercial functions and determine which are appropriate for competition (through feasibility studies)

Thoughtfully pursue competition with appropriate planning and analysis so that standard and streamlined competitions are completed in a timely fashion and few publicly announced competitions are cancelled

Use past experiences to improve future competitions, resulting in further success

Develop long-term plans for continued, routine use of competitive sourcing as a management tool to improve mission effectiveness

Monitor feasibility study and FAIR Act

inventory progress

Continue to monitor

feasibility study progress;

Submit inventory to OMB by 6/30

In August, operating units nominate studies to the CFO Council for review based on

feasibility study results

CFO Council selects which studies will be

conducted to the greatest benefit of the agency

CS program staff provide guidance and coordinate resources(e.g., Tiger Teams)

Monitors status until complete, ensures data

collection and capturing of best practices / lessons

learned

1

2

3

4 5

6

Conduct June site visits with operating units:- Review and discuss any challenges, issues with inventory; gather info to improve future inventory collections, guidance and training needed (including POC for communications strategy development)- Obtain information on feasibility study progress- Conduct analysis of inventory (benchmark against like agencies and work with operating units to answer questions elaborate on inventory) before final submission to OMB by June 30.

Identify best candidates for potential competition (ROI) through the feasibility study approachThe inclusion of the CFO Council in the process will provide the following efficiencies / benefits:-Endorsement from a high-level steering group means greater accountability, visibility and consistency- Individual CFOs view nominations as a group to discuss “big hit” potential (e.g., 10 operating units have IT positions coded as commercial, for competition. Council can suggest one large study.

Ongoing

Data collection:Study statusCost and savingsBest practices / lessons learned

CS program office ensures data is collected frequently (for various reporting requirements)CS program office evolves into one that provides guidance and resources to help operating units conduct meaningful studies (Tiger Team concept)Audits program to continually improve

OAMFA’s Role OAMFA is the central policy and oversight office

CFO Council has charter responsibility to foster competitive sourcing activities across bureaus

OAMFA program office provides assistance to the bureau CS POCs by: Choosing feasibility study / competition targets Training on key elements Providing support to studies / competitions Answering questions and providing guidance as needed Ensuring milestones are met Acting as liaison between bureaus and OMB

Current Status/Initiatives Our President’s Management Agenda (PMA)

implementation scores: yellow in status

• Potential for upgrade to green in status based on identifying additional competitions out of the 07 feasibility studies

green in progress for last six quarters• Much of this success is due to feasibility study approach

OS Photoshop competition is ongoing Expect decision by 3rd quarter, FY07

Results to Date

$7.9 million in savings from prior years’ competitions

Over $4M in savings ($22M over 5 years) from Census Bowie Computer Services Center competition 30% operational savings 65% per FTE savings

Current Challenges

Lack of “low hanging fruit” for competitions

OMB pressure to set specific target dates for new competition announcement and/or feasibility study completion targets

The Near Future Develop our 08 Green Plan in

coordination with the bureaus Identify hard 08 and 09 feasibility study

targets Finalize our current 07 feasibility studies

Move to pre-planning depending on study outcome

Develop a program for post-accountability reviews

Department of Commerce Finance Conference

PMA Scorecard – e-Gov Initiative

Barry C. West

Chief Information Officer

May 30, 2007

25 OMB E-Government Initiatives

Government to Government Grants.gov Geospatial One-Stop Disaster Management SAFECOM E-Vital

Government to Business E-Rulemaking Expanding Electronic Tax Products For Businesses Federal Asset Sales International Trade Process Streamlining Business Gateway Consolidated Health Informatics

Government to Citizen Recreation One-Stop GovBenefits.gov E-Loans IRS Free File USA Services

Internal Efficiency & Effectiveness E-Training Recruitment One-Stop Enterprise Human Resources Integration E-Clearance E-Payroll E-Gov Travel Integrated Acquisition Environment E-Records Management

Cross-Cutting E-Authentication

Commerce Involvement in E-Government

Government to Government Grants.gov Geospatial One-Stop Disaster Management SAFECOM E-Vital

Government to Business E-Rulemaking Expanding Electronic Tax Products For Businesses Federal Asset Sales International Trade Process Streamlining Business Gateway Consolidated Health Informatics

Government to Citizen Recreation One-Stop GovBenefits.gov E-Loans IRS Free File USA Services

Internal Efficiency & Effectiveness E-Training Recruitment One-Stop Enterprise Human Resources Integration E-Clearance E-Payroll E-Gov Travel* Integrated Acquisition Environment E-Records Management

Cross-Cutting E-Authentication* E-Gov Travel receives both Funding/In-Kind

and Fee-For-Service Contributions

Funding or In-Kind Contributions

Fee-For-Service

Commerce participates

Lines of Business: Overview

The Lines of Business (LoBs) take an architecture-based approach to identifying, developing, and providing common solutions and components across the government.

Current Lines Of Business

Financial Management Human Resources Management Grants Management Case Management Federal Health Architecture Information Systems Security Geospatial IT Infrastructure Optimization Budget Formulation & Execution

Denotes Funding or In-Kind Contributions

FY 2006 - 2007 Focus

FY 2006 and Prior

E-Government Initiatives: Adoption Focus

LoB Framework EstablishedE-Gov InitiativesFederal Enterprise ArchitecturePresident’s Management Agenda

LoB MigrationsUtilization and Adoption of E-Gov InitiativesDevelopment of Self-Sustaining Business Models (e.g., Fee For Service)

Cost-savingsImproved Mission PerformanceGovernment-wide Adoption/Implementation

In progressNot Started Complete

FY 2007 - Beyond Focus

 CURRENT STATUS(As of March 31, 2007)

PROGRESSSecond Quarter FY 2007

COMMENTS

Initiative:

E-GOVERNMENT

DOC Lead:

Barry West

Lead RMOExaminer:

David ConnollyLead IT/E-Gov Analyst:

Wendy LiberanteJasmeet Seehra

Yellow

Next est. byFY07 Q4

Enterprise Architecture _ Has 4 in Completion and 3 Use orResults (Y) X Has 4 in Completion and 3 in bothUse and Results (G) Q2 2007

Acceptable business cases for major Systems X for more than 50% (Y) Q2 2007 _ for all (G)

Cost/schedule/performance adherencefor major IT X overruns/shortfalls < 30% (Q1 FY 2006) _ EVMS shows overruns/ shortfalls<10% (G)

Security of all IT systemsX 80% secured or IG verifieseffectiveness (Y) Q2 2007_ 90% secured (G) IG or Agency head verifies effective& rates certification as Satisfactory (G)

E-Gov implementationX has current plan in place (Y) Q2 07X adheres to agency-accepted andOMB approved implementation plan (G)Q2 2007

MAINTAINING GREEN all IT systems secure IT systems installed in accordancewith security configurations X Privacy Impact Statements for 90%of applicable systems Q3 2006 X 90% of systems w/personally ID infohave system of records Q2 2006

Green

Actions taken this quarter:Revised Exhibit 300s and cleared all but 1 from the Management Watch List (MWL).Posted redacted Exhibit 300s on Commerce’s Web site.Met Q2 FY07 E-Gov Implementation Plan milestones and provided evidence of completion.Submitted reports on high-risk systems, E-Gov investment non-duplication, and quarterly FISMA security and privacy reports.Submitted annual Enterprise Architecture (EA).Included benefits of E-Gov initiatives and Lines of Business in Commerce’s Congressional Budget Justification.Selected a product suite for Department-wide e-mail consolidation.

Planned actions for next quarter:By June 15, submit quarterly reports on: E-Gov Implementation Plan, high-risk systems, E-Gov investment non-duplication, FISMA security and privacy reports, and EA.Demonstrate use of EVM data to manage the major IT portfolio; show actual performance to be within 10% of goals in a meeting with the E-Gov Administrator.Receive clearance from Congress to fund Commerce’s participation in the E-Gov initiatives and Lines of Business.Reach concurrence with OMB’s Office of E-Gov & IT on agency’s baseline cost estimates submitted in accordance with M-06-22, by the end of Q3FY07.

Commerce remains Yellow for status and Green for progress.

DOC is not on target to meet its PTB4 goal of green for status in June primarily due to security and Earned Value Management (EVM) criteria.

DOC had a material weakness in IT security for FY06, with the goal of removing the basis for the material weakness in FY07. OMB staff met with DOC to discuss the status of the security weakness, and DOC is now anticipating a FY08 Q1 timeframe for completion.

For EVM, DOC must demonstrate in a meeting with the E-Gov Administrator that it uses EVM data to manage its major IT investments and that actual performance is within 10% of goals. Based on staff level conversations, this will not happen before the end of the PTB4 rating cycle, due to EVM compliance issues at the Patent & Trademark Office (PTO).

DOC has one business case on the Management Watch List (Patent Automation Program). All systems on the MWL will be published on April 16th per this quarter’s Management Procedures Memo.

To get to green in status, Commerce must provide evidence for all “maintaining green” items in the quarterly FISMA Plan of Action & Milestones by June 15th.

President’s Management AgendaDEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Moving to Green

Current Status Progress

FY07 Q2

Planned actions for next quarter:

•Submit quarterly reports on: E-Gov Implementation Plan, high-risk systems, E-Gov investment non-duplication, FISMA security and privacy reports, and Enterprise Architecture (EA).

• Demonstrate use of EVM data to manage the major IT portfolio; show actual performance to be within 10% of goals in a meeting with the E-Gov Administrator.

• Receive clearance from Congress to fund Commerce’s participation in the E-Gov initiatives and Lines of Business.

• Reach concurrence with OMB’s Office of E-Gov & IT on agency’s baseline E-Gov and LOB cost estimates by the end of Q3FY07.

Nearing Closure

• FY 2007 E-Gov MOUs are staged for signing pending reprogramming approval– Reprogramming letters sent to the Hill April 5, 2007– Received request for additional information April 9,

2007; responded April 24, 2007– Status will go to “red” if reprogramming not approved

by June 30, 2007

• Approved Commerce E-gov Implementation Plan dated April 24, 2007

• 15 non-MOU third quarter milestones; on track to complete by June 30, 2007

Questions?

Barry C. West

Chief Information Officer

BUDGET AND PERFORMANCE INTEGRATION INITIATIVE

AND THE

BUDGET FORMULATION AND EXECUTION LINE OF BUSINESS

Steve ShapiroChief, Systems, Policy, and Performance DivisionOffice of Budget

  CURRENT STATUS(As of March 31, 2007)

PROGRESSSecond Quarter, FY 2007

COMMENTS

Initiative:

BUDGET & PERFORMANCE INTEGRATION

DOC Lead:Otto WolffBarbara Retzlaff

Lead RMO Examiner:Robert Alderfer

Lead BPI Analyst:James Hurban

Green

Improved results/use of performance info_X_ uses perf information to improve perf (Sep 2004) (Y)

Strategic and annual plans_X_ limited # of goals & use PART measures (Sep 2003) (Y)_X_ AND focus on info used in senior mgmt. report (Jun 2004) (G)

Cost of achieving performance goals_X_ full cost reported (Sep 2003) (Y)_X_ AND marginal cost reported (Jul 2006) (G)__ uses marginal cost analysis to inform resource allocations (G+)

At least one efficiency measure per PARTed program_X_ for all (Jul 2006) (G)_X_ at least 50% (Sep 2004) (Y)

Use of PART ratings_X_ to justify requests, etc. and hold program managers accountable (Sep 2004) (G)_X_ direct improvements justify requests, etc. (Sep 2004) (Y)% of PARTed programs rated Results Not Demonstrated for 2 yrs in a row_X_ less than 10% (Mar 2006) (G)_X_ no more than 50% (Sep 2003) (Y) [3% based on Budget Authority]

Green

Actions taken this quarter: Ensured that performance information

was included in Congressional Budget Justifications.

Submitted the performance-based FY 2008 President’s budget request to Congress.

Made the draft FY 2007-2012 DOC Strategic Plan available to Congress & stakeholders for review.

Reviewed first quarter program performance with the Deputy Secretary.

Completed first draft of all 2007 PARTs in PARTWeb for OMB review by March 30, 2007.

Conducted workshop for performance/BPI staffs in the DOC bureaus.

Planned actions for next quarter: Work with OMB as they review and

finalize PARTs and determine scores. Review second quarter program

performance with the Deputy Secretary. Provide guidance to bureaus on

developing and submitting FY 2009 budget requests.

Finalize and issue the final FY 2007-2012 DOC Strategic Plan after considering any input received from Congress or other stakeholders.

Update performance data and improvement plans to program entries in PARTWeb, ensuring that improvement plans are aggressive and the responsible managers are identified.

Six of the Department’s programs are currently undergoing PART review:

- Decennial Census- Hydrology- Import Administration- Market Access &

Compliance- Minority Business

Development- National Marine Fisheries DOC provided detailed

responses to OMB’s questionnaire on splitting performance information from the current Performance and Accountability Reports (PAR).

Moving PART review earlier in the year to influence budget development and splitting performance information from the PAR were two of the recommendations of the BPI task force, on which DOC was an active participant.

BPI Scorecard

Quarterly Performance ReviewsPresident’s Management Agenda Budget and Performance Integration

BPI Green Plan requirements were deleted and removed from BPI Scorecards as of Q2.

Stand-alone efficiency measure reports have been discontinued. OMB will likely require this information in another format.

OMB is giving agencies the option to split the PAR into separate performance and financial management reports for FY 2007. Much of the performance information could move to the APP.

OMB plans to revise Audit Bulletin 06-03 to clarify the scope of external financial audits with respect to performance data. These will be limited, consistent with current A-136 language.

OMB views Quarterly Performance discussions with the Deputy Secretary as key to improvement and accountability.

OMB is still considering the possible use of marginal cost measures in developing and submitting FY 2008 budgets.

PART Review HistoryCommerce

17%

40%

30%

13%0%

Effective

Moderately Effective

Adequate

RND

Ineffective

No DoC programs received an ineffective

All Government

17%

31%

28%

21%

3%

Budget Formulation and Execution Line of Business (BFELoB) An e-Gov interagency group formed to address

Federal budget community issues and to: Seek IT solutions for integrated, automated systems to

support budget activities common to all agencies. Help agencies consolidate budget system acquisitions

and share service providers. Improve and streamline budget processes by

identifying best practices.

The Budget Execution and Financial Management (BE&FM) Workgroup Budget Execution and Financial Management

workgroup (BE&FM) is a sub-group of the BFELoB, chaired by Treasury FMS.

BE&FM coordinates with OMB (BRD), the Treasury FMS and Budget Formulation and Execution Management (BFEM) system team, and the FMLoB.

The Budget Execution and Financial Management (BE&FM) Workgroup The BE&FM oversees an effort to help Federal agencies detect and

improve reporting differences and variances between budget and financial reports before submitting quarterly and year-end reports.

The workgoup will also foster information flow between agencies, Treasury, and OMB, as well as creation of data exchange requirements concerning:

Apportionments Allotments, Suballotments, Allowances Commitments Obligations Reprogramming Accounting Funds Control

DoC Participation with BFELoB Annual contribution:

$0 in FY 2007 $75,000 in FY 2008 passback Use of systems such as Treasury’s BFEM represents

an additional cost OB Staff attend bi-weekly meetings of full

BFELoB Workgroups:

BE&FM: OB/BCRD and OFM staff Earmarks: OB/TEP staff Human Capital