By Robert Brodsky, National Journal
Last November, President Bush issued an executive order that, compared with more-contentious policy decrees from the White House, seemed utterly benign. Littered with such bureaucratic buzz phrases as "promote greater accountability" and "objectively measurable outcomes," the order directed all federal departments and agencies to name a staff person to take on responsibility for program performance.
But as officials move to implement the order by its September deadline, critics are raising questions about the administration's motives and the edict's long-term implications for federal program management.
Each department and agency must appoint a "performance improvement officer" charged with overseeing its strategic plan and determining the realistic likelihood of achieving its goals with available funding and other resources. This information will be shared among agencies at monthly meetings of a new Performance Improvement Council and made public on the Web.
Full story: http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=39818&dcn=e_gvet
