USACE Civil Works Program Development, Defense & Execution
Gary Loew, Chief, Programs Integration DivisionDirectorate of Civil Works
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
One Year on the JobObservations, Conclusions,
Future Directions
One Corps, Serving the Army and the Nation
The Recent Past
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007
Admin. BudgetAppropriationHouse RptSenate Rpt
One Corps, Serving the Army and the Nation
FY97-06 Appropriations
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011
Approp.Needs
No Inflation
One Corps, Serving the Army and the Nation
FY97-06 Appropriations vs.FY07-12 Needs
0100020003000400050006000700080009000
1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011
Approp.Needs
Computed
Expectation
One Corps, Serving the Army and the Nation
One Corps, Serving the Army and the Nation
Criticisms of USACE Budget &Financial Management Practices
• Administration– Budget not related to vision,
strategy, goals, objectives– Not observing PMA/PARTS
process • Not budgeting to achieve
objectives• No metrics to judge
budget or execution success
– Supporting materials not timely or accurate
One Corps, Serving the Army and the Nation
Criticisms of USACE Budget &Financial Management Practices
• Congress (House)– No vision, goals
• “Budget is just a collection of projects.”
– No future planning (five year plan)– Not defending ED&M – Supporting materials not timely or accurate– Using funds as Corps wants, not as Congress intended
(reprogramming)– Using continuing contracts to circumvent intent of
Congress – Funds distributed across too many projects: inefficiently
funding projects to realize benefits as soon as possible • Senate does not necessarily agree with all these points
One Corps, Serving the Army and the Nation
Criticisms of USACE Budget &Financial Management Practices
• Corps divisions, districts & field offices– Budget is not responsive to local or
regional needs– Complex; too much information required – Too many data calls; short suspenses– District input ignored during final decision-making
• Final budget not consistent with district priorities (therefore we’ll advise Congress where we really want it; or we’ll reprogram appropriations to where they’re really needed.)
– Basis for decisions changes from year to year; each new year is a crap shoot; cannot plan for the future
– No planning funds– Little funding for new starts– Projects funded inefficiently– Continuing Authorities Programs politicized; inadequately
funded
One Corps, Serving the Army and the Nation
Criticisms of USACE Budget &Financial Management Practices
• Stakeholders– Do not understand basis for budget decisions-- Complex, complicated– Changing decision processes and metrics from year to year; difficult to influence direction– Cannot plan strategically; inconsistent
decision practices (suspensions)– Not enough money for “their” projects
and programs
One Corps, Serving the Army and the Nation
•Have not integrated vision/goals/long range planning into budget development•Have not truly integrated the Performance-Based budget process•Little thoughtful, quality analysis•Budget process is overly complicated
•Too much data•Late changes; inconsistent, uncoordinated review process•Late, inaccurate budget materials; almost impossible to be timely, accurate
•Basis for decisions is not consistent from year-to-year•Interested parties inside/outside government cannot project, plan•Stakeholders Balkanized; little organized support the total program•Serving too many masters
One Corps, Serving the Army and the Nation
One Corps, Serving the Army and the Nation
Have we responded?Some FY05/06 Improvements
• Responded seriously to FY06 legislation– ER 11-2-189
• Reprogramming• Continuing contracts• Reporting• Accurate, timely reports• Executing legislative intent
– Improved 5-year plan• (But no “top 10” list)• Agreement with OMB & Congress on content of FY07
5-Year Development Plan• OMB PARTS—serious effort to improve• Enforcing one project-one ‘capability’ rule• Restoring discipline to budgets and estimates—
more timely
One Corps, Serving the Army and the Nation
How are we doing today?Some FY05/06 Successes
• FY06 Policy Implementation Guidance-45 days• 3rd Supplemental estimates and appropriations• 4th Supplemental• Improved and improving 5-Year Plan• Some Administration agreement on important
budget principles (discussions continue)– Capital investment decisions are permanent – Less reliance on remaining benefit/remaining cost ratio– More use of other-than-economic decision factors
(safety, environment, watershed)• Agreements with Administration & Congress on
future directions– PARTS– FYDP– Willingness to discuss the larger issues
One Corps, Serving the Army and the Nation
PRESIDENT’S MGMT AGENDAPMA Status and Progress
RRRRYG
*
1Q FY061Q FY06
2Q FY062Q FY06
3Q FY063Q FY06
4Q FY064Q FY06
1Q FY071Q FY07
2Q FY072Q FY07
3Q FY073Q FY07
4Q FY074Q FY07
PMA StatusPMA Status
YG RGGG
PMA ProgressPMA ProgressProjectionProjectionArrowsArrows
One Corps, Serving the Army and the Nation
• Changing the Budget Process • One unifying concept of Program
Development, Defense and Execution• Execute our Vision
One Corps, Serving the Army and the Nation
Our Vision will drive the Budget
Objectives
Budget
PerformanceStandards& Metrics
PerformanceManagement
Review &Adjustment
GoalsVision
USACE/Admin./CongressionalAgreement
Senior LevelAccountability
Incorporated intoOMB/PMA/PARTS
Standards
USACE FYDPRegional FYDPsIncorporate Principles & Metrics
SES Accountability
CommandManagement
Review
One Corps, Serving the Army and the Nation
One Corps, Serving the Army and the Nation
VISION
THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS WILL PLAN, DESIGN, CONSTRUCT, OPERATE AND MAINTAIN THE NATION’S WATER RESOURCES INFRASTRUCTURE TO MEET LOCAL, REGIONAL AND NATIONAL CURRENT AND FUTURE NEEDS WITH COST-EFFECTIVE, SAFE AND ENVIRONMENTALLY SUSTAINABLE PROJECTS.
One Corps, Serving the Army and the Nation
CW STRATEGIC GOALS
Goal 1. Sustainable development.Goal 2. Repair past and prevent future
environmental losses.Goal 3. ENSURE THAT PROJECTS
PERFORM TO MEET AUTHORIZED PURPOSES AND EVOLVING CONDITIONS
Goal 4. Reduce vulnerability to natural and man-made disasters
Goal 5. World-class public engineering organization
One Corps, Serving the Army and the Nation
OBJECTIVES-NAVIGATION
• For each Objective, there is a corresponding objective for all relevant business lines.
• OMB will have agreed to all Goals, Objectives and Standards!!
EXAMPLE: Goal 3, Objective 1: Navigation Business Line
OBJECTIVE: PROVIDE SAFE, COST-EFFECTIVE, ENVIRONMENTALLY SUSTAINABLE NAVIGATION CHANNELS TO SUPPORT NATIONAL ECONOMIC GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT
ACCOUNTABLE PERSON: DIRECTOR OF CIVIL WORKS
One Corps, Serving the Army and the Nation
NAVIGATION BUSINESS LINEQUANTIFY OBJECTIVE
• THE OBJECTIVE MUST STATE A DESIRED OUTCOME
• EXAMPLE: THE USACE NAVIGABLE WATERWAYS WILL TRANSPORT 1.2 BILLION TONS OF COMMERCE IN 2007
• ACCOUNTABLE: CHIEF, CW OPERATIONS
One Corps, Serving the Army and the Nation
NAVIGATION—METRICS
President’s Management Agenda (PMA) Performance Assessment Rating Tool (PART)
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
• STANDARDS MAY BE OUTCOME AND OUTPUT– 1. Transport 1.2 billion tons– 2. No more than 5% channel non-availability– 3. Restore project storm damage within 60 days
• APPROVED BY: C/Programs, ASA(CW) and OMB
• PERFORMANCE METRICS– 1. Tonnage transported– 2. 95% channel availability– 3. Restore project storm damage within 60 days
One Corps, Serving the Army and the Nation
BUDGET & FIVE YEAR DEVELOPMENT PLAN
(FYDP)
• Divisions are responsible for Waterways budgets and FYDPs to achieve objectives for their waterways.
• Chief, Operations is responsible to budget and to execute the program to achieve his objectives
• Chief, Programs is responsible to develop, defend the budget, to execute the appropriation and administer the performance review process to achieve objectives, as measured by performance standards
• C/Programs is responsible for USACE FYDP to achieve objectives
One Corps, Serving the Army and the Nation
• As we improve FYDP process, we will address some ‘larger issues’ with policy makers
• We do not discount time or difficulty involved with some of these changes and issues
All budget decisions will be consistent with our vision, and will be formulated to achieve agreed-upon metrics and principles
Bottom Line
By FY09, FYDP will begin to drive budget decisions
One Corps, Serving the Army and the Nation
Newton’s First Law Still Applies
Inertia reigns in the budget process.
The total amount of funds available will not change unless acted upon by an outside force
One Corps, Serving the Army and the Nation
How Can We All Contribute?
• USACE: Provide the vision, goals in objectives in an open, collaborative way.
• Administration: Listen, “walk the performance-based budget talk.”
• Stakeholders:– Contribute to vision, Goals, Objectives, Metrics– Communicate!
• Adopt the Vision to be the desired future state of water resources development
• Create national desire for a water resources infrastructure that will serve this Nation’s economic, quality of [all] life and defense needs, today and into the future.
• Support the budget that enables the vision
One Corps, Serving the Army and the Nation
One Corps, Serving the Army and the Nation