USACE Civil Works Program Development, Defense & Execution Gary Loew, Chief, Programs Integration Division Directorate of Civil Works U.S. Army Corps of.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Planning, Budgeting, Acquisition & Management of Capital Assets Capital programming is an integrated process within an agency for planning, budgeting,
Advertisements

Internal Audit Capability Model (IA-CM) for the Public Sector
US Army Corps of Engineers Budgeting Process
Slide1 Managing Flood Risk U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Steven L. Stockton, P.E. Director of Civil Works U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 14 July 2009 Presentation.
Future Airspace Strategy (FAS) Heathrow Airport Consultative Committee 31 st March 2010 Phil Roberts Assistant Director of Airspace Policy 1 1.
© 2009 The MITRE Corporation. All rights Reserved. Evolutionary Strategies for the Development of a SOA-Enabled USMC Enterprise Mohamed Hussein, Ph.D.
NOAA and OAR Approaches to Research Planning Alexander E. MacDonald PhD Deputy Assistant Administrator for Laboratories and Cooperative Institutes Office.
What Happened to the Promise of Benefits Realization? Presented by:Dave Peters Date: November 12, 2013.
1 Budgeting for Performance in the U.S. Using the Program Assessment Rating Tool J. Kevin Carroll U.S. Office of Management and Budget July 2008.
Program Development & Management: U.S. Army Civil Works Program Gary Loew, Chief, Programs Integration Division Directorate of Civil Works U.S. Army Corps.
Incorporating Investment Decisions in Medium Term and Annual Budgets Robert H. Goldberg Office of Management and Budget Executive Office of the President.
Project Team MSBA – local school board members MASA – local school superintendents and other stakeholders MSBA/MASA.
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® COL Richard P. Pannell District Commander, Galveston District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers United States Army.
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Vertical Team Roles & Responsibilities Planning Principles & Procedures – FY11.
Developing Navigation Performance Measures Barry Holliday Navigation Program Manager US Army Corps of Engineers Headquarters Washington, DC 14 December.
23 Flexible Budgets and Performance Analysis Principles of Accounting
IT Governance Navigating for Value Michael Vitale 6 May 2003 CIO Conference Steering the Enterprise Through Stormy Seas Image source: Access2000.
Resource Allocation in Canada Evaluation, Accountability and Control Brian Pagan Expenditure Operations and Estimates Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat.
Ian Williamson Chief Officer Greater Manchester Health and Social Care Devolution NW Finance Directors Friday 15 May 2015 Ian Williams Chief Officer Greater.
US Army Corps of Engineers PLANNING SMART BUILDING STRONG ® Project Planning with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Presenter Name Presenter Title.
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Missouri River Flood Task Force (MRFTF) Concept Briefing
Information Technology Audit
1 Building Strong! THE ECONOMIST’S ROLE Ken Claseman Senior Policy Advisor for Economics Office of Water Project Review HQUSACE
Flood Risk Management Program Rolf Olsen Institute for Water Resources U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Government at Work: The Bureaucracy
Module 22 STEPS 11, 12, 13 & 14 Washington Level and Administration Review Processes Module 22 STEPS 11, 12, 13 & 14 Washington Level and Administration.
1 Module 4: Designing Performance Indicators for Environmental Compliance and Enforcement Programs.
One NOAA: A Sustainable Collaboration Scott Rayder NOAA Chief of Staff May 9, 2006.
Module 24 STEPS 17, 18, & 19 Project Implementation Civil Works Orientation Course - FY 11.
University Strategic Resource Planning Council Budget.
THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF YORK Information Technology Strategy & 5 Year Plan.
N AVIGATING THE T URN : F LOOD R ISK A SSOCIATED WITH L EVEES Sam Riley Medlock, J.D., CFM Association of State Floodplain Managers May 2011.
DoD Parts Management Reengineering Defense Standardization Program Office Industry Day, 8 May 2007 PMRWG Final Report.
Theodore A. Brown, P.E., SES Chief Planning and Policy Division
Module 11 STEPS 4 & 5 Conduct Reconnaissance Study & Report Certification Civil Works Orientation Course - FY 11.
December 14, 2011/Office of the NIH CIO Operational Analysis – What Does It Mean To The Project Manager? NIH Project Management Community of Excellence.
Inland Waterways: The National Perspective Amy Larson Executive Director National Waterways Conference, Inc PNWA Annual Meeting.
An Integrated Control Framework & Control Objectives for Information Technology – An IT Governance Framework COSO and COBIT 4.0.
James H. Butler, Acting Director NOAA Strategic Planning Moving NOAA into the 21 st Century Third GOES-R User Conference May 2004, Boulder, Colorado.
1 Mid-Term Review of the Hyogo Framework for Action Roadmap to Disaster Risk Reduction in the Americas & HFA Mid-Term Review.
NOAA Restoration Center Implementing the Gulf Regional Sediment Management Master Plan …responding to an ongoing emergency, improving responses to new.
Maricopa Priorities Update Spring Agenda Overview Strategic Directions Implementation process Categorized Recommendations Preliminary Timeline.
Winter Leader Conference February 4, 2009 “ Building Strong “1 Budgets and Appropriations: Restoring our Infrastructure Budgets and Appropriations: Restoring.
Summary of NAST Major Accomplishments Dollars in Millions National Coalition White Paper NAST Congressional Testimony $54.5M RAND $2M Wind Tunnel Study.
December_2009 Partnership building. December_2009 Partnership building within the partnering process COREGROUPCOREGROUP FORMAL LAUNCH $ $ $ $ $ cost centre.
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Planning Principles & Procedures – FY11 AUTHORIZATION AND APPROPRIATION OR “It Takes Two to Tango"
WACTC 2014 Allocation and Accountability Recommendations - Briefing SBCTC October 2014.
Strategic Planning Workshop  Presented by: Jason P Aubee.
Winter Leader Conference February 4, 2009 “ Building Strong “1 Budgets and Appropriations: Restoring our Infrastructure Budgets and Appropriations: Restoring.
1 EMS Fundamentals An Introduction to the EMS Process Roadmap AASHTO EMS Workshop.
Jonathan D. Breul Evaluation as an instrument to improve the quality of public spending - a look at the global financial crisis V Konferencja Ewaluacyjna.
Introduction to SEPA The Scottish Environment Agency For CaSPr Waste Workshop Glasgow 19 October 2006 Claudette Hudes NetRegs Team Leader.
NASA ARAC Meeting Update on Next Generation Air Transportation System May 3, 2005 Robert Pearce Deputy Director, Joint Planning & Development Office.
American Fisheries Society Incoming Governing Board Breakfast Scott Rayder Chief of Staff National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration September 15,
Kathy Corbiere Service Delivery and Performance Commission
Is the Mid-Atlantic Region Water Rich? Presentation to 5 th Mid-Atlantic Regional Planning Roundtable November 7, 2008 Joseph Hoffman, Executive Director.
Inland Navigation - A National Perspective Jim Walker USACE, Headquarters November 8, 2007.
PPBS Planning Programming Budgeting Systems. PPBS The Department of Defense is the only Agency to use this type of budget.budget.
United Nations Statistics Division Developing a short-term statistics implementation programme Expert Group Meeting on Short-Term Economic Statistics in.
7 ROLES OF THE PRESIDENT.
EECS David C. Chan1 Computer Security Management Session 1 How IT Affects Risks and Assurance.
Improving Program Performance in the United States 3 rd Annual Meeting of OECD Senior Budget Officials Network on Performance and Results OECD Paris May.
Long Term Recreation Strategy
Improving Mission Effectiveness By Exploiting the Command’s Implementation Of the DoD Enterprise Services Management Framework - DESMF in the [name the.
R&D Funding in the New Administration and Congress
Research Program Strategic Plan
Navigation Funding for CMANC
Revolutionize USACE Civil Works
USACE infrastructure team update
Director-General: Mr. E Africa
Presentation transcript:

USACE Civil Works Program Development, Defense & Execution Gary Loew, Chief, Programs Integration Division Directorate of Civil Works U.S. Army Corps of Engineers One Year on the Job Observations, Conclusions, Future Directions

One Corps, Serving the Army and the Nation The Recent Past

One Corps, Serving the Army and the Nation FY97-06 Appropriations No Inflation

One Corps, Serving the Army and the Nation FY97-06 Appropriations vs.FY07-12 Needs Computed Expectation

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; a lmost 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

Have we responded? Some FY05/06 Improvements Responded seriously to FY06 legislation –ER 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 AGENDA

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 Performance Standards & Metrics Performance Management Review & Adjustment Goals Vision USACE/Admin./ Congressional Agreement Senior Level Accountability Incorporated into OMB/PMA/PARTS Standards USACE FYDP Regional FYDPs Incorporate Principles & Metrics SES Accountability Command Management Review

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 LINE QUANTIFY 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