This paper addresses how to best gauge the value of a Federal program type, so that the value of their delivery can be assessed and improved. Gauging the value requires understanding the outcome that was expected, and this outcome is shaped, at a minimum, by factors of: program cause, public good delivery type, ownership, and funding source. The US Federal Government has seven types of programs comprising roughly 20% of the US GDP. The program type serves to delineate key features of programs that help parameterize the programs' social costs and expected benefits. Using the 2008 budget as a baseline, supported by trend data from 2006 to 2009 requested (no Recovery.gov dollars), this paper examines the $20T+ baseline according to these seven types. It reviews the nature of the factors driving the programs, their current state of performance measurement, the extent to which the model of New Public Management are reflected in their measures (effective decentralization, networked stakeholders in public good delivery, and incorporation of citizen-driven organizations and interests) and gives metric improvement recommendations.
This paper is the second of a set of three papers based on research findings of the MITRE Corporation. The first paper gave recommendations for improving the Program Assessment and Rating Tool (PART) process and applied modernized approaches to bureaucracy/administration in order to make it more stakeholder driven and outcome focused.
The third paper documents a new approach to performance management—a Stakeholder-Driven Performance Improvement Framework (SPIF) that applies the recommendations of the first paper, the lessons learned from this second paper and applies a commercial model for measuring Social Return on Investment, to derive a way to measure "ROGI," or Return on Government Investment.
