OMB Paper Aims to Clear Up Bush's Management Agenda

As federal employees understand all too well, it's sometimes hard to sort out myth and fact in Washington.

Last week, the White House budget office posted a paper on one of the Bush administration's Web sites ( http://www.results.gov/ ) that, from its perspective, tried to set the record straight on the president's management agenda for the government.

That agenda has been controversial since it began five years ago -- in part because it promotes contracting out federal work and more rigorous approaches to measuring the performance of employees and programs. It's safe to predict that a number of the "facts" in this new paper will be disputed by federal unions and in some quarters of Congress.

Federal employees also will bring their workplace experiences to bear when assessing the Office of Management and Budget's paper, which pulls together the administration's explanations on contentious sections of the agenda. Among the paper's points:

· Changes to the federal personnel systems are not intended to cut payroll expenses. "The amount of money spent overall on raises will not change, and employee benefits will not change," according to the paper. "If an employee is a good performer, he or she will attain higher pay levels faster."

· Additional money has been proposed for training and implementation of new personnel systems. (The paper does not stipulate how much, but officials said two departments -- Defense and Homeland Security -- plan to spend several million dollars.)

· Projected savings from job competitions between federal employees and contractors, often in dispute, will be tracked and verified. "Agencies are establishing internal processes to independently validate results from completed competitions," according to the paper.

· Program assessment ratings, conducted by the OMB, are not used to eliminate federal programs that are out of favor with the administration. Ineffective programs, the paper noted, "may well need more money."

Asked if the paper had been posted with an eye to the November congressional elections, Robert Shea at the OMB said no. The paper had been in the works for some time, said Shea, who serves as counselor to Clay Johnson III , deputy director for management at the OMB.

The management agenda was drawn up shortly after President Bush took office, when administration officials assumed they could count on widespread support in Congress. But a series of events, including questions about the government's sluggish response to Hurricane Katrina, have slowed the administration's ability to overhaul key systems.

Federal unions and the OMB have battled annually over outsourcing, with Congress sometimes supporting unions. A pending House appropriations bill would block some funding for the OMB program assessment ratings. Federal court rulings have blocked personnel system changes that would sharply limit union rights.

Johnson and OMB Director Rob Portman , speaking at a recent luncheon sponsored by the IBM Center for the Business of Government, said that they plan to pick up their efforts to sell Congress on the president's management agenda.

"One of the reasons we are focused on this, and Clay and I are working a little bit more deliberately with Congress and trying to institutionalize more of this, is that we know these committees, some of the staff, some of the members, are going to outlive this administration," Portman said.

Buying and Spending

---

In responding to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the government has increasingly relied on contractors for support and solutions, the Government Accountability Office reported Friday.

From 2001 through 2005, federal acquisition spending increased more than 65 percent, to $388 billion in 2005, the GAO said.

But the government's acquisition workforce has remained steady, at about 106,000 employees. "Many have raised concerns that the increased workload has stretched this workforce to its limit," the GAO said.

The surge in spending also has renewed worries about contract abuse and mismanagement, and Charles Peters , the legendary editor of the Washington Monthly, has kicked off a debate on contracting issues at http://www.understandinggovernment.org/ . The Web site provides federal employees with a forum where they may remain anonymous.

Federal employees interested in government spending also might want to check out http://www.fedspending.org/ , sponsored by OMB Watch, an advocacy group founded in 1983 to promote increased government accountability. That site, which will contain data on $12 trillion in spending from 2000 to 2005, launches tomorrow.

Stephen Barr's e-mail address isbarrs@washpost.com.