Jump to main content.

PART Review Documentation

UST (Prevention) Program

1.1 Is the program purpose clear?
1.2 Does the program address a specific and existing problem, interest or need?
1.3 Is the program designed so that it is not redundant or duplicative of any other federal, state, local, or private effort?
1.4 Is the program design free of major flaws that would limit the program's effectiveness or efficiency?
1.5 Is the program effectively targeted, so that resources will reach intended beneficiaries and/or otherwise address the program's purpose directly?
2.1 Does the program have a limited number of specific long-term performance measures that focus on outcomes and meaningfully reflect the purpose of the program?
2.2 Does the program have ambitious targets and timeframes for its long-term measures?
2.3 Does the program have a limited number of specific annual performance measures that can demonstrate progress toward achieving the program's long-term goals?
2.4 Does the program have baselines and ambitious targets for its annual measures?
2.5 Do all partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) commit to and work toward the annual and/or long-term goals of the program?
2.6 Are independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality conducted on a regular basis or as needed to support program improvements and evaluate effectiveness and relevance to the problem, interest, or need?
2.7 Are Budget requests explicitly tied to accomplishments of the annual and long-term performance goals, and are the resource needs presented in a complete and transparent manner in the program's budget? YES
2.8 Has the program taken meaningful steps to correct its strategic planning deficiencies?
2.RG1 Are all regulations issued by the program/agency necessary to meet the stated goals of the program, and do all regulations clearly indicate how the rules contribute to achievement of the goals?
3.1 Does the agency regularly collect timely and credible performance information, including information from key program partners, and use it to manage the program and improve performance?
3.2 Are Federal managers and program partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) held accountable for cost, schedule, and performance results?
3.3 Are funds (federal and partners') obligated in a timely manner and spent for the intended purpose?
3.4 Does the program have procedures (e.g., competitive sourcing/cost comparisons, IT improvements, appropriate incentives) to measure and achieve efficiencies and cost effectiveness in program execution?
3.5 Does the program collaborate and coordinate effectively with related programs?
3.6 Does the program use strong financial management practices?
3.7 Has the program taken meaningful steps to address its management deficiencies?
3.BF1 Does the program have oversight practices that provide sufficient knowledge of grantee activities?
3.BF2 Does the program collect grantee performance data on an annual basis and make it available to the public in a transparent and meaningful manner?
3.RG1 Did the program seek and take into account the views of all affected parties (e.g., consumers; large and small businesses; State, local and tribal governments; beneficiaries; and the general public) when developing significant regulations?
3.RG2 Did the program prepare adequate regulatory impact analyses if required by Executive Order 12866, regulatory flexibility analyses if required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act and SBREFA, and cost-benefit analyses if required under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act; and did those analyses comply with OMB guidelines?
3.RG4 Are the regulations designed to achieve program goals, to the extent practicable, by maximizing the net benefits of its regulatory activity?
4.1 Has the program demonstrated adequate progress in achieving its long-term performance goals?
4.2 Does the program (including program partners) achieve its annual performance goals?
4.3 Does the program demonstrate improved efficiencies or cost effectiveness in achieving program goals each year?
4.4 Does the performance of this program compare favorably to other programs, including government, private, etc. with similar purpose and goals?
4.5 Do independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality indicate that the program is effective and achieving results?
4.RG1 Were programmatic goals (and benefits) achieved at the least incremental societal cost and did the program maximize net benefits?

Top of page

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.