ADMINISTRATION for CHILDREN and FAMILIESFY 2003 Annual Performance Plan, Revised Final FY 2002 Performance Plan, and FY 2001 Annual Performance Report for the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993
February 2002 Office of Planning Research and Evaluation Contact Person: Mary Ann MacKenzie (202) 401-5272 Web address: http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/opre
PrefaceExecutive SummaryPart I: Agency Context For Performance Measurement1.1 Agency mission and long term goals 1.2 Organization, Programs, Operations, Strategies and Resources 1.3 Partnerships and coordination 1.4 Summary FY 2001 performance report: accountability through performance measurement Performance Commitment Summary of Performance Success Summary of performance challenges Part II: Program Planning And AssessmentStrategic Goal 1: Increase Economic Independence And Productivity For Families1. Increase employment 1.1 TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE FOR NEEDY FAMILIES 1.2 DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES (GENERAL) 1.3 DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES (EMPLOYMENT) 1.4 REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT 1.5 SOCIAL SERVICES BLOCK GRANT 2. Increase independent living 2.1 DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES (HOUSING) 2.2 ASSETS FOR INDEPENDENCE (Individual Development Accounts) 3. Increase parental responsibility 3.1 CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT 4. Increase affordable child care 4.1 CHILD CARE: AFFORDABILITY Strategic Goal 2:Improve Healthy Development, Safety And Well-Being Of Children And Youth5. promote Early childhood development 5.1 CHILD CARE: QUALITY 5.2 HEAD START 6. Improve The Health Status Of Children 6.1 HEAD START: HEALTH STATUS 7. Increase Safety, Permanency, And Well-Being Of Children And Youth 7.1 CHILD WELFARE 7.2 DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES (EDUCATION) 7.3 DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES (HEALTH) 7.4 YOUTH PROGRAMS Strategic Goal 3: Increase The Health And Prosperity Of Communities And Tribes8. Build healthy, safe and supportive communities and Tribes 8.1 COMMUNITY SERVICES BLOCK GRANT 8.2 FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION PROGRAM 8.3 LOW-INCOME HOME ENERGY ASSISTANCE (LIHEAP) 8.4 NATIVE AMERICANS PROGRAMS Strategic Goal 4: Build A Results-Oriented Organization9. Develop and retain a highly skilled, strongly motivated staff 10. Improve automated data and management systems 11. Streamline ACF organizational layers 12. Ensure financial management accountability APPENDICES To The PERFORMANCE PLANA.1Approach to performance measurement Methodology and rationale Data verification and validation and other data issues A.2Changes and improvements over previous year A.3 Linkage to DHHS and OPDIV strategic plans A.4Performance Measurement Linkages Information technology planning Cost accounting Workforce analysis plan Program evaluation Linkage with budget A.5FY 2000 Performance Data not Reported (Previously Unavailable) FY 1999 Performance Data not Reported (Previously Unavailable) A.6Status of FY 2001 Data and Detailed Changes between the Final FY 2002 Plan and the Revised Final FY 2002 Plan A.7AVAILABILITY OF STATE And GRANTEE ADMINISTRATIVE DATA A.8Budget Linkage Table Cross walk of ACF goals and objectives with the budget: PrefaceThe Administration for Children and Families is committed to managing for results. Five years ago, we published our first performance plan for fiscal year FY 1999. and In FY 2001last year, we published our first combined performance plan and report. This combined plan and report gives us the ability to display the achievements of past years with future strategic planning and resource decisions. By combining this information in one document, we have created a tool that is useful to ACF management, our partners and stakeholders to begin integrating budget and performance management systems. The performance information that follows is consistent with the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) requirements and supports ACF’s four goals and related strategic objectives. Our ability to report on actual performance for FY 2001 is dependent on the availability and reliability of administrative performance data submitted by our partners. Over time, we will be better able to analyze annual trends, adjust targets and distribute resources, which in turn will improve our ability to integrate budget with performance information. we will be able to analyze annual trends and adjust targets and distribution of resources accordingly. Currently our targets for FY 2003 are projections of incremental improvement or maintenance of effort.ACF is encouraging programs to set more aggressive targets that will in turn drive improved performance at the State and community levels. This combined corporate plan and report is the result of lengthy conversations, negotiations and collaborative efforts among our fourteen program areas and our partners. The accomplishment of these results is dependent upon the joint efforts of ACF, its partners and coordination with other Federal agencies. The diversity of programs, target populations, levels of government, and range of partners make efforts to establish and achieve goals and outcome measures extremely challenging. In FY 2001, ACF placed special emphasis on developing priority work plans that were aligned with the annual performance plan results. This effort required both central and regional office staff to identify cross-cuttingcross-cutting strategies and activities in collaboration with their partners. These work plans providedinclude more detailed strategies and activities covering ten cross-cutting program areas: welfare reform, child support, child care, infants and toddlers, Head Start, child welfare, youth, Tribal programs, domestic violence and ACF reinvention efforts.
Executive Summary
PurposeThe FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan provides a comprehensive set of measures and outcomes for the major programs in the Administration for Children and Families (ACF). The combined FY 2003 Performance Plan and FY 2001 Performance Report identify the performance measures that we will use to track our progress toward achieving strategic goals. The plan includes linkages of the goals and objectives to the budget (see Budget Linkage Table in Appendix A.86) and to the Department-wide strategic plan (see Appendix A.3). Role of ACFWith its partners, ACF supports strategies that create opportunities for individuals, families, and communities to be economically and socially productive. Our services and interventions are directed toward improving job skills, access to social services, family and community stability and independent living for low-income families, children, the elderly, persons with disabilities and distressed communities. ACF’s role in accomplishing its objectives is to provide leadership, funding and technical assistance to its partners, conduct research, promote best practices, and work to eliminate barriers to access of services. Sustained commitment to continuous improvement has focused our attention on measurable results. Substantial progress has been made in the past several years in helping welfare recipients move to work, increasing child support payments, and providing child care and early learning services to low and moderate income families. Status of Children and FamiliesOur commitment to improving the lives of children and families is the foundation for the series of strategies, goals, objectives, measures and targets included in this plan. Statistics provide evidence for a continued focus on providing assistance to children and families. For example, census data (1999) indicate that 16.9 percent of all children still live in poverty. Only 40 percent of children living in poverty are enrolled in preschool.Preschool enrollment for these children is still at only 40 percent. In 20001999, an average per month ofonly 1.87 million of children in low-income families are receiveding child-care subsidies through the Federal Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) on an average monthly basis representing 12 percent of the children eligible for these subsidies. More thanOver 8900,000 children were victims of substantiated or indicated child abuse and neglect in 1999. Of children who exit foster care, only one in five have been in care more than three years; 32 percent of the children in care as of March 2000 had been in care for three or more years.substantiated or indicated child abuse or neglect in 1998. Only twenty-one percent of children who exit foster care achieve permanency after three or more years; 33 percent of the children currently in care (as of September 1999) have been in care for three or more years. While the welfare caseload has fallen by 6.68.3 million recipients (from 124.1 million in August 1996January 1993 to 5.48 million in JuneJune 20010, a drop of 5559 percent) and the number of employed recipients has increased, there remains the need to make continued investments in raising wages and other incentives to make rewards of work economically meaningful. Although many families work hard, they struggle financially to support their children. Vision, Mission and GoalsVISION STATEMENTWe are committed to the vision of strong, healthy, supportive communities where families and individuals are empowered to increase their economic and social well-being and productivity and to programs that contribute to the protection and healthy development of children. MISSION STATEMENTThe Administration for Children and Families provides national leadership and creates opportunities for low-income, disadvantaged families and individuals to lead economically and socially productive lives, for children to develop into healthy adults, and for communities to become more prosperous and supportive of their members. ACF STRATEGIC GOALS
Organizational Structure and Program Responsibilities ACF employs 1500 people in Washington, DC and the ten regional offices (five regions also act as hub sites for activities that affect several regions). ACF was established in 1991, bringing together several pre-existing programs; it is organized into eight program offices and five staff offices. ACF is responsible for over 60 programs that promote the economic and social well being of families, children, individuals and communities. For exampleWith its partners, ACF with its partners administers the State-Federal welfare reform program, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) providing assistance to an average of 5.488 million persons monthly as of June 20010. ACF administers the national child support enforcement system collectingg almost $18.9 billion in FY 20010 in payments from non-custodial parents referred for collection follow-up. It also administers the Head Start program serving over 905,000857,664 pre-school children. ACF provides funds to assist low-income families in paying for child carechild care and supports State programs to provide foster care and adoption assistance. Selection Criteria for How Goals, Outcomes and Measures were Selected ACF focuses on outcomes because they not only convey a sense of value to the American people, but they provide us with a focus for working with a broad range of partners, including local communities, non-profit organizations and States, to accomplish agreed upon goals. Representative performance measures address activities in each program area. These measures, and the discussion of strategies under each, are generally illustrative of the major activities within ACF. The targets are based on information, e.g. funding levels,reflect a combination of current funding, past funding, program initiatives, staffing capacity and efforts of and the actions of our partners. We encourage our programs to work with their partners to establishWhile there is a certain aspect of "stretch" in some targets, we are committed to identifying targets that are realistic and challenging and that move results in the right direction. This is our fifthourth year of performance planning. In a number of cases, we have improved our ability to define measures and, in some cases, we have developed entirely new measures. New strategies and initiatives have been provided for the replacement measures. We will continue to improve and revise measures with the purpose of improving management and accountability. The budgeted resources support the broad range of ACF goals. A detailed budget linkage table in the appendix displays aggregation and consolidation of program activities that have been or consolidated to support our goals and objectives. Reader’s Guide ACF has followed a standardized format provided by the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). Part I provides general information describing the role of ACF in program implementation, coordination and planning and explains how our measuresgoals, targets and levels of performance support the mission and long-term goals. This section includes the context for performance measurement including the mission and long term goals,a description of the organization, programs and strategies supporting the four strategic goals, description of partnerships and a brief summary of the FY 2001 performance report including performance success and challenges. Part II includes the FY 2003 performance plan and the FY 2001 performance report covering fourteen programs areas as well as management initiatives with the accompanying measures and targets under the appropriate ACF goals and objectives. Each program section includes a narrative description providing (1) the context, legislative intent and broad program goals; (2) program activities, strategies and resources; (3) program coordination, partnerships and cross-cutting issues; and (4) program wide performance and data issues. The programis sections also includes a summary table of measures, targets and performance information forwith FY 1999 --– 2003. targets and performance information for the baseline year. The total program fundingprogram-funding column in the summary table reflects the requesteddollars in the President’s FY 2003 Budget and appropriated funds (aggregated by program area) for FY 1999 – 20022., 2001, 2000 and 1999. (See Detailed Budget Linkage Table in Appendix A.86 for line items included in each program total.) The summary tableis section is followed by a more detailed presentation of performance measures for FY 2003 and the revised final final measures for FY 2002. The Appendices include sections on ACF’s approach to performance measurement; changes and improvements over the previous year; linkage to the DHHS’ strategic plan; itemization of new data reported for FY 1999, 2000 and 2001; status of FY 2001 data and detailed changes between the FY 2002 plan and the revised final FY 2002 plan; and a chart on the timetable for reporting State and grantee administrative data. The appendices also include sections on a variety of critical performance measurement linkages, e.g., information technology, cost accounting, workforce planning and restructuring, program evaluation and budget. Highlights of Accomplishments 1. We helped to improve the economic independence of low-income families. Welfare caseloads have fallen to historic new lows; they are at their lowest level since 1965. As of September 2000, a,t based on the monthly average, welfare recipients represented 2.1 percent of the population as of June 2000, based on the monthly average. In 1996, a comprehensive, bipartisan welfare reform law, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, dramatically changed the nation's welfare system into one that requires work in exchange for in exchange for time-limited assistance.ed assistance. States, Tribes, and Territories receive block grants from ACF under the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) program to cover benefits, administrative expenses, and services. States, Tribes and Territories have wide flexibility under TANF to determine their own eligibility criteria, benefit levels, and the type of services and benefits available to TANF recipients. However, States must maintain a historical level of State spending on behalf of eligible families (the maintenance of effort requirement) and must meet minimum work participation rate requirements. In FY 2000, all fifty States, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico met the overall work participation rates for all families.The States, Tribes and Territories have great flexibility to design and implement programs to move clients from welfare to work, including eligibility requirements, benefit levels, and services provided, as long as they are consistent with the purposes of the program. Additionally one of the purposes is to encourage the formation and maintenance of two-parent families. Of the 328 States, the District of. Columbia. and Guam that havewith two-parent family programs subject to a work participation rate, 258 States and the District of Columbia met the FY 20001999 target rate for work participation of two-parent families. The legislation established the two-parent participation rate at 75% percent for FY 1998 and 90 percent for FY 1999 and subsequent years. States have the option to move their two-parent cases into a separate State program and thus avoid the two-parent work participation requirements. While some States have exercised this option, the statutory two-parent participation target of 90 percent remains a rigorous standard.
* subject to the two parent families work requirement There has been a dramatic increase in employment of current and former welfare recipients. The percentage of working recipients remained at an all-time high for the second year in a row. In FY 2000, 33 percent of adult recipients were working, compared to less than 7 percent in FY 1992, and 11 percent in FY 1996. Thus, about one in three recipients was working in a typical month, the highest level ever recorded and nearly a five-fold increase since FY 1992. In FY 2000 the vast majority of recipients who were working were in paid employment (80 percent of those working); others were engaged in work experience and community service. IIn December 2000, DHHS awarded $200 million in bonuses to 28 states with the best records for FY 1999 (the most recent year for which data is are available) in moving parents on welfare into jobs and assuring their success in the workforce. According to reports filed by the 48 States and the District of Columbia competing for the bonus, more than 1.2 million parents on welfare went to work in the period between October. 1, 1998, and September. 30, 1999. Overall, 43 percent of welfare recipients entered the work force in 1999 in comparison to 39 percent in 1998. Retention rates in FY 1999 were also high: of those who obtained jobs, 77 percent were still working in the next quarter. The States also reported an average increase in earnings of 22 percent from $2,114 in the first quarter of employment to $2,578 in the third quarter for FY 1999. In FY 1998, States reported an average increase of 24 percent.
The challenges for TANF will continue in four areas: reaching all families, moving families into work and promoting success at work, transforming the welfare office, and maintaining the investment. ACF continues to implement a wide range of projects to help the States produce the desired outcomes, e.g.,such as training, technical assistance, and sharing of best practices, and sponsoring research. 2. We increased parental involvement and financial support of non-custodial parents in the lives of their children. The most recent census data show that, in the spring of 1998, 14 million families with children had a parent living elsewhere. These custodial parent families, of which 85 percent were headed by women and 15 percent by men, comprised one fourth of all families with their own, never married children under 21. Of the 14 million custodial parent families, only 7.9 million (56 percent) of the custodial parents had awards or agreements for child support. To ensure that parents support their children, ACF partners extensively with a range of Federal, State, and local entities and provides funding and technical assistance for identifying parents and assets of non-custodial parents who have not supported their children. As of January 31, 2001, 52 States and Territories are reportingsubmitted data requests to the Federal Case Registry, which locates absent parents across State lines. The FCR contains 17.45.5 million child support cases. When absent parents are found, ACF promotes State use of the IRS tax refund and administrative offsets for child support. As part of the total $187.9 billion collected for child support in FY 2001 (representing a 100 percent increase since 1992)0, a record $1.64 billion in delinquent child support was collected in taxcalendar year 20010 using the tax refund and administrative offset, representing a 100 percent increase since 1992. More than 2.11.42 million families benefited from these tax collections.
As of January 31, 2001, 52 States and 146 agencies are reporting data to the National Directory of New Hires, another tool for identifying absent parents. During FY 200010 more than 879690 million records were posted there that matched child support orders to employment records with a value in excess of $3.1 billion. In addition, to match delinquent parents with financial records, ACF is operating the new multi-State financial institution data match system and is working with States to implement the in-State financial institution data match system. 3. We continued to promote access to quality child carechild care services to help low-income working parents and their children. In order to break the cycle of poverty and dependency, it is essential to focus on both the parents and the next generation. Parents are more likely to seek employment and maintain jobs if they have access to and confidence in their child care arrangements. According to new State-reported statistics for FY 20001999, 1.87 million children in low-income families are receiving child-care subsidies through the Federal Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) on an average monthly basis. This is an increase of 360,000 overfrom the 1.51 million children served in 1998. A continuing challenge is to reach the estimated remaining 88 percent of the 15 million children who are eligible for child carechild care subsidies under Federal rules. The quality of child carechild care affects the health and safety, as well as the cognitive, emotional, and social development of children. The National Institute for Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) study of early child care, When Child Care Classrooms Meet Recommended Guidelines for Quality (1998), shows that children attending centers meeting professional standards for quality score higher on school-readiness and language tests and have fewer behavioral problems than their peers in centers not meeting such standards. ACF provides Federal funds through CCDF to States, Territories and Tribes and works with State administrators, professional groups, service providers, and others to promote quality child care. States are required to spend at least four percent of Federal CCDF funds to improve the quality of child carechild care and offer additional services to parents. In addition, funds are earmarked for resource and referral services and school-age care, infant and toddler care, and additional quality improvement activities. States are continuing to expand the innovative ways to improve quality. As an example, several States have already implemented, or are implementing, programs of tiered licensing based on the quality of care. Based on the combined data of independent national organizations who have information about provider accreditation and certification, there were 9,535 accredited child carechild care facilities nationwide in FY 2000 (reported as of November 2000). The FY 2000 number of accredited facilities will be used as the baseline for tracking future improvements. On August 30, 2000, DHHS issued final regulations to implement High Performance Bonuses (HPB) under the TANF Program. These regulations included a child carechild care HPB to reward States that effectively support working families with child carechild care assistance. 4. We improved the healthy development and learning readiness of preschool children. Head Start is a national program that provides comprehensive developmental education, health, mental health, nutrition, and social services for America’s low-income, preschool children ages three to five and their families. The primary goal of Head Start is to promote the social competence and school readiness of low-income children. There are 1,525 community-based organizations which administer Head Start programs.develop unique and innovative programs. In 20010, there were 18,5000 centers and 48,5005,000 classrooms, serving over 905,000857,664 children. Head Start children have been found to be ready for school, with the cognitive and social skills that indicate readiness to learn more in kindergarten. For example, in an age-appropriate assessment of word knowledge, the percentage of children scoring close to or above the national mean increased from only one in four when they started the program in the fall to more than one in three in the spring -- nearly a 40% percent increase. As in child carechild care, Head Start children experience better outcomes when they have good classroom quality. Observed classroom quality is good on average with no classrooms scoring below a minimum standard of quality. An element of that quality is the qualification of the teacher. For Head Start, that means classroom teachers who have a degree in early childhood education (ECE), a child development associate credential, a State-awarded preschool certificate, a degree in a field related to ECE plus a State-awarded certificate or who are in CDA training and have been given a 180-day waiver, consistent with the provisions of Section 648A(a)(1) of the Head Start Act.
The target for FY 2000 established in the legislation for qualified teaching staff was 100%; the actual was 94%. This shortfall is due to a combination of staff turnover and/or limited access to training and credentialing opportunities in certain areas of the country. In partnership with institutions of higher education, Head Start is working to ensure that a majority of teachers obtain associate’s or bachelor’s degrees in early childhood education over the next few years. 5. We increased the safety and security of children and youth. ACF funds a number of programs that focus on preventing maltreatment of children in troubled families, protecting children from abuse, and finding permanent placements for those who cannot safely return to their homes. Programs such as Foster Care, Adoption Assistance, and Independent Living provide stable environments for those children who cannot remain safely in their homes, assuring the child's safety and well-being while their parents attempt to resolve the problems that led to the out-of-home placement. When the family cannot be reunified, foster care provides a stable environment until the child can be placed permanently with an adoptive family. Adoption Assistance funds are available for a one-time payment for the costs of adopting a child as well as for monthly subsidies to adoptive families for care of the child. The Adoption Incentives program was enacted into law by the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997and Safe Families Act of 1997 enacted the Adoption Incentives program into law. The passage of this incentive program along with State, local and private initiatives focusing attention on the needs of children in foster care awaiting permanent adoptive families, isare resulting in unprecedented increases in the number of children adopted from foster care.
Under the law, States may receive incentive funds for each adoption finalized in a fiscal year that exceeds the established baseline number of adoptions. ACF has undertaken a number of activities designed to improve overall performance in child welfare. On January 25, 2000, HHSDHHS published a final rule in the Federal Register to establish new approaches to monitoring State child welfare programs. The new rule plays an important role in improving services to, and outcomes for, abused and neglected children, children in foster care, and children awaiting adoptive families. It promotes increased safety for children who are maltreated,; quicker movement to permanent homes and families for children in foster care; and enhanced well-being for families served by State agencies. Performance Measures ACF continues to make improvements in the performance measurement of its programs. For FY 20010, all ACF programs except the Assets for Independence Program Social Services Block Grant program have performance measures. (This programe Assets for Independence Program was first added in the FY 2001 plan.) As ACF continues to gain experience in performance measurement, measures are being refined, added, dropped and replaced. As of this submission, we are able to report on all FY 1999 data. on forty-five of the forty-seven measures. As of February 2002March 2001, we are able to report on forty-fivesixteen of the fifty-twoone FY 2000 targets and fifteen of the sixty-five FY 2001 targets. Most of the measures in our plan rely on State data systems; final data are available nine to twelve months after the end of the fiscal year. Missing FY 2000-2001 data will be reported in subsequent performance reportsreports, as they become available. Many FY 1999-2000 measures have been replaced and targets adjusted in FY 20021 and FY 20032. In the individual program summary sections, there is a fuller explanation of the difference between targets and actual achievements. As mmore trend data are collected, ACF will be better able to evaluate program strategies and adjust future performance targets. The FY 20032 performance plan has sixty-fiveeight measures and fourteen developmental measures. Additionally, this plan includesThe Individual Development Accounts program is the only program still lacking performance measures. Additionally, ACF has a number of new initiatives that will require further development and discussions with potential partners before measures or targets can be developedidentified. Part I: Agency Context For Performance Measurement1.1 Agency mission and long term goals The Administration for Children and Families (ACF) and its partners--other Federal agencies, State, Territorial Territorial, local, and Tribal governments, and the private sector--provide national leadership and create opportunities for low-income, disadvantaged families and individuals to lead economically and socially productive lives, for children to develop into healthy adults, and for communities to become more prosperous and supportive of their members. ACF oversees and finances a broad range of programs for children and families, including Native Americans, persons with developmental disabilities, refugees, and legalized aliens, to help them develop and grow toward a more independent, self-reliant life. These programs carried out by State, Territorial, county, city, and Tribal governments, and public and private local agencies,agencies are designed to promote stability, economic security, responsibility and self-sufficiency. Some ACF programs assist families in financial crisis, emphasizing short-term financial assistance along with assistance in obtaining and maintaining employment. Programs for children and youth focus on those with special problems, including children of low-income families, abused and neglected children, those in institutions or requiring adoption or foster family services, runaway youth, children with disabilities, migrant children, and Native American children. ACF promotes the development of comprehensive, integrated community and home-based service delivery where possible. ACF advises the Secretary on issues pertaining to children and families, including Native Americans, people with developmental disabilities, refugees and legalized aliens. ACF coordinates development and implementation of family-centered strategies, policies, and linkages among its programs with other programs serving children and families. Our efforts with partners enable families to avoid dependency or move from welfare to work through employment, education, training and quality child care services, coupled with short-term financial aid. ACF enforces child support and provides community development resources and other supports for low income-working families. Investments in sound growth and development for children, particularly those in low-income families, are basic to productive adulthood and citizenship. Early Head Start, Head Start, and quality child care programs for low-income children are essential to good health, early development and school readiness; before and after-school child care provide high quality programming and support for working families; and youth development programs provide positive growth opportunities for young people. Communities provide the context within which families may function well or poorly. ACF, along with numerous public and private partners, is committed to economic development, linking community development strategies with comprehensive "people development" strategies to strengthen communities as a positive factor in the lives of residents.
1.2 Organization, Programs, Operations, Strategies and Resources The Administration for Children and Families is responsible for twenty-two legislative programs (which authorize more than sixty different programs) distributed among thirty-five budget activities. These program and budget activities are consolidated into 14 major program areas to meet the requirements of GPRA, the Government Performance and Results Act... The Assets for Independence Demonstration program was first included in the FY 2001 plan. (The consolidation and aggregation scheme and the linkage to the Budget are described in Section A.46 of the Appendix.)
The operations of these programs are carried out through central office headquarters staff and through ten regional offices, organized into five major hubs. Providing nearly $45 billion in grants to governmental jurisdictions and nonprofit organizations and technical assistance and oversight delivered by approximately 1500 FTEs, ACF enables its partners to achieve results in the goals and strategies listed below. (Specific operational activities are discussed under each program’s performance planning section, which includes references to budget and other resource management documents.) ACF’s GPRA performance plan addresses four major agency goals with twelveen strategic objectives. There has been a concerted effort to focus on program outcomes that have meaning at the State and local level. In many instances, programs have deliberately set performance targets high, encouraging both ACF employees and partners to strive for higher achievements. ACF has purposely moved away from developing a measurement system that includes products, services and processes (inputs and outputs) and has embraced a measurement system that emphasizes results. This shift has been central to creating a dynamic collaboration with our partners, fostering joint accountability and allowing for crosscuttingcross-cutting coordination among programs to improve the lives of families and children. Adopting a results orientation has allowed ACF to complete a cultural transformation in the way we think about program outcomes. Although ACF does not focus on process measures in the annual performance plan, there is a process in place which requires program managers are encouraged toto describe and report on operational strategies, activities, initiatives and management improvement efforts that will be undertaken to accomplish program results. Following is a description of sample strategies and major management improvement efforts that ACF has undertaken to improve overall performance of programs including activities that support the efforts of our partners--States, Tribes, and Territories, and local community organizations -- to achieve these goals and objectives. (Many of these strategies are repeated under the individual program sections.) Because the ability to achieve any and all results identified in this plan depends on the commitment and combined efforts of both ACF and our partners, these activities reflect a true and bold partnership. Strategic Goal 1: Increase economic independence and productivity for families. Examples of operational strategies and processes that are critical to reaching this goal include:
Working in partnership with States, ACF provides resources and tools to increase parental responsibility through the Child Support Enforcement program. Examples include:
Strategic Goal 2: Improve healthy development, safety and well being of children and youth. In the area of child care, ACF is focusing on systems development (with particular emphasis on helping States meet requirements for reporting); consumer education; assisting States in developing inclusion initiatives (e.g., for children with disabilities); and providing guidance on building successful linkages between child care programs and programs such as health services, early childhood education and Head Start. Examples of key strategies include:
ACF’s improvement efforts for the Head Start program include training and technical assistance to assist local projects in meeting the Head Start program performance standards and in maintaining and improving the quality of local programs; research, demonstration, and evaluation activities to test innovative program models and assess program effectiveness; and the conduct of required monitoring activities. Examples of key strategies for maintaining and improving the program quality and increasing full-day, full-year Head Start services include:
ACF funds a number of programs that focus on preventing maltreatment of children in troubled families, protecting children from abuse, and finding permanent placements for those who cannot safely return to their homes. Examples of key strategies in support of "increasing safety, permanency, and well being of children and youth" include:
Strategic Goal 3: Increase the health and prosperity of communities and Tribes Agency investments to meet this goal are focused on improving program performance and outcomes at the State, Tribal and local levels. Key resources designated for training, technical assistance, planning, evaluation and data collection will continue to be awarded to States, Tribes, Territories and localities to accomplish this objective. Examples of strategies include:
Strategic Goal 4: Build a results-oriented organization ACF has added several objectives and measures in response to the President’s Management Agenda which calls for "active, but limited" government: one that empowers States, cities, and citizens to make decisions; ensures results through accountability; and promotes innovations through competition. ACF is working closely with DHHS to implement five strategic reforms: strategic management of human capital, competitive sourcing, improved financial performance, expanded electronic government and budget and performance integration. ACF has focused on improving and expanding our capacity to provide high quality, cost-effective and efficient services to meet customer needs and expectations using state-of-the-art information technology to improve management and data systems. Through our workforce analysis planning and Fair Labor Act initiatives, we anticipate becoming increasingly market-based. Initiatives underway to accomplish these strategies include:
1.3 Partnerships and coordination ACF’s programs are administered in a complex partnership environment in which varying Federal, State, local, non-profit and community-based funding sources and programs develop and carry out programs, deliver services and strive to attain goals. The relationships, funding mechanisms and degrees of autonomy vary from program to program. A primary challenge is to collaborate with partners in crafting effective policies and programs that satisfy mutually agreed-upon objectives. The broad goals of these diverse jurisdictions and organizations are similar to those of ACF, although State and local programs may differ on specific targets and outcomes relevant to the particular needs of the population groups and communities they serve. States and Local Organizations ACF programs have worked intensively with their partners and have made substantial progress in recent years towards a measurable results framework with performance measures and outcomes for operating programs. Results-oriented partnership agreements and targets have been negotiated with individual States. Each program has developed an individualized process for engaging partners in goal setting and definition of measures and targets that are meaningful and useful at the State and local community level. For example, ACF undertook a legislatively-mandated, partner-oriented process to develop the measures and funding formula under which we would award TANF high performance bonuses to States. Also,,, the child support program developed with States a national strategic plan, with indicators and targets. The refugee program involved both State refugee programs and community-based service organizations in the development of measures and targets. In some programs, such as child care, which were new but had no mandated requirement for consultation like TANF, a preliminary set of proxy measures was developed for the first GPRA planning years, while the program undertook a consensus-building process with the partnership constituencies. Collaboration with Federal Partners Across DHHS, a large number of programs share related objectives. Many DHHS programs also share related goals and responsibilities with other Federal agencies. Therefore, both internal and external coordination is necessary to administer programs effectively. Interagency consultation has taken place across programs within ACF, (e.g., child care and Head Start, child support and TANF) and within DHHS (e.g., between TANF and Medicaid) through seminars and forums convened by the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Management and Budget, Technology and Finance (ASMBASBTF) and the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE). Special efforts have been directed to assure that children have access to health and child development services. ACF programs provide outreach for the State Child Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), which is administered by the Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA). Head Start and the Child Care Bureau work with DHHS health agencies e.g. the Maternal and Child Health Bureau, Community Health Centers, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMSHA) and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to assist with attaining health targets. For example, Child Care and Head Start coordinate with the Health Resources and Services Administration’s (HRSA) Maternal and Child Health program to improve health and safety in child care by creating strong links with health communities. Increasing the number of women who receive early and comprehensive prenatal care is among the salient goals of the Early Head Start program, which serves low-income families with infants and toddlers. ACF programs provide outreach for the State Child Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), which is administered by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Child care and Head Start coordinate with the Health Resources and Services Administration’s (HRSA) Maternal and Child Health program. Head Start and Child Care jointly sponsor the QUILT (Quality in Linking Together) project that helps Head Start and child care grantees form program partnerships to provide high quality full-day, full-year early childhood services.. Such coordination at the implementation and delivery level iswill producinge significant results., even if strict measurements are not practical.
ACF has been an active participant in cross-program efforts to develop broader indicators of child well-being, e.g., Trends in the Well-being of America’s Children and Youth; America’s Children: Key National Indicators of Well-being; Healthy People 2010 and the Children’s Indicators Consortium study. ACF is committed to working collaboratively with its partners in the refinement of these broader performance measures and the identification of annual performance targets. It has been challenging to identify cross-cuttingcross-cutting performance measures within ACF. Program data systems are operated by a diversity of grantee partners serving distinct populations. However, ACF has created networks, workgroups, and collaborative initiatives and events that cut across program boundaries and make major contributions to GPRA planning. For example, ACF has measures that link child carechild care and Head Start, and Head Start with health outcomes. Additionally, ACF’s Administration on Developmental Disabilities has GPRA measures that relate to housing, health services, employment and education. The Family Violence Prevention program has measures that focus on Tribes and the National Domestic Violence Hotline. Given that ACF measures have been developed in collaboration with partners, the consultation process outside of ACF has been extensive, though more so with ACF’s program partners, such as States and grantees, than with other Federal agencies. ACF works closely with Federal Departments such as Labor, Treasury, Housing and Urban Development, Education and Transportation in implementing, operating and improving welfare reform, early child development, child care, child support, and other programs. Consultation with Federal agencies outside of DHHS on specific GPRA performance plan issues has not been a formal or rigid process. Program-specific data and measurement issues, as well as differing statutes and populations served, make identical performance measures impractical. However, ACF has found that intensive consultation and coordination on program design and objectives provide a climate for close alignment among programs with similar goals. Performance measurement issues are central to cross-agency discussions, e.g., identifying State unemployment records as a data source for TANF performance measures. There has been extensive programmatic collaboration, including TANF and welfare-to-work grants with the Department of Labor; child care and Head Start with the Department of Education; and child support enforcement with the Departments of Justice, Treasury and Defense. These collaborations have helped develop results-oriented strategies that contribute to the success of performance goals. 1.4 Summary FY 2001 performance report: accountability through performance measurement ACF continues to make improvements in the performance measurement for its programs. For FY 2001, all ACF programs except the Assets for Independence program have performance measures. The number of measures and targets has increased from forty-seven measures in FY 1999 to sixty-fiveone measures in FY 2001. Data for eight additional measures dependent on Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey (FACES) will be available for the FY 2001/2002 cohort in FY 2002. As ACF continues to gain experience in performance measurement, measures are being refined, added, dropped and replaced. ACF reported FY 1999 data on forty five of the forty-seven measures in the FY 2001 Congressional Justification. (See Appendix A-54 for FY 1999 and 2000 for a summary of newly available performance data available that were). previously omitted in the FY 2000 report.) We still lack data for two FY 1999 CSBG measures. The table below illustrates ACF GPRA performance progress for FY 1999-2001. In FY 1999 and 2000, the first two years of our performance measurement program, ACF reported a substantial number of differences between targeted and actual performance. As we continue to work with our partners, many of our program measures and targets are being refined or revised. STATUS OF ACF FY 1999-2001 PERFORMANCE MEASURES
*Note: Includes performance, which is within 5% of estimated
target.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||