ADMINISTRATION for CHILDREN and FAMILIES

FY 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

The Administration for Children and Families (ACF), within the Department of Health and Human Services, administers programs which promote the economic and social well-being of children, youth, and families focusing particular attention on vulnerable populations including low-income children, refugees, Native Americans, and the developmentally disabled.

February 2002

Office of Planning Research and Evaluation
Administration for Children and Families

Contact Person: Mary Ann MacKenzie (202) 401-5272

Web address: http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/opre

Preface

Executive Summary

Part I: Agency Context For Performance Measurement

1.1 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 Assessment

Strategic Goal 1: Increase Economic Independence And Productivity For Families

1.  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 Youth

5.   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 Tribes

8.   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 Organization

9.  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 PLAN

A.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:

Preface

The 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

Purpose

The 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 ACF

With 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 Families

Our 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 Goals

VISION STATEMENT

We 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 STATEMENT

The 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

• Increase economic independence and productivity for families
• Improve healthy development, safety and well-being of children and youth
• Increase the health and prosperity of communities and Tribes
• Build a results-oriented organization

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 Measurement

1.1 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.)

• Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant promotes work, responsibility and self-sufficiency and strengthens families through funding of State and Tribal-designed and administered programs that provide support to needy children and move their parents into work (administered by Office of Family Assistance and Tribal TANF administered by the Office of Community Services).
• Developmental Disabilities enhances the ability of persons with developmental disabilities to live, work and play in their communities through supporting State and other programs that develop, coordinate and stimulate permanent improvement in service systems, with priority to those whose needs are not otherwise met under other health, education and human services programs (administered by Administration on Developmental Disabilities).
• Refugee Resettlement assists refugees and entrants who are admitted into the United States to become employed and self-sufficient as quickly as possible, providing grants to States and other grantees for employment-related services, social adjustment, transitional cash and medical assistance, and other services (administered by Office of Refugee Resettlement).
• Social Services Block Grant (SSBG) supports a variety of social services tailored to supplement State investments in the self-sufficiency and well being of low-income populations. SSBG funds also help improve and integrate services, create community-based partnerships, and stimulate innovations (administered by Office of Community Services).
• Assets for Independence Demonstration Program establishes demonstration projects to determine the effects of providing an incentive to accumulate assets in individual development accounts to low-income individuals and families to increase their economic self-sufficiency (administered by Office of Community Services).
• Child Support locates parents, establishes paternity and support obligations and modifies and enforces those obligations to assure financial support is available to children. This work is done through State agencies that administer the program (administered by Office of Child Support Enforcement).
• Child Care provides grants to States to assist low-income working families who need child care that is safe, affordable and of high quality (administered by Child Care Bureau).
• Head Start provides comprehensive child development services to children and families, primarily for preschoolers from low-income families through grants to local public and private nonprofit agencies (administered by Head Start Bureau).
• Child Welfare funds State programs that assist at-risk children and their families in achieving safety, permanence, and well-being through preventive interventions to strengthen the family unit; foster care and adoption assistance to move children more rapidly from foster care to safe, permanent homes; and reunification services to return the child to the home if in the child's best interest (administered by Children’s Bureau).
• Youth Programs support local agencies, that provide shelter, improve life prospects, and reduce high-risk behavior and sexual abuse of runaway, homeless and street youth, providing alternative activities, safe passages, and the tools needed to move successfully to adulthood. A major focus is on disseminating best practices and building partnerships in all areas of positive youth development (administered by Family and Youth Services Bureau).
• Community Services Block Grant provides an array of social services and programs through flexible block grant funding at the State and local level to assist low-income individuals and alleviate the causes and conditions of poverty (administered by Office of Community Services).
• Family Violence Prevention Program supports state and local programs and projects to prevent family violence and provides immediate shelter and assistance for the victims of family violence and their dependents through grants to States and State domestic violence coalitions for Battered Women's Shelters; and funds the Domestic Violence Hotline and national resource centers (administered by Office of Community Services).
• Low-Income Home Energy Assistance assists low income households meet the costs of heating and cooling their homes, through block grants and emergency contingency funds to States, Indian Tribes, and insular areas which target assistance to low-income households with high energy burdens and vulnerable members (administered by Office of Community Services).
• Native Americans Programs promote economic and social self-sufficiency of American Indians, Alaskan Natives, Native Hawaiians, and Native Pacific Islanders by supporting programs and encouraging local strategies in economic and social development (administered by Administration for Native Americans).

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:

10. Moving families into work and promoting success at work after families enter the work force (job retention and earnings progress) by ensuring that needed supports (e.g., training, child care, child support, transportation, health care coverage, and supports for special needs including substance abuse and mental health, disabilities, domestic violence, rural and inner city communities) are available;
11. Rewarding success through the High Performance Bonus (HPB), following up with States awarded HPB to identify promising strategies to improve performance;
12. Providing technical assistance through contracts and grants including a Peer Technical Assistance Network that provides support to States and localities to share expertise and proven experiences;
13. Sponsoring rigorous evaluations to determine what strategies are most effective in moving families to work, sustaining them in work and assisting them to advance; and
14. Collaborating and providing outreach to key Federal partners for improving program integration, e.g., Department of Labor, Department of Education, Internaland Internal Revenue Service.

Working in partnership with States, ACF provides resources and tools to increase parental responsibility through the Child Support Enforcement program. Examples include:

• Providing Federal match for State administrative expenditures and enhanced match for Statewide automated systems;
• Incentive funding provided to States based on a combination of cost effectiveness of programs and levels of paternity establishment, order establishment, current support collections, and payment of arrears cases;
• Providing quality data to enhance the ability of States to pursue cases both within and between States and to report progress more accurately;
• Expanding the Federal Parent Locator Service including a database of new hires and child support cases to assist States in locating parents and obtaining support through wage withholding; and
• Implementing the Federal Tax Refund/Administrative Offset program to offset income tax refunds and selected Federal benefits payments to child support obligors.

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:

• Expanding partnerships in support of early care and education to build capacity both in the field and among Federal staff;

• Expanding partnerships with States and among early childhood programs to improve quality in early care and education;
• Expanding the number of infants and toddlers being served by quality early childhood programs; and
• Conducting research to help improve services and demonstrate the impact of quality early care and education programs.

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:

1. Expanding partnerships with State child care programs, other early childhood programs and other State and local social service agencies;
2. Improving information and management systems, e.g., the annual Program Information Report which tracks program participation statistics such as the age of children, the kind of education program they receive, and medical, dental and mental health services the children receive;
3. Improving Head Start training and technical assistance networks and quality improvement centers which provide support for programs enrolling infants, toddlers, pregnant women and foster collaboration between community agencies, governments, academic institutions and Head Start programs; and
4. Improving evaluation efforts to measure the impact of Head Start and Early Head Start on children and families.

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:

• Implementing the Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) and the Multiethnic Placement Act (MEPA) to ensure that children are safe and that foster care is viewed as a temporary arrangement. An important provision of the Adoption and Safe Families Act is the requirement that the DHHS, in consultation with States and experts in the field, identify a national set of outcome measures that can be used to gauge State and national progress in reaching these goals, and to report on these outcomes in an annual report to the Congress. The Department published the final list of child welfare outcome measures in the Federal Register on August 20, 1999.
• Increasing capacity at the State and Federal levels to improve the safety, permanency and well-being of children through outcome-based monitoring, identification of problems and corrective action;
• Increasing data collection, analysis and reporting to better support policy development and allocation of resources;
• Implementing the new Chaffee Independent Living Program in a way that moves the youth agenda described in the action plan, A National Blueprint for Youth, forward and assists young people in their transition to successful adulthood; and
• Publishing a final rule in the Federal Register in January 2000 to establish new approaches to monitoring State child welfare programs that promote 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.

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:

• Matching these funds and others from State and local levels to support training at national, State, Tribal and regional association conferences;
• Development and use of special implementation tools such as manuals and scales for incremental measurement at the individual, family and community levels;
• Using surveys and survey methodology and electronically-provided economic and demographic mapping data at the neighborhood level; and
• Providing reporting tools and specific on-site consultative technical assistance efforts.

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:

• ACF has two key strategies in place for the next five years to (1) improve and expand our capacity to provide high quality, cost-effective and efficient services to meet customer needs and expectations and (2) use state-of-the-art information technology to improve management and data systems. Initiatives underway to accomplish these strategies include:Partnering with other Federal Agencies to support the Government-wide Federal Commons project where potential grantees will be able to apply for grant funds through a single portal on the Internet;
• Investing in internal systems improvement and technology so that current and potential ACF grantees can apply for grant funds through our On-Line Data Collection Internet access;
• Investing and expanding initiatives in human resources and skill training to replace staff lost to attrition, hiring the most qualified candidates in key programs areas, and aligning the workforce with our goals and priorities;
• Providing support to the agency to implement diversity and minority initiatives that help us achieve diversity objectives that reflect all groups including our most under-represented populations;
• Identifying crosscuttingcross-cutting work processes with needed core and technical competencies for the next three to five years and developing a training strategy to improve the core competency skills through cross-program training and implementation of individual employee training plans; and
• Investing in systems improvement and technology so that ACF staff have the capacity to move forward in a working environment which increasingly requires that all employees have access to and use of the Internet as an integral part of day-to-day agency operations.

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.
**Youth is unable to report on bracketed number of FY 2001 measures because of changes in data systems and definitions of measures.

As of February 2002, we are able to report on forty-five of the fifty-two 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 included in subsequent performance reportsreports, as they become available.

The reader will note that many FY 1999 and FY 2000 measures have been replaced and targets adjusted in subsequent performance plans. The individual program summary sections explain the difference between targets and actual achievements. As more trend data are collected, ACF will be better able to evaluate program strategies and adjust future performance targets.

Performance Commitment

GPRA has become an integral part of the everyday operation of the agency. ACF has been managing toward results since the early 1990’s. In 1995, it instituted "Achieving Success: Trends and Targets,," an annual report on a number of critical program measures which included goals for major programs, identified data sources and provided initial baselines and trend data later used with partners at the State and local community level in identifying achievable targets. This report, first released in FY 1996 and updated annually through FY 1998, was part of a continuing commitment to share progress with partners, stakeholders, customers and the general public. Although many of these measures and targets have changed as a result of recent legislation and the creation of new programs, this summary data proved useful in assessing past performance.

ACF’s leadership has made a commitment toward to "stretch goals" to encourage programs towards measurably higher achievement, within realistic bounds. As this effort is still in its early stages across government, continued experience should improve the relationship between planned targets and actual results. Over time, ACF will have more trend data, which will help in setting and adjusting targets. In a few programs, such as TANF and child support, goal achievement is linked by program statute to incentives and sanctions. In these cases, the process has been driven by a concern for realistic measures. Where an incentives system is not a factor, programs have been encouraged to identify more ambitious increase targets with the understanding that shortfalls in achievement will be informative for assessing whether the target has been set too aggressively andor what corrective actions should be taken.

Summary of Performance Success

ACF’s performance measures include incentives and increased expectations for single parents to gain employment; initiatives that ensure that children receive the support due from an absent parent; incentives to States to provide necessary supports to families to sustain their participation in the workforce and to provide quality child care; and efforts to find adoptive homes for children who need them. As a result, children and families are achieving greater family stability and economic security.

In 1997, seven priority results were selected from the performance plan to serve as a framework for articulating our mission-critical objectives across organizational boundaries and focusing work to achieve outcomes. These priority results included future-oriented, outcome-driven statements that challenged ACF staff to innovate and collaborate in seven areas: welfare reform, child support, child care, infants and toddlers, Head Start, child welfare and increasing our capacity to work with our partners. These priority results provide senior staff with targeted opportunities to collaborate on a number of selected mission-critical cross-cuttingcross-cutting activities.

In FY 1999, ACF launched a performance-based work planning system that incorporated the collective and individual responsibilities of ACF's leadership team to track agency-wide results. This work planning system linked each senior executive's performance directly to the seven priority areas accomplished under the work plans. The Priority Work Plans (also called Results Maps) wereare based on the outcomes identified in the performance plan for each priority area. ACF executives met as a group and with their staffs to refine targets, strategies and activities and identified clear, distinct roles and responsibilities required for effective accomplishment of each priority result. The Priority Work Plans (Results Maps) providedhave been an invaluable tool for linking operational plans more closely with specific strategies, outcomes and results. In October 2000, three additional priority areas (youth, Tribal programs and domestic violence) were identified.

In FY 2002, ACF leadership identified a number of key priorities to provide targeted opportunities for all programs to collaborate on selected mission-critical cross-cutting activities. Many of these priorities are included in the President’s FY 2003 budget.

• Fatherhood: Helping men become responsible, committed, involved fathers.
• Healthy Marriage: Helping couples who choose marriage for themselves to develop the skills and knowledge to form and sustain healthy marriages.
• Faith-based/Community Initiatives: Removing barriers to the full participation of faith-based and other community services in the delivery of social services.
• Positive Youth Development: Promoting ongoing relationships with adult role models; safe places with structured activities, healthy life styles; opportunities to acquire marketable skills and opportunities for commuity service and civic participation.
• Next Phase of Welfare Reform: Expanding welfare reform efforts to meet all four goals of the original legislation; identifying gaps and changes required to move the welfare reform agenda forward.
• Enhancing Early Literacy of Children: Improving the pre-reading and numeracy skills of young children to improve school readiness.
• Rural Initiative: Strengthening rural families and communities.
• Prevention: Dedicating resources to prevent the need for intervention services.
• One Department: Unifying systems, improving management of financial and physical assets, consolidating resources, eliminating duplication and restructuring the workforce to streamline and provide enhanced, citizen-centered services.

The Assistant Secretary for ACF entered into a results-oriented performance agreement with the Secretary of DHHS for FY 2002. Thirty-three measures in the performance agreement are based on the FY 2002 performance plan. The Assistant Secretary will be entering into similar agreements with political and career senior leaders as a way of setting clear expectations and rewarding good performance.

Our focus on crosscuttingcross-cutting program strategies with increased emphasis on performance has produced measurable improvements, such as:

• The number of TANF recipients who have become newly employed has increased; wages have increased (measures 1.1c-e) and child care supports have been developed to enable parents to carry out the dual responsibilities of raising their children and providing economically for their families.
• The Child Care and Development Fund served an additional 36400,000 children since FY 1998 (measures 4.1a and 5.1);
• Forty-one States reported significant improvement in wages for refugees and in percentage of full-time job placements with health benefits (measure 1.43b);
• Child support collections have more than doubled between 1992 and 20010; (measure 3.1c);
• There has been a substantial increase in the number of adoptions since 1996 (measure 7.1f); the proportion of the children being reunified in less than one year is increasing (measure 7.1c); and the FY 2000 target for adoptions by relatives was reached (measure 7.1k); and
• Head Start children are better prepared to enter school (measures 5.2a-e).

Rewarding Performance: The recent legislative environment has supported a focus on results, in part through enactment of statutory bonus provisions based on performance. For example, the Child Support Performance and Incentive Act of 1998 put in place a performance-based incentive system that rewards States for their performance on five measures: paternity establishment, orders obtained, collection of current support, collection of past- due support and cost effectiveness. In addition, the Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) created the Adoption Incentive program, under which States receive incentive funds tied to their success in increasing the number of children adopted from the foster care system. The TANF statute contains a High Performance Bonus (HPB) provision which rewards States that are most successful in achieving the purposes of the TANF program. Further, the TANF statute rewards up tothe five States with the largest decrease in their ratio of non-marital births to total births, provided that these States also show a decrease in their abortion rate relative to 1995.

Focus on Results: In FY 2000, ACF announced a number of awards to programs and partners which exemplify ACF’s focus on resultspartners, which exemplify ACF’s focus on results, and pursuit of excellence. In February 2000, the Office of Child Support Enforcement received the Hammer Award (given to government agencies that demonstrate innovation) for its success in collecting delinquent child support payments through the National Directory of New Hires. Federal and State child support enforcement programs set new records in nationwide collections in fiscal year 20000, reaching $177.9 billion, more than doubling the amount collected in 1992. The DHHS announced the third annual Adoption 2002 Excellence awards to individuals and organizations for giving abandoned, neglected, or abused children a loving family and a safe and nurturing home. These awards included unprecedented financial incentives to States to increase adoptions, put the safety of children first in placement decisions and set swifter time frames for permanent placement decisions. In December 2000, ACF awarded $200 million in TANF high performance bonuses to the 28 States with the best records in moving parents on welfare into jobs and in sustaining their success in the workforce. This was the second year in which these bonuses were awarded.

ACF selected four core measures as High Impact Agency goals to be achieved byin FY 2000, part of a government-wide effort to focus on results. The establishment of these goals has more intensively focused our efforts with partners and providedhas proven to be an incentive for improving State management and administrative data systems. These four measures included the following target information in the final status report:

1. Increase self-sufficiency for low-income families by moving one million welfare recipients into new employment by FY 2000.

For FY 1998, 46 states reported 1.3 million job entries, substantially exceeding the goal in only one year; and in FY 1999, 48 States and the District of Columbia reported 1.2 million job entries. (completed)

• Increase parents’ financial support for their children by increasing the amount of total child support collections to $20.8 billion by October 2000, an increase of 75% over FY 1996 and 160% over FY 1992.

$17.9 billion in collections were received in total child support for FY 2000. (completed)

• By 2000, consistent with the adoption goal for 2002, increase the number of children who are adopted from the public foster care system to 46,000.

Adoptions increased from 28,000 in FY 1996 to 46,000 in FY 1999. (completed)

• Streamline more than 30 separate grant programs into a single comprehensive system of electronic processing and transfers to benefit grantees by more timely and efficient grants processing, more accurate data, less down time and enabling quicker start-up. This improvement corrected the Year 2000 programming flaw embedded in current grant programs.

Thirty-seven systems were replaced by a single comprehensive system of electronic processing. (completed)

Summary of performance challenges

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. Over the past several years, ACF changed the way it measures the success of programs and implemented a major shift in the way it does business with partners. A changing role with States and grantees allowed ACF to re-examine the culture of the agency in ways that accelerated major reforms in many programs. In order to focus on results, ACF continues to to work on updateing performance measures, targets and information and strengthening partnerships with States and grantees. by continuing to develop agreed-upon goals, measures and targets. Creating a mature set of performance goals and data collection strategies is a high priority. It takes considerable time to bring partners to the table, develop shared priorities and goals, address weaknesses in data collection and determine an optimum set of measures.

Data Issues: ACF relies on State administrative data systems for performance reporting, because States and local community organizations administer most of our programs. For many programs, final reports are due ninety to 120 days after the fiscal year ends. In some cases, for example, in TANF where earnings gains are measured over a 9-month period after an individual obtains a job, the period is even longer. This time lag in receiving and validating data reports on actual achievements makes it difficult to provide a comprehensive summary of FY 2001 performance until late in FY 2002. The lack of readily available information and the restrictions on data collection inhibit performance measurement. Additionally, many of our programs rely on voluntary data reports, e.g., LIHEAP, Child Care, TANF, CSBG, and ADD. Fluctuations in the number of States and grantees reporting and the flexibility allowed in selecting measures continue to make the collection of consistent, reliable and verifiable data extremely challenging. Detailed information on program-specific data issues and requirements for data validation and verification are addressed in each of the fourteen program sections. Appendix A.7 has detailed information on availability of State and grantee administrative data. ACF is currently working with the DHHS Data Council to assess unmet data needs for our major programs. ACF is committed to making additional investments in data collection and information systems.

Part II: Program Planning And Assessment

ACF's program efforts are carried out through partnership with the State, Territorial, local and Tribal governments and non-profit/private sector grantees that implement its programs. Social research, demonstration and evaluation programs are directed at developing reliable knowledge to support program policies, learning about effects on children and families, identifying paths to program quality improvement, and discovering better ways to conduct technical assistance, disseminate information, and deliver effective services.

Performance goals have been stated under the program sections throughout the eight strategic program objectives and fourtwo management improvement objectives in this plan. This approach continues to provide a framework for individual programs and program activities to collaborate and direct their efforts to achieve ACF-wide crosscuttingcross-cutting program goals. This framework enables ACF partners in State, Territorial, Tribal and local governments and nonprofit and private agencies to use the various program resources within ACF to focus on early childhood enrichment and economic and social well-being and productivity of families. "Data sources" under the various measures refer to OMB-approved program data collection instruments. The programs that support each of the goals and objectives are listed below:

Strategic Goal 1: Increase economic independence and productivity for families

2. Increase employment

3. Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
   Developmental Disabilities: Employment
   Refugee Resettlement
   Social Services Block Grant

4. Increase independent living

5. Developmental Disabilities: Housing
   Assets for Independence

6. Increase parental responsibility

7. Child Support

8. Increase affordable child care

Child Care: Affordability

Strategic Goal 2: Improve healthy development, safety and well-being of children and youth

6. Increase the quality of child care to promote childhood development

7. Child Care: Quality
   Head Start

8. Improve the health status of children

9. Head Start: Health Status

10. Increase safety, permanency, and well-being of children and youth

Child Welfare
Developmental Disabilities: Education
Developmental Disabilities: Health
Youth Programs

Strategic Goal 3: Increase the health and prosperity of communities and Tribes

9. Build healthy, safe and supportive communities and Tribes

Community Services Block Grant
Family Violence Prevention Program
Low-Income Home Energy Assistance
Native Americans Programs

Strategic Goal 4: Build a results-oriented organization

10. Develop and retain a highly skilled, strongly motivated stafff
11. Improve automated data and management systems
12. Streamline ACF organizational layers
13. Ensure financial management accountability

In most cases, baselines have been established in either FY 1998 or FY 1999 for the FY 2003 measures. ACF is largely dependent upon State administrative systems for collecting performance data which results in substantial delay in the availability of data for many of the ACF State grant programs for the current reporting period. ACF is developing a plan to identify the obstacles to publish data in a more timely manner. In Section A.86 of the Appendix, a budget table has been provided in which performance goals and measures for each of the twelveen strategic objectives are included. The relationship between these goals and the mission of DHHS as reflected in the DHHS Strategic Plan is shown in the table in Section A.3 of the Appendix.

Program research and evaluations focus on measuring and understanding the impacts of ACF programs on children and families. They provide information to design and improve the results of those programs, and inform performance measurement methodologies. (A table listing selected evaluations is included in Section A.6 of the Appendix.)

Because ACF is interested in trends of improvement over time, measured against a carefully-chosen starting point, many (though not all) of the baselines in the following section are likely to remain the same in subsequent annual editions of this plan, rather than rolling forward to a new baseline year. Such baseline stability is important sinceif, for example, the baseline year has been selected tobecause it indicates with reliable data when a new program initiative, statute or rule begins to have a measurable effect.

Strategic Goal 1: Increase Economic Independence And Productivity For Families

Rationale

Economic independence and self-sufficiency are central to families being able to lead stable and productive lives. Achieving this goal requires assisting welfare-dependent individuals and recently arrived refugees to obtain and maintain employment within the context of work requirements and time-limited assistance. Strategies to increase earnings and income, through activities such as child support enforcement, and supports for work, such as affordable child care, are critical to assuring that children are not living in poverty and that they are adequately cared for while their parent(s) are working.

The job market, economic cycles, changing demographics, and the mores of family formation and child bearing (e.g., rates of divorce which create the need for child support or the incidence of out-of-wedlock teen pregnancies which increase the caseloads of hard-to-serve welfare recipients) influence outcomes under this goal. Such economic and social factors influence parents' ability to find work, meet their family's needs and support obligations, and achieve self-sufficiency.

For nearly all the "economic independence" programs, State welfare reform decisions have had a significant impact on program directions and results. ACF is constantly in dialogue with its partners to learn their objectives and share knowledge about practices that improve results.

The objectives and major program areas under this goal are:

1.Increase employment

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
Developmental Disabilities: Employment
Refugee Resettlement
Social Services Block Grant (SSBG)

2.Increase independent living2.Increase independent living

Developmental Disabilities: Housing
Assets for Independence

3.Increase parental responsibility

Child Support

4.Increase affordable child care

Child Care

1.Increase employment

Approach for the Strategic Objective: Increase employment and economic independence by reducing reliance on public welfare programs, providing job training and encouraging job creation. Focus on the abilities and skills of individuals, enabling them to move toward self-sufficiency and to pursue jobs in their communities.

1.1 TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE FOR NEEDY FAMILIES

Program Description, Context, Legislative Intent and Broad Program Goals

"The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996," (PRWORA) was enacted in 1996--a comprehensive, bipartisan welfare reform plan that dramatically changed the nation's welfare system into one that requires work in exchange for time-limited assistance. The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program replaced the former Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training (JOBS) and Emergency Assistance (EA) programs, ending the Federal entitlement to assistance. In TANF, States and Territories operate programs, and Tribes have the option to run their own programs. States, Territories and Tribes each receive a block grant allocation with a requirement on States to maintain a historical level of State spending known as Maintenance of Effort (MOE). The block grant covers benefits, administrative expenses, and services. States, Territories and Tribes determine eligibility and benefit levels and services provided to needy families.

In FY 2003, the Administration seeks to reauthorize and fund the following pre-appropriated activities originally authorized under PRWORA as part of the TANF program at the levels included under current law: Family Assistance Grants to States; Tribes and Territories; Matching Grants to Territories; Bonus to Reward High Performance States; and Tribal Work Programs. Both the Contingency Fund and Supplemental Grants for Population Increases would be reinstated. In addition, a new Technical Assistance, Research and Family Formation Fund would be established. The reauthorization proposal would eliminate the bonus to reward decreases in illegitimacy in order to better focus efforts on the TANF goals addressing family formation and marriage.

The FY 2003 budget includes a request for $100 million to fund a number of activities primarily targeted to the TANF goals of family formation, marriage and illegitimacy reduction. To date, little effort or funding has been devoted to these key TANF goals by the States. Activities would address best practices in family formation including illegitimacy reduction, marriage promotion, marriage counselling, domestic violence prevention, anger management and child well-being.

ACF provides leadership to help States, Territories and Tribes as they design and implement their programs and move families from welfare to work, while protecting the well-being of children through child care and other services. PRWORA gives States great flexibility to design their TANF programs in ways that promote work, responsibility, and self-sufficiency and strengthen families. The law limits the area that the Federal government may regulate. States may use TANF funding in any manner "reasonably calculated to accomplish the purposes of TANF." These purposes are: to provide assistance to needy families so that children can be cared for in their own homes; to reduce dependency by promoting job preparation, work and marriage; to prevent out-of-wedlock pregnancies; and to encourage the formation and maintenance of two-parent families.

Changing welfare as we know it has not only meant changing the welfare rules, it has also meant changing the way ACF and State welfare agencies plan and do business. Just as the welfare objective has shifted from income maintenance to work and self-sufficiency, so the way we plan for the welfare program has shifted from oversight of States’ check-producing operations to establishing measures and targets for assessing ACF and our partners' success in achieving our strategic goals. The nation has an enormous stake in this new approach to public assistance. ACF is committed to working with States to promote work, personal responsibility, and self-sufficiency in ways that will strengthen families.

To date, there are many positive results from these changes. Record numbers of people are moving from welfare to work. Retention rates are promising. All States met the overall work participation requirements in FY 2000. Welfare caseloads have fallen to historic new lows. Nationwide the rolls have fallen by more than half, from over 12 million in August 1996 to 5.4 million in June 2001. But the job is far from do