[Senate Report 114-71]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 127
114th Congress Report
1st Session SENATE 114-71
_______________________________________________________________________
.
TAXPAYERS RIGHT-TO-KNOW ACT
__________
R E P O R T
of the
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND
GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
to accompany
S. 282
TO PROVIDE TAXPAYERS WITH AN ANNUAL REPORT DISCLOSING THE COST AND
PERFORMANCE OF GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS AND AREAS OF DUPLICATION AMONG THEM,
AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
June 24, 2015.--Ordered to be printed
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin, Chairman
JOHN McCAIN, Arizona THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware
ROB PORTMAN, Ohio CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri
RAND PAUL, Kentucky JON TESTER, Montana
JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin
MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota
KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire CORY A. BOOKER, New Jersey
JONI ERNST, Iowa GARY C. PETERS, Michigan
BEN SASSE, Nebraska
Keith B. Ashdown, Staff Director
Christopher R. Hixon, Chief Counsel
Patrick J. Bailey, Chief Counsel for Governmental Affairs
Gabrielle D'Adamo Singer, Deputy Chief Counsel for Governmental Affairs
Sean C. Casey, Senior Professional Staff Member
Gabrielle A. Batkin, Minority Staff Director
John P. Kilvington, Minority Deputy Staff Director
Mary Beth Schultz, Minority Chief Counsel
Brian F. Papp, Jr., Minority Professional Staff Member
Laura W. Kilbride, Chief Clerk
C O N T E N T S
Page
I. Purpose and Summary..............................................1
II. Background and Need for the Legislation..........................1
III. Legislative History..............................................4
IV. Section-by-Section Analysis......................................5
V. Evaluation of Regulatory Impact..................................6
VI. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................6
VII. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............8
Calendar No. 127
114th Congress Report
SENATE
1st Session 114-71
======================================================================
TAXPAYERS RIGHT-TO-KNOW ACT
_______
June 24, 2015.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Johnson, from the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs, submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 282]
The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs, to which was referred the bill (S. 282), to provide
taxpayers with an annual report disclosing the cost and
performance of government programs and areas of duplication
among them, and for other purposes, having considered the same,
reports favorably thereon with an amendment in the nature of a
substitute and recommends that the bill, as amended, do pass.
I. Purpose and Summary
The purpose of S. 282, the Taxpayers Right-To-Know Act of
2015, is to provide the public with better and more useful
information on the breadth, cost, and performance of programs
administered by the federal government. It does so by refining
existing requirements under the Government Performance and
Results Modernization Act for agencies to create, update, and
make public an inventory of their programs. Specifically, by
providing a uniform definition of the term ``program,'' better
detailing the information agencies must provide, and requiring
the inclusion of financial and performance data about programs,
S. 282 will give the American taxpayers a much better sense of
the programs they are paying for and how those programs are
performing.
II. Background and the Need for Legislation
Over twenty years ago, Congress passed the Government
Performance and Results Act (GPRA) (P.L. 103-62), a law
premised on the belief that the regular and systemic
measurement and reporting of how government programs are
working will help those programs work better.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\See U.S. Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, Government
Performance and Results Act, 1993 (S. 20), Together with Dissenting and
Separate Views, (103 S. Rpt. 103-58), p. 2. The Committee on
Governmental Affairs is the former name of this Committee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
GPRA required agencies to take a number of steps to better
plan and budget for their activities. It also required agencies
to provide information about that planning and budgeting, so
that Congress had the data it needed when considering changes
to, or authorizing spending on, federal programs.\2\ GPRA
implementation, combined with other statutory efforts in the
1990s addressing long-standing management problems,\3\ has
provided a framework for developing and integrating information
about agencies' strategic priorities, the results-oriented
performance goals that flow from those priorities, performance
data showing the level of achievement of those goals, and the
relationship of reliable and audited financial information and
information technology investments to the achievement of those
goals.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\31 U.S.C. Sec. 1101 note, P.L. 103-62 Sec. 2(a)(3) and 2(b)(5).
\3\This includes the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990 (P.L.
111-204), as amended by the Government Management Reform Act of 1994
(P.L. 103-356), and information technology reform legislation,
including the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (P.L. 104-13) and the
Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-106).
\4\Government Accountability Office, Results-Oriented Government:
GPRA Has Established a Solid Foundation for Achieving Greater Results,
GAO-04-38, 25 (Mar. 10, 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
GPRA has led to some improvements in the federal
government's performance, but the implementation of GPRA has
also shown that the law's mandates need refinement. For
example, in 2010, Congress passed the Government Performance
and Results Modernization Act (GPRA Modernization Act).\5\ The
GPRA Modernization Act required the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) to provide government-wide priority goals,
required increased frequency and enhanced quality of agency
reporting, and required improved transparency of performance
reporting.\6\ Additionally, the GPRA Modernization Act required
OMB to publish information about programs identified by
agencies.\7\ This last provision required agencies to describe
the purposes of programs meeting OMB's inventory criteria,
explain how those programs contribute to the mission and goals
of the agency, and report the amount the program cost for the
current and two previous fiscal years.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\P.L. 111-352.
\6\31 U.S.C. Sec. 1115 (a)-(b), P.L. 111-352.
\7\31 U.S.C. Sec. 1122 (a).
\8\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The goal of the GPRA Modernization Act's program inventory
requirement was to facilitate coordination across agencies and
programs by making it easier for federal agencies and Congress
to find programs seeking to serve a shared goal. A program list
with detailed performance and financial information also has
the potential to assist Congress in comparing similar programs
across different agencies and assessing whether there is
duplication, overlap, fragmentation, or inefficiencies within
government programs. As the Government Accountability Office
(GAO) noted in its first annual report on duplication in 2010,
``needed information on program performance is not readily
available; the level of funding in agency budgets devoted to
overlapping or fragmented programs is not clear; and the
implementation costs that might be associated with program
consolidations or terminations, among other variables, are
difficult to predict.''\9\ Reviewing 44 duplicative employment
training programs in that same report, GAO explained that ``the
extent to which individuals receive the same services from
these programs is unknown due to program data
limitations.''\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\Government Accountability Office, Opportunities to Reduce
Potential Duplication in Government Programs, Save Tax Dollars, and
Enhance Revenue, GAO-11-318SP (Washington, D.C.: March, 2011) p. 3.
\10\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The first program inventory was published in May 2013 on
www.performance.gov, a website established by OMB.\11\ GAO
immediately expressed concern that the program inventory did
not meet the requirements of the GPRA Modernization Act and
that the inventory therefore would not enable Congress to
compare similar programs government-wide. In testimony before
this Committee, the Comptroller General of the United States,
Gene Dodaro, reported that GAO's preliminary review of the
inventories yielded concerns about the usefulness of the
information being developed and the extent to which it would
assist executive branch and congressional efforts to identify
and address fragmentation, overlap, and duplication.\12\ Among
the problems identified by GAO were OMB's guidance for
developing the inventories, which allowed agencies flexibility
to define their programs in various ways, including by
outcomes, customers, products/services, organization structure,
and budget structure. As a result, agencies--and even the
components within an agency--took different approaches to
define their programs. The variation in how agencies defined
their programs limited comparability among like programs.
Additionally, federal budget and cost information was not
available for all programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\Office of Management and Budget, OMB Circular No. A-11, Section
280--Federal Program Inventory (2014), available at https://
www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/a11_current_year/
s280.pdf.
\12\Statement of Gene Dodaro (Comptroller General of the United
States), Hearing before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs, Management Matters: Creating a 21st Century
Government, GAO-14-436T, 7 (Mar. 12, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Instead of requiring OMB to provide agencies with guidance
on how to define a program for the purposes of the program
inventory, S. 282 defines the term ``program,'' thereby
providing for uniformity of reporting. The Act also requires
agencies to identify and publish the specific statute
authorizing each program and any major regulations specific to
the program, and to provide links to any evaluation,
assessment, or program performance reviews by the agency, an
Inspector General, or the GAO for the preceding five years. For
any program that provides grants or other financial assistance
to individuals or entities, agencies are also required, to the
extent practical, to publish an estimate of the number of
individuals served by the program and beneficiaries who
received financial assistance under the program; an estimate of
the number of full-time equivalents who administer the program;
and the number of full-time equivalents who administer or
assist in administering the program whose salary is paid in
part or in full by the federal government through a grant,
contract, cooperative agreement, or another form of financial
award or assistance.
In addition to having a defined program list, the Committee
believes it is important for Congress and the public to have a
link to the program's performance information with its
financial information. To that end, the bill builds upon the
Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA),
landmark legislation authored by then-Senators Tom Coburn and
Barack Obama and signed into law in 2006 by President George W.
Bush that fundamentally changed the way that federal spending
was reported to the public,\13\ as well as the 2014 Digital
Accountability and Transparency Act (DATA Act).\14\ The DATA
Act requires the federal government to increase the
availability, accuracy, and usefulness of online information
regarding federal spending. Specifically, it requires federal
agencies to publish spending information online to cover
virtually all forms of government spending, mandates that the
information appear in a form that is both easily searchable and
downloadable, and makes uniform the manner in which agencies
provide such data for online posting. The Taxpayers Right-To-
Know Act would require that program inventories also include,
to the extent available, financial information for each object
class required to be reported under the DATA Act. When fully
enacted, the Taxpayers Right-to-Know Act will result in
detailed financial and performance information for most federal
programs, all in one place.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\31 U.S.C. Sec. 6101 note, P.L. 109-282.
\14\31 U.S.C. Sec. 6101, P.L. 113-101.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Taxpayers Right-To-Know Act was first introduced by
Senator Tom Coburn and then-Represenative James Lankford in
2011 to ensure that future program inventories will reflect
what this Committee and Congress envisioned when GPRA
Modernization was passed.\15\ The bill was reintroduced in 2013
by Senator Coburn, and a companion bill was offered by then-
Representative James Lankford.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\S. 1957 (112th Congress).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Legislative History
Senator James Lankford and six original cosponsors,
Senators Ayotte, Enzi, Heitkamp, Johnson, McCain, and
McCaskill, introduced S. 282, the Taxpayers Right-To-Know Act
of 2015, on January 28, 2015. The bill was referred to the
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Senators Gary Peters and Rob Portman joined as cosponsors on
February 5, 2015. Senator Rand Paul joined as a cosponsor on
April 30, 2015.
The Committee considered S. 282 at a business meeting on
May 6, 2015. During the meeting, one amendment was offered.
Senator Lankford offered a substitute amendment that delayed
implementation of the bill to accommodate OMB's ongoing
implementation of the DATA Act; set a one million dollar
threshold for inclusion of a program in an agency's program
inventory; modified the cost data provisions to reconcile them
with the DATA Act, which reports financial data under a
``program activity'' definition; and modified the provisions
dealing with estimates of the number of beneficiaries and full-
time equivalents to allow for exceptions where such estimates
are not practical. The amendment was adopted by voice vote with
Senators Johnson, McCain, Portman, Lankford, Ernst, Sasse,
Carper, McCaskill, Baldwin, Heitkamp, and Peters present.
The Committee ordered the bill, as amended, reported
favorably by voice vote en bloc on May 6, 2015. Senators
present for the vote on the bill were Senators Johnson, McCain,
Portman, Lankford, Ernst, Sasse, Carper, McCaskill, Baldwin,
Heitkamp, and Peters.
IV. Section-by-Section Analysis of the Bill, as Reported
Section 1: Short title
The short title of the bill is the ``Taxpayers Right-To-
Know Act.''
Section 2: Inventory of government programs
Definition of Program. This section adds a new paragraph to
Section 1122(a) of title 31, United States Code that defines
the term ``program'' for the purposes of 31 U.S.C. Sec. 1122
(the provision establishing the requirement for OMB to publish
an inventory of agency programs) as ``an organized set of
activities by one or more agencies directed toward a common
purpose or goal.''
Website and Program Inventory. This section amends Section
1122(a) of title 31, United States Code. It directs the OMB
Director to publish a program inventory that identifies each
program of the federal government for which there is more than
one million dollars in annual budget authority on the website
where performance information is posted pursuant to the
Government Performance and Results Modernization Act.
Additionally, this section requires the program inventory to
include: (1) any activity that is commonly referred to as a
program by a Federal agency in communications with Congress,
including any activity identified as a program in a budget
request; (2) any activity that is commonly referred to as a
program by a Federal agency in communications with the public,
including each program for which financial awards are made on a
competitive basis; and (3) any activity referenced in law as a
program after June 30, 2018.
The listing for each program must include an identification
of the program activities that are aggregated, disaggregated,
or consolidated as part of identifying each program, the amount
of funding for the current and preceeding two fiscal years for
each of the associated program activities, and to the extent
practicable, the amount of funding for the program based on a
pro rata share of its associated program activites. The listing
for each program must also state the specific statute that
authorizes the program and any major regulations specific to
the program.
Any program that provides grants or other financial
assistance to individuals or entities is also required to
include: a description of the individuals served by the program
and beneficiaries who received financial assistance under the
program, including an estimate of the number of individuals and
beneficiaries, to the extent practicable; a description of the
federal employees who administer the program, including the
number of full time equivalents who administer the program with
a pro rata estimate for full-time equivalents associated with
multiple programs and, to the extent practical, a description
of other individuals whose salary is paid in part or full by
the federal government through a grant, contract, cooperative
agreement, or another form of financial award or assistance who
administer or assist in any way in administering the program,
including the number of full-time equivalents, to the extent
practicable.
Programs listed in the program inventory must also include
web links to any evaluation, assessment, or program performance
reviews by the agency, an Inspector General, or the GAO that
was issued in the preceding five years.
Programs listed in the program inventory must also include,
to the extent practicable, financial and other information for
each program activity that is required to be reported under the
Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of
2006.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\31 U.S.C. Sec. 6101 note, P.L. 109-282.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
At the end of each fiscal year, the Director of the Office
of Management and Budget shall archive and preserve the
information included in the program inventory relating to that
fiscal year.
Finally, no later than February 1 of each fiscal year, the
Director of OMB must make publically available the total amount
of undisbursed grant funding remaining in expired grant
accounts for which the period of availability to the grantee
has expired.
Section 3: Guidance and implementation
Guidance. This section requires the OMB Director, not later
than June 30, 2017, to issue guidance that will assist agencies
in identifying the program activities listed in the president's
budget submission to Congress that correspond with programs
identified in the program inventory required by this
legislation. Additionally, the OMB Director is authorized to
issue guidance to agencies on how to more closely align
programs in the program inventory for purposes of the budget
that the President submits to Congress. Finally, the OMB
Director may, after submitting a notification to Congress,
exempt non-CFO Act agencies that have less than $10 million in
budget authority from the requirements of this Act.
Implementation. This section requires the provisions in
this legislation to be implemented no later than June 30, 2018.
V. Evaluation of Regulatory Impact
Pursuant to the requirements of paragraph 11(b) of rule
XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee has
considered the regulatory impact of this bill and determined
that the bill will have no regulatory impact within the meaning
of the rules. The Committee agrees with the Congressional
Budget Office's statement that the bill contains no
intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) and would impose no costs
on state, local, or tribal governments.
VI. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, May 22, 2015.
Hon. Ron Johnson,
Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, U.S.
Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 282, the Taxpayers
Right-To-Know Act.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Matthew
Pickford.
Sincerely,
Keith Hall,
Director.
Enclosure.
S. 282--Taxpayers Right-To-Know Act
Summary: S. 282 would amend federal law to increase the
amount of information about federal programs that the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) provides online. The legislation
would require that each program administered by a federal
agency be described on the agency's website, including the
number of people served by or benefiting from the program, the
number of federal employees and contract staff involved, and
links to reviews of the program including those by the
Government Accountability Office (GAO) and Inspectors General.
Based on information from several agencies, CBO estimates
that implementing S. 282 would cost $82 million over the 2016-
2020 period, assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts.
Enacting S. 282 could affect direct spending by some agencies
(such as the Tennessee Valley Authority) because they are
authorized to use receipts from the sale of goods, fees, and
other collections to cover their operating costs. Therefore,
pay-as-you-go procedures apply. Because most of those agencies
can make adjustments to the amounts collected, CBO estimates
that any net changes in direct spending by those agencies would
not be significant. Enacting the bill would not affect
revenues.
S. 282 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
and would not affect the budgets of state, local, or tribal
governments.
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated
budgetary impact of S. 282 is shown in the following table. The
costs of this legislation fall within all budget functions that
include spending on administrative activities for government
programs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
-------------------------------------------------------------
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2016-2020
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------
CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
Estimated Authorization Level........... 0 3 30 30 20 83
Estimated Outlays....................... 0 2 30 30 20 82
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that the
bill will be enacted near the end of fiscal year 2015, that the
necessary amounts will be appropriated each year, and that
spending will follow historical patterns for federal salaries
and expenses.
Under current law, agencies regularly produce information
on program management, budgets, strategic plans, and annual
performance. Under the Government Performance and Results Act
(GPRA) agencies are required to describe every program they
administer. Under the Digital Accountability and Transparency
Act of 2014 (DATA Act) agencies are required to make
information on all federal spending more accessible and
transparent to the public. Consequently, CBO expects that some
of the provisions in S. 282 would slightly modify current
requirements.
However, the legislation also would expand the definition
of a federal program and require agencies to list all the
programs, their funding levels, the number of beneficiaries of
the programs, and link each program to all related evaluations,
assessments, performance reviews, or government reports
(including GAO and Inspectors General reports). The Catalog of
Federal Domestic Assistance lists more than 2,200 federal
programs, projects, services, and activities that provide
assistance or benefits to the public, although some programs
may be listed more than once.
Based on information from OMB and selected agencies about
the costs to implement GPRA and the DATA Act, CBO estimates
that assembling such information about each government activity
that provides benefits or services to the public would cost
each of the 26 major agencies about $1 million a year plus a
few million dollars a year to cover such costs for the many
smaller federal agencies. Those costs would not begin until
after OMB provided guidance to agencies to identify the
programs and develop the necessary information for posting. CBO
estimates that OMB would spend $3 million to develop that
guidance. CBO expects that agency costs to comply with the
bill's requirements would decline soon after the initial
reports were developed.
Pay-As-You-Go considerations: The Statutory Pay-As-You-Go
Act of 2010 establishes budget-reporting and enforcement
procedures for legislation affecting direct spending or
revenues. Enacting S. 282 could affect direct spending by some
agencies (such as the Tennessee Valley Authority) because they
are authorized to use receipts from the sale of goods, fees,
and other collections to cover their operating costs.
Therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures apply. Because most of
those agencies can adjust the amounts collected, CBO estimates
that any net changes in direct spending by those agencies would
not be significant. Enacting the bill would not affect
revenues.
Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: S. 282
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as
defined in UMRA and would not affect the budgets of state,
local, or tribal governments.
Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Matthew Pickford;
Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Paige Piper/
Bach; Impact on the Private Sector: Jon Sperl.
Estimate approved by: Theresa Gullo, Assistant Director for
Budget Analysis.
VII. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by
S. 282 as reported are shown as follows (existing law proposed
to be omitted is enclosed in brackets, new matter is printed in
italic, and existing law in which no change is proposed is
shown in roman).
TITLE 31--MONEY AND FINANCE
* * * * * * *
Subtitle II--The Budget Process
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 11--THE BUDGET AND FISCAL, BUDGET, AND PROGRAM INFORMATION
* * * * * * *
SEC. 1122. TRANSPARENCY OF PROGRAMS, PRIORITY GOALS, AND RESULTS.
(a) Transparency of Agency Programs.--
(1) Definition of program.--For purposes of this
subsection, the term `program' means an organized set
of activities by 1 or more agencies directed toward a
common purpose or goal.
[(1)](2) [In general.--Not later than October 1,
2012, the Office of Management and Budget shall]
Website and program inventory.--The Director of the
Office of Management and Budget shall--
(A) ensure the effective operation of a
single website;
(B) at a minimum, update the website on a
quarterly basis; and
[(C) include on the website information about
each program identified by the agencies.]
(C) include on the website----
(i) a program inventory that shall
identify each program of the Federal
Government for which there is more than
$1,000,000 in annual budget authority,
which shall include--
(I) any activity that is
commonly referred to as a
program by a Federal agency in
communications with Congress,
including any activity
identified as a program in a
budget request;
(II) any activity that is
commonly referred to as a
program by a Federal agency in
communications with the public,
including each program for
which financial awards are made
on a competitive basis; and
(III) any activity referenced
in law as a program after June
30, 2018; and
(ii) for each program identified in
the program inventory, the information
required under paragraph (3).
[(2)](3) Information.--Information for each program
[described under paragraph (1)] identified in the
program inventory required under paragraph (2) shall
include--
[(A) an identification of how the agency
defines the term ``program'', consistent with
guidance provided by the Director of the Office
of Management and Budget, including the program
activities that are aggregated, disaggregated,
or consolidated to be considered a program by
the agency;]
(A) an identification of the program
acitivities that are aggregated, disaggregated,
or consolidated as part of identifying
programs;
(B) for each program activity described in
subparagraph (A), the amount of funding for the
current fiscal year and previous 2 fiscal
years;
(C) to the maximum extent practicable, the
amount of funding for each program, determined
using the pro rata share of the program
activities that are aggregated, disaggregated,
or consolidated as part of identifying
programs;
[(B)](D) a description of the purposes of the
program and the contribution of the program to
the mission and goals of the agency; [and]
[(C) an identification of funding for the
current fiscal year and previous 2 fiscal
years.;]
(E) an identification of the statutes that
authorize the program and any major regulations
specific to the program;
(F) for any program that provides grants or
other financial assistance to individuals or
entities, for the most recent fiscal year--
(i) a description of the individuals
served by the program and beneficiares
who received financial assistance under
the program, including an estimate of
the number of individuals and
beneficiaries, to the extent
practicable;
(ii) for each program for which the
head of an agency determines it is not
practicable to provide an estimate of
the number of individuals and
beneficiares served by the program--
(I) an explanation of why
data regarding the number of
such individuals and
beneficiaries cannot be
provided; and
(II) a discussion of the
measures that could be taken to
gather the data required to
provide such an estimate; and
(iii) a description of--
(I) the Federal employees who
administer the program,
including the number of full-
time equivalents with a pro
rata estimate of full-time
equivalents associated with
multiple programs; and
(II) other individuals whose
salary is paid in part or full
by the Federal Government
through a grant, contract,
cooperative agreement, or
another form of financial award
or assistance who administer or
assist in any way in
administering the program,
including the number of full-
time equivalents, to the extent
practicable;
(G) links to any evaluation, assessment, or
program performance reviews by the agency, an
Inspector General, or the Government
Accountability Office (including program
performance reports required under section
1116) released during the preceding 5 years;
and
(H) to the extent practicable, financial and
other information for each program activity
required to be reported under the Federal
Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of
2006 (31 U.S.C. 6101 note).
(4) Archiving.--After the end of each fiscal year,
the Director of the Office of Management and Budget
shall archive and preserve the information included in
the program inventory required under paragraph (2)
relating to that fiscal year.
* * * * * * *