Encourage Legislative Branch Program Design

Encourage the Strengthening of Program Design in the Legislative Branch

To enhance congressional program design performance, the PMC should:

--work with the Congressional Research Service (CRS) to include
consideration of program design concepts in all relevant training and
materials provided by CRS; and

--encourage the participation of CRS, key congressional staff, the
Congressional Budget Office (CBO), and the General Accounting Office
(GAO) in program design courses that are developed under the next action
(DES04).

Many, if not most, federal programs originate in Congress. Yet program
design as a concept or a function is given scant attention there. Among
the offices that participate in the preparation of legislation, varying
degrees of emphasis are placed on program design. And there is no
general, consistent pattern of the use of these offices. The principal
drafters of legislation--the Offices of the Legislative Counsel of the
Senate and the House-- while they do not make program policy, generally
do provide a legal framework and historical context that provide a basis
for the program design process. CRS, GAO, and CBO often play significant
roles in providing analyses and information used to prepare legislation
and in reviewing and shaping draft legislation, and thus contribute to
program design.

CBO's role is generally limited to analysis of the fiscal implications
of proposed legislation.  Evaluation of cost-effectiveness and
efficiency of a proposed program as well as its financial viability
might be an appropriate expansion of the traditional CBO role. CRS also
offers extensive training programs and provides research materials to
congressional staff on a wide range of subjects, many of which could
have significant program design implications.  If all these offices were
able and willing to provide expert advice on program design, members and
staff of Congress would be better equipped to apply the recommended
program design criteria.

Strengthening program design capabilities and encouraging greater use of
available resources in the legislative branch would not only improve
program design, it would also enhance the formulation of programs by
framing the debates which occur on and off the floors of both Houses.
Ideally, the individuals developing program design in Congress would
cooperate on the design of new programs as well as share expertise
concerning tools of public action and obstacles to solid program design.
This cooperation would also be extended by congressional offices and
staff to the executive branch at the agency level and to the Executive
Office of the President and could perhaps reduce some of the traditional
friction between these two branches of government.[Endnote 2]

Endnotes

2. "Hill's Micromanagement of Cabinet Blurs Separation of Powers,''
Washington Post (July 25, 1993), p. A1.