APPENDIX B:

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

FY 2001 PERFORMANCE PLAN

PURSUANT TO GPRA AND OMB A-11

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submitted to OMB/ Congress December, 1999

 

 

 

 

FY 2001 PERFORMANCE PLAN FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

PERFORMANCE MEASURES, GOALS AND TARGETS

 

PERFORMANCE MEASURES AND GOALS

The FEC Strategic Plan identifies performance goals by election cycle or other multi-year time frames. This FY 2001 Performance Plan relates these objectives, goals, and targets to FY 2001. the FY 2001 budget request is couched in terms of resource levels and tied to the four Commission general goals and objectives.

Our Strategic Plan noted the difficulty in developing true measures of performance for the FECís mission. It is difficult to define and measure public faith in the political and campaign finance systems. It is also difficult to measure the impact of the FEC on the publicís confidence in the political process. However, the Commission has developed a set of performance indicators which we believe will measure whether we are successful in achieving improved public confidence in the political process.

If we are successful in meeting our performance targets for timely review and processing of reports, if we meet our targets for resolving enforcement actions in a timely manner, and if we are successful in informing and educating the public about campaign finance, we believe this will help ensure the outcomes desired: public confidence in the Commissionís ability to fairly and effectively apply campaign finance rules and to promote disclosure, thereby enabling the electorate to make informed choices in the electoral process.

PERFORMANCE LEVELS AND FUNDING/FTE

We have requested a FY 2001 budget of 356 FTE and $41,323,000. The request represents a continuation of funding from FY 2000, enacted at $38,152,000 and 351.5 FTE, as adjusted to cover inflation, federal COLAs, and the cost of implementing our Information Technology (IT), or ADP, Strategic Plan. We also adjusted down the staffing level to account for the five temporaries funded in FY 2000 to certify matching fund submissions for the 2000 presidential election cycle. We calculated the cost of the resulting "base" level of 347 FTE at $39,807,000. To this "base" we added five FTE for an Alternative Dispute Resolution project and an improved Title 2 Audit program, plus some initiatives for our Office of Elections Administration. This provides for a continuing resources level, calculated to be $40,798,000 for 352 FTE in FY 2001. Finally, we have added a request for 4 additional staff in FY 2001. The additional staff would be allocated to the Commissioners to provide for an additional executive assistant in all Commissioner offices, not just for the Chairman and Vice Chairman as is currently funded.

Therefore, the Commission calculated the cost of the FY 2000 appropriation as adjusted, as funding 347 FTE in FY 2001 at a cost of $39.8 million. This reflects a "Minimal performance Level" base budget for FY 2001. This minimal performance level is supplemented by an additional 5 FTE to: implement an Alternative Dispute Resolution Program, implement a PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) recommendation for a stand-alone Title 2 audit program, and funds to complete the revision and update of the Voting Systems Standards (VSS) and present them at a national conference of elections administration officials. This is labeled our "Current Resources Performance Level," at a cost of $40.8 million for 352 FTE.

Finally, the Commission requests the four additional positions for the Commissionersí offices, and $65,000 in contract funds to enable the FEC IG to perform additional audits and reviews by using contractors rather than adding more staff. The final Commission Request Performance level is $41.3 million for 356 FTE in FY 2001.

In FY 2001, the Commission determined not to request a final increment for compliance programs. The FY 2000 appropriation and the FY 2001 Budget request reflect four of the nine additional positions contained in our original FY 2000 requested level. That request was itself 10 FTE short of the "full performance requests" submitted in FY 1998 and FY 1999 to properly process the expected future enforcement workload, plus complete on-going work on the 1996 election cycle major cases. The FY 2001 Request represents essentially carrying forward the FY 2000 appropriation for 352 FTE, with a few initiatives for FY 2001. We believe that this FY 2001 request for $41.3 million is a most reasonable funding request.

This submission indicates what the different performance level budgets will "buy" in terms of outcomes, as measured in workloads, service levels, and timeliness goals. In the final analysis, the ability of the Commission to successfully implement the FECA and meet our mission responsibilities flows from the levels of service we are capable of providing. This ultimately impacts on the ability of the Commission to assure the public that the campaign finance system is fairly enforced and fully disclosed.

Displayed below first for each objective and program are the results or predicted outcomes of the Minimal Performance Level of 347 FTE. For most programs, this is the only level requested. This is followed by the improvement possible with a Current Resources Performance Level at 352 FTE. Only the incremental changes in performance or timeliness are included in the Current Request Performance Level description; if unchanged from the Minimal Performance Level, the section is not reiterated. Next, the performance possible at the FEC Request Performance Level (356 FTE) is noted. The only programs which have performance indicated at the levels higher than minimal level are the Commissioners, the IG, the compliance program (enforcement, litigation, audits), and the Office of Elections Administration programs.

Finally, the performance level possible at the Full Performance level of 371 FTE are identified. We did not request this level of funding, but the performance plan indicates what level of compliance would have been possible at this Full performance level.

FY 2001 PERFORMANCE PLAN

Program I: Disclosure

Objective: Promote Disclosure and Provide Information

To meet the desired outcome that the public can make informed choices in the electoral process due to full disclosure of the sources of candidatesí funding for campaigns.

Minimal Performance Level (347 FTE)

-- Meet 48 hour deadline for making reports available for public review of 99% of reports filed at FEC: process (scan, film, file, code and enter summary data) an estimated 75,000 reports and statements in FY 2001 (Public Disclosure/Data Systems)

-- Code and enter itemized data from disclosure reports filed, 95% complete within 45 days from the date the reports are received at the FEC (estimated 50,000 reports and 1,000,000 transactions in FY 2001); reduce backlog of unprocessed 2002 cycle reports to less than 500 (and all unprocessed reports to less than 1,000) by the end of FY 2001 (Data Systems)

-- Respond to 100% of requests for assistance from committees in filing reports within 72 hours; 11,000 estimated in FY 2001 (Reports Analysis)

-- Review 60% of all quarterly reports filed within 90 days of receipt at Commission (75% within 120 days), complete 100% review of all reports

filed, estimated 51,000 in FY 2001; reduce backlog of unreviewed 2002 cycle reports to less than 9,000, and less than 10,000 for all reports from all cycles by the end of FY 2001 (Reports Analysis)

-- Review 100% of all statements received, estimated 11,500 in FY 2001 (Reports Analysis)

-- Prepare RFAI's for 100% of all committees' reports reviewed which require them, 60% within 90 days of receipt at Commission, estimated 10,600 in FY 2001 (Reports Analysis)

-- Respond to 100% of all requests for documents and data within 72 hours in Public Records, estimated at 41,000 in FY 2001; provide 50,000 printouts to requesters of indices (Public Disclosure)

-- Respond to 100% of all press inquiries within 72 hours, and comply with statutory deadlines for 90% of all FOIA requests received; estimated 20,000 and 150 in FY 2001 (Press Office)

-- Respond to 100% of requests for general information on FEC and FECA within 72 hours, 14 days for written requests, estimated at 60,000 calls and requests in FY 2001 (Information)

-- Respond to 100% of requests for copies of forms, the FECA and Regulations, and Commission brochures and guidelines within 72 hours, estimated at 30,000 calls and requests in FY 2001 (Information)

-- Notify all filers of upcoming reporting periods, and provide copies of forms as a pre-reporting notice; publish monthly FEC Record (Information)

-- Publish statutorily required Annual Report in similar fashion to current comprehensive efforts, and publish the following:

-- FEC Disclosure Forms

-- FECA (the Act)

-- FEC Regulations and updates, 11 CFR

-- Campaign Guides

-- Brochures on Election Processes

-- Videos on Campaign Finance (Information)

-- Enable Commission to meet statutory deadlines for issuance or conclude action on Advisory Opinions for 95% of all 60 and 20 day deadlines, estimated 50 in FY 2001, and meet 45-60 day target for AO reconsiderations, 15 days for deficient request notices (OGC)

-- Maintain targets for completion of all rule-making petitions filed pursuant to 11 CFR Part 200, complete revisions to sections of Regulations in FY 2001 (OGC)

-- Respond to all requests for legal assistance from FOIA Officer, and for all FOIA appeals, 95% within statutory deadlines, estimated 530 requests in FY 2001 (OGC)

Current Resources Performance Level (352 FTE)

-- Same as Minimal Performance Level

FEC Request Performance Level (356 FTE)

-- Same as Minimal Performance Level

FEC Full Performance Level (371 FTE) Not Requested

-- Same as Minimal Performance Level

 

Program II: Compliance

Objective: Obtain Compliance and Enforcement

Outcomes desired are the perception by the regulated community that disclosure reports must be accurately and timely filed; that there are real consequences for non-compliance with the FECA; and that the FEC will impartially and speedily enforce the FECA.

Minimal Performance Level (347 FTE)

-- Refer a total of 100 committees for potential 438(b) audits from the 2000 election cycle in FY 1999-2000, 80 in FY 2001 and the last 20 referrals in FY 2002 (RAD)

-- Refer a total of 45 committees for potential enforcement actions in FY 2001; complete all enforcement referrals within the second FY of the election cycle (all of 2000 cycle by close of FY 2001) (RAD)

-- Publish all committees who fail to file reports, referring the most egregious non-and/or late-filers for potential enforcement action, estimated 15-20 in FY 2000 (RAD)

-- Complete a reduced number of 438(b) audits; initiate an estimated 25 total audits for the 2000 cycle; initiate all authorized committee audits within six months of the election (Audit)

-- maintain a system to identify and assign the more significant enforcement cases, more rapidly dispose of less significant cases, and manage limited staff resources: the Enforcement Priority System or EPS (OGC)

-- Performance targets under the EPS include (all estimates assume that significant, major cases from the 1996 and 1998 cycles remain open and active during the 2000 cycle):

Process and close 225 cases in FY 2001, 40% with substantive Commission action (This represents cases in which the Commission has reached a substantive finding on the merits of the matter (other than dismissal), including findings of no RTB)

Assuming a monthly average total caseload of 275 to 290 cases during FY 2001, maintain a monthly average ratio of 40% active to 60% inactive cases (OGC)

-- Permits OGC to continue to effectively process in timely manner 4-5 major cases from pre-2000 election cycles

-- complete review of 438(b) audit reports within 6-8 weeks on average; complete routine matters in two weeks; perform an estimated 10-15 audit reviews in FY 2001 (OGC)

-- Respond to RAD requests for review of debt settlement plans and administrative terminations within 10 days, complete review of complex debt settlement plans within 60 days; estimated 25 debt settlements and 500 administrative terminations in FY 2001 (OGC)

-- File all litigation pleadings in district court for offensive litigation within 90 days of Commission determination to file suit, and meet all other time limits for briefs and other pleadings imposed by the rule or order of the courts; estimated 10-15 defensive suits initiated in FY 2001 (OGC)

-- Make at least one attempt to initiate settlement prior to commencement of suit for each case early enough to permit consideration by Commission of any settlement proposal prior to target date of initiation of suit; initiate 9 to 10 offensive litigation suits in FY 2001

-- Ensure that all pleadings and briefs represent the Commission's positions persuasively, by reporting on status of each active litigation case once a month, and by maintaining a system to obtain satisfaction of all judgments imposing civil penalties (OGC)

 

Current Resources Performance Level (352 FTE)

-- Same as Minimal Performance Level, except for following improvements:

-- Increases number of Title 2 audits to 40 t0 45 audits per election cycle, 20-25 authorized committee audits and 20-25 unauthorized committee audits (Audit)

-- Permits operation of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) process to handle more de minimis violations of the FECA in a more timely, less resource-intensive process than the traditional enforcement process (assuming the successful implementation of the pilot ADR project in FY 2000, Staff Director and OGC)

 

FEC Request Performance Level (356 FTE)

-- Same as Current Resources Performance Level

FEC Full Performance Level (371 FTE) Not Requested

-- Same as Current Resources Performance Level, except for following improvements:

-- Permits OGC to improve its monthly average active case ratio to 45%, and to increase cases closed with substantive action to a rate of 48% of the cases closed

-- Increases to 15 the number of offensive suits that can be initiated (OGC)

 

Program III: Public Financing

Objective: Administer Public Financing

Desired outcomes are that the public funding program is implemented so that the availability of federal funds does not become an issue in the campaign; so that qualified presidential candidates receive entitled funds expeditiously; so that public monies are correctly spent on qualified campaign expenditures and are fully accounted for; and so that the public is assured that the FECA has been impartially enforced in a timely manner.

Minimal Performance Level (347 FTE)

-- With 5 temporary FTE in Audit in FY 2000, allows timely processing of matching fund requests for the 2000 election from January 1999 to December of 2000; five temporary employees facilitate ability for monthly processing. (This is similar to temporary assistance utilized in prior election cycles. Assistance of auditors on loan from GAO was terminated in the 1996 cycle.) (Audit)

-- With goal of completing all Title 26 audits within two years of the general election, initiate 2000 cycle audits of 15-17 primary candidates, at least four convention committees (two per major party), and three general election audits (Audit)

-- Produce report to Congress on the 2000 matching fund process within 2-1/2 years of 2000 general election (Audit)

-- Complete legal reviews of all 2000 presidential audits within two years of 2000 election (December 2002) (OGC)

-- Complete all repayment matters for 2000 cycle committees receiving public funds within three years of general election (by December 2003) (OGC)

-- Complete audit legal review comments within 8 weeks of completion of preliminary Title 26 audits for 2000 cycle (OGC)

-- Report on enforcement matters arising out of Title 26 audits and presidential campaigns to Commission every 3-6 months, depending upon complexity of cases; complete routine legal matters within one week; complete all investigations of 2000 presidential matters within four year presidential election cycle (by December 2004) (OGC)

Current Resources Performance Level (352 FTE)

-- Same as Minimal Performance Level

FEC Request Performance Level (356 FTE)

-- Same as Minimal Performance Level

FEC Full Performance Level (371 FTE) Not requested

-- Same as FEC Minimal Performance Level, except for the following improvements:

-- Additional FTE in Audit would assure completion of all presidential audits in 2000 cycle by two years from the 2000 general election, without adverse impact on title 2 audit program under 2 U.S.C. 438(b) (Audit)

-- Additional FTE in PFESP in OGC would assure timely review of all 2000 cycle audits of presidential candidates (OGC)

 

Program IV: Office of Election Administration

Objective: Administer Office of Election Administration

Desired outcomes are that the state and local election officials charged with administering federal elections are able to hold fair elections efficiently with public confidence in the integrity of the results; to enable elections administrators to comply with the Voting Accessibility and NVRA statutes. The FEC is required by the NVRA to report to congress on the impact of the law after each election.

Minimal Performance Level (347 FTE)

-- Conduct research ($100,000) into elections administration issues, and respond to 100% of an estimated 7,500 requests for information within one week. Research projects include: Updated Voting systems Standards.

-- Comply with all statutory responsibilities and deadlines with regard to the Voting Accessibility and National Voter registration Acts

 

Current Resources Performance Level (352 FTE)

-- Same as Minimal Performance Level, except for the following improvements:

-- Increase funding for VSS update to $200,000 to complete project at total cost of $450,000.

-- Hold National Conference of Elections Administration Officials to introduce updated VSS and hold workshops on various subjects for state and local elections officials.

FEC Request Performance Level (356 FTE)

-- Same as Current Performance Level

FEC Full Performance Level (371 FTE) Not requested

-- Same as Current Performance Level

The Office of Election Administration represents virtually the only direct federal assistance to the multitude of state and local elections officials charged with administering federal elections. The ability, or inability, to properly administer elections and tally elections results can affect the outcome of assuring public faith in the electoral process.

Information Technology (IT or ADP) Projects

A cross-cutting set of projects for computer development and enhancements, which will assist all Divisions and Offices in meeting their objectives and goals as defined above. The two major initiatives are the IT Enhancements and the Electronic Filing projects.

Minimal Performance Level (347 FTE)

-- continue to provide point of entry for filing House disclosure documents at the FEC; scan all documents and transmit images to House Office in usable format for that office; eliminate duplicate processing at FEC and House office.

-- Continuation of multi-year enhancement and upgrade of IT systems for all Commission Offices and Divisions; replaced FEC mainframe based word-processing and E-mail systems with networked, PC based system; retained access to FEC developed disclosure database and other FEC developed systems, including the disclosure imaging system.

-- Development and implementation of an electronic filing system for disclosure reports required to be filed under the FECA; interim system initiated on January 1, 1997; implemented a full electronic filing system on a test basis for 1998 election cycle, completed testing and total system implementation in 2000 election cycle. Implement mandatory, with thresholds, electronic filing for 2002 cycle.

-- Assumes $4.689 million and 8.5 FTE for the computerization initiatives in FY 2001, according to the revised FEC FY 1998-2003 IT (ADP) Strategic and Performance Plans.

Current Resources Performance Level (352 FTE)

-- Same as Minimal Performance Level

FEC Request Performance Level (356 FTE)

-- Same as Minimal Performance Level

FEC Full Performance Level (371 FTE) Not requested

-- Same as Minimal Performance Level