NSF FY 2006 Assessment:
Organizational Excellence
Advisory Committee for Business and
Operations
May 18, 2006
The Organizational Excellence Goal
Organizational Excellence: An agile, innovative
organization that fulfills its mission through leadership
in state-of the-art business practices
In the current draft of the 2006-2011 Strategic Plan, the
Organizational Excellence goal has been changed to Stewardship
Stewardship: Support excellence in science and
engineering research and education through a
capable and responsive organization.
• The Stewardship goal is meant to be more inclusive Foundationwide. Long-term investment priorities in the draft Strategic Plan
attest to this more wide-ranging view.
Background for Current Year (FY 2006)
Assessment
• Took into account observations from the Committee on the 2005
Assessment of Organizational Excellence
– Clarify the connection between activities that address the OE goals
and NSF’s overall mission and purpose.
– Emphasize strategic versus tactical accomplishments.
– Highlight leadership in government-wide initiatives and how these
initiatives benefit the Foundation.
• Noted that this assessment year is “between” Strategic Plans
This year’s assessment is more mission-focused and strategically
oriented
Key Questions for Committee Focus
• Does the evidence presented support NSF’s determination that it
has (or has not) “demonstrated significant achievement” for the
indicator?
• What changes in approach or methodology be considered as
NSF develops an assessment framework for the Stewardship
goal, as outlined in the draft Strategic Plan for FY 2006-2011?
Performance Indicator: Human Capital
Management
Workforce Planning supports NSF’s Strategic Plan in several ways:
• Improves capacity of the workforce to work effectively in a business
environment
• Helps to respond to the changing nature of work and workload
• Increases the effectiveness of human capital techniques and tools
FY 2006 Focus
• Develop an agency-wide Workforce Planning process
Results
• Defined framework
• Implemented Workforce Planning process
• Developed workload and FTE models
• Developed initial agency-wide Workforce Plan
Performance Indicator: Human Capital
Management
Indicator Assessment: Fully Successful
NSF determined that it has demonstrated significant
achievement in Human Capital Management
Performance Indicators: Technology-Enabled
Business Processes
• Leadership in Government-Wide Grants Initiatives
• Increase Efficiency of Proposal and Award Process
• Excellence in IT Management
• Security
• Improve Customer Satisfaction
Leadership in Government-Wide Grants
Initiatives
• Grants.gov
• Grants Management Line of Business
Grants.gov
• Find- 100% posted
• Apply- 75% posted in FY 2006
• FastLane/Grants.gov Integration Complete
Grants Management Line of Business
• NSF was selected as consortium lead for the Grants
Management Line of Business (GMLoB) in Q1 2006
Leadership in Government-Wide Grants
Initiatives
Key Activities- Grants Management Line of Business
• Develop High-Level Business Case
• Pilot a Grants Management service with another agency (US
Dept of Agriculture)
Indicator Assessment: Partially Successful
Increase Efficiency of Proposal and Award
Process
• Continue to support NSF’s goal to reduce paper-based proposal
processing through more extensive use of web-based eJacket.
Results
• Dwell time has been reduced
• Non-Awards: nearly all processed through eJacket
• Committee of Visitors (COV) module: will enable groups to view
jackets and other documents electronically. Incorporates
Conflict of Interest functionality.
• eCorrespondence module: improved functionality and
automation will allow for seamless, workflow-oriented
processing.
Increase Efficiency of Proposal and Award
Process
Next Steps
• Awards processing improvement
– 70% of volume is non-awards
Indicator Assessment: Fully Successful
Excellence in IT Management
•
•
The re-tooled CIO Advisory Group (CIOAG) met initially in May 2005.
The CIOAG will focus on three key technology management areas:
– Capital Planning and Investment Control (CPIC)
– Performance Management and Risk assessment
– Enterprise Architecture (EA)
The cross-Directorate CIOAG team has met five times and has
addressed key challenges in these management areas that has and
will benefit NSF’s IT investments and investment strategy.
Indicator Assessment: Partially Successful
Security
•
NSF continues to do a good job balancing the need to maintain an
open, collaborative environment for scientific research and discovery
while assuring that we protect our information and assets from an
increasingly hostile threat environment.
Results
• The House Committee on Government Reform recently graded 24
Federal Agencies on security. The overall grade for the government
was “D+”. NSF’s score rose from “C+” to “A” in 2006.
• Continued clean Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA)
audit results.
• 100% of major applications certified and accredited.
Indicator Assessment: Fully Successful
Improve Customer Satisfaction
• The second annual NSF-wide Customer Satisfaction Survey was
conducted in December 2005
– 24% of all employees (344) responded [96% confidence level with
5% margin of error].
– Over half of the respondents provided valuable comments
– Most respondents self-identified Directorate worked and role (e.g.,
PO, Manager, non-Manager, etc.).
Results
• Customers generally satisfied with services
– All services (10 rated) increased their scores
Improve Customer Satisfaction
Next Steps
• Formulate Action Plans to address areas of significance/lower
scores
– Strive for steady improvement
Indicator Assessment: Partially Successful
Summary: Technology-Enabled Business
Processes
Indicator
Success
Leadership in Government-Wide Grants Initiatives
Partial
Increase Efficiency of Proposal and Award Process
Full
Excellent in IT Management
Partial
Security
Full
Improve Customer Satisfaction
Partial
NSF determined that it has demonstrated significant
achievement in technology-enabled business processes
Performance Assessment Indicator
Develop and use performance assessment tools
and measures to provide an environment of
continuous improvement in NSF’s intellectual
investments as well as its management
effectiveness
Acronyms
 GPRA: Government Performance and Results Act of
1993
 PART: Program Assessment Rating Tool
 AC/GPA: Advisory Committee for GPRA Performance
Assessment
FY 2006 Focus Areas
1. PART Integration
2. AC/GPA Process Improvements
PART Integration

Emphasis on integrating PART with ongoing program
management activities.



Developing “Improvement Plans” for completed PARTs that
focus on NSF-wide challenges:



Efficiency measures tie directly to merit review process (such as
dwell time).
Output measures focus on NSF-wide objectives, such as
broadening participation and promoting partnerships.
Improving transparency in Merit Review.
Improving project reporting.
Assessment: Fully Successful in FY 2006
AC/GPA Process Improvements
 Addressed more than 50 committee member comments
on process improvements.
 Held training sessions on writing nuggets for NSF
program officers.
 Reached 200+ NSF Program Staff (~1/3 of Pgm. Officers)
 Convened orientation teleconferences for AC/GPA
members at start of assessment process.
 Clarified task & developed resources for OE subgroup.
 Assessment: Fully Successful in FY 2006
Summary/Conclusion: Performance
Assessment
Indicator
Success
PART Integration
Full
AC/GPA Process Improvements
Full
NSF has determined that it has demonstrated significant
achievement in Performance Assessment in FY 2006.
Key Questions for Committee Focus
• Does the evidence presented support NSF’s determination that it
has (or has not) “demonstrated significant achievement” for the
indicator?
• What changes in approach or methodology be considered as
NSF develops an assessment framework for the Stewardship
goal, as outlined in the draft Strategic Plan for FY 2006-2011?