PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 12.
Congressional Research Service
Version 79 · Reported to House without amendment · Mar 17, 2005
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)
Program Assessment and Results Act - (Sec. 3) States as the purposes of this Act: (1) improving the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 by implementing a process to determine the strengths and weaknesses of Federal programs, with a particular focus on results produced by individual programs; (2) using information to help the executive branch make informed management decisions and evidence-based funding requests; and (3) providing Congress with the information necessary to conduct more effective oversight and make better-informed authorization and spending decisions.
(Sec. 4) Requires the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), to the maximum extent practicable, to conduct, jointly with agencies of the Federal Government, an assessment of each Federal program at least once every five fiscal years (program assessments).
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the Director to: (1) coordinate with Federal agency heads to determine the programs to be assessed and to evaluate the purpose, design, strategic plan, management, and results of such programs; (2) develop criteria for identifying programs to be assessed each fiscal year; (3) assess certain higher priority programs more frequently than once every five years; (4) publish in electronic format and provide to Congress a list of programs to be assessed during a fiscal year and the criteria to be used to assess the programs, and allow interested person to comment on such programs; and (5) provide guidance to Federal agency heads for implementing the requirements of this Act.
Requires the Director to report to Congress the results of program assessments conducted during a fiscal year at the same time the President submits the next budget after the end of such fiscal year. Provides for the submission of program assessments containing classified information.
Requires that program assessment functions and activities be performed only by Federal employees as inherently Governmental functions.
(Sec. 5) Changes: (1) the date by which the heads of each Federal agency are required to submit strategic plans for program activities to September 30 of each year following a presidential election, beginning with September 30, 2005; and (2) the period of coverage for strategic plans from five to four years.
People & committees
Rep. Platts, Todd Russell [R-PA-19] · R–PA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 12.
Reported by the Committee on Government Reform. H. Rept. 109-26.
Reported by the Committee on Government Reform. H. Rept. 109-26.
Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 19 - 14.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Government Reform.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E15)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.185 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.185 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.185 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.185 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.