Office of Research and Development Photo image area measures 2 H x 6.93 W and can be masked by a collage strip of one, two or three images. The photo image.

04/11/23Office of Research and Development

Photo image area measures 2” H x 6.93” W and can be masked by a collage strip of one, two or three images.

The photo image area is located 3.19” from left and 3.81” from top of page.

Each image used in collage should be reduced or cropped to a maximum of 2” high, stroked with a 1.5 pt white frame and positioned edge-to-edge with accompanying images.

Howard Cantor Acting Director, Office of Resources Management and Administration

Office of Research & Development Budget Status

2Office of Research and Development

Overview

• Budget Overview• FY 2009 Continuing Resolution• FY 2010 Areas of Emphasis• FY 2011 Planning• Evaluation and Accountability

Overview

3Office of Research and Development

Example Oversize Graphic Template

ORD Budget by Appropriation Account

$529.4 $538.7 $524.9 $516.1 $513.1

$35.8 $30.2 $30.2 $25.7 $26.4

$52 $24

$0

$100

$200

$300

$400

$500

$600

$700

FY 2005 Enacted FY 2006 Enacted FY 2007 Enacted FY 2008 Enacted FY 2009 President'sBudget

Mill

ions

Science and Technology Hazardous Substance SuperfundLeaking Underground Storage Tanks Oil Spill ResponseCongressional Earmarks Environmental Program & Management

$547.6 $540.7$620.9 $594.7 $556.5

Budget Trends

4Office of Research and Development

Congressional Appropriation Accounts, FY 2009 President’s Budget

OW

OARM

OAR

ORD67%

Su

per

fun

d

S&T95%

S&T funds primarily ORD ORD is funded primarily by S&T

S&T Approp. by EPA Office ORD by Approp.Includes revision to the FY 2009 President’s Budget for Homeland Security

Budget Trends

5Office of Research and Development

Personnel Compensation & Benefits (actual)

TravelWCF

Operating Expenses

Research Support

STAR

Extramural

Earmarks

$0

$100

$200

$300

$400

$500

$600

$700

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Enacted Pres.Bud.

Projected

Do

llars

in M

illio

ns

PCB assumes 4% COLA, 1.5% Aw ards, no FTE reductions

$551.3

$273.6

$75.4

ORD Budget Trends: By Component, No FTE Cut

$61.2

$58.0

$57.2

Budget Trends

$242.8

6Office of Research and Development

7.1% 7.0%6.8%

7.1% 7.3%7.7% 7.5%

7.8% 7.8%7.4% 7.3%

7.8%8.1%

8.8%

7.4%7.1%

6.8%

$6.7$6.4

$5.7

$7.0$7.3 $7.4

$7.6$7.8 $7.9

$8.4$8.0

$7.6 $7.5 $7.5$7.1

$6.3$6.5

5%

6%

7%

8%

9%

10%

11%

12%

13%

14%

15%

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009est.

$0

$1

$2

$3

$4

$5

$6

$7

$8

$9

Do

llar

s in

Bil

lio

ns

ORD's Budget Authorityas a Percentge of EPA's Budget Authority

EPA's Budget Authority

Budget Trends: EPA & ORD’s Relative Position

Source: OMB, 2/5/2008, http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2009/pdf/hist.pdf

Includes revision to FY 2009 President’s Budget for Homeland Security

Budget Trends

7Office of Research and Development

Example Oversize Graphic Template

ORD Total Budget with Inflation Indices(enacted budget, includes earmarks, dollars in millions)

$536.3

$574.1$591.9

$637.8$646.5

$620.9

$594.7

$556.5$547.6

$572.8

$434.9

$552.9

$450.3

$494.2

$533.0

$579.8

$542.6$549.0

$300

$350

$400

$450

$500

$550

$600

$650

$700

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Nominal GDP Price Index

Source: Department of Commerce's Bureau of Economic Analysis

GDP - Gross Domestic Product

Budget Trends

8Office of Research and Development

FY 2009 Continuing Resolution

• Continuing Resolution (CR) remains in effect until: – The enactment of the appropriation into law or. – The end of the current CR on March 6, 2009.

• ORD may continue current programs or activities as authorized under the conditions of the FY 2008 Appropriations Act.

• New programs or activities not funded in FY 2008 may not be started under a CR.• Programs with increases in the FY 2009 President’s Budget should still be funded at the

FY 2008 enacted level, even if the increase is a restoration of an FY 2008 enacted reduction.

• The Agency is carefully monitoring spending with particular attention to program projects that differ significantly between FY 2008 enacted levels and the FY 2009 President’s Budget.

• ORD is centrally managing Payroll; Travel, Operating Expenses and Extramural allocations have been provided to the LCOs for operating under the period of the CR.

FY 2009 status

9Office of Research and Development

FY 2010 Planning and Formulation

• The Agency submitted a current services budget for FY 2010 to OMB in September 2008, including performance targets.

• There will be no formal OMB budget hearing, nor will there be an OMB passback.

• After the new Administration takes office in January 2009, the Agency expects to prepare a transition/policy budget reflecting the priorities of the new administration.

FY 2010 Status

10Office of Research and Development

FY 2010 Planning and Formulation 1

• In preparation for a transition budget, EPA established four areas of potential investment and associated resource ranges as part of the FY2010 planning and budgeting process. The four areas include:

– Clean Energy & Climate Change

– Contaminants

– Homeland Security

– Management Efficiencies• Cross-Agency teams were established for the development of the investment

initiatives. ORMA analysts worked with NPDs and program leads to develop ORD’s input to the initiatives.

• This information is part of a host of materials that will be provided to EPA’s new administration.

FY 2010 Status

1. Resource Levels Embargoed until release of President’s Request

11Office of Research and Development

FY 2011 Planning: A Year in Transition

• Administration Transition

– 2010 President’s Budget will likely be delayed & include shifting priorities, which could have potentially significant implications for 2011 planning.

– 2010 discussions in the Agency are currently focused on large, thematic areas, which could impact framing of 2011 discussions.

• ORMA’s intent is to conduct a 2011 process that minimizes burden on ORD stakeholders (NPDs, ALDs/ACDs) while preparing ORD for the future and ensuring appropriate client input.

FY 2011 Status

12Office of Research and Development

ORD Progress in Accountability

Improving ORD performance• Updates and briefing materials from Accountability Road Show available on ORMA’s

Accountability intranet site. Much progress has been made and new areas of work are underway:– Achieved “Green” on President’s Management Agenda (PMA) Scorecard.– BOSC ratings: qualitative performance rating assessments.– Eco and SP2 scored Moderately Effective on 2007 PARTs.– ORD is shifting focus to tools that track the extent to which our research is having an impact

on regulatory decision making, including decision-document analyses, partner surveys, and bibliometric analysis.

Scorecards • A meaningful ORD-level scorecard for managing performance (research improvement and

accountability) and communicating results was needed.– All Labs/Centers/Offices recently provided ORMA with draft 2009 scorecards to facilitate

dialog.Efficiency• EPA sponsored an NAS study on efficiency measurement for research programs. The January

2008 report recommended R&D programs focusing on Investment and Process Efficiency.

Evaluation and Accountability

13Office of Research and Development

Managers’ Roles: Accountability & Performance

Implementing Scorecard• LCOs should be reviewing, discussing, working to refine, and cascading/aligning their

scorecard measures with PARS to be meaningful.Enhancing Efficiency• LCOs should seek research efficiencies that can be used to improve cost effectiveness.Partner Engagement • Results from partner surveys indicate increased value of ORD research, but that

communication in research planning and notification of product completion is lacking. ORD needs to improve communication and product delivery with partners.

Utilizing Science Inventory • LCOs should enter all publications/products in TIMS/Science Inventory to improve

accuracy in decision-document and bibliometric analysis, which inform the BOSC. Responding to BOSC• Managers should read BOSC reports and focus on the key areas for improvement

highlighted in the rating summaries.

Evaluation and Accountability