*
Q "\ Grants Management Plan
v " ? 2009-2013
-------
-------
I am pleased to present the Environmental Protection Agency's second long-term Plan for Grants Management.
This plan reflects EPA's emergence as a best practice agency for grants management and ensures responsible
stewardship of grants funds to protect our air, water and land for future generations,
The goals in the Plan underscore EPA's commitment to awarding outcome-oriented grants, maintaining a well-
trained and talented grants workforce, streamlining grants policies and procedures and implementing a com-
prehensive electronic grants management system.
The Agency will implement the Plan in partnership with States, Tribes, local governments, educational institu-
tions and non-profit organizations. By maximizing efficiency and effectiveness and strengthening internal controls
and accountability, the Plan will keep the Agency's grant program on course to delivering a cleaner, healthier
tomorrow.
Stephen L. Johnson
Administrator
-------
J—,LLL
Dear Reader:
We are pleased to release Grants Management Plan: 2OO9-2O13, EPA's second long-term grants manage-
ment plan. This plan provides the road map to ensure that EPA properly manages its grant dollars, which ac-
count for approximately one-half of the Agency's budget.
In implementing its first plan—Grants Management Plan: 2OO3-2OO8—the Agency put in place a new system
of internal controls focused on the themes of accountability, transparency, and results. By making strong grants
oversight a part of EPA's day-to-day operations, the system allowed the Agency to eliminate its longstanding
grants management weakness and create a model grants management program.
The 2009-201 3 plan builds on the progress made over the past 5 years and will prevent the recurrence of
a grants management weakness. It carries forward the system of internal controls, while establishing new
initiatives to increase efficiency and effectiveness. It contains five goals: demonstrate the achievement of envi-
ronmental results, foster a high-quality grants management workforce, enhance the management process for
grants policies and procedures, standardize and streamline the grants business process, and leverage technol-
ogy to strengthen decision making and increase public awareness.
These goals support the Agency's vision of managing grants to further EPA's mission of protecting human
health and the environment in accordance with the highest stewardship and fiduciary standards. Successful
implementation of the second plan will require the sustained involvement of Headquarters and Regional Offices
as well as close collaboration with the Agency's partners. As senior managers responsible for the administra-
tion of EPA grant programs, we are committed to leading the effort to achieve the plan's goals and objectives.
Sincerely,
-------
Luis A. Luna
Office of Administration
and Resources Management
Susan Hazen
Office of Administration
and Resources Management
Barry Breen
Office of Solid Waste
and Emergency Response
^ Beth Craig
Office of Air and Radiation
Catherine McCabe
Office of Enforcement
and Compliance Assurance
Kathy Petruccelli
Office of International
Activities
aryann Froehlich
Office of the Chief
Financial Officer
Marylouise Uhlig
Office of Prevention,
Pesticides and Toxic Substances
t
/Ray Spears
Office of the
Administrator
Linda Murphy
Region I
Wanda Johnson
Region IV
a
Eddie A. Sierra
Acting Assistant Regional Administrator
Region VIII
Walter Kovalick
Region V
Cu<__^_
/ / Jane Diamond
^ Region IX
Lek Kadeli
Office of Research
and Development
Mike Shapiro
Office of Water
Donna Vizian
Region II
Linda Carroll
Region VI
tr
Julie Hagensen
Region X
Linda Travers
Office of Environmental
Information
cS~^ O ^<~~x>-^
Sherry Kaschak
Office of Administration
and Resources Management
/ Jim Newsom
Region
Martha Cuppy
Region VII
-------
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency awards approximately one-half of its budget annually in grants
to its state, local, tribal, educational, and nonprofit partners. EPA's grants management program—the
aggregate of activities that contribute to the award and management of the thousands of EPA grants and
cooperative agreements under multiple individual programmatic statutory authorities—is a cooperative effort.
That effort involves the Office of Administration and Resources Management's Office of Grants and Debarment
[OGD], National Program Managers, Regional Program Offices, and Grants Management Offices.
As part of the Agency's response to questions about the effectiveness and efficiency of the grants management
program by EPA's Office of Inspector General, the Government Accountability Office, and the Office of Manage-
ment and Budget, EPA adopted an Agency-wide grants management plan in 2003. That plan established a
comprehensive approach to addressing several areas of concern, including grant competition, accountability of
EPA and recipients for the proper management of grant funds, and the need to demonstrate achievement of
environmental results. Implementation of that plan resulted in improvements that allowed EPA to declare that
grants management was no longer a material or agency weakness. It also resulted in a commitment to continu-
ous improvement in Agency grants management.
EPA's Grants Management Plan: 2OO9-2O13 carries forward the vision of the original plan, mainly to ensure
that its management of grants furthers the Agency's mission of protecting human health and the environment
and meets the highest stewardship and fiduciary standards. Specifically, the plan contains five goals, supported
by a number of objectives. The plan also identifies specific activities that EPA will undertake to achieve the objec-
tives, as well as performance measures to track progress against them. In conjunction with this plan, OGD has
developed a tactical action plan that sets annual priorities for planned activities.
Goal 1: Demonstrate the Achievement of Environmental Results
The Agency has made significant strides in ensuring that it measures program performance and evaluates
whether recipients are supporting the achievement of environmental results. Under this goal, EPA and its part-
ners will continue to improve the performance measures and their alignment with EPA strategic goals, as well
as enhance national reporting of environmental results data.
-------
An essential prerequisite to high-quality grants management is a fully
qualified workforce of grant specialists, grants management officers,
and project officers. The initial grants management plan focused on
upgrading grants management skills, particularly for the business
aspects of grants management. In addition to ensuring that Agency
staff members are prepared to meet the core competencies of
grants management, EPA will take steps to retain its grants manage-
ment workforce and further strengthen its skills. EPA also will ensure
that the supervisors and managers of project officers, as well as indi-
viduals who advise or assist project officers, fully support the project
officer function and are accountable for their assigned responsibilities.
EPA has issued a number of new grants management policies and
procedures to eliminate the identified weakness in Agency grants
management. Those policies and procedures significantly changed
and improved the Agency's way of managing grants. Grants man-
agement requirements will continue to evolve. Under this goal, the
Agency will evaluate its policy system to identify and implement pro-
cess and communications improvements.
Because Agency and recipient resources are limited and should be di-
rected to achieving environmental results, as well as compliance with
grants management requirements, EPA will seek ways to reduce the
administrative burden. This goal focuses on standardizing and stream-
lining the Agency's grants management process while maintaining the
gains of the last 5 years in compliance, results, and quality.
EPA needs a comprehensive electronic grants management system
that meets its own requirements, provides information to the pub-
lic, and complies with government-wide electronic grants initiatives
to streamline and simplify grants management. Under the Grants
Management Line of Business, a government-wide electronic initia-
tive, EPA will be required to work with consortia and shared service
providers and to engage in more common business processes. The
purpose of this goal is to ensure that—in moving to a new model, a
new electronic system, and, potentially, a new business process—EPA
maximizes opportunities to use automation in grants management;
adequately considers the needs of its staff, partners, and the public;
ensures that any unique aspects of the Agency's business process
are considered for continuation or elimination; and maximizes the
potential for a successful transition.
-------
Introduction 1
Background and Challenges 1
Purpose of the Plan 2
Vision Statement 3
EPA Stakeholders and Partners 4
Goals 5
Grants Management Plan Map 6
Objectives and Activities 7
Goal 1: Demonstrate the Achievement of Environmental Results 7
Goal 2: Foster a Quality Grants Management Workforce 10
Goal 3: Enhance the Management Process for Grants Policies and Procedures 13
Goal 4: Standardize and Streamline the Grants Business Process 16
Goal 5: Leverage Technology To Strengthen Decision-Making and Increase Public Awareness 20
-------
Background and Challenges
Each fiscal year, EPA awards approximately $4 billion, about one-half of its budget, in grants. This funding
represents a primary means by which EPA—in concert with states, local governments, tribes, educational
institutions, and nonprofit organizations—achieves its mission of protecting and improving the environment. EPA
and its partners must manage these funds effectively and ensure that they are used to achieve environmental
results.
EPA grants management is a cooperative effort involving the Office of Grants and Debarment [OGD], which is
part of the Office of Administration and Resources Management; National Program Managers; and Regional
Grants Management Offices [GMOs], and Regional Program Offices. All of these offices work to promote the
most effective and efficient use of EPAs financial and other resources and to prevent the incidence of waste,
fraud, abuse, mismanagement, and poor performance:
+ OGD formulates policies, procedures, and guidance on awarding and managing grants necessary to ensure
compliance and appropriate stewardship of EPA funds. Also, as the Headquarters GMO, OGD is the admin-
istrative manager for all grant programs at EPA Headquarters.
+ National Program Managers establish and implement national programmatic policies and ensure the imple-
mentation of OGD-issued policies with respect to the grant programs for which they are responsible. They
also set funding priorities and oversee the technical and programmatic aspects of Headquarters grants.
> Regional GMOs manage the administrative aspects of EPAs regional grant activities. The Regional Program
Offices work closely with the Regional GMOs, overseeing the technical and programmatic aspects of region-
al grants.
Over the last several years, EPA has significantly improved grants management. Many of the improvements
addressed criticisms by the Office of Inspector General, the Government Accountability Office, and the Office of
Management and Budget about the Agency's oversight of grants generally and its oversight of nonprofit grant
-------
recipients in particular. Implementation of the plan allowed EPA to
remove the designation of grants management as a material and
agency weakness.
Under the umbrella of the initial Agency grants management plan,
Grants Management Plan: 2OO3-2OO8, EPA provided extensive train-
ing of EPA grants management personnel and nonprofit recipients;
issued Policy for Competition of Assistance Agreements (EPA Order
5700.5A1] and established a Grants Competition Advocate in OGD;
revised Policy on Compliance, Review and Monitoring (EPA Order
5700.6]; and issued Environmental Results under EPA Assistance
Agreements (EPA Order 5700.7] and EPA Policy on Assessing Capa-
bilities of Non-Profit Applicants for Managing Assistance Awards
(EPA Order 5700.8].
Although grants management at EPA has evolved to address Agency
issues, grants management government-wide also is changing and
becoming more complex. During the next 5 years, EPA will have to
ensure that its management of grants keeps pace not only with its
internal needs but also with government-wide requirements. EPA will
have to sustain the improvements it has made, along with efforts
to streamline its grant process and policies and address govern-
ment-wide changes. This second plan—Grants Management Plan:
2OO9-2O13—integrates the successes already achieved with further
improvements and future needs. In doing so, it sustains grants man-
agement as a highly visible aspect of Agency operations—a position
that it both deserves and requires.
Purpose of the Plan
The purpose of this grants management plan is to sustain the im-
provements in grants management that EPA has achieved, while
ensuring continuing Agency-wide attention to the utility and quality of
the resources, processes, requirements, and systems used in grants
management. This plan also seeks ways to further engage the in-
novation and expertise of its partners: state, local, and tribal govern-
ments; educational institutions; and nonprofit organizations. Enhanc-
ing grants management will ensure that EPA and its partners can
work together to achieve the Agency's vision for grants management.
-------
EPA is committed to ensuring that its management
of grants furthers the Agency's mission of protect-
ing human health and the environment and meets
the highest stewardship and fiduciary standards.
1%'
-------
The success of EPA's initial grants management plan was due, in large part, to the Agency's cooperative efforts
with its stakeholders—Congress and the oversight agencies (Office of Inspector General, Government Account-
ability Office, and the Office of Management and Budget]—and with its partners: state, local, and tribal govern-
ments; educational institutions; and nonprofit organizations. In striving for effective and efficient grants man-
agement, the views of the stakeholders, partners, and Agency personnel were all considered in developing the
plan and implementing the vision. In developing this second grants management plan, the Office of Grants and
Debarment has considered input from Agency personnel, stakeholders, and partners on the lessons learned
from the initial plan and on the desired scope of the follow-on plan. Drafts of the goals and objectives were
shared internally with representatives from Headquarters offices and Regional Grants Management Offices
and Program Offices and were then presented to the Agency's Deputy Assistant Administrators and Assistant
Regional Administrators.
EPA and its stakeholders and partners will benefit from the initiatives in this plan in a number of ways. This plan
is intended to build on the successes of the initial plan by making policies and processes more user friendly
while focusing on results. EPA is committed to streamlining its grants management processes through more
efficient use of human and other resources. The Agency also is committed to ensuring accountability through
improved policies and procedures, enhanced coordination and communication with stakeholders and partners,
the availability of more timely and accurate information, the use of performance metrics, and continued empha-
sis on achieving environmental results.
The Agency believes that the plan addresses the concerns of its stakeholders and partners and will help ensure
effective and efficient grants management. The grants management plan has five strategic goals, and objec-
tives that will guide efforts to achieve each goal, for the next 5 years. For each objective, the plan identifies
specific activities and target dates. The plan also presents performance measures that will enable EPA to track
its progress on each of the five goals.
-------
Goal 1: Demonstrate the Achievement of Environmental Results
Goal 2: Foster a High-Quality Grants Management Workforce
Goal 3: Enhance the Management Process for Grants Policies and Procedures
Goal 4: Standardize and Streamline the Grants Business Process
Goal 5: Leverage Technology to Strengthen Decision Making and Increase Public Awareness
-------
Vision Statement
EPA is committed to ensuring that its management of grants furthers the Agency's mission of protecting human health
and the environment and meets the highest stewardship and fiduciary standards
Goal 1: Demonstrate the
Achievement of
Environmental Results
Goal 2: Foster a High-Quality
Grants Management
Workforce
Goal 3: Enhance the
Management Process for
Grants Policies and
Procedures
Goal 4: Standardize and
Streamline the Grants
Business Process
Goal 5: Leverage Technology
to Strengthen Decision Making
and Increase Public
Awareness
Objective 1.1: Implement
government-wide
performance and progress
report formats consistent with
Agency environmental
results requirements
Objective 2.1: Develop
guidance on the roles and
responsibilities of all Agency
personnel involved in grants
management
Objective 3.1: Develop a vision
for Agency grants
management policies,
procedures, and implementing
guidance
Objective 4.1: Identify
opportunities for streamlining
the grants business process
and achieving greater
standardization
Objective 5.1: Expand use of
Grants.gov
Objective 1.2: Develop a
framework for determining
the appropriate types of
measures to use in Agency
grant programs
Objective 2.2: Update the
Agency's 2004 grants
management workload
analysis to assess the amount
of human resources devoted
to grants management
Objective 3.2: Establish a
comprehensive management
framework for grants
management policies,
procedures, and implementing
guidance
Objective 4.2: Make the
competitive process as
efficient and transparent as
possible
Objective 5.2: Provide
electronic tools necessary to
achieve accountable, high-
quality grants management
Objective 1.3: Enhance the
Agency's ability to collect, moni-
tor achievement of, and report
significant environmental
results data
Objective 2.3: Adopt standards
for organizing and staffing the
project officer function
Objective 3.3: Review internal
grants management policies
using the newly developed
comprehensive framework
Objective 4.3: Modify the
approach to grants
management reviews of
EPA offices
Objective 5.3: Evaluate the
selected GMLOB service
provider to identify gaps
Objective 2.4: Implement a
comprehensive training
program for the EPA grants
management workforce
Objective 3.4: Develop a mech-
anism for involving partners
in the development of EPA's
grants management policies
and procedures
Objective 4.4: Develop a
comprehensive approach to
obtaining and using partner
and customer viewpoints
Objective 5.4: Conduct a
transparent process for
GMLOB planning, transition,
and implementation
Objective 3.5: Use a
comprehensive approach
to training partners
Objective 5.5: Provide timely
and accurate grant information
and data to the public
-------
Objectives and Activities
Goal 1:
Demonstrate the Achievement of
Environmental Results
has incorporated in its grants management process considerations related to achieving positive envi-
ronmental results. This has been accomplished primarily through inclusion of environmental results require-
ments in approved work plans. However, more work needs to be done to determine the appropriate types of
measures to be included in grants and to report, document, and successfully demonstrate the achievement of
those results.
The Agency measures environmental results as either outputs or outcomes, but it has not yet fully tied its stra-
tegic goals and objectives to the results to be achieved by grant programs and individual awards. Under this
goal, EPA will analyze the various types of activities in which it engages to determine how best to demonstrate
its achievement of environmental results. Among other things, the Agency will look at how grant-supported
efforts relate to the broader efforts to successfully execute a program and will address appropriate measure-
ment strategies.
-------
Under this goal, the Agency also will determine how to effectively
implement newly adopted government-wide performance/progress
reporting standards and establish the necessary tools to enhance its
ability to collect and aggregate environmental results data for Agency
use on a national basis. The latter will contribute to the Agency's
ability to meet data requirements such as those in OMB's Program
Assessment Rating Tool [PART].
Objectives
EPA identified three objectives related to environmental results and
specific activities for achieving each objective:
> Objective 1.1: Implement government-wide performance and prog-
ress report formats consistent with Agency environmental results
requirements.
•v- Analyze government-wide performance and progress reporting
standards. [2009]
<& Develop a plan for implementing government-wide perfor-
mance and progress reporting standards (including frequency
and mandatory and optional forms] in Agency grant pro-
grams. [2009]
+ Objective 1.2: Develop a framework for determining the appropri-
ate types of measures to use in Agency grant programs.
•v- Develop a taxonomy of EPA programs by purpose and mea-
sures applied at the Agency level and characterize the role of
grants in achieving that purpose. [2010]
•v- Develop criteria for determining the suitability of output and
outcome measures (type of grant, project or ongoing program
support, duration, number and type of related awards to a
recipient]. [2010]
+ Objective 1.3: Enhance the Agency's ability to collect, monitor
achievement of, and report significant environmental results data
<0> Determine Agency requirements for the use of grant environ-
mental results data in PART. [2011]
•v- Facilitate recipient ability to collect data from their constituen-
cies and the public to support assessment of environmental
results under grants for surveys, studies, investigations, and
training through the development of generic Paperwork Re-
duction Act information collection clearances. [2010]
Improve Agency-wide capability to report on significant grant
environmental results data, provide visibility within and across
programs, and evaluate and record recipient performance on
environmental results for use in post-award administration and
funding decisions. (2011]
•v- Seek ways to ensure that, to the extent possible, data col-
lected from recipients can serve multiple purposes to avoid
duplicate reporting. [2011]
•v- Develop and implement environmental results training for, and
outreach to, Agency personnel and recipients. (2011]
-------
Performance Measures
The following performance measures will help EPA track its progress
toward demonstrating the achievement of environmental results:
• Increase percentage of EPA grant and cooperative agreement
work plans consistent with Environmental Results under EPA
Assistance Agreements, EPA Order 5700.7.
Baseline:
(based on 2006 data]
63% of workplans are consis-
tent with Order
Target:
2010: 75% of workplans
201 2: 90% of workplans
• Increase percentage of EPA grant and cooperative agreement
progress reports that are consistent with Environmental Results
under EPA Assistance Agreements , EPA Order 5700.7.
Baseline: Target:
To be developed in 2009 follow- 2010: increase of 10% from
ing completion of a study
baseline
2012: increase of 20% from
baseline
+ Objective 1.1: Implement government-wide perfor-
mance and progress report formats consistent with
Agency environmental results requirements.
+ Objective 1.2: Develop a framework for determining
the appropriate types of measures to use in Agency
grant programs.
4- Objective 1.3: Enhance the Agency's ability to col-
lect, monitor achievement of, and report significant
environmental results data.
-------
Objectives and Activities
Goal 2:
Foster a High-Quality Grants Management Workforce
must have a skilled workforce of grant specialists (including grants management officers] and project
officers to manage its grants, as well as trained managers and supervisors with grant-related or oversight re-
sponsibilities. The Agency also must make certain that the varying skills and competencies of the grant special-
ist and project officer functions are appropriately distinguished. In general, grant specialists and project officers
have complementary roles and responsibilities. Grant specialists are principally responsible for the functions
related to the administrative and financial aspects of grants, while project officers are primarily responsible for
the programmatic and technical requirements.
The Agency will ensure that the roles and responsibilities of the grants management workforce, those individu-
als who approve the award of EPA grant funds, and supervisors and managers are clearly defined, with particu-
lar focus on areas critical to the Agency's stewardship of grants. The Agency will develop detailed guidance that
addresses these roles and responsibilities and will incorporate them in training and in performance standards.
-------
As part of this effort, the Agency will address the ways in which the proj-
ect officer function may be carried out, not only to recognize organiza-
tional and programmatic differences but also to maintain accountability.
To manage grants at EPA, project officers must be certified, which
requires that they complete the basic project officer course and then
take the refresher course every 3 years. The Agency will consider a
certification program for grants management officers/grant special-
ists consistent with the nature and timing of government-wide initia-
tives related to professionalizing the grants management workforce.
In the interim, the Agency will work toward establishing a comprehen-
sive training program for grants management officers/grant special-
ists and appropriate training requirements for other award officials.
It also will move forward with developing a revised long-term training
plan addressing administrative and programmatic training. EPAs in-
vestment in human capital in the grants management area is linked to
and complements the Agency's human resources plan and the Presi-
dent's Management Agenda initiative on the strategic management of
human capital.
EPA identified four objectives related to strengthening the grants man-
agement workforce and specific activities for achieving each objective:
Develop guidance on the roles and responsibilities
of all Agency personnel involved in grants management.
Using existing or newly developed process models, identify
areas requiring more clearly defined roles and responsibilities.
[2009]
Building on previous guidance, develop and issue a document
that fully explains the differences in grants management roles
and responsibilities and identifies areas requiring joint effort or
teamwork. Make the document the basis for policies and pro-
cedures to be included in an assistance administration manual
(see Goal 3). [2009]
Issue a document for recipients explaining the different roles
and responsibilities of Agency grants management personnel.
[2009]
Provide online tools, such as a library of samples and best
practices, as a resource for Agency use. [2009]
Update the Agency's 2004 grants management
workload analysis to assess the amount of human resources de-
voted to grants management.
Update the workload model to reflect policies and require-
ments (for example, environmental results] adopted after the
model was initially completed. [2010]
Compare current staffing with the 2004 baseline to deter-
mine whether the number of grants management personnel is
adequate. [2010]
Adopt standards for organizing and staffing the
project officer function.
Issue guidance, including best practices, on the use of techni-
cal contacts, grants management experts, and other resourc-
es to support the project officer of record. (2011 ]
Update performance plan guidance to address the inclusion
of grants management-related performance standards in the
performance plans of all individuals in program offices involved
in grants management. (2011]
Explore options for creating new performance recognition and
incentive programs for individual project officers and supervi-
sors to encourage excellence in grants management. (2011]
Have the Human Resources Council or Grants Management
Council consider changes to the structure of the EPA project
officer workforce, including whether the Agency should move
toward full-time project officers or consider standards for the
number of grants to be managed by project officers. (2011 ]
-------
4- Objective 2.4: Implement a comprehensive training program for
the EPA grants management workforce.
•v- Address the administrative and programmatic training require-
ments related to the competencies for grants management
officers/grant specialists and project officers and their man-
agers in a revised long-term training plan. [2010]
Performance Measures
The following performance measures will help EPA track its progress
toward strengthening the grants management workforce:
Publication of a revised long-term training plan.
Baseline:
Not applicable
Target:
March 31, 2010
Percentage of certified project officers who are involved in grants
management activities and whose individual performance plans
have at least one critical element that refers to responsibilities
related to grants management.
Baseline:
90% (based on 2007 data]
Target:
2009: 95%
2011: 98%
2013: 99%
Percentage of project officers who find that the annual Perfor-
mance Assessment Review System contributed to increased ac-
countability in relation to grants management.
Baseline:
46.8% (based on 2007
survey with
602 respondents]
Target:
2009: 65%
2011: 75%
+ Objective 2. 7: Develop guidance on the roles and
responsibilities of all Agency personnel involved in
grants management.
+ Objective 2.2 Update the Agency's 2OO4 grants
management workload analysis to assess the
amount of human resources devoted to grants
management.
+ Objective 2.3: Adopt standards for organizing and
staffing the project officer function.
+ Objective 2.4: Implement a comprehensive training
program for the EPA grants management
workforce.
-------
Objectives and Activities
Goal 3:
Enhance the Management Process for Grants Policies
and Procedures
/•/the last 5 years, EPA issued new policies and procedures on competition, post-award monitoring and man-
agement, pre-award reviews of nonprofit organizations, and other grants-related topics. However, the Agency
must improve its process for managing its grants management policies, which includes development, issuance,
and periodic reevaluation. As the Agency seeks to refine the grants management accomplishments of the last
5 years and continuously improve its management of grants, it will need additional policies, some of which will
be dictated by government-wide efforts to streamline grants management. Therefore, it will become increas-
ingly important for the Agency to have an effective process for issuing grants policies and procedures, as well
as their implementing guidance.
The Agency will improve its process for managing grants policies and procedures. The process will be transpar-
ent and inclusive, and its outputs will be accessible and current. The process will include well-articulated roles
-------
and responsibilities, standard time frames to complete activities (in-
cluding the ability to "fast track" policies and procedures when neces-
sary], a means of identifying needed policies, feedback and evaluation
mechanisms to enhance communications, and a unified, authoritative
means of issuance.
An enhanced process for managing grants policies and procedures
will have long-term benefits for the Agency. For example, the Agency's
partners will have an opportunity to participate and receive training,
a mechanism will be available for resolving issues related to individual
policies, and policies and procedures will be easily identifiable and ac-
cessible. In addition, the Agency will be able to quickly respond to the
need for additional policies and will have a standard way to modify or
rescind policies.
EPA identified five objectives related to enhancing the management
process for grants policies and procedures and specific activities for
achieving each objective:
Develop a vision for Agency grants management
policies, procedures, and implementing guidance.
Develop a flow chart of the current process for developing, is-
suing, and communicating about grants management policies,
procedures, and guidance. [2009]
Assess what has worked in the current process and what can
be improved. [2009]
Benchmark other federal agencies' methods of grants man-
agement policymaking and communication. [2009]
Identify guiding principles for grants management policies and
procedures. [2009]
Establish a comprehensive management framework
for grants management policies, procedures, and implementing
guidance.
Define roles and responsibilities of participants in the develop-
ment and implementation of Agency policies and procedures.
[2010]
Determine the characteristics of the framework, for example,
audience, types of issuances, needed distinctions among types
of programs and grants (including research and continuing en-
vironmental programs], time frames, means of dissemination,
implementation approach, and ways to ensure consistency in
implementation across the Agency. [2010]
Develop and implement a method to assess requirements for
human resources, training, and automated systems related to
new or revised Agency policies and procedures. [2010]
Establish processes for evaluating the effectiveness of poli-
cies and procedures and for updating and maintaining them.
[2010]
Review internal grants management policies using
the newly developed comprehensive framework.
Using the framework under Objective 3.2, review all grants
management policies and procedures issued through
January 1, 2010. [2011]
Develop a mechanism for involving partners in the
development of EPA's grants management policies and
procedures.
Identify the categories or types of policies that require or
would benefit from the input of partners. [2010]
Identify ways to involve partners. [2010]
-------
+ Objective 3.5: Use a comprehensive approach to training partners.
Ensure that the revised long-term training plan for EPA grant
applicants and recipients addresses both comprehensive and
targeted training on how to comply with EPA policies. [2010]
Performance Measures
The following performance measures will help EPA track its progress
toward enhancing the management process for grants policies and
procedures:
• Percentage of new and revised policies, issued on or after
January 1, 2009, on which training is offered at least 4 weeks
before required implementation.
Baseline:
None—new activity
Target:
2009-2013: 100%
Completion of an assistance administration manual.
Baseline:
Not applicable
Target:
June 30, 2009
Percentage of grants management policies and procedures, in
place as of January 1, 2010, reviewed for consistency with
guiding principles.
Baseline:
None—new activity
Target:
2011: 100% of those in the
assistance administration manual
2012: 100% of those in
EPA Orders and other
formats not superseded
by the assistance
administration manual
y^
+ Objective 3.1: Develop a vision for Agency grants
management policies, procedures, and implement-
ing guidance.
+ Objective 3.2: Establish a comprehensive manage-
ment framework for grants management policies,
procedures, and implementing guidance.
+ Objective 3.3: Review internal grants management
policies using the newly developed comprehensive
framework.
+ Objective 3.4: Develop a mechanism for involving
partners in the development of EPA's grants
management policies and procedures.
+ Objective 3.5: Use a comprehensive approach to
training partners.
-------
Objectives and Activities
Goal 4:
Standardize and Streamline the Grants Business
Process
/\s part of the initial grants management plan, the Agency developed a comprehensive pre-award and post-
award management approach to ensuring that policies are followed and that applicants and recipients are
aware of their responsibilities and comply with administrative and programmatic requirements. As part of
this approach, the Agency reviewed its internal grants operations and took actions through training and other
means to increase compliance. The Agency based its assessments on existing requirements and ways of doing
business. EPA now needs to standardize and streamline the grants business process. Specifically, the Agency
needs to make the process more responsive and focused on outcomes, and it needs to seek ways to decrease
the administrative burden on grant applicants and recipients consistent with the need for accountability.
To achieve this goal, the Agency will seek to integrate multiple aspects of grants management: compliance,
accountability, quality, and customer satisfaction. The primary emphasis will be on EPAs internal business pro-
cess. While reviewing the grant process to distinguish roles and responsibilities (an objective of Goal 2),
-------
EPA will evaluate whether the grant process can be more efficient,
recognizing that streamlining the process can reduce the administra-
tive burden on applicants and recipients, resulting in, for example, re-
duced paperwork or reporting, and more timely awards. The Agency
will address quality in its internal grants management reviews (includ-
ing comprehensive performance reviews and self assessments] and in
its reviews of recipient performance. Also, as it implements changes
due to government-wide grants streamlining, the Agency will review
opportunities for streamlining the business process for itself and for
applicants and recipients.
Finally, EPA will measure customer satisfaction and use the customer
feedback to improve the process, including making it more
transparent.
EPA identified four objectives related to standardizing and streamlining
the grants business process and specific activities for achieving each
objective:
Identify opportunities for streamlining the grants
business process and achieving greater standardization.
Define the objectives and intended outcomes of the individual
steps of the business process, focusing on those that con-
sume the most time and resources to determine, among
other things, whether some could be eliminated, approval
authorities could be lowered, or reporting requirements could
be reduced. [2010]
Using business process flows, identify activities that dif-
fer among Agency Grants Management Offices [GMOs] and
program offices and standardize those activities if possible.
[2010]
Identify best practices that can be adopted Agency-wide.
[2010]
Assess ways to achieve more even distribution of award activ-
ity throughout the fiscal year. [2010]
Make the competitive process as efficient and
transparent as possible.
Identify ways to make the competitive process more efficient
and effective for both the Agency and applicants. (Ongoing]
Explore further opportunities for use of competition. (Ongoing]
Modify the approach to grants management re-
views of EPA offices.
Assess the protocols for reviewing EPA program and grants
management offices to identify ways to measure quality and
revise the guidance, as appropriate. (2010]
Develop a comprehensive approach to obtaining
and using partner and customer viewpoints.
Develop a baseline, through surveys or other means, of the
views of project officers and other program and grants man-
agement personnel on the grants management process and
requirements and on the performance of each function in
carrying out that process. (2011]
Develop or update grants management customer service
standards, including expectations for both Agency grants man-
agement and program personnel. (2011]
Obtain feedback from the Agency's applicant and recipient
communities to assess their satisfaction with such business
indicators as timeliness, responsiveness, knowledge, and
consistency. (Ongoing]
Develop a structure to assess and address areas of concern
resulting from surveys and other feedback mechanisms.
(2011]
-------
Performance Measures
The following performance measures will help EPA track its progress
toward standardizing and streamlining the grants business process:
• Percentage of acceptable funding packages with commitment
notices sent by program offices to GMOs within 60 days of the
application receipt date (date the application receives a grant
number from the GMO] (includes any proposed award, competitive
or noncompetitive, other than those under continuing environmen-
tal programs].
Baseline:
62% (based on
2007 data]
Target:
2009: 67%
2010: 72%
2011: 77%
2012: 82%
2013: 87%
• Percentage of grants awarded within 60 days of receipt of an
acceptable funding recommendation and commitment notice.
Baseline:
89% (based on 2007 data]
Target:
2009-2013: At least 90%
Competitively award at least 90% of the dollars or 90% of new
awards subject to the competition policy.
Baseline: Target:
90% of dollars or number of 2009-201 3: At least 90% dol-
new awards (as specified in EPA lars or number of new awards]
Order 5700.5A1]
Amount of unliquidated obligations on expired, but not financially
closed out, grants.
-------
Baseline:
$33.8 million (based on 2008
data]
Decrease amount by 1 5% per
year
Target:
2009: $28.7 million
2010: $24.4 million
2011: $20.7 million
2012: $17.6 million
2013: $15.0 million
Percentage of grants that expired in the previous fiscal year and
are closed out.
Baseline:
90% (as specified in EPA Order
5700.6]
Target:
2009-2013: 90%
Percentage of grants that expired in fiscal years prior to the previ-
ous fiscal year and are closed out.
Baseline:
99% (as specified in EPA Order
5700.6]
Target:
2009-2013: 99%
Percentage of awards that receive baseline monitoring consistent
with Policy on Compliance, Review and Monitoring (EPA Order
5700.6].
Baseline:
To be calculated using 2008
Target:
2009: 85%
data after September 30, 2008 2010: 90%
2011: 95%
2012: 100%
2013: 100%
+ Objective 4.1: Identify opportunities for streamlining
the grants business process and achieving greater
standardization.
+ Objective 4.2: Make the competitive process as ef-
ficient and transparent as possible.
+ Objective 4.3: Modify the approach to grants man-
agement reviews of EPA offices.
+ Objective 4.4: Develop a comprehensive approach
to obtaining and using partner and customer view-
points.
-------
Objectives and Activities
Goal 5:
Leverage Technology to Strengthen Decision Making
and Increase Public Awareness
7fi,B time of increased accountability and shrinking budgets, the need for effective grants management requires
the availability of accurate, complete, and up-to-date financial and other information both for internal EPA use
and for the public. It also requires reducing or eliminating unnecessary duplication of effort. Consistent with
other goals to streamline processes and make them transparent and to manage for results, the use of manual
processes must be minimized. Information must be readily accessible by EPA personnel and the public and
must be presented in easily understood and consolidated formats. It is essential that EPA expand or enhance
the use of automation in support of its efforts to streamline and standardize its grants business process from
planning through closeout (Goal 4], as well as its efforts to improve access to information and file management.
EPA has improved its electronic management of grants over the years, using its Integrated Grants Manage-
ment System, but the system is aging, built in an outmoded technology, and is due for replacement. EPA
intends to migrate grant information technology services to a Grants Management Line of Business [GMLOB]
-------
service center to take advantage of government-wide, comprehensive
grant solutions. Under the GMLOB, EPA will be required to move to
a different model: consortia and shared service providers and more
common business processes across federal agencies. The Agency
must make some key decisions about its transition to the GMLOB.
EPA will identify the gaps that must be addressed, as well as alterna-
tive approaches and costs of doing so. The purpose of this goal is to
ensure that—in moving to a new model, a new system, and, potential-
ly, a new business process—EPA not only maximizes opportunities to
use automation in grants management but also adequately considers
the needs of its staff and partners, ensures that any unique aspects
of the Agency's grants business process are considered for continu-
ation or elimination, and maximizes the potential for a successful
transition.
Overall, this goal will prepare the Agency for the next generation
of grants management—seamless automated processes that are
compliant, user friendly, and cost-effective and that produce high-
quality data. Expanding use of automation, providing public access
to information and data about EPA grants management, and making
informed decisions about the GMLOB are essential prerequisites to
EPAs continued and long-term success in grants management. At
the same time, the Agency must preserve its unique processes and
requirements, eliminate activities that do not add value or are not
cost-effective, and ensure that the result is beneficial for EPAs grants
management operations, considering costs, other resource require-
ments, and risk.
EPA identified five objectives related to leveraging technology to
strengthen decision making and increase public awareness and spe-
cific activities for achieving each objective:
Expand use of Grants.gov.
Develop a plan (including timelines, required outreach, and
responsibility for approving exceptions] to increase the avail-
ability of electronic applications under continuing environmen-
tal program grants. [2009]
Provide outreach to applicants promoting use of Grants.gov.
(Ongoing]
Provide electronic tools necessary to achieve ac-
countable, high-quality grants management.
Complete development and implementation of the data mart
containing grants management and related financial informa-
tion, including design of standard reports consistent with user
needs and a user-friendly ad hoc reporting capability. [2009]
Develop a process to identify user needs and determine prior-
ity, cost, and feasibility of implementation. [2009]
Implement a grants management dashboard and desktop
tools for Agency grants management and program personnel
and their managers and supervisors. [2010]
Plan for the acquisition and implementation of an electronic fil-
ing system for Agency grant records as part of the implemen-
tation of the GMLOB system. (2011 ]
Evaluate the selected GMLOB service provider to
identify gaps.
Create a high-level taxonomy of EPA grants that need to be
accommodated by GMLOB (for example, research, other-than
research, earmarks, and construction]. (2009]
Identify gaps and requirements. (2009]
Determine the nature of each gap and the basis of the re-
quirements (statute, policy, other] and determine whether EPA
can modify the requirements and associated business process
activities, is willing to bear the costs of EPA-specific processes
and requirements that differ, or can work with the GMLOB
consortium to adopt the EPA requirement. (2009]
-------
Conduct a transparent process for GMLOB plan-
ning, transition, and implementation.
Form user groups to assist with the transition to the selected
GMLOB systems. (2009 and beyond]
Maintain an EPA GMLOB Steering Committee to provide man-
agement input and oversight to the GMLOB migration project.
(2010 and beyond]
Develop a plan for training EPA personnel on the features of
the selected system. (2010]
Develop a communications strategy related to planning for,
migrating to, and evaluating the GMLOB. (2009 and beyond]
Consult Agency partners on GMLOB transition planning and
implementation. (2009 and beyond]
Provide timely and accurate grant information and
data to the public.
Submit grant award data to the LJSASpending.gov website as
required by the Federal Funding Accountability and Transpar-
ency Act of 2006. (Ongoing]
Maintain the OGD Internet site with up-to-date competition and
grant policy information, as well as recipient training opportu-
nities. (Ongoing]
The following performance measures will help EPA track its progress
toward leveraging technology to strengthen decision making and in-
crease public awareness:
Percentage of state and tribal continuing environmental programs
offered for application through Grants.gov.
To be determined following
assessment in 2008
2009:
2010:
2011: 100%
Completion of migration to the Grants Management Line of Busi-
ness.
Not applicable
March 31, 2012
Percentage of Agency personnel involved in grants management
who are satisfied with their access to, and the availability of, infor-
mation in the grants data mart.
To be determined following
assessment in 2009
2011: 10% above baseline
Expand use of Grants.gov.
Provide electronic tools necessary to
achieve accountable, high-quality grants
management.
Evaluate the selected GMLOB service
provider to identify gaps.
Conduct a transparent process for
GMLOB planning, transition, and implementation.
Provide timely and accurate grant
information and data to the public.
-------
-------
&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Grants and Debarment (3901R)
1 200 Pennsylvania Ave, NW
Washington, DC 20460
EPA-216-K-08-001
www.epa.gov
October 2008
------- |