Should DOGE continue its efforts toward government efficiency?
Each program review should result in a clear recommendation as to its future existence, transfer, elimination, improvement or scope change.
From the Department of Government Efficiency to the Grace Commissions to the National Performance Reviews to the Presidents Management Agendas to the Government Performance and Results Act Modernization Act to high risk lists to duplication and overlap reports, the government has been trying to reform its programs in many ways over a long period of time. With congressional oversight committees, the Government Accountability Office, inspectors general, oversight agencies, performance officers, CXO councils, commissions and hordes of legislation and reports from good government groups, the government has more oversight and ideas for reform than any entity on earth. Yet proper program alignment along with true efficiency and effectiveness often eludes us.
Recently there have been reports of DOGE slowing down and their staff leaving the government. While I am not a fan of the DOGE approach, its intent is right. We need a systemic, stable and accountable function within government to address inefficiencies, waste and effectiveness. Unfortunately, most reform initiatives wain or do not survive administration transitions.
The reality is that government needs to reform, not only for dramatically improved efficiency and effectiveness, but to address the deficit and debt, and it should all start with a National Strategic Plan. Further, the government must consolidate common services and assess all programs to ensure “fit” in their current form.
What is a government program?
A program is a defined function or activity of government that leads to the achievement of a specific objective or result and consumes funds and other resources. It is required to carry out the responsibility of government. Programs can be large or small, simple or complex, mission or mission-support focused. In other words, if it expends money and resources to provide a product (passport) or service (security clearances), it’s a program. While each government program may have had an appropriate intent when it was first codified in legislation, it may have changed as the government and country matures in purpose, capacity and approach. That is why we need a National Strategic Plan to focus the government on what is important and within its purview, and Congress and the administration must be part of the solution.
Consolidate common services
The government needs a legislative mandate for consolidating and modernizing common services such as human resources, procurement, finance, loan administration and many more lines of business. The mandate is necessary since administrations have ebbed and flowed on this for over 40 years with millions spent, with little to show for it. A mandate will ensure the necessary attention, expertise, accountability and action. It also needs effective governance, the right business and operating models, and an effective transformation process with a proven return on investment as well as meaningful and measured outcomes.
Conduct and act on program fit and effectiveness
While all the initiatives and oversight tools identified above have contributed to an environment of reform, they have yet to create a culture of or an effective structured process toward reform. An approach toward efficiency and effectiveness for each program can be defined, but before the government can begin to address that, it must first determine program fit and not take a lot of time doing so. Fit simply determines if the program is a proper function of the federal government, is effective and should continue to exist in its current form. To assess fit, the government should identify and review each program in its inventory based on a set of established and unbiased criteria to determine its efficacy.
Each year the chief operating/management officer of each agency should schedule and review a selected number of programs within each year to determine if they still “fit” as essential and effective government programs under standard and disciplined protocols. Determine fit by assessing each program and answering the following questions:
Is the program an appropriate function of the federal government — does it meet the test of the Constitution, the national needs of the U.S. or its economy, or require the authority of the government to positively support the country?
Does the program in its current form benefit the American people? If appropriate, is there a cost/benefit realized? Does it have clearly defined benefits for the nation? Is the intended outcome still a valid intent? Is the program still applicable to contemporary society (i.e., a program that no longer needs the intended outcome or provide the intended incentives given current advances, needs, market or economy)?
What is the impact if the program were to be eliminated or modified?
Should the program be more appropriately implemented by others: state, local, community, family, individuals? With or without federal support?
Is the program duplicative? What legislative action is required to change it?
Could the program be combined with other federal programs for an efficient use of resources and savings?
Should the program be implemented by the private sector or a public/private partnership? If so, what would be the enhanced benefit to the American people and the shared risk and reward?
Can the government afford the program as prioritized against other pressing needs and budget? If so, does the benefit outweigh the cost?
If the program should remain, could it be made more efficient or realize improved effectiveness?
What hard choices need to be made to address our government’s fiscal issues? We know we need to increase revenue and cut costs to address our debt and deficit.
As a country, we may see a program as deemed important to our core values. Objectivity is critical. Each program review should result in a clear recommendation as to its future existence, transfer, elimination, improvement or scope change.
So to answer the initial question, the concept of DOGE should continue (under a different name and mission), be institutionalized and help eliminate waste, right size government, move it toward full accountability to the American people, and support revitalizing the fiscal strength of our government.
Steve Goodrich is a government effectiveness expert and author of Transforming Government from Congress to the Cubicle.
Copyright
© 2025 Federal News Network. All rights reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.