Overview
Title
Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation Statement of Organization, Functions, and Delegations of Authority
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The ACF has changed how it organizes its team, making new groups to help better understand and use information to support kids and families. They want to be careful about spending money, but the plan is a bit tricky to understand, and they're not clear on what new technologies they'll use.
Summary AI
The Administration for Children and Families (ACF) has reorganized its Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (OPRE) by establishing a new Office of Research and Evaluation (ORE) and the Office of the Chief Data Officer (OCDO). This reorganization aims to enhance guidance, research, and data management related to programs designed to improve the lives of children and families. The OPRE will now focus on strategic planning, research, and evaluation while maintaining and supporting other divisions related to economic independence, child and family development, and family strengthening. The OCDO will handle data governance and enhance data usage to improve program effectiveness and efficiency.
Abstract
The Administration for Children and Families (ACF) has reorganized the Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (OPRE). This reorganization creates a new Office of Research and Evaluation (ORE) and an Office of the Chief Data Officer (OCDO). This notice provides the Statement of Organizations, Functions, and Delegations of Authority for the new office of officer.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document from the Federal Register outlines a significant reorganization within the Administration for Children and Families (ACF), specifically affecting the Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (OPRE). This restructuring initiative establishes two new entities: the Office of Research and Evaluation (ORE) and the Office of the Chief Data Officer (OCDO). The aim of this reorganization is to bolster the effectiveness and efficiency of programs designed to improve the well-being of children and families across the United States.
General Summary
The reorganization centers on enhancing the OPRE's guidance, research, and data management capabilities. With the creation of the ORE, there is a clear emphasis on rigorous program evaluation and compliance with legislation like the Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking Act of 2018. Meanwhile, the OCDO is tasked with overseeing data governance and maximizing the use of data to improve program outcomes. The OPRE will now also support divisions focusing on economic independence, child and family development, and family strengthening.
Significant Issues and Concerns
Several concerns arise from this document. Firstly, it outlines substantial organizational changes that may entail significant spending; however, it lacks a detailed cost breakdown, raising questions about potential fiscal efficiency. Additionally, the document mentions the transfer of funds, personnel, and equipment, but does not specify how these resources will be allocated, leading to possible inefficiencies. The use of complex jargon may also hamper public accessibility and understanding, making it challenging for those unfamiliar with administrative language to grasp the document's implications.
Impact on the Public
Broadly, this reorganization could lead to more effective public service delivery by enhancing the ACF's ability to measure and improve program outcomes. By focusing on data-driven decision-making, the ACF aims to increase accountability and transparency in its operations, ultimately benefiting children and families who rely on these services.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For stakeholders involved directly with ACF's programs—such as state and community agencies, and private sector partners—the reorganization promises greater collaboration and support through data governance and strategic planning. However, there may be initial challenges to adapt to new processes and communication structures. For policymakers and legislators, this shift towards evidence-based practices could offer a more robust framework for assessing program mandates and efficacy. Conversely, the ambiguity around certain implementations, such as the application of "emerging technologies," might complicate strategic planning for some stakeholders seeking clarity on future investments and innovations.
In conclusion, while the reorganization signals a forward-looking approach by the ACF, it comes with concerns regarding resource allocation and the potential barrier of complex documentation that could impact its smooth execution and public transparency.
Issues
• The document reorganization may involve significant spending on creating new offices and divisions such as the Office of Research and Evaluation (ORE) and the Office of the Chief Data Officer (OCDO), but there is no detailed breakdown of the costs involved, raising a concern about potential wasteful spending.
• The distribution and transfer of funds, personnel, and equipment are mentioned but lack detailed information regarding how these resources will be allocated, which might lead to inefficiencies or resource wastage.
• The document contains complex terminology and dense paragraphs that make it difficult to understand for those unfamiliar with administrative or technical jargon, potentially hindering transparency and accessibility for the general public.
• The document mentions the application of 'emerging technologies' but lacks specificity about what these technologies might be, leading to ambiguity about the types of investments or changes that might occur.
• The details concerning the implementation of the Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking Act of 2018 and other Acts lack specificity on how compliance will be achieved, which may lead to ambiguity in understanding the full impact of these legal requirements.