Guam § 1917 - Program Evaluation and Justification Review.

§ 1917. Program Evaluation and Justification Review.

“Agency” as contained in this Chapter shall mean government of Guam line agencies; autonomous or

semi-autonomous, boards, bureaus and commissions. “Programs” are programs defined by law as such,

under the purview of agencies. Every government agency shall be subject to a program evaluation and

justification review by the Public Auditor. Each agency shall offer its complete cooperation to the Public

Auditor so that such review may be accomplished.

Every department head, agency head or head of a program in the government of Guam must maintain

records in a manner consistent with the easy evaluation of program results and compliance with

COL 2025-08-27

performance standards established by I Liheslaturan Guåhan. Every department, agency or program head

in the government of Guam shall comply with recommendations made to them by the Public Auditor with

respect to proper record keeping to facilitate the purposes of this Chapter. A review of each program must

include at a minimum the following:

(a) the identifiable cost of each program;

(b) the specific purpose of each program, as well as the specific public benefit derived therefrom,

as well as a reiteration of the performance standards established by law for that program;

(c) compliance with achieving the outputs and outcomes associated with each program;

(d) an explanation of circumstances contributing to the government agency’s ability to achieve,

not achieve or exceed its projected outputs and outcomes associated with each program; and

(e) alternative courses of action that would result in administration of the same program in a more

efficient or effective manner. The courses of action to be considered must include, but are not limited

to:

(1) whether the program could be organized in a more efficient and effective manner,

whether the program mission, goals, or objectives should be redefined, or, when the agency

cannot demonstrate that its efforts have had a positive effect, whether the program should be

reduced in size or eliminated;

(2) whether the program could be administered more efficiently or effectively to avoid

duplication of activities and ensure that activities are adequately coordinated;

(3) whether the program could be performed more efficiently or more effectively by another

unit of the government or a private entity, or whether a program performed by a private entity

could be performed more efficiently and effectively by a government agency;

(4) when compared to costs, whether effectiveness warrants elimination of the program, or,

if the program serves a limited interest, whether it should be redesigned to require users to finance

program costs (Whether the cost to administer the program exceeds license and other fee revenues

paid by those being regulated.); and

(5) whether other changes could improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the program

and the consequences of discontinuing such program. If any discontinuation is recommended,

such recommendation must be accompanied by a description of alternatives to implement such

recommendation, including an implementation schedule for discontinuation and recommended

procedures for assisting employees affected by the discontinuation. Determination as to public

policy, which may include recommendations as to whether it would be sound public policy to

continue or discontinue funding the program, either in whole or in part, in the existing manner.

Whether the information reported has relevance and utility for the evaluation of each program.

Whether agency management has established control systems sufficient to ensure that

performance data are maintained and supported by agency records and accurately presented in

agency performance reports.