To assess new requirements from the standpoint of how they will affect mission, agency leaders must answer and act on questions like, how will environmental, safety, economic and social considerations integrate into daily operations? And, more importantly, what can realistically be accomplished without negatively impacting mission outcomes and services?
Due to our status as a trusted partner across government, our clients asked us to review the draft EO to help them evaluate the proposed language along those lines, determine if there were areas that still needed to be better defined and elaborated, and delineate how the new policy and its mandates differed from relevant preceding EOs.
Our review team included mission and policy subject matter experts in climate change, renewable energy, waste management, sustainable procurement, emissions reductions, and electric vehicles.
To determine how the draft language would impact client missions, we reviewed agency processes and datasets and consulted with federal program managers to establish mission-performance baselines, estimate current agency performance, and conduct analyses based on the Administration’s proposed goals. We also compared baseline agency performance against current annual goals and proposed outyear goals to determine if current processes and requirements would be sufficient to meet the new goals or if additional steps would need to be taken.
In areas where the EO provided unclear instructions or may have negatively impacted government missions, Booz Allen helped clients draft questions and suggestions to submit to the Administration addressing their concerns.
Booz Allen’s broad federal footprint and deep well of expertise in climate science and policy positioned us to help clients from different agencies sync up on solutions to similar challenges, and to devise solutions that balanced mission and operations considerations with Administration goals.