FINAL REPORT

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

MANAGEMENT REFORM ACT

AUDIT

OIG-00-077 March 29, 2000

Office of Inspector General

*******

United States Department of the Treasury
March 29, 2000

MEMORANDUM FOR LISA ROSS

ACTING ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR MANAGEMENT

 AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

FROM: Dennis S. Schindel /S/

Assistant Inspector General for Audit

SUBJECT: Final Report on Information Technology

Management Reform Act Audit

This memorandum transmits our final report on the

Information Technology Management Reform Act (ITMRA) Audit.

This audit was performed to determine the progress of the

Department of the Treasury to manage, evaluate, and make

strategic decisions about Treasury’s portfolio of

information technology (IT) initiatives. This audit

focused on the establishment of the Treasury Investment

Review Board (TIRB) and its related roles and

responsibilities which are intended to fulfil the

requirements of the Information Technology Management

Reform Act.

Since the enactment of ITMRA, the Department of the

Treasury has taken several steps to establish an

organizational structure to more effectively deliver its IT

systems. The TIRB, the Chief Information Officer's

organization, the Treasury Information System Architecture

Framework Committee, and the Treasury Information

Management Exchange (TIMEX) were each created and became

partners in this organizational structure. At the center

of this structure is the Office of Information Technology

Policy and Management (ITPM). Furthermore, all of the

bureaus have instituted the Investment Review Board (IRB)

process and members of the ITPM office staff are sitting

members at the bureaus’ level (except Internal Revenue

Service).

Our review disclosed that the TIRB is not adequately

structured to provide executive direction and effective

management for fully implementing ITMRA.
Page 2

Furthermore, adequate information is not being collected by

the Department in order to create, maintain and manage a

portfolio of IT Investments by the TIRB. Accordingly, we

recommended that the current TIRB structure should include

representation for the bureaus as well as other working

group membership from the Department. We also recommended

the issuance of formal directives to further Treasury's

progress in implementing ITMRA by specifying a dollar

threshold for investment cost requiring business case

documentation to be submitted to the ITPM office for

concurrence.

Your February 24, 2000, response to our draft report

concurred with our two findings and recommendations. The

response is summarized and evaluated in the body of the

report and included in detail as Appendix 1. For our first

recommendation, we believe that once the new board members

are added the actions noted in your response will

successfully implement the intent of our recommendation.

For the second recommendation, we fully concur with

management on the issuance of the ITMRA guidance. The OIG

supports management's efforts in implementing I-TIPS,

including the establishment of policies and procedures for

its use. However, we recognize that I-TIPS is not fully in

effect and questions have been raised about the sharing of

cost data between the Department and the bureaus. Until

these issues on sharing information are addressed, the

intent of our recommendation cannot be fully implemented.

We will be entering the recommendations contained in this

report in the Inventory Tracking and Closure (ITC) System.

Consistent with Treasury Directive No. 40-01, we request a

written description of actions taken and planned, and

target dates for any incomplete corrective actions, within

30 days of the date of this memorandum. The response to

our draft report indicated that no information was

identified that would warrant protection under the Freedom

of Information Act. Therefore, the report will become

public.
Page 3

We appreciate the courtesies and cooperation provided to

our auditors during the audit. If you have any questions

or require further assistance, you may contact me at

(202) 927-5400, or a member of your staff may contact

Clifford Jennings, Director, Office of Information

Technology Audits at (202) 927-5771.

Attachment
Table of Contents

OIG-00-077 Information Technology

Management Reform Act Audit

Page i

Overview........................................................................................................................... 1

Background............................................................................................... 2

Objective, Scope, and Methodology................................................................ 4

Audit Results............................................................................................. 4

 The TIRB Should Better Support the CIO’s Authority............................... 6

 Recommendation 1............................................................................ 9

 Information Required for IT Investment Analysis Is Not Being Provided......10

 Recommendation 2...........................................................................12

Appendices

1. Management Comments...............................................................14

2. Major Contributors to This Report.................................................17

3. Report Distribution.....................................................................18
OIG-00-077 Information Technology

Management Reform Act Audit

Page 1

Overview 

This report presents the results of our audit to determine the

progress of the Department of the Treasury in managing,

evaluating, and making strategic decisions about its portfolio of

information technology (IT) initiatives. This audit focused on the

establishment of the Treasury Investment Review Board (TIRB)

and its related roles and responsibilities which were intended to

satisfy the requirements of the Information Technology

Management Reform Act (ITMRA), also known as the ClingerCohen legislation.

The ITMRA mandates that Departments establish processes and

provide information to help ensure that IT projects are being

implemented at acceptable costs, and within reasonable and

expected time frames. To achieve this implementation objective,

the law requires IT management processes to be institutionalized

throughout the organization and used for all IT related decisions.

These IT management processes should be designed and

implemented to maximize the value as well as assess and manage

the risks of IT acquisitions and ongoing operations.

The Department of the Treasury established the TIRB to select,

manage and evaluate IT investments. Three years following the

enactment of ITMRA in 1996, the Department remains in its initial

stages of implementing processes to manage its IT investments.

For example, the TIRB lacks the structure to provide executive

direction and effective management over IT investments. As a

result, the TIRB and the Department’s organizational practices

must be improved in order to help the Department manage,

evaluate, and make strategic decisions regarding Treasury’s

portfolio of IT initiatives.

The Department of Treasury, Office of the Chief Information

Officer (CIO), initially prepared a white paper which addressed

how the Office of the CIO was to be structured to carryout the

mandates of the ITMRA legislation. Furthermore, to fulfill the

law’s mandates, the CIO organization is currently laying the

groundwork to establish, develop, maintain and facilitate the

implementation of a sound, integrated information technology

architecture for the Department.
OIG-00-077 Information Technology

Management Reform Act Audit

Page 2

Although the Department has taken these positive steps to

implement ITMRA, improvements can be made in managing,

evaluating and in making strategic decisions regarding the

Treasury’s portfolio of information technology initiatives and

ongoing operations. While the CIO's white paper created a

structure which would satisfy the requirements of ITMRA, the

structure was never fully implemented. The Department can better

implement ITMRA by providing an effective methodology for the

selection of information technology investments, the management

of such investments, and the evaluation of the results of such

investments. Two findings and two recommendations have been

included in this report to assist the Department in improving its

implementation of ITMRA.

Background

Several management reforms enacted in this decade have

introduced requirements emphasizing the need for Federal

agencies to significantly improve their management processes and

the methods they use to select and manage their IT resources.

One of these management reforms is the ITMRA also known as

the Clinger-Cohen legislation. A key goal of ITMRA is that

agencies should have processes and information to help ensure

that their IT projects are being implemented at acceptable costs,

within reasonable and expected time frames, and are contributing

to tangible, observable improvements in mission performance.

Moreover, these agency-wide processes should be

institutionalized throughout the organization, and should be used

for all IT-related decisions. The ultimate goal of these various

legislative reforms is for agencies to make better decisions that

will measurably increase the performance of the Government.

The Information Technology Management Reform Act,

(Division E of Public Law 104-106), enacted on February 10,

1996, requires Federal agencies to focus more on the results

achieved through IT investments while streamlining the Federal

IT procurement process. Specifically this Act introduces much

more rigor and structure into how agencies approach the selection

and management of IT projects than what had been previously

called for in the Brooks Act (Public Law 89-306). For example,

the head of each agency is required to implement a process for

maximizing the value and assessing and managing the risks of the

agency's IT acquisitions.
OIG-00-077 Information Technology

Management Reform Act Audit

Page 3

The Department CIO has the responsibility for carrying out the

requirements of ITMRA and as a result, designed their

organization to provide comprehensive support to the Secretary in

driving the IT strategic planning and decision-making processes.

The Office of IT Policy and Management (ITPM) as part of the

CIO organization is assigned executive responsibilities. Their

functions include strategic and capital planning; portfolio

planning; investment management; portfolio evaluation and

selection; investment evaluation review; investment performance

review; and, monitoring assessment, developing information

management policies, standards and procedures.

The Department of the Treasury established the TIRB to select,

manage and evaluate IT investments. As originally established in

1996, the TIRB was chaired by the Department CIO and

consisted of senior executives from the Bureau CIO’s, the Bureau

Chief Financial Officers (CFO), and senior managers from the

Department. The original TIRB drafted operating guidelines,

was actively involved in several IT related issues and published

minutes of their meetings. In April of 1999, representation of the

TIRB was reduced to five members, which is comprised as

follows: 

• The Assistant Secretary for Management and CFO

(chairperson)

• Treasury’s Chief Information Officer

• Treasury’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Management

Operations

• Treasury’s Deputy CFO

• The Deputy Assistant Secretary, for Strategy and Finance.
OIG-00-077 Information Technology

Management Reform Act Audit

Page 4

Objective, Scope, and Methodology

The overall objective of this audit was to determine the progress

of the Department of the Treasury to manage, evaluate, and make

strategic decisions about Treasury’s portfolio of information

technology (IT) initiatives. This audit focused on the

establishment of the TIRB and its related roles and

responsibilities which were intended to fulfill the requirements of

the Information Technology Management Reform Act.

We conducted this audit between May 1999 and July 1999 at the

Chief Information Officer’s, Office of Information Technology

and Policy Management (ITPM). Further, we interviewed one

current member and three former members of the TIRB. We also

obtained Treasury architectural process documents and attended

architectural meetings.

Audit work was performed in accordance with accepted

Government Auditing Standards.

Audit Results

Since the enactment of ITMRA, the Department of the Treasury

has taken several steps to establish an organizational structure to

more effectively deliver its IT systems. The TIRB, the CIO

organization, the Treasury Information System Architecture

Framework (TISAF) Committee, and the Treasury Information

Management Exchange (TIMEX) were each created and became

partners in this organizational structure. At the center of this

structure is the Office of Information Technology Policy and

Management (ITPM). Furthermore, all of the bureaus have

instituted the Investment Review Board (IRB) process and

members of the ITPM office staff are sitting members at the

bureaus’ level (except Internal Revenue Service).

The CIO organization issued guidance, which summarized the

key provisions of ITMRA, placing emphasis on those provisions,

which were most likely to affect the Department’s information

systems procedures, operations, and guidance to the bureaus.

The guidance outlined the Secretary of the Treasury’s and the

CIO’s responsibilities under ITMRA. It also identified how the

CIO organization would be structured in order to support these
OIG-00-077 Information Technology

Management Reform Act Audit

Page 5

responsibilities and also included the functions of the ITPM

office.

Also, to better fulfill ITMRA requirements the CIO organization

developed the TISAF. On September 30, 1997, ITPM completed

their architectural process manual as guidance to complement

their Information System Architectural Framework document.

Together, the TISAF and architectural process documents help

standardize Treasury’s IT architecture as required by ITMRA. In

addition, regular monthly meetings were held between ITPM

personnel and bureau representatives to assist in implementing

and adhering to these standards.

The Department also demonstrated its commitment to ITMRA

with the establishment of the TIMEX group. TIMEX was

established to support the Treasury bureaus and CIO in bringing

about the Treasury Department’s implementation of the ITMRA

legislation related to IT planning and investment management.

Although the establishment of these various groups formed an

organizational structure capable of carrying out ITMRA’s goals

and objectives, the Department has been unable to support this

structure through the implementation of effective IT investment

controls and guidance. Therefore, the Department can improve

its effectiveness in managing, evaluating and in making strategic

decisions regarding IT initiatives and investments.

The Implementation of ITMRA Can Be Made More Effective

Although the CIO organization drafted guidance and initiated an

organizational structure, which established the initial control

framework needed to satisfy the requirements of ITMRA, the

guidance was never issued as a directive. As a result, the actual

implementation of ITMRA has been negatively impacted. In

addition, the TIRB is not effective in managing, evaluating and in

making strategic decisions regarding the Departments portfolio of

IT initiatives. Further, Treasury has been unable to streamline its

IT acquisitions and emphasize life cycle management of IT as a

capital investment. This condition places the Department’s $597

million in IT initiatives and operations at risk of not being

economical investments.
OIG-00-077 Information Technology

Management Reform Act Audit

Page 6

The TIRB Should Better Support the CIO’s Authority

The Department of the Treasury established the TIRB to select,

manage and evaluate IT investments. However, the TIRB’s

current roles and responsibilities are not clearly defined. As a

result, the TIRB’s authority for the executive direction and

management of the portfolio of Treasury’s IT initiatives is

limited.

The TIRB first met on December 20, 1996, in an attempt to

satisfy and comply with the requirements of ITMRA. Per the

original charter, the TIRB will review Treasury information

technology investments upon the recommendation of the

Department CIO or bureau’s Investment Review Board.

Subsequently, the CIO organization developed operating

guidelines to provide detailed explanation of the purpose of the

TIRB, as well as to define the TIRB’s processes and

requirements. However, in April 1999, the Assistant Secretary

for Management re-invented the TIRB to broaden its scope to

include non-information technology investments and to designate

the Chief Financial Officer as the chairperson. The TIRB’s new

structure does not include representation from the bureaus and

other working group membership throughout Treasury. The reinvented TIRB also eliminated the representation of the senior

executives from Department program areas. In addition, the reinvented TIRB no longer publishes the minutes of its meetings.

During the review, we found that the management oversight

currently performed by the TIRB is deficient. The TIRB is

currently performing only capital planning and investment control

over five projects. The five IT investments under TIRB review

are:

1. Treasury Human Resources Initiative

2. Treasury Communication Environment (TCE) and TCS

3. Treasury Wireless Radio Program

4. Customs’ ACE/ITDS initiatives

5. Disaster Recovery Initiative.

According to our analysis of Information Systems Plans for Fiscal

Years 1997-2001, by the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary

for Information Systems, there are over 95 major systems

throughout the Treasury that the TIRB should be monitoring from

an agency-wide perspective. For example, Financial

Management Services’ Payments and Claims Enhanced
OIG-00-077 Information Technology

Management Reform Act Audit

Page 7

Reconciliation System, Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms’ Firearm

Tracing System, and the U.S. Mints Consolidated Information

System are major systems that could have been monitored. Since

the TIRB is narrowly focusing their attention on only five

investments, their scope of activities for managing according to

ITMRA is limited. The capability of the TIRB is also being

hampered by the fact that there is no agency-wide portfolio of IT

investment to select, manage and evaluate.

For example, ITMRA requires that the selection of IT

investments be made on the basis of a risk ranked portfolio.

However, the TIRB has delegated authority to the various

bureaus for making these decisions. ITMRA also requires that

management be in a position to approve, modify and/or cancel

investments as necessary. However, the current TIRB does not

have the information such as project cost, status, slippage, or

milestone schedules necessary for making those decisions.

Without this information the TIRB’s management of investments

is limited.

In January 1998, the CIO organization placed a work order with

a consulting firm to propose operating procedures and to provide

a detailed explanation of the original TIRB’s purpose, processes,

and requirements. In April 1998, the consulting firm drafted a

report, “TIRB Operating Procedures.” Based upon their

analysis, the TIRB structure would rely on other investment

review boards and a decision-working group to assist the TIRB in

making decisions and recommendations. According to the draft

report, the primary support for the TIRB would reside in a

working group that operated at the Department level. This group

would provide the analysis necessary for TIRB discussion and

decision-making. Further, the consulting report stated that the

TIRB should also rely on a Departmental Services Investment

Review Board (DSIRB). This DSIRB would also reside at the

Department level and have oversight responsibilities over

corporately shared IT services.

According to the consultant’s report, two levels of support were

needed for the TIRB operations. The two levels of support would

serve as an integrating structure for agency-wide management.

The suggested structure recommended an intermediary investment

review board and a team with members from various Treasury

offices. The combined structure would support the TIRB’s

decision making by:
OIG-00-077 Information Technology

Management Reform Act Audit

Page 8

• Providing ITMRA guidance (e.g., capital investment

criteria).

• Coordinating review with staff.

• Assuring reviews of IT initiatives/portfolios.

• Preparing TIRB reviews of selected IT

investments/portfolios, applying decision criteria.

• Communicating actions of TIRB.

• Recommending projects for TIRB review.

The TIRB has not institutionalized a supporting structure to

propose, develop, and evaluate the results of all information

system investments. Consequently, IT strategic decisions are

either relegated to the bureaus or just not made. For example,

the TIRB has not issued a directive, which details their

investment review process for monitoring, managing and

evaluating IT investments. Furthermore, the current TIRB has

not acted on the consultant’s report to provide for more inclusive

intermediary board structures. Without a complete structure and

process, IT issues are delegated to technical and staff units

without prescribing quantitative benchmarks and standards. Such

benchmarks and standards should be used by the TIRB to

evaluate current IT investment performance, document

opportunities for improvement, and hold program managers as

well as stakeholders accountable for IT decisions.

Per the CIO guidance, the TIRB is to coordinate its activity

through the ITPM office and perform IT investment reviews. In

April 1999, the TIRB was reinvented. At that time, the

expressed purpose of the TIRB, was to be the steward of

Treasury’s capital investments. The TIRB was tasked with: (1)

ensuring regular monitoring and proper management of these

investments, (2) ensuring that the investments support the

Treasury strategic plan, and (3) meeting the requirements of the

ITMRA statute and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)

guidelines that support the budget process for Treasury’s capital

investments.

The current TIRB lacks the integrating structure to provide

executive direction and effective management. The roles and

responsibilities for this integrating structure have not been

clarified by the TIRB for putting ITMRA into effect. As a result,

there is no defined process to manage investments from an

agency-wide perspective. To better satisfy ITMRA requirements,
OIG-00-077 Information Technology

Management Reform Act Audit

Page 9

the TIRB should fully implement investment management

practices for making IT strategic decisions and be given the

power, authority, and mission to exercise overall control over IT

Department-wide.

Recommendation:

1. The current TIRB structure should include representation from

the bureaus as well as other working group membership from the

Department. Also, the Treasury should formally institutionalize

the intermediary board structure and support-working group to

more effectively adhere to the requirements of ITMRA. The

intermediary board structure should be comprised of senior

executives from both the Department and Bureau program areas.

Such a structure will better allow Treasury to select, manage, and

evaluate IT investments from an agency-wide basis.

Management Response and OIG Comment

Treasury filled the position of Executive Director for the Capital

Investment Review Board (CIRB), so that full time attention will be

given to an expanded selection of investments across all bureaus.

The Chief Financial Officer from Engraving & Printing has been

added as a permanent CIRB member and consideration is being given

to adding additional members to the Investment Review Board. The

newly structured board has expanded their oversight to include 14

capital investment projects. The new Director will focus on

monitoring the approved projects on a regular basis. The Director is

also putting more structure to the process and requiring more

participation by scheduling pre-CIRB meetings at the staff level.

The OIG believes that once the new board members are added that

actions noted in management's response will successfully implement

the intent of our recommendation.
OIG-00-077 Information Technology

Management Reform Act Audit

Page 10

Information Required for IT Investment Analysis Is Not Being

Provided

The Department of the Treasury lacks sufficient information

regarding proposed IT investments upon which to base their

analysis and to support decisions regarding the management,

oversight and governance functions of its IT investments. As a

result, there is no evaluation of IT investments being made for

maximizing the value as well as assessing and managing the risks

of IT acquisitions for the Department. Further, the significant

changes and performance outcomes as required by ITMRA are

not being achieved.

The mission of the IT Policy and Management Office (ITPM) is

to provide effective IT management practices, policies, and

procedures to achieve the goals of ITMRA. In response to the

ITMRA legislation, the ITPM office realigned its resources and

responsibilities to provide a broader framework of IT investment

management. The Desk Officers were to emphasize active IT

investment evaluation, selection, and review through established

criteria for assessing and quantifying returns and risks for IT

projects/systems. Such a process was to help with the evaluation

and review of bureau IT portfolios for clarity, consistency,

performance and effectiveness. Furthermore, this process was to

provide a minimum criterion in considering whether to undertake

a particular investment in information systems.

The bureaus have not been asked to provide ITPM/Desk Officers

the necessary data needed to create and maintain the portfolio of

IT investments. As a result, the Desk Officers cannot perform

the investment analysis required by ITMRA and also support the

TIRB process. Specifically, business case information needed to

control and evaluate IT investments has not been provided.

Without this data and analysis the CIO organization cannot: (1)

control and compare projects/systems against projected costs,

schedule, and performance; (2) effectively make strategic

decisions for continuing, modifying or canceling each project;

and (3) conduct post-implementation reviews to determine actual

cost, benefits, risks, and returns.

The Desk Officers, as part of the ITPM office, were not

participating in the oversight or monitoring of IT investments.

The bureaus are not providing business case documentation to
OIG-00-077 Information Technology

Management Reform Act Audit

Page 11

them. No Treasury directive (TD) defined their roles and

responsibilities for properly effecting ITMRA requirements.

Current practices are not allowing an integral part of the CIO

organization to carry out its mission to integrate their activities

across the agency. For example, the Desk Officers were not

provided the documentation for major systems such as the

Internal Revenue Service’s Tax Systems Modernization effort,

Custom’s Services Treasury Enforcement Communications

Systems (TECS) and the Secret Service’s White House Access

Control System.

The Department has not provided the specific guidelines and

directions needed to effectively manage IT investments according

to ITMRA requirements. The CIO organization issued guidance,

which described how the Office of the CIO would be structured

in order to carry out the mandates of ITMRA. Although, the

guidance summarized the key provisions of ITMRA, outlined the

responsibilities of the CIO and the Agency Head; described how

the office of the CIO would be organized in order to support

these responsibilities; and described in particular how IT

management, oversight, and governance functions would be

performed within the Office of IT Policy and Management; this

guidance was not formally adopted. Consequently, the significant

changes in IT management, as required by ITMRA, were not

fully implemented.

Although the CIO organization initially published guidance to its

Web site, formal directives necessary to integrate their processes

throughout Treasury were not issued. Management attributed

insufficient funds and other priorities as the reasons for not

completing the process documents. For example, formal

directives, official policy and procedures for IT life cycle

management and the evaluation of IT investments, or the

integration of the Desk Officers functions were not published.

Such authoritative process publication is needed to integrate

Treasury’s many policies, programs, services, processes, and

procedures into one framework to fully implement the ITMRA.

Treasury’s directives for IT investment management remain in

draft. Specifically, TD 81-01, “Treasury Information

Technology Programs”, TD 84-01, “Information System Life

Cycle”, and TD Publication 81-01, “Treasury Information

Technology Manual” have not been completed.
OIG-00-077 Information Technology

Management Reform Act Audit

Page 12

According to ITMRA guidance, an IT investment management

process is an integrated approach to managing IT investments that

provides for the continuous identification, selection, control, lifecycle management, and evaluation of IT investments. Such a

structured process provides a systematic method for agencies to

minimize risks while maximizing the return of IT investments.

For example, ITMRA calls for an agency-wide portfolio of IT

investments to select, manage and evaluate. This should be a

prioritized risk-rank list. For the ITMRA process to be most

effective it should be conducted as part of a continuous and

interdependent management effort.

Without a defined process to integrate the Desk Officer’s mission

with the rest of Treasury, there is no effective mechanism to fully

implement ITMRA requirements and make strategic decisions

consistently throughout the organization. Accordingly, each

bureau is in a position to make IT investment decisions based on

different criteria. Without the defined process available,

Department level resources are not effectively being employed to

enhance the IT investment management. Thus, the Department

of the Treasury has experienced unacceptable information

systems project failures, slow progress and disappointing results.

Examples of such projects include Tax System Modernization and

Custom’s Automated Commercial Environment.

Recommendation:

2. The Department of the Treasury should issue formal

 directives to further Treasury’s progress in implementing

 ITMRA. The directives should centralize the ITMRA

 function through the CIO organization on a Department-wide

 basis, and the directive should specify a dollar threshold for

 investment cost requiring business case documentation to be

 submitted to the ITPM office for concurrence. Furthermore,

 the directives should fully integrate the Department and the

 bureaus into an IT investment management process that

 provides for the continuous identification, selection, control,

 life-cycle management, and evaluation of IT investments from

 an agency-wide perspective.
OIG-00-077 Information Technology

Management Reform Act Audit

Page 13

Management Response and OIG Comment

The Chief Information Officer has agreed to finalize Treasury's

directives relating to ITMRA implementation and includes the

drafts cited in this report. Management has also agreed to

address the feasibility of specifying dollar thresholds as part of

the investment approval process. To maintain cost, schedule and

performance information for any selected project, the

Department has mandated the implementation and use of the

Information Technology Investment Portfolio System (I-TIPS).

To provide better executive direction the CIO is requiring more

coordination between the new Executive Director position, the

Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary (Strategy and Finance) and the

Department Budget Director to monitor the portfolio of IT

investments.

The OIG fully concurs with management on the issuance of the

ITMRA guidance. The OIG supports management's efforts in

implementing I-TIPS, including the establishment of policies and

procedures for its use. However, we recognize that I-TIPS is not

fully in effect and questions have been raised about the sharing of

cost data between the Department and the bureaus. Until these

issues on sharing information are addressed, the intent of our

recommendation cannot be fully implemented.
Appendix 1

Management Comments

OIG-00-077 Information Technology

Management Reform Act Audit

Page 14
Appendix 1

Management Comments

OIG-00-077 Information Technology

Management Reform Act Audit

Page 15
Appendix 1

Management Comments

OIG-00-077 Information Technology

Management Reform Act Audit

Page 16
Appendix 2

Major Contributors to This Report

OIG-00-077 Information Technology

Management Reform Act Audit

Page 17

Clifford Jennings, Director Office of Information Technology Audits

Edward Coleman, Deputy Director Office of Information Technology Audits

Michael DiDiego, IT Auditor

Michael Stein, IT Auditor

Joseph Maranto, Referencer
Appendix 3

Report Distribution

OIG-00-077 Information Technology

Management Reform Act Audit

Page 18

Treasury Departmental Offices

Acting Assistant Secretary for Management and Chief Financial Officer

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Information Systems and Chief Information Officer

Director of Information Technology Policy and Management

Assistant Director of Information Technology Policy and Management

Office of Strategic Planning and Evaluation, Departmental Offices

Office of Budget, Financial Management Division, Departmental Offices

Office of Accounting and Internal Control, Departmental Offices

Office of Management and Budget

OIG Budget Examiner