SOCIAL SECURITY 

ADMINISTRATION

Effective Planning and 

Management Practices 

Are Key to Overcoming IT 

Modernization Challenges

Statement of Valerie C. Melvin, Director

Information Management and Technology Resources 

Issues

Testimony 

Before the Subcommittee on Social 

Security, Committee on Ways and 

Means, House of Representatives

For Release on Delivery 

Expected at 10 a.m. ET

Thursday, July 14, 2016

GAO-16-815T

United States Government Accountability Office
United States Government Accountability Office

Highlights of GAO-16-815T, a testimony 

before the Subcommittee on Social Security, 

Committee on Ways and Means, House of 

Representatives

July 14, 2016

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

Effective Planning and Management Practices 

Are Key to Overcoming IT Modernization 

Challenges

What GAO Found

GAO’s reports have highlighted various challenges in the Social Security 

Administration’s (SSA) information technology (IT) planning and management. 

Overall, these reports identified weaknesses in, among other areas, system 

development practices, IT governance, requirements management, and strategic 

planning. The reports, collectively, stressed the need for the agency to 

strengthen its IT management controls. In previously reporting on SSA’s 

implementation of a new electronic disability system in March 2004, GAO noted 

that the agency had proceeded without (1) conducting testing that was adequate 

to evaluate the performance of all system components collectively and 

(2) evidence that it had consistently applied established procedures to guide the 

system’s development. Additionally, GAO’s April 2012 review of the agency’s IT 

modernization approach pointed out that SSA did not have an updated IT 

strategic plan to guide its efforts and its enterprise architecture lacked important 

content that would have allowed the agency to more effectively plan its 

investments. Beyond the challenges identified in these previous reports, GAO’s

May 2016 report on federal agencies’ IT legacy systems highlighted the 

increasing costs that agencies, including SSA, may be faced with as they 

continue to operate and maintain at-risk legacy systems.

Prior GAO work has shown that effectively managing IT needs depends on 

federal departments and agencies, including SSA, having key processes in 

place. Toward this end, GAO has identified and reported on a set of essential 

and complementary management disciplines that provide a sound foundation for 

IT management. Among these practices are: 

• Strategic planning to define what an organization seeks to accomplish and 

identify the strategies it will use to achieve desired results. 

• IT investment management that includes instituting an investment board, 

selecting investments that meet business needs, providing investment 

oversight, and capturing investment information. 

• Systems development and acquisition that includes defining requirements, 

managing project risk, reliably estimating cost, and developing an integrated 

and reliable master schedule, among other actions.

• Information security and privacy which are essential for preventing data 

tampering, disruptions in operations, fraud, and inappropriate disclosure of 

sensitive information.

• Service management for ensuring that IT services, such as server 

management and desktop support, are aligned with and actively support the 

business needs of the organization.

• Leadership for driving change, providing oversight, and ensuring 

accountability for results. 

Given the longstanding challenges with IT management and modernization 

efforts, it is important for SSA to implement a clearly established, rigorous, and 

disciplined approach for its current efforts to modernize its aging IT systems. 

Without doing so, challenges like those that the agency experienced with its past 

initiatives could continue to be an impediment to the agency in achieving the 

more modernized IT environment that is necessary to support its service-delivery 

mission.

View GAO-16-815T. For more information, 

contact Valerie C. Melvin at (202) 512-6304 

or melvinv@gao.gov.

Why GAO Did This Study

SSA delivers services that touch the 

lives of almost every American, and 

the agency relies heavily on IT 

resources to do so. Its computerized 

information systems support a range of 

activities—from processing Disability 

Insurance and Supplemental Security 

Income payments, to calculating and 

withholding Medicare premiums, and 

issuing Social Security numbers and 

cards. For fiscal year 2015, the agency 

reported spending approximately $1.3 

billion on hardware and software, 

computer maintenance, and contractor 

support, among other things. SSA’s IT 

infrastructure is aging and, thus, 

increasingly difficult and expensive to 

maintain. In its fiscal year 2017 budget, 

the agency has requested $300 million,

to be spread over 4 years, to 

modernize its IT environment. 

This statement summarizes challenges

that SSA has previously encountered 

in managing and modernizing its IT, as

described in prior GAO reports. It also

highlights selected best practices that 

GAO identified as essential to 

effectively planning and managing IT 

modernization efforts.

What GAO Recommends

GAO has made numerous 

recommendations to SSA to mitigate 

challenges in planning for and 

managing its IT. Among other things, 

GAO has recommended strengthening 

the roles and responsibilities of the

agency’s investment board, improving 

post-implementation reviews, and 

establishing an enterprise architecture 

to effectively guide modernization 

activities. The agency has taken a 

number of actions intended to address 

them.
Letter

Page 1 GAO-16-815T 

Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member Becerra, and Members of the 

Subcommittee:

I am pleased to be here today to participate in your hearing on 

modernizing the Social Security Administration’s (SSA) information 

technology (IT). SSA is responsible for delivering services that touch the 

lives of almost every American, and the agency relies heavily on IT 

resources to do so. Its computerized information systems support a wide 

range of activities—from processing Disability Insurance and 

Supplemental Security Income payments to calculating and withholding 

Medicare premiums and issuing Social Security numbers and cards. For 

fiscal year 2015, the agency reported spending approximately $1.3 billion 

on hardware and software, computer maintenance, and contractor 

support, among other things.

SSA has acknowledged the increasing age of its IT environment and has 

reported that some of its databases are at least 40 years old. Moreover, 

our recent reporting on federal agencies’ legacy IT1 has noted the 

increasing cost for agencies, including SSA, to operate and maintain their 

outdated systems. SSA has initiated various projects over the past two 

decades that were intended to update and improve parts of its 

infrastructure. More recently, it announced plans to pursue an agencywide IT modernization initiative.

At your request, my testimony today summarizes results from a number 

of our previous reports on SSA’s IT efforts. Additionally, in anticipation of 

the agency’s planned modernization initiative, my testimony highlights 

selected best practices that we have identified as being essential to an 

agency’s effective planning and management for such an initiative.

In developing this testimony, we relied on reports that we have previously 

issued. These reports, cited throughout this statement, include detailed 

information on the scope and methodology for our reviews. The work on 

which this statement is based was conducted in accordance with 

generally accepted government auditing standards. Those standards 

require that we plan and perform audits to obtain sufficient, appropriate 

evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions. 

 1

GAO, Information Technology: Federal Agencies Need to Address Aging Legacy 

Systems, GAO-16-468 (Washington, D.C.: May 25, 2016). 

Letter
Page 2 GAO-16-815T 

We believe that the evidence obtained provided a reasonable basis for 

our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.

SSA’s mission is to deliver Social Security services that meet the 

changing needs of the public. The Social Security Act and amendments2

established three programs that the agency administers:

• Old-Age and Survivors Insurance—provides monthly retirement and 

survivors benefits to retired and disabled workers, their spouses and 

their children, and the survivors of insured workers who have died. 

SSA has estimated that, in fiscal year 2017, $813 billion in old-age 

and survivors insurance benefits are expected to be paid to a monthly 

average of approximately 52 million beneficiaries.

• Disability Insurance provides monthly benefits to disabled workers 

and their spouses and children. The agency estimates that, in fiscal 

year 2017, a total of approximately $149 billion in disability insurance 

benefits will be paid to a monthly average of about 11 million eligible 

workers.

• Supplemental Security Income is a needs-based program financed 

from general tax revenues that provides benefits to aged adults, blind 

or disabled adults, and children with limited income and resources. 

For fiscal year 2017, SSA estimates that nearly $59 billion in federal 

benefits and state supplementary payments will be made to a monthly 

average of approximately 8.4 million recipients.

SSA relies on its IT resources to support the administration of its 

programs and related activities. For example, among other things, its 

systems are used to handle millions of transactions on the agency’s 

website, maintain records for the millions of beneficiaries and recipients of 

its programs, and evaluate evidence and make determinations of 

eligibility for benefits. According to the agency’s most recent Information 

 2 Title II, Federal Old-Age Survivors, and Disability Insurance, and Title XVI, Supplemental 

Security Income for the Aged, Blind and Disabled, of the Social Security Act are 

administered by the Social Security Administration. See 42 U.S.C. §§ 401-434 and 42 

U.S.C. §§ 1381-1383f.

Background
Page 3 GAO-16-815T 

Resources Strategic Plan,

3 its systems supported the processing of an

average daily volume of about 185 million individual transactions in fiscal 

year 2015.

SSA’s Office of the Deputy Commissioner for Systems is responsible for 

developing, overseeing, and maintaining the agency’s IT systems. 

Comprised of approximately 3,800 staff, the office is headed by the 

Deputy Commissioner, who also serves as the agency’s Chief Information 

Officer (CIO).

SSA’s acting commissioner has stated that the agency’s aging IT 

infrastructure is not sustainable because it is increasingly difficult and 

expensive to maintain. Accordingly, the agency has requested $300 

million in its fiscal year 2017 budget to be spread over 4 years to 

modernize its IT environment. As reflected in the budget, these 

modernization efforts are expected to include projects such as updating 

database designs by converting them to relational databases, eliminating 

the use of outdated code, and upgrading infrastructure.

Among the agency’s priority IT spending initiatives expected to be 

covered in the budget is its Disability Case Processing System. This 

system is intended to replace the 54 disparate Disability Determination 

Services’

4 component systems, support, and maintenance processes with 

a modern, common case processing system. According to SSA, the new 

system was to modernize the entire claims process, including case 

processing, correspondence, and workload management. However, SSA 

and others have reported substantial difficulty in the agency’s ability to 

carry out this initiative, citing software quality and poor system 

performance as issues. Consequently, as of June 2016, the initiative had 

been placed on the Office of Management and Budget’s government-wide 

list of 10 high-priority programs requiring attention.5

 3

SSA, Social Security Administration Information Resources Management Strategic Plan 

2016-2019 (Baltimore, Md.). 

4

SSA has agreements with state Disability Determination Services agencies to initially 

determine whether applicants are disabled.

5

Office of Management and Budget, Report to Congress: 10 High Priority Programs

(Washington, D.C.: June 9, 2016).
Page 4 GAO-16-815T 

We have issued previous reports highlighting various challenges in SSA’s 

management of its IT. Overall, these reports identified weaknesses in, 

among other areas, system development practices, IT governance, 

requirements management, and strategic planning. Our reports, 

collectively, stressed the need for the agency to strengthen its IT 

management controls.

• In previously reporting on SSA’s implementation of a new electronic 

disability system, we noted that the agency had proceeded without 

(1) conducting testing that was adequate to evaluate the performance 

of all system components collectively and (2) evidence that it had 

consistently applied established procedures to guide the system’s 

development.6 In view of the risks and the technological complexity, 

scope, and size of the initiative, we recommended that the agency, 

before continuing with its national rollout of the electronic disability 

system, ensure that all critical problems identified in pilot testing of the 

system were resolved and that end-to-end testing of the interrelated 

systems was performed; and ensure that all software that had been 

developed was approved and that systems were certified for 

production. SSA disagreed with the need for the end-to-end testing, 

stating that to perform such testing would delay the project and the 

agency’s ability to realize benefits from this initiative. However, the 

agency did subsequently take measures to ensure that users 

approved new software and that it certified its systems for production.

• In an evaluation of SSA’s investment management approach,7 we 

noted that, while the agency had executed a majority of key IT 

investment management practices, the critical process of providing 

oversight was not being fully executed. Further, we reported that a 

gap existed in the agency’s management of its IT in that more than 

half of its budget—for acquisitions—was not being overseen as part of 

the agency’s investment management process. We made seven 

recommendations related to strengthening the agency’s investment 

management capability. SSA agreed with six of our seven 

recommendations, and took actions to address five of them. For 

example, it established portfolio-level performance evaluation policies 

and procedures and criteria for assessing portfolio performance; it 

also tracked the status of corrective actions for underperforming IT 

 6

GAO-04-466. 

7

GAO-08-1020.

SSA Has Faced 

Long-Standing 

Challenges in IT 

Management and 

Modernization Efforts
Page 5 GAO-16-815T 

projects. However, the agency did not implement post-implementation 

reviews and was not managing its acquisitions within its IT investment 

management framework. Further, the agency disagreed with our 

recommendation that it develop policies and procedures for managing 

its IT acquisitions as investments and manage them using the 

investment board and investment management processes. The 

agency disagreed because it believed its existing investment 

management framework was adequate. Given that IT product and 

service acquisitions made up the majority of SSA’s IT budget, 

however, the investment board’s involvement was essential to helping 

ensure effective management of and full accountability for these 

acquisitions.

• In previously reporting on SSA’s efforts to ensure that its IT 

infrastructure can support the agency’s future data exchange 

environment,8 we noted that a detailed analysis needed to project the 

workload and performance requirements was not performed. In 

addition, we reported that the agency’s target enterprise architecture 

environment did not address specific business and technical 

requirements for supporting its data exchange program. We 

recommended that SSA conduct the analyses needed to define 

requirements for delivering data exchange services to its partners in 

the future and use the results of these analyses to update its target 

architecture. SSA agreed with these recommendations and, in 

September 2013, took actions to address them. For example, it 

conducted an assessment of its existing electronic exchange 

architecture and identified challenges it expected to encounter as 

requests for data increased, as well as descriptions of target 

architectural components intended to meet requirements for 

addressing the challenges.

• In an examination of the agency’s IT modernization approach, we 

pointed out that the approach lacked key practices to effectively guide 

its efforts.9 Specifically, SSA did not have an updated IT strategic plan 

to guide its modernization efforts and its enterprise architecture lacked 

important content that would have allowed the agency to more 

effectively plan its investments. We recommended that SSA take four 

actions. For example, we recommended that in updating the IT 

 8

GAO-09-966. 

9

GAO-12-495. 
Page 6 GAO-16-815T 

strategic plan to support the agency’s strategic plan, SSA include key 

elements—such as results-oriented goals, strategies, milestones, 

performance measures, and an analysis of interdependencies among 

projects and activities—and use the plan to guide and coordinate IT 

modernization projects and activities. We also recommended that the 

agency establish an enterprise architecture plan that included key 

components called for by federal guidelines10 and GAO’s enterprise 

architecture management framework11—such as the development of 

a service-oriented architecture road map—to effectively guide its 

modernization activities. The agency neither agreed nor disagreed 

with our recommendations. However, it subsequently took action to 

address two of the four recommendations by ensuring that 

performance measures were defined for ongoing IT modernization 

initiatives and updating its IT strategic plan to support the agency’s 

strategic plan. As of this testimony, we have not yet completed our 

evaluation of the agency’s actions to address the other two 

recommendations related to establishing an enterprise architecture 

plan and developing and clearly documenting investment review 

guidance and procedures to ensure oversight reviews will be effective 

in evaluating and controlling investments.

Beyond the challenges identified in the aforementioned reports, our 

recent report on federal agencies’ IT legacy systems highlighted the 

increasing costs that agencies, including SSA, may be faced with as they 

continue to operate and maintain at-risk legacy systems.12 We identified 

SSA’s investment in infrastructure operations and maintenance as being 

among the 10 largest expenditures of federal agencies in fiscal year 

2015. Further, we pointed out that legacy systems may become 

increasingly more expensive as agencies have to deal with issues, such 

as obsolete parts and unsupported hardware and software, and may pay 

 10For example, Federal CIO Council, A Practical Guide to Federal Service Oriented 

Architecture, version 1.1 (Washington, D.C.: June 2008); Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB), Management of Federal Information Resources, OMB Circular No. A-130 

Transmittal Memorandum #4 (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 28, 2000); and OMB, Information 

Technology Architectures, Memoranda 97-16 (Washington, D.C.: June 18, 1997).

11GAO, Organizational Transformation: A Framework for Assessing and Improving 

Enterprise Architecture Management (Version 2.0), GAO-10-846G (Washington, D.C.: 

August 2010).

12GAO, Information Technology: Federal Agencies Need to Address Aging Legacy 

Systems, GAO-16-468 (Washington, D.C.: May 25, 2016). 
Page 7 GAO-16-815T 

a premium to hire staff or engage contractors with the knowledge to 

maintain outdated systems. For example, SSA reported re-hiring retired 

employees to maintain its systems that include many programs written in 

Common Business Oriented Language (COBOL).

Our prior work further emphasized the importance of federal agencies 

using investment operational analyses—a key performance evaluation 

and oversight mechanism required by the Office of Management and 

Budget—to ensure operations and maintenance investments continue to 

meet agency needs.13 We noted that SSA had not previously conducted 

this analysis for its investments. An analysis such as this is important 

because, among other things, it provides information to agency decision 

makers on whether an investment’s actual annual operations and 

maintenance costs are as they were planned to be and whether there is a 

need to examine more cost-effective approaches to meeting agency 

mission objectives. We recommended that SSA perform such an analysis 

on its investment, and in January 2014 the agency did so.

Our prior work has shown that effectively managing IT needs depends on 

federal departments and agencies, including SSA, having key processes 

in place.14 Toward this end, we have identified and reported on a set of 

essential and complementary management disciplines that provide a 

sound foundation to support IT modernization efforts. These include the 

following:

• Strategic planning: Strategic planning defines what an organization 

seeks to accomplish and identifies the strategies it will use to achieve 

desired results. A defined strategic planning process allows an 

agency to clearly articulate its strategic direction and to establish 

linkages among planning elements such as goals, objectives, and 

strategies. A well-defined IT strategic planning process helps ensure 

that an agency’s IT goals are aligned with its strategic goals.15 Also,

 13GAO, Information Technology: Agencies Need to Strengthen Oversight of Multibillion 

Dollar Investments in Operations and Maintenance, GAO-14-66 (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 

6, 2013). 

14GAO, Library of Congress: Strong Leadership Needed to Address Serious Information 

Technology Management Weaknesses, GAO-15-315 (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 31, 2015). 

15GAO-12-495. 

Key Practices Are 

Essential for 

Managing Successful 

Modernizations
Page 8 GAO-16-815T 

as part of its strategic planning efforts, an organization should develop 

an enterprise architecture, which is an important tool to help guide the 

organization toward achieving the goals and objectives in its IT 

strategic plan.16 In addition, the organization should implement human 

capital management practices to sustain a workforce with the skills 

necessary to execute its strategic plan, which includes assessing 

current and future agency skill needs.17

• IT investment management: IT projects can significantly improve an 

organization’s performance, but they can also become costly, risky, 

and unproductive. Agencies can maximize the value of these 

investments and minimize the risks of acquisitions by having an 

effective and efficient IT investment management and governance 

process, which would include instituting an investment board, 

selecting investments that meet business needs, providing investment 

oversight, and capturing investment information.18 Emphasizing the 

importance of investment management, the Clinger-Cohen Act

requires executive branch agencies to establish a process for 

selecting, managing, and evaluating IT investments in order to 

maximize the value and assess and manage the risks of the 

acquisitions.19

• Systems development and acquisition: Our prior reviews have 

shown that proper implementation of disciplined practices for 

developing or acquiring IT systems can significantly increase the 

likelihood of delivering promised system capabilities on time and 

 16GAO, Organizational Transformation: A Framework for Assessing and Improving 

Enterprise Architecture Management (Version 2.0) (Supersedes GAO-03-584G), 

GAO-10-846G (Washington, D.C.: August 2010). 

17Such practices have been identified by both the Office of Personnel Management and 

GAO. See Office of Personnel Management, The Human Capital Assessment and 

Accountability Framework—Systems, Standards, and Metrics

(http://www.opm.gov/hcaaf_resource_center/) and GAO, Human Capital: Key Principles 

for Effective Strategic Workforce Planning, GAO-04-39 (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 11, 

2003). 

18GAO, Information Technology Investment Management: A Framework for Assessing 

and Improving Process Maturity (Supersedes AIMD-10.1.23), GAO-04-394G (Washington, 

D.C.: March 2004). 

1940 U.S.C. § 11312.
Page 9 GAO-16-815T 

within budget.20 These practices include defining the requirements 

that address the needs of the system users, managing project risk to 

identify potential problems before they occur, reliably estimating cost 

to help managers evaluate affordability and performance against a 

project’s plans, and developing an integrated and reliable master 

schedule that defines when and how long work will occur and how 

each activity is related to the others, among other actions. Best 

practices in these areas have been identified by organizations such as 

the Software Engineering Institute and GAO.21

• Information security and privacy: Effective security for federal IT 

systems and data is essential to prevent data tampering, disruptions 

in critical operations, fraud, and inappropriate disclosure of sensitive 

information, including personal information entrusted to the 

government by members of the American public. Recognizing the 

importance of information security and privacy, Congress enacted the 

Federal Information Security Modernization Act of 2014,

22 which 

requires executive branch agencies to develop, document, and 

implement an agency-wide information security program.23

Additionally, in order to help agencies develop such a program, the 

National Institute of Standards and Technology has developed 

guidance for information security and privacy.

• Service management: Agencies should develop and implement a 

process for ensuring that IT services, such as server management 

and desktop support, are aligned with and actively support the 

business needs of the organization. The Information Technology 

Infrastructure Library24 identifies key practices for successful service 

 20See, e.g., GAO, Information Technology: Critical Factors Underlying Successful Major 

Acquisitions, GAO-12-7 (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 21, 2011). 

21SEI, CMMI® for Development and Acquisition, Versions 1.3; GAO, GAO Cost 

Estimating and Assessment Guide: Best Practices for Developing and Managing Capital 

Program Costs, GAO-09-3SP (Washington, D.C., March 2009); and GAO-16-89G. 

22Pub. L. No. 113-283, 128 Stat. 3073 (Dec. 18, 2014). 

23The Federal Information Security Modernization Act of 2014, Pub. L. No. 113-283, 128 

Stat. 3073 (Dec. 18, 2014) partially superseded the Federal Information Security 

Management Act of 2002, enacted as Title III, E-Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 

107-347, 116 Stat. 2899, 2946 (Dec. 17, 2002). 

24Lou Hunnebeck and Colin Rudd, ITIL: Service Design © (London: The Stationary Office, 

2011). 
Page 10 GAO-16-815T 

management. These include developing a service catalog that 

identifies all IT services delivered by the service provider, as well as 

establishing service-level agreements between the IT service provider 

and its customer on the expected service-level targets.25

• Leadership: Effective leadership, such as that of a CIO, can drive 

change, provide oversight, and ensure accountability for results. 

Congress has also recognized the importance of having a strong 

agency CIO. For example, as part of the Clinger-Cohen Act, Congress 

required executive branch agencies to establish the position of 

agency CIO.26 The act also gave these officials responsibility and

accountability for IT investments, including IT acquisitions, monitoring 

the performance of IT programs, and advising the agency head on 

whether to continue, modify, or terminate such programs. More 

recently, in December 2014, Congress passed federal information 

technology acquisition reform legislation (commonly referred to as 

FITARA), which strengthened the role that agency CIOs are to play in 

managing IT.27 For instance, the law requires the head of covered 

agencies to ensure that the CIO has a significant role in the decision 

process for IT budgeting, as well as the management, governance, 

and oversight processes related to IT.

In conclusion, given SSA’s longstanding challenges with IT management 

and modernization efforts, it will be important for the agency to implement 

a clearly established, rigorous, and disciplined approach for its current 

efforts to manage and modernize its aging IT systems. Leveraging IT 

management best practices that we and others have identified and clearly 

documenting what is to be achieved, in what time frame, and at what cost 

could help position the agency to overcome challenges like those 

 25Examples of service-level targets include the hours that customers can expect the 

service to be available (e.g., 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday), availability of 

a service during the agreed service hours (e.g., 99.5 percent), and maximum number of 

failures or incidents that can be tolerated within an agreed time period. 

26Pub. L. No. 104-106, § 5125, 110 Stat. 186, 684 (Feb. 10, 1996); 40 U.S.C. § 11315 

and 44 U.S.C. § 3506(a). 

27Carl Levin and Howard P. “Buck” McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2015, Pub. L. No. 113-291, Div. A, Title VIII, Subtitle D, § 831, 128 Stat. 3292, 3438 

(Dec. 19, 2014); 40 U.S.C. § 11319. 
Page 11 GAO-16-815T 

encountered with past IT efforts. Without doing so, such challenges could 

continue to be an impediment to the agency achieving the more 

modernized IT environment that it needs.

Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member Becerra, and Members of the 

Subcommittee, this concludes my prepared statement. I would be 

pleased to respond to any questions that you or other members of the 

Subcommittee may have.

If you or your staff have any questions about this testimony, please 

contact Valerie C. Melvin, Director, Information Management and 

Technology Resources Issues, at (202) 512-6304 or melvinv@gao.gov.

Contact points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public 

Affairs may be found on the last page of this testimony statement. GAO 

staff who made key contributions to this statement are Nicole Jarvis 

(Assistant Director), Nancy Glover, Monica Perez-Nelson, Scott Pettis, 

and Christy Tyson (Analyst in Charge).

GAO Contact and 

Acknowledgments

(100989)
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety 

without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain 

copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be 

necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately.
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and investigative 

arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional 

responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability of the 

federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use of public 

funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides analyses, 

recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make informed 

oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s commitment to good government 

is reflected in its core values of accountability, integrity, and reliability.

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost is 

through GAO’s website (http://www.gao.gov). Each weekday afternoon, GAO 

posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence. To 

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products, go to http://www.gao.gov

and select “E-mail Updates.”

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of production and 

distribution and depends on the number of pages in the publication and whether 

the publication is printed in color or black and white. Pricing and ordering 

information is posted on GAO’s website, http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 

TDD (202) 512-2537.

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, MasterCard, 

Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information.

Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and YouTube.

Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E-mail Updates. Listen to our Podcasts.

Visit GAO on the web at www.gao.gov.

Contact:

Website: http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512-4400, 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125, 

Washington, DC 20548

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, DC 20548

James-Christian Blockwood, Managing Director, spel@gao.gov, (202) 512-4707

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7814, 

Washington, DC 20548

GAO’s Mission

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

Order by Phone

Connect with GAO

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Congressional 

Relations

Public Affairs

Strategic Planning and 

External Liaison

Please Print on Recycled Paper.