INFORMATION 

TECHNOLOGY 

REFORM

Progress Made; More 

Needs to Be Done to 

Complete Actions and 

Measure Results

Report to Congressional Requesters

April 2012

GAO-12-461

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO
United States Government Accountability Office

Highlights of GAO-12-461, a report to 

congressional requesters

April 2012

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY REFORM

Progress Made; More Needs to Be Done to Complete 

Actions and Measure Results

Why GAO Did This Study

While investments in IT have the 

potential to improve lives and 

organizations, federal IT projects too 

often experience cost overruns,

schedule slippages, and performance 

shortfalls. To address acquisition

challenges, improve operational 

efficiencies, and deliver more value to 

the American taxpayer, in December 

2010, OMB’s Federal CIO issued a 25-

point IT Reform Plan. 

GAO was asked to (1) evaluate the 

progress OMB and key federal 

agencies have made on selected 

action items in the IT Reform Plan, (2) 

assess the plans for addressing action 

items that are behind schedule, and (3) 

assess the extent to which sound 

measures are in place to evaluate the 

success of the IT reform initiatives. To 

do so, GAO selected 10 of the 25 

action items from the IT Reform Plan, 

focusing on the more important

activities due to be completed by 

December 2011; analyzed agency 

documentation; and interviewed 

agency officials. 

What GAO Recommends

GAO is making recommendations to 

three agencies to complete key IT 

Reform action items; the agencies 

generally concurred. GAO is also

making recommendations to OMB to 

complete key action items, accurately 

characterize the items’ status, and 

establish measures for IT reform 

initiatives. OMB agreed to complete 

key action items, but disagreed with 

the latter recommendations, noting that 

the agency believes it is characterizing 

the items’ status correctly and that 

measures are not warranted. GAO 

maintains that its recommendations 

are valid. 

What GAO Found

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and key federal agencies have 

made progress on action items in the Information Technology (IT) Reform Plan, 

but there are several areas where more remains to be done. Of the 10 key action 

items GAO reviewed, 3 were completed and 7 were partially completed by 

December 2011, in part because the initiatives are complex (see table). OMB 

reported greater progress than GAO determined, stating that 7 of the 10 action 

items were completed and that 3 were partially completed. While OMB officials 

acknowledge that there is more to do in each of the topic areas, they consider 

the key action items to be completed because the IT Reform Plan has served its 

purpose as a catalyst for a set of broader initiatives. They explained that work will 

continue on all of the initiatives even after OMB declares that the related action 

items are completed under the IT Reform Plan. We disagree with this approach. 

In prematurely declaring the action items to be completed, OMB risks losing 

momentum on the progress it has made to date. Until OMB and the agencies 

complete the action items, the benefits of the reform initiatives—including 

increased operational efficiencies and more effective management of large-scale 

IT programs—will likely be delayed. 

OMB and key agencies plan to continue efforts to address the seven items that

GAO identified as behind schedule, but lack time frames for completing most of 

them. For example, OMB plans to work with congressional committees during the 

fiscal year 2013 budget process to assist in exploring legislative proposals to

establish flexible budget models and to consolidate certain routine IT purchases 

under agency chief information officers (CIO). However, OMB has not 

established time frames for completing five of the seven IT Reform Plan action 

items that are behind schedule. Until OMB and the agencies establish time

frames for completing these corrective actions, they increase the risk that key 

action items will not be completed or effectively managed to closure. Further, 

they diminish the likelihood of achieving the full benefits of IT reform.

OMB has not established performance measures for evaluating the results of 

most of the IT reform initiatives GAO reviewed. Specifically, OMB has 

established performance measures for 4 of the 10 action items, including data 

center consolidation and cloud computing. However, no performance measures 

exist for 6 other action items, including establishing the best practices 

collaboration platform and developing a cadre of IT acquisition professionals.

Until outcome-oriented performance measures are in place for each of the action 

items, OMB will be limited in its ability to evaluate progress that has been made 

and to determine whether or not the initiative is achieving its intended results.

GAO Assessment of Selected IT Reform Plan Action Items

Data center consolidation ◐ Guidance on modular development ◐

Cloud computing ◐ Budget models for modular development ◐

Contract vehicle for infrastructure ● Routine IT purchases under agency CIO ◐

Best practices platform ◐ Investment review boards ●

IT acquisition professionals ● Role of agency CIO and CIO Council ◐

Source: GAO analysis of OMB and agency data. Key: ● = Completed, ◐ = Partially completed

View GAO-12-461. For more information, 

contact David A. Powner at (202) 512-9286 or 

pownerd@gao.gov.
Page i GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

Letter 1 

Background 2

OMB and Key Federal Agencies Have Made Progress on IT Reform 

Action Items, But Much Remains to Be Done 14

OMB and Key Agencies Plan to Address Items That We Found to 

Be Behind Schedule, But Lack Defined Time Frames for 

Completing Them 18

OMB Has Not Established Measures for Evaluating Results on 

Most IT Reform Initiatives 20

Conclusions 23

Recommendations for Executive Action 23

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 24

Appendix I Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 30

Appendix II Comments from the Office of Management and Budget 33

Appendix III Comments from the Department of Homeland Security 35

Appendix IV Comments from the Department of Justice 37

Appendix V Comments from the Department of Veterans Affairs 38

Appendix VI GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 40

Related GAO Products 41

Tables

Table 1: OMB’s IT Reform Plan: Action Items, Required Activities, 

and Responsible Parties 6

Contents
Page ii GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

Table 2: GAO’s Assessment of the Status of Key Action Items 15

Table 3: Assessment of Performance Measures Associated with 

Selected IT Reform Action Items 21

Abbreviations

CIO Chief Information Officer

GSA General Services Administration

IT information technology

NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology

OFPP Office of Federal Procurement Policy

OMB Office of Management and Budget

OPM Office of Personnel Management

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.
Page 1 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548

April 26, 2012

The Honorable Joseph I. Lieberman

Chairman

The Honorable Susan M. Collins

Ranking Member

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

United States Senate

The Honorable Thomas R. Carper

Chairman

Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government

 Information, Federal Services, and International Security

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

United States Senate

In December 2010, the Federal Chief Information Officer (CIO) released a 

25-point plan for reforming federal information technology (IT) 

management.1

To understand how agencies are implementing the IT Reform Plan, you 

asked us to (1) evaluate the progress the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) and key federal agencies have made on selected action 

items in the IT Reform Plan, (2) assess the plans for addressing any 

action items that are behind schedule, and (3) assess the extent to which 

sound measures are in place to evaluate the success of the IT reform 

initiatives.

This document established an ambitious plan for 

achieving operational efficiencies and effectively managing large-scale IT 

programs. It also clearly identified actions to be completed in three 

different time frames: (1) within 6 months (by June 2011), (2) between 6 

and 12 months (by December 2011), and (3) between 12 and 18 months 

(by June 2012).

To do so, we selected 10 action items from the IT Reform Plan, focusing 

on action items that (1) were expected to be completed by December 

2011, (2) covered multiple different topic areas, and (3) were considered 

 

1

The Federal Chief Information Officer is a position within the Office of Management and 

Budget.

 
 

Page 2 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

by internal and OMB subject matter experts to be the more important 

items. We also selected three federal agencies (the Departments of 

Homeland Security, Justice, and Veterans Affairs) based on several 

factors, including high levels of IT spending and large numbers of 

investments in fiscal year 2011. We then evaluated the steps OMB and 

the three federal agencies had taken to implement the selected action 

items from the IT Reform Plan. In cases where the action was behind 

schedule, we compared plans for addressing the schedule shortfalls to 

sound project planning practices.2 We also determined whether and how 

agencies were tracking performance measures associated with these 

action items, and compared these measures to best practices in IT 

performance management.3

We conducted this performance audit from August 2011 to April 2012 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain 

sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 

findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that 

the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and 

conclusions based on our audit objectives. See appendix I for a complete 

description of our objectives, scope, and methodology.

In addition, we interviewed OMB and 

selected agency officials regarding progress, plans, and measures.

IT can enrich people’s lives and improve organizational performance. For 

example, during the last two decades the Internet has matured from being 

a means for academics and scientists to communicate with each other to 

a national resource where citizens can interact with their government in 

many ways, such as by receiving services, supplying and obtaining 

information, asking questions, and providing comments on proposed 

rules.

 

2

See Carnegie Mellon University’s Software Engineering Institute, Capability Maturity 

Model® Integration for Acquisition, Version 1.3 (CMMI-ACQ, V1.3) and Project 

Management Institute Inc., A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge 

(PMBOK® Guide)–Fourth Edition, (Newtown Square, PA: 2008).

3

See OMB, Guide to the Program Assessment Rating Tool (Washington, D.C.: January 

2008); Department of the Navy, Office of the Chief Information Officer, Guide for 

Developing and Using Information Technology (IT) Performance Measurements 

(Washington, D.C.: October 2001); and General Services Administration, Office of 

Governmentwide Policy, Performance-Based Management: Eight Steps To Develop and 

Use Information Technology Performance Measures Effectively (Washington, D.C.: 1996).

Background 
 

Page 3 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

While investments in IT have the potential to improve lives and 

organizations, some federally funded IT projects can—and have—

become risky, costly, unproductive mistakes. As we have described in 

numerous reports and testimonies, federal IT projects too frequently incur 

cost overruns and schedule slippages while contributing little to missionrelated outcomes. Further, while IT should enable government to better 

serve the American people, the federal government has not achieved 

expected productivity improvements—despite spending more than $600 

billion on IT over the past decade.

Over the last two decades, Congress has enacted several laws to assist 

agencies and the federal government in managing IT investments. Key 

laws include the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,4 the Clinger-Cohen 

Act of 1996,5 and the E-Government Act of 2002.6 Also, the GPRA 

(Government Performance and Results Act) Modernization Act of 2010 

includes IT management as a priority goal for improving the federal 

government.7

• Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The act specifies OMB and agency 

responsibilities for managing information resources, including the 

management of IT. Among its provisions, this law establishes agency 

responsibility for maximizing the value and assessing and managing 

the risks of major information systems initiatives. It also requires that 

OMB develop and oversee policies, principles, standards, and 

guidelines for federal agency IT functions, including periodic 

evaluations of major information systems.

• Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996. The act places responsibility for managing 

investments with the heads of agencies and establishes CIOs to 

advise and assist agency heads in carrying out this responsibility. 

Additionally, this law requires OMB to establish processes to analyze, 

track, and evaluate the risks and results of major capital investments 

 

4

44 U.S.C. § 3501 et seq.

5

40 U.S.C. § 11101 et seq.

6

The E-Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347 (Dec. 17, 2002).

7

Pub. L. No. 111-352, 124 Stat. 3866 (2011). The GPRA (Government Performance and 

Results Act) Modernization Act of 2010 amends the Government Performance and 

Results Act of 1993, Pub. L. No. 103-62, 107 Stat. 285 (1993).

Roles and Responsibilities 

for Federal IT Management
 

Page 4 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

in information systems made by federal agencies and report to 

Congress on the net program performance benefits achieved as a 

result of these investments.

• E-Government Act of 2002. The act establishes a federal egovernment initiative, which encourages the use of web-based 

Internet applications to enhance the access to and delivery of 

government information and services to citizens, business partners, 

employees, and agencies at all levels of government. The act also 

requires OMB to report annually to Congress on the status of egovernment initiatives. In these reports, OMB is to describe the 

administration’s use of e-government principles to improve 

government performance and the delivery of information and services 

to the public.

• GPRA (Government Performance and Results Act) Modernization Act 

of 2010. The act establishes a new framework aimed at taking a more 

crosscutting and integrated approach to focusing on results and 

improving government performance. It requires OMB, in coordination 

with agencies, to develop long-term, outcome-oriented goals for a 

limited number of crosscutting policy areas at least every four years. 

The act specifies that these goals should include five areas: financial 

management, human capital management, IT management, 

procurement and acquisition management, and real property 

management.8

As set out in these laws, OMB is to play a key role in helping federal 

agencies manage their investments by working with them to better plan, 

justify, and determine how much they need to spend on projects and how 

to manage approved projects. Within OMB, the Office of E-government 

and Information Technology, headed by the Federal CIO, directs the 

policy and strategic planning of federal IT investments and is responsible 

for oversight of federal technology spending. In addition, the Office of 

Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP) is responsible for shaping the 

policies and practices federal agencies use to acquire the goods and 

services they need to carry out their missions.

On an annual basis, OMB is to provide information on 

how these long-term crosscutting goals will be achieved.

 

8

31 U.S.C. § 1120(a)(1)(B).
 

Page 5 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

Agency CIOs are also expected to have a key role in IT management. 

Federal law, specifically the Clinger-Cohen Act, has defined the role of 

the CIO as the focal point for IT management, requiring agency heads to 

designate CIOs to lead reforms that would help control system 

development risks; better manage technology spending; and achieve real, 

measurable improvements in agency performance.

In addition, the CIO Council—comprised of the CIOs and Deputy CIOs of 

28 agencies and chaired by OMB’s Deputy Director for Management—is 

the principal interagency forum for improving agency practices related to 

the design, acquisition, development, modernization, use, sharing, and 

performance of federal information resources. The CIO Council is 

responsible for developing recommendations for overall federal IT 

management policy, sharing best practices, including the development of 

performance measures, and identifying opportunities and sponsoring 

cooperation in using information resources.

After assessing the most persistent challenges in acquiring, managing, 

and operating IT systems, in December 2010, the Federal CIO 

established a 25-point IT Reform Plan designed to address challenges in 

IT acquisition, improve operational efficiencies, and deliver more IT value 

to the American taxpayer.9 The actions were planned to be completed in 

three different time frames: (1) within 6 months (by June 2011), (2) 

between 6 and 12 months (by December 2011), and (3) between 12 and 

18 months (by June 2012). Several different organizations were assigned 

ownership of the key action items, including the Federal CIO, the CIO 

Council, the General Services Administration (GSA), Office of Personnel 

Management (OPM), OFPP, the Small Business Administration, and 

other federal agencies. Table 1 contains detailed information on the 

action items in the IT Reform Plan. Shaded items are those selected for 

review in this report.

 

9

OMB, 25 Point Implementation Plan to Reform Federal Information Technology 

Management, (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 9, 2010).

Federal IT Reform Plan 

Strives to Address 

Persistent Challenges
 

Page 6 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

Table 1: OMB’s IT Reform Plan: Action Items, Required Activities, and Responsible Parties

Plan 

number Action item title Required activities

Responsible 

parties Due date 

1 Complete detailed 

implementation 

plans to consolidate 

800 data centers by 

2015

• Complete consolidation plans that include a technical 

roadmap, clear consolidation targets, and measurable 

milestones

• Identify dedicated agency-specific program managers

• Establish a cross-government task force comprised of the 

agency program managers

• Ensure the task force meets monthly

• Launch a public dashboard for tracking progress towards 

closures 

OMB and federal 

agencies

June 2011

2 Create a 

governmentwide 

marketplace for data 

center availability

• Establish a governmentwide marketplace for agencies to 

market or obtain data center services

OMB and GSA June 2012

3 Shift to a “cloud first” 

policy

• Establish a federal strategy for moving to cloud computinga

• Identify three services (per agency) that are to move to cloud 

computing

• Establish migration plans for the three services that are to 

move

• Fully migrate the first service within 12 months 

OMB and federal 

agencies

June 2011

4 Stand-up contract 

vehicles for secure 

Infrastructure-as-aServiceb solutions

• Make a common set of contract vehicles for secure cloudbased infrastructure solutions available governmentwide

GSA June 2011

5 Stand-up contract 

vehicles for 

commodity servicesc

• Make contract vehicles for cloud-based e-mail solutions 

available governmentwide

GSA December 

2011

6 Develop a strategy 

for shared services

• Establish a vision and benchmarks for sharing services among 

federal agencies

CIO Council December 

2011

7 Design a formal IT 

program 

management career 

path

• Create a specialized career path for IT program managers that 

focuses on experience and expertise

• Provide agencies authority to directly hire IT program 

managers

• Have agencies identify and plan to fill competency gaps in IT 

program management

OPM and OMB June 2011

8 Scale IT program 

management career 

path

• Expand IT program management career paths across the 

federal government 

OPM and federal 

agencies

June 2012

9 Require integrated 

program teams

• Issue guidance requiring integrated program teams for all 

major IT programs

• Dedicate resources throughout the program

• Make program team members accountable for individual goals 

and overall program success

OMB June 2011
 

Page 7 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

Plan 

number Action item title Required activities

Responsible 

parties Due date 

10 Launch a best 

practices 

collaboration 

platform

• Establish a portal for program managers to exchange 

information on best practices

• Require agencies to submit their experiences to the portal

• Codify and synthesize agency submissions to provide a 

searchable database that facilitates real-time problem solving 

CIO Council June 2011

11 Launch technology 

fellows program

• Create a technology fellows program and the accompanying 

recruiting infrastructure to allow the government to tap into the 

emerging talent pool at universities with well-recognized 

technology programs

CIO Council December 

2011

12 Enable IT program 

manager mobility 

across government 

and industry

• Develop a process to encourage the movement of program 

managers across the government and industry in order to 

leverage their knowledge and expertise

• Design opportunities for federal program managers to rotate 

through industry

• Establish a repository of information on all federal government 

IT program managers

OMB, CIO 

Council, and 

OPM

June 2012

13 Design a cadre of 

specialized IT 

acquisition 

professionalsd

• Define an IT acquisition specialist position

• Establish the requirements, guidance, curriculum, and process 

for becoming one

• Create guidance to strengthen the IT acquisition skills and 

capabilities of IT acquisition specialists

OMB and federal 

agencies

June 2011

14 Identify IT acquisition 

best practices and 

adopt 

governmentwide

• Study the experience of agencies with specialized IT 

acquisition teams

• Develop a model for implementing such teams 

governmentwide

OFPP June 2011

15 Issue contracting 

guidance and 

templates to support 

modular 

development

• Work with IT and acquisition community to develop guidance 

on contracting for modular developmente

• Obtain feedback from industry leaders

• Develop templates and samples supporting modular 

development

OFPP December 

2011

16 Reduce barriers to 

entry for small 

innovative 

technology 

companies

• Take steps to develop clearer and more comprehensive 

policies for government contracting with small businesses

Small Business 

Administration, 

GSA, and OFPP

June 2012

17 Work with Congress 

to create IT budget 

models that align 

with modular 

development

• Analyze working capital funds and transfer authorities to 

identify current IT budget flexibilities

• Identify programs at agencies where additional budget 

flexibilities could improve outcomes

• Work with Congress to propose budgetary models to 

complement the modular development approach

• Evaluate mechanisms for increased transparency for these 

programs

OMB and federal 

agencies 

June 2011
 

Page 8 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform 

Plan 

number Action item title Required activities 

Responsible 

parties Due date 

18 Develop supporting 

materials and 

guidance for flexible 

IT budget models 

 Develop a set of best practices and materials that explain the 

need for budget flexibilities and prescribe a path to achieve 

more flexible budget models 

OMB, Chief 

Financial Officer 

Council, and CIO 

Council 

December 

2011 

19 Work with Congress 

to scale flexible IT 

budget models more 

broadly 

 Work with Congress to launch flexible IT budget models at 

selected agencies 

 Extend these budget models across the government as 

successes are demonstrated 

OMB and federal 

agencies 

June 2012 

20 Work with Congress 

to consolidate 

commodity IT 

spending under 

agency CIO 

 Work with Congress to consolidate commodity IT spending 

under the agency CIO 

 Develop a workable funding model for “commodity” IT services 

 Have the CIO Council and agency CIOs identify “commodity” 

services to be included in this funding model as they are 

migrated towards shared services 

OMB and federal 

agencies 

June 2011 

21 Reform and 

strengthen 

Investment Review 

Boards 

 Revamp IT budget submissions

 Have agencies conduct “TechStat” reviewsf

 Have OMB analysts provide training to agency CIOs in the 

“TechStat” methodology 

OMB and federal 

agencies 

June 2011 

22 Redefine role of 

agency CIOs and 

CIO Council 

 Make agency CIOs responsible for managing the portfolio of 

large IT projects within their agencies 

 Have the CIO Council periodically review the highest priority 

“TechStat” findings assembled by the agency CIOs 

Federal CIO and 

agency CIOs 

June 2011 

23 Roll out “TechStat” 

model at a 

component level 

 Have an agency’s component organizations conduct 

“TechStat” reviews 

 Make agency CIOs responsible for deploying the necessary 

tools and training on how to conduct “TechStat” reviews 

Agency CIOs June 2012 

24 Launch “mythbusters” education 

campaign 

 Identify the major myths that hinder the acquisition process

 Reach out to key stakeholders in industry and government to 

dispel the myths 

OFPP June 2011 

25 Launch an 

interactive platform 

for agency-industry 

collaboration before 

requests for 

proposals are issued 

 Launch a governmentwide, online, interactive platform for 

identifying inexpensive, efficient solutions in the period prior to 

issuing a request for proposals 

GSA June 2011 

Source: GAO analysis of OMB’s IT Reform Plan. 

Note: The shaded items are those reviewed in this report. 

a

Cloud computing is an emerging form of computing where users have access to scalable, ondemand capabilities that are provided through Internet-based technologies. It has the potential to 

provide IT services more quickly and at a lower cost. 

b

Infrastructure-as-a-Service is one type of cloud computing in which a vendor offers various 

infrastructure components such as hardware, storage, and other fundamental computing resources. 

c

Commodity services are systems or services used to carry out routine tasks (e.g., e-mail, data 

centers, and web infrastructure). 

d

While the IT Reform Plan discusses having agencies develop cadres of specialists, there is no 

requirement for agencies to do so. 
 

Page 9 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

e

According to the IT Reform Plan, modular development is a system development technique that 

delivers functionality in shorter time frames by creating requirements at a high level and then refining 

them through an iterative process, with extensive engagement and feedback from stakeholders.

f

OMB defines a TechStat as a face-to-face, evidence-based accountability review of an IT investment 

that results in concrete actions to address weaknesses and reduces wasteful spending by turning 

around troubled programs and terminating failed programs.

Given the challenges that federal agencies have experienced in acquiring 

and managing IT investments, we have issued a series of reports aimed 

at improving federal IT management over the last decade. Our reports 

cover a variety of topics, including data center consolidation, cloud 

computing, CIO responsibilities, system acquisition challenges, and 

modular development. Key reports that address topics covered in the IT 

Reform Plan include:

• Data center consolidation. In July 2011, we reported on the status of 

OMB’s federal data center consolidation initiative.10 Under this 

initiative, OMB required 24 participating agencies to submit data 

center inventories and consolidation plans by the end of August 2010. 

However, we found that only one of the agencies submitted a 

complete data center inventory and no agency submitted a complete 

data center consolidation plan. We concluded that until these 

inventories and plans are complete, agencies might not be able to 

implement their consolidation activities and realize expected cost 

savings. We recommended that agencies complete the missing 

elements in their plans and inventories. In response to our 

recommendations, in October and November 2011, the agencies 

updated their inventories and plans. We have ongoing work assessing 

the agencies’ revised plans, and in February 2012, we reported that 

our preliminary assessment of the updated plans showed that not all 

agency plans were updated to include all required information.11

• Cloud computing. In May 2010, we reported on multiple agencies’ 

efforts to ensure the security of governmentwide cloud computing. We 

noted that while OMB, GSA, and the National Institute of Standards 

and Technology (NIST) had initiated efforts to ensure secure cloud 

 

10GAO, Data Center Consolidation: Agencies Need to Complete Inventories and Plans to 

Achieve Expected Savings, GAO-11-565 (Washington, D.C.: July 19, 2011). 

11GAO, Follow-up on 2011 Report: Status of Actions Taken to Reduce Duplication, 

Overlap, and Fragmentation, Save Tax Dollars, and Enhance Revenue, GAO-12-453SP

(Washington, D.C.: Feb. 28, 2012). 

GAO Has Previously 

Reported on Needed 

Improvements in Federal 

IT Management
 

Page 10 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

computing, significant work remained to be completed.12

More recently, in October 2011, we testified that 22 of 24 major 

federal agencies reported that they were either concerned or very 

concerned about the potential information security risks associated 

with cloud computing.

For example, 

OMB had not yet finished a cloud computing strategy; GSA had 

begun a procurement for expanding cloud computing services, but 

had not yet developed specific plans for establishing a shared 

information security assessment and authorization process; and NIST 

had not yet issued cloud-specific security guidance. We made several 

recommendations to address these issues. Specifically, we 

recommended that OMB establish milestones to complete a strategy 

for federal cloud computing and ensure it addressed information 

security challenges. OMB subsequently published a strategy which 

addressed the importance of information security when using cloud 

computing, but did not fully address several key challenges 

confronting agencies. We also recommended that GSA consider 

security in its procurement for cloud services, including consideration 

of a shared assessment and authorization process. GSA has since 

developed an assessment and authorization process for systems 

shared among federal agencies. Finally, we recommended that NIST 

issue guidance specific to cloud computing security. NIST has since 

issued multiple publications which address such guidance.

13

We also reported that the CIO Council had established a cloud 

computing Executive Steering Committee to promote the use of cloud 

computing in the federal government, with technical and 

These risks include being dependent on the 

security practices and assurances of vendors and the sharing of 

computing resources. We stated that these risks may vary based on 

the cloud deployment model. Private clouds, whereby the service is 

set up specifically for one organization, may have a lower threat 

exposure than public clouds, whereby the service is available to any 

paying customer. Evaluating this risk requires an examination of the 

specific security controls in place for the cloud’s implementation.

 

12GAO, Information Security: Federal Guidance Needed to Address Control Issues with 

Implementing Cloud Computing, GAO-10-513 (Washington, D.C.: May 27, 2010).

13GAO, Information Security: Additional Guidance Needed to Address Cloud Computing 

Concerns, GAO-12-130T (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 5, 2011). 
 

Page 11 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

administrative support provided by GSA’s Cloud Computing Program 

Management Office, but had not finalized key processes or guidance. 

A subgroup of this committee had developed the Federal Risk and 

Authorization Management Program, a governmentwide program to 

provide joint authorizations and continuous security monitoring 

services for all federal agencies, with an initial focus on cloud 

computing. The subgroup had worked with its members to define 

interagency security requirements for cloud systems and services and 

related information security controls.

• Best practices in IT acquisition. In October 2011, we reported on best 

practices in IT acquisitions in the federal government.14 Specifically, 

we identified nine factors critical to the success of three or more of 

seven IT investments.15

• IT spending authority. In February 2008, we reported that the

Department of Veterans Affairs had taken important steps toward a 

more disciplined approach to ensuring oversight of and accountability 

for the department’s IT budget and resources.

The factors most commonly identified include 

active engagement of stakeholders, program staff with the necessary 

knowledge and skills, and senior department and agency executive 

support for the program. We reported that while these factors will not 

necessarily ensure that federal agencies will successfully acquire IT 

systems because many different factors contribute to successful 

acquisitions, they may help federal agencies address the welldocumented acquisition challenges they face.

16

 

14GAO, Information Technology: Critical Factors Underlying Successful Major 

Acquisitions, 

These steps included 

providing the department’s CIO responsibility for ensuring that there 

are controls over the budget and for overseeing all capital planning 

and execution, and designating leadership to assist in overseeing 

functions such as portfolio management.

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

15The seven IT investments were identified by department officials as successful 

acquisitions in that they best achieved their respective cost, schedule, scope, and 

performance goals.

16GAO, Information Technology: VA Has Taken Important Steps to Centralize Control of 

Its Resources, but Effectiveness Depends on Additional Planned Actions, GAO-08-449T

(Washington, D.C.: Feb. 13, 2008).
 

Page 12 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

• Investment review and oversight. During the past several years, we 

issued numerous reports and testimonies on OMB’s initiatives to 

highlight troubled IT projects.17 We made multiple recommendations 

to OMB and federal agencies to enhance the oversight and 

transparency of federal IT projects. For example, in 2005 we 

recommended that OMB develop a central list of projects and their 

deficiencies, and analyze that list to develop governmentwide and 

agency assessments of the progress and risks of the investments, 

identifying opportunities for continued improvement.18 In 2006, we 

recommended that OMB develop a single aggregate list of high-risk 

projects and their deficiencies and use that list to report to Congress 

on progress made in correcting high-risk problems.19

In June 2009, to further improve the transparency and oversight of 

agencies’ IT investments, OMB publicly deployed a website, known as 

the IT Dashboard, which replaced its Management Watch List and 

High-Risk List. The data in the IT Dashboard is drawn from federal 

agencies’ budget submissions.

As a result, 

OMB started publicly releasing aggregate data on its internal list of 

mission-critical projects that needed to improve (called its 

Management Watch List) and disclosing the projects’ deficiencies. 

The agency also established a High-Risk List, which consisted of 

projects identified as requiring special attention from oversight 

authorities and the highest levels of agency management.

20

 

17GAO, Information Technology: Management and Oversight of Projects Totaling Billions 

of Dollars Need Attention, 

OMB analysts use the IT Dashboard 

to identify IT investments that are experiencing performance problems 

and to select them for a TechStat session—a review of selected IT 

investments between OMB and agency leadership that is led by the 

GAO-09-624T (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 28, 2009).

18GAO, Information Technology: OMB Can Make More Effective Use of Its Investment 

Reviews, GAO-05-276 (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 15, 2005).

19GAO, Information Technology: Agencies and OMB Should Strengthen Processes for 

Identifying and Overseeing High Risk Projects, GAO-06-647 (Washington, D.C.: June 15, 

2006).

20Two different budget submissions, called exhibit 53s and exhibit 300s, provide the data 

accessible through the IT Dashboard. Exhibit 53s list all of the IT investments and their 

associated costs within a federal organization. An Exhibit 300, also called the Capital 

Asset Plan and Business Case, is used to justify resource requests for major IT 

investments and is intended to enable an agency to demonstrate, to its own management 

and to OMB, that a major investment is well planned.
 

Page 13 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

Federal CIO. We have since completed three successive reviews of 

the data on the IT Dashboard and reported that while it is an important 

tool for reporting and monitoring major IT projects, the cost and 

schedule ratings were not always accurate for selected agencies.21

In addition, in September 2011, we reported that OMB provides 

guidance to agencies on how to report on their IT investments, but 

this guidance does not ensure complete reporting or facilitate the 

identification of duplicative investments.

We made recommendations to improve the accuracy of the data and, 

in our most recent report, found that the accuracy had improved.

22

• Agency CIO responsibilities. In September 2011, we reported that the 

responsibilities of the CIOs differ among agencies, and that CIOs face 

limitations in exercising their influence in certain IT management 

areas.

We recommended that 

OMB clarify its reporting on IT investments and improve its guidance 

to agencies on identifying and categorizing IT investments. OMB did 

not agree that further efforts were needed to clarify reporting and has 

not yet addressed our recommendations. Given the importance of 

continued improvement in OMB’s reporting and guidance, we 

maintain that the recommendations are warranted.

23

 

21GAO, IT Dashboard: Accuracy Has Improved, and Additional Efforts Are Under Way To 

Better Inform Decision Making, 

Specifically, CIOs do not always have sufficient control over 

IT investments, and they often have limited influence over the IT 

workforce, such as in hiring and firing decisions and the performance 

of component-level CIOs. We noted that more consistent 

implementation of CIOs’ authority could enhance their effectiveness in 

these areas and that while OMB had taken steps to increase CIOs’ 

effectiveness, it had not established measures of accountability to 

ensure that responsibilities are fully implemented. We recommended 

GAO-12-210 (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 7, 2011);

Information Technology: OMB Has Made Improvements to Its Dashboard, but Further 

Work Is Needed by Agencies and OMB to Ensure Data Accuracy, GAO-11-262

(Washington, D.C.: Mar. 15, 2011); and Information Technology: OMB’s Dashboard Has 

Increased Transparency and Oversight, but Improvements Needed, GAO-10-701

(Washington, D.C.: July 16, 2010).

22GAO, Information Technology: OMB Needs to Improve Its Guidance on IT Investments, 

GAO-11-826 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 29, 2011).

23GAO, Federal Chief Information Officers: Opportunities Exist to Improve Role in 

Information Technology Management, GAO-11-634 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 15, 2011).
 

Page 14 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

that OMB update its guidance to establish measures of accountability 

for ensuring that CIOs’ responsibilities are fully implemented and 

require agencies to establish internal processes for documenting 

lessons learned. OMB officials generally agreed with our 

recommendations and, in August 2011, issued a memo to agencies 

emphasizing the CIO’s role in driving the investment review process 

and responsibility over the entire IT portfolio for an agency.24 The 

memo identified four areas in which the CIO should have a lead role: 

IT governance, program management, commodity services, and 

information security.

OMB and key federal agencies have made progress on selected action 

items identified in the IT Reform Plan, but there are several areas where 

more remains to be done. Of the 10 key action items we reviewed, 3 were 

completed and the other 7 were partially completed by December 2011. 

The action items that are behind schedule share a common reason for 

the delays: the complexity of the initiatives. In all seven of the cases, 

OMB and the federal agencies are still working on the initiatives.

In a December 2011 progress report on its IT Reform Plan, OMB reported 

that it made greater progress than we determined. The agency reported 

that of the 10 action items, 7 were completed and 3 were partially 

completed. OMB officials from the Office of E-government and 

Information Technology explained that the reason for the difference in 

assessments is that they believe that the IT Reform Plan has served its 

purpose in acting as a catalyst for a set of broader initiatives. They noted 

that work will continue on all of the initiatives even after OMB declares the 

related action items to be completed under the IT Reform Plan. We 

disagree with this approach. In prematurely declaring the action items to 

be completed, OMB risks losing momentum on the progress it has made 

to date.

Table 2 provides both OMB’s and our assessments of the status of the 

key action items, with action items rated as “completed” if all of the 

required activities identified in the reform plan were completed, and 

 

24OMB, Memorandum for Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies, M-11-29

(Washington, D.C.: Aug. 8, 2011).

OMB and Key Federal 

Agencies Have Made 

Progress on IT 

Reform Action Items, 

But Much Remains to 

Be Done
 

Page 15 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

“partially completed” if some, but not all, of the required activities were 

completed.

Table 2: GAO’s Assessment of the Status of Key Action Items 

Plan number 

and action 

item title

OMB’s 

reported 

status (as of 

December 

2011)

GAO’s 

assessment Description 

(1) Complete 

detailed 

implementation 

plans to 

consolidate at 

least 800 data 

centers by 

2015

Completed Partially 

completed

In 2011, agencies published their updated consolidation plans and identified dedicated 

program managers for their data center consolidation efforts. Also, OMB established a 

cross-government task force comprised of the agency program managers that meets 

monthly and launched a public dashboard for tracking progress in closing data centers. 

However, not all of the agencies’ updated data center consolidation plans include the 

required elements. Of the three agencies we reviewed, one (the Department of Justice) 

lacked required milestones and targets for servers and utilization. In addition, in 

February 2012, we reported finding similar gaps in multiple agencies’ consolidation 

plans.a When asked why the plans were not yet complete, agencies reported that it 

takes time to adequately plan for data center consolidation and many found that they 

need more time. We have previously recommended that agencies complete the 

missing elements from their data center consolidation plans.b

(3) Shift to 

cloud-first 

policy

Completed Partially 

completed

The Federal CIO published a strategy for moving the government to cloud computing 

and had each agency identify three services to be moved to the cloud. In addition, each 

of the three agencies we reviewed established migration plans for these services and 

had migrated at least one service to the cloud by December 2011. However, each of 

the three agencies’ migration plans we reviewed were missing key required elements, 

including a discussion of needed resources, migration schedules, or plans for retiring 

legacy systems. We have ongoing work performing a more detailed review of seven 

agencies’ progress in implementing the federal cloud computing policy underway, and 

plan to issue that report in the summer of 2012.c

 

(4) Stand-up 

contract 

vehicles for 

secure 

Infrastructureas-a-Service 

solutions

Completed Completed GSA has established a common set of contract vehicles for secure cloud-based 

infrastructure solutions, and made them available governmentwide. As of January 

2012, federal agencies could purchase cloud solutions from three GSA-approved 

vendors.

(10) Launch a 

best practices 

collaboration 

platform

Completed Partially 

completed

The CIO Council developed a web-based collaboration portal to allow program 

managers to exchange best practices and case studies, and all three agencies we 

reviewed have submitted case studies to OMB for the portal. However, the data 

accessible by the portal has not yet been effectively codified and synthesized, making it 

difficult for program managers to search the databases and for them to use it for 

problem solving. For example, a general search for cloud computing best practices 

identified more than 13,000 artifacts, while a date-bounded search for the last year 

identified 14 artifacts—of which only 8 clearly provided information on best practices in 

cloud computing. The vice chairman of the CIO Council explained that the portal’s 

shortcomings are due to how new it is, and noted that the council is still working to 

improve the portal’s functionality. 
 

Page 16 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

Plan number 

and action 

item title

OMB’s 

reported 

status (as of 

December 

2011)

GAO’s 

assessment Description 

(13) Design a 

cadre of 

specialized IT 

acquisition 

professionals

Completed Completed In 2011, OFPP issued guidance defining an IT acquisition specialist; established the 

requirements, guidance, curriculum, and process for becoming one; and established 

guidance to strengthen the IT acquisition skills and capabilities of IT acquisition 

specialists. Because the development of the cadre is voluntary, the status of the 

agencies we reviewed varies: the Department of Veterans Affairs has a cadre of 

specialized IT acquisition professionals, the Department of Homeland Security is 

developing one, and the Department of Justice is still considering whether they need 

such a cadre.

(15) Issue 

contracting 

guidance and 

templates to 

support 

modular 

development

Partially 

completed

Partially 

completed

An OFPP official stated that the agency worked with the IT and acquisition community 

to develop draft guidance for modular development, and has obtained feedback from 

industry leaders. However, OFPP has not yet issued this guidance, or the required 

templates and samples supporting modular development. An OFPP official explained 

that delays were due to challenges in ensuring consistent definitions of modular 

development across the government and industry.

(17) Work with 

Congress to 

create IT 

budget models 

that align with 

modular 

development

Partially 

completed

Partially 

completed

OMB reported that it analyzed existing legal frameworks to determine what budget 

flexibilities are currently available and where additional budget flexibilities are needed, 

and worked to promote these ideas (such as multiyear budgets or revolving funds) with 

selected congressional committees. Also, the three agencies we reviewed identified 

programs where additional budget flexibilities could improve outcomes. For example, 

the Department of Homeland Security proposed a working capital fund for centralized 

IT operations and maintenance functions. However, in response to OMB’s ideas, there 

has not yet been any new legislation to create budget authorities as a result of the IT 

Reform Plan and OMB has not identified options to increase transparency for programs 

that would fall under these budgetary flexibilities. OMB officials noted that they are 

behind schedule in working with Congress, in part because when the IT Reform Plan 

was issued in December 2010, the fiscal year 2012 budget process was already under 

way. They explained that this meant they needed to wait to incorporate changes into 

the fiscal year 2013 budget process.

(20) Work with 

Congress to 

consolidate 

commodity IT 

spending 

under agency 

CIOs

Partially 

completed

Partially 

completed

OMB issued a memo in August 2011 that, among other things, required agencies to 

consolidate commodity IT services under the agency CIO.d In addition, the federal CIO 

has discussed the importance of consolidating commodity IT under the agency CIOs 

with selected congressional committees. However, OMB noted that this action item is 

behind schedule and that it is continuing to discuss the implementation of the memo 

and the development of models for funding commodity IT with agencies and Congress. 

Further, the three agencies we reviewed had not yet reported to OMB on their 

proposals for migrating commodity IT services to shared services, in part because they 

were waiting for guidance from OMB. OMB officials noted that part of the reason for the 

delay is that when the IT Reform plan was issued in December 2010, the fiscal year 

2012 budget process was already under way. Therefore, they needed to wait a year to 

incorporate changes into the fiscal year 2013 budget process. 

(21) Reform 

and strengthen 

Investment 

Review Boards

Completed Completed In 2011, OMB revamped its requirements for agency IT budget submissions. OMB also 

developed, published, and provided training for agency CIOs on how to conduct 

TechStat reviews that includes accountability guidelines, engagement cadence, 

evaluation processes, and reporting processes. By December 2011, all 24 agencies 

conducted at least one TechStat review.
 

Page 17 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

Plan number 

and action 

item title

OMB’s 

reported 

status (as of 

December 

2011)

GAO’s 

assessment Description 

(22) Redefine 

role of agency 

CIOs and the 

CIO Council

Completed Partially 

completed

In August 2011, OMB issued a memo directing agencies to strengthen the role of the 

CIO away from solely being responsible for policymaking and infrastructure 

maintenance to a role that encompasses true portfolio management for all IT. However, 

OMB acknowledged that there is disparity among agency CIOs’ authorities and that it 

will take time for agencies to implement the required changes. Of the three agencies 

we reviewed, two CIOs reported having true portfolio management for all IT projects, 

and one did not. The Department of Homeland Security’s CIO does not yet have 

responsibility for the portfolio of all IT projects. We have ongoing work assessing the 

Department’s governance of IT investments.

Regarding changes in the role of the CIO Council, the council formed a committee to 

focus on management best practices. This committee analyzed the outcomes of 

agency TechStat reviews over the past year and published a report discussing 

governmentwide trends in December 2011. 

Source: GAO analysis of OMB and agency data.

a

GAO-12-453SP. 

b

GAO-11-565. 

c

The seven agencies are the Departments of Agriculture, Health and Human Services, Homeland 

Security, State, and Treasury, as well as the General Services Administration and the Small Business 

Administration.

d

OMB, Memorandum for Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies: Chief Information Officer 

Authorities, M-11-29 (Washington, D.C.: Aug. 8, 2011).

Until OMB and the agencies complete the action items called for in the IT 

Reform Plan, the benefits of the reform initiatives—including increased 

operational efficiencies and more effective management of large-scale IT 

programs—may be delayed. With the last of the action items in the IT 

Reform Plan due to be completed by June 2012, it will be important for 

OMB and the agencies to ensure that the action items due at earlier 

milestones are completed as soon as possible.
 

Page 18 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

According to leading practices in industry and government, effective 

planning is critical to successfully managing a project. Effective project 

planning includes taking corrective actions when project deliverables fall 

behind schedule and defining time frames for completing the corrective 

actions.25

• Data center consolidation. We noted that agencies’ data center 

consolidation plans do not include all required elements. In July 2011, 

OMB directed agencies to complete the missing elements in their 

plans. The agencies are expected to provide an update on their plans 

in September 2012.

As noted earlier in this report, we identified seven action items 

that are behind schedule or falling short of the IT Reform Plan’s 

requirements. OMB and the agencies have plans for addressing all seven 

of the action items that we identified as behind schedule, but lack time

frames for completing five of them. The seven action items we identified 

are:

• Cloud-first policy. We noted that agencies’ migration plans were 

missing selected elements. An OMB official stated while OMB did not 

review the quality of agency migration plans in order to close the 

reform plan action item, the official responsible for the cloud-first 

initiative would continue to work with agencies to ensure that the 

initiative was successful. There are no time frames for agencies to 

complete their migration plans.

• Best practice collaboration portal. We found that the best practices 

collaboration platform is missing key features that would allow the 

information to be accessible and useable. A CIO Council official noted 

that the council plans to improve the portal over time by adding the 

ability to load artifacts, allow users to chat online, contain an expertise 

repository, and allow or encourage labeling of information to improve 

the search for artifacts within the platform. However, the CIO Council 

has not established a time frame for providing additional functionality 

to the web-based collaboration portal.

• Guidance and templates for modular contracting. OFPP has not 

issued guidance or the required templates and samples supporting

 

25See Carnegie Mellon University’s Software Engineering Institute, Capability Maturity 

Model® Integration for Acquisition, Version 1.3 (CMMI-ACQ, V1.3) and Project 

Management Institute Inc., A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge 

(PMBOK® Guide) – Fourth Edition, (Newtown Square, PA: 2008).

OMB and Key 

Agencies Plan to 

Address Items That 

We Found to Be 

Behind Schedule, But 

Lack Defined Time 

Frames for 

Completing Them
 

Page 19 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

modular development. It plans to continue developing guidance and 

templates to support modular development, and the first draft of this 

guidance is currently undergoing initial review. OFPP plans to issue 

its guidance and templates in spring 2012.

• Obtaining new IT budget authorities. OMB is behind schedule in 

obtaining new IT budget authorities. OMB officials stated that it plans 

to propose new authorities as part of the 2013 President’s Budget, 

and intends to work with congressional committees throughout the 

budget rollout process. However, OMB has not yet established time 

frames for completing this activity.

• Consolidating commodity IT under the agency CIO. OMB is behind 

schedule in consolidating commodity IT spending under agency CIOs. 

OMB plans to propose new spending models for commodity IT in the 

2013 President’s Budget, and to work with Congress to implement 

these new models. However, OMB has not established a time frame 

for completing this activity.

• Redefining roles of agency CIOs and the CIO Council. OMB 

acknowledges that not all agency CIOs have authority for a full 

portfolio of IT investments and plans to collect data from agencies 

during spring 2012 to determine the extent to which the CIOs have 

this authority. At that point, OMB should be better positioned to 

determine what more needs to be done to ensure CIO roles are 

redefined. However, there is no time frame for completing this activity.

Until OMB and the agencies establish time frames for completing 

corrective actions, they increase the risk that key actions will not be 

effectively managed to closure. For example, without cloud migration 

plans, agencies risk maintaining legacy systems long after the system 

has been replaced by one operating in the cloud. Further, these 

incomplete actions reduce the likelihood of achieving the full range of 

benefits promised by the IT reform initiatives.
 

Page 20 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

The importance of performance measures for gauging the progress of 

programs and projects is well recognized. In the past, OMB has directed 

agencies to define and select meaningful outcome-based performance 

measures that track the intended results of carrying out a program or 

activity.26 Additionally, as we have previously reported, aligning 

performance measures with goals can help to measure progress toward 

those goals, emphasizing the quality of the services an agency provides 

or the resulting benefits to users.27 Furthermore, industry experts describe 

performance measures as necessary for managing, planning, and 

monitoring the performance of a project against plans and stakeholders’ 

needs.28

Recognizing the importance of performance measurement, OMB and 

GSA have established measures for 4 of the 10 action items we 

reviewed: data center consolidation, shifting to cloud computing, using 

contract vehicles to obtain Infrastructure-as-a-Service, and reforming 

investment review boards. Moreover, OMB reported on three of these 

measures in the analytical perspectives associated with the President’s 

fiscal year 2013 budget. Specifically, regarding data center consolidation, 

OMB reported that agencies were on track to close 525 centers by the 

end of 2012 and expected to save $3 billion by 2015. On the topic of 

cloud computing, OMB reported that agencies had migrated 40 services 

to cloud computing environments in 2011 and expect to migrate an 

additional 39 services in 2012. Regarding investment review boards, 

OMB reported that agency CIOs held 294 TechStat reviews and had 

achieved more than $900 million in cost savings, life cycle cost 

avoidance, or reallocation of funding.

According to government and industry best practices, 

performance measures should be measurable, outcome-oriented, and 

actively tracked and managed.

However, OMB has not established performance measures for 6 of the 10

action items we reviewed. For example, OMB has not established 

 

26OMB, Guide to the Program Assessment Rating Tool. 

27GAO, NextGen Air Transportation System: FAA’s Metrics Can Be Used to Report on 

Status of Individual Programs, but Not of Overall NextGen Implementation or Outcomes, 

GAO-10-629 (Washington, D.C.: July 27, 2010).

28Thomas Wettstein and Peter Kueng, “A Maturity Model for Performance Measurement 

Systems,” and Karen J. Richter, Ph.D., Institute for Defense Analyses, CMMI® for 

Acquisition (CMMI-ACQ) Primer, Version 1.2.

OMB Has Not 

Established Measures 

for Evaluating Results 

on Most IT Reform 

Initiatives 
 

Page 21 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

measures related to the best practices collaboration platform, such as 

number of users, number of hits per query, and customer satisfaction. 

Further, while OMB has designed the guidance and curriculum for 

developing a cadre of IT acquisition professionals, it has not established 

measures for tracking agencies development of such a cadre. Table 3 

details what performance measures and goals, if any, are associated with 

the action item.

Table 3: Assessment of Performance Measures Associated with Selected IT Reform Action Items

Action item Performance measures Performance goals

(1) Complete detailed 

implementation plans to 

consolidate 800 data centers by 

2015

• Number of data center closures

• Expected cost savings

• The IT Reform Plan identifies a goal to consolidate 800 

data centers by 2015.

• In December 2011, in conjunction with a decision to 

include smaller data centers in the consolidation effort, 

the Federal CIO increased this goal to more than 1000 

data centers by 2015.

• In February 2012, OMB announced a goal of saving $3 

billion by 2015.

(3) Shift to a cloud-first policy • Number of services 

transitioned to a cloud 

computing environment

• Number of legacy systems 

eliminated

• Anticipated cost savings

• The IT Reform Plan states that each agency will identify 

three services to move to the cloud and that one of those 

services must move within 12 months.

• OMB has not yet announced goals for eliminated legacy 

systems or anticipated cost savings.

(4) Stand-up contract vehicles 

for secure Infrastructure-as-aService solutions

• Number of task orders issued 

under the contract vehicle

• Dollar amounts awarded 

through the contract vehicle

• Period of performance for the 

contract

• GSA established a goal of having at least one task order 

issued under the Infrastructure-as-a-Service blanket 

purchase agreement in the first year.

• GSA has not yet announced goals for its second year. 

(10) Launch a best practices 

collaboration platform 

–a –a

(13) Design a cadre of 

specialized IT acquisition 

professionals

–a –a

(15) Issue contracting guidance 

and templates to support 

modular development

–a –a

(17) Work with Congress to 

create IT budget models that 

align with modular development

–a –a

(20) Work with Congress to 

consolidate commodity IT 

spending under agency CIOs

–a –a
 

Page 22 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

Action item Performance measures Performance goals

(21) Reform and strengthen 

investment review boards

• Number of TechStat reviews

• Number of terminated 

programs

• Cost savings associated with 

TechStat reviews

• OMB established a goal of having agency CIOs terminate 

or turn around one third of all underperforming IT 

investments by June 2012.

(22) Redefine role of agency 

CIOs and the CIO Council

–a –a

Source: GAO analysis of OMB and agency data.

a

Performance measures or goals have not been established for this action item.

OMB officials, including two policy analysts within the Office of Egovernment and Information Technology who are responsible for the IT 

Reform Plan, stated that they do not believe that it is appropriate for OMB 

to establish measures for the action items in the IT Reform Plan. The 

officials explained that they believe that the purpose of the IT Reform 

Plan is to act as a catalyst for initiatives that are expected to continue 

outside of the plan. For example, the IT Reform Plan called for OMB and 

agencies to complete several discrete activities to push forward on data 

center consolidation, but the Federal Data Center Consolidation Initiative 

will continue on well after the deliverables noted in the reform plan are 

completed. They acknowledged that it would be appropriate to have 

performance measures for each of the broader initiatives outside of the IT 

Reform Plan, but noted that this should be the responsibility of the group 

running each initiative.

We disagree with OMB’s view and believe that performance measures 

are a powerful way to motivate people, communicate priorities, and 

improve performance. In our assessment, we sought any available 

performance measures associated with either the action item or the 

broader initiative, and in cases like the data center consolidation initiative, 

gave credit for the measures that were established for the initiative. 

However, we found that most action items and initiatives lacked any 

performance measures. Moreover, if OMB encourages individual 

agencies to establish measures, there will likely be multiple different 

measures for the action items and it would be more difficult to 

demonstrate governmentwide progress. Therefore, we believe that it is 

appropriate for OMB to establish performance measures for each of the 

action items in order to effectively measure the results of the IT Reform 

Plan. Until OMB establishes and begins tracking measurable, outcomeoriented performance measures for each of the action items, the agency 

will be limited it its ability to evaluate progress that has been made and 

whether or not the initiative is achieving its goals.
 

Page 23 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

OMB and selected agencies have made strides in implementing the IT 

Reform Plan, including pushing agencies to consolidate data centers, 

migrating federal services to cloud computing, improving the skills of IT 

acquisition professionals, and strengthening the roles and accountability 

of CIOs. However, several key reform items are behind schedule and 

OMB lacks time frames for completing most of them. Despite reporting 

that selected actions are completed, OMB and federal agencies are still 

working on them. This sends an inconsistent message on the need to 

maintain focus on these important initiatives. Moving forward, it will be 

important for OMB to accurately characterize the status of the action 

items in the IT Reform Plan in order to keep agencies’ focus and 

momentum on these important reform initiatives.

OMB has not established performance measures for gauging the success 

of most of its reform initiatives. For example, while OMB is tracking the 

number of services that agencies move to a cloud computing environment 

and the number of data center closures, it is not tracking the usefulness 

of its efforts to develop a best practices collaboration portal or a cadre of 

IT acquisition professionals.

Until OMB and the agencies complete the action items called for in the IT 

Reform Plan, establish time frames for completing corrective actions, and 

establish performance measures to track the results of the reform 

initiatives, the government may not be able to realize the full promise of 

the IT Reform Plan. The IT Reform Plan’s goals of improving government 

IT acquisitions and the efficiency of government operations are both 

ambitious and important, and they warrant a more structured approach to 

ensure actions are completed and results are achieved.

To help ensure the success of IT reform initiatives, we are making four 

recommendations to OMB. Specifically we are recommending that the 

Director of the Office of Management and Budget direct the Federal Chief 

Information Officer to

• ensure that the action items called for in the IT Reform Plan are 

completed by the responsible parties prior to the completion of the IT 

Reform Plan’s 18 month deadline of June 2012, or if the June 2012 

deadline cannot be met, by another clearly defined deadline;

• provide clear time frames for addressing the shortfalls associated with 

the IT Reform Plan action items;

Conclusions 

Recommendations for 

Executive Action
 

Page 24 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

• accurately characterize the status of the IT Reform Plan action items 

in the upcoming progress report in order to keep momentum going on 

action items that are not yet completed; and

• establish outcome-oriented measures for each applicable action item 

in the IT Reform Plan.

We are also making two recommendations to the Secretaries of 

Homeland Security and Veterans Affairs and to the Attorney General of 

the Department of Justice to address action items in the IT Reform Plan 

where the agencies have fallen behind. Specifically, we are 

recommending that they direct their respective agency CIOs to

• complete elements missing from the agencies’ plans for migrating 

services to a cloud computing environment, as applicable, and

• identify and report on the commodity services proposed for migration 

to shared services.

We received comments on a draft of our report from OMB; the 

Departments of Homeland Security, Justice, and Veterans Affairs; and 

GSA. OMB agreed with two recommendations and disagreed with two 

recommendations; the Departments of Homeland Security, Justice, and 

Veterans Affairs generally agreed with our recommendations; and GSA 

did not agree or disagree with our recommendations. Each agency’s 

comments are discussed in more detail below.

• OMB’s Federal CIO provided written comments on a draft of this 

report, as well as supplementary comments via e-mail. The written 

comments are provided in appendix II. The Federal CIO stated that 

OMB believes our analysis and findings have been critical to driving IT 

reforms across the federal government, and that OMB plans to use 

this report to continue the positive momentum on the IT Reform Plan. 

In addition, the Federal CIO stated that despite agreeing with many of 

the observations and recommendations in the draft report, OMB had 

concerns with selected recommendations, observations, and the 

scope of our review. The agency’s comments and, where applicable, 

our evaluation follow:

• OMB agreed with our recommendation to ensure that action items 

called for in the IT Reform Plan are completed by the end of the IT 

Reform Plan’s 18-month deadline of June 2012 and stated that 

Agency Comments 

and Our Evaluation
 

Page 25 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

OMB intends to complete the action items by the deadline.

• OMB agreed with our recommendation to provide clear time 

frames for addressing the shortfalls associated with the IT Reform 

Plan action items and stated that OMB will provide clear time 

frames where applicable.

• OMB disagreed with our recommendation that the agency 

accurately characterize the status of IT Reform Plan action items

in the upcoming progress report. The agency stated that it has 

accurately characterized the completeness of the action items, 

and therefore, the recommendation does not apply. As stated in 

this report, we do not agree with OMB’s characterization of four 

action items: data center consolidation, cloud-first policy, best 

practices collaboration portal, and redefining roles of agency CIOs 

and the CIO Council. OMB considers these action items to be 

completed. We do not.

While OMB has made progress in each of these areas, we found 

activities specified in the IT Reform Plan that have not yet been 

completed. Specifically, in the area of data center consolidation, 

we found that selected agency plans are still incomplete; in the 

move to cloud computing, selected agency migration plans lack 

key elements; in the area of the best practices portal, we found 

that the portal lacks key features that would allow the information 

to be accessible and useful to program managers; and in revising 

CIO roles, we identified an agency that does not yet have the 

envisioned authority over IT acquisitions. Further, in a recent 

memorandum to agency CIOs, the Federal CIO acknowledged 

that agency data center consolidation plans are incomplete and 

required agencies to provide an annual update to the plans.29

 

29OMB, Memorandum for Chief Information Officers, (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 19, 2012).

In 

addition, our assessment that the cloud migration plans are 

incomplete was affirmed by the three agencies we reviewed 

agreeing with our recommendation that they complete cloud 

migration plans. Thus, we believe that our recommendation to

OMB to accurately characterize the status of IT Reform action 

items is valid.
 

Page 26 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

• OMB disagreed with our recommendation to establish outcomeoriented measures for each applicable action item in the IT 

Reform Plan, noting that the agency measured the completeness 

of the IT Reform actions and not the performance measures 

associated with broader initiatives. OMB also suggested that we 

erroneously gave the agency credit for performance measures 

associated with broader initiatives on data center consolidation, 

cloud computing, and investment review boards. We acknowledge 

that some of the action items in the IT Reform Plan are subsets of 

broader initiatives, and where applicable, we gave credit for 

having measures associated with the broader initiatives. We 

continue to believe that this approach is appropriate because the 

action items and the broader initiatives are intrinsically intertwined. 

For instance, it would have been unfair to state that there are no 

measures associated with consolidating federal data centers when 

such measures clearly exist.

Moreover, the point remains that there are multiple action items in 

the IT Reform Plan that are not aligned with broader initiatives and 

for which there are no measures. Examples include the best 

practices portal, development of a cadre of specialized IT 

acquisition professionals, and establishing budget models that 

align with modular development. Given that the purpose of the IT 

Reform Plan is to achieve operational efficiencies and improve the 

management of large-scale IT programs, we continue to assert 

that it is appropriate to establish performance measures to monitor 

the IT Reform Plan’s results. According to the administration’s 

public website intended to provide a window on efforts to deliver a 

more effective, smarter, and leaner government, performance 

measurement is a necessary step in improving performance and 

that it helps set priorities, tailor actions, inform on progress, and 

diagnose problems.30

• OMB stated that the title of our draft report (Information 

Technology Reform: Progress is Mixed; More Needs to Be Done 

Until OMB establishes and tracks 

measureable, outcome-oriented performance measures for each 

of the action items in the IT Reform Plan, the agency will be 

limited in its ability to evaluate progress that has been made and 

whether or not the initiative is achieving its goals.

 

30See www.performance.gov. 
 

Page 27 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

to Complete Actions and Measure Results) did not accurately 

capture the substantial and overwhelmingly positive progress 

made to date. Moreover, OMB stated that the responsible entities 

have completed 81.5 percent of the required activities associated 

with the 10 action items we reviewed. We acknowledge the 

progress OMB and agencies have made on IT Reform Plan items 

in this report and have modified the title of our report to reflect that 

progress. However, our analysis of the percentage of completed 

activities differs from OMB’s calculations. The 10 action items we 

reviewed include 31 distinct required activities (see table 1). We 

found that the responsible entities completed 18 of these

activities—a 58 percent completion rate.

• OMB also stated that our assessment should acknowledge that 

OMB does not have the statutory authority to carry out certain 

action items without congressional action. These action items 

involved creating IT budget models to align with modular 

development and consolidating commodity IT spending under the 

agency CIOs. The Federal CIO stated that although OMB has 

taken steps to engage with Congress, the agency cannot 

unilaterally grant budget flexibilities or consolidate spending. While 

it is true that completing these items depends upon congressional 

action, according to the IT Reform Plan, it is the responsibility of 

OMB and the federal agencies to work with Congress to propose 

budget models to address these items.

• In general, OMB stated that it will continue to drive reform 

throughout the federal government via the completion of the 

remaining actions in the IT Reform Plan, as well as continuing to 

work with agencies as they implement broader initiatives such as 

data center consolidation and the transition to cloud computing.

• In supplementary comments provided via e-mail, the Federal CIO 

also expressed concerns with the scope of our report, stating that 

the intent of the IT Reform Plan was not to reform all federal IT, 

but to establish some early wins to garner momentum for OMB’s 

broader initiatives. The Federal CIO also noted that OMB has 

been consistent in publicizing the IT Reform Plan as an 18-month 

plan with discrete goals designed to augment and accelerate 

broader initiatives that existed before the IT Reform Plan was 

launched and would continue after the plan has been completed.

We believe that the scope of our review is appropriate. Since its 

inception, the scope of our review has focused on the action items 
 

Page 28 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

and supporting activities noted in the IT Reform Plan. All of the 

required activities listed in table 1 in the background section of this 

report are listed in the IT Reform Plan. Moreover, we did not 

evaluate activities that are outside of the IT Reform Plan, such as 

OMB’s efforts to establish a cost model for agencies to use in 

estimating the costs and savings of data center consolidation. 

Further, we agree that to completely reform IT, OMB and agencies 

must undertake activities beyond the IT Reform Plan’s 18-month 

time frame. The activities within the IT Reform Plan are essential 

building blocks that will carry on well beyond the IT Reform Plan’s 

end.

• In written comments, the Department of Homeland Security’s Director 

of Departmental GAO-Office of Inspector General Liaison Office 

concurred with our recommendations and identified steps that the 

agency is undertaking to address them. The department’s written 

comments are provided in appendix III.

• In written comments, the Department of Justice’s Assistant Attorney 

General for Administration generally agreed with our 

recommendations and identified steps that the agency has 

undertaken to address them. The department’s written comments are 

provided in appendix IV.

• In written comments, the Chief of Staff at the Department of Veterans 

Affairs agreed with our recommendations and identified steps that the 

department is taking to implement them. The department’s written 

comments are provided in appendix V.

• In comments provided via e-mail, a Management and Program 

Analyst within GSA’s Office of Administrative Services stated that the 

agency had no official response or technical comments on the draft 

report.

As agreed with your offices, unless you publicly announce the contents of 

this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 30 days from the 

report date. At that time, we will send copies to interested congressional 

committees, the secretaries and administrators of the departments and 

agencies addressed in this report, and other interested parties. In 

addition, the report will be available at no charge on the GAO website at 

http://www.gao.gov. 
 

Page 29 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

If you or your staffs have any questions on the matters discussed in this 

report, please contact me at (202) 512-9286 or pownerd@gao.gov. 

Contact points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public 

Affairs may be found on the last page of this report. GAO staff who made 

major contributions to this report are listed in appendix VI.

David A. Powner

Director, Information Technology

Management Issues
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 30 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

Our objectives were to (1) evaluate the progress the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) and key federal agencies have made on 

selected action items in the Information Technology (IT) Reform Plan, (2) 

assess the plans for addressing any action items that are behind 

schedule, and (3) assess the extent to which sound measures are in 

place to evaluate the success of the IT reform initiatives.

In establishing the scope of our engagement, we selected ten action 

items for review, focusing on action items that (1) were due at the 6 or 12 

month milestones because these were expected to be completed during 

our review, (2) covered multiple different topic areas, and (3) were 

considered by internal and OMB subject matter experts to be the more 

important items. These action items are:

• Complete detailed implementation plans to consolidate 800 data 

centers by 2015.

• Shift to a “cloud first” policy.

• Stand-up contract vehicles for secure Infrastructure-as-a-Service 

solutions.

• Launch a best practices collaboration platform.

• Design a cadre of specialized IT acquisition professionals.

• Issue contracting guidance and templates to support modular 

development.

• Work with Congress to create IT budget models that align with 

modular development.

• Work with Congress to consolidate Commodity IT spending under 

agency Chief Information Officers (CIO).

• Reform and strengthen Investment Review Boards.

• Redefine the role of agency CIOs and the CIO Council.

In addition, in the seven cases where multiple agencies are identified as a 

responsible entity for the action item, we selected three civilian agencies 

(the Departments of Homeland Security, Veterans Affairs, and Justice) 

based on factors including (1) high levels of IT spending in fiscal year 

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology 
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 31 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

2011, (2) poor performance on the IT Dashboard, (3) high number of 

major IT investments in fiscal year 2011, and (4) coverage of agencies 

that were not included on other GAO reviews of IT reform initiatives.

To evaluate OMB and federal agencies progress in implementing the IT 

Reform Plan, we evaluated efforts by the entities responsible for each of 

the action items, including OMB, the General Services Administration 

(GSA), the Chief Information Officers (CIO) Council, and selected 

agencies. For each of the 10 action items in the IT Reform Plan, we 

reviewed OMB’s guidance and identified required activities. We compared 

agency documentation to these requirements, and identified gaps and 

missing elements. We rated each action item as “completed” if the 

responsible agencies demonstrated that they completed the required 

activities on or near the due date, and “partially completed” if the 

agencies demonstrated that they completed part of the required activities. 

We interviewed agency officials to clarify our initial findings and to 

determine why elements were incomplete or missing.

To assess the plans for addressing any action items that are behind 

schedule, we identified the agencies’ plans for addressing the schedule 

shortfalls and compared these to sound project planning practices 

identified by organizations recognized for their experience in project 

management and acquisition processes.1

To assess the extent to which sound measures are in place to evaluate 

success, we determined whether performance measures were applicable 

for each of the selected action items, and if so, how agencies were 

tracking these measures. We compared these measures to best practices 

in IT performance management identified by leading industry and 

government organizations

We also interviewed relevant 

agency officials regarding the reasons that their activities were behind 

schedule and the impact of any shortfalls in their mitigation plans.

2

 

1

See Carnegie Mellon University’s Software Engineering Institute, Capability Maturity 

Model® Integration for Acquisition, Version 1.3 (CMMI-ACQ, V1.3) and Project 

Management Institute Inc., A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge 

(PMBOK® Guide)–Fourth Edition, (Newtown Square, PA: 2008).

and assessed other options for measuring 

2

See OMB, Guide to the Program Assessment Rating Tool; Department of the Navy, 

Guide for Developing and Using Information Technology (IT) Performance Measurements; 

and General Services Administration, Office of Governmentwide Policy, PerformanceBased Management: Eight Steps To Develop and Use Information Technology 

Performance Measures Effectively. 
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 32 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

performance. In addition, we interviewed OMB and selected agency 

officials regarding progress, plans, and measures. As we were completing 

our audit work, OMB reported making progress in its efforts to consolidate 

data centers, transition to a cloud computing environment, and strengthen 

investment review boards, and provided data on specific measures within 

each of these areas. We assessed the reliability of the data provided on 

these measures by obtaining information from agency officials and from 

the CIO Council regarding their efforts to ensure the reliability of the data. 

While we identified limitations in the quality of the data that agencies 

reported, we determined that this data was sufficiently reliable for the 

purpose of presenting a general overview of progress in establishing 

performance measures.

We conducted our work at multiple agencies’ headquarters in the

Washington, D.C., metropolitan area. We conducted this performance 

audit from August 2011 to April 2012 in accordance with generally 

accepted government auditing standards. Those standards require that 

we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to 

provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our 

audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a 

reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit 

objectives.
Appendix II: Comments from the Office of 

Management and Budget

Page 33 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

Appendix II: Comments from the Office of 

Management and Budget
Appendix II: Comments from the Office of 

Management and Budget

Page 34 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform
Appendix III: Comments from the Department 

of Homeland Security

Page 35 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

Appendix III: Comments from the 

Department of Homeland Security
Appendix III: Comments from the Department 

of Homeland Security 

Page 36 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform
Appendix IV: Comments from the Department 

of Justice

Page 37 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

Appendix IV: Comments from the 

Department of Justice
Appendix V: Comments from the Department 

of Veterans Affairs

Page 38 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

Appendix V: Comments from the Department 

of Veterans Affairs
Appendix V: Comments from the Department 

of Veterans Affairs

Page 39 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform
Appendix VI: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments

Page 40 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

David A. Powner, (202) 512-9286 or pownerd@gao.gov

In addition to the contact named above, individuals making contributions 

to this report included Colleen Phillips (Assistant Director), Cortland 

Bradford, Rebecca Eyler, Kathleen S. Lovett, and Jessica Waselkow.

Appendix VI: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments 

GAO Contact

Staff 

Acknowledgments 
Related GAO Products

Page 41 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

Information Technology: Critical Factors Underlying Successful Major 

Acquisitions. GAO-12-7. Washington, D.C.: October 21, 2011.

Federal Chief Information Officers: Opportunities Exist to Improve Role in 

Information Technology Management. GAO-11-634. Washington, D.C.: 

September 15, 2011.

Information Technology: VA Has Taken Important Steps to Centralize 

Control of Its Resources, but Effectiveness Depends on Additional 

Planned Actions. GAO-08-449T. Washington, D.C.: February 13, 2008.

Information Security: Additional Guidance Needed to Address Cloud 

Computing Concerns. GAO-12-130T. Washington, D.C.: October 6, 2011.

Information Security: Governmentwide Guidance Needed to Assist 

Agencies in Implementing Cloud Computing. GAO-10-855T. Washington, 

D.C.: July 1, 2010.

Information Security: Federal Guidance Needed to Address Control 

Issues with Implementing Cloud Computing. GAO-10-513. Washington, 

D.C.: May 27, 2010.

Data Center Consolidation: Agencies Need to Complete Inventories and 

Plans to Achieve Expected Savings. GAO-11-565. Washington, D.C.: July 

19, 2011.

Follow-up on 2011 Report: Status of Actions Taken to Reduce 

Duplication, Overlap, and Fragmentation, Save Tax Dollars, and Enhance 

Revenue. GAO-12-453SP. Washington, D.C.: February 28, 2012.

2012 Annual Report: Opportunities to Reduce Duplication, Overlap and 

Fragmentation, Achieve Savings, and Enhance Revenue. GAO-12-

342SP. Washington, D.C.: February 28, 2012.

Information Technology: Departments of Defense and Energy Need to 

Address Potentially Duplicative Investments. GAO-12-241. Washington, 

D.C.: February 17, 2012.

Related GAO Products

Best Practices in 

Information Technology 

Acquisition 

CIO Responsibilities

Cloud Computing 

Data Center Consolidation

Duplication and Overlap
Related GAO Products

Page 42 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

Information Technology: Potentially Duplicative Investments Exist at the 

Departments of Defense and Energy. GAO-12-462T. Washington, D.C.: 

February 17, 2012.

Opportunities to Reduce Potential Duplication in Government Programs, 

Save Tax Dollars, and Enhance Revenue. GAO-11-318SP. Washington, 

D.C.: March 1, 2011.

Investment Management: IRS Has a Strong Oversight Process but Needs 

to Improve How It Continues Funding Ongoing Investments. GAO-11-

587. Washington, D.C.: July 20, 2011.

Information Technology: Investment Oversight and Management Have 

Improved but Continued Attention Is Needed. GAO-11-454T. Washington, 

D.C.: March 17, 2011.

Information Technology: Treasury Needs to Strengthen Its Investment 

Board Operations and Oversight. GAO-07-865. Washington, D.C.: July 

23, 2007.

Information Technology: DHS Needs to Fully Define and Implement 

Policies and Procedures for Effectively Managing Investments. GAO-07-

424. Washington, D.C.: April 27, 2007.

Information Technology: OMB Needs to Improve Its Guidance on IT 

Investments. GAO-11-826. Washington, D.C.: September 29, 2011.

Information Technology: Management and Oversight of Projects Totaling 

Billions of Dollars Need Attention. GAO-09-624T. Washington, D.C.: April 

28, 2009.

Information Technology: OMB and Agencies Need to Improve Planning, 

Management, and Oversight of Projects Totaling Billions of Dollars. GAO08-1051T. Washington, D.C.: July 31, 2008.

Information Technology: Further Improvements Needed to Identify and 

Oversee Poorly Planned and Performing Projects. GAO-07-1211T. 

Washington, D.C.: September 20, 2007.

Information Technology 

Investment Management

Investment Review and 

Office of Management and 

Budget Oversight
Related GAO Products

Page 43 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

Information Technology: Improvements Needed to More Accurately 

Identify and Better Oversee Risky Projects Totaling Billions of Dollars. 

GAO-06-1099T. Washington, D.C.: September 7, 2006.

Information Technology: Agencies and OMB Should Strengthen 

Processes for Identifying and Overseeing High Risk Projects. GAO-06-

647. Washington, D.C.: June 15, 2006.

IT Dashboard: Accuracy Has Improved, and Additional Efforts Are Under 

Way To Better Inform Decision Making. GAO-12-210. Washington, D.C.: 

November 7, 2011.

Information Technology: Continued Attention Needed to Accurately 

Report Federal Spending and Improve Management. GAO-11-831T. 

Washington, D.C.: July 14, 2011.

Information Technology: Continued Improvements in Investment 

Oversight and Management Can Yield Billions in Savings. GAO-11-511T. 

Washington, D.C.: April 12, 2011.

Information Technology: OMB Has Made Improvements to Its Dashboard, 

but Further Work Is Needed by Agencies and OMB to Ensure Data 

Accuracy. GAO-11-262. Washington, D.C.: March 15, 2011.

Information Technology: OMB’s Dashboard Has Increased Transparency 

and Oversight, but Improvements Needed. GAO-10-701. Washington, 

D.C.: July 16, 2010.

Information Technology: Federal Agencies Need to Strengthen 

Investment Board Oversight of Poorly Planned and Performing Projects. 

GAO-09-566. Washington, D.C.: June 30, 2009.

Information Technology 

Dashboard
Related GAO Products

Page 44 GAO-12-461 Information Technology Reform

Federal Housing Administration: Improvements Needed in Risk 

Assessment and Human Capital Management. GAO-12-15. Washington, 

D.C.: November 7, 2011.

Information Technology: HUD’s Expenditure Plan Satisfies Statutory 

Conditions and Implementation of Management Controls Is Under Way. 

GAO-11-762. Washington, D.C.: September 7, 2011.

Information Technology: FBI Has Largely Staffed Key Modernization 

Program, but Strategic Approach to Managing Program’s Human Capital 

Is Needed. GAO-07-19. Washington, D.C.: October 16, 2006.

Information Technology 

Acquisition Professionals

(311253)
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 (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 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: 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

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

Please Print on Recycled Paper.