FY 2005 Report to Congress on 

Implementation of 

The E-Government Act of 2002 

March 1, 2006 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Introduction................................................................................................................................3 

Section I: Compliance with Specific Goals and Provisions of the Act...............................5 

Section II: Highlights of Individual Agency Internal E-Government Activities................24 

 

 Department of Commerce....................................................24 

 Department of Defense.......................................................25 

 Department of Education.....................................................25 

 Department of Energy.........................................................26 

 Department of Homeland Security..........................................27 

 Department of Health and Human Services................................27 

 Department of Housing and Urban Development.........................28 

 Department of the Interior....................................................29 

 Department of Justice.........................................................30 

 Department of Labor..........................................................30 

 Department of Transportation................................................31 

 Department of Treasury.......................................................32 

 Department of State............................................................32 

 Department of Veterans Affairs..............................................33 

 Environmental Protection Agency...........................................33 

 General Services Administration..............................................34 

 National Aeronautics and Space Administration...........................35 

 Nuclear Regulatory Commission.............................................35 

 National Science Foundation..................................................36 

 Office of Management and Budget..........................................37 

 Office of Personnel Management.............................................37 

 Small Business Administration.................................................38 

 Social Security Administration...............................................39 

 U.S. Agency for International Development................................39 

 U.S. Department of Agriculture..............................................40 

Section III: Operations of the E-Government Fund.............................................................42 

Section IV: Listing of Reports and Policies Used in This Report...............................44 

 

2
INTRODUCTION

The Federal government spent approximately $62 billion on information technology in fiscal 

year 2005. Our investment in information technology is fundamentally changing agency 

structures, work processes, and ways of interacting with the public. As a result, we are providing 

more timely and accurate information to citizens and government decision makers, improving 

the effectiveness and efficiency of agency programs, and delivering results to the American 

people. 

In order to achieve these results, agencies are applying management principles necessary to 

effectively implement electronic government (E-Government) initiatives and information 

technology investments. These management principles include: 

• developing and using enterprise architectures to help plan information technology 

investments, maximize interoperability, meet common goals, and avoid unnecessary 

duplication; 

• applying earned value management methodologies to measure cost, schedule, and 

performance variance; 

• documenting capital planning and investment control in order to ensure information 

technology investments integrate strategic planning, budgeting, procurement, and 

management in support of agency missions and business needs; and 

• securing information based on comprehensive analysis of risk and impact to agency 

programs, use of adequate controls, and regular testing and evaluating controls to 

mitigate risks. 

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) works with agencies to implement these 

management principles, and uses the President’s Management Agenda Scorecard to measure 

agency progress each quarter. Successful implementation of the Administration’s E-Government 

management principles not only helps agencies achieve their own mission objectives and goals, 

it also supports our government-wide objectives to: 

• provide high quality services to citizens; 

• reduce the expense and difficulty of doing business with the government and lower 

government operating costs; 

• provide citizens greater access to government services; and 

• make government more transparent and accountable. 

The Administration also uses E-Government to promote greater public access to government 

information. As the President said in his December 14, 2005, Executive Order on Improving 

Agency Disclosure of Information, “The effective functioning of our constitutional democracy 

depends upon the participation in public life of a citizenry that is well informed.” E-Government 

initiatives and policies described in this report enhance the dissemination of and access to 

government information to the public. 

3
ABOUT THIS REPORT

This is OMB’s third annual progress report on implementation of the E-Government Act of 2002 

(Pub. L. No. 107-347) as required by Section 3606 of title 44, United States Code. This report 

describes activities completed in fiscal year 2005, and is among a series of reports produced by 

OMB to describe the Administration’s use of E-Government to improve government 

performance and the delivery of information and services to the public. 

Most prominent among these other reports are the: 

• December 17, 2005, report titled: “Expanding E-Government, Improved Service Delivery 

for the American People Using Information Technology,” describing E-Government 

accomplishments of the departments and agencies and setting forth our goals for next 

year;

1

 

• December 17, 2005, report titled: “Report to Congress on Implementation of Section 212 

of the E-Government Act of 2002,” describing the five original E-Government Lines of 

Business;2

 

• January 6, 2006, report to Congress describing the economic value of multi-agency and 

cross-government E-Government activities;3 and 

• Chapter 9 of the President’s fiscal year 2007 budget of the U.S. Government describing 

how agencies are integrating information technology to enhance services.4 

Section I of this report describes the government’s efforts over the past year to implement certain 

technical requirements of the E-Government Act. It also describes other efforts complementing 

the Act and fulfilling similar objectives. For example, this report describes the government’s 

overall efforts to provide public access to government information and promote information 

privacy. Section II includes examples of internal agency E-Government activities and Section III 

details use of the E-Government Fund established by Section 3604 of the E-Government Act. 

This report, other reports referenced here, and OMB’s prior reports on implementation of the EGovernment Act (i.e., for fiscal years’ 2003 and 2004) are available on OMB’s website and have 

been provided to the Government Printing Office for distribution to Federal Depository 

Libraries. Additionally, links to all reports or policies referenced in this report are found in 

Section IV. The reader is encouraged to refer to all of them for a complete picture of past, 

current, and planned Administration efforts. 

 

1

 For more information see: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budintegration/expanding_egov_2005.pdf. 2

 For more information see: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/documents/Section_212_Report_Final.pdf. 3

 For more information see: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/inforeg/e-gov/e-gov_benefits_report_2006.pdf. 4

 Chapter 9 of the President’s fiscal year 2007 budget of the U.S. Government can be found at: 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2007/pdf/spec.pdf. 

4
SECTION I: COMPLIANCE WITH SPECIFIC GOALS AND 

PROVISIONS OF THE ACT

Improving Public Access to Government Information – Section 207 

The Federal government is the largest single producer, collector, consumer, and disseminator of 

information in the United States and perhaps the world. The nation and its citizens greatly 

benefit from dissemination of government information – it is a valuable national resource used to 

ensure the accountability of government, manage government operations, maintain the healthy 

performance of the economy, and is itself a commodity in the market place. 

Agency information dissemination programs are necessary to deliver programs and services and 

ensure effective and efficient program performance. Many statutes specifically direct agencies 

to provide to the public particular information dissemination products or conduct information 

dissemination programs.5

 Dissemination also is a consequence of agency program activities and 

in most circumstances information dissemination to the public is an important and a necessary 

part of agency mission performance. This openness and transparency distinguishes the United 

States from most other nations. 

To effectively disseminate information to the public, agencies apply a dynamic, yet enduring, 

framework of principles found in law and policy. The E-Government Act built upon this 

existing framework and underscored those principles. Described below are activities taken over 

the past year to further improve public access to government information including efforts 

specifically required by the E-Government Act. 

Executive Order 13392, “Improving Agency Disclosure of Information” 

For 40 years, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) has been an important way for the public 

to obtain information about their government. On December 14, 2005, the President issued 

Executive Order 13392, “Improving Agency Disclosure of Information.”6 The order directs 

agencies to ensure citizen-centered and results-oriented FOIA operations. Agencies identified a 

chief FOIA officer with agency-wide responsibility for efficient and appropriate compliance with 

FOIA. Agencies will take a hard look at their FOIA operations, identify areas in which they can 

do better, and develop a plan for the agency to implement improvements in the coming months. 

Agencies will also establish FOIA Requester Service Centers to receive inquiries from the public 

about the status of their FOIA requests, and designate Public Liaisons to help serve the public 

and respond to inquiries. The results of the review and report will be made available to the 

 

5

 For example, the Agricultural Research Service of the United States Department of Agriculture was recently 

authorized by the “Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 1998” (Pub. L. No. 105-185) to 

ensure federally supported and conducted agricultural research, extension, and education activities are accomplished 

in a manner integrating agricultural research, extension, and education functions to better link research to technology 

transfer and information dissemination activities. 

6

 Executive Order 13392, “Improving Agency Disclosure of Information,” can be found at: 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/12/20051214-4.html. 

5
public, the Department of Justice (DOJ), and OMB. DOJ and OMB issued memoranda to assist 

agencies in implementing the Executive order.7

 

OMB Memorandum M-06-02, “Improving Public Access to and Dissemination of 

Government Information and Using the Federal Enterprise Architecture Data Reference 

Model” 

On December 16, 2005, OMB issued new policy identifying procedures to promote greater 

access to government information through active dissemination.8

 As intended by the EGovernment Act, the policy complements existing laws and policies and incorporates 

information access and dissemination principles found in policies for the management of Federal 

information resources and Federal agency public websites. Furthermore, OMB considered input 

from a variety of sources including the agencies, recommendations from the Interagency 

Committee on Government Information, and responses to a request for information published by 

the General Services Administration using resources from the E-Government Fund.9

 The policy 

improves agency dissemination of government information to the public by recognizing: 

• Significant advances in commercial search technologies and standards permit agencies to 

cost-effectively organize and categorize their information and make it available to the 

public-at-large by publishing information intended for public use directly to the Internet. 

This process exposes information to freely available and other search functions 

(including their associated crawl and index mechanisms), is not complex, and is achieved 

cost-effectively. 

• More complex advance information preparation (e.g., using formal information models 

such as metadata) is sometimes necessary when freely available and other search 

functions do not adequately organize and categorize agency information. The policy 

does not, however, identify an absolute threshold for determining when advance 

preparation is necessary. Agencies must continue to determine whether advance 

preparation is needed by consulting with their users, understanding the marketplace, 

considering the significance of their information products, and balancing their goal of 

maximizing the usefulness of their information dissemination product while minimizing 

the cost to the government and the public. All of these considerations occur within the 

context of an agency’s mission. For example, specific identifiable groups (e.g., a 

particular scientific community) or significant information dissemination products (e.g., 

reports and products required by law or matters of continuing public interest) may 

continue to require advance preparation to ensure effective interchange or dissemination. 

 

7

 OMB Memorandum M-06-04, “Implementation of the President’s Executive Order Improving 

Agency Disclosure of Information,” can be found at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/fy2006/m06-

04.pdf. 8

 For more information see: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/fy2006/m06-02.pdf. 9

 OMB Memorandum M-05-04, “Policies for Federal Agency Public Websites,” can be found at: 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/fy2005/m05-04.pdf. OMB Circular A-130, “Management of Federal 

Information Resources,” can be found at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/a130/a130trans4.pdf. The report 

summarizing responses to the RFI can be can be found at: 

http://www.cio.gov/documents/EEIRS_RFI_Response_Analysis.pdf. 

6
Agencies have found over the years, as the significance of the information dissemination 

product increases, so too may the need for advance preparation. 

The policy also requires agencies to continue reviewing the performance and results of their 

information dissemination programs. The review includes a description of how formal 

information models, if used, cost-effectively meet an agency’s dissemination requirements and 

how they relate to the Federal Enterprise Architecture Data Reference Model.10 A description of 

each agency’s information dissemination program as well as the results of the review is to be 

published on each agency’s website along with their Information Resources Management 

Strategic Plan and inventories, schedules, and priorities. 

One benefit of active information dissemination to both the public and the agencies is timelier 

access to government information. Moreover, readily accessible information through active 

dissemination may also reduce the complexity of FOIA requests. 

Helping the Public Locate Government Information and the Federal Internet Portal 

Federal agency public websites and other agency practices help the public locate government 

information. Information inventories and information product catalogs, as well as priorities and 

schedules for disseminating information are important methods to aid the public in locating 

government information. Links to these aids are provided in the agency summaries found in 

Section II of this report, and are aggregated by FirstGov.gov.11 Internet search functions also 

enhance citizen access to and dissemination of government information and are available on the 

principal homepage of each agency’s public website. 

The inventories, schedules, and priorities are available for public comment to help agencies 

maintain communications with the public and ensure dissemination products meet user needs. 

They also can help agencies identify duplicative collections of information in order to reduce the 

burden placed on the public such as when responding to surveys and completing required forms 

for Federal benefits or services. 

Furthermore, the inventories, schedules, and priorities augment other necessary forms of 

communication and consultation with the public so agencies can better understand the market 

place and know what information is already available. This is especially important when 

considering the effects of agency efforts on the public, State and local governments, and 

industry, and avoiding undue burden and inappropriate competition. Communication and 

consultation also provide notice to the public prior to initiating, substantially modifying, or 

terminating significant information dissemination products. It also helps agencies disseminate 

information on timely and equitable terms by avoiding exclusive, restricted, or other distribution 

arrangements interfering with the availability of information dissemination products. 

FirstGov.gov complements agency information dissemination programs by providing in a central 

location ways to help the public locate government information and services. Besides 

 

10 For more information see: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/a-5-drm.html. 11 The link to Firstgov.gov’s aggregation of agency inventories, schedules, and priorities is at: 

http://www.firstgov.gov/Topics/Reference_Shelf/FOIA/web_inventories.shtml. 

7
aggregating agency links to their inventories, schedules, and priorities of information 

dissemination products, Firstgov.gov will also aggregate agency FOIA plans and Information 

Resources Management Strategic Plans. Perhaps most significantly, FirstGov.gov’s recently 

enhanced search function organizes search results from .gov and .mil domains into subject 

categories to further help citizens locate the specific government information they seek. 

A prominent example of FirstGov.gov’s performance came in the wake of the catastrophic 

hurricanes Katrina, Rita and Wilma. The government quickly put into place a coordinated effort 

to provide up-to-date recovery information through a variety of channels. Agency web managers 

identified five most frequently requested topics following the disaster and FirstGov.gov served 

as one of five topic managers to help the public find information and services disseminated by all 

Federal agencies. 

FirstGov.gov’s specific responsibilities were to assist citizens searching for friends and 

information, answering frequently asked questions, making available all disaster-related 

information in Spanish, and other issues requiring coordination across agency and 

intergovernmental lines (e.g., replacing vital documents, providing hurricane telephone hotlines, 

and identifying hurricane scams and fraud).12 

Resources from the E-Government Fund were also used to support Hurricane relief efforts 

through the development and preparation of a government-wide electronic benefit registration 

system called GovBenefits.gov. The site helps citizens determine their eligibility and register for 

Federal services, greatly reducing the time and burden on citizens trying to identify and apply for 

benefits. 

Organizations Complementing Federal Agency Information Dissemination Programs 

While each Federal agency is ultimately responsible for disseminating their own information, 

they must do so by using diverse dissemination channels (e.g., non-federal parties, State and 

local government agencies, local organizations). This ensures the public has many sources for 

obtaining government information. FirstGov.gov discussed above is one such channel and 

OMB’s April 17, 2005, report, “Organizations Complementing Federal Agency Information 

Dissemination Programs,” describes four others: community technology centers (CTCs), public 

libraries, research rooms at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), and 

Federal Depository Libraries managed by the Government Printing Office.13 

The activities of these organizations complement individual agency information dissemination 

programs and aid the public in accessing Federal information. They also aid Federal agencies 

and the public by: 

• Communicating with the public and evaluating information dissemination programs to 

ensure implementation meets user needs; 

• Providing ready access to quality information and services, including to the disabled; 

• Maintaining records documenting Federal activities; 

 

12 For more information see: http://firstgov.gov/Citizen/Topics/PublicSafety/Hurricane_Katrina_Recovery.shtml. 13 The report can be found at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/inforeg/section_213_report_04-2005.pdf. 

8
• Training staff to aid citizens, including the disabled, in locating government information 

resources and services; and 

• Establishing collaborative relationships with other organizations to share and disseminate 

information resources. 

CTCs also provided timely information and services to aid Hurricane Katrina and Rita evacuees. 

In one example, a center was established in the George R. Brown Convention Center in Houston, 

where up to 7,000 evacuees were housed. The center coordinated with related organizations to 

establish “Room 303 CTC” in the convention center. Room 303 CTC helped hurricane survivors 

search for lost friends and relatives, and complete online applications for assistance (over 3,000 

in the first week). 

Public Access to Electronic Federal Records 

The Federal Records Act of 1950 requires Federal agencies to properly manage government 

records to preserve the government’s historical record and protect the legal and financial rights 

of the government and the public. Records management directly supports agency dissemination 

programs by providing adequate and proper documentation of agency activities and ensures 

access to records regardless of form or medium. 

To promote better records management, on December 17, 2005, NARA issued “Guidance for 

Implementing Section 207(e) of the E-Government Act of 2002.”14 In developing the policy, 

NARA considered input from a variety of sources including the agencies and recommendations 

from the Interagency Committee on Government Information. 

NARA’s policy provides Federal agencies with guidance to improve the management of 

electronic records, including web records. All electronic records created and received by 

agencies are subject to the same existing statutory and regulatory records management 

requirements as records in other formats and on other media (e.g., paper records). In addition, 

NARA’s policy highlights agency responsibilities to identify and schedule their electronic 

records, and to transfer to NARA electronic records requiring permanent retention. 

Ensuring Accessibility to Government Information and Information Technology for People 

with Disabilities 

 

Agencies take a number of steps to ensure timely and equitable dissemination of and access to 

government information, including to members of the public with disabilities. The General 

Services Administration (GSA) provides agencies technical assistance when procuring 

information technology to help agencies achieve their dissemination goals and meet the 

requirements of Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act. Last year, GSA deployed two new tools 

for agencies to use. 

• The “Buy Accessible Wizard” assists agencies in determining whether Section 508 

requirements apply to an acquisition, identifies specific standards applicable to 

 

14 NARA’s guidance can be found at: http://www.archives.gov/records-mgmt/bulletins/2006/2006-02.html. 

9
information technology being acquired, aids in developing solicitation language, and 

provides documentation to help monitor Section 508 compliance. The tool also ensures 

compliance with accessibility standards developed by the United States Access Board 

when purchasing information technology. 

• The “Buy Accessible Data Center” makes available on-line market research provided by 

vendors describing how their information technology meets Section 508 requirements. 

GSA also provides agencies additional information and services including best practices, free 

training on various Section 508-related subjects (such as micro-purchase training), frequently 

asked questions, and other useful information.15 

Common Protocols for Geographic Information Systems 

Geospatial data is used by the public, industry, academia, the scientific community and agencies 

at all levels of government for a variety of purposes from producing maps to identifying 

population distribution and where government programs are most needed. Therefore, developing 

and using geospatial data standards are important to permit greater use and sharing between 

agencies and the public. 

OMB policies provide direction for Federal agencies’ processing, maintaining, or using spatial 

data either directly or indirectly to help perform their mission. An inter-agency committee 

develops standards and a common infrastructure comprising technology, policies, standards, 

human resources, and related activities to more efficiently and effectively acquire, process, 

distribute, use, maintain, and preserve spatial data. 

To further improve the use of geospatial information, OMB and the committee established the 

Geospatial One-Stop initiative to implement policy, eliminate unnecessary duplication of data 

collection, and improve the dissemination of geospatial information. This initiative combines 

resources from Federal, State, local, tribal and private sources and makes them available on a 

single website.16 The GeoData.gov website provides information on geospatial investments, 

promotes inter-governmental partnerships, shared purchasing opportunities, and provides a 

single point of access to map-related data. So far, fifteen Federal agencies have posted over 

34,000 records and 48 States have posted another 30,000 State and local records to the website.

Over the past year, this effort demonstrated how it has already improved decision-making and 

government service delivery. Following several disasters, GeoData.gov served as an on-line 

resource for coordinating multi-agency response and recovery efforts. In support of Hurricane 

Katrina and Rita relief efforts, the website provided public and first responder access to 

“Geographic Information Systems for the Gulf,” an integrated Federal, State and local database 

and specialized viewers developed under “Project Homeland,” a partnership between the 

National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, the Department of Homeland Security, and the United 

States Geological Survey. 

 

15 Additional information and services for agencies can be found at: www.section508.gov. 16 The website is: www.geodata.gov. 

10
From its beginning, the Geospatial One-Stop has been a partnership with both the public and 

private sector and has enabled specialized communities to respond to the disasters described 

above as well as the Asian tsunami and the California wild fires. Over the coming year, areas for 

further improvements will be studied to promote cost-efficiencies, reduce unnecessary 

duplication, and provide even greater public access to geospatial data. 

Promoting Information Privacy – Section 208 

Federal agencies collect personal information about individuals for a variety of authorized 

purposes including to accurately determine program eligibility and to deliver efficient and 

effective services. Agencies must protect an individual’s rights to information privacy by 

guarding against unauthorized disclosure or misuse of personal information. Accordingly, 

agencies take various measures to safeguard the personal information they collect. 

To provide context, the following describes the Federal government’s overall information 

privacy program including how agencies are implementing the E-Government Act’s privacy 

provisions. This discussion also includes agency privacy program performance as reflected in 

their responses to OMB’s new privacy reporting requirements. 

Statutes and Policies Governing the Federal Government’s Information Privacy Program 

The Federal government’s information privacy program relies primarily on five statutes which 

assign to OMB policy and oversight responsibilities: 

 

• The Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. § 552a) sets collection, maintenance, and disclosure 

conditions; access and amendment rights and notice and record-keeping requirements 

with respect to personally identifiable information retrieved by name or identifier. 

• The Computer Matching and Privacy Protection Act of 1988 (5 U.S.C. § 552a note) 

amended the Privacy Act to additionally provide a framework for the electronic 

comparison of personnel- and benefits-related information systems. 

• The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. § 101 note) and the Information 

Technology Management Reform Act of 1996 (also known as Clinger-Cohen Act; 41 

U.S.C. §251 note) linked agency privacy activities to information technology and 

information resources management. Both assign to agency Chief Information Officers 

(CIO) the responsibility to ensure implementation of privacy programs within their 

respective agencies. 

• Section 208 of the E-Government Act of 2002 included provisions requiring agencies to 

conduct privacy impact assessments17 on new or substantially altered information 

technology systems and electronic information collections, and post web privacy policies 

at major entry points to their Internet sites. 

 

17 Privacy impact assessments analyze agency handling of personally identifiable information, describing for a 

specific system how the agency ensures compliance with law and policy and where protecting privacy demands 

modifications to the business process or information system. 

11
As described further below, OMB’s privacy policies are found in five guidance documents and 

referenced in many more, these include: 

• Implementing the Privacy Act of 1974; 

• Conducting matching programs under the Computer Matching and Privacy Protection 

Act of 1988; 

• Completing privacy reports and other required publications; 

• Implementing the privacy provisions of the E-Government Act of 2002; and 

• Designating Senior Agency Officials for Privacy. 

Implementing the Privacy Act of 1974. Following enactment of the Privacy Act of 1974, OMB 

issued comprehensive guidance for implementing the specific provisions of that Act (40 Fed. 

Reg. 28,949-28,978, July 9, 1975). This guidance defines statutory terms and explains notice 

and recordkeeping requirements as well as record subjects’ rights of access and amendment. 

Conducting matching programs under the Computer Matching and Privacy Protection Act of 

1988. With the enactment of the Computer Matching amendments to the Privacy Act, OMB 

issued guidance on conducting matching programs (54 Fed. Reg. 25,819-25,829, June 19, 1989). 

This guidance defines statutory terms (i.e., coverage of the Act) and explains requirements and 

procedures for developing computer matching agreements. 

Privacy reporting and publication requirements. In 1996, OMB issued Circular A-130, 

Appendix I, “Federal Agency Responsibilities for Maintaining Records About Individuals,” 

amplifying on the guidance mentioned above, specifying content of and procedures for providing 

required public notices and describing agency obligations to report to OMB on privacy activities 

and compliance with the Act.18 

Implementing the privacy provisions of the E-Government Act of 2002. In 2003, OMB issued 

guidance on implementing the E-Government Act’s privacy requirements -- OMB Memorandum 

M-03-22 of September 26, 2003, “OMB Guidance for Implementing the Privacy Provisions of 

the E-Government Act of 2002.”19

Designating Senior Agency Officials for Privacy. Most recently, on February 11, 2005, OMB 

issued Memorandum M-05-08, “Designation of Senior Agency Officials for Privacy,” directing 

each executive Department and agency to identify a senior agency official for privacy to assume 

overall responsibility and accountability for ensuring agencies comply with privacy law and 

policy.20 The memorandum directs these senior officials to coordinate development of all 

required agency reports, assume responsibility for agency activities relating to privacy, and 

address privacy policy issues at an agency-wide level. Specifically, the senior officials are 

responsible for: 

 

18 OMB Circular A-130, “Management of Federal Information Resources,” can be found at: 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/a130/a130trans4.pdf. 19 OMB Memorandum M-03-22, “Guidance for Implementing the Privacy Provisions of the E-Government Act of 

2002,” can be found at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/m03-22.html. 20 OMB Memorandum 05-08, “Designation of Senior Agency Officials for Privacy,” can be found at: 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/fy2005/m05-08.pdf. 

12
• overseeing, coordinating and facilitating agency compliance with privacy laws, 

regulations and policies, including maintaining appropriate documentation of compliance 

and ensuring remedial action for identified compliance weaknesses; 

• ensuring the agency’s employees and contractors receive appropriate training and 

education regarding information privacy laws, regulations, policies and procedures; and 

• assuming a central policy-making role in the agency’s development and evaluation of 

legislative, regulatory and other policy proposals which implicate information privacy. 

Agency Privacy Program Performance 

OMB typically evaluates agency privacy compliance in three ways: 

• Within the annual budget process, when agencies propose programs or investments in 

information technology systems; 

• When agencies propose regulations or information collections under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995; and 

• When agencies develop Privacy Act System of Records Notices and E-Government Act 

privacy impact assessments. 

 

In 2005, OMB added two privacy oversight mechanisms. First, privacy was added to the 

quarterly President’s Management Agenda Scorecard. Second, as part of agencies’ annual 

reporting under the Federal Information Security Management Act, OMB asked agencies to 

report on how they are implementing the requirements of privacy laws and policy in the areas of 

privacy leadership and coordination, procedures and practices, and internal oversight.21 In all 

areas, OMB works with agencies to address any reported underperformance. 

Privacy and the President’s Management Agenda 

OMB added two criteria to the President’s E-Government Management Agenda Scorecard to 

ensure agencies remain focused on their privacy responsibilities and integrate privacy into their 

E-Government activities. Agency progress in completing these criteria is evaluated each quarter. 

In order to maintain a successful evaluation of green on their agency scorecard, OMB measures 

whether an agency has: 

• Conducted and publicly posted privacy impact assessments for at least ninety percent of 

applicable systems, and 

 

21 FISMA reporting instructions can be found at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/fy2005/m05-15.html. 

13
• Demonstrated they have developed and published Privacy Act Systems of Records 

Notices in at least ninety percent of required circumstances.22 

Currently, 15 of 26 agencies evaluated each quarter by the President’s Management Agenda 

Scorecard have conducted and publicly posted privacy impact assessments for ninety percent or 

more of applicable systems. Eighteen agencies have developed and published Privacy Act 

Systems of Records Notices in at least ninety percent of required circumstances. 

Findings from Annual Reporting

1. Designating Senior Agency Official for Privacy 

More than half of the 24 CFO Act agencies have designated their Chief Information Officer 

(CIO) as the Senior Agency Official for Privacy, while the remainder designated individuals at 

the Assistant Secretary, General Counsel, Deputy General Counsel, or component Director level. 

By contrast, approximately one-quarter to one-third of the small agencies designated CIOs to be 

their Senior Agency Official for Privacy, while the remainder were General Counsels, Executive 

Directors, Chief Financial Officers, or Administrators, as many of the micro-agencies (e.g., 

foundations, boards, commissions) have only a small executive staff with no specialized CIO 

position. 

Of the 24 CFO Act agencies, 23 report their senior agency official for privacy: reviews 

compliance with agency information privacy activities; evaluates the privacy impact of 

legislative, regulatory and other policy proposals, as well as testimony and other formal 

communications; and assesses the impact of technology on the privacy of personal information. 

2. Integrating Privacy Controls into Agency Operations 

Agencies provided information about the degree to which they document their privacy program 

activities. Reports from the 24 CFO Act agencies indicate: 

• twenty documented their review of compliance with information privacy laws, 

regulations and policies; 

• seventeen provided planned, ongoing, or completed corrective actions addressing 

compliance deficiencies reported by the agency in a previous reporting period; 

 

22 A system of records is a group of any records under the control of any agency from which information is retrieved 

by the name of the individual or by some identifying number, symbol, or other identifying particular assigned to the 

individual. The system of records notice documents the name and location of the system, the categories of 

individuals on whom records are maintained in the system, the categories of records maintained in the system, each 

routine use of the records contained in the system (including the categories of users and the purposes of such use), 

the policies and practices of the agency regarding storage, retrievability, access controls, retention, and disposal of 

records, the title and business address of the agency official who is responsible for the system of records, the agency 

procedures whereby an individual can be notified at his request if the system of records contains a record pertaining 

to him, the agency procedures whereby an individual can be notified at his request how he can gain access to any 

record pertaining to him contained in the system of records, including how he can contest its content, and the 

categories of sources of records in the system. 

14
• twenty provided privacy training (both general and job specific) for employees and 

contractors, and conducted reviews of activities required by the Privacy Act and OMB 

policy; 

• twenty-two established written policies and procedures for conducting privacy impact 

assessments;23

• fourteen performed privacy impact assessments as required for systems newly operational 

or substantially altered in the last year; 

• twenty-one established a written process for determining compliance with agency website 

privacy policies;24

• twenty-two provided machine readable privacy policies (e.g., P3P-compliant or 

automatically readable using some other tool) on their websites and the remaining two 

plan to make their privacy policies machine readable by June 31, 2006;25 

• twenty established a written process for determining continued compliance with 

persistent tracking policies;26

• twenty-four complied with the special authorization and notice requirements for 

persistent tracking; 

• seven used persistent tracking and six have incorporated persistent tracking oversight into 

their privacy governance; 

• eleven used technologies enabling continuous auditing of compliance with stated privacy 

policies and practices; 

• nine submitted an annual report to Congress detailing their privacy activities, including 

activities under the Privacy Act and any violations; and 

• ten provided to their Inspectors General (IG) materials helpful to program oversight 

including compilations of agency privacy and data protection policies and procedures, 

summaries of the agency’s use of information in identifiable form, and verification of 

intent to comply with agency policies and procedures. OMB will follow up with 

agencies and their IGs to determine the extent to which IGs use these products for 

oversight purposes. 

 

23 Written policies and procedures for conducting privacy impact assessments help agencies determine whether a 

privacy impact assessment is needed, conduct an assessment in a consistent manner, evaluate changes in business 

processes or technology to properly identify when conducting an assessment may is necessary, ensure system 

owners, privacy experts, and information technology experts participate in conducting the assessment, and 

disseminate assessments to the public. 

24 This written process helps agencies verify websites comply with the posted privacy policy and ensure corrective 

action is taken if any deficiencies are identified. 

25 The privacy policies inform users about what information the agency collects, and by what authority. P3P, or the 

“platform for privacy preferences,” is an industry standard providing a simple, automated way for users to gain more 

control over the use of personal information on Web sites they visit. More information is at: 

http://www.w3.org/P3P/. Making privacy policies machine-readable ensures visitors to the site can ascertain 

quickly whether the agency’s information handling practices conform to their individual preferences. 26 Written processes ensure limited use of persistent tracking technology to those instances where a compelling need 

is identified and when authorized by agency head. It also helps ensure agencies review use of persistent tracking 

(when used) each year, continue to justify in writing and obtains approval to use the persistent tracking, and include 

language in the web privacy policy informing visitors when the persistent tracking technology is in use and for what 

purpose. OMB Memorandum M-00-13, “Privacy Policies and Data Collection on Federal Web Sites,” located at: 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/m00-13.html provides privacy policies for agencies managing public 

websites. 

15
Cross-Government Privacy Coordination - OMB’s Interagency Privacy Working Group 

To promote a greater government-wide understanding of privacy responsibilities and assist 

agencies in fulfilling them, OMB leads an interagency working group comprising agency privacy 

specialists. The working group meets periodically to discuss issues of common interest such as 

data mining, use of commercial databases, and promising practices in implementing various 

statutory or policy requirements. To assist all agencies in implementing Homeland Security 

Presidential Directive-12, “Policy for a Common Identification Standard for Federal Employees 

and Contractors,” the working group developed model system of records notices and privacy 

impact assessments needed when developing systems using the new identification standard. The 

models were released by OMB in February, 2006. 

Workforce Development -- Section 209

Qualified Federal information technology project managers leading skilled interdisciplinary 

teams are the first line of defense against project cost overruns, schedule slippages, and poor 

performance. They are also critical to ensuring an agencies’ ability to deliver efficient and 

effective services to citizens. 

On April 15, 2005, the Administration requested agencies submit plans to OMB for closing 

important information technology skill and competency gaps. The CIO Council identified 

information technology project management, information technology architecture, and 

information technology security as important competencies because of their direct impact on an 

agency’s ability to achieve the objectives of the President’s Management Agenda. Agencies 

analyzed these three competencies in addition to other competencies important to the specific 

mission of the agency. Agencies identified competency gaps in: 

• enterprise architecture positions related to the lines-of-business framework developed by 

OMB for government-wide improvement; 

• risk management positions applying methods and tools for risk assessment and 

mitigation; 

• standards positions implementing and verifying compliance with standards and 

guidelines; 

• process design positions analyzing information processing and control to fulfill strategic 

objectives; and 

• systems analysis and development positions aiding the design, specification, cost-benefit 

analysis, evaluation, management and implementation of information systems. 

Agencies workforce plans identified the risks of not achieving agency mission caused by each 

competency gap, and a schedule for acquiring competencies where gaps created the highest risk. 

As a result of these analyses, Federal agencies better understand their workforce needs and can 

effectively adapt their workforce in order to address the most critical areas. The table below 

summarizes fiscal year 2005 data provided by agencies identifying the total number of current 

positions by critical skill area, as well as the number of vacant positions agencies planned to fill 

by the end of the fiscal year (Chapter 9 of the President’s fiscal year 2007 budget contains 2006 

data). 

16
Job Area 

Fiscal Year 2005 

– Total Number 

of Current 

Positions* 

Number of Vacant 

Positions Agencies 

Planned to Fill by 

the End of Fiscal 

Year 2005 

Information Technology Project Management 4,619 211 

Information Technology Security 9,030 229 

Information Technology Architecture 2,110 179 

Total 15,759 619 

*As of date agencies reported to OMB 

While agencies reported gaps in enterprise architecture competencies, analysis by OMB’s 

enterprise architecture methodology demonstrated agencies have complete and effective 

enterprise architectures to help plan and implement investments. Furthermore, agency capital 

investment plans (i.e., business cases) are adequately describing the relationship between each 

investment, agency enterprise architectures, and the Federal enterprise architecture. 

In contrast, only seventy percent of the fiscal year 2007 major information technology 

investments are managed by qualified project managers, and competency gaps in project 

management continue. Evaluation of fiscal year 2007 capital investment plans for major 

information technology investments indicate many project managers do not have adequate 

training and lack support from integrated project teams comprising necessary expertise (e.g., 

acquisition, financial, and technical) for successful project execution. Furthermore, project 

managers often attempt to oversee multiple investments causing them to be less effective. 

Gaps in project management competencies not only place major information technology 

investments at risk, they also inhibit the agency from fulfilling mission objectives. Agencies will 

first address information technology project management competencies within their existing 

funding levels (rather than other competency gaps), as this gap causes the highest risk. This 

prioritization also allows agencies to make efficient use of personnel resources within their 

existing funding levels while improving the quality of agency project management. 

Agencies are addressing project management gaps in several other ways including: 

• training and mentoring; 

• developing communities of practice; 

• using bonuses and other incentives for employees acquiring or possessing needed skills; 

and 

• improving recruitment and retention. 

The Administration measures agency progress in hiring, training, mentoring, and use of skills 

incentive programs to close information technology competency gaps as part of the President’s 

Management Agenda Human Capital Scorecard. 

Agencies are using existing guidance and reports produced by the Office of Personnel 

Management (OPM), OMB, and the CIO Council to ensure their information technology 

17
workforce has the skills necessary to deliver government information and services. To aid 

agency development, implementation, and assessment of their information technology workforce 

plans in coordination with their overall human capital planning, agencies are using: 

• Federal information technology project manager guidance to ensure Federal information 

technology project managers have qualifications validated against criteria identified in 

the guidance.27 

• a capability planning and analysis tool to conduct sophisticated government-wide and 

agency-wide analysis of competency and skill gaps and to update their workforce plans. 

• the information technology workforce development roadmap to identify individual 

employee skill gaps and necessary training, as well as enhance and coordinate agency 

training programs as described in OPM’s report, “Report on the Establishment of a 

Government-wide Information Technology Training Program.”28 

• information technology training program guidance to use when addressing their 

information technology training needs.29

 

• a Federal information technology workforce management resource package to assist in 

information technology workforce planning and the development of information 

technology training programs and standards.30 

Other initiatives sponsored or organized by OPM, the General Services Administration, and the 

CIO Council further strengthen the Federal information technology workforce and ensure 

agencies can achieve their mission. An information technology quarterly forum convenes to 

discuss and share promising practices regarding information technology initiatives. A 

partnership between CIO University and seven universities graduated over 600 students trained 

in Federal information technology management. The Cyber Corps program provides more than 

300 scholarships and paid internships to students pursuing college, graduate, and doctoral 

degrees who serve at agencies and work on information security issues. 

Exchange programs and other training programs also equip agencies with tools for addressing 

workforce gaps. For example, OPM finalized regulations to implement the Information 

Technology Exchange Program (ITEP) for agencies to incorporate in their training and 

development programs. Agencies are designing information technology exchanges with the 

private sector with assistance from OPM, and expect to initiate exchanges after a thorough 

agency review. OPM is marketing the exchange program to the private sector through the 

USAJobs website where exchange opportunities, participating Federal agencies, and points of 

 

27 Federal information technology project manager guidance can be found at: 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/fy04/m04-19.pdf. 28 The Information Technology Workforce Development Roadmap can be found at: http://itroadmap.golearn.gov, 

and the report can be found at: http://opm.gov/hrd/lead/pubs/ittpreport_07-04/ittpreportJuly2004.pdf. 29 The information technology training program guidance can be found at: 

http://www.chcoc.opm.gov/transmittal_detail.cfm?ID=623. 30 The resource package can be found at: http://www.cio.gov/index.cfm?function=specdoc&id=649. 

18
contact can be found.31 Furthermore, the American Council of Technology hosts a website for 

Federal agencies to view and explore exchange opportunities in the private sector.32

Integrating Reporting and Pilot Projects – Section 212

The Presidential E-Government initiatives and Lines of Business task forces (described in 

Chapter 9 of the President’s fiscal year 2007 Budget) use the Federal Enterprise Architecture 

(FEA) to identify potential duplication and help agencies consider broad-based approaches to 

building common solutions rather than maintaining separate investments. The initiatives 

integrate Federal information systems to make them more interoperable, thereby potentially 

saving money while improving services and agency efficiency. Agencies also use the FEA to 

help describe and document existing and desired relationships among business and management 

processes and information technology. Once the descriptions and relationships are documented, 

agency enterprise architectures serve as a common frame of reference to identify opportunities to 

consolidate information resources and processes, share information, and improve interoperability 

across organizations.33

As described in OMB’s December 17, 2005 report, “Report to Congress on Implementation of 

Section 212 of the E-Government Act of 2002,” the five E-Government Lines of Business are 

pilot projects under Section 212 of the E-Government Act.34 Similarly, the information systems 

security line of business, supported by resources from the E-Government Fund, is consolidating 

commonly used information technology security process and controls (e.g., security reporting, 

certification, and accreditation). Consolidation will reduce the operational costs of producing 

required security reports and increase the effectiveness of information security programs across 

the Federal government. 

Use of Information Technology to Enhance Crisis Management – Section 214 

Information technology is improving the coordination and dissemination of critical government 

information to improve disaster preparedness, response, and recovery. OMB, in consultation 

with the Department of Homeland Security’s Federal Emergency Management Agency, is 

completing a study on using information technology to enhance crisis preparedness and response 

to natural and manmade disasters. The Computer Science and Telecommunications Board 

Committee of the National Academy of Sciences is aiding in this effort. 

The first phase of the study included a workshop held in June, 2005 attended by over 75 

practitioners representing Federal, State, and local officials, disaster management experts, and 

information technology researchers. The workshop covered three major topic areas: 

• The critical and evolving role of information technology in disaster management; 

 

31 The website describing how to enroll in the ITEP program can be found at: 

http://www.opm.gov/leader/hrd/lead/itep/overview.asp. The USA Jobs website is www.USAJobs.gov. 32 The American Council of Technology's website is at www.actgov.org/ITEP. 33The FEA is described in more detail at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/a-1-fea.html. 34 The “Report to Congress on Implementation of Section 212 of the E-Government Act of 2002” can be found at: 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/documents/Section_212_Report_Final.pdf. 

19
• Research directions for information technology in disaster management; and 

• Collaboration, coordination, and interoperability: pressing issues in a need-to-share 

world. 

The workshop emphasized the critical dependence first responders place upon wireless 

communication systems during an emergency and the need to enhance interoperability among 

existing and future wireless communications systems. Participants identified fundamental 

constraints to wireless communication, significant unsolved problems, and a number of areas for 

ongoing research.35 

The National Research Council is supplementing the first phase of the study by organizing 

additional workshops, site visits, and briefings to inform the final report. The final report will 

provide findings and recommendations to effectively use information technology for crisis 

management, research and development needs and opportunities, and related research 

management and technology transition considerations. 

Furthermore, managers of two Presidential E-Gov initiatives described below, Disaster 

Management and SAFECOM, use information technology and are developing standards to 

improve information sharing and communications for the nation’s public safety community. 

Both of these initiatives are led by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), are supported 

by other Federal agencies with responsibilities in this area, and partner with State, local, and 

tribal organizations. 

Disaster Management Initiative

The Disaster Management initiative provides three critical services to first responders and 

citizens: 

• One-stop access through the www.disasterhelp.gov portal for all Federal disaster 

management-related information, services, and planning and response tools, allowing for 

seamless sharing of disaster management information; 

• An interoperable disaster management tool, Disaster Management Interoperability 

Services (DMIS), to assist first responders in preparing for and responding to a disaster; 

and 

• Interoperability standards to share emergency response information across disparate third 

party software packages and between organizations, regardless of the source or type of 

information. 

The Disaster Management program deployed a new version of DMIS in June 2005. This second 

release of the software, now used at twenty-five Federal agencies, includes the capability to 

create and send alerts in a common alert protocol format, allowing a consistent warning message 

to be sent simultaneously over many different systems. The system allows emergency operating 

 

35 A summary of the workshop can be found at: http://www7.nationalacademies.org/cstb/pub_fema_workshop.html. 

20
centers at all levels of government to manage and share incident or disaster related information 

over the web with other responder organizations, and consequently, emergency responders 

obtain greater knowledge of a particular incident or disaster and can more easily coordinate 

response efforts. The system also provides authoritative sources of disaster preparation, 

mitigation, and recovery information. 

There are now over 54,000 registered users of the disasterhelp.gov portal, and the number of 

visitors to disasterhelp.gov increased exponentially from 3,000 to 6,000 visitors per day in 

August, to over 30,000 visitors on September 1, 2005. 

Over 1,549 user groups in 50 States and Washington, DC use this system (see map below), and it 

has been used to respond to over 112 incidents, including Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. During 

the response phase of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, numerous operating groups used DMIS to see 

how current events were unfolding. Based on this experience, additional operating groups will 

be established to collaborate, exchange information, and offer support. 

21
SAFECOM Initiative

SAFECOM is a communications program providing research, development, testing, evaluation, 

guidance, and assistance for local, tribal, State, and Federal public safety agencies to improve 

public safety response through more effective and efficient interoperable wireless 

communications. Public safety officials rely upon wireless communications to obtain and 

disseminate information when responding to emergencies. 

SAFECOM is working with existing Federal communications initiatives and key public safety 

stakeholders to develop better technologies and processes for the cross-jurisdictional and crossdisciplinary coordination of existing systems and future networks. The scope of this community 

is broad; the customer base includes over 50,000 local and State public safety agencies and 

organizations, and there are over 100 Federal agencies engaged in public safety disciplines such 

as law enforcement, firefighting, public health, and disaster recovery. The initiative continues 

to: 

1. Develop Guidelines and Criteria for Public Safety Communications Systems; 

SAFECOM first published functional requirements for public safety wireless 

communications in March 2004. The requirements are based on input from the public 

safety and emergency responder community and served as the basis for developing a 

national architecture framework for communications interoperability. The initiative is 

further refining the requirements so industry has a blueprint from which to build 

technologies for addressing public safety needs. 

2. Coordinate Testing and Evaluation Processes for Interoperability Products;

SAFECOM created a testing and evaluation working group to help ensure methodologies 

for testing and evaluating interoperability products are technically sound and comparable 

across testing laboratories. Coordinated testing and evaluation processes ensure 

communications equipment meets the critical needs of emergency responders with the 

first critical need being operability. The working group members are practitioners and 

subject matter experts from law enforcement, fire services, and emergency medical 

services. These members help review and develop test criteria and serve the program by 

determining which products should be evaluated. 

3. Standardize Public Safety Communications Equipment with Grant Guidance;

SAFECOM developed grant guidance for public safety interoperability equipment grants 

administered and awarded by DHS and DOJ to local, tribal, and State organizations. The 

grant guidance ensures consistency in public safety communications grant solicitations, 

maximizes the allocation and use of grants, and helps create interoperable systems. 

22
4. Coordinate Communications Spectrum Policy; and 

The radio spectrum is a finite resource shared by public safety, radio broadcasters, 

government users, and other commercial and private consumers, and coordination of its 

use is critical to ensuring interoperability. Overcrowding due to high demand can cause 

delays or disruption of public safety communications. SAFECOM is assessing public 

safety spectrum needs to support the President’s national spectrum management 

initiative. 

5. Coordinate Communications Planning.

Statewide emergency communications plans are fundamental to effective emergency 

response. SAFECOM published the Statewide Communications Interoperability 

Planning Methodology, a model for States to integrate practitioner input in statewide 

strategic plans.36 The model is based on the strategic plan SAFECOM partnered with 

Virginia and DOJ to develop for improving statewide interoperable communications. 

SAFECOM is also helping Nevada and Kentucky to implement the methodology. 

SAFECOM works closely with representatives from the public safety community to 

identify and implement solutions and is applying lessons learned from RapidCom to 

public safety agencies at the Federal, State, local, and tribal levels. Rapidcom was 

initiated by SAFECOM to help improve capabilities for immediate incident-level 

interoperable emergency communications in ten high-threat urban areas. Upon 

completion of the project, incident commanders in each of the urban areas have the 

ability to communicate quickly with each other and their command centers during an 

incident. 

 

36 The planning methodology can be found at: 

http://www.safecomprogram.gov/SAFECOM/library/interoperabilitycasestudies/1223_statewidecommunications.ht

m.

23
SECTION II: HIGHLIGHTS OF INDIVIDUAL AGENCY INTERNAL 

E-GOVERNMENT ACTIVITIES

This section of the report summarizes and highlights agency specific E-Government activities. 

More detailed information is located on each agency’s website. 

Department of Commerce: http://www.commerce.gov 

Inventory, priorities, and schedules of agency information dissemination products are located at: 

http://www.osec.doc.gov/cio/oipr/web_pub_sched.htm.

The Shipper's Export Declaration (SED) is the most common form of export documentation filed 

by the U.S. exporter community. Information collected on the form is used by the U.S. Census 

Bureau to compile trade statistics and help prevent illegal exports. The Automated Export 

System (AES) and AESDirect.gov were implemented to automate the manual, paper-based 

process of filing the SED and related export documentation. AESDirect.gov, the Census 

Bureau’s free Internet-based system, can be used directly by exporters, and anyone else 

responsible for export reporting to electronically file SED information. This saves exporters 

time and effort in filing required forms, reduces time and resources required by the Census 

Bureau for data processing, and provides the Federal government more timely and accurate trade 

data for the monthly principal economic indicator, “U.S. International Trade in Goods and 

Services.” 

 

AES benefits the export trade community by removing the burden on them for paper handling 

and retention, reducing costs, eliminating duplicate reporting to multiple government agencies, 

and helping to maintain a compliant level of reporting. For example, prior to the implementation 

of AES, around six million SEDs were filed each year. The Census Bureau has reduced this 

number to approximately 720,000 per year by implementing requirements for filing AES, 

marketing the benefits of AES, and working with companies to successfully migrate from paper 

to electronic filing. Use of the system has reduced the reporting burden placed on exporters by 

167,000 hours from current levels, and will reduce the costs for exporters from $50 to file a 

paper SED to $1.50 when filed electronically. 

The Census Bureau maintains a direct dialog with the key stakeholders (e.g., exporters, 

forwarding agents, carriers, consolidators, port authorities, software providers, and service 

centers) involved in the export trade process who are using the system. The Census Bureau 

regularly holds seminars in major port cities to educate the exporting community on the benefits 

of AES and AESDirect. 

The Census Bureau utilizes innovative technology to ensure widespread use and availability of 

AESDirect. For example, the Census Bureau maintains an active Section 508 accessibility 

compliance program, ensures information is available through a wide variety of formats, and 

makes information and services available to non-Internet users.

24
Department of Defense: http://www.dod.gov 

Inventory, priorities, and schedules of agency information dissemination products are located at: 

http://www.defenselink.mil/sitemap.html. 

The Defense Information Systems Agency manages an E-Business program to support and 

accelerate the application of electronic business practices. The program hosts a suite of EBusiness applications to improve the internal efficiency and effectiveness of the Department’s 

operations. Regular meetings with industry groups and vendor training sessions, as well as 

system users within the Department, obtain feedback on ways to improve the program’s 

initiative. Furthermore, representatives from each of the military services and defense agencies 

support the development and maintenance of the functional requirements for these systems to 

ensure the program meets Department needs. 

One of three key components of the E-Business program is the electronic document access 

system. This system provides secure online, electronic storage and retrieval of procurement 

information and documents across the entire Department. Users of the system have access to 

awarded contracts and other documents within 4 days of award/release compared to 30 days via 

paper processing, allowing the Department to begin acquisition and implement new services 

more quickly. 

Another key component of the E-Business program is the global exchange services system. This 

system provides translation, routing, and archiving services as transactions move between 

DOD’s business systems. The system identifies and records all transactions passing through the 

system, providing users an up-to-date status overview and robust audit trails to ensure 

transactions are not misplaced. The system reduces paper handling costs by an estimate of $0.15 

per transaction, saving approximately $52.8 million from over 352 million transactions. 

Finally, the wide-area workflow initiative ensures almost all commercial payments are on time to 

vendors, reducing the total cycle time for invoicing by sixty percent, as well as reducing the 

“acceptance to payment” cycle time from 60 days to 24 days. Over the last year, use of the 

system has almost tripled for a total value of $10.589B in invoice transactions. In comparison, 

the Department paid interest penalties of an estimated $294 per million dollars in invoice 

transactions when using the older manual process, but the automated process allowed by this 

initiative reduced the interest penalties to only $0.02 per million in invoice transactions. 

Department of Education: http://www.ed.gov 

Inventory, priorities, and schedules of agency information dissemination products are located at: 

http://www.ed.gov/notices/egovinventory.html. 

The Department of Education has improved mission critical processes by developing an online emonitoring system to provide grant monitoring functionality for Department staff. The system 

allows all Department users, across multiple agencies, access to essential grant management 

information. The application enhances the Department’s ability to effectively manage grants by 

improving the efficiency of the Department’s grant processing. For example, the system allows 

25
users to analyze budget and financial summary data over the lifecycle of the grant, as well as 

monitor, track, and report grant status and trends. The system also aids in grants processing by 

allowing users to reassign grants for review and receive notice of inadequate and excessive grant 

drawdown. 

While the initiative is designed to assist Department employees in monitoring recipients of 

Department grants, and is not used by external partners, it does improve the Department’s 

interaction and communication with external partners and grantees. For example, the system 

allows users to log email, phone or mail communications of any given grant, as well as print 

mailing labels and send bulk emails to aid in information dissemination. Performance 

agreements of applicable Department employees required use of the system, reinforcing the 

importance of the initiative. 

The system has been implemented in one program office, and there are plans to roll out the tool 

to other Department program offices over the next year. The system will be evaluated to assess 

performance and impact on improving the agency mission, and the Department is establishing 

performance measures (including cost savings and avoidance) based on baseline data collected 

this year. 

Department of Energy: http://www.energy.gov 

Inventory, priorities, and schedules of agency information dissemination products are located at: 

http://www.energy.gov/webpolicies.htm. 

The Department of Energy (DOE) Voluntary Protection Program improves the safety and health 

of those managing environmental remediation, nuclear operations, weapons maintenance and 

production, strategic petroleum reserves and national laboratories run by DOE. The program 

uses a web-based system to disseminate information from DOE to help protect health and safety 

at participating sites and organizations and serves as a management system for identifying, 

preventing, and controlling occupational hazards. 

The system greatly simplifies and reduces the workload for business partners (including 

corporate organizations and other contractors) in preparing, transmitting, and amending 

applications to participate in the voluntary protection program. By using the system, participants 

are improving relations between labor groups and executive management, reducing workplace 

injuries and illnesses, increasing employee involvement in organizing and managing their own 

health and safety programs, and improving employee morale. The system also enables users to 

electronically submit required reports, identify performance trends, and evaluate participant 

performance data. In the past, the application process took weeks to process and resulted in 

applications containing hundreds of documents. This system reduces the time and resources 

spent on submissions and reporting by three-fourths. The Department estimates participation in 

the program resulted in an annual cost avoidance caused by safety accidents of over $250,000 

per site per year, with cumulative savings at twenty-five major DOE sites saving over 

$6,000,000 per year. 

26
This program is operated jointly by DOE and the Voluntary Protection Programs Participants’ 

Association, an association of non-profit organizations made up of the 1,200 private sector 

corporations. The association’s outreach program partners with private-sector firms desiring 

recognition of outstanding voluntary safety programs. DOE, the Environmental Protection 

Agency, and the association work closely with OSHA in the development and implementation of 

the program. 

Department of Homeland Security: http://www.dhs.gov 

Inventory, priorities, and schedules of agency information dissemination products are located at: 

http://www.dhs.gov/interweb/assetlibrary/ContentInventory.htm.

The Department of Homeland Security utilizes the International Trade Data System to 

implement an integrated, government-wide system for the electronic collection, use, and 

dissemination of trade and transportation data. Twenty-six Federal agencies participate in this 

initiative to provide the Federal government a single window into international trade data 

collection and distribution. 

The system aids importers, businesses, and Federal agencies by simplifying and streamlining the 

process of importation. Previously, users were required to complete multiple forms with the 

same information and provide them to different agencies. With this system, users file data into 

one account for use by all related agencies, allowing users to file their import data once for use 

many times. 

 

Through consolidation of a variety of different automated systems and paper forms, this system 

better serves the user. Participating organizations reduce the expense and difficulty of doing 

business with the government, and Federal agencies are able to provide high quality, coordinated 

service across multiple business channels. Furthermore, unified business processes and 

information collection bring substantial reductions in paperwork and reporting burdens, and 

enhances enforcement of international trade and transportation regulations and laws. 

To achieve its partnering vision, the initiative is governed by a board of directors comprising 

members from participating agencies. To facilitate greater understanding of the system, a series 

of outreach sessions have been conducted to identify the initial agencies to be integrated into the 

collaborative environment. 

Department of Health and Human Services: http://www.hhs.gov 

Inventory, priorities, and schedules of agency information dissemination products are located at: 

http://www.hhs.gov/webinventory/.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) at the Department of Health and Human 

Services has established a Medicare beneficiary portal at http://My.Medicare.gov. The portal 

provides beneficiaries and their caregivers access to Medicare information and services. 

27
Registered beneficiaries can view eligibility, entitlement, deductible and address of record 

information. This helps them understand what services they qualify for, the status of their 

Medicare enrollment or claim (claims data will be available in early, 2006), and other essential 

information. Additionally, My.Medicare.gov provides beneficiaries with information on 

preventive services, prescription drug plans, and limited income subsidy enrollment information. 

The portal also has an option for web chat assistance for any technical questions and a message 

center for beneficiaries to gain access to important Medicare related messages and 

announcements sent from CMS. 

The initiative improves services by allowing transaction processing in a secure environment, 

lowers the overall cost of administering Medicare services in a paper-based environment, and 

ensures relevant and quality information reaches Medicare recipients in a timely manner. The 

portal is available to all Medicare beneficiaries, and citizens without Internet access can also 

obtain the same information and services over the phone. The initiative used pilots to guide 

gradual implementation, and the Department hosted multiple focus groups with Medicare 

beneficiaries to help design the system and better understand citizen needs. Continuous feedback 

will be used by the initiative to provide a broader set of functionality to all Medicare 

beneficiaries. 

Department of Housing and Urban Development: http://www.hud.gov 

Inventory, priorities, and schedules of agency information dissemination products are located at: 

http://www.hud.gov/about/inventory.cfm.

The Enterprise Income Verification system aids the Department of Housing and Urban 

Development (HUD) and housing authorities to aggregate information necessary for 

administering public housing programs. The system serves as a centralized income data source 

for public housing authorities when verifying applicant income, and is used by housing 

authorities to quickly and accurately determine tenant income and subsidy levels as part of the 

annual re-certification process. Housing authorities can now assess information supplied by 

tenants together with new hire, wage, unemployment compensation, and Social Security benefit 

information, as well as other information from the system to help determine appropriate subsidy 

levels. 

The system has significantly contributed to the overall success of HUD's assistance programs 

and services, and aids HUD’s efforts to reduce erroneous payments and ensure funds are 

effectively used for those with actual housing assistance needs. For example, the system helped 

reduce the annual subsidy loss associated with administrative errors and unreported income from 

$1,202.7 million to $623.2 million, representing a fifty-two percent decrease in the annual 

subsidy error, and increased the number of correct public housing subsidy determinations by ten 

percent. In addition to increased efficiency and accuracy of income and rent determinations, the 

system has reduced incidents of underreported household income, eased the burden on HUD 

business partners in verifying tenant-reported income, and eliminated the burden on Federal and 

State entities of supplying tenant income data piecemeal to 4,300 Public Housing authorities. 

The system also removed material weaknesses in HUD’s public housing tenant re-certification 

process and related program operations. 

28
HUD maintains regular communications with housing authorities and other business partners, 

and meets with public housing interest groups to share information, obtain feedback, and address 

the needs of applicants and system users. All information is available in various formats, 

including paper documentation available upon request by phone and other means. Additionally, 

HUD has placed 106 touch-screen kiosks in public places throughout the country to provide 

basic information about HUD programs and services to citizens. HUD regional offices across the 

country also provide information, and community events supplement dissemination of HUD 

program information. 

Department of the Interior: http://www.doi.gov 

Inventory, priorities, and schedules of agency information dissemination products are located at: 

http://www.doi.gov/soc.

The Department of the Interior (DOI) has the responsibility to manage federally owned 

resources, protect the environment, prevent, detect, and investigate criminal activity and manage 

visitor use and protection programs. The Incident Management Analysis and Reporting System 

(IMARS) will provide a Department-wide information collection, analysis, and reporting system 

for incident information. Currently, it is not possible to query and analyze incidents across 

multiple National Park Service (NPS) parks or other DOI Bureaus. The system will aggregate 

and disseminate incident information, improve DOI’s ability to prevent, detect, and investigate 

criminal activity, and thereby aid in protecting the public, as well as natural and cultural 

resources. The system will also help DOI prioritize protection efforts and complete reports 

required to evaluate agency programs and services. 

An advisory council will include representatives from non-law enforcement subject areas, as 

well as the National Park Service, the Bureau of Reclamation, Fish and Wildlife Service, the 

Bureau of Indian Affairs, and the Bureau of Land Management, and ensure requirements from all 

bureaus are included when developing and implementing the system. The system will also 

interface with criminal information sharing networks at other Federal, State, and local 

governments. Information on the system will be accessible to those who are disabled, and 

resources will be available to answer questions or provide assistance when necessary. Future 

services and information disseminated by the system will also be provided in alternative media. 

The timeliness and number of successfully adjudicated cases, as well as the number of illegal 

incidents leading to damage or loss to Federal or private property located on DOI lands or areas 

of interest will be key performance indicators demonstrating the system’s impact on agency 

programs and services. The system will reduce operational costs by replacing and integrating 

isolated law enforcement efforts into a centralized and common infrastructure, and eliminate the 

need for duplicative technologies and training. 

29
Department of Justice: http://www.usdoj.gov 

Inventory, priorities, and schedules of agency information dissemination products are located at: 

http://www.usdoj.gov/jmd/ocio/egovschedule.htm.

The Bomb Arson Tracking System at the Department of Justice (DOJ) is an Internet based arson 

and explosives tracking system. Investigators use the system to share incident based bomb and 

arson information in a timely, secure, and accurate manner and provide State, local and other 

Federal law enforcement agencies the ability to receive and exchange real-time information 

concerning fire, bomb and arson related violent crimes. 

The system provides images of arsons, improvised explosives devices, and crime scenes to be 

shared online with law enforcement partners anywhere in the United States. The system also 

provides a central repository view of real-time data regarding the improvised explosive and 

incendiary devices being used throughout the country. As a result, investigators can identify and 

track any trends and compare incidents for similarities in motives, leads, and potential suspects. 

The system is accessible to over 500 agencies and organizations, including all DOJ law 

enforcement agencies, as well as related Federal, State, local and tribal law enforcement 

organizations. Sharing of this data improves coordination and cooperation between law 

enforcement partners across the United States, and contributes directly to increased efficiencies, 

including improved case solvability and decreased costs. 

While DOJ is responsible for maintaining the consolidated arson and explosives system, an 

advisory board comprised of members from Federal, State and local law enforcement and fire 

service agencies meets with related interest groups to identify needs and useful approaches. 

Other Federal, State, local and tribal law enforcement agencies and associated groups 

collaborated very closely in the development of the system and continue to meet regularly with 

the advisory board. 

Department of Labor: http://www.dol.gov 

Inventory, priorities, and schedules of agency information dissemination products are located at: 

http://www.dol.gov/dol/aboutdol/content.htm. 

The Department of Labor (DOL) Unified Technology Infrastructure project is identifying and 

consolidating information technology infrastructure and business processes across the 

Department. Beginning this year, DOL will consolidate nine independent networks into a single, 

unified wide area network providing network services and on-line services to all DOL 

installations. The project will support DOL employees in their work and reduce overhead costs 

by: 

• eliminating network duplication and complexity, 

• creating a unified and coordinated structure for managing security and privacy programs, 

• protecting and ensuring the continuity of services in the event of an emergency, and 

• maximizing system integration and interoperability across the entire Department. 

30
The Department is evaluating the implementation and performance of the project to ensure it 

meets objectives. These include a planned 10% reduction in network service outages per year 

and a 5% reduction in network service outages due to malicious acts. The Department currently 

maintains network uptime around 99.8% of the time, and the project plans to increase levels to 

99.9% network uptime in subsequent years. Increasing the network’s uptime ensures network 

services and information are available when the Department delivers its programs. It is 

estimated consolidation of the networks and business processes will provide an annual savings of 

$3 million. 

To facilitate this project, an intra-agency working group has executed a collaborative approach to 

identify consolidation opportunities, risks and requirements. The group has consulted extensively 

with independent experts, contract support staff, and other Federal agencies. As the project 

continues, DOL will begin an analysis to identify and implement additional opportunities to 

consolidate other infrastructure and supporting business processes, such as data centers and help 

desks. 

Department of Transportation: http://www.dot.gov 

Inventory, priorities, and schedules of agency information dissemination products are located at: 

http://www.dot.gov/webpublishing.htm. 

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration of the Department of Transportation uses 

an online interactive web portal to facilitate its mission of saving lives and reducing injuries and 

vehicle-related crashes. The Department collects industry data from over 650 manufacturers of 

vehicles, child safety seats, tires, and motor vehicle equipment. Over 9,000 unique users visit the 

site each day to access real-time data on prior investigations, recalls, and consumer complaints. 

Previously, manufacturers submitted this information via paper, increasing the time necessary to 

upload information and make it available for analysis. Automating this process will avoid an 

estimated $1.2 million dollars in cost per year. 

The Department hosted numerous public meetings with industry to aid in developing the web 

portal to ensure it met their needs. The meetings also helped design responsive helpdesk 

services. To ensure continual improvement, the Department monitors the total number of 

manufacturers submitting data and the number of attempts necessary to accept manufacturer 

input. The number of manufacturers submitting electronically has grown by a factor of six, and 

the average number of attempts before acceptance dropped from 3.5 to 1.2. These metrics 

indicate more users are taking advantage of the web portal and their interaction with it is 

increasingly easier. 

While the Department embraces the use of information technology, it is equally important to 

ensure access to government information to individuals without Internet access or with 

disabilities. All services and information provided through the web portal is accessible to 

everyone, and there links to additional resources and service options if necessary. Furthermore, 

the Department provides the same information available on the portal via a one-stop toll-free call 

center and text telephone to those without Internet access. The vehicle safety hotline allows users 

31
to submit complaints or request an operator to search the site for summaries of investigations, 

recalls, and technical service bulletins. The Department also takes requests via walk-in visitors 

and processes information requests received by fax, mail, or email. 

Department of the Treasury: http://www.treas.gov 

Inventory, priorities, and schedules of agency information dissemination products are located at: 

http://www.treas.gov/offices/cio/web-inventory.shtml. 

The Department of Treasury’s Bureau of the Public Debt operates TreasuryDirect, an Internetbased application enabling investors to purchase and hold both marketable and non-marketable 

Treasury securities directly with Treasury in a single account. At TreasuryDirect.gov, investors 

can create and access accounts, submit bids, purchase securities, conduct transactions, and 

manage their account information and holdings online in a secure environment. 

The system has transformed the bureau’s retail securities program by enabling investors to 

purchase, manage, and conduct paper-free transactions for securities conveniently from any webenabled personal computer without assistance from a bank, broker, or other intermediary. The 

system incorporated a payroll savings feature which enables employees to deposit amounts 

deducted from their pay to their accounts for the purchase of securities, and has become a onestop shop for all retail securities, Treasury bills, notes, and inflation-protected securities. Owners 

of paper savings bonds are able to convert their bonds to electronic form and hold them in their 

TreasuryDirect accounts. While the system eliminates the need for all paper and related costs for 

handling paper, bond and marketable security services are still available through traditional 

channels for those without Internet access. 

The bureau measures usage of the system by counting the number of accounts established, 

transactions, sales of securities, outstanding balances in accounts, and paper savings bond 

conversions. Last year, the bureau established 165,975 new TreasuryDirect accounts, and 

processed 3 million online transactions. The bureau uses TreasuryDirect.gov as a primary 

channel for communicating with customers and stakeholders. The website contains a wealth of 

information and enables the bureau to educate current and potential investors about Treasury’s 

products and services. New features and program changes are highlighted on the website. 

Department of State: http://www.state.gov 

Inventory, priorities, and schedules of agency information dissemination products are located at: 

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/rls/38791.htm. 

The Department of State provides U.S. citizens an online, Internet-based service disseminating 

information on how to obtain a U.S. passport (see: http://www.travel.state.gov/passport). The 

initiative provides all information necessary for obtaining a passport, and includes passport 

renewal and related services. The initiative ensures citizens can obtain up-to-date information 

about the status of their passport application at any time. The initiative will also begin 

administering diplomatic passports and official passports issued to Federal employees. This will 

improve the operational efficiency of the many Federal departments and agencies requiring 

32
employees to travel internationally. 

The initiative reduces resources necessary to respond to status requests in a paper-based process, 

thereby allowing Department employees more time to help citizens with application issues. The 

service also reduces processing errors and helps ensure passports are obtained in a timelier 

manner. While the initiative has reduced the number of calls made to the passport center, those 

without Internet access can continue to call and obtain the same information and services over 

the phone. 

The service was designed with input from stakeholders throughout the Department, and citizens 

can also provide feedback (thru mail, phone, or email) detailing any improvements and 

suggestions for improving the service. 

Department of Veterans Affairs: http://www.va.gov 

Inventory, priorities, and schedules of agency information dissemination products are located at: 

http://www1.va.gov/webinventory/. 

The Federal Health Information Exchange Program is an interagency information technology 

initiative between the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and Defense (DoD) enabling the 

secure transmission of protected electronic health information. The program uses existing 

clinical systems and offers authorized VA clinicians, including those involved in claims 

adjudication, immediate access to DOD clinical data about service members separated from the 

Armed Forces. The program supports the Department’s goal of ensuring a smooth transition for 

veterans from active military service to civilian life. 

DOD and VA worked very closely in establishing the appropriate technical architecture to 

extract electronic health information from an existing DOD health care system and transmit this 

information to a secure, shared repository. VA can then make the data accessible to VA clinical 

care providers as part of the veteran’s electronic medical record within VA’s health information 

system, ensuring a patient’s health information held at DOD is readily available at any VA 

service center. The program provides current and historical data electronically from DOD’s 

existing health care systems into VA’s on selected data types for active duty, retired and 

separated service members, thereby reducing the cumbersome and manual process associated 

with transferring paper health information from DOD to VA. As a result, users of the system can 

easily retrieve patient health information and focus more time on providing patient care. 

Environmental Protection Agency: http://www.epa.gov 

Inventory, priorities, and schedules of agency information dissemination products are located at: 

http://www.epa.gov/epahome/inventory.htm. 

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) completed the first of a multi-step strategy to 

reduce the reporting burden of participants in the Toxics Release Inventory program 

(http://www.epa.gov/tri/). The program provides a publicly available database containing 

33
information on toxic chemical releases and other waste management activities as reported by 

certain industry groups and Federal facilities. 

EPA’s entry point for the submission of environmental data, the Central Data Exchange (CDX), 

works with EPA program offices looking for a way to better manage incoming data and 

stakeholders looking for a way to reduce time and money spent to meet EPA reporting 

requirements. The system provides stakeholders with the ability to: 

• submit data through one centralized point of access; 

• complete a single electronic form which can be submitted instantaneously instead of 

mailing multiple paper forms; 

• receive agency confirmation upon receipt of submission; 

• submit data in a variety of formats; and 

• reduce costs associated with submitting and processing data submissions. 

In fiscal year 2005, more than half of all annual TRI reports were sent electronically to EPA, a 

43% increase over prior year reports. In comparison to paper processing, electronic reporting 

saved the government approximately $1.2 million, and when the information is transmitted 

electronically, the data are more timely, accurate, and complete. Detailed information indexed by 

geographic location helps Federal, State, and local governments set priorities, measure progress, 

and target areas of special and immediate concern. The public also benefits from the information 

made available thru this initiative to understand their local environment, participate in local and 

national debates about choices being made affecting their health and the health of their children, 

and exert their influence on the outcome of these debates. 

General Services Administration: http://www.gsa.gov 

Inventory, priorities, and schedules of agency information dissemination products are located at: 

www.gsa.gov/gsagovinventory. 

The General Services Administration (GSA) administers .gov domain name registration for 

Federal departments and agencies, as well as for State and local governments and federally 

recognized Indian Tribes. The initiative helps agencies to disseminate government information 

and services, and ensures government information dissemination products can be made available 

on recognizable websites. As a result, Internet users are assured they are accessing an official 

government website to obtain quality information and services. 

The creation and use of .gov helped brand Federal agency public websites, and soon became 

useful for establishing cross-agency public websites disseminating information and services to 

specific identifiable user groups, such as recreation.gov. Similarly, the initiative grew to include 

all levels of government including States, cities, towns, and counties. Currently .gov hosts 

approximately 4,000 different second level domains of State and local governments (second 

level domain names contain more descriptive information beyond first level domains of .com, 

.edu, .gov, and others). 

34
GSA collaborates with users through various councils and associations, such as the National 

Association of State Chief Information Officers (CIOs) to ensure the service meets everyone’s 

needs. Stakeholders meet at least once a year to review the .gov registration process and identify 

potential improvements. The initiative provides prompt service and can activate a new site online 

in as little as 48 hours upon receiving funds and a letter from an agency CIO. In emergencies, 

GSA will expedite critical requests, such as websites related to Hurricane Katrina relief. When 

preparing to register, government entities can refer to requirements listed on GSA’s web site, and 

a help desk is available to provide them assistance when registering their site. 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration: http://www.nasa.gov 

Inventory, priorities, and schedules of agency information dissemination products are located at: 

http://www.nasa.gov/about/contact/information_inventories_schedules.html. 

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is converting an older paper 

medical records system created in 1958 into a new electronic health information system. The 

system contains required occupational health data of NASA employees, and improves the 

management of agency medical records by making records readily available, creating back-up 

records to ensure sufficient storage and archival, and deploying safeguards to ensure 

confidentiality. 

NASA consulted with its various clinics to identify their health evaluation requirements, 

processes, and practices when planning and developing the system. A working group comprising 

medical and computer technology personnel from each NASA center consulted with other 

subject matter experts, as well as representatives from the Department’s of Defense, Health and 

Human Services, and Veterans Affairs, to learn best practices and obtain recommendations. 

The system is transforming occupational health services performed at the agency by maximizing 

the input of health data in digital format. The initiative standardizes medical terms and methods 

for data input to improve the quality and access to medical information. By automating data 

entry and retrieval of multiple paper records, agency medical personnel have more time for 

patient assessment and care. A reduction of processing errors and improved patient safety will 

create further efficiencies. Additionally, personnel traveling from one NASA location to another 

have immediate clinic access to their medical records as needed. Medical personnel at each site 

are available to aid those without access to the Internet and persons with disabilities when they 

seek information from the system. 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission: http://www.nrc.gov 

Inventory, priorities, and schedules of agency information dissemination products are located at: 

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/news/2000/00-083.html. 

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) National Source Tracking System is being 

developed to support implementation of a forthcoming rule establishing requirements for 

licensee reporting on sealed sources containing nuclear materials. The system will track 

individual sealed sources throughout their entire life cycle, beginning at manufacture, through 

35
storage, transfer, possession, and disposition. Currently, tracking is performed using an interim 

database with periodic data loads from organizations licensed by the NRC and States to handle 

sensitive materials. 

The NRC established a governance and project management structure with representation from 

multiple Federal, State, and local government stakeholders to ensure the system is developed to 

meet user needs. The SafeSource Steering Committee includes NRC, the Department of Energy 

(DOE), and Agreement State representatives and is tasked with policy direction and oversight of 

a working group. The working group defined system requirements, and is recommending 

necessary regulatory changes, providing capital planning analysis and justification, and 

contributing to the development and implementation of the system. The working group is also 

advised by an interagency coordinating committee of representatives from other Federal 

agencies. 

The cost-benefit analysis indicated this project will avoid substantial costs since it will provide a 

simplified interface for prompt tracking information of sealed sources. The system serves as 

repository of up-to-date information, and will generate alert notifications to designated agency 

staff when certain business or system events occur. Without the system, the NRC would have to 

manually locate and compile physical sealed source transfer documents in order to provide 

necessary tracking reports. Access to the system will primarily be web-based, however 

provisions will be in place for those without access to the Internet or those who prefer to provide 

data in hard copy, by fax, by phone, or by other means. Provisions will include a user help desk 

and data entry support. An internal NRC management directive specifies what categories of 

documents are to be made publicly available by the staff, and NRC intends to automatically 

make information publicly available when information is anticipated to be of interest to the 

public. Using this guidance, NRC makes approximately 200 to 300 documents publicly 

available each day. 

National Science Foundation: http://www.nsf.gov 

Inventory, priorities, and schedules of agency information dissemination products are located at: 

http://www.nsf.gov/policies/egov_inventory.jsp. 

Administration of merit-based grants is a primary function of the National Science Foundation 

(NSF). A sophisticated electronic grants management system called “eJacket” is a primary 

component of this business function, and is the core internal system used by NSF to process 

proposals for research opportunities submitted by researchers. The system provides NSF staff 

with a single, web-based application designed to electronically process proposals from 

submission through grant award. 

The system supported the processing of 41,700 proposals last year, and served to consolidate 

multiple grants applications and business processes at the Foundation. The initiative has already 

reduced the time necessary to make an award decision by 13 days, and 70% of NSF’s paper 

proposal handling activity has been eliminated. Manual, paper-based proposal processes 

consisting of printing submitted proposals, processing hard copy jackets and paper archiving and 

storage will be eliminated. 

36
The system was developed in extensive consultation with a wide range of stakeholders from each 

research directorate and other relevant customers, and requirements for all enhancements are 

developed using working groups comprising subject matter experts throughout the Foundation. 

Furthermore, capabilities are deployed in an iterative and phased approach to ensure smooth 

adoption and deployment. The system has been designed for ease of use with speech recognition 

tools, allowing tasks to be completed with single word instructions, and the system provides 

various screen displays for the visually impaired. 

The Office of Management and Budget: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb

Inventory, priorities, and schedules of agency information dissemination products are located at: 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/gils/gils-top.html. 

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) uses an application to collect Program 

Assessment Rating Tool (PART) data. The application allows agency officials to present 

performance information about their programs to OMB examiners and integrate PART 

information in the development of the President’s budget. 

The system allows users to monitor and evaluate agency actions to address findings and 

recommendations identified in the PART. Agencies use the application to accurately respond to 

questions in the PART and provide other data necessary for reports. Information shared between 

agencies allows for interagency collaboration and timely assessment of improvement plans, and 

performance information from similar programs at other agencies can be compared as well. 

The application was developed incorporating feedback from agency representatives, and is 

modeled after a similar management information tracking system at the Departments of Interior 

and State. Focus groups are held regularly to solicit feedback. Trained agency coordinators 

provided assistance to those using the system, and additional web-based training materials are 

available for agency staff. 

The results of the PART process are now published on a new website, www.expectmore.gov, 

and are accessible to those with disabilities. Citizens without access to the Internet can find 

summary information printed in Chapter 2 of the President’s fiscal year 2007 budget of the U.S. 

Government. 

Office of Personnel Management: http://www.opm.gov 

Inventory, priorities, and schedules of agency information dissemination products are located at: 

http://www.opm.gov/About_OPM/WebContentInventory-OMB.asp. 

The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) initiated a project to modernize its financial 

management and procurement systems. A recent audit identified weaknesses related to 

budgetary accounting and Federal accounting standards caused reporting of inaccurate and 

incomplete financial data. This initiative moves financial processes to a more effective operating 

center in order to record and report financial data in a more timely and accurate manner. 

37
Program managers need up-to-date financial information to effectively manage their programs 

and make informed decisions. 

Rather than building its own replacement financial system, OPM determined significant cost 

savings would be achieved by obtaining similar services, or “cross-servicing,” from the 

Department of Treasury. The Department of Treasury operates multiple financial systems on 

behalf of other agencies, and is able to share resources across a greater number of systems, 

giving it the scale to provide OPM with consistent service at a lower cost. As a result, OPM’s 

operating costs for financial management services has decreased as the agency no longer 

manages its own financial system; the agency estimates saving $2.2 million annually during the 

project. 

A project office at OPM was established to help transition the agency’s financial management 

systems. The project office coordinated with key stakeholders within the agency including the 

OPM Director, Chief Financial Officer, Inspector General, Chief Information Officer, and 

program managers to ensure financial services continued to meet OPM needs and comply with 

capital planning and investment control requirements, including maintaining accessibility for the 

disabled. 

Small Business Administration: http://www.sba.gov 

Inventory, priorities, and schedules of agency information dissemination products are located at: 

http://www.sba.gov/aboutsba/contentinventory.html. 

The Small Business Administration’s (SBA) HUBZone (Historically Underutilized Business 

Zone) Program uses an Internet-based system to provide services for applicants and certified 

small business concerns. The purpose of the HUBZone program is to provide Federal 

contracting assistance to qualified small businesses located in historically underutilized business 

zones. The system enables users to quickly and efficiently determine eligibility. Once certified, a 

client becomes eligible for the benefits of the HUBZone program, including certain Federal 

contract set asides, sole source awards, and price evaluation preferences reserved for HUBZone 

small businesses. 

The system fully automates all of the program's business processes including application by 

potential clients, re-certification of a client’s eligibility, and program examination by SBA staff. 

The system also delivers a variety of applicant services and allows SBA program managers to 

comply with the HUBZone legislative directive to certify eligible firms and monitor continuing 

eligibility. For example, the system incorporates information from related databases and 

receives client input to track the status of submitted forms and provide Federal contracting 

officers an up-to-date list of HUBZone certified small business concerns. This also prevents 

applicants from submitting the same information multiple times. The system also provides a 

web-based mapping feature allowing users to quickly and easily identify Congressional districts 

covered by the HUBZone Program, and is used by State and local governments to identify areas 

of economic distress. 

38
The program office maintains an open line of communication with Federal agencies using the 

system, as well as the national council representing HUBZone certified small business concerns. 

The project enhances various program operations by increasing staff productivity in related 

areas, including program examinations, re-certifications, and protest and appeals resolution. For 

example, an SBA employee can now process 440 applications per year as compared to 133 for 

other SBA employees using another older paper-based system. 

Social Security Administration: http://www.socialsecurity.gov 

Inventory, priorities, and schedules of agency information dissemination products are located at: 

http://www.socialsecurity.gov/webcontent/. 

Social Security Administration (SSA) recently implemented the Social Security Number 

Verification Service, a free online service allowing employers or their third-party representatives 

to verify names and social security numbers of their employees against records from SSA. 

Ensuring the accuracy of names and social security numbers for wage reporting is important 

because unmatched records result in additional processing costs to SSA and unaccredited 

earnings for workers, which may lead to inaccurate benefit levels and tax liabilities. This new 

online service transforms agency operations by reducing the number of verifications done via 

other more time-consuming means, such as through telephone, paper, tapes or diskettes – all of 

which are maintained as alternate service options. 

The electronic application was developed after extensive collaboration among employers and 

associations representing the payroll and software communities. All respondents to a user 

satisfaction survey of the pilot program rated the system favorably. Usage of the system by 

employers has been growing steadily, there are currently as many employers using the system 

(slightly over 5,000) as there are those using older paper-based verification processes. 

The system is a win-win application for both the agency and employers. Employers save time by 

using a faster online application, and they can submit their requests online at their convenience 

rather than limited hours when a call center is available. SSA, employers, and citizens all benefit 

by having wage information accurately and timely accredited as it aids the proper administration 

of tax and benefit programs. The system is also accessible to the disabled. Estimates indicate 

the system will save SSA $6.6 million over a seven year period by decreasing the number of 

telephone calls and gradually transitioning the verification process from a tape/diskette/paper 

process to an electronic one. 

U.S. Agency for International Development: http://www.usaid.gov 

Inventory, priorities, and schedules of agency information dissemination products are located at: 

http://www.usaid.gov/policy/egov/inventory.html. 

The agency is implementing a financial management system, known as Phoenix, as part of a 

comprehensive business systems modernization initiative. The system supports financial 

operations at agency headquarters and 22 overseas regional offices, with the remaining 29 

regional offices planned to complete implementation soon. 

39
The system provides up-to-date financial data for program managers to use to assess program 

performance, make informed mission critical decisions, and identify program areas requiring 

improvement or attention. The system improves the accuracy of financial reporting and 

increases the speed and efficiency of processing financial payments. For example, the number of 

on-time payments has improved to 99%. 

The Department of State coordinates with the agency to plan and implement the initiative, and as 

a result Phoenix is aligned with their financial systems. The agency conducts frequent focus 

groups to identify areas of improvement, and solicits information from vendors, other agencies, 

and interested parties to find innovative ways to use information technology and implement best 

practices. 

The initiative will create savings by eliminating redundant systems and transforming paper-based 

business processes. For example, the system reduces invoice processing costs by automating and 

consolidating transaction processes. The agency estimates savings due to increased efficiencies 

of over $6.5 million. Contracts to acquire and implement the system ensure the functions and 

services are accessible to all users, and the agency performs periodic reviews to verify the system 

is meeting performance expectations. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture: http://www.usda.gov 

Inventory, priorities, and schedules of agency information dissemination products are located at: 

http://w3.usda.gov/comments/contentinventory.html. 

The Farm Service Agency (FSA) at the United States Department of Agriculture recently 

released an Electronic Loan Deficiency Payment application 

(http://www.fsa.usda.gov/egov/eldp_default.htm). The application allows eligible producers in 

every State to request loan deficiency payments online and, in most cases, receive approval and 

payment by direct deposit within 24 to 48 hours. Previously, the paper-based process to obtain 

direct deposit took two weeks. This initiative transforms the operations of FSA's local offices by 

consolidating a set of reports for monitoring producer payments to make their processing more 

accurate and efficient. 

The Department has administered several small surveys to solicit feedback from users of the 

service as well as Department staff, and analyzes less favorable responses in order to improve the 

business process and software system. In designing and launching the system, FSA reached out 

for input from personnel at FSA centers as well as the producers who use the service, and 

continual feedback from them has helped to perfect the system. Those who need the service but 

are without Internet access can visit a local FSA office or public library, and the system is 

accessible to the disabled. 

Through January, 2006, the system has handled 1,250,000 applications and processed 

approximately $4.1 billion in electronic transactions. This represents a significant proportion of 

the total volume of loan deficiency payment transactions, which together comprise 1,420,000 

applications for approximately $4.6 billion. Assuming a typical annual volume of 2,000,000 

40
loan deficiency payment transactions, the use of this system will save 104,000 hours per year. 

Accordingly, the electronic process has eliminated the costs of salaries for a temporary 

workforce of 200 to 400 processors, and has allowed permanent staff more time to work on other 

services and programs. Additionally, the Department has realized $2 million in savings by 

reducing the payment interest accrued from delayed loan deficiency payments. 

41
SECTION III: OPERATIONS OF THE E-GOVERNMENT FUND 

The General Services Administration manages the E-Government Fund to support innovative 

interagency projects approved by OMB. The initiatives transform internal operations necessary 

to secure and disseminate Federal information while improving the services delivered to the 

public. 

The following table describes the projects for which funding was approved by OMB in 

fiscal year 2005 and the results achieved. Funding for these four initiatives totaled $1,465,693. 

Fiscal Year 2005 E-Government Fund Initiatives 

Agency Initiative Funding Description and Results 

OMB Lines of 

Business – 

Information 

Systems 

Security 

$500,000 The Information Systems Security line of business 

is consolidating commonly used information 

technology security processes and controls (e.g., 

security, weakness tracking, data collection and 

reporting patch management, certification and 

accreditation tools). Consolidation will reduce the 

operational costs of producing required security 

reports and increase the effectiveness of 

information security programs across the Federal 

government. 

A cyber security technology (named “Bro”), 

developed by the Department of Energy (DOE), 

provides intrusion detection capabilities to help 

monitor agency Internet connections. Funds were 

used with the National Institute of Standards and 

Technology and DOE to: 

• exchange and review software code to help 

expand the service to other agencies; and 

• test and implement the technology in a pilot 

environment to validate and verify it’s 

capabilities. 

OMB Lines of 

Business – 

Information 

Systems 

Security 

$612,806 Funds were used for a program support office for 

the information systems security line of business. 

The program office: 

• developed a Request For Information (RFI) to 

elicit best practices and potential approaches of 

public, private, and non-profit organizations; 

• planned, facilitated and hosted a practitioner 

day to demonstrate how different approaches 

can be used; 

• analyzed RFI responses for government 

applicability; and 

42
• supported analysis of business case for the 

information systems security line of business, 

documenting representative information 

security needs of Federal agencies. 

OMB Lines of 

Business - 

Efficient and 

Effective 

Information 

Sharing Line 

of Business 

$152,887 This initiative supported the implementation of 

Executive Order 13356 and studied the most costeffective means to search for, identify, locate, 

retrieve, and share information, and assessed the 

net performance difference (including costbenefits) of assigning metadata and/or controlled 

vocabulary to various types of information versus 

not doing so. 

Funds were used to provide program support and: 

• develop an RFI to elicit best practices and 

potential approaches of public, private, and nonprofit organizations; 

• work with agency subject matter experts to 

reach out and identify possible respondents to 

the RFI; 

• plan and facilitate a practitioner day for RFI 

respondents; and 

• provide RFI analysis. 

The initiative concluded for the majority of 

government information, exposing it to indexing 

with commercial search technology is sufficient to 

meet the information categorization, dissemination, 

and sharing needs of the public and as required by 

law and policy. 

The interagency taskforce developed and submitted 

an implementation plan as required by the 

Executive Order. 

GSA GovBenefits $200,000 Funds were used to support Hurricane Katrina 

relief efforts through the development and 

preparation of a government-wide electronic 

benefit registration system. 

The system will determine benefit eligibility for 

evacuees and forward registration data to Federal 

agencies providing benefits for follow-up with the 

evacuee, thus greatly reducing the time and burden 

to evacuees of identifying and applying for 

benefits. 

43
SECTION IV: LISTING OF REPORTS AND POLICIES USED IN THIS 

REPORT 

Page 4 

1. “Expanding E-Government, Improved Service Delivery for the American People Using 

Information Technology,” can be found at: 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budintegration/expanding_egov_2005.pdf. 

2. “Report to Congress on Implementation of Section 212 of the E-Government Act of 

2002,” can be found at:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/documents/Section_212_Report_Final.pdf. 

3. The report to Congress describing the economic value of multi-agency and crossgovernment e-government activities can be found at: 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/inforeg/e-gov/e-gov_benefits_report_2006.pdf. 

4. Chapter 9 of the President’s fiscal year 2007 budget of the U.S. Government can be 

found at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2007/pdf/spec.pdf. 

Page 5 

5. Executive Order 13392, “Improving Agency Disclosure of Information,” can be found at 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/12/20051214-4.html. 

Page 6 

6. OMB Memorandum M-06-04, “Implementation of the President’s Executive Order 

Improving Agency Disclosure of Information,” can be found at: 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/fy2006/m06-04.pdf. 

7. “Improving Public Access to and Dissemination of Government Information and Using 

the Federal Enterprise Architecture Data Reference Model” can be found at: 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/fy2006/m06-02.pdf. 

8. OMB Memorandum M-05-04, “Policies for Federal Agency Public Websites,” can be 

found at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/fy2005/m05-04.pdf. 

9. OMB Circular A-130, “Management of Federal Information Resources,” can be found at: 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/a130/a130trans4.pdf. 

10. “Efficient and Effective Information Retrieval and Sharing (EEIRS) Request for 

Information (RFI) Response Analysis” can be found at: 

http://www.cio.gov/documents/EEIRS_RFI_Response_Analysis.pdf. 

Page 7 

11. “The Data Reference Model” can be found at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/a-5-

drm.html. 

12. The link to Firstgov’s aggregation of agency inventories, schedules, and priorities is: 

http://www.firstgov.gov/Topics/Reference_Shelf.shtml. 

44
Page 8 

13. More disaster recovery information found at Firstgov can be found at: 

http://firstgov.gov/Citizen/Topics/PublicSafety/Hurricane_Katrina_Recovery.shtml. 

14. OMB’s Section 213 of the E-Government Act Report to Congress: “Organizations 

Complementing Federal Agency Information Dissemination Programs,” can be found at: 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/inforeg/section_213_report_04-2005.pdf. 

Page 9 

15. “NARA Guidance for Implementing Section 207(e) of the E-Government Act of 2002” 

can be found at: http://www.archives.gov/records-mgmt/bulletins/2006/2006-02.html.

Page 10 

16. Additional information and services to help agencies meet the requirements of Section 

508 of the Rehabilitation Act can be found at: www.section508.gov.

17. www.geodata.gov.

Page 12 

18. OMB Circular A-130, “Management of Federal Information Resources,” can be found at: 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/a130/a130trans4.pdf. 

19. OMB Memorandum M-03-22, “Guidance for Implementing the Privacy Provisions of the 

E-Government Act of 2002,” can be found at: 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/m03-22.html. 

20. OMB Memorandum 05-08, “Designation of Senior Agency Officials for Privacy,” can be 

found at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/fy2005/m05-08.pdf. 

Page 13 

21. FISMA reporting instructions can be found at: 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/fy2005/m05-15.html. 

Page 15 

22. More information about the platform for privacy preferences can be found at: 

http://www.w3.org/P3P/. 

23. OMB Memorandum M-00-13, “Privacy Policies and Data Collection on Federal Web 

Sites,” is located at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/m00-13.html. 

45
Page 18 

24. Federal information technology project manager guidance can be found at: 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/fy04/m04-19.pdf. 

25. The Information Technology Workforce Development Roadmap can be found at: 

http://itroadmap.golearn.gov. 

26. The “Report On The Establishment Of A Government-wide Information Technology 

Training Program” can be found at: http://opm.gov/hrd/lead/pubs/ittpreport_07-

04/ittpreportJuly2004.pdf. 

27. Information technology training program guidance can be found at: 

http://www.chcoc.opm.gov/transmittal_detail.cfm?ID=623. 

28. The Information Technology Workforce Management Resource Package can be found at: 

http://www.cio.gov/index.cfm?function=specdoc&id=649. 

Page 19 

29. Information about the information technology exchange program can be found at: 

http://www.opm.gov/leader/hrd/lead/itep/overview.asp. 

30. The USA Jobs website is www.USAJobs.gov. 

31. The American Council of Technology's website is at www.actgov.org/ITEP. 

32. The FEA is described in more detail at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/a-1-

fea.html. 

33. The “Report to Congress on Implementation of Section 212 of the E-Government Act of 

2002” can be found at: 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/documents/Section_212_Report_Final.pdf. 

Page 20 

34. A summary of the workshop can be found at: 

http://www7.nationalacademies.org/cstb/pub_fema_workshop.html. 

Page 23 

35. The statewide communications interoperability planning methodology can be found at: 

http://www.safecomprogram.gov/SAFECOM/library/interoperabilitycasestudies/1223_st

atewidecommunications.htm. 

46