GAO

United States General Accounting Office

Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee 

on Oversight, Committee on Ways and 

Means, House of Representatives

October 1999 YEAR 2000 

COMPUTING 

CHALLENGE

Financial Management 

Service Has 

Established Effective 

Year 2000 Testing 

Controls

GAO/AIMD-00-24

Page 1 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

Contents

Letter 3

Appendixes Appendix I: Briefing to House Committee on Ways and Means, 

Subcommittee on Oversight 10

Appendix II: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 64
Page 2 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls
Page 3 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

United States General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548

Accounting and Information

Management Division

B-282428 Leter

October 29, 1999

The Honorable Amo Houghton

Chairman, Subcommittee on Oversight

Committee on Ways and Means

House of Representatives

Dear Mr. Chairman:

The Treasury Department’s Financial Management Service (FMS) annually 

disburses social benefit and other payments and collects revenue which in 

the aggregate is now about $2.7 trillion. FMS also manages and oversees 

the federal government’s central accounting and reporting systems that 

generate vital financial information used by congressional and executive 

agency decisionmakers. Consequently, it is essential for FMS’ missioncritical computer systems to operate correctly at and beyond

January 1, 2000.

At your request, we reviewed FMS’ Year 2000 program to determine 

whether FMS is (1) effectively managing its Year 2000 testing and (2) taking 

adequate steps to mitigate the Year 2000 risks associated with four missioncritical systems that were not implemented by the Office of Management 

and Budget’s (OMB) March 1999 deadline. On September 22, 1999, we 

briefed FMS’ Chief Information Officer (CIO) on our work results and later 

obtained FMS’ comments on this report. The CIO agreed with our results 

and conclusions. On October 4, 1999, we provided this briefing to your 

office. This report summarizes the information presented at that briefing. 

The briefing slides are included in appendix I and details of our scope and 

methodology are in appendix II. Our work was performed from February 

1999 through October 1999, in accordance with generally accepted 

government auditing standards.

Results in Brief FMS has established effective Year 2000 test management controls for its 

six most mission-critical systems. For instance, FMS developed test 

guidance, defined compliance criteria, and defined test roles and 

responsibilities. Together, these and other controls provided the 

infrastructure needed for planning, executing and reporting Year 2000 test 

activities, including system acceptance and end-to-end testing. 
B-282428

Page 4 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

In line with our Year 2000 test guide,1 which is widely accepted and used in 

government and private industry, FMS also engaged an Independent 

Verification and Validation (IV&V) contractor to ensure that testing was 

complete and thorough. We reviewed this contractor’s work and found that 

(1) its scope was consistent with our Year 2000 test guide and (2) the 

contractor identified no material problems with system acceptance testing 

of five of FMS’ six most critical systems.2

 We also found that although the 

IV&V contractor did not review the sixth system,3 FMS took steps to gain 

reasonable assurance that Year 2000 testing for this system was effectively 

managed. 

Further, FMS has established effective management controls in performing 

its portion of selected Year 2000 end-to-end tests. Specifically, FMS 

satisfied the end-to-end testing key processes defined in our guidance for 

three critical test events. These events focused on three of FMS’ most 

important core business functions−Social Security payments, 

Supplemental Security Income (SSI) payments, and IRS tax refund 

payments. The tests included FMS processing payment files from the Social 

Security Administration (SSA) and Internal Revenue Service (IRS), printing 

checks, and transmitting electronic payment files to Federal Reserve 

Banks. 

As of October 1, 1999, FMS reported that it had implemented two of the 

four systems4 that did not meet the March 31, 1999, OMB-imposed deadline 

for implementation. For the remaining two, FMS reported that it has

(1) renovated and tested both, (2) implemented both at two of five sites, 

and (3) plans to complete implementation in early November 1999. In 

addition, FMS has prepared and plans to test system contingency plans for 

these late systems as well as its other mission-critical systems. 

1

Year 2000 Computing Crisis: A Testing Guide (GAO/AIMD-10.1.21, issued as an exposure 

draft in June 1998; issued in final in November 1998).

2

Social Security Administration (SSA) Payments, Supplemental Security Income (SSI) 

Payments, Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Payments, STAR, and Government On-line 

Accounting Link System (GOALS).

3

Electronic Federal Tax Payment System (EFTPS).

4

None of the four were among FMS’ six most mission-critical systems. Instead, FMS ranked 

the four to be lower priority mission-critical systems. 
B-282428

Page 5 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

Background FMS, a bureau of the Department of the Treasury, is the federal 

government’s financial manager. In this capacity, FMS has three primary 

functions: disburser, collector, and accountant of financial information. 

As a disburser for most federal agencies, FMS processed in fiscal year 1998 

over 860 million disbursements totaling over $1 trillion. These covered a 

wide variety of expenses, including social security and veterans benefit 

payments, IRS tax refunds, federal employee salaries, and vendor billings.

As a collections agent, FMS is responsible for administering the world’s 

largest collections system. In fiscal year 1998, the government collected 

over $1.7 trillion from individual and corporate income tax deposits, 

customs duties, loan repayments, fines, and proceeds from leases, among 

other sources. FMS relies on a network of about 11,000 financial 

institutions to help collect these revenues.

As an accountant, FMS operates and maintains the federal government’s 

central accounting and reporting systems to reconcile and keep track of the 

federal government’s assets, liabilities, receipts, and disbursements. 

Financial and budget execution information from these central systems is 

used by FMS to publish financial reports that are used by the Congress, 

OMB, and others who make financial decisions on behalf of the U.S. 

government. 

To accomplish many of these functions, FMS relies on six systems it 

considers its most mission critical:

• The Social Security Administration (SSA) Payments system validates 

payment certification against payment file totals, performs edit 

checking, and generates and releases old-age and survivor social 

security payments.

• The Supplemental Security Income (SSI) Payments system validates 

payment certification against payment file totals, performs edit 

checking, and generates and releases SSI payments.

• The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Payments system validates payment 

certification against payment file totals, performs edit checking, and 

generates and releases IRS tax refund payments. 

• The Electronic Federal Tax Payment System (EFTPS) collects, deposits, 

and accounts for taxes withheld by employers from individuals’ wages. 

• The Government On-line Accounting Link System (GOALS) is a 

commercial timesharing service comprised of 18 subsystems that 
B-282428

Page 6 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

collect, edit, and communicate accounting and financial data to and 

from federal program agency users.

• STAR maintains the Treasury’s central accounting system by aggregating 

all transactions relating to the receipt and disbursement of government 

funds.

Because of FMS’ heavy reliance on these systems, complete and thorough 

testing is essential to provide reasonable assurance that they process dates 

correctly and will not jeopardize FMS’ ability to perform core business 

functions during and after transition to a Year 2000 computing 

environment. Our Year 2000 test guide describes a structured and 

disciplined approach for managing Year 2000 test activities.

FMS Established an 

Effective Year 2000 

Testing Organizational 

Infrastructure

Establishing an effective organizational infrastructure for Year 2000 testing 

provides the foundation for planning, execution, and reporting on each 

incremental phase of Year 2000 testing activities, including system 

acceptance testing and end-to-end testing. FMS has established the 11 

organizational infrastructure key processes that our test guide defines. For 

example, FMS (1) designated program- and project-level test managers for 

its mission-critical systems, (2) developed and issued organizational Year 

2000 test guidance, (3) defined Year 2000 compliance criteria, (4) defined 

the test organization and its components’ roles and responsibilities,

(5) defined test facilities and Year 2000 reporting requirements, and

(6) employed a process for ensuring the Year 2000 compliance of vendorsupported products and services.

In addition, FMS engaged an IV&V contractor to provide third-party 

assurance that its testing of 22 of its most mission-critical systems was 

performed effectively (i.e., that it met process and product standards). We 

found that the IV&V contractor’s scope of work, as specified in the contract 

between FMS and the contractor, was consistent with our test guide and 

that the IV&V contractor performed according to the scope of work. 
B-282428

Page 7 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

FMS Employed 

Effective Management 

Controls in Performing 

Systems Acceptance 

Testing 

As specified in our test guide, system acceptance testing (SAT) verifies that 

the entire system performs as intended. To determine how well FMS 

managed SAT, we (1) selected the six mission-critical systems that FMS 

identified as being the most important to supporting FMS’ central payment, 

collections, and accounting functions and (2) determined whether the 

selected systems’ testing had been independently verified and validated 

and, if so, reviewed the results of the IV&V contractor’s work. 

FMS’ IV&V contractor found no material problems with the SAT of five of 

these systems (SSA Payments, SSI Payments, IRS Payments, STAR, and 

GOALS) and concluded that FMS had effectively managed SAT. FMS did 

not subject EFTPS to IV&V because the two commercial banks that operate 

and maintain the system were subject to Year 2000 examinations by a 

federal banking regulator−the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency 

(OCC). 

Nevertheless, FMS took other steps to ensure that SAT for EFTPS was 

managed effectively. For example, FMS reviewed the two banks’ testing 

progress monthly. FMS also required the banks to submit documentation 

certifying the system’s Year 2000 compliance. In addition, OCC agreed to 

review the banks’ progress on EFTPS during the regulator’s Year 2000 

examinations and report any concerns to FMS. According to FMS, as of 

October 1, 1999, OCC had performed several on-site Year 2000 reviews at 

each bank, reported that both had made satisfactory progress, and raised 

no issues to FMS.5

FMS Employed 

Effective Management 

Controls in Performing 

Its Portion of End-toEnd Test Events 

End-to-end testing verifies that a set of interrelated systems, which 

collectively support an organizational core business area or function, 

interoperate properly in an operational environment. These interrelated 

systems include not only those owned and managed by the organization but 

also the external systems with which the organization interfaces, as well as 

the supporting telecommunications infrastructures. 

5

We reviewed the Year 2000 oversight efforts of OCC and the other federal depository 

institution regulators and found that they had developed and issued detailed Year 2000 

guidelines for the institutions and performed extensive, periodic on-site examinations of 

banks’ and other depository institutions’ Year 2000 efforts (e.g., see Year 2000 Computing 

Crisis: Federal Depository Institution Regulators Are Making Progress, But Challenges 

Remain (GAO/T-AIMD-98-305, Sept. 17, 1998)).
B-282428

Page 8 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

In its management of its portion of end-to-end test events for three critical 

business functions (Social Security payments, SSI payments, and IRS tax 

refund payments), FMS satisfied the end-to-end testing key processes 

specified in our guide. For example, FMS worked with its test partners to 

define the boundaries of these end-to-end tests, secured the commitment of 

data exchange partners, used interorganizational test teams, prepared test 

procedures and data, defined the expected results of each test, and 

documented the test results. In addition, FMS confirmed the Year 2000 

compliance of its vendor-supported telecommunications and 

infrastructure.

FMS Is Reporting 

Progress on Its Late 

Mission-Critical 

Systems 

OMB’s Year 2000 guidance, as amended in January 1998, requires that all 

mission-critical systems be renovated, tested, and implemented by

March 31, 1999, in order to allow enough time for agencies to ensure that 

systems are running smoothly and to plan for unexpected failures. On that 

date, FMS reported that seven mission-critical systems had not yet been 

implemented. By June 1999, FMS reported that it had implemented three of 

these systems. As of October 1, 1999, FMS reported that it had 

implemented two of the four remaining systems. With respect to the 

remaining two systems, both of which FMS ranked as lower priority 

mission-critical systems, FMS reported that it had (1) renovated and tested 

both, (2) implemented both at two of five sites, and (3) planned to complete 

implementation in early November 1999. In addition, FMS reports that it 

had prepared and planned to test system contingency plans for these late 

systems as well as its other mission-critical systems. 

Conclusion FMS has effectively managed the Year 2000 testing of its most critical 

payment, collection, and accounting systems. While this does not 

guarantee that Year 2000-induced disruptions will not occur, it should 

significantly reduce FMS’ risk of internal system failures. 

We are sending copies of this report to Representative William Coyne, 

Ranking Minority Member of your Subcommittee; Representatives Bill 

Archer, Chairman, and Charles Rangel, Ranking Minority Member, House 

Committee on Ways and Means; Senators William Roth, Chairman, and 

Daniel P. Moynihan, Ranking Minority Member, Senate Committee on 

Finance; Senators Fred Thompson, Chairman, and Joseph Lieberman, 

Ranking Minority Member, Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs; 

Representatives Dan Burton, Chairman, and Henry Waxman, Ranking 
B-282428

Page 9 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

Minority Member, House Committee on Government Reform; and 

Representatives Steven Horn, Chairman, and Jim Turner, Ranking Minority 

Member, Subcommittee on Government Management, Information and 

Technology, House Committee on Government Reform.

We are also sending copies to the Honorable Lawrence H. Summers, 

Secretary of the Treasury; the Honorable Richard Gregg, Commissioner, 

Financial Management Service; the Honorable Kenneth S. Apfel, 

Commissioner, Social Security Administration; the Honorable

Charles O. Rossotti, Commissioner of Internal Revenue; the Honorable 

John Koskinen, Chair, the President’s Council on Year 2000 Conversion; and 

the Honorable Jacob Lew, Director, Office of Management and Budget. We 

will send copies to others upon request.

If you have any questions, please contact me or Gary Mountjoy, Assistant 

Director, at (202) 512-6240 or via e-mail at hiter.aimd@gao.gov or 

mountjoyg.aimd@gao.gov. Other major contributors to this work were 

Bernard Anderson, Timothy Hopkins, Richard Hung, and Sabine Paul.

Sincerely yours,

Randolph C. Hite

Associate Director

Governmentwide and Defense

 Information Systems
Page 10 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight ApendxIi

1

Accounting and Information

Management Division

Treasury Department’s Financial

Management Service (FMS) Has

Established Effective Year 2000

Testing Controls

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

October 4, 1999
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 11 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

2

Briefing Overview

• Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

• Results in Brief

• Background

• Key Findings

• Conclusions
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 12 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

3

Objectives, Scope and Methodology

The Subcommittee asked us to determine whether

• FMS is effectively managing its Year 2000 testing.

Specifically, has FMS

• implemented an effective organizational infrastructure for

Year 2000 testing,

• employed effective management controls in performing

system acceptance testing (SAT) of selected systems, and

• employed effective management controls in performing

selected end-to-end test events.

• FMS is adequately mitigating the Year 2000 risks

associated with four mission-critical systems that did

not meet OMB’s 3/31/99, implementation deadline.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 13 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

4

Objectives, Scope and Methodology

(cont’d)

 Applicable GAO Year 2000 Testing Guide Criteria

 Testing

Infrastructure

System

Acceptance

Testing

 End-to-End

Testing

•Assign test management authority and responsibility; define

compliance criteria; secure test resources; issue test guidance

•Schedule and plan tests; prepare test procedures and data; define

exit criteria; execute tests and document results; correct defects

•Define test boundaries; schedule and plan tests; prepare test

procedures and data; define exit criteria; execute tests; document

results; correct defects

To address the first objective, we used applicable criteria

from our test guide, Year 2000 Computing Crisis: A

Testing Guide (GAO/AIMD-10.1.21, November 1998):
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 14 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

5

Objectives, Scope and Methodology

(cont’d)

Objective 1(a): To assess FMS’ Year 2000 testing

organizational infrastructure, we

• analyzed the institutional management structures and

controls (organizations, policies, guidance,

standards) used by FMS to perform Year 2000

testing and

• compared them to the 11 key processes in our guide

to identify any variances, their causes, and impacts.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 15 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

6

Objectives, Scope and Methodology

(cont’d)

Objective 1(b): To evaluate the management of

selected systems’ testing, we

• determined whether the selected systems’ testing

had been independently verified and validated (IV&V)

and, if so, we reviewed FMS’ IV&V agent’s plans and

results.

• reviewed, for any selected system whose testing was

not independently verified and validated, the

management control and oversight steps that FMS

took to assure itself that the system had been

adequately tested.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 16 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

7

Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

(cont’d)

• We selected the six mission-critical systems identified

by FMS as being the most crucial to supporting FMS’

central payment, collections, and accounting

functions. Testing of all but one was reviewed by

FMS’ IV&V agent.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 17 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

8

Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

(cont’d)

S yste m Description

SSA P aym ents SS A P aym ents is used to is sue over 500 m illion paym ents (roughly 60 percent of FM S’ paym ents )

representing about $336 billion annually. This system validates paym ent ce rtification agains t

paym ent file totals, perform s edit checking, and generates and releas es old age and survivor S ocia l

Security paym ents.

SSI P aym ents SSI Paym ents is used to iss ue about 80 m illion paym ents (roughly 10 percent of FM S’ paym ents )

representing about $24 billion annually. This system validates paym ent ce rtification agains t

paym ent file totals, per form s edit checking, and generates and releas es supplem ental s ecurity

incom e (S SI) paym ents.

IR S P aym ents In fiscal year 1998, IRS P aym ents w as us ed to issue 91 m illion paym ents (about 10 percent of

F M S ’ paym ents) totaling about $137 billion. T his s ystem validates paym ent ce rtification agains t

paym ent file totals, perfor m s edit checking, and gene rates and releases IRS tax refund paym ents.

Electr onic F eder al T ax

Paym ent Syste m

(EF TPS)

In fis cal yea r 1998, E FT P S w as used to collect about $1.1 trillion or nearly 60% of the

governm ent’s total collections. T his system collects, deposits and accounts for taxes w ithhe ld by

em p l o y ers f ro m in d iv id u a ls ' w ag e s. E F T P S is r ep la ci n g th e cu r ren t m a n u al p ap er- b ase d F e d e ra l

Ta x Deposit/T reasury Tax & L oan Syste m .

G overnm ent O n-line

A ccounting Link S yste m

(G OA L S)

G O A L S is a com m ercial tim esharing service com pris ed of 18 sub-syste m s that collect, edit and

trans m it data to and from F ederal program a gency (FP A) users . It s upports the gathering of

m andatory F PA accounting data that is utilized to satisfy statutory reporting requirem ents (e.g.,

M onthly T reas ury Statem ent, U nited States Governm ent Cons olidated Financial Statem ent).

S T A R S T A R is the autom ated system that m aintains the T reasury's central ac counting syste m by

aggrega ting a ll trans actions relating to the receipt and disburs em ent of governm ent funds.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 18 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

9

Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

(cont’d)

Objective 1(c): To assess the management of selected

end-to-end test events, we

• selected three completed test events (SSA

Payments, SSI Payments, and IRS Payments) due to

their impact on the public,

• analyzed the management structures and controls

(organizations, policies, guidance, standards) used

by FMS to manage and perform end-to-end testing

for these events and compared them to the 11 key

processes in our guide to identify any variances, their

causes, and impacts, and
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 19 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

10

Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

(cont’d)

• did not analyze the management structures and

controls used by the other end-to-end test

participants (SSA, IRS, and FRB).
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 20 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

11

Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

(cont’d)

Objective 2: To assess risk mitigation efforts for the four

systems that missed OMB’s implementation

milestone, we

• determined the current status of each system,

• determined each system’s purpose and mission

significance,

• analyzed plans and schedules for completing each

system’s outstanding Year 2000 activities, and

• analyzed FMS’ plans and activities for identifying and

managing each system’s risks and assessed

progress in implementing risk mitigation strategies.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 21 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

12

Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

(cont’d)

• We coordinated our work with the Treasury IG, who is

assessing the effectiveness of FMS’ Year 2000

business continuity and contingency planning.

• We performed our work from February through

September 1999 in accordance with generally

accepted government auditing standards.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 22 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

13

Results in Brief

• Objective 1: FMS is effectively managing its Year

2000 testing for its most critical payment, collection,

and accounting systems:

– FMS has established the Year 2000 testing organizational

infrastructure key processes specified in our test guide;

– FMS has implemented an IV&V process which is consistent

with our guide, and the IV&V agent followed this process in

performing its work;

– FMS’ IV&V agent found no material problems with system

acceptance testing of SSA Payments, SSI Payments, IRS

Payments; STAR; and GOALS and concluded that this

testing was managed effectively;

– FMS took steps to provide itself assurance that Year 2000

testing for EFTPS had been effectively managed; and
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 23 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

14

Results in Brief (cont’d)

– FMS has satisfied our end-to-end testing key processes on

three test events--Social Security payments, Supplemental

Security Income payments, and IRS income tax refunds.

• Objective 2: As of September 1, 1999, FMS had

implemented two of the four late systems. FMS had

also (1) renovated and tested the remaining two late

systems, (2) implemented them at two of five sites,

and (3) planned to complete their implementation in

October 1999. In addition, FMS prepared and

planned to test system contingency plans for these

late systems as well as its other mission-critical

systems.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 24 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

15

Background

• The Financial Management Service, a bureau of the

Treasury Department, is the federal government’s

financial manager.

• In this capacity, FMS has three primary functions:

– central disburser,

– collections agent, and

– accountant/reporter of financial information.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 25 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

16

Background (cont’d)

.

• As a “central disburser,” FMS makes disbursements

for most federal agencies.

– For fiscal year 1998, FMS reported processing over

860 million disbursements totaling over $1 trillion for a wide

variety of expenses, including Social Security and veterans

benefit payments, IRS tax refunds, federal employee

salaries, and vendor billings.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 26 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

17

Background (cont’d)

.

• As a “collections agent,” FMS is also responsible for

administering the world’s largest collections system.

– In fiscal year 1998, the government collected over

$1.7 trillion from sources such as individual and corporate

income tax deposits, customs duties, loan repayments, fines,

and proceeds from leases.

– FMS relies on a network of about 11,000 financial institutions

to help collect these revenues.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 27 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

18

Background (cont’d)

.

• As an “accountant,” FMS operates and maintains the

federal government’s central accounting and

reporting systems to reconcile and keep track of the

federal government’s assets, liabilities, receipts, and

disbursements.

– Financial and budget execution information from these

central systems is used by FMS to publish financial reports

that are used by the Congress, OMB, and others who make

financial decisions on behalf of the U.S. government.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 28 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

19

Background (cont’d)

• To provide its services, FMS relies on a wide array of

geographically dispersed information systems. For

example,

– FMS has data centers at six regional centers that support its

payment functions.

– FMS also uses a network of contractors and Federal

Reserve Banks to help carry out its other financial

management responsibilities.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 29 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

20

Objective 1(a):

Test Organizational Infrastructure Key

Processes Satisfied

G AO K ey Processes Satisfied? (Y/N)

1 . Assign Y ear 2 000 test m anag ement authority and respo nsibility Y

2 . Defin e Year 2000 com pliance criteria Y

3 . D e velo p org aniz atio nal Y ear 20 00 test and ev alu atio n m aster plan (TE M P ) Y

4 . En gag e the qu ality assu rance/ verification and valida tion grou p Y

5 . D efine a nd secure test bud gets Y

6 . Estab lish new or au gm ent ex isting test e nviron m en ts and sched ule th eir use Y

7 . D evelop an d issu e org anizatio nal Y ear 20 00 test guid ance Y

8 . E sta blish pro cesses and info rm a tion so urc es to su ppo rt testers an d activitie s Y

9 . Pro vid e for ensuring Year 200 0 co mpliance o f ven dor-sup ported produ cts an d

serv ices

Y

10.E s ta b l ish p ro c e s s e s a n d m e tric s f o r re p o rtin g te s t a c tiv ity a n d p ro g re s s Y

11.E stab lish a l ibra ry o f tes t to o l s Y
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 30 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

21

Objective 1(a):

Test Organizational Infrastructure Key

Process 1 Satisfied

• Year 2000 test management authority, responsibility,

and accountability should be assigned at both the

program and project levels.

• FMS designated two test managers for its missioncritical IT systems. These managers are responsible

for coordinating and overseeing testing across

platforms to ensure critical testing is performed on a

priority basis, as well as to manage the best use of

available resources. Automated Information System

Project Managers are responsible for testing at the

project level.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 31 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

22

Objective 1(a):

Test Organizational Infrastructure Key

Process 2 Satisfied

• Year 2000 compliance criteria should be defined.

• FMS defined Year 2000 compliance criteria in its

Year 2000 Testing Guidance. For example,

according to the criteria,

– “date-based functionality must behave consistently for dates

prior to, during, and after Year 2000. Manipulations of date

data need to be reliable/correct only over the range of dates

that an application was designed to process.”
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 32 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

23

Objective 1(a):

Test Organizational Infrastructure Key

Process 3 Satisfied

• An organizational Year 2000 test and evaluation

master plan should be developed.

• FMS defined its Year 2000 test and evaluation

master plan in several documents. For example,

FMS

– defined the test organization and its components’ roles and

responsibilities in its Year 2000 Compliance Methodology

Document;

– developed a master schedule of high-level test activities for

each system/project in its Schedule for Year 2000 Platform

Availability

– defined its test facilities and Year 2000 testing reporting

requirements in its Year 2000 Testing Guide.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 33 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

24

Objective 1(a):

Test Organizational Infrastructure Key

Process 4 Satisfied

• The quality assurance/verification and validation

group should be engaged.

• On August 24, 1998, FMS engaged a contractor to

conduct IV&V. The contractor’s scope included 22

high priority systems. The IV&V contractor’s role was

to

– review and, if necessary, provide assistance in the

development of test plans;

– evaluate established test criteria, including systems

acceptance tests (SAT) and associated test data, to ensure

they are comprehensive;
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 34 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

25

Objective 1(a):

Test Organizational Infrastructure Key

Process 4 Satisfied (cont’d)

– act as an independent observer during the test and

certification processes; and

– evaluate and validate test results prior to certification.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 35 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

26

Objective 1(a):

Test Organizational Infrastructure Key

Process 5 Satisfied

• Test budgets should be defined and secured.

• FMS defined and secured a Year 2000 program

budget through the century date change. FMS

budgeted about $45 million to convert and test its

systems from FY 1997 through FY 2000.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 36 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

27

Objective 1(a):

Test Organizational Infrastructure Key

Process 6 Satisfied

• New test environments should be established or

existing ones should be augmented.

• FMS established two Year 2000 test environments for

its mainframe systems--one in which HourGlass 2000

software is used to simulate advancement of the

operating system date, and the other in which the

operating system date is actually advanced. It also

established test environments for its mid-level and

personal computer systems.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 37 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

28

Objective 1(a):

Test Organizational Infrastructure

Key Process 7 Satisfied

• Organizational Year 2000 test guidance should be

developed and issued.

• FMS developed and issued organizational Year 2000

test guidance via its March 1999 Year 2000 Testing

Guidance. FMS used our testing guide to develop its

guidance.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 38 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

29

Objective 1(a):

Test Organizational Infrastructure Key

Process 8 Satisfied

• Processes (e.g., configuration management, risk

management, etc.) and information sources (e.g.,

intranet web site containing Year 2000 test

requirements, lessons learned data base, etc.) to

support testers and test activities should be

established.

• FMS established processes and information sources

for configuration management, Year 2000

certification, risk management, and quality

assurance.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 39 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

30

Objective 1(a):

Test Organizational Infrastructure Key

Process 9 Satisfied

• Year 2000 compliance of vendor-supported products

and services should be ensured.

• FMS ensured that vendors’ products and services

(including hardware, operating systems software and

utilities, application software, telecommunications

equipment and lines) for its internal systems were

compliant by (1) obtaining vendor certification of its

products’ and services’ Year 2000 compliance and

(2) validating vendors’ certifications through testing.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 40 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

31

Objective 1(a):

Test Organizational Infrastructure Key

Process 9 Satisfied

• For systems operated by contractors, FMS required

the contractors to attest to the Year 2000 compliance

of their vendors’ products and services as part of their

certification documentation.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 41 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

32

Objective 1(a):

Test Organizational Infrastructure

Key Process 10 Satisfied

• Processes and metrics for reporting test activity and

progress should be established.

• FMS’ Year 2000 Special Project Office established

processes and metrics for reporting testing activity

and progress. For example, project managers submit

monthly reports to the project office that detail,

among other things, whether system renovation,

testing and implementation milestones have been

completed and the number of lines of code tested.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 42 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

33

Objective 1(a):

Test Organizational Infrastructure

Key Process 11 Satisfied

• A library of test tools should be established.

• FMS established a library of test tools. It includes

– HourGlass 2000 used to simulate advancement of the

system operating date;

– CA-Endevor for configuration management;

– CA-Datamacs/II which assists in creating test data sets.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 43 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

34

Objective 1(b):

IV&V Agent Found That Acceptance Testing

on Five Systems Was Managed Effectively

• Our test guide recommends establishing IV&V for test

activities as a key process for developing an effective

testing infrastructure. Through IV&V of testing, an

independent third party group generally reviews test plans

and procedures, observes execution of the tests, and

reviews test results to ensure that test criteria (guidance,

plans, standards) are satisfied.

• FMS’ Year 2000 Testing Guidance and its IV&V contract

statement of work specify the contractor’s responsibilities

and define an IV&V process that is consistent with our

guide.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 44 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

35

Objective 1(b):

IV&V Agent Found That Acceptance Testing

on Five Systems Was Managed Effectively

• FMS employed IV&V on five of our selected systems:

SSA, SSI, and IRS Payments, GOALS, and STAR.*

• We found that the IV&V agent followed FMS’ IV&V

requirements and did not report material problems.

• The IV&V agent concluded that FMS had effectively

managed acceptance testing, including testing of

interfaces.

-------------------------

*IV&V was also employed on 17 other FMS mission-critical systems.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 45 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

36

Objective 1(b):

For EFTPS, FMS Took Other Steps to

Ensure SAT Was Managed Effectively

• FMS did not select EFTPS for IV&V because the two

financial agents (commercial banks) who operate and

maintain the system are examined by a federal

banking regulator (the Office of the Comptroller of the

Currency (OCC)) pursuant to Federal Financial

Institutions Examination Council Year 2000 guidance.

• Nevertheless, FMS obtained and reviewed the

agents’ testing progress via monthly meetings with

the two banks.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 46 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

37

Objective 1(b):

For EFTPS, FMS Took Other Steps to

Ensure SAT Was Managed Effectively

• OCC agreed to review the agents’ progress on

EFTPS during the regulator’s Year 2000

examinations and report any concerns to FMS.

According to FMS, OCC has performed several onsite Year 2000 reviews, reported that both agents

have made satisfactory progress, and has raised no

issues to FMS.

• FMS also required the agents to complete FMS’

process for certification. This process includes

having bank senior executives attest in writing that

EFTPS is Year 2000 compliant and was successfully

and comprehensively tested.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 47 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

38

Objective 1(b):

For EFTPS, FMS Took Other Steps to

Ensure SAT Was Managed Effectively

• The banks submitted their certification documentation

to FMS in March 1999, and it has been reviewed and

approved by FMS.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 48 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

39

Objective 1(c):

End-to-End Testing Key Processes

Satisfied for FMS’ Portion of the Tests

GAO Key Processes Satisfied? (Y/N)

1. Define the system boundaries of the end-to-end test(s)

2. Secure the commitment of key data exchange partners

3. Establish an interorganizational end-to-end test team

4. Confirm Year 2000 compliance of vendor-supported telecommunications and

other infrastructure(s)

5. Schedule and plan the end-to-end test(s)

6. Prepare end-to-end test procedures and data

7. Define end-to-end test exit criteria

8. Execute end-to-end test(s)

9. Document end-to-end test results

10.Correct defects

11.Ensure that end-to-end test exit criteria are met

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 49 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

40

Objective 1(c): End-to-End Testing Key

Processes Satisfied for FMS’ Portion of

the Tests--Key Process 1

• The system boundaries of end-to-end tests should be

defined.

• FMS worked with its test partners to define the

boundaries of their end-to-end tests. For example,

– for the SSA and SSI payment core business functions, the

partners agreed that the test would encompass the following

business subfunctions: (1) SSA transmitting payment

requests to FMS, (2) FMS processing the requests and then

printing checks with post-Jan. 1, 2000, dates or transmitting

electronic payment files to the Federal Reserve Banks

(FRBs), (3) for the latter, FRBs processing direct deposit

files and transmitting them electronically to commercial

banks; and (4) FMS transmitting its processing results to

SSA.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 50 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

41

Objective 1(c): End-to-End Testing Key

Processes Satisfied for FMS’ Portion of

the Tests--Key Process 1 (cont’d)

– for the IRS refund payment core business function, the

partners agreed that the test would encompass the following

business subfunctions: FMS (1) processing IRS payment

requests and (2) transmitting electronic payment files to an

FRB.*

*This test did not include IRS’ generation and transmission

of payment request files to FMS. IRS officials stated that

IRS plans to test this function with FMS but has not yet

established a test date.

---------------------
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 51 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

42

Objective 1(c): End-to-End Testing Key

Processes Satisfied for FMS’ Portion of

the Tests--Key Process 2

• Commitment of key data exchange partners should

be secured.

• FMS secured SSA, IRS, and the Federal Reserve’s

commitment to participate in the end-to-end tests that

were planned and successfully conducted.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 52 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

43

Objective 1(c): End-to-End Testing

Key Processes Satisfied for FMS’

Portion of the Tests--Key Process 3

• An interorganizational end-to-end test team should

be established.

• FMS and other test participants (SSA, IRS, Federal

Reserve) built upon their existing working

relationships and interorganizational teams to assign

and share roles and responsibilities for the planning,

execution, and reporting of the end-to-end tests.

Under this arrangement, each participant was

responsible for, among other things, ensuring that

exit criteria were met for its portion of the test.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 53 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

44

Objective 1(c): End-to-End Testing Key

Processes Satisfied for FMS’ Portion of

the Tests--Key Process 4

• Year 2000 compliance of vendor-supported

telecommunications and other infrastructure should

be confirmed.

• Consistent with the shared leadership approach,

FMS confirmed Year 2000 compliance of its vendorsupported telecommunications and other

infrastructure via FMS’ certification process.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 54 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

45

Objective 1(c): End-to-End Testing Key

Processes Satisfied for FMS’ Portion of

the Tests--Key Process 5

• End-to-end tests should be scheduled and planned.

• For the three end-to-end test events, FMS defined

and documented test schedules, data to be used,

anticipated results, interfaces to be tested, roles and

responsibilities for performing key tasks, etc.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 55 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

46

Objective 1(c): End-to-End Testing Key

Processes Satisfied for FMS’ Portion of

the Tests--Key Process 6

• End-to-end test procedures and data should be

prepared.

• In addition to test plans, FMS developed test

procedures or “scripts” that detailed the steps to be

followed and the functions to be tested during the

end-to-end test events. SSA and IRS prepared and

provided the test data to FMS.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 56 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

47

Objective 1(c): End-to-End Testing Key

Processes Satisfied for FMS’ Portion of

the Tests--Key Process 7

• End-to-end test exit criteria should be defined.

• For each end-to-end test, FMS defined exit criteria as

100% success. FMS also documented the expected

results of the test.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 57 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

48

Objective 1(c): End-to-End Testing Key

Processes Satisfied for FMS’ Portion of

the Tests--Key Process 8

• End-to-end tests should be executed.

• End-to-end tests for SSA, SSI, and IRS payments

were conducted between June 1998 and December

1998 in accordance with the test plans.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 58 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

49

Objective 1(c): End-to-End Testing Key

Processes Satisfied for FMS’ Portion of

the Tests--Key Process 9

• End-to-end test results should be documented.

• FMS’ Year 2000 Testing Guidance requires end-toend test results to be documented and to be reported

to management via monthly status reports.

Accordingly, FMS documented the test results along

with expected results.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 59 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

50

Objective 1(c): End-to-End Testing Key

Processes Satisfied for FMS’ Portion of

the Tests--Key Process 10

• Defects identified during tests should be corrected.

• No defects were identified during end-to-end tests for

IRS Payments.

• Defects were identified and corrected during end-toend tests for SSA and SSI Payments.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 60 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

51

Objective 1(c): End-to-End Testing Key

Processes Satisfied for FMS’ Portion of

the Tests--Key Process 11

• Organization should ensure end-to-end test exit

criteria are met.

• According to FMS, it ensured exit criteria were met

on its segments of the tests by having test

participants verify whether FMS file formats, test

results, and input/output data met exit criteria.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 61 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

52

Objective 2: Two Remaining Late Systems

Are to Be Implemented in October 1999

• OMB’s guidance, as amended in January 1998,

requires that agencies complete implementation of

their mission-critical systems by March 31, 1999.

• As of March 31, 1999, FMS reported that seven

mission-critical systems had not been implemented.

At the time of the Subcommittee’s request, FMS

reported that it had implemented three of these

systems, leaving four to be completed.
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 62 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

53

Objective 2: Two Remaining Late

Systems Are to Be Implemented in

October 1999 (cont’d)

• As of September 1, 1999, FMS reported that it had

implemented two of the four late systems. For the two

remaining systems, FMS reported that it had

(1) renovated and tested the systems, (2) implemented

them at two of five sites, and (3) planned to complete

their implementation in October 1999. In addition, FMS

prepared and planned to test in the fall system

contingency plans for these late systems as well as its

other mission-critical systems .
Appendix I

Briefing to House Committee on Ways and 

Means, Subcommittee on Oversight

Page 63 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

54

Conclusion

• FMS has effectively managed the Year 2000 testing of

its most critical payment, collection, and accounting

systems.
Page 64 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

Appendix II

Objectives, Scope, and Methodology ApendxIi

Our objectives were to determine whether FMS is (1) effectively managing 

its Year 2000 testing and (2) taking adequate steps to mitigate the Year 2000 

risks associated with four mission-critical systems that were not 

implemented by OMB’s March 1999 deadline. 

To address the first objective, we assessed whether FMS had

(1) implemented an effective organizational infrastructure for Year 2000 

testing, (2) employed effective management controls in performing system 

acceptance testing of selected systems, and (3) employed effective 

management controls in performing selected end-to-end tests.

To assess organizational infrastructure, we analyzed FMS’ institutional 

management structure and controls (organizations, policies, guidance, and 

standards) used to perform Year 2000 testing. We compared these 

structures and controls against the 11 key processes in our Year 2000 test 

guidance1

 to identify variances, their causes, and impacts.

To evaluate the management of the selected systems’ acceptance testing, 

we first selected six key systems to review. These systems were selected 

because they are the most mission-critical systems that support FMS’ three 

central functions (payments, collections, and accounting). For payments, 

we selected the three systems that process the largest dollar volume and 

process payment transactions related to public financial well-being.2

 For 

collections, we selected the system that collects the vast majority of the 

government’s revenue.3

 For accounting, we selected the two systems that, 

among other things, are central to FMS meeting its statutory mandate of 

preparing an annual consolidated financial statement for the federal 

government.4

 FMS officials agreed that our selected systems were its most 

important systems. 

1

Year 2000 Computing Crisis: A Testing Guide (GAO/AIMD-10.1.21, issued as an exposure 

draft in June 1998; issued in final in November 1998).

2

According to FMS, these systems−the Social Security Administration (SSA) Payments, 

Supplemental Security Income (SSI) Payments, and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) 

Payments systems−issue annual disbursements totaling about $497 billion.

3

Electronic Federal Tax Payment System (EFTPS) processed the collection of tax receipts 

totaling about $1.1 trillion in 1998.

4

These systems are the Government On-line Accounting Link System (GOALS) and STAR.
Appendix II

Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

Page 65 GAO/AIMD-00-24 FMS Year 2000 Testing Controls

We then determined whether the selected systems’ testing had been 

independently verified and validated and, if so, we compared the IV&V 

contractor’s scope of work (as specified in the contract between FMS and 

the contractor) to our guidance and then compared the actual work to 

FMS’ IV&V requirements to ensure that the contractor’s work was complete 

and thorough. This was the case for SSA, SSI, and IRS payments; GOALS; 

and STAR. For the system whose testing was not independently verified 

and validated (EFTPS), we reviewed the management control and 

oversight steps that FMS took to assure itself that the system had been 

adequately tested.

To assess the management of selected end-to-end tests, we selected three 

completed test events (SSA payments, SSI payments, and IRS tax refunds) 

pertaining to FMS’ core business functions that are essential to its ability to 

meet its mission goals. We then analyzed the management structures and 

controls that FMS used to manage and perform end-to-end testing for these 

events and compared them to the 11 key processes in our Year 2000 test 

guidance to identify any variances, their causes, and impacts. We did not 

analyze the management structures and controls used by the other end-toend test participants (SSA, IRS, and the Federal Reserve). 

To assess the risk mitigation efforts for the four mission-critical systems 

that missed OMB’s March 31, 1999, implementation date, we (1) determined 

the current status of each system, (2) determined each system’s purpose 

and mission significance, (3) analyzed FMS’ plans and schedules for 

completing outstanding Year 2000 activities, and (4) analyzed FMS’ plans 

and activities for identifying and managing each system’s risks and 

assessed progress in implementing risk mitigation strategies.

We coordinated our work with the Department of the Treasury’s Office of 

the Inspector General, which is conducting a concurrent review of FMS’ 

Year 2000 business continuity and contingency planning. 

We conducted our work at the Financial Management Service in 

Washington, D.C., and Hyattsville, Maryland. We performed our work from 

February 1999 through October 1999 in accordance with generally 

accepted government auditing standards.

(511138) Letr
Ordering Information

The first copy of each GAO report and testimony is free.

Additional copies are $2 each. Orders should be sent to the 

following address, accompanied by a check or money order made 

out to the Superintendent of Documents, when necessary, VISA and 

MasterCard credit cards are accepted, also.

Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a single address are 

discounted 25 percent.

Orders by mail:

U.S. General Accounting Office

P.O. Box 37050

Washington, DC 20013

or visit:

Room 1100

700 4th St. NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW)

U.S. General Accounting Office

Washington, DC

Orders may also be placed by calling (202) 512-6000

or by using fax number (202) 512-6061, or TDD (202) 512-2537.

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and 

testimony. To receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any list 

from the past 30 days, please call (202) 512-6000 using a touchtone 

phone. A recorded menu will provide information on how to obtain 

these lists.

For information on how to access GAO reports on the INTERNET, 

send an e-mail message with “info” in the body to:

info@www.gao.gov

or visit GAO’s World Wide Web Home Page at: 

http://www.gao.gov

United States

General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548-0001

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

Address Correction Requested

Bulk Rate

Postage & Fees Paid

GAO

Permit No. GI00