Page 1 GAO-05-960R Improvements Needed to FPDS-NG 

United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548 

September 27, 2005 

The Honorable Joshua B. Bolten 

Director, Office of Management and Budget 

Subject: Improvements Needed to the Federal Procurement Data System-Next Generation 

Dear Mr. Bolten: 

Federal government purchases of goods and services have grown to more than $300 billion 

annually.1

 The Federal Procurement Data System-Next Generation (FPDS-NG) is the only 

governmentwide system for obtaining information on how these funds are being spent. The 

FPDS-NG was intended to improve the prior FPDS system in several ways, including 

providing more timely and accurate data; enabling users to generate their own reports; and 

providing easier user access to data. The system was developed by Global Computer 

Enterprises, Inc., (GCE) under contract with the General Services Administration (GSA). The 

FPDS-NG is currently in a transition period, which is scheduled to end by October 2005. 

We initiated a review to assess the extent to which FPDS-NG has demonstrated the intended 

improvements, and to determine whether the FPDS-NG is currently capable of collecting and 

reporting on interagency contracting data. As discussed more fully in the scope and 

methodology section of this letter, we reviewed documents related to FPDS-NG; held 

discussions with officials from GSA, GCE, and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), 

and with private sector and government users. We also made numerous attempts to use the 

system to generate reports. 

Based on our review, we have concerns regarding whether the new system has achieved the 

intended improvements in the areas of timeliness and accuracy of data, as well as ease of use 

and access to data. We also are concerned as to whether the FPDS-NG system has the 

flexibility to capture data on interagency contracting transactions. Completion of the FPDSNG transition provides an opportunity for assessing the implementation of the system to date 

and for considering needed adjustments as the contractor begins its next period of 

performance.2

 We are recommending actions to help achieve the intended improvements for 

FPDS-NG, which should be considered as part of that assessment. 

BACKGROUND

The Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act of 1974 required that the Administrator of the 

Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP) within OMB establish a system for collecting 

 

1

The total dollar value of contracting actions reported in the Federal Procurement Data System-Next 

Generation exceeded $300 billion in fiscal years 2003 and 2004. 

2

According to GSA, the FPDS-NG contract was for an initial 2-year and 5-month base period for 

development and maintenance. Additionally, the contractor can receive up to five 1-year contract 

options based on performance. 
 

Page 2 GAO-05-960R Improvements Needed to FPDS-NG

and developing information about federal procurement contracts.3 Subsequently, the FPDS 

was implemented in 1978. Since 1982, GSA has administered the system on OFPP’s behalf. 

The Congress, GAO, executive branch agencies, and the public rely on FPDS data for 

information on agency contracting actions, governmentwide procurement trends, and 

achievement of goals related to small business. 

Since 2000, efforts have been underway to modernize the FPDS. In April 2003, GSA awarded 

the FPDS-NG contract to GCE, Inc. The FPDS-NG became operational in October 2003 and 

entered into a 2-year transition period during which the contractor has worked with federal 

agencies to review and transfer their data, and validate and connect their contract writing 

systems to FPDS-NG.4

 The FPDS-NG became available to the public in December 2004. 

GAO has reported on its concerns regarding the FPDS almost since the system’s beginning. 5

In December 2003, we reiterated our concerns regarding long-standing inaccuracies and 

incomplete data in the system, and made specific recommendations to OMB to help improve 

the successor system, FPDS-NG, as it was being implemented.6

 Subsequently, OMB issued a 

memorandum requiring federal departments and agencies to take certain steps to ensure 

their full participation in the FPDS-NG initiative.7

 

KEY CONCERNS 

Our review raised concerns regarding whether the FPDS-NG has achieved its intended 

improvements. The following examples reflect our key areas of concern regarding the new 

system: 

• Timeliness and accuracy of data: Interviews with several users indicate a lack 

of confidence in the system’s ability to provide timely and accurate data. The 

FPDS-NG vision included improving the timeliness and accuracy of data by 

requiring agencies and departments to connect to FPDS-NG via contract 

writing systems. These systems enable the real-time electronic submission of 

data, thereby reducing the risk of errors by eliminating or reducing manual rekeying into FPDS-NG. Although GSA and contractor officials believe that 

roughly 90 percent of agencies with contract writing systems have completed 

their connections to the FPDS-NG, this is not the case for the Department of 

Defense (DOD)—by far the largest contracting entity in the government. In 

fact, DOD has delayed its time frames for connecting to the system at least 

 

3

Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act of 1974, Pub.L. No. 93-400 (1974). 

4

Contract writing systems are computer software that, among other things, allows agencies to report 

their contracting data electronically to FPDS-NG through a machine-to-machine interface. The Office 

of Management and Budget (OMB) directed federal agency and department heads to identify and 

allocate funds to ensure that their contract writing systems were capable of electronically transferring 

data directly to FPDS-NG no later than the end of fiscal year 2005. The reliability of data in FPDS-NG is 

expected to improve because agency submissions to FPDS-NG will be based on data already entered 

into the contract writing systems, reducing or eliminating separate data entry requirements and 

providing contracting data in real-time. 

5

See the enclosure for a list of related GAO products. 

6

GAO, Reliability of Federal Procurement Data, GAO-04-295R (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 30, 2003). 

7

OMB memorandum: Timely and Accurate Procurement Data, August 25, 2004. 
 

Page 3 GAO-05-960R Improvements Needed to FPDS-NG

twice and currently estimates it will not be fully connected until sometime in 

fiscal year 2006 given the complexity of its reporting needs and other 

requirements.8

 Given that DOD data represent about 60 percent of the 

contracting actions that will be captured within FPDS-NG, this delay 

significantly affects the ability of FPDS-NG to reflect timely and accurate 

procurement data. 

Additionally, prior to transferring data and connecting their contract writing 

systems to FPDS-NG, agencies and departments were to review their data and 

identify and correct any deficiencies, as well as to “certify” the accuracy and 

completeness of their fiscal year 2004 data with the FPDS-NG contractor. GSA 

officials informed us that the data review process, including certification of 

accuracy and completeness of fiscal year 2004 data, has been more rigorous 

than in prior years and that this might become an annual process. Although 

GSA officials told us that many agencies have reviewed and verified their data, 

GSA has not informed users about the extent to which agencies’ data are 

accurate and complete. This lack of confirmation perpetuates a lack of 

confidence in the system’s ability to provide quality data. 

• Ease of use and access to data: The FPDS-NG Web site provides users the 

ability to generate reports at any time through standard report templates or an 

“ad hoc” reporting tool. Although GAO analysts attended contractor-provided 

training on these reporting tools, we did not find either easy to use. 9 We 

repeatedly encountered significant performance problems, including system 

time-outs and delays, when trying to generate both kinds of reports. 

Additionally, while the ad hoc reporting capability is a potentially useful new 

feature that allows users to create their own reports, it takes time and effort to 

build a customized report query, which then cannot be saved and must be 

rebuilt every time this feature is utilized. With respect to access, our 

interviews with private sector users, GSA officials, and the FPDS-NG 

contractor indicated that repeated requests have been made for 

governmentwide procurement data and a summary report, such as the prior 

FPDS Federal Procurement Report; however, such a report is not currently 

available. GSA officials have indicated that they are exploring ways to improve 

the ad hoc reporting tool and provide governmentwide procurement reports, 

and they expect some of these improvements to be implemented early in fiscal 

year 2006. 

While FPDS-NG has enabled users to access government procurement data 

more readily through its Web-based reporting features, some users have more 

 

8

DOD, Office of the Under Secretary of Defense memorandum, Transition to the Federal Procurement 

Data System-Next Generation, July 8, 2004; DOD, Office of the Under Secretary of Defense 

memoranda, Update on Transition to the Federal Procurement Data System-Next Generation, Dec. 

6, 2004; Jan. 24, 2005; and Aug. 1, 2005. 

9

There are three ways to access FPDS-NG data: (1) direct Web site access, which includes a data query 

search tool, over 50 standard report templates, and an ad hoc reporting capability; (2) downloading 

fiscal year 2004 and fiscal year 2005 data files archived on the Web site; and (3) Web services access, 

which allows external systems to access data and “real-time” data updates. Access to the raw data 

through option (2) or (3) allows users to manipulate and present the data in different ways than 

available through the FPDS-NG standard templates or ad hoc reporting features. There is a one-time 

integration fee for the Web services option, which is typically used by commercial companies. 
 

Page 4 GAO-05-960R Improvements Needed to FPDS-NG

complex data needs that require the ability to access and download raw data.10

These users can access data through archived files from the FPDS-NG Web 

site or through Web services, which provides an interface between external 

systems and the FPDS-NG. In either case, FPDS-NG presents the data in an 

XML format, which is a way to present data in a simple and machine-readable 

manner.11 However, our attempts to extract contracting data across multiple 

government agencies using current XML-compliant software were 

unsuccessful. Data had to be extracted separately for each agency from 

multiple archived files, involving over 1,000 tables for fiscal year 2004 alone. 

Subsequent discussions with the FPDS-NG contractor indicated this is the 

only means currently available for accessing the raw data. Obtaining this data 

through multiple XML files involves a significant increase in time and effort 

and does not facilitate user access to data to meet information needs. 

INTERAGENCY CONTRACTING TRANSACTIONS

The need for collecting and tracking data on interagency contracting transactions has 

become increasingly important. In recent years, federal agencies have been making greater 

use of existing contracts provided by other agencies, such as multiple award schedules and 

governmentwide acquisition contracts, as well as interagency acquisition services provided 

through the use of franchise funds. However, total spending using other agencies’ contracting 

vehicles and services is unknown because there is currently no system that tracks and 

reports this information. Challenges associated with these acquisition vehicles and their 

management led GAO to designate interagency contracting as a governmentwide high-risk 

area in January 2005.12

 

Over the last decade, Congress has repeatedly called for DOD to report on certain types of 

interagency contracting and financial data. Recently, the Senate Armed Services Committee 

conveyed its expectation that DOD business systems have the capability to track basic 

information about interagency transactions. This information includes the following: number 

and dollar value of transactions under each interagency contracting vehicle; the status of 

open transactions; the status of funds under interagency transactions (including 

appropriation type and year, and fund balance received, obligated, expended, and available); 

and the amount of any funds returned or to be returned to DOD or to the Department of the 

Treasury.13 DOD officials have indicated that they plan to use FPDS-NG to track interagency 

contracting data and to request changes to the system to capture more specific information in 

this regard. 

GSA documentation indicates that the vision for FPDS-NG included system capability that 

was flexible enough to change as new data collection needs arose, such as those related to 

interagency contracting activities. GSA officials told us that some interagency contracting 

 

10Raw data are data that have not been processed; the data appear in the original format as entered into 

agencies’ contract writing systems and then reported electronically to FPDS-NG. 

11XML (Extensible Markup Language) is a flexible way to create common information formats and 

share both the format and the data on the World Wide Web, intranets, and elsewhere. While XML has 

been successful as a markup language for documents and data, the overhead associated with 

generating, parsing, transmitting, storing, or accessing XML-based data has hindered its use in some 

environments. 

12GAO, High-Risk Series: An Update, GAO-05-207 (Washington, D.C.: January 2005). 

13S. Rep. No. 109-69 at 352 (2005), accompanying S. 1042, 109th Cong. (2005). 
 

Page 5 GAO-05-960R Improvements Needed to FPDS-NG

data are available in FPDS-NG. However, our efforts to obtain data and to generate reports 

on interagency contracting transactions were unsuccessful. GSA officials also expressed 

concerns that FPDS-NG may not be the appropriate system to collect certain types of data on 

interagency transactions. Given these circumstances, it is unclear whether FPDS-NG has the 

flexibility to address these new data needs and whether it is the appropriate system for this 

purpose. 

CONCLUSION

The FPDS-NG is currently the only system providing information on over $300 billion in 

annual government spending; however, concerns remain regarding the timeliness, accuracy, 

accessibility, and ease of use of the system. Additionally, the growth in interagency 

contracting and the associated challenges heightens the need for data in this area to provide 

sufficient oversight. Given that the FPDS-NG transition period is ending, the opportunity 

exists to address key areas of concern as the system’s implementation to date is assessed. 

 

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR EXECUTIVE ACTION

In order to help achieve the intended improvements for FPDS-NG, we recommend that the 

Director of OMB take the following three actions: 

• Work with DOD and any other agencies that have not yet moved to an electronic 

data submission environment to connect to FPDS-NG via contract writing systems 

as soon as possible, and provide confirmation of agencies’ review and verification 

of the accuracy and completeness of their data in FPDS-NG. 

• Develop a plan to improve ease of use and access to data, including report 

generation, governmentwide reporting needs, and accessing raw data through 

more efficient means. 

• Determine whether the FPDS-NG currently has the capability to collect and report 

on interagency contracting data and whether it is the appropriate system to 

capture this data in the future. 

AGENCY COMMENTS 

We provided a draft of this letter to OMB and GSA for comment. OMB and GSA officials 

commented orally that their respective agencies concurred with the recommendations, and 

OMB stated that it would take into consideration the findings of the report, including whether 

the use, access and capability of FPDS-NG appropriately meets the government's needs. 

Officials from both agencies indicated that ensuring DOD connects its contracting writing 

systems to FPDS-NG as soon as possible is a top priority. Additionally, GSA agreed that an 

overall statement about the agencies’ verification of the accuracy and completeness of the 

data in FPDS-NG could be made now that most agencies have completed that process. OMB 

and GSA officials stated that new software is expected to improve reporting capability and 

that additional improvements are being explored to improve ease of use of the system. GSA 

added that additional reports and improved capability are planned for early in fiscal year 

2006. 

Regarding interagency contracting, OMB stated that currently FPDS-NG has a limited role in 

identifying and reporting information on interagency contracting transactions. GSA stated 

that FPDS-NG was not intended to collect information on financial transactions between 
 

Page 6 GAO-05-960R Improvements Needed to FPDS-NG

government agencies and that OMB would need to decide whether FPDS-NG should be 

modified so that the system could collect and report on this type of information. 

SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY

The information in this letter is based on previous GAO reviews and limited additional work 

conducted from February through August 2005, in accordance with generally accepted 

government auditing standards. In conducting our work, we reviewed relevant GAO reports 

and audit documentation. We also held discussions with officials at GSA, OMB, GCE, and 

with several private sector and government users. We attended training at the GCE facility on 

FPDS-NG report generation; we attempted to generate standard reports and to build several 

ad hoc report queries using the FPDS-NG system; and we reviewed relevant documents 

concerning FPDS and FPDS-NG. 

We are sending copies of this letter to the Chairs and Ranking Members of the Senate 

Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, the House Government Reform 

Committee, and other interested congressional committees, as well as to the Administrator of 

General Services. We will provide copies to others upon request. This letter will also be 

available on GAO’s home page at http://www.gao.gov. If you or your staff has any questions 

about this letter, please contact me at (202)-512-4841. Contact points for our Offices of 

Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this report. This 

letter was prepared under the direction of Bill Woods. GAO staff who made contributions to 

this letter were Amelia Shachoy, Assistant Director; Art James; Julia Kennon; William 

McPhail; Lisa Simon; Shannon Simpson; and Robert Swierczek. 

Sincerely yours, 

Katherine V. Schinasi 

Managing Director 

Acquisition and Sourcing Management 

Enclosure 
 

Page 7 GAO-05-960R Improvements Needed to FPDS-NG

ENCLOSURE: Related GAO Products 

GAO. Contract Management: Impact of Strategy to Mitigate Effects of Contract Bundling 

on Small Business Is Uncertain. GAO-04-454. (Washington, D.C.: May 27, 2004). 

GAO. Reliability of Federal Procurement Data. GAO-04-295R. (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 30, 

2003). 

GAO. Contract Management: No Reliable Data to Measure Benefits of the Simplified 

Acquisition Test Program. GAO-03-1068. (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 30, 2003). 

GAO. Contract Management: Civilian Agency Compliance with Revised Task and Delivery 

Order Regulations. GAO-03-983. (Washington, D.C.: Aug. 29, 2003). 

GAO. Small Business: HUBZone Program Suffers from Reporting and Implementation 

Difficulties. GAO-02-57. (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 26, 2001). 

GAO. OMB and GSA: FPDS Improvements. GAO/AIMD-94-178R. (Washington, D.C.: Aug. 19, 

1994). 

GAO. The Federal Procurement Data System—Making It Work Better. 

GAO/PSAD-80-33. (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 18, 1980). 

GAO. The Federal Procurement Data System Could Be an Effective Tool for Congressional 

Surveillance. GAO/PSAD-79-109. (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 12, 1979). 

(120409) 
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 

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

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; 

and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help 

Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s 

commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

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

is through GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts 

newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To 

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go 

to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to Updates.” 

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. 

A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of 

Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 

more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders 

should be sent to: 

U.S. Government Accountability Office 

441 G Street NW, Room LM 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm 

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

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

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400 

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

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Paul Anderson, Managing Director, AndersonP1@gao.gov (202) 512-4800 

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

Washington, D.C. 20548 

GAO’s Mission 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony 

Order by Mail or Phone 

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs 

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER