For Release on Delivery

Expected at

10 a.m. EDT

Tuesday,

April 3, 2001

INFORMATION AND

TECHNOLOGY

MANAGEMENT

Achieving Sustained and

Focused Governmentwide

Leadership

Statement of David L. McClure

Director, Information Technology Management Issues

Testimony

Before the Subcommittee on Technology and

Procurement Policy, Committee on Government Reform,

House of Representatives

United States General Accounting Office

GAO

GAO-01-583T
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:

It is a pleasure to be here to participate in today’s hearing on the various

information resources management models that state and local

governments are using. You have asked us to participate in this hearing to

set the federal government context for this hearing as it relates to the issue

of the federal Chief Information Officer (CIO).

As you know, the rapid pace of technological change and innovation has

offered unprecedented opportunities for both the government and

commercial sectors to use information technology (IT) to improve

operational performance, reduce costs, and enhance service

responsiveness to citizens and consumers. In some cases these

opportunities have become reality. For example, as we testified last year,

it is increasingly common to find federal, state, and local governments

using the Internet for basic transactional services, such as allowing

citizens to submit and pay taxes, process renewal fees, and file

applications.1 Governments are also using the Internet to buy the goods

and services that support their operations and are establishing “portals” or

integrated web sites for targeted citizen information and services. Yet at

the same time, a range of issues have emerged about how to best manage

and integrate complex information technologies and management

processes so that they are aligned with mission goals, strategies, and

objectives.

In my remarks today, I will

ï briefly summarize the major governmentwide IT challenges,

ï describe the federal government’s current information resources and

technology management framework and discuss how it could be

strengthened,

ï describe various federal CIO proposals under consideration,

ï provide an overview of the structure and responsibilities of existing state

CIO models, and

ï discuss the keys to maximizing the success of a federal CIO.

 1Electronic Government: Federal Initiatives Are Evolving Rapidly But They Face Significant

Challenges (GAO/T-AIMD/GGD-00-179, May 22, 2000).
Page 2 GAO-01-583T Federal Chief Information Officer

Although the American people expect world-class public services and are

demanding more of government, the public’s confidence in the

government’s ability to address its demands remains all too low. The

government’s successful implementation of information technology could

improve this confidence. Indeed, according to the Council for Excellence

in Government,

“Electronic government can fundamentally recast the connection between

people and their government. It can make government far more responsive

to the will of the people and greatly improve transactions between them. It

can also help all of us to take a much more active part in the democratic

process.”2

Government use of Internet-based services is broadening and becoming

more sophisticated. In particular, public sector agencies are increasingly

turning to the Internet to conduct paperless acquisitions (electronic

malls), provide interactive electronic services to the public, and tailor or

personalize information.

However, the government must still overcome several major challenges to

its cost-effective use of information technology. At the beginning of this

year we issued a series of reports—our Performance and Accountability

Series—devoted to framing the actions needed to support the transition to

a more results-oriented and accountable federal government.3 To the

extent that the billions of dollars in planned IT expenditures can be spent

more wisely and the management of such technology improved, federal

programs will be better prepared to meet mission goals and support

national priorities. However, we identified seven continuing IT challenges

that are key to achieving this goal:

ï strengthening agency information security,

ï improving the collection, use, and dissemination of government

information,

ï pursuing opportunities for electronic government,

 2e-Government: The Next American Revolution (The Council for Excellence in Government).

3Major Management Challenges and Program Risks: A Governmentwide Perspective (GAO-01-241,

January 2001) provides an overview of this series. The 2001 Performance and Accountability Series

also contains separate reports on 21 agencies—covering each cabinet department, most major

independent agencies, and the U.S. Postal Service.

The Federal

Government Faces

Significant IT

Challenges
Page 3 GAO-01-583T Federal Chief Information Officer

ï constructing sound enterprise architectures,

ï fostering mature systems acquisition, development, and operational

practices,

ï ensuring effective agency IT investment practices, and

ï developing IT human capital strategies.

Until these challenges are overcome, agencies are likely to continue to

have fundamental weaknesses in their information resources and

technology management and practices, which can negatively affect

mission performance.

Since 1990, we have also periodically reported on government operations

that we have assessed as high risk because of their greater vulnerability to

waste, fraud, abuse, or mismanagement. In January of this year, in the

information resources and technology management area, we designated

information security and three agency IT modernization efforts as high

risk.4 We have reported governmentwide information security as high risk

since 1997, and the three major modernization efforts since 1995.

The federal government’s information resources and technology

management structure has its foundation in six laws: the Federal Records

Act, the Privacy Act of 1974, the Computer Security Act of 1987, the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,5 the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996, and the

Government Paperwork Elimination Act of 1998. Taken together, these

laws largely lay out the information resources and technology

management responsibilities of the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB), federal agencies, and other entities, such as the National Institute

of Standards and Technology.

 4High-Risk Series: An Overview (GAO/HR-95-1, February 1995), High-Risk Series: Information

Management and Technology (GAO/HR-97-9, February 1997), High-Risk Series: An Update (GAO/HR99-1, January 1999), and High-Risk Series: An Update (GAO-01-263, January 2001).

5The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 revised the information resources management responsibilities

established under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, as amended in 1986.

The Federal

Information

Resources and

Technology

Management

Structure
Page 4 GAO-01-583T Federal Chief Information Officer

In general, under the government’s current legislative framework, OMB

has important responsibilities for providing direction on governmentwide

information resources and technology management and overseeing agency

activities in these areas, including analyzing major agency information

technology investments as part of the federal budget process. Among

OMB’s responsibilities are

ï ensuring agency integration of information resources management plans,

program plans, and budgets for acquisition and use of information

technology and the efficiency and effectiveness of interagency information

technology initiatives;

ï developing, as part of the budget process, a mechanism for analyzing,

tracking, and evaluating the risks and results of all major capital

investments made by an executive agency for information systems;6

ï directing and overseeing implementation of policy, principles, standards,

and guidelines for the dissemination of and access to public information;

ï encouraging agency heads to develop and use best practices in

information technology acquisition;

ï reviewing proposed agency information collections to minimize

information collection burdens and maximize information utility and

benefit; and

ï developing and overseeing implementation of privacy and security

policies, principles, standards, and guidelines.

Federal departments and agencies, in turn, are accountable for the

effective and efficient development, acquisition, and use of information

technology in their organizations. For example, the Paperwork Reduction

Act of 1995 and the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996 require agency heads, acting

through agency CIOs, to

ï better link their information technology planning and investment decisions

to program missions and goals;

ï develop and implement a sound information technology architecture;

 6This responsibility is in addition to OMB’s role in assisting the President in reviewing agency budget

submissions and compiling the President’s budget, as discussed in 31 U.S.C. Chapter 11.
Page 5 GAO-01-583T Federal Chief Information Officer

ï implement and enforce information technology management policies,

procedures, standards, and guidelines;

ï establish policies and procedures for ensuring that information technology

systems provide reliable, consistent, and timely financial or program

performance data; and

ï implement and enforce applicable policies, procedures, standards, and

guidelines on privacy, security, disclosure, and information sharing.

Another important organization in federal information resources and

technology management—the CIO Council—was established by the

President in July 1996—shortly after the enactment of the Clinger-Cohen

Act. Specifically, Executive Order 13011 established the CIO Council as

the principal interagency forum for improving agency practices on such

matters as the design, modernization, use, sharing, and performance of

agency information resources. The Council, chaired by OMB’s Deputy

Director for Management with a Vice Chair selected from among its

members, is tasked with (1) developing recommendations for overall

federal information technology management policy, procedures, and

standards, (2) sharing experiences, ideas, and promising practices,

(3) identifying opportunities, making recommendations for, and

sponsoring cooperation in using information resources, (4) assessing and

addressing workforce issues, (5) making recommendations and providing

advice to appropriate executive agencies and organizations, and

(6) seeking the views of various organizations. Because it is essentially an

advisory body, the CIO Council must rely on OMB’s support to see that its

recommendations are implemented through federal information

management policies, procedures, and standards. With respect to Council

resources, according to its charter, OMB and the General Services

Administration are to provide support and assistance, which can be

augmented by other Council members as necessary.

The information issues confronting the government in the new Internetbased technology environment rapidly evolve and carry significant impact

for future directions. To effectively address these issues, we believe that

the government’s current information resources and technology

management framework could be strengthened by establishing a central

focal point, such as a federal CIO. Increasingly, the challenges the

government faces are multidimensional problems that cut across

numerous programs, agencies, and governmental tools. Clearly,

departments and agencies should have the primary responsibility and

accountability for decisions related to IT investments and spending

Additional

Governmentwide IT

Leadership Needed to

Meet Challenges
Page 6 GAO-01-583T Federal Chief Information Officer

supporting their missions and statutory responsibilities. But

governmentwide issues need a strong catalyst to provide substantive

leadership, full-time attention, consistent direction, and priority setting for

a growing agenda of government issues, such as critical infrastructure

protection and security, e-government, and large-scale IT investments. A

federal CIO could serve as this catalyst, working in conjunction with other

high-level officials, to ensure that information resources and technology

management issues are addressed within the context of the government’s

highest priorities and not in isolation from these priorities.

During the period of the legislative deliberations on the Clinger-Cohen Act,

we supported strengthened governmentwide management through the

creation of a formal CIO position for the federal government.7 In

September 2000 we also called for the Congress to consider establishing a

formal CIO position for the federal government to provide central

leadership and support.8 As we noted, a federal CIO would bring about

ways to use IT to better serve the public, facilitate improving access to

government services, and help restore confidence in our national

government. With respect to specific responsibilities, a federal CIO could

be responsible for key functions, such as overseeing federal agency IT

activities, managing crosscutting issues, ensuring interagency

coordination, serving as the nation’s chief IT spokesman internationally,

and maintaining appropriate partnerships with state, local, and tribal

governments and the private sector. A federal CIO could also participate in

establishing funding priorities, especially for crosscutting e-government

initiatives, such as the President’s recently proposed e-government fund

(estimated to include $100 million over three years), which is expected to

support interagency e-government initiatives.

Consensus has not been reached within the federal community on the

need for a federal CIO. Department and agency responses to questions

developed by the Chairman and Ranking Minority Member of the Senate

Committee on Governmental Affairs regarding opinions about the need for

a federal CIO found mixed reactions. In addition, at our March 2000 Y2K

Lessons Learned Summit, which included a broad range of public and

 7Improving Government: Actions Needed to Sustain and Enhance Management Reforms (GAO/

T-OCG-94-1, January 27, 1994), Government Reform: Using Reengineering and Technology to Improve

Government Performance (GAO/T-OCG-95-2, February 2, 1995), and Government Reform: Legislation

Would Strengthen Federal Management of Information and Technology (GAO/T-AIMD-95-205, July 25,

1995).

8Year 2000 Computing Challenge: Lessons Learned Can Be Applied to Other Management Challenges

(GAO/AIMD-00-290, September 12, 2000).

No Consensus Has

Been Reached on a

Federal CIO
Page 7 GAO-01-583T Federal Chief Information Officer

private-sector IT managers and policymakers, some participants did not

agree or were uncertain about whether a federal CIO was needed.

Even individuals or organizations that support a federal CIO disagree on

the structure and authorities of this office. For example, as you know, the

last Congress considered two proposals to establish a federal CIO: H.R.

4670, the Chief Information Officer of the United States Act of 2000,

introduced by Representative Turner, and H.R. 5024, the Federal

Information Policy Act of 2000, which you introduced. These bills shared a

common call for central IT leadership from a federal CIO but they differed

in how the roles, responsibilities, and authorities of the position would be

established.

H.R. 5024 vested in the federal CIO the information resources and

technology management responsibilities currently assigned to OMB, as

well as oversight of related activities of the General Services

Administration and promulgation of information system standards

developed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology. On the

other hand, H.R 4670 generally did not change the responsibilities of these

agencies; instead, it called on the federal CIO to advise agencies and the

Director of OMB and to consult with nonfederal entities, such as state

governments and the private sector.

Senator Lieberman also plans to introduce an e-government bill, which is

expected to include a provision establishing a federal Chief Information

Officer.

Different federal CIO approaches have also been suggested by other

organizations. For example, in February, the Council for Excellence in

Government recommended that the President (1) name an Assistant to the

President for Electronic Government with cabinet-equivalent rank, who

would chair a Public/Private Council on Electronic Government and (2)

designate OMB’s Deputy Director for Management as Deputy Director for

Management and Technology. The Council also called for the Deputy

Director for Management and Technology, in turn, to create an Office of

Electronic Government and Information Policy to be headed by a

presidentially appointed, senate-confirmed federal CIO.9

 9e-Government: The Next American Revolution (The Council for Excellence in Government).
Page 8 GAO-01-583T Federal Chief Information Officer

In March, the GartnerGroup—a private research firm—called on the

President to appoint a cabinet-level federal CIO within the Executive

Office of the President. Some key areas that the GartnerGroup stated that

the federal CIO should focus on include (1) advising the President on

technology-related public policy, (2) developing and implementing federal

e-government plans, (3) managing appropriated “seed money” for crossagency e-government initiatives, and (4) developing standards for egovernment interoperability and other IT-related transformation

initiatives.10

CIOs or equivalent positions exist at the state level but no single preferred

model has emerged. The specific roles, responsibilities, and authorities

assigned to the CIO or CIO-type position vary, reflecting the needs and

priorities of the particular government. However, some trends are

apparent. Namely, according to the National Association of State

Information Resource Executives (NASIRE), half the states have a CIO in

place who reports directly to the governor. (Only eight states reported

such an arrangement in a 1998 survey.) All but one of the remaining CIOs

report to a cabinet-level officer or an IT board. In addition, some state

CIOs work in conjunction with an advisory board or commission, and

many of them serve as chair of a council of agency-level CIOs. As a former

president of the National Association of State Information Resource

Executives noted in prior testimony, “IT is how business is delivered in

government; therefore, the CIO must be a party to the highest level of

business decisions . . . [and] needs to inspire the leaders to dedicate

political capital to the IT agenda.”11

With respect to CIOs’ responsibilities, according to the NASIRE, the vast

majority of states have senior executives with statewide authority for IT.

In addition, state CIOs are usually in charge of developing statewide IT

plans and approving statewide technical IT standards, budgets, personnel

classifications, salaries, and resource acquisitions, although the CIO’s

authority depends on the specific needs and priorities of the governors. In

some cases, the CIO is guided by an IT advisory board.

 10Mr. President, Appoint a Federal CIO (GartnerGroup, TG-12-8984, March 18, 2001) and Help Wanted:

Federal CIO for High-Stress, Rewarding Work (GartnerGroup, COM-13-0387, March 14, 2001).

11Testimony of Otto Doll, President, National Association of State Information Resource Executives

before the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Government Reform, Subcommittee on

Government Management, Information and Technology, March 24, 2000.

Statewide CIO Models

Exist But Approaches

Vary
Page 9 GAO-01-583T Federal Chief Information Officer

Examples of the diversity in CIO structures that states reported in 2000 to

the Government Performance Project—administered by the Maxwell

School of Citizenship and Public Affairs of Syracuse University in

partnership with Governing Magazine—are as follows.12

ï A model in which the CIO has a strong link to the state’s highest official is

Missouri’s Chief Information Officer who reports to the Governor’s office.

Missouri’s CIO is responsible for, among other things, IT strategic planning

and policy, IT procurement, e-government, and facilitating IT resource

sharing across agencies. The CIO is also the liaison representing Missouri

on national issues affecting IT functions of the state.

ï Kansas uses a model in which the CIO has multiple reporting

responsibilities, including reporting to an IT council and the Governor.

The Kansas Chief Information Officer serves as the Executive Branch

Chief Information Technology Officer reporting to the Information

Technology Executive Council, Governor and the Secretary of

Administration. The Kansas CIO (1) establishes project management

standards, (2) approves bid specifications, (3) approves IT projects over

$250,000, (4) reports project status, and (5) manages the Strategic

Information Management 3-year plan. Kansas also has Chief Information

Technology Officers for its legislative and judicial branches that also

report to the Information Technology Executive Council, as well as to the

Legislative Coordinating Council and Office of Judicial Administration,

respectively.

ï Finally, in the model used by Michigan, the CIO reports to the head of an

executive agency—the Department of Management and Budget. The duties

of the Michigan CIO include developing a statewide information

technology architecture and standards, developing and managing a

statewide telecommunications network, and coordinating and

reengineering business processes throughout the state government.

 12Since 1996, the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs of Syracuse University has rated the

management capacity of state governments, based in part on state responses to a survey. The project,

called the Government Performance Project, conducts criteria-based assessments in five areas of

government management, including information technology management. Summaries of these

assessments can be found at http://governing.com/gpp/gp1intro.htm.
Page 10 GAO-01-583T Federal Chief Information Officer

Certain key principles and success factors can provide insight into the

establishment of a successful CIO organization—including at the federal

level. In February we issued an executive guide13 that includes a

framework of critical success factors and leading principles (see figure 1).

We developed this framework based on interviews with prominent privatesector and state CIOs, as well as other research. Mr. Chairman, what may

be of particular interest to this Subcommittee is that CIOs of leading

organizations we interviewed described a consistent set of key principles

of information management that they believed contributed to the

successful execution of their responsibilities. These principles touch on

specific aspects of their organizational management, such as formal and

informal relationships among the CIO and others, business practices and

processes, and critical CIO functions and leadership activities. While

focused on the use of CIOs within organizations, many of the principles of

the framework are applicable to a federal CIO position.

 13Executive Guide: Maximizing the Success of Chief Information Officers, Learning from Leading

Organizations (GAO-01-376G, February 2001).

Keys to Maximizing

the Success of a

Federal CIO
Page 11 GAO-01-583T Federal Chief Information Officer

Figure 1: CIO Critical Success Factors, Principles and Organizational Relationships

Participants

Collaborators

Align Information

Management

Leadership for

Value Creation

Promote

Organizational

Credibility

Execute CIO

Responsibilities

Critical Success

Factors

I. Recognize the

 Role of Information

 Management in

 Creating Value

III. Ensure the

 Credibility of the

 CIO Organization

V. Organize Information

 Resources to Meet

 Business Needs

Principles

II. Position the CIO

 for Success

IV. Measure Success

 and Demonstrate

 Results

VI. Develop Information

 Management

 Human Capital

Senior executive

management,

especially the CEO

CIO peers and

senior management CIO organization

Organizational

Foci

CEO, CFO, COO Senior executives

and division heads

Client and CIO

organizations

CEO - Chief Executive Officer; CFO - Chief Financial Officer; COO - Chief Operating Officer
Page 12 GAO-01-583T Federal Chief Information Officer

Let me explain some of the key characteristics of the six fundamental

principles described by CIOs we interviewed and important parallels that

can be made to the establishment of a federal CIO.

Recognize the Role of Information Management in

Creating Value

Recognizing the business transformation potential of IT, executives of

leading organizations position their CIOs as change agents with

responsibility for applying technology to achieve major improvements in

fundamental business processes and operations. With CEO support, the

CIOs are in a good position to significantly affect not only IT, but the

entire business enterprise. Similarly, it is important that a federal CIO be

assigned a prominent role in the government’s decisionmaking to create

and set a clear agenda and expectations for how information management

and information technologies can be effectively used to help improve

government operations and performance.

Position the CIO for Success

Diversities in corporate missions, structures, cultures, and capabilities

prohibit a prescriptive approach to information management leadership.

Instead, executives in leading organizations ensure that their CIO models

are consistent with the business, technical, and cultural contexts of their

enterprises. In conjunction with determining their CIO models, senior

executives of leading organizations clearly define up front the roles,

responsibilities, and accountability of their CIOs for enterprisewide

information management, better enabling their CIOs to operate effectively

within the parameters of their positions vis-à-vis those of their senior

management counterparts (i.e., CFO, COO). These senior executives also

provide their CIOs with the authority they need to effectively carry out

their diverse responsibilities.

The federal government is large, complex, and diverse. Indeed, many

federal departments and agencies easily rival in size and complexity some

of our nation’s largest corporations. In addition, virtually all the results

that the federal government strives to achieve require the concerted and

coordinated efforts of two or more agencies. These are the types of issues

that are important to consider when establishing a federal CIO. For

example, while it may not be realistic for a federal CIO to have explicit

responsibility for agency IT investments, a federal CIO could be an
Page 13 GAO-01-583T Federal Chief Information Officer

important broker of solutions that require cross-agency cooperation and

coordination.

Ensure the Credibility of the CIO Organization

CIOs in leading organizations recognize that providing effective

information management leadership and vision is a principal means of

building credibility for their CIO positions. In addition, CIOs often outline

plans of attack or roadmaps to help guide them in effectively

implementing short- and long-term strategies. Further, CIOs participate on

executive committees and boards that provide forums for promoting and

building consensus for IT strategies and solutions. These types of

responsibilities can effectively translate to a federal CIO as well. A federal

CIO can help set and prioritize governmentwide IT goals, provide

leadership for the governmentwide CIO Council, and actively participate

in other advisory organizations, such as the CFO Council, the Procurement

Executives Council, and the President’s Information Technology Advisory

Committee.

Measure Success and Demonstrate Results

While there is no standardized approach to performance measurement,

leading organizations strive to understand and measure what drives and

affects their businesses and how to best evaluate results. Leading

organizations use performance measures that focus on business outcomes

such as customer satisfaction levels, service levels, and, in some instances,

total requests satisfied. In addition, to properly collect and analyze

information, leading organizations develop measurement systems that

provide insight into their IT service delivery and business processes.

Establishing an information feedback system allows organizations to link

activities and functions to business initiatives and management goals.

The Government Performance and Results Act is results-oriented

legislation that is intended to shift the focus of government

decisionmaking, management, and accountability from activities and

processes to the results and outcomes achieved by federal programs. A

key role for a federal CIO could be to help formulate consensus and

direction on performance and accountability measures pertinent to

information management in the federal government. Moreover, a federal

CIO could help establish goals and measures for major governmentwide

efforts, including for the CIO Council, and create a mechanism to report

on the government’s progress in meeting these goals. This is a particularly
Page 14 GAO-01-583T Federal Chief Information Officer

important role since managers at the organizations we studied cautioned

that IT performance measurement is in its infancy and measurement

techniques are still evolving, partly due to changes in technology.

Organize Information Resources to Meet Business Needs

In lieu of establishing either completely centralized or decentralized CIO

organizations, leading organizations manage their information resources

through a combination of such structures. In this hybrid, the CEO assigns

central control to a corporate CIO and supporting CIO organization, while

delegating specific authority to each business unit for managing its own

unique information management requirements. This model is particularly

appropriate for the federal government since the Clinger-Cohen Act of

1996 requires executive agencies to appoint CIOs to carry out the IT

management provisions of the act and the broader information resources

management requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act. Accordingly,

a federal CIO could help ensure overall IT policy direction and oversight

for the government, and agency CIOs would be responsible for carrying

out these policies, as appropriate for their agencies. In addition, a federal

CIO could play a role in suggesting, through formal and informal means,

how the government information resources and technology management

structure should be organized, with particular emphasis on how such a

structure can achieve cross-cutting functionally oriented government

services.

Develop Information Management Human Capital

High-performance organizations have long understood the relationship

between effective “people management” and organizational success.

Accordingly, we found that leading organizations develop human capital

strategies to assess their skill bases and recruit and retain staff who can

effectively implement technology to meet business needs. Such strategies

are particularly important since studies forecast an ever-increasing

shortage of IT professionals, presenting a great challenge for both industry

and the federal government. Complicating the issue further, serious

concerns are emerging about the aging of the federal workforce, the rise in

retirement eligibility, and the effect of selected downsizing and hiring

freeze initiatives. Since human capital concerns are a governmentwide

concern, this is one area in which a federal CIO could have a tremendous

impact. Working with the Office of Personnel Management and OMB, the

CIO could explore and champion initiatives that would aid agencies in

putting in place solid IT workforce management and development

strategies.
Page 15 GAO-01-583T Federal Chief Information Officer

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, while information technology can help the

government provide services more efficiently and at lower costs, many

challenges must be overcome to increase the government’s ability to use

the information resources at its disposal effectively, securely, and with the

best service to the American people. A central focal point such as a federal

CIO can serve in the essential role of ensuring that attention to

information technology issues is sustained and improves the likelihood

that progress is charted and achieved. Although our research has found

that there is no one right way to establish a CIO position, critical success

factors we found in leading organizations, such as aligning the position for

value creation, are extremely important considerations.

Finally, the experiences of statewide CIOs offer a rich set of experiences

to draw on for ideas and innovation. As a result, it is critical that a federal

CIO, as well as agency-level CIOs, develop effective working relationships

with state CIOs to discuss and resolve policy, funding, and common

systems and technical infrastructure issues. Such relationships are of

growing importance as public entities work to establish effective egovernment initiatives.

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. I would be pleased to respond

to any questions that you or other members of the Subcommittee may

have at this time.

For information about this testimony, please contact me at (202) 512-6240

or by e-mail at mcclured@gao.gov. Individuals making key contributions to

this testimony include Felipe Colon, Jr., and Linda Lambert.

(310411)

Contacts and

Acknowledgments
Orders by Internet

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

Contact one:

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

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

1-800-424-5454 (automated answering system)

Ordering Information

To Report Fraud,

Waste, and Abuse in

Federal Programs