IRS WEBSITE

Long-Term Strategy 

Needed to Improve 

Interactive Services

Report to Chairman, Committee on 

Finance, U.S. Senate

April 2013

GAO-13-435

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO
United States Government Accountability Office

Highlights of GAO-13-435, a report to the 

Chairman, Committee on Finance, U.S. 

Senate

April 2013

IRS WEBSITE

Long-Term Strategy Needed to Improve Interactive 

Services 

Why GAO Did This Study

U.S. taxpayers visited the IRS’s 

website over 375 million times during 

2012. IRS officials noted there are over 

110,000 web pages and downloadable 

documents plus some basic interactive 

tools, such as calculators, on IRS.gov. 

In December 2011, GAO reported that 

taxpayers benefit from the increased 

web services, and IRS could realize 

substantial savings by transferring 

taxpayers away from costly telephone 

interactions. GAO was asked to review 

IRS’s efforts to offer more interactive 

services. Among other things, this 

report describes the interactivity of 

IRS’s online services and assesses its 

strategy for expanding the interactivity 

of its website. To address these 

objectives, GAO reviewed IRS’s 

website to determine the services it 

provided as of March 2013, compared 

the IRS Online Strategy to federal 

guidance such as Howto.gov, and 

interviewed IRS officials in the Offices 

of Online Services and Information 

Technology.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that IRS develop a 

long-term strategic plan for its web 

services that includes, among other 

things, studies of leading practices at a 

strategic level; a measurable goal for 

taxpayer satisfaction; business cases 

for new online services that describe 

the potential benefits and costs and 

prioritized projects; and links to 

investments in security. IRS agreed 

with two of these recommendations, 

did not state whether it agreed or 

disagreed on two others, and partially 

agreed with developing business cases 

because it believes other criteria 

should be considered. GAO believes 

this recommendation remains valid as 

discussed in this report.

What GAO Found

The Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) existing online services are limited when 

compared to many other government and private sector organizations. Static 

web pages make up the majority of www.IRS.gov; however, IRS highlights 18 

basic interactive tools from its homepage. IRS does not offer dynamic account 

access to taxpayers. Other federal and state taxing authorities provide a broader 

range of online services to their customers, including interactive account access.

Current and Future Online Services on IRS.gov

To improve its website, IRS has been simultaneously (1) focusing on multiple 

short term projects to deliver new basic interactive tools and (2) longer term 

efforts to invest in foundational infrastructure, such as security. 

IRS does not, however, have a long term strategy for enhancing its website that 

explains how its ongoing and new efforts fit together. No overall cost estimate 

exists and there are not enough details on goals, deliverables, future online 

services, and timeframes to be able to assess progress. Several fundamental 

elements for a website strategy, as described on www.Howto.gov and in other 

guidance, are missing. Among others actions, IRS is not: 

• using leading practices learned to help formulate a long-term strategy; 

• setting a measureable taxpayer satisfaction goal to help ensure taxpayers’ 

needs are being met;

• prioritizing the development of new online services based on business cases 

that outline the benefits and costs; and

• linking investments in security to a long term plan. 

While IRS’s efforts to date have already benefited taxpayers and hold the 

promise of additional benefits in the future, a long term strategy could help 

managers have a common understanding of IRS’s plans, and better assist 

Congress in understanding what it is being asked to fund and holding IRS 

accountable for progress.

View GAO-13-435. For more information, 

contact James R. White at (202) 512-9110 or 

whitej@gao.gov.
Page i GAO-13-435 IRS Website

Letter 1 

Background 4

IRS Provides Limited Interactive Services and Is Tracking More 

Performance Metrics 9

Taxpayers’ Rating of IRS’s Website Is below Average and Oversight 

Entities Recommend Enhancements 15

IRS Is Following Some but Not All Fundamental Elements for a 

Website Strategy 17

Conclusions 27

Recommendations for Executive Action 28

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 28

Appendix I Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 31

Appendix II IRS’s Basic Interactive Tools 34

Appendix III IRS’s Component Scores for Customer Satisfaction 36

Appendix IV Comments from the Department of Treasury 37

Appendix V GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgment 42

Tables

Table 1: Number of Visits and Downloads on IRS.gov 11

Table 2: IRS’s Use of Howto.gov’s Recommended Performance 

Metrics for Federal Websites, as of March 7, 2013 12

Table 3: New and Planned Self Service Tools Fiscal Years 2013 and 

2014 21

Table 4: IRS e-Authentication Procedures and Identity Elements 

Required 25

Table 5: Interactive Tools for Taxpayers Available on IRS.gov as of 

March, 2013 34

Table 6: IRS’s ACSI Scores for Website Elements 36

Contents 
Page ii GAO-13-435 IRS Website

Figures

Figure 1: IRS.gov Homepage 5

Figure 2: Summary of Current and Future Online Services on 

IRS.gov 9

Figure 3: IRS’s American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) 

Scores 2005 through 2012 Compared to Selected Private 

Sectors 16

Abbreviations

ACSI American Customer Satisfaction Index

AGI Adjusted Gross Income

AMT Alternative Minimum Tax

DOB Date of Birth

EIN Employer Identification Number

EITC Earned Income Tax Credit

GPRA Government Performance and Results Act

GPRAMA GPRA Modernization Act of 2010

IRS Internal Revenue Service 

IT Information Technology

NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology

OLS Office of Online Services

OMB Office of Management and Budget 

PIN Personal Identification Number 

SSN Social Security Number

VITA Volunteer Income Tax Assistance

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety 

without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain 

copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be 

necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately.
Page 1 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548

April 16, 2013

The Honorable Max Baucus

Chairman

Committee on Finance

United States Senate

Dear Mr. Chairman:

U.S. taxpayers visited the Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) website over 

375 million times during 2012 to obtain tax-related information, download 

forms, and check on the status of a refund, among other things.1 IRS 

officials noted that there are over 110,000 web pages and downloadable 

documents available on IRS.gov. Enhancing IRS.gov with additional 

online services is cited by the Department of Treasury as part of how it 

intends to achieve its priority goals of improving service to taxpayers and 

increasing compliance with tax laws.2 Taxpayers benefit from online 

services because they can research large amounts of tax guidance, the 

services are available 24 hours a day, and there is no waiting in a queue 

to speak to a telephone representative. In December 2011, we reported 

that IRS could realize savings by transferring taxpayers from costly 

telephone and walk-in services to much cheaper online services.3

While IRS’s website is heavily used and provides access to vast amounts 

of information, concerns have been expressed about the sophistication of 

the services provided and the extent to which taxpayers’ needs are met.

Much of the content on IRS’s website is read-only. There are some basic 

tools that allow users to request personalized information, such as the 

status of refunds, but IRS’s website does not give taxpayers interactive 

personal account access. The IRS Oversight Board, the National 

Taxpayer Advocate, and the Electronic Tax Administration Advisory 

Committee have all recently made recommendations that IRS should 

provide taxpayers with online access to their accounts, including ways to 

 

1

http://www.IRS.gov, accessed March 15, 2013.

2

As cited on www.performance.gov, accessed March 26, 2013. 

3

GAO, 2011 Tax Filing: Processing Gains, but Taxpayer Assistance Could be Enhanced 

by More Self-Service Tools, GAO-12-176 (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 15, 2011).

 
 

Page 2 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

resolve compliance problems or other issues.4 In 2011, we recommended 

that IRS complete a strategy that includes an assessment of providing 

online interactive tools that allow taxpayers to access and update 

elements of their accounts online.5 IRS stated it would consider online 

access for taxpayers, but as of March 2013, IRS has not yet taken action 

to fully address the recommendation.

You asked us to review IRS’s efforts to offer more interactive services. 

This report (1) describes the interactivity of IRS’s online services and 

assesses how IRS measures use of the services, (2) describes taxpayers’ 

satisfaction with these services, and (3) assesses IRS’s strategy for 

expanding the interactivity of its website, including how it learns from 

other organizations, sets goals for taxpayer satisfaction for its website, 

prioritizes the development of new services, and addresses security risks.

To accomplish our objectives, we reviewed IRS.gov to determine the 

different types of online services IRS offered as of March 2013, and 

analyzed the performance metrics IRS uses to monitor taxpayer 

satisfaction with the website and its interactive tools. We compared IRS’s 

performance metrics to the recommended performance metrics on 

Howto.gov—a website managed by the General Services Administration 

to guide federal agencies to provide better customer experiences through 

their websites.6 We reviewed IRS’s average American Customer 

Satisfaction Index (ACSI) scores from 2005 through 2012 as gathered by 

ForeSee via optional online surveys.7 We compared IRS’s score to the 

average scores of other federal agencies and private organizations.8 We 

 

4

IRS Oversight Board, Electronic Filing 2011: Annual Report to Congress, December, 

2011; National Taxpayer Advocate Annual Report to Congress, December 31, 2012; and 

Electronic Tax Administration Advisory Committee, Annual Report to Congress, June 

2012, Publication 3415. These three organizations oversee IRS’s operations. 

5

GAO-12-176. 

6

Accessed February 26, 2013, http://www.howto.gov. 

7

IRS uses ForeSee, a company that uses customer experience analytics to continuously 

measure satisfaction and provide insights to clients to administer the ACSI optional pop up 

survey to users on IRS.gov.

8

We compared IRS’s average ACSI scores (2005 to 2012) to the average scores of (1) 

approximately 30 other federal agencies and (2) private organizations with transactions 

similar to IRS including in the Internet brokerage, Internet retail, and banks sectors. Both 

the federal agencies and private organizations used ACSI to measure overall customer 

satisfaction with their websites.
 

Page 3 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

analyzed the September 2012 IRS Online Strategy and updates of the 

strategy provided March 19, 2013. We reviewed IRS’s records of contact 

with other organizations to determine the steps taken to learn about 

leading practices when implementing interactive tools, and we compared 

IRS’s website management practices to best practices outlined on 

Howto.gov. We interviewed Office of Online Service (OLS) officials to 

determine IRS’s plans to set a taxpayer satisfaction goal. We assessed 

how IRS prioritized new interactive tools for implementation in fiscal year 

2013 by comparing the planned time frames listed in the IRS Online 

Strategy to actual implementation dates of the interactive tools and 

reviewing OLS’s documentation used to determine prioritization, including 

business cases. We compared the business cases to benefit cost criteria, 

including the Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) Circular A-94. 

We obtained and reviewed IRS’s security risk assessments for two 

interactive tools—Send My Transcript to Banks and First Time 

Homebuyers Credit—and its planned actions to address any risks it 

identified. We also reviewed IRS’s plans to authenticate taxpayer 

identities for new interactive tools and compared them to the National 

Institute of Standards and Technology’s (NIST) guidance on 

authentication.9 For all objectives we interviewed relevant IRS officials to 

collect information on IRS’s online services and its plans to implement 

additional online services in the future. We reviewed documents and 

interviewed ACSI officials and determined that the ASCI data presented 

in our report for years 2005 through 2012 were sufficiently reliable for our 

purposes. (See app. I for more information on our scope and 

methodology.) 

We conducted this performance audit from June 2012 to April 2013 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

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

sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 

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

the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and 

conclusions based on our audit objectives.

 

9

NIST is charged with providing guidance and assistance to agencies and defining 

minimum security requirements, among other things.
 

Page 4 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

IRS.gov offers users access to a wide range of guidance, forms, and 

sources for help, as indicated by the screen shot of the home page shown 

in figure 1. According to the IRS Oversight Board’s annual taxpayer 

attitude survey, 86 percent of taxpayers were likely to use technologybased services, like the IRS website, and this percentage has grown in 

recent years.10

 

10IRS Oversight Board, 2012 Taxpayer Attitude Survey, February, 2013.

Background 
 

Page 5 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

Figure 1: IRS.gov Homepage

Note: IRS.gov homepage as of March 6, 2013.
 

Page 6 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

Based on our review of literature on interactive online services, we 

identified three categories of such services, which we call (1) static web 

pages, (2) basic interactive tools, and (3) dynamic account access.

• Static web pages: web pages that provide the same information for all 

users. These pages are mostly read-only, although users may be able 

to use hyperlinks to move to other related content. The pages do not 

have the capacity to return any personalized information to the user.

• Basic interactive tools: more complex web pages that allow users to 

perform routine tasks online and, in some cases, obtain personalized 

data. These tools can be non-secure or secure.

• Non-secure tools: basic interactive tools that do not require users 

to confirm their identity in order to use the tool. There is also no 

interaction between the user and the user’s tax account at IRS. 

The tools may allow the taxpayer to input some data and in return 

get back personal information based on the information provided.

A calculator for estimating tax is one example.

• Secure tools: basic interactive tools that allow users to obtain 

some information from their account after confirming their identity. 

While users can request some information about their account, the 

information is limited and users do not have the ability to make 

changes to the account. For example, one of IRS’s secure tools 

allows taxpayers to request a copy of a previously filed tax return.

• Dynamic account access: the most complex web pages that provide 

users with real-time account access and the ability to make account 

changes after confirming their identity. For example, the Social 

Security Administration allows users to start or change direct deposit 

benefit payments.

Created in 2011, OLS is charged with developing IRS’s overall website 

strategy and operations and creating new services to increase website 

use. Officials developed the IRS Online Strategy, a PowerPoint slide 

presentation, to help govern the steps OLS plans to take to develop future 

online services. Officials noted that the strategy is a living document that 

was meant to evolve as priorities changed. OLS has an operating budget 

for the management of its staff, but it does not have a specific funding 

The Office of Online 

Services 
 

Page 7 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

source to develop online services and generally must rely on off-budget 

cycle funding requests presented to the IRS Technical Investment Review 

Board.11

Since OLS’s establishment, officials have been focused mainly on 

modernizing IRS.gov, including updating the technical infrastructure that 

supports the website and also lays the groundwork for the next phase of 

online services. In addition to technical upgrades, OLS’s main goals have 

been to improve website content and design and to optimize the search 

capability on the website. OLS officials pursued a limited set of new 

interactive tools during their first two years to realize short-term 

improvements for taxpayers. Prior to the establishment of OLS, IRS 

business units, primarily Wage and Investment, developed online 

services for the IRS website based on specific needs.

While there is no single authoritative source or governance board for 

federal website development and management, several sources of 

guidance exist.

• Howto.gov: A website managed by the General Services 

Administration and designed to be a resource to help improve how 

agencies communicate and interact with customers and use 

innovative tools and technologies to improve service. Howto.gov 

offers best practices, training, and guidance on strategic planning; 

federal web requirements and policies; applications, data, and web 

infrastructure tools; web content management, usability, and design; 

and performance metrics.

• Digital Government–Building a 21st Century Platform to Better Serve

the American People: A directive issued by the President on May 23, 

2012, aimed at guiding agencies to deliver better digital services. Its 

main objectives are to (1) enable the American people to access highquality digital government information and services anywhere, 

 

11The IRS Technical Investment Review Board is a group of executives including the 

Chief Financial Officer, Chief Technology Officer, Deputy Commissioners, and the Chief of 

Staff from the Commissioner Office, that decides what investments to fund from off-budget 

cycle proposals. The Director of OLS told us he expects funding for fiscal year 2014 and 

beyond to go through the congressional justification budget process. The Fiscal Year 2014 

President’s Budget was released on April 10, 2013, and requests $24.1 million for online 

services. 

Guidance for Websites
 

Page 8 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

anytime, on any device; (2) ensure that the government adjusts to this 

new digital world; and (3) spur innovation.

• National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST): Part of the 

U.S. Department of Commerce, NIST is charged with providing 

guidance and assistance to agencies, defining minimum security 

requirements, identifying methods of assessing the effectiveness of 

security requirements, and evaluating security policies and 

technologies from the private sector and national security systems to 

potentially implement in federal agencies, among others.

• IRS’s Internal Revenue Manual: IRS publishes its information security 

policies and guidance and project assurance standards and 

procedures in the Internal Revenue Manual.12

• OLS’s internal guidance: According to the guidance, before new 

interactive tools are released for taxpayer use, they should go through 

multiple stages of a product management process including 

evaluating new product ideas; baselining the current state; identifying 

a potential set of online solutions; developing business cases and 

securing funding; and building, piloting, and launching new tools. 

According to the Director of OLS, the product management process 

identifies future online opportunities, assesses the value of a product, 

and develops a business case to justify the need for an interactive 

tool.

Other guidance is also available to federal agencies to help managers 

make resource decisions when implementing new programs, including 

websites. The OMB Circular A-94 provides federal program managers 

with guidance to help promote efficient resource allocation through wellinformed decision making.13 It provides guidance for conducting benefit 

cost and cost-effectiveness analyses, and can serve as a checklist of all 

the elements to be considered.

 

12The Internal Revenue Manual section on Information Technology Security, Policy and 

Guidance has been aligned with NIST guidance. 

13OMB Circular A-94, Memorandum For Heads of the Executive Departments and 

Establishments on Guidelines and Discount Rates for Benefit Cost Analysis of Federal 

Programs (Oct. 29, 1992). 
 

Page 9 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

IRS’s existing online services are limited when compared to many other 

organizations. According to IRS officials, static web pages make up the 

majority of content on IRS.gov. IRS offers some basic interactive tools, 18 

of which are highlighted from its homepage as of March 2013. (See app. 

II for a description of the 18 basic interactive tools.) IRS is not currently 

positioned to offer dynamic account access to taxpayers.14 Figure 2 

provides some examples.

Figure 2: Summary of Current and Future Online Services on IRS.gov

 

14IRS cannot offer dynamic account access until it can securely authenticate a taxpayer’s 

identity electronically, which is planned for the end of 2013. IRS.gov facilitates electronic 

filing for taxpayers through two programs, E-file and Free File. Officials consider these 

programs components of account services; however, they were not included in our review 

because the services are not hosted on IRS.gov and taxpayers can only send information 

to IRS. 

IRS Provides Limited 

Interactive Services 

and Is Tracking More 

Performance Metrics

IRS’s Website Does Not 

Offer Dynamic Account 

Access
 

Page 10 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

• Static web pages: Most of IRS’s web pages are static. According to 

IRS officials, there are over 30,000 static web pages on IRS.gov (i.e., 

general information for taxpayers) and more than 80,000 static files 

(i.e., downloadable documents such as tax forms) with more content 

being added daily. These pages only change when the agency 

updates the information, such as a revised tax form or publication.

• Basic interactive tools: IRS offers a few basic interactive tools, both 

non-secure and secure. IRS highlights a number of basic interactive 

tools for taxpayers on its website (see app. II).

• Non-secure tools: IRS offers several non-secure tools. For 

example, a taxpayer who would like to determine the potential 

deduction amount for a state or local sales tax can use the Sales 

Tax Deduction Calculator and answer a series of questions to 

determine the deduction estimate. The website also offers a 

number of calculators to help taxpayers determine either the 

correct deduction amount or amount of tax owed.

• Secure tools: IRS offers a few basic secure tools for taxpayers. 

For example, to receive updates on refund status using the 

Where’s My Refund? tool, a taxpayer must provide his or her 

Social Security number, filing status, and refund amount. In 

another example, the Order a Transcript tool allows taxpayers to 

request that a copy of a prior year tax return be mailed to the 

taxpayer’s address on file.

• Dynamic account access: IRS is not currently positioned to offer 

dynamic account access to taxpayers that would allow, for example, a 

taxpayer to access his or her tax account balance, view recent 

payments, or correspond digitally with IRS to respond to notices 

similar to other federal and private sector organizations that provide a 

broad range of services to their customers.

Other federal agencies, states, and countries provide their taxpayers with 

dynamic account access features. For example, the Social Security 

Administration offers users the ability to create a personalized My Social 

Security account. Through their individual accounts, users can get their 

Social Security statements to review estimates of retirement, disability, 

and survivors’ benefits; earnings records; and estimated Social Security 

and Medicare taxes paid. Those receiving benefits can also use their 

dynamic account access to get benefit verification letters; check benefit 

and payment information and earnings records; change address and 

phone number; and start or change direct deposit benefit payments. 
 

Page 11 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

Medicare allows beneficiaries to access their account through 

MyMedicare.gov. This secure site allows users to check their eligibility 

status, enrollment status, and Medicare benefits. Users can also access 

claims information and receive preventative health information.

In addition, the New York and California state tax agencies provide 

dynamic account access allowing taxpayers to view tax account balances 

and recent payments; respond to notices; and change addresses.15

Finland encourages accurate withholding of taxes from taxpayers’ income 

through an online system called the Tax Card that covers the national tax, 

municipality tax, social security tax, and church tax.16 Taxpayers can 

access the Tax Card through a taxpayer’s secured bank system or by a 

government issued access card. Taxpayers can also update withholding 

rates and revise government-prepared income tax returns online.

For years, IRS has tracked and reported on a limited number of website 

metrics such as those shown in table 1.

Table 1: Number of Visits and Downloads on IRS.gov 

In millions

2009 2010 2011 2012

2009—2012 

percent change

2011—2012 

percent change

Total visitsa 299.0 307.5 322.5 375.5 25.6% 16.4%

Downloadsb 203.8 216.8 247.5 358.7 76.0 44.9

Source: IRS data, based on calendar years.

a

Total visits is a count of the number of times taxpayers visited IRS.gov.

b

Downloads is a count of the number of taxpayer forms, publications, or instructions that were 

downloaded to a taxpayer’s computer from IRS.gov.

Within the last 3 years, IRS has started to track additional performance 

metrics. As of early March 2013, OLS management tracked and used 18 

of the 24 metrics recommended by Howto.gov. Specifically, OLS fully 

tracked 15 of the 18 measures and partially tracked 3 measures (i.e., for 

some web pages). Six of the 24 metrics were not tracked or used by 

 

15GAO-12-176. 

16GAO, Tax Administration: Information on Selected Foreign Practices That May Provide 

Useful Insights, GAO-11-439, (Washington, D.C.: May 24, 2011).

IRS Management Is 

Tracking More 

Recommended Website 

Performance Metrics and 

Is Considering Others, but 

Has Not Yet Determined a 

Final Suite
 

Page 12 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

management (see table 2). Howto.gov calls the measures in table 2 a 

minimum baseline set of performance and customer satisfaction 

measures, which allow agency officials to get a holistic view of how well 

online services and information are delivered and to prioritize 

improvements.

Table 2: IRS’s Use of Howto.gov’s Recommended Performance Metrics for Federal Websites, as of March 7, 2013

Performance metric Description IRS tracking

Website performance

1 Total visits An interaction by an individual viewing one or more pages on a website ●

2 Total page views The number of times a page was viewed during the designated time period (e.g., 

monthly) ●

3 Unique visitors One person (or a computer/IP address) who visits a website at least once during a 

designated time period (e.g., monthly) ○

4 Page views per visit The number of page views in a reporting period divided by the number of visits in the 

same reporting period ●

5 Average visit duration The length of time in a session (activity on a website during a specific time period) ●

6 Time on page The time visitors spend on individual pages ◐

7 Bounce rate The percentage of visitors who looked at only one page and immediately left the site ◐

8 New vs. returned visitor The ratio between first-ever site visitors to returning visitors (i.e., a user that visited the 

site prior to the reporting period) ●

9 Visits per visitor for a given 

time frame

The number of times a visitor visited a website during the designated time period (e.g., 

monthly) ○

10 Total number of on–site 

search queries

The total number of times the website’s search function was used ●

External search metrics

11 Top referring commercial 

search engines

The search engines (e.g., Google, Bing, Yahoo) that send the most traffic to the site ●

12 Top referring search terms The most-used words and phrases people type into commercial search engines to find 

content ○

13 Top referring search terms 

with low click through rates 

The most common links followed for specific search terms that don’t lead to clicks on 

the website ○

Internal/site search

14 Top search terms/phrases The most-used words and phrases people type into the website’s search box ●

15 Top “no results” queries Most popular, valid searches that don’t return any results on the website’s search 

results page (e.g., because the agency does not have the content on the website, or 

the content is not findable by the person’s search term)

●

16 Top searches with low click 

through rates 

Most popular search terms that people generally don’t act (click) on ○

17 Top changing search terms 

(movement up/down)

Shows trending topics, what’s hot or not ●
 

Page 13 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

Performance metric Description IRS tracking

Website performance

1 Total visits An interaction by an individual viewing one or more pages on a website ●

2 Total page views The number of times a page was viewed during the designated time period (e.g., 

monthly) ●

3 Unique visitors One person (or a computer/IP address) who visits a website at least once during a 

designated time period (e.g., monthly) ○

4 Page views per visit The number of page views in a reporting period divided by the number of visits in the 

same reporting period ●

5 Average visit duration The length of time in a session (activity on a website during a specific time period) ●

6 Time on page The time visitors spend on individual pages ◐

7 Bounce rate The percentage of visitors who looked at only one page and immediately left the site ◐

18 Percentage of visitors using 

site search

Percentage of people who visited the website and used the search box on the site ◐

19 Top clicked URLs for

specific queries

Most common results that searchers found most relevant or appealing, for specific 

search terms ○

Speed

20 Page load time How quickly pages (including the search results page) load on the website ●

Customer satisfaction

21 Overall customer 

experience

Customer’s perception of the experience of his or her visit. ●

22 Completion rate of intended 

task

The customer’s perceived ability to get the information or service he or she came to 

accomplish ●

23 Percent of visitors likely to 

return 

A customer’s perceived willingness to choose the service for the same or similar task 

in the future ●

24 Percent of visitors likely to 

recommend

A customer’s perceived willingness to recommend the product or service ●

Source: GAO analysis of IRS data from IRS.gov Site Usage Report (January 2013) and customer satisfaction survey questions.

Legend:

● IRS fully tracks this performance metric.

◐ IRS tracks this performance metric and uses it for only some pages.

○ IRS does not track this performance metric.

In addition to increasing the number of website metrics they track, OLS 

managers told us they are making or considering other changes to 

measuring performance. OLS managers noted that they changed the 

program used to collect performance data in August 2012, and the new 

program provides the capability to obtain a more comprehensive view of 
 

Page 14 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

IRS’s online performance.17 They also said that some OLS staff recently 

started tracking 4 of the remaining 6 metrics in table 2, although the

metrics are not monitored by OLS management and they have not 

determined if all of the existing measures as well as the 4 they are 

considering will be tracked long-term.18 Furthermore, OLS management 

stated that not all the Howto.gov metrics may be relevant, in their entirety, 

for major federal websites. They said they plan to focus on the metrics 

that help improve the taxpayer’s experience with the website. We agree 

that learning more about taxpayers’ experience with the website is 

important. However, the documents OLS provided did not discuss how 

IRS intends to do this, what measures would be included in the complete

final set of performance metrics, or when the decisions of what to include 

would be made. Because IRS’s website is highly used and enhancing it 

with additional online services is a key goal to improve taxpayer service 

and compliance, it is important to have a full set of performance metrics 

as a baseline. As noted by Howto.gov, without a baseline set of 

performance metrics in place, managers will not have a complete picture 

of the extent to which taxpayers’ needs are being met and will lack 

information useful for making decisions about website improvements.

 

17Since August 30, 2012, IRS has used Google Analytics to collect performance metrics 

data on IRS.gov. Prior to August 30, 2012, IRS used WebTrends 8.7 on Demand to 

analyze website usage. IRS also tracks performance metrics using surveys. According to 

IRS, Google Analytics is more comprehensive because it gives IRS the ability to track 

more measures.

18The two metrics that IRS has not begun to track as of March 18, 2013 are visits per 

visitor for a given time frame and top searches with low click through rates.
 

Page 15 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

According to one survey, IRS’s website has consistently ranked below the 

average of websites from other federal agencies and many sectors of the 

private economy including banks, Internet retailers, and Internet 

brokerage firms in customer satisfaction as shown in figure 3.19 IRS uses 

the American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) to measure taxpayers’ 

satisfaction with IRS.gov. ACSI is an independent national model of 

customer satisfaction measured by website users who volunteer to 

complete a survey and answer questions determining elements of 

satisfaction such as customer expectations, perceived quality, and 

value.20 While ACSI survey results are not generalizable to all website 

users and subject to the limitations of a convenience sample, IRS has 

scored below the average of other federal government websites since 

2008. A score of 80 or above (on its 100 point scale) refers to top 

performing websites, according to ACSI’s model.21 The score for IRS.gov 

has ranged from an annual average high of 73 in 2007 to an annual 

average low of 67 in 2012. Judgments about the quality of IRS’s website 

should not be based on ACSI scores alone—other organizations have 

different missions and users. OLS officials told us that given its new 

website content and design, they expected their scores to fall in 2012, as 

taxpayers had to adapt to the new site.22 Further, officials noted that they 

also track 10 individual components of the ACSI customer satisfaction 

scores, such as taxpayers’ views on ease of navigation and search, to 

gain more insights into taxpayers’ experience. These component scores 

ranged from 68 to 84 in 2012 with the majority of scores in the 70’s (see 

app. III).

 

19The average customer satisfaction score for other federal agencies websites ranged 

from 74 to 75 for 2009 to 2012 and select sectors of the private economy ranged from 75 

to 81 for the same time period.

20ACSI was developed at the University of Michigan as a multi-equation econometric 

model to determine the satisfaction of customers. Internet industries include web-based 

businesses such as Internet retailers and Internet brokerage firms.

21While the model has limitations, all of the federal agencies and private organizations 

surveyed by ACSI are subject to the same limitations. 

22IRS’s scores for January and February 2013 have increased to 69 and 70, respectively. 

IRS officials attribute this increase to the redesigned home page and search functions. 

Taxpayers’ Rating of 

IRS’s Website Is below 

Average and 

Oversight Entities 

Recommend 

Enhancements 
 

Page 16 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

Figure 3: IRS’s American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) Scores 2005 through 

2012 Compared to Selected Private Sectors

Note: These estimates are subject to sampling error, but the precise confidence level is not known. It 

is also unknown whether these estimates are statistically significant. The overall score represents 

users’ responses to three questions about their overall satisfaction with the web sites being surveyed. 

The three questions are: “What is your overall satisfaction with this site?”; “How well does this site 

meet your expectations?”; and “How does this site compare to your idea of an ideal website?” 

The reviews of external oversight organizations provide evidence 

corroborating the message in the ACSI scores for IRS.gov. In the last 2

years, three separate oversight entities have found that IRS’s website, 

and especially the interactive services offered, could be improved. The 

Electronic Tax Administration Advisory Committee, IRS Oversight Board, 

and the National Taxpayer Advocate have all recently stated that IRS 

needs to develop a more modern website and provide more interactive 
 

Page 17 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

services such as dynamic account access to meet the needs of 

taxpayers.23

Since its inception, OLS has been simultaneously (1) focusing on short 

term projects to deliver new basic interactive tools (what OLS managers 

described as “low hanging fruit”) and (2) longer term efforts to stand up 

the organization and invest in foundational infrastructure, such as 

security. In 2012 and 2013, OLS has delivered seven interactive tools, 

including First Time Homebuyer Credit, Offer in Compromise Prequalifier, and e-Transcripts for Banks. OLS officials said they are planning 

to deliver four additional tools in 2014. Efforts to stand up the organization 

have included establishing a governance structure and hiring staff.

Foundational infrastructure improvements recently implemented include 

the redesign of the static website, which improved content, design, and 

search capabilities. Two foundational infrastructure investments 

underway are projects to develop more secure internet portals for 

accessing information and improve IRS’s ability to authenticate taxpayers’ 

identities. In 2009, IRS estimated that it would spend $320 million to 

upgrade and maintain its website over a 10-year period.

IRS does not have a long-term strategy for its website that explains how 

all of these ongoing and new efforts over the next several years fit 

together. IRS has a strategy document (IRS Online Strategy), but it does 

not contain any overall cost estimates or enough detail on goals, 

deliverables, future online services, or timeframes so that Congress can 

hold IRS accountable for making progress over the long-term. The 

document itself is labeled “draft/pre-decisional,” and much of the content 

is described as illustrative. Information about new services and benefits to 

taxpayers beyond 2014 is at times referred to as an aspiration or “to be 

determined.” OLS provided us with a large number of documents 

providing a range of detail about IRS’s website improvement efforts. For 

example, in March 2013, IRS provided us an Excel spreadsheet 

describing “multi-year themes” for new services it plans to implement 

through 2015, but it is not consistent with the IRS Online Strategy. 

 

23Electronic Tax Administration Advisory Committee, Annual Report to Congress, June 

2012, Publication 3415; IRS Oversight Board, Electronic Filing 2011: Annual Report to 

Congress, December, 2011; and National Taxpayer Advocate, Annual Report to 

Congress, December 31, 2012.

IRS Is Following 

Some but Not All 

Fundamental 

Elements for a 

Website Strategy
 

Page 18 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

As we have previously reported, the Government Performance Results 

Act of 1993 (GPRA), as amended by the GPRA Modernization Act of 

2010 (GPRAMA) can serve as leading practices for planning at lower 

levels within federal agencies, such as individual programs or initiatives.

24

Among other things, GPRAMA states that strategic plans should contain

the goals and objectives of a program along with measures of 

performance so that an agency can be held accountable. It also describes 

what is needed to carry out the strategy including resource needs and 

milestones over the long term. We recognize that a strategy is necessarily 

high level and that proposals for out year efforts may not be fully 

developed. This is especially true for technology-related investments. 

However, without a strategy that provides an overall picture of what IRS is 

investing in, it will be difficult for Congress and other decision makers to 

understand up front what they are funding and what benefits they can 

expect. Because some of the costs being incurred today are for 

foundational efforts, it is even more important that a strategy explain the 

long-term benefits.

To be more specific, IRS is missing important parts of the following four 

elements that Howto.gov and other guidance describe as key parts of a 

website strategy:

• using leading practices to inform strategic decision making;

• setting goals for improving customer satisfaction;

• developing business cases with estimates of benefits and costs and 

using the information to prioritize new investments; and

• linking security investments to the rest of the strategy .

IRS has taken steps to learn about website design, such as layout, page 

flow, and usability for specific interactive tools. For example, OLS staff 

attended a presentation given by the New York State Department of 

Taxation and Finance to learn about the online services account page. 

OLS officials also reviewed the websites of the California Franchise Tax 

Board and the Internal Revenue Authority of Singapore, which both utilize 

secure email technologies. Additionally, IRS has used a private research 

firm to help explore new options for online tools, such as improving

taxpayers’ ability to make online payments on IRS.gov. Also, Where’s My 

 

24Pub L. No. 103-62, 107 Stat. 285 (1993); Pub. L. No. 111-352, 124 Stat. 3866 (Jan. 4, 

2011); and GAO, Veteran-Owned Small Businesses: Planning and Data System for VA’s 

Verification Program Needs Improvement, GAO-13-95 (Washington, D.C.: Jan.14, 2013).

IRS Reviews Other 

Organizations’ Interactive 

Tool Designs, but Has Not 

Used Leading Practices to 

Inform Its Strategic Plan
 

Page 19 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

Refund? and Where’s My Amended Return? are IRS tools that were 

derived from private sector tracking tools (e.g., online tools that track the 

location of mailed packages). IRS officials told us they are also part of a 

Government Services Administration community of practice which 

focuses on website content.

OLS officials did not provide us with analysis showing how they used 

leading practice reviews to help make long-term strategic decisions 

about, for example, how much and what type of dynamic account access 

to offer. In addition, IRS is not using leading practice reviews to help 

inform prioritization and has had difficulty adhering to timeframes based 

on its implementation decisions. For example, IRS rated the Online 

Payment Agreement tool highest of all new tools scheduled for 

implementation in fiscal year 2012 to fiscal year 2014 based on projected 

impact and ease of implementation. However, the business case was in 

draft form as of March 2013, and implementation is now scheduled for 

fiscal year 2014, whereas other tools with a lower level of priority have 

been implemented. Federal guidance, such as OMB’s Streamlining 

Service Delivery and Improving Customer Service, states that 

government managers should learn what is working in the private sector 

and apply these leading practices to deliver services better, faster, and 

cheaper, including improvements to interactive tools.25 Howto.gov and 

OLS’s Product Management Process provide similar guidance.

OLS officials told us that because IRS is so far behind on the web 

services it offers on IRS.gov, they have enough ideas for website 

improvements and do not always need to look to other organizations for a 

list of improvements. OLS officials further stated that as an organization, 

IRS is unique and that the lessons learned from other organizations

cannot always be directly applied to online services for IRS.gov. In 

addition, officials told us that staff responsible for developing the 

interactive tools may have prior private industry experience. Therefore, 

IRS relied on staff knowledge.

 

25See OMB M-11-24, Implementing Executive Order 13571 on Streamlining Service 

Delivery and Improving Customer Service (June 13, 2011); 25 Point Implementation Plan 

to Reform Federal Information Technology Management by the U.S. Chief Information 

Officer (Dec. 9, 2010); and Executive Order 13571, Streamlining Service Delivery and 

Improving Customer Service ( April 27, 2011).
 

Page 20 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

However, learning from other organizations about their strategy for 

providing online services could help IRS improve its own services. 

Looking at other organizations’ experiences, including those of state and 

foreign tax agencies, and lessons learned could help IRS prioritize future 

projects by identifying which tools are providing users, including other 

taxpayers, with the most benefit.

IRS does not have a long-term numerical or other measureable goal 

including a related timeframe to increase its below average taxpayer 

satisfaction with its website. A key attribute of a successful performance 

metric is to have a measurable target with a numerical goal.26 Numerical 

or measurable targets facilitate future assessments of whether overall 

goals and objectives were achieved because comparisons can be easily 

made between projected performance and actual results. OLS officials 

stated that their long-term goal is “to increase satisfaction over a period of 

time.” They stated the time period is not specific because they want to 

look at trends that pertain to the redesigned IRS.gov before making 

meaningful long-term goals.27 We understand that examining trends can 

be helpful in determining meaningful long-term goals; however, it is 

difficult to measure progress without establishing a period of time for 

which to measure such progress. Without a numerical goal or other 

measurable target and a related timeframe for achieving the goal, IRS will 

have difficulty determining whether its long-term taxpayer satisfaction 

plan is successful.

The September 2012 IRS Online Strategy outlined eight new interactive 

tools to implement in fiscal year 2013. (See table 3.) Subsequent to the 

issuance of this strategy, IRS modified the implementation date of four of 

these tools to fiscal year 2014. In a more recent document, IRS shows 

most of these tools as being implemented in multiple phases over the 

 

26In our prior work, we developed nine key attributes of successful performance measures 

by reviewing, among other things, key legislation and performance management literature.

GAO, Tax Administration: IRS Needs to Further Refine Its Tax Filing Season Performance 

Measures, GAO-03-143 (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 22, 2002). A numerical goal does not 

have to be a number, but could be qualitative, such as “above average.” 

27IRS has set numerical taxpayer satisfaction goals for other areas of strategic 

importance, such as achieving an ASCI score of 72 for individual income tax filers’ 

experience with paper and electronic filing in fiscal year 2013. 

IRS Does Not Have a LongTerm Measurable Goal for 

Taxpayer Satisfaction with 

Its Website

Business Cases for New 

Interactive Tools Are 

Missing Useful Information 

and Are Not Being Used to 

Set Priorities
 

Page 21 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

next 2 years. However, the documentation is not clear as to how many 

phases will be needed for each tool until it is complete.

Table 3: New and Planned Self Service Tools Fiscal Years 2013 and 2014

Online interactive tool Description

Implementation in fiscal year 2013

Where’s My Refund (2013) Improves taxpayers ability to check refund status across the filing process

Taxpayer Protection Unit with Out of Wallet 

Authentication

Enables online authentication of taxpayers who have been identified as 

potential fraud victims

Offer in Compromise Pre-qualifier Assists taxpayers in determining eligibility for offers in compromise

Where’s My Amended Return Allows taxpayers the ability to check the status of 1040-X Amended returns

Projected implementation in fiscal year 2014

Automated Clearing House Debit Allows taxpayers to electronically debit fund from bank accounts

e-Transcripts View and Print Enables taxpayers to view and print their tax transcript online

Online Payment Agreement Enhancements Improves the usability of existing online installment agreement tool

Direct Authorization of Power of Attorney Allows individuals with power of attorney to request transcripts

Source: IRS Online Strategy (September 2012). 

Note: The Fiscal Year 2014 President’s Budget for IRS, which was released on April 10, 2013, 

requests funding for e-Transcripts View and Print, Online Payment Agreement Enhancements, and 

Direct Authorization of Power of Attorney. 

IRS provided us with business cases for some of its new interactive tools, 

but these cases lacked enough information about benefits and costs to be 

useful for setting priorities—either across potential investments IRS-wide 

(both web related and non-web related) or across potential interactive tool 

investments.28 Benefits were often described on a per taxpayer basis 

without any indication of how many taxpayers might be expected to use a 

tool. In some cases descriptions about potential benefits were 

inconsistent across documents. For example, for the Automated Clearing 

House Debit tool, one document states that the tool will provide a free 

payment option for taxpayers, but benefits such as this are not listed in 

another document. Another document describing the features of the 

e-Transcripts View and Print tool states taxpayers will be able to export 

data to Excel, but this is not mentioned in the business case. Costs were 

also not listed consistently. In some cases costs were provided for one 

year, in others for multiple years. Some estimates covered only 

 

28The depth and rigor of a benefit cost analysis should depend on the magnitude of the 

project and where the agency is in the planning process. 
 

Page 22 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

developmental costs; others covered operating costs as well. In no case 

was there any link to overall costs for website modernization, including to 

the $320 million dollars mentioned above for upgrading website 

infrastructure. Consequently, it is not clear what the overall costs 

including infrastructure and tool development will be. Furthermore, it was 

not clear from the business cases if the costs were for the first or later 

phases. Because of these inconsistencies and other issues about the 

benefits and costs, we are not listing in this report any of the estimates we 

found in the IRS documentation.

IRS is not prioritizing which interactive tools it will develop based on 

benefits and costs. There are two reasons for this. First, as just 

mentioned, basic information about benefits and costs is not provided or 

is inconsistent. Second, IRS established priorities before developing the 

full set of business cases. For example, IRS originally planned to 

implement all of the tools in table 3 in 2013, but by mid-March officials 

had provided us with business cases for moving forward with only four of 

the tools. According to the Director of OLS, the eight new interactive tools 

listed in the September 2012 IRS Online Strategy were a “wish list” for 

fiscal year 2013, and not all of them had been approved for development 

at the time the strategy was developed.29

The IRS Online Strategy shows OLS prioritizes the implementation of 

new interactive tools based on projected impact (improving taxpayer 

service; reducing use of other high costs services such as telephone; and 

increasing collection revenue) and ease of implementation (technical, 

organizational, dependence on other IRS projects, and risks). However, it 

is unclear whether IRS followed this prioritization methodology. For 

example, the Online Payment Agreement tool was rated the highest 

priority of all new tools scheduled for implementation in fiscal years 2012 

to 2014 based on projected impact and ease of implementation. However, 

the business case was in draft form as of March 2013, and 

implementation is now scheduled for fiscal year 2014. OLS officials stated 

that they must work with multiple IRS divisions and management to 

prioritize new information technology (IT) demands, while balancing 

 

29As of the end of February 2013, IRS revised its time frames to only implement in fiscal 

year 2013 the four interactive tools for which business cases existed. As of mid-March IRS 

provided three additional draft business cases for the projects to be implemented in fiscal 

year 2014. IRS officials are in the process of developing the business case for the last 

tool.
 

Page 23 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

among investing in new systems, maintaining existing systems, and 

operating a large technology infrastructure. However, situations where 

multiple proposed investment projects have to compete with each other 

for limited funds are exactly when using business cases to rank projects 

can be useful.30

OMB’s Circular A-94 provides guidance to agencies on how to develop 

benefit and cost data. This guidance suggests that analyses be used to 

support decisions to initiate, renew, or expand programs or projects which 

would result in measureable benefits or costs. Without business cases 

that explicitly outline the benefit cost analysis for proposed interactive 

tools, it will be difficult for IRS to know which additional services would 

benefit taxpayers the most and the costs of those services.31 Our previous 

work has shown that results of benefit cost analyses help agencies 

decide which new projects to start in a manner that maximizes the 

benefits derived from agency resources.32

New online services go through IRS processes to assess security before 

being released for taxpayer use. While IRS has upgraded its capabilities 

to authenticate taxpayers’ identities, it is missing some of the capabilities 

needed to ensure the security of either new, basic interactive tools, or 

dynamic account access. While investments in security upgrades are 

underway, they are not linked to long-term plans that describe security 

needs.

IRS has processes in place to identify and assess information security 

risks for its new interactive tools in accordance with NIST guidance. 

However, for the two interactive tools we reviewed, the implementation 

was inconsistent. IRS uses a detailed methodology for conducting 

information security risk assessments, which consider internal and 

 

30GAO, IRS Guidance on Economic Analysis in Investment Business Cases, 

GAO-02-234R (Washington, D.C.: May 9, 2002).

31The depth and rigor of a benefit cost analysis should depend on the magnitude of the 

project and where the agency is in the planning process. 

32GAO, Tax Gap: IRS Could Significantly Increase Revenues by Better Targeting 

Enforcement Resources, GAO-13-151 (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 5, 2012).

IRS’s Current Security 

Capabilities Limit Its 

Ability to Increase 

Interactive Web Services, 

and Investments in 

Security Upgrades Are Not 

Clearly Linked to a LongTerm Plan

IRS’s Security Risk Assessment 

Process Is Not Consistently 

Followed When Implementing 

Interactive Tools 
 

Page 24 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

external threats to the confidentiality and integrity of the tools and data.33

The methodology also requires IRS to develop a mitigation plan to reduce 

or eliminate the risks identified.

IRS followed its methodology for conducting the risk assessment for the 

Send My Transcripts to Banks tool, which allows taxpayers to request a 

transcript be sent to their bank for income verification when applying for a 

mortgage. The risk assessment included key elements such as threat and 

vulnerability identification. The risks were also documented in a mitigation 

plan, which included the resources required to address the risk and the 

timeframe for completion.

IRS did not follow its risk assessment methodology for First Time 

Homebuyer Credit tool, which allows taxpayers to determine if they have 

a repayment requirement and a remaining balance on the credit. The risk 

assessment documentation included some key elements, such as 

identification of risks to the tool and recommendations to mitigate those 

risks. However, all five identified risks were not included in the mitigation 

plan. After we informed IRS of this error, the Director of Applications 

Development Customer Service Domain acknowledged that the identified 

risks were not included and immediately took steps to address four of the 

five. IRS plans to address the other risk by June 2013. IRS did not 

indicate why this oversight occurred, but the fact that it did occur raises 

questions about the reliability of the risk assessment process for its other 

six interactive tools. Reviewing mitigation plans for other interactive tools 

to help ensure that all risks are included could provide IRS with 

reasonable assurance that it is addressing those risks, and that its 

processes are reliable.

 

33Threat and vulnerability identification is the process of identifying (1) threats (both 

internal and external) to the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of systems and data 

supporting critical operations and assets and (2) vulnerabilities (i.e., flaws or weaknesses) 

that could be exploited by such threats.
 

Page 25 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

As of March 2013, IRS does not have the capability to authenticate a 

taxpayer’s identity with the level of security required for dynamic account 

access. e-Authentication is the process of establishing confidence in the 

taxpayer’s identity electronically over the Internet for the purpose of 

electronic government and commerce. NIST provides e-Authentication 

standards.34 IRS plans to verify taxpayers’ identities by confirming various 

elements of their identity with either IRS or third party databases (see 

table 4).

Table 4: IRS e-Authentication Procedures and Identity Elements Required 

Level of 

authentication 

based on

NIST guidancea e-Authentication procedure Identity elements required

Source of

confirmation data

Level 1 Credential not required User name and password not required. N/A

Level 2

Single factor identity validation User name and password required, and taxpayer 

must be able to provide taxpayer’s name, Social 

Security Number, date of birth, address, and filing 

status.

IRS databases

Knowledge based 

authentication (out of wallet)

User name and password required, and taxpayer 

must answer some personal knowledge based 

questions, such as previous known address, name 

of mortgage lender, or prior telephone number.

IRS databases

Third party information 

(e.g. credit bureaus)

Financial/ utility information 

validation

User name and password required, and taxpayer 

must confirm a financial or utility account number.

IRS databases

Third party information 

(e.g. financial institutions 

or utility companies)

Level 3 Multi-factor identity validation User name and password required, and taxpayer is 

mailed a one-time password though U.S. Postal 

Service which is needed to complete registration 

process.

IRS databases

Third party information 

(e.g. financial institutions 

or utility companies)

Level 4 In person Taxpayer must be authenticated in person. N/A

Source: GAO analysis of IRS information.

Note: N/A means not applicable.

a

NIST Special Publication 800-63-1.

 

34NIST Special Publication 800-63-1 provides technical guidance to agencies to allow an 

individual to remotely authenticate his or her identity to a federal information technology 

system. 

IRS Has Taken Some Steps to 

Upgrade Its Capability to 

Authenticate Taxpayers’ 

Identities, but Additional Steps 

Are Required to Provide 

Dynamic Account Access 
 

Page 26 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

In August 2012, IRS implemented the first stage of a Level 2 

authentication procedure—single factor identity validation.35 By the end of 

2013, IRS IT officials expect to rollout the remaining stages of the Level 2 

authentication plus Level 3. Level 3 would provide IRS with the highest 

level of confidence that the taxpayer is in fact the person attempting 

authentication, without the need for in-person verification. According to 

IRS officials, at Level 3 the security processes would be in place to allow 

for the possibility of dynamic account access for taxpayers.

The IRS Online Strategy does not describe how security issues, including 

how investing in security upgrades, such as the e-Authentication 

procedures, will fit into an overall plan for improving the interactivity of 

IRS’s website. IRS’s investment in security upgrades have been a 

multiyear effort and required resources from several offices to meet 

federal requirements. For example, in 2010, IRS started upgrading 

security because it had outdated technology, and federal guidance 

required secure access to account information.36 Officials in the IRS 

offices of Privacy, Cybersecurity, Online Services, and others had to 

coordinate many aspects of the security upgrades, including determining 

what information would be used to confirm taxpayers’ identities. IT 

officials stated that more interactive tools will use the e-Authentication 

procedure in the future and that officials plan to transfer older interactive 

tools to the new procedures as well.37

Upgrading IRS’s systems is an important and required step to ensure IRS 

provides a secure environment for taxpayers to interact with IRS, and to 

ultimately offer dynamic account access. GPRA Modernization Act of 

2010 and OMB Circular A-94 guidance suggests that agencies should 

include information on benefits and costs of security investments in their 

strategic plans to ensure IRS managers have the most relevant available 

 

35According to IT officials, the Send My Transcript to Banks tool, which allows taxpayers 

to send a copy of their transcript to a bank of vendor of a financial institution, is the only 

interactive tool using the Level 2 authentication. Static web pages are considered to have 

Level 1 authentication. 

36According to NIST Special Publication 800-63 and OMB Circular 04-04, federal 

agencies are required to develop security features that allow people to access information 

based on the level of risk associated with information being accessed.

37Some of the future interactive tools that would require e-authentication include the 

Online Payment Agreement and Automated Clearing House Debit tools. 

IRS Investments in Upgrading 

Security and Developing 

Authentication Capabilities Are 

Not Linked to a Long-Term 

Plan
 

Page 27 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

information on which to base critical investment decisions.38 OLS officials 

did not state why security investments were not included in the IRS 

Online Strategy. However, linking security investments to the strategic 

plan helps to align activities, core processes, and resources to support 

the mission.

IRS provides online services to millions of taxpayers and is engaged in a 

multi-year effort to improve its website. Since 2011 when OLS was 

created, it has focused on improving IRS’s static web pages, realizing 

short-term gains by developing new basic interactive tools, and building 

an infrastructure foundation for future improvements. These efforts have 

already benefited taxpayers and hold the promise of additional benefits in 

the future.

However, IRS does not have a long-term strategy for enhancing its 

website. While IRS has a large amount of documentation for its ongoing 

website improvement efforts, we could not piece together a clear 

understanding of the intended benefits to be provided to website users, 

when those benefits would be realized, how IRS would accomplish its 

goals, or what it would cost. A strategy is necessarily at a high level 

without many details, but ensuring it contains enough information could 

help managers throughout IRS have a common understanding of the 

strategy, better assist Congress in understanding what it is being asked to 

fund and holding IRS accountable for progress over time.

We identified several areas where improvements could help develop a 

long-term strategic plan. One area is measuring performance, where IRS 

has not finalized a full suite of metrics. Another area is learning from other 

organizations, and IRS has not made use of them to inform strategic 

decision making. IRS also has not set a measureable goal for improving 

taxpayer satisfaction, nor consistently developed business cases based 

on benefit and costs or used business cases to set priorities. Finally, IRS 

has not ensured that all risks are mitigated and security investments are 

linked to a long-term plan. Improvements in all of these areas would help 

IRS develop a strategic plan that would provide the information that 

 

38GPRA Modernization Act of 2010, Pub. L. No. 111-352, 124 Stat. 3866 (Jan. 4, 2011),

OMB Circular A-94, and GAO-02-234R. 

Conclusions 
 

Page 28 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

managers and Congress need for improving website services to 

taxpayers.

The Acting Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service should direct 

appropriate officials to develop a long-term strategy to improve web 

services provided to taxpayers, in accordance with Howto.gov and other 

federal guidance outlined in our report. To accomplish this, we further 

recommend that IRS take the following six actions.

• Decide on a complete suite of performance metrics, as soon as 

practical.

• Study leading practices of other organizations to understand how web 

improvement strategies were developed and new services prioritized.

• Establish a numerical or other measureable goal to improve taxpayer 

satisfaction and a timeframe for achieving it.

• Develop business cases for all new online services, describing the 

potential benefits and costs of the project, and use them to prioritize 

future projects.

• Review risk mitigations plans for interactive tools to ensure all risks 

are addressed. If risks are not addressed, IRS should take corrective 

action and identify the root cause to help prevent similar occurrences 

in future mitigation plans.

• Link investments in security to the long-term plan.

We provided a draft of this report to the Acting Commissioner of the IRS. 

In written comments, which are reprinted in app. IV, the Acting 

Commissioner agreed with four of the seven recommendations, did not 

state agreement or disagreement with two, and partially agreed with one. 

IRS also provided technical comments on our draft report, which we 

incorporated as appropriate. 

Specifically, IRS stated that it agreed with deciding on a complete suite of 

performance metrics, studying leading practices of other organizations to 

understand how web improvement strategies were developed and new 

services priorities, reviewing risk mitigation plans for interactive tools to 

ensure all risks are addressed, and linking investments in security to the 

long-term plan. 

Recommendations for 

Executive Action

Agency Comments 

and Our Evaluation
 

Page 29 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

IRS did not state whether it agreed with the recommendation to develop a 

long-term strategy in accordance with federal guidance. Rather, IRS 

stated it has a long-term strategy to improve online services and would 

make improvements to the plan as appropriate. Thus, it is not clear to 

what extent IRS’s actions will fully address the intent of this 

recommendation. As we note throughout the report, we were unable to 

identify a number of fundamental elements for a website strategy, as

described on www.Howto.gov in the documentation IRS provided us. 

Thus, we continue to believe that a strategy should be developed that 

includes these elements. Without a strategy that clearly outlines the 

elements described in this report and provides an overall picture of what 

IRS is investing in, it will be difficult for Congress and other decision 

makers to understand up front what they are funding and what benefits 

they can expect. 

IRS also did not state whether it agreed with the recommendation to 

establish a numerical or other measureable goal to improve taxpayer 

satisfaction and a timeframe for achieving it. IRS stated it recognized the 

need for setting specific goals for taxpayer satisfaction, but that a high 

satisfaction score by itself is not necessarily as meaningful as other 

measures, such as reviewing satisfaction scores with responses to open 

ended questions. IRS reported it will consider defining a set of 

measurable goals that demonstrates taxpayer satisfaction. As discussed 

in this report, we acknowledge that reviewing other measures of 

satisfaction and examining trends in the data have merit, but without 

setting a numerical or other measureable goal IRS will have difficulty 

determining whether its long-term taxpayer satisfaction plan is successful. 

IRS stated that it partially agreed with the recommendation to develop 

business cases for all new online services. Specifically, IRS stated that it 

will continue to develop business cases, including potential benefits and 

costs, for all new online services and use them to help prioritize future 

projects. However, IRS stated that it will also need to consider additional 

criteria, such as risk, time-to-market (i.e., how quickly projects can be 

developed), and the ability for stakeholder organizations to incorporate 

the project into existing systems or processes. As noted in the report, 

these additional criteria are part of the same criteria IRS reported already 

using to set priorities for implementing new tools. However, as we also

note in the report, it was unclear whether IRS used this prioritization 

methodology and the benefit and cost information in the business cases 

lacked enough information to be useful for setting priorities. Thus, it is 

unclear whether IRS’s actions will fully meet the intent of the 

recommendation. 
 

Page 30 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

We plan to send copies to the Chairmen and Ranking Members of other 

Senate and House committees and subcommittees that have 

appropriation, authorization, and oversight responsibilities for IRS. We will 

also send copies to the Acting Commissioner of Internal Revenue, the 

Secretary of the Treasury, the Chairman of the IRS Oversight Board, and 

the Deputy Director for Management of the Office of Management and 

Budget. In addition, the report will be available at no charge on the GAO 

website at http://www.gao.gov. 

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact 

me at (202) 512-9110 or whitej@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices 

of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last 

page of this report. GAO staff who made key contributions to this report 

are listed in appendix V.

Sincerely yours,

James R. White

Director, Tax Issues

Strategic Issues
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 31 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

We were asked to review the interactivity of the Internal Revenue 

Service’s (IRS) website. This report (1) describes the interactivity of IRS’s 

online services and assesses how IRS measures use of the services, (2) 

describes taxpayers’ satisfaction with these services, and (3) assesses 

IRS’s strategy for expanding the interactivity of its website, including how 

it learns from other organizations, sets goals for taxpayer satisfaction for 

its website, prioritizes the development of new services, and addresses 

security risks.

To describe the interactivity of IRS’s online services and assess how IRS 

measures use of the services, we:

• reviewed IRS.gov to compile a list of all interactive tools available to 

individual taxpayers as of March 2013. We also interviewed Office of 

Online Services (OLS) officials and reviewed supplemental 

documentation they provided on their tools to complete our list. For 

each tool, we obtained information on its purpose, information 

requirements for use, and determined whether it was a secure or nonsecure interactive tool.

• reviewed two federal websites that had dynamic account access 

available to users, Social Security Administration’s and Medicare’s 

websites. We also cited examples used in prior reports on the tax 

agencies of New York, California, and Finland’s websites that also 

provide dynamic account access to users.

• reviewed IRS’s performance metrics for the website and compared 

them against criteria established by Howto.gov, a leading source for 

guidance and best practices for government websites. We also 

interviewed officials to determine their plans to track additional 

performance measures as recommended by Howto.gov

To describe taxpayer satisfaction with IRS’s online services, we:

• reviewed IRS’s American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) scores 

as gathered by ForeSee via optional online surveys and compared 

IRS’s average annual scores from 2005 to 2012 to the average scores 

of (1) approximately 30 other federal agencies and (2) private 

organizations with transactions similar to IRS including in the Internet 

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology 
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 32 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

brokerage, Internet retail, and banks sectors.1 Both the federal 

agencies and private organizations used ACSI to measure overall 

customer satisfaction with their websites.

To assess IRS’s strategy for expanding the interactivity of its website, 

including how it learns from other organizations, sets goals for taxpayer 

satisfaction for its website, prioritizes the development of new services, 

and addresses security risks, we:

• analyzed the September 2012 IRS Online Strategy and updates to the 

strategy provided March 19, 2013 and compared them to federal 

guidance. 

• identified and reviewed documentation on outreach OLS conducted 

with other organizations to learn about leading practices when 

implementing interactive tools, such as attending a presentation from 

the New York State Department of Taxation and Finance. We 

compared the steps IRS takes to conduct outreach to OLS’s product 

management process and other federal guidance, such as Executive 

Order 13571: Streamlining Service Delivery and Improving Customer 

Service, OMB M-11-24: Implementing Executive Order 13571 on 

Streamlining Service Delivery and Improving Customer Service, and 

Howto.gov, to determine if there are any deficiencies.

• interviewed OLS officials to determine what goals IRS plans to set for 

customer satisfaction on IRS.gov and how officials planned to achieve 

those goals. 

• assessed how IRS prioritized new interactive tools for implementation, 

by comparing the time frames listed in the IRS Online Strategy to 

actual implementation dates of the interactive tools. We reviewed 

business cases for new tools scheduled to be implemented in fiscal 

year 2013, outlined in the September 2012 IRS Online Strategy. We 

asked for business cases for all new tools that were shown to be 

implemented in fiscal year 2013. We reviewed the business cases for

the interactive tools, Where’s My Refund? (2013), Taxpayer 

Protection Unit with Out of Wallet Authentication, Offer in Compromise

Pre-qualifer, and Where’s My Amended Return? We compared the 

 

1

IRS uses ForeSee, a company that uses customer experience analytics to continuously 

measure satisfaction and provide insights to clients to administer the ACSI optional pop up 

survey to users on IRS.gov.
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 33 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

business cases to benefit cost criteria, including OMB’s Circular A-94: 

Guidelines and Discount Rates for Benefit-Cost Analysis of Federal 

Programs. We interviewed OLS officials about the prioritization 

process and the listed time frames for implementation of new 

interactive tools.

• reviewed IRS’s security risk assessments for two interactive tools and 

IRS’s risk mitigation plans used to overcome security challenges it 

identified in the security risk assessments. We selected the First Time 

Homebuyer Credit and Send My Transcripts to Banks tools, because 

they were the most recently implemented interactive tools for fiscal 

year 2012.

• reviewed IRS’s recently implemented and planned e-Authentication 

procedures and compared them to National Institute of Standards and 

Technology (NIST) Electronic Authentication Guideline, Special 

Publication 800-63-1 and OMB’s E-Authentication Guidance for 

Federal Agencies (OMB M-04-04).

For all objectives we interviewed relevant IRS officials to collect 

information on IRS’s online services and its plans to implement additional 

online services in the future. We reviewed documents and interviewed 

ACSI officials to determine that the ACSI data presented in our report for 

years 2005 to 2012 were sufficiently reliable for our purposes. We 

conducted our work primarily at IRS’s National Office where relevant IRS 

staffs are located.

We conducted this performance audit from June 2012 to April 2013 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

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

sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 

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

the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and 

conclusions based on our audit objectives. 
Appendix II: IRS’s Basic Interactive Tools

Page 34 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

As of March 2013, IRS’s website highlighted the following 18 basic 

interactive tools from its homepage. Table 5 describes the interactive 

tools, if the tool was secure or not, and the types of personal information 

required to use the tool.

Table 5: Interactive Tools for Taxpayers Available on IRS.gov as of March, 2013

Name of tool Description

Secure 

tool 

(Y/N) Personal information required

1 Order A Transcript Allows taxpayers to order a transcript to be sent to their 

address on record (the taxpayer will not be able to view 

the transcript online).

Y Social Security number (SSN), 

date of birth (DOB), address, ZIP 

code

2 Where’s My Refund? Allows taxpayers to check the status of their refund. Y SSN, filing status, refund amount

3 Online Payment 

Agreement

Allows taxpayers or their authorized representatives to 

apply for installment agreements if taxes are unable to 

be paid in full.

Y SSN, DOB, personal identification 

number (PIN) or adjusted gross 

income, bank address, employer 

address, estimated repayment 

amount, and time

4 Electronic Filing PIN 

Request

Allows taxpayers to request an electronic filing PIN to 

verify their identity to e-file tax returns and other 

electronic tax documents.

Y SSN, name, DOB, filing status, 

address on prior year tax return

5 First Time Homebuyer 

Credit Account Look-up

Allows taxpayers to get information such as the total 

amount of the credit or repayment amount.

Y SSN, DOB, address, ZIP code

6 Send My Transcript to 

Banksa Allows taxpayers to order a transcript to be sent to their 

bank or vendor (the taxpayer will not be able to view the 

transcript online).

Y SSN, tax year, bank information

7 Where’s My Amended 

Return? 

Tracks the status of a taxpayer’s amended return after it 

was filed with the IRS.

Y SSN, DOB, and ZIP code

8 IRS Withholding 

Calculator

Helps taxpayers determine whether they should submit 

a new Form W-4 to their employer to avoid having too 

much or too little tax withheld from their pay.

N Filing status, credits, income and 

withholding, adjustments, 

deductions

9 Authorized e-File 

Provider (For 

Individuals)

Allows taxpayers to search for nearby authorized e-file 

providers to electronically file their tax return.

N ZIP code

10 Volunteer Income Tax 

Assistance (VITA) Site 

Locator

Allows taxpayers who generally make $50,000 or less

to find free assistance in preparing their own tax 

returns. It also includes Association of American Retired 

Persons Tax Aide locator. 

N ZIP code

11 Taxpayer Assistance 

Center Locator

Allows taxpayers to find a walk-in Taxpayer Assistance 

Center to get help with questions that cannot be 

handled by phone.

N ZIP code

12 Earned Income Tax 

Credit (EITC) Assistant

Helps taxpayers determine whether they are eligible for 

the EITC and estimate the amount of the credit through 

a series of questions (Spanish version available).

N General information to determine 

eligibility 

13 Alternative Minimum 

Tax (AMT) Assistant

Helps taxpayers determine whether they are subject to 

the AMT through a series of questions.

N General information to determine 

eligibility from past Form 1040

Appendix II: IRS’s Basic Interactive Tools
Appendix II: IRS’s Basic Interactive Tools

Page 35 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

Name of tool Description

Secure 

tool 

(Y/N) Personal information required

14 Sales Tax Deduction 

Calculator

Helps taxpayers determine the amount of optional state 

and local sales tax they can claim on Schedule A of 

Form 1040.

N Answers to general questions to 

determine deduction estimate 

based on income and residency

15 Exempt Organizations 

Select Check

Allows taxpayers to find an exempt organization and 

determine the amount of their contributions that are tax 

deductible as well as other information on an 

organization’s federal tax status and filings.

N Database search based on 

organization’s employer 

identification number (EIN), name, 

and address

16 Interactive Tax Assistant Provides taxpayers with a resource for tax law and 

provides responses to tax law questions. Categories 

covered are credits, deductions, general filing 

questions, and income.

N Answers to general questions to 

provide personalized answers 

17 Tax Trails Provides taxpayers with answers to many common tax 

questions, such as deductions and exemptions, tax 

credits, taxable income, and other topics.

N General and some personalized 

information to provide answers to 

questionnaires 

18 Subscription Services 

(IRS E-mail Services)

Allows taxpayers to sign up for one or more of IRS’s 

subscription e-mail services to receive tax-related news.

N Email address

Source: GAO analysis of IRS.gov. 

Note: This table primarily focuses on tools provided for individual taxpayer uses, but other taxpayers, 

such as businesses or exempt organizations, could use some of these interactive tools as well.

a

OLS started a pilot program for the Send My Transcript to Banks tool at the end of 2012, but as of 

March 2013 it has not been rolled out to the public.
Appendix III: IRS’s Component Scores for 

Customer Satisfaction

Page 36 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

IRS tracks additional customer service performance metrics using the 

American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI). According to Office of 

Online Services officials, the component scores for customer satisfaction 

are considered valuable since they provide more insights to customers’ 

experiences.

Table 6: IRS’s ACSI Scores for Website Elements

Elements of Customer Satisfaction 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Search 

The relevance, organization, and quality of search results 

available on the site. (Although this element is not 

applicable universally, it is often extremely impactful for 

sites where it is relevant.) 69 72 73 73 71 69 69 68

Functionality

The usefulness, convenience, and variety of online 

features and tools available on the website. 73 76 77 74 75 75 76 74

Online transparency

How thoroughly, quickly, and accessibly the website 

discloses information about what the agency is doing. N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 75 73

Navigation

The organization of the site and options for navigation. 67 71 72 72 71 69 69 68

Look and feel

The visual appeal of the site and its consistency 

throughout the site. 73 76 77 77 77 75 76 76

Content

The accuracy, quality and relevancy of news, information 

and content on the website. 78 80 81 78 80 79 80 77

Site performance

The speed, consistency, and reliability of loading pages 

on the website. 80 82 83 82 83 83 84 82

Primary resource

Likelihood to use website as primary resource for tax 

information? 74 77 78 76 78 77 77 75

Recommend

Likelihood to recommend website to someone else? 78 81 82 80 81 81 80 77

Return

Likelihood to return to the website? 82 85 86 83 86 86 86 84

Source: IRS data from ForeSee’s ACSI survey results.

Note: ACSI survey results are subject to the limitations of a convenience sampling methodology. We 

did not independently verify IRS’s scores. Individual components scores do not necessarily sum to 

the final score because only three questions are used to determine the overall customer satisfaction 

score. The three questions are “What is your overall satisfaction with this site?”; “How well does this 

site meet your expectations?”; and “How does this site compare to your idea of an ideal website?” 

N/A: Data are not available for those years.

Appendix III: IRS’s Component Scores for 

Customer Satisfaction
Appendix IV: Comments from the Department 

of Treasury

Page 37 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

Appendix IV: Comments from the 

Department of Treasury
Appendix IV: Comments from the Department 

of Treasury

Page 38 GAO-13-435 IRS Website
Appendix IV: Comments from the Department 

of Treasury

Page 39 GAO-13-435 IRS Website
Appendix IV: Comments from the Department 

of Treasury

Page 40 GAO-13-435 IRS Website
Appendix IV: Comments from the Department 

of Treasury

Page 41 GAO-13-435 IRS Website
Appendix V: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgment

Page 42 GAO-13-435 IRS Website

James R. White, (202) 512-9110, or Whitej@gao.gov

In addition to the contact named above, Libby Mixon, Assistant Director; 

Amy Bowser, Emily Gruenwald, Nicole Jarvis, Jeffrey Knott, Ed 

Nannenhorn, Cynthia Saunders, and Robyn Trotter made key 

contributions to this report.

Appendix V: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgment 

GAO Contact:

Staff 

Acknowledgments: 

(450999)
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and 

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

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and 

policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance 

to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. 

GAO’s commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability.

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

cost is through GAO’s website (http://www.gao.gov). Each weekday 

afternoon, GAO posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, 

and correspondence. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted 

products, go to http://www.gao.gov and select “E-mail Updates.”

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of 

production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the 

publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and 

white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s website, 

http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 

TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, 

MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information.

Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and YouTube. 

Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E-mail Updates. Listen to our Podcasts. 

Visit GAO on the web at www.gao.gov. 

Contact:

Website: http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

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

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512-

4400, U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 

7125, Washington, DC 20548

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800

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

Washington, DC 20548

GAO’s Mission

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony 

Order by Phone

Connect with GAO

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs

Please Print on Recycled Paper.