INFORMATION 

TECHNOLOGY

OMB and Agencies Need to 

Focus Continued Attention 

on Eliminating Duplicative 

Investments

Statement of David A. Powner, Director 

Information Technology Management Issues

Testimony

Before the Committee on Homeland 

Security and Governmental Affairs, 

U.S. Senate

For Release on Delivery

Expected at 10:30 a.m. EDT

Tuesday, June 11, 2013

GAO-13-685T

United States Government Accountability Office
United States Government Accountability Office

Highlights of GAO-13-685T, a testimony 

before the Committee on Homeland Security 

and Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate 

June 2013 

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

OMB and Agencies Need to Focus Continued 

Attention on Eliminating Duplicative Investments

Why GAO Did This Study

With the federal government poised to 

reportedly spend at least $82 billion on 

IT in fiscal year 2014, the magnitude of 

these expenditures highlights the 

importance of avoiding duplicative 

investments to ensure the most 

efficient use of resources. In a series of 

reports over the last few years, GAO 

has identified federal programs or 

functional areas where unnecessary 

duplication, overlap, or fragmentation 

exists. In particular, GAO has identified 

opportunities to reduce duplication and 

the cost of government operations in 

critical areas, such as federal data 

centers and IT investment 

management. 

To help address IT duplication, OMB 

launched the PortfolioStat initiative. As 

part of this initiative, agencies are 

required to conduct an annual review 

of their IT investments and make 

decisions on eliminating duplication, 

among other things. 

GAO was asked to testify on the

results and recommendations from its

selected reports that focused on IT 

duplication. To prepare this statement, 

GAO relied on previously published 

work.

What GAO Recommends

GAO has issued numerous 

recommendations to OMB and 

selected agencies to utilize existing 

transparency mechanisms and report 

the steps taken to avoid making 

duplicative investments.

What GAO Found

GAO has identified a number of issues related to information technology (IT) 

duplication across the federal government. For example, GAO has previously 

reported that hundreds of investments provide similar functions. Specifically, 

agencies reported 1,536 information and technology management investments, 

777 supply chain management investments, and 622 human resource 

management investments (see table). 

Number of IT Investments Governmentwide by Primary Function

Selected category of investment

Number of

investments

Expenditures 

($ in millions)

Information and technology management 1,536 $35,476 

Supply chain management 777 3,327

Human resource management 622 2,406

Source: GAO analysis of the Office of Management and Budget’s IT Dashboard, exhibit 53 data as of July 2011.

GAO further reported that while the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 

and federal agencies have undertaken several initiatives to address potentially 

duplicative IT investments, such as consolidating similar functions through “line 

of business” initiatives, most of OMB’s recent initiatives had not yet demonstrated 

results. Further, agencies were not routinely assessing operational systems to 

determine if they were duplicative. GAO recommended that OMB require federal 

agencies to report the steps they were taking to ensure that their IT investments 

were not duplicative as part of their annual budget and IT investment 

submissions. OMB agreed with the recommendation.

In addition, GAO reported on potentially duplicative investments at selected 

federal agencies. More specifically, although the Departments of Defense and 

Energy used various investment review processes to identify duplicative 

investments, GAO found that 37 of its sample of 810 investments were 

potentially duplicative. These investments accounted for about $1.2 billion in total 

IT spending for fiscal years 2007 through 2012. For example, GAO identified four 

Department of the Navy personnel assignment investments—one system for 

officers, one for enlisted personnel, one for reservists, and a general assignment 

system—each of which is responsible for managing similar functions. GAO 

recommended that the agencies report on the progress of efforts to identify and 

eliminate duplication, where appropriate; the agencies agreed with the 

recommendations.

In part to address duplicative IT investments, in March 2012 OMB launched 

PortfolioStat. Specifically, PortfolioStat is designed to assist agencies in 

assessing the current maturity of their IT portfolio management process, making

decisions on eliminating duplication, and moving to shared solutions in order to 

maximize the return on IT investments across the portfolio. In March 2013, OMB 

reported that through this effort, agencies had identified and committed to nearly 

100 opportunities to consolidate or eliminate commodity IT investments. OMB 

also believes that PortfolioStat may save the government $2.5 billion by 2015.

GAO has ongoing work looking at PortfolioStat, including determining whether 

agencies are completing key actions. View GAO-13-685T. For more information, 

contact David A. Powner at (202) 512-9286 or 

pownerd@gao.gov. 
Page 1 GAO-13-685T 

441 G St. N.W.

Washington, DC 20548

Chairman Carper, Ranking Member Coburn, and Members of the 

Committee:

I am pleased to be here today to discuss duplicative information 

technology (IT) investments and the Office of Management and Budget’s 

(OMB) PortfolioStat initiative. As reported to OMB, federal agencies plan 

to spend at least $82 billion on IT in fiscal year 2014. Given the scale of 

such planned outlays, it is important that federal agencies avoid 

duplicative investments, whenever possible, to ensure the most efficient 

use of resources.

Over the past few years, we have issued a series of reports that have 

identified federal programs or functional areas where unnecessary 

duplication, overlap, or fragmentation exists; the actions needed to 

address such conditions; and the potential financial and other benefits of 

doing so.1

To help address IT duplication, in March 2012 OMB launched 

PortfolioStat, which requires agencies to conduct annual reviews of their 

IT investments and make decisions on eliminating duplication, among

other things. According to OMB, PortfolioStat has the potential to save the 

government $2.5 billion over the next 3 years.

In particular, we identified opportunities to reduce duplication

and the cost of government operations in several critical IT areas, 

including avoiding investing in duplicative and unnecessary systems and 

underutilized federal data centers. 

You asked us to testify on the results and recommendations from our 

selected reports that focused on IT duplication.

2

 

1

GAO, 2013 Annual Report: Actions Needed to Reduce Fragmentation, Overlap and 

Duplication, and Achieve Other Financial Benefits, 

Accordingly, my 

testimony specifically discusses our past work reporting on duplication, 

GAO-13-279SP (Washington, D.C.: 

Apr. 9, 2013); 2012 Annual Report: Opportunities to Reduce Duplication, Overlap and 

Fragmentation, Achieve Savings, and Enhance Revenue, GAO-12-342SP (Washington, 

D.C.: Feb. 28, 2012); and Opportunities to Reduce Potential Duplication in Government 

Programs, Save Tax Dollars, and Enhance Revenue, GAO-11-318SP (Washington, D.C.: 

Mar. 1, 2011). 

2

GAO, Information Technology: Departments of Defense and Energy Need to Address 

Potentially Duplicative Investments, GAO-12-241 (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 17, 2012); and 

Information Technology: OMB Needs to Improve Its Guidance on IT Investments,

GAO-11-826 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 29, 2011).

 
 

Page 2 GAO-13-685T 

overlap, and fragmentation across the federal government and OMB’s 

efforts to identify and address potentially duplicative IT investments 

through PortfolioStat. All work on which this testimony is based was 

performed 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.

Information technology should enable government to better serve the 

American people. However, according to OMB, despite spending more

than $600 billion on IT over the past decade, the federal government has

achieved little of the productivity improvements that private industry has

realized from IT.3 Too often, federal IT projects run over budget, behind

schedule, or fail to deliver promised functionality. In combating this

problem, proper oversight is critical. Both OMB and federal agencies have

key roles and responsibilities for overseeing IT investment management.

OMB is responsible for working with agencies to ensure investments are

appropriately planned and justified. Additionally, each year, OMB and 

federal agencies work together to determine how much the government

plans to spend on IT projects and how these funds are to be allocated. As 

reported to OMB, federal agencies plan to spend more than $82 billion on 

IT investments in fiscal year 2014, which is the total expenditure for not 

only acquiring such investments, but also to operate and maintain them.

Over the past several years, we have reported that overlap and 

fragmentation among government programs or activities could be 

harbingers of unnecessary duplication.4

 

3

OMB, 25 Point Implementation Plan to Reform Federal Information Technology 

Management (Washington, D.C.: December 2010). 

Thus, the reduction or elimination 

of duplication, overlap, or fragmentation could potentially save billions of 

tax dollars annually and help agencies provide more efficient and 

effective services. Many of the government programs or activities with 

opportunities to reduce duplication and the cost of government operations

are related to critical IT areas, including the following: 

4

GAO-13-279SP, GAO-12-342SP, and GAO-11-318SP. 

Background

Opportunities to Reduce 

Duplication and Achieve 

Cost Savings Exist in 

Critical IT-related Areas
 

Page 3 GAO-13-685T 

• IT Dashboard. Given the importance of transparency, oversight, and 

management of the government’s IT investments, in June 2009 OMB 

established a public web site, referred to as the IT Dashboard, that 

provides detailed information on approximately 700 major IT

investments5 at 27 federal agencies, including ratings of their 

performance against cost and schedule targets. The public 

dissemination of this information is intended to allow OMB; other 

oversight bodies, including Congress; and the general public to hold 

agencies accountable for results and performance. As of August 

2012, 190 of the federal government’s approximately 700 major IT 

investments—totaling almost $12.5 billion—were in need of 

management attention.

• Federal data centers. As federal agencies have modernized their 

operations, put more of their services online, and increased their

information security profiles, they have demanded more computing 

power and data storage resources. According to OMB, the number of 

federal data centers grew from 432 in 1998 to more than 2,000 in 

2010. The growth in the number of federal data centers, many offering 

similar services and resources, has resulted in overlap and duplication 

among the centers. In addition, according to OMB, in August 2009 the

average utilization rate for servers ranged from 5 percent to 15 

percent.

• IT investment management. OMB and agencies need to address 

potentially duplicative IT investments to avoid investing in 

unnecessary systems. In fiscal year 2011, there were approximately 

7,200 reported investments (includes major and nonmajor 

investments) totaling at least $79 billion. The Department of Defense

(Defense) reported the largest number of IT investments (2,383 

investments at $37 billion), followed by the Department of Energy

(Energy) (876 investments and $2 billion).

 

5

According to OMB guidance, a major investment is a system or acquisition requiring 

special management attention because of its importance to the mission or function of the 

agency, a component of the agency, or another organization; is for financial management 

and obligates more than $500,000 annually; has significant program or policy implications; 

has high executive visibility; has high development, operating, or maintenance costs; is 

funded through other than direct appropriations; or is defined as major by the agency’s 

capital planning and investment control process. 
 

Page 4 GAO-13-685T 

• Geospatial investments. The federal government collects, maintains, 

and uses geospatial information—information linked to specific 

geographic locations6

—to help in decision making and to support 

many functions, including national security, law enforcement, health 

care, and environmental protection. Many activities, such as 

maintaining roads and responding to natural disasters—floods, 

hurricanes, and fires—can depend on critical analysis of geospatial 

information. Multiple federal agencies may provide services at the 

same geographic locations and may independently collect similar 

geospatial information about those locations. In August 2012, the 

Department of the Interior estimated that the federal government 

invests billions of dollars in geospatial data annually and reported that 

duplication among investments is common. Better coordination 

among these agencies could help reduce duplication of geospatial 

investments and provide the opportunity for potential savings of 

millions of dollars.

• Cloud computing. As an emerging approach to delivering IT services, 

cloud computing provides on-demand access to a shared pool of 

scalable computing resources. According to OMB, cloud computing 

has the potential to address IT inefficiencies by providing services 

both more quickly and at a lower cost. OMB further noted that IT 

services costing billions of dollars annually could potentially be 

migrated to cloud computing. Accordingly, agencies have reported 

saving millions of dollars from implementing cloud-based solutions. In 

particular, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) reported that 

its implementation of enterprise content delivery services avoids an 

estimated $5 million in costs annually.

• Enterprise architecture. An enterprise architecture is a modernization 

blueprint that is used by organizations to describe their current state 

and a desired future state and to leverage IT to transform business 

and mission operations. In light of the importance of developing welldefined enterprise architectures, we issued a seven-stage enterprise 

architecture management maturity framework that defines actions 

 

6

For example, entities such as houses, rivers, road intersections, power plants, and 

national parks can all be identified by their location. In addition, phenomena such as 

wildfires, the spread of the West Nile virus, and the thinning of trees because of acid rain 

can also be identified by their geographic locations. 
 

Page 5 GAO-13-685T 

needed to effectively manage an architecture program.7 The 

alternative, as our work has shown, is the perpetuation of the kinds of 

operational environments that burden most agencies today, where a 

lack of integration among business operations and the IT resources 

supporting them leads to systems that are duplicative, poorly 

integrated, and unnecessarily costly to maintain. 

OMB has implemented a series of initiatives to manage IT more 

effectively, reduce duplication, and achieve cost savings. These efforts

include the following: 

• TechStat reviews. In January 2010, the Federal Chief Information 

Officer (CIO) began leading reviews—known as “TechStat” 

sessions—of selected IT investments involving OMB and agency 

leadership to increase accountability and transparency and improve 

performance. Subsequently, OMB empowered agency CIOs to hold 

their own TechStat sessions within their respective agencies. As of 

April 2013, OMB reported that it had led 79 sessions that resulted in 

improvements to or termination of IT investments with performance 

problems. According to the former Federal CIO, the efforts of OMB 

and federal agencies to improve management and oversight of IT 

investments have resulted in almost $4 billion in savings.

• Federal Data Center Consolidation Initiative. In February 2010, the 

Federal CIO established the Federal Data Center Consolidation 

Initiative to address the growing number of federal data centers. This 

initiative’s four high-level goals are to promote the use of “green IT”8

 

7

GAO, Organizational Transformation: A Framework for Assessing and Improving 

Enterprise Architecture Management (Version 2.0), 

by reducing the overall energy and real estate footprint of government 

data centers; reduce the cost of data center hardware, software, and 

operations; increase the overall IT security posture of the government; 

and shift IT investments to more efficient computing platforms and 

technologies. OMB believes that this initiative has the potential to 

provide about $3 billion in savings by the end of 2015.

GAO-10-846G (Washington, D.C.: 

August 2010). 

8

“Green IT” refers to environmentally sound computing practices that can include a variety 

of efforts, such as using energy efficient data centers, purchasing computers that meet 

certain environmental standards, and recycling obsolete electronics. 

OMB Initiated Recent 

Major Initiatives for 

Reducing Duplication and 

Achieving Cost Savings
 

Page 6 GAO-13-685T 

• PortfolioStat reviews. In March 2012, OMB launched the PortfolioStat 

initiative, which requires agencies to conduct an annual agency-wide 

IT portfolio review to, among other things, reduce commodity IT9

spending and demonstrate how their IT investments align with the 

agency’s mission and business functions.10 PortfolioStat is designed 

to assist agencies in assessing the current maturity of their IT 

investment management process, making decisions on eliminating 

duplicative investments (such as geospatial information), and moving

to shared solutions (such as cloud computing) in order to maximize 

the return on IT investments across the portfolio. While OMB’s 

TechStat reviews are intended to examine IT performance at the 

specific project or investment-level, PortfolioStat reviews are intended 

to examine the portfolio as a whole and draw on the agency's 

enterprise architecture to help identify and eliminate areas of 

duplication and waste. OMB believes that the PortfolioStat effort has 

the potential to save the government $2.5 billion over the next 3 years 

by, for example, consolidating duplicative systems.

During the past few years, we have reported on IT investment 

management—an important mechanism for identifying and analyzing 

duplicative investments—at key agencies. For example, in July 2011, we

reported11 that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) had established most 

of the foundational practices needed to manage its IT investments, but 

that additional improvements were needed. Specifically, the agency had 

executed 30 of the 38 key practices identified by GAO’s Information 

Technology Investment Management framework12

 

9

According to OMB, commodity IT includes services such as IT infrastructure (data 

centers, networks, desktop computers and mobile devices); enterprise IT systems (e-mail, 

collaboration tools, identity and access management, security, and web infrastructure); 

and business systems (finance, human resources, and other administrative functions).

as foundational for 

successful IT investment management, including all the practices needed 

to provide investment oversight and capture investment information. For 

10OMB, Implementing PortfolioStat, Memorandum M-12-10 (Washington D.C.: Mar. 30, 

2012).

11GAO, Investment Management: IRS Has a Strong Oversight Process But Needs to 

Improve How It Continues Funding Ongoing Investments, GAO-11-587 (Washington, 

D.C.: July 20, 2011). 

12GAO, Information Technology Investment Management: A Framework for Assessing 

and Improving Process Maturity, GAO-04-394G (Washington, D.C.: March 2004). 

GAO Has Previously 

Reported on IT Investment 

Management at Selected 

Agencies
 

Page 7 GAO-13-685T 

instance, IRS had defined and implemented a tiered governance structure 

to oversee its projects and had several mechanisms for the boards to 

regularly review IT investments’ performance. However, we reported that, 

despite these strengths, IRS could improve its investment management 

process in two key areas. First, IRS did not have an enterprisewide IT 

investment board with sufficient representation from IT and business units 

that was responsible for the entire investment management process, and 

as a result may not have been optimizing its decision-making process. 

Second, IRS did not have a process, including defined criteria, for 

reselecting (i.e., deciding whether to continue funding) ongoing projects. 

We concluded that, given the size of its IT budget, IRS could be spending 

millions of dollars with no assurance that the funds are being used wisely.

Accordingly, we made recommendations to IRS to, among other things, 

assign responsibilities for implementing the investment management 

process to optimize decision making, and define and implement a 

process for deciding whether to continue funding ongoing projects; the 

agency concurred with our recommendations.

More recently, in July 2012, we reported13 that DHS was making progress 

in developing and implementing a new IT governance process that 

focused on portfolio management and eliminating duplication. 

Specifically, we found that DHS had developed a new governance 

framework and that the associated policies and procedures were 

generally consistent with recent OMB guidance and with best practices 

for managing projects and portfolios identified in GAO’s Information 

Technology Investment Management framework.

14 For example, DHS’s 

new governance framework included the establishment of portfolio 

governance boards to oversee functional portfolios with the goals of 

eliminating duplication and leveraging services and programs across the 

department. However, the agency had not yet finalized most policies and 

procedures and was not fully using best practices for the implementation. 

Accordingly, we made recommendations to DHS to, among other things, 

strengthen its new governance process and related IT management 

capabilities; the agency agreed to implement the recommendations.

 

13GAO, Information Technology: DHS Needs to Further Define and Implement Its New 

Governance Process, GAO-12-818 (Washington, D.C.: July 25, 2012). 

14GAO-04-394G. 
 

Page 8 GAO-13-685T 

In September 2011, we reported15

Figure 1: Number of Government IT Investments by Primary Function, as of July 2011

that, although OMB’s guidance to 

federal agencies on how to categorize IT investments allowed for analysis 

of investments with similar functions, it did not go far enough to allow 

identification of potentially duplicative investments. Specifically, since the 

fiscal year 2004 budget cycle, OMB had required agencies to categorize 

their IT investments according to primary function and subfunction. In 

their fiscal year 2011 submissions, agencies reported the greatest 

number of IT investments in Information and Technology Management 

(1,536 investments), followed by Supply Chain Management (777 

investments), and Human Resource Management (622 investments). 

Similarly, planned expenditures on investments were greatest in 

Information and Technology Management, at about $35.5 billion. Figure 1 

depicts, by primary function, the total number of investments within the 26

federal agencies that report to the IT Dashboard, as of July 2011. 

We also found that the at least $79 billion in IT investments for fiscal year 

2011 did not include IT investments by 58 independent executive branch 

 

15GAO-11-826. 

OMB and Agencies 

Have Taken Steps to 

Reduce Duplicative IT 

Investments, but More 

Remains to Be Done
 

Page 9 GAO-13-685T 

agencies, including the Central Intelligence Agency and Securities and 

Exchange Commission, or by the legislative or judicial branches. A closer 

look at the investments for the 26 agencies also revealed that some 

agencies excluded systems that fit the definition of an IT investment, such 

as space systems and systems that are in research and development.

Further, we reported that, while OMB guidance stated that an investment 

needs to be mapped to a single functional category within the Federal 

Enterprise Architecture,16 IT investments could fit into more than one 

category. For example, an agency could identify an inventory system as a 

financial management system or a supply chain management system. 

Thus, if an organization planned to develop an inventory system and 

searched for potentially duplicative investments in a group labeled as 

financial management systems, it would miss seeing potentially 

duplicative systems categorized as supply chain management systems. 

As an example, we cited our May 2009 finding that a Defense financial 

management system was identified in a different functional category—

supply chain management.17

Finally, we reported that OMB and federal agencies had undertaken 

several initiatives to address potentially duplicative IT investments. For 

example, OMB had efforts under way to consolidate similar functions 

through its “line of business” and Federal Enterprise Architecture

initiatives and had eliminated duplicative systems identified during its 

TechStat sessions. In addition, several of the agencies we evaluated had 

established guidance for ensuring new investments were not duplicative 

with existing systems. However, we found that most of OMB’s recent 

initiatives had not demonstrated results. Further, several agencies did not 

We noted that because Defense had

categorized the system as supply chain management, the cost of this 

system was not included in OMB’s estimate for financial management 

systems. 

 

16The Federal Enterprise Architecture is intended to provide federal agencies and other 

decision makers with a common frame of reference or taxonomy for informing agencies’ 

individual enterprise architecture efforts and their planned and ongoing investment 

activities, and to do so in a way that identifies opportunities for avoiding duplication of 

effort and launching initiatives to establish and implement common, reusable, and 

interoperable solutions across agency boundaries. 

17GAO, Financial Management Systems: OMB's Financial Management Line of Business 

Initiative Continues but Future Success Remains Uncertain, GAO-09-328 (Washington, 

D.C.: May 7, 2009).
 

Page 10 GAO-13-685T 

routinely assess legacy systems to determine if they were duplicative. We 

concluded that, until agencies routinely assess their entire IT portfolios to 

identify and remove or consolidate duplicative systems, such duplication 

will continue to exist.

Accordingly, we recommended that OMB require federal agencies to 

report the steps they take to ensure that their IT investments are not 

duplicative as part of their annual budget and IT investment submissions. 

OMB agreed with our recommendation and has since taken action to 

implement it. Specifically, in March 2012, the OMB issued a 

memorandum to federal agencies regarding implementing PortfolioStat 

reviews. As previously mentioned, these reviews are intended to assist in 

ending the investment in duplicative IT investments. In addition, as part of 

this effort, OMB is requiring agencies to document their cost savings and 

cost avoidance due to consolidation beginning in their fiscal year 2014 

budget submissions. 

In February 2012, we reported18

 

18

that although Defense, Energy, and DHS

utilized various processes to prevent and reduce investment in duplicative 

programs and systems, potentially duplicative IT investments existed. 

Specifically, each of the agencies we reviewed had IT investment 

management processes in place that were, in part, intended to prevent, 

identify, and eliminate unnecessary duplicative investments. For example, 

Defense’s Information Technology Portfolio Management Implementation 

guide required the evaluation of existing systems to identify duplication 

and determine whether to maintain, upgrade, delete, or replace identified

systems. Similarly, Energy’s Guide to IT Capital Planning and Investment

Control specified that investment business case summaries should be

reviewed for redundancies and opportunities for collaboration.

Additionally, according to DHS’s Capital Planning and Investment Control

Guide, proposed investments were to be reviewed at the department level 

to determine if the proposed need is, among other things, being fulfilled 

by another DHS program, or already fulfilled by an existing capability.

GAO-12-241. 

Selected Federal Agencies 

Have Potentially 

Duplicative Investments
 

Page 11 GAO-13-685T 

Even with such investment review processes, of the 810 investments we

reviewed,19 we identified 37 potentially duplicative investments at Defense 

and Energy within three Federal Enterprise Architecture categories 

(Human Resource Management, Information and Technology

Management, and Supply Chain Management).20 These investments 

accounted for about $1.2 billion in total IT spending for fiscal years 2007 

through 2012. Specifically, we identified

• 31 potentially duplicative investments totaling approximately $1.2

billion at Defense and

• 6 potentially duplicative investments totaling approximately $8 million

at Energy. 

The 37 investments comprised 12 groups of investments that appeared to

have duplicative purposes based on our analysis of each investment’s

description, budget information, and other supporting documentation from

agency officials (see table 1). For example, we identified three

investments at Energy that were each responsible for managing the 

backend infrastructure at three different locations. We also identified four 

Department of the Navy (Navy) personnel assignment investments—one 

system for officers, one for enlisted personnel, one for reservists, and a 

general assignment system—each of which was responsible for 

managing similar assignment functions. Additionally, the Department of 

the Air Force had five investments that were each responsible for contract 

management, and within the Navy there were another five contract 

management investments. Table 1 summarizes the 12 groups of 

potentially duplicative investments we identified by purpose and agency.

 

19We reviewed 11 percent of the total number of IT investments that agencies reported to 

OMB through the IT Dashboard (810 of 7,227). The investments we reviewed represented

approximately 24 percent of Defense’s IT portfolio in terms of the number of investments 

reported to the Dashboard, 19 percent of Energy’s, and 16 percent of DHS’s. 

20Within the three selected functions, we narrowed our review to the following seven 

subfunctions: Benefits Management, Organization and Position Management, Employee 

Performance Management, Information Management, Information Security, Inventory 

Control, and Goods Acquisition. 
 

Page 12 GAO-13-685T 

Table 1: Potentially Duplicative Investments

Dollars in millions

Department Branch or bureau Purpose

Number of 

investments

Planned and actual 

spending fiscal 

years 2007-2012

Defense Air Force Contract Management 5 $41

Army Personnel Assignment Management 2 $12

Navy Acquisition Management 4 $407

Aviation Maintenance and Logistics 2 $85

Contract Management 5 $17

Housing Management 2 $5

Personnel Assignment Management 4 $28

Promotion Rating 2 $3

Workforce Management 3 $109

Defense Enterprisewide Civilian Personnel Management 2 $504

Energy Energy Programs Back-end Infrastructure 3 $1

Energy Programs & Environmental 

and Other Defense Activities

Electronic Records and Document 

Management

3 $7

Total 37 $1,219

Source: GAO analysis of agencies’ data.

We did not identify any potentially duplicative investments at DHS within

our sample; however, DHS independently identified several duplicative 

investments and systems. Specifically, DHS officials identified and, more 

importantly, reduced duplicative functionality in four investments by 

consolidating or eliminating certain systems within each of these 

investments, including a personnel security investment, time and

attendance investment, human resources investment, and an information

network investment. DHS officials also identified 38 additional systems 

that they determined to be duplicative. For example, officials identified 

multiple personnel action processing systems that could be consolidated.

Officials from the three agencies reported that duplicative investments

existed for a number of reasons, including decentralized governance 

within the departments and a lack of control over contractor facilities. For

example, Energy investments for the management of back-end

infrastructure were for facilities which Energy oversaw but does not 

control. In addition, Defense officials indicated that a key reason for 

potential duplication at the Navy is that it had traditionally used a
 

Page 13 GAO-13-685T 

decentralized IT management approach, which allowed offices to develop

systems independent of any other office’s IT needs or acquisitions.

Further complicating the agencies’ ability to prevent investment in 

duplicative systems or programs was the miscategorization of 

investments. Among the 810 investments we reviewed, we identified 22 

investments where the selected agencies assigned incorrect Federal 

Enterprise Architecture primary functions or subfunctions. Specifically, we 

identified 13 miscategorized investments at Defense, 4 at Energy, and 5 

at DHS. For example, DHS’s Federal Emergency Management Agency—

Minor Personnel/Training Systems investment was initially categorized 

within the Employee Performance Management subfunction, but DHS 

agreed that this investment should have been assigned to the Human 

Resources Development subfunction.

Agency officials agreed that they had inadvertently miscategorized 15 of

the 22 investments we identified. However, our report noted that proper 

categorization is necessary in order to analyze and identify duplicative 

investments, both within and across agencies. Each improper 

categorization represented a possible missed opportunity to identify and 

eliminate an unjustified duplicative investment. We concluded that, until 

agencies correctly categorize their investments, they could not be 

confident that their investments were not duplicative and were justified, 

and they may continue expending valuable resources developing and 

maintaining unnecessarily duplicative systems.

Therefore, we recommended in our report that Defense and Energy utilize 

existing transparency mechanisms, such as the IT Dashboard, to report 

on the results of the departments’ efforts to identify and eliminate, where 

appropriate, each potentially duplicative investment we have identified, as 

well as any other duplicative investments. In response, Defense and 

Energy stated that they agreed with our recommendations. In addition, 

Energy’s Office of the CIO stated that the agency was committed to 

increasing its IT investment oversight.
 

Page 14 GAO-13-685T 

In March 2012, OMB launched the PortfolioStat initiative, which requires 

agencies to conduct an annual agency-wide IT portfolio review to, among 

other things, reduce commodity IT spending and demonstrate how its IT 

investments align with the agency’s mission and business functions.21

As part of this initiative, OMB required agency Chief Operating Officers to 

lead a PortfolioStat review on an annual basis—working in coordination 

with CIOs, Chief Financial Officers, and Chief Acquisition Officers. Such 

an effort is appropriate given the numerous investments performing the 

same function, as we reported in February 2012.

PortfolioStat is designed to assist agencies in assessing the current 

maturity of their IT portfolio management process, making decisions on 

eliminating duplication, and moving to shared solutions in order to 

maximize the return on IT investments across the portfolio. According to 

OMB, while TechStat reviews examine IT performance at the specific 

project or investment-level, PortfolioStat reviews examine the portfolio as 

a whole and draw on the agency's enterprise architecture to help identify 

and eliminate areas of duplication and waste. OMB believes that the 

PortfolioStat effort has the potential to save the government $2.5 billion 

over the next 3 years by, for example, consolidating duplicative systems. 

22

Subsequently, in March 2013, OMB issued a memorandum documenting 

additional guidance to help strengthen the PortfolioStat initiative and 

noted that the results from PortfolioStat so far had been significant—

including that agencies had identified and committed to nearly 100 

For example, as noted 

previously, 26 major federal agencies had planned to spend $2.7 billion 

on 580 financial management systems in 2011. According to OMB, 

agencies were required to designate a lead with direct reporting authority 

to the Chief Operating Officer for implementing the PortfolioStat process 

and OMB requirements by April 2012, and develop a baseline of their 

commodity IT investments by June 15, 2012. Using this portfolio data, 

agencies were asked to consolidate commodity IT spending under the 

agency CIO, hold a PortfolioStat session by July 31, 2012, with key 

stakeholders, and submit a final plan to consolidate their IT portfolio by 

August 31, 2012, including outlining at least 3 years of agency 

consolidation activities and migrating at least two duplicative commodity 

IT services by December 31, 2012.

 

21OMB, Memorandum M-12-10.

22GAO-12-241. 

To Address Duplicative IT 

Investments, OMB 

Launched PortfolioStat
 

Page 15 GAO-13-685T 

opportunities to consolidate or eliminate commodity IT investments.

23

Among other things, OMB’s memorandum describes plans to strengthen 

the initiative by integrating PortfolioStat and the Federal Data Center 

Consolidation Initiative,

24 streamlining agency reporting requirements, 

and establishing guidance for conducting PortfolioStat sessions in fiscal 

year 2013. For example, to improve the outcomes of PortfolioStat and to 

advance agency IT portfolio management, OMB’s memorandum 

consolidated previously collected IT plans, reports, and data calls into 

three primary collection channels—an information resources 

management strategic plan,25 an enterprise road map,26 and an

integrated data collection channel.27

We recently reported

Agencies’ draft versions of their 

strategic plans and enterprise road maps were due to OMB in May 2013, 

as well as their first integrated data collections. The integrated data 

collections are to be updated quarterly beginning in August 2013 and the 

strategic plans and road maps are to be updated after Congress receives 

the President’s budget for fiscal year 2015. 

28 and testified29

 

23OMB, Fiscal Year 2013 PortfolioStat Guidance: Strengthening Federal IT Portfolio 

Management, Memorandum M-13-09 (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 27, 2013). 

on, among other things, OMB’s 

efforts to integrate the Federal Data Center Consolidation Initiative with 

24OMB established the Federal Data Center Consolidation Initiative, under the direction of 

the Federal CIO, in February 2010 to reduce the size of the federal data center inventory 

and improve the efficiency, performance, and the environmental footprint of federal data 

center activities. 

25OMB, Management of Federal Information Resources, Circular A-130 (Washington, 

D.C.: Nov. 30, 2000). According to OMB Circular A-130, an agency’s information 

resources management strategic plan should describe how information resources 

management activities help accomplish agency missions, and ensure that information 

resource management decisions are integrated with organizational planning, budget, 

procurement, financial management, human resources management, and program 

decisions.

26OMB, Increasing Shared Approaches to Information Technology Services (Washington, 

D.C.: May 2, 2012). The enterprise road map is to include a business and technology 

architecture, an IT asset inventory, a commodity IT consolidation plan, a line of business 

service plan, and an IT shared service plan. 

27The integrated data collection channel will be used by agencies to report structured 

information, such as progress in meeting IT strategic goals, objectives, and metrics, as 

well as cost savings and avoidances resulting from IT management actions. 

28GAO, Data Center Consolidation: Strengthened Oversight Needed to Achieve Cost 

Savings Goal, GAO-13-378 (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 23, 2013). 
 

Page 16 GAO-13-685T 

PortfolioStat and found that key performance metrics were not yet fully 

defined. More specifically, OMB’s March 2013 memorandum30 stated 

that, to more effectively measure the efficiency of an agency’s data center 

assets, agencies would also be measured by the extent to which their 

data centers are optimized for total cost of ownership by incorporating 

metrics for data center energy, facility, labor, and storage, among other

things. However, we found that although OMB had indicated which 

performance measures it planned to use going forward, it had not 

documented the specific metrics for agencies to report against. OMB’s 

March 2013 memorandum indicates that these would be developed by 

the Data Center Consolidation Task Force,31

Further, our report noted that OMB’s integration of the Federal Data 

Center Consolidation Initiative with PortfolioStat also included a 

modification to the previous data center consolidation goal of closing 

approximately 40 percent of the total number of agency data centers. 

Specifically, OMB stated an agency’s data center population will now be 

placed into one of two categories—core and non-core data centers—but 

for which the memorandum did not provide specific definitions. OMB 

further stated that its new goal is to close 40 percent of non-core data 

centers but, as noted, the definition of a core and non-core data center 

was not provided. Therefore, the total number of data centers to be 

closed under OMB’s revised goal could not be determined.

but did not provide a time 

frame for when this will be completed. 

We also reported that, although OMB had previously stated that 

PortfolioStat was expected to result in savings of approximately $2.5 

billion through 2015, its March 2013 memorandum did not establish a

new cost savings goal that reflected the integration of the Federal Data 

Center Consolidation Initiative. Instead, OMB stated that all cost savings 

goals previously associated with the Federal Data Center Consolidation 

Initiative would be integrated into broader agency efforts to reshape their 

IT portfolios, but did not provide a revised savings estimate. We 

 

29GAO, Data Center Consolidation: Strengthened Oversight Needed to Achieve Billions of 

Dollars in Savings, GAO-13-627T (Washington, D.C.: May 14, 2013). 

30OMB, Memorandum M-13-09. 

31The Data Center Consolidation Task Force is comprised of the data center consolidation 

program managers from each agency. According to its charter, the Task Force is critical to 

supporting collaboration across the Federal Data Center Consolidation Initiative agencies, 

including identifying and disseminating key pieces of information, solutions, and processes 

that will help agencies in their consolidation efforts. 
 

Page 17 GAO-13-685T 

concluded that the lack of a new cost savings goal would limit OMB’s 

ability to determine whether or not the new combined initiative is on 

course toward achieving its planned objectives. As a result, we 

recommended that OMB track and annually report on key data center 

consolidation performance measures, such as the size of data centers 

being closed and cost savings to date. OMB agreed with our 

recommendation.

We have ongoing work looking at OMB’s PortfolioStat initiative, including 

determining whether agencies completed key required PortfolioStat 

actions, evaluating selected agencies' plans for making portfolio 

improvements and achieving associated cost savings, and describing

OMB's plans to improve the PortfolioStat process.

In summary, while OMB and agencies have taken steps to improve their

ability to identify and categorize IT investments, duplicative IT 

investments still exist at federal agencies. Because these investments 

account for billions of dollars in spending, it will be important for OMB and

agencies to implement our prior recommendations to better ensure that

duplicative investments are identified and eliminated. 

To help agencies better address duplicative IT investments, OMB 

established PortfolioStat as a means of assisting agencies with the 

assessment of the maturity of their IT investment management processes 

and eliminating areas of duplication and waste. OMB recently released 

additional guidance that expanded this important initiative’s scope and 

reported that significant progress had been made to date, including more 

than 100 opportunities to consolidate or eliminate commodity IT 

investments. Moving forward, it will be important for OMB to be 

transparent on agencies’ progress against key performance metrics, such 

as cost savings, in order to ensure that the PortfolioStat initiative is 

meeting its established objectives.

Chairman Carper, Ranking Member Coburn, and Members of the 

Committee, this completes my prepared statement. I would be pleased to 

respond to any questions that you may have at this time.
 

Page 18 GAO-13-685T 

If you or your staffs have any questions about this testimony, please 

contact me at (202) 512-9286 or at pownerd@gao.gov. Individuals who 

made key contributions to this testimony are Dave Hinchman (Assistant 

Director), Justin Booth, Kate Feild, Rebecca Eyler, Valerie Hopkins,

Sabine Paul, Colleen Phillips, Bradley Roach, Jonathan Ticehurst and 

Kevin Walsh. 

GAO Contact and 

Staff 

Acknowledgments

(311290)
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.
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.