OPEN DATA

Treasury Could 

Better Align 

USAspending.gov 

with Key Practices 

and Search 

Requirements

Report to Congressional Addressees

December 2018

GAO-19-72

United States Government Accountability Office
United States Government Accountability Office

Highlights of GAO-19-72, a report to 

congressional addressees

December 2018

OPEN DATA

Treasury Could Better Align USAspending.gov with 

Key Practices and Search Requirements

What GAO Found

GAO identified five key practices for transparently reporting government data, as 

well as actions to implement each practice. These key practices and actions can

assist managers of open government data programs in the transparent 

presentation of their data. Open data are information that can be freely used, 

modified, or shared by anyone for any purpose. 

USAspending.gov aligns with several key practices. However, the Department of 

the Treasury (Treasury) has not fully aligned the website with all of the key 

practices, the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and 

Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA), and Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) guidance (see table.) FFATA, as amended by the Digital Accountability 

and Transparency Act of 2014 (DATA Act), directed Treasury to develop and 

manage USAspending.gov to provide detailed information on federal spending. 

USAspending.gov Alignment with Key Practices and Other Requirements

Key practices USAspending.gov characteristics

Provide free and 

unrestricted data

Consistent with this key practice, USAspending.gov, as a general matter,

provides unrestricted data to the public and Treasury has made all the data

available for free. In the course of its work, GAO found that users could 

only download the complete database after registering for an account with 

a third-party database host and incurring a charge. In July 2018, in 

response to GAO’s inquiries, Treasury provided an option for users to 

download the entire database for free without creating an account.

Engage with users

Consistent with this key practice, Treasury conducts user research and 

engages with users of USAspending.gov online and in person. For 

example, Treasury officials said they have conducted more than 150 

interviews with users. Treasury officials also told GAO that they have 

directly engaged with various audiences about the website through a 

hackathon and a partnership. 

Provide data in useful 

formats

Consistent with this key practice, USAspending.gov provides detailed, 

machine-readable data in standardized formats and includes several 

options for downloading the data. However, Treasury lacks a process to 

ensure that any new pages added to the website are hosted on a .gov 

domain and encrypted with the secure HTTPS protocol required by OMB. 

Without such a process Treasury does not have assurance that new pages 

added to the website meet federal security requirements. 

Fully describe the 

data 

USAspending.gov does not fully reflect this key practice because while it

discloses data sources and timeliness, the website does not provide 

structured metadata. Providing metadata—structured descriptive 

information about the data—is also an OMB requirement. In addition, while 

OMB guidance provides that agencies must apply open licenses, the 

website does not provide comprehensive licensing information for the data. 

As a result, users may not have the information they need on how the data 

can be used.

Facilitate data 

discovery for all users

Consistent with this key practice, Treasury facilitates data discovery by 

providing tools such as interactive maps and visualizations to help users 

interpret the data. However, users cannot search for city and program 

source (the unique accounting code used to track federal spending) as 

required by FFATA. As a result, users may be unable to find certain 

financial or geographic information related to recipients or federal 

programs. 

Source: GAO analysis of USAspending.gov. │ GAO-19-72

View GAO-19-72. For more information, 

contact Triana McNeil (202) 512-6806 or 

McNeilT@gao.gov

Why GAO Did This Study

Open data can foster accountability 

and public trust by providing citizens 

with information on government 

activities and their outcomes. It can 

also promote private sector innovation. 

The DATA Act requires that the 

federal government collect and present 

open data on roughly $4 trillion in 

annual federal spending. The DATA 

Act also includes a provision requiring 

GAO to review its implementation.

This report (1) identifies key practices 

for transparently reporting government 

data; and (2) evaluates the extent to 

which USAspending.gov is consistent 

with those key practices and other 

requirements. GAO developed the key 

practices by systematically evaluating 

and synthesizing information from 

literature on open data, as well as 

interviews with open data experts and 

good governance groups. GAO used 

these key practices as well as existing 

federal website standards and 

applicable laws to evaluate 

USAspending.gov.

What GAO Recommends

GAO is making five recommendations 

including that Treasury (1) establish a 

process to ensure that additions to 

USAspending.gov meet security 

requirements, (2) provide structured 

metadata and licensing information on 

the website, and (3) ensure that users 

can search for awards by city and 

program source as required by law. 

Treasury agreed with GAO’s 

recommendations.
Page i GAO-19-72 Open Data

Letter 1

Background 4

Key Practices for Transparently Reporting Government Data 8

USAspending.gov Aligns with Several Key Practices, but Does 

Not Fully Meet Licensing, Search Functionality, and Other 

Requirements 26

Conclusions 45

Recommendations for Executive Action 46

Agency Comments, Third-Party Views, and Our Evaluation 47

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 50

Appendix II: Comments from the Department of the Treasury 54

Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 56

Related GAO Products 57

Table

Table 1: Key Practices and Key Actions for Transparently 

Reporting Open Government Data 9

Figures

Figure 1: Timeline of Federal Spending Transparency Laws and 

Versions of USAspending.gov 6

Figure 2: Key Actions for Providing Free and Unrestricted Data 10

Figure 3: Key Actions for Engaging with Users 12

Figure 4: Key Actions for Providing Data in Useful Formats 15

Figure 5: Example of Transaction-Level Spending Data from 

Ohio’s Online Checkbook 16

Figure 6: Key Actions for Fully Describing Data 18

Figure 7: Metadata for Kansas City, Missouri’s, Budget Data 19

Figure 8: Key Actions for Facilitating Data Discovery for All Users 21

Figure 9: “OhioCheckbook” Mobile App Showing Payments to 

Cuyahoga Community College 22

Contents
Page ii GAO-19-72 Open Data

Figure 10: Summary Data from the Montgomery County, 

Maryland’s, spendingMontgomery Website 23

Figure 11: Data Discovery Tools on New York City’s Open Data 

Portal 25

Figure 12: Example of a Treasury User Profile 28

Figure 13: Treasury Contractor Interviewing a Member of the 

Public at the Capitol Visitor Center 29

Figure 14: Example of Detailed and Disaggregated Data from a 

Contract Summary Page on USAspending.gov 31

Figure 15: Download Options Available on USAspending.gov 32

Figure 16: No Award Information in Spending Explorer for the 

Vaccines for Children Program Activity 36

Figure 17: Example of a Map of Advanced Search Results for 

Social Security Retirement Insurance (as of September 

2018) 41

Figure 18: Example of a Contract Explorer “Sunburst” 

Visualization from the Data Lab (as of September 2018) 42

Figure 19: Example of Plain Language (left) and Official Definition 

(right) on USAspending.gov 43
Page iii GAO-19-72 Open Data

Abbreviations 

API Application Programming Interface

CFDA Catalogue of Financial Domestic Assistance

CFO Act Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990

DAIMS DATA Act Information Model Schema

DATA Act Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014 

DUNS Data Universal Numbering System 

FFATA Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act 

of 2006 

FOIA Freedom of Information Act

GSA General Services Administration 

NAICS North American Industry Classification System 

OECD Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development

OMB Office of Management and Budget 

PII personally identifiable information 

TAS Treasury Account Symbol 

Treasury Department of the Treasury

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-19-72 Open Data

441 G St. N.W.

Washington, DC 20548

December 13, 2018

Congressional Addressees:

The increasing availability of open government data—that is, governmentproduced information that can be freely used, modified, and shared by 

anyone for any purpose—holds great potential to promote government 

transparency and private sector innovation. In recent years, governments 

around the world have increased the availability of open data by providing 

information on a wide range of topics such as health, education, 

transportation networks, budgets, and performance. Such data can foster 

accountability and public trust by providing citizens with information on 

government activities and their outcomes. In addition, according to a 2014 

study by the Department of Commerce, U.S. government data have 

helped private firms in data-intensive industries generate revenues of at 

least $24 billion and upwards of $221 billion annually.1 However, for open 

data to achieve their full potential, government websites must ensure that 

their data are effectively presented to a wide range of users.

To provide more transparency for roughly $4 trillion in federal spending, 

on March 2, 2018, the Department of the Treasury (Treasury) released a 

new version of its USAspending.gov website.2 The new 

USAspending.gov displays data submitted by federal agencies to comply 

with the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 

(FFATA), as amended by the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act 

of 2014 (DATA Act), and upon release became the official source of 

spending data required to be published under the DATA Act.3 Because of 

federal spending data’s broad appeal to users such as Congress, grant 

recipients, journalists, and the general public, it is important that 

USAspending.gov follow key practices for reporting this information as 

transparently as possible.

 1

See Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration, Fostering 

Innovation, Creating Jobs, Driving Better Decisions: The Value of Government Data (July 

2014).

2

Treasury first released data submitted under the Digital Accountability and Transparency 

Act of 2014 (DATA Act) in May 2017 on an earlier version of the website, 

Beta.USAspending.gov. USAspending.gov was initially launched in 2007. 

3

Pub. L. No. 109-282, 120 Stat. 1186 (Sept. 26, 2006); Pub. L. No. 113-101, 128 Stat. 

1146 (May 9, 2014) codified at 31 U.S.C. § 6101 note.

Letter
Page 2 GAO-19-72 Open Data

The DATA Act includes a provision for us to review implementation of the 

act.4 Over the past 4 years, we have issued 13 reports assessing various 

aspects of DATA Act implementation.5 This report builds on our body of 

work on the DATA Act and (1) identifies key practices for transparently 

reporting government data on a centralized website, and (2) evaluates the 

extent to which the new USAspending.gov is consistent with these key 

practices, as well as existing standards for federal websites.

To identify key practices for transparently reporting open government 

data on a centralized website, we conducted a literature search and 

systematically reviewed articles on open government data programs and 

practices. We evaluated and synthesized information from the literature 

review to identify commonly-reported key practices for transparently 

reporting open government data. We also interviewed experts on open 

data and good governance.6 We first had open-ended conversations with 

experts to obtain their views on what key practices exist for transparently 

reporting open government data. After developing an initial list of key 

practices, we then obtained experts’ feedback to finalize the list. We 

shared a draft of the key practices with Treasury, the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB), and the General Services 

Administration (GSA).

To obtain illustrative examples showing how those key practices can be 

implemented, we selected open data practitioners from six state and local 

governments:

• Connecticut;

• Kansas City, Missouri;

• Los Angeles, California;

• Montgomery County, Maryland;

 4

FFATA, § 6(b).

5

A list of related products, including our prior work on the DATA Act and 

USAspending.gov, is included at the end of this report. 

6

Specifically, we obtained the views of 18 individuals and organizations from a variety of 

sectors and backgrounds, including the Data Coalition (which advocates for the 

publication of government information as standardized, machine-readable data), Code for 

America (which organizes people to build technology that helps local governments), and 

the IBM Center for the Business of Government (which researches government 

management issues, including the use of technology). A full list of the individuals and 

organizations we interviewed is included in appendix I.
Page 3 GAO-19-72 Open Data

• New York City, New York; and

• Ohio.

We selected these practitioners because they have well-regarded open 

data websites that include a general open data portal as well as budget or 

spending data visualizations, and because they represent different 

locations and levels of government, including cities, counties, and states. 

We reviewed these practitioners’ open data websites and related 

documentation, and interviewed cognizant state and local government 

officials.

To assess the extent to which the new USAspending.gov is consistent 

with key practices and existing standards for federal websites, we 

compared the website to applicable laws and policies—such as FFATA 

and OMB guidance—as well as the key practices in this report. We also 

reviewed documentation related to the website, observed Treasury’s 

participation in a hackathon, and interviewed Treasury officials.7 To clarify 

policies and practices for federal websites, we interviewed GSA officials 

and OMB staff.

To evaluate the extent to which specified federal award data elements on 

USAspending.gov are searchable, as required by FFATA, as amended by 

the DATA Act, we obtained and tested a nongeneralizable, random 

sample of award data from USAspending.gov.8 Specifically, we 

downloaded contract and financial assistance data from 

USAspending.gov, generated a random sample of awards, and used the 

website’s search tools to search for the required data elements from 15 

contracts and 15 financial assistance awards.

For the purposes of this report, we focused on the presentation of data 

and related contextual information on USAspending.gov. Our review did 

not include data quality or data governance.9 We reported on the quality 

 7

A hackathon is an event in which people work in groups on projects over a short period of 

time, with the goal of creating a functioning product by the end of the event. 

8

FFATA, §§ 2(a)(7), (b)(1), (c); 4(b)(2).

9

For the purposes of this report, data governance is defined as the processes, policies, 

standards, organization, and technologies required to manage and ensure the availability, 

accessibility, quality, consistency, auditability, and security of data in an organization. See 

Panian, Zeljko. “Some Practical Experience in Data Governance.” World Academy of 

Science, Engineering, and Technology, no.62 (2010): 939-946. 
Page 4 GAO-19-72 Open Data

of the data submitted under the DATA Act in November 2017.10 In 2019, 

we will report an updated assessment of the quality of these data and, 

separately, report on OMB and Treasury’s efforts to develop a 

governance process for maintaining the integrity of the data standards 

established under the DATA Act. Detailed information on our scope and 

methodology is included in appendix I.

We conducted this performance audit from February 2017 to December 

2018 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.

Recognizing the federal government’s role as a major supplier of data, 

the 2018 President’s Management Agenda announced the creation of a 

Federal Data Strategy.11 According to the agenda, this strategy promises 

to leverage data as a strategic asset to grow the economy, increase the 

effectiveness of the federal government, facilitate oversight, and promote 

transparency. It proposes improving data dissemination by making data 

available more quickly and in more useful formats, maximizing 

nonsensitive data shared with the public, and enabling external users to 

access and use government data for commercial and other public 

purposes.

The Federal Data Strategy builds on existing policy governing the federal 

government’s websites and data. In 2016, OMB memorandum M-17-06, 

Policies for Federal Agency Public Websites and Digital Services, 

established policy for the federal government’s online information 

resources, such as the need to ensure that information is searchable and 

to inform users about information quality issues. In addition, in 2013, 

 10See GAO, DATA Act: OMB, Treasury, and Agencies Need to Improve Completeness 

and Accuracy of Spending Data and Disclose Limitations, GAO-18-138 (Washington, 

D.C.: Nov. 8, 2017). 

11See OMB, The President’s Management Agenda (Mar. 19, 2018). 

Background

Federal Open Data Policy
Page 5 GAO-19-72 Open Data

OMB memorandum M-13-13, Open Data Policy—Managing Information 

as an Asset, established an information management framework to 

promote interoperability and openness at each stage of the information 

life cycle.

These efforts are consistent with the international Open Government 

Partnership, which aims to make governments more inclusive, 

responsive, and accountable. Seventy-five countries have committed to 

the Open Government Partnership by endorsing the Open Government 

Declaration. In doing so, these countries have committed to increasing 

the availability of information about government activities, supporting 

public participation in government, and using new technologies for 

openness and accountability, among other things.

Enacted in 2006, FFATA requires agencies to report information on 

federal awards—such as contracts, grants, and loans. In 2014, the DATA 

Act expanded on FFATA by establishing new requirements intended to 

allow policymakers and the public to more effectively track federal 

spending, including:

• Reporting additional data. Agencies are required to report additional 

financial data from different points in the spending life cycle.

• Setting government-wide standards. OMB and Treasury are 

responsible for establishing government-wide financial data standards 

for any federal funds made available to or expended by federal 

agencies.12 These standards define and describe the data elements 

that agencies must report.

• Reporting consistently. Agencies reporting financial information are 

required to comply with the standards established by OMB and 

Treasury so that information can be compared across the 

government.13

• Improving data access. The data must be made available in 

machine-readable and open formats, to be downloaded in bulk, and—

to the extent practicable—for automated processing.14

 12FFATA, § 4(a), (b).

13FFATA, § 4(c)(2)(A).

14FFATA, § 2(c)(7).

DATA Act and 

USAspending.gov
Page 6 GAO-19-72 Open Data

The DATA Act required agencies to begin reporting data in accordance 

with the data standards issued by Treasury and OMB within three years 

of its enactment, and required that those data be displayed on 

USAspending.gov or a successor system. USAspending.gov has been 

the platform to provide federal spending information to the public since 

2007 (see figure 1). In May 2017, Treasury released a new website, 

Beta.USAspending.gov, where it began to publish information submitted 

under the DATA Act. In March 2018, this new website assumed the 

USAspending.gov web address and Treasury retired the old version of 

USAspending.gov.15

Figure 1: Timeline of Federal Spending Transparency Laws and Versions of 

USAspending.gov

Data on USAspending.gov come from a variety of sources, including files 

that agencies began submitting quarterly for DATA Act reporting in May 

2017. When agencies submit quarterly data, Treasury’s DATA Act Broker 

ingests the data and validates certain information before the data are 

published on the website.16 Agency Senior Accountable Officials certify 

that the agency’s submission is valid and reliable. In addition to agencies’ 

 15In this report, we refer to the version of USAspending.gov that was available prior to 

March 2018 as “legacy USAspending.gov.” In contrast, “USAspending.gov” refers to the 

website that was released as Beta.USAspending.gov in May 2017 and assumed the 

USAspending.gov web address in March 2018.

16The DATA Act Broker is an information technology system that collects and validates 

agency data, and extracts information from government-wide reporting systems. For more 

information on the sources and validation process for DATA Act data, see GAO-18-138. 
Page 7 GAO-19-72 Open Data

quarterly DATA Act reporting files, USAspending.gov includes data from 

government-wide systems. Government-wide procurement data on the 

website are updated daily, while government-wide financial assistance 

data are updated biweekly. The new USAspending.gov also includes

older award data that had been available on the prior version of the 

website.

In November 2017, we issued our first report on data quality as required 

by the DATA Act.17 We found issues with the completeness and accuracy 

of the data that agencies submitted for the second quarter of fiscal year 

2017 as well as the use of data elements. For example:

• Of the 78 agencies that submitted data on time, 13 submitted the data 

file intended to link budgetary and award information without providing 

any data in the file.

• Between 56 and 75 percent of the newly-required budgetary records 

were fully consistent with agency sources, but only between 0 and 1 

percent of award records (such as grants, contracts, and loans) were 

fully consistent.18

• Agencies differed in how they interpreted and applied OMB’s 

definitions for two data elements—Primary Place of Performance and 

Award Description—raising concerns regarding data consistency and 

comparability. These two award data elements are particularly 

important to achieving the transparency goals envisioned by FFATA

because they provide the public with information on where the federal 

government spends money and what it spends it on, respectively.

We also found issues with the presentation of the data on 

Beta.USAspending.gov, including fragmented or incomplete search 

results and insufficient disclosure of data limitations. Among other things, 

we recommended that Treasury disclose known data quality issues and 

limitations on the new USAspending.gov website. We provide an update 

 17GAO-18-138. 

18These estimates came from a statistical sample which we selected from the population 

of all 24 Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990 (CFO Act) agencies’ USASpending.gov data 

submitted from January through March of 2017. The spending data for the 24 CFO Act 

agencies represented approximately 94 percent of all records on Beta.USAspending.gov. 

A record was considered “fully consistent” if the information it contained matched agency 

sources for every applicable data element. We found that the consistency of individual 

data elements varied.

Our Prior Report Identified 

Data Quality and Website 

Issues
Page 8 GAO-19-72 Open Data

on actions Treasury has taken to address this recommendation later in 

this report.

We identified five key practices that managers of open government data 

programs can consider to help ensure the transparent presentation of 

their data. We also identified key actions for implementing each key 

practice. We identified these key practices and key actions by 

systematically evaluating and synthesizing information from literature on 

open data as well as interviews with open data experts and good 

governance groups. These key practices and key actions are listed in

table 1.

Key Practices for 

Transparently 

Reporting 

Government Data
Page 9 GAO-19-72 Open Data

Table 1: Key Practices and Key Actions for Transparently Reporting Open 

Government Data

Key Practices Key Actions

Provide free and 

unrestricted data

Make government data open by default, while protecting 

sensitive or restricted information 

Do not charge users for access to the data 

Engage 

with users

Identify data users and their needs

Solicit and be responsive to user feedback

Reach out to potential users to encourage data use

Provide data in 

useful formats

Provide users with detailed and disaggregated data 

Provide machine-readable data that can be downloaded in 

bulk and in selected subsets

Provide data downloads in a non-proprietary format

Make the data interoperable with other datasets 

Fully describe 

the data

Disclose known data quality issues and limitations

Disclose data sources and timeliness

Clearly label data and provide accompanying metadata

Publish data under an open license and communicate 

licensing information to users

Facilitate data 

discovery for 

all users

Provide an interface that enables intuitive navigation and 

ensure that the most important information is visible 

Provide users with appropriate interpretations of the data, 

such as visualizations or summaries

Ensure that the website’s content is written in plain language

Provide a search function that is optimized for easy and 

efficient use

Use central data repositories and catalogues to help users 

easily find the data they are looking for 

Source: GAO. │ GAO-19-72

These key practices and actions are intended to be used in tandem with 

requirements for federal government websites and open data programs, 

such as relevant laws and OMB guidance. They are not intended to 

replace or supersede any applicable requirements. When considering an 
Page 10 GAO-19-72 Open Data

individual open government data program, some key practices and 

actions may be more relevant than others because the purpose and 

characteristics of open government data programs may vary. In addition, 

while this report focuses on the presentation of open government data, 

open data practitioners should also consider other elements—including 

data quality and data governance—to ensure that the public has access 

to high-quality information.

To promote transparency, we found that open data should be freely and 

equally available to users without restrictions. As such, we identified two 

key actions for providing free and unrestricted data (see figure 2).

Figure 2: Key Actions for Providing Free and Unrestricted Data

Make government data open by default, while protecting sensitive or 

restricted information. Making government data open by default 

ensures that the data are equally open to all types of users; in contrast, 

when government information is available by request, it may favor citizens 

with greater information about and access to government institutions. In 

addition, some open data practitioners we spoke with said that providing 

open data can minimize the burden of responding to information requests. 

For example, according to Connecticut officials, before the state’s open 

spending data website was launched, payroll data were the most 

frequently requested information under the state’s Freedom of Information 

Act (FOIA). Officials said that providing open payroll data on the website 

Provide Free and 

Unrestricted Data
Page 11 GAO-19-72 Open Data

significantly reduced FOIA requests, which allowed state officials to 

spend time and resources on other activities.

However, not all government information is appropriate to publish. Some 

datasets may contain sensitive information such as personally identifiable 

information, information that is classified or similarly not subject to 

disclosure, or intellectual property. Other legal restrictions may also 

prohibit the disclosure of certain information. In some cases the 

information in an individual dataset may not pose a risk of identifying 

sensitive information, but may pose such a risk when combined with other 

available information. For that reason, when considering whether or not 

information may be disclosed, OMB M-13-13 requires agencies to 

determine whether it may be combined with existing publically available 

data to identify an individual or otherwise pose a security concern.19 In 

such situations, agencies must conduct a risk-based privacy analysis to 

determine whether the information can be made publicly available that 

accounts for the nature of the information, the availability of other 

information, and the technology in place that could facilitate the process 

of identification.

As an example of how open data practitioners can balance these types of 

considerations, Montgomery County, Maryland, applies safeguards such 

as a review by internal departments. Additionally, if Department officials 

request a secondary fact-specific review, the Office of the County 

Attorney will review the information to further ensure that protected 

information is not published. In some cases, sensitive information is 

removed from a dataset prior to publication. For example, according to 

county officials, the names of housing assistance recipients are removed 

from spending data to protect resident privacy. Users can see 

nonsensitive aspects of these data, such as the amount spent, with

identifying details removed.

Do not charge users for access to the data. Providing data for free can 

help ensure equitable access to users independent of their ability to pay. 

Lowering barriers, such as cost, increases the value of open data, as 

more users are able to access it.

 19See OMB, Open Data Policy—Managing Information as an Asset, M-13-13 (May 9, 

2013).
Page 12 GAO-19-72 Open Data

Open government data only create value to the extent that they are used. 

With that in mind, we identified three key actions for engaging with users 

(see figure 3).

Figure 3: Key Actions for Engaging with Users

Identify data users and their needs. By identifying who is using the data 

and what content or features are important to them, data providers can 

better prioritize their efforts to present information to data consumers. 

Open data experts we spoke with emphasized that data providers should 

engage with users both inside and outside of government, including 

groups that may typically have less access to government institutions. For 

example, to further New York City’s Open Data for All vision to provide 

open data for people from all walks of life and all five of the city’s 

boroughs, Columbia University students conducted user research on 

behalf of the city to better understand the extent to which community 

organizations use open data and what barriers they face, according to the 

capstone report for this project. By surveying and interviewing these 

organizations, the students learned that users found the city’s data portal 

interface difficult to use. In response, the city worked with users to design 

and test a new, more streamlined portal.

Solicit and be responsive to user feedback. Soliciting and being 

responsive to user feedback—both when the website is being developed 

and on an ongoing basis—can help ensure that the website meets users’

Engage with Users
Page 13 GAO-19-72 Open Data

needs. Feedback can also surface issues with the functionality of the 

website and the quality of the data, thus enabling the data provider to 

make corrections when needed. User feedback mechanisms vary and 

can include online comment forms, forums, and discussion boards, as 

well as in-person public forums. Open data experts we spoke with said it 

is particularly helpful to list the contact information for a responsible 

official on the website in case users have questions about the data. In 

addition, timely response to feedback encourages engagement by

assuring users that their voices have been heard.

Monitoring how the public is using the data can also help practitioners 

determine which content and features are most useful. Web analytics can 

show how the data are being used, such as by identifying commonly-used 

search terms and datasets, and showing trends over time. 

According to a city official, Los Angeles uses web analytics to measure 

how frequently its datasets are accessed. Web analytics data showed 

that some datasets were often accessed on certain dates or in 

conjunction with current events, while other datasets were rarely used. 

City officials use this information to adjust how data are presented on the 

website, which has increased overall use of the city’s data. For example,

the city created data visualizations and links to data—including its City 

Revenue and City Budget Expenditures datasets—to accompany the 

release of its Comprehensive Annual Financial Report.

Reach out to potential users to encourage data use. Actively 

engaging potential users can provide an opportunity to educate them on 

how the data can be appropriately used and encourage innovation. Data 

trainings can provide potential users with important context and 

information, which can include teaching users how the data can be used. 

Resources such as how-to guides can also encourage data use. For 

example, as shown on the website, New York City’s open data portal 

includes a “How To” page with a step-by-step guide to help users get 

started with open data, and directs them toward additional resources such 

as data dictionaries.

We previously found that open data collaboration and prize competitions 

or challenges are two strategies that agencies can use to harness the 

ideas, expertise, and resources of those outside of their organization.20

 20See GAO, Open Innovation: Practices to Engage Citizens and Effectively Implement 

Federal Initiatives, GAO-17-14 (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 13, 2016).

Web Analytics

Web analytics is the collection, reporting, and 

analysis of website data, such as the number 

of users who visit the website.

Source: GAO. │ GAO-19-72
Page 14 GAO-19-72 Open Data

Agencies engage in open data collaboration by mobilizing participants to 

use their open data in innovative ways, such as sharing, exploring, and 

analyzing publicly-available datasets; using the data to conduct research; 

designing data visualizations; or creating web and mobile applications 

and websites that help people access and use the data. In addition, 

agencies use prize competitions or challenges for help solving a problem 

or reaching a specific goal by asking members of the public to submit 

potential solutions. The agency then evaluates these proposals and 

provides a monetary or nonmonetary award to selected winners.

New York City encourages the use of its open data using these strategies 

by hosting data literacy trainings, hackathons, and contests. For example, 

in the spring of 2018 the city hosted a contest to recognize projects that 

effectively use its open data and showcase the diversity of potential uses, 

according to city officials and contest documentation. Winning projects 

were posted to a gallery on the city’s open data website. As shown on the 

city’s open data website, one winner—a project called “Plan(t)wise”—

predicts various tree species’ likelihood of survival in locations throughout 

the city based on tree census data, and recommends which type of tree 

to plant at a given address.

Data are most useful when they are provided in formats that allow them to 

be analyzed in a variety of ways. We identified four key actions for 

providing data in useful formats (see figure 4).

Provide Data in Useful 

Formats
Page 15 GAO-19-72 Open Data

Figure 4: Key Actions for Providing Data in Useful Formats

Provide users with detailed and disaggregated data. Data are most 

useful when they are provided in as much granularity as possible.21 For 

example, Ohio’s online checkbook allows users to view detailed, 

disaggregated data in a user-friendly checkbook format, as shown on the 

website (see figure 5). The representation of the expenditure is displayed 

as a check, and includes the vendor’s name and address, the amount 

paid, payment date, check number, and contact information for the 

appropriate state office.

 21While providing disaggregated data is optimal, we acknowledged earlier that, in some 

cases, aggregation may be necessary to protect sensitive information so that the dataset 

can be released to the public. For example, sensitive data—such as the names of 

individuals receiving housing assistance—can be aggregated by providing summary 

statistics rather than individual data points.
Page 16 GAO-19-72 Open Data

Figure 5: Example of Transaction-Level Spending Data from Ohio’s Online 

Checkbook

Provide machine-readable data that can be downloaded in bulk and 

in selected subsets. Providing data in machine-readable formats makes 

them easier to process and analyze, which is particularly important for 

large datasets. For example, Kansas City officials said the city has been 

working to convert information from the PDF format to machine-readable 

formats such as CSV because PDF documents are challenging for the 

city to update and for users to navigate. In one instance, officials said that 

converting the city’s list of vehicles for sale in its tow lot from PDF to CSV 

format allowed the city to update the data more frequently so that users 

can see what vehicles are for sale at any given time. 

Making data available to download in bulk allows users who need the full 

dataset to easily access it rather than retrieving information record-byrecord. If the full dataset is large, allowing users to download selected 

subsets can make it easier for them to work with only the data they need. 

Data can also be provided to users through an Application Programming 

Interface (API), which allows users to connect directly with the dataset by 

enabling machine-to-machine communication. APIs can be particularly 

useful for large, frequently updated, or highly complex datasets because 

Application Programming Interface (API)

An API sets up machine-to-machine 

communication, which can allow users to 

obtain real-time data updates.

Source: GAO. │ GAO-19-72
Page 17 GAO-19-72 Open Data

they offer users flexibility to obtain the data they need. In addition, 

developers can use APIs to build applications based on the data.

Provide data downloads in a non-proprietary format. To ensure broad 

and equitable access, data downloads should be available in formats that 

do not require specific commercial software to access, and therefore do 

not exclude users who do not have access to such software. Nonproprietary data formats include, but are not limited to, CSV, RDF, TXT, 

and XML. For example, Kansas City, Missouri’s, open data portal allows 

users to export spatial data in an open format that does not require 

proprietary mapping software, according to city officials and the city’s 

open data portal website. Open data experts we spoke with said that 

practitioners should consult stakeholders when determining which format 

is appropriate for a given program, and that the appropriate format may 

change over time as technology advances.

Make the data interoperable with other datasets. Making data 

interoperable with other datasets can make them more useful because 

users may want to create new opportunities for analysis by linking 

datasets together. This can be done by standardizing the way that the 

data are reported. For example, using standard definitions for the specific 

items included in a set of data—known as data elements—can promote 

consistency with other datasets. Additionally, documentation such as data 

dictionaries can help ensure that definitions are clear and avoid 

misunderstandings.

To promote interoperability between datasets that use geographic 

information, Kansas City uses standard land parcel identification numbers 

across departments. This allows different datasets that contain location 

information to be used in combination. For example, officials said that the 

city is linking different datasets that use those identification numbers—

including building code violation data, 311 calls, and dangerous buildings 

data, among others—to build a model to prioritize code enforcement 

inspections.22

 22311 is a non-emergency phone number that people can call in many cities to find 

information about services or report problems such as road damage, among other things. 

Non-Proprietary File Formats

File formats describe what type of information 

a file contains, as well as how that information 

is stored and structured. Some file formats are 

proprietary, meaning that they can only be 

opened by specific commercial software 

applications. In contrast, non-proprietary 

formats are publicly available and can be 

used by all software developers. Examples of 

non-proprietary file formats include:

• CSV, which stores tabular data;

• RDF, which stores metadata;

• TXT, which stores unformatted text; and

• XML, which stores both the format and 

content of data.

Source: GAO. │ GAO-19-72
Page 18 GAO-19-72 Open Data

Providing information about a dataset allows users to determine whether 

it is suitable for their intended purpose, and make informed decisions 

about whether and how to use it. With that in mind, we identified four key 

actions for fully describing the data (see figure 6).

Figure 6: Key Actions for Fully Describing Data

Disclose known data quality issues and limitations. Disclosing data 

quality issues and limitations helps users make informed decisions about 

whether and how to use the data. Disclosure of data quality issues and 

limitations can include descriptions of the completeness, timeliness, and 

accuracy of the data, such as an explanation of why certain data may not 

be disseminated. For example, we observed that Connecticut’s 

“OpenCheckbook” website includes an “About” page explaining that some 

information is excluded to protect privacy, or because it is not processed 

through the state’s financial system, such as the state’s Airport Authority, 

jury duty payments, and unclaimed property.

Disclose data sources and timeliness. Disclosing where the data come 

from and how frequently they are updated provides context that helps 

users judge their quality and determine whether they can be appropriately 

used for the intended purpose. Without this information, users may view, 

download, or use data without full knowledge of the extent to which they 

are timely, complete, or accurate, and therefore could inadvertently draw 

inaccurate conclusions from the data.

Fully Describe the Data
Page 19 GAO-19-72 Open Data

Clearly label data and provide accompanying metadata. In addition, 

data should be clearly labeled and accompanied by structured metadata 

so that users can easily find information about the dataset. Metadata 

describe the characteristics of data in clearly defined, machine-readable 

fields, which can include attributes such as the date the data were 

created or modified, or the license used, among other things. Structuring 

metadata in clearly defined fields makes it possible for search tools to 

filter and match content pertaining to those fields. As shown in figure 7, 

Kansas City’s budget data are accompanied by metadata showing when 

they were last updated, the source of the data, and the name and contact 

link for the dataset owner, among other things.

Figure 7: Metadata for Kansas City, Missouri’s, Budget Data

Publish data under an open license and communicate licensing 

information to users. Documentation for a dataset should also specify 

what license applies to the data because a data license provides users 

with information about how they may use the data, including whether 

Metadata

Metadata provide descriptive information 

about a dataset in a structured, machinereadable format. They describe aspects of the 

dataset—such as the source of the data and 

when it was last updated—in clearly 

delineated fields.

Source: GAO. │ GAO-19-72
Page 20 GAO-19-72 Open Data

there are any restrictions, such as copyrights.23 An open license indicates 

that there are few to no restrictions on how the data may be used. An 

open license can encourage innovation, for example, by assuring users 

that they are permitted to use the data to develop commercial 

applications. To realize these benefits, licensing information should be 

clearly communicated to users, ideally in machine-readable and humanreadable formats. As shown in figure 7, metadata can be used to 

communicate licensing information in a clear and structured way.

Including licensing information in metadata can help ensure that it is 

machine readable—which makes it easier to process and analyze—as 

well as help users discover the licensing information and compare it 

across datasets.

Data discovery is facilitated by presenting the data in a way that enables 

users to easily explore them. We identified five key actions for facilitating 

data discovery for all users (see figure 8).

 23While OMB M-13-13 generally requires federal agencies to apply open licenses, it also 

specifies that “when information is acquired or accessed by an agency through the 

performance of a contract, appropriate existing clauses shall be utilized to meet these 

objectives while recognizing that contractors may have proprietary interests in such 

information, and that protection of such information may be necessary to encourage 

qualified contractors to participate in and apply innovative concepts to government 

programs.”

Facilitate Data Discovery 

for All Users
Page 21 GAO-19-72 Open Data

Figure 8: Key Actions for Facilitating Data Discovery for All Users

Provide an interface that enables intuitive navigation and ensures 

that the most important information is made visible. To facilitate data 

discovery for all users, practitioners of open government data should 

ensure that the data are provided on a website that is simple and intuitive 

so that users can easily navigate it to find the information they need. 

Obtaining user feedback and conducting usability testing can help 

practitioners assess whether the website is easy to use, and identify any 

aspects that do not work well for users. In addition, websites designed to 

work on mobile devices, as well as mobile applications such as Ohio’s 

“OhioCheckbook” app (see figure 9), can allow users to access data on a 

variety of devices, according to the state’s website and our observations.
Page 22 GAO-19-72 Open Data

Figure 9: “OhioCheckbook” Mobile App Showing Payments to Cuyahoga 

Community College

Provide users with appropriate interpretations of the data, such as 

visualizations or summaries. Summaries and visualizations can help 

users explore data. For example, our review of Montgomery County, 

Maryland’s, “spendingMontgomery” website found that the website

provides summary data of the top five services, vendors, and expense 

categories with the greatest amount of spending, as well as a chart of 

annual spending along with historical averages, as shown in figure 10. 

This summary information provides a starting point for users, who can 

then navigate through the website to access more granular data.
Page 23 GAO-19-72 Open Data

Figure 10: Summary Data from the Montgomery County, Maryland’s, 

spendingMontgomery Website

Ensure that the website’s content is written in plain language. The 

content of an open data website should also be written in a way that is 

clear and direct, using plain language. Using commonly understood terms 

rather than technical jargon can help users understand the information 

provided. For example, to use well-understood terms when 

communicating budget information, Kansas City officials told us they 

participated in plain language training and applied that knowledge to the 

city’s open budget data website. In addition, we found that in cases where 

it is necessary to use technical language, providing a glossary that 

defines key terms can help make the information understandable to 

users.
Page 24 GAO-19-72 Open Data

Provide a search function that is optimized for easy and efficient 

use. Open data websites should also include a search function that is 

optimized for easy and efficient use so that users can find information that 

is relevant to them. For example, Connecticut officials said that the 

search function on the state’s open spending data website is designed so 

that users do not need to be familiar with the state government’s structure 

or terminology to find meaningful results. When a user enters a search 

term, the search bar will return a list of items that include this term and a 

description of what they are. For example, when we typed “Education”

into the search bar, the website suggested Department of Education 

spending, bilingual education programs, and a vendor called Family Life 

Education.

In addition, Connecticut officials told us that they track the most 

commonly-used search terms—such as “housing” and “voter turnout”—on 

the state’s open data portal, and test them to verify that the information is 

discoverable. Similarly, Ohio’s online checkbook includes a “Popular 

Searches” tool that provides presaved searches that allow users to see 

expenditures for a variety of categories—such as travel, roads and 

highways, or parks—by clicking a single button. In addition, officials told 

us that if a user’s search returns a large volume of results, a pop-up 

appears prompting the user to narrow their search, which could help them 

focus on more relevant information.

Use central data repositories and catalogues to help users easily 

find the data they are looking for. Central data repositories and 

catalogues—also known as data portals—are websites that provide a 

“one-stop shop” for users to access a variety of datasets. These websites 

host the data directly, link to other websites where users can access the 

data, or a combination of the two. They typically provide descriptions of 

the datasets, as well as structured metadata, to help users find data 

suitable for their purpose. New York City’s open data portal also includes 

a number of tools to help users find datasets, including a search function 

as well as lists of new datasets, popular datasets, and datasets by 

category, as shown in figure 11.
Page 25 GAO-19-72 Open Data

Figure 11: Data Discovery Tools on New York City’s Open Data Portal
Page 26 GAO-19-72 Open Data

We found that USAspending.gov aligns with the key practices of providing 

free and unrestricted data and engaging with users. However, Treasury 

does not fully describe the data and two data elements required by law 

are not searchable. In addition, Treasury lacks a process to ensure all 

pages on the website are secure, consistent with federal requirements.

Spending data are open by default and sensitive information is 

protected. The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 

2006 (FFATA) requires the website displaying the data that agencies 

must provide to be accessible to the public at no cost.24 In response to 

requirements in FFATA, as amended by the Digital Accountability and 

Transparency Act of 2014 (DATA Act), in May 2014, OMB and Treasury 

developed standard definitions for data elements for agencies to report, 

and Treasury displays these open data on USAspending.gov.25 Agencies 

should not report classified or protected information, such as personally 

identifiable information (PII). However, they are required to aggregate 

some awards containing PII at the county or state level if they are unable 

to report spending at the individual level.

All data are available for free. Treasury has made all of the data on 

USAspending.gov available to users at no cost, as required by the DATA 

Act and FFATA. During the course of our work, we found that users could 

only download the complete database after registering for an account with 

the database host—Amazon Web Services. Further, we also found that 

users would incur a charge when attempting to download the entire 

database. Treasury officials said they intended for the data to be available 

 24FFATA, § 2(b)(1).

25FFATA does not require the public disclosure of information that is exempt from 

disclosure under sections 552 and 552a of title 5, United States Code (commonly known 

as the Freedom of Information Act and the Privacy Act of 1974, respectively) or taxpayer 

return information protected by section 6103 of title 26, United States Code. FFATA, § 7. 

We previously reported on OMB and Treasury’s implementation of data standards for 

DATA Act reporting. See GAO, DATA Act: Data Standards Established, but More 

Complete and Timely Guidance Is Needed to Ensure Effective Implementation, 

GAO-16-261 (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 29, 2016). 

USAspending.gov 

Aligns with Several 

Key Practices, but 

Does Not Fully Meet 

Licensing, Search 

Functionality, and 

Other Requirements

USAspending.gov 

Provides Free and 

Unrestricted Spending 

Data 

Key Practice

Provide Free and Unrestricted Data

Source: GAO. │ GAO-19-72
Page 27 GAO-19-72 Open Data

for free and were unaware that users were being charged to access the 

data. In response to our inquiries on this issue, in July 2018, Treasury 

resolved this issue and provided an option for users to download the 

entire database for free without creating an account.

Treasury identifies data users and their needs through user 

research. Treasury researches users to understand their needs when 

working with USAspending data. Treasury has developed profiles for 

eight types of users ranging from data consumers like “Citizen” or 

“Journalist” (see figure 12) to budget analysts or chief financial officers. 

These profiles are part of Treasury’s user-centered design process in 

which officials told us they learn from users, make changes to the 

website, and test whether those changes make the website more useful 

and intuitive to users.

Treasury Engages Users 

by Encouraging Feedback 

and Data Use

Key Practice

Engage with Users

Source: GAO. │ GAO-19-72
Page 28 GAO-19-72 Open Data

Figure 12: Example of a Treasury User Profile

Treasury obtains and responds to user feedback. Treasury officials 

told us that they track user feedback, which informs improvements they 

make to the website. We previously found that Treasury has a variety of 

user feedback mechanisms, including a community forum, one-on-one 

interviews, and a “contact us” link that allows users to provide feedback 

by email.26 As of July 2017, Treasury officials said they had interviewed 

more than 130 users, such as citizens, funding recipients, and federal 

agency officials, regarding USAspending.gov website features. They have 

 26GAO-18-138.
Page 29 GAO-19-72 Open Data

since conducted 20 additional interviews about the user experience and 

received feedback from another 130 users about the Data Lab, a related 

website that offers visual interpretations of the spending data. Treasury 

has also conducted “intercept” interviews where interviewers go to a 

location with large groups of people and request feedback about the 

website from random individuals. For example, figure 13 shows a 

Treasury contractor interviewing a visitor about an early version of 

USAspending.gov at the U.S. Capitol Visitor Center.

Figure 13: Treasury Contractor Interviewing a Member of the Public at the Capitol 

Visitor Center

Treasury officials said they respond to user feedback about 

USAspending.gov on two websites. They respond directly to user 

comments on the USAspending.gov Community website, where users 

can share feedback and find answers to frequently asked questions. 

Treasury officials told us they also track users’ issues as “stories” on an 

open development platform called JIRA, which is their primary way of 

documenting website development decisions and tracking potential 

improvements to the website.27 For example, Treasury added new 

functionality to the Application Programming Interface (API) based on 

user feedback from agencies. Officials said this feature allowed some 

agencies to more efficiently manage their quarterly DATA Act 

submissions. Treasury announces updates to the API and other changes 

to the website via an email newsletter.

 27Treasury tracks users’ issues on the following website: https://federal-spendingtransparency.atlassian.net/secure/Dashboard.jspa.
Page 30 GAO-19-72 Open Data

Treasury reaches out to potential users to encourage data use.

Treasury educates the public about the use of the spending data on 

USAspending.gov and the Data Lab through how-to guides and outreach 

activities. For example, the website offers an “API Guide” for users 

seeking to utilize computer programs to request and receive the data, and 

the Data Lab features an “Analyst Guide” that answers questions about 

using the data.

Treasury officials told us that they have directly engaged with various 

audiences about USAspending.gov. For example, they have engaged 

with the Syracuse University Maxwell School of Government to map the

use of federal funds in New York State. In April 2017, we observed 

Treasury’s participation in a hackathon where participants developed 

ways to use federal spending data, including using the spending data to 

evaluate block grant formulas and track the economic impact of stimulus 

money. Treasury officials said they have held information sessions with 

Congress, federal agencies, and nongovernment organizations.

USAspending.gov provides users with detailed and disaggregated 

data. As shown in figure 14, an award summary page on the website 

displays information on specific awards, including the awarding agency, 

recipient, award amount, description, and location. These pages also 

include transaction histories so that spending can be tracked over time. 

As of October 2018, we found that USAspending.gov listed more than 53 

million pages of prime awards representing more than $33 trillion in 

obligated funds between fiscal year 2008 and 2018.

USAspending.gov Data 

Are Detailed and in 

Standardized Formats, but 

Treasury Lacks Certain

Security Processes

Key Practice

Provide Data in Useful Formats

Source: GAO. │ GAO-19-72
Page 31 GAO-19-72 Open Data

Figure 14: Example of Detailed and Disaggregated Data from a Contract Summary Page on USAspending.gov

Data are machine readable and can be downloaded in bulk and in 

selected subsets, but Treasury lacks a process to fully ensure 

security. As shown in figure 15, USAspending.gov provides six ways for 

users to download the data, including subsets of the data or the complete 

database. An API is also available, which enables machine-to-machine 

communication that allows real-time updates.
Page 32 GAO-19-72 Open Data

Figure 15: Download Options Available on USAspending.gov

During the course of our review, we found that some of the data 

download web addresses did not point to a government domain and were

unsecured. OMB guidance requires that federal web pages be hosted on 

a .gov domain and be encrypted by the secure HTTPS protocol.

28 In 

response to our inquiries on this issue, Treasury updated 

USAspending.gov in October 2018 so that the web pages for the 

database download and agency submission files use the secure HTTPS 

protocol and are on a government domain. As a result, the users 

requesting this information from USAspending.gov now have better 

assurance of the integrity of the data requested, the privacy of their 

connection to USAspending.gov, and that the website they are using is a 

trusted government domain.

Treasury officials said they take steps to ensure they meet federal 

information security requirements, but had not noticed that the web pages 

were unsecured or on a nongovernment domain. According to Treasury 

officials, the agency has a process for the team developing a website to 

vet whether proposed pages are secured and hosted properly, but they 

 28OMB Memorandum M-17-06.
Page 33 GAO-19-72 Open Data

acknowledged unintended gaps in how the process was applied in this 

case, which caused some pages to be omitted. Standards for Internal 

Control in the Federal Government states that management should 

design control activities to achieve objectives and respond to risks.29

Control activities are the policies, procedures, techniques, and 

mechanisms that enforce management’s directives to achieve the entity’s 

objectives and address related risks.

Until the gaps in Treasury’s information security process are addressed, 

the agency does not have assurance that any new pages that may be 

added to USAspending.gov will conform to federal information security 

requirements. In response to our inquiries, Treasury provided 

documentation showing that the agency is in the process of addressing 

the issue to prevent future unintended gaps. The agency has taken initial 

steps to revise its process to ensure that all pages on USAspending.gov 

are secured and hosted properly. We will continue to monitor Treasury’s 

efforts to develop and implement this new process.

Downloads are available in standard, non-proprietary formats. 

Downloads of search results, agency files, and subsets of the 

USAspending.gov database are available in file formats that can be 

opened using common office software, including CSV and XML files.

Spending data are potentially interoperable with other datasets. The 

data in the USAspending.gov database are organized according to a 

government-wide standard which can potentially support interoperability 

with related government datasets. The DATA Act Information Model 

Schema (DAIMS) provides standardized definitions for federal spending 

information, including 57 data standards that federal agencies are 

required to report for DATA Act implementation. These standards come 

with technical specifications describing the format and structure of each 

data element, which are intended to facilitate consistent data reporting 

across the federal government, and allow for interoperability between 

agencies’ data submissions.

According to Treasury’s DAIMS Architecture document, DAIMS could 

eventually support interoperability between USAspending.gov and related 

nonfederal datasets such as state, local, and international spending 

 29GAO, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government, GAO-14-704G 

(Washington, D.C.: September 2014). 
Page 34 GAO-19-72 Open Data

data.30 For example, state governments could make their data 

interoperable with the federal spending data on USAspending.gov by 

developing their own data standards and definitions aligned with DAIMS

as appropriate. In addition, the DAIMS Architecture document specifies 

that future DAIMS content could include federal receipt and financing 

balances with accounts and sources, as well as performance measures 

and outcomes linked to federal grants, awards, or other financial 

assistance.31

Website still does not completely disclose data quality issues.

Treasury has improved the disclosure of data quality issues and 

limitations, but other issues have not yet been described to users. In 

November 2017, we found that the website did not sufficiently disclose 

known limitations affecting data quality.32 We recommended that Treasury 

disclose known data quality issues and limitations. Treasury agreed with 

the recommendation and took the following steps to disclose limitations:

• By May 2018, Treasury had added a “Learn More” box to the website 

with information about the data, including an explanation that the 

Department of Defense reports its data later than other agencies.33

• In June 2018, Treasury added information on unreported spending to 

the Spending Explorer tool that visualizes federal spending, clarifying 

that information reported on the website does not capture the totality 

of federal spending. Treasury explains to users that data might not be 

reported when an agency reports incomplete data, has a submission 

deadline extension, is not required to submit certain data elements, 

and for accounts that are not reported to Treasury.

 30The current version of the DAIMS Architecture and related documentation is available on 

the website of Treasury’s Bureau of the Fiscal Service: 

https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/data-transparency/data-act-v1.2.html.

31While the DATA Act does not require that DAIMS be expanded to include interoperability 

with state, local, and international spending or links with performance measures and 

outcomes, Treasury and OMB could choose to do so as a matter of discretion.

32GAO-18-138. 

33The Department of Defense’s procurement data are released to the public after a 90-day 

waiting period, which results in a 90-day delay in reporting these data to 

USAspending.gov. In addition, the DATA Act specifies that OMB may grant up to three 

extensions for the Department of Defense for reporting financial and payment data, each 

lasting up to 6 months. FFATA, § 4(c)(2)(B).

Treasury Improved 

Descriptions of Data, but 

USAspending.gov Lacks 

Metadata and Complete 

Licensing Information

Key Practice

Fully Describe the Data

Source: GAO. │ GAO-19-72
Page 35 GAO-19-72 Open Data

While the steps Treasury has taken are positive, they do not fully address 

our recommendation. This is because one purpose of the DATA Act is to 

allow users to track federal spending more effectively by linking specific 

awards to financial budgetary information. However, we found that award 

data do not appear in the Spending Explorer for combinations of certain 

agencies and program activities.

34 For example, as figure 16 shows, there 

are “no associated awards” for the program activity “Vaccines for 

Children” within the Department of Health and Human Services account 

for Medicaid grants to states.35 However, the account page for this 

program elsewhere on USAspending.gov shows approximately $3.6 

billion in obligations and various associated awards for the first three 

quarters of fiscal year 2018.There is no context for a user to understand 

whether this information is required for this federal account, missing, or 

searchable elsewhere on the website.

 34A program activity is a specific activity or project as listed in the program and financing 

schedules of the President’s budget. For more information on budget terminology, see 

GAO, A Glossary of Terms Used in the Federal Budget Process (Supersedes AFMD2.1.1), GAO-05-734SP (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 1, 2005). 

35The Department of Human Service’s Grants to States for Medicaid account consists of 

three program activities: Vaccines for Children, Medicaid Vendor Payments, and State 

and Local Administration.
Page 36 GAO-19-72 Open Data

Figure 16: No Award Information in Spending Explorer for the Vaccines for Children Program Activity

Note: In the Spending Explorer, no associated awards are attributed to the Vaccines for Children 

program activity (i.e., spending project) within the Department of Health and Human Services account 

for Medicaid grants to states. However, the account page for this program elsewhere on 

USAspending.gov shows approximately $3.6 billion in obligations and various associated awards for 

the first three quarters of fiscal year 2018.

Treasury officials informed us of a number of data limitations that could 

cause spending data and award data to be disconnected in the Spending 

Explorer, but these issues are not disclosed on the website. According to 

Treasury officials, agencies might not currently report certain data fields 
Page 37 GAO-19-72 Open Data

as some fields are optional, there are inconsistencies between several 

agency data systems, and some agencies have not been able to link 

financial and award data. As a result, the Spending Explorer does not 

consistently provide a clear and complete presentation of federal 

spending, and because Treasury does not disclose these limitations, it 

could limit the ability of taxpayers and policy makers to fully track federal 

spending with this tool.

More broadly, we have raised concerns that USAspending.gov does not 

sufficiently disclose other, broader government-wide data quality issues. 

For example, we found in November 2017 that only between 0 to 1 

percent of awards were fully consistent with agency records.36 While the 

consistency of individual data elements varied, our prior report found 

inconsistencies with agency records in at least 41 percent of the data for 

Award Description, Current Total Value of Award, and Primary Place of 

Performance Address from the second quarter of Fiscal Year 2017.

Website discloses data sources and timeliness. The “About” page and 

“Frequently Asked Questions” describe data sources, data quality, and 

legal requirements. There is also a diagram on the “About” page showing 

how the data go from agencies to the database for USAspending.gov, 

and the frequency with which the data are updated, which is a useful way 

to visualize how the types of award data are updated either daily, bimonthly, or every quarter.

Website labels some data, but lacks structured metadata. Treasury 

labels some of the data on USAspending.gov in tables and data 

visualizations, and describes it in narrative form. The website also 

includes data dictionaries that provide definitions for the data elements.

However, the website lacks structured, machine-readable metadata. OMB 

guidance requires agencies to use metadata to describe their datasets so 

that all users can understand and process open data.37 Agencies must 

consult with the best practices from Project Open Data, OMB’s online 

repository of tools and schema, to help agencies meet the requirements 

of its open data policy. According to Project Open Data, metadata are 

structured information that describe, explain, locate, or otherwise make it 

easier to retrieve, use, or manage datasets like that displayed on 

 36GAO-18-138.

37See OMB Memorandum M-13-13 (May 9, 2013). 
Page 38 GAO-19-72 Open Data

USAspending.gov. This guidance also indicates that making metadata 

machine readable greatly increases their utility.

Treasury officials said the types of information found in metadata are 

already available in a number of separate documents on Treasury’s 

Fiscal Service web page.38 Treasury officials told us that they decided not 

to provide structured metadata on USAspending.gov because it is more 

efficient to provide external links to other websites. Further, Treasury 

officials asserted that providing metadata on those websites is sufficient 

to comply with OMB guidance.39

However, the information found on these various websites does not align 

with best practices outlined in Project Open Data, or the key action to 

clearly label data and provide accompanying metadata, because it is not 

provided in a single place on USAspending.gov as structured metadata in 

a machine-readable format. Without easy access to information that fully 

describes the data, it may be difficult or time consuming for users of 

USAspending.gov to find the information available on other websites, and 

determine whether or how to use the data for their purposes.

Website lacks complete licensing information. While the website 

describes restrictions on the use of proprietary contract data from Dun & 

Bradstreet Inc.’s Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS), it does not 

 38The various documents that describe metadata for USAspending.gov include the 

Interface Definition Document, Reporting System Specifications, and the Online Data 

Dictionary. The DAIMS Consumption-Focused Metadata document is available on the site 

of Treasury’s Fiscal Service at https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/data-transparency/data-actv1.2.html.

39We found structured, machine-readable metadata for USAspending.gov on DATA.gov, a 

government repository of databases. These metadata were updated in September 2018. 

Metadata for “USAspending.gov Federal Award, Subaward, and Account Data” can be 

found at 

https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/usaspending-gov-contracts-and-purchases-a7059. 

Metadata for agency’s raw submission files can be found at 

https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/usaspending-gov-grants-and-loans-89a71. 
Page 39 GAO-19-72 Open Data

include general licensing information for the rest of the data.40 The 

website includes a link to a notice specifying the “Limitation on 

Permissible Use of Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. Data.” According to Treasury 

officials, most data on USAspending.gov are in the public domain, but we 

found that the website does not clearly indicate which data are openly 

available to use without restrictions.

OMB M-13-13 specifies that federal agencies “must apply open licenses,

in consultation with the best practices found in Project Open Data, to 

information as it is collected or created so that if data are made public 

there are no restrictions on copying, publishing, distributing, transmitting, 

adapting, or otherwise using the information for non-commercial or for 

commercial purposes.”41 According to OMB staff, agencies should include 

licenses in metadata so that this information is machine readable. If data 

access is limited, this should also be prominently featured in the 

metadata. In addition, Project Open Data specifies that licensing 

information should be provided in metadata.

Treasury officials said that the agency is evaluating options and 

approaches for including open data licensing information on the website, 

consistent with OMB M-13-13. In addition, Treasury officials said they had 

only received one question from users about licensing.

However, not displaying licensing information for the majority of data 

elements on the website is not consistent with the key action to publish 

data under an open license and communicate licensing information to 

 40In June 2012, we found that Dun & Bradstreet had placed restrictions on DUNS numbers 

that limit the purposes for which the government can use the data, and hamper the ability 

to switch to a new numbering system. We recommended that the Administrator of GSA 

initiate discussions with Dun & Bradstreet on ways to reduce restrictions on the use of 

DUNS numbers. GSA agreed with our recommendation and took steps to consider 

alternatives. OMB staff told us in April 2018 that they were conducting an analysis of 

alternatives to DUNS that will be completed in December 2018. See GAO, Government Is 

Analyzing Alternatives for Contractor Identification Numbers, GAO-12-715R (Washington, 

D.C.: June 12, 2012). 

41See OMB Memorandum, M-13-13 (May 9, 2013). As stated earlier in this report, M-13-

13 also specifies that “when information is acquired or accessed by an agency through 

performance of a contract, appropriate existing clauses shall be utilized to meet these 

objectives while recognizing that contractors may have proprietary interests in such 

information, and that protection of such information may be necessary to encourage 

qualified contractors to participate in and apply innovating concepts to government 

programs.” Treasury’s disclosure of DUNS data restrictions is consistent with this 

provision.
Page 40 GAO-19-72 Open Data

users. Without licensing information for all of the data, users will likely be 

unable to determine what license, if any, applies to USAspending.gov, 

and it will be unclear to the public whether there are any restrictions to 

reusing data that they can download from the website.

Website includes a user interface to assist navigation. 

USAspending.gov’s top menu gives users various ways to explore, 

search, download, and understand the most important information. The 

menu links to the Spending Explorer, Award Search, Profiles, Download 

Center, and Glossary. There is also “featured content” on the home page 

guiding users to the Data Lab, and other new features such as a 

download option for Federal Account data and recipient profile pages for 

any entity that has received federal money in the form of contracts, 

grants, loans, or other financial assistance.

Interactive visualizations enable exploration. Search results can be 

visualized by prime award or subaward aggregated in a table, in a chart 

showing awards over time, in a map showing the geographic distribution 

of awards (see figure 17 for an example of social security insurance 

results mapped by congressional district), or in a bar chart showing the 

top 10 awards by category. The visualizations show how spending has 

increased over time, the regional concentration of spending, and a list of 

the top recipients.

USAspending.gov Makes 

Data Easy to Discover, but 

Does Not Fully Meet 

Search Requirements

Key Practice

Facilitate Data Discovery for All Users

Source: GAO. │ GAO-19-72
Page 41 GAO-19-72 Open Data

Figure 17: Example of a Map of Advanced Search Results for Social Security 

Retirement Insurance (as of September 2018)

We found that the Spending Explorer provides a simple, graphical 

interface that allows users to navigate spending data by budget function, 

agency, and object class.42 It gives users the option to drill down from 

these three high-level categories to specific program activities, federal 

accounts, recipients, or awards. It displays the total amount obligated for 

the selected category, and a breakdown of the amounts in dollars and as 

a percentage of the total.43

The Data Lab is a separate website linked to USAspending.gov that 

offers users visual interpretations of the spending data. Treasury officials 

 42The “budget function” classification system is a way of grouping budgetary resources so 

that all budget authority and outlays of on- and off-budget federal entities and tax 

expenditures can be presented according to the national needs being addressed, such as 

agriculture or national defense. The “object class” is a uniform classification identifying the 

obligations of the federal government by the types of goods or services purchased (such 

as personnel compensation, supplies and materials, and equipment) without regard to the 

agency involved or the purpose of the programs for which they are used. 

43An “obligation” is a definite commitment that creates a legal liability of the government 

for the payment of goods and services ordered or received, or a legal duty on the part of 

the United States that could mature into a legal liability by virtue of actions on the part of 

the other party beyond the control of the United States.
Page 42 GAO-19-72 Open Data

said the “Contract Explorer Sunburst” is a popular Data Lab visualization. 

As shown in figure 18, it provides users an interactive overview of about 

$500 billion in federal contract data organized as a set of concentric 

circles starting from the funding agency (inner ring) to the recipients 

(outer ring). Treasury officials noted that analyses and visualizations in 

the Data Lab are updated with varying frequency because it can be a 

challenge to continually update some of the visualizations.

Figure 18: Example of a Contract Explorer “Sunburst” Visualization from the Data Lab (as of September 2018)

The website includes a glossary that provides plain language 

definitions of terms that describe the spending data. To help users 

understand the data on USASpending.gov, the website provides a 

“Glossary” sidebar that is available on every page of the website, and 

provides users both “plain language” and official definitions of financial 

terms that are used on the website, as shown in figure 19. According to 
Page 43 GAO-19-72 Open Data

the key practices we identified, using commonly understood terms rather 

than technical jargon can help users understand the information provided.

Figure 19: Example of Plain Language (left) and Official Definition (right) on 

USAspending.gov

A variety of search tools are available, but program source and city 

are not searchable. We found that the website features a variety of 

search tools to help users find and interpret the data. Users can search 

the data using generic keyword search and advanced search filters. 

These features allow users to explore and quickly obtain large volumes of 

award results. For example, we found that searching by funding agency 

returns all spending by that particular federal agency and by award.

However, we tested the search functionality of the website and found that 

two data elements required to be searchable by FFATA, as amended by 

the DATA Act, were not: (1) program source (Treasury Account Symbol 
Page 44 GAO-19-72 Open Data

(TAS)) and (2) city.44 Our search testing of a nongeneralizable, random 

sample of awards for data elements required by FFATA successfully 

found most of the data elements, but we were unable to search for 

program source (TAS) or city.45 TAS and city data can be downloaded 

and are displayed on award web pages, but we were not able to search 

for them using either the advanced or keyword search pages. Treasury 

officials said they did not include functionality to search for these two 

required data elements on the new website because users searching by 

these data elements on the Beta version of the website had received 

confusing results. This is due in part to the fact that agency submissions 

with these data elements used different standards before and after the 

DATA Act. Instead, according to our review of the website, users can 

access TAS and city information using the website’s navigation features, 

which officials said meets the spirit of the FFATA requirement.

However, simply displaying TAS or city information only on award or 

federal account pages does not meet the FFATA requirement that users 

be able to search for this information. Users currently have to click on a 

specific award or federal account page, and scroll through the web page 

to find the relevant section that shows city or TAS information. If federal 

agencies and Congress are not able to search for TAS, they cannot easily 

connect detailed information on financial transactions to federal accounts 

for management or oversight purposes. In addition, users looking for 

geographic information related to recipients or federal programs cannot 

easily search USAspending.gov by city.

 44TAS is a code assigned by Treasury to individual appropriation, receipt, or other fund 

accounts. All financial transactions of the federal government are classified by TAS for 

reporting to Treasury and OMB. TAS includes the account symbol and the period of 

availability for the funds it contains, among other things. For example, the Department of 

Education’s Higher Education account includes TAS 091-2018/2018-0201-000. Code 091 

is the Department of Education’s agency code, 2018/2018 indicates that the funds are 

available for fiscal year 2018, 0201 is the account symbol for the Higher Education 

account, and 000 is the sub-account. According to OMB Memorandum M-09-19, TAS is 

considered the official program source for use in USAspending.gov. 

45The data elements required by FFATA that we tested include the following: 

Awardee/Recipient Legal Entity Name, Award Type, Funding Agency Name, North 

American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Code, Catalogue of Financial Domestic 

Assistance (CFDA) Number, Treasury Account Symbol, Award Description, Primary Place 

of Performance Address, Primary Place of Performance Congressional District, Legal 

Entity Address, Legal Entity Congressional District, Awardee/Recipient Legal Entity 

Identifier, Ultimate Parent Unique Identifier. FFATA, §§ 2(b)(1); 4(b)(3).
Page 45 GAO-19-72 Open Data

Government data catalogues and repositories link to 

USAspending.gov. Treasury facilitates discovery of the DATA Act data 

by linking to USAspending.gov from centralized data repositories and 

catalogues. Information and links to USAspending.gov can be found on 

DATA.gov, which is a data catalogue for a variety of U.S. government 

datasets.46

Treasury maintains a web page on GitHub, a public online collaboration 

website, designed to share information about its process in meeting the 

requirements of the DATA Act, including information and links to 

USAspending.gov.47 Associated pages on this GitHub site serve as a 

data repository for the computer code behind the central data submission 

platform for the DATA Act, called the Data Act Broker, the API for 

USAspending.gov, and the USAspending.gov website itself.

USAspending.gov is a major open government data program with the 

potential to be a model for transparently reporting government data—if 

Treasury takes additional steps to further align it with the five key 

practices and associated key actions for open data in addition to DATA 

Act requirements. USAspending.gov has already followed several key 

actions such as providing the data on the website for free, engaging the 

public online and in person, providing detailed and disaggregated data for 

download, and making interactive tools so users can interpret and 

visualize the data. Treasury has also made progress in disclosing 

limitations of the data, although it has not fully addressed our prior 

recommendation to do more to make users fully aware of issues that 

affect its quality.

However, Treasury has not fully aligned USAspending.gov with some key 

practices or federal website standards, and has not fully implemented the

search functionality required by FFATA, as amended by the DATA Act. 

As a result, users may not be able to find the information they need, and 

may not have confidence in the integrity of the data. Treasury updated 

USAspending.gov in October 2018 so that the web pages for the 

database download and agency submission files available at that time 

 46According to OMB guidance, individual agencies are required to report their DATA Act 

data to DATA.gov. 

47Treasury’s “fedspendingtransparency” GitHub page is located at 

https://github.com/fedspendingtransparency. 

Conclusions
Page 46 GAO-19-72 Open Data

used the secure HTTPS protocol and a government domain. However, 

without an effective control process in place, Treasury does not have 

assurance that any new pages that may be added to USAspending.gov 

will conform to certain federal information security requirements. 

Furthermore, without easy access to structured metadata, it may be 

difficult or time consuming for users of USAspending.gov to find the 

information they need to determine whether or how to use the data. 

Similarly, the lack of an explicit open license might discourage some 

users from using the data to develop innovative commercial products. 

Users are also not able to easily search award information by program 

source or city, as required by FFATA, which could limit their ability to find 

and use these data to inform future decision making.

We are making a total of five recommendations to Treasury. Specifically:

The Secretary of the Treasury should establish a process to ensure all 

pages on the USAspending.gov website use the secure HTTPS protocol, 

consistent with OMB requirements. (Recommendation 1)

The Secretary of the Treasury should establish a process to ensure all 

content on USAspending.gov is available from a government domain, 

consistent with OMB requirements. (Recommendation 2)

The Secretary of the Treasury should fully comply with OMB’s 

requirements by providing metadata in a single location that are easy to 

find on the USAspending.gov website. (Recommendation 3)

The Secretary of the Treasury should fully comply with OMB’s 

requirements by communicating licensing information on 

USAspending.gov. (Recommendation 4)

The Secretary of the Treasury should ensure that users can easily search 

for awards by city and program source (TAS), consistent with FFATA 

requirements. (Recommendation 5)

Recommendations for 

Executive Action
Page 47 GAO-19-72 Open Data

We provided a draft of this report to the Secretary of the Treasury, the 

Director of OMB, and the Administrator of GSA for review and comment. 

Treasury provided written responses, which are summarized below and 

reproduced in appendix II. Treasury and OMB also provided technical 

comments, which we incorporated as appropriate. GSA responded that 

the agency had no comments on the report. 

In its written response, Treasury highlighted areas where 

USAspending.gov aligned with the key practices that we identified for 

transparently reporting government data, such as engaging users and 

providing the data in useful formats. Treasury agreed with our 

recommendations. Treasury stated that the agency has already taken 

steps to address our first two recommendations, to establish processes to 

ensure that all pages on USAspending.gov use the secure HTTPS 

protocol and to ensure that all content on the website is available from a 

government domain. Treasury provided us with documentation of a 

revised process that is intended to address these issues. We revised the 

report to acknowledge that Treasury has taken these steps. We will 

continue to monitor Treasury’s efforts to develop and implement this new 

process and update the status of our recommendations accordingly.

We also provided excerpts of the draft report to Connecticut; Kansas City, 

Missouri; Los Angeles, California; Montgomery County, Maryland; New 

York City, New York; and Ohio. Los Angeles, Montgomery County, New 

York City, and Ohio provided technical comments, which we incorporated 

as appropriate. Connecticut and Kansas City officials responded that they 

had no comments.

We are sending copies of this report to the Secretary of the Treasury, the 

Director of OMB, and the Administrator of the General Services 

Administration, as well as interested congressional committees and other 

interested parties. This report will be available at no charge on our 

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

Agency Comments, 

Third-Party Views,

and Our Evaluation
Page 48 GAO-19-72 Open Data

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

Triana McNeil 202-512-6806 or McNeilT@gao.gov. Contact points for our 

Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on 

the last page of our report. Key contributors to this report are listed in 

appendix III.

Triana McNeil

Acting Director

Strategic Issues
Page 49 GAO-19-72 Open Data

List of Congressional Addressees

The Honorable Ron Johnson

Chairman

The Honorable Claire McCaskill

Ranking Member

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

United States Senate

The Honorable Rob Portman

Chairman

The Honorable Thomas R. Carper

Ranking Member

Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

United States Senate

The Honorable Trey Gowdy

Chairman

The Honorable Elijah E. Cummings

Ranking Member

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

House of Representatives

The Honorable Mark Meadows

Chairman

The Honorable Gerald E. Connolly

Ranking Member

Subcommittee on Government Operations

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

House of Representatives

The Honorable Will Hurd

Chairman

The Honorable Robin Kelly

Ranking Member

Subcommittee on Information Technology

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

House of Representatives

The Honorable Mark R. Warner

United States Senate
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 50 GAO-19-72 Open Data

The Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014 (DATA Act) 

includes a provision for us to review implementation of the act. Over the 

last 4 years, we have issued 13 reports assessing various aspects of 

DATA Act implementation.1 This report builds on our body of work on the 

DATA Act and (1) identifies key practices for transparently reporting 

government data on a centralized website, and (2) evaluates the extent to 

which the new USAspending.gov is consistent with these key practices, 

as well as existing standards for federal websites.

To identify key practices for transparently reporting open government 

data on a centralized website, we conducted a literature review and 

interviewed experts on open data and representatives of good 

governance groups. We also identified illustrative examples by 

interviewing open data practitioners from state and local governments.

Literature review. To conduct the literature review, we first identified 

relevant publications using a number of bibliographic databases, including 

ProQuest, the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and 

Development’s (OECD) iLibrary, the National Technical Information 

Service, and the Public Affairs Information Service. We reviewed articles 

that focused on open data programs and practices in OECD countries, 

including scholarly peer-reviewed articles, working papers, conference 

papers, and reports by policy research organizations, nonprofit 

organizations, and associations. We conducted our search in March 2017 

and subsequently added relevant articles identified during our 

background research.2 To systematically review these articles, one 

analyst reviewed each article to identify relevant themes. A second 

analyst then reviewed the documentation to verify categorization 

decisions. Then, both analysts met to resolve any discrepancies. We 

evaluated and synthesized the categorized information to identify 

commonly-reported key practices for transparently reporting open 

government data.

Interviews with experts. We selected open data and good governance 

experts based on recommendations made by other experts, frequent 

 1

A list of related products, including our prior work on the DATA Act and 

USAspending.gov, is included at the end of this report. 

2

We did not limit our review of relevant sources by date because many of the articles we 

reviewed are undated web publications.

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Identifying Key Practices
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 51 GAO-19-72 Open Data

citations in others’ work, and recent contributions to the field. We also 

selected experts that represent a variety of sectors and backgrounds 

(such as government, academia, and nonprofit organizations). We 

obtained the views of the following individuals and organizations:

• Andrew Stott, former United Kingdom Director for Transparency and 

Digital Engagement,

• Center for Open Data Enterprise,

• Code for America,

• Data Coalition,

• Dr. Anneke Zuiderwijk-van Eijk, Delft University of Technology,

• General Services Administration (GSA),

• Global Initiative for Fiscal Transparency,

• Governance Laboratory of New York University,

• IBM Center for the Business of Government,

• International Budget Partnership,

• Johns Hopkins University Center for Government Excellence,

• Project on Government Oversight,

• ProPublica,

• Results for America,

• Sunlight Foundation,

• U.S. Public Interest Research Group,

• What Works Cities, and

• World Bank.

We first had open-ended conversations with experts to obtain their views 

on what key practices exist for transparently reporting open government 

data. After developing an initial list of key practices, we then conducted a 

second round of interviews with experts to finalize the list. We shared a 

draft of the key practices with the Department of the Treasury (Treasury), 

the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and GSA.

Illustrative examples. To obtain illustrative examples showing how those 

key practices can be implemented, we selected open data practitioners 

from six selected state and local governments:
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 52 GAO-19-72 Open Data

• Connecticut;

• Kansas City, Missouri;

• Los Angeles, California;

• Montgomery County, Maryland;

• New York City, New York; and

• Ohio.

We selected these practitioners because they were identified in our 

literature search and by the experts we spoke with as having wellregarded open data websites. We also selected practitioners that have 

websites with both a general open data portal and visualizations showing 

budget or spending data. We also selected practitioners that represent 

different locations and levels of government, including cities, counties, 

and states. We reviewed these practitioners’ open data websites and 

related documentation, and interviewed cognizant state and local 

government officials.

To assess the extent to which USAspending.gov is consistent with the 

key practices and selected standards for federal websites, we reviewed 

the website, reviewed agency documents, observed Treasury’s 

participation in a hackathon, and interviewed OMB staff and Treasury 

officials. Specifically, we analyzed the USAspending.gov website to 

determine how it aligned with the key practices and the extent to which 

data elements were searchable as required by the Federal Funding 

Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA). We also assessed 

USAspending.gov against criteria for federal websites and open data 

programs, including OMB M-17-06, Policies for Federal Agency Public 

Websites and Digital Services, and OMB M-13-13, Open Data Policy—

Managing Information as an Asset.

To evaluate the extent to which the USAspending.gov search functionality 

complies with FFATA requirements, as amended by the DATA Act, we 

randomly selected a nongeneralizable sample of 30 awards (consisting of 

15 contracts and 15 financial assistance awards) downloaded from 

USAspending.gov for fiscal year 2017. We identified the required FFATA 

data elements from these awards, searched for these elements on 

USAspending.gov in July 2018, recorded whether each search 

successfully resulted in a matching award, and observed any other issues 

that occurred during testing. Finally, we interviewed Treasury officials to 

corroborate our observations on search functionality and other aspects of 

Evaluating 

USAspending.gov
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 53 GAO-19-72 Open Data

the website, and discussed any planned improvements to the website. 

We also interviewed GSA officials and OMB staff to clarify policies and 

procedures for federal websites.

We conducted this performance audit from February 2017 to December 

2018 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: Comments from the Department 

of the Treasury

Page 54 GAO-19-72 Open Data

Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of the Treasury
Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of the Treasury

Page 55 GAO-19-72 Open Data
Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments

Page 56 GAO-19-72 Open Data

Triana McNeil, (202) 512-6806 or mcneilt@gao.gov

In addition to the contact named above, Thomas J. McCabe, Assistant 

Director, and Laurel Plume, Analyst-in-Charge, supervised the 

development of this report. Colenn Berracasa, Samuel Gaffigan, and 

Parke Nicholson made major contributions to this report. Also contributing 

to this report in their areas of expertise were Michael Bechetti, Steven 

Campbell, Mark Canter, Jenny Chanley, Jacqueline Chapin, Peter Del 

Toro, Nancy Donovan, Kathleen Drennan, Sarah Gilliland, Sarah 

Kaczmarek, Michael LaForge, Paula M. Rascona, Andrew J. Stephens, 

and James Sweetman, Jr.

Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments

GAO Contact

Staff 

Acknowledgements
Related GAO Products

Page 57 GAO-19-72 Open Data

DATA Act: Reported Quality of Agencies’ Spending Data Reviewed by 

OIGs Varied Because of Government-wide and Agency Issues.

GAO-18-546. Washington, D.C.: July 23, 2018.

DATA Act: OMB, Treasury, and Agencies Need to Improve Completeness 

and Accuracy of Spending Data and Disclose Limitations. GAO-18-138. 

Washington, D.C.: November 8, 2017.

Open Innovation: Executive Branch Developed Resources to Support 

Implementation, but Guidance Could Better Reflect Leading Practices. 

GAO-17-507. Washington, D.C.: June 8, 2017.

DATA Act: As Reporting Deadline Nears, Challenges Remain That Will 

Affect Data Quality. GAO-17-496. Washington, D.C.: April 28, 2017.

DATA Act: Office of Inspector General Reports Help Identify Agencies’ 

Implementation Challenges. GAO-17-460. Washington, D.C.: April 26, 

2017.

DATA Act: Implementation Progresses but Challenges Remain.

GAO-17-282T. Washington, D.C.: December 8, 2016.

DATA Act: OMB and Treasury Have Issued Additional Guidance and 

Have Improved Pilot Design but Implementation Challenges Remain.

GAO-17-156. Washington, D.C.: December 8, 2016.

Open Innovation: Practices to Engage Citizens and Effectively Implement 

Federal Initiatives. GAO-17-14. Washington, D.C.: October 13, 2016.

DATA Act: Initial Observations on Technical Implementation.

GAO-16-824R. Washington, D.C.: August 3, 2016.

DATA Act: Improvements Needed in Reviewing Agency Implementation 

Plans and Monitoring Progress. GAO-16-698. Washington, D.C.: July 29, 

2016.

DATA Act: Section 5 Pilot Design Issues Need to Be Addressed to Meet 

Goal of Reducing Recipient Reporting Burden. GAO-16-438. Washington, 

D.C.: April 19, 2016.

DATA Act: Progress Made but Significant Challenges Must Be Addressed 

to Ensure Full and Effective Implementation. GAO-16-556T. Washington, 

D.C.: April 19, 2016.

Related GAO Products
Related GAO Products

Page 58 GAO-19-72 Open Data

DATA Act: Data Standards Established, but More Complete and Timely 

Guidance Is Needed to Ensure Effective Implementation. GAO-16-261. 

Washington, D.C.: January 29, 2016.

DATA Act: Progress Made in Initial Implementation but Challenges Must 

be Addressed as Efforts Proceed. GAO-15-752T. Washington, D.C.: July 

29, 2015.

Federal Data Transparency: Effective Implementation of the DATA Act 

Would Help Address Government-wide Management Challenges and 

Improve Oversight. GAO-15-241T. Washington, D.C.: December 3, 2014.

Government Efficiency and Effectiveness: Inconsistent Definitions and 

Information Limit the Usefulness of Federal Program Inventories.

GAO-15-83. Washington, D.C.: October 31, 2014.

Data Transparency: Oversight Needed to Address Underreporting and 

Inconsistencies on Federal Award Website. GAO-14-476. Washington, 

D.C.: June 30, 2014.

Federal Data Transparency: Opportunities Remain to Incorporate 

Lessons Learned as Availability of Spending Data Increases.

GAO-13-758. Washington, D.C.: September 12, 2013.

Government Transparency: Efforts to Improve Information on Federal 

Spending. GAO-12-913T. Washington, D.C.: July 18, 2012.

Electronic Government: Implementation of the Federal Funding 

Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006. GAO-10-365. Washington, 

D.C.: March 12, 2010.

(101453)
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 (https://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 https://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, https://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 https://www.gao.gov.

Contact:

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

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7700

Orice Williams Brown, Managing Director, WilliamsO@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

James-Christian Blockwood, Managing Director, spel@gao.gov, (202) 512-4707

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7814, 

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

Strategic Planning and 

External Liaison

Please Print on Recycled Paper.