Government Efficiency and Effectiveness: Views on the Progress and Plans for Addressing Government-wide Management Challenges
Published: 2014-03-12T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: The federal government is one of the world's largest and most diverse entities, with about $3.5 trillion in outlays in fiscal year 2013, funding an extensive array of programs and operations. Moreover, it faces a number of significant fiscal, management, and governance challenges in responding to the varied and increasingly complex issues it seeks to address.
This statement focuses on (1) GAO's work related to the President's Management Agenda, and (2) additional opportunities for decision makers to address major management challenges.
This statement is primarily based upon our published and ongoing work covering GAO's High Risk List; fragmentation, overlap, and duplication reports; and managing for results work. The work upon which these published reports and preliminary findings were based was conducted in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.
GAO has made numerous recommendations to OMB and executive branch agencies in these areas and reports in this statement on the status of selected key recommendations.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: A number of areas on the President's Management Agenda are consistent with issues highlighted by GAO's work on the High Risk Program, its annual reports on fragmentation, overlap, and duplication, and other work related to long-standing management challenges. These include, for example: using information technology to better manage for results; addressing improper payments; expanding strategic sourcing; strengthening strategic human capital management; and improving the Department of Defense's weapon systems and services acquisitions. Lasting success in addressing the difficult and longstanding issues on the Presidents Management Agenda will hinge on effective implementation, including sustained top leadership attention. GAO and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) have agreed to hold a series of high level meetings on the issues on GAO's High Risk List to discuss progress and actions that are needed to fully address high-risk issues. Further, the executive branch has taken a number of steps to implement key provisions of the GPRA Modernization Act by developing cross-agency and agency priority goals; assigning performance management roles and responsibilities to leadership; conducting agency quarterly performance reviews; and developing Performance.gov, a website that provides quarterly updates on the priority goals.
However, additional opportunities exist for decision makers to address major performance management challenges, including, for example:
Developing a comprehensive inventory of federal programs. GAO's preliminary review of the program inventories produced by 24 large federal agencies identified concerns about the usefulness of the information provided in these inventories for addressing crosscutting issues.
Enhancing the use of collaborative mechanisms. Addressing many of the challenges government faces requires collaboration across agencies, levels of government, or sectors. Yet the mechanisms the federal government uses to collaborate do not always operate effectively.
Effectively implementing strategic reviews . Starting in 2014, agency leaders are to annually assess how relevant organizations, programs, and activities, both within and outside of their agencies, are contributing to progress on their strategic objectives and identify corrective actions where progress is lagging. Such reviews could help address fragmentation, overlap, and duplication issues.
Improving capacity to gather and use better performance information . GAO's work has found that federal decision makers often lack complete and reliable performance data needed to address the government's management challenges.
Furthermore, the administration needs to accelerate progress in (1) addressing major impediments preventing GAO from rendering an opinion on the U.S. government's consolidated financial statements and risks to the government's future financial condition; (2) elevating top leadership attention to the areas identified in our annual reports on fragmentation, overlap, and duplication; and (3) responding to pressing challenges with its cybersecurity, such as evolving cyber threats to systems supporting government operations and critical infrastructure. Congress also has key roles in addressing each of these issues.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: I am pleased to be here today to discuss efforts under way to address  major management challenges facing the federal government, as well as  opportunities for the administration and Congress to make further  progress moving forward. The federal government is one of the world’s  largest and most diverse entities, with about $3.5 trillion in outlays in fiscal  year 2013, funding an extensive array of programs and operations. In  responding to the varied and increasingly complex issues the federal  government seeks to address, it faces a number of significant fiscal,  management, and governance challenges.
My statement today focuses on (1) GAO’s work related to the President’s  Management Agenda, and (2) additional opportunities for decision  makers to address major management challenges. My comments are  primarily based upon our published and ongoing work covering GAO’s  High Risk List; fragmentation, overlap and duplication reports; and  managing for results work. The work upon which these published reports  and preliminary findings were based was conducted in accordance with  generally accepted government auditing standards.
subsections: section_title: The President’s Management Agenda Covers Many Areas Highlighted by GAO as Needing Attention
paragraphs: A number of areas on the President’s Management Agenda are  consistent with issues highlighted by our work on the High Risk Program,  our annual reports on fragmentation, overlap, and duplication, and other  work related to long-standing management challenges. Over the years,  we have made hundreds of recommendations to address these issues.  The current and prior administrations have taken actions to address many  of these recommendations, and have made progress in many areas.
Much more, however, remains to be done. Lasting solutions to remaining  issues offer the potential to save billions of dollars, dramatically improve  service to the American public, and strengthen public confidence and  trust in the performance and accountability of our national government.  Examples of where the President’s Management Agenda and our work  are consistent include:
Using information technology (IT) to better manage for results.
The government invests about $80 billion annually in IT. Improving the  transparency of about 700 major IT investments with the IT  Dashboard can help focus attention on troubled projects. In addition,  holding executive reviews, known as TechStat sessions, of selected  investments that are not producing results has resulted in positive  outcomes such as accelerated delivery, reduced scope, and  termination. We have made recommendations to improve the  accuracy and use of the IT Dashboard and for the Office of  Management and Budget (OMB) and agencies to hold more TechStat  sessions. OMB has generally concurred with our Dashboard  recommendations and has taken actions such as improving the  accuracy of the reported investment cost and schedule data. OMB  also agreed with our recommendation to hold more TechStat sessions  and stated that OMB and the agencies were taking appropriate steps  to meet that recommendation.
Other IT initiatives such as PortfolioStat and Data Center  Consolidation can eliminate duplicative investments and close  hundreds of centers, resulting in billions in savings. For example, we  recently reported that the PortfolioStat initiative has the potential to  save between $5.8 and $7.9 billion. We have made multiple  recommendations to OMB and agencies to more fully implement and  report on eliminating duplicative and inefficient IT investments. OMB  agreed with some of these recommendations and subsequently  clarified its guidance on how agencies should identify potentially  duplicative investments. Further, agencies have also generally agreed  with our recommendations and taken steps such as conducting  portfolio reviews to identify duplicative investments and report those  results via the IT Dashboard.
Addressing improper payments. The federal government serves as  the steward of taxpayer dollars and should safeguard them against  improper payments. The President’s Management Agenda is  consistent with our prior reporting that predictive analytic technologies  can help agencies better identify and prevent improper payments.  Further, OMB reported that it plans to develop more detailed  categories of improper payments, which can help agencies tailor  corrective action plans to better address the root causes of improper  payments.
In fiscal year 2013, estimated governmentwide improper payments  totaled approximately $106 billion; however, this may not cover the full  extent of improper payments throughout the federal government. In  order to determine the full extent of improper payments  governmentwide and to more effectively reduce and recover them,  continued attention is needed to (1) adopt sound risk assessment and  improper payment estimation methodologies and (2) develop effective  corrective action plans and preventive and detective controls to  address the root causes of improper payments.
Expanding strategic sourcing. One area that could yield significant  cost savings is the expanded use of strategic sourcing, a process that  moves away from numerous individual procurements to a broader  aggregate approach. Our work has found that federal agencies could  better leverage their buying power and achieve additional savings by  directing more procurement spending to existing strategic sourcing  contracts and further expanding strategic sourcing practices to their  highest spending procurement categories. For example, most  agencies’ efforts do not address their highest spending areas such as  services.
We estimated that savings of one percent from selected large  agencies’ procurement spending alone would equate to over $4  billion. In that regard, the President’s Management Agenda calls on  federal agencies to expand the use of strategic sourcing to better  leverage the government’s buying power and reduce contract  duplication. It did not, however, lay out specific governmentwide  metrics or savings goals. We had previously recommended that OMB  establish additional metrics to measure progress toward goals. OMB  has efforts underway to address this recommendation.
Strengthening strategic human capital management. Consistent  with the President’s Management Agenda goal to attract and retain a  talented workforce, foster a culture of excellence, and invest in the  Senior Executive Service (SES), we have reported that addressing  complex challenges such as homeland security, economic stability,  and other national priorities requires a high-quality workforce able to  work seamlessly with other agencies, levels of government, and  across sectors. Strategic human capital management has been on our  High Risk List since 2001.
Since then, as a result of actions taken by Congress, the Office of  Personnel Management, and individual agencies, important progress  has been made. Still, additional efforts are needed in such areas as  human capital planning, building results-oriented cultures, and talent  management, such as (1) addressing government-wide and agency- specific skill gaps and enhancing workforce diversity, (2)  strengthening performance management systems to improve the “line  of sight” between individual performance and organizational  outcomes, and (3) fully assessing the costs and benefits of SES  training.
Improving the Department of Defense’s (DOD) weapons systems  and services acquisition. The President’s Management Agenda is  consistent with our findings and recommendations on improving the  Department of Defense’s (DOD) acquisition of weapon systems and  services, issues that have been on GAO’s High Risk List since the  1990s. DOD has made some progress in this area. Over the past  several years it has decreased the size of its major defense  acquisition program portfolio as well as its estimated total cost;  however, programs continue to experience cost growth over time.  DOD has launched its “Better Buying Power” initiatives to achieve  more efficiency and reduce cost growth.
We have tracked implementation of some of these initiatives and  found that DOD has largely been successful in implementing its  “should-cost” effort to lower contract prices during negotiations and  has reported near-term cost savings as a result. DOD has had less  success in implementing affordability constraints—which limit a  program’s total cost throughout its lifecycle—an initiative that has the  potential for long-term savings if implemented effectively. Similarly,  we have found that DOD has made mixed progress in improving its  acquisition of services. DOD leadership has demonstrated a  commitment to improving service acquisitions and management, but  the department’s efforts are hindered, in part, by limited knowledge  and baseline data on the current state of service acquisitions and the  absence of goals and metrics to assess its progress. We have  ongoing reviews to help improve the efficiency of DOD’s weapon  system acquisition process and the effectiveness of its portfolio  management practices that we believe will further the administration’s  and Congress’ efforts in this area.
section_title: Effective Implementation Is Essential to Successfully Addressing Issues on the Management Agenda
paragraphs: Lasting success in addressing the difficult and longstanding issues on the  President’s Management Agenda will hinge on effective implementation,  including sustained top leadership attention. For example, our work has  shown that there are five key factors that are essential to resolving high- risk issues:  1.  a demonstrated strong commitment to, and top leadership support for,  2.  the capacity to address problems;  3.  a corrective action plan;  4.  a program to monitor corrective measures; and  5.  demonstrated progress in implementing corrective measures.
Top administration officials have continued to show their commitment to  ensuring that significant management challenges, including those on the  High Risk List, receive attention and oversight. OMB regularly convenes  meetings for agencies to provide progress updates on high-risk issues.  GAO and OMB have agreed to hold a series of meetings on the issues on  GAO’s High Risk List. The purposes of these meetings are to discuss  progress achieved and specifically focus on actions that are needed to  fully address high-risk issues and ultimately remove them from the list.  These meetings typically include OMB’s Deputy Director for  Management, agency leaders, as well as myself and have provided a  useful forum for constructive and productive dialogues.
The President’s Management Agenda also commits to making continued  progress in managing for results. In that regard, our work has shown that  progress has been made in implementing the GPRA Modernization Act of  2010 (GPRAMA). For example, the executive branch has taken a  number of steps to implement key provisions of GPRAMA. The Office of  Management and Budget (OMB) has developed cross-agency priority  goals, and agencies developed agency priority goals. Agency officials  reported that their agencies have assigned performance management  leadership roles and responsibilities to officials who generally participate  in performance management activities, including quarterly performance  reviews for agency priority goals. Further, OMB developed  Performance.gov, a government-wide website, which provides quarterly  updates on cross-agency priority goals and agency priority goals.
While the building blocks needed for implementation are being put in  place, much more needs to be done before the provisions of the act are  fully useful to decision makers as shown in the following examples.
subsections: section_title: Developing a Comprehensive Inventory of Federal Programs
paragraphs: Executive branch efforts to address crosscutting issues are hampered by  the lack of a comprehensive list of programs—a key requirement of the  act. As we have noted, such a list is critical for aligning federal  government efforts for identifying potential fragmentation, overlap, or  duplication among federal programs or activities. GPRAMA requires OMB  to compile and make publicly available a comprehensive list of all federal  programs identified by agencies, and to include the purposes of each  program, how it contributes to the agency’s mission, and recent funding  information. OMB began implementing this provision by directing 24 large  federal agencies to develop and publish inventories of their programs in  May 2013.
Our preliminary review of these initial inventories identified concerns  about the usefulness of the information being developed and the extent to  which it might be able to assist executive branch and congressional  efforts to identify and address fragmentation, overlap, and duplication.  OMB’s guidance for developing the inventories provided agencies with  flexibility to define their programs, such as by outcomes, customers,  products/services, organizational structure, and budget structure. As a  result, agencies took various approaches to define their programs—with  many using their budget structure while others used different approaches  such as identifying programs by related outcomes or customer focus.
The variation in definitions across agencies will limit comparability among  like programs. In addition, as reported in our annual reports on  fragmentation, overlap and duplication, we have found that federal budget  and cost information is often not available or not sufficiently reliable to  identify the level of funding provided to programs or activities. For  example, agencies could not isolate budgetary information for some  programs because the data were aggregated at higher levels.
OMB identified 12 different program types (e.g., block grants, regulatory,  credit) for agencies to assign to their programs; however, the list of  program types does not include tax expenditures, which represent a  substantial federal commitment. OMB does not yet have definitive plans  on when this effort will be expanded beyond the current 24 agencies to  cover all other agencies and programs. We plan to further explore these  issues and report on potential ways that the federal program inventory  might be improved going forward later this spring.
section_title: Enhancing the Use of Collaborative Mechanisms
paragraphs: Collaboration across agencies, levels of government, or sectors is  fundamental to addressing many high-risk issues and reducing  fragmentation, overlap, and duplication. In one example, we have noted  that better coordination among the more than 30 federal agencies that  collect, maintain, and use geospatial information could help reduce  duplication of investments and provide the opportunity for potential  savings of millions of dollars.
In another example, the Department of Veterans Affairs and DOD operate  two of the nation’s largest health care systems, together providing health  care to nearly 16 million veterans, service members, military retirees, and  other beneficiaries at estimated costs for fiscal year 2013 of about $53  billion and $49 billion, respectively. As part of their health care efforts, the  departments have established collaboration sites—locations where the  two departments share health care resources through hundreds of  agreements and projects—to deliver care jointly with the aim of improving  access, quality, and cost-effectiveness of care. However, we found that  the departments do not have a fully developed and formalized process for  systematically identifying all opportunities for new or enhanced  collaboration, potentially missing opportunities to improve health care  access and quality, and reduce costs.
Many collaborative mechanisms, such as interagency groups and  specially created interagency offices, do not operate as effectively as they  could. These mechanisms face challenges with issues such as  identifying a common outcome and managing resources across agency  lines. Our work has found practices and corresponding effective  implementation approaches that collaborative mechanisms have used to  work effectively across agency lines. For example, we have found  practices and approaches such as agreeing on roles and responsibilities,  with corresponding accountability for both the agency and the individual  participants, creating an inventory of agency resources dedicated towards  interagency outcomes, developing outcomes that represent the collective  interests of participants, and developing performance measures that are  tied to shared outcomes, can help enhance and sustain collaboration.
section_title: Effectively Implementing Strategic Reviews
paragraphs: OMB’s 2013 guidance implementing GPRAMA directs agencies,  beginning in 2014, to conduct annual reviews of progress towards  strategic objectives—the outcomes or impacts the agency is intending to  achieve. Agency leaders are responsible for assessing progress on  each strategic objective established in the agency’s strategic plan.  Effective implementation could help identify and address fragmentation,  overlap, and duplication issues because as part of the strategic reviews,  agencies are to identify the various organizations, programs, regulations,  tax expenditures, policies, and other activities that contribute to each  objective both within and outside the agency.
Where progress in achieving an objective is lagging, the reviews are  intended to identify strategies for improvement, such as strengthening  collaboration to better address crosscutting challenges. If successfully  implemented in a way that is open, inclusive, and transparent—to  Congress, delivery partners, and a full range of stakeholders—this  approach could help decision makers assess the relative contributions of  various programs that contribute to a given objective. Successful strategic  reviews could also help decision makers identify and assess the interplay  of public policy tools that are being used, to ensure that those tools are  effective and mutually reinforcing, and results are being efficiently  achieved.
section_title: Improving the Government’s Capacity to Gather and Use Better Performance Information
paragraphs: Our annual reports on fragmentation, overlap and duplication have also  highlighted several instances in which executive branch agencies do not  collect necessary performance data. In an example from our 2011 annual  report, we noted that a lack of information on program outcomes for  economic development, where four agencies administer 80 programs,  was a longstanding problem. We suggested that the four agencies—the  Departments of Commerce, Housing and Urban Development, and  Agriculture and the Small Business Administration—collect accurate and  complete information on program outcomes. As of March 2013, the four  agencies had taken actions to begin to collect better data on program  performance.
Moreover, our June 2013 report on GPRAMA implementation found that  agencies continue to face long-standing issues with measuring  performance, such as obtaining complete, timely, and accurate  performance information across various programs and activities. In one  example, we reported in June 2013 on two Federal Emergency  Management Agency (FEMA) grant programs that collect performance  information and feed the resulting data into a higher-level Department of  Homeland Security (DHS) goal. We found that data were self-reported  by recipients and FEMA had varied and inconsistent approaches to  verifying and validating the data. We recommended that FEMA ensure  that there are consistent procedures in place to verify and validate grant  performance data. DHS, of which FEMA is a part, concurred with the  recommendation.
Given the Performance Improvement Council’s responsibilities for  addressing crosscutting performance issues and sharing performance  improvement practices, our June 2013 report noted that it could do more  to examine and address the difficulties agencies face to measuring  performance across various program types, such as grants and contracts.  We recommended that OMB work with the Performance Improvement  Council to develop a detailed approach for addressing these long- standing performance measurement issues. OMB staff agreed with this  recommendation.
Even in instances where agencies are collecting performance information,  our periodic surveys of federal managers between 1997 and 2013 have  found little improvement in managers’ reported use of performance  information to improve results. However, agencies’ quarterly  performance reviews of progress on their priority goals—which began at  most agencies in 2011 under GPRAMA—show promise as a leadership  strategy for improving the use of performance information in agencies. Of  the 12 percent of federal managers who both responded to our survey  and reported they were very familiar with these reviews, 76 percent  agreed that their top leadership demonstrated a strong commitment to  using performance information to guide decision making to a great or very  great extent. In addition, according to our 2012 survey of performance  improvement officers at 24 agencies, the majority (21 out of 24 agencies  required to conduct these reviews) reported that actionable opportunities  for performance improvement were identified through the reviews at least  half the time.
section_title: Accelerated Progress Is Needed on Major Financial Management, Cybersecurity, and Fragmentation, Overlap, and Duplication Issues
paragraphs: To operate as effectively and efficiently as possible and to make difficult  decisions to address the federal government’s fiscal challenges,  Congress, the administration, and federal managers must have ready  access to reliable and complete financial and performance information— both for individual federal entities and for the federal government as a  whole. Overall, significant progress has been made since the enactment  of key federal financial management reforms in the 1990s; however, our  February 2014 report on the U.S. government’s consolidated financial  statements underscores that much work remains to improve federal  financial management, and these improvements are urgently needed.
In that report, we concluded that certain material weaknesses in internal  control over financial reporting and other limitations on the scope of our  work resulted in conditions that prevented us from expressing an opinion  on the accrual-based consolidated financial statements as of and for the  fiscal years ended September 30, 2013, and 2012. Three major  impediments prevented us from rendering an opinion on the federal  government’s accrual-based consolidated financial statements:  serious financial management problems at DOD that have prevented its  financial statements from being auditable — about 33 percent of the  federal government’s reported total assets as of September 30, 2013, and  approximately 16 percent of the federal government’s reported net cost  for fiscal year 2013 relate to DOD, which received a disclaimer of opinion  on its consolidated financial statements,  the federal government’s inability to adequately account for and reconcile  intragovernmental activity and balances between federal entities, and  the federal government’s ineffective process for preparing the  consolidated financial statements.
In addition to the material weaknesses underlying the three major  impediments, we identified other material weaknesses which resulted in  ineffective internal control over financial reporting for fiscal year 2013.  These weaknesses are the federal government’s inability to determine the full extent to which improper payments occur and  reasonably assure that appropriate actions are taken to reduce them,  identify and timely resolve information security control deficiencies and  manage information security risks on an ongoing basis, and effectively manage its tax collection activities.
There are also risks that certain factors could affect the federal  government’s financial condition in the future, including the following:
The U.S. Postal Service (USPS) is facing a deteriorating financial  situation with a lack of liquidity as it has reached its borrowing limit of $15  billion and finished fiscal year 2013 with a reported net loss of $5 billion.
The Federal Housing Administration’s (FHA) mortgage insurance portfolio  continues to grow, and its insurance fund has experienced major financial  difficulties. FHA’s capital ratio for its Mutual Mortgage Insurance Fund  remained below the required 2 percent level as of the end of fiscal year  2013. The ultimate roles of the Federal National Mortgage Association  (Fannie Mae) and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie  Mac) in the mortgage market may further affect FHA’s financial condition.
The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation’s (PBGC) financial future is  uncertain because of long-term challenges related to PBGC’s governance  and funding structure. PBGC’s liabilities exceeded its assets by about $36  billion as of September 30, 2013. PBGC reported that it is subject to  further losses if plan terminations that are reasonably possible occur.
GAO’s High Risk List includes several of these issues, such as  information security, USPS’s business model, DOD financial  management, and the PBGC and FHA insurance programs.
Increased attention to risks that could affect the federal government’s  financial condition is made more important because of the nation’s longer- term fiscal challenges. The administration’s long-term fiscal projections— and our own long-term federal fiscal simulations—show that, absent  policy changes, the federal government continues to face an  unsustainable long-term fiscal path. The oldest members of the baby- boom generation are already eligible for Social Security retirement  benefits and for Medicare benefits. Under the administration’s  projections—and our simulations—spending for the major health and  retirement programs will increase in coming decades as more members  of the baby-boom generation become eligible for benefits and the health  care cost for each enrollee increases. Over the long term, the imbalance  between revenue and spending built into current law and policy will lead  to continued growth of debt held by the public as a share of Gross  Domestic Product (GDP). This situation—in which debt grows faster than  GDP—means the current federal fiscal path is unsustainable.
Reliable financial and performance information is even more critical as (1)  federal managers likely face increasingly tight budget constraints and  need to operate their respective entities as efficiently and effectively as  possible and (2) decision makers carry out the important task of deciding  how to use multiple tools (tax provisions, discretionary spending,  mandatory spending, and credit programs) to address the federal  government’s fiscal challenges.
Similarly ongoing attention is needed to address issues identified in our  annual reports on fragmentation, overlap, duplication, and potential cost  savings and revenue enhancements. Of the 162 areas that we have  identified in our annual reports, 19 (12 percent) have been fully  addressed, 111 (69 percent) have been partially addressed, and 31 (19  percent) have not been addressed. More specifically, of the  approximately 380 actions identified in our annual reports, 87 (23 percent)  have been fully addressed, 187 (49 percent) have been partially  addressed, and 104 (28 percent) have not been addressed as of  December 2013. Our reports and GAO’s Action Tracker provide details  for each of the issues, describing the nature of the problems, what actions  have been taken to address them, and what remains to be done to make  further progress.
While agencies have continued to make progress, important opportunities  have yet to be pursued. The details in our reports, along with successful  implementation by agencies and continued oversight by Congress, can  form a solid foundation for progress to address risks, improve programs  and operations, and achieve greater efficiencies and effectiveness.
In 2012, OMB collected information from the responsible agencies on the  steps they have taken to address our suggested actions. To ensure  sustained leadership attention on these actions, OMB also asked the  performance improvement officers from responsible agencies to monitor  the progress being made. GAO and OMB staff meet throughout the year  to discuss the issues identified by our work and the extent to which the  administration is working to address the issues. These meetings have  been helpful in monitoring progress. However, given that issues of  fragmentation, overlap, and duplication often involve multiple agencies,  the discussions need to be elevated to include more senior officials who  have the responsibility and authority for resolving the crosscutting issues  identified.
In addition to financial management and widespread fragmentation,  overlap, and duplication issues, the federal government must address  pressing challenges with its cybersecurity. As computer technology has  advanced, federal agencies and our nation’s critical infrastructures such  as power distribution, water supply, telecommunications, and emergency  services have become increasingly dependent on computerized  information systems and electronic data to carry out operations and to  process, maintain, and report essential information. The security of these  systems and data is essential to protecting national security, economic  prosperity, and public health and safety. We have reported that (1) cyber  threats to systems supporting government operations and critical  infrastructure were evolving and growing, (2) cyber incidents affecting  computer systems and networks continue to rise, and (3) the federal  government continues to face challenges in a number of key aspects of  its approach to cybersecurity, including those related to protecting the  nation’s critical infrastructure. For these reasons, federal information  security has been on GAO’s list of high-risk areas since 1997; in 2003, we  expanded this high-risk area to include cyber critical infrastructure  protection.
The federal government has taken a variety of actions that are intended  to enhance federal and critical infrastructure cybersecurity. For example,  the government issued numerous strategy-related documents over the  last decade, many of which addressed aspects of the challenge areas we  identified. The administration also took steps to enhance various  cybersecurity capabilities, including establishing agency performance  goals and a tracking mechanism to monitor performance in three cross- agency priority areas. In February 2013, the president issued  Presidential Policy Directive 21 on critical infrastructure security and  resilience and Executive Order 13,636 on improving critical infrastructure  cybersecurity. Improving these capabilities is a step in the right direction,  and their effective implementation can enhance federal information  security and the cybersecurity and resilience of our nation’s critical  infrastructure.
However, more needs to be done to accelerate the progress made in  bolstering the cybersecurity posture of the nation and federal government.  The administration and executive branch agencies need to implement the  hundreds of recommendations made by GAO and agency inspectors  general to address cyber challenges, resolve known deficiencies, and  fully implement effective information security programs. Until then, a  broad array of federal assets and operations will remain at risk of fraud,  misuse, and disruption, and the nation’s most critical federal and private  sector infrastructure systems will remain at increased risk of attack from  our adversaries. Congress is considering several bills that are intended, if  enacted into law and effectively implemented by the executive branch, to  improve cyber information sharing and the cybersecurity posture of the  federal government and the nation.
In closing, our nation’s long-term fiscal challenges underscore the need  for the federal government to operate in an efficient and effective manner.  To do so, the federal government must address a number of significant  management and governance challenges—many highlighted by our High  Risk List and our annual reports on fragmentation, overlap, and  duplication. Our work has also highlighted a variety of approaches the  executive branch and Congress could take to resolve these issues  moving forward. In doing so, it is vital that both branches of government  demonstrate the sustained leadership commitment needed to address  these challenges. Given the crosscutting nature of many of these  challenges, it will be particularly important for OMB to play a leadership  role in the Executive Branch.
Chairman Carper, Ranking Member Dr. Coburn, and Members of the  Committee, this completes my prepared statement. I would be pleased to  respond to any questions that you may have at this time.
section_title: GAO Contacts
paragraphs: For further information regarding this testimony, please contact J.  Christopher Mihm, Managing Director, Strategic Issues, at (202) 512- 6806 or mihmj@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of Congressional  Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this  statement.
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.