Information Technology: Improved Implementation of Reform Law Is Critical to Better Manage Acquisitions and Operations
Published: 2016-12-06T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: The federal government is likely to invest more than $89 billion on IT in fiscal year 2017. Historically, these investments have frequently failed, incurred cost overruns and schedule slippages, or contributed little to mission-related outcomes. Accordingly, in December 2014, IT reform legislation was enacted, aimed at improving agencies' acquisitions of IT. Further, in February 2015, GAO added improving the management of IT acquisitions and operations to its high-risk list. Between fiscal years 2010 and 2015, GAO made about 800 recommendations related to this high-risk area to OMB and agencies.
This statement summarizes agencies' progress in improving the management of IT acquisitions and operations. To do so, we reviewed and summarized GAO's prior and recently published work on (1) data center consolidation, (2) risk levels of major investments as reported on OMB's IT Dashboard, and (3) implementation of incremental development practices.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: Consolidating data centers. In an effort to reduce the growing number of data centers, OMB launched a consolidation initiative in 2010. GAO reported in March 2016 that agencies had closed 3,125 of the 10,584 total data centers and achieved $2.8 billion in cost savings and avoidances through fiscal year 2015. Agencies are planning a total of about $8.2 billion in savings and avoidances through fiscal year 2019. GAO recommended that the agencies take actions to meet their cost savings targets and improve optimization progress related to their data center consolidation and optimization efforts. Most agencies agreed with the recommendations or had no comment.
Enhancing transparency. OMB's IT Dashboard provides detailed information on major investments at federal agencies, including ratings from Chief Information Officers (CIO) that should reflect the level of risk facing an investment. GAO reported in June 2016 that agencies had not fully considered risks when rating their major investments on the IT Dashboard. In particular, of the 95 investments reviewed, GAO's assessments of risks matched the CIO ratings 22 times, showed more risk 60 times, and showed less risk 13 times. Several issues contributed to these differences, such as CIO ratings not being updated frequently. GAO recommended that agencies improve the quality and frequency of their ratings. Most agencies generally agreed with or did not comment on the recommendations.
Implementing incremental development. A key reform initiated by OMB has emphasized the need for federal agencies to deliver investments in smaller parts, or increments, in order to reduce risk and deliver capabilities more quickly. Since 2012, OMB has required investments to deliver functionality every 6 months. In August 2016, GAO reported that 22 agencies had reported that 64 percent of 469 active software development projects planned to deliver usable functionality every 6 months for fiscal year 2016. Further, for 7 selected agencies, GAO identified significant differences in the percentages of software projects reported to GAO as delivering functionality every 6 months, compared to what was reported on the IT Dashboard. This was due to, among other things, inconsistencies in agencies' reporting on non-software development projects, and the timing of reporting data. GAO made 12 recommendations to 7 agencies and OMB to improve the reporting of incremental data on the IT Dashboard and the policies for CIO certification of adequate incremental development. Most agencies agreed or did not comment on our recommendations, and OMB did not agree or disagree.
section_title: What GAO Recommends
paragraphs: GAO has previously made numerous recommendations to OMB and federal agencies to improve the oversight and execution of the data center consolidation initiative, the accuracy and reliability of the IT Dashboard, and incremental development policies. Most agencies agreed with GAO's recommendations or had no comments. GAO will continue to monitor agencies' implementation of these recommendations.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: I am pleased to be here today to discuss our recent work related to the  December 2014 information technology (IT) reform law (commonly  referred to as the Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act  or FITARA). As you know, the effective and efficient acquisition and  management of IT investments has been a long-standing challenge in the  federal government. In particular, the federal government has spent  billions of dollars on failed and poorly performing IT investments, which  often suffered from ineffective management. Moreover, spending on IT  operations has been inefficient. In light of these ongoing challenges, in  February 2015, we added improving the management of IT acquisitions  and operations to our list of high-risk areas for the federal government.
My statement today discusses agencies’ progress in improving the  management of IT acquisitions and operations. To do so, we reviewed  and summarized our prior and recently published work on (1) data center  consolidation, (2) risk levels of major investments as reported on the  Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) IT Dashboard, and (3)  implementation of incremental development practices. A more detailed  discussion of the objectives, scope, and methodology for this work is  included in each of the reports that are cited throughout this statement.
We conducted the work on which this statement is based 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.
subsections: section_title: Background
paragraphs: The federal government is likely to invest more than $89 billion on IT in  fiscal year 2017. However, as we have previously reported, investments  in federal IT too often result in failed projects that incur cost overruns and  schedule slippages, while contributing little to the desired mission-related  outcomes. For example:
The Department of Veterans Affairs’ Scheduling Replacement Project  was terminated in September 2009 after spending an estimated $127  million over 9 years.
The tri-agency National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental  Satellite System was stopped in February 2010 by the White House’s  Office of Science and Technology Policy after the program spent 16  years and almost $5 billion.
The Department of Homeland Security’s Secure Border Initiative  Network program was ended in January 2011, after the department  obligated more than $1 billion to the program, because it did not meet  cost-effectiveness and viability standards.
The Office of Personnel Management’s Retirement Systems  Modernization program was canceled in February 2011, after  spending approximately $231 million on the agency’s third attempt to  automate the processing of federal employee retirement claims.
The Department of Veterans Affairs’ Financial and Logistics  Integrated Technology Enterprise program was intended to be  delivered by 2014 at a total estimated cost of $609 million, but was  terminated in October 2011 due to challenges in managing the  program.
The Department of Defense’s Expeditionary Combat Support System  was canceled in December 2012 after spending more than a billion  dollars and failing to deploy within 5 years of initially obligating  funds.
These and other failed IT projects often suffered from a lack of disciplined  and effective management, such as project planning, requirements  definition, and program oversight and governance. In many instances,  agencies had not consistently applied best practices that are critical to  successfully acquiring IT investments.
Federal IT projects have also failed due to a lack of oversight and  governance. Executive-level governance and oversight across the  government has often been ineffective, specifically from chief information  officers (CIO). For example, we have reported that not all CIOs had the  authority to review and approve the entire agency IT portfolio and that  CIOs’ authority was limited.
subsections: section_title: FITARA Can Improve Agencies’ Management of IT
paragraphs: Recognizing the severity of issues related to government-wide  management of IT, FITARA was enacted in December 2014. The law was  intended to improve agencies’ acquisitions of IT and enable Congress to  monitor agencies’ progress and hold them accountable for reducing  duplication and achieving cost savings. FITARA includes specific  requirements related to seven areas.
Federal data center consolidation initiative (FDCCI). Agencies are  required to provide OMB with a data center inventory, a strategy for  consolidating and optimizing the data centers (to include planned cost  savings), and quarterly updates on progress made. The law also  requires OMB to develop a goal for how much is to be saved through  this initiative, and provide annual reports on cost savings achieved.
Enhanced transparency and improved risk management. OMB  and agencies are to make detailed information on federal IT  investments publicly available, and agency CIOs are to categorize  their IT investments by level of risk. Additionally, in the case of major  IT investments rated as high risk for 4 consecutive quarters, the law  requires that the agency CIO and the investment’s program manager  conduct a review aimed at identifying and addressing the causes of  the risk.
Agency CIO authority enhancements. Agency CIOs are required  to (1) approve the IT budget requests of their respective agencies, (2)  certify that OMB’s incremental development guidance is being  adequately implemented for IT investments, (3) review and approve  contracts for IT, and (4) approve the appointment of other agency  employees with the title of CIO.
Portfolio review. Agencies are to annually review IT investment  portfolios in order to, among other things, increase efficiency and  effectiveness and identify potential waste and duplication. In  establishing the process associated with such portfolio reviews, the  law requires OMB to develop standardized performance metrics, to  include cost savings, and to submit quarterly reports to Congress on  cost savings.
Expansion of training and use of IT acquisition cadres. Agencies  are to update their acquisition human capital plans to address  supporting the timely and effective acquisition of IT. In doing so, the  law calls for agencies to consider, among other things, establishing IT  acquisition cadres or developing agreements with other agencies that  have such cadres.
Government-wide software purchasing program. The General  Services Administration is to develop a strategic sourcing initiative to  enhance government-wide acquisition and management of software.  In doing so, the law requires that, to the maximum extent practicable,  the General Services Administration should allow for the purchase of  a software license agreement that is available for use by all executive  branch agencies as a single user.
Maximizing the benefit of the federal strategic sourcing initiative.  Federal agencies are required to compare their purchases of services  and supplies to what is offered under the federal strategic sourcing  initiative. OMB is also required to issue related regulations.
In June 2015, OMB released guidance describing how agencies are to  implement FITARA. OMB’s guidance is intended to, among other things: assist agencies in aligning their IT resources with statutory establish government-wide IT management controls that will meet the  law’s requirements, while providing agencies with flexibility to adapt to  unique agency processes and requirements;  clarify the CIO’s role and strengthen the relationship between agency  CIOs and bureau CIOs; and  strengthen CIO accountability for IT cost, schedule, performance, and  security.
The guidance identified several actions that agencies were to take to  establish a basic set of roles and responsibilities (referred to as the  common baseline) for CIOs and other senior agency officials, which are  needed to implement the authorities described in the law. For example,  agencies were required to conduct a self-assessment and submit a plan  describing the changes they intended to make to ensure that common  baseline responsibilities are implemented. Agencies were to submit their  plans to OMB’s Office of E-Government and Information Technology by  August 15, 2015, and make portions of the plans publicly available on  agency websites no later than 30 days after OMB approval. As of  November 2016, all agencies had made their plans publicly available.
In addition, in August 2016, OMB released guidance intended to, among  other things, define a framework for achieving the data center  consolidation and optimization requirements of FITARA. The guidance  includes requirements for agencies to: maintain complete inventories of all data center facilities owned,  operated, or maintained by or on behalf of the agency; develop cost savings targets due to consolidation and optimization for  fiscal years 2016 through 2018 and report any actual realized cost  savings; and measure progress toward meeting optimization metrics on a quarterly  basis.
The guidance also directs agencies to develop a data center  consolidation and optimization strategic plan that defines the agency’s  data center strategy for fiscal years 2016, 2017, and 2018. This strategy  is to include, among other things, a statement from the agency CIO  stating whether the agency has complied with all data center reporting  requirements in FITARA. Further, the guidance indicates that OMB is to  maintain a public dashboard that will display consolidation-related costs  savings and optimization performance information for the agencies.
section_title: IT Acquisitions and Operations Identified by GAO as a High-Risk Area
paragraphs: In February 2015, we introduced a new government-wide high-risk area,  Improving the Management of IT Acquisitions and Operations. This area  highlights several critical IT initiatives in need of additional congressional  oversight, including (1) reviews of troubled projects; (2) efforts to increase  the use of incremental development; (3) efforts to provide transparency  relative to the cost, schedule, and risk levels for major IT investments; (4)  reviews of agencies’ operational investments; (5) data center  consolidation; and (6) efforts to streamline agencies’ portfolios of IT  investments. We noted that implementation of these initiatives has been  inconsistent and more work remains to demonstrate progress in achieving  IT acquisitions and operations outcomes.
Further, in our February 2015 high-risk report, we identified actions that  OMB and the agencies need to take to make progress in this area. These  include implementing FITARA, as well as implementing at least 80  percent of our recommendations related to the management of IT  acquisitions and operations within 4 years. As noted in that report, we  made multiple recommendations to improve agencies’ management of IT  acquisitions and operations, many of which are discussed later in this  statement. Specifically, between fiscal years 2010 and 2015, we made  803 recommendations to OMB and federal agencies to address  shortcomings in IT acquisitions and operations, including many to  improve the implementation of the recent initiatives and other  government-wide, cross-cutting efforts.
As of October 2016, OMB and the agencies had fully implemented about  46 percent of these recommendations. This is a 23 percent increase  compared to the percentage we reported as being fully implemented in  2015. Figure 1 summarizes the progress that OMB and the agencies  have made in addressing our recommendations, as compared to the 80  percent target.
In addition, in fiscal year 2016, we made 202 new recommendations, thus  further reinforcing the need for OMB and agencies to address the  shortcomings in IT acquisitions and operations.
section_title: Full Implementation of FITARA Needed to Improve IT Management
paragraphs: Agencies have taken steps to improve the management of IT acquisitions  and operations by implementing key FITARA initiatives. However,  agencies would be better positioned to fully implement the law, and thus  realize additional management improvements, if they addressed the  numerous recommendations we have made aimed at improving data  center consolidation, increasing transparency via OMB’s IT Dashboard,  and incremental development.
subsections: section_title: Agencies Have Made Progress in Consolidating Data Centers, but Need to Take Action to Achieve Planned Cost Savings
paragraphs: One of the key initiatives to implement FITARA is data center  consolidation. OMB established FDCCI in February 2010 to improve the  efficiency, performance, and environmental footprint of federal data  center activities. In a series of reports over the past 5 years, we  determined that while data center consolidation could potentially save the  federal government billions of dollars, weaknesses existed in several  areas, including agencies’ data center consolidation plans and OMB’s  tracking and reporting on cost savings. In total, we have made 111  recommendations to OMB and agencies to improve the execution and  oversight of the initiative. Most agencies agreed with our  recommendations or had no comments.
In March 2016, we reported that the 24 agencies participating in  FDCCI collectively had made progress on their data center closure  efforts. Specifically, as of November 2015, these agencies had identified  a total of 10,584 data centers, of which they reported closing 3,125  through fiscal year 2015. Notably, the Departments of Agriculture,  Defense, the Interior, and the Treasury accounted for 84 percent of these  total closures. Further, the agencies have reported that they are planning  to close additional data centers by the end of fiscal year 2019.
In addition, we noted that 19 of the 24 agencies had reported achieving  an estimated $2.8 billion in cost savings and avoidances from their data  center consolidation and optimization efforts from fiscal years 2011  through 2015. The Departments of Commerce, Defense, Homeland  Security, and the Treasury accounted for about $2.4 billion (or about 86  percent) of the total. Further, 21 agencies collectively reported planning  an additional $5.4 billion in cost savings and avoidances, for a total of  approximately $8.2 billion, through fiscal year 2019. Figure 2  summarizes agencies’ reported achieved and planned cost savings and  avoidances from fiscal years 2011 through 2019.
To better ensure that federal data center consolidation and optimization  efforts improve governmental efficiency and achieve cost savings, we  recommended that 10 of the 24 agencies take actions to complete their  planned data center cost savings and avoidance targets for fiscal years  2016 through 2018. We also recommended that 22 of the 24 agencies  take actions to improve optimization progress, including addressing any  identified challenges. Fourteen agencies agreed with our  recommendations, 4 did not state whether they agreed or disagreed, and  6 stated that they had no comments.
section_title: Risks Need to Be Fully Considered When Agencies Rate Their Major Investments on OMB’s IT Dashboard
paragraphs: To facilitate transparency across the government in acquiring and  managing IT investments, OMB established a public website—the IT  Dashboard—to provide detailed information on major investments at 26  agencies, including ratings of their performance against cost and  schedule targets. Among other things, agencies are to submit ratings  from their CIOs, which, according to OMB’s instructions, should reflect the  level of risk facing an investment relative to that investment’s ability to  accomplish its goals. In this regard, FITARA includes a requirement for  CIO’s to categorize their major IT investment risks in accordance with  OMB guidance.
Over the past 6 years, we have issued a series of reports about the IT  Dashboard that noted both significant steps OMB has taken to enhance  the oversight, transparency, and accountability of federal IT investments  by creating its IT Dashboard, as well as issues with the accuracy and  reliability of data. In total, we have made 47 recommendations to OMB  and federal agencies to help improve the accuracy and reliability of the  information on the IT Dashboard and to increase its availability. Most  agencies agreed with our recommendations or had no comments.
Most recently, in June 2016, we determined that agencies had not fully  considered risks when rating their major investments on the IT  Dashboard. Specifically, our assessments of risk for 95 investments at 15  selected agencies matched the CIO ratings posted on the Dashboard  22 times, showed more risk 60 times, and showed less risk 13 times.
Figure 3 summarizes how our assessments compared to the selected  investments’ CIO ratings.
Aside from the inherently judgmental nature of risk ratings, we identified  three factors which contributed to differences between our assessments  and the CIO ratings:
Forty of the 95 CIO ratings were not updated during the month we  reviewed, which led to more differences between our assessments  and the CIOs’ ratings. This underscores the importance of frequent  rating updates, which help to ensure that the information on the  Dashboard is timely and accurately reflects recent changes to  investment status.
Three agencies’ rating processes spanned longer than 1 month.
Longer processes mean that CIO ratings are based on older data, and  may not reflect the current level of investment risk.
Seven agencies’ rating processes did not focus on active risks.
According to OMB’s guidance, CIO ratings should reflect the CIO’s  assessment of the risk and the investment’s ability to accomplish its  goals. CIO ratings that do no incorporate active risks increase the  chance that ratings overstate the likelihood of investment success.
As a result, we concluded that the associated risk rating processes used  by the agencies were generally understating the level of an investment’s  risk, raising the likelihood that critical federal investments in IT are not  receiving the appropriate levels of oversight. To better ensure that the  Dashboard ratings more accurately reflect risk, we recommended that the  15 agencies take actions to improve the quality and frequency of their  CIO ratings. Twelve agencies generally agreed with or did not comment  on the recommendations and three agencies disagreed.
section_title: Agencies Need to Increase Their Use of Incremental Development Practices
paragraphs: OMB has emphasized the need to deliver investments in smaller parts, or  increments, in order to reduce risk, deliver capabilities more quickly, and  facilitate the adoption of emerging technologies. In 2010, it called for  agencies’ major investments to deliver functionality every 12 months and,  since 2012, every 6 months. Subsequently, FITARA codified a  requirement that agency CIOs certify that IT investments are adequately  implementing OMB’s incremental development guidance.
In May 2014, we reported that 66 of 89 selected investments at five  major agencies did not plan to deliver capabilities in 6-month cycles,  and less than half of these investments planned to deliver functionality in  12-month cycles. We also reported that only one of the five agencies had  complete incremental development policies. Accordingly, we  recommended that OMB develop and issue clearer guidance on  incremental development and that the selected agencies update and  implement their associated policies. Four of the six agencies agreed with  our recommendations or had no comments; the remaining two agencies  partially agreed or disagreed with the recommendations.
More recently, in August 2016, we reported that agencies had not fully  implemented incremental development practices for their software  development projects. Specifically, we noted that, as of August 31, 2015,  22 federal agencies had reported on the IT Dashboard that 300 of 469  active software development projects (approximately 64 percent) were  planning to deliver usable functionality every 6 months for fiscal year  2016, as required by OMB guidance. Regarding the remaining 169  projects (or 36 percent) that were reported as not planning to deliver  functionality every 6 months, agencies provided a variety of explanations  for not achieving that goal. These included project complexity, the lack of  an established project release schedule, or that the project was not a  software development project. Table 1 lists the total number and percent  of federal software development projects for which agencies reported  plans to deliver functionality every 6 months for fiscal year 2016.
In reviewing seven selected agencies’ software development projects,  we determined that 45 percent of the projects delivered functionality every  6 months for fiscal year 2015 and 55 percent planned to do so in fiscal  year 2016. However, significant differences existed between the delivery  rates that the agencies reported to us and what they reported on the IT  Dashboard. For example, in four cases (Commerce, Education, HHS, and  Treasury), the percentage of delivery reported to us was at least 10  percentage points lower than what was reported on the IT Dashboard.  These differences were due to (1) our identification of fewer software  development projects than agencies reported on the IT Dashboard and  (2) the fact that information reported to us was generally more current  than the information reported on the IT Dashboard. Figure 4 compares  the software development projects’ percentage of planned delivery every  6 months reported on the IT Dashboard and to us.
We concluded that by not having on the IT Dashboard up-to-date  information about whether the project is a software development project  and the extent to which projects are delivering functionality, these seven  agencies were at risk that OMB and key stakeholders may make  decisions regarding the agencies’ investments without the most current  and accurate information.
Finally, while OMB has issued guidance requiring agency CIOs to certify  that each major IT investment’s plan for the current year adequately  implements incremental development, only three agencies (the  Departments of Commerce, Homeland Security, and Transportation) had  defined processes and policies intended to ensure that the department  CIO certifies that major IT investments are adequately implementing  incremental development. Officials from three other agencies (the  Departments of Education, Health and Human Services, and the  Treasury) reported that they were in the process of updating their existing  incremental development policy to address certification, while the  Department of Defense’s policies that address incremental development  did not include information on CIO certification. We concluded that until all  of the agencies we reviewed define processes and policies for the  certification of the adequate use of incremental development, they will not  be able to fully ensure adequate implementation of, or benefit from,  incremental development practices, as required by FITARA.
To improve the reporting of incremental data on the IT Dashboard and  policies for CIO certification of adequate incremental development, we  made 12 recommendations to seven agencies and OMB. Five agencies  agreed with our recommendations. In addition, the Department of  Defense partially agreed with one recommendation and disagreed with  another, OMB did not agree or disagree, and the Department of the  Treasury did not comment on the recommendations.
In summary, with the enactment of FITARA, the federal government has  an opportunity to improve the transparency and management of IT  acquisitions and operations, and to strengthen the authority of CIOs to  provide needed direction and oversight. To their credit, agencies have  taken steps to improve the management of IT acquisitions and operations  by implementing key FITARA initiatives, including data center  consolidation, efforts to increase transparency via OMB’s IT Dashboard,  and incremental development; and they have continued to address  recommendations we have made over the past several years. However,  additional improvements are needed, and further efforts by OMB and  federal agencies to implement our previous recommendations would  better position them to fully implement FITARA. To help ensure that these  efforts succeed, continued congressional oversight of OMB’s and  agencies’ implementation of FITARA is essential. In addition, we will  continue to monitor agencies implementation of our previous  recommendations.
Chairmen Meadows and Hurd, Ranking Members Connolly and Kelly,  and Members of the Subcommittees, 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 and Staff Acknowledgments
paragraphs: If you or your staffs have any questions about this testimony, please  contact me at (202) 512-9286 or at pownerd@gao.gov. Individuals who  made key contributions to this testimony are Kevin Walsh (Assistant  Director), Chris Businsky, Rebecca Eyler, and Bradley Roach (Analyst in  Charge).
section_title: Related GAO Products
paragraphs: Information Technology Reform: Agencies Need to Increase Their Use of  Incremental Development Practices, GAO-16-469. Washington, D.C.:  August 16, 2016.
IT Dashboard: Agencies Need to Fully Consider Risks When Rating Their  Major Investments, GAO-16-494. Washington, D.C.: June 2, 2016.
Data Center Consolidation: Agencies Making Progress, but Planned  Savings Goals Need to Be Established .  GAO-16-323. Washington, D.C.: March 3, 2016.
High-Risk Series: An Update. GAO-15-290. Washington, D.C.: February  11, 2015.
Data Center Consolidation: Reporting Can Be Improved to Reflect  Substantial Planned Savings. GAO-14-713. Washington, D.C.:  September 25, 2014.
Information Technology: Agencies Need to Establish and Implement  Incremental Development Policies. GAO-14-361. Washington, D.C.: May  1, 2014.
IT Dashboard: Agencies Are Managing Investment Risk, but Related  Ratings Need to Be More Accurate and Available. GAO-14-64.  Washington, D.C.: December 12, 2013.
Data Center Consolidation: Strengthened Oversight Needed to Achieve  Cost Savings Goal. GAO-13-378. Washington, D.C.: April 23, 2013.
Information Technology Dashboard: Opportunities Exist to Improve  Transparency and Oversight of Investment Risk at Select Agencies.  GAO-13-98. Washington, D.C.: October 16, 2012.
Data Center Consolidation: Agencies Making Progress on Efforts, but  Inventories and Plans Need to Be Completed. GAO-12-742. Washington,  D.C.: July 19, 2012.
IT Dashboard: Accuracy Has Improved, and Additional Efforts Are Under  Way to Better Inform Decision Making. GAO-12-210. Washington, D.C.:  November 7, 2011.
Data Center Consolidation: Agencies Need to Complete Inventories and  Plans to Achieve Expected Savings. GAO-11-565. Washington, D.C.: July  19, 2011.
Federal Chief Information Officers: Opportunities Exist to Improve Role in  Information Technology Management. GAO-11-634. Washington, D.C.:  September 15, 2011.
Information Technology: OMB Has Made Improvements to Its Dashboard,  but Further Work Is Needed by Agencies and OMB to Ensure Data  Accuracy. GAO-11-262. Washington, D.C.: March 15, 2011.
Information Technology: OMB’s Dashboard Has Increased Transparency  and Oversight, but Improvements Needed. GAO-10-701. Washington,  D.C.: July 16, 2010.
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.