Information technology should enable government to better serve the American people. However, according to OMB, despite spending more than $600 billion on IT over the past decade, the federal government has achieved little of the productivity improvements that private industry has realized from IT.Too often, federal IT projects run over budget, behind schedule, or fail to deliver promised functionality. In combating this problem, proper oversight is critical. Both OMB and federal agencies have key roles and responsibilities for overseeing IT investment management. OMB is responsible for working with agencies to ensure investments are appropriately planned and justified. Additionally, each year, OMB and federal agencies work together to determine how much the government plans to spend on IT projects and how these funds are to be allocated. To assist agencies in managing their IT investments, Congress enacted the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996, which requires OMB to establish processes to analyze, track, and evaluate the risks and results of major capital investments in information systems made by federal agencies and report to Congress on the net program performance benefits achieved as a result of these investments. Further, the act places responsibility for managing investments with the heads of agencies and establishes chief information officers (CIO) to advise and assist agency heads in carrying out this responsibility. Many of these investments are critical to our nation. For example, they include systems to secure our nation, control aircraft, and process tax returns. However, the federal government has spent billions of dollars on failed and poorly performing IT investments, as the following examples illustrate: In December 2012, the Department of Defense (DOD) canceled the Air Force’s Expeditionary Combat Support System after having spent more than a billion dollars and missing multiple milestones, including failure to achieve deployment within 5 years of obligating funds. The system was to provide the Air Force with a single, integrated logistics system that was to control and account for about $36 billion of inventory. We issued several reports on this system and found that, among other things, the program was not fully following best practices for developing reliable schedules and cost estimates. Among other things, we had recommended that DOD ensure that any future system deficiencies identified through independent assessments are resolved or mitigated prior to further deployment of the system. In January 2011, the Department of Homeland Security ended the Secure Border Initiative Network (SBInet) program after obligating more than $1 billion to the program because it did not meet cost- effectiveness and viability standards. Since 2007, we had identified a range of issues and made several recommendations to improve this program. For example, in May 2010 we reported that the final acceptance of the first two deployments had slipped from November 2009 to September 2010 and from March 2010 to November 2010, and that the cost-effectiveness of the system had not been justified. As a result, we recommended that the department (1) limit near-term investment in the first incremental block of the program, (2) economically justify any longer-term investment in it, and (3) improve key program management disciplines. This work contributed to the department’s decision to cancel the program. In February 2010, a task force led by the President’s Office of Science and Technology Policy decided to disband the National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System (NPOESS), a weather satellite program managed by three different agencies, after having spent 16 years and almost $5 billion on the program. We issued a series of reports on the NPOESS program that highlighted the technical challenges, cost growth, and tri-agency management challenges facing the program. For example, in June 2009 we reported that the program’s approved cost and schedule baselines were not achievable, and that costs could grow by approximately $1 billion over the then-current $13.95 billion estimate. We further noted that schedules for the launch of a demonstration satellite and the first two operational satellites were expected to be delayed, increasing the risk of a gap in satellite continuity. However, after the program’s cancellation, the agencies were directed to undertake separate acquisitions. Appendix I provides further details on federal IT projects that have failed or faced significant challenges. In addition to these projects, the IT Dashboard identifies other at-risk investments. Specifically, as of July 2013, according to the IT Dashboard, 154 of the federal government’s approximately 700 major IT investments—totaling about $10.4 billion—were in need of management attention (rated to indicate the need for attention or to indicate significant concerns). (See fig. 1.) In addition to poorly performing investments, federal IT spending is hampered by inefficient operations and duplication, as the following examples illustrate: Federal data centers. In March 2011, we reported that the increasing demand for IT had led to a dramatic rise in the number of federal data centers, with many housing similar types of equipment and providing similar processing and storage capabilities. As federal agencies have modernized their operations, put more of their services online, and increased their information security profiles, they have demanded more computing power and data storage resources. According to OMB, the number of federal data centers grew from 432 in 1998 to more than 2,000 in 2010. The growth in the number of federal data centers, many offering similar services and resources, has resulted in overlap and duplication among the centers. In addition, according to OMB, in August 2009 the average utilization rate for servers ranged from 5 percent to 15 percent. In contrast, OMB’s 2012 Data Center Consolidation Plan guidance states that the target for server utilization is 60 to 70 percent. Duplicative IT investments. In September 2011, we reported that limitations in OMB’s guidance hindered efforts to identify IT duplication. Specifically, although OMB’s guidance to federal agencies on how to categorize IT investments allowed for analysis of investments with similar functions, it did not go far enough to allow identification of potentially duplicative investments. Specifically, since the fiscal year 2004 budget cycle, OMB had required agencies to categorize their IT investments according to primary function and subfunction. In their fiscal year 2011 submissions, agencies reported the greatest number of IT investments in Information and Technology Management (1,536 investments), followed by Supply Chain Management (777 investments), and Human Resource Management (622 investments). Similarly, planned expenditures on investments were greatest in Information and Technology Management, at about $35.5 billion. Figure 2 depicts, by primary function, the total number of investments within the 26 federal agencies that report to the IT Dashboard, as of July 2011. However, we noted that categorizing IT investments according to primary function and subfunction limited OMB’s ability to identify potentially duplicative investments both within and across agencies because similar investments may be organized under different functions. Accordingly, we recommended that OMB revise guidance to federal agencies on categorizing IT investments to ensure that the categorizations are clear and that it allows agencies to choose secondary categories, where applicable. OMB generally agreed with this recommendation and has since taken action to implement it. Specifically, OMB updated its policy to enable agencies to select one primary category and up to four secondary categories for each IT investment. We also reported that results of OMB initiatives to identify potentially duplicative investments were mixed and that several federal agencies did not routinely assess their entire IT portfolios to identify and remove or consolidate duplicative systems. Specifically, we said that most of OMB’s recent initiatives had not yet demonstrated results, and several agencies did not routinely assess legacy systems to determine if they are duplicative. As a result, we recommended that OMB require federal agencies to report the steps they take to ensure that their IT investments are not duplicative as part of their annual budget and IT investment submissions. OMB generally agreed with this recommendation and has since taken action to implement it. Specifically, in March 2012, OMB issued a memorandum to federal agencies regarding implementing PortfolioStat reviews. As previously mentioned, these reviews are intended to assist in ending the investment in duplicative IT investments. In addition, as part of this effort, OMB is requiring agencies to document their cost savings and cost avoidance due to consolidation beginning in their fiscal year 2014 budget submissions. OMB has implemented a series of initiatives to improve the oversight of underperforming investments, more effectively manage IT, and address duplicative investments. These efforts include the following: IT Dashboard. Given the importance of transparency, oversight, and management of the government’s IT investments, in June 2009 OMB established a public website, referred to as the IT Dashboard, that provides detailed information on approximately 700 major IT investments at 27 federal agencies, including ratings of their performance against cost and schedule targets. The public dissemination of this information is intended to allow OMB; other oversight bodies, including Congress; and the general public to hold agencies accountable for results and performance. TechStat reviews. In January 2010, the Federal CIO began leading TechStats sessions—face-to-face meetings to terminate or turnaround IT investments that are failing or are not producing results. These meetings involve OMB and agency leadership and are intended to increase accountability and transparency and improve performance. Subsequently, OMB empowered agency CIOs to hold their own TechStat sessions within their respective agencies. According to the former Federal CIO, the efforts of OMB and federal agencies to improve management and oversight of IT investments have resulted in almost $4 billion in savings. FDCCI. Concerned about the growing number of federal data centers, in February 2010 the Federal CIO established FDCCI. This initiative’s four high-level goals are to promote the use of “green IT” by reducing the overall energy and real estate footprint of government data centers; reduce the cost of data center hardware, software, and operations; increase the overall IT security posture of the government; and shift IT investments to more efficient computing platforms and technologies. OMB believes that this initiative has the potential to provide about $3 billion in savings by the end of 2015. PortfolioStat.