This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-06-906 
entitled 'Electronic Records Archives: The National Archives and 
Records Administration's Fiscal Year 2006 Expenditure Plan' which was 
released on August 18, 2006. 

This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part 
of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every 
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of 
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text 
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the 
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided 
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed 
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic 
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail 
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this 
document to Webmaster@gao.gov. 

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright 
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed 
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. 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. 

Report to Congressional Committees: 

August 2006: 

Electronic Records Archives: 

The National Archives and Records Administration's Fiscal Year 2006 
Expenditure Plan: 

GAO-06-906: 

GAO Highlights: 

Highlights of GAO-06-906, a report to congressional committees 

Why GAO Did This Study: 

Since 2001, the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) has 
been working to acquire the Electronic Records Archives (ERA) system, 
which is intended to address critical issues in the creation, 
management, and use of federal electronic records. As required by law, 
the agency submitted its fiscal year 2006 expenditure plan to the 
congressional appropriations committees, seeking the release of about 
$22 million for the development of the system. 

GAO’s objectives in reviewing the expenditure plan were to (1) 
determine the extent to which the expenditure plan satisfied the 
legislative conditions specified in the appropriations act; (2) 
determine the extent to which NARA has implemented GAO’s prior 
recommendations; and (3) provide any other observations about the 
expenditure plan and the ERA acquisition. We reviewed the expenditure 
plan and analyzed it against the legislative conditions and assessed 
NARA’s progress in addressing prior recommendations. 

What GAO Found: 

NARA’s fiscal year 2006 expenditure plan fully satisfies three of the 
six legislative conditions and partially satisfies the remaining 
conditions (see table). 

Table: Fiscal Year 2006 Expenditure Plan: Compliance with Legislative 
Conditions: 

Legislative Conditions: 1. Meet OMB capital planning and investment 
control review requirements; Status: Partially satisfied. 

Legislative Conditions: 2. Comply with NARA’s enterprise architecture; 
Status: Partially satisfied. 

Legislative Conditions: 3. Conform to NARA’s enterprise life cycle 
methodology; Status: Partially satisfied. 

Legislative Conditions: 4. Comply with acquisition rules, requirements, 
guidelines, and system acquisition management practices of the federal 
government; Status: Satisfied. 

Legislative Conditions: 5. Approval by NARA and OMB; Status: Satisfied. 

Legislative Conditions: 6. Review by GAO; Status: Satisfied. 

Source: GAO. 

[End of Table] 

The agency continues to make progress in addressing prior GAO 
recommendations: the agency has fully implemented three of five and has 
partially implemented the remaining two. The agency has (1) 
strengthened information security by developing a program that includes 
agencywide assessments of information security risks; (2) developed and 
implemented a document review process to ensure that recommendations 
from reviewers are addressed and incorporated into acquisition policies 
and plans; and (3) improved federal records management by implementing 
strategies to raise agencies’ awareness of records management 
principles, functions, and programs. However, while NARA has completed 
the development of an enterprise architecture, it lacks an agencywide 
board for reviewing information technology projects for conformance to 
the architecture, including projects that are interdependent with ERA. 
In addition, the agency revised four out of five key policies and plans 
to comply with industry standards. At the time of our briefing, the 
Risk Management Plan was under revision. It was completed in July 2006. 
Until the agency fully addresses all prior recommendations, risks 
remain to the successful implementation of the system. 

NARA’s expenditure plan does not contain the level and scope of 
information needed by Congress to understand the agency’s plans and 
commitments relative to system capabilities, benefits, schedules, and 
costs. For example, it does not fully describe how the infrastructure 
elements that are to be procured will fit into the overall system 
design. Until the agency improves future expenditure plans to include 
information on system capabilities, benefits, schedules, and costs, 
Congress will not have the information needed to oversee plans and 
progress on the acquisition of the system. We performed our work at 
NARA’s College Park, Maryland, location in accordance with generally 
accepted government auditing standards. 

What GAO Recommends: 

GAO recommends that the Archivist of the United States ensure that 
future expenditure plans include a sufficient level and scope of 
information for Congress to effectively oversee the program. In 
commenting on a draft of this report, the Archivist of the United 
States agreed with the results and recommendation. 

[Hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-906]. 

To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on 
the link above. For more information, contact Linda D. Koontz at (202) 
512-6240 or koontzl@gao.gov. 

[End of Section] 

Contents: 

Letter: 

Recommendation for Executive Action: 

Agency Comments: 

Appendixes: 

Appendix I: Briefing Slides: 

Appendix II: Comments from the National Archives and Records 
Administration: 

Appendix III: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments: 

Abbreviations: 

ERA: Electronic Records Archives: 
IT: information technology: 
NARA: National Archives and Records Administration: 
OMB: Office of Management and Budget: 

August 18, 2006: 

The Honorable Christopher S. Bond: 
Chairman: 
The Honorable Patty Murray: 
Ranking Minority Member: 
Subcommittee on Transportation, Treasury, the Judiciary, Housing and 
Urban Development, and Related Agencies: 
Committee on Appropriations: 
United States Senate: 

The Honorable Joe Knollenberg: 
Chairman: 
The Honorable John W. Olver: 
Ranking Minority Member: 
Subcommittee on Transportation, Treasury, and Housing and Urban 
Development, the Judiciary, and District of Columbia, and Independent 
Agencies: 
Committee on Appropriations: 
House of Representatives: 

As required by law, the National Archives and Records Administration 
(NARA) submitted its fiscal year 2006 expenditure plan in March 2006 to 
congressional appropriations committees, seeking the release of about 
$22 million for the development of the Electronic Records Archives 
(ERA). ERA is a major information system that is intended to address 
critical issues in creating, managing, and using federal electronic 
records and automating the records management and archiving life cycle. 
Our objectives in reviewing the plan were to (1) determine whether the 
plan satisfied the conditions specified in the law,[Footnote 1] (2) 
determine the extent to which NARA has implemented our prior 
recommendations, and (3) provide any other observations about the 
expenditure plan and the ERA acquisition. 

In May 2006, we transmitted a copy of our briefing to your staff and 
briefed staff from the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on 
Transportation, Treasury, the Judiciary, Housing and Urban Development, 
and Related Agencies on the results of our review. This report 
transmits the materials we used at the briefing and provides the 
recommendation that we made to the Archivist of the United States. The 
full briefing materials, including our scope and methodology, are 
reprinted as appendix I. 

In summary, we made the following major points: 

* NARA's fiscal year 2006 expenditure plan has fully satisfied three of 
the six legislative conditions. The agency's plan (1) has complied with 
acquisition rules, requirements, guidelines, and system acquisition 
management practices of the federal government; (2) was approved by 
NARA and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB); and (3) was 
reviewed by GAO. The agency has partially satisfied the three remaining 
conditions by (1) meeting OMB's capital planning and investment control 
review requirements for the ERA acquisition, but has not appointed a 
group to regularly review ERA and other ongoing information technology 
(IT) investments, including those that have interdependencies with ERA; 
(2) developing and implementing a procedure to ensure that ERA complies 
with the agency's enterprise architecture, but has not established a 
board to assess IT projects agencywide, including those that have 
interdependencies with ERA, to ensure conformity to the EA; and (3) 
implementing procedures to ensure ERA conforms to the agency's life 
cycle methodology, but has not yet fully established an agencywide risk 
management capability. 

* NARA continues to make progress in addressing our prior 
recommendations. The agency has fully implemented three of five 
recommendations and has partially implemented the remaining two. The 
agency has (1) strengthened information security by developing a 
program that includes agencywide assessments of information security 
risks and an enterprise architecture that addresses information 
security issues agencywide; (2) developed and implemented a document 
review process to ensure that recommendations from independent 
verification and validation reviews are addressed and incorporated into 
acquisition policies and plans; and (3) improved federal records 
management by implementing strategies to raise agencies' awareness of 
records management principles, functions, and programs and by 
monitoring the performance of agencies' records management programs and 
practices. The agency has partially implemented two other 
recommendations that are essential for the successful management of the 
acquisition. It has (1) completed the development of an enterprise 
architecture, but lacks a board for reviewing IT projects agencywide, 
including projects that are interdependent with ERA and (2) revised 
four out of five key policies and plans to comply with industry 
standards. At the time of our briefing, the remaining document--the 
Risk Management Plan--was under revision with an expected completion 
date of June 2006. The Risk Management Plan was subsequently completed 
in July 2006. 

* NARA's expenditure plan provides only general information on how the 
$22 million is to be spent and does not fully describe, for example, 
how the infrastructure elements that are to be procured will fit into 
the overall system design. The legislative requirement for submitting 
an ERA expenditure plan to the appropriations committees is intended to 
provide lawmakers with a sufficient understanding of the system 
acquisition in order to permit effective oversight and to allow for 
informed decision making about the use of appropriated funds. To 
achieve these objectives, the plan needs to disclose a sufficient level 
and scope of information to understand what system capabilities and 
benefits are to be delivered, by when, at what cost, and the progress 
being made against the commitments that were made in prior expenditure 
plans. Without this complete information, Congress does not have the 
information needed to oversee plans and progress on the acquisition of 
the ERA system.  

Recommendation for Executive Action: 

To reduce the risks associated with NARA's efforts to acquire ERA, we 
recommend that the Archivist of the United States ensure that future 
expenditure plans include a sufficient level and scope of information 
to enable Congress to understand what system capabilities and benefits 
are to be delivered, by when, and at what cost, and report on the 
progress being made against the commitments that were made in prior 
expenditure plans. 

Agency Comments: 

In written comments on a draft of this report, the Archivist of the 
United States agreed with the results and recommendation. In addition, 
he stated that the agency has submitted an action plan to relevant 
congressional committees documenting how it plans to satisfy the 
legislative conditions that we identified as partially implemented. He 
also noted that NARA has proposed to the committees that the agency 
submit an addendum to its expenditure plan that would provide more 
detailed information on the allocation of funds, infrastructure 
elements, workflow capability, and business applications in the ERA 
system. 

We are sending copies of this report to the Archivist of the United 
States. We will make copies available to others on request. In 
addition, the report will be available at no charge on the GAO Web site 
at [Hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/].  

If you or your staff have any questions concerning this report, please 
call me at 202-512-6240; I can also be reached by e-mail at 
koontzl@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of Congressional 
Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this 
report. GAO staff who made major contributions to this report are 
listed in appendix III. 

Signed by: 

Linda D. Koontz: 
Director, Information Management Issues: 

[End of section] 

Appendix I: Briefing Slides: 

Electronic Records Archives: The National Archives and Records 
Administration's Fiscal Year 2006 Expenditure Plan: 

Briefing for Staff Members of the: 

Subcommittee on Transportation, Treasury, the Judiciary, Housing and 
Urban Development, and Related Agencies: 

Senate Committee on Appropriations: 

and the: 

Subcommittee on Transportation, Treasury, and Housing and Urban 
Development, the Judiciary, District of Columbia, and Independent 
Agencies: 

House Committee on Appropriations[Footnote 2]: 

May 26, 2006: 

Introduction: 

Objectives, Scope, and Methodology Results in Brief: 

Background Legislative Conditions Implementation of Prior 
Recommendations * Enterprise Architecture: 

Information Security: 

Document Review Process: 

Acquisition Policies and Plans:  

Records Management:  

Observation on the ERA Expenditure Plan: 

Conclusions: 

Recommendation for Executive Action: 

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation: 

The mission of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) 
is to ensure "ready access to essential evidence" for the public, the 
President, Congress, and the courts. NARA is responsible for oversight 
of records management and archiving, which increasingly involves 
dealing with documents that are electronically created and stored. 
Accordingly, the Archivist of the United States plans to develop the 
Electronic Records Archives (ERA) to address critical issues in the 
creation, management, and use of federal electronic records. ERA is a 
major information system that NARA envisions will have the ability to 
preserve and provide access to massive volumes of all types and formats 
of electronic records. Overall, the system is to automate the records 
management and archiving life cycle. Specifically, ERA is to consist 
of: 

infrastructure elements, including hardware and operating systems; 

business applications that will provide for scheduling electronic 
records, accessioning, preserving and storing records; and: 

public access provided by a Web browser and the public Internet. 

In 2001, NARA hired a contractor to develop policies and plans using 
the standards of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, 
Inc., (IEEE) to guide the overall acquisition of an electronic records 
system. 

In December 2003, the agency released a request for proposals for the 
design of ERA. In August 2004, NARA awarded two firm fixed-price 
contracts [Footnote 3] for the design phase totaling about $20 million- 
one to Harris Corporation and the other to Lockheed Martin Corporation. 
On September 8, 2005, NARA announced the selection of Lockheed Martin 
Corporation to build the ERA system. 

NARA's fiscal year 2006 appropriations act[Footnote 4] provides that 
the agency must submit an expenditure plan before obligating fiscal 
2006 funds for the ERA program. The plan must: 

meet the capital planning and investment control review requirements 
established by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), including 
Circular A-11; 

comply with NARA's enterprise architecture; 

conform with NARA's enterprise life cycle methodology; 

comply with the acquisition rules, requirements, guidelines, and system 
acquisition management practices of the federal government; 

be approved by NARA and OMB; and be reviewed by GAO. 

On March 16, 2006, NARA submitted its 2006 expenditure plan to the 
relevant House and Senate appropriations subcommittees, seeking release 
of about $22 million for the development contract with Lockheed Martin. 

Since June 2002, we have completed several reports assessing NARA's 
efforts to acquire the ERA system[Footnote 5]. In these reports, we 
made a total of 10 recommendations; 5 have been implemented while the 
following remained to be addressed at the beginning of this review. 

Develop an enterprise architecture. 

Improve information security in order to address the lack of (1) a 
capability to assess agencywide information security risks and (2) a 
security architecture that addresses information security issues 
agencywide. 

Design and implement a process to ensure that recommendations from 
verification and validation reviews are addressed and incorporated into 
ERA's acquisition policies and plans. 

Revise five key ERA program policies and plans to conform to IEEE 
standards. 

Develop a documented strategy for (1) raising agency senior management 
awareness of and commitment to records management principles, 
functions, and programs and (2) conducting systematic inspections of 
agency records management programs to (a) periodically assess agency 
progress in improving records management programs and (b) evaluate the 
efficacy of NARA's governmentwide guidance. 

Objectives, Scope, and Methodology: 

As agreed, our objectives were to: 

determine the extent to which NARA's fiscal year 2006 expenditure plan 
satisfies the legislative conditions specified in NARA's appropriations 
act, 

determine the extent to which NARA has implemented our prior 
recommendations, and: 

provide any other observations about the expenditure plan and the ERA 
acquisition. 

To assess compliance with legislative conditions, we: 

reviewed the fiscal year 2006 expenditure plan submitted by NARA in 
March 2006 and analyzed the plan against the legislative conditions to 
identify any variances; 

reviewed and analyzed NARA's processes to ensure the ERA system 
acquisition conforms to the agency's enterprise architecture; 

reviewed NARA's fiscal year 2006 A-11, section 300 submission to OMB 
and identified and analyzed NARA's responses to determine the extent to 
which the agency has complied with OMB's capital planning and 
investment control requirements; and: 

reviewed the systems development life cycle policy that the agency is 
using to guide the ERA acquisition and analyzed relevant items for 
compliance. 

To determine the extent to which NARA has implemented prior 
recommendations, we: 

evaluated the agency's enterprise architecture plans and products and 
conducted interviews of senior NARA officials to determine the status 
of the agency's efforts to develop an enterprise architecture; 

reviewed Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA) reports 
and NARA's security program plan, security architecture, and system 
security plans; interviewed senior NARA officials and Office of 
Inspector General (OIG) auditors to determine the status of the 
agency's efforts to strengthen information security; 

reviewed key ERA policies and plans and independent verification and 
validation reports on the policies and plans and interviewed ERA 
officials to determine what progress the program had made in addressing 
our recommendation that policies and plans conform to industry 
standards; 

assessed the program's process for reviewing and finalizing policies 
and plans and interviewed ERA officials responsible for the review 
process to determine the extent to which the review process was 
developed and implemented; and: 

interviewed NARA officials and reviewed documents to determine the 
progress the agency has made in addressing our recommendation to raise 
awareness among senior federal officials of the importance of federal 
records management and increase their commitment to federal records 
management; and to conduct systematic inspections of agency records 
management programs to (a) periodically assess agency progress in 
improving records management programs and (b) evaluate the efficacy of 
NARA's governmentwide guidance. 

To develop our observation on the ERA expenditure plan and acquisition, 
we: 

assessed the completeness of the cost and schedule information 
contained in the expenditure plan and interviewed NARA officials in 
order to gain an understanding of the data. 

We performed our work from December 2005 to May 2006 at NARA's College 
Park, Maryland, location in accordance with generally accepted 
government auditing standards. 

Results in Brief: 

Legislative Conditions: 

NARA's fiscal year 2006 expenditure plan fully satisfies three of the 
six legislative conditions. The plan partially satisfies the 
legislative conditions that ERA meet OMB's capital planning and 
investment control review requirements, conform to the enterprise 
architecture, and comply with the requirements of the systems 
development life cycle. 

Prior Recommendations: 

NARA has fully implemented three of five prior GAO recommendations and 
partially implemented the remaining two. 

Table 1: Summary Status of NARA's Progress in Implementing Prior 
Recommendations:  

Prior recommendation: 1. Enterprise architecture; 
Status: partially implemented; 
Progress: NARA has completed a baseline, target, and a plan for 
transitioning from the baseline to the target architecture. However, 
the agency lacks a board for reviewing IT projects agencywide, 
including projects that are interdependent with ERA. 

Prior recommendation: 2. Information security; 
Status: implemented; 
Progress: NARA has developed a program that includes agencywide 
assessments of information security risks and an enterprise 
architecture that addresses information security issues agencywide. 

Prior recommendation: 3. Document review process; 
Status: implemented; 
Progress: A document review process has been developed and implemented 
to ensure that recommendations from independent verification and 
validation reviews are addressed and incorporated into acquisition 
policies and plans. 

Prior recommendation: 4. Acquisition program policies and plans; 
Status: partially implemented; 
Progress: NARA has revised four out of five key policies and plans to 
comply with IEEE standards. According to NARA officials, the remaining 
document-the Risk Management Plan-is currently under revision. 

plans;5. Federal records management; 
Status: implemented; 
Progress: NARA has implemented strategies to raise agencies' awareness 
of records management principles, functions, and programs and to 
monitor the performance of agencies' records management programs and 
practices. 

Source: GAO. 

[End of table] 

Observations on the ERA Expenditure Plan and Program: 

NARA's expenditure plan does not contain the level and scope of 
information needed for Congress to understand its plans and commitments 
relative to system capabilities, benefits, schedules, and costs. 

We are making a recommendation to NARA to improve the utility of future 
expenditure plans. 

In commenting on a draft of these briefing slides, the Archivist 
generally agreed with the contents and our recommendation. 

Background ERA Expenditure Plan: 

NARA's fiscal year 2006 expenditure plan includes a description of 
plans to complete initial operating capability of the ERA 
system[Footnote 6] by September 2007. Table 2 shows the schedule of 
planned activities. 

Table 2: Summary of Planned Activities: 

Milestone: Develop ERA through initial operating capability; 
Start date: October 1, 2005; 
Completion date: August 7, 2006. 

Milestone: Establish ERA system infrastructure; 
Start date: June 5, 2006; 
Completion date: November 24, 2006. 

Milestone: Provide business applications for appraisal, scheduling, 
limited preservation, and internal dissemination of electronic records; 
Start date: August 17, 2006; 
Completion date: September 30, 2006. 

Milestone: Complete initial operating capability; 
Start date: [Empty]; 
Completion date: September 7, 2007.  

Source: GAO. 

[End of table]

Successfully acquiring the ERA system also involves the management of 
interdependent IT projects. The current environment consists of a 
number of legacy systems that do not adequately fulfill mission needs, 
comprehensively address the entire life cycle management of records, or 
support all of NARA's evolving business processes. These legacy systems 
will be subsumed into the new system. 

NARA's fiscal year 2006 expenditure plan for the ERA program also 
includes a summary of funding to complete initial operating capability 
of the ERA system. 

Table 3: Summary of NARA's Fiscal Year 2006 ERA Expenditure Plan: 

Project category: Program management; 
Amount: $12,019,698. 

Project category: Research and development; 
Amount: 3,500,000. 

Project category: Site deployment; 
Amount: 1,980,000. 

Project category: Development contract - Lockheed Martin; 
Amount: 21 ,780,000. 

Project category: Independent verification and validation [Footnote 7]; 
Amount: 1,549,909. 

Project category: Total; 
Amount: $40,829,607. 

Source: NARA 2006 Expenditure Plan. 

[End of table] 

Of these funds, NARA cannot obligate the $21,780,000 for the 
development contract with Lockheed Martin until Congress reviews and 
approves the expenditure plan. Congress released the remaining funds 
when NARA's appropriations bill was signed in November 2005. 

Legislative Conditions: 

NARA has fully satisfied three of the six legislative conditions and 
partially satisfied three. 

Table 4: Fiscal Year 2006 Expenditure Plan Provisions for Satisfying 
Legislative Conditions: 

Legislative condition: 1. Meet OMB capital planning and investment 
control review requirements; 
Status: Partially satisfied;  
Progress: NARA meets OMB's capital planning and investment control 
review requirements for the ERA acquisition. It identified funding 
required for acquiring ERA and conducts regular reviews of the program. 
However, while NARA has appointed a group comprised of senior managers 
that meets weekly to review ERA, the agency does not regularly review 
other ongoing IT investments, including those that have 
interdependencies with ERA. 

Legislative condition: 2. Comply with NARA's enterprise architecture; 
Status: Partially satisfied; 
Progress: NARA has developed and implemented a procedure to ensure that 
ERA complies with the agency's enterprise architecture (EA). However, 
while the chief technology officer reviews and approves ERA's 
conformance to the agency's EA, NARA has not yet established a board to 
assess IT projects agencywide, including those that have 
interdependencies with ERA, to ensure they conform to the EA. 

Legislative condition: 3. Conform to NARA's enterprise life cycle 
methodology; 
Status: Partially satisfied; 
Progress: ERA conforms to the life cycle methodology. For example, the 
plan includes descriptions of the incremental approach the agency has 
adopted for acquiring ERA and the program performs risk and performance 
management. However, NARA has not yet fully established an agencywide 
risk management capability. While it has established a Risk Review 
Board and assigned a chairperson to it, identified risks, and is 
developing processes, it has not yet completed a risk management plan 
or strategy. 

Legislative condition: 4. Comply with acquisition rules, requirements, 
guidelines, and system acquisition management practices of the federal 
government; 
Status: Satisfied; 
Progress: NARA satisfied this provision by (1) conducting internal 
assessments in 2002 and 2004 that used the Software Engineering 
Institute's (SEI)[Footnote 8] SA-CMM[Footnote 9] methods to determine 
the maturity of ERA's system policies, processes, and practices; (2) 
implemented a process to address the assessment's recommendations; and 
(3) is planning to commission an independent standard CMMI[Footnote 10] 
appraisal methodology for process improvement (SCAMP)[Footnote 11] 
appraisal of ERA in FY 2007. 

Legislative condition: 5. Approval by NARA and OMB; 
Status: Satisfied; 
Progress: 
* OMB-March 14, 2006. 
* NARA -March 16, 2006. 

Legislative condition: 6. Review by GAO; 
Status: Satisfied; 
Progress: 
* GAO - May 26, 2006, briefing to NARA's appropriations subcommittees. 

Source: GAO. 

[End of table] 

NARA recognizes the weaknesses associated with the legislative 
conditions. According to its Chief Information Officer, the agency: 

intends to establish a group to assess IT projects' compliance with the 
EA, 

plans to establish a process for regular reviews by management of 
ongoing IT investments, and 

has begun to establish an agencywide risk management capability. 

Implementation of Prior Recommendations Enterprise Architecture: 

In our June 2002 report, we recommended that NARA strengthen its IT 
management capabilities by developing an EA. An EA provides a 
description-in useful models, diagrams, and narrative-of the mode of 
operation for an agency. It describes the agency in logical terms, such 
as interrelated business locations and users, and in IT operational 
terms, such as hardware, software, data, communications, and 
information security attributes and standards. It provides these 
perspectives both for the baseline and target environments as well as a 
plan for transitioning from the baseline to the target. Furthermore, 
the agency should establish an architecture review board that meets 
regularly to evaluate projects' compliance with the EA. 

The agency has established baseline and target architectures that 
include: 

* business process definitions and flows for interrelated activities; 

* IT defined in operational terms including hardware, software, data, 
and security; and 

* a plan to transition from the baseline to the target architecture. 

However, as previously noted, the agency lacks a review board for 
ensuring that IT projects conform to the EA. 

Until a board is established, the agency lacks assurance that projects 
are fully consistent with the architecture. 

Implementation of Prior Recommendations Information Security: 

In our June 2002 report, we recommended that the agency improve 
information security because it lacked a program for assessing 
agencywide information security risks and an EA that addresses security 
issues across the agency. 

NARA has strengthened information security by: 

improving its information security program plan, performing agencywide 
assessments of information security risks, and developing plans of 
action and milestones for identified weaknesses and: 

developing its EA to encompass information security and providing 
documentation that identifies and specifies NARA's requirements for IT 
security management, processes, and technologies across the agency. 

Because of several assessments that identified numerous security 
weaknesses, the Archivist declared information security a material 
weakness in fiscal year 2000. According to the Archivist, corrective 
actions taken since then to address these weaknesses were completed in 
fiscal year 2005, and information security is no longer considered a 
material weakness. However, in its annual FISMA reports, the OIG has 
identified numerous NARA IT security weaknesses. 

While the agency has addressed our specific recommendation, NARA will 
need to continue to be vigilant in identifying and addressing 
information security weaknesses. 

Implementation of Prior Recommendations Document Review Process: 

In our September 2004 report, we reported that the program lacked a 
process to ensure that the results of verification and validation 
reviews of policies and plans were incorporated into final versions. We 
recommended that the Archivist direct the ERA program director to 
design and implement a process to ensure that recommendations from 
verification and validation reviews are addressed and incorporated into 
acquisition policies and plans. We noted that such a process reduces 
the risk that acquisition policies and plans do not meet industry 
standards. Without a documented process, NARA cannot ensure that 
reviewers' comments are integrated into the final versions. 

NARA has developed and implemented standard operating procedures to 
ensure that reviewers' recommendations are addressed in the final 
versions of ERA's acquisition policies and plans. Specifically, 
acquisition policies and plans are assessed by an independent 
verification and validation contractor, who reviews them against 
applicable industry standards and prepares a report with results and 
recommendations. After the policies and plans have been revised and 
recommendations incorporated, they are returned to the independent 
verification and validation contractor to ensure that all 
recommendations have been incorporated. NARA recently applied these 
procedures in its revisions to key ERA policies and plans, including 
the acquisition strategy and configuration management plan. 

By ensuring that independent verification and validation comments are 
addressed and incorporated into final versions of its policies and 
plans, NARA has increased assurance that it now has compliant 
acquisition policies and plans to guide its efforts. 

Implementation of Prior Recommendations Acquisition Policies and Plans: 

We previously reported that ERA had developed key acquisition policies 
and plans to guide its acquisition, but that the documents did not 
fully conform to the IEEE standards selected by the agency. These 
policies and plans are essential for managing the acquisition and 
providing critical guidance to the contractor who will be developing 
the system. As a result, we recommended that ERA revise these policies 
and plans to conform to industry standards. 

NARA has revised these four of five key acquisition policies and plans 
to comply with IEEE standards 

Acquisition Strategy: 

Configuration Management Plan 

Quality Management Plan: 

Program Management Plan: 

The revised acquisition policies and plans have been reviewed by an 
independent verification and validation contractor. According to these 
reviews, these documents are compliant with IEEE standards. 

According to the Director of the ERA Program Support Division, the 
remaining document-the risk management plan-is currently under revision 
and should be completed by June 2006.[Footnote 12] 

By revising these key ERA policies and plans to meet industry 
standards, NARA has strengthened the guidance it needs to acquire the 
ERA system. 

Implementation of Prior Recommendations Records Management: 

We previously reported that records management was generally afforded 
low priority by federal agencies and that NARA lacked strategies to 
address the low priority given to records functions and to monitor the 
performance of records management programs and practices on an ongoing 
basis. We recommended that the Archivist develop documented strategies 
for: 

raising senior management awareness of and commitment to records 
management principles, functions, and programs and: 

conducting systematic inspections of agency records management programs 
to (1) periodically assess agency progress in improving records 
management programs and (2) evaluate the efficacy of NARA's 
governmentwide guidance. 

NARA has implemented our recommendation by: 

briefing agency leaders on the importance of records and information 
management and providing guidance and support on electronic records to 
senior agency officials; 

assessing agency records management programs by (1) conducting cross- 
government studies to identify and analyze records management best 
practices; (2) developing governmentwide recommendations and guidance 
on these practices; and (3) developing a plan to undertake agency 
inspections based on a risk-based model, government studies, or reports 
from the media; and: 

conducting a survey of agency federal records officers that determined 
that the officers were generally satisfied with the utility of NARA 
guidance products. 

In addition, NARA plans to broaden the survey to include electronic 
records guidance, records management training, and scheduling and 
appraisal services. 

The plans and strategies implemented by NARA should raise agencies' 
awareness of records management principles, functions, and programs. 

Observations on the ERA Expenditure Plan and Acquisition ERA 
Expenditure Plan: 

The legislative requirement to submit an expenditure plan for ERA to 
the appropriations committees is intended to provide lawmakers with a 
sufficient understanding of the system acquisition to permit effective 
oversight and to allow for informed decision making about the use of 
appropriated funds. For this to occur, however, these plans need to 
disclose a sufficient level and scope of information to understand what 
system capabilities and benefits are to be delivered, by when, at what 
cost, and what progress is being made against the commitments that were 
made in prior expenditure plans. 

NARA's expenditure plan does not contain the level and scope of 
information needed for Congress to understand its plans and commitments 
relative to system capabilities, benefits, schedules, and costs. More 
specifically, the plan provides only general information on how the $22 
million, for which it is requesting release, is to be spent. According 
to the plan, these funds are to enable the development contractor, 
Lockheed Martin, to: 

* Provide the infrastructure for systems operations, including 
security, systems management, common services, and limited storage 
capabilities. This is to enable receiving, storing, and maintaining the 
integrity of electronic records being ingested into ERA. The plan also 
notes that a key element of this infrastructure is an "automated 
workflow capability." 

* Initiate work on business applications needed to support records 
appraisal, scheduling, limited preservation, and limited internal 
dissemination. 

However, the spend plan does not contain details on, for example: 

how the $22 million requested is to be allocated among planned tasks; 

the infrastructure elements-including software and hardware-that are to 
be procured or how these will fit into the overall system design; 

what is meant by an "automated workflow capability" and its 
relationship to system requirements and benefits; and: 

the portion of the work on business applications that will be completed 
during fiscal year 2006 with the funds requested. 

We also note that the schedule provided in the expenditure plan has 
changed since the plan was submitted to the appropriations committees. 
Specifically, while the plan indicates that the review and approval of 
the infrastructure design was to be completed by May 23, 2006, NARA 
officials stated that the current plan is to conduct a series of 
reviews that will result in approval of both the infrastructure and 
business applications designs by August 7, 2006. 

NARA officials stated that they had attempted to use another agency's 
plans as models in developing their own. They also indicated that they 
have more detailed information on their plans-including a list of the 
equipment to be procured-but did not include it because they believed 
it was too detailed. 

A listing of specific equipment would be of limited value; however, the 
plan does not provide sufficient information on system capabilities, 
benefits, schedules or costs to fully inform the Congress on what is 
being acquired. Without this information, Congress does not have the 
information needed to oversee plans and progress on the acquisition of 
the system. 

Conclusions: 

NARA's expenditure plan satisfies three of six legislative conditions 
and the agency has continued to make significant progress in 
implementing our recommendations. The agency plans to address 
outstanding issues. If NARA complies with the legislative conditions 
and implements our recommendations, the agency should be better 
positioned to successfully acquire the ERA system. 

NARA has not included a sufficient level and scope of information on 
infrastructure elements, automated workflow capability, and business 
applications to be completed in fiscal year 2006 so that Congress will 
be able to understand what system capabilities and benefits are to be 
delivered, by when, and at what cost. Without sufficient detail in 
future expenditure plans, Congress may be hampered in its ability to 
effectively oversee the program. 

Recommendation for Executive Action: 

We recommend that the Archivist of the United States ensure that future 
expenditure plans include a sufficient level and scope of information 
so that Congress will be able to understand what system capabilities 
and benefits are to be delivered, by when, and at what cost, and what 
progress is being made against the commitments that were made in prior 
expenditure plans. 

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation: 

In written comments on a draft of our briefing slides, the Archivist of 
the United States generally agreed with the contents and our 
recommendation. He stated that he was pleased to note the recognition 
of the progress made towards implementing our recommendations and 
indicated that the agency would make every effort to complete those 
identified as being partially implemented. 

Regarding the information provided in this year's spend plan, the 
Archivist said that providing more detail to Congress was inappropriate 
because (1) funding had fallen far short of expectations, (2) the 
agency and its contractor were replanning ERA to match available 
resources, and (3) the plan's details had not been finalized. However, 
NARA's spend plan did not provide information on these developments. 
Without this information, it is difficult for Congress to discern from 
the expenditure plan that NARA is significantly revising ERA's cost, 
schedule, and performance goals. Nonetheless, the Archivist agreed that 
NARA would provide additional information in future expenditure plans, 
as we recommended. 

The Archivist also stated that, because of substantial corrective 
actions completed in fiscal year 2005, information security is no 
longer considered to be a material weakness. We have clarified this in 
our briefing. However, information security must continue to be a 
priority as the agency increases reliance on its IT infrastructure for 
records management and archiving of electronic information. 

National Archives at College Park: 
8601 Adelphi Road: 
College Park, Maryland 20740-6001: 

Government Accountability Office: 
Director of Information Issues: 
Ms. Linda Koontz: 
441 G Street, NW: 
Washington, DC 20548: 

Dear Ms. Koontz: 

We thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the draft 
presentation entitled Electronic Records Archive: The National Archives 
and Records Administration's Fiscal Year 2006 Expenditure Plan before 
it is briefed to the staff members of the Subcommittee on 
Transportation, Treasury, the Judiciary, Housing and Urban Development 
and Related Agencies, Senate Committee on Appropriations and the 
Subcommittee on Transportation, Treasury, Housing and Urban 
Development, the Judiciary, District of Columbia, and Independent 
Agencies, House Committee on Appropriations. We are pleased to note the 
recognition of the progress made towards implementing five of the ten 
recommendations provided by GAO in their reports since June 2002. 

We also appreciate the insight into the progress remaining to be made 
towards addressing the five GAO recommendations discussed in the 
presentation, as well as the recommendations for future expenditure 
plans. To ensure successful implementation of the Electronic Records 
Archives (ERA) system we will make every effort to complete those 
recommendations identified in your presentation as "Partially 
Implemented". As you point out in your presentation, NARA is already 
working towards implementing the solutions to your recommendations. 

We would like to clarify the observations provided on the ERA 
Expenditure Plan and Acquisition. GAO noted that the ERA Expenditure 
Plan does not contain sufficiently detailed information on the 
allocation of funds, the infrastructure elements, workflow capability 
and work on business applications in the ERA system. While NARA had 
such information at the time the plan was submitted, it would have been 
inappropriate to include it. Such information was most fully 
articulated in Lockheed Martin's proposal for addressing NARA's 
requirements; however, the costs of addressing those requirements at 
the pace laid out in NARA's instructions to the contractor far exceeded 
expected resource levels. This necessitated a re-plan of all details 
about what would be built when. While NARA and the contractor reached a 
high level agreement on this quickly, revision of detailed plans is 
still in progress. Detailed re-planning requires not only addressing 
each element, but also assessing feasibility of each change and the 
cost, schedule, and engineering impacts on other elements of the plan. 
NARA and Lockheed expect to complete agreement on revised detailed 
plans by July. NARA will be happy to provide detailed information in 
future expenditure plans, as recommended by GAO. 

While the effort involved in the re-planning has required some 
adjustments in the system development effort, all major milestones in 
system development since the award of the contract option in September 
2005 have been met on time. The schedule change noted in GAO's 
observation will enable us to meet the next major milestone of 
completing the Critical Design Review as scheduled in August 2006. 

Finally, we would like to clarify the statement on slide 18 pertaining 
to our past material weakness in information security identified by 
NARA in our Fiscal Year 2000 Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act 
(FMFIA) Assurance Report to the President. The slide states that 
information security continues to be a material weakness. The Archivist 
of the United States reported in the FY 2005 Performance and 
Accountability Report, that because of the substantial corrective 
actions completed last year, the information technology security 
material weakness was resolved during FY 2005. 

Again, we thank you for this opportunity and look forward to our future 
interactions as we continue the ERA acquisition process. 

Sincerely, 

Signed by: 

Allen Weinstein: 
Archivist of the United States: 

[End of section] 

Appendix II: Comments from the National Archives and Records 
Administration: 

National Archives at College Park: 
8601 Adelphi Road College Park, Maryland 20740-6001: 

Jul 18 2006: 

Government Accountability Office: 
Director of Information Issues: 
Ms. Linda Koontz: 
441 G Street, NW: 
Washington, DC 20548: 

Dear Ms. Koontz: 

We thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the proposed 
report entitled Electronic Records Archive: The National Archives and 
Records Administration 's Fiscal Year 2006 Expenditure Plan before the 
report is issued. As mentioned in our letter of May 22,2006, we are 
pleased to note the recognition of the progress made towards 
implementing five of the ten recommendations provided by GAO in their 
reports since June 2002 and the insight into the progress remaining to 
be made towards addressing the five GAO recommendations discussed in 
the presentation, as well as the recommendations for future expenditure 
plans. 

We are making every effort to complete those recommendations identified 
in your report as "Partially Implemented" as well as the concerns 
regarding the Electronic Records Archives (ERA) Expenditure Plan. The 
same concerns were raised by the Committees on Appropriations in their 
letter of June 22, 2006. 

In response to the letter from the Committees, we are providing an 
action plan on fully satisfying the three legislative conditions 
identified as "Partially Implemented". We are also proposing submission 
of an addendum to the existing ERA Expenditure Plan that would provide 
more detail information on the allocation of funds, the infrastructure 
elements, workflow capability and work on business applications in the 
ERA system identified in your report. This information will be 
available on September l, 2006 after we have reached an agreement with 
Lockheed Martin on their proposed re-plan for the expected resource 
levels. 

While the effort involved in the re-planning has required some 
adjustments in the system development effort, all major milestones in 
system development since the award of the contract option in September 
2005 have been met on time. The schedule change noted in GAO's 
observation will enable us to meet the next major milestone of 
completing Increment 1 of the project. 

Finally, we appreciate your clarification on slide 18 pertaining to our 
past material weakness in information security. The Archivist of the 
United States reported in the FY 2005 Performance and Accountability 
Report that because of the substantial corrective actions completed 
last year, the information technology security material weakness was 
resolved during fiscal year 2005. However, understanding the importance 
of information security in the Federal government, we will continue to 
be vigilant in identifying and addressing information security 
weaknesses in the future. 

Again, we thank you for this opportunity and look forward to our future 
interactions as we continue the ERA acquisition process. 

Sincerely, 

Signed By: 

Allen Weinstein: 
Archivist of the United States: 

[End of section] 

Appendix III: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments: 

GAO Contact: 

Linda Koontz, (202) 512-6240:  

Staff Acknowledgments: 

In addition to the contact named above, Naba Barkakati, Timothy Case, 
Mike Dolak, Nancy Glover, Mary Hatcher, Jacqueline Mai, and Amos 
Tevelow made key contributions to this report. 

(310770): 

FOOTNOTES 

[1] NARA's fiscal year 2006 appropriations act provides that the agency 
must submit an expenditure plan before obligating fiscal 2006 funds for 
the ERA program. The plan must (1) meet the capital planning and 
investment control review requirements established by the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB), including Circular A-11; (2) comply with 
NARA's enterprise architecture; (3) conform with NARA's enterprise life 
cycle methodology; (4) comply with the acquisition rules, requirements, 
guidelines, and system acquisition management practices of the federal 
government; (5) be approved by NARA and OMB; and (6) be reviewed by 
GAO. See P.L. No. 109-115, November 30, 2005, Div. A, Title VI, 119 
Stat. 2486. 

[2] A technical clarification was added on p. 20. 

[3] According to the Federal Acquisition Regulation, a firm fixed- 
price contract provides for a price that is not subject to any 
adjustment on the basis of the contractor's cost experience in 
performing the contract. This type of contract places maximum risk and 
full responsibility for all costs and resulting profit or loss on the 
contractor(s). 

[4] P.L. 109-115, November 30, 2005, Div. A, Title VI, 119 Stat. 2486. 

[5] GAO, Information Management. Challenges in Managing and Preserving 
Electronic Records, GAO-02-586 (Washington, D.C.: June 17, 2002); GAO, 
Records Management. National Archives and Records Administration's 
Acquisition of Major System Faces Risks, GAO-03-880 (Washington, D.C.: 
Aug. 22, 2003); GAO, Records Management. Planning for the Electronic 
Records Archives Has Improved, GAO-04-927 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 23, 
2004); and GAO, Information Management: Acquisition of the Electronic 
Records Archives is Progressing, GAO-05-802 (Washington, D.C.: July 15, 
2005). 

[6] A senior ERA official indicated that these dates were tentative and 
would not be finalized until August 7, 2006, when Lockheed Martin and 
NARA complete the design. 

[7] NARA contracted with Northrop Grumman to perform independent 
verification and validation on policies and plans produced by the ERA 
program and contractual deliverables produced by Lockheed Martin. 

[8] SEI is a federally funded research and development center operated 
by Carnegie Mellon University and sponsored by the Department of 
Defense. Its objective is to provide leadership in software engineering 
and in the transition of new software engineering technology into 
practice. 

[9] SA-CMM: Identifies key process areas that are essential to 
effectively managing software-intensive system acquisitions. 

[10] CMMI is registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office by 
Carnegie Mellon University. The CMMI is SEI's process model that 
describes how to develop the processes needed for software development 
and specific practices that organizations should follow. 

[11] SCAMPI (SM) is a service mark of Carnegie Mellon University. It is 
a method used for appraising organizations using CMMI. 

[12] The Risk Management Plan was subsequently completed in July 2006.

GAO's Mission: 

The Government Accountability Office, the 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. 

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony: 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 
cost is through the Internet. GAO's Web site ( www.gao.gov ) contains 
abstracts and full-text files of current reports and testimony and an 
expanding archive of older products. The Web site features a search 
engine to help you locate documents using key words and phrases. You 
can print these documents in their entirety, including charts and other 
graphics. 

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and 
correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as "Today's Reports," on its 
Web site daily. The list contains links to the full-text document 
files. To have GAO e-mail this list to you every afternoon, go to 
www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to e-mail alerts" under the "Order 
GAO Products" heading. 

Order by Mail or Phone: 

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent 
of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 
more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. 
Orders should be sent to: 

U.S. Government Accountability Office 

441 G Street NW, Room LM 

Washington, D.C. 20548: 

To order by Phone: 

Voice: (202) 512-6000: 

TDD: (202) 512-2537: 

Fax: (202) 512-6061: 

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs: 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm 

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov 

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470: 

Public Affairs: 

Jeff Nelligan, managing director, 

NelliganJ@gao.gov 

(202) 512-4800 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 

441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548: