Summary
The federal government expects to spend about $71 billion for information technology (IT) projects for fiscal year 2009. Given the amount of money at stake, it is critical that these projects be planned and managed effectively to ensure that the public's resources are being invested wisely. This includes ensuring that they receive appropriate selection and oversight reviews. Selection involves identifying and analyzing projects' risks and returns and selecting those that will best support the agency's mission needs; oversight includes reviewing the progress of projects against expectations and taking corrective action when these expectations are not being met. GAO was asked to determine whether (1) federal departments and agencies have guidance on the role of their department-level investment review boards in selecting and overseeing IT projects and (2) these boards are performing reviews of poorly planned and poorly performing projects. In preparing this report, GAO reviewed the guidance of 24 major agencies and requested evidence of department-level board reviews for a sample of 41 projects that were identified as being poorly planned or poorly performing.
The 24 major federal agencies have guidance calling for department-level investment review boards to select and oversee IT investments. However, while all of the agencies had department-level boards, the board membership for the Departments of Commerce and Labor did not include business unit (i.e., mission) representation as called for by IT investment management best practices. Without business unit representation on their department-level boards, these agencies will not have assurance that the boards include those executives who are in the best position to make the full range of investment decisions necessary for them to carry out their missions most effectively. About half of the projects GAO examined did not receive selection or oversight reviews. Specifically, 12 of the 24 projects GAO reviewed that were identified by OMB as being poorly planned (accounting for $4.9 billion in the President's fiscal year 2008 budget request or two-thirds of the funding represented by the 24 projects) did not receive a selection review, and 13 of 28 poorly performing projects GAO reviewed (amounting to about $4.4 billion or 93 percent of the funding represented by the 28 projects) did not receive an oversight review by a department-level board. Agencies provided several reasons for not performing department-level board reviews, including some which were not consistent with sound management practices. Furthermore, 6 of the 11 projects in the sample identified as being both poorly planned and poorly performing, with over $3.7 billion in funding in the President's fiscal year 2008 budget request, received neither a selection review nor an oversight review. Without consistent involvement of department-level review boards in selecting and overseeing projects that have been identified as poorly planned or poorly performing, agencies incur the risk that these projects will not improve, potentially leading to billions of federal taxpayer dollars being wasted.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:
Team:
Phone:
David A. Powner
Government Accountability Office: Information Technology
(202) 512-9286
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To ensure that IT projects are effectively managed, the Secretaries of Commerce and Labor should ensure their department-level review boards include business unit (i.e., mission) representation.
Agency Affected: Department of Commerce
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To ensure that IT projects are effectively managed, the Chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission should direct the Executive Director for Operations to define conditions for elevating issues related to project selection and oversight to its department-level Investment Review Board (IRB).
Agency Affected: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To ensure that IT projects are effectively managed, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs should define and implement responsibilities for the department-level IRB to oversee projects in operations and maintenance.
Agency Affected: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: The Secretaries of the Departments of Defense, Education, Homeland Security, Transportation, Treasury, and Veterans Affairs, the Administrator for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and the Administrator for the U.S. Agency for International Development should ensure that the projects that are identified in this report as not having received departmental-IRB selection or oversight reviews receive these reviews.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency Affected: Department of Education
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency Affected: Department of Defense
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency Affected: Department of Transportation
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency Affected: Department of the Treasury
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency Affected: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency Affected: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency Affected: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Agency Affected: United States Agency for International Development
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
