Open Government is Powered by You
By Todd Park
Thank you to everyone who posted responses to both my blog and HHS’s initial Open Government Plan outline!
Very interesting responses. I wanted to give a shout-out to several folks in particular:
- To Scott in NJ, Scott Ruhl in CA, and Survivor in Iowa – who collectively pointed out that we have a great opportunity to advance Open Government through making the work of our federal advisory committees more accessible.
- To Snobound in VA and Tommy J, thanks for the posts urging us to avoid government jargon and speak plainly. It’s hard to be transparent if nobody knows what on earth you’re saying. We’ll try to lead by example by writing our Open Government plan in a way that folks can actually understand – and by making this blog a jargon-free zone.
- To Mother Horta, who chastised me for not making it easier for folks to offer ideas and then have them discussed. Mother, you may have already noticed that there’s a new feature in the “Our Plan” discussion – “Share Ideas” buttons under each category of Open Government action. Under “Share Ideas,” folks can offer ideas and suggestions, to which other folks can respond and which folks can rate.
Which brings me to my next question for everyone: what are your ideas regarding how HHS can best engage the American public in what we do for the betterment of the country? How can HHS collaborate in innovative ways with citizens and with organizations outside government to deliver most effectively on our mission of helping to improve health and well-being?
For a start to this particular conversation, check out the detailed, helpful post by Kate Walser of VA in the “Share Participation Ideas” area under “Our Plan.” Kate, thank you for your extremely thoughtful post. Others: please let us know what you think of Kate’s ideas, and add to her suggestions! Particularly interesting would be ideas which are simple, effective, and quick momentum builders for increased civic engagement in the work of HHS.
In case it’s not obvious by now, we plan to make this blog not about us, but about you – about your ideas and your thoughts regarding how HHS can best make progress on Open Government. Please keep your suggestions coming. We plan to keep blogging about Open Government long after our Open Government Plan is published. Like so many things, Open Government isn’t a destination, but a journey. And it’s a journey that should ultimately be powered by you.
Add a Comment | Privacy Policy | Permalink |
Tahnks for the updates
Thank you for taking on the challenge of making government more transparent. Half the battle will probably involve the 'making government transparent' part. The other half will be to engage people who have long ago given up on getting their voices heard. It could take years before people figure out that government is really serious about engaging engaging people through blogs like this. Keep at it, though. Gaining trust through social media takes time. Thank you for your efforts. Keep us informed and let us know how we can help bring attention to open government initiatives. @cindythroop (twitter)
I AGREE WITH the challenge of making government more transparent THANKS Lic. Ramiro Sanz
Thanks for the comments
I think the HHS's Open Government Plan sets a terrific example of an almost democratic and transparent initiative to make a government healthcare instituion more accountable to the citizen. I hope this trends spreads to Europe, especially the UK, as I believe this would greatly improve our healthcare system. Michael Maynard ver tv online
Todd, I don't know how I managed to miss this request, but I just learned about it. I'm in a conference in Philadelphia right now but I'll reply more tonight.
HHS needs to let the private sector do this. Government doesn't need to be involved.
Dear Mr. CTO: You asked for suggestions and comments - here's some fast input: 1) if you haven't yet read the book IT Savvy find it fast; if you already have it, buy copies for every executive at HHS involved with IT issues. $20. at Amazon.com provides the leading advice for all C level Execs from authors at MIT's Sloan School of Information Research. The book will help you articulate and sell the concept. Focusing on the operating model rather than individual business strategies gives HHS better guidance for developing IT and business process capability. 2) FEAF, DODAF, and Zachman are good but each are becoming outdated - keep an eye on TOGAF. 3) Multiple frameworks are needed in IT management today. Legislation is incapable of providing timely guidance and forces use of outdated approaches. The CIO Act of 1996 (Clinger-Cohen - great guys - but outdated in IT law) is about as good as a 286 with a 10 meg HD. What reference models do Federal CIOs use to manage IT? As a CTO what advice do you provide the CIO and other C-level Execs.? 4) Who will create a reference model which takes into account Technology, Architecture, Security, Infrastructure, and all the other necessary areas of IT? Nobody's done it yet and it's going to be awhile before our industry consolidates frameworks and standards. So what do you do in the meantime? Make it up? Wing it? Hope for the best? Business as Usual? Use marketing slogans? I suggest the CTO or chief Architect should drive the process and control architecture conversation. 5) If we truly embrace "open, transparent and participatory" CTO's might consider taking a bold stance. I suggest that HHS should publish the approaches or reference models used in all areas of IT management. Examples: IT Security - FISMA / NIST. Architecture - FEAF (or derivative). IT Strategy - Balanced Scorecard, IT Investment - ?, IT Governance - ? IT Risk - ?, IT Service Management - ITIL V2?, Project Management - PMBOK, Certification and Accreditation - ?. For IT to work, all these areas must work together and the leaders must understand and buy-into the approach. Using a football analogy, all the players must understand what's in the "play-book". And, then annually report as to the status an effectiveness of the approaches. It's the same concept as federal Sarbanes - Oxley legislation. Tell me which approach you're using and how well you're doing them. 6) Non-profit, vendor agnostic professional associations are addressing these issues and offer solutions. Example: the IT Governance Institute, in cooperation with the Information Systems Audit and Control Association (ISACA) has created several frameworks available for use in Federal agencies. Control objectives for IT and related technologies (COBIT) for IT Governance, Val IT for Enterprise Management of IT Investments and Risk IT. All of the content is available for open distribution - free - inside federal agencies. No need for legislation and no need to expend federal resources on a creative exercise. You can even get the content in word.doc or access.mdb format for $50. This is well within the authority of a CTO to advocate standardized, publically available industry leading good practices which integrates the management of all common IT domains. www.isaca.org 7) The IT Service Management reference model known by the name "IT Infrastructure Library (ITIL)" was developed by the British government in the 1980s. It's just starting to take hold in US federal agencies. One could say we're at least 5 - 10 years behind the British government in IT management practices. I think our OMB should ask the British government for permission to re-use all the content royalty free. Now that would be effective data sharing. Currently US federal agencies are spending millions of dollars per year in ITIL training - I presume HHS has some initiative going in this area. Does the CTO endorse and promote the use of this reference model? Does the CTO know that ITIL authors recommend using COBIT in conjunction with ITIL? Do you know ISO 20000, ISO 27000 and ISO 38500 - all directly focused on IT. 8) The local interest group for ISACA in the national capital area is one of the largest IT professional association groups in the area. The professional certification program recommended for CTO's is the COBIT Foundation level exam. 9) ISACA also provides a Board Briefing document which addresses the roles and responsibilities of four decision making bodies: IT Strategy Committee, IT Steering Committee, Technology Board and Architecture Board. From personal experience, I suggest that trying to define and segregate these bodies internally at an agency is not a good use of executive resources. Use the approach of A-B-C: adopt, buy or create, in that order. 10) How does HHS integrate IT management practices with NIH? Or other agencies? Do you speak the same language? Many of our working groups spend months defining common terminology. COBIT details for a Chief Architect or CTO can be found in COBIT: Defining the Information Architecture (PO2) page 33; and Determine the Technological Direction (PO3) - page 37. Each provides high levels and detailed control objectives, inputs and outputs, RACI chart, metrics, and maturity model. Easy to follow materials which can be used at any federal agency. 11) If you're not doing formal IT Governance and IT Investment Management and IT Risk Management, based on open models, you could be doing better; and all the other IT efforts will be sub-optimal. 12) All CTO's should continually be asking four questions: 1) Are we doing the right things? 2) Are we doing them the right way? 3) Are we getting them done well? 4) Are we getting the benefits? 13) thanks for allowing me to provide my two cents and keep up the good work at HHS!