STATEMENT OF
THE HONORABLE KAREN EVANS
ADMINISTRATOR FOR ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT AND
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON TECHNOLOGY, INFORMATION POLICY,
INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS AND THE CENSUS
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
March
3, 2004
Mr. Chairmen and Members
of the Subcommittee:
Thank you for inviting
me here today to talk to you about the federal information technology
(IT) portfolio. My remarks will focus on the Administrations strategy
and progress to date in planning, managing, and measuring the results
of the governments technology investments. In particular, I would
like to provide the Committee an update on the successful results of the
Presidents E-Government initiatives and the impact of the Federal
Enterprise Architecture.
IT Portfolio
As you know, the Presidents
2005 Budget request includes nearly $60 billion dollars for IT, and reflects
this Administrations commitment to Defense and Homeland Security.
Of the nearly
$60 billion dollars requested this year, roughly $27 billion is directed
to the Department of Defense, while more than $10 billion directly supports
Homeland Security. For example, the Department of Homeland Security's
IT budget increased in key priority areas such as an additional $69 million
to support border enforcement activities and an increase of $96 million
to support Transportation Security Administration (TSA) equipment.
This budget also shows
our continuing work in exercising fiscal responsibility without sacrificing
results. We are reaffirming the Administrations commitment to results-oriented
management by reducing duplication in IT spending while providing the
opportunity to share in common solutions for agency IT needs, while improving
service delivery for the citizen. Efforts by agencies to hold down the
cost of IT services and at the same time improve citizen satisfaction
have generated some innovative solutions. Our continued emphasis on eliminating
redundant IT investments drove agencies to examine IT spending and develop
consolidated plans for technology acquisition and maintenance. For example,
USDA conducted an extensive effort to identify opportunities to reduce
redundancy and duplication within its IT portfolio. These efforts led
to the department's consolidation of its portfolio and a $162 million
savings from the FY2004 to FY2005 budget.
Of the nearly 1,200
major projects included in this years budget, 621 representing
roughly $22 billion are currently on a "management watch list.
This list includes mission-critical projects in need of improvement in
areas such as performance measures, project management and/or IT security.
The FY2005 budget reflects the requirement that agencies successfully
correct identified project weaknesses and business case deficiencies or
OMB will limit new starts and other developmental activities; the agencies
must make real progress addressing and correcting these weaknesses.
Other specific challenges
to better serve the citizen through E-Government include an ongoing shortfall
in qualified project managers and IT architects needed to successfully
manage the federal IT portfolio.
This challenge is
being addressed through direction to agencies to have a program management
plan and a qualified project manager for projects to be approved for spending
in 2004 and thereafter.
Status of
Federal Systems
Ensuring the security
of the federal government's information and systems is a critical element
of effective and responsible IT management. As you know, the Federal Information
Security Management Act (FISMA) requires agencies and Inspector Generals
(IGs) to annually review and evaluate agency IT security programs and
systems and to report on their results to OMB and the Congress. Additionally,
both FISMA and long-standing OMB policy direct agencies to fund IT security
throughout the life cycle of every system and develop remediation plans
for all systems with IT security weaknesses.
OMB used the information
from the annual FISMA reports and quarterly remediation updates to directly
influence the FY 2005 budget process. Specifically:
-
Information from agency and IG reports along with their remediation
plans identified both agency-wide and system specific IT security weaknesses.
The annual reviews and reports identified the gaps and the remediation
plans provided the corrective actions the agency has determined are
necessary to close the gaps.
-
Information from OMB IT budget submission documents, including the exhibit
53 and 300, also identifies whether appropriate steps to secure both
new and legacy IT systems have been undertaken. For example, agencies
must report whether risk-based and cost-effective IT security controls
have been identified, implemented, and tested, and their operational
systems have been fully certified and accredited.
While this information
assisted OMB in making FY 2005 funding decisions, thereby addressing longer-term
IT security weaknesses, it was also useful in prioritizing FY 2004 expenditures.
For example, agencies with significant weaknesses in information and system
security were directed to remediate operational systems with weaknesses
prior to spending FY 2004 development or modernization funds. If additional
resources are needed to resolve those weaknesses, agencies are to use
their FY 2004 development funds. These steps were taken to reinforce both
law and policy requirements; they underscore the President's commitment
to security and privacy.
Effects of
E-Government Initiatives
FY 2005 E-Government
priorities and IT resource levels reflect activities with which we are
presently engaged with the agencies. For example, this year agencies must
review all commercial software acquisitions for appropriateness for inclusion
into the SmartBuy program.
This program will leverage government purchasing power and reduce redundant
purchases. If an agency intends to complete an acquisition found to be
duplicative, my prior approval is required.
Another example is
our work in the enterprise human resources initiative (EHRI). Agencies
have been directed to work with OPM to develop a migration plan to the
EHRI initiative which provides workforce analysis tools. Agencies must
cease further development of agency-specific workforce analysis tools
and capabilities. Agencies are identifying FY2004 resources for development
and maintenance of workforce analysis tools, re-directing redundant spending
to support migrations to the common EHRI tools. Accordingly, no resources
for new agency workforce analysis tools are included in the FY2005 Budget.
In Phase 2 of Grants.gov,
agencies must use the "find and apply" solutions of this initiative.
In addition, agencies must designate funds for migrating grants management
systems and/or applications to the common solution developed by Grants.gov.
This also includes interfacing back office grants management systems to
the government-wide effort. All FY 2004 new planning and development dollars
will be redirected to develop an action plan, solution, and architecture
for an agency's grants management system that integrates to the government-wide
solution by September 1, 2004.
Finally, this year
agencies must share all appropriate data with OMB about their core financial
system applications on a government-wide basis. They have also been asked
to redirect all planning and acquisition dollars for core financial systems
planning and development work in FY2004 to standards and architecture
development for a government-wide solution.
Status of
FEA Activities
We first used the
Federal Enterprise Architecture (FEA) in formulating the FY 2004 budget.
Using the Business Reference Model (BRM), we identified six major service
areas with over $6.8 billion in IT investment funding that seemingly offer
great potential for government wide collaboration, consolidation and savings.
Results to date include:
- The
Department of Health and Human Services has taken a leading role in
bringing together all of the major players in the Federal government
who have programs providing Health services. This initiative is currently
defining the common work across many of these activities in order to
identify specific work areas that can be shared and where technologies
can be leveraged across many agencies resulting in real cost savings.
- The
Department of Justice has brought together all of the major investigative
agencies in the Federal government to identify where it will be possible
to use shared technology tools to support their case management needs.
The result should be a reduction in the number of unique case-management
systems as well as the ability to share information where it is imperative
to do so.
- In
the area of Financial Management, a function performed by every Federal
agency, the FEA identified at least 103 financial management systems
planned or in use across the government. The Departments of Energy and
Labor are leading a cross-agency task force of nine agencies and link
together efforts of JFMIP, the SGL board, GSA procurement initiatives,
and OMB/Treasury reporting. The approach targets seamless data interchange
among partner agencies, reduced acquisition expenditures resulting from
common system requirements, and a common architecture that includes
standardized data structures and business processes across government
for core financial systems.
For the FY 2005 budget
process we were able to implement the FEA in a much more dynamic way and
as a result we have been able to identify further areas within the federal
government that have the potential for substantial collaboration and consolidation.
We have also begun to identify where agencies are using the same technology
components and as a result we can target many of those technologies for
government-wide enterprise licensing through the SmartBuy program. We
will also be able to identify technologies that can be shared and re-used
by multiple agencies. The Pay.gov system developed and supported by the
Department of the Treasury is an excellent example of this capability.
Pay.gov provides the necessary processing capability for credit card transactions
that many agency systems require. Rather than each agency developing their
own capability, it is now possible for agencies to use Pay.gov to provide
that capability, reducing the cost and effort for many agencies.
In preparing for FY2006
we will continue to require agencies to align their efforts with the FEA.
We will also provide them with a web-based tool giving them access to
government-wide data that is organized around the FEA. With this tool,
each agency can identify other agencies engaged in developments that are
similar or identical to its. Through this tool they can identify potential
collaboration partners as well as specific technology components they
may be able to use, rather than develop their own. We anticipate substantial
savings to the government as these capabilities begin to take hold.
Conclusion
The Administration
will continue to work collaboratively across agencies and with Congress.
I look forward to working with you on these matters, and would be happy
to take questions at this time.
|