Reports & Testimonies

  • GAO’s recommendations database contains report recommendations that still need to be addressed.

    GAO’s recommendations help congressional and agency leaders prepare for appropriations and oversight activities, as well as help improve government operations. Recommendations remain open until they are designated as Closed-implemented or Closed-not implemented. You can explore open recommendations by searching or browsing.

    GAO's priority recommendations are those that we believe warrant priority attention. We sent letters to the heads of key departments and agencies, urging them to continue focusing on these issues. These recommendations are labeled as such. You can find priority recommendations by searching or browsing our open recommendations below, or through our mobile app.

  • Browse Open Recommendations

    Explore priority recommendations by subject terms or browse by federal agency

    Search Open Recommendations

    Search for a specific priority recommendation by word or phrase



  • Governing on the go?

    Our Priorities for Policy Makers app makes it easier for leaders to search our recommendations on the go.

    See the November 10th Press Release


  • Have a Question about a Recommendation?

    • For questions about a specific recommendation, contact the person or office listed with the recommendation.
    • For general information about recommendations, contact GAO's Audit Policy and Quality Assurance office at (202) 512-6100 or apqa@gao.gov.
  • « Back to Results List Sort by   

    Results:

    Subject Term: "Enterprise architecture"

    8 publications with a total of 97 open recommendations including 2 priority recommendations
    Director: David A. Powner
    Phone: (202) 512-9286

    4 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To assist VA in improving key IT management processes to ensure that investments support the delivery of health care services, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs should direct the Under Secretary for Health and the Chief Information Officer to identify performance metrics and associated targets for the goals and objectives in the department's IT strategic plans, including the Information Resources Management strategic plan and the Health Information Strategic Plan, as they relate to the delivery of health IT and the VHA mission.

    Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
    Status: Open

    Comments: In comments on our report, VA concurred with our recommendation and described planned coordination with the Office of Information and Technology and the Veterans Health Administration to develop or revise and maintain performance metrics that support the strategic and health information technology goals and objectives. The department plans to revise performance metrics to align to new goals and objectives by June 2018.
    Recommendation: To assist VA in improving key IT management processes to ensure that investments support the delivery of health care services, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs should direct the Under Secretary for Health and the Chief Information Officer to ensure that the department-level investment review structure is implemented as planned and that guidance on the IT governance process is documented and identifies criteria for selecting new investments, and reselecting investments currently operational at VHA.

    Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
    Status: Open

    Comments: In comments on our report, VA concurred with our recommendation and provided meeting minutes for its Portfolio Investment Management Board and a document describing the proposed alignment and interdependencies between the 11 governance boards. We will continue to monitor the implementation of the proposed relationships and review any additional guidance issued that further describes the process used by the governance boards for selecting and reselecting information technology investments.
    Recommendation: To assist VA in improving key IT management processes to ensure that investments support the delivery of health care services, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs should direct the Under Secretary for Health and the Chief Information Officer to identify additional performance metrics to align with VHA's core business functions, and then use these metrics to determine the extent to which the department's IT systems support performance of VHA's mission.

    Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
    Status: Open

    Comments: In comments on our report, VA concurred with our recommendation. In addition, the department outlined steps it intends to take to address our recommendation. These steps include developing a set of core metrics to provide continuous input into investment portfolio decisions and establishing a methodology for ensuring that information technology investments are aligned to business needs and that expected outcomes are defined prior to making the investments. The department plans to complete this work by September 2018. We will continue to monitor VA's progress on these efforts.
    Recommendation: To assist VA in improving key IT management processes to ensure that investments support the delivery of health care services, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs should direct the Under Secretary for Health and the Chief Information Officer to ensure that unmet IT needs identified by key program areas--pharmacy benefits management, scheduling, and community care--are addressed appropriately and that related business functions are supported by IT systems to the extent required.

    Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
    Status: Open

    Comments: In comments on our report, VA concurred with our recommendation. The department has described its intention to ensure that unmet information technology needs for the pharmacy benefits management, scheduling, and community care program areas are addressed appropriately during fiscal year 2018 budget formulation. We will follow-up with VA to ascertain what needs have been addressed, closed, or reprioritized for each program office during fiscal year 2018.
    Director: Carol R. Cha
    Phone: (202) 512-4456

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help ensure that the department can better achieve business process reengineering and enterprise architecture outcomes and benefits, the Secretary of Defense should utilize the results of our portfolio manager survey to determine additional actions that can improve the department's management of its business process reengineering and enterprise architecture activities.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD developed a plan, using the results of our survey, to improve the department's management of its business process reengineering and enterprise architecture activities; however, key milestones have not yet been completed. Specifically, in January 2017, the department issued a business enterprise architecture (BEA) improvement plan. The plan was intended to address BEA usability and deficiencies in information supporting the investment management process. As part of the plan, the department identified opportunities to address the results of our survey. For example, according to the plan, our survey results were utilized to identify opportunities for improving management and integration of existing enterprise business processes and investments; assessing duplication early in the analysis phase and finding process and capability reuse across the department; and providing a federated BEA information environment and capabilities to discover and exchange information from other sources. The plan included delivering three major capabilities. As of September 2017, the Office of the Deputy Chief Management Officer stated that the delivery dates for the three capabilities were as follows: Business Capability Acquisition Cycle content ingest and investment reviews by June 2018; process and system reviews within and across domains by June 2018; and development and integration of functional strategies by December 2018. Further, the office stated that dates were subject to a contract being awarded. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.
    Director: Valerie C. Melvin
    Phone: (202) 512-6304

    2 open recommendations
    including 1 priority recommendation
    Recommendation: To ensure effective management and modernization of HUD's IT environment, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development should direct the department's Chief Information Officer to establish a means for evaluating progress toward institutionalizing management controls and commit to time lines for activities and next steps.

    Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of April 2017, HUD had not yet established a means for evaluating progress toward institutionalizing IT management controls. According to HUD officials, the department expects to evaluate the controls through an update to its IT Management Framework scheduled to be completed during fiscal year 2017.
    Recommendation: To ensure effective management and modernization of HUD's IT environment, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development should direct the department's Chief Information Officer to define the scope, implementation strategy, and schedule of its overall modernization approach, with related goals and measures for effectively overseeing the effort.

    Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: In August 2016, HUD officials reported that the department was taking actions intended to establish a new, stronger enterprise approach for IT development and operations. As of April 2017, the department reported that it was in phase 2 of a 4-phase application assessment initiative expected to address this recommendation. However, HUD has not yet provided evidence of how the new approach is expected to define the scope, implementation strategy, and schedule for modernizing the department's IT.
    Director: Powner, David A
    Phone: (202)512-9286

    48 open recommendations
    including 1 priority recommendation
    Recommendation: To help ensure the success of PortfolioStat, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget should direct the Federal Chief Information Officer to disclose the limitations of any data reported (or disclose the parameters and assumptions of these data) on the agencies' consolidation efforts and associated savings and cost avoidance.

    Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
    Status: Open

    Comments: In its comments on GAO's November 2013 report, OMB disagreed with this recommended action, stating that it had disclosed limitations on data reported and cited three instances of these efforts. However, GAO maintained that, while OMB reported limitations of data regarding commodity information technology (IT) consolidation efforts in these cases, the information reported did not provide stakeholders and the public with a complete understanding of the data presented. For example, OMB did not disclose that information from the Departments of Defense (DOD) and Justice was not included in the consolidation estimates reported, which, considering the scope of DOD's efforts in this area (at least $3.2 billion), was a major gap. As of March 2017, OMB still had not addressed this recommendation. During that month, the agency told GAO that improving the quality of the data agencies submit through the integrated data collections (which include data on agencies' consolidation efforts and associated savings and cost avoidance) is a priority and that Office of the Federal Chief Information Officer staff follow up with agencies when they detect anomalies in the data reported. OMB, however, did not address actions to disclose the limitations of data reported or disclose the parameters and assumptions of these data. Such disclosure would provide the public and other stakeholders with crucial information needed to understand the status of PortfolioStat and agency progress in meeting the goals of the initiative.
    Recommendation: To help ensure the success of PortfolioStat, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget should direct the Federal Chief Information Officer to require that agencies report on efforts to address action plan items as part of future PortfolioStat reporting.

    Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
    Status: Open

    Comments: OMB's June 2015 memorandum on the management and oversight of federal information technology (M-15-14) established quarterly PortfolioStat sessions between OMB and agency Chief Information Officers. This represented a change from the previously required annual action item memos. In November 2016, OMB stated that it informally tracks action items resulting from PortfolioStat but no formal documentation is kept. We will continue to follow up on how OMB ensures that agencies report on efforts to address action items as part of future PortfolioStat reporting.
    Recommendation: To help ensure the success of PortfolioStat, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget should direct the Federal Chief Information Officer to improve transparency of and accountability for PortfolioStat by publicly disclosing planned and actual data consolidation efforts and related cost savings by agency.

    Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
    Status: Open

    Comments: In October 2015, OMB started displaying actual data consolidation savings data on the federal information technology (IT) dashboard, consistent with provisions of the IT reform legislation commonly referred to as the Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act. However, in November 2016, and again in March 2017, OMB stated that it does not track planned cost savings and cost avoidance figures and did not provide any plans to do so. Improving the transparency and accountability for PortfolioStat by publicly disclosing both planned and actual data consolidation efforts and related cost savings by agency would provide stakeholders, including Congress and the public, a means to monitor agencies' progress and hold them accountable for reducing duplication and achieving cost savings.
    Recommendation: To improve the department's implementation of PortfolioStat, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the CIO to develop a complete commodity IT baseline.

    Agency: Department of Agriculture
    Status: Open

    Comments: In its March 2014 statement of actions to address our recommendations, the Department of Agriculture (USDA) provided information on its efforts to ensure the quality of its commodity IT baseline data. Specifically, USDA reported having (1) developed a central repository for agencies and staff offices to populate commodity IT data and (2) provided training on the use of the repository, and (3)established an addtional level of oversight to monitor data quality. We are reviewing supporting documentation obtained from the department to determine whether the recommendation has been fully addressed.
    Recommendation: To improve the department's implementation of PortfolioStat, in future reporting to OMB, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the CIO to fully describe the following PortfolioStat Action plan elements: (1) consolidate commodity IT spending under the agency CIO and (2) establish criteria for wasteful, low-value, or duplicative investments.

    Agency: Department of Agriculture
    Status: Open

    Comments: In its March 2014 statement of actions to address our recommendations, the Department of Agriculture provided information on the elements identified in the recommendation. We are reviewing additional supporting documentation obtained from the department to determine whether the recommendation has been fully addressed.
    Recommendation: To improve the department's implementation of PortfolioStat, as the department finalizes and matures its valuation methodology, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the CIO to utilize this process to identify whether there are additional opportunities to reduce duplicative, low-value, or wasteful investments.

    Agency: Department of Agriculture
    Status: Open

    Comments: In its March 2014 statement of actions to address our recommendations, the Department of Agriculture stated that its Chief Information Officer will formalize and implement a value-based measurement model to help determine which IT investments should be included in the USDA IT portfolio. We are reviewing supporting documentation obtained from the department to determine whether this recommendation has been fully addressed.
    Recommendation: To improve the department's implementation of PortfolioStat, the Secretary of Agriculture should direct the CIO to develop support for the estimated savings for fiscal years 2013 through 2015 for the Cellular Phone Contract Consolidation, IT Infrastructure Consolidation/Enterprise Data Center Consolidation, and Geospatial Consolidation initiatives.

    Agency: Department of Agriculture
    Status: Open

    Comments: In its March 2014 statement of actions to address our recommendations, the Department of Agriculture stated that its CIO has developed supporting documentation for the cost savings/avoidance associated with the efforts identified in the recommendation. We are reviewing supporting documentation obtained from the department to determine whether this recommendation has been fully addressed.
    Recommendation: To improve the department's implementation of PortfolioStat, the Secretary of Commerce should direct the CIO to reflect 100 percent of information technology investments in the department's enterprise architecture.

    Agency: Department of Commerce
    Status: Open

    Comments: In its January 2014 statement of actions to address our recommendations, the Department of Commerce stated that the majority of its IT investments were made at the operating unit level and it was therefore planning on issuing policy to require consistency between the operating units' enterprise architecture and the totality of IT investments as reflected in the annual capital asset plan and business case summary submission. The department noted it would also require that consistency between the department's enterprise architecture and the IT investment portfolio is confirmed before submission of either of these artifacts. We are following up with the department to determine the status of these planned actions.
    Recommendation: To improve the department's implementation of PortfolioStat, the Secretary of Commerce should direct the CIO to develop a complete commodity IT baseline.

    Agency: Department of Commerce
    Status: Open

    Comments: In its January 2014 statement of actions to address our recommendations, the Department of Commerce stated it had submitted two iterations of its commodity IT baseline to OMB since we made our recommendation. The department noted the PortfolioStat process and requirement to submit the baseline through the integrated data collection tool helped ensure the baseline was complete. We plan to follow up with Commerce officials.
    Recommendation: To improve the department's implementation of PortfolioStat, the Secretary of Defense should direct the CIO to develop a complete commodity IT baseline.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In its December 2013 statement of actions to address our recommendations, the Department of Defense stated that it had efforts underway, including an initiative known as the Joint Information Environment, to further refine the Department's commodity IT baseline. As of August 2016, we found that the department's DOD IT Portfolio Repository included business and enterprise IT systems--two of three commodity IT areas defined by OMB--as part of an ongoing engagement. We are following up with the department to find out about actions to develop an inventory of assets associated with IT infrastructure--the third category of commodity IT defined by OMB.
    Recommendation: To improve the department's implementation of PortfolioStat, in the future reporting to OMB, the Secretary of Defense should direct the CIO to fully describe the following PortfolioStat action plan element: consolidate commodity IT spending under the agency CIO.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of December 2013, the department did not concur with this recommendation stating that the commodity IT construct implemented in the PortfolioStat initiative did not work well within the department's federated processes. The department agreed, however, that a strategy, consistent with the intent of achieving better buying power and control of commodity IT items, should be developed and implemented within the department using existing authorities, and noted that it was in the process of implementing such a strategy. In August 2016, we followed up with the department to obtain an update on the status of this strategy and determine the associated reporting to OMB. As of the end of October, we were still waiting for a response.
    Recommendation: To improve the department's implementation of PortfolioStat, the Secretary of Defense should direct the CIO to obtain support from the relevant component agencies for the estimated savings for fiscal years 2013 to 2015 for the data center consolidation, enterprise software purchasing, and General Fund Enterprise Business System initiatives.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In its statement of actions to address our recommendations, the Department of Defense stated that it already reports data center consolidation savings to both OMB and Congress and will continue to realize savings from the Enterprise Software Initiative, other strategic sourcing efforts, and the continuing implementation of General Fund Enterprise Business System initiatives. As of August 2016, we had collected support for data center consolidation as part of our ongoing data center consolidation work, and were waiting to receive support for the Enterprise Software Initiative savings for fiscal years 2013 to 2015 through recommendation follow-up for a prior software licensing review (GAO-14-413). We are following up with the department to obtain support for savings for the General Fund Enterprise Business System.
    Recommendation: To improve the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' implementation of PortfolioStat, in future reporting to OMB, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army to the CIO to fully describe the following PortfolioStat action plan elements: (1) consolidate commodity IT spending under the agency CIO; (2) target duplicative systems or contracts that support common business functions for consolidation; (3) establish criteria for identifying wasteful, low-value, or duplicative investments; and (4) establish a process to identify these potential investments and a schedule for eliminating them from the portfolio.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In its statement of actions to address our recommendations, the Department of Defense stated that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers would fully describe the four action plan elements identified in this recommendation in future OMB reporting. We are following up with the department to determine the status of these efforts and obtain the associated supporting documentation.
    Recommendation: To improve the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' implementation of PortfolioStat, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army to report on the agency's progress in consolidating eCPIC to a shared service as part of the OMB integrated data collection quarterly reporting until completed.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In October 2016, the Department of Defense provided a report stating it had completed the consolidation of eCPIC to a shared service in August 2014. We are following up with the department to obtain supporting documentation.
    Recommendation: To improve the department's implementation of PortfolioStat, in future reporting to OMB, the Secretary of Energy should direct the CIO to fully describe the following PortfolioStat action plan elements: (1) consolidate commodity IT spending under the agency CIO and (2) establish criteria for identifying wasteful, low-value, or duplicative investments.

    Agency: Department of Energy
    Status: Open

    Comments: In its March 2014 statement of actions to address our recommendations, the Department of Energy stated that it will update its policy orders as necessary to implement the OMB policy for consolidating commodity IT under the Chief Information Officer and include a description in future OMB reporting. The department also noted that it will work to establish additional value criteria to idenitfy low-value or duplicative federal commodity IT investments, and these criteria will be described in future OMB reporting. We are reviewing the department's reporting to OMB to determine the extent to which this recommendation has been addressed.
    Recommendation: To improve the agency's implementation of PortfolioStat, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency should direct the CIO to develop a complete commodity IT baseline.

    Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
    Status: Open

    Comments: In August 2014, the Environmental Protection Agency reported that it uses OMB's quarterly integrated data collection submission process to continually update the information in its baseline. We are following up with the agency to determine whether it has any process to ensure the completeness of the information that is submitted.
    Recommendation: To improve the agency's implementation of PortfolioStat, in future reporting to OMB, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency should direct the CIO to fully describe the following PortfolioStat action plan elements: (1) consolidate commodity IT spending under the agency CIO; (2) establish targets for commodity IT spending reductions and deadlines for meeting those targets; and (3) establish criteria for identifying wasteful, low-value, or duplicative investments.

    Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
    Status: Open

    Comments: In August 2014, the Environmental Protection Agency stated that, in its August 2014 PortfolioStat update, it had reported to OMB on the status of actions to consolidate commodity IT spending under the agency CIO and to establish targets for commodity IT spending reductions. The agency also stated that it was working to develop criteria for identifying wasteful, low-value, and duplicative investments. We are reviewing the August 2014 PortfolioStat update to verify the agency's claims. We plan to also follow up on efforts to develop the aforementioned criteria and any associated reporting to OMB.
    Recommendation: To improve the agency's implementation of PortfolioStat, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency should direct the CIO to report on the agency's progress in consolidating the managed print services and strategic sourcing of end user computing to shared services as part of the OMB integrated data collection quarterly reporting until completed.

    Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
    Status: Open

    Comments: In its March 2014 statement of actions to address our recommendations, the Environmental Protection Agency stated that it expected its print services to take on additional devices and locations beginning in April 2014 and that a contract vehicle for the purchasing and leasing of end user computing equipment was expected to be awarded by the end of the month. We are reviewing the agency's quarterly reporting to OMB to determine whether progress on the two initiatives was reported to OMB as we recommended.
    Recommendation: To improve the department's implementation of PortfolioStat, the Secretary of the Interior should direct the CIO to develop a complete commodity IT baseline.

    Agency: Department of the Interior
    Status: Open

    Comments: In August 2014, the Department reported that it was planning to undertake a series of activities spanning a 15-month timeframe to create a complete commodity IT baseline, including embarking upon a statistical analysis and cost projection initiative that is intended to identify the degree of confidence in the commodity IT baseline, and develop mechanisms that will enable validation and verification in the future. We will follow up with the department on the results of its activities.
    Recommendation: To improve the department's implementation of PortfolioStat, in future reporting to OMB, the Secretary of the Interior should direct the CIO to fully describe the following PortfolioStat action plan element: establish criteria for identifying wasteful, low-value, or duplicative investments.

    Agency: Department of the Interior
    Status: Open

    Comments: In its January 2014 comments on our report, the Department of the Interior stated that it was undertaking a business-driven approach that will involve working wtih its governance boards to establish criteria for identifying wasteful, low-value, or duplicative investments. The department stated it would establish the criteria by December 2014. However, the department did not address whether it would be reporting its plans to OMB, which was the focus of our recomnendation. We will follow up with officials on this.
    Recommendation: To improve the department's implementation of PortfolioStat, the Secretary of the Interior should direct the CIO to report on the department's progress in consolidating the Electronic Forms System component of the eMail Enterprise Records & Document Management System deployment 8 to a shared service as part of the OMB integrated data collection quarterly reporting until completed.

    Agency: Department of the Interior
    Status: Open

    Comments: In its January 2014 comments on our report, the Department of the Interior provided information on the status of its efforts to consolidate the Enterprise Forms System to a shared service and established a December 2014 target date for completion. In addition, the department stated that it would report on the status of the initiative quarterly until completion. We will follow up with the department to monitor its progress in completing the initiative and reporting on it to OMB.
    Recommendation: To improve the department's implementation of PortfolioStat, the Attorney General should direct the CIO to reflect 100 percent of information technology investments in the department's enterprise architecture.

    Agency: Department of Justice
    Status: Open

    Comments: In its December 2013 response to this recommendation, the Department of Justice stated that it had updated its enterprise architecture to include 100 percent of the information technology investments. However, it did not provide evidence of this action.We will follow up with the department to obtain supporting documentation.
    Recommendation: To improve the department's implementation of PortfolioStat, in future reporting to OMB, the Attorney General should direct the CIO to fully describe the following PortfolioStat action plan element: establish targets for commodity IT spending reductions and deadlines for meeting those targets.

    Agency: Department of Justice
    Status: Open

    Comments: In its December 2013 response to this recommendation, the Department of Justice (DOJ) stated that its Email and Collaboration Working Group established consolidation targets, and began Phase One of its email consolidation effort. In addition, DOJ provided information on the status of its efforts to establish additional targets. We are reviewing the information provided, as well as DOJ's reporting to OMB, to determine the extent to which this recommendation has been addressed.
    Recommendation: To improve the department's implementation of PortfolioStat, in future reporting to OMB, the Secretary of Labor should direct the CIO to fully describe the following PortfolioStat action plan elements: (1) consolidate commodity IT spending under the agency CIO and (2) establish targets for commodity IT spending reductions and deadlines for meeting those targets.

    Agency: Department of Labor
    Status: Open

    Comments: In its December 2013 response to this recommendation, the Department of Labor stated that the Chief Information Officer participates in discussions to identify and eliminate duplication and facilitate the use of commodity IT and shared services through the IT governance committees. We are reviewing documentation we recently obtained from the department to determine the current status of action to address this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the department's implementation of PortfolioStat, the Secretary of Labor should direct the CIO to report on the department's progress in consolidating the cloud e-mail services to a shared service as part of the OMB integrated data collection quarterly reporting until completed.

    Agency: Department of Labor
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Labor completed the consolidation of DOL agency e-mail systems into a shared cloud-based e-mail service in September 2014. In July 2015, the department provided evidence of a status report on the Office of Management and Budget IT dashboard showing completion of the initiative.
    Recommendation: To improve the agency's implementation of PortfolioStat, the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration should direct the CIO to reflect 100 percent of information technology investments in the agency's enterprise architecture.

    Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: in July 2015, NASA reported that it had initiated an effort referred to as Business Service Assessment (BSA) for IT to establish a more efficient IT operating model that maintains a minimum set of capabilities and meets current and future mission needs. The agency stated that one objective of the BSA is to guide technical, services, and investment decisions, create enterprise architecture and enterprise services methodologies for each IT domain that feeds into the overarching enterprise architecture for the full IT portfolio. In March 2016, the agency reported that final recommendations regarding the BSA were expected to be submitted to the Agency Mission Support Council at the end of the month. We are following up with NASA on the status of this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the agency's implementation of PortfolioStat, in future reporting to OMB, the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration should direct the CIO to fully describe the following PortfolioStat action plan elements: (1) consolidate commodity IT spending under the agency CIO; (2) target duplicative systems or contracts that support common business functions for consolidation; (3) establish criteria for identifying wasteful, low-value, or duplicative investments; and (4) establish a process to identify these potential investments and a schedule for eliminating them from the portfolio.

    Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: In May 2015, NASA reported that OMB published new action items that resulted in a shift in tracking of the previous action items identified in our recommendation. In July 2015, the agency provided evidence of a July 2015 report updating OMB of the status of these items.
    Recommendation: To improve the agency's implementation of PortfolioStat, in future reporting to OMB, the Archivist of the United States should direct the CIO to fully describe the following PortfolioStat action plan elements: (1) consolidate commodity IT spending under the agency CIO; (2) target duplicative systems or contracts that support common business functions for consolidation; (3) establish criteria for identifying wasteful, low-value, or duplicative investments; and (4) establish a process to identify these potential investments and a schedule for eliminating them from the portfolio.

    Agency: National Archives and Records Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: In its February 2014 statement of actions to address our recommendations, the National Archives and Records Administration reported that the four action plan elements identified in the recommendation had been included in the latest information resources management strategic plan submitted to OMB. We will review the plan to confirm whether the elements were included.
    Recommendation: To improve the agency's implementation of PortfolioStat, in future reporting to OMB, the Director of the National Science Foundation should direct the CIO to fully describe the following PortfolioStat action plan elements: (1) consolidate commodity IT spending under the agency CIO and (2) establish criteria for identifying wasteful, low-value, or duplicative investments.

    Agency: National Science Foundation
    Status: Open

    Comments: The National Science Foundation (NSF) reported that while OMB had not requested that the agency provide updates to the 2012 PortfolioStat action plan, NSF had provided different, OMB-requested documentation in support of annual PortfolioStat activities. We plan to follow up with the agency to determine the extent to which the documentation provided to OMB addresses our recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the agency's implementation of PortfolioStat, the Director of the Office of Personnel Management should direct the CIO to develop a complete commodity IT baseline.

    Agency: Office of Personnel Management
    Status: Open

    Comments: In August 2014, the Office of Personnel Management stated that it would be generating a policy requiring the baselines to be updated quarterly and established a target of May 2015 for fully implementing this recommendation. In March 2015, the agency stated that it was continuing to make progress toward the completion of its commodity IT baseline.
    Recommendation: To improve the agency's implementation of PortfolioStat, in future reporting to OMB, the Director of the Office of Personnel Management should direct the CIO to fully describe the following PortfolioStat action plan elements: (1) move at least two commodity IT areas to shared services and (2) target duplicative systems or contracts that support common business functions for consolidation.

    Agency: Office of Personnel Management
    Status: Open

    Comments: In August 2014, the Office of Personnel Management stated that the initial program office responses to our recommendation represented the vision of the former Chief Information Officer (CIO). The agency stated that the new CIO's strategic plan would address duplicative systems and contracts as part of the CIO re-organization project that was underway, with the intent of bringing the different job functions under one group in order to utilize resources and common business functions more effectively. The agency established May 2015 as a target for fully implementing the recommendation. However, we have not yet received evidence of this action. We plan to follow up on the status of actions taken.
    Recommendation: To improve the agency's implementation of PortfolioStat, the Director of the Office of Personnel Management should direct the CIO to report on the agency's progress in consolidating the help desk consolidation and IT asset inventory to shared services as part of the OMB integrated data collection quarterly reporting until completed.

    Agency: Office of Personnel Management
    Status: Open

    Comments: In August 2014, the Office of Personal Management (OPM) stated that a project initiated under the former Chief Information Officer's guidance deals specifically with help desk consolidation. OPM also stated it had leveraged the Remedy tool to integrate the IT asset inventory function as part of the help desk and that many of the IT asset inventory functions were now automated as part of this effort. The agency established May 2015 as a target for fully implementing the recommendation. We plan to follow up with OPM to find out about the status of actions taken to address this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the agency's implementation of PortfolioStat, the Administrator of the Small Business Administration should direct the CIO to develop a complete commodity IT baseline.

    Agency: Small Business Administration
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: In a recent GAO review examining whether agencies have complete inventories of business and enterprise IT systems (which represent 2 of the 3 categories of assets called for in the commodity IT baseline), SBA provided an inventory which it acknowledged did not include all systems or represent all offices. (Note: the review was summarized in GAO-16-511 issued in September 2016.) The agency noted that it was working with its offices to complete the inventory and hoped to finalize it and establish processes for updating the inventory, including possibly automating its data gathering abilities. In May 2017, SBA provided an update on the status of actions to address the recommendation. We are currently reviewing the documentation provided to determine whether SBA has fully addressed the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the agency's implementation of PortfolioStat, in future reporting to OMB, the Administrator of the Small Business Administration should direct the CIO to fully describe the following PortfolioStat action plan elements: (1) consolidate commodity IT spending under the agency CIO; (2) establish targets for commodity IT spending reductions and deadlines for meeting those targets; (3) target duplicative systems or contracts that support common business functions for consolidation; and (4) establish a process to identify those potential investments and a schedule for eliminating them from the portfolio.

    Agency: Small Business Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: In June 2015, SBA stated it believed the action items would be addressed as part of its actions to implement the provisions of the Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act. We reviewed the agency's December 2015 plan for implementing the law and an April 2016 update but did not find evidence of actions to address the items in the recommendation. In May 2017, SBA provided an update on the status of actions to address the recommendation. We are currently reviewing the documentation provided to determine whether SBA has fully addressed the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the agency's implementation of PortfolioStat, the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration should direct the CIO to develop a complete commodity IT baseline.

    Agency: Social Security Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: In September 2014, the Social Security Administration (SSA) reported that the instruction set for its Special Expense Item process through which all non-labor IT dollars go now includes the definition of commodity IT baseline, and the requirement to identify all commodity IT baseline funds requested. SSA also stated it will report the commodity IT baseline results for fiscal year 2015 in its November integrated data collection report. We are reviewing the instruction set for the Special Expense Item process and SSA's November integrated data collection report to verify SSA's reported actions.
    Recommendation: To improve the agency's implementation of PortfolioStat, the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration should direct the CIO to report on the agency's progress in consolidating the geospatial architecture to a shared service as part of the OMB integrated data collection quarterly reporting until completed.

    Agency: Social Security Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: In August 2015, the Social Security Administration (SSA) reported that it had migrated its geospatial architecture to a shared service in September 2014 and was complying with OMB reporting requirements. In July 2016, the agency provided e-mail messages and meeting minutes documenting various stages of the migration as evidence that it was completed as planned. However, SSA did not provide evidence of reporting to OMB. We are following up with SSA to obtain this evidence.
    Recommendation: To improve the department's implementation of PortfolioStat, the Secretary of State should direct the CIO to reflect 100 percent of information technology investments in the department's enterprise architecture.

    Agency: Department of State
    Status: Open

    Comments: According to the Department of State, since August 2014 all major and non-major IT investments and corresponding assets have been captured in enterprise architecture artifacts. We will follow up with the department to obtain documentation supporting this claim.
    Recommendation: To improve the department's implementation of PortfolioStat, in future reporting to OMB, the Secretary of State should direct the CIO to fully describe the following PortfolioStat action plan elements: (1) consolidate commodity IT spending under the agency CIO; (2) establish targets for commodity IT spending reductions and deadlines for meeting those targets; (3) move at least two commodity IT areas to shared services; (4) target duplicative systems or contracts that support common business functions for consolidation; and (5) establish a process to identify those potential investments and a schedule for eliminating them from the portfolio.

    Agency: Department of State
    Status: Open

    Comments: In August 2014, the Department of State reported taking several actions to address the action plan elements we determined had not been fully described in our review. For example, it provided the Integrated Logistics Management System and the Global IT Modernization program as examples of two commodity IT investments it had moved to shared services and reported that it instituted review processes to identify duplicative efforts within the IT portfolio. The department, however, did not state whether it had reported these actions to OMB, which was the focus of our recommendation. We will follow up with the department on this.
    Recommendation: To improve the department's implementation of PortfolioStat, the Secretary of State should direct the CIO to report on the department's progress in consolidating the Foreign Affairs Network and content publishing and delivery services to shared services as part of the OMB integrated data collection quarterly reporting until completed.

    Agency: Department of State
    Status: Open

    Comments: In August 2014, the Department of State reported that it had completed the content publishing and delivery services initiative and was reporting on its progress in consolidating the Foreign Affairs Network initiative to shared services through the OMB budget process. We plan to follow up with the agency to obtain supporting documentation.
    Recommendation: To improve the department's implementation of PortfolioStat, the Secretary of Transportation should direct the CIO to report on the department's progress in consolidating the Enterprise Messaging to shared services as part of the OMB integrated data collection quarterly reporting until completed.

    Agency: Department of Transportation
    Status: Open

    Comments: In September 2015, the department reported that it had discontinued its effort to migrate the Enterprise Messaging program to shared services because it was no longer cost-effective. We plan to follow up with the department on this matter.
    Recommendation: To improve the department's implementation of PortfolioStat, in future reporting to OMB, the Secretary of the Treasury should direct the CIO to fully describe the following PortfolioStat action plan elements: (1) consolidate commodity IT spending under the agency CIO and (2) establish criteria for identifying wasteful, low-value, or duplicative investments.

    Agency: Department of the Treasury
    Status: Open

    Comments: In September 2014, the Departmnent of the Treasury provided information on its efforts to address its action plan elements, including (1) establishing a general approach to reviewing new investment requests that considers risk, value, and cost; and (2) driving Treasury's IT investment portfolio toward common platforms whenever possible. However, the department did not address whether it was reporting on these efforts to OMB, which was the focus of our recommendation. We will follow up with the department on this.
    Recommendation: To improve the department's implementation of PortfolioStat, as the department finalizes and matures its enterprise architecture and valuation methodology, the Secretary of the Treasury should direct the CIO to utilize these processes to identify whether there are additional opportunities to reduce duplicative, low-value, or wasteful investments.

    Agency: Department of the Treasury
    Status: Open

    Comments: The department described several examples of processes it had in place to identify opportunities to reduce duplicative, low-value or wasteful investments, including annual reviews of each major IT investment and monthly portfolio reviews. We plan to follow up with the department to obtain supporting documentation.
    Recommendation: To improve the department's implementation of PortfolioStat, the Secretary of the Treasury should direct the CIO to develop support for the estimated savings for fiscal years 2013 to 2015 for the DoNotPay Business Center, Fiscal IT Data Center Consolidation and Business Process Management Status initiatives.

    Agency: Department of the Treasury
    Status: Open

    Comments: The department provided documentation related to its DoNotPay Business Center, Fiscal IT Data Center Consolidation, and Business Process Management Status initiatives. We are reviewing the information provided and plan to follow up with the department as appropriate.
    Recommendation: To improve the agency's implementation of PortfolioStat, the Administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development should direct the CIO to reflect 100 percent of information technology investments in the agency's enterprise architecture.

    Agency: United States Agency for International Development
    Status: Open

    Comments: In response to this recommendation, in September 2014, USAID provided GAO its guidance for establishing an IT asset inventory consistent with Federal Information Systems Management Act requirements and its guidance for purchasing equipment and services which are compliant with agency standards. In October 2015, USAID also stated that it regularly updates its enterprise architecture through maintenance of its information systems inventory and evaluation of future investments. In March 2017, the agency provided GAO documentation supporting its efforts to maintain its information systems inventory and evaluate future investments. However, USAID did not show how these activities help ensure that investments are all included in the enterprise architecture. GAO is following up with the agency on this matter.
    Recommendation: To improve the department's implementation of PortfolioStat, in future reporting to OMB, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs should direct the CIO to fully describe the following PortfolioStat action plan element: target duplicative systems or contracts that support common business functions for consolidation.

    Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
    Status: Open

    Comments: In a December 2015 update to the status of this recommendation, the department stated it was changing its governance processes and organizational structures for IT portfolio, system, project and requirements management to strengthen its ability to identify and eliminate/consolidate duplicative systems or contracts. The department recently reported that these new processes and organizations were established in the Spring of 2016, including a new strategic sourcing approach which should assist in addressing our recommendation. We are following up with the department to obtain evidence of this approach.
    Recommendation: To improve the department's implementation of PortfolioStat, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs should direct the CIO to report on the department's progress in consolidating the dedicated fax servers to a shared service as part of the OMB integrated data collection quarterly reporting until completed.

    Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
    Status: Open

    Comments: In December 2015, the department reported that it would no longer pursue the initiative because an analysis performed in fiscal year 2014 indicated very little, if any cost savings to be achieved. The agency, however, did not provide evidence regarding any related reporting to OMB. We are following up with the department to obtain this evidence.
    Recommendation: To improve the department's implementation of PortfolioStat, as the department matures its enterprise architecture process, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs should direct the CIO to make use of it, as well as the valuation model, to identify whether there are additional opportunities to reduce duplicative, low-value, or wasteful investments.

    Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
    Status: Open

    Comments: In December 2015, the department stated it was changing its governance processes and organizational structures for IT portfolio, system, project and requirements management to strengthen its ability to identify and eliminate/consolidate duplicative systems or contracts. The department recently reported that these new processes and organizations were established in the Spring of 2016. We are following up with the department to find out how they are incorporating the use of the enterprise architecture and value model to identify opportunities to reduce duplicative, low-value, or wasteful investments.
    Recommendation: To improve the department's implementation of PortfolioStat, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs should direct the CIO to develop detailed support for the estimated savings for fiscal years 2013 to 2015 for the Server Virtualization, Eliminate Dedicated Fax Servers Consolidation, Renegotiate Microsoft Enterprise License Agreement, and one CPU policy initiatives.

    Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
    Status: Open

    Comments: In December 2015, the department reported that the scope of the Server Virtualization initiative was increased and that the cost avoidance estimates were being revised accordingly. It also reported that the Elimination of Analog Fax Lines initiative was no longer being pursued because an analysis found that it would result in very little, if any, cost savings. In regards to the Renegotiate Microsoft Enterprise License Agreement initiative, the department reported that total savings over a 5-year period were renegotiated but did not provide supporting documentation. Lastly, the department reported that a new economic justification for the One CPU Policy initiative was being developed based on a consolidation strategy, and would be provided when completed. We are following up with the department to obtain documentation supporting its reported actions.
    Director: Melvin, Valerie C
    Phone: (202) 512-6304

    6 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To effectively implement key components of DOD's business systems modernization program, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Deputy Chief Management Officer to define by when and how the department plans to develop an architecture that would extend to all defense components and include, among other things, (a) information about the specific business systems that support business enterprise architecture (BEA) business activities and related system functions; (b) business capabilities for the Hire-to-Retire and Procure-to-Pay business processes; and (c) sufficient information about business activities to allow for more effective identification of potential overlap and duplication.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of September 2017, the Department of Defense (DOD) had taken steps to address the recommendation; however, more steps are needed to meet its intent. For example, as of July 2015, the department had taken steps to improve the integration of business enterprise architecture (BEA) information with other existing information. This integration was intended to allow DOD to identify information such as mapping of existing business systems to individual BEA system functions. In addition, in January 2017, the department issued a plan to improve the usefulness of the architecture by delivering three major capabilities, including the ability to conduct process and system reviews within and across domains, which can help better identify potential duplication and overlap, by January 2017. The plan also included other activities that may help support the identification of duplication and overlap, such as developing a federated ontology for BEA data structures, migrating legacy architecture data into the federated ontology, and defining requirements to enable extensible data structures for future updates, by June 2016. However, the department has not developed the ontology or delivered the capability to conduct process and system reviews within and across domains. An official from the Office of the Deputy Chief Management Officer stated in September 2017 that the BEA ontology work is ongoing and that a plan for moving the existing BEA content to the new framework is in development. The official also stated that delivery of the capability to conduct process and system reviews within and across domains is now planned for June 2018, depending on contract award. However, DOD has not updated its BEA improvement plan to reflect the revised delivery dates. In addition, the department also has not identified the business capabilities associated with the Hire-to-Retire and Procure-to-Pay business processes. The department continues to update its business architecture, but it has not demonstrated that it has defined by when and how it plans to develop an architecture that would extend to all defense components and include business capabilities for the Hire-to-Retire and Procure-to-Pay business processes.
    Recommendation: To effectively implement key components of DOD's business systems modernization program, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Deputy Chief Management Officer to ensure that the functional strategies include all of the critical elements identified in DOD investment management guidance, including performance measures to determine progress toward achieving the goals that incorporate all of the attributes called for in the department's guidance.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of August 2017, the Department of Defense (DOD) had taken some steps to address the intent of this recommendation. However, more remains to be done to fully address the intent of the recommendation. For example, we reported in July 2015 that the department established performance measures in its functional strategies that addressed at least some of the five attributes called for in DOD guidance. In particular, all of the fiscal year 2015 functional strategies identified examples of quantitative metrics. However, not all functional strategies identified metrics that addressed the other attributes. As of August 2017, this continues to be the case. For example, the fiscal year 2017 human resources management functional strategy did not address prior year business outcomes and initiatives progress, as required by the February 2015 investment management guidance.
    Recommendation: To effectively implement key components of DOD's business systems modernization program, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Deputy Chief Management Officer to select and control its mix of investments in a manner that best supports mission needs by (a) documenting a process for evaluating portfolio performance that includes the use of actual versus expected performance data and predetermined thresholds; (b) ensuring that portfolio assessments are conducted in key areas identified in our IT investment management framework: benefits attained; current schedule; accuracy of project reporting; and risks that have been mitigated, eliminated, or accepted to date; and (c) ensuring that the documents provided to the Defense Business Council as part of the investment management process include critical information for conducting all assessments.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of August 2017, the Department of Defense had not addressed the recommendation. In February 2017, the department issued DOD Instruction 5000.75, Business Systems Requirements and Acquisition, to assist in managing defense business systems. Further, in April 2017, the department updated its investment management guidance. However, neither the instruction nor the revised guidance call for a process for evaluating portfolio performance that includes the use of actual versus expected performance data and predetermined thresholds. The instruction and the revised guidance also do not specify a process for ensuring that portfolio assessments are conducted in key areas identified in our information technology investment management framework: benefits attained; current schedule; accuracy of project reporting; and risks that have been mitigated, eliminated, or accepted to date. Further, the department has not demonstrated that it has ensured that documents provided to the Defense Business Council (i.e., the investment review board) include critical information for conducting assessments, such as information about system scalability to support additional users or new features in the future and cost in relationship to return on investment.
    Recommendation: To effectively implement key components of DOD's business systems modernization program, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Deputy Chief Management Officer to implement and use the BEA and business process reengineering compliance assessments more effectively to support organizational transformation efforts by (a) disclosing relevant information about known weaknesses, such as BEA and business process reengineering compliance weaknesses for systems that were not certified or certified with qualifications in annual reports to Congress; (b) establishing milestones by which selected validations of BEA compliance assertions are to be completed; and (c) ensuring that appropriate business process reengineering assertions have been completed on all investments submitted for the fiscal year 2014 certification reviews prior to the certification of funds.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of August 2017, the Department of Defense (DOD) has taken steps to address the intent of the recommendation; however, more remains to be done. For example, the 2015 Congressional Report on Defense Business Operations included some information consistent with our recommendation. In particular, it contained information about weaknesses for systems that were certified with qualifications. The report stated that the department conditionally approved 29 military department and 30 defense agency requests pending Defense Business Council (DBC) approval of their problem statements. The report also cited the specific systems that were conditionally approved pending approval of their problem statements. In addition, in February 2017, the department issued an instruction (DOD Instruction 5000.75, Business Systems Requirements and Acquisition). The instruction requires that the certifying official verify that a capability is aligned with the business enterprise architecture (BEA) prior to a decision to proceed with a solutions analysis phase. The instruction also requires the certifying official to validate that sufficient business process reengineering (BPR) has been conducted to determine that a business system is required. The Office of the Deputy Chief Management Officer (DCMO) explained in August 2017 that the office reviews BEA compliance assertions in BEA compliance reporting tools, and if any issues are found with the assertions they are documented in investment decision memos. In addition, for BPR assertions, the office stated that DCMO portfolio leads review the assertions to determine if a system has required documentation. For those that have no plan of action or BPR assertions, according to the office, the DCMO team works with the domain or portfolio owners to ensure that a plan of action is documented. However, the department did not provide evidence to demonstrate that BEA assertions have been validated for selected investments or that BPR assertions have been validated for all its investments as part of its last annual certification process.
    Recommendation: To effectively implement key components of DOD's business systems modernization program, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Deputy Chief Management Officer to develop a skills inventory, needs assessment, gap analysis, and plan to address identified gaps as part of a strategic approach to human capital planning for the Office of the Deputy Chief Management Officer.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of September 2017, the Department of Defense (DOD) had not addressed this recommendation; and the Office of the Deputy Chief Management Officer (DCMO) stated that it does not plan to address it. Specifically, it said that the department did not concur with the recommendation, and that, further, it had been overcome by other events. According to DOD officials, the recommendation has been overcome by several reorganizational changes, including one based on reviews of the department's business processes and systems. The Office of the DCMO stated that the department used a skills inventory, needs assessment, and gap analysis to do these reorganizations, and there are no open positions beyond those occurring from normal attrition. However, the Office of the DCMO did not provide evidence of the skills inventory, needs assessment and gap analysis that it said it used in its reorganizations. We still consider the recommendation to be valid and will continue to monitor its implementation as part of our periodic assessments of DOD efforts to manage its defense business systems.
    Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the appropriate authority to ensure that complete documentation, such as root cause analyses, assessments of existing interfaces for reuse opportunities, and performance metrics related to the reengineering efforts, is provided as part of the fiscal year 2014 certification and approval process for the Integrated Personnel and Pay System - Army (IPPS-A), Integrated Personnel and Pay System - Navy (IPPS-N), Air Force Integrated Personnel and Pay System (AF-IPPS), and Integrated Electronic Health Record (iEHR) investments.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of September 2017, the Department of Defense (DOD) had taken some steps to address the intent of this recommendation, and other aspects of the recommendation have been overcome by events. However, more work is needed to demonstrate that the department has more fully addressed the intent of our recommendation. For example, in July 2015, we reported that the department demonstrated that it had completed documentation, such as root cause analyses, assessments of existing interfaces for reuse opportunities, and performance metrics related to the reengineering efforts, and that the documentation was provided as part of the certification and approval process for the Air Force Integrated Personnel and Pay System investment. However, since we made the recommendation, the department has changed its approach to evaluating business process reengineering for its defense business systems. As a result of this change, the department requires different documentation than the documentation required when we prepared our report. The department now requires business process reengineering to be documented in a problem statement. In particular, the December 2014 DOD problem statement guidance requires a description of and validation that a thorough review of the business process reengineering was conducted, and no longer specifically requires root cause analyses, assessments of existing interfaces for re-use opportunities, or performance metrics related to reengineering efforts. Regarding the Integrated Personnel and Pay System - Army, in September 2017, the department demonstrated that it had completed a March 2016 description of its business process reengineering efforts and provided supporting documentation as part of its review and certification process. However, as of September 2017, the department had not demonstrated that complete documentation related to reengineering efforts has been submitted as part of its annual certification and approval process for the Integrated Personnel and Pay System-Navy (IPPS-N) investment. According to an Official from the Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of the Navy (Management), the department expects the IPPS-N problem statement to be complete by the end of September 2017. Regarding the Integrated Electronic Health Record investment, the Office of the Deputy Chief Management Officer stated that the department does not plan to conduct business process reengineering because the investment is now in sustainment, and the department does not require business process reengineering for systems in sustainment.
    Director: Cha, Carol
    Phone: (202) 512-3000

    33 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should fully establish an approach for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes, including a documented method (i.e., steps to be followed) and metrics that are measurable, meaningful, repeatable, consistent, actionable, and aligned with the agency's enterprise architecture's strategic goals and intended purpose.

    Agency: Department of Agriculture
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Agriculture has not implemented this recommendation. In January 2017, the department provided an action plan that indicated it would address the recommendation by November 2017.
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should fully establish an approach for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes, including a documented method (i.e., steps to be followed) and metrics that are measurable, meaningful, repeatable, consistent, actionable, and aligned with the agency's enterprise architecture's strategic goals and intended purpose.

    Agency: Department of Commerce
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Commerce has not implemented this recommendation. We reported in September 2012 that the department had established metrics to measure and report outcomes associated with its enterprise architecture program, such as information technology cost savings, but it had yet to establish a method (i.e. steps to be followed) for measuring such outcomes. In April 2017, a department liaison reported that the Office of the Chief Information Officer had developed an initial draft of an enterprise architecture value measurement plan. However, as of August 2017, the department had not demonstrated that the plan had been finalized.
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should fully establish an approach for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes, including a documented method (i.e., steps to be followed) and metrics that are measurable, meaningful, repeatable, consistent, actionable, and aligned with the agency's enterprise architecture's strategic goals and intended purpose.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of August 2017, the Department of Defense had not addressed our recommendation for either of the department's enterprise architectures we reviewed in 2012. With respect to the DOD enterprise architecture, we reported in 2012 that, according to officials, DOD's approach to establishing a method and metrics for measuring enterprise architecture strategic mission value (outcomes and benefits) would be accomplished through the development and publication of a DOD instruction and an enterprise architecture management plan. In particular, DOD's June 2012 draft instruction on enterprise architecture called for establishing metrics for assessing the effectiveness of the enterprise architecture to provide information that contributes to mission effectiveness and efficiency. In addition, the draft Enterprise Architecture Management Plan called for the development of metrics to assess the use of enterprise architecture, provided examples of potential metrics, including reduction in redundancies in DOD's portfolio, and called for the development of baseline and target threshold values for each selected metric. The plan also stated that the DOD CIO and architecture organization were to determine the final set of metrics and threshold values based on the resources available to assess the metrics. However, according to a March 2016 memo from the Deputy Chief Information Officer for Information Enterprise to the DOD Inspector General, the department no longer planned to publish an instruction related to enterprise architecture and considered our recommendation closed. The memo also described structures and processes for developing, managing, and applying DOD's architecture that it said fulfilled what would have been the intent of a DOD instruction on enterprise architecture, including governance, requirements, acquisition, portfolio management, and budgeting. However, the memo did not discuss measuring architecture outcomes. With respect to its business enterprise architecture, in August 2016, the department stated that it did not have a systematic methodology for measuring the business value of its business enterprise architecture. Department officials noted that our July 2015 report "DOD Business Systems Modernization: Additional Action Needed to Achieve Intended Outcomes" (GAO-15-627) concluded that the business enterprise architecture has yielded limited value. The officials stated that internal department management assessments and component feedback supported these determinations. The department also stated that it used our report as a key method for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes and is acting on the results. Specifically, the department stated that senior management has directed changes to the department's Business Enterprise Architecture program. However, as of August 2017, the department had not provided documentation indicating that it planned to establish an approach for measuring business enterprise architecture outcomes. We will continue to follow up on the department's efforts to address this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should fully establish an approach for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes, including a documented method (i.e., steps to be followed) and metrics that are measurable, meaningful, repeatable, consistent, actionable, and aligned with the agency's enterprise architecture's strategic goals and intended purpose.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of August 2017, the Department of the Air Force had not implemented this recommendation. As of September 2016, the department reported architecture-related outcomes, to top agency officials, including the numbers of defense business systems decommissioned. However, the department did not demonstrate that it had established an approach, including metrics and a documented method, to measure enterprise architecture outcomes. We will continue to monitor the Air Force's efforts to implement this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should fully establish an approach for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes, including a documented method (i.e., steps to be followed) and metrics that are measurable, meaningful, repeatable, consistent, actionable, and aligned with the agency's enterprise architecture's strategic goals and intended purpose.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of the Navy has partially implemented this recommendation. Specifically, the department demonstrated that it had established a metric to measure the percentage of server-based systems and applications that are virtualized annually. However, the department has yet to demonstrate that it documented the steps to be followed for measuring this virtualization. In October 2015, Navy developed a plan of actions and milestones to address elements in GAO's Enterprise Architecture Management Maturity Framework, including the element focused on measuring and reporting enterprise architecture outcomes, by September 2017. We will continue to monitor the Navy's efforts to implement this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should fully establish an approach for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes, including a documented method (i.e., steps to be followed) and metrics that are measurable, meaningful, repeatable, consistent, actionable, and aligned with the agency's enterprise architecture's strategic goals and intended purpose.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of the Army has taken steps to address this recommendation, but much more remains to be done. Specifically, since we reported in September 2012 that one of the department's three segment architectures had established a metric and a method to measure architecture outcomes, one of the remaining segments had established metrics, but it had not documented the steps to measure the metrics. The other remaining segment had yet to establish metrics and a method to measure architecture outcomes. Specifically, in December 2013, the Generating Force segment (now known as the Business Mission Area) developed an Army Business Management Strategy, which included metrics to measure the number of business systems retired over five years and cost savings and avoidance through use of the Army's business enterprise architecture. However, the department had not demonstrated that it had documented the steps to measure the metrics. In addition, the Operating Force segment has not demonstrated that it had established metrics and a method to measure architecture outcomes. In September 2015, the Army developed a plan of actions and milestones to address elements of GAO's Enterprise Architecture Management Maturity Framework, including the element focused on measuring and reporting enterprise architecture outcomes, by September 2017. We will continue to monitor the Army's efforts to implement this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should fully establish an approach for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes, including a documented method (i.e., steps to be followed) and metrics that are measurable, meaningful, repeatable, consistent, actionable, and aligned with the agency's enterprise architecture's strategic goals and intended purpose.

    Agency: Department of Energy
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Energy has not implemented our recommendation. In March 2017, the department's Office of the Chief Information Officer reported that the department was evaluating actions to better integrate enterprise architecture practices into the department's information technology strategic planning, capital planning and investment control, and program management processes. The Office of the Chief Information Officer further reported that the department expected to develop a plan to measure and report architecture outcomes by the end of fiscal year 2017.
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should fully establish an approach for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes, including a documented method (i.e., steps to be followed) and metrics that are measurable, meaningful, repeatable, consistent, actionable, and aligned with the agency's enterprise architecture's strategic goals and intended purpose.

    Agency: Department of Justice
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Justice has not taken sufficient steps to implement our recommendation. In June 2014, the department established metrics associated with the department's enterprise architecture (e.g., cost savings/avoidance gained through consolidated systems). However, as of August 2017, the department had not provided evidence that it had documented a method for measuring the metrics, or that it plans to do so. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should fully establish an approach for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes, including a documented method (i.e., steps to be followed) and metrics that are measurable, meaningful, repeatable, consistent, actionable, and aligned with the agency's enterprise architecture's strategic goals and intended purpose.

    Agency: Department of Labor
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Labor has not implemented this recommendation. In July 2017, the department stated that, by the end of fiscal year 2018, it would include the adoption and implementation of measurable enterprise architecture outcomes as part of upcoming information technology strategic planning efforts. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should fully establish an approach for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes, including a documented method (i.e., steps to be followed) and metrics that are measurable, meaningful, repeatable, consistent, actionable, and aligned with the agency's enterprise architecture's strategic goals and intended purpose.

    Agency: Department of the Treasury
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of August 2017, the Department of the Treasury had not implemented our recommendation. We reported in September 2012 that the department had established enterprise architecture metrics, but that it had not established a methodology for measuring its architecture outcomes. In June 2016, the department reported that it did not plan to establish an approach to measure architecture outcomes. Specifically, the department stated that it measured cost, schedule, and operational outcomes, but it did not attribute these measures to any practice, such as architecture. Nonetheless, we continue to believe that it is important to measure the value of its enterprise architecture and we will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should fully establish an approach for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes, including a documented method (i.e., steps to be followed) and metrics that are measurable, meaningful, repeatable, consistent, actionable, and aligned with the agency's enterprise architecture's strategic goals and intended purpose.

    Agency: Department of State
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of State has yet to implement this recommendation. In June 2017, the department's Information Resource Management GAO liaison stated that the department was in the process of developing an enterprise architecture plan. According to the liaison, the plan is to include a structured approach to capturing, evaluating, and assessing relevant performance related data. The liaison also that the target completion date for the plan is June 2018.
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should fully establish an approach for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes, including a documented method (i.e., steps to be followed) and metrics that are measurable, meaningful, repeatable, consistent, actionable, and aligned with the agency's enterprise architecture's strategic goals and intended purpose.

    Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of August 2017, the Environmental Protection Agency had not implemented this recommendation and did not have a specific plan to do so. In March 2014, the agency submitted its Enterprise Roadmap to the Office of Management and Budget, which included metrics associated with potential outcomes related to its enterprise architecture efforts, such as cost savings gained from consolidating and sharing services. However, the agency had not established steps to be followed for measuring architecture outcomes. More recently, according to its May 2015 Enterprise Roadmap, the agency no longer planned to measure architecture-related outcomes. We will continue to monitor the agency's efforts to implement the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should fully establish an approach for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes, including a documented method (i.e., steps to be followed) and metrics that are measurable, meaningful, repeatable, consistent, actionable, and aligned with the agency's enterprise architecture's strategic goals and intended purpose.

    Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has taken steps to implement this recommendation, but more remains to be done. In December 2013, NASA issued Enterprise Architecture Procedures, which stated that key enterprise architecture metrics, such as cost savings and reduction of duplication, would be established. The procedures also stated that NASA's Chief Architect was to work with internal and external stakeholders to develop and mature metrics that provide information on enterprise architecture benefits and clearly illustrate progress or deficiencies in key areas. In January 2017, an official from NASA's Office of the Chief Information Officer described steps that NASA was taking to establish an approach for measuring architecture outcomes. However, as of August 2017, NASA had not demonstrated that it has documented a method and metrics for measuring outcomes.
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should fully establish an approach for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes, including a documented method (i.e., steps to be followed) and metrics that are measurable, meaningful, repeatable, consistent, actionable, and aligned with the agency's enterprise architecture's strategic goals and intended purpose.

    Agency: National Science Foundation
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of March 2017, the National Science Foundation had not implemented this recommendation. The agency stated that it is committed to measuring and reporting enterprise architecture results and outcomes and that it continues to adopt the Office of Management and Budget's recommended approach to enterprise architecture measurement. However, the agency did not provide supporting documentation. We will continue to monitor its efforts to implement the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should fully establish an approach for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes, including a documented method (i.e., steps to be followed) and metrics that are measurable, meaningful, repeatable, consistent, actionable, and aligned with the agency's enterprise architecture's strategic goals and intended purpose.

    Agency: Small Business Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Small Business Administration (SBA) has not implemented our recommendation or established a plan to do so. In April 2014 and May 2015, SBA submitted to the Office of Management and Budget its Enterprise Roadmap, which included metrics associated with the agency's enterprise architecture, such as cost savings gained from consolidating systems. However, as of August 2017, the agency had yet to document the steps to be followed for measuring architecture outcomes. In July 2016, a Program Manager from the SBA Office of Congressional and Legislative Affairs stated that, going forward, progress for the SBA enterprise architecture program was expected to be limited because of limited labor resources. Nevertheless, we will continue to monitor the agency's efforts to implement the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should fully establish an approach for measuring enterprise architecture outcomes, including a documented method (i.e., steps to be followed) and metrics that are measurable, meaningful, repeatable, consistent, actionable, and aligned with the agency's enterprise architecture's strategic goals and intended purpose.

    Agency: Office of Personnel Management
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Office of Personnel Management has not implemented this recommendation. In September 2016, the agency's Office of Internal Oversight and Compliance reported that it planned to develop an enterprise architecture strategic plan in the third quarter of fiscal year 2017. The plan was to include application rationalization metrics and a method for measurement. However, as of August 2017, the agency had not demonstrated that it had addressed the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should periodically measure and report enterprise architecture outcomes and benefits to top agency officials (i.e., executives with authority to commit resources or make changes to the program) and to OMB.

    Agency: Department of Agriculture
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Agriculture has not yet implemented this recommendation. In January 2017, the department provided its action plan to address the recommendation by November 2017.
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should periodically measure and report enterprise architecture outcomes and benefits to top agency officials (i.e., executives with authority to commit resources or make changes to the program) and to OMB.

    Agency: Department of Commerce
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Commerce has not implemented this recommendation. In November 2012, the department reported architecture outcomes, such as information technology cost savings, to top agency officials. However, the department has not reported architecture outcomes again to top agency officials or to the Office of Management and Budget. In April 2017, a department liaison reported that the Office of the Chief Information Officer had developed an initial draft enterprise architecture value measurement plan, which the department expected to complete by May 2017. In addition, the official reported that the department was in the process of developing a communication plan, by May 2017, to brief executive leadership on architecture value measurement on a regular basis. However, as of August 2017, the department had not demonstrated that these plans had been finalized.
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should periodically measure and report enterprise architecture outcomes and benefits to top agency officials (i.e., executives with authority to commit resources or make changes to the program) and to OMB.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of August 2017, the Department of Defense (DOD) had not implemented this recommendation for either of the department's enterprise architectures we reviewed in 2012. With respect to the DOD enterprise architecture, the department had not measured and reported architecture outcomes and benefits. We reported in 2012 that, according to DOD officials, the implementation of an instruction on enterprise architecture and an enterprise architecture management plan would allow the benefits of architecture to be measured and reported. However, according to a March 2016 memo from the Deputy Chief Information Officer for Information Enterprise to the DOD Inspector General, the department no longer planned to publish an instruction related to enterprise architecture and considered our recommendation closed. The memo also described structures and processes for developing, managing, and applying DOD's architecture, including governance, requirements, acquisition, portfolio management, and budgeting. However, the memo did not discuss measuring and reporting enterprise architecture outcomes. With respect to its business enterprise architecture, in August 2016, the department stated that it did not have a systematic methodology for measuring the business value of its business enterprise architecture. Department officials further stated that our July 2015 report "DOD Business Systems Modernization: Additional Action Needed to Achieve Intended Outcomes" (GAO-15-627) concluded that the business enterprise architecture had yielded limited value. As a result of our report, the department stated that senior management had directed changes to the department's Business Enterprise Architecture program. However, as of August 2017, the department had not provided documentation indicating that it planned to establish an approach for measuring and reporting business enterprise architecture outcomes. We will continue to follow up on the department's efforts to address this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should periodically measure and report enterprise architecture outcomes and benefits to top agency officials (i.e., executives with authority to commit resources or make changes to the program) and to OMB.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of the Navy has not implemented this recommendation. Specifically, the department has not demonstrated that it has measured and reported enterprise architecture outcomes and benefits to top agency officials. In October 2015, the department developed a plan of actions and milestones to address elements in GAO's Enterprise Architecture Management Maturity Framework, including the element focused on measuring and reporting enterprise architecture results and outcomes by September 2017. We will continue to monitor the Navy's efforts to implement this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should periodically measure and report enterprise architecture outcomes and benefits to top agency officials (i.e., executives with authority to commit resources or make changes to the program) and to OMB.

    Agency: Department of Energy
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Energy has not yet implemented the recommendation. In March 2017, the department's Office of the Chief Information Officer reported that the department is evaluating actions to better integrate enterprise architecture practices into the department's information technology strategic planning, capital planning and investment control, and program management processes. The Office of the Chief Information Officer also reported that the department expects to develop a plan to measure and report architecture outcomes by the end of fiscal year 2017 and to have routine measures and reporting in place during fiscal year 2018.
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should periodically measure and report enterprise architecture outcomes and benefits to top agency officials (i.e., executives with authority to commit resources or make changes to the program) and to OMB.

    Agency: Department of Justice
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Justice has not sufficiently implemented our recommendation. Although the department reported cost savings through use of its enterprise architecture, as of August 2017, it has not provided documentation to support that the cost savings have been reliably measured.
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should periodically measure and report enterprise architecture outcomes and benefits to top agency officials (i.e., executives with authority to commit resources or make changes to the program) and to OMB.

    Agency: Department of Labor
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Labor has not implemented this recommendation. In July 2017, the department stated that it planned to include, by the end of fiscal year 2018, the adoption and implementation of measurable enterprise architecture outcomes as part of upcoming information technology strategic planning efforts. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should periodically measure and report enterprise architecture outcomes and benefits to top agency officials (i.e., executives with authority to commit resources or make changes to the program) and to OMB.

    Agency: Department of the Treasury
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of August 2017, the Department of the Treasury had not measured and reported enterprise architecture outcomes in accordance with our recommendation. Moreover, in June 2016, the department reported that it does not plan to do so. In September 2012, we reported that the department had reported architecture outcomes; however the metrics had not been periodically measured and reported. Subsequently, in its February 2014 Information Technology Enterprise Roadmap, the department reported a reduction in infrastructure spending as a percentage of its information technology budget from fiscal year 2010 through fiscal year 2013 and attributed the results to enterprise architecture. However, the department did not demonstrate that it had reliably measured the outcome. Specifically, it did not provide supporting documentation. In June 2016, the department reported that it did not plan to establish an approach to measure and report architecture outcomes. Nonetheless, we continue to believe our recommendation is warranted and will monitor the department's efforts to implement it.
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should periodically measure and report enterprise architecture outcomes and benefits to top agency officials (i.e., executives with authority to commit resources or make changes to the program) and to OMB.

    Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Veterans Affairs has not implemented this recommendation. In July 2017, the department stated that in the fall of 2016, the Chief Information Officer instituted a new information technology governance framework and established the Architecture Board that is responsible for overseeing all aspects of the department's architecture. According to the department, as of July 2017, the board was formulating enterprise architecture priorities, including the measurement and reporting of architecture outcomes and benefits. The department anticipated that priority enterprise architecture measures and reporting requirements would be established by the end of fiscal year 2017, and that actual reporting to the board will begin by December 2017.
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should periodically measure and report enterprise architecture outcomes and benefits to top agency officials (i.e., executives with authority to commit resources or make changes to the program) and to OMB.

    Agency: Department of State
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of State has not implemented our recommendation. According to the department's Information Resource Management GAO liaison, the department will complete an updated enterprise architecture plan and establish desired performance outcomes by December 2017.
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should periodically measure and report enterprise architecture outcomes and benefits to top agency officials (i.e., executives with authority to commit resources or make changes to the program) and to OMB.

    Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Environmental Protection Agency has not implemented this recommendation. In March 2014, the agency submitted to the Office of Management and Budget its Enterprise Roadmap, which identified outcomes associated with its enterprise architecture efforts. For example, the agency reported cost savings achieved in fiscal year 2013 related to consolidating and sharing services. However, the agency did not demonstrate that it reliably measured the outcome (i.e., it did not provide supporting documentation). More recently, according to its May 2015 Enterprise Roadmap, the agency no longer planned to measure architecture-related outcomes. As of August 2017, the agency had not demonstrated that it had taken additional actions to address this recommendation. Nonetheless, we continue to believe that it is important that the agency measure the value of its enterprise architecture and will monitor its efforts to implement the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should periodically measure and report enterprise architecture outcomes and benefits to top agency officials (i.e., executives with authority to commit resources or make changes to the program) and to OMB.

    Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has not implemented this recommendation. In February 2017, the agency reported that enterprise architecture performance outcomes were being refined for incorporation into its 2017 Information Resource Management Strategic Plan. However, as of August 2017, NASA had not demonstrated that it has measured and reported architecture outcomes.
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should periodically measure and report enterprise architecture outcomes and benefits to top agency officials (i.e., executives with authority to commit resources or make changes to the program) and to OMB.

    Agency: National Science Foundation
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of March 2017, the National Science Foundation had not implemented this recommendation. The agency stated that it is committed to measuring and reporting enterprise architecture results and outcomes and that it continues to adopt the Office of Management and Budget's recommended approach to enterprise architecture measurement. However, the agency did not provide supporting documentation. We will continue to monitor its efforts to implement the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should periodically measure and report enterprise architecture outcomes and benefits to top agency officials (i.e., executives with authority to commit resources or make changes to the program) and to OMB.

    Agency: Small Business Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of August 2017, the Small Business Administration had not implemented this recommendation. Specifically, it had not demonstrated that it has measured architecture outcomes. In July 2016, the agency reported that, going forward, desired progress for its enterprise architecture program was expected to be limited because of limited labor resources. Nevertheless, we will continue to monitor the agency's efforts to implement the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, the Air Force, the Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, the Interior, Labor, the Navy, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Small Business Administration; the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Social Security Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Personnel Management should periodically measure and report enterprise architecture outcomes and benefits to top agency officials (i.e., executives with authority to commit resources or make changes to the program) and to OMB.

    Agency: Office of Personnel Management
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has not implemented this recommendation. In September 2016, OPM's Office of Internal Oversight and Compliance reported that the agency planned to develop an enterprise architecture strategic plan in the third quarter of fiscal year 2017, which was to include measuring and reporting application rationalization metrics to OPM senior executives and the Office of Management and Budget. However, as of August 2017, the agency had not demonstrated that it had addressed the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, the Secretaries of the Departments of Health and Human Services and Housing and Urban Development should ensure that enterprise architecture outcomes are periodically measured and reported to top agency officials.

    Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services has not implemented this recommendation, or provided a plan to do so. As of August 2017, it had not demonstrated that it had measured architecture metrics that it had established in its April 2014 Enterprise Roadmap. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation
    Recommendation: To enhance federal agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits, and to assist agencies in measuring and reporting outcomes achieved through enterprise architecture, the Director of OMB should ensure that the planned December 2012 guidance for enterprise architecture value measurement and reporting includes (1) sufficient details on the method and metrics that agencies could use to measure their architecture program's value and (2) a requirement for agencies to include in their April 2013 enterprise roadmap submissions a measurement method (i.e., steps to be followed) and metrics, and report on the outcomes and benefits achieved through enterprise architecture.

    Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2017, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) had not fully addressed our recommendation. In March 2013, the office required agencies to submit annually an Enterprise Roadmap, which was to include an appendix on enterprise architecture outcomes. To prepare the appendix, the office provided agencies with a template to document architecture metrics and measurement methods. The template included examples of outcome metrics and a field where agencies were to document measurement methods. However, OMB did not provide details on the methods that agencies could use to measure architecture outcomes or require that agencies include the steps to be followed for measuring outcomes. Furthermore, as of July 2016, OMB no longer required agencies to submit a report of enterprise architecture outcomes. According to OMB's Integrated Data Collection guidance, the Office of the Federal Chief Information Officer reviewed the information requested from agencies and reduced it in an effort to reduce the reporting burden on agencies. Nonetheless, we continue to believe that it is important that OMB assist agencies in measuring outcomes achieved through enterprise architecture and require that outcomes be reported, in order to enhance agencies' ability to realize enterprise architecture benefits.
    Director: Melvin, Valerie C
    Phone: (202)512-6304

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To ensure that DOD continues to implement the full range of institutional management controls needed to address its business systems modernization high-risk area, the Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Deputy Secretary of Defense, as the department's Chief Management Officer, establish a policy that clarifies the roles, responsibilities, and relationships among the Chief Management Officer, Deputy Chief Management Officer, DOD and military department Chief Information Officers, Principal Staff Assistants, military department Chief Management Officers, and the heads of the military departments and defense agencies, associated with the development of a federated business enterprise architecture (BEA). Among other things, the policy should address the development and implementation of an overarching taxonomy and associated ontologies to help ensure that each of the respective portions of the architecture will be properly linked and aligned. In addition, the policy should address alignment and coordination of business process areas, military department and defense agency activities associated with developing and implementing each of the various components of the BEA, and relationships among these entities.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of September 2017, the Department of Defense had taken steps to address the intent of our recommendation, but had not issued a policy that addresses the various elements called for in our recommendation. For example, in January 2017, the department issued a business enterprise architecture improvement plan, which included providing, among other capabilities, the ability to conduct process and system reviews within and across domains by January 2017. The plan also included delivering a federated ontology for business enterprise architecture data structures by June 2016. However, as of September 2017, the Office of the Deputy Chief Management Officer stated that work to develop the federated ontology was ongoing. In addition, the delivery date of the capability for conducting process and system reviews within and across domains had changed to June 2018. Further, the office stated that date was subject to a contract being awarded. In addition, as of September 2017, the department had not established policy that clarified the roles, responsibilities, authorities, and relationships between the Deputy Chief Management Officer and military department officials responsible for the business enterprise architecture and its federation or provided details of an overarching taxonomy to be used across the enterprise. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.
    Director: Dillingham, Gerald L
    Phone: (202)512-3000

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: Because of the importance of the successful planning and implementation of NGATS and the need for effective collaboration between diverse organizations, the Secretary of Transportation should direct JPDO to better ensure the involvement of all key stakeholders in the NGATS planning process, by determining whether key stakeholders and expertise are not represented on JPDO's integrated product teams, divisions, or elsewhere within its organization. For example, JPDO should consider the addition of active, subject matter expert air traffic controllers to its integrated product teams.

    Agency: Department of Transportation
    Status: Open

    Comments: In multiple reports and testimonies on Air Traffic Control Modernization and subsequently the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) GAO has reported that a lack of stakeholder or expert involvement early and throughout a project can lead to cost increases and delays. We also found that the Joint Planning and Development Office within the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) had not adequately involved air traffic controllers or the National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA) in NextGen planning efforts, and have since reported on challenges facing FAA in involving controllers and other stakeholders as they begin to implement various NextGen improvements. GAO recommended that the Secretary of Transportation consider various actions to better ensure the involvement of all key stakeholders in planning and implementing NextGen and specifically recommended further involvement of active, subject matter expert air traffic controllers. Article 114 of the recently signed contract between the FAA and NATCA addresses this recommendation by directing full participation by NATCA to further the development and implementation of NextGen. The specifics of the agreement between FAA and NATCA regarding how and in what manner controllers will be included has yet to be determined, but the inclusion of Article 114 is a step in the right direction to ensuring active involvement. With greater active participation from air traffic controllers and NATCA, issues that cause cost increase and delays can be identified earlier and their effects mitigated.
    Recommendation: Given the technical complexity of the implementation of NGATS and FAA's past experiences, the Secretary of Transportation should direct the FAA to undertake a formal exploration of FAA's strengths and weaknesses with regard to the technical expertise and contract management expertise that will be required to define, implement, and integrate the numerous complex programs and systems inherent in the transition to NGATS. For example, FAA should work to determine whether it will need to contract with an LSI, federally-funded not-for-profit corporation, or other technical or managerial entity to assist in the implementation of NGATS.

    Agency: Department of Transportation
    Status: Open

    Comments: According to the Vice President for Planning, FAA, on June 13, 2007, FAA awarded a contract to the National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA) to do an independent assessment of FAA's technical and program management (i.e., contract management) skills required for NextGen implementation. The Vice President directly attributed FAA's ability to move the contract award to GAO's recommendation.