Immigration services, which involve regulating  permanent and temporary immigration to the United States, include  granting legal permanent residence status, nonimmigrant status (e.g.,  tourists and students), and naturalization. In particular, the Clinger-Cohen Act  requires that the head of each agency implement a process for maximizing  the value of the agency's IT investments and for assessing and managing  the risks of its acquisitions. Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

Our objectives were to determine whether (1) INS is effectively managing  its IT investments and (2) the Department of Justice is effectively  promoting, guiding, and overseeing INS' investment management activities. These comments are presented in chapter 5 and are reprinted in  appendix I.

	INS Lacks Foundation Capabilities Upon Which to Build IT Investment Management Maturity

The primary purpose of ITIM stage two maturity is to attain repeatable,  successful IT project-level investment control processes and basic  selection processes. INS Is Not Managing Its IT Investments as a Complete Portfolio

An IT investment portfolio is a collection of investments that are assessed  and managed based on common criteria. Further, it  disagreed with our finding that Justice is not guiding and directing INS'  investment management approach.
Why GAO Did This Study

The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) invests hundreds of millions of dollars each year in information technology (IT) to help (1) prevent aliens from entering the United States illegally and remove aliens who succeed in doing so and (2) provide services or benefits to facilitate entry, residence, employment, and naturalization to legal immigrants. The Clinger-Cohen Act requires agency heads to implement a process for maximizing the value and assessing and managing the risks of its IT investments. GAO examined leading private and public sector IT management practices to determine whether INS is effectively managing its IT investments and whether the Department of Justice (DOJ) is effectively promoting, guiding, and overseeing INS' investment management activities.

What GAO Found

GAO found that INS lacks the basic capabilities upon which to build IT investment management maturity. Furthermore, INS is not managing IT investments as a complete portfolio. By managing its IT investments as individual projects, INS will not be able to determine which investments contribute most to the agency mission. GAO also found that DOJ is not guiding and overseeing INS' investment management approach.