Reporting on more types of federal spending. Improving data quality. Table 2 provides a summary of our  findings applying the ISO leading practices for formulating data definitions  to the definitions developed by OMB and Treasury as part of DATA Act  implementation. For example, OMB and Treasury standardized the  definition of Program Activity as required by the DATA Act and we found  that this definition adhered to all 13 ISO leading practices. Agencies  must begin reporting data using the data definitions established under the  DATA Act by 2017. OMB and Treasury Addressed Initial Challenges with the Technical Schema, but the Lack of Finalized Technical Guidance Could Impede Agency Implementation

The DATA Act calls for OMB and Treasury to establish government-wide  data standards, to the extent reasonable and practicable, that produce  consistent and comparable data available in machine-readable formats. In addition to the draft technical schema, Treasury is developing an  intermediary service called a “broker” to standardize data formatting and  assist reporting agencies in validating their data submissions before they  are submitted to Treasury. Selected Agencies Have Taken Initial Steps to Implement Data Standards

The three agencies in our review—the Corporation for National and  Community Service (CNCS), the Department of Health and Human  Services (HHS), and the Department of Agriculture (USDA)—have begun  addressing the requirements of the DATA Act by forming DATA Act  teams, participating in government-wide deliberations on data standards,  developing an inventory of their data, identifying systems containing  pertinent data and the associated business practices, and assessing the  policy, process, and technology changes that may be needed for  successful implementation. If guidance is not timed to coincide with  agencies’ expected milestones for key steps in the implementation  process, agencies could incur additional costs as they revise  implementation plans to align with later versions of the guidance or could  be forced to delay implementation. To help ensure that agencies report consistent and comparable data  on federal spending, we recommend that the Director of OMB, in  collaboration with the Secretary of the Treasury, provide agencies  with additional guidance to address potential clarity, consistency, or  quality issues with the definitions for specific data elements including  Award Description and Primary Place of Performance and that they  clearly document and communicate these actions to agencies  providing this data as well as to end-users. To ensure that federal agencies are able to meet their reporting  requirements and timelines, we recommend that the Director of OMB,  in collaboration with the Secretary of the Treasury, take steps to align  the release of finalized technical guidance, including the DATA Act  schema and broker, to the implementation time frames specified in  the DATA Act Implementation Playbook. Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

This report (1) identifies steps taken by the Office of Management and  Budget (OMB) and the Department of Treasury (Treasury) to establish  government-wide data element definitions and the extent to which those  definitions are consistent with leading practices or face challenges that  could affect data quality; (2) reviews efforts by OMB and Treasury to  provide agencies with technical implementation guidance to standardize  how data are collected and reported and related challenges; and (3)  examines the status of selected federal agencies’ progress in meeting  DATA Act requirements. We reviewed applicable agency guidance  and documentation related to the data standards and technical schema  on OMB’s and Treasury’s websites. Provisions of  the Digital Accountability and Transparency  Act of 2014 could address this  recommendation, but implementation will  take several years. Open.
Why GAO Did This Study

The DATA Act directed OMB and Treasury to establish government-wide data standards by May 2015 to improve the transparency and quality of federal spending data. Agencies must begin reporting spending data in accordance with these standards by May 2017 and must publicly post spending data in machine-readable formats by May 2018. Consistent with GAO’s mandate under the act, this report is part of a series of products that GAO will provide to the Congress as DATA Act implementation proceeds.
This report (1) identifies steps taken by OMB and Treasury to standardize data element definitions and the extent to which those definitions are consistent with leading practices or face challenges that could affect data quality; (2) reviews efforts by OMB and Treasury to provide agencies with technical implementation guidance and related challenges; and (3) examines the implementation status of selected federal agencies. GAO analyzed data standards against leading practices; reviewed key implementation documents, technical specifications, and applicable guidance; and interviewed staff at OMB, Treasury, and other selected agencies.

What GAO Found

As required by the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014 (DATA Act), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Department of the Treasury (Treasury) issued definitions for 57 federal spending data elements. GAO found that most definitions adhered to leading practices derived from international standards for formulating data definitions. Specifically, 12 of the 57 definitions met all 13 leading practices and none met fewer than 9. However, GAO found several definitions that could lead to inconsistent reporting. For example, as shown in the figure below, the Primary Place of Performance definitions’ inclusion of the word “predominant“ leaves much open to interpretation. Without more interpretive clarification, agencies run the risk of reporting data that cannot be aggregated government-wide.
OMB and Treasury addressed some of GAO’s earlier concerns on draft technical guidance for implementing data standards. However, final technical guidance has not been issued, which could impede agency implementation. While OMB and Treasury have released interim versions of technical guidance, they have not yet released final guidance to provide a stable base for agency implementation. They also are developing an intermediary service (“broker”) to standardize and validate agency data submissions. GAO’s review of selected implementation plans found that agencies need the technical guidance and the intermediary service to be finalized before they can develop detailed agency-level plans. If this guidance is not aligned with agency implementation timelines, agencies may delay taking key steps or need to revise existing plans once final technical guidance is released, thereby hindering their ability to meet DATA Act requirements and timelines.
GAO found that the three agencies it reviewed—the Departments of Agriculture and Health and Human Services, as well as the Corporation for National and Community Service—have formed internal teams and are inventorying their data and assessing any needed changes to policies, processes, and technology to implement the DATA Act.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that OMB and Treasury (1) provide agencies with clarifications to address potential quality issues with the definitions, and (2) take steps to align the release of finalized technical guidance and the broker service with agency implementation time frames. OMB and Treasury generally concurred with our recommendations.