	OMB and Federal Agencies Have Taken Steps to Improve Federal Spending Data

The first federal effort to publicly display comprehensive data on federal  awards was USAspending.gov. Among other things, the Federal Funding  Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA) required OMB to  establish a free, publicly accessible website containing data on federal  awards no later than January 1, 2008. The site  included the required data elements and search capabilities, and  OMB guidance required periodic updates from agencies consistent  with the act’s requirement for timeliness. OMB partially satisfied the  act’s requirement to establish a pilot to test the collection of subaward  data.   Although USAspending.gov included required grant information from  29 agencies for fiscal year 2008, it did not include grant information  from 15 programs at 9 other agencies. In a sample of 100 awards from USAspending.gov that we reviewed,  each had at least one data error in a required field, consisting of either  a blank data field, an inconsistency between the USAspending.gov  data and agency records, or a lack of sufficient agency information to  determine consistency. We also recommended that OMB develop and  implement a plan to collect and report subaward data, as well as a  procedure to regularly ensure that agencies report required award  information. Since we last evaluated FFATA compliance, OMB has taken steps to  improve USAspending.gov and the quality of its data through increased  agency-level accountability and government-wide improvements. First, in  OMB’s 2009 Open Government Directive, agencies were directed to  designate a high-level senior official to be accountable for the quality of,  and internal controls over, federal spending information disseminated on  public websites. That information is no longer available on the  site.   OMB has produced only one of the required annual reports to  Congress that were to include data on usage of the site and public  feedback on its utility. OMB and the Recovery Board Addressed Several Implementation Challenges with Recovery Act Recipient Reporting

As Congress and the administration crafted the American Recovery and  Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act), they built into it provisions to  increase transparency and accountability over spending. It required  recipients of Recovery Act funds, including grants, contracts, or loans, to  submit quarterly reports with information on each project or activity,  including the amount and use of funds and an estimate of the jobs  created or retained. The Recovery.gov site  was launched in 2009 to fulfill these requirements, and a second site— http://www.FederalReporting.gov—was established for recipients to report  their data. The transparency envisioned under the Recovery Act for tracking  spending and results was unprecedented for the federal government. As part of our oversight of the Recovery Act and in response to a  mandate to comment quarterly on recipient reporting, we issued a  number of reports addressing procedures related to recipient reporting  and the quality of data on Recovery.gov, and we made several  recommendations for improvements. With OMB Oversight, Agencies Took on the Key Role of Ensuring Data Accuracy and Completeness

After we reported that initially there were significant reporting and quality  issues, OMB issued guidance to federal agencies that incorporated  lessons learned from the first reporting period and addressed  recommendations we had made. Additional Approaches Could Streamline Reporting and Oversight

Our analysis of the quality of recipient-reported data showed that  recipients made errors in reporting award identification numbers, amount  of awards, and other data that agencies already had, and that if those  items had been pre-populated for recipients, errors might have been  reduced. Initiatives to Improve Transparency Can Benefit from Lessons Learned

There are initiatives under way in Congress and the administration that  look to build on these two transparency efforts now in place. For example,  legislation has been passed in the House of Representatives and  introduced in the Senate to improve the accountability and transparency  of federal spending. In addition, in June 2011 the President issued an  executive order establishing the Government Accountability and  Transparency Board to provide strategic direction for, among other things,  enhancing the transparency of federal spending. There are lessons from the implementation of both USAspending.gov and  Recovery.gov that can be applied to these new initiatives. Foremost,  consideration needs to be given to what objectives are to be achieved  and in what priority. However, it is important that ongoing efforts to  improve the data provided to the public continue to evolve. Recovery Act: Status of States’ and Localities’ Use of Funds and Efforts  to Ensure Accountability. Met  The site captured information on all  required data elements, such as the entity  receiving the award and the award  amounts.
Why GAO Did This Study

It is important to ensure the transparency of information detailing how the federal government spends more than $1 trillion annually in the form of contracts, grants, loans, and other awards. Toward this end, the government has multiple initiatives under way to increase such transparency, including publicly accessible websites providing information on federal spending, such as http://www.USAspending.gov and http://www.Recovery.gov. While these efforts have increased the amount of information available, challenges have been identified to better ensure the quality of data on these sites.
GAO was asked to provide a statement addressing (1) the status of efforts to improve the quality of publicly available data on government awards and expenditures and (2) lessons that can be learned from the operation of Recovery.gov that can contribute to other spending transparency efforts. In preparing this statement, GAO relied on its previous work in these areas, as well as discussions with OMB officials and officials from the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board.

What GAO Found

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and other federal agencies have taken steps to improve federal spending data available on USAspending.gov. This effort to publicly display comprehensive data arose from the federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006, which required OMB to establish a free, publicly accessible website containing data on federal awards and subawards. OMB launched USAspending.gov in December 2007 to meet these requirements. As GAO reported in 2010, while OMB had satisfied most of the requirements associated with the act, such as establishing the site with required data elements and search capability, it had only partially satisfied the requirement to establish a pilot program to test the collection and display of subaward data and had not met the requirements to include subaward data by January 2009, or to report to Congress on the sites usage. Also, GAO found that from a sample of 100 awards on USAspending.gov, each award had at least one data error and that USAspending.gov did not include information on grants from programs at 9 agencies for fiscal year 2008. Subsequently, OMB and agencies have taken steps to improve the site and the quality of its data through increased agency-level accountability and government-wide improvements. These efforts include directing agencies to appoint a senior-level official to be accountable for the quality of federal spending information disseminated on public websites, and increasing the use of automated tools. However, OMB has not yet implemented plans to create a data quality dashboard on USAspending.gov and has produced only one of the required annual reports to Congress on usage of the site.
OMB, the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board, federal agencies, and funding recipients addressed several challenges in managing reporting under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Recovery.gov was established in 2009 to provide public access to information on Recovery Act spending. Specifically, it was to provide timely information on projects or activities funded by federal grants, contracts, or loans provided to recipients, such as state or local governments. The transparency envisioned by the act was unprecedented for the federal government, and GAO identified a number of lessons learned from the operation of Recovery.gov:
OMB and the Recovery board used two-way communication with recipients to refine and clarify guidance.
Training and other assistance was provided to recipients to clarify reporting requirements and address early system problems.
After early reporting and quality issues were identified, OMB required agencies to ensure data accuracy and completeness.
Recipients made errors in reporting data, but these could be reduced through pre-populating data fields and other refinements to the reporting process.
Recent legislative proposals and a newly created executive branch board aim to expand and improve upon the transparency of federal spending. The challenges and lessons learned from implementing the existing reporting tools should help inform current and future efforts. In particular, attention should be given to stakeholder involvement, the effort required for reporting and oversight, and the need for clear objectives and priorities.

What GAO Recommends

GAO previously made several recommendations to improve these transparency efforts, including that OMB clarify guidance on reporting award data and develop a procedure to ensure agencies report required information. While GAO is not making new recommendations at this time, it underscores the importance of fully implementing its prior recommendations.