Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

Our objectives were to determine the extent to which federal agencies are  following practices associated with key legislative and other requirements  for (1) IT strategic planning/performance measurement and (2) IT  investment management. Agencies’ Use of IT Strategic Planning/Performance Measurement Practices Is Uneven

The use of IT strategic planning/performance measurement practices is  uneven (see fig. Moreover, without  enterprisewide performance measures that are being tracked against actual  results, agencies lack critical information about whether their overall IT  activities, at a governmentwide cost of billions of dollars annually, are  achieving expected goals. Strategic planning defines what an  organization seeks to accomplish and identifies the strategies it will use  to achieve desired results. Although the agencies largely have one or more of the required  performance measures, these measures are not always linked to the  agencies’ enterprisewide IT goals. Executive level oversight of project- level management activities provides the organization with increased  assurance that each investment will achieve the desired cost, benefit,  and schedule results. Although no agencies had the practices associated with the control  phase fully in place, some have implemented important aspects of this  phase. Conclusions

Federal agencies did not always have in place important practices  associated with IT laws, policies, and guidance. Agencies cited a variety of reasons for not having these  practices in place, such as that the CIO position had been vacant, not  including a requirement in guidance was an oversight, or that the process  was being revised. Nevertheless, not only are these practices based on law,  executive orders, OMB policies, and our guidance, but they are also  important ingredients for ensuring effective strategic planning,  performance measurement, and investment management, which, in turn,  make it more likely that the billions of dollars in government IT  investments will be wisely spent. To improve the department’s IT investment management processes, we  recommend that the Secretary of the Treasury take the following eight  actions:  develop a capital planning and investment control guide that includes,  for example, the elements of practice 2.1;  develop work processes and procedures for the agency’s IT investment  management board, and document the alignment and coordination of  responsibilities of its various boards for decision making related to  investments, including the criteria for which investments—including  cross-cutting investments—will be reviewed by the enterprisewide  board;  use the department’s IT asset inventory as part of managerial decision  making, including using it to identify the potential for asset duplication;  establish a policy requiring that proposed IT investments support work  processes that have been simplified or redesigned to reduce costs and  improve effectiveness and that makes maximum use of COTS software;  implement a structured IT selection process that includes the elements  of practices 2.12 and 2.13;  establish a policy requiring modularized IT investments;  implement an IT investment management process that includes a  control phase that addresses, for example, the elements of practices  2.15, 2.16, and 2.17; and   implement an IT investment management process that includes an  evaluation phase that addresses, for example, the elements of practice  2.18.
Why GAO Did This Study

Over the years, the Congress has promulgated laws and the Office of Management and Budget and GAO have issued policies and guidance, respectively, on (1) information technology (IT) strategic planning/performance measurement (which defines what an organization seeks to accomplish, identifies the strategies it will use to achieve desired results, and then determines how well it is succeeding in reaching resultsoriented goals and achieving objectives) and (2) investment management (which involves selecting, controlling, and evaluating investments). To obtain an understanding of the government's implementation of these key IT management policies, congressional requesters asked GAO to determine the extent to which 26 major agencies have in place practices associated with key legislative and other requirements for (1) IT strategic planning/ performance measurement and (2) IT investment management.

What GAO Found

Agencies' use of 12 IT strategic planning/performance measurement practices--identified based on legislation, policy, and guidance--is uneven. For example, agencies generally have IT strategic plans and goals, but these goals are not always linked to specific performance measures that are tracked. Without enterprisewide performance measures that are tracked against actual results, agencies lack critical information about whether their overall IT activities are achieving expected goals. Agencies' use of 18 IT investment management practices that GAO identified is also mixed. For example, the agencies largely have IT investment management boards, but no agency had the practices associated with the control phase fully in place. Executive-level oversight of project-level management activities provides organizations with increased assurance that each investment will achieve the desired cost, benefit, and schedule results. Agencies cited a variety of reasons for not having practices fully in place, such as that the chief information officer position had been vacant, that not including a requirement in guidance was an oversight, and that the process was being revised, although they could not always provide an explanation. Regardless of the reason, these practices are important ingredients for ensuring effective strategic planning, performance measurement, and investment management, which, in turn, make it more likely that the billions of dollars in government IT investments are wisely spent.