[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 31 (Tuesday, February 25, 2014)]
[House]
[Pages H1891-H1902]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
FEDERAL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACQUISITION REFORM ACT
Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill
(H.R. 1232) to amend titles 40, 41, and 44, United States Code, to
eliminate duplication and waste in information technology acquisition
and management, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 1236
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Federal Information
Technology Acquisition Reform Act''.
SEC. 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS.
The table of contents for this Act is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title.
Sec. 2. Table of contents.
Sec. 3. Definitions.
TITLE I--MANAGEMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY WITHIN FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
Sec. 101. Increased authority of agency Chief Information Officers over
information technology.
Sec. 102. Lead coordination role of Chief Information Officers Council.
Sec. 103. Reports by Government Accountability Office.
TITLE II--DATA CENTER OPTIMIZATION
Sec. 201. Purpose.
Sec. 202. Definitions.
Sec. 203. Federal data center optimization initiative.
Sec. 204. Performance requirements related to data center
consolidation.
Sec. 205. Cost savings related to data center optimization.
Sec. 206. Reporting requirements to Congress and the Federal Chief
Information Officer.
TITLE III--ELIMINATION OF DUPLICATION AND WASTE IN INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY ACQUISITION
Sec. 301. Inventory of information technology software assets.
Sec. 302. Website consolidation and transparency.
Sec. 303. Transition to the cloud.
Sec. 304. Elimination of unnecessary duplication of contracts by
requiring business case analysis.
TITLE IV--STRENGTHENING AND STREAMLINING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
Subtitle A--Strengthening and Streamlining IT Program Management
Practices
Sec. 401. Pilot program on interagency collaboration.
Sec. 402. Designation of assisted acquisition centers of excellence.
Subtitle B--Strengthening IT Acquisition Workforce
Sec. 411. Expansion of training and use of information technology
acquisition cadres.
Sec. 412. Plan on strengthening program and project management
performance.
Sec. 413. Personnel awards for excellence in the acquisition of
information systems and information technology.
TITLE V--ADDITIONAL REFORMS
Sec. 501. Maximizing the benefit of the Federal strategic sourcing
initiative.
[[Page H1892]]
Sec. 502. Governmentwide software purchasing program.
Sec. 503. Promoting transparency of blanket purchase agreements.
Sec. 504. Additional source selection technique in solicitations.
Sec. 505. Enhanced transparency in information technology investments.
Sec. 506. Enhanced communication between government and industry.
Sec. 507. Clarification of current law with respect to technology
neutrality in acquisition of software.
Sec. 508. No additional funds authorized.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Chief acquisition officers council.--The term ``Chief
Acquisition Officers Council'' means the Chief Acquisition
Officers Council established by section 1311(a) of title 41,
United States Code.
(2) Chief information officer.--The term ``Chief
Information Officer'' means a Chief Information Officer (as
designated under section 3506(a)(2) of title 44, United
States Code) of an agency listed in section 901(b) of title
31, United States Code.
(3) Chief information officers council.--The term ``Chief
Information Officers Council'' or ``CIO Council'' means the
Chief Information Officers Council established by section
3603(a) of title 44, United States Code.
(4) Director.--The term ``Director'' means the Director of
the Office of Management and Budget.
(5) Federal agency.--The term ``Federal agency'' means each
agency listed in section 901(b) of title 31, United States
Code.
(6) Federal chief information officer.--The term ``Federal
Chief Information Officer'' means the Administrator of the
Office of Electronic Government established under section
3602 of title 44, United States Code.
(7) Information technology or it.--The term ``information
technology'' or ``IT'' has the meaning provided in section
11101(6) of title 40, United States Code.
(8) Relevant congressional committees.--The term ``relevant
congressional committees'' means each of the following:
(A) The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and
the Committee on Armed Services of the House of
Representatives.
(B) The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs and the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate.
TITLE I--MANAGEMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY WITHIN FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
SEC. 101. INCREASED AUTHORITY OF AGENCY CHIEF INFORMATION
OFFICERS OVER INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY.
(a) Presidential Appointment of CIOs of Certain Agencies.--
(1) In general.--Section 11315 of title 40, United States
Code, is amended--
(A) by redesignating subsection (a) as subsection (e) and
moving such subsection to the end of the section; and
(B) by inserting before subsection (b) the following new
subsection (a):
``(a) Presidential Appointment or Designation of Certain
Chief Information Officers.--
``(1) In general.--There shall be within each agency listed
in section 901(b)(1) of title 31 an agency Chief Information
Officer. Each agency Chief Information Officer shall--
``(A)(i) be appointed by the President; or
``(ii) be designated by the President, in consultation with
the head of the agency; and
``(B) be appointed or designated, as applicable, from among
individuals who possess demonstrated ability in general
management of, and knowledge of and extensive practical
experience in, information technology management practices in
large governmental or business entities.
``(2) Responsibilities.--An agency Chief Information
Officer appointed or designated under this section shall
report directly to the head of the agency and carry out, on a
full-time basis, responsibilities as set forth in this
section and in section 3506(a) of title 44 for Chief
Information Officers designated under paragraph (2) of such
section.''.
(2) Conforming amendments.--Section 3506(a)(2) of title 44,
United States Code, is amended--
(A) by striking ``(A) Except as provided under subparagraph
(B), the head of each agency'' and inserting ``The head of
each agency, other than an agency with a Presidentially
appointed or designated Chief Information Officer as provided
in section 11315(a)(1) of title 40,''; and
(B) by striking subparagraph (B).
(b) Authority Relating to Budget and Personnel.--Section
11315 of title 40, United States Code, is further amended by
inserting after subsection (c) the following new subsection:
``(d) Additional Authorities for Certain CIOs.--
``(1) Budget-related authority.--
``(A) Planning.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, the head of each agency listed in section 901(b)(1) or
901(b)(2) of title 31 and in section 102 of title 5 shall
ensure that the Chief Information Officer of the agency has
the authority to participate in decisions regarding the
budget planning process related to information technology or
programs that include significant information technology
components.
``(B) Allocation.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, amounts appropriated for any agency listed in section
901(b)(1) or 901(b)(2) of title 31 and in section 102 of
title 5 for any fiscal year that are available for
information technology shall be allocated within the agency,
consistent with the provisions of appropriations Acts and
budget guidelines and recommendations from the Director of
the Office of Management and Budget, in such manner as
specified by, or approved by, the Chief Information Officer
of the agency in consultation with the Chief Financial
Officer of the agency and budget officials.
``(2) Personnel-related authority.--Notwithstanding any
other provision of law, the head of each agency listed in
section 901(b)(1) or 901(b)(2) of title 31 shall ensure that
the Chief Information Officer of the agency has the authority
necessary to approve the hiring of personnel who will have
information technology responsibilities within the agency and
to require that such personnel have the obligation to report
to the Chief Information Officer in a manner considered
sufficient by the Chief Information Officer.''.
(c) Single Chief Information Officer in Each Agency.--
(1) Requirement.--Section 3506(a)(3) of title 44, United
States Code, is amended--
(A) by inserting ``(A)'' after ``(3)''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(B) Each agency shall have only one individual with the
title and designation of `Chief Information Officer'. Any
bureau, office, or subordinate organization within the agency
may designate one individual with the title `Deputy Chief
Information Officer', `Associate Chief Information Officer',
or `Assistant Chief Information Officer'.''.
(2) Effective date.--Section 3506(a)(3)(B) of title 44,
United States Code, as added by paragraph (1), shall take
effect as of October 1, 2014. Any individual serving in a
position affected by such section before such date may
continue in that position if the requirements of such section
are fulfilled with respect to that individual.
SEC. 102. LEAD COORDINATION ROLE OF CHIEF INFORMATION
OFFICERS COUNCIL.
(a) Lead Coordination Role.--Subsection (d) of section 3603
of title 44, United States Code, is amended to read as
follows:
``(d) Lead Interagency Forum.--
``(1) In general.--The Council is designated the lead
interagency forum for improving agency coordination of
practices related to the design, development, modernization,
use, operation, sharing, performance, and review of Federal
Government information resources investment. As the lead
interagency forum, the Council shall develop cross-agency
portfolio management practices to allow and encourage the
development of cross-agency shared services and shared
platforms. The Council shall also issue guidelines and
practices for infrastructure and common information
technology applications, including expansion of the Federal
Enterprise Architecture process if appropriate. The
guidelines and practices may address broader transparency,
common inputs, common outputs, and outcomes achieved. The
guidelines and practices shall be used as a basis for
comparing performance across diverse missions and operations
in various agencies.
``(2) Report.--Not later than December 1 in each of the 6
years following the date of the enactment of this paragraph,
the Council shall submit to the relevant congressional
committees a report (to be known as the `CIO Council Report')
summarizing the Council's activities in the preceding fiscal
year and containing such recommendations for further
congressional action to fulfill its mission as the Council
considers appropriate.
``(3) Relevant congressional committees.--For purposes of
the report required by paragraph (2), the relevant
congressional committees are each of the following:
``(A) The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and
the Committee on Armed Services of the House of
Representatives.
``(B) The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs and the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate.''.
(b) Additional Function.--Subsection (f) of section 3603 of
such title is amended by adding at the end the following new
paragraph:
``(8) Assist the Administrator in developing and providing
guidance for effective operations of the Federal
Infrastructure and Common Application Collaboration Center
authorized under section 11501 of title 40.''.
(c) References to Administrator of e-government as Federal
Chief Information Officer.--
(1) References.--Section 3602(b) of title 44, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following: ``The
Administrator may also be referred to as the Federal Chief
Information Officer.''.
(2) Definition.--Section 3601(1) of such title is amended
by inserting ``or Federal Chief Information Officer'' before
``means''.
SEC. 103. REPORTS BY GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE.
(a) Requirement to Examine Effectiveness.--The Comptroller
General of the United States shall examine the effectiveness
of the Chief Information Officers Council in meeting its
responsibilities under section 3603(d) of title 44, United
States Code, as added by section 102, with particular focus
on--
(1) whether agencies are actively participating in the
Council and heeding the Council's advice and guidance; and
[[Page H1893]]
(2) whether the Council is actively using and developing
the capabilities of the Federal Infrastructure and Common
Application Collaboration Center authorized under section
11501 of title 40, United States Code, as added by section
401.
(b) Reports.--Not later than 1 year, 3 years, and 5 years
after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller
General shall submit to the relevant congressional committees
a report containing the findings and recommendations of the
Comptroller General from the examination required by
subsection (a).
TITLE II--DATA CENTER OPTIMIZATION
SEC. 201. PURPOSE.
The purpose of this title is to optimize Federal data
center usage and efficiency.
SEC. 202. DEFINITIONS.
In this title:
(1) Federal data center optimization initiative.--The term
``Federal Data Center Optimization Initiative'' or the
``Initiative'' means the initiative developed and implemented
by the Director, through the Federal Chief Information
Officer, as required under section 203.
(2) Covered agency.--The term ``covered agency'' means any
agency included in the Federal Data Center Optimization
Initiative.
(3) Data center.--The term ``data center'' means a closet,
room, floor, or building for the storage, management, and
dissemination of data and information, as defined by the
Federal Chief Information Officer under guidance issued
pursuant to this section.
(4) Federal data center.--The term ``Federal data center''
means any data center of a covered agency used or operated by
a covered agency, by a contractor of a covered agency, or by
another organization on behalf of a covered agency.
(5) Server utilization.--The term ``server utilization''
refers to the activity level of a server relative to its
maximum activity level, expressed as a percentage.
(6) Power usage effectiveness.--The term ``power usage
effectiveness'' means the ratio obtained by dividing the
total amount of electricity and other power consumed in
running a data center by the power consumed by the
information and communications technology in the data center.
SEC. 203. FEDERAL DATA CENTER OPTIMIZATION INITIATIVE.
(a) Requirement for Initiative.--The Federal Chief
Information Officer, in consultation with the chief
information officers of covered agencies, shall develop and
implement an initiative, to be known as the Federal Data
Center Optimization Initiative, to optimize the usage and
efficiency of Federal data centers by meeting the
requirements of this Act and taking additional measures, as
appropriate.
(b) Requirement for Plan.--Within 6 months after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Federal Chief Information
Officer, in consultation with the chief information officers
of covered agencies, shall develop and submit to Congress a
plan for implementation of the Initiative required by
subsection (a) by each covered agency. In developing the
plan, the Federal Chief Information Officer shall take into
account the findings and recommendations of the Comptroller
General review required by section 205(e).
(c) Matters Covered.--The plan shall include--
(1) descriptions of how covered agencies will use
reductions in floor space, energy use, infrastructure,
equipment, applications, personnel, increases in
multiorganizational use, server virtualization, cloud
computing, and other appropriate methods to meet the
requirements of the initiative; and
(2) appropriate consideration of shifting Federally owned
data center workload to commercially owned data centers.
SEC. 204. PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO DATA CENTER
CONSOLIDATION.
(a) Server Utilization.--Each covered agency may use the
following methods to achieve the maximum server utilization
possible as determined by the Federal Chief Information
Officer:
(1) The closing of existing data centers that lack adequate
server utilization, as determined by the Federal Chief
Information Officer. If the agency fails to close such data
centers, the agency shall provide a detailed explanation as
to why this data center should remain in use as part of the
submitted plan. The Federal Chief Information Officer shall
include an assessment of the agency explanation in the annual
report to Congress.
(2) The consolidation of services within existing data
centers to increase server utilization rates.
(3) Any other method that the Federal Chief Information
Officer, in consultation with the chief information officers
of covered agencies, determines necessary to optimize server
utilization.
(b) Power Usage Effectiveness.--Each covered agency may use
the following methods to achieve the maximum energy
efficiency possible as determined by the Federal Chief
Information Officer:
(1) The use of the measurement of power usage effectiveness
to calculate data center energy efficiency.
(2) The use of power meters in facilities dedicated to data
center operations to frequently measure power consumption
over time.
(3) The establishment of power usage effectiveness goals
for each data center.
(4) The adoption of best practices for managing--
(A) temperature and airflow in facilities dedicated to data
center operations; and
(B) power supply efficiency.
(5) The implementation of any other method that the Federal
Chief Information Officer, in consultation with the Chief
Information Officers of covered agencies, determines
necessary to optimize data center energy efficiency.
SEC. 205. COST SAVINGS RELATED TO DATA CENTER OPTIMIZATION.
(a) Requirement to Track Costs.--
(1) In general.--Each covered agency shall track costs
resulting from implementation of the Federal Data Center
Optimization Initiative within the agency and submit a report
on those costs annually to the Federal Chief Information
Officer. Covered agencies shall determine the net costs from
data consolidation on an annual basis.
(2) Factors.--In calculating net costs each year under
paragraph (1), a covered agency shall use the following
factors:
(A) Energy costs.
(B) Personnel costs.
(C) Real estate costs.
(D) Capital expense costs.
(E) Maintenance and support costs such as operating
subsystem, database, hardware, and software license expense
costs.
(F) Other appropriate costs, as determined by the agency in
consultation with the Federal Chief Information Officer.
(b) Requirement to Track Savings.--
(1) In general.--Each covered agency shall track realized
and projected savings resulting from implementation of the
Federal Data Center Optimization Initiative within the agency
and submit a report on those savings annually to the Federal
Chief Information Officer. Covered agencies shall determine
the net savings from data consolidation on an annual basis.
(2) Factors.--In calculating net savings each year under
paragraph (1), a covered agency shall use the following
factors:
(A) Energy savings.
(B) Personnel savings.
(C) Real estate savings.
(D) Capital expense savings.
(E) Maintenance and support savings such as operating
subsystem, database, hardware, and software license expense
savings.
(F) Other appropriate savings, as determined by the agency
in consultation with the Federal Chief Information Officer.
(3) Public availability.--The Federal Chief Information
Officer shall make publicly available a summary of realized
and projected savings for each covered agency. The Federal
Chief Information Officer shall identify any covered agency
that failed to provide the annual report required under
paragraph (1).
(c) Requirement to Use Cost-effective Measures.--Covered
agencies shall use the most cost-effective measures to
implement the Federal Data Center Optimization Initiative,
such as using estimation to measure or track costs and
savings using a methodology approved by the Federal Chief
Information Officer.
(d) Government Accountability Office Review.--Not later
than 6 months after the date of the enactment of this Act,
the Comptroller General of the United States shall examine
methods for calculating savings from the Initiative and using
them for the purposes identified in subsection (d), including
establishment and use of a special revolving fund that
supports data centers and server optimization, and shall
submit to the Federal Chief Information Officer and Congress
a report on the Comptroller General's findings and
recommendations.
SEC. 206. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS TO CONGRESS AND THE FEDERAL
CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER.
(a) Agency Requirement to Report to CIO.--
(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), each
covered agency each year shall submit to the Federal Chief
Information Officer a report on the implementation of the
Federal Data Center Optimization Initiative, including
savings resulting from such implementation. The report shall
include an update of the agency's plan for implementing the
Initiative.
(2) Department of defense.--The Secretary of Defense shall
comply with paragraph (1) each year by submitting to the
Federal Chief Information Officer a report with relevant
information collected under section 2867 of Public Law 112-81
(10 U.S.C 2223a note) or a copy of the report required under
section 2867(d) of such law.
(b) Federal Chief Information Officer Requirement to Report
to Congress.--Each year, the Federal Chief Information
Officer shall submit to the relevant congressional committees
a report that assesses agency progress in carrying out the
Federal Data Center Optimization Initiative and updates the
plan under section 203. The report may be included as part of
the annual report required under section 3606 of title 44,
United States Code.
TITLE III--ELIMINATION OF DUPLICATION AND WASTE IN INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY ACQUISITION
SEC. 301. INVENTORY OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SOFTWARE
ASSETS.
(a) Plan.--The Director shall develop a plan for conducting
a Governmentwide inventory of information technology software
assets.
(b) Matters Covered.--The plan required by subsection (a)
shall cover the following:
[[Page H1894]]
(1) The manner in which Federal agencies can achieve the
greatest possible economies of scale and cost savings in the
procurement of information technology software assets,
through measures such as reducing the procurement of new
software licenses until such time as agency needs exceed the
number of existing and unused licenses.
(2) The capability to conduct ongoing Governmentwide
inventories of all existing software licenses on an
application-by-application basis, including duplicative,
unused, overused, and underused licenses, and to assess the
need of agencies for software licenses.
(3) A Governmentwide spending analysis to provide knowledge
about how much is being spent for software products or
services to support decisions for strategic sourcing under
the Federal strategic sourcing program managed by the Office
of Federal Procurement Policy.
(c) Availability.--The inventory of information technology
software assets shall be available to Chief Information
Officers and such other Federal officials as the Chief
Information Officers may, in consultation with the Chief
Information Officers Council, designate.
(d) Deadline and Submission to Congress.--Not later than
180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Director shall complete and submit to Congress the plan
required by subsection (a).
(e) Implementation.--Not later than two years after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Director shall
complete implementation of the plan required by subsection
(a).
(f) Review by Comptroller General.--Not later than two
years after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Comptroller General of the United States shall review the
plan required by subsection (a) and submit to the relevant
congressional committees a report on the review.
SEC. 302. WEBSITE CONSOLIDATION AND TRANSPARENCY.
(a) Website Consolidation.--The Director shall--
(1) in consultation with Federal agencies, and after
reviewing the directory of public Federal Government websites
of each agency (as required to be established and updated
under section 207(f)(3) of the E-Government Act of 2002
(Public Law 107-347; 44 U.S.C. 3501 note)), assess all the
publicly available websites of Federal agencies to determine
whether there are duplicative or overlapping websites; and
(2) require Federal agencies to eliminate or consolidate
those websites that are duplicative or overlapping.
(b) Website Transparency.--The Director shall issue
guidance to Federal agencies to ensure that the data on
publicly available websites of the agencies are open and
accessible to the public.
(c) Matters Covered.--In preparing the guidance required by
subsection (b), the Director shall--
(1) develop guidelines, standards, and best practices for
interoperability and transparency;
(2) identify interfaces that provide for shared, open
solutions on the publicly available websites of the agencies;
and
(3) ensure that Federal agency Internet home pages, web-
based forms, and web-based applications are accessible to
individuals with disabilities in conformance with section 508
of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 794d).
(d) Deadline for Guidance.--The guidance required by
subsection (b) shall be issued not later than 180 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 303. TRANSITION TO THE CLOUD.
(a) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
transition to cloud computing offers significant potential
benefits for the implementation of Federal information
technology projects in terms of flexibility, cost, and
operational benefits.
(b) Governmentwide Application.--In assessing cloud
computing opportunities, the Chief Information Officers
Council shall define policies and guidelines for the adoption
of Governmentwide programs providing for a standardized
approach to security assessment and operational authorization
for cloud products and services.
(c) Additional Budget Authorities for Transition.--In
transitioning to the cloud, a Chief Information Officer of an
agency listed in section 901(b) of title 31, United States
Code, may establish such cloud service Working Capital Funds,
in consultation with the Chief Financial Officer of the
agency, as may be necessary to transition to cloud-based
solutions. Any establishment of a new Working Capital Fund
under this subsection shall be reported to the Committees on
Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate
and relevant Congressional committees.
SEC. 304. ELIMINATION OF UNNECESSARY DUPLICATION OF CONTRACTS
BY REQUIRING BUSINESS CASE ANALYSIS.
(a) Purpose.--The purpose of this section is to leverage
the Government's buying power and achieve administrative
efficiencies and cost savings by eliminating unnecessary
duplication of contracts.
(b) Requirement for Business Case Approval.--
(1) In general.--Chapter 33 of title 41, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
section:
``Sec. 3312. Requirement for business case approval for new
Governmentwide contracts.
``(a) In General.--An executive agency may not issue a
solicitation for a covered Governmentwide contract unless the
agency performs a business case analysis for the contract and
obtains an approval of the business case analysis from the
Administrator for Federal Procurement Policy.
``(b) Review of Business Case Analysis.--
``(1) In general.--With respect to any covered
Governmentwide contract, the Administrator for Federal
Procurement Policy shall review the business case analysis
submitted for the contract and provide an approval or
disapproval within 60 days after the date of submission. Any
business case analysis not disapproved within such 60-day
period is deemed to be approved.
``(2) Basis for approval of business case.--The
Administrator for Federal Procurement Policy shall approve or
disapprove a business case analysis based on the adequacy of
the analysis submitted. The Administrator shall give primary
consideration to whether an agency has demonstrated a
compelling need that cannot be satisfied by existing
Governmentwide contract in a timely and cost-effective
manner.
``(c) Content of Business Case Analysis.--The Administrator
for Federal Procurement Policy shall issue guidance
specifying the content for a business case analysis submitted
pursuant to this section. At a minimum, the business case
analysis shall include details on the administrative
resources needed for such contract, including an analysis of
all direct and indirect costs to the Federal Government of
awarding and administering such contract and the impact such
contract will have on the ability of the Federal Government
to leverage its purchasing power.
``(b) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Covered governmentwide contract.--The term `covered
Governmentwide contract' means any contract, blanket purchase
agreement, or other contractual instrument for acquisition of
information technology or other goods or services that allows
for an indefinite number of orders to be placed under the
contract, agreement, or instrument, and that is established
by one executive agency for use by multiple executive
agencies to obtain goods or services. The term does not
include--
``(A) a multiple award schedule contract awarded by the
General Services Administration;
``(B) a Governmentwide acquisition contract for information
technology awarded pursuant to sections 11302(e) and
11314(a)(2) of title 40;
``(C) orders under Governmentwide contracts in existence
before the effective date of this section; or
``(D) any contract in an amount less than $10,000,000,
determined on an average annual basis.
``(2) Executive agency.--The term `executive agency' has
the meaning provided that term by section 105 of title 5.''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections for chapter
33 of title 41, United States Code, is amended by adding
after the item relating to section 3311 the following new
item:
``3312. Requirement for business case approval for new Governmentwide
contracts.''.
(c) Report.--Not later than June 1 in each of the next 6
years following the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Administrator for Federal Procurement Policy shall submit to
the relevant congressional committees a report on the
implementation of section 3312 of title 41, United States
Code, as added by subsection (b), including a summary of the
submissions, reviews, approvals, and disapprovals of business
case analyses pursuant to such section.
(d) Guidance.--The Administrator for Federal Procurement
Policy shall issue guidance for implementing section 3312 of
such title.
(e) Revision of FAR.--Not later than 180 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Federal Acquisition
Regulation shall be amended to implement section 3312 of such
title.
(g) Effective Date.--Section 3312 of such title is
effective on and after 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
TITLE IV--STRENGTHENING AND STREAMLINING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
Subtitle A--Strengthening and Streamlining IT Program Management
Practices
SEC. 401. PILOT PROGRAM ON INTERAGENCY COLLABORATION.
(a) Pilot Program.--
(1) In general.--Chapter 115 of title 40, United States
Code, is amended to read as follows:
``CHAPTER 115--INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
``Sec.
``11501. Pilot program on interagency collaboration.
``Sec. 11501. Pilot program on interagency collaboration
``(a) Requirement to Conduct Pilot Program.--The Director
of the Office of Management and Budget shall conduct a three-
year pilot program in accordance with the requirements of
this section to test alternative approaches for the
management of commonly used information technology by
executive agencies.
``(b) Establishment and Purposes.--For purposes of the
pilot program, the Director of the Office of Management and
Budget shall establish a Federal Infrastructure and Common
Application Collaboration Center
[[Page H1895]]
(hereafter in this section referred to as the `Collaboration
Center') within the Office of Electronic Government
established under section 3602 of title 44. The purpose of
the Collaboration Center is to serve as a resource for
Federal agencies, available on an optional-use basis, to
assist and promote coordinated program management practices
and to develop and maintain requirements for the acquisition
of IT infrastructure and common applications commonly used by
various Federal agencies.
``(c) Organization of Center.--
``(1) Membership.--The Center shall consist of the
following members:
``(A) An appropriate number, as determined by the CIO
Council, but not less than 12, full-time program managers or
cost specialists, all of whom have appropriate experience in
the private or Government sector in managing or overseeing
acquisitions of IT infrastructure and common applications.
``(B) At least 1 full-time detailee from each of the
Federal agencies listed in section 901(b) of title 31,
nominated by the respective agency chief information officer
for a detail period of not less than 1 year.
``(2) Working groups.--The Collaboration Center shall have
working groups that specialize in IT infrastructure and
common applications identified by the CIO Council. Each
working group shall be headed by a separate dedicated program
manager appointed by the Federal Chief Information Officer.
``(d) Capabilities and Functions of the Collaboration
Center.--For each of the IT infrastructure and common
application areas identified by the CIO Council, the
Collaboration Center shall perform the following roles, and
any other functions as directed by the Federal Chief
Information Officer:
``(1) Develop, maintain, and disseminate requirements
suitable to establish contracts that will meet the common and
general needs of various Federal agencies as determined by
the Center. In doing so, the Center shall give maximum
consideration to the adoption of commercial standards and
industry acquisition best practices, including opportunities
for shared services, consideration of total cost of
ownership, preference for industry-neutral functional
specifications leveraging open industry standards and
competition, and use of long-term contracts, as appropriate.
``(2) Develop, maintain, and disseminate reliable cost
estimates.
``(3) Lead the review of significant or troubled IT
investments or acquisitions as identified by the CIO Council.
``(4) Provide expert aid to troubled IT investments or
acquisitions.
``(e) Guidance.--The Director, in consultation with the
Chief Information Officers Council, shall issue guidance
addressing the scope and operation of the Collaboration
Center. The guidance shall require that the collaboration
Center report to the Federal Chief Information Officer.
``(f) Report to Congress.--
``(1) In general.--The Director shall annually submit to
the relevant congressional committees a report detailing the
organization, staff, and activities of the Collaboration
Center, including--
``(A) a list of IT infrastructure and common applications
the Center assisted;
``(B) an assessment of the Center's achievement in
promoting efficiency, shared services, and elimination of
unnecessary Government requirements that are contrary to
commercial best practices; and
``(C) the use and expenditure of amounts in the Fund
established under subsection (i).
``(2) Inclusion in other report.--The report may be
included as part of the annual E-Government status report
required under section 3606 of title 44.
``(g) Guidelines for Acquisition of IT Infrastructure and
Common Applications.--
``(1) Guidelines.--The Collaboration Center shall establish
guidelines that, to the maximum extent possible, eliminate
inconsistent practices among executive agencies and ensure
uniformity and consistency in acquisition processes for IT
infrastructure and common applications across the Federal
Government.
``(2) Central website.--In preparing the guidelines, the
Collaboration Center, in consultation with the Chief
Acquisition Officers Council, shall offer executive agencies
the option of accessing a central website for best practices,
templates, and other relevant information.
``(h) Pricing Transparency.--The Collaboration Center, in
collaboration with the Office of Federal Procurement Policy,
the Chief Acquisition Officers Council, the General Services
Administration, and the Assisted Acquisition Centers of
Excellence, shall compile a price list and catalogue
containing current pricing information by vendor for each of
its IT infrastructure and common applications categories. The
price catalogue shall contain any price provided by a vendor
in a contract awarded for the same or similar good or service
to any executive agency. The catalogue shall be developed in
a fashion ensuring that it may be used for pricing
comparisons and pricing analysis using standard data formats.
The price catalogue shall not be made public, but shall be
accessible to executive agencies.
``(i) Authorization to Use Fund.--In any fiscal year,
notwithstanding section 321(c) of title 40, up to five
percent of the fees collected during the prior fiscal year
under the multiple award schedule contracts entered into by
the Administrator of General Services and credited to the
Acquisition Services Fund under section 321 of title 40, may
be used to fund the activities of the Collaboration Center.
Each fiscal year, the Director, in consultation with the
Federal Chief Information Officer, shall determine an
appropriate amount needed to operate the Collaboration Center
and the Administrator of General Services shall transfer
amounts only to the extent and in such amounts as are
provided in advance in appropriation acts from the Fund to
the Director for the Center.
``(j) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Executive agency.--The term `executive agency' has
the meaning provided that term by section 105 of title 5.
``(2) Federal chief information officer.--The term `Federal
Chief Information Officer' means the Administrator of the
Office of Electronic Government established under section
3602 of title 44.
``(3) Relevant congressional committees.--The term
`relevant congressional committees' means each of the
following:
``(A) The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and
the Committee on Armed Services of the House of
Representatives.
``(B) The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs and the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate.''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The item relating to chapter 115
in the table of chapters at the beginning of subtitle III of
title 40, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
``115. Information Technology Acquisition Management Practi11501''.....
(b) Deadlines.--
(1) Guidance.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Director shall issue guidance
under section 11501(e) of title 40, United States Code, as
added by subsection (a).
(2) Center.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Director shall establish the
Federal Infrastructure and Common Application Collaboration
Center, in accordance with section 11501(b) of such title, as
so added.
(3) Guidelines.--Not later than 2 years after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Federal Infrastructure and
Common Application Collaboration Center shall establish
guidelines in accordance with section 11501(g) of such title,
as so added.
(c) Conforming Amendment.--Section 3602(c) of title 44,
United States Code, is amended--
(1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (2);
(2) by redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (4); and
(3) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following new
paragraph (3):
``(3) all of the functions of the Federal Infrastructure
and Common Application Collaboration Center, as required
under section 11501 of title 40; and''.
SEC. 402. DESIGNATION OF ASSISTED ACQUISITION CENTERS OF
EXCELLENCE.
(a) Designation.--Chapter 115 of title 40, United States
Code, as amended by section 401, is further amended by adding
at the end the following new section:
``SEC. 11502. ASSISTED ACQUISITION CENTERS OF EXCELLENCE.
``(a) Purpose.--The purpose of this section is to develop
specialized assisted acquisition centers of excellence within
the Federal Government to serve as a resource for Federal
agencies, available on an optional-use basis, to assist and
promote--
``(1) the effective use of best acquisition practices;
``(2) the development of specialized expertise in the
acquisition of information technology; and
``(3) Governmentwide sharing of acquisition capability to
augment any shortage in the information technology
acquisition workforce.
``(b) Designation of AACEs.--Not later than 1 year after
the date of the enactment of this section, and every 3 years
thereafter, the Director of the Office of Management and
Budget, in consultation with the Chief Acquisition Officers
Council and the Chief Information Officers Council, shall
designate, redesignate, or withdraw the designation of
acquisition centers of excellence within various executive
agencies to carry out the functions set forth in subsection
(d) in an area of specialized acquisition expertise as
determined by the Director. Each such center of excellence
shall be known as an `Assisted Acquisition Center of
Excellence' or an `AACE'.
``(c) Use of Existing Authority.--This section provides no
new authority to establish a franchise fund or revolving
fund.
``(d) Functions.--The functions of each AACE are as
follows:
``(1) Best practices.--To promote, develop, and implement
the use of best acquisition practices in the area of
specialized acquisition expertise that the AACE is designated
to carry out by the Director under subsection (b).
``(2) Assisted acquisitions.--To assist all Government
agencies in the expedient, strategic, and cost-effective
acquisition of the information technology goods or services
covered by such area of specialized acquisition expertise by
engaging in repeated and frequent acquisition of similar
information technology requirements.
``(3) Development and training of IT acquisition
workforce.--To assist in recruiting and training IT
acquisition cadres (referred to in section 1704(j) of title
41).
[[Page H1896]]
``(e) Criteria.--In designating, redesignating, or
withdrawing the designation of an AACE, the Director shall
consider, at a minimum, the following matters:
``(1) The subject matter expertise of the host agency in a
specific area of information technology acquisition.
``(2) For acquisitions of IT infrastructure and common
applications covered by the Federal Infrastructure and Common
Application Collaboration Center authorized under section
11501 of this title, the ability and willingness to
collaborate with the Collaboration Center and adhere to the
requirements standards established by the Collaboration
Center.
``(3) The ability of an AACE to develop customized
requirements documents that meet the needs of executive
agencies as well as the current industry standards and
commercial best practices.
``(4) The ability of an AACE to consistently award and
manage various contracts, task or delivery orders, and other
acquisition arrangements in a timely, cost-effective, and
compliant manner.
``(5) The ability of an AACE to aggregate demands from
multiple executive agencies for similar information
technology goods or services and fulfill those demands in one
acquisition.
``(6) The ability of an AACE to acquire innovative or
emerging commercial and noncommercial technologies using
various contracting methods, including ways to lower the
entry barriers for small businesses with limited Government
contracting experiences.
``(7) The ability of an AACE to maximize commercial item
acquisition, effectively manage high-risk contract types,
increase competition, promote small business participation,
and maximize use of available Governmentwide contracts.
``(8) The existence of an in-house cost estimating group
with expertise to consistently develop reliable cost
estimates that are accurate, comprehensive, well-documented,
and credible.
``(9) The ability of an AACE to employ best practices and
educate requesting agencies, to the maximum extent
practicable, regarding critical factors underlying successful
major IT acquisitions, including the following factors:
``(A) Active engagement by program officials with
stakeholders.
``(B) Possession by program staff of the necessary
knowledge and skills.
``(C) Support of the programs by senior department and
agency executives.
``(D) Involvement by end users and stakeholders in the
development of requirements.
``(E) Participation by end users in testing of system
functionality prior to formal end user acceptance testing.
``(F) Stability and consistency of Government and
contractor staff.
``(G) Prioritization of requirements by program staff.
``(H) Maintenance of regular communication with the prime
contractor by program officials.
``(I) Receipt of sufficient funding by programs.
``(10) The ability of an AACE to run an effective
acquisition intern program in collaboration with the Federal
Acquisition Institute or the Defense Acquisition University.
``(11) The ability of an AACE to effectively and properly
manage fees received for assisted acquisitions pursuant to
this section.
``(f) Funds Received by AACEs.--
``(1) Availability.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law or regulation, funds obligated and transferred from an
executive agency in a fiscal year to an AACE for the
acquisition of goods or services covered by an area of
specialized acquisition expertise of an AACE, regardless of
whether the requirements are severable or non-severable,
shall remain available for awards of contracts by the AACE
for the same general requirements for the next 5 fiscal years
following the fiscal year in which the funds were
transferred.
``(2) Transition to new AACE.--If the AACE to which the
funds are provided under paragraph (1) becomes unable to
fulfill the requirements of the executive agency from which
the funds were provided, the funds may be provided to a
different AACE to fulfill such requirements. The funds so
provided shall be used for the same purpose and remain
available for the same period of time as applied when
provided to the original AACE.
``(3) Relationship to existing authorities.--This
subsection does not limit any existing authorities an AACE
may have under its revolving or working capital funds
authorities.
``(g) Government Accountability Office Review of AACE.--
``(1) Review.--The Comptroller General of the United States
shall review and assess--
``(A) the use and management of fees received by the AACEs
pursuant to this section to ensure that an appropriate fee
structure is established and enforced to cover activities
addressed in this section and that no excess fees are charged
or retained; and
``(B) the effectiveness of the AACEs in achieving the
purpose described in subsection (a), including review of
contracts.
``(2) Reports.--Not later than 1 year after the designation
or redesignation of AACES under subsection (b), the
Comptroller General shall submit to the relevant
congressional committees a report containing the findings and
assessment under paragraph (1).
``(h) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Assisted acquisition.--The term `assisted
acquisition' means a type of interagency acquisition in which
the parties enter into an interagency agreement pursuant to
which--
``(A) the servicing agency performs acquisition activities
on the requesting agency's behalf, such as awarding,
administering, or closing out a contract, task order,
delivery order, or blanket purchase agreement; and
``(B) funding is provided through a franchise fund, the
Acquisition Services Fund in section 321 of this title,
sections 1535 and 1536 of title 31, or other available
methods.
``(2) Executive agency.--The term `executive agency' has
the meaning provided that term by section 133 of title 41.
``(3) Relevant congressional committees.--The term
`relevant congressional committees' has the meaning provided
that term by section 11501 of this title.
``(i) Revision of FAR.--The Federal Acquisition Regulation
shall be amended to implement this section.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of chapter 115 of title 40, United States Code, as
amended by section 401, is further amended by adding at the
end the following new item:
``11502. Assisted Acquisition Centers of Excellence.''.
Subtitle B--Strengthening IT Acquisition Workforce
SEC. 411. EXPANSION OF TRAINING AND USE OF INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY ACQUISITION CADRES.
(a) Purpose.--The purpose of this section is to ensure
timely progress by Federal agencies toward developing,
strengthening, and deploying personnel with highly
specialized skills in information technology acquisition,
including program and project managers, to be known as
information technology acquisition cadres.
(b) Report to Congress.--Section 1704 of title 41, United
States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following
new subsection:
``(j) Strategic Plan on Information Technology Acquisition
Cadres.--
``(1) Five-year strategic plan to congress.--Not later than
June 1 following the date of the enactment of this
subsection, the Director shall submit to the relevant
congressional committees a 5-year strategic plan (to be known
as the `IT Acquisition Cadres Strategic Plan') to develop,
strengthen, and solidify information technology acquisition
cadres. The plan shall include a timeline for implementation
of the plan and identification of individuals responsible for
specific elements of the plan during the 5-year period
covered by the plan.
``(2) Matters covered.--The plan shall address, at a
minimum, the following matters:
``(A) Current information technology acquisition staffing
challenges in Federal agencies, by previous year's
information technology acquisition value, and by the Federal
Government as a whole.
``(B) The variety and complexity of information technology
acquisitions conducted by each Federal agency covered by the
plan, and the specialized information technology acquisition
workforce needed to effectively carry out such acquisitions.
``(C) The development of a sustainable funding model to
support efforts to hire, retain, and train an information
technology acquisition cadre of appropriate size and skill to
effectively carry out the acquisition programs of the Federal
agencies covered by the plan, including an examination of
interagency funding methods and a discussion of how the model
of the Defense Acquisition Workforce Development Fund could
be applied to civilian agencies.
``(D) Any strategic human capital planning necessary to
hire, retain, and train an information acquisition cadre of
appropriate size and skill at each Federal agency covered by
the plan.
``(E) Governmentwide training standards and certification
requirements necessary to enhance the mobility and career
opportunities of the Federal information technology
acquisition cadre within the Federal agencies covered by the
plan.
``(F) New and innovative approaches to workforce
development and training, including cross-functional
training, rotational development, and assignments both within
and outside the Government.
``(G) Appropriate consideration and alignment with the
needs and priorities of the Infrastructure and Common
Application Collaboration Center, Assisted Acquisition
Centers of Excellence, and acquisition intern programs.
``(H) Assessment of the current workforce competency and
usage trends in evaluation technique to obtain best value,
including proper handling of tradeoffs between price and
nonprice factors.
``(I) Assessment of the current workforce competency in
designing and aligning performance goals, life cycle costs,
and contract incentives.
``(J) Assessment of the current workforce competency in
avoiding brand-name preference and using industry-neutral
functional specifications to leverage open industry standards
and competition.
``(K) Use of integrated program teams, including fully
dedicated program managers, for each complex information
technology investment.
``(L) Proper assignment of recognition or accountability to
the members of an integrated program team for both individual
functional goals and overall program success or failure.
[[Page H1897]]
``(M) The development of a technology fellows program that
includes provisions for recruiting, for rotation of
assignments, and for partnering directly with universities
with well-recognized information technology programs.
``(N) The capability to properly manage other transaction
authority (where such authority is granted), including
ensuring that the use of the authority is warranted due to
unique technical challenges, rapid adoption of innovative or
emerging commercial or noncommercial technologies, or other
circumstances that cannot readily be satisfied using a
contract, grant, or cooperative agreement in accordance with
applicable law and the Federal Acquisition Regulation.
``(O) The use of student internship and scholarship
programs as a talent pool for permanent hires and the use and
impact of special hiring authorities and flexibilities to
recruit diverse candidates.
``(P) The assessment of hiring manager satisfaction with
the hiring process and hiring outcomes, including
satisfaction with the quality of applicants interviewed and
hires made.
``(Q) The assessment of applicant satisfaction with the
hiring process, including the clarity of the hiring
announcement, the user-friendliness of the application
process, communication from the hiring manager or agency
regarding application status, and timeliness of the hiring
decision.
``(R) The assessment of new hire satisfaction with the
onboarding process, including the orientation process, and
investment in training and development for employees during
their first year of employment.
``(S) Any other matters the Director considers appropriate.
``(3) Annual report.--Not later than June 1 in each of the
5 years following the year of submission of the plan required
by paragraph (1), the Director shall submit to the relevant
congressional committees an annual report outlining the
progress made pursuant to the plan.
``(4) Government accountability office review of the plan
and annual report.--
``(A) Not later than 1 year after the submission of the
plan required by paragraph (1), the Comptroller General of
the United States shall review the plan and submit to the
relevant congressional committees a report on the review.
``(B) Not later than 6 months after the submission of the
first, third, and fifth annual report required under
paragraph (3), the Comptroller General shall independently
assess the findings of the annual report and brief the
relevant congressional committees on the Comptroller
General's findings and recommendations to ensure the
objectives of the plan are accomplished.
``(5) Definitions.--In this subsection:
``(A) The term `Federal agency' means each agency listed in
section 901(b) of title 31.
``(B) The term `relevant congressional committees' means
each of the following:
``(i) The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and
the Committee on Armed Services of the House of
Representatives.
``(ii) The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs and the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate.''.
SEC. 412. PLAN ON STRENGTHENING PROGRAM AND PROJECT
MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE.
(a) Plan on Strengthening Program and Project Management
Performance.--Not later than June 1 following the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Director, in consultation with the
Director of the Office of Personnel Management, shall submit
to the relevant congressional committees a plan for improving
management of IT programs and projects.
(b) Matters Covered.--The plan required by subsection (a)
shall include, at a minimum, the following:
(1) Creation of a specialized career path for program
management.
(2) The development of a competency model for program
management consistent with the IT project manager model.
(3) A career advancement model that requires appropriate
expertise and experience for advancement.
(4) A career advancement model that is more competitive
with the private sector and that recognizes both Government
and private sector experience.
(5) Appropriate consideration and alignment with the needs
and priorities of the Infrastructure and Common Application
Collaboration Center, the Assisted Acquisition Centers of
Excellence, and acquisition intern programs.
(c) Combination With Other Cadres Plan.--The Director may
combine the plan required by subsection (a) with the IT
Acquisition Cadres Strategic Plan required under section
1704(j) of title 41, United States Code, as added by section
411.
SEC. 413. PERSONNEL AWARDS FOR EXCELLENCE IN THE ACQUISITION
OF INFORMATION SYSTEMS AND INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY.
(a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Director of the Office of
Personnel Management shall develop policy and guidance for
agencies to develop a program to recognize excellent
performance by Federal Government employees and teams of such
employees in the acquisition of information systems and
information technology for the agency.
(b) Elements.--The program referred to in subsection (a)
shall, to the extent practicable--
(1) obtain objective outcome measures; and
(2) include procedures for--
(A) the nomination of Federal Government employees and
teams of such employees for eligibility for recognition under
the program; and
(B) the evaluation of nominations for recognition under the
program by 1 or more agency panels of individuals from
Government, academia, and the private sector who have such
expertise, and are appointed in such a manner, as the
Director of the Office of Personal Management shall establish
for purposes of the program.
(c) Award of Cash Bonuses and Other Incentives.--In
carrying out the program referred to in subsection (a), the
Director of the Office of Personnel Management, in
consultation with the Director of the Office of Management
and Budget, shall establish policies and guidance for
agencies to reward any Federal Government employee or teams
of such employees recognized pursuant to the program--
(1) with a cash bonus, to the extent that the performance
of such individual or team warrants the award of such bonus
and is authorized by any provision of law;
(2) through promotions and other nonmonetary awards;
(3) by publicizing--
(A) acquisition accomplishments by individual employees;
and
(B) the tangible end benefits that resulted from such
accomplishments, as appropriate; and
(4) through other awards, incentives, or bonuses that the
head of the agency considers appropriate.
TITLE V--ADDITIONAL REFORMS
SEC. 501. MAXIMIZING THE BENEFIT OF THE FEDERAL STRATEGIC
SOURCING INITIATIVE.
Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Administrator for Federal Procurement Policy
shall prescribe regulations providing that when the Federal
Government makes a purchase of services and supplies offered
under the Federal Strategic Sourcing Initiative (managed by
the Office of Federal Procurement Policy) but such Initiative
is not used, the contract file for the purchase shall include
a brief analysis of the comparative value, including price
and nonprice factors, between the services and supplies
offered under such Initiative and services and supplies
offered under the source or sources used for the purchase.
SEC. 502. GOVERNMENTWIDE SOFTWARE PURCHASING PROGRAM.
(a) In General.--The Administrator of General Services, in
collaboration with the Department of Defense, shall identify
and develop a strategic sourcing initiative to enhance
Governmentwide acquisition, shared use, and dissemination of
software, as well as compliance with end user license
agreements.
(b) Examination of Methods.--In developing the initiative
under subsection (a), the Administrator shall examine the use
of realistic and effective demand aggregation models
supported by actual agency commitment to use the models, and
supplier relationship management practices, to more
effectively govern the Government's acquisition of
information technology.
(c) Governmentwide User License Agreement.--The
Administrator, in developing the initiative under subsection
(a), shall allow for the purchase of a license agreement that
is available for use by all executive agencies as one user to
the maximum extent practicable and as appropriate.
SEC. 503. PROMOTING TRANSPARENCY OF BLANKET PURCHASE
AGREEMENTS.
(a) Price Information to Be Treated as Public
Information.--The final negotiated price offered by an
awardee of a blanket purchase agreement shall be treated as
public information.
(b) Publication of Blanket Purchase Agreement
Information.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Administrator of General Services
shall make available to the public a list of all blanket
purchase agreements entered into by Federal agencies under
its Federal Supply Schedules contracts and the prices
associated with those blanket purchase agreements. The list
and price information shall be updated at least once every 6
months.
SEC. 504. ADDITIONAL SOURCE SELECTION TECHNIQUE IN
SOLICITATIONS.
Section 3306(d) of title 41, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) by striking ``or'' at the end of paragraph (1);
(2) by striking the period and inserting ``; or'' at the
end of paragraph (2); and
(3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(3) stating in the solicitation that the award will be
made using a fixed price technical competition, under which
all offerors compete solely on nonprice factors and the fixed
award price is pre-announced in the solicitation.''.
SEC. 505. ENHANCED TRANSPARENCY IN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
INVESTMENTS.
(a) Public Availability of Information About IT
Investments.--Section 11302(c) of title 40, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (3); and
[[Page H1898]]
(2) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new
paragraph:
``(2) Public availability.--
``(A) In general.--The Director shall make available to the
public the cost, schedule, and performance data for all of
the IT investments listed in subparagraph (B),
notwithstanding whether the investments are for new IT
acquisitions or for operations and maintenance of existing
IT.
``(B) Investments listed.--The investments listed in this
subparagraph are the following:
``(i) At least 80 percent (by dollar value) of all
information technology investments Governmentwide.
``(ii) At least 60 percent (by dollar value) of all
information technology investments in each Federal agency
listed in section 901(b) of title 31.
``(iii) Every major information technology investment (as
defined by the Office of Management and Budget) in each
Federal agency listed in section 901(b) of title 31.
``(C) Quarterly review and certification.--For each
investment listed in subparagraph (B), the agency Chief
Information Officer and the program manager of the investment
within the agency shall certify, at least once every quarter,
that the information is current, accurate, and reflects the
risks associated with each listed investment. The Director
shall conduct quarterly reviews and publicly identify
agencies with an incomplete certification or with significant
data quality issues.
``(D) Continuous availability.--The information required
under subparagraph (A), in its most updated form, shall be
publicly available at all times.
``(E) Waiver or limitation authority.--The applicability of
subparagraph (A) may be waived or the extent of the
information may be limited--
``(i) by the Director, with respect to IT investments
Governmentwide; and
``(ii) by the Chief Information Officer of a Federal
agency, with respect to IT investments in that agency;
if the Director or the Chief Information Officer, as the case
may be, determines that such a waiver or limitation is in the
national security interests of the United States.''.
(b) Additional Report Requirements.--Paragraph (3) of
section 11302(c) of such title, as redesignated by subsection
(a), is amended by adding at the end the following: ``The
report shall include an analysis of agency trends reflected
in the performance risk information required in paragraph
(2).''.
SEC. 506. ENHANCED COMMUNICATION BETWEEN GOVERNMENT AND
INDUSTRY.
Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council shall
prescribe a regulation making clear that agency acquisition
personnel are permitted and encouraged to engage in
responsible and constructive exchanges with industry, so long
as those exchanges are consistent with existing law and
regulation and do not promote an unfair competitive advantage
to particular firms.
SEC. 507. CLARIFICATION OF CURRENT LAW WITH RESPECT TO
TECHNOLOGY NEUTRALITY IN ACQUISITION OF
SOFTWARE.
(a) Purpose.--The purpose of this section is to establish
guidance and processes to clarify that software acquisitions
by the Federal Government are to be made using merit-based
requirements development and evaluation processes that
promote procurement choices--
(1) based on performance and value, including the long-term
value proposition to the Federal Government;
(2) free of preconceived preferences based on how
technology is developed, licensed, or distributed; and
(3) generally including the consideration of proprietary,
open source, and mixed source software technologies.
(b) Technology Neutrality.--Nothing in this section shall
be construed to modify the Federal Government's long-standing
policy of following technology-neutral principles and
practices when selecting and acquiring information technology
that best fits the needs of the Federal Government.
(c) Guidance.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Director, in consultation with
the Chief Information Officers Council, shall issue guidance
concerning the technology-neutral procurement and use of
software within the Federal Government.
(d) Matters Covered.--In issuing guidance under subsection
(c), the Director shall include, at a minimum, the following:
(1) Guidance to clarify that the preference for commercial
items in section 3307 of title 41, United States Code,
includes proprietary, open source, and mixed source software
that meets the definition of the term ``commercial item'' in
section 103 of title 41, United States Code, including all
such software that is used for non-Government purposes and is
licensed to the public.
(2) Guidance regarding the conduct of market research to
ensure the inclusion of proprietary, open source, and mixed
source software options.
(3) Guidance to define Governmentwide standards for
security, redistribution, indemnity, and copyright in the
acquisition, use, release, and collaborative development of
proprietary, open source, and mixed source software.
(4) Guidance for the adoption of available commercial
practices to acquire proprietary, open source, and mixed
source software for widespread Government use, including
issues such as security and redistribution rights.
(5) Guidance to establish standard service level agreements
for maintenance and support for proprietary, open source, and
mixed source software products widely adopted by the
Government, as well as the development of Governmentwide
agreements that contain standard and widely applicable
contract provisions for ongoing maintenance and development
of software.
(6) Guidance on the role and use of the Federal
Infrastructure and Common Application Collaboration Center,
authorized under section 11501 of title 40, United States
Code (as added by section 401), for acquisition of
proprietary, open source, and mixed source software.
(e) Report to Congress.--Not later than 2 years after the
issuance of the guidance required by subsection (b), the
Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to the
relevant congressional committees a report containing--
(1) an assessment of the effectiveness of the guidance;
(2) an identification of barriers to widespread use by the
Federal Government of specific software technologies; and
(3) such legislative recommendations as the Comptroller
General considers appropriate to further the purposes of this
section.
SEC. 508. NO ADDITIONAL FUNDS AUTHORIZED.
Except as provided in section 11501(i) of title 40, United
States Code, as added by section 401, no additional funds are
authorized to carry out the requirements of this Act and the
amendments made by this Act. Such requirements shall be
carried out using amounts otherwise authorized or
appropriated.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
California (Mr. Issa) and the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
General Leave
Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks
and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
This bill, the Federal IT Acquisition Reform Act, or FITARA, is a
slightly modified version of the one that left committee. It was
changed only with my cosponsor's concurrence in order to make it more
likely to easily pass both bodies. This is, in fact, substantially the
same bill, as amended, as the full House voted last year to incorporate
in the House version of the defense authorization bill.
H.R. 1232 reforms governmentwide the process by which the government
annually acquires and employs, roughly, $81 billion of Federal
information technology. To quote President Obama on November 14, 2013:
``One of the things the Federal Government does not do well is
information technology procurement.''
Now, that was profound because, in the fifth year of his Presidency,
it is very clear that the President has realized that this is a
monumental task, one inherited by him, not one created by him.
There are systematic problems in the way that we procure IT,
including the nature of the history of individuals at all levels
thinking they can buy something, and often they can, but too often our
committee sees and reviews billion-dollar writeoffs of IT programs in
which you cannot find out who was in charge, in which you cannot find
out how they went on so long, and the hardest thing to find out is why
they don't work at the end of $1 billion worth of ``in and out'' of
House production. Indeed, industry experts estimate that as much as 25
percent of the over $80 billion annual expenditure is mismanaged or is
attributable to duplicative investments or simply doesn't come to be
used.
We need to enhance the best value to the taxpayer. More importantly,
good software saves billions of dollars and countless lives and
countless hours if it works. Bad or poorly done software can frustrate
the American public and can often deprive them of the very product or
service that they expect to receive.
When this bill was originally envisioned, written, and passed out of
our committee, no one had heard of the healthcare.gov Web site. Our
committee, in fact, had looked at countless other failures within the
IT procurement community, including ones at the
[[Page H1899]]
Department of Defense and others, including ones that occurred under
previous Presidents. We had determined, along with Mr. Connolly, that
there were a number of areas in which we needed to make fundamental
change. So, although the American people can certainly see the launch
of healthcare.gov as a poster child for not done on time, not, perhaps,
done on a budget that we would be proud of and certainly something for
which you could not find the responsible parties, even when you called
them before your committee, let us make this clear: this bill is not
about one failure. It is about a governmentwide, longstanding failure
that predates this administration.
Among the things that FITARA will do is to create a clear line of
responsibility, authority, and accountability over IT investment and
management decisions by empowering agency CIOs; creating an operational
framework to dramatically enhance the government's ability to procure
commonly used IT faster, cheaper, and smarter; and strengthening the IT
acquisition workforce. I want to reiterate this, that this is the
Federal IT acquisition force. There can be no better investment than to
make sure the people whom you trust the most for procuring IT, both
from a standpoint of functionality and security, be a well-trained
workforce, which is part of what we want to make sure we have.
FITARA accelerates and consolidates and optimizes the organization of
government's proliferating data centers, something that my colleague
from Virginia has worked on tirelessly. It increases the transparency
of IT investment scorecards by requiring 80 percent of governmentwide
IT spending to be covered by public Web sites called ``IT dashboards,''
and it ensures procurement decisions give due consideration to all
technologies, including open source. I might note that for the $677
million that initially was spent on healthcare.gov, some of the areas
in which the code worked was proven open source technology that was
made available.
The discussion draft of this bill was first posted by our committee
on its Web site 18 months ago. We held two full committee hearings on
the bill, and the language that has evolved through the course of
several rewrites and extensive feedback by the contracting and
technology communities and experts inside and outside of the government
has given us the legislation you see before you today. This is a
significant and timely reform that enhances both defense and nondefense
procurement, and I urge all Members to support the bill.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act, FITARA,
would make a number of improvements to the management and the
acquisition of IT systems in the Federal Government. I think if we were
to summarize what this bill does we would have to use the words
``effective'' and ``efficient.'' We would have to use them over and
over again, and we would also say that we are going to do better.
It would enhance the authority of the Federal Chief Information
Officers, require agencies to optimize the functioning of Federal data
centers, eliminate duplicative IT acquisition practices, and strengthen
the Federal IT acquisition workforce. These reforms are needed to
ensure that the Federal Government makes effective and efficient
investments in information technology.
I want to commend Representative Issa, the chairman of the Oversight
and Government Reform Committee, for the bipartisan approach to this
legislation. We had two full committee hearings on the concepts of this
bill. The draft of the bill was made available for comment prior to the
committee's considering it, and we really do appreciate that.
I also want to recognize Representative Gerald Connolly, the ranking
member of the Government Operations Subcommittee, for his critical work
on drafting this legislation on technology issues generally. He has
made himself an expert in this area, and we are the beneficiaries of
that expertise. A significant portion of the legislation before us is
based on Ranking Member Connolly's own bill to consolidate Federal data
centers.
Last year, the GAO issued its most recent high-risk report, which
lists several IT projects as being among the Federal Government's
highest-risk investments. For instance, a contract to streamline the
Army's inventory of weapons systems is more than 12 years behind
schedule and is almost $4 billion over budget. Effective oversight is
one of the best weapons against this kind of wasteful spending.
Congress has a duty to conduct oversight as well as the obligation to
give agencies the tools they need to conduct their own oversight and
improve their processes.
Agencies need more well-trained acquisition management professionals
to effectively oversee complex systems acquisitions and to ensure that
the government is a smart and diligent consumer. If you do not have the
people who have the expertise who are doing the acquisitions, you often
run into major problems. As has often been said, there is nothing like
not knowing what you don't know. The Federal IT Acquisition Reform Act
addresses this need by requiring OMB to submit a 5-year plan to
develop, strengthen, and solidify IT acquisition cadres.
I understand that the administration has some concerns with this
legislation we are considering today, so it is my hope that we can
address those concerns as the bill moves forward in the legislative
process.
Again, I want to thank Chairman Issa for all of his hard work and Mr.
Connolly for all of his. I urge all of my colleagues to support this
legislation.
With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I now yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Utah (Mr. Chaffetz), a man who has worked diligently on the
subcommittee to ensure that national security includes Internet
security.
Mr. CHAFFETZ. I thank the chairman for his good work on this. Without
Chairman Issa's leadership on this issue, we would not have this bill
here today. I appreciate his work and dedication and passion on this
issue. I appreciate Mr. Cummings. I also appreciate Mr. Connolly and
the good work he does on this topic.
Mr. Speaker, I hope what people see here is a bipartisan approach to
something that is a very large problem. There is a great imperative
that we deal with this and deal with it right away. The Federal
Government spent more than $600 billion over the past decade on
information technology, and we spend, roughly, $80 billion a year just
on IT. It is a critical component to making sure that we do have an
effective and responsive government.
Now, of the $80 billion or so that is spent each year, about one-
third is spent on new procurement projects, and about two-thirds is
spent on the operation and maintenance of existing or obsolete systems.
It takes so much more energy and personnel to go through obsolete
systems than it does to quickly replace with software and hardware and
personnel new information technology systems that will make our
government more responsive and more effective. There is nothing more
frustrating than trying to work with an operating system that is no
longer supported by the company that even makes the operating system.
We have heard horror stories of people working on DOS operating
systems. They are still looking at green screens, for goodness sakes.
This is an imperative, and we have to make sure it is prioritized.
{time} 1530
Some industry experts have estimated that as much as 70 percent of
new IT acquisitions fail or require re-baselining. The Technology CEO
Council, made up of top industry experts, estimates that $20 billion of
the $80 billion we spend is wasted every year on mismanaged and
duplicative IT programs.
The GAO has estimated that the Departments of Treasury, Agriculture,
Energy, and State spend well over 80 percent of their IT budgets on
operations and maintenance of potentially obsolete systems.
We can do better on this. We are united in a bipartisan way. I
encourage my colleagues to pass this bill.
Again, Mr. Speaker, I appreciate Chairman Issa and his leadership on
this issue, and I urge a ``yes'' vote on this bill.
Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Connolly), a man who has
[[Page H1900]]
worked very hard on this legislation with Chairman Issa.
Mr. CONNOLLY. I thank my good friend and our distinguished ranking
member of the committee, Mr. Cummings, for his graciousness and
generosity. He has been a great leader and a great mentor in our
committee. I also thank the distinguished chairman, Mr. Issa, for his
leadership on this legislation. I have been proud to cosponsor and
coauthor this bill with him.
In the 21st century, Mr. Speaker, effective governance is
inextricably linked with how well government leverages technology to
serve its citizens. Yet our current Federal laws governing IT
management and procurement are antiquated and out of step with
technological change and growth and yield poor results.
Far too often, cumbersome bureaucracy stifles innovation and prevents
government from efficiently buying and deploying cutting-edge
technology. Program failure and cost overruns plague the vast majority
of major Federal IT investments.
As the distinguished chairman indicated, if only the rollout of the
health care Web site were a unique incident. Unfortunately, it actually
characterizes most major Federal IT procurement rollouts.
Some Federal managers report as much as 47 percent of their budgets
are spent on maintaining inadequate or antiquated IT platforms. That is
47 percent.
In recent decades, taxpayers have been forced to foot the bill for
massive IT program failures that ring up staggeringly high costs but
exhibit astonishingly poor performance. For example, the Air Force
invested 6 years in a modernization effort that cost more than $1
billion but failed to deliver a usable product, prompting the Assistant
Secretary to state:
I am personally appalled at the limited capabilities that
program has produced relative to that amount of investment.
This status quo is neither acceptable nor sustainable.
Again, I want to thank Chairman Issa for working with me in a
productive manner to develop the bipartisan Issa-Connolly Federal
Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act, or FITARA. This
bipartisan legislation seeks to comprehensively streamline and
strengthen the Federal IT acquisition process and promote the adoption
of the best practices from the technology community.
The reform measure before us recognizes that effective Federal IT
procurement reform must start with leadership and accountability. It is
absolutely essential that a department's top leadership understands how
critical effective IT investments are to an agency's operations and
ability to carry out its future mission.
We must elevate and enhance the prestige and, more importantly, the
authorities of CIOs across the Federal Government to hold them
accountable and to give them the flexibility to effectively manage an
agency's IT portfolio. Agency heads need talented leaders to serve as
their primary advisers on IT management; to recruit and retain talented
IT staff, as the distinguished chairman has indicated; and to oversee
critical IT investments across the organization. Title I of our
legislation would accomplish this while also avoiding one-size-fits-all
solutions by allowing agencies significant discretion in implementing
the various aspects of this new law.
Our bill would also accelerate data center optimization, as the
distinguished ranking member indicated, and provide agencies with
flexibility to leverage efficient cloud services and strengthen the
accountability and transparency of Federal IT programs.
If enacted, 80 percent of the approximately $80 billion spent
annually on Federal IT investment would be required to be posted on the
public IT Dashboard, compared to the 50 percent or less that
characterizes that activity today.
Strengthening the transparency requirements is an urgent and much-
needed reform in light of the most recent January 2014 GAO report that
revealed the IT Dashboard has not been updated for 15 of the last 24
months. This finding is as astonishing as it is unacceptable.
Fortunately, a bipartisan consensus is forming around the urgent need
to further streamline and strengthen how the Federal Government
acquires and deploys information technology. President Obama has
embraced Federal IT procurement reform, and a number of agencies are
already taking a lead in the area.
Now is the time, Mr. Speaker, to ensure reforms are adopted
governmentwide and carry the force of reform law. I urge all of my
colleagues to join us in this bipartisan effort in supporting this
important and urgently needed reform.
In the 21st century, effective governance is inextricably linked with
how well government leverages technology to serve its citizens.
Yet, our current Federal laws governing Federal IT management remain
out of step with technological change and growth, with bureaucracy
stifling innovation and preventing government from efficiently buying
and deploying cutting edge technology.
Simply put, today Federal IT acquisition is often a cumbersome,
bureaucratic, and wasteful exercise--characterized by a Federal
Government that has no idea what technology it needs, struggles to
manage what it has, and consequently wastes billions of taxpayer
dollars on failed IT investments.
In recent decades, taxpayers have been forced to foot the bill for
massive IT program failures that ring up staggeringly high costs, but
exhibit astonishingly poor performance.
Program failure and cost overruns still plague the vast majority of
major Federal IT investments, while Federal managers' report that 47
percent of their budget is spent on maintaining antiquated and
inadequate IT platforms.
The annual price tag of this wasteful spending on Federal IT programs
is estimated to add up to approximately $20 billion.
The Air Force invested six years in a modernization effort that cost
more than $1 billion, but failed to deliver a usable product, prompting
its Assistant Secretary to state, quote ``I am personally appalled at
the limited capabilities that program has produced relative to that
amount of investment.''
Of course, failing mission-critical IT investments do not only waste
taxpayer dollars, but they jeopardize our Nation's safety, security,
and economy.
From malfunctioning Census handheld computers that threatened to
undermine a critical constitutional responsibility . . . to a promised
electronic border fence that never materialized . . . time and time
again, agency missions have been sabotaged by failed IT acquisitions
and gross mismanagement.
This status quo is unacceptable and unsustainable.
The question facing us today is how can we modernize an IT
procurement process designed for the 20th Century to meet the growing
technology demands of the 21st?
There are no quick fixes or legislative silver bullets. However, I
strongly believe that if Congress can limit partisan posturing, we may
finally have an opportunity to address the core problem at the heart of
the HealthCare.gov challenge--our Nation's broken Federal IT
procurement system.
I want to thank Chairman Issa for working with me in a productive
manner to develop the bipartisan Issa-Connolly Federal Information
Technology Acquisition Reform Act, also known as FITARA.
Our bipartisan legislation seeks to comprehensively streamline and
strengthen the Federal IT acquisition process and promote the adoption
of best practices from the technology community.
We have solicited extensive input from all stakeholders to refine and
improve our bill in an open and transparent manner.
The resulting Issa-Connolly reform measure recognizes that effective
Federal IT procurement reform must start with leadership and
accountability.
It is absolutely vital that a Department's top leadership understands
how critical effective IT investments are to an agency's operations and
ability to carry out its mission.
After reviewing the findings of extensive oversight reviews, and
feedback from those in the trenches, I believe we must elevate and
enhance the prestige, and more importantly, the authorities, of CIOs
across the Federal Government to hold them accountable for effectively
managing an agency's IT portfolio.
Agency heads must have talented leaders to serve as primary advisors
on IT management . . . recruit and retain talented IT staff . . . and
oversee critical IT investments.
Title I of FITARA would accomplish this, while also avoiding ``one-
size-fits-all'' solutions by allowing agencies significant discretion
in implementing the law.
In many respects, FITARA simply provides the force of law behind the
August 2011 memorandum authored by then-OMB Director Jacob Lew, which
announced that the Administration was committed to, quote:
``changing the role of Agency Chief Information Officers
away from just policymaking and infrastructure maintenance,
to encompass true portfolio management for all IT.
This will enable CIOs to focus on delivering IT solutions
that support the mission and
[[Page H1901]]
business effectiveness of their agencies and overcome
bureaucratic impediments to deliver enterprise-wide
solutions.''
More than two years has passed since that policy memorandum was
distributed to agencies, and it has become clear that efforts to reform
IT through Administrative actions alone will not suffice.
In fact, if one takes the time to analyze FITARA vis-a-vis existing
Administration IT initiatives, one will find that our bipartisan bill
is consistent with, and seeks to build on, the nascent Federal IT
initiatives that have emerged over the past five years, including those
in the 25 Point Plan.
For example, the Issa-Connolly FITARA would enhance the CIO Council's
role, tasking it with leading enterprise-wide portfolio management, and
coordinating shared services and shared platforms across government.
This bipartisan bill would also empower agencies to eliminate
duplicative and wasteful IT contracts that have proliferated for
commonly-used, IT Commodity-like investments, such as e-mail.
In this era of austerity, agencies cannot afford to spend precious
dollars and time creating duplicative, wasteful contracts for products
and licenses they already own. In addition to improving how the
government procures IT, this amendment would also enhance how the
government deploys these tools.
Our bill would accelerate data center optimization, provide agencies
with flexibility to leverage efficient cloud services, and strengthen
the accountability and transparency of Federal IT programs.
If enacted, 80 percent of the approximately $80 billion annual
Federal IT investment would be required to be posted on the public IT
Dashboard, compared to the 50 percent coverage that exists today.
Strengthening the transparency requirements of the IT Dashboard is an
urgent and much needed reform in light of the recent January 2014 GAO
report that revealed the IT Dashboard has not been updated for 15 of
the past 24 months! This finding was as astonishing as it was
unacceptable.
The IT Dashboard was launched in 2009 with great fanfare, and to this
day, OMB continues to claim that, quote ``The IT Dashboard gives the
public access to the same tools and analysis that the government uses
to oversee the performance of the Federal IT investments.''
Clearly providing the public with accurate and updated Federal IT
investment performance data for only 9 months out of a 2-year period
fails to give average citizens access to the same analysis used by
agencies.
It certainly undermines OMB's claim that the IT Dashboard was
launched to, quote shine ``light onto the performance and spending of
IT investments,'' by ensuring that the public has access to data
indicating not only whether a project is over budget or behind
schedule, but providing specific dollars figures and dates.
Consistent with the principle that public contracts are public
documents, our amendment also strengthens transparency in regard to the
final negotiated price a company charges a Federal agency for a good or
service.
Today, far too many agencies negotiate blanket purchase agreements in
silos, without any knowledge that another agency has already negotiated
a BPA with the same exact vendor, for the same exact product, but at a
different price.
Nearly two decades has passed since the Information Technology
Management Reform Act and the Federal Acquisition Reform Act were
enacted through the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
1996--reforms that are better known today as the foundational
``Clinger-Cohen Act.''
Fortunately, a bipartisan consensus is finally forming around the
urgent need to further streamline and strengthen how the Federal
Government acquires and deploys IT. President Obama has embraced
Federal IT procurement reform and several agencies are already taking
the lead in this area.
Now is the time to ensure reforms are adopted government-wide and
carry the force of law.
The bipartisan Issa-Connolly Federal IT Acquisition Reform Act will
enhance the statutory framework established by Clinger-Cohen to create
an efficient and effective Federal IT procurement system that best
serves agencies, industry, and most importantly, the American taxpayer.
I urge all my colleagues to join me in supporting this important and
urgently needed bipartisan reform measure.
IT Alliance for Public Sector,
Washington, DC, February 25, 2014.
Re H.R. 1232, the Federal Information Technology Acquisition
Reform Act (FITARA)
Hon. Darrell Issa,
Chairman, House Oversight & Government Reform, Washington,
DC.
Hon. Gerry Connolly,
House Oversight & Government Reform, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Issa and Representative Connolly: On behalf
of the Information Technology Alliance for Public Sector (IT
Alliance), I would like to thank you for your continued
engagement with industry regarding the Federal Information
Technology Acquisition Reform Act (FITARA). We believe that
these discussions have led to many improvements to the
legislation over the past year. We look forward to continuing
this dialogue as the bill advances to the Senate.
The IT Alliance recognizes the importance of revisiting and
revising federal information technology management and
related acquisition processes, and we appreciate the outreach
efforts of the bill's cosponsors and their staffs. We greatly
appreciate the additional changes recently made to the bill
that include the clarification of applicability to the
Department of Defense regarding CIO authorities, the added
``optional-use'' text around the Acquisition Centers of
Excellence, and the removal of the term ``low-cost'' from the
bill. While we still hold some reservations regarding the
Federal Infrastructure and Common Application Collaboration
Center, we believe making the program into a pilot allows
agencies more flexibility. Additionally, we continue to
support many of the provisions and authorities in the bill:
Enhanced Authorities for the Civilian Chief Information
Officers (CIOs)--The IT Alliance supports enhanced authority
for ClOs, including consolidation of the position to improve
management of IT investment decisions, reduce redundancy, and
drive efficiency across the entire department. ARWG further
supports provisions establishing direct executive agency
personnel engagement in the IT investment strategy for the
agency.
Multi-Year Revolving Funds for IT Investment--The IT
Alliance strongly supports the funding availability for
agencies wishing to transition to the cloud. We see this as a
significant improvement that will allow the government
acquisition of technology to keep pace with innovation, and
to provide more flexibility in budget models than currently
exists. We further believe this flexibility should be
extended to all IT investments.
Transition to the Cloud--The IT Alliance supports the
provisions that promote the government's transition to a
cloud services environment. Industry has emphasized the need
for government to utilize the most innovative advancements in
information technology to increase efficiency and reduce
costs, and transitioning to the cloud will provide the
government with more reliable, more affordable and more
flexible access to IT infrastructure than currently exists.
Data Center Optimization--The IT Alliance supports
provisions that seek to create effective data center
optimization plans. These plans would establish metrics for
optimizing data center usage and drive efficiencies in their
utilization, while also encouraging the wider use of
commercial data centers and commercial cloud services. The
bill seeks to eliminate non-optimized data centers, and,
subject to appropriations, use the savings achieved to
promote other IT capabilities and services throughout the
agency involved.
Strengthening the IT Acquisition Workforce--The IT Alliance
is also very supportive of provisions that enhance the IT
acquisition workforce's capabilities. These provisions,
particularly regarding the development of a career path for
IT program management, represent a first step to meaningful
improvements in the management of IT investments.
Enhanced Communication with Industry--ARWG supports the
provisions that encourage a more robust dialogue between
industry and government. This promotes federal acquisition
personnel having responsible and constructive dialogues with
industry and we could not encourage this point more.
Thank you again for your dedication to improving the way
the federal government procures information technologies, and
for recognizing the need for management, workforce, and
technical solutions. We look forward to continuing to work
with you and your colleagues as it advances to the Senate to
further improve this important bill. Should you have any
questions, please feel free to contact Erica McCann of the
ITAPS staff if we can be of further assistance.
Respectfully submitted,
A.R. ``Trey'' Hodgkins III,
Senior Vice President, Public Sector.
Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, can I inquire as to how much time remains?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California has 12 minutes
[[Page H1902]]
remaining. The gentleman from Maryland has 11\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes.
My partners in this are sitting on the other side of the aisle. But
this committee has come together to look at a problem as simple as
chief information officer doesn't mean ``chief.'' It is simply a hollow
title.
This bill, more than anything else to the American people, means that
for every piece of major IT procurement, there will be a chief
information officer; and that CIO will have budget authority and be
held accountable, but also be given the ability to make those
decisions, including pulling the ``stop'' button on a bad piece of
legislation.
So the title of CIO and CTO and some of the other titles need to mean
something. Our committee unanimously believes that if you are to be a
chief, you have to be able to tell the Indians what to do. You can't be
a chief in name only, and when something doesn't work, find yourself
without the ability to call ``halt,'' to go directly to the agency head
or do the other things we would expect the title ``chief'' to mean.
So, for that reason, I believe it has united a committee behind
something that must pass today, go to the Senate and be taken up and
become law, if we are going to begin regaining the American people's
confidence in our ability to procure large information systems.
With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I agree with Chairman Issa. If we are going to have a
chief information officer, they need to be what we say they are. They
need to have the power to effect change when change is appropriate.
They have to have the power to make sure decisions are made to carry
out the issues that come up with IT in an effective and efficient
manner. I think this legislation is a giant step in the right
direction.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I would hope and ask all Members of Congress
to vote in favor of this legislation. As I often say, we can always do
better. I think that this is one of those times when, through a
bipartisan effort, we are making a major statement that we are going to
do better.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
In closing, first, I urge all Members to vote on this important
legislation to send a strong message that this is a do-something
Congress when it comes to problems that have been around for a very
long time.
Secondly, I would like to take a moment, in a bit of personal
privilege, to say to the American workforce that work for the Federal
Government that, in every investigation by our committee, we have found
in every failed project there were legions of good Federal employees
who recognized the problem, sent letters, and who tried to have a
program that was not going right to go right or go better.
It is not for lack of many, many in the Federal workforce who are
doing their job as best they can. It is for lack of a consolidated and
predictable chain of command. It is for lack of the ability to have
somebody know they are in charge, bear the full weight, and be
qualified.
I have no doubt that, upon enactment of this law, the Federal
workforce will begin to breathe a breath of fresh air to know that they
are being empowered to do the work they so desperately want to do, and
that the tools are going to be added for them and the titles will
become a title earned and then used wisely.
Seldom do we spend a lot of time on the House floor talking about how
great the Federal workforce is. We are talking about monumental
failures. Let's understand that it is not for lack of good programmers,
it is not for lack of good contractors, and it is not for lack of well-
meaning and dedicated Federal workers that we come today. It is for the
need to organize them in a way in which we believe they can be
successful. And that is the other part of our committee. We are the
Committee on Government and Oversight Reform, and today is a structural
reform in how we purchase information technology.
For that, I want to thank my partners on the other side of the aisle
because we have been right next to each other on this all the way. I
particularly thank Mr. Connolly, who has put his staff and his own
personal time into every aspect of this, and who also added his earlier
legislation that allows us to bring about the necessary consolidation
of duplicative centers spread around the country. They are simply a
waste of energy and a waste of software power.
So I see this as a win-win, one in which Republicans and Democrats
have come together in a Congress that does not have a great reputation
but, on occasion, does great things.
I urge support for this, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1232 because it
begins to fix a broken procurement system that has been on the GAO's
``high-risk'' list since the early 1990's.
Federal IT procurement has been a black hole of taxpayer dollars long
before the deeply flawed rollout of Healthcare.gov. During my service
on the House Intelligence Committee from 2003 to 2011, there were
billions of dollars spent on IT projects that failed, without a shred
of work product recoverable for the taxpayer.
H.R. 1232 will go a long way toward addressing these problems by
empowering agency CIOs and developing new IT acquisition guidelines and
best practices. This bill is a strong start but I think there's more
that can be done.
Congressman Connolly and I have worked together to draft
complementary legislation to FITARA, called the Reforming Federal
Procurement of Information Technology Act. Our bill would create a new,
high-level office of IT experts in the White House charged with
reviewing major federal IT projects before they get off track.
Our bill would also make it easier for small, innovative businesses
to compete for federal projects by simplifying the contracting process.
The Federal Acquisition Regulation is 1,900 pages long, and some
agencies have a supplement that's an additional 1,000 pages. This
rewards incumbent companies familiar with the rules and prevents open
competition and innovation among vendors.
I applaud Congressmen Issa and Connolly for working together on this
important legislation, and I urge my colleagues to support it.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. Issa) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 1232, as amended
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________