Electronic Government: Initiatives Sponsored by the Office of	 
Management and Budget Have Made Mixed Progress (24-MAR-04,	 
GAO-04-561T).							 
                                                                 
One of the five priorities in the President's Management Agenda  
is the expansion of electronic (e-) government--the use of	 
Internet applications to enhance access to and delivery of	 
government information and services. To this end, the Office of  
Management and Budget (OMB) has sponsored 25 high-profile	 
e-government initiatives. The initiatives were selected on the	 
basis of value to citizens, potential improvement in agency	 
efficiency, and the likelihood of being deployed within 18 to 24 
months. In May 2002, a total of 91 objectives were set for these 
initiatives. At the request of Congress, GAO assessed the	 
progress of the initiatives in addressing these 91 objectives as 
well as key challenges they have faced. 			 
-------------------------Indexing Terms------------------------- 
REPORTNUM:   GAO-04-561T					        
    ACCNO:   A09584						        
  TITLE:     Electronic Government: Initiatives Sponsored by the      
Office of Management and Budget Have Made Mixed Progress	 
     DATE:   03/24/2004 
  SUBJECT:   Electronic government				 
	     Productivity in government 			 
	     Program management 				 
	     Strategic planning 				 
	     Internet						 
	     Performance measures				 
	     Government information dissemination		 

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO Product.                                                 **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
******************************************************************
GAO-04-561T

United States General Accounting Office

GAO Testimony

Before the Subcommittee on Technology, Information Policy,
Intergovernmental Relations and the Census, Committee on Government
Reform, House of Representatives

For Release on Delivery Expected at 2:30 p.m. EST on Wednesday March 24,
2004

ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT

  Initiatives Sponsored by the Office of Management and Budget Have Made Mixed
                                    Progress

Statement of Linda D. Koontz
Director, Information Management Issues

GAO-04-561T

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without further permission from GAO. However, because this
work may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this material
separately.

Highlights of GAO-04-561T, a testimony before the Subcommittee on
Technology, Information Policy, Intergovernmental Relations and the
Census, Committee on Government Reform, House of Representatives

One of the five priorities in the President's Management Agenda is the
expansion of electronic (e-) government-the use of Internet applications
to enhance access to and delivery of government information and services.
To this end, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has sponsored 25
high-profile e-government initiatives. The initiatives were selected on
the basis of value to citizens, potential improvement in agency
efficiency, and the likelihood of being deployed within 18 to 24 months.
In May 2002, a total of 91 objectives were set for these initiatives. At
the request of the Subcommittee, GAO assessed the progress of the
initiatives in addressing these 91 objectives as well as key challenges
they have faced.

March 2004

ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT

Initiatives Sponsored by the Office of Management and Budget Have Made Mixed
Progress

Overall, mixed progress has been made in achieving the 91 objectives
originally defined for the 25 OMB-sponsored e-government initiatives. To
date, 33 have been fully or substantially achieved; 38 have been partially
achieved; and for 17, no significant progress has been made towards these
objectives. In addition, 3 of the objectives no longer apply because they
have been found to be impractical or inappropriate. The figure below
summarizes these results.

Examples of initiatives that have made good progress in achieving their
objectives include Grants.gov, which established a Web portal that, as of
February 2004, allowed prospective grants applicants to find and apply for
a total of 835 grant opportunities at 29 grant-making agencies; and the
Integrated Acquisition Environment, which created a single point of
registration and validation for vendors and a directory of interagency
contracts that currently references 16,000 contracts. A contrasting
example is Project SAFECOM, which has made very limited progress over the
past 2 years, largely because management teams for the project have
changed four times among three different federal agencies.

Given that OMB's stated criteria in choosing these initiatives included
their likelihood of deployment in 18 to 24 months, the substantial number
of objectives that are still unmet or only partially met indicates that
making progress on these initiatives is more challenging than OMB may have
originally anticipated. The extent to which the 25 initiatives have met
their original objectives can be linked to how they have addressed key
challenges, including (1) focusing on achievable objectives that address
customer needs, (2) maintaining management stability through executive
commitment, (3) collaborating effectively with partner agencies and
stakeholders, (4) driving transformational changes in business processes,
and (5) implementing effective funding strategies. Initiatives that have
overcome these challenges have generally met with success in achieving
their objectives, whereas initiatives that have had problems dealing with
these challenges have made less progress.

              Assessed Status of Initiatives' Original Objectives

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-04-561T.

To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on
the link above. For more information, contact Linda D. Koontz at (202)
512-6240 or [email protected].

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:

I appreciate the opportunity to participate in the Subcommittee's hearing
on electronic government (e-government) progress. Generally speaking,
e-government refers to the use of information technology (IT),
particularly Web-based Internet applications, to enhance the access to and
delivery of government information and service to citizens, to business
partners, to employees, and among agencies at all levels of government.

Under the leadership of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), a team
known as the E-Government Task Force identified a set of high-profile
initiatives to lead the federal government's drive toward e-government
transformation. The initiatives were selected on the basis of value to
citizens, potential improvement in agency efficiency, and likelihood of
deploying within 18 to 24 months. These initiatives-now numbering
251-cover a wide spectrum of government activities, ranging from the
establishment of centralized portals on government information to
eliminating redundant, nonintegrated business operations and systems. OMB
has reported that, in some cases, positive results from these initiatives
could produce over one billion dollars in savings from improved
operational efficiency.

As requested, in my remarks today, I will discuss the progress of these
cross-agency e-government projects in meeting their original objectives.
In the initiatives' first formal work plans, submitted to OMB in May 2002,
a total of 91 objectives were laid out. While these objectives vary
widely-from simple, narrowly defined tasks, like developing a business
case (e-Payroll), to broad, long-term goals, like achieving effective
communications interoperability among emergency personnel at all levels of
government (Project SAFECOM)-they serve as a benchmark across all of the
initiatives for measuring progress over the past two years. In my remarks,
I will describe the status of these original 91 objectives and also
discuss major challenges that have affected the initiatives' progress

1 Based on analysis by the E-Government Task Force, 23 initiatives were
originally selected in September 2001. A 24th, e-Payroll, was then added
by the President's Management Council. In 2002, a decision was made to
separate the e-Clearance initiative from the Integrated Human Resources
initiative, resulting in the current count of 25 projects.

in meeting these objectives. To supplement my remarks, I have included an
attachment that provides additional information on the status and progress
of each of the 25 e government projects in meeting their original
objectives.

To address our objective of assessing the initiatives' progress in meeting
their original objectives, we reviewed project management plans,
documentation associated with annual budget submissions, and other related
documents. We also interviewed key project management officials to gain a
complete understanding of project goals, milestones, costs, performance
measures, and implementation challenges. Based on analysis of this
information, we assessed the status of specific project objectives by
comparing achievements as of March 2004 with objectives established in May
2002 to determine whether the reported achievements (1) fully or
substantially meet the stated objectives, (2) partially meet the stated
objectives, or (3) do not contribute significantly or at all to the stated
objectives. In three cases, we determined that addressing the original
objectives would not be feasible or appropriate and thus characterized
these objectives as "no longer applicable." We performed our work from
January 2004 to March 2004 in accordance with generally accepted
government auditing standards.

  Results in Brief

Overall, mixed progress has been made in achieving the 91 objectives
originally defined for the 25 OMB-sponsored e-government initiatives in
their work plans submitted to OMB in May 2002. To date, 33 have been fully
or substantially achieved; 38 have been partially achieved; and for 17, no
significant progress has been made towards these objectives. In addition,
3 of the objectives no longer apply because they have been found to be
impractical or inappropriate. For two of the initiatives-Grants.gov and
Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Free File-all original objectives have been
achieved, and for an additional five,2 the majority of their original
objectives have been achieved. For the other 18 initiatives, most of their
objectives are either partially met or not significantly met. An

2 These initiatives include e-Clearance, e-Payroll, e-Training, e-Travel,
and Integrated Acquisition Environment.

example of an initiative that has made excellent progress in achieving its
original objectives is Grants.gov, which established a Web portal that, as
of February 2004, allowed prospective grants applicants to find and apply
for a total of 835 grant opportunities at 29 grant-making agencies.
Project SAFECOM, on the other hand, has made very limited progress in
addressing its original objectives, which all relate to achieving
communications interoperability among entities at various levels of
government. Given that OMB's stated criteria in choosing these initiatives
included their likelihood of deployment in 18 to 24 months, the
substantial number of objectives that are still unmet or only partially
met indicates that making progress on these initiatives is more
challenging than OMB may have originally anticipated.

The extent to which the 25 initiatives have met their original objectives
can be linked to a common set of challenges that they all face, including
(1) focusing on achievable objectives that address customer needs, (2)
maintaining management stability through executive commitment, (3)
collaborating effectively with partner agencies and stakeholders, (4)
driving transformational changes in business processes, and (5)
implementing effective funding strategies. Initiatives that have overcome
these challenges have generally met with success in achieving their
objectives, whereas initiatives that have had problems dealing with these
challenges have made less progress.

Background

E-government has been seen as promising a wide range of benefits based
largely on harnessing the power of the Internet to facilitate
interconnections and information exchange between citizens and their
government. A variety of actions have been taken in recent years to
enhance the government's ability to realize the potential of e-government,
culminating in the recent enactment of the E-Government Act of 2002,3
which includes provisions addressing everything from funding of
e-government initiatives to measures for ensuring security and privacy. In
addition to the E-Government Act, the President designated e-government as
one of five priorities in his

3 P. L. No. 107-347.

fiscal year 2002 management agenda for making the federal government more
focused on citizens and results. According to the agenda, e-government is
expected to

0M	provide high-quality customer services regardless of whether the
citizen contacts the agency by phone, in person, or on the Web;

0M	reduce the expense and difficulty of doing business with the
government;

0M cut government operating costs;

0M provide citizens with readier access to government services;

0M	increase access for persons with disabilities to agency Web sites and
e-government applications; and

0M make government more transparent and accountable.

As the lead agency for implementing the President's management agenda, OMB
developed a governmentwide strategy for expanding e-government, which it
published in February 2002.4 In its strategy, OMB established a portfolio
management structure to help oversee and guide the Quicksilver initiatives
and facilitate a collaborative working environment for each of them. This
structure includes five portfolios, each with a designated portfolio
manager reporting directly to OMB's Associate Director for IT and
E-Government. The five portfolios are "government to citizen," "government
to business," "government to government," "internal efficiency and
effectiveness," and "cross-cutting." Each of the 25 initiatives is
assigned to one of these portfolios, according to the type of results the
initiative is intended to provide. Further, for each initiative, OMB
designated a specific agency to be the initiative's "managing partner,"
responsible for leading the initiative, and assigned other federal
agencies as "partners" in carrying out the initiative. Figure 1 provides
an overview of the e-government management structure established by OMB.

4 Office of Management and Budget, E-Government Strategy (Washington,
D.C.: Feb. 27, 2002).

Figure 1: OMB Management Structure for e-Government Initiatives

To oversee implementation of the initiatives, OMB has required managing
partners of the initiatives to submit a series of specific planning
documents. Work plans submitted by agencies in May 2002 were among the
first of these documents. The work plans document agreements reached
between OMB and managing partner agencies on the scope and direction of
each of the initiatives. Another key planning document required for all
active e-government initiatives is

a structured business case that is updated annually as part of the budget
development process.

In November 2002, we reported on the completeness of the information used
in selecting and overseeing the 25 e-government initiatives.5 We
determined that despite the importance that OMB attached to collaboration
and customer focus in its e-government strategy, fewer than half of the
initiatives' initial business cases addressed these topics. We
subsequently reviewed the challenge of achieving effective
interorganizational collaboration within four of the initiatives,
e-Payroll, Geospatial One-Stop, Integrated Acquisition Environment (IAE),
and Business Gateway.6 We found that while the four initiatives had all
taken steps to promote collaboration with their partner agencies, none had
been fully effective in adopting key practices to fully involve important
stakeholders. We made recommendations to each of the four managing partner
agencies responsible for these initiatives to more fully adopt key
collaboration practices, and all have indicated that they are taking
actions that address our recommendations.

  Mixed Progress Has Been Made in Achieving the OMB-Sponsored Initiatives'
  Original Objectives

Overall, mixed progress has been made in achieving the 91 objectives
originally defined for the e-government initiatives in their work plans
submitted to OMB in May 2002. To date, 33 of the objectives have been
fully or substantially achieved; 38 have been partially achieved; and for
17, no significant progress has been made towards these objectives. In
addition, 3 of the objectives no longer apply because they have been found
to be impractical or inappropriate. For two of the initiatives-Grants.gov
and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Free File-all original objectives have
been achieved, and for an additional five,7 the majority of their original

5 U.S. General Accounting Office, Electronic Government: Selection and
Implementation of the Office of Management and Budget's 24 Initiatives,
GAO-03-229 (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 22, 2002).

6 U.S. General Accounting Office, Electronic Government: Potential Exists
for Enhancing Collaboration on Four Initiatives, GAO-04-6 (Washington,
D.C.: Oct. 10, 2003).

7 These initiatives include e-Clearance, e-Payroll, e-Training, e-Travel,
and Integrated Acquisition Environment.

objectives have been achieved. For the other 18 initiatives, most of their
objectives are either partially met or not significantly met. Given that
OMB's stated criteria in choosing these initiatives included their
likelihood of deployment in 18 to 24 months, the substantial number of
objectives that are still unmet or only partially met indicates that
making progress on these initiatives is more challenging than OMB may have
originally anticipated.

A number of the initiatives have made very significant accomplishments.
For example, according to project documentation, as of February 2004, the
Grants.gov portal allowed prospective grants applicants to find and apply
for a total of 835 grant opportunities at 29 grant-making agencies.
Similarly, GovBenefits developed a Web portal that currently provides
information about over 500 benefits programs at 22 agencies, including
some state benefits programs. The portal uses a structured set of
questions to identify benefit programs that may apply to citizens,
eliminating the need to try to identify such programs individually at
separate government agencies. Likewise, the IAE project team has been
successful in creating a single point of registration and validation for
vendors. The IAE project team has also developed and implemented a
directory of interagency contracts that currently references 16,000
contracts.

In contrast, other initiatives have made less progress. For example,
Project SAFECOM has made very limited progress in addressing its three
objectives, all of which relate to achieving communications
interoperability among entities at various levels of government. Since its
inception 2 years ago, management teams for the project have changed four
times among three different federal agencies. The e-Loans initiative has
made slow progress over its 2-year history and still does not have its
central portal for locating loan information operational, although such a
portal-GovLoans.gov-is scheduled to come online in April 2004. An
extensive effort to re-scope that initiative soon after it began took up
the first year of that project.

It is important to note that the scope and specificity of the initiatives'
original objectives vary widely. The number of objectives per initiative
varies from one to six, with some being specific nearterm tasks, while
others represent broader goals associated with transforming government.
One of the e-Payroll initiative's

objectives, for example, was simply to develop a business case- something
that was actually required of all the initiatives. On the other hand,
Project SAFECOM's three objectives called for achieving effective
communications interoperability among emergency personnel at the federal,
state, and local levels-broad objectives that could not realistically be
expected to be fully realized in 18 to 24 months. Between these extremes,
many of the objectives fell into recurrent categories, such as developing
a Web portal for consolidated information dissemination (Recreation
One-Stop, GovBenefits.gov, Grants.gov, and USA Services), providing the
capability to conduct transactions online (IRS Free File, e-Loans,
Grants.gov, and e-Vital), consolidating duplicative agency systems across
the federal government (e-Travel, e-Rulemaking, and e-Payroll), and
developing government standards (Consolidated Health Informatics,
e-Authentication, and Geospatial One-Stop). The attachment contains
specifics on the status and progress of each of the 25 initiatives in
addressing their original objectives.

Initiatives Have Had Varying Success in Addressing Key Management Challenges

Achieving the e-government vision of a seamless federal enterprise
offering an order-of-magnitude improvement in service to citizens can be
very challenging for agencies used to complex, nonintegrated systems and
business processes. The extent to which the 25 initiatives have met their
original objectives can be linked to a common set of challenges that they
all face, including

0M focusing on achievable objectives that address customer needs,

0M maintaining management stability through executive commitment,

0M collaborating effectively with partner agencies and stakeholders,

0M driving transformational changes in business processes, and

0M implementing effective funding strategies.

In many cases, how these challenges were addressed has been a contributing
factor to whether the initiatives' objectives were satisfactorily met.
Initiatives that have overcome these challenges have often met with
success in achieving their objectives, whereas

initiatives that have had problems dealing with these challenges have made
less progress. I will discuss each of these challenges in more detail and
offer some examples of how they have affected specific e-government
initiatives.

Focusing on Achievable Objectives That Address Customer Needs

By and large, e-government initiatives that have been able to keep their
objectives achievable and customer-focused have been successful in meeting
their objectives on time. IT planning best practices indicate that when
establishing objectives for a project, an organization should consider the
needs of its customers, be realistic

8

in planning, and take into consideration potential obstacles.

The Grants.gov initiative, tasked with creating a portal for federal grant
customers to find and apply for discretionary grants online, is an example
of an initiative that has been successful in meeting achievable objectives
focused on customer needs. The initiative's efforts to date have been
focused on the core functions of allowing customers to find potential
grants opportunities and to apply for them through the grants.gov portal.
In October 2003, the Grants.gov site was deployed with tools that allow a
grant applicant to search for grant opportunities via the site, download
an application form, and submit the application online. According to
project documentation, as of February 2004, the Grants.gov portal allowed
prospective grants applicants to find and apply for a total of 835 grant
opportunities at 29 grant-making agencies.

In contrast are initiatives such as e-Authentication, which has made
slower progress because one of its original objectives was not achievable.
The operations concept originally defined for e-Authentication was based
on a centralized gateway architecture, and the vast majority of the effort
invested in the initiative through the fall of 2003 was devoted to
development of this gateway. However, according to the project managers,
based on the results of an internal technical advisory board review as
well as a GAO

8 See U.S. General Accounting Office, Assessing Risks and Returns: A Guide
for Evaluating Federal Agencies' IT Investment Decision-Making,
GAO/AIMD-10.1.13 (Washington, D.C.: February 1997) and Executive Guide:
Improving Mission Performance Through Strategic Information Management and
Technology, GAO/AIMD-94-115 (Washington, D.C.: May 1994).

review,9 the planned centralized gateway was found to be neither
technically feasible nor an appropriate solution to the authentication
challenge. The e-Authentication initiative was refocused on setting a
framework of policies and standards for agencies to use in procuring
commercial products to meet their authentication needs, and the technical
architecture for e-Authentication in the federal government has been
revised to promote a "federated approach," whereby individual agencies
develop independent but interconnected authentication mechanisms as part
of their individual e-government initiatives, using products tested and
approved by the e-Authentication initiative. The initiative is still in
the process of overseeing development of an authentication policy
framework and developing a test capability for commercial products so as
to be able to provide complete support to government agencies in their
acquisition of authentication services.

Another example of an initiative that originally had an unachievable
objective is the Consolidated Health Informatics (CHI) initiative.
According to the CHI program manager, the original intent of the
initiative was to build an application for processing and exchanging
standardized electronic medical records. However, through surveys of
stakeholder groups, the initiative found wide variances in the kind of
information required by groups in the health care community and concluded
that developing a standardized electronic record was not feasible. As a
result, the CHI initiative refocused its efforts on establishing health
data and messaging standards in 24 specific clinical domains that are
meant to serve as the building blocks for a future electronic
application-a more modest but more achievable objective.

Maintaining Management Stability through Executive Commitment

Because the e-government initiatives are aimed at changing the way the
government does business, sustained executive commitment has been critical
to their ability to elicit cross-agency cooperation and make progress
toward their objectives. Effective top management leadership, involvement,
and ownership are a cornerstone of any

9 U.S. General Accounting Office, Electronic Government: Planned
e-Authentication Gateway Faces Formidable Development Challenges,
GAO-03-952 (Sept. 12, 2003).

effective information technology investment strategy. Strong leadership
and stable management are especially critical to the success of
transformational programs such as the OMB-sponsored e-government
initiatives. Without such leadership, these projects are less likely to be
able to meet their objectives.

For several of the e-government initiatives, executive support from OMB
has been a critical element in meeting their planned objectives.
Initiatives such as e-Payroll and e-Rulemaking benefited from having OMB
issue memorandums to federal agencies directing them to participate in the
initiatives and, as appropriate, cease operation of their own redundant
systems. According to the project's managers, this direction from OMB
provided critical support to the initiatives' success. Strong OMB support
and attention have also allowed other initiatives to make rapid progress.
The Geospatial One-Stop initiative, for example, was able to draft a set
of geospatial standards for submission to the American National Standards
Institute far more quickly than similar standards had been developed
previously. The project manager credited this success largely to the
support and visibility that OMB had given the project.

Further, support from the heads of managing partner agencies has also been
critical to achieving objectives. For example, the program manager for
Grants.gov stated that senior executive support had been critical in
obtaining full stakeholder participation on the initiative's executive
board. Specifically, the Secretary of Health and Human Services sent
letters to the 11 Grants.gov partner agencies in the summer of 2002
requesting that each partner agency identify a senior member to sit on the
executive board. Without such support, it would have been difficult to
obtain full participation by senior officials, according to the program
manager.

In contrast, Project SAFECOM, for example, has experienced frequent
changes in management, which have hampered progress towards its overall
objective of achieving communications interoperability10 among emergency
response personnel at all levels of government. OMB originally designated
the Department of the Treasury as the project's managing partner, but in
May 2002,

10 Interoperability is the ability of two or more systems or components to
exchange information and to use the information that has been exchanged.

oversight responsibility was given to the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA). By September 2002, FEMA had replaced its original SAFECOM
management team and changed its implementation strategy for the project.
Then, following the establishment of the Department of Homeland Security
in May 2003, the project was taken out of FEMA and assigned to the
department's new Science and Technology Directorate. At that time, the
project gained its fourth management team and once again "started over" by
devoting its energies to defining a new strategy for achieving the
project's overall objective. The changing of project teams approximately
every 6 to 9 months meant that much of the effort spent on the project was
made repeatedly to establish administrative structures, develop program
plans, and obtain stakeholder input and support. After more than 2 years,
Project SAFECOM has made very limited progress in achieving its overall
objective of emergency communications interoperability among entities at
all levels of government.

Collaborating Effectively with Partner Agencies and Stakeholders

Many federal agencies have found it challenging to establish effective
ways of collaborating across agencies and with other levels of government.
In the context of electronic government, collaboration can be defined as a
mutually beneficial and welldefined relationship entered into by two or
more organizations to achieve common goals. Recent management reform
efforts within the federal government have focused on collaboration as a
way to reduce duplication and integrate federal provision of services to
the public. Collaboration is also a key theme of the President's
management agenda. In October 2003, we reported on the extent to which
federal agencies and other entities had been collaborating on four of the
OMB-sponsored initiatives, and found that varying degrees of collaboration
had been achieved.11 We made recommendations to the managing partner
agencies for each initiative to enhance the effectiveness of collaboration
as a tool to use in achieving their objectives.

11 U.S. General Accounting Office, Electronic Government: Potential Exists
for Enhancing Collaboration on Four Initiatives, GAO-04-6 (Washington,
D.C.: Oct. 10, 2003).

The Integrated Acquisition Environment (IAE) initiative provides an
example of effective collaboration. GSA adopted a variety of effective
collaboration practices that have contributed to progress in advancing the
goals of the initiative. For example, the project team developed a formal
charter outlining the objectives, tasks, and roles and responsibilities of
project partners, and it is in the process of completing implementation of
memorandums of agreement with all participating agencies to further define
their roles and financial responsibilities. Further, successful
collaboration contributed to achieving the goal of establishing the
Business Partner Network as a central point of access for the initiative.
Specifically, effective collaboration with the Small Business
Administration (SBA) helped facilitate termination of SBA's competing and
redundant Pro-Net. SBA was one of IAE's original partner agencies, was
involved in developing IAE's charter, and contributed staff to help
achieve IAE's objectives.

In contrast, the limited progress of the Business Gateway project
highlights the importance of developing collaborative relationships that
include specific resource commitments. As we reported in October 2003, one
of the key characteristics that contribute to the success of
cross-organizational collaboration is that each participating organization
contributes resources in the form of human capital or funding. However,
until recently, the Business Gateway initiative did not use this approach.
Instead, the project relied solely on SBA, its managing partner, to fund
the initiative. Officials from partner agencies told us that because they
did not provide funds for the initiative, they had little input in the
decisionmaking process and, as a result, did not have a strong incentive
to participate. In part because of poor collaboration, the Business
Gateway initiative has not completed any of its original objectives. SBA
officials stated that its funding strategy had recently been amended to
seek funding from partner agencies. Officials reported that the revised
funding strategy is currently under review by the project's governance
board.

In the case of e-Vital, project officials found they could not sustain
collaborative working relationships with state governments and, as a
result, the project failed to complete one of its main objectives-to
simplify, through the use of Internet-based technology, processes
associated with collecting, reporting, and verifying vital records.

Although a system for making death record information available
electronically was developed and is in use, a more comprehensive system
was terminated after the pilot phase. According to project officials, the
project team piloted an automated electronic system for verification of
vital events in eight states, which proved successful in providing
electronic access to vital records. However, the project was terminated in
December 2003 because state governments, as represented by the National
Association of Public Health Statistics and Information Systems, were
unwilling to lower their fees for providing vital record information,
which are an important source of revenue. The rationale for the initiative
had been based on realizing substantial cost savings for the Social
Security Administration (SSA) by allowing it to obtain vital records
electronically at reduced cost. Given this obstacle, SSA decided to
discontinue work on this objective. However, stronger collaboration
between the e-Vital initiative and state governments could have led to
earlier awareness of the fee problem and a greater joint effort to
identify a creative solution that would satisfactorily address the states'
financing concerns while simultaneously maintaining the overall objectives
of the e-Vital initiative.

Driving Transformational Changes in Business Processes

While some of the initiatives' objectives are relatively simple and
straightforward-such as developing a Web site to disseminate
information-others, aimed at transforming the way government does business
with its customers, have been significantly more challenging. If these
transformational objectives are not fully achieved, the potential of
e-government to facilitate order-ofmagnitude improvements in services to
citizens may not be realized.

The Department of Labor's GovBenefits.gov initiative offers an example of
the relative status of transformational and nontransformational
objectives. Although the project team has successfully achieved its
objective of creating a Web portal to assist citizens in identifying
government benefit programs, it has not yet addressed its transformational
objective of streamlining the process of applying for these benefits.
According to project officials, it has been very difficult to develop a
common application for government benefits, because each program has
unique requirements and has processes in place based on collecting unique
kinds of data. With

OMB's support, the project team has defined a data standardization
process-including a governance board to define standard data elements for
benefits eligibility-that will be used during the next phase of the
project. Because project officials are unsure how long this process will
take, no milestone has yet been set for completing this objective.

The Environmental Protection Agency's e-Rulemaking initiative has had a
similar experience. The project has made progress on one of its objectives
through the launch of www.regulations.gov, which provides citizens with
the ability to locate and submit comments electronically on proposed rules
that are open for comment in the Federal Register. However, the initiative
also includes a more transformational objective that will require
additional time to achieve. Specifically, the ability to search full
rulemaking dockets- the complete set of publicly available material (i.e.,
economic analyses, models, etc.) associated with a proposed rule-is not
yet available and is contingent on developing a governmentwide electronic
docket system and migrating all other rulemaking agencies' existing
systems to the new system. Program officials currently plan to implement a
first version of the centralized system by the end of January 2005 and
expect that all other rulemaking agencies will migrate to it by mid-fiscal
year 2006.

The General Service Administration's e-Travel initiative, which was tasked
with automating and consolidating the federal government's travel process,
is an example of an initiative that, like e-Rulemaking, is intended to
consolidate redundant government operations, and that will require
additional time to complete. Full achievement of this initiative's
objectives requires that federal civilian agencies shut down existing
travel management systems, and migrate to service provided by one of three
e-Travel systems vendors. One step in the process of implementing this
initiative was a change in a federal travel regulation that requires all
affected agencies to submit migration plans to the e-Travel program
management office by March 31, 2004, and migrate to an approved system for
full agencywide use by September 30, 2006. According to the project
manager, the process of migrating all affected federal agencies to
approved systems is complex and could not be completed within the
18-to-24-month time frame set by OMB as a benchmark for the e-government
initiatives.

Implementing Effective Funding Strategies

Implementing effective funding strategies has been another significant
challenge for the e-government initiatives. In a recent survey conducted
by the Information Technology Association of America,12 Chief Information
Officers (CIO) expressed concern that funding for e-government was not
integrated into the annual budget process and that OMB has required
agencies to take resources out of existing programs to advance
e-government. Project officials reported adopting a variety of funding
strategies to try to keep their projects on schedule.

Some initiatives have been successful in tapping into stable sources of
funds, thus helping to minimize project delays. For example, OMB
instructed agencies to spend their fiscal year 2003 payroll-related funds
only in association with the e-Payroll initiative. The e-Payroll
initiative received redirected fiscal year 2003 funds from agencies based
on this guidance. Other initiatives, particularly Grants.gov and
e-Rulemaking, have successfully developed and achieved consensus with
partner agencies on funding contributions based on agencyunique
characteristics, such as the volume of business an agency expects to
conduct in conjunction with the initiative or the number of agency
components that plan to participate. In these cases, effective funding
strategies have been closely linked with effective collaboration
strategies.

In other cases, funding strategies adopted by project teams have not
helped reduce risk. With e-Records Management, for example, partner
agencies have been held responsible for providing funds for the specific
project components for which they act as leads. This approach is intended
to encourage agency collaboration, as agencies become stewards for
specific project deliverables. However, the risk of such an approach is
that if expected funding from certain agencies is not provided, then an
entire component of the project can be delayed. According to project
officials, delays in the piloting of an enterprisewide e-Records
management system occurred because the lead agency, the Environmental
Protection Agency, had decreases in its fiscal year 2004 appropriations
resulting in insufficient funding for the project.

12 Information Technology Association of America, CIO: Catalyst for
Business Transformation (Arlington, VA: March 2004).

In the case of Project SAFECOM, a lack of shared resource commitments has
contributed to slow progress. According to project officials, during
fiscal year 2003, SAFECOM received only about $17 million of the $34.5
million OMB allocated to it to be contributed by partner agencies.
Further, more than $1.4 million of that amount was not received until late
September 2003, when only a week remained in the fiscal year. According to
program officials, these funding shortfalls and delays resulted in the
program's having to delay some of the tasks it had intended to complete,
such as establishing the project's major milestones.

The challenge of identifying and instituting effective funding strategies
for cross-agency initiatives remains. Regardless of what innovations
agencies may make in attempting to obtain funds, the risk remains that
without reliable funding mechanisms, these initiatives may face
significant delays in achieving their objectives.

Having taken on a broad set of objectives to improve a wide variety of
important government services, the 25 e-government initiatives sponsored
by OMB have made mixed progress over their 2-year history. In some cases,
citizens have been given valuable new capabilities to interact and conduct
business more efficiently with their government. The Grants.gov portal,
for example, now allows prospective grants applicants to find and apply
for hundreds of grant opportunities across the government. Similarly, the
GovBenefits portal also provides information about hundreds of benefits
programs at 22 different agencies, including some state benefits programs.
At the same time, however, other initiatives have had trouble addressing
their original objectives, completing them slowly or changing them
significantly. Consolidated Health Informatics, for example, dropped plans
to develop a standardized electronic health record because it proved
infeasible, just as the e-Authentication initiative dropped plans for a
centralized gateway, which also turned out to be impractical. Until the
initiatives fully deal with the challenges of maintaining management
stability through executive commitment, collaborating effectively with
partner agencies and stakeholders, driving transformational changes in
business processes, and implementing effective funding strategies, they
are unlikely to be able to fully meet their objectives

and realize the potential of e-government to facilitate order-ofmagnitude
improvements in services to citizens. It will be important that the
initiatives' managing partners focus on fully addressing these challenges
as they continue to progress.

Contact and Acknowledgements If you should have any questions about this
testimony, please contact me at (202) 512-6240 or via e-mail at
[email protected]. Other major contributors to this testimony included
Shannin Addison, Elizabeth Bernard, Barbara Collier, Felipe Colon, Jr.,
John de Ferrari, and Jamie Pressman.

Attachment. Status and Progress of the 25 e-Government Initiatives

  Business Gateway

Managing partner agency: Small Business Administration (SBA)

Purpose: Reduce the burden on businesses by making it easy to find,
understand, and comply (including submitting forms) with relevant laws and
regulations at all levels of government.

Reported fiscal year 2004 budget: $8.2 million

Table 1: Status of Original Business Gateway Objectives

Assessed Objectives status

Allow businesses to easily get information about the federal, state, and
0Rlocal laws and regulations that apply to them.

Provide businesses access to online tools that will help them determine
applicable laws and regulations, whether they are in compliance with
such laws and regulations, and what to do/where to go to achieve 0R
compliance.

Allow businesses to register online, at the state level, and apply to
receive selected federal, state, and local licenses and permits. 0R

Source: GAO analysis of SBA data.

Legend: = objective fully or substantially achieved; 0R = objective
partially achieved; = no significant progress made toward this objective;
{} = objective no longer applicable.

Project Progress

The Business Gateway initiative (formerly Business Compliance One-Stop)
was originally planned to be implemented in two phases, both of which
together would address the initiative's first objective. Only the first
phase has been completed. Phase one was to implement a Web portal intended
to serve as a single place for finding "plain English" legal guides and
legal and regulatory information. This Web portal, www.BusinessLaw.gov,
became operational in December 2001. The second phase was to make the
portal more interactive by developing a new navigation tool, offering a
range of automated compliance assistance tools and prototyping a
transaction engine for integrated business registration, online licensing,
and permitting. However, by July 2003, SBA had made only limited progress
toward achieving expanded capabilities of the portal. A pilot version of
the planned navigation tool had been

implemented, but only 4 of the 30 planned automated compliance assistance
tools had been developed. On July 1, 2003, OMB announced that the project
would be refocused on reducing the

                                       13

paperwork burden on small businesses.

To address the second objective, the initiative plans to (1) develop an
electronic catalog listing both electronic and paper forms and (2)
consolidate other Web-based information resources such as Business.gov and
BusinessLaw.gov. Regarding the last objective, SBA reported that pilot
projects are under way with Illinois and Georgia.

Performance

The table lists key performance metrics planned for the Business Gateway
initiative.

                          Table 2: Performance Metrics

                                       Metric          Target Reported status 
                    Time savings for business                                 
                               compliance and   Reduce by 50%  Not reported
                                       filing                 
            Regulatory agency savings through                                 
                                   transition Increase by 25%  Not reported
               to compliance from enforcement                 
                                      through                 
                          automated processes                 
           Number of days reduced for issuing                                 
                                      permits    Not reported  Not reported
                                 and licenses                 
              Cycle time to issue permits and Within 24 hours                 
                                     licenses                  Not reported
                                       issued                 
                    Reduction in redundant IT                                 
                                  investments    Not reported  Not reported

Number of visitors/page views Increase by 10-20% Not reported

Source: President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget submission.

13 For additional discussion of Business Gateway's past progress, see U.S.
General Accounting Office, Electronic Government: Potential Exists for
Enhancing Collaboration on Four Initiatives, GAO-04-6 (Washington, D.C.:
Oct. 10, 2003).

  Consolidated Health Informatics (CHI)

Managing partner agency: Health and Human Services (HHS)

Purpose: Adopt a portfolio of health information interoperability
standards enabling all agencies in the federal health enterprise to "speak
the same language" based on common enterprisewide business and information
technology architectures.

Reported fiscal year 2004 budget: This initiative is supported entirely by
contributions of staff time and other nonfinancial resources from HHS and
partner agencies.

Table 3: Status of Original Consolidated Health Informatics Objectives

Assessed Objectives status

Create a single, integrated, electronic medical record and access
infrastructure that could capture health data at the point of care and {}
make it available to government agencies and healthcare organizations
that need the information.

Establish a public/private sector consolidated health informatics council

          to oversee activities undertaken as part of the initiative.

Source: GAO analysis of HHS data.

Legend: = objective fully or substantially achieved; 0R = objective
partially achieved; = no significant progress made toward this objective;
{} = objective no longer applicable.

Project Progress

According to the CHI program manager, the initiative was substantially
re-scoped early in its development and, as a result, no longer plans to
address its original first objective. According to the program manager,
the original intent was to build an application for processing and
exchanging standardized electronic medical records. However, project staff
surveyed a range of stakeholders and found wide variances in the kind of
information that was needed by different groups within the health care
community and concluded that developing a single standardized electronic
medical record was not feasible. As a result, the CHI initiative was
refocused on establishing health data and messaging standards in 24
specific clinical domains (i.e., medications, demographics, immunizations,
etc.) that are to serve as building blocks for an electronic medical

record. In March 2003, 5 of the 24 planned standards were rolled out for
use by federal agencies. CHI plans final rollout of all 24 clinical
domains by the end of spring 2004. The second original objective still
applies. The CHI initiative instituted a CHI Council consisting of federal
agencies, including the Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs and
the Social Security Administration. The council meets every 2 weeks and
has component working groups that are tasked to work on specific clinical
domains. The council established a partnership with the National Committee
on Vital Health Statistics to obtain input from the private sector on the
24 proposed clinical domain standards.

Performance

The table lists key performance metrics planned for the Consolidated
Health Informatics initiative.

                          Table 4: Performance Metrics

                                          Metric       Target Reported status 
               Number of contracts requiring the                              
                                       standards Not reported  Not reported
               Impact on patient service, public Not reported                 
                                     health, and               Not reported
                                        research              
              Percentage increase in common data Not reported                 
                                    available to               Not reported
                            be shared with users              

Number of federal agencies and systems using CHI Not reported Not reported
standards to store and/or share health information

            Source: President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget submission.

  Disaster Management

Managing partner agency: Department of Homeland Security (DHS)

Purpose: Provide federal, state, and local emergency managers online
access to disaster management related information, planning, and response
tools.

Reported fiscal year 2004 budget: $35.3 million

Table 5: Status of Original Disaster Management Objectives

Assessed Objectives status

An easy to use, unified point of access to disaster management 0Rknowledge
and services

Accelerated and improved quality of disaster mitigation and response

Source: GAO analysis of DHS data.

Legend: = objective fully or substantially achieved; 0R = objective
partially achieved; = no significant progress made toward this objective;
{} = objective no longer applicable.

Project Progress

Currently the disaster management Web site (www.disasterhelp.gov) has a
variety of information about disaster management activities and links to
many agency Web sites that provide further information and services.
Several specific tasks were established under the first objective, and one
of these is partially complete-to deploy an integrated portal for access
to disaster management services and tools. Regarding the second objective,
the initiative has not begun addressing how to accelerate and improve the
quality of disaster mitigation and response. Although the overall
objectives for Disaster Management have not changed, the project has
changed its implementation approach, based on input from stakeholders at
the state and local level. Specifically, the project originally intended
to develop a complete set of electronic tools to assist state and local
officials in managing disaster response. However, stakeholders expressed a
clear preference to continue using existing commercial products, and OMB
concurred with Homeland Security's decision to re-scope the

planned work to better meet stakeholder needs. As re-scoped, the project
is planned to focus on facilitating connectivity among existing disaster
management systems by developing data exchange standards and providing
supporting telecommunications links.

Performance

The table lists key performance metrics used for the Disaster Management
initiative and their reported status.

                          Table 6: Performance Metrics

Metric Target Reported status

Reduce response recovery time by 15% Reduction by 15% Not reported

Improve situational awareness planning Improve capability Not reported
capability by 25% by 25%

Increase the number of first responders Increase usage by 1,500 first
responders using Disaster Management 10% trained to use DMIS
Interoperability Services (DMIS) tools by tools as of November 13, 10%
2003; DMIS delivered to

almost 300 user groups

Number of registered users in Not reported 10,291 as of November
DisasterHelp.gov 11, 2003

            Source: President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget submission.

e-Authentication

Managing partner agency: General Services Administration (GSA)

Purpose: Minimize the burden on businesses, the public, and government
when obtaining services online by providing a secure infrastructure for
online transactions, eliminating the need for separate processes for the
verification of identity and electronic signatures.

Reported fiscal year 2004 budget: $9.27 million

Table 7: Status of Original e-Authentication Objectives

Assessed Objectives status

Develop an outreach program to the e-Gov initiatives, industry, and

citizen groups.

Define operation concepts, to include critical success factors and
requirements, in conjunction with each e-Gov initiative. 0R

Identify ease of use requirements in conjunction with portfolio
managers. 0R

Develop an authentication capability that will support multiple levels of
{}  assurance.

Source: GAO analysis of GSA data.

Legend: = objective fully or substantially achieved; 0R = objective
partially achieved; = no significant progress made toward this objective;
{} = objective no longer applicable.

Project Progress

Of e-Authentication's four original objectives, the team has completed
one, partially completed two others, and developed a new objective to
replace its original fourth objective, which was terminated. The
operational concept originally defined for e-Authentication was based on a
centralized gateway architecture, and the vast majority of the effort
invested in the initiative through the fall of 2003 was devoted to
development of this gateway. However, based on the results of an internal
technical advisory board review as well as a GAO review,14 the planned
centralized

14 U.S. General Accounting Office, Electronic Government: Planned
e-Authentication Gateway Faces Formidable Development Challenges,
GAO-03-952 (Sept. 12, 2003).

gateway was found to be neither technically feasible nor an appropriate
solution to the authentication challenge. The e-Authentication initiative
is now focused on setting a framework of policies and standards for
agencies to use in procuring commercial products to meet their
authentication needs, and the technical architecture for e-Authentication
in the federal government has been revised to promote a "federated
approach."

The project team has developed an extensive outreach effort, including a
series of public meetings and presentations involving both citizen groups
and industry, which address the project's first objective. Regarding the
second objective, project officials have been working with the other
e-government initiatives to define their e-Authentication requirements
using an electronic risk assessment tool. Regarding the third objective,
the e-Authentication project did not identify ease-of-use requirements in
conjunction with portfolio managers. Instead, the team is working on
addressing ease-of-use issues within the process of assessing stakeholder
requirements.

Performance

The table lists key performance metrics used for the e-Authentication
initiative and their reported status.

           Table 8: Performance Metrics Metric Target Reported status

Cost avoidance from a coordinated and Not reported Not reported
streamlined approach

Minimum number of different credentials Not reported Not reported
required to do business with the
government online

                    Number of accredited Not reported 12 as of March 15, 2004 
                              credential              
                               providers              
                 Number of interoperable Not reported 3 as of December 31,    
                          authentication              2003                    
                                products              
                  Percentage of citizens Not reported 24 percent of Americans 
                                trusting              are                     
                   transactions with the                     "high trusters," 
                              government                       according to a 
                                                          Pew survey in April 
                                                                         2003 

            Source: President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget submission.

  e-Clearance

Managing partner agency: Office of Personnel Management (OPM)

Purpose: Streamline and improve the quality of the current security
clearance process.

Reported fiscal year 2004 budget: $9.96 million

Table 9: Status of Original e-Clearance Objectives

Assessed Objectives status

Create a common, secure, and standardized source of investigative

information to support employee assignment decisions.

Connect OPM's Security/Suitability Investigations Index (SII) with

DOD's Joint Personnel Adjudication System (JPAS).a

Cause civilian agencies to "load" their clearance information into the SII
in order to centralize the data.

Allow individuals to complete and submit forms electronically to security
personnel and for security personnel to submit electronically to their
investigative supplier.

Reduce future paper investigations records to electronic versions and make
them universally accessible to authorized users on a real time 0R  basis.

Ensure all e-Clearance systems have appropriate privacy and security
protections necessary to assure the data are adequately protected. 0R

Source: GAO analysis of OPM data.

Legend: = objective fully or substantially achieved; 0R = objective
partially achieved; = no significant progress made toward this objective;
{} = objective no longer applicable.

a For an assessment of DOD's clearance process, see U.S. General
Accounting Office, DOD Personnel Clearances: DOD Needs to Overcome
Impediments to Eliminating Backlog and Determining Its Size, GAO-04-344
(Washington, D.C.: Feb. 9, 2004).

Project Progress

The Clearance Verification System, which addresses objective 1, was
completed in February 2003, and e-Clearance connected with JPAS in
December 2002 (objective 2). Further, all existing clearance data have
been loaded into SII (objective 3), and the Electronic Questionnaire for
Investigations Processing (e-QIP) has been made available to allow
individuals to complete and submit forms electronically (objective 4). The
fifth objective is partially complete;

major investigative agencies have begun imaging their paper files.
Finally, e-Clearance is in the process of certifying and accrediting the
various elements of its systems to assure security and privacy.

Performance

The table lists key performance metrics used for the e-Clearance
initiative and their reported status.

          Table 10: Performance Metrics Metric Target Reported status

Cost per application Not reported Not reported

Reciprocation between agencies Not reported Not reported

Average time to process clearance forms

       Not reported Not reported Average time to complete clearance forms

Not reported 	2 hours as of June 23, 2003

Time to locate and evaluate previous Not reported Not reported
investigations and clearances

            Source: President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget submission.

  e-Loans (Online Access for Loans)

Managing partner agency: Department of Education

Purpose: Create a single point of access for citizens to locate
information on federal loan programs, and improve back-office loan
functions.

Reported fiscal year 2004 budget: $1.81 million

                Table 11: Status of Original e-Loans Objectives

Assessed Objectives status

Provide a single point of entry to allow citizens and businesses to find
0Rand apply for loan programs.

Source: GAO analysis of Education data.

Legend: = objective fully or substantially achieved; 0R = objective
partially achieved; = no significant progress made toward this objective;
{} = objective no longer applicable.

Project Progress

The e-Loans Web site (GovLoans.gov) is currently in prototype stage and is
planned to be operational in April 2004. Originally the initiative was
intended to develop a consolidated central portal for identifying and
applying for government-sponsored loans. However, the objectives for this
initiative changed in September 2002, after project officials conducted
extensive outreach to better identify the needs of their stakeholders.
They discovered that the original business case for the initiative did not
recognize the significant role played by private-sector lenders and other
providers in delivering loans and loan services. Accordingly, the
project's objectives were revised to (1) create an easy-to-find, single
point of access to government loan-related services, (2) reduce the
reporting burden on businesses, (3) share information more quickly and
conveniently between federal agencies, and (4) automate internal
processes.

Performance

The table lists key performance metrics established for the e-Loans
initiative.

Table 12: Performance Metrics

Target Reported Metric status

 Number of clicks to access relevant loan information Not reported Not reported

    Improve agency access to risk mitigation data Not reported Not reported

            Source: President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget submission.

  Enterprise Human Resources Integration (EHRI)

Managing partner agency: Office of Personnel Management (OPM)

Purpose: Streamline and automate the electronic exchange of standardized
human resources (HR) data needed for creation of an official employee
record across the executive branch. Provide comprehensive knowledge
management workforce analysis, forecasting, and reporting across the
executive branch for the strategic management of human capital.

Reported fiscal year 2004 budget: $32.2 million

                  Table 13: Status of Original EHRI Objectives

Assessed Objectives status

Develop the methods and means to support integrated resource 0Rforecasting
and planning policy analysis.

Transform the manual data currently captured on paper forms into a
0Rreadily accessible electronic medium.

Improve data accuracy and integrity through employee self-validation.

Modernize governmentwide HR record keeping, sourcing, and reporting
practices.

Analyze OPM's Retirement Systems Modernization data requirements and
incorporate into the EHRI Logical Data Model. 0R

Promote data standardization, architectural integrity, and
interoperability

                  across the spectrum of HR e-Gov initiatives.

Source: GAO analysis of OPM data.

Legend: = objective fully or substantially achieved; 0R = objective
partially achieved; = no significant progress made toward this objective;
{} = objective no longer applicable.

Project Progress

Regarding the first objective, to date EHRI has made HR workforce analysis
and forecasting tools available to 15 agencies, but has not developed the
means to support planning policy analysis. A pilot for conversion of
manual data is to be implemented in fiscal year 2004. According to the
project manager, EHRI has not yet taken steps to improve data accuracy and
integrity through employee selfvalidation nor has it modernized government
HR record-keeping practices. EHRI has analyzed the Retirement Systems
Modernization

data and plans to incorporate data requirements by September 30, 2004.
EHRI is actively participating in and contributing to the construction of
OPM's enterprise architecture, and coordinating with other OPM initiatives
on data requirements, standards, and technology to promote data
standardizations, architectural integrity, and interoperability.

Performance

The table lists key performance metrics established for the Enterprise HR
Integration initiative.

                         Table 14: Performance Metrics

                                          Metric       Target Reported status 
         Cost/cycle time savings per transaction Not reported                 
                                          due to               Not reported
            reduction in manual paper processing              
                 Time for intra-agency transfers Not reported  Not reported   
         Usage of analytics by all cabinet-level Not reported                 
                                     agencies in               Not reported
              the human capital planning process              

            Source: President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget submission.

e-Payroll

Managing partner agency: Office of Personnel Management (OPM)

Purpose: Consolidate 22 federal payroll systems to simplify and
standardize federal human resources/payroll policies and procedures to
better integrate payroll, human resources, and finance functions.

Reported fiscal year 2004 budget: $56.1 million

Table 15: Status of Original e-Payroll Objectives

Assessed Objectives status

Develop a business case.

Benchmark federal payroll services and systems. Integrate payroll policy
with HR policy. 0R

Incorporate partners in decision process. Leverage existing investments.
0R

Source: GAO analysis of OPM data.

Legend: = objective fully or substantially achieved; 0R = objective
partially achieved; = no significant progress made toward this objective;
{} = objective no longer applicable.

Project Progress

E-Payroll has completed three of its five objectives: a business case has
been completed, an initial benchmarking study was completed for 26
agencies, and partners have been incorporated in the decision-making
process. With regard to the third objective, e-Payroll officials have
identified approximately 92 specific payroll policy issues and have
resolved four of them to date. According to the project manager, e-Payroll
providers are working to leverage existing investments but have not
completed this objective.

Performance

The table lists key performance metrics established for the e-Payroll
initiative.

                         Table 16: Performance Metrics

                                         Metric        Target Reported status 
               Payroll cost per transaction/per "In line with                 
                                       employee industry         Not reported
                                                    averages" 
            Accuracy of Treasury disbursements,                               
                                           post  Not reported    Not reported
               payroll interfaces, and periodic               
                                      reporting               

            Source: President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget submission.

e-Records Management

Managing partner agency: National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA)

Purpose: Provide policy guidance to help agencies to better manage their
electronic records, so that records information can be effectively used to
support timely and effective decision making, enhance service delivery,
and ensure accountability. Four major issue areas are correspondence
management, enterprisewide electronic records management, electronic
information management standards, and transferring permanent records to
NARA.

Reported fiscal year 2004 budget: $0.6 million

Table 17: Status of Original e-Records Management Objectives

Assessed Objectives status

Providing correspondence management models to enable agencies to use
modern techniques for cross-agency decision making and {} correspondence.

Developing revised baseline functional requirements for records

                management applications for governmentwide use.

The development of enterprisewide e-records management practices. 0R

Giving agencies tools for transferring electronic records to the National
Archives in a variety of data types and formats so that records may be 0R
preserved for future government and citizen use.

Source: GAO analysis of NARA data.

Legend: = objective fully or substantially achieved; 0R = objective
partially achieved; = no significant progress made toward this objective;
{} = objective no longer applicable.

Project Progress

According to the project managers, the first objective was terminated
based on stakeholder input that there was no need for a correspondence
tracking system. Regarding the second objective, NARA established baseline
functional requirements for records management applications by issuing
guidance endorsing the use of Defense Department standards. Concerning the
development of enterprisewide e-records management practices, progress was

reported to be partially complete. The initiative issued guidance on
capital planning for enterprisewide record management applications in June
2003. NARA is awaiting OMB approval of draft guidance that would direct
agencies in developing agency-specific electronic record management system
requirements. Additionally, part of the planned effort to address the
third objective has been delayed due to funding shortfalls. For the last
objective, four of the six planned data standards types-which serve as the
initiative's tools for transferring electronic records-have been defined.

Performance

The table lists key performance metrics planned for the e-Records
Management initiative and their reported status.

                         Table 18: Performance Metrics

                                     Metric           Target Reported status  
             Percent of eligible data items   Not reported       Not reported 
                         archived/preserved                  
                             electronically                  
           Document search/retrieval burden   Not reported       Not reported 
                   Document recovery burden   Not reported       Not reported 
                 Median time for processing     250 calendar     759 calendar 
                                   archival             days             days 
                         electronic records                  

            Source: President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget submission.

e-Rulemaking

Managing partner agency: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

Purpose: Allow citizens to easily access and participate in the rule
making process. Improve access to, and quality of, the rulemaking process
for individuals, businesses, and other government entities while
streamlining and increasing the efficiency of internal agency processes.

Reported fiscal year 2004 budget: $11.5 million

Table 19: Status of Original e-Rulemaking Objectives

Assessed Objectives status

Provide an easy and consistent way for the public to find and comment

on proposed rules.

Create a governmentwide, centralized online capability to access and 0R 
search all publicly available regulatory material.

Build a unified, cost-effective "back room" regulatory management
system to ensure efficiency, economies of scale, and consistency for
public customers and the government.

Source: GAO analysis of EPA data.

Legend: = objective fully or substantially achieved; 0R = objective
partially achieved; = no significant progress made toward this objective;
{} = objective no longer applicable.

Project Progress

In January 2003, www.regulations.gov was launched, which enables citizens
and businesses to search for and respond electronically to proposed rules
open for comment in the Federal Register.15 The ability to search full
rulemaking dockets-the complete set of publicly available material (i.e.,
economic analyses, models, etc.) associated with a proposed rule-is not
yet available and is contingent on developing a governmentwide electronic
docket system. At the request of OMB, the e-Rulemaking initiative was
asked to reassess the centralized architecture it had originally

15 For a more detailed examination of the first phase of this initiative,
see U.S. General Accounting Office, Electronic Rulemaking: Efforts to
Facilitate Public Participation Can Be Improved, GAO-03901 (Washington,
D.C.: Sept. 17, 2003).

proposed for this system, identify alternatives, and submit a
recommendation to OMB. The e-Rulemaking executive committee submitted its
recommendation to adopt a centralized architecture to OMB in late February
2004. Officials expect OMB to endorse this recommendation in the near
future. Program officials anticipate rolling out "Version 1.0" by the end
of January 2005 and expect all other rulemaking agencies will migrate to
it by mid-fiscal year 2006. Development of a regulatory management system
(objective 3) will depend on implementation of the docket architecture,
and, according to program officials, OMB has directed that agency
participation in this objective be voluntary.

Performance

The table lists key performance metrics used for the e-Rulemaking
initiative and their reported status.

                         Table 20: Performance Metrics

                                     Metric    Target     Reported status     
              Number of electronic comments   200,000                     509 
          submitted through Regulations.gov           
           Number of downloads of rules and 4,000,000  More than 700,000 page 
                                regulations           views or downloads from 
                                                        July to November 2003 

           Number of public participants in the 150,000 Almost 200,000 unique 
                             rulemaking process              visitors to      
                                                         Regulations.gov from 
                                                           January through    
                                                            November 2003     

Number of online docket systems 5 systems, $8 million Not reported
decommissioned with the associated in cost savings, $5
cost savings and cost avoidance million cost

                                   avoidance

            Source: President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget submission.

e-Training

Managing partner agency: Office of Personnel Management (OPM)

Purpose: Create a premier e-Training environment that supports development
of the federal workforce through simplified and onestop access to high
quality e-Training products and services, and thus advances the
accomplishment of agency missions.

Reported fiscal year 2004 budget: $19.4 million

Table 21: Status of Original e-Training Objectives

Assessed Objectives status

Reduce redundancies and provide economies of scale for the purchase,
development, and implementation of e-learning products and services across
government.

Implement a premier e-training portal that provides enhanced one-stop
access to high quality training and development opportunities for
government employees.

Provide increased access to common need government-centric/high

interest e-training courses.

To support and advance the use of "communities of practice" to improve
0Rhuman capital within agencies and across the federal government.

Source: GAO analysis of OPM data.

Legend: = objective fully or substantially achieved; 0R = objective
partially achieved; = no significant progress made toward this objective;
{} = objective no longer applicable.

Project Progress

According to the project manager, the project realized $15 million in cost
avoidance/savings in fiscal year 2003 by reducing redundancies in federal
training programs and providing economies of scale (objective 1).
GoLearn.gov was launched in July 2002, with additional modules released in
January and September 2003 (objective 2). The e-Training initiative has
provided increased access to government-oriented courses, such as "Merit
Systems Principles and Prohibited Personnel Practices" and "Foreign Voting
Assistance" (objective 3). In September 2003 the initiative implemented
the Competency Management Center on its GoLearn.gov site. The Competency
Management Center currently

contains career path and competency data for the IT workforce based on the
CIO Council's IT Workforce Development Roadmap. Additional communities in
the acquisition, human resources, and finance domains will be added with
the September 2004 update (objective 4).

Performance

The table lists key performance metrics used for the e-Training initiative
and their reported status.

                         Table 22: Performance Metrics

Metric Target Reported status

Cost avoidance: total tuition/travel cost Minimum of $50 $15 million as of
July 31, reductions for participating agencies million in reductions 2003

Percent of executive branch agencies receiving their e-Training via
GoLearn.gov

                      Not reported 14 as of July 31, 2003

Number of registered users with Not reported 190,000 GoLearn.gov

             Total number of courses completed Not reported 160,000

            Source: President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget submission.

  e-Travel

Managing partner agency: General Services Administration (GSA)

Purpose: Provide a governmentwide Web-based service that applies
world-class travel management practices to consolidate federal travel,
minimize cost, and produce superior customer satisfaction. From travel
planning and authorization to reimbursement, the e-Travel Service (eTs)
will leverage administrative, financial, and information technology best
practices to realize significant cost savings and improved employee
productivity.

Reported fiscal year 2004 budget: $12.4 million

                Table 23: Status of Original e-Travel Objectives

Assessed Objectives status

Rationalize, automate, and consolidate the federal government's travel
process. This travel management service will be accessed through the 0RWeb
and will cover the travel process from planning, authorization, and
reservations, to travel claims and voucher reconciliation.

Assess the operational concepts to include critical success factors and

requirements.

Identify at least three realistic alternative business models.

Draft legislative changes, redefine a Travel Management System, and

                      act on enabling regulatory changes.

Source: GAO analysis of GSA data.

Legend: = objective fully or substantially achieved; 0R = objective
partially achieved; = no significant progress made toward this objective;
{} = objective no longer applicable.

Project Progress

The e-Travel initiative has taken a number of steps to establish a
governmentwide Web-based travel management service. In November 2003, GSA
awarded contracts for the Web-based e-Travel system to three vendors. All
civilian federal agencies will be required to use the new system by
September 30, 2006. Regarding its second objective, the project team
developed a concept of operations in December 2001 based on an initial OMB
assessment, meetings with partnering agencies, and market and best
practices research. According to the project manager, three potential
business models were identified (objective 3) including maintaining the

existing paper-based travel process, establishing a simple electronic
booking system with paper-based voucher processing, and a full e-Travel
option incorporating both electronic booking and electronic voucher
processing. The initiative selected the full e-Travel option. Regarding
the fourth objective, a federal travel regulation (FTR) that became
effective January 21, 2004, outlines three key milestones for agency
implementation. Agencies are required to submit migration plans to the
e-Travel project management office by March 31, 2004, and have a signed
task order to implement eTs with one of the three vendors by December 31,
2004. The FTR also establishes September 30, 2006, as the date by which
all agencies covered by the FTR must migrate to the eTs for full
agencywide use. According to the e-Travel project manager, an additional
objective has been added to the original four that involves development of
a business intelligence capability based on analyzing travel data captured
by the system.

Performance

The table lists key performance metrics established for the e-Travel
initiative.

Table 24: Performance Metrics

                                          Metric       Target Reported status 
             Percentage of users expressing high Not reported                 
                                        level of                 Not reported
                                    satisfaction              
               Number of agencies using e-Travel Not reported    Not reported 
             Percentage use of e-Travel services Not reported    Not reported 
                                     within each              
                                          agency              
                Number of trips serviced through Not reported    Not reported 
                                        e-Travel              
                 Percentage of trips planned and Not reported                 
                                completed online                 Not reported

Significant reduction in duplicative systems (Currently Not reported Not
reported
6+ online booking channels, 50+ travel planning/
processing channels, 200+ licensed and government
developed expense reporting systems)

Reduction in administrative cost per trip 	Align with Not reported
commercial best practices

            Source: President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget submission.

  e-Vital

Managing partner agency: Social Security Administration (SSA)

Purpose: Establish common electronic processes for federal and state
agencies to collect, process, analyze, verify, and share death record
information. Also promote automating how deaths are registered with the
states.

Reported fiscal year 2004 budget: $2.0 million

           Table 25: Status of Original e-Vital Objectives Objectives

Assessed status

Automate state-based processes for death registration. 0R

Simplify, through use of Internet-based technology, processes 0R 
associated with collecting, reporting, and verifying vital records.

Establish a framework that will facilitate more efficient processing and
effective use of other state-owned vital record information (e.g.,
divorce,
fetal death data).

Source: GAO analysis of SSA data.

Legend: = objective fully or substantially achieved; 0R = objective
partially achieved; = no significant progress made toward this objective;
{} = objective no longer applicable.

Project Progress

Of e-Vital's three original objectives, the project team has partially
completed two. Regarding the first objective, the team has developed a
framework for states to build electronic death registration (EDR) systems,
which provide an automated registration process for making death record
information available electronically. In addition, they have established
standards, guidelines, and requirements for states to use to implement
these systems. Three states and New York City have signed contracts to
implement EDR and are scheduled to implement the systems by April 2004.
Four more states are scheduled to implement EDR by September 2004, and
five more by 2005. The Electronic Verification of Vital Events (EVVE),
which is intended to provide the federal government with online access to
vital records such as birth records, was piloted in 8 states, and it
proved successful in providing electronic access to vital records.
However, the project

was terminated in December 2003 because state governments were unwilling
to lower their fees for providing vital record information. The rationale
for the initiative had been based on realizing substantial cost savings
for the Social Security Administration (SSA) by allowing it to obtain
vital records electronically at reduced cost; however, states were
reluctant to forgo an important source of revenue and, in some cases, fees
could not be lowered because they were set by state law. Given this
obstacle, SSA decided to discontinue work on this objective. According to
the SSA officials, no effort is under way to address the third objective,
because it is intended to build on the infrastructure of the EDR project
once it is in place.

Performance

The table lists key performance metrics established for the e-Vital
initiative.

                         Table 26: Performance Metrics

                                          Metric    Target    Reported status 
           Time for state to report death to SSA   15 days     Not reported   
                Number of verified death records Not reported  Not reported   
                  Number of false identify cases Not reported  Not reported   

    Time to verify birth and death entitlement factors 24 hours Not reported

            Source: President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget submission.

  Expanding Electronic Tax Products for Businesses

Managing partner agency: Department of Treasury

Purpose: Reduce the number of tax-related forms that businesses must file,
provide timely and accurate tax information to businesses, increase the
availability of electronic tax filing, and model simplified federal and
state tax employment laws.

Reported fiscal year 2004 budget: $3.2 million, based on official
direction by OMB as part of the fiscal year 2004 budget process

Table 27: Status of Original Expanding Electronic Tax Products for
Businesses Objectives

Assessed Objectives status

Reduce the number of tax-related forms that businesses must file and that
government agencies must process. 0R

Provide timely and accurate tax information to businesses. 0R

Increase the availability of electronic tax filing. 0R

Simplify federal and state tax employment laws and related reporting
requirements.

Source: GAO analysis of Treasury data.

Legend: = objective fully or substantially achieved; 0R = objective
partially achieved; = no significant progress made toward this objective;
{} = objective no longer applicable.

Project Progress

The Expanding Electronic Tax Products for Businesses initiative consists
of seven separate projects, of which four have been implemented to date.
Implementation of these four projects contributes to the partial
achievement of the first three objectives. In January 2003, employment tax
reporting forms were made available for electronic filing. In April 2003,
IRS deployed its Internet-based employer identification number (EIN) tool,
allowing businesses to apply for and obtain EINs online. In February 2004,
corporate and exempt organization tax returns were made available for
electronic submission, completing the third and fourth projects. According
to the program manager, the fourth objective is to be addressed by
providing support for three additional projects, which

have not yet been implemented: Harmonized Wage Reporting, Standardized
EIN, and Single Point Electronic Filing of Form W-2/3.

Performance

The table lists key performance metrics used for the Expanding Electronic
Tax Products for Businesses initiative and their reported status.

Table 28: Performance Metrics

                   Metric                 Target       Reported status    
      Burden reduction for businesses               290,991 burden hours  
                 per return            Not reported 
          and/or application filed                    saved from Internet 
                                                                      EIN 
                                                     as of November 29,   
                                                            2003          

Administrative cost to federal government per return filed

Not reported Not reported Cycle time to grant EIN-valid EIN granted immediately

Immediately 	5 seconds for Internet EIN application

          Number of electronic "94x" forms Not reported 11,244 as of December 
                                 submitted              
                                                                      5, 2003 
         Number of electronic "SS-4" forms                      581,981 as of 
                                 submitted Not reported              December 
                                                                     20, 2003 
         Number of states participating in                                    
                                integrated Not reported  2 as of July 1, 2003
                      registration and EIN              

            Source: President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget submission.

  Federal Asset Sales

Managing partner agency: General Services Administration (GSA)

Purpose: Identify, recommend, and implement improvements for asset
recovery and disposition, making it easier for agencies, businesses, and
citizens to find and acquire/buy federal assets.

Reported fiscal year 2004 budget: $7.24 million

Table 29: Status of Original Federal Asset Sales Objectives

Assessed Objectives status

Serve as the focal point for the development of a Web-based single
point solution to federal asset sales with increased value to the citizen
0R
that provides a consistent and standardized experience for the
government customer base.

Reduce redundant investments, minimize costs, maximize agency
participation, and maximize sales proceeds.

Through the use of proven marketplace solutions, increase the number of
buyers and active users; enhance satisfaction for agency sellers as well
as citizen and business buyers.

Source: GAO analysis of GSA data.

Legend: = objective fully or substantially achieved; 0R = objective
partially achieved; = no significant progress made toward this objective;
{} = objective no longer applicable.

Project Progress

According to project officials, the first objective is being addressed
through development of Web portals for the sale of excess personal and
real property. The team plans to award a contract for the personal
property portal in the near future. Project documentation states that the
portal will be operational in July 2004. Project officials have scheduled
the real property portal contract to be awarded in September 2004. Efforts
to draft and award these contracts have taken up most of the time of the
initiative, as the initiative has worked to gain stakeholder consensus and
approval. According to agency officials, the second and third objectives
will also be addressed by implementation of these portals; however, no
progress has yet been made on these objectives.

Performance

The table lists key performance metrics used for the Federal Asset Sales
initiative and their reported status.

                         Table 30: Performance Metrics

Metric Target Reported status

At least 10 federal departments and At least 10 agencies GSA and NASA have
agencies actively contributing and committed assets to supporting Federal
Asset Sales effort by Federal Asset Sales as offering assets for sale by
end of fiscal of December 2003 year 2003

Reduce the number of existing Web Reduction by 25 Not reported
sites that sell or list federal assets for percent
sale by 25 percent in fiscal year 2004

Reduce the cost to process a personal Reduction by 5 Not reported
property sales transaction by 5 percent percent
in fiscal year 2004

                      Increase the number of Increase of 5 times Not reported 
                             unique visitors                     
                   to Federal Asset Sales by        January 2003 
                                 5 times the                     
                    January 2003 baseline in            baseline 
                                 fiscal year                     
                                        2004                     

Decrease average cycle time Decrease cycle time Not reported
associated with the personal property by 21 business days
asset disposition process by 21
business days in fiscal year 2004

                    Net proceeds generated through Not reported  Not reported 
                           personal property sales               
                    Net proceeds generated through Not reported  Not reported 
                               real property sales               

            Source: President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget submission.

  Geospatial One-Stop

Managing partner agency: Department of the Interior

Purpose: Provide federal and state agencies with a single point of access
to map-related data to enable consolidation of redundant data.

Reported fiscal year 2004 budget: $9.95 million

Table 31: Status of Original Geospatial One-Stop Objectives

Assessed Objectives status

Provide fast, low cost, reliable access to geospatial data needed for
federal, state, and local government operations. 0R

Facilitate government-to-government interactions needed for vertical
missions such as homeland security. 0R

Facilitate the improved delivery of government services to the public. 0R

Obtain multisector input for coordinating, developing, and implementing
geographic information standards to create the consistency needed for 0R 
interoperability and to stimulate market development of tools.

Source: GAO analysis of Interior data.

Legend: = objective fully or substantially achieved; 0R = objective
partially achieved; = no significant progress made toward this objective;
{} = objective no longer applicable.

Project Progress

The Geospatial One-Stop project team has taken actions that partially
complete all four of the initiative's original objectives. To address the
first objective, in June 2003, the project team developed a portal,
www.geodata.gov, intended to provide a central location to identify
geospatial data held by both federal and nonfederal agencies. The project
plans to award a contract in August 2004 to develop a revised version of
the portal. In addition, according to the fiscal year 2005 budget
submission, the project team has created a draft framework of data
standards that have been submitted to the American National Standards
Institute for review. To address the second objective, project officials
are working to organize the content of the portal into content categories
and lines of business, such as homeland security. According to the
executive director, the team is working on the third objective by setting
up an online

"marketplace" intended to provide information on federal agencies' future
data acquisitions, allowing state and local governments the opportunity to
find and potentially make use of geographic information systems (GIS)
projects in their areas. Regarding the fourth objective, the project team
recently conducted the first of a series of teleconferences aimed at
sharing information about federal, state, and local government GIS
activities.

Performance

The table lists key performance metrics used for the Geospatial One-Stop
initiative and their reported status.

                         Table 32: Performance Metrics

Metric Target Reported status

Number of data sets posted to the portal Not reported 5,417 as of November
5, 2003

Number of users Not reported 	12,299 unique visitors for month ending
November 3, 2003

Number of cost sharing partnerships for Not reported Not reported data
collection activities

Number of data set hits Not reported Not reported

Number of federal agencies posting Not reported 16 as of November 3, 2003
data sets to geodata.gov

            Source: President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget submission.

GovBenefits

Managing partner agency: Department of Labor

Purpose: Provide a single point of access for citizens to locate and
determine potential eligibility for government benefits and services.

Reported fiscal year 2004 budget: $11.9 million

Table 33: Status of Original GovBenefits.gov Objectives

Assessed Objectives status

Provide potential beneficiaries instant access to information for all

government benefit programs and services through a single Web site.

Enable individuals to apply for benefits online through a streamlined
application process.

Source: GAO analysis of Labor data.

Legend: = objective fully or substantially achieved; 0R = objective
partially achieved; = no significant progress made toward this objective;
{} = objective no longer applicable.

Project Progress

The GovBenefits program has made progress in allowing citizens to locate
and apply for government benefits and services. The GovBenefits.gov portal
currently provides information about over 500 benefits programs at 22
agencies, including some state benefits programs. The portal uses a
structured set of questions to identify benefit programs that may apply to
citizens, eliminating the need to try to identify such programs
individually at separate government agencies. According to GovBenefits
officials, the project's next phase will focus on working with partner
agencies to develop standards for benefit eligibility and application
information. GovBenefits officials reported that until such standards are
developed, an online application capability cannot be deployed.

Performance

The table lists key performance metrics used for the GovBenefits.gov
initiative and their reported status.

Table 34: Performance Metrics

                                  Metric       Target     Reported status     
                Visits to site per month      350,000    498,743 for month    
                                                      ending October 31, 2003 
           Number of unique visitors per                 251,304 for month    
                                   month Not reported 
                                                      ending October 31, 2003 

               Number of referrals to partner 10% increase   35,000 for month 
                                      benefit                          ending 
                                        sites               October 2, 2002;  
                                                           107,484 for month  
                                                           ending October 31, 
                                                                         2003 

Average time to find benefits and 20 minutes or less 15 minutes as of
determine eligibility September 1, 2003

            Source: President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget submission.

  Grants.gov

Managing partner agency: Health and Human Services (HHS)

Purpose: Create a single portal for all federal grant customers to find,
apply for, and ultimately manage grants online.

Reported fiscal year 2004 budget: $10.67 million

Table 35: Status of Original Grants.gov Objectives

Assessed Objectives status

Pilot a simple, unified way to find grant opportunities via the Web.

Evaluate the use or expansion of interagency and agency specific

                 capabilities for discretionary grant programs.

Work with e-authentication PMO and privacy groups.

Define application data standards.

Deploy simple, unified application mechanism.

Source: GAO analysis of HHS data.

Legend: = objective fully or substantially achieved; 0R = objective
partially achieved; = no significant progress made toward this objective;
{} = objective no longer applicable.

Project Progress

The Grants.gov initiative (formerly e-Grants) has achieved all of its
original objectives. In July 2002, the initiative piloted its "Find" tool,
which serves as a simple, unified way for grant applicants to find
discretionary grant opportunities via the Internet. In May 2002, a
technology evaluation report was published that examined the use or
expansion of interagency and agency-specific capabilities including
commercial off-the-shelf software. In consultation with the
e-Authentication initiative, Grants.gov selected a commercial provider of
e-authentication credentials for the Grants.gov site. The initiative
worked to define a standard grant application for its "Apply" tool, which
would allow an applicant to download an application form and submit an
application online. In October 2002, after consultations with stakeholders
in the grantee community, an existing OMB-approved standard grant
application form already in use by many grant-making agencies was selected
for use in the "Apply" tool. On October 31, 2003, the www.Grants.gov site
was deployed with both "Find" and "Apply" tools. A grant applicant may

search for grant opportunities via the site, download an application form,
and submit the application online. According to project documentation, as
of February 2004, the Grants.gov portal allowed prospective grants
applicants to find and apply for a total of 835 grant opportunities at 29
grant-making agencies.

Performance

The table lists key performance metrics used for the Grants.gov initiative
and their reported status.

                         Table 36: Performance Metrics

Metric Target Reported status

Number of grant-making agencies Not reported 26 as of December 9, 2003

                    publishing grant opportunities in portal

Number of grant programs available for electronic application

                     Not reported 6 as of December 9, 2003

Percent of reusable information per grant Not reported Not reported
application

            Number of applications received Not reported  8 as of December 9, 
                                                                         2003 
                             electronically              
              Number of grant announcements Not reported 1,516 as of December 
                                     posted              3,                   
             in Grants.gov (Total Postings)                              2003 

            Source: President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget submission.

  Integrated Acquisition Environment (IAE)

Managing partner agency: General Services Administration (GSA)

Purpose: Create a secure business environment that will facilitate and
support the cost-effective acquisition of goods and services by agencies,
while eliminating inefficiencies in the current acquisition environment.

Reported fiscal year 2004 budget: $44 million

Table 37: Status of Original Integrated Acquisition Environment Objectives

Assessed Objectives status

Deploy a single point of registration and validation of supplier data

accessed by all agencies.

Implement a central point for consolidated collection and access of
statistical and management information related to government
acquisitions.

Implement a directory of governmentwide acquisition contracts (GWAC) and
multiple award contracts (MAC) to simplify selection and facilitate 
leverage of government buying.

Develop a standard glossary and vocabulary to facilitate exchange of data
between and within agencies. 0R

Reduce the cost of and make transparent the ordering, billing, and
collections of intergovernmental transactions. 0R

Source: GAO analysis of GSA data.

Legend: = objective fully or substantially achieved; 0R = objective
partially achieved; = no significant progress made toward this objective;
{} = objective no longer applicable.

Project Progress

Three of IAE's five original objectives are complete, and the remaining
two objectives are partially complete. The project team developed a single
point of registration and validation through IAE's Business Partner
Network, which allowed the Small Business Administration to shut down its
obsolete Pro-NET. In October 2003, the project launched the Federal
Procurement Data System-Next Generation (FPDS-NG), which is intended to be
the central point for collection of statistical and management information
related to government acquisitions. In addition, the IAE project team
developed and implemented an interagency contracts directory,

which became operational in July 2003. The directory references 16,000
contracts as of February 18, 2004. Regarding its fourth objective, the
project team has published a first version of eTransaction standards as
well as a draft summary Extensible Markup Language guidance. While the
fifth objective was listed in the project's May 2002 work plans as
involving "intergovernmental" transactions, it was actually intended to
refer to intragovernmental (i.e., within the federal government)
transactions. The IAE team has registered all agencies for
intragovernmental transactions, and it is currently prototyping an
intragovernmental transaction system with five agencies.

Performance

The table lists key performance metrics used for the IAE initiative and
their reported status.

          Table 38: Performance Metrics Metric Target Reported status

Percent reduction in time for delivery of Not reported Not reported
products and services

Cost-to-spend Not reported Not reported

              Number of intra-governmental Not reported 40 as of December 11, 
                                                                         2003 
            transactions going through the              
            Intragovernmental Transactions              
                                  Exchange              

                     Number of interagency Not reported 16,000 as of December 
                              contracts in              11,                   
                                 directory                               2003 
              Number of vendors registered Not reported         262,823 as of 
                                    in the                       December 11, 
                        central contractor                               2003 
                      registration central              
                                  database              
                      Percent reduction in Not reported                       
                               procurement                       Not reported
                        transaction errors              

Percent of transactions reported directly Not reported Not reported to
FPDS-NG

            Source: President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget submission.

  Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Free File

Managing partner agency: Department of Treasury

Purpose: Create a single point of access to free online preparation and
electronic tax filing services provided by commercial partners to reduce
burden and costs to taxpayers.

Reported fiscal year 2004 budget: $406,00016

Table 39: Status of Original IRS Free File Objectives

Assessed Objectives status

Work with a consortium of companies from the electronic tax
preparation and filing industry to offer free online tax return
preparation
to a significant number of taxpayers.

Host a Web page for the consortium and provide access to the

               consortium from appropriate government Web pages.

Source: GAO analysis of Treasury data.

Legend: = objective fully or substantially achieved; 0R = objective
partially achieved; = no significant progress made toward this objective;
{} = objective no longer applicable.

Project Progress

Formerly known as EZ Tax Filing, the IRS Free File initiative is now
largely complete. The initiative's strategy has been to leverage existing
commercial service providers to offer a free tax filing option to some
federal taxpayers. According to the IRS Free File program manager, the IRS
signed an agreement with the Free File Alliance-a consortium of companies
in the electronic tax preparation and filing industry-to make free
electronic filing services available to 60 percent of taxpayers on October
30, 2002. On January 16, 2003, the IRS launched the free file service on
www.irs.gov. Taxpayers visiting the project's Web site can link to
companies that are members of the Free File Alliance and receive free
filing services, if taxpayers meet company-defined eligibility
requirements, such as a maximum adjusted gross income.

16 Estimate provided by IRS Free File initiative program staff. There was
no fiscal year 2004 budget submission for this initiative.

Performance

The table lists key performance metrics used for the IRS Free File
initiative and their reported status.

                         Table 40: Performance Metrics

Metric Target Reported status

Percentage coverage of tax filing public Minimum of 60 percent 60 percent
minimum

Number of citizens filing electronically 2.4 million 	2.79 million as of
September 30, 2003

            Source: President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget submission.

  International Trade Process Streamlining (ITPS)

Managing partner agency: Department of Commerce

Purpose: Make it easy for small and medium enterprises to obtain the
information and documents needed to conduct business abroad.

Reported fiscal year 2004 budget: $1.47 million

Table 41: Status of Original International Trade Process Streamlining
Objectives

Assessed Objectives status

Consolidate and integrate the export process online under Export.gov,
which will include foreign partner matching/verification, export financing
and insurance, and consolidated market research.

Develop online applications for export financing, insurance, and loan
guarantees offered through the Export-Import Bank and the Foreign 0R 
Agriculture Service's Credit Guarantee System.

Introduce "One-Stop, One Form," which will reduce the time required for
small and medium enterprises to fill out export-related forms and 0R
paperwork by providing a single online form for many export
transactions.

Source: GAO analysis of Commerce data.

Legend: = objective fully or substantially achieved; 0R = objective
partially achieved; = no significant progress made toward this objective;
{} = objective no longer applicable.

Project Progress

The ITPS project team has fully achieved one of its original objectives
and has made progress towards achieving the other two. According to the
ITPS project manager, other trade portals have been integrated into the
export.gov portal, thus consolidating the online export process. The
project team has deployed online tools, such as a guide for exporting, an
automated North American Free Trade Agreement certificate of origin, and a
streamlined application process for exporters. Additionally, the project
manager stated that a tool has been put online that allows exporters to
enter their information in a single form that is used to automatically
populate all other applications that are linked to this form. According to
the project manager, additional applications to more fully address the
second and third objectives are currently in development.

Performance

The table lists key performance metrics used for the ITPS initiative and
their reported status.

Table 42: Performance Metrics

Metric Target Reported status

Time to fill out export forms and locate Reduce by 10 Not reported
information percent annually

Number of unique visitors to Export.gov 	Increase by 15 598,290 as of
January 7, percent 2004

           Number of trade leads accessed Increase by 10 28,716 as of January 
                                       by                                  7, 
             small and medium enterprises        percent                 2004 
                                  through                
                               export.gov                
          Number of registered businesses                 1,246 as of January 
                                       on   Not reported              7, 2004 
                               Export.gov                

            Source: President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget submission.

  Project SAFECOM

Managing partner agency: Department of Homeland Security (DHS)

Purpose: Serve as the umbrella program within the federal government to
help local, tribal, state, and federal public safety agencies improve
public safety response through more effective and efficient interoperable
wireless communications.

Reported fiscal year 2004 budget: $26.02 million

Table 43: Status of Original Project SAFECOM Objectives

Assessed Objectives status

Achieve federal-to-federal interoperability throughout the nation.

Achieve federal-to-state/local interoperability throughout the nation.

Achieve state/local interoperability throughout the nation.

Source: GAO analysis of DHS data.

Legend: = objective fully or substantially achieved; 0R = objective
partially achieved; = no significant progress made toward this objective;
{} = objective no longer applicable.

Project Progress

As of March 2004, Project SAFECOM has made very limited progress in
addressing its overall objective of achieving communications
interoperability among entities at all levels of government. Program
officials now estimate that a minimum level of interoperability will not
occur until 2008, and that full interoperability will not occur until 15
years later, in 2023.

SAFECOM has experienced frequent changes in management, which have
hampered its progress. OMB originally designated the Department of the
Treasury as the project's managing partner. However, in May 2002, the
Federal Emergency Management Agency, which had an emergency-response
mission more closely aligned with SAFECOM's goals, was designated managing
partner. By September 2002, the Federal Emergency Management Agency had
replaced its SAFECOM management team and shifted its implementation
approach. Following the establishment of the

Department of Homeland Security17 in May 2003, the project was taken out
of the Federal Emergency Management Agency and assigned to the
department's new Science and Technology Directorate because of a perceived
need to incorporate more technical expertise. This marked the fourth major
change in the project's management team within 2 years.

Project SAFECOM has pursued a number of activities since DHS took control
of the project in May 2003 that are intended to lay the groundwork for
future interoperability. Specifically, DHS established a governance
structure for the project that includes executive and advisory committees
to formalize collaboration with stakeholders. The department has also
conducted several planning conferences that have provided an opportunity
for stakeholders to modify program goals and the tasks planned to address
them. Further, grant guidance has been developed within the SAFECOM
project for use with awards to public safety agencies that encourage
planning for interoperability. Also, project officials are working with
the Commerce Department to catalog all existing federal agencies that use
public safety communications systems and networks.

Performance

The table lists key performance metrics used for the Project SAFECOM
initiative and their reported status.

          Table 44: Performance Metrics Metric Target Reported status

Number of agencies that can communicate with Not reported Not reported one
another

Response times for jurisdictions and disciplines Not reported Not reported
to respond to an event

Number of wireless grant programs that include Not reported 2
SAFECOM-approved equipment

Voice, data, and video Not reported Not reported Convergence

Source: President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget submission.

17 The Federal Emergency Management Agency became part of the Department
of Homeland Security in March 2003.

  Recreation One-Stop

Managing partner agency: Department of the Interior

Purpose: Provide a single-point-of-access, user-friendly, Web-based
resource to citizens, offering information and access to government
recreational sites.

Reported fiscal year 2004 budget: $0.6 million

Table 45: Status of Original Recreation One-Stop Objectives

Assessed Objectives status

Allow citizens to be able to obtain information about parks, museums,
historical landmarks, and other recreation sites, including hours of
operation, fees, public accommodations, and services.

Allow citizens to be able to make reservations, order passes, conduct
other service transactions online. 0R

Provide access to government-collected data relevant to recreation
activities. 0R

Link to related information and services provided by nongovernmental
partners.

Source: GAO analysis of Interior data.

Legend: = objective fully or substantially achieved; 0R = objective
partially achieved; = no significant progress made toward this objective;
{} = objective no longer applicable.

Project Progress

Of the four original objectives, the initiative has completed one,
partially completed two others, and made no progress on the last. The
original Recreation.gov Web site, which was launched in April 1998,
provided limited information on recreation sites and activities. The
current site, developed by the Recreation One-Stop initiative, offers
services that allow citizens not only to obtain information on recreation
sites and activities-addressing the initiative's first objective-but also
to make reservations, partially addressing the second objective. The site
does not yet allow for ordering passes or for conducting other online
transactions. By providing online information and reservations, the Web
site provides access to some government-collected data relevant to
recreation activities, but not all state government recreation information
is yet included.

Currently, the initiative is seeking to develop agreed-upon standards for
data submission and display for a planned online clearinghouse. The site
does not yet contain any links to information or services provided by
nongovernmental partners.

Performance

The table lists key performance metrics used for the Recreation One-Stop
initiative and their reported status.

          Table 46: Performance Metrics Metric Target Reported status

Number of partners sharing data using common (Recreation Markup Language)
data standard

                          Increase by 15% Not reported

Number of facilities listed in Recreation.gov Increase by 25% 3,800 as of
1/7/04 Number of federal Web sites with

    Increase by 25% Not reported consistent recreation data Number of online
                     reservations Not reported Not reported

            Source: President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget submission.

  Recruitment One-Stop (ROS)

Managing partner agency: Office of Personnel Management (OPM)

Purpose: Outsource delivery of USAJOBS Federal Employment Information
System to deliver state-of-the-art online recruitment services to job
seekers including intuitive job searching, online resume submission,
applicant data mining, and online feedback on status and eligibility.

Reported fiscal year 2004 budget: $6.7 million

                  Table 47: Status of Original ROS Objectives

Assessed Objectives status

Increase customer satisfaction with the federal application process
through Recruitment One-Stop. 0R

Decrease the amount of time it takes to source candidates. 0R

Source 75 percent of federal job candidates through Recruitment One-Stop
by the end of fiscal year 2003.

Desired quality level of new hires is achieved.

Identify and work to eliminate unnecessary legal and regulatory
constraints to effective recruitment.

Source: GAO analysis of OPM data.

Legend: = objective fully or substantially achieved; 0R = objective
partially achieved; = no significant progress made toward this objective;
{} = objective no longer applicable.

Project Progress

The ROS team has worked primarily to enhance the USAJobs Web

site, which is intended to serve as the foundation for achieving most

of the initiative's objectives. Regarding the first objective, ROS has

used the American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) as a

measure. The ACSI rates customer service with a score of 0 to 100,

and the customer satisfaction rating for the USAJobs Web site has

increased from a score of 68 to a score of 73. OPM officials stated

that although they have increased customer satisfaction, their

intention is to significantly surpass the government average score of

71. The projects' second objective has been partially realized; a
resume-mining tool to source candidates has been implemented, but

it has not been widely used to date. The third objective has not been
achieved; currently only approximately 21 percent of federal job
candidates have been sourced through ROS. Further, ROS has not developed
or implemented a measure for whether the "desired quality level" of new
hires has been achieved. ROS has made no significant progress toward the
fifth objective; ROS has not identified nor has it worked to eliminate
unnecessary legal and regulatory constraints.

Performance

The table lists key performance metrics used for the Recruitment One-Stop
initiative and their reported status.

                         Table 48: Performance Metrics

Metric Target Reported status

            Cost per hire Not reported $2,790 as of August 30, 2003

Time to fill vacancies Not reported 102 as of August 30, 2003

        Percent of federal job applicants   80 percent           Not reported 
                                    using              
                     Recruitment One-Stop              
               Number of visitors to site Not reported 183,911 as of December 
                                  (daily)                                 31, 
                                                                         2003 
         Number of applications (resumes) Not reported 273,820 as of December 
                                       on                                 31, 
                            file annually                                2003 

Availability of applicant status Real time Not reported

            Source: President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget submission.

  USA Services

Managing partner agency: General Services Administration (GSA)

Purpose: Develop and deploy governmentwide citizen customer service using
industry best practices that will provide citizens with timely, consistent
responses about government information and services.

Reported fiscal year 2004 budget: $9.35 million

Table 49: Status of Original USA Services Objectives

Assessed Objectives status

Implement a pilot routing and reporting solution for e-mail messages from

                  FirstGov to a selected group of 10 agencies

Deploy an integrated Web and call center point of service including e-mail

management systems managed by GSA's Office of Citizen Services

Assess citizen needs against existing federal government customer
relationship management (CRM) environments and systems. Define 0R
citizen-focused response processes that are optimized for timeliness and
quality of response, while incorporating privacy and security.

Develop and implement a prototype for a seamless, multiagency citizen
response accountability solution. This will be an integrated case
management and CRM system. Then implement the solution as an 
integrated cross-organization solution.

Source: GAO analysis of GSA data.

Legend: = objective fully or substantially achieved; 0R = objective
partially achieved; = no significant progress made toward this objective;
{} = objective no longer applicable.

Project Progress

USA Services developed and implemented a pilot reporting and routing
solution for e-mail messages in December 2002, and in April 2003, the
project established a more robust e-mail capability through its Federal
Citizen Information Center (FCIC) National Contact Center. Currently, a
citizen can submit questions for the federal government via the FirstGov
portal or by calling the National Contact Center. Inquiries submitted via
FirstGov are routed to an FCIC "information agent" where the inquiry is
resolved or forwarded to the appropriate agency contact. Currently USA
Services resolves agency-specific requests for four agencies that have
contracted for

such services and has newly signed agreements with two additional
agencies. USA Services assesses citizen needs through various means,
including the American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) and by obtaining
direct citizen feedback. However, the CRM component of the initiative's
objectives has not yet been realized. According to project officials, the
project's original vision of an integrated case management system has not
been achieved and is currently on hold because of concerns about
feasibility, cost, and protection of customer privacy.

Performance

The table lists key performance metrics used for the USA Services
initiative and their reported status.

Table 50: Measures of USA Services Performance

Reported status as of Measure Target Sept. 30, 2003

Average time to respond to inquiries 100% of inquiries 12 hours through
Firstgov.gov and FCIC responded to within

                                    24 hours

Average time to resolve inquiries Not reported 2 business days through
Firstgov.gov and FCIC

Number of governmentwide inquiries 3.3 million calls per 1,756,700 calls;
60,198 that call center and e-mail systems can year; 150,000 e-mails
handle e-mails per year

Achieve cost savings from outsourcing 10 agencies by Sept. 3 agencies; 13
agencies Tier 1 citizen contact center 30, 2004 have established
requirements to USA Services working agreements

            Source: President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget submission.

(310703)
*** End of document. ***