Information Technology: Agencies Need to Establish Comprehensive 
Policies to Address Changes to Projects' Cost, Schedule, and	 
Performance Goals (31-JUL-08, GAO-08-925).			 
                                                                 
The federal government plans to spend about $70 billion on	 
information technology (IT) projects during fiscal year 2008.	 
Consequently, it is important that projects be managed		 
effectively to ensure that public resources are wisely invested. 
At times, a project's cost, schedule, and performance		 
goals--known as its baseline--are modified to reflect changed	 
development circumstances. These changes--called a		 
rebaselining--can be done for valid reasons, but can also be used
to mask cost overruns and schedule delays. GAO was asked to (1)  
determine the extent of and the primary reasons for IT project	 
rebaselining and (2) determine whether federal agencies have	 
sound policies for rebaselining projects. To do this, GAO	 
surveyed the managers of a random sample of 180 projects selected
from the 778 major IT projects the 24 major agencies plan to	 
invest in during fiscal year 2008. GAO also compared agencies'	 
rebaselining policies to best practices.			 
-------------------------Indexing Terms------------------------- 
REPORTNUM:   GAO-08-925 					        
    ACCNO:   A83236						        
  TITLE:     Information Technology: Agencies Need to Establish       
Comprehensive Policies to Address Changes to Projects' Cost,	 
Schedule, and Performance Goals 				 
     DATE:   07/31/2008 
  SUBJECT:   Agency missions					 
	     Best practices					 
	     Budgeting						 
	     Cost analysis					 
	     Cost overruns					 
	     Federal agencies					 
	     Future budget projections				 
	     Information technology				 
	     IT acquisitions					 
	     IT investment management				 
	     IT policies					 
	     Performance measures				 
	     Policy evaluation					 
	     Program evaluation 				 
	     Requirements definition				 
	     Schedule slippages 				 
	     Surveys						 
	     Systems analysis					 
	     Systems conversions				 
	     Systems development life cycle			 
	     Policies and procedures				 
	     Transparency					 

******************************************************************
** 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-08-925

This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part 
of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every 
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of 
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text 
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the 
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided 
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed 
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic 
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail 
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this 
document to [email protected]. 

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. 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. 

Report to Congressional Requesters: 

United States Government Accountability Office: 
GAO: 

July 2008: 

Information Technology: 

Agencies Need to Establish Comprehensive Policies to Address Changes to 
Projects' Cost, Schedule, and Performance Goals: 

GAO-08-925: 

GAO Highlights: 

Highlights of GAO-08-925, a report to congressional requesters. 

Why GAO Did This Study: 

The federal government plans to spend about $70 billion on information 
technology (IT) projects during fiscal year 2008. Consequently, it is 
important that projects be managed effectively to ensure that public 
resources are wisely invested. At times, a projectï¿½s cost, schedule, 
and performance goalsï¿½known as its baselineï¿½are modified to reflect 
changed development circumstances. These changesï¿½called a 
rebaseliningï¿½can be done for valid reasons, but can also be used to 
mask cost overruns and schedule delays. 

GAO was asked to (1) determine the extent of and the primary reasons 
for IT project rebaselining and (2) determine whether federal agencies 
have sound policies for rebaselining projects. To do this, GAO surveyed 
the managers of a random sample of 180 projects selected from the 778 
major IT projects the 24 major agencies plan to invest in during fiscal 
year 2008. GAO also compared agenciesï¿½ rebaselining policies to best 
practices. 

What GAO Found: 

Based on GAOï¿½s survey, approximately 48 percent of the federal 
governmentï¿½s major IT projects have been rebaselined, and projects are 
rebaselined for several reasons, including changes in project goals, 
changes in funding, or inaccurate original baselines. Of the 
rebaselined projects, 51 percent were rebaselined twice or more, and 11 
percent were rebaselined 4 times or more (see figure). The most 
commonly cited reasons for rebaselining were changes in project 
requirements, objectives, or scope (55 percent of IT projects), and 
changes in funding stream (44 percent of IT projects). 

While major agencies have all established rebaselining policies, these 
policies are not comprehensive. Specifically, none of the policies are 
fully consistent with best practices, such as describing a process for 
developing a new baseline. Agenciesï¿½ policies vary in part because the 
Office of Management and Budget, which plays a key role in overseeing 
the federal governmentï¿½s IT investments and how they are managed, has 
not issued guidance specifying what elements these policies are to 
include. Without comprehensive policies to guide them, agencies may not 
be optimizing the effectiveness of rebaselining as a tool to improve 
performance management. In addition, their rebaselining processes may 
lack the transparency needed to ensure effective oversight. 

Figure: Estimated Frequency of the Number of Times that Rebaselined 
Major IT Projects were Rebaselined: 

[See PDF for image] 

This figure is a vertical bar graph depicting the following data: 

Times rebaselined: 1; 
Percentage of projects: 49%. 

Times rebaselined: 2
Percentage of projects: 29%. 

Times rebaselined: 3; 
Percentage of projects: 11%. 

Times rebaselined: 4. 
Percentage of projects: 5%. 

Times rebaselined: 5; 
Percentage of projects: 4%. 

Times rebaselined: 6; 
Percentage of projects: 1%. 

Times rebaselined: 7; 
Percentage of projects: 1%. 

Source: GAO survey of major IT projects. 

[End of figure] 

What GAO Recommends: 

GAO is recommending that Office of Management and Budget issue guidance 
for rebaselining policies and that the major agencies develop policies 
that address identified weaknesses. Most of the agencies who commented 
on a draft of this report generally agreed with GAOï¿½s results and/or 
recommendations. 

To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-08-925]. For more 
information, contact David A. Powner at (202) 512-9286 or 
[email protected]. 

[End of section] 

Contents: 

Letter: 

Results in Brief: 

Background: 

About Half of the Federal Government's Major IT Projects Have Been 
Rebaselined for Several Reasons: 

Agencies' Rebaselining Policies Are Not Comprehensive: 

Conclusions: 

Recommendations: 

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation: 

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope and Methodology: 

Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Commerce: 

Appendix III: Comments from the Department of Defense: 

Appendix IV: Comments from the Department of Housing and Urban 
Development: 

Appendix V: Comments from the Department of State: 

Appendix VI: Comments from the National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration: 

Appendix VII: Comments from the Department of Homeland Security: 

Appendix VIII: Comments from the Agency of International Development: 

Appendix IX: Comments from the Department of Environmental Protection 
Agency: 

Appendix X: Comments from the General Services Administration: 

Appendix XI: Surveyed Projects with Number of Times Rebaselined and 
Reasons for Most Recent Rebaseline: 

Appendix XII: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments: 

Tables: 

Table 1: Projects Rebaselined Four or More Times: 

Table 2: Estimated Frequency of Reasons for the Most Recent 
Rebaselining of Projects: 

Table 3: Rebaselined Projects Cost and Schedule Changes (dollars in 
millions): 

Table 4: Summary of Rebaselining Policy Assessment: 

Table 5: Extent to Which Agencies' Policies Are Consistent with Best 
Practices: 

Table 6: Number of Times Each Project was Rebaselined and Reasons for 
Most Recent Rebaseline: 

Figures: 

Figure 1: Estimated Percentage of Major FY2008 Funded IT Projects 
Rebaselined: 

Figure 2: Estimated Frequency of the Number of Times that Rebaselined 
Projects were Rebaselined: 

Abbreviations: 

DOD: Department of Defense: 

DOE: Department of Energy: 

FASA: Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act: 

IT: information technology: 

MD: Management Directive: 

NPOESS: National Polar-orbiting Operational Environment Satellite 
System: 

OMB: Office of Budget and Management: 

OPM: Office of Personnel Management: 

[End of section] 

United States Government Accountability Office: Washington, DC 20548: 

July 31, 2008: 

The Honorable Tom Carper: 
Chairman: 
The Honorable Tom Coburn, M.D. 
Ranking Member: 
Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information, 
Federal Services, and International Security: 
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs: 
United State Senate: 

The federal government plans to spend about $70 billion on information 
technology (IT) projects during fiscal year 2008. Given the size of 
this investment, it is important that projects be managed effectively 
to ensure that public resources are wisely invested. Effectively 
managing projects involves pulling together essential cost, schedule, 
and performance goals in a meaningful, coherent fashion so that 
managers have an accurate view of the program's development status. At 
times these cost, schedule, and performance goals--known as a baseline-
-need to be modified to reflect new circumstances. While these changes-
-generally referred to as rebaselining--can be done for valid reasons, 
they can also be used to mask cost overruns and schedule delays. 

As agreed with your staff, our objectives were to (1) determine the 
extent of and primary reasons for IT project rebaselining and (2) 
determine whether agencies have sound policies for rebaselining 
projects. To address these objectives, we sent a structured 
questionnaire to the 24 major federal agencies[Footnote 1] asking them 
to provide rebaselining information on a random sample of 180 projects 
from the total of 778 major IT projects they expect to invest in during 
fiscal year 2008. We achieved a response rate of 99%. 

We also obtained rebaselining policies from each of the agencies and 
compared these policies to best practices identified in the Cost 
Assessment Guide.[Footnote 2] Appendix I contains details about our 
objectives, scope, and methodology. Our work was performed between 
January and July 2008 in accordance with generally accepted government 
auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform 
the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a 
reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit 
objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable 
basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. 

Results in Brief: 

Based on our survey, we estimate that about 48 percent[Footnote 3] of 
the federal government's major IT projects have been rebaselined and 
that projects are rebaselined for several reasons, including changes in 
project goals and changes in funding. Of those rebaselined projects, 51 
percent were rebaselined at least twice and about 11 percent were 
rebaselined 4 times or more. The most commonly cited reason for 
rebaselining was changes in project requirements, objectives, or scope-
-55 percent.[Footnote 4] Another frequently cited reason was changes in 
funding stream--44 percent. Examples of rebaselined projects we have 
identified show that rebaselining can result in significant changes to 
projects' cost and schedule goals. The U.S. Coast Guard's Rescue 21 
system, for example, is projected to experience cost increases of 184 
percent and schedule delays of 5 years after rebaselining. 

While the major agencies have all established rebaselining policies, 
these policies are not comprehensive. Specifically, none of the 
policies were fully consistent with best practices, including 
describing a process for developing a new baseline and requiring the 
validation of the new baseline, identified in the Cost Assessment 
Guide. Agencies' policies vary in part because the Office of Management 
and Budget (OMB), which plays a key role in overseeing the federal 
government's IT investments and how they are managed, has not issued 
guidance specifying what elements these policies are to include. 
Without comprehensive policies to guide them, agencies may not be 
optimizing the effectiveness of rebaselining as a tool to improve 
performance management. In addition, their rebaselining processes may 
not have the transparency needed to ensure effective oversight. 

To address the weaknesses identified with agencies' rebaselining 
policies, we are recommending that the Director of OMB issue guidance 
for rebaselining policies that would include a minimum set of key 
elements. In doing so, the Director should consider the criteria used 
in our report. We are also recommending that the heads of the 24 major 
agencies direct the development of comprehensive rebaselining policies 
that address the weaknesses we identified. 

We received comments on a draft of our report from 20 of the major 
agencies--4 of which stated that they had no comments. Of the remaining 
16 agencies, 10 generally agreed with our findings and/or 
recommendations, and 6 disagreed with our assessment of certain 
practices associated with their rebaselining policies. The Departments 
of Commerce, Defense, Housing and Urban Development, and State, the 
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Department of 
Homeland Security, the U.S. Agency for International Development, the 
Environmental Protection Agency, and the General Services 
Administration provided written responses which are reprinted in 
appendices II through X. 

Background: 

The federal government plans to spend about $70 billion on IT projects 
during fiscal year 2008, the bulk of this amount on 778 major projects 
being developed by the 24 major agencies. Major projects are those 
investments that require special management attention because of their 
importance to an agency's mission or because they are an integral part 
of the agency's enterprise architecture, have significant program or 
policy implications, have high executive visibility, or are defined as 
major by the agency's capital planning and investment control process. 
[Footnote 5] 

Given the size and significance of the government's investment in IT, 
it is important that projects be managed effectively to ensure that 
public resources are wisely invested. Effectively managing projects 
entails, among other things, pulling together essential cost, schedule, 
and performance goals in a meaningful, coherent fashion so that 
managers have an accurate view of the program's development status. At 
times these cost, schedule, and performance goals--known as a baseline-
-need to be modified to reflect new circumstances. While these changes-
-generally referred to as rebaselining--can be done for valid reasons-
-including, for example, changes in a project's objectives, scope, 
requirements, or funding stream, they can also be used to mask cost 
overruns and schedule delays. The purpose of a rebaselining is to 
ensure that project managers have realistic benchmarks for tracking the 
status of the project. 

OMB plays a key role in overseeing federal agencies' IT investments and 
how they are managed, stemming from its functions: to assist the 
President in overseeing the preparation of the federal budget and to 
supervise budget administration in Executive Branch agencies. In 
helping to formulate the President's spending plans, OMB evaluates the 
effectiveness of agency programs, policies, and procedures; assesses 
competing funding demands among agencies; and sets funding priorities. 
It also ensures that agency reports, rules, testimony, and proposed 
legislation are consistent with the President's budget and with 
administration policies. In carrying out these responsibilities, OMB 
depends on agencies to collect and report accurate and complete 
information; these activities depend, in turn, on agencies having 
effective IT management practices. 

Laws and Guidance on Project Oversight Reference Rebaselining: 

The Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) Circular A-11 and its 
accompanying Capital Programming Guide[Footnote 6] establish guidance 
for implementing a disciplined capital programming process as well as 
techniques for planning and budgeting, acquisition, and management and 
disposition of capital assets for federal agencies. For major 
acquisitions (which includes major IT systems), OMB requires that the 
agency head approve or define the cost, schedule, and performance 
goals. OMB specifies that agencies are expected to achieve, on average, 
90 percent of the cost, schedule and performance goals for major 
acquisitions. Further, OMB states that the Federal Acquisition 
Streamlining Act (FASA) of 1994 requires agency heads to review major 
acquisitions not achieving 90 percent of their goals to determine 
whether there is a continuing need for them and what corrective action 
should be taken.[Footnote 7] 

OMB requires that all proposed changes to baselines be submitted to it 
prior to an agency's budget request (and that proposed changes should 
not be assumed to be approved). The information OMB requires of 
agencies includes costs and milestones from both the initial baseline 
as well as the current baseline (if the program has been rebaselined). 
It also asks agencies whether the investment was rebaselined during the 
past fiscal year and, if so, if it was approved by the agency head. The 
Capital Programming Guide also notes that OMB reviews the reasons for 
deviation from goals, the reasonableness of the corrective actions 
proposed, and the validity of increased cost estimates. The guide 
further states that OMB is to consider approving a rebaseline proposal 
only when the agency has provided justification based on an integrated 
baseline review,[Footnote 8] demonstrates that the new goals have a 
high probability of attainability, and shows that the acquisition will 
still have a benefit-cost ratio that justifies continued funding after 
comparing it with the other projects in the portfolio and considering 
budget limitations. 

Staff from OMB's Office of E-government and Information Technology and 
the Acting Chief of OMB's Information Policy and Technology Branch told 
us that they review agencies' earned value management policies to 
determine their compliance with the provisions of the Presidential 
Management Agenda[Footnote 9] for E-government. They stated that, in 
reviewing these policies, they determine whether rebaselining is 
adequately addressed. 

In addition, the Department of Defense (DOD) has statutory requirements 
involving rebaselining. Each major defense acquisition program is 
required by statute to establish an approved program baseline before 
entering into the system development and demonstration phase of the 
acquisition cycle. The statute also requires DOD to prescribe 
regulations addressing the content of the baseline, reports of 
deviations from the baseline, procedures for reviewing such deviations 
within DOD, and procedures for submission to and approval by the 
Secretary of Defense of revised baselines. Another statute, known as 
Nunn-McCurdy (10 U.S.C. ï¿½ 2433), requires the baseline to be used by 
DOD in reporting program cost growth while another statute (10 U.S.C. ï¿½ 
2432) requires the baseline to be used to report annually to Congress 
on program status in selected acquisition reports. 

In a recent report on DOD acquisition program rebaselining,[Footnote 
10] we found that then-existing reporting requirements provided limited 
oversight information to Congress because rebaselining shortens the 
period of performance that is reported and resets the measurement of 
cost growth to zero. We also stated that DOD did not report the 
cumulative unit cost growth that a program has experienced since the 
first full baseline was established. Further, DOD was not required to 
report programs' rebaselines to Congress, and the revised status of 
such programs was not expeditiously reflected in reports to Congress. 

Subsequently, Congress revised the baseline statute to establish an 
"original baseline estimate" and the parameters for its revision. 
[Footnote 11] The original baseline, along with the current baseline, 
is now required to be used in reporting program cost growth and in 
annual reporting of program status to Congress. Congress also recently 
established baseline requirements specifically for major DOD automated 
information systems in the John Warner National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2007.[Footnote 12] These requirements were 
effective January 1, 2008, and establish the elements of a baseline for 
major DOD automated information system programs, to include: 

* the development schedule, including major milestones; 

* the implementation schedule, including estimates of milestone dates, 
initial operational capability, and full operational capability; 

* estimates of development costs and full life-cycle costs; and; 

* a summary of key performance parameters. 

The new statute requires that this information be included in DOD's 
budget justification documents and deems the initial submittal to 
Congress for each program to be the original baseline for that program. 
The statute then establishes procedures for reporting to Congress 
significant and critical changes to the program measured from the 
original baseline. If certain thresholds are crossed, DOD is required 
to certify the program to Congress, similar to the Nunn-McCurdy process 
mentioned above. The statute allows a rebaselining in the event of a 
critical change in the program and requires notification to Congress of 
such a change. 

GAO Guide Includes Practices Applicable to Rebaselining: 

We also recently issued the draft Cost Assessment Guide on best 
practices for estimating and managing program costs[Footnote 13] which, 
among other things, discusses considerations for rebaselining programs. 
For example, the guide identifies key cost, schedule, project execution 
risk, and data accuracy indicators that can serve as warning signs that 
a program may need to be rebaselined. These indicators include: a 
significant difference between the estimated cost to complete and the 
budget for remaining work (cost); unrealistic activity durations 
(schedule); a risk management analysis that shows significant changes 
in risk levels (project execution risk); and frequent or significant 
current or retroactive changes (data accuracy). The guide also 
identifies best practices that are relevant to rebaselining policies. 
These practices are: (1) describing reasons when a rebaseline is 
warranted, (2) describing the process for developing a new baseline, 
(3) requiring validation of the new baseline, (4) requiring management 
review, and (5) requiring that decisions associated with the 
rebaselining process are documented. We have performed assessments at 
several agencies using this guide, including assessments of National 
Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite programs and the 
Federal Bureau of Investigation's Case Management System.[Footnote 14] 

About Half of the Federal Government's Major IT Projects Have Been 
Rebaselined for Several Reasons: 

Based on our survey, an estimated 48 percent of the federal 
government's major IT projects have been rebaselined, and projects are 
rebaselined for several reasons, including changes in project goals and 
changes in funding. Of the rebaselined projects, about 51 percent were 
rebaselined two or more times and 9 were rebaselined 4 or more times. 
The most commonly cited reason for rebaselining was changes in project 
requirements, objectives, or scope--55 percent. Another frequently 
cited reason was changes in funding stream--44 percent. Examples of 
rebaselined projects we have identified show that rebaselining can 
result in significant changes to projects' cost and schedule goals. For 
example, the U.S. Coast Guard's Rescue 21 system is projected to have 
cost increases of 184 percent and schedule delays of 5 years after 
rebaselining. 

About Half of IT Projects Rebaselined: 

Our survey of 24 agencies' major IT projects funded for fiscal year 
2008 indicates that 48 percent of these projects have been rebaselined 
and about half of those have been rebaselined at least twice. Figure 1 
summarizes the percentage of projects rebaselined and figure 2 
summarizes the estimated frequencies of the number of times rebaselined 
major IT projects were rebaselined. 

Figure 1: Estimated Percentage of Major FY 2008 Funded IT Projects 
Rebaselined: 

[See PDF for image] 

This figure is a pie-chart depicting the following data: 

Estimated Percentage of Major FY 2008 Funded IT Projects Rebaselined: 
Rebaselined: 49%; 
Not rebaselined: 51%. 

Source: GAO survey of major IT projects. 

[End of figure] 

Figure 2: Estimated Frequency of the Number of Times that Rebaselined 
Projects were Rebaselined: 

[See PDF for image] 

This figure is a vertical bar graph depicting the following data: 

Times rebaselined: 1; 
Percentage of projects: 49%. 

Times rebaselined: 2
Percentage of projects: 29%. 

Times rebaselined: 3; 
Percentage of projects: 11%. 

Times rebaselined: 4. 
Percentage of projects: 5%. 

Times rebaselined: 5; 
Percentage of projects: 4%. 

Times rebaselined: 6; 
Percentage of projects: 1%. 

Times rebaselined: 7; 
Percentage of projects: 1%. 

Source: GAO survey of major IT projects. 

[End of figure] 

The detailed list of surveyed projects and the number of times agencies 
reported rebaselining them is found in appendix XI. 

Table 1 lists the nine projects in our sample that agencies reported 
having been rebaselined four or more times.[Footnote 15] 

Table 1: Projects Rebaselined Four or More Times: 

Department: Department of Defense; 
Project: Advanced Field Artillery Tactical Data System; 
Number of times rebaselined: 4. 

Department: Department of Energy; 
Project: Licensing Support Network; 
Number of times rebaselined: 4. 

Department: Department of Homeland Security; 
Project: Coast Guard Rescue 21; 
Number of times rebaselined: 4. 

Department: Department of Housing and Urban Development; 
Project: Integrated Human Resources and Training System; 
Number of times rebaselined: 4. 

Department: U.S. Department of Agriculture; 
Project: Program Fund Control System; 
Number of times rebaselined: 5. 

Department: Department of Commerce; 
Project: Patent and Trade Office Revenue and Account Management System; 
Number of times rebaselined: 5. 

Department: Department of Commerce; 
Project: Commerce Business Environment; 
Number of times rebaselined: 5. 

Department: Department of Veterans Affairs; 
Project: Health Admin Center IT Operations; 
Number of times rebaselined: 6. 

Department: Department of Housing and Urban Development; 
Project: Tenant Rental Assistance Certification System; 
Number of times rebaselined: 7. 

Source: GAO analysis of agency survey responses. 

[End of table] 

Changes in Goals and Funding Stream Reported as Primary Reasons for 
Rebaselining: 

Agency officials reported that the key reasons for the most recent 
rebaselinings were changes in project requirements, objectives, or 
scope, and changes in funding stream. Table 2 shows the estimated 
frequencies of each of these reasons. 

Table 2: Estimated Frequency of Reasons for the Most Recent 
Rebaselining of Projects: 

Category of Reasons: Change in project requirements, objectives, or 
scope; 
Percentage of times reported: 55%. 

Category of Reasons: Change in funding stream; 
Percentage of times reported: 44%. 

Category of Reasons: Original baseline was inaccurate; 
Percentage of times reported: 14%. 

Category of Reasons: Cost or schedule overruns due to project 
performance; 
Percentage of times reported: 4%. 

Category of Reasons: Cost or schedule overruns due to contractor 
performance; 
Percentage of times reported: 4%. 

Category of Reasons: Other; 
Percentage of times reported: 41%. 

Source: GAO analysis of agency survey responses. 

Note: Percentages do not total 100 percent because multiple reasons 
could be provided for rebaselining projects. 

[End of table] 

Examples of projects that have been rebaselined for each of the agency- 
provided primary reasons include: the Bureau of Land Management's 
Automated Fluid Mineral Support System, which, according to officials, 
was rebaselined in part due to changes in project requirements stemming 
from the Energy Policy Act of 2005; the Department of Veterans Affairs' 
My HealtheVet program, which was rebaselined due to changes made in the 
project's requirements, objectives, or scope in order to integrate 
newly available technology; the Environmental Protection Agency's 
Integrated Compliance Information System, which was rebaselined in part 
because of funding constraints resulting from a continuing resolution 
from October 2006 through April 2007 that slowed down planned 
development; and the Office of Personal Management's USA Jobs, which 
was rebaselined because changes in schedule and approved costs made the 
original baseline inaccurate. Appendix XI provides a detailed list of 
the reasons given for each rebaselined project. 

Respondents to our survey also cited other reasons for rebaselining. 
For example, the Transportation Security Administration's Secure Flight 
program was reportedly rebaselined in part due to additional 
requirements imposed to address congressional concerns about the 
security and privacy of personal data. The Department of Defense's 
Global Decision Support System was reportedly rebaselined due to 
changed requirements resulting from recommendations of the Base 
Realignment and Closure Commission. Additionally, the Department of 
Agriculture's Resource Ordering and Status System was reportedly 
rebaselined due to cost changes associated with changing economic 
conditions. 

Several Rebaselined Projects Have Experienced Significant Cost and 
Schedule Changes: 

Several rebaselined projects we have performed detailed reviews of have 
experienced significant cost or schedule changes. For example, the U.S. 
Coast Guard's Rescue 21 system is projected to have cost increases of 
184 percent and schedule delays of 5 years after rebaselining. The 
following table provides additional examples of projects we have 
reviewed that experienced significant cost or schedule changes. 

Table 3: Rebaselined Projects Cost and Schedule Changes (dollars in 
millions): 

Project: National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite 
System[A]; 
Original cost: $7000; 
Cost after rebaseline(s): $12500; 
Dollar change: $5500; 
Percent change: 79%; 
Original completion date: 2018; 
Completion date after rebaseline: 2026; 
Delay: 8 years. 

Project: Navy Enterprise Resource Planning; 
Original cost: $1993; 
Cost after rebaseline(s): $2445; 
Dollar change: $452; 
Percent change: 23%; 
Original completion date: Jun. 2011; 
Completion date after rebaseline: Aug. 2013; 
Delay: 2.2 years. 

Project: FAA Standard Terminal Automation Replacement System; 
Original cost: $940; 
Cost after rebaseline(s): $2770; 
Dollar change: $1830; 
Percent change: 195%; 
Original completion date: Oct. 2005; 
Completion date after rebaseline: Dec. 2007; 
Delay: 2.2 years. 

Project: FAA Wide Area Augmentation System; 
Original cost: $1001; 
Cost after rebaseline(s): $3340; 
Dollar change: $2339; 
Percent change: 234%; 
Original completion date: Aug. 1999; 
Completion date after rebaseline: Dec. 2008; 
Delay: 9.3 years. 

Project: US Coast Guard Rescue 21; 
Original cost: $250; 
Cost after rebaseline(s): $711; 
Dollar change: $461; 
Percent change: 184%; 
Original completion date: 2006; 
Completion date after rebaseline: 2011; 
Delay: 5 years. 

Source: GAO reports and agency data. 

[A] Only a portion of this program's costs are included in the federal 
government's $70 billion estimated IT expenditures for fiscal year 
2008. The rest is not considered to be an IT investment. 

[End of table] 

Agencies' Rebaselining Policies Are Not Comprehensive: 

Although the 24 major agencies have rebaselined about half of the major 
IT projects that they plan to invest in during fiscal year 2008, they 
have not been guided by comprehensive rebaselining policies. 
Specifically, while major agencies have all established rebaselining 
policies, none of the policies are fully consistent with best practices 
such as describing a process for developing a new baseline. 

Our recently issued draft Cost Assessment Guide[Footnote 16] includes 
five practices that are relevant to rebaselining policies: 

1. Describe reasons when a rebaseline is warranted. A rebaselining 
policy should require valid reasons for rebaselining such as that the 
baseline is no longer useful as a management tool (e.g., cost/schedule 
variances are so high that they lose meaning; program scope has 
significantly changed). 

2. Describe the process for developing a new baseline. A rebaselining 
policy should describe the development of a new cost estimate and a new 
project plan that details the scope of the remaining work along with 
schedule and resource allocation. 

3. Require validating the new baseline. A rebaselining policy should 
identify who can validate the new baseline and how the validation is to 
be done. 

4. Require management review. A rebaselining policy should identify the 
authority who decides whether the rebaselining is warranted and the 
rebaselining plan is acceptable. In addition, the policy should outline 
decision criteria used by the decision authority to determine if the 
rebaseline plan is acceptable. 

5. Require that the process is documented. A rebaselining policy should 
identify and document rebaselining decisions, including the reasons for 
rebaselining; changes to the approved baseline cost, schedule, and 
scope; management review of the rebaseline request; and approval of new 
baseline. The policy should also require an explanation of why the 
current plan is no longer feasible, identify the problems that led to 
the need for a new plan of the remaining work, and discuss measures in 
place to prevent recurrence. 

Our analysis shows that agencies do not have comprehensive rebaselining 
policies. Specifically, none of the agencies' rebaselining policies are 
fully consistent with all of the five practices mentioned above. Most 
policies fully or partially addressed describing reasons for 
rebaselining, requiring management review, and requiring that the 
rebaselining process be documented (79 percent, 96 percent, and 88 
percent, respectively), while describing the process for developing the 
new baseline, and requiring validation of the new baseline were 
addressed the least (46 percent and 54 percent of the policies, 
respectively, did not address these practices). Table 4 summarizes our 
assessment of agencies' rebaselining polices and table 5 provides a 
detailed assessment by agency. 

Table 4: Summary of Rebaselining Policy Assessment: 

Extent to Which Policy Addressed Best Practices: 

Practice: Describe reasons when a rebaseline is warranted; 
Number (and percent) of policies that fully addressed the practice: 14 
(58%); 
Number (and percent) of policies that partially addressed the practice: 
5 (21%); 
Number (and percent) of policies that did not address the practice: 5 
(21%). 

Practice: Describe process for developing a new baseline; 
Number (and percent) of policies that fully addressed the practice: 0 
(0%); 
Number (and percent) of policies that partially addressed the practice: 
13 (54%); 
Number (and percent) of policies that did not address the practice: 11 
(46%). 

Practice: Require validating the new baseline; 
Number (and percent) of policies that fully addressed the practice: 5 
(21%); 
Number (and percent) of policies that partially addressed the practice: 
6 (25%); 
Number (and percent) of policies that did not address the practice: 13 
(54%). 

Practice: Require management review; 
Number (and percent) of policies that fully addressed the practice: 9 
(38%); 
Number (and percent) of policies that partially addressed the practice: 
14 (58%); 
Number (and percent) of policies that did not address the practice: 1 
(4%). 

Practice: Require that the process is documented; 
Number (and percent) of policies that fully addressed the practice: 6 
(25%); 
Number (and percent) of policies that partially addressed the practice: 
15 (63%); 
Number (and percent) of policies that did not address the practice: 3 
(13%). 

Source: GAO analysis of agencies' rebaselining policies. 

[End of table] 

Table 5: Extent to Which Agencies' Policies Are Consistent with Best 
Practices: 

Agency: Agency for International Development; 
Describe reasons when a rebaseline is warranted: fully addressed; 
Describe process for developing a new baseline: partially addressed; 
Require validating the new baseline: fully addressed; 
Require management review: fully addressed; 
Require that the process is documented: partially addressed. 

Agency: Agriculture; 
Describe reasons when a rebaseline is warranted: partially addressed; 
Describe process for developing a new baseline: not addressed; 
Require validating the new baseline: not addressed; 
Require management review: partially addressed; 
Require that the process is documented: partially addressed. 

Agency: Commerce; 
Describe reasons when a rebaseline is warranted: not addressed; 
Describe process for developing a new baseline: not addressed; 
Require validating the new baseline: not addressed; 
Require management review: partially addressed; 
Require that the process is documented: partially addressed. 

Agency: Defense; 
Describe reasons when a rebaseline is warranted: fully addressed; 
Describe process for developing a new baseline: partially addressed; 
Require validating the new baseline: fully addressed; 
Require management review: partially addressed; 
Require that the process is documented: fully addressed. 

Agency: Homeland Security; 
Describe reasons when a rebaseline is warranted: not addressed; 
Describe process for developing a new baseline: not addressed; 
Require validating the new baseline: not addressed; 
Require management review: not addressed; 
Require that the process is documented: not addressed. 

Agency: Education; 
Describe reasons when a rebaseline is warranted: fully addressed; 
Describe process for developing a new baseline: not addressed; 
Require validating the new baseline: not addressed; 
Require management review: fully addressed; 
Require that the process is documented: fully addressed. 

Agency: Energy; 
Describe reasons when a rebaseline is warranted: fully addressed; 
Describe process for developing a new baseline: partially addressed; 
Require validating the new baseline: fully addressed; 
Require management review: partially addressed; 
Require that the process is documented: partially addressed. 

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency; 
Describe reasons when a rebaseline is warranted: fully addressed; 
Describe process for developing a new baseline: not addressed; 
Require validating the new baseline: fully addressed; 
Require management review: fully addressed; 
Require that the process is documented: partially addressed. 

Agency: General Services Administration; 
Describe reasons when a rebaseline is warranted: fully addressed; 
Describe process for developing a new baseline: partially addressed; 
Require validating the new baseline: not addressed; 
Require management review: fully addressed; 
Require that the process is documented: fully addressed. 

Agency: Health and Human Services; 
Describe reasons when a rebaseline is warranted: not addressed; 
Describe process for developing a new baseline: not addressed; 
Require validating the new baseline: not addressed; 
Require management review: partially addressed; 
Require that the process is documented: partially addressed. 

Agency: Housing and Urban Development; 
Describe reasons when a rebaseline is warranted: fully addressed; 
Describe process for developing a new baseline: not addressed; 
Require validating the new baseline: partially addressed; 
Require management review: fully addressed; 
Require that the process is documented: partially addressed. 

Agency: Interior; 
Describe reasons when a rebaseline is warranted: partially addressed; 
Describe process for developing a new baseline: partially addressed; 
Require validating the new baseline: not addressed; 
Require management review: fully addressed; 
Require that the process is documented: fully addressed. 

Agency: Justice; 
Describe reasons when a rebaseline is warranted: fully addressed; 
Describe process for developing a new baseline: not addressed; 
Require validating the new baseline: not addressed; 
Require management review: partially addressed; 
Require that the process is documented: partially addressed. 

Agency: Labor; 
Describe reasons when a rebaseline is warranted: fully addressed; 
Describe process for developing a new baseline: not addressed; 
Require validating the new baseline: not addressed; 
Require management review: partially addressed; 
Require that the process is documented: partially addressed. 

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration; 
Describe reasons when a rebaseline is warranted: partially addressed; 
Describe process for developing a new baseline: not addressed; 
Require validating the new baseline: partially addressed; 
Require management review: partially addressed; 
Require that the process is documented: partially addressed. 

Agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission; 
Describe reasons when a rebaseline is warranted: not addressed; 
Describe process for developing a new baseline: not addressed; 
Require validating the new baseline: partially addressed; 
Require management review: partially addressed; 
Require that the process is documented: not addressed. 

Agency: National Science Foundation; 
Describe reasons when a rebaseline is warranted: not addressed; 
Describe process for developing a new baseline: partially addressed; 
Require validating the new baseline: not addressed; 
Require management review: partially addressed; 
Require that the process is documented: not addressed. 

Agency: Office of Personnel Management; 
Describe reasons when a rebaseline is warranted: partially addressed; 
Describe process for developing a new baseline: partially addressed; 
Require validating the new baseline: fully addressed; 
Require management review: partially addressed; 
Require that the process is documented: partially addressed. 

Agency: Small Business Administration; 
Describe reasons when a rebaseline is warranted: fully addressed; 
Describe process for developing a new baseline: partially addressed; 
Require validating the new baseline: not addressed; 
Require management review: partially addressed; 
Require that the process is documented: partially addressed. 

Agency: Social Security Administration; 
Describe reasons when a rebaseline is warranted: fully addressed; 
Describe process for developing a new baseline: partially addressed; 
Require validating the new baseline: partially addressed; 
Require management review: partially addressed; 
Require that the process is documented: fully addressed. 

Agency: State; 
Describe reasons when a rebaseline is warranted: fully addressed; 
Describe process for developing a new baseline: partially addressed; 
Require validating the new baseline: not addressed; 
Require management review: fully addressed; 
Require that the process is documented: partially addressed. 

Agency: Transportation; 
Describe reasons when a rebaseline is warranted: partially addressed; 
Describe process for developing a new baseline: partially addressed; 
Require validating the new baseline: partially addressed; 
Require management review: fully addressed; 
Require that the process is documented: partially addressed. 

Agency: Treasury; 
Describe reasons when a rebaseline is warranted: fully addressed; 
Describe process for developing a new baseline: partially addressed; 
Require validating the new baseline: partially addressed; 
Require management review: partially addressed; 
Require that the process is documented: partially addressed. 

Agency: Veteran Affairs; 
Describe reasons when a rebaseline is warranted: fully addressed; 
Describe process for developing a new baseline: partially addressed; 
Require validating the new baseline: not addressed; 
Require management review: fully addressed; 
Require that the process is documented: fully addressed. 

Source: GAO analysis of agencies' rebaselining policies. 

Note: A practice was determined to be fully addressed if the policy 
addressed all aspects of the practice, partially addressed if the 
policy only addressed some aspects of the practice, or not addressed if 
the policy did not address any aspect of the practice. 

[End of table] 

Agencies' policies vary in part because no guidance has been issued 
specifying what elements these policies are to include. As previously 
noted, OMB has issued guidance which, among other things, requires 
baseline change requests to be approved by the agency heads and 
submitted to OMB for approval. However, this guidance does not 
specifically address how agencies are to implement their rebaselining 
activities, including the key elements that should be addressed in 
their policies. In addition, officials from OMB's Office of E- 
government and Information Technology and the Acting Chief of OMB's 
Information Policy and Technology Branch told us that, in their 
oversight function, they review agencies' earned value management 
policies, and in doing so determine whether these policies address 
rebaselining. However, they noted that they have not established 
specific criteria to evaluate the earned value management policies (and 
therefore their rebaselining aspects) and acknowledged that having such 
criteria would improve consistency among the policies and facilitate 
their oversight process. 

Without comprehensive policies to guide their rebaselining activities, 
agencies may not be optimizing the effectiveness of rebaselining as a 
tool to improve performance management. In addition, their rebaselining 
processes may lack the transparency needed to ensure effective 
oversight. 

Conclusions: 

Based on our sample of the federal government's major IT projects, an 
estimated 48 percent of these projects have been rebaselined, and, of 
these, a large number more than once. The frequency with which projects 
are rebaselined highlights the importance of sound policies to guide 
this process. However, agencies' rebaselining policies do not include 
several important elements of a comprehensive policy, and OMB has 
acknowledged that it has not established specific criteria to evaluate 
agencies' earned value management policies, which include rebaselining. 
Without specific and comprehensive policies, new baselines may be 
inaccurate and fail to provide the necessary transparency to agency 
officials, OMB, and other oversight organizations. 

Recommendations: 

To address the weaknesses identified in agencies' rebaselining 
policies, we are making recommendations to the Director of OMB and to 
the 24 major agencies. Specifically, we recommend that: 

* the Director of OMB issue guidance for rebaselining policies that 
would include a minimum set of key elements, taking into consideration 
the criteria used in this report, and: 

* each of the heads of the 24 major agencies direct the development of 
comprehensive rebaselining policies that address the weaknesses we 
identified. 

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation: 

We received comments on a draft of our report from 20 of the major 
agencies--four of which stated that they had no comments (the 
Departments of Agriculture, Education, Justice, and the Treasury). Of 
the remaining 16 agencies, 10 generally agreed with our results and/or 
recommendations, 6 disagreed with our assessment of their rebaselining 
policies and provided information which we have incorporated into the 
report as appropriate. Several of the agencies also provided technical 
comments which we incorporated as appropriate. We did not receive 
comments from the Departments of Health and Human Services, the 
Interior, and Veterans Affairs, or from the Small Business 
Administration, or the Office of Management and Budget. 

The comments of the 10 agencies that generally agreed with our results 
and/or recommendations are summarized below: 

* In written comments on a draft of the report, the Department of 
Commerce's Chief Information Officer concurred that managing project 
baselines is key to the effective management of IT projects and stated 
that the department is revising its policy to ensure that it fully 
reflects the five practices that we cite in the report as relevant to 
rebaselining policies. The Department of Commerce's written comments on 
a draft of this report are printed in appendix II. 

* In written comments on a draft of our report, the Department of 
Defense's Deputy Assistant Secretary for Command, Control, and 
Communication, and Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance 
agreed with our findings and recommendations. The Department of 
Defense's written comments on a draft of this report are printed in 
appendix III. 

While the Departments of Commerce and Defense agreed with our findings 
and recommendations, both disagreed with our use of the National Polar- 
orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System (NPOESS) as an 
example of a rebaselined IT project. NPOESS is jointly funded by the 
Department of Commerce and DOD. In its comments, the Department of 
Commerce stated that NPOESS is a space system acquisition and that it 
only considers a portion of the program--the ground segment--to be an 
IT system. The department also noted that, while the ground segment 
accounted for some of the cost and schedule changes associated with the 
program's rebaselining effort, it did not experience the degree of cost 
and schedule issues that the NPOESS space segment did. In addition, in 
its comments, DOD stated that it does not consider NPOESS to be an IT 
system and that NPOESS--like other space-based assets--is not reported 
in the Department's IT budget. The department recommended that we 
remove NPOESS from the report. We acknowledge that the departments do 
not include the entire NPOESS program when reporting to OMB on their IT 
systems, and have modified the report to acknowledge this. Further, 
while we focused on IT systems for this report, OMB's guidance 
governing rebaselining applies to all major acquisitions and therefore 
would include NPOESS regardless of how a department reports it to OMB. 

* In written comments on a draft of the report, the Department of 
Housing and Urban Development's Acting Chief Information Officer stated 
that the department is in agreement with the findings and 
recommendations. The Department of Housing and Urban Development's 
written comments on a draft of this report are printed in appendix IV. 

* In e-mail comments on a draft of this report, the Department of 
Labor's Deputy Chief Information Officer stated that, as the department 
continues to mature its rebaselining policies and practices, it will 
reference practices identified in GAO's Cost Assessment Guide. 

* In written comments on a draft of the report, the Department of 
State's Assistant Secretary for Resource Management and Chief Financial 
Officer stated that the department had already begun updating its IT 
rebaselining policies and would ensure that best practices were 
included in the update. The Department of State's written comments on a 
draft of this report are printed in appendix V. 

* In e-mail comments on a draft of this report, the Department of 
Transportation's Director of Audit Relations stated, on behalf of the 
Office of the Chief Information Officer, that the department agrees 
that more comprehensive OMB guidance can help address agency 
inconsistencies with respect to rebaseline justifications and policy. 
In addition, the department stated that it agreed that each agency 
should take responsibility for developing its own comprehensive 
rebaselining policies. 

* In written comments on a draft of the report, the National 
Aeronautics and Space Administration's Deputy Administrator concurred 
with our recommendation. The National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration's written comments on a draft of this report are printed 
in appendix VI. 

* In e-mail comments on a draft of the report, the Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission's Chief Information Officer and Deputy Executive Director 
for Corporate Management stated that the agency agreed with the thrust 
of the recommendations. 

* In e-mail comments on a draft of this report, the National Science 
Foundation's Chief Information Officer stated that the agency plans to 
clarify its policy to address the specific areas of IT rebaselining 
cited in our report, in accordance with our recommendations. 

* In e-mail comments on a draft of the report, the Social Security 
Administration stated that the administration agreed with the report as 
written. 

Specific comments and our responses from the six agencies that 
disagreed with our assessment of their rebaselining policies and 
provided information which we have incorporated into the report as 
appropriate follow: 

* In e-mail comments on a draft of the report, the Department of 
Energy's (DOE) Associate Chief Information Officer for IT Planning, 
Architecture, and E-government disagreed with our assessments of the 
department's rebaselining policy for three practices--describe the 
process for developing the new baseline, require management review, and 
require that the process is documented--and provided references to its 
DOE Manual 413 Project Management for the Acquisition of Capital Assets 
and to three supplemental guides which we had not received before--DOE 
Performance Baseline Guidance, DOE External Independent Review Standard 
Operating Procedures, and DOE Guidance for Developing Scheduling and 
Cost Baselines--to support claims that the agency's policy fully 
addresses these elements. After reviewing these documents, we changed 
two of our initial assessments. 

* Specifically, for describe the process for developing the new 
baseline, we changed our assessment from a "not addressed" to a 
"partially addressed" in light of the fact that the documentation 
provided calls for a new cost estimate and a new project plan that 
details the scope of work remaining with schedule and resource 
allocation. We are not changing our "partially addressed" assessment 
for the require management review practice because, while DOE's 
guidance identifies the authorities who are to decide whether the 
rebaselining is warranted and whether the rebaselining plan is 
acceptable, it does not outline the criteria to be used in making these 
decisions. Regarding the require that the process is documented 
practice, while DOE's policy addresses the need for documentation and 
even includes a template that program managers must submit, it does not 
specifically require documentation of the reasons for rebaselining; 
changes to the approved baseline cost, schedule, and scope; and 
management review of the rebaseline request and approval of new 
baseline. It also does not call for documenting measures in place to 
prevent recurrence. The new documentation provided by DOE also provides 
additional information on require validation of the new baseline which 
changes our assessment of that practice from a "partially addressed" to 
a "fully addressed." We have adjusted the department's ratings in table 
5 of our report according to our new assessments. 

* In written comments on a draft of the report, the Department of 
Homeland Security's Director for the Departmental GAO/OIG Liaison 
Office disagreed with our assessment that none of the rebaselining 
practices were addressed in the department's policy and provided 
references to acquisition program baseline guidance that it believed 
fully addressed the practices. However, we did not reconsider our 
ratings because the department did not provide this guidance to us. In 
addition, when we requested the department's rebaselining policy in 
February, we were told that the department's Chief Information Officer 
was collaboratively working with the Chief Procurement Officer to re- 
engineer its investment review process currently codified in its 
Management Directive (MD) 1400 policy document and that rebaselining 
would be addressed in this new policy. We were told that, as part of 
the MD 1400 revision, the department would also be revising its 
acquisition program baseline guidance to address rebaselining. The 
Department of Homeland Security's written comments on a draft of this 
report are printed in appendix VII. 

* In written comments on a draft of the report, the Agency for 
International Development's Senior Deputy Assistant Administrator for 
Bureau Management stated that he believed that the agency's policy and 
guidance fully address GAO's criteria, and provided specific documents 
to support this claim. When we initially reviewed the agency's 
rebaselining policy, it was in draft form and we therefore rated three 
out of the five practices as "partially addressed." We received the 
final policy and a document titled Management Services ADS 577 - 
Information Technology Capital Planning and Investment Control, which 
we had not received during our review. Based on our review of these 
documents, we determined describe reasons when a rebaseline is 
warranted, require validating the new baseline, and require management 
review to be fully addressed. We also determined describe process for 
developing a new baseline, and require that the process is documented 
to be "partially addressed." We have adjusted our ratings in the report 
accordingly. The Agency for International Development's written 
comments on a draft of this report are printed in appendix VIII. 

* In written comments on a draft of the report, the Environmental 
Protection Agency's Assistant Administrator and Chief Information 
Officer agreed with GAO that government rebaselining policies should be 
constructed to optimize the effectiveness of rebaselining as a tool to 
improve performance management of IT projects. However, the Assistant 
Administrator disagreed with our assessment that their rebaselining 
policy does not address require validating the new baseline and only 
partially addresses require that the process is documented and provided 
specific references to its EPA EVM Procedures believed to fully address 
these practices. After reviewing these references, we determined that 
the policy fully addresses the first practice, and we adjusted the 
rating accordingly. However, we did not change our assessment of the 
second practice because the policy does not the require documenting 
reasons why the current plan is no longer feasible. The Environmental 
Protection Agency's written comments on a draft of this report are 
printed in appendix IX. 

* In written comments on the a draft of the report, the General 
Services Administration's Acting Administrator partially agreed with 
our recommendation but stated he believed the administration 
rebaselining policy partially met the practice associated with 
describing the process for developing a new baseline and provided a 
reference in the GSA Quarterly Control Review User Guide which we 
analyzed during our review. We agree with this assessment and have 
adjusting our rating accordingly. The General Services Administration's 
written comments on a draft of this report are printed in appendix X. 

* In e-mail comments on a draft of this report, the Office of Personnel 
Management's (OPM) Chief Information Officer stated that the agency 
disagreed with our ratings for three of the five practices used to 
assess its rebaselining policy. Specifically, the agency stated that 
(1) the rating for describe the reasons when a rebaseline is warranted 
should have been at least a "partially addressed" instead of a "not 
addressed," (2) the rating for the require management review should 
have been "fully addressed" instead of "partially addressed," and (3) 
the rating for require that the process is documented should be "fully 
addressed" instead of "partially addressed." In addition, OPM provided 
references to its OPM Earned Value Management System Description to 
support its claims. After reviewing the references, we are changing the 
rating for describe the reasons when a rebaseline is warranted to 
"partially addressed": while OPM's policy generally states that 
rebaselining should occur when analysis shows that the remaining budget 
is not adequate to complete the remaining work and provide for 
meaningful performance measurement, it does not provide specific 
reasons that would cause this condition (e.g., change in requirements). 
We have adjusted the report to reflect this change. We disagree, 
however, that any other rating should change. Specifically, while the 
earned value management policy specifies who is to review the 
rebaselining request, it does not identify the criteria to be used by 
the review authority to determine whether the rebaselining plan is 
acceptable, and the require management review rating should therefore 
remain as "partially addressed." In addition, while the policy calls 
for documenting items such as the reasons for rebaselining and changes 
to the approved baseline cost, schedule, and scope, it does not call 
for documenting measures to prevent reoccurrence of the conditions that 
lead to the rebaselining. The require that the process is documented 
practice should therefore remain "partially addressed." 

We will be sending copies of this report to other interested 
congressional committees, the Director of the Office of Management and 
Budget, and other interested parties. We will also make copies 
available to others upon request. In addition, the report will be 
available at no charge on our Web site at [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov]. 

If you or your staffs have any questions on the matters discussed in 
this report, please contact me at (202) 512-9286 or by e-mail at 
[email protected]. Contact points for our Offices of Congressional 
Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this 
report. GAO staff who made major contributions to this report are 
listed in appendix XII. 

Signed by: 

David A. Powner:
Director, Information Technology Management Issues: 

[End of section] 

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology: 

[End of section] 

Our objectives were to determine (1) the extent of and primary reasons 
for IT project rebaselining; and (2) whether agencies have sound 
policies for rebaselining projects. 

To determine the extent of and primary reasons for IT rebaselining, we 
sent a questionnaire to each of the managers of a random sample of 180 
projects selected from the population of 778 major IT projects the 24 
major agencies plan to fund in during fiscal year 2008. Our population 
list of 778 major projects was developed from the Office of Management 
and Budget's Report on IT Spending for Fiscal Years 2007, 2008, and 
2009 (this is generally referred to as the exhibit 53). 

All of the survey results that appear in this report are estimates of 
characteristics of the major IT projects the 24 major federal agencies 
plan to invest in during fiscal year 2008. Our questionnaire gathered 
information on (a) whether the sampled project had been rebaselined, 
(b) the number of times the project had been rebaselined, and (c) 
reasons for the project's most recent rebaselining. We followed up with 
many agencies to ensure accuracy and completeness of the responses and 
obtained completed surveys for 178 of the 180 sampled projects, for an 
overall response rate of 99 percent. 

Since our sample of IT projects is only one of a large number of 
samples that we might have drawn, and each sample could have provided 
different estimates, we express our confidence in the precision of our 
particular sample's results as a 95 percent confidence interval. This 
is the interval that would contain the actual population value for 95 
percent of the samples we could have drawn. All proportion estimates 
from this sample used in this report have 95 percent confidence 
intervals of within plus or minus 11 percentage points, unless 
otherwise noted. 

We also selected a sample of rebaselined projects we have previously 
reviewed for Congress to provide examples of the cost and schedule 
changes experienced by rebaselined projects. We selected projects for 
which original and new cost and schedule information was readily 
available. 

To determine whether agencies have sound policies for rebaselining 
projects, we drew best practices from an exposure draft version of the 
Cost Assessment Guide.[Footnote 17] While one section of the guide 
specifically addresses rebaselining, sections describing reliable 
processes for developing cost estimates were also relevant as 
rebaselining involves establishing new cost estimates. To validate the 
soundness of these criteria, we sought feedback from GAO cost 
estimating experts and others. The five best practices for rebaselining 
policies that we identified are: (1) describing reasons when a 
rebaseline is warranted, (2) describing processes for developing a new 
baseline, (3) requiring validation of the new baseline, (4) requiring 
management review, and (5) requiring that decisions associated with the 
rebaselining process are documented. We obtained agencies' rebaselining 
policies and determined whether they were consistent with the practices 
we identified. We determined a practice to be fully addressed if the 
policy addressed all aspects of the practice. We determined a practice 
to be partially addressed if the policy only addressed some aspects of 
the practice. We determined a practice to be not addressed if the 
policy did not address any aspect of the practice. We shared our 
assessments of the rebaselining policies with agencies and followed up 
with them to identify additional documentation to address the 
weaknesses we identified. 

During our review, we also interviewed staff from the Office of 
Management and Budget's Office of E-government and Information 
Technology and the Acting Chief for the Information Policy and 
Technology Branch, to understand their role in guiding and overseeing 
agencies' rebaselining activities. 

We conducted this performance audit in Washington, D.C., from January 
2008 to July 2008, in accordance with generally accepted government 
auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform 
the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a 
reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit 
objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable 
basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. 

[End of section] 

Appendix II Comments from the Department of Commerce: 

United States Department Of Commerce: 
Chief Information Officer: 
Washington, D.C. 20230: 

July 23, 2008: 

Mr. David A. Powner: 
Director, Information Technology Management Issues: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street, N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20548: 

Dear Mr. Powner: 

Thank you for the opportunity to review the General Accountability 
Office's (GAO) draft report entitled Information Technology: Agencies 
Need to Establish Comprehensive Policies to Address Changes to 
Projects' Cost, Schedule, and Performance Goals (GAO-08-925). 

We concur that it is important that information technology projects be 
managed effectively to ensure that public resources are wisely invested 
and that managing project baselines is key to that effort. To this end, 
the Department of Commerce has in place an Information Technology (IT) 
Investment Performance Management Policy, which addresses cost, 
schedule, and performance baselines. We are revising that policy to 
ensure that it fully reflects the five practices that GAO cites in the 
report as relevant to rebaselining policies. 

The draft report highlights the National Polar Orbiting Environmental 
Satellite System (NPOESS) on pages 3, 9, and 10 as an example of how 
rebaselining can result in significant changes to a project's cost and 
schedule goals. No other project in the report is so highlighted. 
Because the report focuses on the rebaselining of IT projects, it 
should not highlight NPOESS as an example of a rebaselined IT project. 
The final report should not include references to NPOESS cost growth 
and schedule slippage because they refer to the space segment and not 
the NPOESS IT component and thus are highly misleading. The reader 
would erroneously conclude that NPOESS is an example of an IT project 
that experienced significant cost growth and schedule slippage. 

NPOESS, reported in many GAO space program evaluations, is a space 
system acquisition. NPOESS has a major IT component, the ground 
segment, the rebaselining of which NOAA reported to GAO in completing 
the GAO survey used as the basis for the draft report. However, this IT 
system, or ground segment, has not experienced the degree of cost and 
schedule issues associated with the NPOESS space segment. The GAO 
report Polar-Orbiting Operational Environmental Satellites (GAO-07-498) 
cited in the subject draft report noted, "Development of the ground 
segment-which includes the interface data processing system, the ground 
stations that are to receive satellite data, and the ground-based 
command, control, and communications system-is under way and on track." 
Rebaselining of the ground system did occur, driven by changes in the 
overall program. However, ground system rebaselining accounted for only 
12% of total program rebaselining cost growth. The ground system 
schedule slipped three years (vs. eight for total program rebaselining) 
and was delivered ahead of the operational need. 

The draft report draws a distinction between the guidance covering 
rebaselining of major defense acquisitions (the Nunn-McCurdy statute) 
and a more recent requirement governing Department of Defense major 
automated information system programs (the John Warner National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007). That the NPOESS space segment 
drove a rebaselining under Nunn-McCurdy is another reason why that 
rebaselining should not be associated with IT project management. 

Signed by: 

Suzanne Hilding: 

[End of section] 

Appendix III: Comments from the Department of Defense: 

Office Of The Assistant Secretary Of Defense: 
Networks And Information Integration: 
6000 Defense Pentagon: 
Washington, D.C. 20301-6000: 

July 25, 2008: 

Mr. David A. Powner: 
Director: 
Information Technology Management Issues: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
Washington, DC 20548: 

Dear Mr. Powner: 

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the GAO Draft Report, GAO-
08-925, "Information Technology: Agencies Need to Establish 
Comprehensive Policies to Address Changes to Projects' Cost, Schedule, 
and Performance Goals". I concur with the overall findings of the 
report and enclosed general comments on the report as well as comments 
to your specific recommendations. 

Sincerely, 

Signed by: 
Timothy J. Halp: 
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense: 
(C3ISR & IT Acquisition): 

Enclosure: As stated. 

[End of section] 

Appendix IV: Comments from the Department of Housing and Urban 
Development: 

U.S. Department Of Housing And Urban Development: 
Office Of Chief Information Officer: 
Washington, DC 20410-3000: 

July 24, 2008: 

Mr. David A. Powner: 
Director, Information Technology Management Issues: 
U. S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G. Street, N.W. 
Washington, DC 20548: 

Dear Mr. Powner: 

This letter is in response to the United States Government 
Accountability Office (GAO) draft Report issued on July 10, 2008 
entitled Information Technology: Agencies Need to Establish 
Comprehensive Policies to Address Changes to Projects' Cost, Schedule, 
and Performance Goals (GAO-08-925). 

The Department of Housing and Urban Development (DHUD) is in agreement 
with the findings and recommendations identified in this report. GAO's 
main recommendation is for the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to 
issue guidance, and for agencies to "direct the development of 
comprehensive rebaselining policies" to address areas of weakness 
identified in the report. Rebaselining is an issue that we are well 
aware of and according to the draft report HUD appears to be above 
average compared to other agencies' rebaselining policies. The Office 
of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) is already actively planning to 
improve the Department's rebaselining processes as well as strengthen 
those practices where further improvements can be made. 

We thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the draft 
report and look forward in receiving the final document. In the 
interim, if you or your staff should have any questions, please contact 
Shelia Fitzgerald, Acting Director, Investment Strategy Policy and 
Management at 202-402-2432 or Wanda Taylor, Audit Liaison at 202-402-
8085. 

Sincerely, 

Signed by: [Illegible] 
For: 

Joseph M. Milazzo: 
Acting Chief Information Officer: 

[End of section] 

Appendix V: Comments from the Department of State: 

United States Department of State: 
Assistant Secretary for Resource Management and Chief Financial 
Officer: 
Washington, D.C. 20520: 

Ms. Jacquelyn Williams-Bridgers: 
Managing Director: 
International Affairs and Trade: 
Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street, N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20548-0001: 

July 24, 2008: 

Dear Ms. Williams-Bridgers: 

We appreciate the opportunity to review your draft report, "Information 
Technology: Agencies Need to Establish Comprehensive Policies to 
Address Changes to Projects' Cost, Schedule, and Performance Goals," 
GAO Job Code 310867. 

The enclosed Department of State comments are provided for 
incorporation with this letter as an appendix to the final report. 

If you have any questions concerning this response, please contact 
Frank Bowers, Information Technology Specialist, Bureau of Information 
Resource Management at (202) 453-8743. 

Sincerely, 

Signed by: 

Bradford R. Higgins: 

cc: GAO - Sabine Paul: 
IRM - Susan Swart: 
State/OIG - Mark Duda: 

Department of State Comments on GAO Draft Report: 

Information Technology: Agencies Need to Establish Comprehensive 
Policies to Address Changes to Projects' Cost, Schedule, and 
Performance Goals: 
(GAO-08-925, GAO Code 310867): 

The Department of State appreciates the opportunity to comment on GAO's 
draft report "Information Technology: Agencies Need to Establish 
Comprehensive Policies to Address Changes to Projects' Cost, Schedule, 
and Performance Goals." 

Recommendations: 

1. provide a fuller description of the process for developing a new 
baseline; 

2. identify who can validate the new baseline and how the validation is 
to be done; and; 

3. provide a fuller identification and documentation of rebaselining 
decisions. 

State Response: 

The Department of State has already begun updating the Information 
Technology (IT) rebaselining policies to fully describe the process for 
new baseline development, validation by whom and how the new baseline 
will be accomplished, and more fully identify and document rebaselining 
decisions. The Department will ensure that the GAO Cost Assessment 
Guide's practices related to baseline policies are included in these 
updates. 

[End of section] 

Appendix VI: Comments from the National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration: 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration: 
Office of the Administrator: 
Washington, DC 20546-0001: 

July 22, 2008: 

Mr. David A. Powner: 
Director, Information Technology Management Issues: 
United States Government Accountability Office: 
Washington, DC 20548: 

Dear Mr. Powner: 

Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the draft report 
entitled, "Information Technology: Agencies Need to Establish 
Comprehensive Policies to Address Changes to Projects' Cost, Schedule, 
and Performance Goals" (GAO-08-925), dated July 10, 2008. I appreciate 
the Government Accountability Office's (GAO) interest in ensuring 
changes to cost, schedule, and performance goals of information 
technology projects are made with appropriate transparency and 
oversight. This is fully consistent with current NASA efforts to 
implement more effective information technology governance and 
supporting policies. 

In the draft report, GAO made two recommendations regarding the 
development of guidance and policies for rebaselining, one of which was 
addressed to NASA as well as 23 other major agencies. 

Recommendation 2: Each of the heads of the 24 major agencies direct the 
development of comprehensive rebaselining policies that address the 
weaknesses we identified. 

Response: NASA concurs with this recommendation. NASA will ensure that 
Agency policies for information technology program and project 
management include a comprehensive rebaselining policy that describes 
reasons when a rebaseline is warranted, describes the process for 
developing a new baseline, requires validating the new baseline, 
requires management review, and requires that the process is 
documented. 

My point of contact for this matter is Gary Cox, Associate Chief 
Information Officer for Policy and Investments. He may be contacted by 
e-mail at [email protected] or by telephone at (202) 358-0413. 

Sincerely, 

Signed by: 

Shana Dale: 
Deputy Administrator: 

[End of section] 

Appendix VII: Comments from the Department of Homeland Security: 

U.S. Department of Homeland Security: 
Washington, DC 20528: 
[hyperlink, http://wwww.dhs.gov]: 

July 24, 2008: 

Mr. David A. Powner: 
Director: 
Information Technology Management Issues: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street, NW: 
Washington, DC 20548: 

Dear Mr. Powner: 

Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Government 
Accountability Office's (GAO's) draft report GAO-08-925 entitled 
Information Technology: Agencies Need to Establish Comprehensive 
Policies to Address Changes to Projects' Cost, Schedule, and 
Performance Goals. The draft report cites the Department of Homeland 
Security (DHS) as lacking sound policies for rebaselining projects. 
Table 5: Extent to Which Agencies' Policies Are Consistent with Best 
Practices depicts each of the best practices as "not addressed" by DHS. 
The legend for the table notes that `"not addressed" is if the policy 
did not address any aspect of the practice. However, DHS's current APB 
guidance for rebaselining (also referred to within the Department as 
remediation of cost, schedule, and performance breaches) aligns with 
these best practices. DHS requests that the assigned ratings be 
revisited upon review of this response. 

The DHS APB breach process is aligned with the best practices cited by 
GAO, though cited in the GAO report as not having addressed any of the 
five areas: (1) Describe reasons when a rebaseline is warranted; (2) 
Describe process for developing a new baseline; (3) Require validating 
the new process; (4) Require management review; (5) Require that the 
process is documented. The Department's APB Guidance at a minimum 
partially addresses all of these areas. DHS is in the process of 
establishing a comprehensive rebaselining policy and on April 4, 2008, 
an official memorandum describing the Acquisition Program Baseline 
(APB) process was released. The memo was accompanied by a comprehensive 
guidance document for APBs. This includes guidance on breaches, defined 
by DHS as the conditions requiring a program to rebaseline. 

The DHS guidance on APB rebaselining cites similar reasons for a 
program to consider rebaselining (referred to as "warning signs" in the 
GAO report), including: 

* An indication of not meeting key performance parameters; 

* Estimated cost not equaling the budget required for the remaining 
work, particularly, program cost increases greater than or equal to 8% 
are required to be brought to management's attention immediately; 

* Unrealistic activity durations resulting in schedule milestones not 
being met. 

The Department has in place policy/guidance that addresses the 
requirements noted in GAO's recommended rebaselining practices. The 
specific DHS approaches to each of these practice areas are outlined 
below: 

1. Describe reasons why a rebaseline is warranted. The APB guidance 
describes the requirements for rebaselining as any breach of 
performance, schedule, or cost. An APB breach of performance or 
schedule is defined as failure to meet the Threshold value of the 
specific parameter. An APB cost breach is defined as cumulative program 
cost increases greater than or equal to 8% from the approved cost 
baseline. Breaches to the APB can be driven by multiple causes, many of 
which are fact-of life changes in requirements, resources or schedule 
that are beyond the Program Manager's/Component's control. 

Additionally, DHS currently monitors program APBs and is headed towards 
improved oversight and management of program baselines through a 
monthly periodic reporting process that takes into account project 
level information. The intent is to be alerted sooner rather than later 
in those instances that a program is headed towards a breach. The 
Department is diligently conducting APB reviews to determine whether 
programs are meeting cost, schedule, and performance objectives. Any 
program breach in cost, schedule or program objectives triggers a 
comprehensive APB review. Component leadership works with the program 
manager to develop and submit a remediation plan, which includes an 
approach to rebaselining (as defined in the GAO report), to submit to 
the Department. The APB is a living document that includes an audit 
trail for any changes made to the baselines and serves as the contract 
between the program and the Department. A remediation plan for the APB 
must be submitted within 30 days of the breach notification. 

2. Describe the process for developing a new baseline. The process for 
addressing a breach which will require a rebaseline is described in the 
APB Guide and specific policy surrounding the development of a new cost 
estimate fully aligns with GAO's cost estimation methods. The 
Department has adopted the draft GAO Cost Assessment Guide as its 
guidance for developing new cost estimates. 

According to the APB Guide, if a program breaches an approved APB 
parameter threshold, (or the Program Manager determines that the 
program will so breach in the near future), the Program Manager must 
promptly notify the Component leadership and MDA via a formal memo. The 
Program Manager must submit (1) a remediation plan both explaining 
circumstances of the breach and proposing corrective action within 30 
days of breach notification and (2) if required, a revised APB for MDA 
approval within 90 days of breach notification. The program is required 
to provide the justification for rebaselining in the recovery plan. 

3. Require validating the new baseline. Several safeguards are in place 
to validate new baselines for DHS programs. The Component's Review 
Authority serves as the initial reviewer and must validate the changes 
made by the Program Manager before submitting to the Department. 
Additionally, the Enterprise Architecture Board (EAB) must validate the 
changes made prior to submitting for management review. The CPO, CFO, 
CIO, CAO, collectively known as the CXOs (report to USM) can require 
independent government cost estimates for further validation. DHS' 
Investment Review Board (IRB) is another layer of oversight and 
management that validates the information provided by programs when 
rebaselining. 

4. Require management review. DHS clearly delineates in its APB Guide 
that an Acquisition Decision Memo (ADM) signed by the Milestone 
Decision Authority (usually the Deputy Secretary or his designee) must 
decide whether the rebaselining is warranted and the rebaselining plan 
is acceptable. Programs must also undergo a review by the Investment 
Review Board prior to having a rebaselined APB approved. Also, the 
Department's Management Directive 0007.1 defines approval authorities 
for IT programs. The Directive institutionalizes the Enterprise 
Architecture Board responsible for validating the requirements within 
the APBs and any changes to the APBs based on reviews of program 
performance and alignment with enterprise architecture. 

5. Require that the process is documented. The APB is a living document 
that keeps record of all changes or adjustments made to the program's 
plan. Efforts are underway to automate the management and oversight of 
APBs within the Department's new Periodic Reporting System to ensure 
appropriate controls are in place and that an audit trail is available 
and visible to leadership. The system will also record date of review, 
reviewer, justification for changes, decision made, approval authority, 
and track progress towards obtaining approval, etc. The system will 
provide workflow support from the time an APB is first developed, 
through the management of the program against the baselines. The system 
will have a record of all decisions, changes, updates, made to the APB. 

Thank you again for the opportunity to comment on this draft report and 
we look forward to working with you on further homeland security 
issues. 

Sincerely, 

Signed by: 

Jerald E. Levine: 
Director
Departmental GAO/OIG Liaison Office: 

[End of section] 

Appendix VIII: Comments from the Agency for International Development: 

USAID: 
From The American People: 
U.S. Agency for International Development: 
1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW: 
Washington, DC 20573: 
[hyperlink, http://www/usaid.gov]: 

July 24, 2008: 

Mr. David A. Powner: 
Director: 
Information Technology Management Issues: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street, N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20548: 

Dear Mr. Powner: 

I am pleased to provide the U.S. Agency for International Development's 
(USAID) formal response on the draft GAO report entitled "Information 
Technology: Agencies Need to Establish Comprehensive (Policies to 
Address Changes to (Projects' Cost, Schedule and Performance Goals" 
(GAO-08-925). 

We agree with GAO's premise that baseline control is a critical 
component of project management, which is why our policy and supporting 
project guidance documents address how a project must establish, review 
and obtain approval for baseline changes. We believe that USAID policy 
and guidance fully address GAO's criteria, and have provided specific 
document and section references in the enclosed table. 

Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the GAO draft report and 
for the courtesies extended by your staff in the conduct of this 
review. 

Sincerely, 

Signed by: 

Drew W. Luten: 
Senior Deputy Assistant Administrator: 
Bureau for Management: 

Enclosure: 

Reference Page GAO-08-925 Draft Report 17, Table 5. 

[End of section] 

Appendix IX: Comments from the Environmental Protection Agency: 

United States Environmental Protection Agency: 
Office Of Environmental Information: 
Washington, D.C. 20460 

July 24, 2008: 

Mr. David Powner: 
Director: 
IT Management Issues: 
United States Government Accountability Office: 
Washington, DC 20548: 

Dear Mr. Powner:: 

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) appreciates the 
opportunity to provide comments on the General Accountability Office 
(GAO) draft report, "Information Technology (IT): Agencies Need to 
Establish Comprehensive Policies to Address Changes in Projects' Cost, 
Schedule, and Performance Goals" (GAO-08-925) (Engagement 310867). 

EPA agrees with GAO that government re-baselining policies should be 
constructed to optimize the effectiveness of re-baselining as a tool to 
improve performance management of IT projects. We further agree with 
GAO's assessment that the Agency's re-baselining policy, which is 
included in "EPA's Earned Value Management (EV) Procedures," is 
consistent with GAO's best practices with regard to "Describe reasons 
when a re-baseline is warranted" and "Require management review," and 
that our policy could be improved with regard to "Describe the process 
for developing a new baseline." 

We do not agree, however, with GAO's assessment that EPA's re-
baselining policy does not address "Require validating the new 
baseline." On page 5 in Section 6.1.2, "Integrated Baseline Reviews," 
of "EPA's EV Procedures," we state that "The Integrated Baseline 
Reviews must occur before development/modemization/enhancement (DAME) 
starts and before any re-baseline request is sent to the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB)." The key purpose of an Integrated Baseline 
Review is to validate the baseline, as required by GAO's best practice. 
A copy of EPA's EV Procedures is enclosed. 

We also do not agree with GAO's assessment that EPA's re-baselining 
policy only partially addresses "Require that the process is 
documented." On page 12 in Section 6.3, "Baseline Change Control 
Process," of "EPA's EV Procedures," we state that the documentation 
required for review and approval of a re-baselining is "Precise 
justification, Revised milestones with new cost and schedule goals, and 
Revised Summary of Spending table of the proposed schedule." On page 11 
of that same section, we state that "All re-baseline change requests 
are reviewed and approved by the Senior Information Official (SIO) for 
the requesting office, and the Information Investment Subcommittee 
(IIS) [made up of EPA's senior managers] before being submitted to 
OMB." These requirements go directly to GAO's description of best 
practice documentation of re-baselining requests. 

Although we believe our re-baselining policy is more robust than the 
level assessed by GAO, we agree it could be enhanced, and intend to 
improve it to more fully address GAO's recommendations when OMB issues 
the needed guidance GAO recommends. 

If you have questions about the Agency's response please contact Odelia 
Funke, Director of EPA's Mission Investment Solutions Division, at 202-
566-0667, or at [email protected]. 

Sincerely, 

Signed by: [Illegible] 
For: 

Molly A. O'Neill: 
Assistant Administrator and Chief Information Officer: 

Enclosure: 

[End of section] 

Appendix X: Comments from the General Services Administration: 

U.S. General Services Administration: 
GSA Administrator: 
1800 F Street, NW: 
Washington, DC 20405-0002: 
[hyperlink, http://www.gsa.gov] 

July 24, 2008: 

The Honorable Gene L. Dodaro: 
Acting Comptroller General of the United States: 
Government Accountability Office: 
Washington, DC 20548: 

Dear Mr. Dodaro: 

The General Services Administration (GSA) appreciates the opportunity 
to review and comment on the draft report, "Information Technology: 
Agencies Need to Establish Comprehensive Policies to Address Changes to 
Projects' Cost, Schedule, and Performance Goals' (GAO-08-925). The 
Government Accountability Office recommends that GSA address the 
weaknesses identified with rebaselining policies. 

We partially agree with the findings and recommendations. Technical 
comments that update and clarify statements in the draft report are 
enclosed and incorporated herein by reference. 

If you have any questions, please contact me. Staff inquiries can be 
directed to Mr. Kevin Messner, Associate Administrator, Office of 
Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs, at (202) 501-0563. 

Signed by: 

David L. Bibb: 
Acting Administrator: 

Enclosure 

cc:
Mr. David A. Powner, Director Information Technology Issues: 

Government Accountability Office (GAO) Draft Report: 
Information Technology: Agencies Need to Establish Comprehensive 
Policies to Address Changes to Projects' Cost, Schedule, and 
Performance Goals: 
GAO-08-925 - Dated July 2008: 

General Services Administration Comments to the Recommendations: 

Recommendation 1: GAO recommends that the Director of OMB issue 
guidance for rebaselining policies that would include a minimum set of 
key elements, taking into consideration the criteria used in this 
report. 

Recommendation 2: GAO recommends that the Acting Administrator direct 
the development of comprehensive rebaselining policies that address the 
weaknesses identified. 

GSA Response: Partially concurs with recommendation GAO should specify 
that OMB rebaseline policies be developed before agency rebaseline 
policies. This would avoid agency rebaselining policies being 
potentially inconsistent with OMB's policies. 

Additionally, GSA believes that based on information provided in GSA's 
Quarterly Control Review User Guide - FY2008 Guidance, rebaselining 
practice #2 is partially met. As a result, GSA respectfully requests 
GAO to make appropriate correction to Table 5 in the final report. 

[End of section] 

Appendix XI: Surveyed Projects with Number of Times Rebaselined and 
Reasons for Most Recent Rebaseline: 

Table 6: Number of Times Each Project was Rebaselined and Reasons for 
Most Recent Rebaseline: 

Agency: Department of Homeland Security; 
Project: ICE (FFMS); 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Homeland Security; 
Project: FEMA - Integrated Financial Management Information System; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Homeland Security; 
Project: USCIS - Integrated Document Production; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Homeland Security; 
Project: CBP - Automated Targeting System Maintenance; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Homeland Security; 
Project: CBP - Traveler Enforcement Compliance System - Modernization; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Homeland Security; 
Project: CBP (WHTI); 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Homeland Security; 
Project: Secure Flight; 
Times rebaselined: 2; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Check]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Department of Homeland Security; 
Project: Alien Flight Student Program; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Homeland Security; 
Project: United States Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator 
Technology; Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Homeland Security; 
Project: FAMS Air to Ground Communications System and Tactical 
Information Sharing System; Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Homeland Security; 
Project: NPPD - IICP - Infrastructure Information Collection Program; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Homeland Security; 
Project: NPPD - Integrated Common Analytical Viewer; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Homeland Security; 
Project: Rescue 21; Times rebaselined: 4; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Check]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Check]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Homeland Security; 
Project: FEMA - eNEMIS; Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Homeland Security; 
Project: DHS - Homeland Secure Data Network; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Commerce; 
Project: Commerce Business Systems; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Department of Commerce; 
Project: USPTO Revenue and Account Management System; 
Times rebaselined: 5; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Department of Commerce; 
Project: Economic Census and Surveys; 
Times rebaselined: 2; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Commerce; 
Project: Master Address File/Topologically Integrated Geographic 
Encoding and Referencing Enhancements; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Department of Commerce; 
Project: Advanced Weather Interactive Processing System; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Commerce; 
Project: NOAA Weather Radio All Hazards Weather Network; 
Times rebaselined: 2; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Check]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Commerce; 
Project: NDBC Ocean Observing System of Systems; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Commerce; 
Project: NPOESS Data Exploitation; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Commerce; 
Project: NOAA Research Scientific Computing Support; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Commerce; 
Project: GOES Ground System; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Commerce; 
Project: NPOESS Ground System; 
Times rebaselined: 2; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Commerce; 
Project: NCEP Weather and Climate Computing Infrastructure Services; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Commerce; 
Project: BIS Legacy Export Control; 
Times rebaselined: 2; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Department of Commerce; 
Project: Commerce Business Environment; 
Times rebaselined: 5; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Commerce; 
Project: NIST-wide Grant Management Information System; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Justice; 
Project: FBI Biometric Interoperability; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Justice; 
Project: FBI Law Enforcement National Data Exchange; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Justice; 
Project: JMD Integrated Wireless Network; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Transportation; 
Project: OSTXX001: Delphi; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Department of Transportation; 
Project: FAAXX600 (ATOP); 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Transportation; 
Project: Survey FAAXX603: Traffic Mgmt Advisor-single Cntr; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Transportation; 
Project: FAAX711-(DataComm); 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Transportation; 
Project: FAAXX610: Aviation Safety Knowledge Management, incorporates: 
FAAXX196, FAAXX264, FAAXX471, FAAXX487; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Transportation; 
Project: NHTSA020: Artemis; 
Times rebaselined: 2; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Department of Transportation; 
Project: FAAXX169: Wide Area Augmentation System; 
Times rebaselined: 3; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Transportation; 
Project: NHTSA304: EDS; 
Times rebaselined: 2; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Department of Transportation; 
Project: PHMSA018: National Pipeline Mapping System; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Transportation; 
Project: FAAXX704: Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast, of the 
Surveillance and Broadcast Services Program; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Transportation; 
Project: DOTXX070: DOT IT Combined Infrastructure; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Defense; 
Project: Commissary Advanced Resale Transaction System; 
Times rebaselined: 2; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Check]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Defense; 
Project: Defense Information System For Security; 
Times rebaselined: 0; [Empty]; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Defense; 
Project: Defense Travel System; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Defense; 
Project: Global Decision Support System; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Department of Defense; 
Project: Net Centric Enterprise Services; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Defense; 
Project: Navy Enterprise Resource Planning; 
Times rebaselined: 2; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Department of Defense; 
Project: JTRS - Airborne, Maritime And Fixed Radios; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Defense; 
Project: Navy Marine Corps Intranet; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Defense; 
Project: Future Combat Systems-Advanced Collaborative Environment; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Defense; 
Project: Advanced Field Artillery Tactical Data System; 
Times rebaselined: 4; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Defense; 
Project: Warfighter Information Network-Tactical; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Defense; 
Project: Defense Enterprise Accounting and Management System-Air Force; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Defense; 
Project: Integrated Strategic Planning And Analysis Network; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Defense; 
Project: Joint Precision Approach And Landing System; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Education; 
Project: Financial Management Support System; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Education; 
Project: Contracts and Purchasing Support System; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Education; 
Project: Common Services for Borrowers-Legacy; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Education; 
Project: E-Authentication; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Education; 
Project: National Student Loan Data System; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Education; 
Project: Advance-AID Delivery; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Education; 
Project: Combined Office Automation -EDUCATE; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency; 
Project: Legacy Financial Systems; 
Times rebaselined: 2; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency; 
Project: Storage and Retrieval Information System; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency; 
Project: Integrated Compliance Information System; 
Times rebaselined: 3; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency; 
Project: Enterprise Content Management System; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency; 
Project: Integrated Contracts Management System; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Energy; 
Project: NNSA STA Transportation Command and Control System; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Energy; 
Project: NNSA ASC LLNL Purple Platform; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Energy; 
Project: ETTP Contractor Business and Administrative Systems; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Energy; 
Project: RW DOE Licensing Support Network; 
Times rebaselined: 4; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Department of Energy; 
Project: SC Lattice Quantum ChromoDynamics Computing; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Energy; 
Project: HS Nuclear Materials Management and Safeguards System; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: General Services Administration; 
Project: Financial Management Line of Business Managing Partner; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: General Services Administration; 
Project: Human Capital Information Technology Services; 
Times rebaselined: 2; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: General Services Administration; 
Project: IT Infrastructure Initiative Line of Business; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: General Services Administration; 
Project: Rent Estimate; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: General Services Administration; 
Project: Sales Automation System; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: General Services Administration; 
Project: GSA Advantage; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: General Services Administration; 
Project: GSA Enterprise Infrastructure Operations; 
Times rebaselined: 2; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Health and Human Services; 
Project: NIH CIT Central Accounting System; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Health and Human Services; 
Project: OS ASAM Debt Management and Collection System; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Health and Human Services; 
Project: IHS Resource and Patient Management System - Maintenance & 
Enhancements; 
Times rebaselined: 3; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Health and Human Services; 
Project: CMS Modernized IT Infrastructure; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Health and Human Services; 
Project: CMS Beneficiary Enrollment and Plan Payment for Part C & D; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Health and Human Services; 
Project: CMS Durable Medical Equipment Claims Processing; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Health and Human Services; 
Project: CMS Medicare Appeals System; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Health and Human Services; 
Project: CMS Q-net; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Health and Human Services; 
Project: Mission Accomplishments and Regulatory Compliance Services; 
Times rebaselined: 2; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Health and Human Services; 
Project: CDC Public Health Information Network; 
Times rebaselined: 2; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Health and Human Services; 
Project: HHS Asset - Property Management Information System; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Health and Human Services; 
Project: CMS Medicare Program Integrity Modernization - One PI System; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Health and Human Services; 
Project: Grants.gov - Find and Apply; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Health and Human Services; 
Project: FDA Consolidated Infrastructure; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Health and Human Services; 
Project: CMS IT Infrastructure; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Health and Human Services; 
Project: ACF GrantSolutions.gov/Grants Administration Tracking 
Evaluation System - Grants Center for Excellence; 
Times rebaselined: 2; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development; 
Project: HSG - 251780 - Tenant Rental Assistance Certification System; 
Times rebaselined: 7; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development; 
Project: ADM - 202750 - HUD Integrated Human Resources and Training 
System; 
Times rebaselined: 4; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Department of the Interior; 
Project: E-DOI - NBC FMLoB Shared Service Provider; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of the Interior; 
Project: BOR1-CDW (Corporate Data Warehouse); 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of the Interior; 
Project: E-DOI - Geospatial One-Stop; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of the Interior; 
Project: BLM-Incident Qualifications and Certification System; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of the Interior; 
Project: USGS - National Water Information System; 
Times rebaselined: 2; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Department of the Interior; 
Project: BLM-Automated Fluid Mineral Support System; 
Times rebaselined: 2; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Department of the Interior; 
Project: BOR1-GCPO SCADA (Grand Coulee Power Office Supervisory Control 
and Data Acquisition System); 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of the Interior; 
Project: NPS - NPS.gov Internet/Intranet Portal; 
Times rebaselined: 3; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of the Interior; 
Project: BIA - Integrated Records Management System; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of the Interior; 
Project: OST - Trust Funds Accounting System; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. . 

Agency: Department of the Interior; 
Project: OSM - Abandoned Mine Land Inventory System; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of the Interior; 
Project: FWS - Federal Aid Information Management System; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Department of Labor; 
Project: ESA - OWCP-Black Lung Automated Support Package; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Labor; 
Project: OCFO - PeoplePower; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Labor; 
Project: BLS - CPI Maintenance; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Department of Labor; 
Project: ESA - OFCCP - Federal Contractor Compliance System; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Labor; 
Project: MSHA - Information Processing - MSHA Standardized Information 
System; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Labor; 
Project: ETA - UI Database Management System; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Labor; 
Project: PBGC - Risk Management and Early Warning/Legal Management; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Labor; 
Project: OPA - DOL-National Contact Center Initiative; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Labor; 
Project: PBGC - IT Business Transformation; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration; 
Project: NASA Integrated Enterprise Management - Human Capital 
Information Environment; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration; 
Project: JSC Integrated Planning System; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration; 
Project: ESMD - Integrated Collaborative Environment; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration; 
Project: KSC Shuttle Launch Control System; 
Times rebaselined: 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration; 
Project: KSC Shuttle Processing Support; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration; 
Project: NASA Data Center; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: National Regulatory Commission; 
Project: Time and Labor Modernization; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: National Regulatory Commission; 
Project: Reactor Program System; 
Times rebaselined: 2; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: National Regulatory Commission; 
Project: Licensing Support Network; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: National Science Foundation; 
Project: Grants Management Line of Business; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Office of Personnel Management; 
Project: Agency Financial System; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Office of Personnel Management; 
Project: USAJOBS; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Office of Personnel Management; 
Project: e-QIP; 
Times rebaselined: 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Small Business Administration; 
Project: GCBD: Business Development Management Information System; 
Times rebaselined: 2; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Small Business Administration; 
Project: OCIO: OA/T/I Meta 300; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Social Security Administration; 
Project: DDS Automation; 
Times rebaselined: 3; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Social Security Administration; 
Project: Access to Financial Institution Information; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of State; 
Project: Joint Financial Management System; 
Times rebaselined: 3; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of State; 
Project: Foreign Assistance Coordination and Tracking System; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of State; 
Project: Consular Support & Visa Applications; 
Times rebaselined: 3; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of State; 
Project: A/LM ILMS; 
Times rebaselined: 3; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of State; 
Project: Global Network; 
Times rebaselined: 2; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of State; 
Project: Global IT Modernization; 
Times rebaselined: 2; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of the Treasury; 
Project: Travel Reimbursement and Accounting System; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Department of the Treasury; 
Project: Fiscal Management 09; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of the Treasury; 
Project: Integrated Customer Communications Environment; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of the Treasury; 
Project: Counsel Automated Systems Environment; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of the Treasury; 
Project: Treasury-Wide Enterprise Content Management Services; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of the Treasury; 
Project: Criminal Investigation Management Information System - Major; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of the Treasury; 
Project: Pay.gov; 
Times rebaselined: 2; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of the Treasury; 
Project: Government-Wide Accounting and Reporting Modernization; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of the Treasury; 
Project: Automated Standard Application for Payments; 
Times rebaselined: 2; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of the Treasury; 
Project: Treasury Automated Auction Processing System; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of the Treasury; 
Project: Appeals Automated Environment; 
Times rebaselined: 2; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Department of the Treasury; 
Project: Individual Master File; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of the Treasury; 
Project: Examination Desktop Support System - Release 2 - Major; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of the Treasury; 
Project: Modernized e-File; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of the Treasury; 
Project: Common Services-Enterprise Application Integration Broker; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Agency for International Development; 
Project: ISS LOB Center of Excellence; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Agriculture; 
Project: Corporate Financial Management Systems; 
Times rebaselined: 2; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Department of Agriculture; 
Project: Consolidated Financial Management Information Systems; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Agriculture; 
Project: Program Fund Control System - #0082; 
Times rebaselined: 5; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Agriculture; 
Project: National Financial Applications; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Agriculture; 
Project: ROSS - Resource Ordering and Status System; 
Times rebaselined: 3; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Department of Agriculture; 
Project: RMA-01 - Financial Management Systems; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Agriculture; 
Project: Farm Program Modernization; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Agriculture; 
Project: USDA (PHICP); 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Agriculture; 
Project: Consolidated Infrastructure, Office Automation, and 
Telecommunications; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs; 
Project: Health Admin Center IT Operations; 
Times rebaselined: 6; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Check]. 

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs; 
Project: VistA Imaging; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs; 
Project: Learning Management System; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs; 
Project: Enrollment Enhancements; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs; 
Project: My HealtheVet; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Check]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs; 
Project: Veterans Benefits Delivery; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs; 
Project: Payroll/HR Systems; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs; 
Project: IT Infrastructure; 
Times rebaselined: 0; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs; 
Project: Document and Correspondence Management System; 
Times rebaselined: 1; 
Reasons: Project performance: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Contractor performance: [Check]; 
Reasons: Original baseline inaccurate: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Change in requirements: [Check]; 
Reasons: Change in funding Stream: [Empty]; 
Reasons: Other: [Empty]. 

Source: Office of Management and Budget's Report on IT Spending for 
Fiscal Years 2007, 2008, and 2009 for project names and GAO survey 
responses and additional agency data for number of times rebaselined 
and reasons. 

[End of table] 

[End of section] 

Appendix XII: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments: 

GAO Contact: 

David A. Powner, (202) 512-9286, or [email protected]: 

Staff Acknowledgements: 

In addition to the contact named above, Carol Cha, Melinda L Cordero, 
Neil Doherty, Joel Grossman, Ethan Iczkovitz, Kaelin Kuhn, Lee 
McCracken, Paul Middleton, Sabine Paul, Mark Ramage, and Eric Winter 
made key contributions to this report. 

[End of section] 

Footnotes: 

[1] The 24 major agencies are the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, 
Defense, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland 
Security, Housing and Urban Development, the Interior, Justice, Labor, 
State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the 
Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, 
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, National Science 
Foundation, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Personnel 
Management, Small Business Administration, Social Security 
Administration, and the U.S. Agency for International Development. 

[2] GAO, Cost Assessment Guide: Best Practices for Estimating and 
Managing Program Costs, exposure draft, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-1134SP] (Washington, D.C.: 
July 2007). 

[3] All percentage estimates based on our survey have 95 percent 
confidence intervals that are within +/-11 percentage points of the 
estimate itself. See Appendix I for additional information on the 
sample design and sampling error. 

[4] Agencies provided reasons for each project's most recent 
rebaseline. 

[5] Definition in OMB Circular A-11, Part 7, sec. 53. 

[6] OMB, Capital Programming Guide, Supplement to OMB Circular A-11, 
Part 7, version 2.0, Planning, Budgeting, and Acquisition of Capital 
Assets, June 2006. 

[7] These OMB requirements reflect provisions in FASA, codified at 41 
U.S.C. ï¿½ 263 for civilian agencies. A similar requirement in 10 U.S.C. 
ï¿½ 2220 applied to the Department of Defense but was later amended to 
remove the 90 percent measure. The department has its own major program 
performance oversight requirements in Chapters 144 (Major Defense 
Acquisition Programs) and 144A (Major Automated Information System 
Programs) of title 10, U.S. Code, including the Nunn-McCurdy cost 
reporting process at 10 U.S.C. ï¿½ 2433. Further, 40 U.S.C. ï¿½ 11317 
(formerly 40 U.S.C. ï¿½ 1427) requires agencies to identify in their 
strategic information resources management plans any major information 
technology acquisition program, or phase or increment of that program, 
that has significantly deviated from cost, performance, or schedule 
goals established for the program. 

[8] An integrated baseline review is an evaluation of a program's 
baseline plan to determine whether all program requirements have been 
addressed, risks have been identified, mitigation plans are in place, 
and available and planned resources are sufficient to complete the 
work. 

[9] The President's Management Agenda is a program that was instituted 
in 2002 to improve the management and performance of the federal 
government. It addresses five governmentwide initiatives, including E- 
government, that agencies are supposed to implement to achieve 
improvements. 

[10] GAO, Defense Acquisitions: Information for Congress on Performance 
of Major Programs Can Be More Complete, Timely, and Accessible, 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-182] (Washington, 
D.C.: March 2005). 

[11] National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006, Pub. L. 
No. 109-163,ï¿½ 802(d), (Jan. 6, 2006), amending 10 U.S.C. ï¿½ 2435. 

[12] Pub. L. No. 109-364 ï¿½ 816 (Oct. 17, 2006), adding a new chapter 
144A to title 10 of the U.S. Code on major automated information system 
programs (10 U.S.C. ï¿½ï¿½ 2445a - 2445d). 

[13] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-1134SP]. 

[14] GAO, Polar-Orbiting Operational Environmental Satellites: 
Restructuring is Under Way, but Technical Challenges and Risks Remain, 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-498] (Washington, 
D.C.: April 2007); GAO, Information Technology: FBI Following a Number 
of Key Acquisition Practices on New Case Management System, but 
Improvements Still Needed, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-
bin/getrpt?GAO-07-912] (Washington, D.C.: July 2007); GAO, Chemical 
Demilitarization: Additional Management Actions Needed to Meet Key 
Performance Goals of DOD's Chemical Demilitarization Program, 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-08-134] (Washington, 
D.C.: Dec. 2007); GAO, Air Traffic Control: FAA Uses Earned Value 
Techniques to Help Manage Information Technology Acquisitions, but 
Needs to Clarify Policy and Strengthen Oversight, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-08-756] (Washington, D.C.: July 
18, 2008); GAO, Air Traffic Control: FAA Uses Earned Value Techniques 
to Help Manage Information Technology Acquisitions, but Needs to 
Clarify Policy and Strengthen Oversight, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-08-756] (Washington, D.C.: July 
18, 2008). 

[15] This lists only the projects in our sample that have been 
rebaselined at least four times. Additional projects in the full 
population of 778 major IT projects may also have been rebaselined at 
least four times. 

[16] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-1134SP]. 

[17] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-1134SP]. 

[End of section] 

GAO's Mission: 

The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting 
its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance 
and accountability of the federal government for the American people. 
GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and 
policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance 
to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding 
decisions. GAO's commitment to good government is reflected in its core 
values of accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony: 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 
cost is through GAO's Web site [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each 
weekday, GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and 
correspondence on its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly 
posted products every afternoon, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov] 
and select "E-mail Updates." 

Order by Mail or Phone: 

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent 
of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 
more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. 
Orders should be sent to: 

U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room LM: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: 

To order by Phone: 
Voice: (202) 512-6000: 
TDD: (202) 512-2537: 
Fax: (202) 512-6061: 

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs: 

Contact: 

Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]: 
E-mail: [email protected]: 
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470: 

Congressional Relations: 

Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, [email protected]: 
(202) 512-4400: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7125: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: 

Public Affairs: 

Chuck Young, Managing Director, [email protected]: 
(202) 512-4800: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7149: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: 

*** End of document. ***