Electronic Government Act: Agencies Have Implemented Most Provisions, but Key Areas of Attention Remain
Highlights
What GAO Found
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and other agencies have taken steps to carry out leadership and organizational responsibilities as called for by the E-Government Act. Specifically, OMB's Office of Electronic Government has issued key guidance for agencies on complying with the requirements of the act and coordinated annual reporting to Congress on agency compliance with the act. In addition, the Federal Chief Information Officers Council has taken actions, such as publicizing best practices and recommendations for more efficient use of information technology and assisting in the implementation of the act's requirements. Further, executive branch agencies have made significant progress in carrying out leadership responsibilities under the act, including designating officials with responsibility for ensuring compliance with the act, issuing internal policy and guidance, and developing performance measures. However, while OMB and agencies have reported annually on their compliance with the act as required, OMB did not always require agencies to report on all of the act's provisions and has not been explicit in communicating to Congress provisions that it is not reporting on and the reasons why. For example, from fiscal year 2006 to fiscal year 2009, OMB did not require agencies to report on how they enhanced public participation by electronic means for development and issuance of regulations. OMB officials stated that each year's reporting requirements reflected particular administration priorities and were tailored to reduce the reporting burden on agencies.
Agencies have taken numerous actions to address specific requirements for enhancing public access to government information. For example:
- The General Services Administration has established, and agencies are using, a framework for electronic signatures.
- A federal Internet portal was established to provide a consolidated point of public access to government information, although challenges remain in streamlining federal web operations.
- Agencies have taken steps to ensure the availability of government information and services to individuals with diminished access to the Internet and those with disabilities.
- A website was established to provide the public with information and the ability to comment on proposed federal regulations.
- OMB and agencies have taken steps to improve the accessibility, usability, and preservation of government information through, for example, organizing website content and electronic records management.
- OMB has issued policies on protecting the privacy of individuals' personal information on government websites.
However, OMB has yet to fully establish a repository and website for providing public access to information on government investments in research and development as required or issued guidance to agencies on participating in the site.
Why GAO Did This Study
The E-Government Act of 2002 was enacted to promote the use of the Internet and other technologies to improve citizen access to government information and services, improve government decision making, and enhance accountability and transparency. The act established an Office of Electronic Government within OMB to oversee the act's implementation and required executive branch agencies to take a number of actions aimed at, among other things, using technology to better organize, maintain, and make information about the operations of the federal government available.
With the 10th anniversary of the act's passage approaching, GAO was asked to (1) assess OMB's and agencies' efforts to fulfill the act's requirements to establish leadership and organizational responsibilities and (2) evaluate agencies' progress in meeting the act's requirements to enhance public access to government information and services. To do this, GAO reviewed and analyzed the requirements of the act and OMB and agency reports on compliance with these requirements, administered a questionnaire to responsible officials at 24 major agencies, and interviewed agency and OMB officials.
Recommendations
GAO is recommending that OMB identify in its annual report to Congress the provisions of the act that are not included and why, establish a federal research and development repository and website, and issue guidance on agency participation in this site. In reviewing a draft of the report, OMB indicated that it had no comment.
Recommendations for Executive Action
| Agency Affected | Recommendation | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Office of Management and Budget | To further progress toward the E-Government Act's goal of promoting better use of the Internet and other information technologies to improve government services to citizens, internal government operations, and opportunities for citizens' participation in government, the Director of OMB should direct the Administrator of the Office of E-Government to identify in its annual E-Gov reports to Congress the provisions of the act that are not discussed in the report, and the reasons why, including when certain activities may no longer be a priority |
In its "FY 2013 Annual Report to Congress: E-Government Act Implementation," the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) identified each E-Government Act reporting requirement and the report section or related website where the required information could be found. OMB's fiscal year 2014 and fiscal year 2015 annual E-Gov reports to Congress also identified the reporting requirements and where the information was located within the reports or on a website. Further, OMB no longer excluded provisions of the act in the annual reports.
|
| Office of Management and Budget | To further progress toward the E-Government Act's goal of promoting better use of the Internet and other information technologies to improve government services to citizens, internal government operations, and opportunities for citizens' participation in government, the Director of OMB should direct the Administrator of the Office of E-Government to develop a timeline for reestablishing the research and development repository and website. |
The Office of Management and Budget, in conjunction with the Office of Science and Technology Policy, the National Institutes of Health, and the National Science Foundation, established a research and development repository and website. The website--Science and Technology for America's Reinvestment Measuring the Effects of Research on Innovation, Competitiveness and Science (STAR METRICS)--was established to create a repository of data and tools to assess the impact of the federal government's research and development investments. The associated Federal RePORTER tool created a searchable database of scientific awards made by federal agencies. Our review of the Federal Reporter tool found that it showed the number of projects by agency and the total funding provided by the respective agency. The website was established in March 2014 and, according to the website, is updated on an annual basis. As of September 2016, seven federal agencies had provided research and development data to the Federal RePORTER tool.
|
| Office of Management and Budget | To further progress toward the E-Government Act's goal of promoting better use of the Internet and other information technologies to improve government services to citizens, internal government operations, and opportunities for citizens' participation in government, the Director of OMB should direct the Administrator of the Office of E-Government to provide guidance to agencies on their participation in the research and development repository. |
The Office of Management and Budget, in conjunction with the Office of Science and Technology Policy, the National Institutes of Health, and the National Science Foundation, developed a governmentwide repository and website for all federally funded research and development. However, as of September 2016, OMB has not provided guidance to agencies regarding participation in the repository. In addition, our review of guidance related to the use of the IT Dashboard for research and development information found that it does not discuss agencies' reporting on funding for research and development activities.
|