U.S. Courts: Action Needed to Improve IT Management and Establish a Chief Information Officer
Fast Facts
The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts relies on IT systems for court administration and probation and pretrial services.
We looked at the Office's IT workforce management. The Office didn't have a strategic approach to addressing its IT workforce needs, although it had taken steps to implement leading practices. For example, it didn't have a recruiting strategy or training program focused on its IT workforce to address the cybersecurity skills gaps it had identified in that workforce.
Also, the Office doesn't have a Chief Information Officer to handle IT oversight across the agency.
Our 18 recommendations address these issues and more.
Highlights
What GAO Found
The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts (the Office) is a judicial branch agency that, among other things, provides IT support services to federal courts. Regarding IT workforce management, the Office's implementation of 12 selected leading practices across four areas varied (see table). The Office substantially implemented practices in the performance management area, but was less successful in recruitment and hiring and training and development. For example, although the Office identified gaps in the cybersecurity skills of its IT workforce, it did not have a recruiting strategy for IT staff and did not establish a training program for its IT staff. Agency officials said that they did not establish such a training program because the agency's departments are to address training on an individual or project basis. Fully addressing practices in these areas would help ensure that it has the knowledge and skills to tackle pressing IT issues.
Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts' Implementation of 12 Selected Leading Practices Associated with Four Workforce Planning and Management Areas for Its IT Workforce
|
IT workforce area |
Overall area rating |
Number of practices fully implemented |
Number of practices partially implemented |
Number of practices not implemented |
|
1. Strategic planning |
Partially implemented |
0 |
3 |
0 |
|
2. Recruitment and hiring |
Minimally implemented |
0 |
2 |
1 |
|
3. Training and development |
Minimally implemented |
0 |
2 |
1 |
|
4. Performance management |
Substantially implemented |
1 |
2 |
0 |
|
Total |
─ |
1 |
9 |
2 |
Source: GAO analysis of data provided by Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts officials. | GAO-22-105068
The Office partially implemented most of the 23 selected project management best practices for its three largest IT projects: (1) the Judiciary Electronic Filing System, (2) JSPACE (an enterprise facilities management system), and (3) Probation and Pretrial Services Automated Case Tracking System 360. It fully implemented the majority of the supplier agreement management practices for each project. However, for project planning, while the Office had developed life cycle cost estimates and schedules for each project, none of the cost estimates were comprehensive and none of the schedules were well-constructed. Full implementation of these practices would help ensure that projects meet user needs and are delivered on schedule and within budget. However, insufficient oversight and incomplete IT project management guidance have hampered the projects and may have contributed to cost increases and schedule overruns.
Although a Chief Information Officer (CIO) with enterprise-wide authority could address IT oversight and guidance shortcomings, such a position does not exist at the Office. Instead, the Associate Director for the Department of Technology Services serves as the principal IT advisor to the Director. Agency officials acknowledged that the Associate Director does not have oversight of other Office units that separately manage their own IT workforces and projects. The judicial branch does not have a statutory requirement to establish a CIO. However, according to GAO's prior work at federal agencies, leading organizations adopt and use an enterprise-wide approach to managing IT under the leadership of a CIO.
Why GAO Did This Study
The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts relies on IT systems to manage information to support its lines of business. These lines of business include case management, court administration, and probation and pretrial services.
GAO was asked to review the Office's IT management. This report evaluates, among other things, the extent to which the Office (1) implemented selected leading IT workforce planning and management practices, (2) implemented selected best practices for planning and managing IT projects, and (3) has a CIO with the authority to exercise enterprise control and oversight of the Office's IT workforce and project portfolio.
To do so, GAO assessed agency documentation against 12 selected leading workforce management practices within four topic areas. It also evaluated 23 best practices for managing the Office's three largest IT acquisition projects. In addition, GAO interviewed officials from the Office about the agency's management of its IT workforce and projects.
Recommendations
GAO is making 18 recommendations, including that the Office improve its IT workforce planning and management, enhance its IT project management practices, and establish a CIO position with enterprise-wide responsibility. The Office said it would evaluate the recommendations in light of its decentralized management model and determine what improvements to make. As discussed in the report, GAO maintains the recommendations are appropriate.
Recommendations for Executive Action
| Agency Affected | Recommendation | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Administrative Office of the United States Courts | The Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts should conduct a strategic analysis to fully determine the agency's IT staffing needs. (Recommendation 1) |
In January 2023, the Director of the Administrative Office (AO) stated that the agency's Chief Information Officer would prioritize and address this recommendation while assessing the AO's IT management and organizational structure. However, as of January 2023, the agency was still in the process of establishing a Chief Information Officer position (which will be a new position at the agency) and the Director of AO did not provide a date for when the assessment of the agency's IT management and organizational structure will occur. We will continue to follow-up with the agency on its efforts to implement this recommendation.
|
| Administrative Office of the United States Courts | The Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts should fully identify and document all of the required knowledge and skills, including technical competencies, needed for the IT workforce. (Recommendation 2) |
In January 2023, the Director of the Administrative Office (AO) stated that the agency's Chief Information Officer would prioritize and address this recommendation while assessing the AO's IT management and organizational structure. However, as of January 2023, the agency was still in the process of establishing a Chief Information Officer position (which will be a new position at the agency) and the Director of AO did not provide a date for when the assessment of the agency's IT management and organizational structure will occur. We will continue to follow-up with the agency on its efforts to implement this recommendation.
|
| Administrative Office of the United States Courts | The Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts should regularly analyze the IT workforce to identify the staffing and competency needs of the overall IT workforce and any gaps the agency may have in those areas. (Recommendation 3) |
In January 2023, the Director of the Administrative Office (AO) stated that the agency's Chief Information Officer would prioritize and address this recommendation while assessing the AO's IT management and organizational structure. However, as of January 2023, the agency was still in the process of establishing a Chief Information Officer position (which will be a new position at the agency) and the Director of AO did not provide a date for when the assessment of the agency's IT management and organizational structure will occur. We will continue to follow-up with the agency on its efforts to implement this recommendation.
|
| Administrative Office of the United States Courts | The Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts should develop specific strategies and plans to address gaps in IT competencies and staffing, after completing a strategic analysis of all of its IT competency and staffing needs. (Recommendation 4) |
In January 2023, the Director of the Administrative Office (AO) stated that the agency's Chief Information Officer would prioritize and address this recommendation while assessing the AO's IT management and organizational structure. However, as of January 2023, the agency was still in the process of establishing a Chief Information Officer position (which will be a new position at the agency) and the Director of AO did not provide a date for when the assessment of the agency's IT management and organizational structure will occur. We will continue to follow-up with the agency on its efforts to implement this recommendation.
|
| Administrative Office of the United States Courts | The Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts should develop and track metrics to monitor the effectiveness of the agency's recruitment and hiring efforts specifically for the IT workforce, including their effectiveness at addressing IT skill and staffing gaps, and require reporting to agency leadership on progress made in addressing skill and staffing gaps in the IT workforce. (Recommendation 5) |
In January 2023, the Director of the Administrative Office (AO) stated that the agency's Chief Information Officer would prioritize and address this recommendation while assessing the AO's IT management and organizational structure. However, as of January 2023, the agency was still in the process of establishing a Chief Information Officer position (which will be a new position at the agency) and the Director of AO did not provide a date for when the assessment of the agency's IT management and organizational structure will occur. We will continue to follow-up with the agency on its efforts to implement this recommendation.
|
| Administrative Office of the United States Courts | The Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts should adjust recruitment and hiring activities, as necessary, after establishing and tracking metrics to monitor the effectiveness of these activities at addressing skill and staffing gaps in the IT workforce. (Recommendation 6) |
In January 2023, the Director of the Administrative Office (AO) stated that the agency's Chief Information Officer would prioritize and address this recommendation while assessing the AO's IT management and organizational structure. However, as of January 2023, the agency was still in the process of establishing a Chief Information Officer position (which will be a new position at the agency) and the Director of AO did not provide a date for when the assessment of the agency's IT management and organizational structure will occur. We will continue to follow-up with the agency on its efforts to implement this recommendation.
|
| Administrative Office of the United States Courts | The Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts should establish a training program that identifies required and recommended training for all IT staff, as appropriate. (Recommendation 7) |
In January 2023, the Director of the Administrative Office (AO) stated that the agency's Chief Information Officer would prioritize and address this recommendation while assessing the AO's IT management and organizational structure. However, as of January 2023, the agency was still in the process of establishing a Chief Information Officer position (which will be a new position at the agency) and the Director of AO did not provide a date for when the assessment of the agency's IT management and organizational structure will occur. We will continue to follow-up with the agency on its efforts to implement this recommendation.
|
| Administrative Office of the United States Courts | The Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts should ensure that IT employees complete appropriate training (after establishing a training program that identifies required training for IT staff). (Recommendation 8) |
In January 2023, the Director of the Administrative Office (AO) stated that the agency's Chief Information Officer would prioritize and address this recommendation while assessing the AO's IT management and organizational structure. However, as of January 2023, the agency was still in the process of establishing a Chief Information Officer position (which will be a new position at the agency) and the Director of AO did not provide a date for when the assessment of the agency's IT management and organizational structure will occur. We will continue to follow-up with the agency on its efforts to implement this recommendation.
|
| Administrative Office of the United States Courts | The Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts should collect and assess performance data (including qualitative or quantitative measures, as appropriate) to determine how the training program for IT staff (once implemented) contributes to improved performance and results. (Recommendation 9) |
In January 2023, the Director of the Administrative Office (AO) stated that the agency's Chief Information Officer would prioritize and address this recommendation while assessing the AO's IT management and organizational structure. However, as of January 2023, the agency was still in the process of establishing a Chief Information Officer position (which will be a new position at the agency) and the Director of AO did not provide a date for when the assessment of the agency's IT management and organizational structure will occur. We will continue to follow-up with the agency on its efforts to implement this recommendation.
|
| Administrative Office of the United States Courts | The Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts should update the AO performance management process to include appropriate technical competencies, once identified, against which IT staff performance should be assessed. (Recommendation 10) |
In January 2023, the Director of the Administrative Office (AO) stated that the agency's Chief Information Officer would prioritize and address this recommendation while assessing the AO's IT management and organizational structure. However, as of January 2023, the agency was still in the process of establishing a Chief Information Officer position (which will be a new position at the agency) and the Director of AO did not provide a date for when the assessment of the agency's IT management and organizational structure will occur. We will continue to follow-up with the agency on its efforts to implement this recommendation.
|
| Administrative Office of the United States Courts | The Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts should explicitly align individual performance expectations for IT staff with organizational goals. (Recommendation 11) |
In January 2023, the Director of the Administrative Office (AO) stated that the agency's Chief Information Officer would prioritize and address this recommendation while assessing the AO's IT management and organizational structure. However, as of January 2023, the agency was still in the process of establishing a Chief Information Officer position (which will be a new position at the agency) and the Director of AO did not provide a date for when the assessment of the agency's IT management and organizational structure will occur. We will continue to follow-up with the agency on its efforts to implement this recommendation.
|
| Administrative Office of the United States Courts | The Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts should require the Departments of Administrative Services and Program Services to ensure that the selected IT projects comply with the agency's guidance or a set of standard processes for IT project management. (Recommendation 12) |
In January 2023, the Director of the Administrative Office (AO) stated that she had instructed the Associate Directors responsible for IT projects to follow the agency's IT Project Management guidance. She also noted that the agency's Chief Information Officer--a new position that the agency was working to establish, as of January 2023--would have the authority to enforce the requirement that IT projects follow the agency's IT Project Management guidance. As of September 2023, AO has not yet provided supporting documentation of the requirement for IT projects to comply with this guidance. We will continue to follow-up with the agency on its efforts to implement this recommendation.
|
| Administrative Office of the United States Courts | The Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts should develop guidance for IT projects (including contractors) to follow related to the best practices that were not fully reflected in AO's existing IT project management guidance. The guidance should address, among other things, cost and schedule estimating best practices. (Recommendation 13) |
In January 2023, the Director of the Administrative Office (AO) stated that she had instructed the Associate Directors responsible for IT projects to follow the agency's IT Project Management guidance. However, AO had not yet updated this guidance to fully address the IT project management best practices (including cost and schedule estimating best practices) that were not included in the guidance. We will continue to follow-up with the agency on its efforts to implement this recommendation.
|
| Administrative Office of the United States Courts | The Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts should require, and take steps to ensure, that the JEFS, JSPACE, and PACTS 360 projects document and track activities related to the best practices that they did not fully implement. (Recommendation 14) |
In January 2023, the Director of the Administrative Office (AO) stated that she had instructed the Associate Directors responsible for IT projects to follow the agency's IT Project Management guidance. The Director further stated that regular meetings are held with AO leadership, key stakeholders, and project sponsors to inform them on the progress of the projects. However, as of September 2023, AO has not yet provided supporting documentation demonstrating that the JEFS, JSPACE, and PACTS360 projects are documenting and tracking activities related to the IT project management best practices that they did not fully implement. We will continue to follow-up with the agency on its efforts to implement this recommendation.
|
| Administrative Office of the United States Courts | The Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts should establish a CIO with enterprise control and oversight of the agency's IT workforce and project portfolio. (Recommendation 15) |
In January 2023, the Director of the Administrative Office (AO) stated that the agency would recruit a CIO who will have enterprise authority over IT portfolio management, including IT project planning, acquisitions, standards, and policy. Subsequently, in February 2023, the agency posted a CIO job announcement on USAJobs.gov (the central website for posting federal job openings). We will continue to follow-up with the agency on its efforts to implement this recommendation.
|
| Administrative Office of the United States Courts | The Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts should direct the Court Services Office to perform and document a comprehensive assessment of risks to EPA program obligations, including identifying, analyzing, and responding to risks associated with obligating EPA program funds. (Recommendation 16) |
In January 2023, the Director of the Administrative Office (AO) stated that the agency's Office of Compliance and Risk had begun a comprehensive risk analysis of EPA program obligations in November 2022. As of January 2023, the Director stated that the analysis was still underway. We will continue to follow-up with the agency on its efforts to implement this recommendation.
|
| Administrative Office of the United States Courts | The Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts should direct the Court Services Office to (1) fully design and document the procedures for reviews of EPA program obligations; and (2) establish performance metrics for evaluating the effectiveness of the agency's internal control system over EPA program obligations in supporting program objectives and minimizing risks. (Recommendation 17) |
The Director of the Administrative Office (AO) stated that, in June 2022, the agency had hired an individual who would be responsible for training AO staff, court units, and federal public defender organizations in the documentation and self-assessment of internal controls. In January 2023, the Director also stated that, once the agency's Office of Compliance and Risk completes a risk analysis of EPA program obligations (which was ongoing, as of January 2023), the individual would work with the EPA program office to (1) design and document procedures for reviews of EPA program obligations and (2) create a tool and metrics for evaluating the effectiveness of internal control over EPA obligations. We will continue to follow up with the agency regarding its efforts to implement this recommendation.
|
| Administrative Office of the United States Courts | The Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts should direct the Court Services Office to (1) require AO offices to conduct and document periodic reviews of control activities over EPA program obligations to ensure their continued effectiveness in achieving the EPA program's objectives; and (2) document responsibilities for conducting reviews of control activities and addressing any deficiencies in the established internal controls over EPA program obligations. (Recommendation 18) |
In January 2023, the Director of the Administrative Office (AO) stated that, in June 2022, the agency had hired an individual who would be responsible for training AO staff, court units, and federal public defender organizations in the documentation and self-assessment of internal controls. The Director also stated that the individual will work with the EPA program office to schedule annual self-assessments over control activities and document the results of those assessments. The agency has not yet provided supporting documentation of these efforts. We will continue to follow up with the agency on its efforts to implement this recommendation.
|