S. 920 (111th): Information Technology Investment Oversight Enhancement and Waste Prevention Act of 2009

111th Congress, 2009–2010. Text as of May 20, 2010 (Referred to House Committee).

Status & Summary | PDF | Source: GPO

I

111th CONGRESS

2d Session

S. 920

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

May 20, 2010

Referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

AN ACT

To amend section 11317 of title 40, United States Code, to improve the transparency of the status of information technology investments, to require greater accountability for cost overruns on Federal information technology investment projects, to improve the processes agencies implement to manage information technology investments, to reward excellence in information technology acquisition, and for other purposes.

1.

Short title

This Act may be cited as the Information Technology (IT) Investment Oversight Enhancement and Waste Prevention Act of 2009.

2.

Findings

Congress finds the following:

(1)

The effective deployment of information technology can make the Federal Government more efficient, effective, and transparent.

(2)

Historically, the Federal Government has struggled to properly plan, manage, and deliver information technology investments on time, on budget, and performing as planned.

(3)

The Office of Management and Budget has made significant progress overseeing information technology investments made by Federal agencies, but continues to struggle to ensure that such investments meet cost, schedule, and performance expectations.

(4)

Congress has limited knowledge of the actual cost, schedule, and performance of agency information technology investments and has difficulty providing the necessary oversight.

(5)

In July 2008, an official of the Government Accountability Office testified before the Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information, Federal Services, and International Security of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate, stating that—

(A)

agencies self-report inaccurate and unreliable project management data to the Office of Management and Budget and Congress; and

(B)

the Office of Management and Budget should establish a mechanism that would provide real-time project management information and force agencies to improve the accuracy and reliability of the information provided.

3.

Real-time transparency of it investment projects

Section 11302(c)(1) of title 40, United States Code, is amended by striking the period at the end and inserting the following: “, including ensuring the effective operation of a Web site, updating the Web site, at a minimum, on a quarterly basis, and including on the Web site, not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of the Information Technology (IT) Investment Oversight Enhancement and Waste Prevention Act of 2009

(1)

the accurate cost, schedule, and performance information since the commencement of the project of all major information technology investments reported in a manner consistent with policy established by the Office of Management and Budget on the use of earned-value management data, which should be based on the ANSI–EIA–748–B standard or another objective performance-based management system approved by the E-Government Administrator;

(2)

a graphical depiction of trend information, to the extent practicable, since the commencement of the major IT investment;

(3)

a clear delineation of major IT investments that have experienced cost, schedule, or performance variance greater than 10 percent over the life cycle of the investment, and the extent of the variation;

(4)

an explanation of the reasons the investment deviated from the benchmark established at the commencement of the project; and

(5)

the number of times investments were rebaselined and the dates on which such rebaselines occurred.

.

4.

IT investment projects

(a)

Significant and gross deviations

Section 11317 of title 40, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

11317.

Significant and gross deviations

(a)

Definitions

In this subchapter:

(1)

Agency head

The term Agency Head means the head of the Federal agency that is primarily responsible for the IT investment project under review.

(2)

ANSI EIA–748–B standard

The term ANSI EIA–748–B Standard means the measurement tool jointly developed by the American National Standards Institute and the Electronic Industries Alliance to analyze Earned Value Management systems.

(3)

Appropriate congressional committees

The term appropriate congressional committees means—

(A)

the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate;

(B)

the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the House of Representatives;

(C)

the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate;

(D)

the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives; and

(E)

any other relevant congressional committee with jurisdiction over an agency required to take action under this section.

(4)

Chief information officer

The term Chief Information Officer means the Chief Information Officer designated under section 3506(a)(2) of title 44 of the Executive department (as defined in section 101 of title 5) that is primarily responsible for the IT investment project under review.

(5)

Core IT investment project

The terms core IT investment project and core project mean a mission critical IT investment project designated as such by the Chief Information Officer, with approval by the Agency Head under subsection (b).

(6)

Director

The term Director means the Director of the Office of Management and Budget.

(7)

Earned value management

The term Earned Value Management means the cost, schedule, and performance data used to determine project status and developed in accordance with the ANSI EIA–748–B Standard.

(8)

Grossly deviated

The term grossly deviated means cost, schedule, or performance variance that is at least 40 percent from the Original Baseline.

(9)

Independent cost estimate

The term independent cost estimate means a pragmatic and neutral analysis, assessment, and quantification of all costs and risks associated with acquisitions related to an IT investment project, which—

(A)

is based on programmatic and technical specifications provided by the office within the agency with primary responsibility for the development, procurement, and delivery of the project;

(B)

is formulated and provided by an entity other than the office within the agency with primary responsibility for the development, procurement, and delivery of the project;

(C)

contains sufficient detail to inform the selection of an Earned Value Management baseline benchmark measure under the ANSI EIA–748–B standard; and

(D)

accounts for the full life cycle cost plus associated operations and maintenance expenses over the usable life of the project’s deliverables.

(10)

Life cycle cost

The term life cycle cost means the total cost of an IT investment project for planning, research and development, modernization, enhancement, operation, and maintenance.

(11)

Major IT investment project

The terms major IT investment project and project mean an information technology system or information technology acquisition that—

(A)

requires special management attention because of its importance to the mission or function of the agency, a component of the agency, or another organization;

(B)

is for financial management and obligates more than $500,000 annually;

(C)

has significant program or policy implications;

(D)

has high executive visibility;

(E)

has high development, operating, or maintenance costs;

(F)

is funded through other than direct appropriations; or

(G)

is defined as major by the agency’s capital planning and investment control process.

(12)

Original baseline

(A)

In general

Except as provided under subparagraph (B), the term Original Baseline means the ANSI EIA–748–B Standard-compliant Earned Value Management benchmark or an equivalent benchmark approved by the Office of Management and Budget and established at the commencement of an IT investment project.

(B)

Grossly deviated project

If an IT investment project grossly deviates from its Original Baseline (as defined in subparagraph (A)), the term Original Baseline means the ANSI EIA–748–B Standard-compliant Earned Value Management benchmark or an equivalent benchmark approved by the Office of Management and Budget and established under subsection (e)(3)(C).

(13)

Significantly deviated

The term significantly deviated means cost, schedule, or performance variance that is at least 20 percent from the Original Baseline.

(b)

Core IT investment projects designation

Each Chief Information Officer, with approval by the Agency Head, shall—

(1)

identify the major IT investments that are the most critical to the agency; and

(2)

designate any project as a core IT investment project or a core project, upon determining that the project is a mission critical IT investment project that—

(A)

represents a significant high dollar value relative to the average IT investment project in the agency’s portfolio;

(B)

delivers a capability critical to the successful completion of the agency mission, or a portion of such mission;

(C)

incorporates unproven or previously undeveloped technology to meet primary project technical requirements; or

(D)

would have a significant negative impact on the successful completion of the agency mission if the project experienced significant cost, schedule, or performance deviations.

(c)

Cost, schedule, and performance reports

(1)

Quarterly reports

Not later than 14 days after the end of each fiscal quarter, the project manager designated by the Agency Head for an IT investment project shall submit information to the Chief Information Officer that includes, as of the last day of the applicable quarter—

(A)

a description of the cost, schedule, and performance of all projects under the project manager’s supervision;

(B)

the original and current project cost, schedule, and performance benchmarks for each project under the project manager’s supervision;

(C)

the quarterly and cumulative cost, schedule, and performance variance related to each IT investment project under the project manager’s supervision since the commencement of the project;

(D)

for each project under the project manager’s supervision, any known, expected, or anticipated changes to project schedule milestones or project performance benchmarks included as part of the original or current baseline description;

(E)

the current cost, schedule, and performance status of all projects under supervision that were previously identified as significantly deviated or grossly deviated; and

(F)

any corrective actions taken to address problems discovered under subparagraphs (C) through (E).

(2)

Interim reports

If the project manager for an IT investment project determines that there is reasonable cause to believe that an IT investment project has significantly deviated or grossly deviated since the issuance of the latest quarterly report, the project manager shall submit to the Chief Information Officer, not later than 21 days after such determination, information on the project that includes, as of the date of the report—

(A)

a description of the original and current program cost, schedule, and performance benchmarks;

(B)

the cost, schedule, or performance variance related to the IT investment project since the commencement of the project;

(C)

any known, expected, or anticipated changes to the project schedule milestones or project performance benchmarks included as part of the original or current baseline description;

(D)

the major reasons underlying the significant or gross deviation of the project; and

(E)

a corrective action plan to correct such deviations.

(d)

Determination of significant deviation

(1)

Chief information officer

Upon receiving information under subsection (c), the Chief Information Officer shall—

(A)

determine if any IT investment project has significantly deviated; and

(B)

report such determination to the Agency Head.

(2)

Congressional notification

If the Chief Information Officer determines under paragraph (1) that an IT investment project has significantly deviated and the Agency Head has not submitted information to the appropriate congressional committees of a significant deviation for that project under this section since the project was last required to be rebaselined under this section, the Agency Head shall submit information to the appropriate congressional committees, the Director, and the Government Accountability Office that includes—

(A)

notification of such determination;

(B)

the date on which such determination was made;

(C)

the amount of the cost increases and the extent of the schedule delays with respect to such project;

(D)

any requirements that—

(i)

were added subsequent to the original baseline; or

(ii)

were originally contracted for, but were changed by deferment or deletion from the original baseline, or were otherwise no longer included in the requirements contracted for;

(E)

an explanation of the differences between—

(i)

the estimate at completion between the project manager, any contractor, and any independent analysis; and

(ii)

the original budget at completion;

(F)

a statement of the reasons underlying the project’s significant deviation; and

(G)

a summary of the plan of action to remedy the significant deviation.

(3)

Deadline

(A)

Notification based on quarterly report

If the determination of significant deviation is based on information submitted under subsection (c)(1), the Agency Head shall notify Congress and the Director in accordance with paragraph (2) not later than 21 days after the end of the quarter upon which such information is based.

(B)

Notification based on interim report

If the determination of significant deviation is based on information submitted under subsection (c)(2), the Agency Head shall notify Congress and the Director in accordance with paragraph (2) not later than 21 days after the submission of such information.

(e)

Determination of gross deviation

(1)

Chief information officer

Upon receiving information under subsection (c), the Chief Information Officer shall—

(A)

determine if any IT investment project has grossly deviated; and

(B)

report any such determination to the Agency Head.

(2)

Congressional notification

If the Chief Information Officer determines under paragraph (1) that an IT investment project has grossly deviated and the Agency Head has not submitted information to the appropriate congressional committees of a gross deviation for that project under this section since the project was last required to be rebaselined under this section, the Agency Head shall submit information to the appropriate congressional committees, the Director, and the Government Accountability Office that includes—

(A)

notification of such determination, which—

(i)

identifies the date on which such determination was made; and

(ii)

indicates whether or not the project has been previously reported as a significant or gross deviation by the Chief Information Officer, and the date of any such report;

(B)

incorporations by reference of all prior reports to Congress on the project required under this section;

(C)

updated accounts of the items described in subparagraphs (C) through (G) of subsection (d)(2);

(D)

the original estimate at completion for the project manager, any contractor, and any independent analysis;

(E)

a graphical depiction that shows monthly planned expenditures against actual expenditures since the commencement of the project;

(F)

the amount, if any, of incentive or award fees any contractor has received since the commencement of the contract and the reasons for receiving such incentive or award fees;

(G)

the project manager’s estimated cost at completion and estimated completion date for the project if current requirements are not modified;

(H)

the project manager’s estimated cost at completion and estimated completion date for the project based on reasonable modification of such requirements;

(I)

an explanation of the most significant occurrence contributing to the variance identified, including cost, schedule, and performance variances, and the effect such occurrence will have on future project costs and program schedule;

(J)

a statement regarding previous or anticipated rebaselining or replanning of the project and the names of the individuals responsible for approval;

(K)

the original life cycle cost of the investment and the expected life cycle cost of the investment expressed in constant base year dollars and in current dollars; and

(L)

a comprehensive plan of action to remedy the gross deviation, and milestones established to control future cost, schedule, and performance deviations in the future.

(3)

Remedial action

(A)

In general

If the Chief Information Officer determines under paragraph (1)(A) that an IT investment project has grossly deviated, the Agency Head, in consultation with the Chief Information Officer and the appropriate project manager, shall develop and implement a remedial action plan that includes—

(i)

a report that—

(I)

describes the primary business case and key functional requirements for the project;

(II)

describes any portions of the project that have technical requirements of sufficient clarity that such portions may be feasibly procured under fixed-price contracts;

(III)

includes a certification by the Agency Head, after consultation with the Chief Information Officer, that all technical and business requirements have been reviewed and validated to ensure alignment with the reported business case;

(IV)

describes any changes to the primary business case or key functional requirements which have occurred since project inception; and

(V)

includes an independent government cost estimate for the project conducted by an entity approved by the Director;

(ii)

an analysis that—

(I)

describes agency business goals that the project was originally designed to address;

(II)

includes a gap analysis of what project deliverables remain in order for the agency to accomplish the business goals referred to in subclause (I);

(III)

identifies the 3 most cost-effective alternative approaches to the project which would achieve the business goals referred to in subclause (I); and

(IV)

includes a cost-benefit analysis, which compares—

(aa)

the completion of the project with the completion of each alternative approach, after factoring in future costs associated with the termination of the project; and

(bb)

the termination of the project without pursuit of alternatives, after factoring in foregone benefits; and

(iii)

a new baseline of the project is established that is consistent with the independent government cost estimate required under clause (i)(V); and

(iv)

the project is designated as a core IT investment project and subjected to the requirements under subsection (f).

(B)

Submission to congress

The remedial action plan and all corresponding reports, analyses, and actions under this paragraph shall be submitted to the appropriate congressional committees and the Director.

(C)

Reporting and analysis exemptions

(i)

In general

The Chief Information Officer, in coordination with the Agency Head and the Director, may forego the completion of any element of a report or analysis under clause (i) or (ii) of subparagraph (A) if the Chief Information Officer determines that such element is not relevant to the understanding of the challenges facing the project or that such element does not further the remedial steps necessary to ensure that the project is completed in a timely and cost-efficient manner.

(ii)

Identification of reasons

The Chief Information Officer shall include the reasons for not including any element referred to in clause (i) in the report submitted to Congress under subparagraph (B).

(4)

Deadline and funding contingency

(A)

Notification and remedial action based on quarterly report

(i)

In general

If the determination of gross deviation is based on a report submitted under subsection (c)(1), the Agency Head shall—

(I)

not later than 45 days after the end of the quarter upon which such report is based, notify the appropriate congressional committees and the Director in accordance with paragraph (2); and

(II)

not later than 180 days after the end of the quarter upon which such report is based, ensure the completion of remedial action under paragraph (3).

(ii)

Failure to meet deadlines

If the Agency Head fails to meet the deadline described in clause (i)(II), additional funds may not be obligated to support expenditures associated with the project until the requirements of this subsection have been fulfilled, except for expenditures to address reporting notifications, remedial actions, and other requirements under this Act.

(B)

Notification and remedial action based on interim report

(i)

In general

If the determination of gross deviation is based on a report submitted under subsection (c)(2), the Agency Head shall—

(I)

not later than 45 days after the submission of such report, notify the appropriate congressional committees in accordance with paragraph (2); and

(II)

not later than 180 days after the submission of such report, ensure the completion of remedial action in accordance with paragraph (3).

(ii)

Failure to meet deadlines

If the Agency Head fails to meet the deadline described in clause (i)(II), additional funds may not be obligated to support expenditures associated with the project until the requirements of this subsection have been fulfilled, except for expenditures to address reporting notifications, remedial actions, and other requirements under this Act.

(f)

Additional requirements for core IT investment project reports

(1)

Initial report

If a remedial action plan described in subsection (e)(3)(A) has not been submitted for a core IT investment project, the Agency Head, in coordination with the Chief Information Officer and responsible program managers, shall prepare an initial report for inclusion in the first budget submitted to Congress under section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, after the designation of a project as a core IT investment project, which includes—

(A)

a description of the primary business case and key functional requirements for the project;

(B)

an identification and description of any portions of the project that have technical requirements of sufficient clarity that such portions may be feasibly procured under fixed-price contracts;

(C)

an independent cost estimate for the project;

(D)

certification by the Chief Information Officer that all technical and business requirements have been reviewed and validated to ensure alignment with the reported business case; and

(E)

any changes to the primary business case or key functional requirements which have occurred since project inception.

(2)

Quarterly review of business case

The Agency Head, in coordination with the Chief Information Officer and responsible program managers, shall—

(A)

monitor the primary business case and core functionality requirements reported to Congress and the Director for designated core IT investment projects; and

(B)

if changes to the primary business case or key functional requirements for a core IT investment project occur in any fiscal quarter, submit a report to Congress and the Director not later than 14 days after the end of such quarter that details the changes and describes the impact the changes will have on the cost and ultimate effectiveness of the project.

(3)

Alternative significant deviation determination

If the Chief Information Officer determines, subsequent to a change in the primary business case or key functional requirements, that without such change the project would have significantly deviated—

(A)

the Chief Information Officer shall notify the Agency Head of the significant deviation; and

(B)

the Agency Head shall fulfill the requirements under subsection (d)(2) in accordance with the deadlines under subsection (d)(3).

(4)

Alternative gross deviation determination

If the Chief Information Officer determines, subsequent to a change in the primary business case or key functional requirements, that without such change the project would have grossly deviated—

(A)

the Chief Information Officer shall notify the Agency Head of the gross deviation; and

(B)

the Agency Head shall fulfill the requirements under subsections (e)(2) and (e)(3) in accordance with subsection (e)(4).

(g)

Method of delivery

Reports and other information required under this section may be submitted through the Web site established under section 11302(c)(1) in a manner consistent with guidance from the Office of Management and Budget to satisfy reporting requirements and to reduce paperwork.

(h)

Department of Defense acquisitions

The requirements of section 2445a of title 10, United States Code, shall apply to the information technology investment projects of the Department of Defense instead of the requirements under this section.

.

(b)

Inclusion in the budget submitted to Congress

Section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, is amended—

(1)

in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking include in each budget the following: and inserting include in each budget—;

(2)

by redesignating the second paragraph (33) (as added by section 889(a) of Public Law 107–296) as paragraph (35);

(3)

in each of paragraphs (1) through (34), by striking the period at the end and inserting a semicolon;

(4)

in paragraph (35), as redesignated by paragraph (2), by striking the period at the end and inserting ; and; and

(5)

by adding at the end the following:

(36)

the reports prepared under section 11317(f) of title 40, United States Code, relating to the core IT investment projects of the agency.

.

(c)

Improvement of information technology acquisition and development

Subchapter II of chapter 113 of title 40, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

11319.

Acquisition and development

(a)

Purpose

The objective of this section is to significantly reduce—

(1)

cost overruns and schedule slippage from the estimates established at the time the program is initially approved;

(2)

the number of requirements and business objectives at the time the program is approved that are not met by the delivered products; and

(3)

the number of critical defects and serious defects in delivered information technology.

(b)

OMB guidance

The Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall—

(1)

not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this section, prescribe uniformly applicable guidance for agencies to implement the requirements of this section, which shall not include any exemptions to such requirements not specifically authorized under this section; and

(2)

take any actions that are necessary to ensure that Federal agencies are in compliance with the guidance prescribed pursuant to paragraph (1) not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this section.

(c)

Establishment of program

Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this section, each Agency Head (as defined in section 11317(a) of title 40, United States Code) shall establish a program to improve the information technology (referred to in this section as IT) processes overseen by the Chief Information Officer.

(d)

Program requirements

Each program established pursuant to this section shall include—

(1)

a documented process for IT acquisition planning, requirements development and management, project management and oversight, earned-value management, and risk management;

(2)

the development of appropriate metrics that can be implemented and monitored on a real-time dashboard for performance measurement of—

(A)

processes and development status of investments;

(B)

continuous process improvement of the program; and

(C)

achievement of program and investment outcomes;

(3)

a process to ensure that key program personnel have an appropriate level of experience, training, and education, at an institution or institutions approved by the Director, in the planning, acquisition, execution, management, and oversight of IT;

(4)

a process to ensure that the agency implements and adheres to established processes and requirements relating to the planning, acquisition, execution, management, and oversight of IT programs and developments; and

(5)

a process for the Chief Information Officer to intervene or stop the funding of an IT investment if it is at risk of not achieving major project milestones.

(e)

Annual report to OMB

Not later than the last day of February of each year, the Agency Head shall submit a report to the Office of Management and Budget that includes—

(1)

a detailed summary of the accomplishments of the program established by the Agency Head pursuant to this section;

(2)

the status of completeness of implementation of each of the program requirements, and the date each such requirement was deemed to be completed;

(3)

the percentage of Federal IT projects covered under the program compared to all of the IT projects of the agency, listed by number of programs and by annual dollars expended;

(4)

a detailed breakdown of the sources and uses of the amounts spent by the agency during the previous fiscal year to support the activities of the program;

(5)

a copy of any guidance issued under the program and a statement regarding whether each such guidance is mandatory;

(6)

the identification of the metrics developed in accordance with subsection (b)(2);

(7)

a description of how paragraphs (3) and (4) of subsection (b) have been implemented and any related agency guidance; and

(8)

a description of how agencies will continue to review and update the implementation and objectives of such guidance.

(f)

Annual report to Congress

The Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall provide an annual report to Congress on the status and implementation of the program established pursuant to this section.

(g)

Department of Defense acquisitions

The requirements of section 2223a of title 10, United States Code, shall apply to the information technology investment projects of the Department of Defense instead of the requirements under this section.

.

(d)

Clerical amendments

The table of sections for chapter 113 of title 40, United States Code, is amended—

(1)

by striking the item relating to section 11317 and inserting the following:

11317. Significant and gross deviations.

; and

(2)

by inserting after the item relating to section 11318 the following:

11319. Acquisition and development.

.

5.

Major automated information system programs of the Department of Defense

(a)

Program To improve information technology processes

Chapter 131 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding after section 2223 the following:

2223a.

Information technology acquisition planning and oversight requirements

(a)

Establishment of program

The Secretary of Defense shall establish a program to improve the planning and oversight processes for the acquisition of major automated information systems by the Department of Defense.

(b)

Program components

The program established under subsection (a) shall include—

(1)

a documented process for information technology acquisition planning, requirements development and management, project management and oversight, earned value management, and risk management;

(2)

the development of appropriate metrics that can be implemented and monitored on a real-time basis for performance measurement of—

(A)

processes and development status of investments in major automated information system programs;

(B)

continuous process improvement of the program; and

(C)

achievement of program and investment outcomes;

(3)

a process to ensure that key program personnel have an appropriate level of experience, training, and education in the planning, acquisition, execution, management, and oversight of information technology systems;

(4)

a process to ensure that military departments and defense agencies adhere to established processes and requirements relating to the planning, acquisition, execution, management, and oversight of information technology programs and developments; and

(5)

a process under which an appropriate Department of Defense official may intervene or terminate the funding of an information technology investment if the investment is at risk of not achieving major project milestones.

.

(b)

Annual report to Congress

Section 2445b(b) of title 10, United States Code is amended by adding at the end the following:

(5)

For each major automated information system program for which such information has not been provided in a previous annual report—

(A)

a description of the primary business case and key functional requirements for the program;

(B)

a description of the analysis of alternatives conducted with regard to the program;

(C)

an assessment of the extent to which the program, or portions of the program, have technical requirements of sufficient clarity that the program, or portions of the program, may be feasibly procured under firm, fixed-price contracts;

(D)

the most recent independent cost estimate or cost analysis for the program provided by the Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation in accordance with section 2334(a)(6);

(E)

a certification by a Department of Defense acquisition official with responsibility for the program that all technical and business requirements have been reviewed and validated to ensure alignment with the business case; and

(F)

an explanation of the basis for the certification described in subparagraph (E).

(6)

For each major automated information system program for which the information required under paragraph (5) has been provided in a previous annual report, a summary of any significant changes to the information previously provided.

.

6.

IT SWAT Team

(a)

Purpose

The Director of the Office of Management of Budget (referred to in this section as the Director), in consultation with the Administrator of the Office of Electronic Government and Information and Technology at the Office of Management and Budget (referred to in this section as the E-Gov Administrator), shall assist agencies in avoiding significant and gross deviations in the cost, schedule, and performance of IT investment projects (as such terms are defined in section 11317(a) of title 40, United States Code).

(b)

IT SWAT Team

(1)

Establishment

Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Director shall promulgate policy and guidance for the head of each Federal agency that establishes procedures for the creation of a small group of individuals (referred to in this section as the IT SWAT Team) to carry out the purpose described in subsection (a).

(2)

Qualifications

Individuals selected for the IT SWAT Team—

(A)

shall be certified at the Senior/Expert level according to the Federal Acquisition Certification for Program and Project Managers (FAC–P/PM);

(B)

shall have comparable education, certification, training, and experience to successfully manage high-risk IT investment projects; or

(C)

shall have expertise in the successful management or oversight of planning, architecture, process, integration, or other technical and management aspects using proven process best practices on high-risk IT investment projects.

(3)

Number

The Director, in consultation with the E-Gov Administrator and the head of the agency primarily responsible for the IT investment, shall determine the number of individuals who will be selected for the IT SWAT Team.

(c)

Outside consultants

(1)

Identification

The E-Gov Administrator and representatives of the Chief Information Officers Council shall identify consultants in the private sector who have expert knowledge in IT program management and program management review teams. Not more than 20 percent of such consultants may be formally associated with any 1 of the following types of entities:

(A)

Commercial firms.

(B)

Nonprofit entities.

(C)

Federally funded research and development centers.

(2)

Use of consultants

(A)

In general

Consultants identified under paragraph (1) may be used to assist the IT SWAT Team in assessing and improving IT investment projects.

(B)

Limitation

Consultants with a formally established relationship with an organization may not participate in any assessment involving an IT investment project for which such organization is under contract to provide technical support.

(C)

Exception

The limitation described in subparagraph (B) may not be construed as precluding access to anyone having relevant information helpful to the conduct of the assessment.

(3)

Contracts

The E-Gov Administrator, in conjunction with the Administrator of the General Services Administration (GSA), may establish competitively bid contracts with 1 or more qualified consultants, independent of any GSA schedule.

(d)

Initial response to anticipated significant or gross deviation

If the head of the Federal agency primarily responsible for the major IT investment or the E-Gov Administrator determines that there is reasonable cause to believe that a major IT investment project is likely to significantly or grossly deviate (as defined in section 11317(a) of title 40, United States Code), including the receipt of inconsistent or missing data, or if such agency head or the E–Gov Administrator determines that the assignment of 1 or more members of the IT SWAT Team could meaningfully reduce the possibility of significant or gross deviation, such agency head or the E-Gov Administrator shall carry out the following activities:

(1)

Recommend the assignment of 1 or more members of the IT SWAT Team to assess the project in accordance with the scope and time period described in section 11317(c)(1) of title 40, United States Code, beginning not later than 14 days after such recommendation. No member of the SWAT Team who is associated with the department or agency whose IT investment project is the subject of the assessment may be assigned to participate in this assessment. Such limitation may not be construed as precluding access to anyone having relevant information helpful to the conduct of the assessment.

(2)

If such agency head or the E-Gov Administrator determines that 1 or more qualified consultants are needed to support the efforts of the IT SWAT Team under paragraph (1), negotiate a contract with the consultant to provide such support during the period in which the IT SWAT Team is conducting the assessment described in paragraph (1).

(3)

Ensure that the costs of an assessment under paragraph (1) and the support services of 1 or more consultants under paragraph (2) are paid for by the agency being assessed.

(4)

Monitor the progress made by the IT SWAT Team in assessing the project.

(e)

Reduction of significant or gross deviation

If the agency head described in subsection (d) or the E-Gov Administrator determines that the assessment conducted under subsection (d) confirms that a major IT investment project is likely to significantly or grossly deviate, such agency head or the E-Gov Administrator shall take steps to reduce the deviation, which may include—

(1)

providing training, education, or mentoring to improve the qualifications of the program manager;

(2)

replacing the program manager or other staff;

(3)

supplementing the program management team with Federal Government employees or independent contractors;

(4)

terminating the project; or

(5)

hiring an independent contractor to report directly to senior management and the E-Gov Administrator.

(f)

Enforcement of accountability

The Director may use the actions directed under section 11303(b)(5) of title 5, United States Code, to enforce accountability of the head of the agency and for the investments made by the agency in information technology.

(g)

Report to Congress

The Director shall include in the annual Report to Congress on the Benefits of E-Government Initiatives a detailed summary of the composition and activities of the IT SWAT Team, including—

(1)

the number and qualifications of individuals on the IT SWAT Team;

(2)

a description of the IT investment projects that the IT SWAT Team has worked during the previous fiscal year;

(3)

the major issues that necessitated the involvement of the IT SWAT Team to assist agencies with assessing and managing IT investment projects and whether such issues were satisfactorily resolved;

(4)

if the issues referred to in paragraph (3) were not satisfactorily resolved, the issues still needed to be resolved and the Agency Head’s plan for resolving such issues;

(5)

a detailed breakdown of the sources and uses of the amounts spent by the Office of Management and Budget and other Federal agencies during the previous fiscal year to support the activities of the IT SWAT Team; and

(6)

a determination of whether the IT SWAT Team has been effective in—

(A)

preventing projects from deviating from the original baseline; and

(B)

assisting agencies in conducting appropriate analysis and planning before a project is funded.

7.

Awards for Personnel for Excellence in the Acquisition of Information Systems and Information Technology

(a)

In general

Not later than 180 days after the enactment of this Act, the Director of the Office of Personnel Management shall develop policy and guidance for agencies to develop a program to recognize excellent performance by Federal Government employees and teams of such employees in the acquisition of information systems and information technology for the agency.

(b)

Elements

The program referred to in subsection (a) shall, to the extent practicable—

(1)

obtain objective outcome measures; and

(2)

include procedures for—

(A)

the nomination of Federal Government employees and teams of such employees for eligibility for recognition under the program; and

(B)

the evaluation of nominations for recognition under the program by 1 or more agency panels of individuals from government, academia, and the private sector who have such expertise, and are appointed in such a manner, as the Director of the Office of Personal Management shall establish for purposes of the program.

(c)

Award of cash bonuses and other incentives

As part of the program referred to in subsection (a), the Director of the Office of Personnel Management, in consultation with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, shall establish policies and guidance for agencies to reward any Federal Government employee or teams of such employees recognized pursuant to the program—

(1)

by awarding a cash bonus authorized by any other provision of law to the extent that the performance of such individual so recognized warrants the award of such bonus under such provision of law;

(2)

through promotions and other nonmonetary awards;

(3)

by publicizing acquisition accomplishments by individual employees and, as appropriate, the tangible end benefits that resulted from such accomplishments; and

(4)

through other awards, incentives, or bonuses that the head of the agency considers appropriate.

Passed the Senate May 19, 2010.

Nancy Erickson,

Secretary