GAO’s Open Government Recommendations for USAspending.gov
March 15th, 2010 by Jack MannBefore the Open Government Initiative, there was the The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA) which required the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to create a publicly accessible website containing data on federal awards. The OMB obliged, creating USAspending.gov, but the GAO’s recently-released review of the site points out a few missing pieces: “of nine requirements GAO reviewed, OMB has satisfied six and partially satisfied one.”
Here are the GAO’s four recommendations for improving USAspending.gov:
1. OMB should develop and implement a specific plan for the collection and reporting of subaward data, including a time frame for including subaward data on USAspending.gov.
One of the requirements of the FFATA was to conduct a pilot program on collecting subaward data beginning no later than July 2007. So far, OMB has only partially satisfied the requirement – two pilot programs began in 2008, after the statutory deadline. There is no subaward data included on the USAspending.gov website (a requirement that was due in January 2009) and OMB does not have a specific plan in place for collecting and reporting such data.
2. OMB should develop and implement a process to regularly ensure that all federal agencies report required award information to USAspending.gov and clarify (1) the requirement that award titles describe the award’s purpose; and (2) requirements for validating and documenting agency award data submitted by federal agencies.
While USAspending.gov has mandatory information on federal awards from 29 agencies, 9 agencies did not report a total of 15 awards. These agencies include the Department of the Treasury and the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, have said that they plan to report any awards required going forward. However, OMB doesn’t have a process for identifying non-compliant agencies as originally planned but relies on voluntary agency compliance to ensure complete and accurate reporting. Without a more effective approach to ensuring that all agencies report applicable awards, the GAO says, the utility and accuracy of USAspending.gov will be hamstrung by gaps in the required information.
3. USAspending.gov should include information on the city where work is performed.
In the GAO report’s words, “Until OMB and agencies better ensure that complete and accurate information is included on USAspending.gov, the Web site will be limited in providing the public with a view into the details of federal spending.”
