Clinger-Cohen gets mixed marks after five years

In the five years since the Clinger-Cohen Act became law, it has revolutionized the way the government buys and manages technology. But the changes at federal agencies have been more evolutionary than revolutionary, say some government officials.

Implementation has been uneven across government, said David McClure, the General Accounting Office's associate director of governmentwide and defense information systems.

But Paul Brubaker, who helped draw up the bill, said agencies have all but failed to carry out the management reforms envisioned by the legislation. The government has made great strides in reforming how information technology is bought; however, many of the management reforms prescribed in the seminal IT management law have not been realized, said Brubaker, who recently left his post as Defense Department deputy chief information officer for a private-sector job.

Although he largely praised the IT procurement reforms, giving them a "B or B-minus," Brubaker was more critical of the management provisions.

"I'd give it an F-plus," said Brubaker, who was a staff member for then-Sen. William Cohen (R-Maine) when the Clinger-Cohen Act was approved in February 1996. "There are some pockets of genius out there," but they are the exception.

"We're not making the hard decisions based on business analysis," said Bru-baker, who spoke at a conference sponsored by the Potomac Forum Ltd. of Potomac, Md. The failures are largely due to inadequate leadership and an entrenched culture, he said, adding that in many cases, agency CIOs lack the authority to carry out the provisions of the law as intended.

The Clinger-Cohen Act instructed agencies to treat technology as an investment and said agencies should tie those investments to actual results. In addition to calling for agencies to appoint CIOs, the act requires agencies to create capital planning processes and architectures that guide IT buys. Other officials gave agencies mixed reviews on Clinger-Cohen implementation, although most said Brubaker's assessment was overly critical.

Many of the problems that existed when the law was implemented still exist today, said Interior Department CIO Daryl White, co-chairman of the CIO Council's Capital Planning and IT Management Committee.

Jasmeet Seehra, a policy analyst for the Office of Management and Budget's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, gave the government a "gentleman's C" overall, and acknowledged that progress has been patchy.

Although nearly every organization has a CIO, that person's role has not yet been fully integrated within all organizations, Seehra said, and nearly every agency has capital planning processes in place. But many agencies are still not using those processes to make better decisions about how they buy and use technology, she said.

White noted that CIOs have not been given all of the tools necessary to do their job effectively. "We have all the responsibility," he said, but do not have all of the powers that were specified in the Clinger-Cohen Act.

The Agriculture Department's acting CIO, Ira Hobbs, said that despite the hurdles, there have been many accomplishments over the last five years. Agencies are working together on projects such as the FirstGov Web portal, he said, and "in spite of the leadership issues, we are getting things done."

Dorobek is a freelance writer based in Arlington, Va.