OMB backtracks on granting CIOs more authority

The Office of Management and Budget substantially edited a final memo outlining the role of federal chief information officers, removing from a draft version the responsibilities that would have given the technology executives more power within agencies.

Comment on this article in The Forum.OMB officials said they wrote the memo to give agencies clearer guidance on the role and responsibilities of federal CIOs so IT would be more uniformly managed and to aid in a smooth transition to the next presidential administration. In a draft of the memo, the White House had stated a CIO should report to the head of the agency and "except where otherwise authorized by law, order, or waiver from the director of OMB, no other individual in any organizational component of the agency ... has authorities or responsibilities that infringe upon those of the agency CIO."

But in the final version of the memo, OMB removed the clause. The agency also removed from the CIO the responsibilities relating to planning, managing and overseeing agencies' IT portfolios, placing those authorities with the head of the agency. OMB designated the CIO as the "lead agency official in taking the necessary steps actions to ensure such activities are completed."

To compare the two memos, click here.

For years, the Bush administration has held the position that CIOs do not have to report to agency heads to make technology an integral part of managing the organization or to make IT part of strategic planning, which takes part among an agency's top executives. That stance has been a subject of debate among federal CIOs, many of whom believe they do not have the proper authority to manage IT effectively and point to the 1996 Clinger-Cohen Act, which established the federal CIO position and requires them to report to the head of an agency, although many dispute the clarity of the language.

The draft memo surprised many active and former CIOs because the administration seemingly reversed its position. The changes between the draft and final versions of the memo were viewed as a political move sothe policy-making power within agencies would not be distributed to career executives and would be held closely among managers who were politically appointed, observers said.

"They clearly did water it down, so much so that I am not certain it even complies with the basics of [the Clinger-Cohen Act]" said one former federal CIO who asked not to be identified. "In essence, they took all the teeth out of the earlier draft and gave power back to the agency head, which is OK, but because so few agency heads understand or know how to realize value from IT, it greatly dilutes the power of resources to bring new value to the agency."

Still, the draft memo, which circulated among the IT community last week, was described as "too little, too late" by longtime IT executives in and out of government. The clause giving no other individual in the agency authority over the CIO was one of the few points that were widely praised. Removing it is an effective endorsement by OMB of the current practice in some agencies of having the CIO report to the chief financial officer.

It's not clear why OMB deleted language in the draft memo that gave CIOs more authority, or why it was included in the first place. Karen Evans, administrator of e-government and information technology at OMB, declined to be interviewed for this article.

But at a press conference on Thursday where Evans released the final version of the memo, she said, "I can't believe when someone reads this, who [a person] reports to is going to be most important. Whether [CIOs] report to the [chief financial officer], the deputy secretary, or whoever - the agency head is responsible for [the management of IT]. It doesn't matter who you report to.

"Certain CIOs say, 'I have to report to the deputy secretary; I need a seat at the table,' " she added. "But it's more about clarity of responsibilities; it's the value you bring. When there is a problem, are you a key member they call?"

Many active and former CIOs disagree with that position.

"Anyone who knows anything about the situation with federal CIOs agrees that in order for the CIO to be effective he or she needs to report to the agency head directly, have a clear line of authority, control over all IT funding, and control of the IT personnel resources," said Ed Meagher, former deputy CIO at the Interior and Veterans Affairs departments. "However, that would change the power equations inside the various departments and the CFO community and others do not want that."

Another former CIO said, "The way [the memo] reads to me now, the agency head is the boss and the agency CIO is a counselor, an adviser, not a clear decision-maker, leader. To me, this will not deliver the promise of IT to agency modernization and operational effectiveness."

The memo may be moot. The guidance is not binding and because it was released within weeks of the end of the Bush administration, it is not expected to change the responsibilities CIOs have.