What's Brewin: Valid Excuses?

Yeah, This Is Hard Stuff

It's rather common for the top information technology executives in government to tell Congress that the reason their IT projects are so far behind schedule and over budget is because of the projects' complexity. It's also common for members of Congress and the public to respond, "Yeah, right. Tell me another one."

That seemed to be what was happening last week at a hearing of the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee. Robert Howard, assistant secretary for IT at the Veterans Affairs Department, took some heat for saying that it will probably be years before a system to share electronic health records with the Defense Department will be complete (mostly because of the tedious process of determining technology standards and policies on nomenclature). Same old, same old, right?

Wait. Also testifying was John Glaser, the chief information officer at Partners Healthcare in Boston, which is considered one of the leading health care facilities in using technology. This is what he told the senators:

"It is very, very difficult to exchange data. As you discuss progress, as it goes on here, we ought to be mindful of the extraordinary difficulty here, both technically, [with] policy procedures, privacy . . . and while making sure we have a good game plan and accountability, that we appreciate it will take several years to effect and effect well, certainly to the degree that we would like to see it [with] broad operability. So, let's appreciate the challenges that confront those that make those organizations happen."

No senator responded.

VA's Big Security Numbers

Ever since the VA disclosed in May 2006 that a laptop was stolen from an employee's house, security has been at the top of executives' agenda. At the hearing, Howard gave some details on progress in tightening the department's information security strings:

• More than 18,000 laptops have been encrypted. (No word on what percentage that number represents of all VA laptops.)
• The department is in the process of procuring software to encrypt data stored in databases.
• The agency has transferred almost 6,000 employees to its Office of Information and Technology.
• VA has completed tests of 10,000 security controls on 603 computer systems.

Highly and Deeply Concerned Over Army IT

You don't have to read too far into the Senate report that accompanies the Defense Department's fiscal 2008 appropriations bill to learn that senators are a bit concerned about the Army's IT management prowess.

For example, in the report's discussions of four consecutive Army IT programs, you learn that the committee is "highly concerned," "is concerned about this program delay," "denies the requested funding for," "is deeply concerned" and finds "an exponential growth in requirements" for an IT program "particularly troubling."

Such hand-wringing led the committee to deny the Army's request to triple the funding for the Warfighter Information Network -- Tactical (WIN-T) program. The committee increased funding for the WIN-T program by only $100 million to $737.9 million. The committee denied the Army's request for $56 million for the third component of the Excalibur Precision Guided Extended Range Artillery Projectile because the Army had yet to develop an acquisition strategy.

Who says the military services get everything they want?

Well, there is the General Fund Enterprise Business System (GFEBS), a commercial-off-the-shelf Web-based enterprise resource planning system that will allow the Army to share resource management data across the organization. Although the Army's fiscal 2008 budget request "differs substantially" from the original request and from a briefing the Army gave the Senate earlier this year -- all of which the committee noted indicates "no . . . stability in the GFEBS program" -- the appropriations committee, "faced with a lack of alternatives," according to the report, reluctantly agreed to more than double the budget to $122.7 million.

The committee, however, does want the Army to submit updates that "include the program's requirements, schedule, status of deliverables, contractor performance and execution of resources not less than every 60 days."