Policy | DorobekInsider

Archive for the ‘Policy’ Category

DorobekINSIDER: IRS’s Doone named GSA CFO

GSA Administrator Martha Johnson has filled one of her key leadership vacancies naming Alison Doone to be the agency’s chief financial officer.

Doone currently is the IRS CFO.

She fills the vacancy that was created in May when Johnson announced that Kathleen Turco, GSA’s current chief financial officer, will lead GSA’s Office of Governmentwide Policy.

She starts at GSA on September 26.

The memo from Johnson to GSA staff:

MEMORANDUM FOR ALL EMPLOYEES

FROM: Administrator Martha Johnson

SUBJECT: New Chief Financial Officer

As we continue to make important leadership transitions to better leverage GSA’s position, I am happy to announce that effective September 26 Alison Doone will join the GSA team as our Chief Financial Officer (CFO), a key leadership position for the agency.

Alison comes to us from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and has a sterling record of public service. Over the past twenty years, she has held executive positions as CFO of the Federal Election Commission, Deputy Assistant Administrator of the Office of Finance at the Drug Enforcement Agency, and most recently as the CFO of the IRS where she oversees the financial management and accounting operations for a $12 billion budget and $2.3 trillion in tax revenue.

As we rise to meet the bold agenda that the White House has given us, Alison’s proven record of increasing efficiency and financial responsibility will help propel GSA forward to deliver on our major initiatives.

I would like to extend my sincere thanks to Micah Cheatham who has served us well as Acting CFO and will be returning to his permanent position in the Office of the CFO as GSA’s Budget Director.

Please join me in welcoming Alison to her new position, and in thanking Micah for his service.

Sincerely,

Martha

Written by cdorobek

August 25, 2010 at 4:45 PM

Posted in CFO, GSA, Management, Policy, Whose In and Whose Out

DorobekINSIDER: NASA cyber-security chief Jerry Davis to join VA

leave a comment »

Jerry Davis, the widely respected chief information security officer at NASA, is leaving that agency to join the Department of Veterans Affairs, the DorobekINSIDER has confirmed.

The move had been widely rumored for months, but was just made official when Davis accepted the offer from the VA on Friday.

While NASA has has its own share of cyber-security issues, the challenges at VA are daunting. Not only is VA the second largest agency in government, but it is the poster child for cyber-security problems dating back to that now infamous stolen laptop that was loaded with millions of names and personal information on vets.

Back in 2006, the data on 26.5 million active duty troops and veterans were on the laptop and external drive, which disappeared while in the custody of a Veterans Affairs data analyst in 2006.

While none of those data became public — and it wasn’t a result of a cyber-attack but rather a common house burglary, it has become the most discussed cyber-security event, even more than four years later. And the event cost the agency $20 million in a settlement.

Davis talking about that on Federal News Radio’s Federal Security Spotlight [July 1, 2010]… and on Federal News Radio’s Federal Drive about changing ways of measuring cyber-security [May 28, 2010]

From NextGov:

[Davis told] his staff on Tuesday to shift their focus from certifying that networks are compliant with a nearly decade-old law to monitoring systems for holes and real-time reporting of threats.
The change is a watershed moment for federal information technology managers, who since 2002 have been required to follow a law that critics say forces IT staffs to spend days filling out reports that confirm technology managers have followed certain security procedures. The law did not require specific actions to secure systems, said opponents of the Federal Information Security Management Act.

Jerry Davis, NASA’s deputy chief information officer for IT security, issued a memo to information system managers informing them they no longer need to certify every three years that their networks are compliant with FISMA, as called for by the law. Instead, they should rely on automated continuous monitoring to find holes that hackers could exploit. The process will remain in effect as long as agencies are required to submit annual status reports for networks and vulnerabilities detected during the monitoring don’t pose unacceptable risk.

Here is Davis’s most recent bio:

Jerry L. Davis is the Deputy Chief Information Officer (DCIO), IT Security for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). Jerry’s role is to provide thought leadership and oversee all aspects of Information Security and privacy for the Agency to include the development and implementation of enterprise-wide IT security engineering and architecture, IT security governance and IT security operations capabilities. Jerry’s division also generates IT and data security solutions and services to the Agency’s Space Operations, Science, Exploration Systems and Aeronautics Research Mission Directorates programs and projects, while defending $1.8 billion in annual IT investments.

Previously, Jerry served as the DCIO for the Department of Education overseeing the day-to-day operations of the Department’s enterprise-wide IT infrastructure. During his tenure at the Department, Jerry also served as the Department’s first Chief Information Security Officer (CISO) and Director, Information Assurance (IA). In this role, Jerry’s teams proactively defended over $500 million dollars in annual IT investments, which supported the $400 billion dollar grants and loans portfolio.

Jerry was one of the principal thought leaders in the design, implementation and management of the District of Columbia’s first city-wide IT Security program and served as the Manager of Wide Area Network (WAN) Security Architecture. Jerry also held positions as a senior security consultant with several Fortune 500 consulting firms, serving clients in the Intelligence Community (IC), Department of Defense (DoD) and federal civilian agencies. Jerry held a staff position with the Central Intelligence Agency’s (CIA) Directorate of Operations (DO) for several years. Jerry is a combat veteran of the United States Marine Corps and trained as a Counterintelligence Specialist with focus on Human Intelligence (HUMINT) operations. He holds a masters degree in network security from a National Security Agency (NSA) Center of Excellence in Information Assurance and a bachelors of science in business with a concentration in IT security. Jerry has done doctoral work in the field of information systems and holds the Certified Information Systems Security Professional (CISSP) and Project Management Professional (PMP) certifications. Mr Davis won the People’s Choice Award at the 2009 Mid-Atlantic Region Information Security Executive of the Year and was selected as one of the 50 Most Important African Americans in Technology in 2009.

Written by cdorobek

July 26, 2010 at 8:04 AM

Posted in CIOs, Circuit, Management, Policy, security, Technology, Whose In and Whose Out, Workforce

DorobekINSIDER: OFPP recertifies NIH governmentwide contract

leave a comment »

The DorobekINSIDER has confirmed that the Office of Federal Procurement Policy has recertified the National Institute of Health Information Technology Acquisition & Assessment Center’sChief Information Officer – Solutions and Partners 3 (CIO-SP3), one of three governmentwide acquisition contracts.

There was widespread speculation that OFPP might not recertify the NIH contract — and Federal News Radio’s Jason Miller has been reporting that there has been a real focus whether there was a proliferation of multiple-award contracts. (See Federal News Radio 1500 AM’s special report — Contract Overload, which focused on the multiples of multiple-award contracts out there.)

Here is the OFPP decision:

On July 20, 2010, the OMB Director designated NIH as an executive agent for the Chief Information Officer Solutions and Partners 3 (CIOSP3) GWAC and the CIOSP3-Small Business GWAC. Each GWAC will offer a wide range of IT services, with a particular focus on health-related IT services.

In deciding whether to grant the designation, OMB carefully evaluated a business case NIH developed to justify the need and value of its proposed GWACs. To supplement this information, OMB conducted a significant amount of outreach with different stakeholders in the acquisition community, including agency users of NIH’s existing GWACs, agency managers of GWACs and other interagency contract vehicles, Chief Acquisition Officers and Senior Procurement Executives, trade associations, and Congressional staffers.

OMB approved the request based on several factors that promise enhanced value for the Government and our taxpayers. NIH’s proposed GWACs will fill an important need by agencies with health-related responsibilities, including those in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. The programmatic expertise of its in-house scientists and medical experts will provide strong support for the award and management of its contracts. The new GWAC vehicles will also provide increased opportunities for small businesses in Federal contracting, allowing agencies to tap into the talents of this community as they work to achieve best value for their missions and our citizens.

Written by cdorobek

July 22, 2010 at 3:46 PM

Posted in Contracting, Industry, OMB, Policy, procurement, Technology

DorobekINSIDER: Kempf named to head GSA’s Federal Acquisition Service

leave a comment »

Steve Kempf has been named to lead GSA’s Federal Acquisition Service.

Kempf has been serving the acting commissioner of GSA’s Federal Acquisition Service since the departure of Jim Williams in April.

GSA's Kempf

The Federal Acquisition Service is the big buyer for government. It oversees contracts such as the GSA schedule contracts, the multi-billion dollar Alliant contract, and the Networx telecommunications contract.

There were four finalists for the FAS job. Kempf was seen as the front-runner. That surprised that GSA Administrator Martha Johnson would select Kempf, selecting somebody from inside the organization.

That being said, Kempf is well respected both within the procurement community, in industry, and within GSA. And he won high praise for his performance at a recent hearing before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Ad Hoc Subcommittee on Contracting Oversight, which focused on the number of government multiple-award contracts.

In addition to naming Kempf as FAS commissioner, Johnson also announced that Jon Jordan will become the permanent deputy commissioner.

“Jon has worked in GSA and FAS’ budget programs for over 36 years and his deep operational knowledge, commitment to excellence and good stewardship of taxpayer dollars will be invaluable to FAS’ future,” Johnson said in a note to staff.

Here is the note Johnson sent to GSA staff:

To: GSA Employees
From: Administrator Martha Johnson
Subject: FAS Commissioner Announcement

Many of you have heard me speak of this as GSA’s moment. We have set aggressive goals and been challenged to play a leading role in key Administration priorities by the White House. We are on the frontline for championing sustainability, open government, acquisition performance, flexible workplace and more. Leadership and enterprise positioning will be key to our success.

Therefore, I am delighted to announce today that Steve Kempf has accepted my offer to be the next Commissioner of GSA’s Federal Acquisition Service, one of our most critical leadership positions.

As GSA steps forward, so, too, will FAS be facing a challenge. FAS has expertise, operational know-how, and extensive customer knowledge. Used well, these will position FAS to gain further market credibility by offering customer agencies real value as they strive to meet their missions under constrained resources. This opportunity is real, and it is now.

At this critical juncture in FAS’ history and as an 18 year veteran of FAS, Steve brings significant expertise to the Commissioner role having served as a contracting officer, lawyer, and business professional. Equally as impressive is Steve’s leadership style. He is collaborative, inclusive and
eager for change. I am confident that Steve will combine his deep roots, loyalty, and enthusiasm for FAS and transform it into our customers’ hands down, preferred, acquisition partner.

For starters, Steve has already made strides in:

•     Revitalizing FAS’ relationships with its customers;
•     Appointing an executive to champion innovation and transformation across FAS;
•     Driving forward on the Zero Environmental Footprint goal and other key enterprise objectives;
•     Building leadership prowess and a workforce positioned for success;
•     Completing and executing the FAS strategic reviews and implementation plans for key programs;
•     Deepening change management capacity; and
•     Communicating constantly with employees, customers, industry, and stakeholders to bolster FAS’ ability to perform with excellence.

In addition, I am delighted to announce that Jon Jordan will become the permanent Deputy Commissioner. Jon has worked in GSA and FAS’ budget programs for over 36 years and his deep operational knowledge, commitment to excellence and good stewardship of taxpayer dollars will be invaluable to FAS’ future.

Please join me in congratulating both Steve and Jon on their permanent appointments and pledge to give them the support they and FAS will need to turbo-charge its future.

Written by cdorobek

July 13, 2010 at 11:22 AM

Posted in Executives, GSA, Management, Policy, procurement, Technology, Whose In and Whose Out

DorobekINSIDER: Federal news month in review

leave a comment »

What stories made news for the month of June?

Here are the most read stories across Federal News Radio 1500 AM … on the DorobekInsider.com … for Mike Causey’s Federal Report… on the Federal Drive with Tom Temin and Amy Morris… and for FederalNewsRadio.com…

…from the DorobekInsider.com…

… for Mike Causey’s Federal Report …

… on the Federal Drive with Tom Temin and Amy Morris…

… and from FederalNewsRadio.com …

Written by cdorobek

July 1, 2010 at 7:33 AM

Posted in DorobekInsider, Federal News Radio, Management, Most read items, Policy, procurement, Technology

DorobekINSIDER: An open letter to OMB: Stop the public sector bashing

leave a comment »

An open letter to OMB Director Peter Orszag:

Dear Mr. Orszag,

I write this with a certain regret. I have tremendous amount of respect for you and the work you have done over the years. And I appreciate the Office of Management and Budget’s initiative to cut waste across government — and improve the use of IT. I have been covering government IT for nearly 20 years — and, as I wrote in Federal Computer Week years ago, I firmly believe that the government can use technology to accomplish its mission more effectively.

And I think the administration has taken a number of positive steps in its first 18 months.

And therefore, I was pleased with Monday’s OMB announcement about the initiative to cut waste by reforming government IT. Federal News Radio’s Jason Miller reported on the policy memos — he has been out in front covering this issue.

There are three steps to the plan:

Fix federal financial systems — a critical step
Stepped up and detailed reviews of troubled IT systems
A plan for improving the federal government’s overall IT procurement and management practices. That plan will come within by October.

I even read the policies [PDF]:

M-10-27, Information Technology Investment Baseline Management Policy (June 28, 2010)
M-10-26, Immediate Review of Financial Systems IT Projects (June 28, 2010)
M-10-25, Reforming the Federal Government’s Efforts to Manage Information Technology Projects (June 28, 2010)

Unfortunately, I was disappointed with your post on the subject. It included this line:

While a productivity boom has transformed private sector performance over the past two decades, the federal government has almost entirely missed this transformation and now lags far behind on efficiency and service quality. We are wasting billions of dollars a year, and more importantly are missing out on the huge productively improvements other sectors have benefited from.

Quite simply, we can’t significantly improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the federal government without fixing IT.

The emphasis is mine, not yours. But, to be honest, I found the wording unfair… and disappointing.

A few points:

It is utterly untrue to say that the federal government has “almost entirely missed this transformation.” I have been covering government technology for nearly 20 years. During that time, there have been remarkable strides. Today, IT touches just about every facet of every part of every business in government — and has utterly transformed certain parts of government. In fact, I would argue you would be hard pressed to find a part of government that hasn’t been transformed by IT.

Is there more to be done? Absolutely, and I give you and your team credit for your IT initiative… but it leads to the second point…

Please oh please retire the tired, tedious comparison between the public and private sectors. I would argue that it simply isn’t true because it isn’t a fair comparison. The challenges facing government agencies are, in many ways, larger in scope — and they are more complex — than those faced by most private sector organizations. And there are scores of cases that make this point. The one I often use are Homeland Security’s efforts to secure ports from potential terrorism. That mission can be accomplished: We can enlist resources to stop anything from coming into or out of the country. That would bring trade to a screeching halt — and having the same result on the U.S. economy… clearly not an option. And opening for any and all trade is also not an option. So the federal government has the unenviable task of finding the mix of those black-and-white options — essentially, they have to determine what is the right shade of gray.

That task is even more complex because those decisions are subject to constant hindsight review — sometimes years later. And then layer a complex management structure… within agencies… within the executive branch itself… and within Congress.

And none of this even touches on a almost utterly broken budget process where agencies are assigned money months into the fiscal year — and then told that they must spend it before the end of that fiscal year.

But even beyond that, the public-private comparison is specious because it is overly broad. What are you talking about when you highlight the private sector? Is the model General Motors? AIG?

We all have worked for private sector organizations where we have been amazed by what we deem as inefficiencies — or organizations that have terrible service quality. I now no longer use my United Visa card — put out by Chase Bank — because just about every third charge is rejected. Even worse — try to find a Chase official in their credit card division to contact.

And what are you talking about when you lambaste the public sector? There aren’t any examples of government agencies that use technology effectively?

Last year in AFCEA’s Signal magazine, I pleaded for a stop to this public-private comparison. What is most insidious about this private sector envy like the one in your post is that it feeds the false notion that government cannot do anything right, and that public employees — and public service — are somehow inept. It infers that somehow the problems agencies face are intractable… that government cannot — and does not — change… and that somehow government performance and government innovation are oxymorons.

To be blunt, it is unfair.

And even beyond that, it does something that I know you abhor: It adds no value. It adds nothing to the discussion.

You raise important issues — ones faced by both the public and private sectors — at what point to you cut off a troubled system by making the determination that continuing would be throwing good money after bad. It is a tough decision to make.

But some of the troubled programs mentioned — the Department of Veterans Affair’s financial management system and FBI’s Sentential program — are complex.

In the end, the issues you are facing are not new. I’d point to Raines Rules, published in 1996 by then OMB Director Franklin Raines to get a handle on IT systems.That OMB memo, issued under the title, “Funding Information Systems Investments,” was quickly renamed Raines’ Rules. And it became a seminal document for guiding IT management. The rules issued guidance for complying with the Information Technology Management Reform Act, which eventually became part of the Clinger-Cohen Act. It essentially set the criteria for evaluating major information system investments — and they read as if they could have been issued today.

There are issues — and I think even feds will give you credit for working to fix problems.

Again, I’m not taking away from this initiative — and the work that you and your OMB management team are doing is very important. But the slams against government are unwarranted — and unnecessary. That rhetoric simply is… not helpful, to be kind.

Sincerely,

Christopher J. Dorobek

Written by cdorobek

June 29, 2010 at 7:11 PM

Posted in budget, CIOs, Executive, innovation, Management, OMB, oversight, Performance, Policy, procurement, strategy, Technology

DorobekINSIDER Reader: Federal Internet cookie policies

leave a comment »

The Office of Management and Budget has just issued a new policy for dealing with Internet “cookies” — these are text files that a Web site can put on your computer to track how you traverse the site.

Cookies enable Web site personalization — for example, the allow a Web site to remember you and, maybe, the items you put in your online shopping cart. But they have always been watched by some privacy advocates because of the potential implications — for example, they could track a visitor’s travels to other sites. [Read how cookies work here… and how to delete them here.]

The federal government has been all but banned from using persistent Internet cookies because of those privacy concerns. OMB has just issued new policy guidance would enable agencies to use this tool. And Federal News Radio’s Max Cacas reported on the new policies on the Dorobek Insider on Friday. You can find his report here.

This is an issue I’ve followed for a long time (here is the FCW editorial I wrote on the subject back in 2006) — and, to be honest, I’m suspicious of the new policy. That being said, I have just started reading them.

The new OMB policy seeks to re-balance the privacy considerations given that the ban was instituted more than a decade ago. The idea: Times have changed and people are more accepting of these tools.

As I say, I’m reading the policies now, but… It is important to be very clear — agencies were absolutely not banned from using cookies. They had been banned from using PERSISTENT cookies — cookies that can track you long term. I didn’t get a chance to read all the comments that came in — and unfortunately OMB has not kept those comments online. And I still have to read the policies, but… I have year to hear a convincing argument why agencies must have persistent cookies. Some argue that the private sector does it, but that argument is specious — the government is not the private sector. In the end, it doesn’t matter what the private sector does. (Should government follow the Facebook privacy model?)

Let’s be very clear — this is not the most critical privacy issue facing government. That being said, it doesn’t help. People are already distrustful of government. I have yet to be convinced of the enormous public good that comes from using this tracking tool that one cannot accomplish otherwise. Again, agencies can use cookies — just not persistent cookies. How does it make people feel about their government if they feel like they are being tracked? (The stopwatch is running until the first story comes out of people using cookies to actually track people using government Web sites.)

I’m reading the new policies with an open mind, but… I’m very suspicious.

Regardless, I thought it was an opportunity to pull together the DorobekINSIDER Reader on the OMB cookie policy with background information, given that this has been going on for a long time…

The 2010 cookie/federal Web privacy policies:

* OMB policy M-10-22: Guidance for Online Use of Web Measurement and Customization Technologies [PDF] [Scribd]

* OMB policy M-10-23: Guidance for Agency Use of Third-Party Websites and Applications [PDF] [Scribd]

* The OMB “fact sheet” on the two policies

View this document on Scribd

How these came about…
Giving OMB credit, they tried to evolve these policies in a relatively public way. As I seem to say a lot these days, I think they could have developed it in a public way. That being said, it would be nice if the comments were still available.

Here were some of the discussion:

White House blog post from July 24, 2009: Federal Websites: Cookie Policy
By federal CIO Vivek Kundra and Michael Fitzpatrick, associate administrator of OMB’s Office of Information and Regulatory Policy

During the Open Government Initiative outreach, Federal employees and the public have asked us questions about the federal government’s policy on cookies. As part of our effort to create a more open and innovative government, we’re working on a new cookie policy that we’ll want your input on. But before we get into that, let’s provide some context.

In June 2000, the OMB Director issued a memorandum (M-00-13, later updated by M-03-22) that prohibited Federal agencies from using certain web-tracking technologies, primarily persistent cookies, due to privacy concerns, unless the agency head approved of these technologies because of a compelling need. That was more than nine years ago. In the ensuing time, cookies have become a staple of most commercial websites with widespread public acceptance of their use. For example, every time you use a “shopping cart” at an online store, or have a website remember customized settings and preferences, cookies are being used.

Read the full post — and the comments — here.

* The Federal Register item that went along with that comment period.

* WhiteHouse.gov blog post: Enhancing Online Citizen Participation Through Policy [June 16, 2009]
By Kundra and Fitzpatrick

Last week, Vivek Kundra and Katie Stanton talked about the efforts underway to introduce more Web 2.0 technologies to the federal government sites and to open more back-and-forth communication between the American people and the government. Some of this naturally requires the adoption of new approaches and innovative technologies. But another big part of this is updating existing practices and how these tools can be used to break down barriers to communication and information.

We continue to ask for your feedback, but the best feedback is informed feedback. So what follows is background on current policies and some examples of what we’ve heard from you during the Brainstorming phase of our outreach.

Here is the specific section on cookies:

FEDERAL COOKIE POLICY: This has been a challenging issue to navigate. Put in place in 2000 to protect the privacy of Americans, the federal cookie policy limited the use of persistent cookies by federal agencies. A cookie, as many readers here know, is a small piece of software that tracks or authenticates web viewing activities by the user. In the nine years since this was put in place, website cookies have become more mainstream as users want sites to recognize their preferences or keep track of the items in their online shopping carts. We’ve heard a lot of feedback on this area. One person put it all together. “Persistent cookies are very useful as an indirect feedback mechanism for measuring effectiveness of government web sites . . . Cookies allow a greater level of accuracy in measuring unique visitors . . . Being able to look at returning visitors allows us to see what

Recognizing the fundamental change in technology in the past nine years, and the feedback that we’ve received so far, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is reexamining the cookie policy as part of this Open Government Initiative. There is a tough balance to find between citizen privacy and the benefits of persistent cookies, and we would welcome your thoughts on how best to strike it.

Read the rest of the post here.

* WhiteHouse.gov blog: Cookies Anyone (the http kind)? [July 24, 2009]
By Bev Godwin, who was on assignment to the White House at the time. She is currently GSA’s Director of USA.gov and the Office of Citizen Service’s Web Best Practices Office

Nine years ago – a lifetime in Internet time – the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued a policy commonly referred to as “the cookies policy. “This policy prohibited federal agencies from using certain web-tracking technologies, primarily persistent cookies, unless the agency head provided a waiver. This may sound like arcane, boring policy – but it is really important in the online world.

Unfortunately in this post, Godwin points to a site where people could post comments — http://blog.ostp.gov/2009/07/24/cookiepolicy. Unfortunately that page doesn’t seem to exist. It would be great to see the comments now.content is important to our citizens. We can use that data to improve the content and navigation of our sites.”

* WhiteHouse.gov blog post: On Cookies [August 11, 2009]
By Kundra and Fitzpatrick

Over the past two weeks, during the public comment period on OMB’s cookie policy, we have received significant feedback and suggested revisions to the current policy. These comments reflect individual opinions on all sides of the issue.

Our main goal in revisiting the ban on using persistent cookies on Federal websites is to bring the federal government into the 21st century. Consistent with this Administration’s commitment to making government more open and participatory, we want federal agencies to be able to provide the same user- friendly, dynamic, and citizen-centric websites that people have grown accustomed to using when they shop or get news online or communicate through social media networks, while also protecting people’s privacy.

It is clear that protecting the privacy of citizens who visit government websites must be one of the top considerations in any new policy. This is why we’ve taken such a cautious approach going forward and why we felt it so important to get feedback and hear from people on this. While we wanted to get people’s ideas for improving our policy, we also needed to hear any concerns so that we could understand better where potential pitfalls might lie.

This privacy issue has recently received some attention in the media. We want to make it clear that the current policy on Federal agencies’ use of cookies has not changed. Moreover, the policy won’t change until we’ve read the public comments that have been submitted to ensure that we’re considering all sides of the issue and are addressing privacy concerns appropriately.

Continue reading the full post here.

Going back a decade… some of the discussion that led to the persistent cookie ban.

* Letter from then Commerce Department CIO Roger Baker, now the CIO at the Department of Veterans Affairs, to John Spotila on Federal agency use of Web cookies (July 28, 2000)

[The CIO Council] strongly support the requirement that the use of any technology, including persistent cookies, to track the activities of users on web sites be approved personally by the head of the executive department (for the 14 executive departments) or agency.

As we make progress towards electronic government, personalization of web sites, typically done through persistent cookies, may become necessary in order to serve our customer’s requirements. At that time, it would be appropriate for OMB to review the “no delegation” policy in light of the then-current “state-of-the-art” in privacy protections. For example, OMB may decide to relax this policy when customers are given a choice of selecting either a personalized (i.e., with persistent cookie) or non-personalized (no persistent cookie) web experience.

* Letter from Spotila to Baker, clarification of OMB Cookies Policy (September 5, 2000)

We are concerned about persistent cookies even if they do not themselves contain personally identifiable information. Such cookies can often be linked to a person after the fact, even where that was not the original intent of the web site operator. For instance, a person using the computer later may give his or her name or e-mail address to the agency. It may then be technically easy for the agency to learn the complete history of the browsing previously done by users of that computer, raising privacy concerns even when the agency did not originally know the names of the users.

* M-00-13, Privacy Policies and Data Collection on Federal Web Sites (June 22, 2000)

* M-99-18, Privacy Policies on Federal Web Sites (June 2, 1999)

Written by cdorobek

June 26, 2010 at 4:21 PM

Posted in CIOs, Government 2.0, Policy, privacy, security, Technology, transparency, Web 2.0, Web sites, White House

DorobekINSIDER: Green government – and telework

leave a comment »

I had the pleasure of moderating a panel last week… ostensibly on green IT, but it ended up being about the larger issue of green government.

The program was sponsored by the Java Team of the American Council on Technology and Industry Advisory Council’s Partners program, which is a marvelous development program designed to help government and industry understand each other better.

And we had a great line-up:

Jeff Eagan, Energy Department, who is on assignment at the White House reviewing the agency sustainability plans. I should note he is a 2010 Fed 100 winner.
Emile Monette, director of GSA’s Federal Technology Service’s sustainability division
Kimberly T. Nelson, Microsoft and former EPA CIO
Marian Van Pelt, a principal at ICF and a carbon inventory expert.

And we discussed Executive Order 13514: Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance [PDF] — read more from the White House about EO 13514 here… and a WhiteHouse.gov blog post on the green initiative here.

The executive order essentially calls on agencies to cut energy use by 28 percent… and they were required to submit “sustainability plans” to the Office of Management and Budget by the begging of this month. (I understand all are in now.)

There were several issues that came out of our discussion.

One was that this just seems overwhelming. One CIO for one of the big agency departments asked, essentially, help me know what are the best things to do out there. Agencies — and agency CIOs — have scores of mandates on them… and most of them generally want to be as green as possible. That being said, the greening discussion became so broad that it became almost overwhelming.

The general response was…
1. Work with your sustainability officer… Each agency is required to appoint a chief sustainability officers. I can’t seem to find a list of those names, unfortunately, but the first recommendation was to find out who that person is and work with them.

2. Measure… The second was to come up with a plan for measuring what your organization’s energy footprint is… so you can then determine if you are having an impact.

3. Just do it… Start doing something… turning off computers at night… turn off lights in buildings… reduce your data centers… GSA Administrator Martha Johnson has actually taken this issue quite seriously. At recent conferences, GSA executives were prohibited from renting their own cars. Instead, GSA organized a bus to shuttle people where they needed to go. And, it was pointed out to me, GSA actually sought public input on its sustainability plan.

4. See helpful links below for other ideas.

The other big issue that was discussed was — ready for it — telework. I should note that this is now the third green focused panel that I have moderated — and it is the third time the panel has been dominated by telework issues. And again, people asked why the government seems to be so reluctant to institute telework — and why there isn’t more of a push for telework.

Last week on Federal News Radio 1500 AM’s Dorobek Insider, we spoke about telework — and a new FedScoop survey on the government’s attitudes towards telework [PDF]. The survey shows the government is still behind, but that attitudes are changing.

Anyway, during the discussion, there were a number of helpful sites mentioned… I promised I would round them up.

* The Federal Electronics Challenge: http://www.federalelectronicschallenge.net
The Federal Electronics Challenge (FEC) is a partnership program that encourages federal facilities and agencies to:
Purchase greener electronic products.
Reduce impacts of electronic products during use.
Manage obsolete electronics in an environmentally safe way.

* EPEAT: http://www.epeat.net
EPEAT is a system that helps purchasers evaluate, compare and select electronic products based on their environmental attributes. The system currently covers desktop and laptop computers, thin clients, workstations and computer monitors.

* Energy Department’s Federal Energy Management Program
The Energy Department’s Federal Energy Management Program’s (FEMP) mission is to facilitate the Federal Government’s implementation of sound, cost-effective energy management and investment practices to enhance the nation’s energy security and environmental stewardship.

Other resources from Federal News Radio 1500 AM:

* For Earth Day, we spoke to Michelle Moore, Federal Environmental Executive in the Executive Office of the President. She is the person who is leading the oversight of the agency sustainability plans. Hear that conversation here.

* Somebody who just did it: Want to have hope in what you can do… and in young people… Last week, I got to talk to a 29-year-old woman who is making a difference. Saskia van Gendt is a resource conservation specialist at the EPA… and she is working in the field of “climaterials” — essentially the greening of all the materials to make buildings. And she launched a contest — the Lifecycle Building Challenge, a yearly online competition that recognizes cutting-edge building design and challenges students, architects and builders to reduce the environmental impact of buildings. This ‘just do it’ attitude scored her a place as a finalist for the Service to America Medals — the SAMMIES. Hear Ms. van Gendt talk about what she did here.

* Beneath the Green Dome: My colleague Amy Morris did a series looking at the greening of the Capitol. Find that series here.

Tomorrow… is there a better way to do sustainability plans?

Written by cdorobek

June 21, 2010 at 9:51 AM

Posted in Contracting, Green, GSA, Industry, Policy, strategy, Technology