Billion-dollar IT failure at Census Bureau

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Why is anyone surprised. I spent many years on NRC (National Research Council) study groups looking at Social Securit , 
IRS, FAA and various DoD software procurements. They were all in serious troubles usally due to very poor procurement 
processes; endlessly changing requirments; poor software management etc etc etc. BUT it still goes on and on and on. 
Try reading some of the NRC reports,They are informative and sad.

Dave


________________________________________
From: eekid () aol com [eekid () aol com]
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 5:03 PM
To: dfarber () cs cmu edu; David Farber
Subject: Billion-dollar IT failure at Census Bureau

http://blogs.zdnet.com/projectfailures/?p=660

Billion-dollar IT failure at Census Bureau

Posted by Michael Krigsman @ 7:51 pm

 US Census Bureau faces cost overruns up to $2 billion on an IT initiative replacing paper-based data collection 
methods with specialized handheld devices for the upcoming 2010 census. The Bureau has not implemented longstanding 
Government Accountability Office (GAO) recommendations and may therefore be forced to scrap the program. Harris Corp., 
the contractor associated with this incompetently managed initiative, was awarded a $600 million contract to develop 
the handhelds and related software.

In March 5, 2008 testimony before the Senate, Commerce Secretary Carlos M. Gutierrez said: “There is no question that 
both the Census Bureau and Harris could have done things differently and better over the past couple of years.”

On the same date, Census Bureau Director, Steve H. Murdock, added:

    I cannot over-emphasize the seriousness of this problem. My colleagues and I recognize that we must move quickly to 
address this problem, and implement solutions. While we still have an enormous challenge in front of us, I am confident 
that we are close to defining and implementing a strategy that will ensure a successful 2010 Census.

The GAO characterized the handheld initiative, known as the Field Data Collection Automation (FDCA) program, as follows:

    Of the $11 billion total estimated cost of the 2010 Census, the Census Bureau planned (as of 2007) to spend about 
$3 billion on automation and information technology in order to improve census coverage, accuracy, and efficiency. 
Among other things, the Bureau is planning to automate many of its planned field data collection activities as a way to 
reduce costs and improve data quality and operational efficiency.

The GAO report, dated March 8, 2008, added:

    In October 2007, GAO concluded that without effective management of key risks, the Field Data Collection Automation 
(FDCA) program responsible for the devices faced an increased probability that the system would not be delivered on 
schedule and within budget or perform as expected. The magnitude of these problems is not clear…. [T]he Bureau has not 
performed recommended analysis or provided sufficient information to provide a level of confidence in its $11.5 billion 
life-cycle cost estimate of the decennial census. The Bureau has not itemized the estimated costs of each component 
operation, conducted sensitivity analysis on cost drivers, or provided an explanation of significant changes in the 
assumptions on which these costs are based. Together, these weaknesses and actions raise serious questions about the 
Bureau’s preparations for conducting the 2010 Census.

Computer World blogger, Frank Hayes, summarized the situation succinctly, “The fancy custom handhelds might work. But 
if they don’t, the Census Bureau will use paper instead.”

THE IT PROJECT FAILURES ANALYSIS

Managing an $11 billion initiative is a daunting task and unforeseen problems are inevitable. Nonetheless, the GAO, 
going back to January, 2005, repeatedly identified significant procurement, management, and operational risks 
associated with this project. For reasons unknown, the Census Bureau chose not to follow these recommendations.

The following table summarizes significant project issues identified by the GAO:

Billion dollar IT mismanagement at Census Bureau

How does a failure of this magnitude arise? Clearly, Census Bureau management is ineffective at properly and 
efficiently executing the organization’s basic mandate. A detailed analysis would probably reveal hidden agendas; 
conflicts of interest; good intentions gone bad; inexperienced, lazy, and incompetent management; lack of controls; and 
plain old poor judgment. I believe these deeply ingrained issues are symptomatic of fundamental problems shared by both 
Bureau leadership and line management.

My recommendation: The GAO must conduct a formal inquiry into two specific areas:

   1. It should investigate and analyze the management policies and procedures that allowed this situation to develop 
and persist over the course of several years. We must understand why program controls didn’t prevent this huge waste of 
dollars.
   2. It should perform a detailed (and I mean exhaustive) investigation of Harris Corp.’s role. Let an unbiased panel 
determine what percentage of the billion-dollar waste Harris caused and force the company to pay direct restitution for 
that amount.

Until the government holds contractors and their agency sponsors accountable, massive failures will continue and more 
money will be flushed down the drain.
________________________________
Planning your summer road trip? Check out AOL Travel 
Guides<http://travel.aol.com/travel-guide/united-states?ncid=aoltrv00030000000015>.

-------------------------------------------
Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com