Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupport
Contact Us
Search
Close

OMB Issues Final Guidance Implementing FITARA

By Alan Pemberton on June 16, 2015
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

The Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) has issued final guidance (the “Guidance”) implementing the Federal IT Acquisition Reform Act (FITARA).  We have previously discussed FITARA’s requirements that seek to reform and streamline the Government’s information technology (“IT”) acquisitions, which account for approximately $80 billion in annual spending.

At its core, the Guidance implements the mandate of FITARA to increase the involvement and responsibility of agencies’ Chief Information Officers (“CIOs”) in IT procurement and management.  According to Tony Scott, the United States Chief Information Officer, the Guidance also “position[s] CIOs so that they can reasonably be held accountable for how effectively their agencies use modern digital approaches to achieve the objectives of effective and efficient programs and operations.”  Indeed, although CIOs may delegate some of their decisions concerning IT resources to other agency officials through CIO Assignment Plans, the Guidance makes clear that CIOs remain accountable and must monitor those to whom they delegate decision-making authority.

The most noteworthy development in the Guidance is the establishment of a set of basic requirements—the Common Baseline for IT Management (the “Common Baseline”)—that agencies must implement by December 31, 2015.  The Common Baseline details various roles and responsibilities for the CIO and other agency stakeholders in the budgeting, planning, procurement, and management of IT resources.  The Common Baseline requires an agency CIO to:

  • Coordinate with the CFO and Chief Acquisition Officer in the planning, programming, and budgeting stages of IT resources;
  • Review and approve the major IT investments in agency budget justifications and initial budget submissions;
  • Share procurement responsibilities by reviewing cost estimates of IT-related costs in IT acquisitions and ensuring that acquisitions adequately account for incremental development principles; and
  • Report to the agency head in carrying out the responsibilities established by IT acquisition reform.

By August 15, each agency must complete a self-assessment to determine whether it meets the Common Baseline requirements and create an implementation plan detailing the steps that it must take to ensure compliance by the end of this year.  Notably, the implementation portion of the self-assessment will be publicly available after approval by OMB. Following the initial self-assessments, agencies must perform annual reviews and updates to their self-assessments to ensure ongoing compliance with the Common Baseline.

In addition to implementing the Common Baseline, the Guidance integrates FITARA’s requirements into existing OMB programs, including PortfolioStat, the Federal IT Dashboard, and the Federal Data Center Consolidation Initiative (“FDCCI”).  For example, the Guidance explains that agencies must continue to provide updates regarding their implementation of the FDCCI.  In addition, the Guidance details the process for FY2015 PortfolioStat review sessions, which will now occur on a quarterly, rather than annual, basis and will continue to focus on consolidating and eliminating duplicative IT resources and ensuring that IT acquisition aligns with the agency’s needs.

Over the next year, according to Scott, we “can expect to see a major push from OMB to leverage the implementation of FITARA . . . [and implement] stronger approaches to the acquisition and management of commodity IT and data infrastructure[.]”  In addition, as we have previously discussed, GAO continues to emphasize IT procurement reform by adding IT acquisition to its list of high risk programs and highlighting the ongoing struggles for reform in this area.  In light of this growing momentum for IT acquisition reform, the contracting community would be well-advised to continue monitoring developments in this area.  In particular, contractors should review the implementation portion of agencies’ self-assessments when they are released this Fall to evaluate any changes agencies plan to make to IT acquisitions and should also monitor OMB’s plans for what Scott refers to as “commodity IT,” a controversial term not used in the final version of FITARA.

Photo of Alan Pemberton Alan Pemberton

Alan Pemberton has practiced in the government contracts area since 1982, and chaired or co-chaired Covington’s government contracts practice from 2000 to 2016. His practice includes the full range of government contracts matters, including bid protest and other procurement litigation before GAO, agency…

Alan Pemberton has practiced in the government contracts area since 1982, and chaired or co-chaired Covington’s government contracts practice from 2000 to 2016. His practice includes the full range of government contracts matters, including bid protest and other procurement litigation before GAO, agency boards, and federal and state courts and ADR tribunals. He advises large and small contractors and grantees about the full range of government proposal, performance, compliance, regulatory, suspension and debarment, transactional and legislative issues. He also directs the firm’s pro bono program as co-chair of the Public Service Committee.

Read more about Alan PembertonEmail
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Government Contracts
  • Blog:
    Inside Government Contracts
  • Organization:
    Covington & Burling LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo