PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 577.
Congressional Research Service
Version 01 · Reported to Senate with amendment(s) · Sep 18, 2014
Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act - Title I: Management of Information Technology within Federal Government - (Sec. 101) Requires the heads of the following agencies to ensure that their respective chief information officers (CIOs) have a significant role in information technology (IT) decisions, including annual and multi-year planning, programming, budgeting, execution, reporting, management, governance, and oversight functions:
Department of Agriculture (USDA),
Department of Commerce,
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Department of Defense (DOD),
Department of Education,
Department of Energy (DOE),
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS),
Department of Homeland Security (DHS),
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD),
Department of the Interior,
Department of Justice (DOJ),
Department of Labor,
Department of State,
Department of Transportation (DOT),
Department of the Treasury,
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA),
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA),
U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID),
General Services Administration (GSA),
National Science Foundation (NSF),
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC),
Office of Personnel Management (OPM),
Small Business Administration (SBA),
Social Security Administration, and
military departments (Departments of the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force).
Requires the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB's) annual information technology capital planning guidance to require such CIOs (excluding the military departments) to: (1) approve their agency's IT budget requests, (2) certify that IT investments adequately implement incremental development, and (3) ensure that all requested IT positions meet ongoing requirements.
Prohibits such agencies (including the military departments) from contracting for IT and requesting the reprogramming of IT funds without their CIO's review and approval. Allows agencies to approve contracts through an agency governance process if the CIO is included as a full participant.
Permits CIOs to delegate contract approval duties for OMB-defined non-major IT investments to an individual who reports directly to the CIO.
Requires CIOs (excluding the military departments) to approve the appointment of any other employee who functions in the capacity of a CIO for any component organization within the agency.
(Sec. 102) Sets forth requirements concerning OMB's risk management program for major IT investments.
Requires the OMB Director to make publicly available the cost, schedule, and performance data for each IT investment designated as major within specified agencies. Permits the Director to waive public availability requirements in the interest of national security.
Requires CIOs and investment program managers of specified agencies to certify at least quarterly the accuracy and risks associated with such investments. Directs such CIOs to categorize the investment level of risk using specified cost and schedule risk rating factors.
Directs the OMB's Office of Electronic Government (commonly referred to as the Office of E-Government and Information Technology) to: (1) review each major IT investment that, for four consecutive quarters, receives a high risk rating; and (2) communicate to Congress the causes of the high risk level and the probability of future success.
Requires the Director, if an investment is still rated as high risk on the date that is one year after the completion of such review, to deny any request for additional development, modernization, or enhancement funding for such investment until the CIO certifies that: (1) the root causes have been addressed, and (2) there is sufficient capability to deliver the remaining planned increments within the planned cost and schedule.
Requires the OMB to expand an existing report to Congress concerning net program performance benefits resulting from major capital investments (made by executive agencies for information systems) to include an analysis of the trends reflected in performance risk data.
Terminates the provisions of this section five years after enactment of this Act.
(Sec. 103) Directs the GSA to develop a strategic sourcing initiative to enhance government-wide acquisition, shared use, and dissemination of software, as well as compliance with end user license agreements. Requires the GSA to allow the purchase of a license agreement that is available for use by all executive agencies as one user.
Title II: Portfolio Review and Federal Data Center Consolidation Initiative - (Sec. 201) Requires the OMB, for the five-year period after enactment of this Act, to implement a process for agencies to review their IT investment portfolios to reduce duplication and waste, consolidate acquisition and management functions, and increase cost savings. Directs specified CIOs to review such portfolios annually and requires the Office of Electronic Government to report to Congress quarterly regarding cost savings and reductions in duplicative investments identified by such reviews.
(Sec. 202) Directs specified agencies to submit annually to the Administrator for the Office of E-Government and Information Technology (referred to above as the Office of Electronic Government): (1) a comprehensive inventory of data centers owned, operated, or maintained by or on behalf of the agency; and (2) a multi-year strategy to consolidate and optimize inventoried data centers. Requires such strategies to include performance metrics, timelines, and year-by-year calculations of investment and cost savings to measure progress toward meeting goals of the Federal Data Center Consolidation Initiative (FDCCI) described in the OMB Memorandum on the Federal Data Center Consolidation Initiative, dated February 26, 2010.
Directs CIOs to update the Administrator quarterly regarding the progress of agencies implementing such strategies.
Requires the Administrator to: (1) establish requirements that agencies must meet to comply with such inventories and strategies, (2) make information regarding agencies' progress available to the public, (3) update annually the cumulative cost savings realized through implementation of the FDCCI, and (4) establish metrics applicable to the consolidation and optimization of data centers government-wide.
Directs the Administrator to develop, and make publicly available, a goal, broken down by year, for the amount of planned cost savings and optimization improvements achieved through the FDCCI. Requires the Administrator to submit such goal to Congress with an assessment broken down by agency.
Requires the Administrator, each year after the goal is made publicly available, to compare reported cost savings of each agency to goal projections.
Directs the Comptroller General (GAO) to publish an annual report reviewing the quality and completeness of agency asset inventories and strategies.
Permits the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) to waive the applicability to any element of the intelligence community of any provision of this section if the waiver is in the interest of national security. Requires the DNI to notify Congress of the reasons for any waiver.
Repeals this section on October 1, 2018.
People & committees
Rep. Issa, Darrell E. [R-CA-49] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 577.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Reported by Senator Carper with an amendment in the nature of a substitute and an amendment to the title. With written report No. 113-262.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Reported by Senator Carper with an amendment in the nature of a substitute and an amendment to the title. With written report No. 113-262.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Committee on Armed Services Subcommittee on Readiness and Management Support. Hearings held.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H1891-1898)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H1891-1898)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1232.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H1891-1902)
Mr. Issa moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended. (consideration: CR H1891)
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 267.
Reported by the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. H. Rept. 113-359.
Reported by the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. H. Rept. 113-359.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1232 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1232 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1232 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1232 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.