versities, and other private organizations. Other agencies also use such non-Government facilities. We plan to provide some type of training in ADP for all of our professional accounting and auditing staff. I made a count, Mr. Chairman, as of yesterday and found that 1,270 or 55 percent of our professional accounting and auditing staff have completed one or more of these courses. Another 100 of our professional staff have partially completed one of these programs. And we hope that it won't be too long before all of our professional staff will have some kind of training in this area. We think it is essential, particularly in the General Accounting Office, that we have this kind of training. At the present time we are engaged in two Government-wide studies relating to the management and use of ADP facilities. One of these studies is concerned with the various computer utilization concepts that have come into being over the past few years. The variations in computer use range from simple batch type processing all the way out. to realtime, multiprogramed, or time-shared systems which serve many users. In this study, we are attempting to analyze the various circumstances under which more efficient operations can be achieved by applying joint utilization, service center, or time-sharing concepts to serve the needs of multiple users of computer services. We believe that, as third-generation systems grow and as data communications systems develop, the concept of sharing of large data bases and programs will come into play to such a significant degree that only through the greatest coordination of effort on a Government-wide or, at least, on an interagency basis will we be able to avoid extensive duplication of effort in designing and redesigning of systems in future periods. We therefore suggest that consideration be given to the establishment of a high-level commission at the Presidential level composed of leading experts-in and outside of the Federal Government-to consider the overall implications of ADP use in Government and, in particular, the problems of future systems design efforts as related to long-range planning in Government. Another Government-wide study in which we are engaged is concerned with the compatibility of data processing systems on an overall basis. In this study, we are looking toward ways and means of providing automatic interchange of data and programs between computer systems. There are many problems that have arisen in this area because of the lack of standardization of languages, equipment, data elements and codes, software, data, and other data processing facilities. Our efforts are being concentrated on specific problem areas that have arisen because of a lack of standardization or compatibility to determine how to overcome these problems and how to provide arrangements for interchanging data between systems in an economical and efficient manner. In addition to these two broad studies, we are also conducting a number of audits relating to specific ADP facilities and installations as part of our recurring auditing efforts. For example, in response to the committee's interest in the question of maintenance of Govern Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record-Continued Sample position description, digital computer system analyst, Schedule of courses to be offered by the ADP Management Training Center during fiscal year 1968_ Reynolds, Edwin L., Acting Commissioner of Patents: statement.... Staats, Elmer B., Comptroller General of the United States: List of selected reports by the Comptroller General of the United States to the Congress containing comments on agency accounting systems matters, July 1, 1966 to June 30, 1967, table.. APPENDIXES Appendix A-Roster of organizations supplying courses, training, or instruction in computing, programing, or systems.. Page 109 119 114 137 16 175 Appendix B-Directives from the Bureau of the Budget implementing Appendix C-ASA X3, X4 sectional committees-Alphabetic list of Fed- Appendix D-Exploratory hearing by the Federal Communications Com- Appendix G-USASI fact sheet and other material relating to the stand- 199 235 238 248 255 338 DATA PROCESSING MANAGEMENT IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TUESDAY, JULY 18, 1967 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, OF THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS, Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met at 10:15 a.m., in room 2247, Rayburn House Office Building, the Honorable Jack Brooks, chairman of the subcommittee, presiding. Present: Representatives Jack Brooks, William S. Moorhead, William J. Randall, Dante B. Fascell, Fletcher Thompson, and Margaret M. Heckler. Also Present: Ernest C. Baynard, staff administrator; Joseph L. Gibson, counsel; Hulen Selman, investigator; Irma Reel, clerk; Lynn Higginbotham, clerk; J. Richard Berman, assigned from GAO, supervisory accountant; Frank J. Borsellino, assigned from GAO, accountant; and William H. Copenhaver, minority counsel. Mr. BROOKS. Gentlemen, we were expecting some other members but we have Congressman Thompson here from Georgia, who is still dedicated to serving. And, we are delighted to see him. The other members will be along. They are familiar with this, and I think we will proceed and not wait any longer. The Government Activities Subcommittee, having been duly authorized by the rules of the committee and a quorum being present for the purpose of taking testimony, is hereby called to order. In March 1963, I introduced legislation to provide a coordinated, Government-wide management system for Government data processing equipment. With data processing fast becoming a vital component to efficient and effective government, it became imperative that this costly and essential equipment itself be managed in the most efficient manner and applied in the most effective way. In October 1965, after almost 3 years of bitter struggle, this legislation was approved and is now Public Law 89-306. During the past 20 months, the Bureau of the Budget, the General Services Administration and the National Bureau of Standardseach of which was delegated specific responsibilities under this statute—have had time to begin implementation of this new business-like management system. Setting up this system is by no means complete. Much remains to be done and as time passes, improvements must constantly be made. But, even today, the benefits of this new approach are apparent. Earlier this year, the Bureau of the Budget announced savings on the order of between $100 and $300 million had already been achieved as a result of a coordinated approach to management of Government data processing as provided in this legislation. The purpose of this hearing is to hear from those directly involved in this management effort to learn of their successes-but, more important, to define the problems confronting them as we seek fuller implementation of this management program and even greater efficiency and economy in the use of Government data processing. It is vital that we keep in mind that improved management of Government data processing, important as it may be, is not an end in itself. Improved management is simply an essential means by which substantive utilization of these new techniques can be applied to bring better government to the people of this Nation. With effective management, with improved educational opportunities for Government decisionmakers into the mysteries of data processing, and with reasonable compatibility and standardization, literally billions in the Federal budget can be saved and used to meet urgent needs of the Nation. This subcommittee, as always, welcomes the advice and recommendations of knowledgeable individuals who share our deep concern for efficiency in Government. Our aim is to constructively recommend, not hinder, as we together seek to identify new problems and solve them in the public interest. General, I want to welcome you in behalf of the subcommittee. During the period that you, Elmer Staats, have held the Office of Comptroller General, the subcommittee has continued to work closely with your staff, has received a full measure of cooperation from you that was traditional under your predecessor. The GAO made a significant contribution to the enactment of this Public Law 89-306. You submitted to Congress and to Federal agencies more than 100 audit reports from 1958 through 1964, outlining the devastating deficiencies in the management of this equipment. The need for Public Law 89-306 was reflected in the findings of these audit reports; and the savings recently announced by the Bureau of the Budget, stated in terms of hundreds of millions of dollars, constitute the best evidence I know, of the soundness of our findings. Now, before going to your statement, would you like to introduce the key members of your staff here with you, General? STATEMENT OF ELMER B. STAATS, COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES; ACCOMPANIED BY EDWARD J. MAHONEY, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF POLICY AND SPECIAL STUDIES; ROBERT F. KELLER, GENERAL COUNSEL; AND ELLSWORTH B. MORSE, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF POLICY AND SPECIAL STUDIES Mr. STAATS. To my right, Mr. Chairman, is Mr. Ellsworth Morse, who is Director of our Office of Policy and Special Studies, and to my left here, Mr. Ed Mahoney, who is our top man in the ADP field and a member of the staff of that Office. I have other members of our staff here, whom I will identify at the time they are called upon. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate very much the opportunity to appear here today before your committee for the purpose of discussing current problems and developments in automatic data processing in the Federal Government. Since the enactment in October 1965 of Public Law 89-306, in systems in Federal programs has continued to expand and more sophisticated systems are being developed. So, it seems to me that hearings of the type which you envisage here at the present time can be most helpful. All of us realize that important as any piece of legislation is, it may be equally important that there be adequate followthrough and continued interest on the part of the Congress if we are to accomplish the objectives which Congress had in mind when it enacted the legislation. In my statement today I will discuss some of the new developments that are associated with the increasing use of computers and communication systems in what might be categorized as "third-generation systems." The Bureau of the Budget, the General Services Administration, and the National Bureau of Standards were given important roles to perform in carrying out the objectives of Public Law 89-306. Since representatives of these agencies will be testifying at these hearings, I do not plan to describe their activities under this law in detail. There seems to be no question that in the new environment of sophisticated application of communications and computers in these systems in the Government we will require, more than ever, a coordinated management approach such as envisioned in Public Law 89-306. This need is evidenced by requirements for coordination in such diverse areas as computer time sharing, ADP resource procurement matters, systems development, and standardization. It is also manifest in the demonstrated need for increased standardization of computer programs, data elements and codes, data communication facilities, and overall coding systems. The need for information within the Government for use in providing effective management control over the billions of dollars of ADP resources acquired by the Government is vital if we are to promote more effective and efficient use of the new technology. Steps already taken by the Bureau of the Budget to develop a management information system for the ADP activities of the Government are most encouraging. Full development of such a system offers the potential for timely correction of developing problem areas, avoidance of unnecessary costs, and other possibilities for determining improvements in the Government's overall approach to ADP management. For example, matching of procurement needs with upcoming excesses of equipment or other ADP resources could be analyzed in advance. Also, bulk procurement opportunities could be more easily determined. In addition, Government investment policies on an overall basis would be susceptible to continuous review. Sharing of ADP resources has increased during the past few years under the General Services Administration sharing program. In the February 1967 Bureau of the Budget Report to the President on ADP Management in the Federal Government, the Bureau reported that $26 million had been saved by using time available on Government computers at locations other than where the requirement existed rather than acquiring additional equipment. The report also pointed out that equipment valued at $70 million was redistributed within the Government, thereby avoiding expenditures for new equipment. Sharing of computer equipment and other ADP resources could receive increased emphasis through the full development and use of |