House committee members express dismay over the agency's plan to improve accountability.
By PAUL DE LA GARZA, Times Staff Writer
Published September 15, 2005
WASHINGTON - Citing last year's computer debacle at the VA hospital in St. Petersburg, the Department of Veterans Affairs unveiled plans Wednesday to better manage billions of dollars in computer projects.
But VA officials immediately ran into trouble during a congressional hearing to help draft legislation to improve accountability at the VA.
Deputy VA Secretary Gordon Mansfield told lawmakers the agency would not abide by the top recommendation made in an independent, $873,000 study commissioned by the VA. Rather, VA officials preferred anothersolution suggested in the study.
The revelation angered lawmakers on the House Veterans Affairs committee, who noted that the VA already has spent $2-billion on failed computer projects in the past decade, including one at Bay Pines VA Medical Center.
"There's a lot of failure here," Committee Vice Chairman Rep. Mike Bilirakis, R-Tarpon Springs, said, "and there's a lack of credibility."
He accused the various entities within the VA of engaging in power struggles and "turf wars," as they seek to control the purse strings.
Committee Chairman Rep. Steve Buyer told Mansfield he had lost his patience with the VA. He said Congress had been pushing for better IT management for six years. "I'm pretty exhausted, Mr. Secretary," Buyer said.
Outside the hearing room, the Republican lawmaker from Indiana threw up his arms in frustration. Buyer noted that he had proposed cutting $400-million from the agency's IT budget request next year to serve as a "wake-up call."
VA's IT budget in 2005 totaled $1.6-billion, and it has asked for $2.2-billion next year. Part of the money would be used to start funding a 10-year, $3.5-billion overhaul of VA hospital computing.
The plans discussed Wednesday marked the first time in years that the VA has tried to reorganize the office of information technology. Gartner Consulting, hired by the VA to assess its IT management structure, concluded that the VA can't keep track of its IT funds.
"Budgets are very fluid in the VA and - beyond the big numbers - there's not much accountability for how and when money is spent," Michael Pedersen, Gartner managing vice president, testified.
"If you don't have the money you need, there's a likelihood you can get it by working your connections, so money is simply shifted," he said.
The study also found "excessive duplication," inefficiencies and that priorities, goals and plans changed month to month.
According to the study, the VA has no central office that monitors IT operations. Rather, IT units are scattered across the country within regional offices and hospitals.
Gartner proposed two options to improve accountability and efficiency:
--Have the VA's chief information officer share responsibilities with other departments that handle veteran health care and benefits.
--Give control of the entire IT operation to one person, a recommendation favored by Gartner and Robert McFarland, the VA assistant secretary for information and technology.
During the hearing, Buyer said the committee also favored the centralized option.
But Mansfield told lawmakers he would recommend that VA Secretary Jim Nicholson go with the first option.
Wednesday afternoon, VA spokesman Scott Hogenson clarified Mansfield's remarks. He said no decision had been made on how to overhaul the office of information technology. He said Nicholson would announce a decision soon.
"A difference of opinion does not constitute a difference in policy," Hogenson said, "particularly when no policy decision has been made."
Witnesses from the Government Accountability Office testified it was a good to give the chief information officer control over IT spending.
But they cautioned that one person would not be able to keep an eye on each and every single VA computer project.
