1. GAO’s Approach to Assessing an Organization’s Investment Maturity:
September 23, 2007
Objectives:
To provide a high-level overview on IT management disciplines: Enterprise Architecture; Investment Management; Systems Acquisition and Development; Human Capital; and Information Security.
To provide case studies that cut across multiple domains.

2. Introduction Best Practices FISMA CCA SA EA IS E-Gov IM OMB GuidanceHC
PRA

3. Federal Agencies’ Perspectives
The challenges facing departments and agencies in developing and using enterprise architectures are formidable.
The challenge that most cited as being experienced to the greatest extent is the one that having and using an architecture is intended to overcome—organizational parochialism and cultural resistance to adopting an enterprisewide mode of operation.
Specifically, 76 percent of the departments and agencies reported that they encountered this challenge to a significant extent.
Other challenges reported to this same extent were ensuring that the architecture program had adequate funding (52 percent),
having the department or agency senior leaders understand the importance and role of the enterprise architecture (48 percent) and
obtaining staff skilled in the architecture discipline (48 percent).
We reported that the key to these departments and agencies building upon their current status, and ultimately realizing the benefits that they cited architectures providing, is sustained executive leadership, as virtually all the challenges that they reported can be addressed by such leadership. Examples of the challenges are organizational parochialism and cultural resistance, adequate resources (human capital and funding), and top management understanding; examples of benefits cited are better information sharing, consolidation, improved productivity, and reduced costs.
To assist the 27 major departments and agencies in addressing enterprise architecture challenges, managing their architecture programs, and realizing architecture benefits, we recommended that each agency develop and implement plans for fully satisfying each of the conditions in our enterprise architecture management maturity framework..

4. What is the ITIM?
Information Technology Investment Management (ITIM) Framework
Five stage maturity model
Written for use in all agencies with appropriate interpretation
Addresses process maturity for IT investment management
Broadly generalizes investment decision making
Technology/implementation neutral
Choose your own implementation strategy

5. How is it used? GAO guidance for conducting assessments
Agency use for conducting self-assessments
Static assessment of maturity
Measure progress over time
Provide framework for understanding relationship among processes
Implement using techniques that work for specific agency
Being used by several agencies

6. IT Investment Management Framework:
In May 2000, we issued the Information Technology Investment Management (ITIM) maturity framework, which identifies critical processes for successful IT investment comprising five stages of maturity. This framework supports the fundamental requirements of the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996, which requires IT investment and capital planning processes and performance measurement.
The maturity stages, listed here represent steps toward achieving a stable and mature IT investment management process which also depends on its instituting other good management practices such as EA, project management, human capital management, and system acquisition management.

7. IT Investment Management Framework:

8. ITIM’s Structure Maturity Stage
Ex. Stage 2: Building the Investment Foundation
Critical Process
Ex. Selecting an Investment
Key Practices
Organizational Commitments (e.g. senior management sponsorship and policies and procedures)
Prerequisites (e.g. resources, structures and training)
Activities (e.g. performing and tracking the work and taking corrective actions)

9. General Findings Findings:
Lack policies and procedures for developing criteria for selecting and reselecting investments and managing the oversight of IT projects
Lack mature processes for managing IT investments as a portfolio
Post-implementation reviews not being performed
Executive Boards are not directly involved in management and oversight

10. Governmentwide Review:
In January 2004, we reported5 on mixed results of federal agencies’ use of IT investment management practices.
Findings: Although most of the agencies had IT investment boards responsible for defining and implementing the agencies’ IT investment processes, none had fully implemented practices for monitoring the progress of its investments.
Recommendations: GAO made over 200 recommendations to the 26 agencies. These recommendations addressed issues such as developing policies and procedures, improving processes for effective oversight, and requiring postimplementation reviews to be completed.
Results: Over 80% percent of these recommendations have been fully addressed and others are still being actively addressed.
Information Technology Management: Governmentwide Strategic Planning, Performance Measurement, and Investment Management Can Be Further Improved, GAO (Jan. 12, 2004)

11. ITIM Issues Issues with Flexibility Interpretation
Integration with Other Guidance
Governance Perspective
Static Assessment
Relationship with Other Processes

12. Questions ?
Contact: Tomas Ramirez, Senior IT Analyst,