Overview

Title

An Act To amend chapter 3 of title 5, United States Code, to improve Government service delivery, and build related capacity for the Federal Government, and for other purposes.

ELI5 AI

H.R. 5887 is a bill that wants to make it easier and nicer to talk to the government when you need help or information, by asking government workers to work together better and make things clearer for everyone. The bill says they must do this using the money they already have, and they have to tell Congress how it's going.

Summary AI

H.R. 5887, also known as the “Government Service Delivery Improvement Act,” aims to enhance how the Federal Government provides services to the public. It establishes new guidelines and responsibilities for improving these services, especially focusing on making interactions with the government more efficient, transparent, and user-friendly. The bill designates key officials within each agency to lead these improvements and ensures efforts are coordinated across agencies. Additionally, it requires reports to Congress on the progress and effectiveness of these initiatives but does not authorize new funds for these purposes.

Published

2024-05-22
Congress: 118
Session: 2
Chamber: SENATE
Status: Referred in Senate
Date: 2024-05-22
Package ID: BILLS-118hr5887rfs

Bill Statistics

Size

Sections:
6
Words:
1,917
Pages:
11
Sentences:
41

Language

Nouns: 653
Verbs: 150
Adjectives: 83
Adverbs: 10
Numbers: 81
Entities: 106

Complexity

Average Token Length:
4.68
Average Sentence Length:
46.76
Token Entropy:
5.08
Readability (ARI):
27.56

AnalysisAI

General Summary of the Bill

The legislation, titled the "Government Service Delivery Improvement Act," seeks to amend chapter 3 of title 5 of the United States Code to enhance how the federal government provides services to the public. The act outlines a framework to improve government service delivery, including designating officials responsible for overseeing these improvements. It emphasizes using digital advancements and data collection to evaluate and enhance the quality of services. The bill does not authorize new funding, requiring agencies to implement these changes with existing budgets.

Summary of Significant Issues

One significant concern about the bill is its requirement for agencies to use existing funds to implement the new mandates, which may strain resources and hinder effective implementation, especially for agencies already operating with limited budgets. The absence of specific criteria for appointing the Federal Government Service Delivery Lead role could result in ambiguity in the selection process, potentially affecting the execution of the act’s objectives.

Additionally, there is a lack of detailed metrics for evaluating the success of service delivery improvements, which could complicate performance assessments. The recommendation to adopt commercial products and services lacks safeguard measures, raising concerns about the potential for inefficient spending. There is also an issue of potential overlap between the new roles and existing positions, which might lead to redundancies and confusion.

Furthermore, the directive to apply new service delivery standards uniformly across agencies may be challenging due to the diverse needs and priorities of different federal agencies. The bill's legal references and technical language might prove difficult for the public to easily understand, potentially reducing transparency.

Impact on the Public

Broadly, the bill aims to make federal government services more efficient and accessible to individuals, businesses, and organizations. By improving government service delivery, the act could lead to faster processing times, better-quality services, and more user-friendly interactions with government entities. However, the lack of new funding might mean that some agencies struggle to meet the bill’s requirements, potentially impacting the expected improvements.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

For federal agencies, this act presents both opportunities and challenges. Agencies have the opportunity to modernize and improve their service delivery, which could enhance public satisfaction and trust. However, without additional funding, agencies might face difficulties balancing existing commitments with the new mandates, potentially leading to resource constraints.

Government employees in roles targeted by the act, such as the newly designated service delivery leads, could find themselves with increased responsibilities for improving services. While this could lead to professional development and advancement, it may also increase workload and present challenges without adequate resources and guidance.

In summary, the "Government Service Delivery Improvement Act" strives to bring about meaningful changes in federal service delivery. However, the lack of specified funding and clear evaluation criteria presents risks that could affect its effectiveness. As such, while the potential benefits are notable, careful consideration and possibly further revisions could be needed to ensure successful implementation and outcomes.

Issues

  • The amendment requires agencies to comply with new mandates using existing funds, without authorizing new funds (Section 2, e). This may strain resources and potentially hamper the effective implementation of the act, making it difficult for some agencies to meet the imposed requirements, especially those with already tight budgets.

  • The lack of specific criteria or qualifications for the Federal Government Service Delivery Lead role (Section 322) might lead to ambiguity in appointing a suitable candidate, possibly affecting the execution of service delivery improvements.

  • The bill does not specify any metrics or criteria for evaluating the effectiveness of improvements in Government service delivery (Sections 322 and 323). This lack of specificity might lead to challenges in assessing the performance and success of the initiatives.

  • The recommendation to encourage the adoption of commercial products and services (Section 322, paragraph 5 (E)) lacks safeguard measures, which might lead to inefficient or wasteful spending if not properly monitored and evaluated for cost-effectiveness.

  • Potential overlaps and redundancies are present due to the roles of Lead agency service delivery officials possibly overlapping with existing positions (Section 323), which could cause confusion in responsibilities and inefficiencies.

  • The section on Rule of Construction (Section 324) contains legal references that may not be readily understood by individuals without a legal background, potentially hindering transparent public understanding.

  • The directive to develop broad standards, policies, and guidelines for governmentwide service delivery (Section 322) could be challenging to implement uniformly across all agencies, given their varied needs and priorities, risking inefficiency.

  • The timeframe of one year for designating Lead agency service delivery officials (Section 323, b) may pressure some agencies to rush appointments without clear plans, due to their size and current commitments.

  • The language related to coordinating website consistency and other detailed processes (Section 322) may lead to bureaucratic complexities that could delay meaningful implementation and outcomes.

Sections

Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.

1. Short title Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The first section specifies the short title of the law, stating that it can be called the “Government Service Delivery Improvement Act.”

2. Federal Government service delivery Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section of the bill establishes guidelines to improve how the Federal Government provides services to individuals and organizations. It sets responsibilities for officials to enhance service delivery, ensures the use of digital technology, and mandates agencies to report their progress using existing funds.

321. Definitions Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The provided section of the bill defines several key terms: an "agency" as described in another law, the "Director" as the head of the Office of Management and Budget, "Government service delivery" as actions by an agency or its representatives to provide benefits or services, and "Government service delivery channel" as the different ways people can interact with the government. It also describes a "high impact service provider" as an agency program identified for its large-scale and influential services.

322. Federal Government service delivery Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section outlines the responsibilities of a senior official appointed to improve how government services are delivered. This person will work across agencies to set standards, gather feedback, and ensure service quality, while also coordinating efforts to make government services more efficient and user-friendly, especially online.

323. Lead agency officials for Government service delivery Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section outlines that each government agency's leader is in charge of enhancing their service delivery, which includes appointing a senior official for this purpose. This official's duties include reporting directly to agency leadership, coordinating improvements, submitting plans, collaborating with other offices and agencies, and assisting in implementing modern digital experiences and government service requirements.

324. Rule of construction Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

This section clarifies that nothing in this part of the law should be interpreted to weaken the power of agency Chief Information Officers, who are responsible for managing information resources, as given by existing laws.