Overview

Title

An Act To amend title 40, United States Code, to require the submission of reports on certain information technology services funds to Congress before expenditures may be made, and for other purposes.

ELI5 AI

The GSA Technology Accountability Act is a plan that makes sure the government tells Congress how it spends money on computer stuff every year, so we can see where the money goes and make sure it's used right.

Summary AI

H.R. 7524, titled the “GSA Technology Accountability Act,” aims to increase transparency in government spending on information technology services. The bill requires the General Services Administrator to submit an annual report to Congress detailing each program funded over the previous year, including how these programs were funded and any projects associated with them. The report must include specific details such as total expenditures, anticipated reimbursements, and project timelines. This law will take effect starting from the first fiscal year after its enactment.

Published

2024-05-06
Congress: 118
Session: 2
Chamber: HOUSE
Status: Engrossed in House
Date: 2024-05-06
Package ID: BILLS-118hr7524eh

Keywords AI

gsa technology accountability act information technology services general services administration federal reporting requirements government spending transparency congressional oversight expenditure reporting accountability measures annual report submission funding transparency

Sources

Bill Statistics

Size

Sections:
2
Words:
838
Pages:
6
Sentences:
25

Language

Nouns: 242
Verbs: 61
Adjectives: 32
Adverbs: 2
Numbers: 31
Entities: 56

Complexity

Average Token Length:
4.36
Average Sentence Length:
33.52
Token Entropy:
4.71
Readability (ARI):
19.22

AnalysisAI

General Summary of the Bill

The legislation titled “GSA Technology Accountability Act” (H.R. 7524) aims to amend title 40 of the United States Code. This bill focuses on requiring the General Services Administration (GSA) to submit detailed annual reports to Congress on the expenditures associated with certain information technology services. These reports, which must be provided by September 30 each year, will describe programs funded by federal citizen services and acquisition services funds. Key components of these reports include explanations of funded programs, financial details, project descriptions, and anticipated reimbursements. The bill also provides definitions for terms like “Administrator” and “Expenditure” to ensure clarity.

Summary of Significant Issues

Several issues have been identified in the bill:

  • Public Transparency: While the reports are mandated for congressional oversight, the bill lacks specifics on how this information will be made available to the general public, which might limit broader transparency.

  • Oversight and Accountability: There is no explicit mechanism to verify the accuracy or completeness of the information submitted by the GSA Administrator, potentially undermining the integrity of the reports.

  • Repetitive Language: The bill uses repetitive language for describing the report components, which could be streamlined for better clarity.

  • Ambiguities in Financial Reporting: The term “expenditure” might not comprehensively cover all financial obligations, leading to potential ambiguities.

  • Standards for Additional Information: The lack of clear standards or criteria for what constitutes “additional information, data, or analysis” could result in inconsistent reporting practices.

  • Implementation Transition: The bill does not detail how the transition to new reporting requirements will be managed, possibly leading to administrative challenges.

Potential Impacts on the Public and Stakeholders

Broad Impact on the Public

This bill, if enacted, could contribute to increased oversight and transparency of how public funds are spent on technology services within the federal government. By requiring detailed reports on the use of funds, it might help ensure accountability and better management of taxpayer money. However, without provisions for public access to these reports, the wider public may not benefit from enhanced transparency directly.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

  • Congressional Committees: The committees receiving these reports could gain better insights into federal technology expenditures, potentially improving their oversight capacity.

  • General Services Administration: The GSA might face additional administrative burdens ensuring timely and detailed reporting. This could require more resources or adjustments in its current operations.

  • Federal Agencies: Agencies involved in these programs might also feel increased pressure to provide detailed financial and project information, impacting their administrative processes.

  • Public Sector Accountability Advocates: These stakeholders might view the bill positively if it leads to greater transparency and accountability within federal spending, though concerns over the public's access to information might remain.

Overall, while the GSA Technology Accountability Act proposes mechanisms for improved oversight of IT services funding, addressing identified issues could enhance its efficacy and ensure it meets transparency goals across all stakeholder groups.

Issues

  • The bill mandates detailed reporting to specific congressional committees but does not clarify how this information will be disseminated to the public, which could limit public transparency and awareness of the use of funds. (Section 2)

  • There is no mention of oversight or an accountability mechanism to verify the accuracy or completeness of the reports submitted by the Administrator, which could lead to potential issues in transparency or accountability. (Section 2)

  • The language used in the bill is quite repetitive, especially regarding the structure of the reports required annually by the Administrator. Simplifying or consolidating the repeated clauses could enhance clarity and reduce complexity. (Section 2)

  • The bill does not specify any particular criteria or standards for what constitutes 'additional information, data, or analysis' used in the report, which may lead to inconsistencies in the level of detail provided across different reports. (Section 2)

  • The effective date clause does not specify the process for transitioning to the new reporting requirements, which could lead to confusion or administrative burdens during the implementation phase. (Section 2)

  • The definition of 'expenditure' may not fully encompass all types of financial commitments or obligations that could be covered under these funds, potentially leading to ambiguities in financial reporting. (Section 2)

  • The section provided is very brief and does not contain detailed information about spending or specific provisions, making it difficult to identify potential wasteful spending or favoritism. (Section 1)

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 states that this law can be referred to as the "GSA Technology Accountability Act."

2. Transparency of GSA funded information technology services Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The bill section requires the Administrator of General Services to submit an annual report by September 30 each year to relevant congressional committees. The report must detail programs funded by the federal citizen services and acquisition services funds, including program descriptions, funding information, and project details, along with definitions for terms like "Administrator" and "Expenditure."