Overview
Title
To require agencies to create consistent organizational hierarchies, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
The ORG CHART Act says that government offices have to make easy-to-understand family tree-like diagrams to show who is in charge and how they are connected, and this information should be available online, but they can't use extra money to do it.
Summary AI
S. 5312, known as the "ORG CHART Act," requires government agencies to create and maintain clear organizational hierarchies. The agencies must provide diagrams and lists showing the relationships between their offices and positions, identify leaders, note if any positions are vacant or filled temporarily, and link to relevant information online. These hierarchies must be updated regularly and be publicly accessible on the agency's website and within budget materials. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) will review the implementation and effectiveness of this requirement, and no new funds will be allocated to support the act.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
The proposed legislation, titled the “Organizing and Revealing the Government’s Construction, Hierarchies, Appointments, Responsibilities, and Tasks Act” or the “ORG CHART Act,” aims to increase transparency in government agencies. It requires each agency to formulate detailed organizational charts that reveal structures, leadership roles, and vacancies. The guidance for the development of these hierarchies will be issued by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, in consultation with other key administrative bodies. This guidance must be enacted within one year, and the organizational details must be publicly accessible online. Furthermore, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) will evaluate the implementation of these requirements and report to Congress.
Significant Issues
Several significant issues arise from the bill. Firstly, it mandates the creation of detailed organizational charts without allocating new funds, which could potentially strain agency budgets or lead to inadequate compliance if resources are limited. Another concern involves the exemption of the GAO from the classification of an "agency," which could introduce inconsistencies in how these new rules are applied across different entities.
The bill also leaves certain terms undefined, such as “acting capacity,” which may cause confusion in how roles and responsibilities are interpreted. Moreover, while the bill calls for a GAO review, it lacks a mechanism for sustained oversight after the initial review, possibly leading to a decline in compliance over time.
Additionally, the requirement that human capital data be consistent “to the maximum extent practicable” is vague. Lastly, the choice to withhold contact details and allow personnel to withhold their names might obstruct transparency and accessibility.
Impact on the Public
For the general public, the bill's promise of increased transparency could enhance awareness and accountability within federal agencies. By having a clear understanding of agency structures and leadership, citizens, and organizations could potentially hold these bodies more accountable for their actions and performance.
However, should agencies struggle with funding and resources to properly implement these requirements, the intended transparency might not be fully realized, thereby limiting the bill’s potential impact.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Government Agencies: Agencies may face logistical and financial challenges without additional funding. Creating, maintaining, and ensuring the accuracy of these organizational hierarchies could demand significant time and resources, particularly in larger departments with complex structures.
Government Officials: Transparency requirements could pressure officials to maintain up-to-date information. Those in leadership roles may have increased visibility, but with the option to consent to name inclusion, the effectiveness of this transparency could vary.
The GAO: Although exempt from the requirement, the GAO has a pivotal role in evaluating the effectiveness of this bill. This responsibility may require them to develop additional resources and methodologies for evaluation, though exempt from compliance themselves.
In conclusion, the ORG CHART Act represents a clear push towards increased government transparency but is met with challenges that might limit its efficacy if not addressed strategically. The success of the Act will largely depend on how these challenges are managed and overcome within the constraints of current governmental resources.
Issues
The bill requires agencies to create and maintain organizational hierarchies without allocating new funds, which may strain existing budgets and resources, potentially leading to inadequate implementation or compliance (Section 2).
The exemption of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) from the definition of 'agency' might result in inconsistencies in oversight and compliance with the bill's requirements (Section 2).
The term 'acting capacity' is not clearly defined, leading to potential ambiguity in interpreting the roles and responsibilities of officials serving in such capacities (Section 2).
The absence of a clear mechanism for ongoing monitoring and evaluation of agency compliance after the initial GAO review might result in the neglect of the transparency requirements over time (Section 2).
The requirement for hyperlinks to relevant information for officials could pose logistical challenges for agencies, particularly large ones, in keeping the information up-to-date and ensuring accuracy (Section 2).
The provision allowing officials to consent to the inclusion of their names and the prohibition on including contact information could limit transparency and public accessibility to agency leadership (Section 2).
The vague requirement for human capital data consistency 'to the maximum extent practicable' may lead to disparate implementation across agencies, potentially undermining the objectives of the bill (Section 2).
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 of the bill is referred to as the "Short title," and it allows the Act to be called the “Organizing and Revealing the Government’s Construction, Hierarchies, Appointments, Responsibilities, and Tasks Act” or simply the “ORG CHART Act.”
2. Agency organization hierarchies Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section requires that within one year, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget must guide each government agency to create and publicly share an up-to-date organization chart. This chart should show how the agency is structured, include names of leaders, and if positions are vacant or filled by someone temporarily. Additionally, the Government Accountability Office will review how well this is done and report to Congress with an evaluation and suggestions for improvements.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The first section of the act explains that the official short title for this piece of legislation is the “ORG CHART Act,” which stands for "Organizing and Revealing the Government’s Construction, Hierarchies, Appointments, Responsibilities, and Tasks Act."
2. Agency organization hierarchies Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section requires that each government agency create a clear and up-to-date organizational chart showing who is in charge of different parts of the agency. This information must be posted online and updated regularly, and the Government Accountability Office will review and report on how well this is being done.