Information Technology Spending in the
President’s Budget Submission: In Brief
November 22, 2021
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
R46972

link to page 3 link to page 3 link to page 4 link to page 4 link to page 5 link to page 5 link to page 5 link to page 6 link to page 6 link to page 9 link to page 7 link to page 8 link to page 8 link to page 9 link to page 10 link to page 10 link to page 11

Information Technology Spending in the President’s Budget Submission: In Brief

Introduction
Over the past two decades, proposed federal information technology (IT) spending has nearly
doubled. During the same time period, IT budgeting has evolved from a minor component of the
President’s annual budget submission to a dedicated chapter. This evolution may reflect the
increased importance of IT systems to agencies’ operations as well as the increased focus on IT
policy issues by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the President.
Federal agencies are increasingly using IT systems as a way to interact with many outside groups,
including:
 members of the public (e.g., providing information or services);
 other federal agencies (e.g., collaborating with or providing services to one
another);
 state and local governments (e.g., operating joint programs or providing funds);
and
 the private sector (e.g., receiving goods and services from contractors).
In recognition of IT’s role in sustaining government operations and achieving policy goals,
Congress has passed a series of measures that assign certain IT planning and management
responsibilities to executive branch agencies, agency chief information officers (CIOs), and
OMB. These actors may play significant roles in the budgeting, management, and funding of IT.
This report discusses how congressional and executive branch actions have shaped the format and
content of federal IT budgetary reporting, including aggregated reporting on IT spending in the
President’s budget submission. Drawing on this data, the report analyzes how aggregate federal
IT spending, as reported by OMB, has changed over time in recent years. The report concludes by
briefly analyzing budget data presented in the most recent presidential budget submission for
FY2022.1 The IT spending aggregates contained in this report as well as the spending trends may
be of interest to authorizing and appropriations committees that oversee agencies with substantial
IT investments. (For more information about federal IT budgeting processes in the context of the
broader executive budget process, see CRS Report R46877, Federal Information Technology (IT)
Budgeting Process in the Executive Branch: An Overview, by Dominick A. Fiorentino.)
The President’s Budget Submission
The President’s annual budget submission is one of the most comprehensive modes of reporting
budgetary information at the federal level. In practice, OMB prepares the budget submission on
the President’s behalf. In recent decades, the President’s budget submission has included several
printed and electronic volumes, including one called Analytical Perspectives.2

1 Detailed information about particular IT budget projects and corresponding budget proposals is outside the scope of
this CRS report. More information on these proposals may be found in detailed agency budget justifications.
2 To find these documents, see U.S. Government Publishing Office, “Budget of the United States Government,”
https://www.govinfo.gov/app/collection/budget.
Congressional Research Service

1

Information Technology Spending in the President’s Budget Submission: In Brief

A Focus on IT Spending in the Analytical Perspectives Volume
The Analytical Perspectives volume contains in-depth discussion of government programs,
technical explanation of budget baselines and concepts, and policy-area-focused budgetary
breakouts. An example of the latter includes IT spending aggregated at the agency level.3 The
form and content of the IT budgetary information has evolved over time, potentially reflecting
increased reliance on IT systems by executive agencies to carry out their missions as well as
increased focus on IT policy issues by OMB and the President.4
Evolving Reporting of IT Spending in Analytical Perspectives
Presentation of IT-related spending in the principal volumes of the President’s budget submission
has evolved over time. Prior to the FY2000 budget submission, IT investments were grouped
under the category of “major equipment,” which also included capital assets such as weapons
systems.5 In FY2000, however, the budget submission began listing individual IT investments
separately from other types of capital asset investments.6 The Analytical Perspectives volume
began including an aggregate federal IT spending figure for the first time in FY2003.7
In 2009, OMB created the IT Dashboard website to increase transparency of agency IT
investments.8 The resulting publicly accessible website currently displays data from 26 agencies
on the cost, schedule, and performance of certain IT investments.9 In FY2013, OMB began using
the Analytical Perspectives volume to annually report aggregated information about IT spending.
OMB used information submitted to the IT Dashboard by agencies to produce Department of
Defense (DOD) and non-DOD (referred to as “civilian agency”) IT spending totals.10
While spending totals presented in the Analytical Perspectives include both classified and non-
classified DOD IT spending, only non-classified IT spending appears on the IT Dashboard. As
classified IT investments do not appear on the IT Dashboard, DOD must separately report this
spending to OMB.11
Since the President’s FY2018 budget submission, OMB has presented disaggregated IT spending
by agency in the Analytical Perspectives volume based on data submitted to the IT Dashboard.12

3 See CRS Report R42633, The Executive Budget Process: An Overview, by Michelle D. Christensen.
4 In 2002, the George W. Bush Administration released the first President’s Management Agenda in which “Expanding
Electronic Government” was made one of the five government-wide management priorities. For more information
about the FY2002 agenda, see OMB, The President’s Management Agenda, FY2002, https://georgewbush-
whitehouse.archives.gov/omb/budget/fy2002/mgmt.pdf#page=22.
5 OMB, Budget of the United States, Fiscal Year 1999: Analytical Perspectives, February 1998, p. 139,
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BUDGET-1999-PER/pdf/BUDGET-1999-PER.pdf#page=139.
6 OMB, Budget of the United States, Fiscal Year 2000: Analytical Perspectives, February 1999, p. 361,
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BUDGET-2000-PER/pdf/BUDGET-2000-PER.pdf#page=361
7 OMB, Budget of the United States, Fiscal Year 2003: Analytical Perspectives, February 2002, p. 395,
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BUDGET-2003-PER/pdf/BUDGET-2003-PER.pdf#page=395.
8 The IT Dashboard website is located at https://itdashboard.gov/.
9 IT Dashboard, “Frequently Asked Questions,” https://itdashboard.gov/drupal/frequently-asked-questions.
10 See OMB, Budget of the United States, Fiscal Year 2013: Analytical Perspectives, February 2012, p. 361, note on
Table 20-1, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BUDGET-2013-PER/pdf/BUDGET-2013-PER.pdf#page=361.
11 OMB, Budget of the United States, Fiscal Year 2013: Analytical Perspectives, p. 361.
12 OMB, Budget of the United States, Fiscal Year 2018: Analytical Perspectives, May 2017, p. 206,
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BUDGET-2018-PER/pdf/BUDGET-2018-PER.pdf#page=206.
Congressional Research Service

2

Information Technology Spending in the President’s Budget Submission: In Brief

This disaggregation includes 26 agencies—25 civilian agencies and DOD—that report spending
data to the IT Dashboard. Those reporting to the dashboard include all of the major executive
branch departments and agencies. The inclusion of these agencies is driven by statute, namely the
CFO Act and FITARA, which will be further discussed in the section below.
Statutory Requirements Related to IT Budgeting
Several pieces of legislation have shaped the presentation of IT spending data in the President’s
budget submission and other modes of reporting.
Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996
Congress passed the Clinger-Cohen Act due to growing concern about the federal government’s
ability to develop and maintain IT infrastructure and personnel.13 Provisions pertinent to IT
budgeting include:
 establishing the role of CIOs within agencies to develop and maintain IT systems
as well as to evaluate and report on IT improvements; and
 establishing a new federal IT capital planning and investment control process,
with prominent roles for OMB and agencies.14
From FY2003 to FY2009, OMB noted that the inclusion of the IT chapter in the Analytical
Perspectives fulfilled the reporting requirements of Clinger-Cohen.15
E-Government Act of 2002
The E-Government Act created the Office of Electronic Government (E-Gov) within OMB,16
which helps guide executive branch agencies’ IT budgeting and IT capital planning.17 E-Gov is
responsible for aspects of two annually issued documents:
 OMB Circular No. A-11, which provides agencies with instructions and
schedules for the submission of budget requests and justifications to OMB; and
 IT Budget—Capital Planning Guidance, which provides annual guidance around
IT budget submissions and budgetary reporting.18

13 The law, as subsequently retitled by P.L. 104-208 (110 Stat. 3009-393), comprised Divisions D (110 Stat. 642) and E
(110 Stat. 679) of P.L. 104-106 (110 Stat. 186), at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-104publ106/pdf/PLAW-
104publ106.pdf.
14 Statutory provisions that are associated with the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996 have been amended and codified into
Title 40, Subtitle III, of the U.S. Code (40 U.S.C. §§11101-11703) and relate to multiple aspects of IT management and
acquisition.
15 OMB, Budget of the United States, Fiscal Year 2009: Analytical Perspectives, February 2008, p. 169,
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BUDGET-2009-PER/pdf/BUDGET-2009-PER.pdf#page=169.
16 P.L. 107-347, December 17, 2002; 116 Stat. 2899, at 2902. Relevant provisions are codified at Title 44, Section
3602, of the U.S. Code.
17 OMB, “Office of Management and Budget Office of E-Government & Information Technology,”
https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/management/egov/#A1. For a more detailed discussion of the OMB statutory offices,
see CRS Report RS21665, Office of Management and Budget (OMB): An Overview, coordinated by Taylor N. Riccard.
18 See OMB, Circular No. A-11, “Preparation, Submission and Execution of the Budget,” April 2021,
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/a11.pdf; and OMB, FY 2022 IT Budget—Capital Planning
Guidance, November 2020, https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/
Congressional Research Service

3

Information Technology Spending in the President’s Budget Submission: In Brief

Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act (2014)
Multiple provisions of the Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act (FITARA)
were built upon the Clinger-Cohen Act.19 FITARA’s provisions that related to IT budgeting
included:
 the increased transparency of reporting for IT investments via the IT
Dashboard;20
 establishment of requirements for categorizing IT investments according to
risk;21 and
 establishment of requirements for an agency IT portfolio review process, where
individual investments are viewed in the context of the agency’s broader set of
projects.22
Enactment of FITARA followed in the wake of several administrative initiatives undertaken by
OMB during the Obama Administration, including the creation of the IT Dashboard website in
2009.23
Not all federal agencies are subject to FITARA. Agencies covered by FITARA are identified in
provisions associated with the Chief Financial Officers (CFO) Act of 1990.These agencies are
commonly referred to as “CFO Act agencies.”24 OMB guidance encourages, but does not require,
non–CFO Act agencies to comply with FITARA.25 The IT Dashboard currently includes IT
spending data from 26 agencies: the 24 CFO Act agencies, the National Archives and Records
Administration, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.26
Perspectives on IT Spending Trends: FY2003-FY2022
Reporting on overall IT-related spending for the executive branch has evolved over recent
decades, although it has been inconsistent in format and content. Nevertheless, the President’s
budget submission has given increased attention to the topic of IT funding and spending.
A review of presidential budget proposals may help to reveal trends in IT spending. In practice,
OMB has frequently presented historical spending about IT spending in terms of proposed

FY22ITBudget_CapitalPlanningGuidance.pdf.
19 P.L. 113-291, Title VIII, Subtitle D, of the Carl Levin and Howard P. “Buck” McKeon National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015; 128 Stat. 3438.
20 40 U.S.C. §11302(c)(3)(A).
21 40 U.S.C. §11302(c)(3)(C).
22 40 U.S.C. §11319.
23 For an overview of these administrative initiatives, see Vivek Kundra, U.S. Chief Information Officer, OMB, 25
Point Implementation Plan to Reform Federal Information Technology Management, December 9, 2010,
https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/omb/assets/egov_docs/25-point-implementation-plan-to-
reform-federal-it.pdf.
24 40 U.S.C. §11302(c)(1)(A); The CFO Act of 1990 (31 U.S.C. §901(b), P.L. 101-576, 104 Stat. 2838) enacted into
law a financial management and reporting framework in the executive branch. The legislation also created the role of
CFO and deputy CFO at certain executive agencies who have certain statutory responsibilities related to financial
management and reporting. There are currently 24 CFO Act agencies.
25 OMB, Memorandum M-15-14, “Management and Oversight of Federal Information Technology,” June 2015,
https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/omb/memoranda/2015/m-15-14.pdf#page=2.
26 IT Dashboard, “Browse by Agency,” https://itdashboard.gov/#explore-agency.
Congressional Research Service

4

link to page 7 link to page 8

Information Technology Spending in the President’s Budget Submission: In Brief

amounts rather than obligated amounts. The history of proposed amounts may provide
perspective on the evolving scale and composition of IT spending in the executive branch.
Proposed IT spending, in nominal terms, has generally increased each year since FY2003 (see
Figure 1). After adjusting for inflation, however, proposed IT spending totals have remained
relatively constant, with real proposed spending peaking in 2018 (see Figure 2). Total proposed
IT spending was not provided in the FY2019 and FY2022 budget submissions because DOD IT
spending figures were excluded.27
OMB’s methodology for measuring IT spending has varied since FY2003, as outlined in a
number of updates:
 In FY2015, OMB revised the FY2013 and FY2014 DOD IT spending figures
downward by 3% to account for past overstatements in amounts for the Defense
Working Capital Fund.28
 Prior to FY2019, the IT budgets for the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the
Department of Health and Human Services included grants made to state and
local governments for IT systems used to administer federal benefits. In FY2018,
these grants totaled $9 billion, accounting for approximately 10% of the total
federal IT budget. In FY2019, OMB updated its guidance to exclude these funds,
because state and local governments, rather than federal CIOs, are responsible for
the development and maintenance of these IT systems.29
Figure 1. Nominal Presidential Proposals for IT Spending
FY2003-FY2021 (billions of nominal dollars)

Source: CRS analysis of data from annual publications of OMB, Analytical Perspectives, Budget of the United States
Government, FY2003-FY2021.
Notes: FY2019 is excluded because aggregated DOD IT spending figures were not provided. FY2020 and
FY2021 spending totals no longer included grants made to state and local government.

27 OMB, Budget of the United States, Fiscal Year 2019: Analytical Perspectives, February 2018, p. 234,
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BUDGET-2019-PER/pdf/BUDGET-2019-PER.pdf#page=234; OMB, Budget of
the United States, Fiscal Year 2022: Analytical Perspectives, May 2021, p. 179, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/
BUDGET-2022-PER/pdf/BUDGET-2022-PER.pdf#page=179.
28 OMB, Budget of the United States, Fiscal Year 2015: Analytical Perspectives, March 2014, p. 311,
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BUDGET-2015-PER/pdf/BUDGET-2015-PER.pdf#page=311.
29 OMB, Budget of the United States, Fiscal Year 2019: Analytical Perspectives, p. 233.
Congressional Research Service

5

link to page 8 link to page 9

Information Technology Spending in the President’s Budget Submission: In Brief

Figure 2. Real Presidential Proposals for IT Spending
FY2003-FY2021 (billions of 2020 dollars)

Source: CRS analysis of data from annual publications of OMB, Analytical Perspectives, Budget of the United States
Government, FY2003-FY2021. Data was adjusted for inflation using the Consumer Price Index for All Urban
Consumers (CPI-U) from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).
Notes: FY2019 is excluded because aggregated DOD IT spending figures were not provided. FY2020 and
FY2021 spending totals no longer included grants made to state and local government.
In FY2013, OMB began providing aggregated DOD and civilian IT spending figures, with DOD
consistently accounting for 40 percent or more of total IT spending (see Figure 3). In real terms,
both DOD and civilian proposed IT spending increased from FY2016 to FY2018 and peaked in
FY2018 (see Figure 4).
Figure 3. Nominal Non-DOD vs. DOD Proposed IT Spending
FY2013-FY2021 (billions of nominal dollars)

Source: CRS analysis of data from OMB, Analytical Perspectives, Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year
2022, “Information Technology,” May 28, 2021.
Notes: DOD IT spending figures were not provided in the FY2019 and FY2022 budget submissions.
Congressional Research Service

6

Information Technology Spending in the President’s Budget Submission: In Brief

Figure 4. Real Non-DOD vs. DOD Proposed IT Spending
FY2013-FY2021 (billions of 2020 dollars)

Source: CRS analysis of data from OMB, Analytical Perspectives, Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year
2022, “Information Technology,” May 28, 2021. Data was adjusted for inflation using CPI-U from BLS.
Notes: DOD IT spending figures were not provided in the FY2019 and FY2022 budget submissions
Analysis of Proposed IT Spending: FY2022 Budget
Submission
The President’s budget submission for FY2022 proposed $58.4 billion in IT spending at civilian
agencies, a 2.4% increase from FY2021.30 DOD IT funding was not included in the total IT
spending figure provided by OMB in the FY2022 Analytical Perspectives. The FY2022 budget
includes funding for 4,531 investments at 25 agencies, of which 546 are categorized as major IT
investments.31 According to a breakdown of this data by OMB, these investments support the
following three IT portfolio areas:
 Part 1: Mission Delivery (i.e., IT investments that directly support an agency’s
mission);
 Part 2: Administrative Services and Support Systems (activities that are common
across all agencies such as human resources and financial management); and
 Part 3: IT Infrastructure, Security, and Management (IT goods and services
common to all agencies such as IT security and IT network infrastructure).32

30 OMB, Budget of the United States, Fiscal Year 2022: Analytical Perspectives, May 2022, p. 177.
31 Ibid. OMB has defined major IT investment as
an IT investment requiring special management attention because of its importance to the mission
or function of the government; significant program or policy implications; high executive visibility;
high development, operating, or maintenance costs; unusual funding mechanism; or definition as
major by the Agency’s [Capital Planning and Investment Control] process.
See OMB, FY 2022 IT Budget—Capital Planning Guidance, p. 10.
32 OMB, FY 2022 IT Budget—Capital Planning Guidance, p. 7. In OMB’s FY2022 Capital Planning Guidance
Congressional Research Service

7

link to page 10 link to page 10

Information Technology Spending in the President’s Budget Submission: In Brief

Administrative Services and Support Systems account for approximately 11% of total spending,
with the remaining spending divided almost equally between Mission Delivery and IT
Infrastructure, Security, and Management (see Figure 5).
Figure 5. Proposed FY2022 Spending: Federal Civilian IT Investments

Source: CRS analysis of data from OMB, Analytical Perspectives, Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year
2022, “Information Technology,” May 28, 2021.
Notes: DOD IT funding was not included in the total IT spending figure provided by OMB in the FY2022
Analytical Perspectives.
The FY2022 budget submission also disaggregated total civilian IT spending by agency (see
Table 1). The top three civilian agencies by proposed IT spending are (1) the Department of
Veterans Affairs, (2) the Department of Homeland Security, and (3) the Department of Health and
Human Services.
Table 1. Proposed FY2022 Civilian Federal IT Spending and Percentage by Agency
In Millions of Dollars
Agency
FY2022 Proposal
Percent of Total
Percent Change
from FY2021
Department of Veterans Affairs
$8,495
14.5%
9.5%
Department of Homeland Security
$8,150
13.9%
11.7%
Department of Health and Human Services $6,956
11.9%
8.3%
Department of the Treasury
$5,967
10.2%
16.8%
Department of Transportation
$3,694
6.3%
8.9%
Department of Justice
$3,475
5.9%
6.4%
Department of Energy
$3,245
5.6%
14.0%
Department of Agriculture
$2,762
4.7%
16.4%
Department of State
$2,756
4.7%
4.6%
Department of Commerce
$2,598
4.4%
-1.4%
Social Security Administration
$2,157
3.7%
11.2%

document, the portfolio names differ slightly from the FY2019 Analytical Perspectives. In the Capital Planning
Guidance document, portfolio areas 1-3 are called “mission delivery,” “mission support services,” and “standard IT
investments,” respectively.
Congressional Research Service

8

Information Technology Spending in the President’s Budget Submission: In Brief

Agency
FY2022 Proposal
Percent of Total
Percent Change
from FY2021
National Aeronautics and Space
$2,145
3.7%
Administration
-0.4%
Department of the Interior
$1,502
2.6%
8.1%
Department of Education
$982
1.7%
10.7%
Department of Labor
$819
1.4%
4.5%
General Services Administration
$702
1.2%
10.0%
Department of Housing and Urban
$437
0.7%
Development
6.8%
Environmental Protection Agency
$370
0.6%
4.8%
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
$269
0.5%
8.9%
U.S. Agency for International Development $263
0.4%
18.5%
National Science Foundation
$165
0.3%
29.9%
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
$152
0.3%
7.8%
Office of Personnel Management
$141
0.2%
8.5%
National Archives and Records
$127
0.2%
Administration
28.3%
Small Business Administration
$109
0.2%
0.9%
Total
$58,439
100.0%
9.5%
Source: CRS analysis of data from OMB, Analytical Perspectives, Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year
2022, “Information Technology,” May 28, 2021.
Notes: This analysis excludes DOD. Agencies may use different accounting methodologies when reporting IT
spending.

Author Information

Dominick A. Fiorentino

Analyst in Government Organization and
Management

Congressional Research Service

9

Information Technology Spending in the President’s Budget Submission: In Brief

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

Congressional Research Service
R46972 · VERSION 1 · NEW
10