Slashdot Mirror


US Spends $1bn Over a Decade Trying To Digitize Immigration Forms, Just 1 Is Online (washingtonpost.com)

Bruce66423 writes: A government project to digitize immigration forms succeeded in enabling exactly one application to be completed and submitted after 10 years of work because of the botched software and implementation. The Washington Post reports: "This project, run by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, was originally supposed to cost a half-billion dollars and be finished in 2013. Instead, it’s now projected to reach up to $3.1 billion and be done nearly four years from now, putting in jeopardy efforts to overhaul the nation’s immigration policies, handle immigrants already seeking citizenship and detect national security threats, according to documents and interviews with former and current federal officials."

34 of 305 comments (clear)

  1. I'm beginning to see a pattern here. by AntronArgaiv · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is there ANY government IT project that has been completed on time, under budget and exceeds specifications?

    1. Re:I'm beginning to see a pattern here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      The Hoover Dam. It may not seem IT related, but it supplies electricity to lots of computers.

    2. Re:I'm beginning to see a pattern here. by bfpierce · · Score: 2

      Well I'm basing this on RTFA. If they're blaming waterfall, you know exactly what happened.

    3. Re:I'm beginning to see a pattern here. by gstoddart · · Score: 2

      The company's initial approach proved especially controversial. Known as "Waterfall," this approach involved developing the system in relatively long, cascading phases, resulting in a years-long wait for a final product. Current and former federal officials acknowledged in interviews that this method of carrying out IT projects was considered outdated by 2008. "The Waterfall method has not been successful for 40 years"

      LOL ... wow, now that's quit the claim. Sounds like utter bullshit to me.

      Reading the article, it sounds like DHS had unlimited cash, little oversight, and no clue.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    4. Re:I'm beginning to see a pattern here. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As my late father used to say, the Golden Gate Bridge could never be built today.

    5. Re:I'm beginning to see a pattern here. by blogagog · · Score: 2

      NASA did it up until ~1969. No other government entity has since though, including current NASA :).

    6. Re:I'm beginning to see a pattern here. by zAPPzAPP · · Score: 2

      What I simply don't understand with these projects:

      If they fail to meet the specifications, why are they paid?
      Why are they paid even more afterwards?

      If the company could not deliver what was specified, sure the forms are not there which is bad, but it should also cost nothing.

    7. Re: I'm beginning to see a pattern here. by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I know, on behalf of those of us who have been on many successful projects which used Waterfall, I find myself thinking "no wonder that clown didn't want his name used".

      Anybody who says it doesn't/can't work literally has no experience in running projects, and is so utterly unqualified to talk about it as to defy belief.

      This is finger pointing, and claiming how your new methodology is going to be so much better. Right up until the replacement project fails as well.

      But to say it hasn't been successful in 40 years? Sorry, you immediately lose all credibility and can't be taken seriously.

      Go ahead, build a bridge or a house without Waterfall. Let's see what you end up with.

      A bunch of people randomly doing some subset of what you need for completion and then trying again next week? That's no guarantee of anything, it's just smaller tasks to almost get right.

      Agile is no magic bullet, and Waterfall isn't some method which has been so badly discredited that nobody uses it.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    8. Re:I'm beginning to see a pattern here. by kellymcdonald78 · · Score: 2

      Apollo 11 may have been on time, but it was over budget (particularly the LM)

    9. Re:I'm beginning to see a pattern here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Of course not, the existing one is in the way.

    10. Re:I'm beginning to see a pattern here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      The contractors are paid for the work they perform. While they're generally scum-sucking shitbags, they have nothing on us (I say this as a USG program manager) on our amazing ability to fuck up everything we touch. By and large, the IT contractors deliver exactly what we tell them to. However, they haven't got a prayer when we re-write the requirements documentation faster than they can decompose it, put in irrational requirements, hold them to draft standards that are dynamically changing, impose an accounting system that's both byzantine and archaic, and subject them to acquisition law that is, I shit you not, so large that the Government Printing Office has given up on trying to print it.

      I am, however, very good at ensuring, as a program manager, that none of the failures, delays or overruns can be pinned on me, and as continue to be promoted for my excellence at avoiding any risk of success.

    11. Re:I'm beginning to see a pattern here. by asylumx · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Is there ANY IT project that has been completed on time, under budget and exceeds specifications?

      FTFY

  2. This is why we don't trust them with anything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    "We can have the federal government handle X, the Euro's do it, after all!"

    Except we don't have a European bureaucracy, we have an American one. There is just about nothing they can get right. Ever. Mass transit, health care, food subsidies, infrastructure, education, you name it: they fuck it up. They are incompetent, brainless boobs. They are trustworthy with nothing. Hand over the immigration budget to the border states and let them handle it.

    1. Re:This is why we don't trust them with anything by viperidaenz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I reckon it's because your country is run by campaign contributions and lobbying.

      You should start by putting limits on campaign spending and making all party donations public.

    2. Re:This is why we don't trust them with anything by jpapon · · Score: 2

      I don't think there should be limits on contributions private property and the disposition there of it, is the very corner stone of liberty. Once you start telling people how they can spend their own money, freedom is just a joke.

      So you think bribery is necessary to keep freedom from being "a joke"???

      If someone independently and anonymously wants to run issues ads, I think that is okay and their should be no limits on their downing so.

      You don't see the problem with people being able to run issue ads with no accountability? What's to stop people from just saturating the airwaves with disinformation and outright lies?

      --
      -- Let us endeavor so to live that when we pass even the undertaker shall be sorry. -- M. Twain
    3. Re:This is why we don't trust them with anything by kaiser423 · · Score: 2

      Once you start telling people how they can spend their own money, freedom is just a joke.

      You cannot legally buy votes. You cannot legally pay to have someone killed. You cannot legally buy another person. Obviously freedom is just a joke and we should be allowed to do these things. Or, one could realize that freedoms among people are various balancing acts, and that striking the right balance is a good one. I don't think that you should be able to effectively buy a politician's vote. It's corrosive to our government, and our government is whom we charge with enforcing our notions of freedom. Hence, more freedom is preserved if we restrict this one; similarly with slavery, contract hit jobs, etc.

    4. Re:This is why we don't trust them with anything by kaiser423 · · Score: 2

      I fail to see how this is the case. I can't provide bagels to anyone in the US Government during my meetings because various laws do not allow it -- it would be seen as currying favor, and they must pay for it all themselves (well, you can give them up to $50 a year or something, but that's just one breakfast+lunch out of many in a 5-day meeting on the East Coast). But you can effectively donate $MILLIONS to a politician? I say that if there truly is a 1st Amendment issue at stake here, then the various government procurement officers should at least get in on the game too. Let the graft commence!

    5. Re:This is why we don't trust them with anything by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

      This is why we need to outsource our government to the Europeans.

  3. Start going after incompetent contractors by QuietLagoon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I think it is about time the government starts to legally chase after the contractors who are just incompetent.

    1. Re:Start going after incompetent contractors by AntronArgaiv · · Score: 2

      But then the elected officials who voted to approve the projects wouldn't get cushy jobs when they left office...

  4. The applicant's name... by Lendrick · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...was Test Test. from the town of Testville, Testistan. Interestingly, his postal code was 90210.

  5. Re:But... by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Agency officials did not complete the basic plans for the computer system until nearly three years after the initial $500 million contract had been awarded to IBM, and the approach to adopting the technology was outdated before work on it began.

    OK, so the cheap shot here is IBM.

    But I often see these things and think to myself, there's probably a list of reasons why shit like this happens.

    Stupid conflicting policies, politicians angling for a little pork for their constituents, politicians who want to fuck up the system to show why government can't do these things, bad vision to start with, departments dickering over their own little information silos, competing agencies trying to get you to use their system to help them pay for their own mistakes.

    I frequently think this kind of thing happens as much from mismanagement and meddling by the people who started the process as anything.

    And I've seen a few cases where people want to blame the vendor because it's just easier, but the vendor had to put up with tremendous amounts of dithering an inability to make decisions from the players.

    Yes, sometimes the vendor falls short. Yes, government can fall short. But sometimes it seems like there's too many competing agendas, and individual players dropping in and trying to redefine everything. Delivery of anything is doomed from the start because they don't know what they want.

    You never get to know the real truth, but in a lot of ways I bet an objective understanding of how things go so horribly wrong would be interesting. Usually, however, it's almost impossible to get an honest evaluation of what really happened ... because so many asses have been covered the truth has been buried under an avalanche of finger pointing.

    Hell, I've see these kinds of things fail because the original sales people lied to badly what was being offered had no chance ... and I've seen customers redefine what they're looking for so often as to make it impossible to actually deliver the contract.

    Invariably some new PM or stakeholder wants to scrap everything done so far and use the technology they're most comfortable with.

    These projects fail, often spectacularly. And the difference between what the low-level people think happened, and what management things is often staggering. Because the higher up the org chart you go, the less reality is defined by what is true, until you get to a level where facts don't even enter into anything.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  6. Re:Geez... by halivar · · Score: 4, Funny

    That's a 6-digit UID you're replying to. But on the bright side, we have 50% less goatse.

  7. US Debt per day by FlopEJoe · · Score: 2

    The national debt has continued to increase an average of $2.25 billion per day since September 30, 2012. Losing a billion in a decade is practically frugal.

  8. Wrong end of the telescope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't think there should be limits on contributions private property and the disposition there of it, is the very corner stone of liberty. Once you start telling people how they can spend their own money,

    We don't want to tell private individuals how they can spend their money. We do want to tell public servants what kinds of gifts they can accept.

  9. Re:Geez... by HornWumpus · · Score: 2

    Liberal pansy.

    The only solution is to simply take everything down to the Darien gap, than build a wall and minefields, which will be much shorter.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  10. Re:Not IBM's or Waterfall's fault by Tailhook · · Score: 2

    Come on now, guys. How stupid can you be?

    How naive can you be? This isn't about "shoddy planning" or missing requirements. Those are symptoms.

    Immigration is a political football. The immigration service is completely politicized, employing bureaucrats that bend to the will the prevailing administration, overlooking whichever laws need to be ignored and neglecting whichever projects need to be neglected, to avoid getting fired. The Powers That Be DON'T WANT an efficient, cost effective system, or they'd have applied the necessary attention to achieve it. They prefer the unmanageable, un-measurable, un-traceable mess just as it is.

    The project was doomed before it started.

    --
    Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
  11. But you should see it! by OakDragon · · Score: 2

    It's one helluva form!

  12. Why? by goombah99 · · Score: 2

    Article doesn't answer the question of why?
    Even the initial premise it would cost half a billion to digitize 90 forms and keep a data base seems absurd. What is so special that it has needs that would cost that much. A high school class project could do that it a month. Survey monkey could do it.
    Sure it might be shitty and scaling the backend tricky. But not very tricky. Now spend a million ir even two and you could do it well.

    A billion? Why?

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      How much would it cost to digitize a 1040 and all the dependent schedules from scratch today? I think that's an apt comparison.

      In 2012 a co-worker of mine was assigned to a project to work on his company's bid to be part of this fiasco. They finally decided there was no way they were going to get involved. It's not just a handful of forms. It was dozens of large complex forms with intricate underlying business rules driven by volatile legislation and ICE policy.

    2. Re:Why? by I+kan+Spl · · Score: 2

      The market cap today for NASDAQ: INTU, the maker of Turbo Tax is ~27 billion.

      I would hazard a guess that even the government can likely digitize all the forms with that kind of budget.

      --
      My UID is prime and so is this number: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0.
    3. Re:Why? by JoeMerchant · · Score: 2

      The challenge of digitizing the 1040 and related forms is that, as soon as (perhaps even before, if you bother to do thorough research) you've got it digitized, the laws change. Perpetually moving target, changing at least quarterly - sometimes more often, with most changes lacking complete definition, potentially nuanced by case law.

  13. Re:But... by Notorious+G · · Score: 2

    I worked for IBM over 15 years on many large scale projects. The second I read the headline, I knew IBM would be in there somewhere. This has kind of become the SOP for IBM in the last decade or so (State of TX, Disney, ServiceMbr Hilton, etc).

  14. Re:Geez... by merky1 · · Score: 2

    Ahhh.. the old days of natalie portman and hot grits... Which I still don't fully get to this day...

    --
    --WooooHoooo--