Source Code: Your daily look at what matters in tech.

source-codesource codeauthorKevin McAllisterNoneWant your finger on the pulse of everything that's happening in tech? Sign up to get David Pierce's daily newsletter.64fd3cbe9f
×

Get access to Protocol

Your information will be used in accordance with our Privacy Policy

I’m already a subscriber
People

What $9 billion would do for the Technology Modernization Fund

The Alliance for Digital Innovation's Matthew T. Cornelius looks at how a new administration's big investment could alter the fund he helped set up.

What $9 billion would do for the Technology Modernization Fund

The funding itself is only half the battle.

Photo: Joshua Sukoff/Unsplash

The Biden administration wants to give the Technology Modernization Fund a $9 billion payday. In doing so, they could change what the fund actually does.

Matthew T. Cornelius, now the Alliance for Digital Innovation's executive director, was instrumental in getting the fund off the ground back in 2018. As a senior adviser for technology and cybersecurity policy at the White House's Office of Management and Budget, he helped make some of the fund's first investments in government IT modernization. At the time, though, there was only about $100 million in the fund.

Now, as a part of the sweeping $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan laid out last week, the Biden administration has shared its plan to increase that total almost 90-fold to $9 billion. For Cornelius, that kind of investment could give the TMF the power to effect change across the government's IT infrastructure instead of solving agency-specific challenges, as it has done to date.

But the funding itself is only half the battle. The other challenges Cornelius sees are figuring out new frameworks that agencies can use to repay the funds if the fund does have more cash on hand and communicating why the fund is more effective than traditional budgeting processes when it comes to tech investment.

"If President Biden's team gets this money for the TMF, what I would hope is that the [General Services Administration] and OMB communications teams loosen up some of their strings and allow the board to go out and talk about what they've done," Cornelius said. "Because even under the constraints it's operated under, where it's had very limited funding, the success stories are there."

In an interview with Protocol, Cornelius examined how the expansion of the fund could open the door to enterprise-level changes within government services and considered how the fund itself could take new shape if that money made it through Congress.

This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity.

Before we get into any details on how the fund might change with a new administration, what makes the Technology Modernization Fund an effective vehicle for creating change within the government?

Normal budget and appropriations processes take lots of time. Agencies will start preparing their budgets in the summer. They will submit them to OMB in the fall, and there will be a bunch of back and forth. A budget comes out in February, and then it takes another six to nine months, if you're lucky, to pass an appropriations bill.

By the time an agency has an idea for what they want to do in technology, it takes months, if not a year or a year plus, to get money to start actually working on it. So the project is already pretty much obsolete by the time it actually gets approved. The pace of technology innovation moves far too fast for normal government procurement cycles.

If the money were more flexible, if the oversight were more effective, and if OMB and agencies could work more closely together to drive real outcomes the way the TMF allows versus operating under the constraints of the normal funding of approaches, that could lead to dramatically better outcomes.

When you were working with the fund, how were you prioritizing which projects would have access to that kind of flexible funding?

The TMF was an idea that started in 2016, but it wasn't until the 2018 National Defense Authorization Act that the TMF was actually created. And it was appropriated with $100 million initial investment soon after. During that time, OMB and GSA worked a lot with technology experts across the government — with CEOs, with CISOs — to try to figure out what the high-priority projects were for individual agencies, as well as cross-agency problems.

The important thing about the TMF is there's no one person that has control over it. There's a board that sits over top of the fund that accepts project proposals and makes the determination on what should be funded. In that time leading up to when the fund was actually created and there was money available in it, we actually set up a mock board. We brought in some technology experts across government and [gave them] 25 different examples of potential projects and different characteristics of things that might come in front of you if you become a board member.

We had a lot of thinking that went behind it before the first project was even submitted for review, so that by the time the bill passed, you had a board that came up with their set of characteristics: Is the approach smart? Do you understand the technology market? Is there going to be a citizen service component? The board basically went out to the federal agencies and said, "Here's what we're looking for. If you think you can meet these criteria, submit projects and we'll take a look."

President Biden proposed last week that, as a part of the broader relief package, the TMF would get $9 billion in funding, a far cry from the $25 million allocated to it in FY 2020. If that were to pass, how do you see the fund's priorities changing?

There's two things here: One, if President Biden is able to work with Congress to get $9 billion, or even if they get $3 billion — the original amount that the Obama administration requested — the board is going to have to take a fundamentally different approach to how they look at projects.

Traditionally, the way the TMF has worked, agencies will come to the board and submit projects. Maybe it's to move some applications to the cloud, maybe it's to set up a new customer experience board or maybe it's to move some paper-based process to a digital process. Those are some things that the board has funded in the past, but with that amount of money, the board should instead be looking across the agency. They should be looking for widespread, common technology issues that they can invest in to drive a whole-of-government approach to technology modernization.

There are significant investments to make. I'm thinking of things like collaboration tools, so that agencies can talk and share information more easily across the departments. I think of secure remote work. The government's going to have a much more virtual footprint than a physical footprint when it comes to technology going forward. So how are you going to ensure that agencies have the right kind of telework capabilities that are both secure and highly functional? You're going to look at some large replacements of legacy systems.

I think you'll see a big push on things like unemployment insurance systems and other big infrastructure investments that you can make that will improve the way that the government does identity management. There's no common identity solution across the government.

In terms of the actual dollar amount, we've seen $1 billion, $3 billion and now $9 billion suggested. Those aren't small differences, and the price tag seems to be continually increasing. Is $9 billion the actual number to make the necessary changes?

Frankly, I think it's probably larger than $9 billion if you want to get true transformation out of the fund. The government spends somewhere between $90 billion and $100 billion on technology every year, so even $9 billion is essentially a 10% down payment on trying to get some long-term change.

I applaud the Biden team for thinking big or understanding that the challenges we face are enormous, that responding to COVID is difficult and that getting the economy back up and running is going to rely on government operations being more effective and more efficient. I think that's why they went with such a significant number. And I think the other numbers that you've seen have been driven more by political considerations and policy considerations and not so much about the need.

Let's say one of the larger-dollar figures makes it through Congress and the fund can focus on enterprise-wide change. If you were on the board making the funding decisions, where would the priority lie?

Investing in cloud is incredibly important. There's still far too many agencies that are laggards in comparison to a lot of commercial companies when it comes to the move into the cloud. And the amount of paper-based processes that you have in government and the amount of time it takes to move across multiple agencies slows down how government services work.

One of the investments that the TMF has already made is in improving the H-1B visa process. If you're a farmer and you want to hire a seasonal worker, you have to submit a form through the Department of Agriculture. It would go through a portal there, then it would go to the Labor Department to make adjustments and to make a determination on applicability. They would print it on this blue security paper and snail mail it to the Department of Homeland Security to check all of the immigrant databases and everything else. They would mail that determination with the blue security paper to the State Department so the state department could issue a visa, and [the State Department would] send a paper visa to the employer so they could give it to the seasonal worker.

The investment that TMF made to digitize that entire process made it easier for the business owner, made it easier for the seasonal worker, made it easier for the agencies to share data securely and effectively and line up all of that data in a structured way.

So viewing that example through the lens of more funding and through enterprise-wide change, would you then look at any process similar to the visa application and try to unify them?

Yeah, I think that's right. And when I say that, I don't mean that you just have to go to one solution. You don't just have to take a billion dollars and give it to vendor X and have them do everything.

But you also shouldn't have to provide the same amount of information in government documents nine different times in nine different forms. If you send that data in, you [should be] getting a visa, a social security card, something like that. It should be easy to make sure that data is shared to other agencies, so that when you're applying for benefits, when you're signing up for programs, when you're looking for services, that information can be safely and securely shared. When I tell [ADI's] members about how that works, that's the stuff that blows their mind that the government can't do.

Beyond the funding itself, the repayment period seems to be the other thorny issue. How do the ideas of a larger pot and less-strict repayment frameworks mesh?

Back when the TMF was originally stood up, we were still operating under the BCA. There were still strict budget caps. There were lots of spending fights between the Obama administration and the Republican Congress at the time. It was a much more acrimonious budget constraint environment, and part of the argument the Obama administration made was that [moving] people off these old systems would result in cost savings that they could pay back into the fund. And I still think that's true, but we're now operating in a different world. Those budget caps are gone. The government's gone on a multitrillion-dollar spending spree, and the work the government is doing is hampered even more dramatically at this scale because of this old technology.

If we are serious about truly changing some of the technology issues in government, we really need to get rid of the repayment strings, but keep all of the other oversight and accountability provisions.

Before any project is ever funded, the TMF board submits a spend plan to the appropriators, so they show Congress what we plan to invest in [and] the outcomes and how quarterly reporting is going to work. They go back and brief individual committees on projects on an as-needed basis. I think that level of commitment and that level of transparency is something you wouldn't get under the normal budget process.

That's what I would hope the appropriators understand. Of course they want tight strings on things. They want to make sure they have control, but the problem is too great. The need is too acute. And we really have to get that money moving as quickly as possible. Keep the accountability there, but give the executives flexibility to make smart investments the way that they want to. And don't artificially constrain their ability to match the right amount of money to the projects with the highest probability of success, because a lot of those repayment strings keep that from happening.

Protocol | Workplace

The pay gap persists for Black women

"The pay gap is a multifaceted problem and any time you have a complex problem, there's not a single solution that's going to solve it."

For every dollar paid to white, non-Hispanic men, Black women are paid just 63 cents, according to the American Community Survey Census data.

Photo: Christine/Unsplash

Last year's racial reckoning following the murder of George Floyd led many tech companies to commit to promoting equity within their organizations, including working toward pay equity. But despite efforts, the wage gap for Black women still persists. For every dollar paid to white, non-Hispanic men, Black women are paid just 63 cents, according to the American Community Survey Census data.

Black Women's Equal Pay Day on Tuesday represents the estimated number of days into the year it would take for Black women to make what their white, non-Hispanic male counterparts made at the end of the previous year, according to the organization Equal Pay Today. And while the responsibility to fix the pay gap falls mostly on companies to rectify, some female employees have taken matters into their own hands and held companies to their asserted values by negotiating higher pay.

Keep Reading Show less
Amber Burton

Amber Burton (@amberbburton) is a reporter at Protocol. Previously, she covered personal finance and diversity in business at The Wall Street Journal. She earned an M.S. in Strategic Communications from Columbia University and B.A. in English and Journalism from Wake Forest University. She lives in North Carolina.

pay

What comes to mind when you think of AI? In the past, it might have been the Turing test, a sci-fi character or IBM's Deep Blue-defeating chess champion Garry Kasparov. Today, instead of copying human intelligence, we're seeing immense progress made in using AI to unobtrusively simplify and enrich our own intelligence and experiences. Natural language processing, modern encrypted security solutions, advanced perception and imaging capabilities, next-generation data management and logistics, and automotive assistance are some of the many ways AI is quietly yet unmistakably driving some of the latest advancements inside our phones, PCs, cars and other crucial 21st century devices. And the combination of 5G and AI is enabling a world with distributed intelligence where AI processing is happening on devices and in the cloud.

Keep Reading Show less
Alex Katouzian
Alex Katouzian currently serves as senior vice president and general manager of the Mobile, Compute and Infrastructure (MCI) Business Unit at Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. In this role, Katouzian is responsible for the profit, loss and strategy of the MCI BU, which includes business lines for Mobile Handset Products and Application Processor Technologies, 4G and 5G Mobile Broadband for embedded applications, Small and Macro Cells, Modem Technologies, Compute products across multiple OS’, eXtended Reality and AI Edge Cloud products.
Protocol | Workplace

Tech company hybrid work policies are becoming more flexible, not less

Twitter, LinkedIn and Asana are already changing their hybrid policies to allow for more flexibility.

Photo: FG Trade/Getty Images

Twitter, LinkedIn and Asana are all loosening up their strategies around hybrid work, allowing for more flexibility before even fully reopening their offices.

In the last week and a half, Twitter announced it's adopting an asynchronous-first approach, and both Asana and LinkedIn said they would increase the amount of time their employees can work remotely.

Keep Reading Show less
Allison Levitsky
Allison Levitsky is a reporter at Protocol covering workplace issues in tech. She previously covered big tech companies and the tech workforce for the Silicon Valley Business Journal. Allison grew up in the Bay Area and graduated from UC Berkeley.
Power

Activision Blizzard scrambles to repair its toxic image

Blizzard President J. Allen Brack is the first executive to depart amid the sexual harassment crisis.

Activision Blizzard doesn't seem committed to lasting change.

Photo: Allen J. Schaben/Getty Images

As Activision Blizzard's workplace crisis rages on into its third week, the company is taking measures to try to calm the storm — to little avail. On Tuesday, Blizzard President J. Allen Brack, who took the reins at the developer responsible for World of Warcraft back in 2018, resigned. He's to be replaced by executives Jen Oneal and Mike Ybarra, who will co-lead the studio in a power-sharing agreement some believe further solidifies CEO Bobby Kotick's control over the subsidiary.

Nowhere in Blizzard's statement about Brack's departure does it mention California's explosive sexual harassment and discrimination lawsuit at the heart of the saga. The lawsuit, filed last month, resulted last week in a 500-person walkout at Blizzard's headquarters in Irvine. (Among the attendees was none other than Ybarra, the new studio co-head.)

Keep Reading Show less
Nick Statt
Nick Statt is Protocol's video game reporter. Prior to joining Protocol, he was news editor at The Verge covering the gaming industry, mobile apps and antitrust out of San Francisco, in addition to managing coverage of Silicon Valley tech giants and startups. He now resides in Rochester, New York, home of the garbage plate and, completely coincidentally, the World Video Game Hall of Fame. He can be reached at nstatt@protocol.com.
Protocol | Workplace

Alabama Amazon workers will likely get a second union vote

An NLRB judge said that Amazon "usurped" the NLRB by pushing for a mailbox to be installed in front of its facility, and also that the company violated laws that protect workers from monitoring of their behavior during union elections.

An NLRB judge ruled that Amazon has violated union election rules

Image: Amazon

Bessemer, Alabama warehouse workers will likely get a second union vote because of Amazon's efforts to have a USPS ballot box installed just outside of the Bessemer warehouse facility during the mail-in vote, as well as other violations of union vote rules, according to an NLRB ruling published Tuesday morning.

While union organizers, represented by the Retail, Wholesale, and Department Store Union, lost the first vote by more than a 2:1 margin, a second election will be scheduled and held unless Amazon successfully appeals the ruling. Though Amazon is the country's second-largest private employer, no unionization effort at the company has ever been successful.

Keep Reading Show less
Anna Kramer

Anna Kramer is a reporter at Protocol (Twitter: @ anna_c_kramer, email: akramer@protocol.com), where she writes about labor and workplace issues. Prior to joining the team, she covered tech and small business for the San Francisco Chronicle and privacy for Bloomberg Law. She is a recent graduate of Brown University, where she studied International Relations and Arabic and wrote her senior thesis about surveillance tools and technological development in the Middle East.

Latest Stories