People are very interested in tracking that spending, of making sure that it is achieving the results that all of us hope that it will.

The President has committed to making this Administration more transparent, and that is something that I completely support.

When the Department of Homeland Security was established, Congress recognized the important role that technology must play in securing our Nation.

OMB has developed a system known as the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART), and it is a performance results system that is intended to evaluate the effectiveness of Federal programs.

Why can we not get our act together when it comes to websites for tracking spending?

In the previous Administration, OMB tried to use low PART ratings as a justification for terminating or reducing funding for various programs.

There are a considerable number of privately funded BSL3 labs in this country that are permitted to work on a number of dangerous pathogens that could result in a serious biological event, yet these labs are not required to inform any…

I think you have identified the key issue.

This year alone, the Federal Government will spend more than $70 billion on IT projects, and yet OMB every year, through its tracking system, identifies billions of dollars of wasted spending on IT.

I believe her nomination is an inspired choice.

Despite the existence of the PART ratings, managers across the Federal Government do not use the assessments when it comes to allocating resources.

I join the Chairman in welcoming Tara O'Toole to the Committee today.

You have mentioned in your testimony and confirmed to Senator McCaskill that you are losing $1 million a month on this contract.

If that is not a true statement, then the Department of State should not be saying it.

In government procurement, ensuring the best value for the American taxpayer is important under the best of circumstances, but it is crucial when our Nation is at war and our fellow citizens are serving in harm's way in Iraq, Afghanistan…

I guess that would be extremely poor performance.

If it is accurate, then it is an alarming situation that demands action by the State Department.

Now tell me how that differs from a best value approach to awarding the contract.