http://blog.gartner.com/blog/government.php?x=0 Innovating Government en-us Nucleus CMS v3.41 © Weblog http://backend.userland.com/rss http://blog.gartner.com/blog/government.php?x=0blog/nucleus/nucleus2.gif http://blog.gartner.com/blog/government.php?x=0
The survey can be found here, and takes 10-15 minutes to complete.

As a token of our appreciation, if you qualify for and complete the questionnaire, you will receive a copy of the final Research Study once it has been completed.

Please note that all information you provide will be used for research purposes only. None of your responses will be identified with your name or your organization's name without your permission.

Please also make sure you answer with reference only to budgets your office controls (e.g., statewide or specific department, agency, bureau, or office) not for non-IT departmental budgets controlled by line-of-business/program executives.

We look forward to your feedback!]]> General Thu, 02 Apr 2009 16:18:42 -0500
However, as Governor she focused on counter-terrorism and as a result DHS helped co-sponsor the Arizona Counter-Terrorism Information Center, which is a fusion center designed to share various types of information (including intelligence) between and among differing domains and levels of government. In addition, her interests in implementing surveillance-type technologies, such as, aerial reconnaissance platforms and sensory devices to better detect illegal border crossings as well as champion license plate recognition technologies for the State Highway Patrol seems high. For example, she criticized the Federal government's building of a border fence with Mexico as a waste of time and money. She still maintains that governments should "incentivize" the private sector to develop more innovative technologies. However, she has never been specific with what she meant other than in the context of improved border detection and surveillance or guest-workers programs.

Rhetoric aside, look for her to focus on ways the private sector can better apply technology to better develop, classify and share various types of information for large programs such as US-VISIT, Secure Border Initiative, Transportation Workers Identity Credential.]]> General Wed, 28 Jan 2009 18:01:38 -0500
• How and why are state and local law enforcement information sharing systems being initiated
• What works and what does not work for these agencies
• How much do they cost
• What are the barriers to participation

Shifting the review away from a total DHS-centric or Federal government-centric viewpoint may reveal some revelations as to how state and local multi-jurisdictional information sharing systems operate both functionally and technically and how they are tied to specific policing functions.]]> General Mon, 26 Jan 2009 10:39:57 -0500 online survey.

All of your survey entries will remain confidential and will not be attributed to you or to your organization. The information you provide will only be used in an aggregate form. Please complete the online survey form no later than March 1, 2009.

Thank you in advance for your help.]]> General Mon, 22 Dec 2008 12:56:29 -0500 "Shared Services in Government: Getting It Right").

But what about the ICT companies supplying services to the government? Centralization means - at least in the first phase - the insourcing of activities that separate government business units (now the shared service unit customers) might have previously sourced from external providers, and in the long-term it surely means more consolidated bargaining power that will squeeze suppliers' margins. Suddenly the CIO (or whoever is leading the shared service program) finds herself/himself trapped between the political mandate to reduce IT costs and the political mandate not to harm the economic health of the private sector. In an ideal world, politicians would have built a solid business case, by identifying a scenario where the political return generated by private sector economic development is much higher than the operational efficiency and constituent service gains (see "How to Measure the Public Value of IT"). In a less than ideal (and real) world, politicians often put pressure on CIOs for the wrong reasons, such as:

• Favorable attitudes towards outsourcing. Elected officials and executives might have a strong view about ICT not being the core business of government. They purport that by outsourcing ICT services to external contractors, more government resources could be redeployed to front-office tasks that directly add value to the citizens. Even assuming the external contractor has the government sector expertise necessary to deliver IT solutions that support the desired business outcomes, the argument may be weak from a strict economic point of view. If an ICT shared service or centralized unit is more efficient and effective than an external supplier, the lower cost of delivering the service will free up resources to be invested in better services for the citizens, whereas the outsourcing contract will waste them. A rational decision can only be made by comparing, on a case by case basis, the total cost of ownership and the quality of service.

• The "next Silicon Valley" dream. Politicians often have a view that public procurement can provide enough market opportunity to prompt local entrepreneurs to start up ICT SMEs that will blossom into successful multinationals that they can champion in their next electoral campaign. With the exception of some domains, where public procurement is not a "big enough" market, but is the "only" market - such as defense, public safety or healthcare - governments are rarely the leading-edge buyers that can stimulate ICT innovation. And even in those rare cases, public procurement alone is not enough: it must be complemented by a lively academic research community, venture capital and low level of bureaucracy in order to establish and finance new ventures.

• Political agenda. In some cases, elected officials might not be able to understand the value of managerial efficiencies generated by shared services, because they are solely focused on their political vision. In other, less fortunate, but not less frequent cases, elected officials want to protect their political turf and gain electoral support from large companies and local associations of SMEs.

In the long-run, supply-side innovations such as cloud-based services, that are transforming the service consumption models and fee structures (see "Shared Services in Government: Obscured by the Cloud?"), or demand-side innovations such as social communities, that will prompt constituents to consume services from organizations outside of traditional public administration boundaries, will determine the destiny of what will be delivered by shared services units, or by external providers. But, as John Maynard Keynes used to say,"Long run is a misleading guide to current affairs. In the long run we are all dead." Insourcing or outsourcing won’t kill anyone, but might well shake government CIOs' careers!]]> General Thu, 30 Oct 2008 15:51:48 -0500 Government Agenda for 2008).

We are looking for specific areas of concern for government clients around the world, and we would like to ask both government clients and non-clients three simple questions:

* What are your top three technology issues for 2009?
* What are your top three IT management issues for 2009?
* What are the top three challenges for IT caused by the economic downturn and financial crisis?

You are welcome to either take our ON-LINE SURVEY or to respond to this post.]]> General Wed, 29 Oct 2008 14:49:31 -0500 1984, the government attempts to control the speech and the thoughts of its citizens, cataloging incorrect thoughts as "thought crimes". While this story was first published in 1949 as fiction, now in 2008, in a world affected by terrorism, it may become prophetic. Predicting malicious intent from mere observations is becoming a government skill.

The U.S. Transportation Security Administration (TSA) already uses human agents and surveillance cameras to search airport passengers for their bodys' non-verbal clues to predict whether they intend harm to their fellow passengers. And the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is updating this skill using a mobile laboratory with its Future Attribute Screening Technology (FAST) program (formerly known as "Project Hostile Intent") to detect harmful intentions from its citizens.

The premise is to reconfigure large trailers to become mobile screening modules that can be set-up at major events, border crossings or even airports that consist of an array of sensors that can measure breathing patterns, pulse rates, facial expressions and skin temperatures as persons answer a series of controlled questions. These questions are akin to those asked by polygraph examiners, such as, "Are you attempting to detonate an explosive device in this airport today?"

The benefit of this approach is that unlike a polygraph examination there is no baseline questioning or wires connected to an individual, so it takes less time. It is being described by DHS and its technology partners as an, "X-ray for bad intentions". The system, known as "Malintent," uses multiple sensors - everything from cameras to infrared sensors to laser radars to collect and collate data to determine if people are displaying certain behavioral, biological or psychological markers that can be classified as malicious.

Recently, DHS tested its mobile screening truck on 144 unknowing volunteers. Twenty-three of these were accomplices who were told by DHS to be "disruptive" as they passed through an entrance way loaded with sensors that screened them - not for bad acts, but for bad intentions. When the sensors identified something as malicious, they transmitted warnings to analysts who then had to make a determination as to whether or not to flag these volunteers for additional questioning and screening for mood and intention.

DHS still has along way to go in regards to accuracy and privacy before you see these mobile screening modules at political conventions, schools, sporting events or even large shopping malls. For example, DHS will have to employ human analysts to assess the data collected and collated to determine if a secondary interview and screening is required. For now, DHS claims that any data collected is only to be used to determine bad intentions and if necessary apply more scrutiny to certain individuals. All data of such encounters is to be destroyed. Assuming this to be true, you cannot erase memories or even testimony of those involved.

The government sees this as a non-judgmental approach, by requiring technology and analysts to differentiate between bad and good intentions. This approach will be subjected to legal challenges. For example, these actions will invoke privacy implications as well as unwanted medical examinations. What about existing medical conditions (sleep deprivation) or reactions to legally prescribed medications (profuse sweating from certain antibiotics) or even illegal substances altering biological markers that are misread as maliciousness. What will a secondary and more probing interview reveal? More importantly how will this information be used against persons and in what context?

If a person is deemed full of bad intentions, is the government remedy to restrict them from otherwise permissible activities? In addition, once the privacy implications are addressed and perhaps somewhat resolved, look to see the addition of more sensors, such as biological and radiological, which if activated would require even more expanded and serious government action and the need for more record-keeping.]]> General Fri, 26 Sep 2008 10:48:41 -0500
Governments have all sorts of customers to serve: citizens, pupils, patients, businesses - and tourists. Tourists are an attractive clientele, especially for regional and local governments, because they generate direct revenue from taxes and prices paid for public cultural attractions, and indirect revenue from the growing turnover of local businesses. They also cost little, because they do not ask for long-term assistance, such as social or education services, and guarantee some political glow too to the most visited destinations.

A few government agencies followed the chimera of tourist Web portals throughout the e-government era. They had the ambition to provide all information, from tips on what museum to visit, to restaurants and hotel search and booking functionalities. And, while Expedia, lastminute.com, and airlines and railways booking Web sites thrived, government tourist portals lagged behind with few hits. Furthermore, tourists nowadays use more advice from peers, through Web 2.0 communities, such as TripAdvisor, or even more-niche sites dedicated to special themes, such as mountaineering, cycle-touring or Slow Food to select places to visit as well as the best restaurants to dine at. However, there is one type of information that tourists cannot access through those channels - real-time handy tips once they are onsite, such as touring Paris' hundreds of museums, or sailing through the Greek Archipelago, or hiking up a peak in the Rocky Mountains. They will need a map, weather forecasts, directions for a tour that encompasses multiple landmarks, last-minute changes to museums' opening hours, and even a list of nearby pizzerias. That information is typically printed on brochures that can be picked up at the local tourist office, or distributed by the same office through hotels, hostels, campsites, bed and breakfasts (B&Bs), and so on. Proactively pushing that information through Short Message Service or Multimedia Messaging Service could provide a better, more personalized service to tourists. Why would I want to read a 100-page brochure about Amsterdam that includes a 4-by-4 meter (un)foldable map, and information about the Van Gogh museum, classical music concerts and Indian restaurants, when all I care about is the Heineken Brouwerij, steakhouses and funk-rock concerts?

To provide such value-added information, governments do not necessarily need to build ad hoc $10 million portals, which would have few accesses anyhow, because few tourists travel with their laptops. Nor will they have to deploy networks, because, in some cases, they already have agreements with mobile phone operators; for example, to push messages in case of emergencies. Hopefully, they will use those services very rarely, so why not leverage contractual agreements to text tourists with messages that are easier to handle, as they have less-stringent requirements in terms of security and network prioritization. Local governments do not even need to provide all the content; they can mash up and link the information they own with information typically provided by private businesses, such as publishers of tourist maps and guides, or of yellow pages. And they can still collaborate with hotels, hostels, B&B and campsites to channel information; instead of handing out brochures, hotel receptionists will provide phone numbers that by texting keywords will return the desired personalized content.

To implement such a service, local governments will have to build a set of skills that include the ability to segment tourists and design personalized services, the capability to set up and manage partnerships with private-sector content providers and network operators with a sustainable financing model, and technical competencies that lean more toward maintaining and updating their own content and mashing it with private sector partners, rather than deploying new platforms and syndicating content from a hundred different sources. If governments manage to do this, they can make tourists happier, and most likely spend less than if they tried to build fancy tourist portals.]]> General Tue, 16 Sep 2008 16:57:06 -0500
In March 2008, the U.S. federal government announced that the WHTI final regulations would go into effect in July 2009. Once these requirements are in place, verification requirements will vary depending on country. For example, the following types of documents will become the only acceptable documents for border crossings and ports of entry.
• U.S. citizens must present a valid passport, passport card, enhanced driver's license or a trusted traveler program card (Nexus, Fast or SENTRI), Merchant Mariner card or valid U.S. military ID card. For merchant marines as well as military personnel these ID cards will only be accepted if you can demonstrate you are on official and not personal business.
• U.S. permanent residents will be required to present their resident cards.
• Canadian citizens will be required to present a valid passport, enhanced driver's license or a trusted-traveler-equivalent program card (Fast or Nexus).
• Mexican nationals will be required to present a valid passport and visa, a government sanctioned Border Crossing Card, or a valid SENTRI card
• Members of U.S. and Canadian Indian tribes will be required to present Indian identification cards.

Thus, unless new rules pre-empt existing ones, WHTI seems to be still allowing a variety of other documents. In addition, the U.S. government is now offering citizens a new wallet-size passport card for both land and sea travel to and from Western Hemisphere countries. This new card uses a radio frequency identification (RFID) chip that allows the U.S. Customs and Border officers to access photographs and other biographical information before the traveler reaches the inspection booth. However, this new passport card is not ICAO-compliant but only WHTI-compliant - meaning this passport card cannot be used for any international travel outside the Western Hemisphere. The cost of the card is $45 for adults and $35 for children. Current U.S. passport holders can apply for only $20; the same information and process required for a traditional passport book will be used for this card. The question remains whether this card is worth the effort and for what other purposes can it be used?

This new passport card eliminates the need for travelers to carry multiple documents, and this card can verify identification and citizenship through a unique government identifier that gives government agents access to government databases that the passport book cannot. Thus, when compared to a traditional passport book, RFID-enabled (if working properly) wallet cards could speed up the inspection process. However, these cards will have to be protected by some form of sleeve to block them from being read by other RFID scanners when not used for border crossings. A traditional passport book holder must ask the question, "Is this wallet-size card worth the additional time and money for what is in essence a minor convenience?" This question must be answered on an individual basis. However, collectively, this passport card seems to be another avenue for RFID-enabled chips to be used in ID cards. If recent history is an indicator, the U.S. government is determined in the long term to use RFID-enabled chips in various identity card schemes. For example, when the Department of Homeland Security developed implementation regulations to support the Real ID Act, it considered but dropped the idea of requiring each state to include RFID-enabled chips. However, if the passport card is successful, then look for more government-specific uses for the RFID-enabled chips, such as for workplace or other government-issued IDs. ]]> General Wed, 10 Sep 2008 17:43:42 -0500
How did this happen? It all began a few years ago when ning.com and others began an experiment in harnessing the power of social networking for creating structured social interactions. Ning's online service enables building and using social Web applications supporting hundreds of applications, video sharing, photos, tagging, blogs, wikis, map mashups that can be used to create multiple mini Web sites that are all hosted and managed by ning.com. For example, as Gustav approached, Ning created a hosted wiki. Within 24 hours, volunteers copied useful emergency management information, such as links and feeds from Katrina Web sites, and updated them. These citizens also provided neighborhood and regional updates. This site can work even without computer access or Internet connections as it can be accessed and updated using Twitter and an iPhone or another mobile device. This volunteer-supported site is best understood as a platform that aggregates content from a variety of social media sources, such as Twitter, Flickr and YouTube, allowing ordinary citizens to post and link to a variety of information and content.

Governments should look at this recent exercise in Web flexibility and get busy retrofitting wikis, blogs and social-networking sites to deliver similar capability. Learn from ordinary citizens that new capabilities are only a mouse-click away in harnessing a form of Web-based community activism that providers for a more-flexible self-service approach to government-to-citizen interaction and are less dependent on government's more-general information broadcasts.]]> General Fri, 05 Sep 2008 16:34:00 -0500