Behind the Curtain at TCG

Senate debates S.2590

GovExec has a good summary of the debate about S.2590, which aims to create a database of federal grants and contracts. (H.R.5060 is focused only on grants.) I'll post more about this subject later. Gotta run to a meeting right now!

Grants.gov to use E-Authentication

GCN reports on Grants.gov's plans to expand the number of credential providers servicing their user authentication requirements, thereby aligning with the E-Authentication initiative. User authentication is different to user validation. The latter is simply an exchange of username and password. The former refers to a process of ensuring that the person claiming an identity has the rights to that identity (e.g. some bloke claiming to be me actually is me, and not an impostor). This is important in grants because the government only wants to hand money to people who are who they claim they are.

Up to now Grants.gov has used one credential provider, Operational Research Consultants Inc., but will now expand that, based on Security Assertion Markup Language 1.0 (SAML), to enable authentication against two more providers, namely the Agriculture Department and the Office of Personnel Management’s Employee Express.

It's brave of Grants.gov to embrace an initiative such as E-Authentication, and could have significant snowball effects across other e-government programs as Grants.gov users obtain and want to reuse their credentials.

[7/18/06 16:56: Edited title to clarify that Grants.gov is expanding its use of E-Authentication.]

Federal Transition Framework

OMB has released the Federal Transition Framework, which aims to consolidate information about cross-agency initiatives into one catalog. This is useful for agencies who need to align budgets with these initiatives and demonstrate they've done so through their EAs.

Right now the FTF catalog contains only three initiatives (IPv6, infrastructure line of business, and e-authentication). Additional entries will be contributed by cross-agency workgroups but I see an opportunity here for the broader community to contribute to the FTF. For example, our company has done a lot of work in aligning agencies with the Grants Management Line of Business, and we've generated a lot of information about the initiative within the various layers of the FEA. Wouldn't it make sense to reuse that?

There's been a chasm between agency EA development and budget submissions, which agencies have struggled to fill using the resources available to them. The FTF may help fill in at least some of that chasm out-of-the-gate, and that has to be a welcome development for CIOs and anyone involved in CPIC activities.

Awards database legislation passes the House

As reported in GCN, the Blunt/Davis bill to create a single database of federal assistance awards has passed the House and will be considered by the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.

More transparency in the federal funding process can only lead to a better-informed population...and maybe less Matthew Lesko (hope springs eternal).

Federal Transition Framework briefing

The government's Chief Enterprise Architect, Dick Burk, is giving a briefing on the Federal Transition Framework (FTF) on Thursday, and it's open to anyone with an interest in Federal enterprise architecture. Check out the FedBizOpps posting for all the details. Many agencies have serious problems in figuring out how to implement the FEA in their organizations. A lot of time and money is spent just thinking this set of problems through. The FTF aims to address some of that by providing a single source of "how-to" information, with models to support activities like moving to consolidated Line of Business initiatives.

Grants.gov gets new look-n-feel

Grants.gov just got a make-over. Check out the new-look site!

Independence Is Good, But We Need to Know Why

Just in time for the 4th of July, Kevin Shockey of Tux Magazine encourages users to "declare their independence from proprietary software."  By comparing the "revolution" of open source software, and desktop Linux in particular, to the American Revolution, he hints very broadly to the "Free as in Freedom" arguments many people make in favor of open source.  Unfortunately, his analogy doesn't go deep enough to convince a skeptic.  Considering his publication is geared towards people new to Linux, he could probably do better.  For starters, where are the examples of companies "abus[ing] our trust"?  A few well-chosen links to information on last year's Sony Rootkit fiasco would certainly provide some heft to his argument.  And perhaps some specific instances of "monopolistic behavior" being harmful to consumers, like the "car with the hood welded shut" analogy, would help convince doubters. 

Many computer users, especially those who want things to "just work," don't understand why the freedoms associated with open source software are important to them.  In some cases, they might not know what those freedoms are (or worse, confuse them with "free as in beer").  Most Americans understand why we fought for independence from Britain, which is why Shockey's analogy is potentially powerful.  But to make his case, he needs to get more specific as to why proprietary software is like taxation without representation.

UVM grantee jailed for false research

Well, here's something you don't see often: a federal grantee has been thrown in the slammer for falsifying research in order to secure $3 million in federal funding! NIH's own Dr. Sally Rockey said, '"science itself is compromised" when a researcher falsifies data. She called such data "a break in the chain, and all the links that follow can be compromised."' The chap in question, Eric Poehlman, claimed that he was driven to do it because federal funding is an important measure of academic worth. The difference being, of course, that most scientists get federal funding because they want to do science, not because they want to impress their lab-mates. [Via Slashdot]