Steve O'Keeffe's blog - The Biggest Loser?

Steve O'Keeffe

View All Entries

Blog (132)
Research (1)

Application Development Database Management Mobile Computing Project Management Security

The Biggest Loser?

Posted: 2/23/2011 - 8 comment(s) [ Comment ] - 0 trackback(s) [ Trackback ]

Opt in below to keep stirring IT up.

Like you, last week I read the patient's chart on the 2012 budget - and what it means for IT. Spending pulse quickens by $1.5 billion - up $3.5 billion, down $2 billion. Amputations at OPM, NASA, and Education. Huge infrastructure cholesterol scares at Army Corps, VA, HUD, and SSA. DoD puts on the white coat as lead shrink in cyber anxiety.

But, it's the prescribed data center diet that left a lump in my throat. Hats off to OMB for its commitment to EHR - government transparency and new medicine. OMB examines the patient - the data center count skyrocketed 385 percent since 1998. Dr. Kundra then plots the data center spike directly against the IT spending hike in the same period. This is a "fatty foods, high blood pressure" connection - the intended takeaway here is "cause and effect." OMB sees pork in data centers. And, following the first lady’s lead, Dr. Kundra's putting Uncle Sam on a data center diet.

While doctors are famous for their illegible scrawl, Dr. Kundra's prescription is written in block capitals. Publishing the results of the 2010 Federal Data Center audit, OMB goes beyond the 2,094 aggregate number to break out the data center count at each agency. And, if that's not enough, Dr. Kundra sets us up for our very own version of The Biggest Loser - telling each agency how much weight to drop by 2015. We've published the chart from the 2012 Budget Analytical Perspective below - and added a couple of columns to rank agencies by absolute and relative target data center cuts, red columns on right.

Agency Name	# DCs in '10	Target # DCs in '15	Absolute Ranking	Relative Ranking
Department of Commerce	41	23	8	8
Department of Defense	772	428	1	7
Department of Energy	89	83	12	17
General Services Administration	15	3	11	4
Department of Health and Human Services	185	131	5	11
Department of Homeland Security	24	2	7	2
Department of Interior	210	120	2	9
Department of Housing and Urban Development	2	1	15	6
Department of Justice	65	50	9	13
Department of Labor	20	18	14	16
National Aeronautics and Space Administration	79	57	7	12
National Science Foundation	2	1	15	6
Nuclear Regulatory Commission	3	1	14	5
Small Business Administration	4	2	14	6
Department of State	361	282	4	14
Department of Transportation	35	31	13	15
Department of Treasury	42	29	10	10
U.S. Agency for International Development	2	1	15	6
U.S. Department of Agriculture	46	7	6	3
Department of Veterans Affairs	87	4	3	1

Hardly surprising, DoD tips the scale as the sumo with 772 data centers. And, according to the OMB diet, the armed services have the most weight to drop - 344 data centers. It'd be interesting to get that breakout by service branch... VA is going to be living on celery for the foreseeable future. Interior, State, HHS, and USDA all make the scales creak. Cutting the data by relative versus absolute weight loss targets shows us why VA may be reaching for "Fen-Phen" - and may raise questions about the health implications of the diet velocity. Looking past VA, it reveals DHS, USDA, and GSA all face tough pound-for-pound targets.

To be sure, the diet's not going to be an easy pill for agencies to swallow. Dr. Kundra deserves high marks for giving a definitive diagnosis - no qualitative TQM or BPR prevarication here. This is a bold new treatment. But, questions remain. Incentives - where's the stick, carrots, and is OMB eating its own dog food? Accuracy of the scales - is counting data centers a meaningful metric? Viability of the nutritional substitution plan - where's the South Beach cookbook and what happens if the “Open Table” is bare? Do data center “owners” really own them - or is there more than one person on the scales?

As Kundra, M.D. points to data center consolidation as the funding source for his cloud vision, only time will tell if he succeeds in getting Feds to shed their IT bulge. By being so direct about the number, the reduction goal, and the timeline - what happens if the pounds don’t come off? 2015 is over the horizon - who’ll be in charge at OMB and the agencies to get back on the scale? Unlike the reality show, there are many, many variables in this equation. If we don’t get it right, then who’s the biggest loser?

Opt in today to keep stirring IT up.

Back to Steve O'Keeffe's Articles

Inappropriate Content