Overview
Title
Proposed Designation of Databases for Treasury's Working System Under the Do Not Pay Initiative
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The government wants to check if certain lists (like mail lists and survey data) can help stop mistakes in paying people. They are asking everyone what they think about this idea before making a final choice.
Summary AI
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has issued a notice under the Payment Integrity Information Act of 2019 (PIIA) proposing the designation of certain databases to be included in the Treasury's Working System as part of the Do Not Pay (DNP) Initiative. These databases include the United States Postal Service’s Delivery Sequence File, the Census Bureau's American Communities Survey, and others. OMB is inviting public comments on this proposed designation and has provided a 30-day period for feedback, which ends on February 22, 2021. After reviewing the comments, if OMB decides to proceed, they will officially designate the databases in the Federal Register.
Abstract
The Payment Integrity Information Act of 2019 (PIIA) authorizes the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to designate databases for inclusion in Treasury's Working System under the Do Not Pay (DNP) Initiative. PIIA further requires OMB to provide public notice and opportunity for comment prior to designating additional databases. As a result, OMB is publishing this Notice of Proposed Designation to designate the United States Postal Service (USPS) Delivery Sequence File, the Census Bureau Federal Audit Clearinghouse, the Do Not Pay (DNP) Agency Adjudication Data, Fiscal Service's Payments, Claims, and Enhanced Reconciliation (PACER) database, Bureau of Prisons (BOP) Incarceration Data, Digital Accountability and Transparency Act (DATA Act) data, Census Bureau's American Communities Survey (ACS) Annual State and County Data Profiles, Veterans Affairs' (VA) Beneficiary Identification Records Locator Service (BIRLS), Department of Agriculture's National Disqualified List (NDL), Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) National Plan and Provider Enumeration System (NPPES), Internal Revenue Service's (IRS) Statistics of Income (SOI) Annual Individual Income Tax ZIP Code Data, and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval (EDGAR) System. OMB's detailed analysis of the aforementioned databases has been posted on Regulations.gov. This notice has a 30-day comment period.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The Federal Register document informs the public of a proposed decision by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Payment Integrity Information Act of 2019 (PIIA). OMB plans to include certain databases in the Treasury's Working System as part of the Do Not Pay (DNP) Initiative. This initiative aims to prevent improper payments by federal agencies. The document invites the public to comment on this proposal within a 30-day period, ending on February 22, 2021.
Key Issues and Concerns
One of the primary concerns with the proposed designation is the inclusion of multiple databases without explicit criteria for selection. The document does not provide justifications for how each database will specifically contribute to preventing improper payments. This raises questions about the strategic choice and relevancy of these databases to the initiative's objectives.
Integration of these databases into the Treasury's Working System is another area lacking clarity. The document does not outline the operational process or the role of each database within the system. Without this explanation, it remains ambiguous how these databases will synergistically work to enhance payment integrity.
Furthermore, there is a lack of transparency regarding how public feedback will influence the final decision-making. The notice does not clarify if and how OMB will address or incorporate public comments into their designation process. This omission could lead to public skepticism about the process being open and participatory.
The language used in describing the proposal could be challenging for the general audience to understand. Simplifying the technical jargon could make the information more accessible and reduce possible misunderstandings.
Finally, there is no discussion of criteria to assess the effectiveness of the databases once integrated. This absence leaves questions about how the success of this initiative will be measured and evaluated over time.
Impact on the Public and Stakeholders
The proposal has the potential to impact the public broadly by aiming to reduce wasteful government spending through better management of payments. However, without clear explanations and justifications, the public may question the efficiency and necessity of including these specific databases.
Specific stakeholders, such as data owners and federal agencies, could experience both positive and negative impacts. On the one hand, inclusion in this initiative could lead to improved data utilization and recognition. On the other hand, agencies might face operational and privacy challenges associated with data sharing and integration.
In conclusion, while the intent of the proposal aligns with improving government accountability and financial integrity, the document's lack of clarity, transparency, and detailed criteria raises significant concerns that need addressing to gain public confidence and ensure successful implementation.
Issues
• Potential concern of wasteful spending arises from the inclusion of numerous databases without explicit criteria or justifications on how each will contribute to payment integrity.
• The document lacks clarity on how these databases will operationally integrate into the Treasury's Working System and the specific role they will play in preventing improper payments.
• There is no detailed rationale provided for the selection of the specified databases which leaves ambiguity about why these databases are critical compared to others.
• There is a lack of clear explanation on how the public's comments will impact OMB's final decision, which may lead to a perception of a non-transparent decision-making process.
• The language used in describing the databases and their function within the DNP Initiative could be simplified for better public understanding, currently the notice could be difficult for a layperson to grasp.
• No criteria for evaluating the sufficiency or effectiveness of the databases in preventing improper payments is provided, leading to ambiguity in how success will be measured.