Improving Implementation of the Paperwork Reduction Act

On Oct. 27, 2009, the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) opened a public comment process on ways to improve implementation of the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). The PRA covers a range of information resource management issues and topics, although it is best known for creating OIRA and establishing a paperwork clearance procedure. The law was passed in 1980 and last reauthorized in 1995, well before current technological capabilities that allow for greater public participation and streamlined information collection and reporting.

Under the PRA, agencies are required to send to OIRA for its approval all proposed or renewed information collection requests affecting more than nine people, as well as all forms used for statistical purposes. OIRA’s review is premised on whether the information collection is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information has practical utility.

The PRA (and OIRA in its implementation) treat all information collection requests the same, regardless of how many people or organizations are impacted by an information collection activity or the importance of the agency's need for the information. OIRA does not assign personnel to reviews based on how many "burden hours" an agency creates. However, OIRA may choose certain requests for special scrutiny based on burden-hour estimates. As a result, critics have argued that OIRA has periodically politicized the process by using its review power to delay and frustrate agencies' efforts to collect information essential to informed rulemaking.

The Federal Register notice [1] announcing the request for comments asked the public to focus on several aspects of PRA implementation. For example, commenters were asked to address ways to improve how agencies calculate the burden imposed on the public when they collect information, whether these burdens should be monetized, and how government can maximize the usefulness of information collected by agencies.

The comment period closed Dec. 27, 2009, and about 20 different comments were submitted for OIRA's consideration. Those commenting included business associations and individual companies, foundations, public interest groups, individuals, and state and local public health organizations. The comments are available online [2].

OMB Watch's comments [3] focused on three broad areas. First, the comments addressed flaws in OIRA's review of agency information collection requests and burden-hour estimates and called on the administration to provide agencies with more flexibility so that not every information collection request is reviewed by OIRA.

Second, OMB Watch argued that information collection under the PRA could be substantially different in light of the rapid technological and web-based improvements in recent years and urged the administration to capitalize on those improvements to increase transparency, enhance citizen engagement, improve data quality, and minimize unnecessary burdens.

Third, the comments urged OIRA to reorient itself toward PRA responsibilities other than information collection and to focus more on those functions, most importantly information dissemination and information resources management.

OMB Watch's recommendations for improved PRA implementation included:

• OIRA should more frequently delegate to agency chief information officers the responsibility for approving certain classes of information collection requests.
• OIRA should allow and encourage agencies to implement pilot programs for managing information collection request review.
• The focus on burden calculations is misapplied and inefficient. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and agencies should, therefore, work together to develop an overarching view of information collection that places an emphasis on electronic reporting and transparency as means to hasten citizen interaction with the government.
• OIRA should work with agencies to begin considering a one-stop reporting source.
• OMB should work with agencies to identify best practices for information resources management and dissemination.
• OIRA, along with the Office of the Chief Information Officer, should provide leadership on establishing identifiers, starting with organizational identifiers, in order to take advantage of new web-based data integration, aggregation, and interpretation tools.

Several themes were repeated in the comments by other organizations, especially the need to streamline aspects of the information collection and dissemination processes. For example, groups across the political spectrum called for OIRA to delegate at least routine information collection approvals (especially voluntary collections) to agencies and allow agencies to use pilot programs to determine new ways to engage the public. Another common theme was a call for OIRA to find ways to expedite information reporting and at least certain types of reviews and approvals. To reduce duplicative reporting, several groups called for "one-stop" information reporting sites.

A poignant example of how OIRA currently implements the PRA was provided by state and local public health agencies. They cited how OIRA's data collection approval process hinders HIV-related surveillance activities. Two projects funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) designed to collect information about the behaviors of people at risk or already infected with HIV are jeopardized. The surveillance surveys collect information to monitor and evaluate health trends. One commenter noted that OIRA review of these data collection requests has sometimes exceeded a year, severely impacting CDC's ability to revise health information based on reporting from state and local agencies.

The comments make clear that OIRA's focus on improving PRA implementation is important. The comments also make clear that OIRA needs to manage its PRA responsibilities more efficiently and effectively, updating its implementation to reflect current paperless capabilities and providing agencies with increased flexibility to manage their responsibilities.