Summary#
This bill would make federal agencies report every year on large taxpayer-funded projects that are seriously delayed or far over budget. The main change is a new annual list of “covered projects” that agencies must give to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and OMB must publish the list for Congress and the public. The stated goal is to increase information about expensive projects that are behind schedule or over original cost estimates.
- Main change: Agencies must report projects that are more than 5 years behind the original completion date or at least $1 billion over the original cost estimate.
- Who collects and publishes: The OMB Director must issue guidance within one year and collect the reports annually, then send a report to Congress and post it on OMB’s website.
- What must be reported: A description of each project, locations, contract or award numbers (if any), start year, federal share of cost, primary contractors and subrecipients, scope changes, original and current completion dates, original and current cost estimates (adjusted for inflation), explanations for delays or cost increases, and any bonuses or incentive payments.
- Which projects are covered: Major acquisitions, defense acquisition programs, procurements, construction projects, cleanup/remediation efforts, and other time-limited endeavors — but not projects funded through direct spending (mandatory spending).
- Timing: OMB must issue guidance within one year of enactment and agencies must report annually after that.
What it means for you#
- Taxpayers / General public: More public information will be available about big federal projects that are very late or at least $1 billion over budget. This could make it easier to see where taxpayer money has large overruns or delays.
- Members of Congress: They will receive an annual OMB report with standardized information about these projects. That may help oversight and decision-making on appropriations or investigations.
- Federal agencies (covered agencies): Agencies will have to gather and submit the specified information each year for projects that meet the thresholds. That adds a new reporting task.
- Contractors, subcontractors, grant recipients, and subgrantees: Their names and contract or award numbers would be included in the public report for covered projects.
- State and local partners or grant recipients: If they are primary recipients on covered projects, their roles and funding shares must be reported.
- Defense programs: Major defense acquisition programs are explicitly included, so defense contractors and program offices will be subject to the same reporting rules.
- If you are not affected: Smaller projects, projects on schedule, or projects that do not exceed $1 billion over original cost are not required to be reported.
Expenses#
No publicly available information.
- This reporting requirement would likely increase administrative work at OMB and at covered agencies to identify covered projects, gather records, adjust cost estimates for inflation, and prepare the reports.
- This could mean hiring staff, updating databases, or adding IT capacity at OMB and some agencies. The bill does not include an estimate of these costs or a funding appropriation.
- There may be small costs to contractors or recipients who must provide information, and possible costs for agencies to locate historical contract numbers or original estimates.
Proponents' View#
- The bill appears intended to increase transparency about large federal projects that are severely delayed or over budget.
- Supporters may argue that a single annual list makes it easier for Congress and the public to find and compare problem projects.
- This could be seen as improving government accountability by requiring explanations for delays and cost increases, including effects of insufficient or delayed appropriations.
- Naming contractors and showing incentive payments may help evaluate contract performance and payment practices.
Opponents' View#
- One concern is the added administrative burden on agencies and OMB without a stated funding source. The bill does not provide a cost estimate or appropriations to cover reporting work.
- The bill does not explain how agencies should handle ambiguous cases (for example, projects with phased starts or repeated baseline changes), so implementation could be inconsistent.
- The choice of thresholds (more than 5 years behind or $1 billion over) may miss many problematic projects that have smaller overruns or shorter delays.
- Excluding projects funded through direct (mandatory) spending may leave out some large federal projects, producing an incomplete picture.
- It is unclear how OMB will verify the accuracy of agency submissions or resolve disputes about responsibility for delays and cost increases.