recommended reading

Don’t Expect Defense and VA Health Records to Share Data Anytime Soon


The Defense and Veterans Affairs departments have a long history of trying to integrate their existing electronic health records, and it doesn’t bode well for their future plans to improve information sharing. That’s the conclusion of the Government Accountability office.

The problems have resulted from more than a decade of poor management, planning and oversight along with insufficient accountability, according to Valerie Melvin, the GAO’s director of information management and technology resources issues.

“In particular, there has been a persistent absence of clearly defined, measurable goals and metrics, together with associated plans and time frames, that would enable the departments to report progress in achieving full interoperability,” Melvin said Feb. 27 in testimony before the House Veterans Affairs committee.

Earlier in February, Congressional leaders criticized Defense and Veterans Affairs for abandoning efforts to build a joint system and instead pursue technologies that would make their existing systems interoperable. 

Veterans Affairs Department Chief Information Officer Roger Baker told reporters in a press call on Thursday that officials halted the effort to develop an integrated electronic health record after cost estimates doubled to about $12 billion.  He said officials now expect to acquire 50 joint and shared applications, which he estimated will cost between $4 billion and $6 billion.

Melvin said the past failures of both departments to successfully collaborate on building a unified, integrated system did not bode well for a sudden shift towards limited modernization.

“Moreover, GAO has identified barriers to the departments jointly addressing their common needs arising from deficiencies in key IT management areas, which could continue to jeopardize their pursuits,” she said.

Melvin noted that the 2008 National Defense Authorization Act required the departments to establish an interagency program office to be accountable for implementing specific capabilities aimed at improving the exchange of electronic health information between the two departments. But the office failed to fulfill key management responsibilities, she said, noting that it served as a coordinating body without sufficient authority.

“As a result, each department continued to pursue separate strategies and implementation paths, rather than coming together to build a unified, interoperable approach,” Melvin said.   

In 2011, the interagency program office was re-chartered and given budget control and authority to expand its staff more than 7 times its original size to 236 personnel. But as of January 2013, the office was staffed at 62 percent, and officials said hiring was one of their biggest challenges, Melvin said.

Lawmakers were not impressed with the departments’ decision to abandon the plan to develop a single integrated electronic health record in favor of rendering the existing records systems interoperable.

“When [Defense] and [Veterans Affairs] take shortcuts, the veterans and service members under their care will be shortchanged,” Rep. Jeff Miller, R-Fla., said in a statement after the departments announced the new approach.  

Threatwatch Alert

Network intrusion

FBI Warns Doctors, Dentists Their FTP Servers Are Targets

See threatwatch report


Close [ x ] More from Nextgov

Thank you for subscribing to newsletters from
We think these reports might interest you:

  • It’s Time for the Federal Government to Embrace Wireless and Mobility

    The United States has turned a corner on the adoption of mobile phones, tablets and other smart devices, outpacing traditional desktop and laptop sales by a wide margin. This issue brief discusses the state of wireless and mobility in federal government and outlines why now is the time to embrace these technologies in government.

  • Featured Content from RSA Conference: Dissed by NIST

    Learn more about the latest draft of the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology guidance document on authentication and lifecycle management.

  • A New Security Architecture for Federal Networks

    Federal government networks are under constant attack, and the number of those attacks is increasing. This issue brief discusses today's threats and a new model for the future.

  • Going Agile:Revolutionizing Federal Digital Services Delivery

    Here’s one indication that times have changed: Harriet Tubman is going to be the next face of the twenty dollar bill. Another sign of change? The way in which the federal government arrived at that decision.

  • Software-Defined Networking

    So many demands are being placed on federal information technology networks, which must handle vast amounts of data, accommodate voice and video, and cope with a multitude of highly connected devices while keeping government information secure from cyber threats. This issue brief discusses the state of SDN in the federal government and the path forward.

  • The New IP: Moving Government Agencies Toward the Network of The Future

    Federal IT managers are looking to modernize legacy network infrastructures that are taxed by growing demands from mobile devices, video, vast amounts of data, and more. This issue brief discusses the federal government network landscape, as well as market, financial force drivers for network modernization.


When you download a report, your information may be shared with the underwriters of that document.