Why is it so hard to build government technology? – MIT Technology Review

Throughout it all, politicians, engineers, and public health officials had to keep peoples information safeand, perhaps even more of a challenge, convince the public they were succeeding at it.

What would it take to actually make government technology work well in the US? What are the basics of a healthy technological infrastructure that can work for the residents who need it?

We asked five experts to help us understand why its so hard to build good government technology, and for their advice on how to create a healthy technological infrastructure for the people who rely on the outcomes.

Cyd Harrell: Government in the US means a lot of different things. After the federal government, weve got 50 state governments, 3,000 countieswhich play different roles in different parts of the countryand 20,000 municipalities.

So many different parties own pieces of the data needed to identify whether you, in a particular location, are eligible and can get an appointment at a place with a stock of vaccines. Not just governments, but hospitals, clinics, and drug stores, they all need agreements to share that data, and to make their systems work together, which they almost certainly dont.

After all that, web designand accounting for people who dont have web accessmay actually be the easy part.

Alexis Madrigal: A lot of the time, the actual technology isnt that complicated. The problem is the system underlying the tech. When the federal government wants data that states dont normally produce for their own work, someone has to put that data together. During an emergency, when everyone has shit to do, its not a priority. Without a national healthcare system, theres no way to easily track tests or overall cases.

Sha Hwang: I call working with legacy systems software archaeology. Its like homes built before city infrastructure existedthey werent built to connect to city plumbing or a power grid. You have to find the one person whos been maintaining the system for 30 years, updating a spreadsheet thats a million rows long with a crazy color-coding system.

For new systems, theres a phrase you hear a lot: government buyers want one throat to choke if something goes wrong. Big vendors like Deloitte and Accenture will bring in all the people needed for a project. But by outsourcing the potential blame, agencies also cede all the technical expertise. They get locked in. If the system fails, they have to rely on vendors who dug the hole to get them out of it.

For new systems, theres a phrase you hear a lot: government buyers want one throat to choke

Dan Hon: No one gets fired for hiring Deloitte or IBM. And when vendors keep getting the same kind of work theyve done badly, theres no incentive for them not to build a shitty system. Government requests for proposals are often written so they only fit one or a few vendors. You might see a yes or no box for, Vendor must have worked on a healthcare system that serves over 500,000 people. I dont care whether that system exists, I want to know whether people who have to use it hate it.

Liana Dragoman: A lot of services are designed around how government works, as opposed to the needs of residents. If youre trying to get a permit to use a soccer field, you shouldnt need to know which specific department within Parks & Rec can give you that specific permit. Residents just want to go to the city website and fill out the form.

Hon: Theres a lot of regulatory complexity in vaccine distribution. But on the website or in the app, the experience is condensed down to, Why cant I find out if Im eligible for a vaccine? I just want an appointment.

Go here to see the original:

Why is it so hard to build government technology? - MIT Technology Review