In paragraph 2.49, you talk about how the government abandoned Secure Channel in 2012 after spending $975 million on the secure infrastructure, including $377 million in implementation costs. In 2012, the government realized that the service was too complex, too difficult to make changes to and hard to use. According to your report, the government replaced it with a less expensive service. My goodness, we'd all be very rich if we invested in IT companies.
Is anyone in charge of keeping an eye on costs? Spending $377 million on implementing a system only to scrap it strikes me as a rather costly move.