Ellen S. MillerCo-Founder and Executive DirectorThe Sunlight Foundation1818 N Street, NWSuite 300Washington, DC 20036December 28, 2009Comment on E9-25757 -- Improving Implementation of the Paperwork Reduction ActTo the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs:The Sunlight Foundation welcomes the opportunity to comment on improving the PaperworkReduction Act.The Sunlight Foundation was founded in 2006 with the non-partisan mission of using thepower of the Internet to make information about the federal government more meaningfullyaccessible to citizens. Through our projects and grant-making, Sunlight catalyzes politicaltransparency and fosters openness and accountability in government. Our comments focuson the intersection between the Paperwork Reduction Act and the government's presence onthe Internet.The Paperwork Reduction Act has multiple purposes, four of which are particularly applicablehere:•"Minimize the paperwork burden . . . resulting from the collection of information byor for the Federal Government";•"Ensure the greatest possible public benefit from and maximize the utility of information . . .collected. . .and disseminated by or for the Federal Government";•"Provide for the dissemination of public information on a timely basis, on equitableterms, and in a manner that promotes the utility of the information to the public andmakes effective use of information technology"; and•"Improve the quality and use of Federal information to strengthen decisionmaking,accountability, and openness in Government and society".

See

44 U.S.C. 3501.Government agencies have traditionally interpreted the Paperwork Reduction Act in waysthat subvert these purposes when it comes to the government's presence online.Specifically, government websites do not implement user surveys without first receivingapproval from OIRA in a process that is lengthy and laborious.

See 5

C.F.R. 1320

et seq

.Moreover, agencies interpret the term "survey" broadly, banning or restricting tools thatallow users to publicly rank or assess the usefulness of information. Finally, the authors of the Paperwork Reduction Act never considered the ways that the Internet would allowcitizens to directly communicate with one another on government websites through the useof voluntary surveys.

Nature of the Information Collection

We must start by distinguishing among information collections that are voluntary, voluntaryto receive a benefit, and mandatory, particularly in the online context. Voluntary "surveys"on government websites are easily distinguishable in that they impose either no or a

deminimis

burden on citizens because of their very nature. In addition, online surveys allowcitizens to communicate with one another in ways never envisioned by the authors of thePaperwork Reduction Act, thereby transforming any theoretical burden into a benefit forcitizens.Although there are strong arguments that mandatory surveys or surveys required to receivea benefit, when used in an online context, should be subject to fewer restrictions than theirpaper equivalents, we focus our comments on voluntary online survey methods. We beginwith an examination of the private sector.

Private Sector Voluntary Survey Methods

The private sector employs many voluntary survey methods to improve the user friendlinessof their websites. These survey methods include "up or down" votes, star rating systems,tags, prose comments, traditional surveys, and website analytics.In the simplest instance, websites allow users indicate their interest in an item by clickingon a button to vote for it. See, e.g., the news aggregator Digg.com. Information conveyedon Digg.com is dynamically organized by the items that have received the most votes or"diggs." Similarly, video content provider YouTube.com allows users to indicate theirapproval or disapproval of comments on videos by voting the item up or down. Thus,information that is deemed to be most useful is also the most easily accessible.A slightly more sophisticated rating system has been implemented by the retailerAmazon.com, which utilizes a rating system of 1 to 5 stars. Users select the stars inreviewing a product, with 5 stars indicating a high level of satisfaction. Over time, thisreveals whether there is a consensus opinion on the utility of a product. YouTube.com usersalso rate videos on a 5 star scale. YouTube videos may be sorted based upon the number of votes and ratings, allowing users to find what likely will be most interesting to them.Another common approach is the labeling or "tagging" of items. Tags are often employedeither to bring items to the website administrator's attention or to create a dynamic index.Craigslist.org, a retail intermediary, allows users to tag posts as "miscategorized,""prohibited," "spam/overpost," or "best of craigslist." This is a signal to administrators thatthey need to take further action, thereby allowing the administrators to focus their attentionwhere it is most useful. By contrast, the photo sharing website Flickr.com allows users totag photos with any text they choose. For example, a picture of roses may be tagged by auser with the terms flowers, roses, red, Valentine's Day, etc. Flickr website users may thensearch using the tagged terms. This helps optimize the website's search engine, leading tomore user-friendly results.Many websites solicit user feedback in the form of prose comments. Blogs, such as theSunlight Foundation's blog.sunlightfoundation.com, encourage reader feedback.Amazon.com encourages users to review books, and makes those reviews available toothers. The aggregation of all of these reviews provide extraordinarily helpful signals toother users of these sites, as well as to their owners.Finally, a number of websites use a traditional voluntary survey to solicit user feedback.Among all of the tools discussed above, this seems to be the least common method, andonly is applied in specific contexts. Instead, websites rely on tools such as Google Analytics(http://www.google.com/analytics/) to gain an understanding of visitor behavior. Google

Analytics tracks clicks on hyperlinks. It indicates the pages users visit most frequently,which hyperlinks users click, and so on. With suitable safeguards, website analytics can helpwebsite administrators understand user behavior without infringing upon individual privacy.It can lead to better website design.All of the rating tools engage users in the common task of improving the websites theycommonly use. The user experience is significantly improved without imposing any burdenat issue in the Paperwork Reduction Act. Moreover, each of the tools, when properly used bythe government, would significantly improve user experiences on these sites and providevaluable feedback to the administrators of the sites.

Recommendations

Voluntary government website surveys should not fall under the Paperwork Reduction Act.OIRA should issue clear guidance to this effect. To the extent that the use of voluntaryonline government surveys should be centrally coordinated, OMB retains the power to fulfillthat function.If, however, the Paperwork Reduction Act is interpreted to apply to online voluntarysurveys, the Act's role should be strictly limited. We recommend:•

Expedited approval authority

. A government website administrator's request toimplement an online survey and subsequent approval for survey language shouldtake no more than 15 days from start to finish in total, not the more than 180 oftenrequired.•

Delegated approval authority

. More agencies should be delegated the authorityto approve surveys under Appendix A to 5 C.F.R. 1320.•

Concurrent comment period with surveys

. Instead of requiring public commentas to whether a voluntary survey is appropriate prior to a survey being used online,public comment can take place concurrently with a survey being available online.Comments on the survey could also be included in the survey itself.•

Pilot programs

. Agencies should be permitted to engage in pilot programs to trynew voluntary survey techniques.•

Pre-approved voting/rating surveys

. Commonly utilized surveys that usevoting/rating systems should not require additional approval by OIRA. Instead, theyshould be pre-approved for use. For example, the use of "voting up or down" or a 5star rating system should be pre-approved for use by all agencies and not subject toadditional approval for use in specific cases.•

Pre-approved questionnaire surveys

. There should be pre-approved surveysthat use the questionnaire format. For each survey, multiple questions can be pre-approved as well, with the agency having the final say as to which questions to use.•

Website analytics

. Website analytics that protect users' identities should be pre-approved for use, and not require re-approval when used in specific instances.•

OMB Policy statements

. Agencies are often confused by what is and is notpermissible under the Paperwork Reduction Act. OMB should issue clear guidanceexplaining the extent to which the Paperwork Reduction Act limits the use of surveys, and identify information collection techniques that meet with the