Connect with us

Politics

USDA’s Washington shifts to new kind of ‘CIO’ role

Published

2 months ago

on

Change in the agency chief information officer ranks isn’t unusual. There’s a common refrain most of you have heard that most CIOs only last, on average, two years.

While that perception comes from a six-year-old Government Accountability Office report, the reality is many agency CIOs last much longer. But it’s a rarity that one stays in the role and does so as successfully as Gary Washington has over the last almost eight years.

Gary Washington is moving into a new role at the Agriculture Department.

So the fact that Washington, one of the longest serving agency chief information officers in government, is moving to a new role at the Agriculture Department is worth taking a second to recognize.

USDA named Sam Berry, who joined in May as a senior advisor on government efficiency in the Office of the CIO, as its new CIO on Friday. With Berry taking over the lead technology role, USDA has converted the CIO’s role to a political one.

“Originally from Michigan, Sam has built a reputation as a visionary leader in the tech space. We are excited for his perspectives and entrepreneurial energy he brings to the role, and confident his leadership will help drive our technology strategy into the next chapter,” wrote Secretary Brooke Rollins in an email to staff, obtained by Federal News Network. “Sam brings a strong track record of driving digital transformation and technology excellence, with long-standing hands-on experience in both startup and enterprise environments. As founder and CEO of software companies, Sam led the automation of complex business processes, consolidated enterprise platforms, and priorities running infrastructure securely and efficiently in the cloud. His work as a founding engineer of several innovative service offerings demonstrates a sharp eye for building solutions from the ground up that deliver real world impact.”

Washington, who joined USDA in February 2018, will transition to this new chief innovation officer role, though Rollins didn’t offer any insight into what he will do. The longest serving agency CIO today is probably Dave Shive at GSA. In fact, there has been a high rate of turnover across the CIO community this year, with 23 out of 27 CFO Act agencies changing executives in the last nine months.

“With decades of service in both government and military sectors, followed by an impactful tenure within USDA, Gary has been instrumental in shaping the technological foundation USDA relies on today,” Rolins wrote. “We offer our deepest gratitude to Gary for his dedication, expertise and visionary leadership over the years. This new role is a natural progression and will allow him to focus on advancing USDA strategic innovation initiatives that align with serving our customers and the American people. These changes reflect our belief that technology and innovation are cornerstones for our future success. With Sam guiding our information systems and Gary spearheading innovation, we are more aligned than ever with our mission to serve American farmers, ranchers, and the agriculture community.”

Washington always out in front

As the USDA CIO, Washington accomplished more for USDA than nearly any other of the agency’s  technology leaders in the last 20 years. He led the effort to win five awards from the Technology Modernization Fund, including a $64 million investment to consolidate and modernize 17 disparate networks. At least two other attempts to consolidate networks across USDA failed, making Washington’s decision to use the carrot and stick of the oversight of the TMF board a major key to the agency’s success.

Washington, who came to USDA from the Office of Management and Budget’s Federal CIO team, understood how to use the resources available across government. USDA was one of the first agencies to win a TMF award, to bring in the Centers of Excellence experts from the General Services Administration, and to move applications to cloud services. He also pushed for the use of low-code/no-code platforms and leaned into using application programming interfaces to help agency software developers modernize applications more quickly.

Washington said in 2023 that he wants USDA to rely mostly on software-as-a-service, awarding cloud contracts through its Stratus vehicle. USDA launched the basic ordering agreement contract vehicle with last November and is expanding it this year with more vendors.

In the 2023 omnibus spending bill, lawmakers recognized the importance and impact of Washington and his Office of the CIO. Legislators added a provision requiring the agency’s CIO to approve any new or significant upgrades to IT systems.

“[N]one of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this act may be transferred to the Office of the Chief Information Officer without written notification to and the prior approval of the committees on appropriations of both houses of Congress,” the bill stated. “[N]one of the funds available to the Department of Agriculture for information technology shall be obligated for projects, contracts or other agreements over $25,000 prior to receipt of written approval by the chief information officer; Provided further, that the CIO may authorize an agency to obligate funds without written approval from the CIO for projects, contracts or other agreements up to $250,000 based upon the performance of an agency measured against the performance plan requirements.”

Washington’s IT modernization and management efforts were recognized outside of USDA as well. He was a finalist for the Samuel J. Heyman Service to America Medal Management Excellence finalist in 2021 and a Presidential Rank Award for Meritorious Service honoree in 2024.

Role of CINO varies

As Washington transitions into his new role, the question comes up: What does a CINO exactly do?

While it’s not exactly a new position, it’s one that isn’t as well defined as a CIO. Other agencies have had CINOs before, including the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation in 2022 and the Defense Department in 2016. But typically, folks in these positions didn’t last long. The FDIC CINO lasted just over a year. The Pentagon decided to name a CINO only to put the position on hold less than nine months after that initial decision, and never came back to it.

Over the years, several other agencies have also established chief innovation officers, including the departments of Health and Human Services, Transportation and Energy as well as the  the U.S. Agency for International Development.

Currently, Leadership Connect says there are 17 people or positions with the CINO or deputy CINO title across government, including executives at the departments of Labor and Commerce, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

A 2019 report from the Institute for Defense Analysis detailed what the role of a chief innovation officer could look like.

“The role of a CINO is inherently flexible with sometimes purposefully ambiguous boundaries. To use a football metaphor, CINOs can be a bit like a ‘free safety’ position, with their portfolios defined around an agency’s priority needs,” the report stated. “The primary role of a CINO is not to innovate, but to provide recognition and support (e.g., time, funding, training, and management support) for federal employees to identify and implement innovative ideas. Despite their working in federal agencies with different operating contexts, government CINOs have similar understandings of their role.”

Elisa Farri, a vice president and the co-lead of Capgemini Invent’s Management Lab, wrote in a 2022 white paper that in their review of Fortune 500 companies the role of chief innovation officers varied widely.

“Unlike more established C-suite roles, whose job specs are relatively standardized, the chief innovation officer’s role varies significantly depending on the organization, business context and the individual themselves,” the researchers found. “The role is divided into two main categories: managing the innovation funnel (e.g., identifying new market spaces, funding and supporting early-stage initiatives, and managing the experiment portfolio) and building innovation capabilities (e.g., developing internal skillsets and disseminating best practices).”

Most recently, the IT and Innovation Foundation recommended the Trump administration establish a federal CINO. This person would coordinate and drive innovation within the federal enterprise.

“The CINO would complement the chief technology officer (CTO), whose role should be focused on supporting technological innovation in the broader society and economy, and the federal chief information officer (CIO), whose job is to focus on the federal IT enterprise,” ITIF wrote in February.

It seems like Washington will have a broad canvas to drive innovation through USDA. But it also will be worth watching how Washington settles into his new role, or if this is just a weigh station for his next adventure.

The post USDA’s Washington shifts to new kind of ‘CIO’ role first appeared on Federal News Network.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

What Does Accountability Look Like for Service Members Affected by the COVID-19 Shot ?

Published

2 hours ago

on

November 11, 2025

By

Image: Wikimedia Commons (U.S. Department of Defense, February 2025)

Dozens of service members currently serving in the military have offered their thoughts on how to hold accountable those military leaders who violated the law by implementing and enforcing the COVID-19 shot.

A startling report released by The Gateway Pundit recently highlighted the findings of a small, independent survey carried out by J.M. Phelps. Sadly, 89 percent of over sixty respondents stated that they would not advise their children, family members, or friends to join the military.

As previously reported, 80 percent attribute their reason to “the lack of accountability for the implementation and enforcement of the 2021 military shot mandate.”

Out of 66 participants in the fall 2025 survey, 64 respondents, or 97 percent, believe that leaders within the Department of Defense should be held responsible for how the mandate was put into action and enforced in August 2021.

While the survey only represents a small fraction of a much larger population, 63 out of the 66 participants, or 95 percent, expressed that accountability is essential for them to restore their trust in the military. This perspective has been echoed by hundreds of service members and veterans in discussions with the author over the past four years. And as of now, no one has faced consequences.

In the latest findings presented below, individuals actively serving in the various branches of the military also shared their perspectives on what accountability would look like to them. Each emphasized that his or her views to not reflect those of the War Department or their respective branches of the military.

To summarize, here’s what the participants in the survey conveyed about the accountability of military leaders responsible for the implementation and enforcement of the shot:

Subjectively, most survey participants indicated that their violations of the law should be categorized into different levels, including low-level, moderate-level, and severe-level violations. Although these categories would need to be clearly defined, “low-level” infractions would require mandatory training on the unlawful components of the mandate, with no repercussions for the violator’s career.

In the case of what would be considered “moderate” infractions, those who violated the law should encounter negative administrative actions that may affect their career. Lastly, “severe” violations would warrant Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) action, which could lead to the end of their career through courts-martial, dishonorable discharges, and more, including complete forfeiture of rank, benefits, and pension.

Numerous individuals advocated for General Officer Memorandums of Reprimand (GOMOR) to be included in their records. Some even proposed prohibiting federal service and future political appointments. One person even recommended that leaders face treason charges and time in jail.

Participants in the survey also advocated for public apologies to the American people through testimonies presented to Congress that would be included in the congressional record.

One respondent expressed concern that any form of punishment might be perceived as “authoritarian” by those on the Left. This same service member proposed offering “ribbons, medals, or awards [for] the brave few” who opposed the illegal enforcement of the shot mandate.

The loss of careers, the loss of promotions, the strains on marriages, and so much more have left many service members feeling resentful. Given the incredible challenges they faced in opposing an “unlawful as implemented” shot mandate, their anger may be justified.

Is there a middle ground that can be reached between those adversely affected and the Department of War? That’s a decision for War Secretary Pete Hegseth and his department to make.

Here are a few additional points for the Department of War to consider:

Out of 66 participants in the survey, 59—equating to 89 percent—reported knowing someone who has been separated or compelled to leave military service due to the COVID-19 shot mandate. Additionally, 61 individuals, or 92 percent, indicated that they know someone who has suffered physical harm from the shot. Furthermore, eight of the 66 participants reported experiencing physical harm themselves.

Is it any wonder why they may never cease seeking accountability? War Secretary Hegseth, what’s holding you back? That’s the question on everyone’s mind.

The post What Does Accountability Look Like for Service Members Affected by the COVID-19 Shot ? appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Continue Reading

Politics

Embattled BBC Apologizes to the Public for Misleading Edit of Trump J6 Speech, as US President Demands Retraction, Threatens Legal Action Seeking $1 Billion in Damages

Published

2 hours ago

on

November 11, 2025

By

Will Trump take legal action against the BBC?

The ‘Beeb’ is in the crosshairs of Trump’s legal team for one billion dollars.

A day after the resignation of Director-General Tim Davie and the ousting of Chief News Executive Deborah Turness, the British Broadcasting Company (BBC) is dealing with the fallout of the accusations of institutional biases and the scandal over the deceptive editing of Donal J. Trump’s J6 speech.

Today (10), BBC Chairman Samir Shah has publicly admitted the corporation made what he called an ‘error of judgment’.

Shah admitted that the editing of separate comments by Trump created the manufactured impression that the US President had called for violence on January 6 2021.

Shah made these comments in a written statement to Parliament’s Culture, Media and Sport Committee.

BBC reported:

“He writes: ‘Since the publication of Mr. Prescott’s memo, this issue has led to over 500 complaints. These are now being dealt with in the normal way. It has also prompted further reflection by the BBC’.

‘The conclusion of that deliberation is that we accept that the way the speech was edited did give the impression of a direct call for violent action. The BBC would like to apologize for that error of judgement’.”

A spokesman for failing Prime Minister Keir Starmer says that he ‘does not believe the BBC is institutionally biased’.

“He added: ‘It is important the BBC acts to maintain trust and corrects mistake quickly when they occur… for any public service broadcaster – accountability is vital’.”

Dramatic AI-generated image of London skyline with burning buildings and smoke, featuring the iconic Big Ben and BBC logo in the foreground.AI image by Grok: BBC in complete meltdown.

This comes as BBC News has reported that Trump has sent a letter to the BBC threatening legal action.

UPDATE: Trump’s legal team demands a retraction from the BBC, threatening to sue for $1 Billion if the Broadcaster does not respond by Friday (14).

Text discussing legal action and potential damages involving President Trump and the BBC.

Read more:

JUST IN – Embattled BBC Head Tim Davie Resigns Over Trump Deceptive Documentary Edit and Widespread Bias – Chief News Executive Deborah Turness Also Out – UPDATE: Trump Reacts

The post Embattled BBC Apologizes to the Public for Misleading Edit of Trump J6 Speech, as US President Demands Retraction, Threatens Legal Action Seeking $1 Billion in Damages appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Continue Reading

Politics

“America Against America”: Iran Hardliners Emboldened by Mamdani’s Election Win

Published

2 hours ago

on

November 11, 2025

By

Image collage featuring a man in a "Free Palestine" hoodie, a political cartoon of Zohran Mamdani winning, and a video clip of Mamdani waving, all provided by MEMRI.Images taken from screenshots of Iranian sources, including the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Quds Force, courtesy of MEMRI, a media which opposes the Iranian regime.

Hardliners and conservative commentators in Iran celebrated Zohran Mamdani’s election as New York’s first Muslim mayor as a symbolic victory for Islam over the West and a sign of America’s decline.

State-affiliated outlets such as the conservative daily Hamshahri and Nour News framed the win as “America Against America,” interpreting it as proof of deep divisions within the U.S. establishment and the “collapse of the old order” marking the beginning of the end of “Trumpism.”

Conservative and state-run media emphasized that Mamdani’s win reflected both a moral and political defeat for America and Israel, with Asr-e Iran describing the election as a “crossing of the mental barriers” created after 9/11 and the erosion of the “Jewish lobby’s” power over U.S. politics.

The IRGC Qods Force Telegram channel called it “the defeat of Trump and Zionism” and “a joyful event” marking America’s changing identity.

In Iran’s parliament, lawmaker Abolghasem Jarareh declared that Mamdani’s victory “shows the strength of the slogan ‘Death to Israel,'” prompting fellow MPs to chant it on the floor.

Tehran mayor’s spokesman Abdolmotahhar Mohammadi praised the result as evidence that “the people of New York reject the influence of a genocidal regime in U.S. governance,” calling it a boost to pro-Palestinian and anti-racist movements worldwide.

Tehran University ideologue Foad Izadi described Mamdani’s rise as “the arrival of the message of 13 Aban in New York,” invoking the anniversary of the 1979 U.S. embassy takeover, a cornerstone of Iran’s revolutionary hostility toward Washington.

Former culture minister Mohammad Hosseini credited Mamdani’s campaign to inspiration from Imam Hossein and the spirit of Ashura.

For Iran’s hardliners, Mamdani’s Shiite background and anti-Israel rhetoric validated their long-standing belief that America is collapsing under its own hypocrisy and moral decay.

They celebrated the rise of a Shia Muslim to power in what they view as the center of Western capitalism, framing it as proof that Islam is advancing within the heart of the enemy’s political system.

Pro-regime commentators portrayed his win as both a political and spiritual triumph over the forces of “arrogance,” arguing that Mamdani’s faith, class-based rhetoric, and pro-Palestinian stance echo the Islamic Revolution’s principles of justice, resistance, and opposition to Zionism.

His victory was cast not merely as a local event but as a divine sign that the West’s liberal order is faltering and that the narrative of Islamic resistance is spreading inside the enemy’s own institutions.

According to The Tehran Times, Iranian commentators framed Mamdani’s election as proof that the American capitalist system is collapsing under its own contradictions.

The paper described his socialist platform, free childcare, rent freezes, public transit reform, and higher taxes on the wealthy, as a direct challenge to U.S. capitalism and evidence of growing anger among ordinary Americans toward an economic order that enriches elites while impoverishing workers.

It characterized the United States as a nation where “billionaires live next to people who can barely pay rent,” portraying Mamdani’s rise as evidence that Americans are rejecting inequality and searching for a fairer alternative to the capitalist model.

Founded in 1979 after the Islamic Revolution, The Tehran Times framed his election as part of a global political shift led by the oppressed and working classes against the “bullies and thugs in the White House.”

His criticism of Israel and defense of Palestinian rights were highlighted as marks of moral courage and proof that the Western narrative on Gaza is weakening.

Asr-e Iran presented the result as a sign of shifting attitudes toward Israel, particularly among younger Americans, and as evidence of the “Zionist lobby’s decline” in New York, home to the world’s second-largest Jewish population.

Mamdani’s pro-Palestinian stance was celebrated as a triumph for the “Axis of Resistance” and proof that revolutionary ideals are spreading into the heart of the United States.

By aligning his socialist and anti-Israel message with Iran’s own revolutionary rhetoric, The Tehran Times cast Mamdani’s victory not merely as a domestic American development but as a symbolic win for the oppressed, confirming that history is tilting toward Islam’s eventual victory over Western hegemony.

According to a report by the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs titled “Tehran Celebrates Mamdani: ‘A Political Earthquake, A Crack in the Pro-Israeli Hegemony,’” Iranian discourse now frames the Islamic Republic as a “demanding side” rather than a reactive one toward Washington.

Supreme Leader Khamenei’s remarks on the “Day of Struggle Against Global Arrogance” reaffirmed that the battle between America and Islam is ideological.

Mamdani’s victory is also expected to embolden the political left in America and across the West.

The Cleveland Jewish News reported that the win is being hailed as a watershed moment for the emerging “Red-Green” alliance between the radical left and Islamist movements, a coalition gaining traction in both Europe and the United States.

Fiamma Nirenstein, Italian-Israeli journalist, author and former politician, described Mamdani as the embodiment of this new ideological partnership: a politician who built his campaign on pro-Palestinian rhetoric, anti-Israel activism, and the rejection of Western democratic norms that once anchored New York’s Jewish and pluralistic identity.

Mamdani’s victory symbolizes how anti-Zionism has become a socially acceptable form of antisemitism, even in America’s most Jewish city.

His promises to cut ties with Israeli institutions, boycott city–Israel partnerships, and divest from Israeli funds are seen as steps toward normalizing hostility to the Jewish state under the banner of social justice.

Nirenstein warns that while Mamdani’s policies may or may not benefit ordinary New Yorkers, the greater cost will be moral and cultural, signaling a West drifting toward moral relativism, hostility to Israel, and the loss of its Judeo-Christian democratic foundations.

The post “America Against America”: Iran Hardliners Emboldened by Mamdani’s Election Win appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Continue Reading

Trending