The Lawfare Podcast: Hillary Hartley and David Eaves on 18F, Its Origin, Legacy, and Lessons

Release Date: April 4, 2025

Introduction

In this episode of The Lawfare Podcast, host Kevin Frazier engages in an in-depth conversation with Hilary Hartley, former Chief Digital Officer of Ontario and co-founder/deputy executive director of 18F, and David Eaves, Associate Professor of Digital Government and Co-Director of the Institute for Innovation and Public Purpose at University College London. The discussion centers on the rise and fall of 18F, a pivotal federal digital services team, its contributions to government digital transformation, the reasons behind its closure, and the lessons it imparts for future governmental digital initiatives.

Understanding 18F: Origin and Mission

18F was established as an internal consultancy within the U.S. federal government with the mission of building exceptional digital services. Hartley describes 18F as a unique entity shaped by its consultancy model, inspired by counterparts like the Government Digital Service (GDS) in the UK and the United States Digital Service (USDS).

• Hilary Hartley [04:35]: "18F was essentially a consultancy inside the US federal government trying to build great digital services."

The inception of 18F was influenced by a confluence of events in 2013, including the failure of healthcare.gov, a government shutdown, and the realization of the critical need for in-house digital capacity.

• Hartley [07:28]: "A lot of fellows had been hired into the General Services Administration... we started having serious conversations about what it would look like to get a group... to become permapefs. That was the seed of it."

David Eaves highlights the international context and the global shift toward digital government services, emphasizing that 18F's establishment was part of a broader movement to enhance governmental digital proficiency.

• David Eaves [10:59]: "Governments were finally wrestling with the fact that the Internet was a thing that people expected to get services on it."

Operational Excellence and Impact of 18F

18F was lauded for its transparent and collaborative approach, emphasizing open-source practices and user-centered design. By maintaining open blogs and GitHub repositories, 18F fostered transparency and encouraged public engagement.

• Hartley [18:15]: "Everything that we did started as a GitHub repository... open source was really at the heart of our value system."

David Eaves contrasts 18F's invitation-only collaboration model with USDS's more directive approach. While USDS often intervened in agencies experiencing crises, 18F operated as a "Peace Corps", partnering with agencies that willingly sought their expertise.

• David Eaves [24:42]: "They were the Peace Corps. They only went where they were invited... there were coalitions of the willing that wanted to change."

Key Projects:

• Cloud.gov: A platform-as-a-service for government use.
• Login.gov: A secure authentication service.
• Analytics.usa.gov: Providing transparency through data analytics.

These projects not only streamlined government operations but also significantly reduced costs and improved service delivery.

Comparison with USDS (DOTE)

The conversation distinguishes between 18F and USDS (DOTE), highlighting their differing methodologies and impacts. While USDS often "throws fire hats" into crises to force immediate solutions, 18F preferred a more collaborative and consensual approach, aligning closely with agency needs and fostering sustainable change.

• David Eaves [10:59]: "USDS... like the Marine Corps... they're here to help whether you like it or not."

In contrast, 18F's invited presence facilitated partnerships based on mutual consent, leading to more enduring and internally supported improvements.

• David Eaves [24:42]: "They went where there were coalitions of the willing that wanted to change."

Challenges and Opposition Facing 18F

Despite its successes, 18F faced significant resistance from various quarters:

1. Vendor Pushback: External vendors felt threatened by 18F's ability to deliver high-quality digital services in-house at a fraction of the cost, undermining their business models.

   • Hartley [29:48]: "There was always chatter about bringing these kids in from Silicon Valley who think they know better than us."

2. Media Criticism: The media often portrayed 18F as a naive group of tech enthusiasts disrupting government without fully understanding its complexities.

3. Internal Resentment: The spotlight on innovation teams like 18F sometimes bred resentment among other government employees who felt overlooked or overshadowed.

4. Political Climate: Shifts in administration and policies led to varying levels of support, ultimately contributing to 18F's downfall.

• Hartley [29:48]: "Private sector vendors were deeply concerned about its mere existence even before it had any successes."

Closure of 18F: Reasons and Implications

In March 2025, 18F was abruptly disbanded, a decision that had far-reaching implications for government digital services. The closure was attributed to a combination of political shifts, budgetary constraints, and persistent opposition from entrenched interests that viewed 18F's model as a threat to traditional vendor-dependent operations.

• David Eaves [34:49]: "Privacy concerns... a small degree in state capacity... team could have actually been serving that interest really, really well."

The demise of 18F not only halted ongoing projects but also eroded the in-house digital capacity that 18F had cultivated, potentially setting back government digital transformation efforts by years.

Lessons Learned and Recommendations for Future Initiatives

Both Hartley and Eaves emphasize the critical need for in-house digital expertise within government to ensure effective service delivery and policy implementation. They advocate for the resurrection of 18F-like initiatives with key reforms to prevent past pitfalls.

David Eaves' Recommendations:

1. Restart 18F: Re-establishing 18F is essential for building resilient digital infrastructure.

2. Reform Hiring Practices: Implement innovative hiring strategies to tap into both internal and external digital talent, ensuring diverse and capable teams.

   • David Eaves [40:39]: "We need to unleash people across the government. There's lots of great talent already inside the government that I think is constrained."

Hilary Hartley's Recommendations:

1. Insourcing Over Outsourcing: Reinforce the importance of internal capacity to understand and solve governmental problems without over-relying on external vendors.

2. Diversified Funding Models: Develop stable and varied funding streams to ensure the longevity and sustainability of digital service teams.

   • Hartley [42:14]: "We have to think about a diversified funding model. So we can't just pray that each administration is going to work us into appropriations and is going to give us money."

3. User-Centered Approaches: Continue fostering transparency and collaboration through open-source practices and user research to maintain trust and effectiveness.

Conclusion

The closure of 18F marks a significant setback for government digital transformation. However, the insights shared by Hilary Hartley and David Eaves underscore the indispensable role of in-house digital expertise and the need for sustained, collaborative efforts to modernize government services. Their advocacy for restarting 18F with strategic reforms offers a roadmap for future endeavors aimed at enhancing governmental efficiency, transparency, and responsiveness in the digital age.

Notable Quotes:

• Hilary Hartley [02:01]: "When you outsource your mission, that's when you're in trouble."

• David Eaves [10:59]: "We have to make this implicit skill an explicit skill of the government."

• Hilary Hartley [18:15]: "We were an open source team. Everything that we did started as a GitHub repository."

• David Eaves [24:42]: "They were the Peace Corps... there were coalitions of the willing that wanted to change."

• David Eaves [34:49]: "18F was challenging a consensus position that had emerged in many governments, which is that governments weren't really competent, they couldn't do things, and that things are best outsourced."

• Hilary Hartley [42:14]: "We have to think about a diversified funding model. So we can't just pray that each administration is going to work us into appropriations and is going to give us money."

For more insights and discussions on national security, law, and policy, visit www.lawfareblog.com.