Early in the year as President Barack Obama sought support for his $787 billion economic stimulus bill, he vowed unprecedented transparency. In February, the White House launched Recovery.gov as an easy-to-find, user-friendly Web site he said would clearly explain the expenditures.

So it was a bit of an inauspicious beginning when even Vice President Joe Biden forgot the new site's URL. During a Feb. 25 interview on CBS' "Early Show," Biden asked an off-camera aide for the "Web site number."

"I'm actually embarrassed," Biden said.

Recovery.gov had a three-part mission: explain the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act; show how, when and where the money is spent; and provide data that allows citizens to evaluate the act's progress and provide feedback. Three months after its launch, is the site fulfilling its missions?

Observers are registering early concerns and note that the site doesn't have much data yet.

The Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board, which manages the site, is hustling to prepare it by October for loads of new detailed information about how the money is being spent -- and who is getting it, Chairman Earl Devaney told a House panel May 5.

"Money is not the constraint; time is the constraint, and it’s unusual to say that in government,” Devaney told the House Science and Technology Committee.

It will be tough for the government to get the site ready for so much data, Eric Gillespie, chief information officer for Onvia, said at the May 5 House hearing. Onvia has launched Recovery.org, a site the company says is better equipped to do the job of Recovery.gov after years of development.

"It's really, really hard," Gillespie said in USA Today, "and it's taken us 10 years to figure out."

Observers say they have high expectations for the site and that it looks good and has a lot of potential. They laud the administration for attempting such a complex endeavor and for a commitment to transparency.

But it's not clear yet that the site will follow the money all the way to its final recipient, observers said.

The White House has signaled that it plans to stop monitoring the flow of cash once it ends up in the hands of states and local governments, said the top Republican on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

"After that, the money trail runs cold," California Rep. Darrell said in an April statement.

Watchdog groups are concerned that users ultimately might not see a full accounting of "whoever touches the money" -- all contractors included, said Gary Bass, executive director of OMB Watch, a Washington watchdog group.

Observers want to be able to use the site's data to determine, for example, whether money went from a city to the mayor's brother-in-law and whether there were competitive bids, Bass said. Watchdogs want to how much money urban areas get compared to the suburbs, and whether money is going to big companies or small businesses, Bass said.

Observers are hopeful that the site will track money as it is spent and organized in a variety of ways. Early indications suggest the site is not there yet, Bass said.

"We need [an interactive state] map that shows how much money has been spent and in what program area," Bass said. "I think most of the money that has been spent so far is Medicaid money. But we can't see that."

Design Vs. Content

The site itself has a relatively clean design if not much content yet.

"Some people think it's a pretty site -- it's got nice colors," Bass said. "But it's not a full-featured, great site yet."

Others have said the site does not do enough yet to provide a proper forum for whistleblowers, with no explanation about what kinds of information they can report, what protections they have, or how the information will be used, Danielle Brian, executive director of Project On Government Oversight, told a House panel in testimony on May 5.

"That is an invitation for problems," she said. "We know from our own experience you need to have very clear directions, a tracking system, and a way to communicate further with the whistleblower for this to work at all."

Observers also fret that the site won't clearly outline how money was wasted or used fraudulently or explain what the government planned to do about the lost money.

"They also have to highlight the negative," said David Williams, of Citizens Against Government Waste, a Washington watchdog group. "This should not be a PR tool for the administration."

Observers were reluctant to be sharply critical this early given the site's ambitious scope.

"We really haven't seen an undertaking like this before from the federal government -- we haven't ever had a stimulus package like this before," Williams said. "So this is a new frontier in a lot of ways."

The Obama administration plans site improvements and more data. In a recent weeklong comment period, site managers gathered 1,330 comments and 542 ideas for making the site better.

Biden, tasked with overseeing the stimulus spending, said the site would be filling with data this summer and that users would be able to search for project information by state and county.

"We hope, and it is our fervent desire, and our commitment that we will have the most comprehensive Web site that I think you've ever seen in government up and running, so you can look with precision at exactly what's being spent where," Biden said in the April 29 Salt Lake Tribune.

Promises Vs. Reality

Here's a glance at how the fledgling Web site is delivering on the promises listed in its mission:

Promise: Feature information on how the Act is working, tools to help hold the government accountable, and up-to-date data on the expenditure of funds.

Reality: It's hard to know exactly how up-to-date the data will be -- observers are hoping the site can keep up with the rapid pace of spending. The site promises that it "is currently working to provide an online complaint and hot line service" for users to report fraud and waste, but for now it provides links to agency inspector generals. Watchdog groups have raised concerns that the site's "Tell us your story" page does not offer good guidance for whistleblowers.

Promise: Feature information about federal grant awards and contracts as well as formula grant allocations.

Reality: The site has a "Featured News" section on the homepage that has been updated almost daily -- often multiple times a day -- mostly with government press releases about spending plans. Few are full of detailed spending data.

Promise: Provide data on how agencies are using the money, and eventually, prime recipients of federal funding will provide information on how they are using their federal funds.

Reality: The site lists agencies and how much money each agency has available and has spent. Clicking on the "available" and "spent" figures sends the user to a breakdown of those two expenditures. For example, a check on May 6 showed the Department of Transportation had spent just $31 million of $9.3 billion available. Another click on the $31 million figure revealed how that money was spent -- on four expenditures, including $10.3 million on "Highway Infrastructure Investment." But it doesn't further explain where or who spent it.

Promise: Use interactive graphics to illustrate where the money is going, as well as estimates of how many jobs are being created, and where they are located.

Reality: A colorful U.S. map allows users to click on a state for a general breakdown of expenditures. The list for Ohio, for instance, breaks out 47 line items that total $4.5 billion in spending. Examples: $1.3 million for child support enforcement and $23.9 million for educational technology state grants.

Promise: Feature a search capability to make it easier for users to track the funds.

Reality: It's early -- there's not much data to search. A search for "Illinois" yields seven hits, including the "Investments By State" page. A quick search for "Chicago" yields one press release about an immunization program.

Promise: Feature projections for how, when, and where the funds will be spent -- which states and sectors of the economy are due to receive what proportion of the funds. As money starts to flow, far more data will become available.

Reality: The site's U.S. maps offer estimates of how much money is to be spent and how many jobs could be saved/created in each state in the next two years. A general glance at which sectors of the economy would benefit (energy -- $43 billion; health care -- $59 billion) offers little detail yet.