Human Capital
DHS Faces Challenges In Implementing Its New Personnel System Gao ID: GAO-04-790 June 18, 2004DHS was provided with significant flexibility to design a modern human capital management system. Its proposed system has both precedent-setting implications for the executive branch and farreaching implications on how the department is managed. GAO reported in September 2003 that the effort to design the system was collaborative and consistent with positive elements of transformation. In February, March, and April 2004 we provided preliminary observations on the proposed human capital regulations. Congressional requesters asked GAO to describe the infrastructure necessary for strategic human capital management and to assess the degree to which DHS has that infrastructure in place, which includes an analysis of the progress DHS has made in implementing the recommendations from our September 2003 report. DHS generally agreed with the findings of our report and provided more current information that we incorporated. However, DHS was concerned about our use of results from a governmentwide survey gathered prior to the formation of the department. We use this data because it is the most current information available on the perceptions of employees currently in DHS and helps to illustrate the challenges facing DHS.
To date, DHS's actions in designing its human capital management system and its stated plans for future work on the system are helping to position the department for successful implementation. Nonetheless, the department is in the early stages of developing the infrastructure needed for implementing its new human capital management system. DHS has begun strategic human capital planning efforts at the headquarters level since the release of the department's overall strategic plan and the publication of proposed regulations for its new human capital management system. Strategic human capital planning efforts can enable DHS to remain aware of and be prepared for current and future needs as an organization. However, this will be more difficult because DHS has not yet been systematic or consistent in gathering relevant data on the successes or shortcomings of legacy component human capital approaches or current and future workforce challenges. Efforts are now under way to collect detailed human capital information and design a centralized information system so that such data can be gathered and reported at the departmentwide level. DHS and Office of Personnel Management leaders have consistently underscored their personal commitment to the design process. Continued leadership is necessary to marshal the capabilities required for the successful implementation of the department's new human capital management system. Sustained and committed leadership is required on multiple levels: securing appropriate resources for the design, implementation, and evaluation of the human capital management system; communicating with employees and their representatives about the new system and providing opportunities for feedback; training employees on the details of the new system; and continuing opportunities for employees and their representatives to participate in the design and implementation of the system. In its proposed regulations, DHS outlines its intention to implement key safeguards. For example, the DHS performance management system must comply with the merit system principles and avoid prohibited personnel practices; provide a means for employee involvement in the design and implementation of the system; and overall, be fair, credible, and transparent. The department also plans to align individual performance management with organizational goals and provide for reasonableness reviews of performance management decisions through its Performance Review Boards.
GAO-04-790, Human Capital: DHS Faces Challenges In Implementing Its New Personnel System
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-04-790
entitled 'Human Capital: DHS Faces Challenges In Implementing Its New
Personnel System' which was released on July 19, 2004.
This text file was formatted by the U.S. General Accounting Office
(GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part of a
longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this
document to Webmaster@gao.gov.
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this
material separately.
Report to Congressional Requesters:
June 2004:
HUMAN CAPITAL:
DHS Faces Challenges In Implementing Its New Personnel System:
[Hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-04-790]:
GAO Highlights:
Highlights of GAO-04-790, a report to congressional requesters
Why GAO Did This Study:
DHS was provided with significant flexibility to design a modern human
capital management system. Its proposed system has both precedent-
setting implications for the executive branch and far-reaching
implications on how the department is managed. GAO reported in
September 2003 that the effort to design the system was collaborative
and consistent with positive elements of transformation. In February,
March, and April 2004 we provided preliminary observations on the
proposed human capital regulations.
Congressional requesters asked GAO to describe the infrastructure
necessary for strategic human capital management and to assess the
degree to which DHS has that infrastructure in place, which includes
an analysis of the progress DHS has made in implementing the
recommendations from our September 2003 report.
DHS generally agreed with the findings of our report and provided more
current information that we incorporated. However, DHS was concerned
about our use of results from a governmentwide survey gathered prior to
the formation of the department. We use this data because it is the
most current information available on the perceptions of employees
currently in DHS and helps to illustrate the challenges facing DHS.
What GAO Found:
To date, DHS‘s actions in designing its human capital management system
and its stated plans for future work on the system are helping to
position the department for successful implementation. Nonetheless,
the department is in the early stages of developing the infrastructure
needed for implementing its new human capital management system.
* DHS has begun strategic human capital planning efforts at the
headquarters level since the release of the department‘s overall
strategic plan and the publication of proposed regulations for its new
human capital management system. Strategic human capital planning
efforts can enable DHS to remain aware of and be prepared for current
and future needs as an organization. However, this will be more
difficult because DHS has not yet been systematic or consistent in
gathering relevant data on the successes or shortcomings of legacy
component human capital approaches or current and future workforce
challenges. Efforts are now under way to collect detailed human capital
information and design a centralized information system so that such
data can be gathered and reported at the departmentwide level.
* DHS and Office of Personnel Management leaders have consistently
underscored their personal commitment to the design process. Continued
leadership is necessary to marshal the capabilities required for the
successful implementation of the department‘s new human capital
management system. Sustained and committed leadership is required on
multiple levels: securing appropriate resources for the design,
implementation, and evaluation of the human capital management system;
communicating with employees and their representatives about the new
system and providing opportunities for feedback; training employees on
the details of the new system; and continuing opportunities for
employees and their representatives to participate in the design and
implementation of the system.
* In its proposed regulations, DHS outlines its intention to implement
key safeguards. For example, the DHS performance management system must
comply with the merit system principles and avoid prohibited personnel
practices; provide a means for employee involvement in the design and
implementation of the system; and overall, be fair, credible, and
transparent. The department also plans to align individual performance
management with organizational goals and provide for reasonableness
reviews of performance management decisions through its Performance
Review Boards.
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-04-790.
To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on
the link above. For more information, contact J. Christopher Mihm at
(202) 512-6806 or mihmj@gao.gov.
[End of section]
Contents:
Letter:
Results In Brief:
Background:
DHS Is Beginning Strategic Human Capital Planning Efforts:
Continued Leadership Is Necessary to Marshal the Capabilities Required
for Successful Implementation:
DHS Proposes Implementing Key Safeguards:
Conclusions:
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:
Appendixes:
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology:
Scope:
Methodology:
Appendix II: Criteria Used for Evaluation:
Strategic Human Capital Planning:
Key Capabilities for Implementing Human Capital Approaches:
Institutionalizing Performance Management Safeguards:
Appendix III: Comments from the Department of Homeland Security:
Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments:
GAO Contact:
Acknowledgments:
Figure:
Figure 1: The Development of the DHS Human Capital System:
Letter June 18, 2004:
The Honorable George V. Voinovich:
Chairman, Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the
Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia:
Committee on Governmental Affairs:
United States Senate:
The Honorable Jo Ann Davis:
Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Civil Service and Agency Organization:
Committee on Government Reform:
United States House of Representatives:
The creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is an
historic opportunity for the federal government to fundamentally
transform how the nation will protect itself from terrorism and other
threats. DHS is in the early stages of transforming and integrating a
disparate group of agencies with multiple missions, values, and
cultures into a strong and effective cabinet department. Together with
this unique opportunity, however, comes significant risk to the nation
if this transformation is not implemented successfully. In fact, we
designated this implementation and transformation as high risk in
January 2003.[Footnote 1]
On February 20, 2004, the Secretary of DHS and the Director of the
Office of Personnel Management (OPM) released proposed regulations for
DHS's new human capital system. Among other things, the proposal
establishes a pay for performance system, a new adverse actions and
appeals process, and new labor relations rules. The regulations
provided the broad outline of the DHS proposed system. As the system
evolves, critical issues, such as how DHS will link individual
performance expectations to DHS's mission and goals, how it will define
performance expectations to promote individual accountability, and how
it will continue to incorporate adequate safeguards to ensure fairness,
will need to be addressed. Such detailed implementation policies and
procedures will need to be developed in a transparent and inclusive
manner as the system evolves.
In light of the challenge to establish a modern strategic human capital
management system in the department, you asked that we undertake a
series of engagements to assess and assist DHS in its implementation
efforts. As agreed with your office, this is the third of several
studies in which we examine how DHS begins to implement its new human
capital system. Our first report, issued in September 2003, described
the process DHS put in place to design its human capital system and
involve employees and analyzed the extent to which the process
reflected what we found to be important elements of successful
transformations.[Footnote 2] We found that, to date, the design effort
was collaborative and facilitated participation of employees from all
levels of the department. The effort also generally reflected what we
have found to be important elements of effective transformations.
Second, we provided our preliminary observations on selected major
provisions of the proposed human capital regulations in a testimony and
two related items of correspondence providing answers to post-hearing
questions.[Footnote 3] We found that many of the basic principles
underlying the proposed regulations were consistent with proven
approaches to strategic human capital management, and identified parts
of the system that deserved further consideration.
As agreed with your offices, this third study describes the
infrastructure necessary for strategic human capital management and
assesses the degree to which DHS has that infrastructure in place,
including progress DHS has made since our September 2003 report. More
details on our scope and methodology can be found in appendix I and
criteria used to evaluate the department's efforts are summarized in
appendix II. We interviewed officials from DHS headquarters who are
involved in designing the new human capital system. Human resource
leaders from the five largest legacy components within DHS were also
interviewed: the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the organizations formerly known as
the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) and the U.S. Customs
Service (Customs), and the U.S. Coast Guard. This work was conducted
from March 2003 through March 2004 in Washington, D.C., and in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.
The analysis of DHS's effort to design a strategic human capital
management system can be particularly instructive for future human
capital management and integration initiatives within specific units of
DHS. We have consistently supported the need for government
transformation and the concept of modernizing federal human capital
policies, as underscored in recent testimonies and our January 2003
report that described why strategic human capital management remains a
governmentwide high-risk area.[Footnote 4] The DHS effort can also
prove instructive as other agencies implement changes to their human
capital management systems.
Results In Brief:
DHS is in the early stages of developing the infrastructure needed for
implementing its new human capital management system. At a minimum,
this infrastructure includes a strategic human capital planning process
that integrates the agency's human capital approaches with program
goals, desired outcomes, and mission; the capabilities to effectively
develop and implement a new human capital system; and a modern,
effective, and credible performance management system that includes a
set of institutional safeguards, including reasonable transparency and
appropriate accountability mechanisms to ensure the fair, effective,
and credible implementation of the new system. DHS's infrastructure
development efforts include the following:
* DHS has begun strategic human capital planning efforts at the
headquarters level since the release of the department's overall
strategic plan and the publication of proposed regulations for its new
human capital management system. In comparison, the five legacy
agencies we studied each engage in strategic human capital planning
activities, but their efforts vary in their level of detail, including
the time frames covered by the plans and the degree to which future
skill and competency needs are identified. DHS has not yet
systematically gathered relevant human capital data at the headquarters
level. However, efforts are now under way to collect detailed human
capital information and design a centralized information system so that
such data can be gathered and reported at the departmentwide level.
These strategic human capital planning efforts can enable DHS to remain
aware of and be prepared for current and future needs as an
organization.
* DHS and OPM leaders have consistently underscored their personal
commitment to the design process. Sustained and committed leadership is
required on multiple levels: securing appropriate resources for the
design, implementation, and evaluation of the human capital management
system; communicating with employees and their representatives about
the new system and providing opportunities for feedback; training
employees on the details of the new system; and continuing
opportunities for employees and their representatives to participate in
the design and implementation of the system. In light of this
challenge, DHS formed three teams to implement the human capital
regulations, each of which are co-led by professional staff from DHS
headquarters and a component agency.
* In its proposed regulations, DHS outlines its intention to implement
key safeguards. For example, the DHS performance management system must
comply with the merit system principles and avoid prohibited personnel
practices; provide a means for employee involvement in the design and
implementation of the system; and overall, be fair, credible, and
transparent. The department also plans to align individual performance
management with organizational goals and provide for reasonableness
reviews of performance management decisions through its Performance
Review Boards.
The proposed DHS human capital management system has both significant
precedent-setting implications for the executive branch and far-
reaching implications for how the department is managed. However, how
it is done, when it is done, and the basis on which it is done can make
all the difference in whether such efforts are successful. To date,
DHS's actions in designing its human capital management system and its
stated plans for future work on the system are helping to position the
department for successful implementation.
In commenting on a draft of this report, DHS generally agreed with its
findings. DHS comments provided more current information on
implementation timelines and described further research conducted by
the design teams between April and September 2003, which we have
incorporated. In addition, DHS raised concerns about our use of data
from the OPM governmentwide Federal Human Capital Survey (FHCS) since
the survey was administered before the formation of DHS. Since the
administration of the survey, DHS notes a significant amount of change
has been made in the department. We agree that the department is making
progress in designing its human capital system and outline in this
report where the department is making strides. This report notes that
the FHCS was conducted during the same time frame that the
administration proposed legislation to form DHS. FHCS data are the most
current information available on the perceptions of employees currently
employed by DHS and are valuable because of their illustration of the
challenges the department faces. DHS provided additional technical
comments, which were incorporated where appropriate. Comments from DHS
are provided in full in appendix III.
Background:
Mission and Organization of DHS:
The DHS strategic plan, released on February 23, 2004, includes the
following mission statement: "We will lead the unified national effort
to secure America. We will prevent and deter terrorist attacks and
protect against and respond to threats and hazards to the nation. We
will ensure safe and secure borders, welcome lawful immigrants and
visitors, and promote the free-flow of commerce." The strategic plan
further identifies seven strategic goals: awareness, prevention,
protection, response, recovery, service, and organizational
excellence.
DHS is generally organized into four mission-related directorates:
Border and Transportation Security, Emergency Preparedness and
Response, Science and Technology, and Information Analysis and
Infrastructure Protection. These directorates include the following
legacy agencies:
* The Border and Transportation Security directorate consolidates the
major border security and transportation operations under one roof,
including legacy Customs, parts of the legacy INS, TSA, the Federal Law
Enforcement Training Center, the Federal Protective Service, the Office
for Domestic Preparedness from the Department of Justice (DOJ), and
part of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service (APHIS). This directorate includes the newly formed
Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Bureau of
Customs and Border Protection (CBP).
* The Emergency Preparedness and Response (EPR) directorate integrates
domestic disaster preparedness training and government disaster
response and includes FEMA, the Strategic National Stockpile, the
National Disaster Medical System, the Nuclear Incident Response Team,
the Domestic Emergency Support Teams from DOJ, and the National
Domestic Preparedness Office from the Federal Bureau of Investigation
(FBI).
* The Science and Technology directorate coordinates scientific and
technological advantages for securing the homeland and includes the
Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Countermeasures
Programs, the Environmental Measurements Laboratory, the National Bio-
Weapons Defense Analysis Center, and the Plum Island Animal Disease
Center.
* The Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection directorate
accesses and analyzes intelligence, law enforcement data, and other
information involving threats to homeland security and evaluates
vulnerabilities from state and local agencies, the private sector, and
federal agencies such as the Central Intelligence Agency, FBI, and the
National Security Agency. It includes the Critical Infrastructure
Assurance Office, the Federal Computer Incident Response Center, the
National Communications System, the National Infrastructure Protection
Center, and the energy security and assurance program activities of the
Department of Energy.
* In addition to the mission directorates, the Management Directorate,
led by the Undersecretary for Management, is responsible for
integrating the activities of the Chief Financial Officer, the Chief
Procurement Officer, the Chief Human Capital Officer, the Chief
Information Officer, and the Chief of Administrative Services.
In addition to the four mission-related directorates, the U.S. Secret
Service and the U.S. Coast Guard remain intact as distinct entities in
DHS. The Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services, composed of
legacy INS adjudications and benefits programs, reports to the Deputy
Secretary.
DHS's People:
DHS has just under 158,000 civilian employees.[Footnote 5] Of the
civilian employees, a vast majority transferred from seven
organizations: TSA, INS, Customs, FEMA, the U.S. Coast Guard, the
Secret Service, and APHIS. Of the civilian employees who transferred
from these seven organizations, approximately 90 percent are stationed
outside the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area. These employees hold
positions ranging from inspectors, investigators, police and
intelligence to attorneys and administrative services.
According to OPM, just over 49,000, or just under one-third, of DHS
civilian employees are represented by unions. This includes 16
different unions divided into 75 separate bargaining units. The 3
unions representing the largest number of employees are the American
Federation of Government Employees, the National Treasury Employees
Union, and the National Association of Agricultural Employees.
Process Used to Design the Human Capital System:
The design process of the DHS human capital management system included
DHS and OPM employees and union representatives. Figure 1 describes the
development of the DHS human capital system.
Figure 1: The Development of the DHS Human Capital System:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
DHS Is Beginning Strategic Human Capital Planning Efforts:
Using the department's strategic plan as a starting point, DHS recently
began drafting a strategic human capital plan and a more detailed
workforce plan for the department. One of the goals of the strategic
plan, organizational excellence, makes it a priority for the agency to
value its people and create a culture that promotes a common identity,
innovation, mutual respect, trust, accountability, and teamwork. To
support the accomplishment of this goal, the department has an
objective focused on ensuring effective recruitment, development,
compensation, succession management, and leadership of a diverse
workforce to provide optimal service at a responsible cost. While the
plan broadly states a few strategies that could be used to achieve this
objective, it does not identify the skills needed, resources required,
or timetables associated with the strategies. Additional programmatic
objectives within the strategic plan will require human capital
approaches to ensure they are realized.
The Director for Human Resources Policy and the Senior Advisor for
Human Resources Policy said that the strategic human capital plan will
be completed later this spring and will include goals for transforming
the human capital management of the department over the next 5 years.
These same officials report that this will be a "living document" and
expect that revisions will be made as they learn more about the human
capital needs across the department.
Below the headquarters level, strategic human capital planning of
different levels of detail is being done in the five legacy components
we studied. These plans vary in terms of the time frame covered by the
plan and the degree to which future skill and competency needs are
identified.
* In July 2003, FEMA/EPR released a 5-year strategic human capital plan
that identified the challenges it faces, improvement initiatives, and
outcome measures for the initiatives. A timeline and the unit
responsible for implementation are also identified. Part of FEMA's
"Model for Success" articulates the need to identify strategic
competencies. The plan states that FEMA intends to integrate its
competency management system with future workforce planning efforts.
According to agency officials, FEMA was invited to present its
Competency Assessment System to the DHS Human Capital Management Forum
and OPM.
* Customs/CBP workforce planning efforts are currently short-term and
tactical in nature. The component does not have a consolidated plan
that identifies human capital needs or strategies and the planning
horizon is less than 1 year in duration. Instead, CBP informally sets
annual targets for various human capital activities that are
articulated in various agency meetings and memoranda. Progress towards
the targets is tracked in a biweekly report that includes information
such as changes in staffing levels, retirement eligibilities, and the
gender breakdown of the workforce.
* INS/ICE officials reported that they used workforce plans to respond
to Congressional mandates in managing large-scale recruiting and
retention efforts, beginning in 1996. It released a 3-year plan in June
1996 to manage this growth, placing a priority on deployment,
recruiting, hiring, and training strategies. Since the original release
of the plan, it has been updated annually through individual memoranda
and charts reflecting current human capital data. According to an
agency official, the component is working with a contractor to identify
a baseline understanding of workforce demographics and skills and
determine future workforce requirements.
* TSA hired a consultant in September 2003 to conduct a study of
screener staffing levels at the nation's commercial airports in an
effort to right-size and stabilize its screener workforce. Among the
tasks the contractor is to complete are the implementation of a
staffing analysis model to be used as a management tool to determine
daily and weekly staffing levels and the deployment of the model to
commercial airports nationwide.
* The Coast Guard has a 5-year strategic human capital plan covering
the period 2001 to 2005 that integrates approaches for managing
military, civilian, and reserve employees. Identified within the plan
are current challenges and desired characteristics for the workforce of
the future. Strategies are adjusted annually and the objectives and
approaches are continuously evaluated for their impact so that
midcourse corrections can be made if necessary, according to an agency
official. The Coast Guard plans to do a major update of its plan once
the department's human capital system is completed.
DHS headquarters has not yet been systematic or consistent in gathering
relevant data on the successes or shortcomings of legacy component
human capital approaches or current and future workforce challenges,
despite the potential usefulness of this information to strategic human
capital planning activities. Efforts are now under way to gather such
data. During the design process, from April through September 2003, the
subgroups that identified options for the human capital system gathered
an extensive amount of research on innovative practices outside of DHS
and basic demographic data on employees in the department. DHS also
reported that it gathered policy documents from legacy components and
specifically noted meeting with TSA, Coast Guard, legacy Customs, and
FEMA to understand their policies and practices. However, at a briefing
for DHS stakeholders in August 2003, DHS and OPM officials said that
they did not evaluate the successes or shortcomings of legacy agency
human capital approaches or current and future workforce challenges,
nor had they analyzed the results from the OPM FHCS.
The department is now beginning to collect more detailed, internal
human capital data, according to one DHS official. With the support of
a contractor, focus groups are planned for this summer so that human
capital challenges can be identified and validated. According to the
same official, the Chief Human Capital Officer is holding monthly
meetings to spotlight the successful practices of components within the
department and disseminate best practices. Moving forward, the
department plans to design a centralized information system so that
human capital data can be gathered and reported at the corporate level.
With this information, the department will be better positioned to
conduct data-driven evaluations of the successes and shortcomings of
its new human capital management system. DHS documents indicate that
the department is committed to an ongoing comprehensive evaluation of
the effectiveness of the human capital system. The department described
efforts to identify human capital metrics and an intent to use employee
surveys to gauge employee satisfaction and needs. We testified that DHS
should consider doing evaluations that are broadly modeled on the
evaluation requirements of the OPM demonstration projects.[Footnote 6]
Under the demonstration project authority, OPM requires agencies to
evaluate and periodically report on results, implementation of the
demonstration project, cost and benefits, impacts on veterans and other
equal employment opportunity groups, adherence to merit system
principles, and the extent to which the lessons from the project can be
applied governmentwide. A set of balanced measures addressing a range
of results and customer, employee, and external partner issues may also
prove beneficial. An evaluation such as this would facilitate
congressional oversight; allow for any midcourse corrections; assist
DHS in benchmarking its progress with other efforts; and provide for
documenting best practices and sharing lessons learned with employees;
stakeholders; other federal agencies; and the public. We have reported
on key principles for effective strategic human capital planning and
the importance of data-driven human capital decision making (see app.
II).[Footnote 7]
Continued Leadership Is Necessary to Marshal the Capabilities Required
for Successful Implementation:
DHS and OPM leaders have consistently underscored their personal
commitment to the design process and speak openly in support of it. As
we have reported, this is a very positive start. DHS will need to
sustain this effort to overcome the views reflected in the OPM
FHCS,[Footnote 8] administered prior to the formation of DHS, in which
employees now in the department responded with the following
perceptions:
* 28 percent believe that leaders generate high levels of motivation
and commitment in the workforce, compared to a governmentwide response
of 36 percent;[Footnote 9]
* 35 percent hold their leaders in high regard, compared to a
governmentwide response of 43 percent; and:
* 43 percent believe their organization's leaders maintain high
standards of honesty and integrity, compared to a governmentwide
response of 47 percent.
Resources. DHS is recognizing that there are up-front costs to design
and implementation and that its components are starting from different
places regarding the maturity of their human capital management
systems. Members of the Senior Review Advisory Committee agreed during
their deliberations that creating the new human capital management
system will require a substantial investment, and identified this as a
core principle for the design of the system. Additionally, during the
DHS focus groups, employees expressed an interest in increasing the
resources available for training and professional development, and
noted the importance of having an adequate budget for the performance
management system in particular.[Footnote 10]
The administration recognizes the importance of funding this major
reform effort and has requested, for fiscal year 2005, $102.5 million
to fund training, the development of the performance management and
compensation system, and contractor support, and over $10 million for a
performance pay fund in the first phase of implementation (affecting
about 8,000 employees) to recognize those who meet or exceed
expectations.[Footnote 11] Approximately $20 million was also requested
to fund the development of a departmental human resources information
technology system. While the investments are important to the ultimate
success of DHS's efforts, it is equally important to recognize that
certain costs are one-time in nature and, therefore, should not be
built into the base of DHS's budget for future years.
Communication. In our September 2003 report, we commended the
structured approach the department developed to communicate with
stakeholders on the human capital system and recommended that the
Secretary of DHS ensure that the message communicated across the
department was consistent. Officials we interviewed in five legacy
components of the department agreed that communication from DHS
headquarters on the human capital system has been consistent. In
particular, three noted that the information contained in the weekly
departmental newsletter is helpful. As an example of the consistency of
the communication on the new human capital management system, between
December 5, 2003 and February 27, 2004, employees were assured in five
different newsletters that the new human capital system would not lead
to a loss in pay or benefits and four different newsletters reported
that no layoffs would result due to the implementation of the new
system. To ensure the consistency of the message, a Communications
Coordination Team, which includes members from across the department,
has been established to disseminate information and promote a clear
understanding of the new human capital system. This team meets biweekly
or weekly and is co-chaired by the Director of Internal Communications
and the Director of Human Resource Management.
In our September report we also recommended that the department
maximize opportunities for two-way communication and employee
involvement through the completion of the design process and
implementation, and noted that special emphasis should be placed on
seeking the feedback and buy-in of front-line employees in the field.
Opportunities for two-way communication were limited between the
conclusion of the town hall meetings in July 2003 and the publishing of
the proposed regulations in February 2004. The primary means for
employees to provide feedback was through the Human Resources Design
Team e-mail box. Employees and the general public were also allowed to
participate in the public comment period of the Senior Review Advisory
Committee meetings in October 2003. While the department continued to
consult intermittently with leaders of the three major unions during
this period, one agency official noted that the department does not
have a similar mechanism in place to obtain feedback from nonunionized
employees. One action taken to overcome this challenge was the effort
to notify employees how to comment on the proposed regulations, which
was communicated in six different newsletters between February 13 and
March 22, 2004. DHS received over 3,400 comments on its proposed
regulations, in part due to its efforts to encourage employees to
submit comments on the system.
Since the release of the proposed regulations, DHS has provided
information to employees through a variety of formats. For example, a
link to the proposed human capital regulations was placed in a
prominent position on the intranet home page of the department for easy
access. On February 13, 2004, a satellite broadcast outlined the major
features of the human capital management system, reaching approximately
500 DHS locations around the country. During the broadcast, employees
submitted questions, and those unable to view the broadcast could
access it through the DHS Internet Web site. Additionally, a senior
leadership conference was held, in part, to brief executives on the
proposed system. The department has developed tool kits to provide
information to both executives and line managers about the changes and
to provide them with talking points for discussion with their employees
and developed a quad-fold to distribute to line employees containing
questions and answers about the new system. Town hall meetings that
were held around the country to mark the one-year anniversary of the
department included discussions about the proposed human capital
system. Finally, between February 13 and March 22, 2004, the time in
which employees could submit comments on the proposed regulations, the
weekly DHS newsletter included answers to commonly asked questions and
details on what would be changed and remain the same under the
proposal.
The success of DHS communication efforts is especially important, given
employee responses to the OPM FHCS:
* 40 percent report that managers promote communication among different
work units, which is less than the governmentwide response of 51
percent;
* 65 percent feel they have enough information to do their job well,
which is less than the governmentwide response of 71 percent; and:
* 37 percent are satisfied with the information they receive from
management on what is going on in the organization, which is less than
the governmentwide response of 45 percent.
Training. Members of the Senior Review Advisory Committee identified
training and development as a critical component for implementing the
human capital system. Furthermore, participants in the DHS focus groups
expressed a need for training and professional development
opportunities in a number of areas, including general supervisory
capabilities, assessing employee performance, labor-management
relations, and alternative dispute resolution. The DHS proposal
correctly recognizes that a substantial investment in training is a key
aspect of implementing a performance management system. The need for
in-depth and varied training will continue as the system is
implemented, as indicated by results from the OPM FHCS in which 53
percent of respondents believe supervisors/team leaders in their work
unit encourage their development at work, which is less than the
governmentwide response of 59 percent. Furthermore, 47 percent feel
they are given a real opportunity to improve their skills, which is
less than the governmentwide response of 57 percent. Our recently
released guides for agencies to help ensure investments in training and
development are targeted strategically and could prove helpful to DHS
as it develops its training and development programs.[Footnote 12]
Employee Participation. The Undersecretary for Management has already
noted her commitment to move forward on implementing the human capital
system in a collaborative way, and reiterated that support in a
December 19, 2003 memorandum to DHS employees regarding the human
capital system. Regardless of whether it is a part of collective
bargaining, involving employees in such important decisions as how they
are deployed and how work is assigned is critical to the successful
operations of the department. This is likely to be a significant
challenge for the department in light of employee responses to the OPM
FHCS in which 28 percent of DHS employees indicated a feeling of
personal empowerment, which is fewer than the governmentwide response
of 40 percent. Additionally, 44 percent of DHS employees reported
satisfaction with their involvement in decisions that affect their
work, compared to 53 percent governmentwide.
Implementation Teams. DHS formed three implementation teams at the end
of February 2004 to support the design and implementation of the human
capital management system because of the multiple areas that require
management attention. This includes a Training and Communications team;
a Pay, Performance, and Classification team; and a Labor Relations,
Adverse Actions, and Appeals team. According to agency officials, the
teams will initially focus their efforts on data collection and project
planning activities until the department issues interim final
regulations for the human capital management system, at which time the
teams will begin to draft departmental policies to support
implementation. Agency officials reported that, as they move forward,
they will pay particular attention to how their decisions may affect
other human capital approaches across the department.
The mission of the Training and Communications team is to develop
comprehensive communication and training plans, coordinate and manage
the development of training, coordinate the delivery of training, and
to disseminate information related to the design and implementation of
the department's human capital system. The co-leads of the team said
their work largely depends on the efforts of the other two
implementation teams and acknowledged the concerns raised by employees
on the need for training, especially for departmental managers. They
also said they plan to rely on the training capacity already in the
department. A second goal is for the team to ensure that communication
with employees about the new human capital management system is
coordinated and consistent across components and to ensure that avenues
are available for DHS employees to communicate ideas to the
implementation teams.
The mission of the Pay, Performance, and Classification team is to
design departmental policies, procedures, guidance, implementation
instructions, and evaluation criteria so that components can implement
new systems in the areas of pay, performance management, and
classification. The team is beginning its work by gathering information
in these areas from departmental components and defining the system
objectives. Officials noted this would be a significant challenge
because of differences in the types of data collected, the varied
manner in which the data are stored, and uneven levels of data
reliability. As the team develops its proposals, it plans to use
advisory groups to evaluate the efficacy of draft policies. Particular
attention will be paid to ensuring there are adequate safeguards in the
classification, pay, and performance management systems, according to
officials.
The mission of the Labor Relations, Adverse Actions, and Appeals team
is to prepare rules, regulations, policies, procedures, guidance,
implementing instructions, and evaluation criteria for the department
to deploy new systems in these areas. The co-leads noted that they
intend to work collaboratively to design systems that encourage
cooperation. These officials reported that their initial tasks are to
explore how to staff different boards and panels identified in the
proposed regulations and determine how to transition pending cases to
the new system. They further plan to identify elements that require
departmental-level guidance, identify elements where policy variation
is appropriate among departmental components, and collect data on
historical levels of grievances and appeals to forecast the potential
workload once the department is transitioned to the new system.
The composition of the implementation teams sends an important signal.
Each of the three implementation teams is co-led by professional staff
from DHS headquarters and a component agency. As of mid-March 2004,
officials noted the membership of the teams was still evolving, but was
composed mainly of human capital professionals. Agency officials noted
that decisions had not yet been made about the level of involvement of
union officials. These same officials reported that OPM staff would
serve as advisers when needed as opposed to participating on a full-
time basis, and noted an intention to pull together groups of employees
to serve as "sounding boards and challenge groups" throughout the
process. Contractors will be integrated with the teams to provide
project management and other support.
As DHS moves forward, it may find helpful a set of key capabilities
that our work has found to be central to the use of human capital
authorities.[Footnote 13] These practices center on effective planning
and targeted investments, employee training and participation, and
accountability and cultural change (see app. II).
DHS Proposes Implementing Key Safeguards:
In its proposed regulations, DHS outlines its intention to implement
key safeguards that we have found essential to implementing performance
management systems in a fair, effective, and credible manner. For
example, the DHS performance management system must comply with the
merit system principles and avoid prohibited personnel practices;
provide a means for employee involvement in the design and
implementation of the system; and overall, be fair, credible, and
transparent. The department also plans to align individual performance
management with organizational goals and provide for reasonableness
reviews of performance management decisions through its Performance
Review Boards. Moreover, employees and their union representatives
played a role in shaping the design of the proposed systems. These
safeguards are generally consistent with our work identifying key
practices that leading public sector organizations here and abroad have
used in their performance management systems to link organizational
goals to individual performance and create a "line of sight" between an
individual's activities and organizational results (see app.
II).[Footnote 14]
Our February 2004 testimony identified additional steps DHS could take
to build safeguards into its revised performance management
system.[Footnote 15] For example, we suggested that DHS commit to
publishing the results of the performance management process to assure
reasonable transparency and provide appropriate accountability
mechanisms in connection with the results of the performance management
process. This can include publishing overall results of performance
management and individual pay decisions while protecting individual
confidentiality and reporting periodically on internal assessments and
employee survey results relating to the performance management system.
Publishing the results in a manner that protects individual
confidentiality can provide employees with the information they need to
better understand the performance management system.
Conclusions:
The proposed DHS human capital management system has both significant
precedent-setting implications for the executive branch and far-
reaching implications on how the department is managed. However, how it
is done, when it is done, and the basis on which it is done can make
all the difference in whether such efforts are successful. To date,
DHS's actions in designing its human capital management system and its
stated plans for future work on the system are positioning the
department for successful implementation. Looking forward, DHS will
need to make continued progress in a number of key areas including the
following.
* Strategic workforce planning and the gathering of relevant human
capital data --Strategic human capital planning activities can enable
the department to capitalize on the strengths of its workforce and
address challenges in a manner that is clearly linked to achieving
DHS's mission and goals. The potential for human capital planning
activities to positively impact the department, however, depends on its
gathering of valid, reliable data on workforce demographics and the
successes and shortcomings of new approaches at the headquarters level.
* Communication and training --As we previously noted, communicating
with employees and their representatives about the new system and
providing opportunities for feedback, placing a special emphasis on
reaching out to line employees in the field, can facilitate gaining
employee buy-in to the new human capital management system.
Additionally, the delivery of training on the new system can enable
employees to understand their rights and how the agency will use its
authority.
* Safeguards --Publishing the results of the performance management
process can provide employees with the information they need to better
understand the performance management system and make the system more
transparent.
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:
In commenting on a draft of this report, DHS generally agreed with its
findings. DHS comments provided more current information on
implementation timelines and described further research conducted by
the design teams between April and September 2003, which we have
incorporated. In addition, DHS raised concerns about our use of data
from the OPM governmentwide FHCS since the survey was administered
before the formation of DHS. Since the administration of the survey,
DHS notes a significant amount of change has been made in the
department. We agree that the department is making progress in
designing its human capital system and outline in this report where the
department is making strides. This report notes that the FHCS was
conducted during the same time frame that the administration proposed
legislation to form DHS. FHCS data are the most current information
available on the perceptions of employees currently employed by DHS and
are valuable because of their illustration of the challenges the
department faces. DHS provided additional technical comments, which
were incorporated where appropriate. Comments from DHS are provided in
full in appendix III.
As agreed with your offices, unless you publicly release its contents
earlier, we plan no further distribution of this report until 30 days
from its date. At that time, we will send copies of this report to the
Chairman and Ranking Minority Member, Senate Committee on Governmental
Affairs; the Chairman and Ranking Minority Member, House Committee on
Government Reform; the Chairman and Ranking Minority Member, House
Select Committee on Homeland Security; and other interested
congressional parties. We will also send copies to the Secretary of the
Department of Homeland Security and the Director of the Office of
Personnel Management. Copies will be made available at no charge on the
GAO Web site at [Hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov].
If you have any questions about this report, please contact me on (202)
512-6806. Key contributors to this report are listed in appendix IV.
Signed by:
J. Christopher Mihm Managing Director, Strategic Issues:
[End of section]
Appendixes:
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology:
Scope:
This work was conducted from March 2003 through March 2004 in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. We
performed our work in the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area in the
headquarters offices of Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the
five largest legacy components that transferred to the department: The
Transportation Security Administration (TSA), the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA), the organizations formerly known as the
Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) and the U.S. Customs
Service, and the U.S. Coast Guard.
Methodology:
To address our objective, we examined the workforce planning efforts of
the five largest legacy components that transferred to the department.
Data on workforce planning and capabilities needed for successful human
capital management were supplemented by information gathered in
interviews with officials from DHS headquarters and the five legacy
components. A standard set of questions was used for interviewing the
legacy components. Interviews with the components were conducted
between January and February 2004. Presentations made by DHS and the
Office of Personnel Management (OPM) in August 2003 were evaluated to
understand the level of data analysis conducted during system design.
We were observers at the August 2003 briefing. We also examined the
transcripts and report summarizing the proceedings of the Senior Review
Advisory Committee meetings in October 2003 and relevant issues of the
weekly DHS newsletter. Our findings were analyzed against criteria
articulated in relevant GAO human capital reports.
To be responsive to your particular interest in seeking out and
incorporating employee perspectives on the human capital system, we
gathered information on employee perceptions from a variety of sources
and presented these findings throughout the report. Insights into
employee opinions were gathered from the OPM Federal Human Capital
Survey, administered between May and August 2002, and a DHS report
summarizing findings from the department's focus groups held during the
summer of 2003. A description of the objective, scope, methodology, and
limitations of these two studies was detailed in appendix I of Human
Capital: Preliminary Observations on Proposed DHS Human Capital
Regulations
[Hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-04-479T].
In the background section of this report, we cite information from
OPM's Central Personnel Data File (CPDF). The CPDF contains personnel
data for most employees of the executive branch. The largest executive
branch employee groups not included are in the intelligence agencies
(CIA, etc.) and the Postal Service. Agencies submit data to the CPDF at
the end of each fiscal quarter. We have found the CPDF to be
sufficiently reliable for the purposes of this report.[Footnote 16]
[End of section]
Appendix II: Criteria Used for Evaluation:
The success of DHS's efforts to design and implement its new human
capital system depends, in part, on building and maintaining an
institutional infrastructure to make effective use of its
flexibilities. At a minimum, this infrastructure includes a strategic
human capital planning process that integrates the agency's human
capital approaches with program goals, desired outcomes, and mission;
the capabilities to effectively develop and implement a new human
capital system; and a modern, effective, and credible performance
management system that includes a set of institutional safeguards,
including reasonable transparency and appropriate accountability
mechanisms to ensure the fair, effective, and credible implementation
of the new system.
Strategic Human Capital Planning:
Strategic workforce planning is the first essential element of the
institutional infrastructure that an agency needs to ensure that its
human capital program capitalizes on its workforce's strengths and
addresses related challenges in a manner that is clearly linked to
achieving the agency's mission and goals. Strategic workforce planning
addresses two critical needs: (1) aligning an organization's human
capital programs with its current and emerging mission and programmatic
goals and (2) developing long-term strategies for acquiring,
developing, and retaining staff to achieve programmatic goals.[Footnote
17]
At its core, strategic workforce planning, also called human capital
planning, focuses on developing long-term strategies for acquiring,
developing, and retaining an organization's total workforce (including
full-and part-time federal staff and contractors) to meet the needs of
the future. We recently described five principles for strategic
workforce planning.[Footnote 18]
* Involve top management, employees, and other stakeholders in
developing, communicating, and implementing the strategic workforce
plan.
* Determine the critical skills and competencies that will be needed to
achieve current and future programmatic results.
* Develop strategies that are tailored to address gaps in the number
and deployment of employees and the alignment of human capital
approaches for enabling and sustaining the contributions of all
critical skills and competencies.
* Build the capability needed to address administrative, educational,
and other requirements important to support workforce strategies.
* Monitor and evaluate the agency's progress towards its human capital
goals and the contribution that human capital results have made toward
achieving programmatic goals.
Consistent with these principles, we have identified that one of the
critical success factors for strategic human capital planning is data-
driven human capital decision making.[Footnote 19] A fact-based,
performance-oriented approach to human capital management is crucial
for maximizing the value of human capital as well as managing risk.
High-performing organizations use data to determine key performance
objectives and goals that enable them to evaluate the success of their
human capital approaches. Valid and reliable data are critical to
assessing an agency's workforce requirements and heighten an agency's
ability to manage risk by allowing managers to spotlight areas for
attention before crises develop and identify opportunities for
enhancing agency results. Reporting on the results of these evaluations
can facilitate congressional oversight of the system, allow for
midcourse corrections, and serve as a tool for documenting best
practices and sharing lessons learned with employees, stakeholders,
other federal agencies, and the public.
Key Capabilities for Implementing Human Capital Approaches:
As DHS moves forward, it may find helpful a key set of capabilities
that our work has found to be central to the use of human capital
authorities.[Footnote 20] These practices center on effective planning
and targeted investments, employee participation and training, and
accountability and cultural change.
* Plan strategically and make targeted investments:
* Obtain agency leadership commitment:
* Determine agency workforce needs using fact-based analysis:
* Develop strategies that employ appropriate flexibilities to meet
workforce needs:
* Make appropriate funding available:
* Ensure stakeholder input in developing policies and procedures:
* Engage the human capital office:
* Engage agency managers and supervisors:
* Involve employees and unions:
* Use input to establish clear, documented, and transparent policies
and procedures:
* Educate managers and employees on the availability and use of
flexibilities:
* Train human capital staff:
* Educate agency managers and supervisors on existence and use of
flexibilities:
* Inform employees of procedures and rights:
* Streamline and improve administrative processes:
* Ascertain the source of existing requirements:
* Reevaluate administrative approval processes for greater efficiency:
* Replicate proven successes of others:
* Build transparency and accountability into the system:
* Delegate authority to use flexibilities to appropriate levels within
the agency:
* Hold managers and supervisors directly accountable:
* Apply policies and procedures consistently:
* Change the organizational culture:
* Ensure involvement of senior human capital managers in key decision-
making processes:
* Encourage greater acceptance of prudent risk taking and
organizational change:
* Recognize differences in individual job performance and competencies:
Institutionalizing Performance Management Safeguards:
We testified last spring that Congress should consider establishing
statutory standards that an agency must have in place before it can
implement a more performance-based pay program and developed an initial
list of possible safeguards to help ensure that pay for performance
systems in the government are fair, effective, and credible.[Footnote
21]
* Assure that the agency's performance management systems (1) link to
the agency's strategic plan, related goals, and desired outcomes and
(2) result in meaningful distinctions in individual employee
performance. This should include consideration of critical competencies
and achievement of concrete results.
* Involve employees, their representatives, and other stakeholders in
the design of the system, including having employees directly involved
in validating any related competencies, as appropriate.
* Assure that certain predecisional internal safeguards exist to help
achieve the consistency, equity, nondiscrimination, and
nonpoliticization of the performance management process (e.g.,
independent reasonableness reviews by Human Capital Offices and/or
Offices of Opportunity and Inclusiveness or their equivalent in
connection with the establishment and implementation of a performance
appraisal system, as well as reviews of performance rating decisions,
pay determinations, and promotion actions before they are finalized to
ensure that they are merit-based; internal grievance processes to
address employee complaints; and pay panels whose membership is
predominately made up of career officials who would consider the
results of the performance appraisal process and other information in
connection with final pay decisions).
* Assure reasonable transparency and appropriate accountability
mechanisms in connection with the results of the performance management
process. This can include reporting periodically on internal
assessments and employee survey results relating to the performance
management system and publishing overall results of performance
management and individual pay decisions while protecting individual
confidentiality. Publishing the results in a manner that protects
individual confidentiality can provide employees with the information
they need to better understand the performance management system.
While incorporating these safeguards into performance management
systems, our work indicates that there is a set of key practices for
agencies to create a clear linkage, or "line of sight," between
individual performance and organizational success.[Footnote 22] These
key practices include the following.
1. Align individual performance expectations with organizational goals.
An explicit alignment helps individuals see the connection between
their daily activities and organizational goals.
2. Connect performance expectations to crosscutting goals. Placing an
emphasis on collaboration, interaction, and teamwork across
organizational boundaries helps strengthen accountability for results.
3. Provide and routinely use performance information to track
organizational priorities. Individuals use performance information to
manage during the year, identify performance gaps, and pinpoint
improvement opportunities.
4. Require follow-up actions to address organizational priorities. By
requiring and tracking follow-up actions on performance gaps,
organizations underscore the importance of holding individuals
accountable for making progress on their priorities.
5. Use competencies to provide a fuller assessment of performance.
Competencies define the skills and supporting behaviors that
individuals need to effectively contribute to organizational results.
6. Link pay to individual and organizational performance. Pay,
incentive, and reward systems that link employee knowledge, skills, and
contributions to organizational results are based on valid, reliable,
and transparent performance management systems with adequate
safeguards.
7. Make meaningful distinctions in performance. Effective performance
management systems strive to provide candid and constructive feedback
and the necessary objective information and documentation to reward top
performers and deal with poor performers.
8. Involve employees and stakeholders to gain ownership of performance
management systems. Early and direct involvement helps increase
employees' and stakeholders' understanding and ownership of the system
and belief in its fairness.
9. Maintain continuity during transitions. Because cultural
transformations take time, performance management systems reinforce
accountability for change management and other organizational goals.
[End of section]
Appendix III: Comments from the Department of Homeland Security:
U.S. Department of Homeland Security:
Washington, DC 20528:
June 7, 2004:
Mr. J. Christopher Mihm:
Managing Director, Strategic Issues:
United States Government Accounting Office:
Dear Mr, Mihm:
On behalf of Secretary Ridge, I would like to thank you for the
opportunity to review and comment on the report entitled Human Capital:
DHS Faces Challenges in Implementing Its New Personnel System (GAO-04-
790). Generally, we believe this report is accurate and reflective of
our processes and current status; however we believe there is some
information that needs to be updated or clarified, The most substantive
comments are discussed below, and it is our understanding that the
final report will incorporate our technical comments.
The draft report references the use of and/or the results of OPM's
Federal Human Capital Survey (FHCS). While we support the FHCS and
believe the results can be of tremendous value to agencies, we question
the current usefulness to DHS. The FHCS was conducted prior to the
establishment of DHS and the opinions expressed by the respondents to
the survey were provided prior to the formation of DHS. Yet, this
report appears to use the survey results from the legacy organizations
as a baseline for DHS. We question how accurately the results portray
the perceptions of DHS employees given the significant amount of change
that has occurred. Thus, it is our opinion that the results of the
FHCS, as used in the context of this report, may be misleading,
We also believe that timeframes contained in the draft report should be
updated since we are now in a position to more accurately project major
milestones, This includes the ability to better estimate when the
interim final regulations might be published which has enabled us to
set realistic internal goals for the implementation phase, As a result,
some of the milestones outlined on page six, Figure 1, should be
adjusted. Specifically, under the last box "Fall 2004 to January 2009,"
you may want to change the second bullet to reflect, "Implement the job
evaluation, pay, and performance management provisions in a phased
approach, with the first phase implemented beginning January/February
2005 and the second phase implemented beginning fall of 2005." You
should also revise the second full paragraph on page eight to reflect
that the focus groups are more likely to occur during the summer than
late spring or early summer,
Finally, we also would like to correct the information provided on page
eight in the first full paragraph, Specifically, we request that you
change the third sentence to reflect that during the design process
from April through September 2003, not only did the subgroups gather
basic demographic data, but they also gathered policy documents from
all the legacy organizations and met with representatives of many of
the organizations in order to conduct in-depth discussions
regarding internal HR policies. For example, during the summer of 2003,
the subgroups met with representatives of TSA, the Coast Guard, legacy
Customs, and FEMA to learn more about their organizations and their
current policies and practices,
We have enjoyed working with all the representatives of your
organization and appreciate the insight and feedback we have received,
both in person, and through these reports. Should you have any
questions regarding these comments, please feel free to give me a call.
Enclosure:
Sincerely,
Signed by:
Ronald J. James,
Chief Human Capital Officer:
[End of section]
Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments:
GAO Contact:
J. Christopher Mihm, (202) 512-6806:
Acknowledgments:
In addition to the person named above, Ed Stephenson, Ellen V. Rubin,
Tina Smith, Lou V.B. Smith, Masha Pasthhov-Pastein, Karin Fangman, and
Ron La Due Lake made key contributions to this report.
(450258):
FOOTNOTES
[1] U.S. General Accounting Office, Major Management Challenges and
Program Risks: Department of Homeland Security, GAO-03-102 (Washington,
D.C.: January 2003).
[2] U.S. General Accounting Office, Human Capital: DHS Personnel System
Design Effort Provides for Collaboration and Employee Participation,
GAO-03-1099 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 30, 2003).
[3] U.S. General Accounting Office, Human Capital: Preliminary
Observations on Proposed DHS Human Capital Regulations, GAO-04-479T
(Washington, D.C.: Feb. 25, 2004); Posthearing Questions Related to
Proposed Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Human Capital
Regulations, GAO-04-570R (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 22, 2004); and
Additional Posthearing Questions Related to Proposed Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) Human Capital Regulations, GAO-04-617R
(Washington, D.C.: Apr. 30, 2004).
[4] U.S. General Accounting Office, Human Capital: Building on DOD's
Reform Effort to Foster Governmentwide Improvements, GAO-03-851T
(Washington, D.C.: June 4, 2003); High-Risk Series: Strategic Human
Capital Management, GAO-03-120 (Washington, D.C.: January 2003); and
Managing for Results: Using Strategic Human Capital Management to Drive
Transformational Change, GAO-02-940T (Washington, D.C.: July 15, 2002).
[5] According to OPM's Central Personnel Data File (CPDF), as of
December 2003. This represents the number of DHS federal employees. For
more information on the CPDF, see appendix I.
[6] GAO-04-479T.
[7] U.S. General Accounting Office, Human Capital: Key Principles for
Effective Strategic Workforce Planning, GAO-04-39 (Washington, D.C.:
Dec. 11, 2003), and A Model of Strategic Human Capital Management, GAO-
02-373SP (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 15, 2002).
[8] The DHS responses reported by the 2002 OPM FHCS approximate the
views of some, but not all, employees now at DHS. For example, TSA
screeners were not hired at the time of the survey. Also, though APHIS
employees were divided between DHS and the U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA), the APHIS respondents included those remaining at
USDA. Additionally, the survey was conducted during the same time frame
that the administration proposed legislation to form DHS; thus, the
opinions expressed by the respondents to the survey were before the
formation of DHS. The objective, scope, and methodology for the 2002
OPM FHCS is described in more detail in GAO-04-479T.
[9] In all instances, comparing DHS's results to the OPM FHCS
governmentwide average, DHS results are fewer by a statistically
significant amount, according to analysis presented on OPM's Web site.
Statistics are rounded to the nearest whole number. The governmentwide
response includes all respondents except for those transferred to DHS.
[10] The objective, scope, and methodology for the DHS focus groups are
described in more detail in GAO-04-479T.
[11] According to agency officials, the training costs do not include
the time employees are expected to spend in training or the costs
associated with using training resources already in the department.
[12] U.S. General Accounting Office, Human Capital: A Guide for
Assessing Strategic Training and Development Efforts in the Federal
Government, GAO-04-546G (Washington, D.C.: March 2004); and Human
Capital: Selected Agencies' Experiences and Lessons Learned in
Designing Training and Development Programs, GAO-04-291 (Washington,
D.C.: Jan. 30, 2004).
[13] U.S. General Accounting Office, Human Capital: Effective Use of
Flexibilities Can Assist Agencies in Managing Their Workforces, GAO-03-
2 (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 6, 2002).
[14] U.S. General Accounting Office, Results-Oriented Cultures:
Creating a Clear Linkage between Individual Performance and
Organizational Success, GAO-03-488 (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 14, 2003).
[15] GAO-04-479T.
[16] U. S. General Accounting Office, OPM's Central Personnel Data
File: Data Appear Sufficiently Reliable to Meet Most Customer Needs,
GAO/GGD-98-199 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 30, 1998).
[17] U.S. General Accounting Office. Human Capital: Key Principles for
Effective Strategic Workforce Planning, GAO-04-39 (Washington, D.C.:
Dec. 11, 2003).
[18] GAO-04-39.
[19] U.S. General Accounting Office, A Model of Strategic Human Capital
Management, GAO-02-373SP (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 15, 2002).
[20] U.S. General Accounting Office, Human Capital: Effective Use of
Flexibilities Can Assist Agencies in Managing Their Workforces, GAO-03-
2 (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 6, 2002).
[21] U.S. General Accounting Office, Defense Transformation:
Preliminary Observations on DOD's Proposed Civilian Personnel Reforms,
GAO-03-717T (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 29, 2003).
[22] U.S. General Accounting Office, Results-Oriented Cultures:
Creating a Clear Linkage between Individual Performance and
Organizational Success, GAO-03-488 (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 14, 2003).
GAO's Mission:
The General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress,
exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional
responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability
of the federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use
of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides
analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make
informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's commitment to
good government is reflected in its core values of accountability,
integrity, and reliability.
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony:
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no
cost is through the Internet. GAO's Web site ( www.gao.gov ) contains
abstracts and full-text files of current reports and testimony and an
expanding archive of older products. The Web site features a search
engine to help you locate documents using key words and phrases. You
can print these documents in their entirety, including charts and other
graphics.
Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as "Today's Reports," on its
Web site daily. The list contains links to the full-text document
files. To have GAO e-mail this list to you every afternoon, go to
www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to e-mail alerts" under the "Order
GAO Products" heading.
Order by Mail or Phone:
The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent
of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or
more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent.
Orders should be sent to:
U.S. General Accounting Office
441 G Street NW,
Room LM Washington,
D.C. 20548:
To order by Phone:
Voice: (202) 512-6000:
TDD: (202) 512-2537:
Fax: (202) 512-6061:
To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:
Contact:
Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:
Public Affairs:
Jeff Nelligan, managing director, NelliganJ@gao.gov (202) 512-4800 U.S.
General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 Washington, D.C.
20548:
