Veterans Benefits Administration
Better Staff Attrition Data and Analysis Needed Gao ID: GAO-03-452T February 11, 2003By the year 2006, the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) projects it will lose a significant portion of its mission-critical workforce to retirement. Since fiscal year 1998, VBA has hired over 2,000 new employees to begin to fill this expected gap. GAO was asked to review, with particular attention for new employees, (1) the attrition rate at VBA and the soundness of its methods for calculating attrition and (2) whether VBA has adequate data to effectively analyze the reasons for attrition. To answer these questions, we obtained and analyzed attrition data from VBA's Office of Human Resources, calculated attrition rates for VBA and other federal agencies using a government-wide database on federal employment, and interviewed VBA officials about their efforts to measure attrition and determine why new employees leave.
About 15 percent of new examiners hired in fiscal year 2000 left VBA within 12 months of their hiring date, more than double the 6 percent rate of all VBA employees who left in fiscal year 2000. In general, new hire attrition tends to exceed the rate for all other employees, and VBA's 15 percent rate is similar to the attrition rate for all new federal employees hired between fiscal years 1998 and 2000, when as many as 17 percent left within 12 months of being hired. VBA does not have adequate data on the reasons why employees, particularly new employees, choose to leave the agency. VBA has descriptive data on how employees leave the agency (whether through resignation, retirement, or transfer), but VBA does not have comprehensive data on the reasons employees resign. While VBA collects some data on the reasons for attrition in exit interviews, these data are limited because exit interviews are not conducted consistently, and the data from these interviews are not compiled and analyzed. Without such data, VBA cannot determine ways to address the reasons employees are leaving. Furthermore, VBA has not performed analysis to determine whether it can reduce its staff attrition. Improved collection and analysis of attrition data, including data on the reasons for attrition, could help the agency minimize the lost investment in training, particularly when new employees resign. A forthcoming report will explore options for improving VBA's collection and analysis of attrition data.
GAO-03-452T, Veterans Benefits Administration: Better Staff Attrition Data and Analysis Needed
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-03-452T
entitled 'Veterans Benefits Administration: Better Staff Attrition Data
and Analysis Needed' which was released on February 11, 2003.
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.
Testimony:
Before the House Committee on
Veterans‘ Affairs:
United States General Accounting Office:
GAO:
For Release on Delivery Expected at 10:00 a.m. EST:
Tuesday, February 11, 2003:
Veterans Benefits Administration:
Better Staff Attrition Data and Analysis Needed:
Statement for the Record by Cynthia A. Bascetta, Director
Education, Workforce and Income Security Issues:
GAO-03-452T:
GAO Highlights:
Highlights of GAO-03-452T, a statement for the record to the Committee
on Veterans‘ Affairs, House of Representatives.
Why GAO Did This Study:
By the year 2006, the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) projects
it will lose a significant portion of its mission-critical workforce
to retirement. Since fiscal year 1998, VBA has hired over 2000 new
employees to begin to fill this expected gap. GAO was asked to
review, with particular attention for new employees, (1) the
attrition rate at VBA and the soundness of its methods for
calculating attrition and (2) whether VBA has adequate data to
effectively analyze the reasons for attrition. To answer these
questions, we obtained and analyzed attrition data from VBA‘s Office
of Human Resources, calculated attrition rates for VBA and other
federal agencies using a governmentwide database on federal
employment, and interviewed VBA officials about their efforts to
measure attrition and determine why new employees leave.
What GAO Found:
About 15 percent of new examiners hired in fiscal year 2000 left
VBA within 12 months of their hiring date, more than double the
6 percent rate of all VBA employees who left in fiscal year 2000.
In general, new hire attrition tends to exceed the rate for all
other employees, and VBA‘s 15 percent rate is similar to the
attrition rate for all new federal employees hired between fiscal
years 1998 and 2000, when as many as 17 percent left within 12
months of being hired.
VBA does not have adequate data on the reasons why employees,
particularly new employees, choose to leave the agency. VBA has
descriptive data on how employees leave the agency (whether through
resignation, retirement, or transfer), but VBA does not have
comprehensive data on the reasons employees resign. While VBA
collects some data on the reasons for attrition in exit
interviews, these data are limited because exit interviews are
not conducted consistently, and the data from these interviews
are not compiled and analyzed. Without such data, VBA cannot
determine ways to address the reasons employees are leaving.
Furthermore, VBA has not performed analysis to determine whether
it can reduce its staff attrition. Improved collection and
analysis of attrition data, including data on the reasons for
attrition, could help the agency minimize the lost investment in
training, particularly when new employees resign. A forthcoming
report will explore options for improving VBA‘s collection and
analysis of attrition data.
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt? GAO-03-452T. To view the full report,
including the scope and methodology, click on the link above. For
more information, contact Cynthia Bascetta, Director, Education,
Workforce and Income Security, 202-512-7101.
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee:
We are pleased to have the opportunity to comment on efforts undertaken
by the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) to ensure it has a
sufficient workforce to process veterans‘ claims for disability
compensation and pension benefits. About 40 percent of VBA‘s employees
work as examiners, who review and process veterans‘ disability claims
at 57 regional offices throughout the country. VBA projects that, of
its examiners who are eligible to retire, 21 percent will do so by the
year 2006. Acknowledging the implications of these retirements for the
quality of services provided to veterans, VBA hired over 2,000 new
examiners between fiscal years 1998 and 2001. While VBA recognizes the
importance of retaining its new employees, until 2001 it was not
regularly calculating an attrition rate for its newly hired employees.
In response to a request from Representative Lane Evans, Ranking
Democratic Member, we examined (1) the attrition rate at VBA, and the
soundness of its methods for calculating attrition and (2) the adequacy
of data VBA has on the reasons for attrition. We focused our analysis
on new employees because of the investment in training they need to
reach full productivity. To do our work, we obtained and analyzed
attrition data from VBA‘s Office of Human Resources and interviewed VBA
officials. We performed calculations of VBA‘s attrition rates and
compared them to those for other federal claims examiners, using a
governmentwide database on federal civilian employment. We also
interviewed Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and GAO human capital
officials to identify generally accepted methods of calculating
attrition and to determine how federal agencies develop and analyze
data on attrition and the reasons for attrition. We conducted our work
between October 2002 and January 2003 in accordance with generally
accepted government auditing standards. This statement for the record
is an interim product that summarizes the results to date based on our
ongoing review of staff attrition at VBA.
In summary, for fiscal years 2000 and 2001, the attrition rate at VBA
for all employees was about 6 percent. The rate for newly hired
examiners was more than twice as high in fiscal year 2000, the most
recent year for which comparable data were available. Specifically,
about 15 percent of new examiners hired in fiscal year 2000 left the
agency within 12 months of being hired. This is similar to the
attrition rate for all new federal employees hired between fiscal years
1998 and 2000, when as many as 17 percent left within 12 months of
being hired. It is typical for new hire attrition to exceed overall
attrition, but the new hire attrition rate was much higher in certain
VBA regional offices located in major urban areas than it was in other
regional offices. While VBA has descriptive data on how employees leave
the agency (whether through resignation, retirement, or transfer), it
does not have analytic data on the reasons why employees, particularly
new employees, leave the agency. Without such data, VBA cannot
determine ways to address why employees are leaving. Furthermore, VBA
has not performed the types of analysis on its data that would help the
agency determine whether it can reduce attrition. Such analyses can
help an agency determine the extent to which an attrition problem may
exist and provide needed information for effective workforce planning.
We will be reporting in more detail in a forthcoming report on these
issues and options for improving VBA‘s collection and analysis of
attrition data.
Background:
VBA provides benefits to about 2.7 million veterans and about 579,000
surviving spouses, children, and parents. Some of these benefits and
services include disability compensation and pension, education, loan
guaranty, and insurance. VBA employs about 5,000 examiners,[Footnote 1]
and they represent about 40 percent of the agency‘s entire workforce.
Most examiners are located at 57 regional offices and are responsible
for reviewing and processing veterans‘ disability claims. Typically,
they begin service at GS-5 or GS-7, grades that have starting salaries
for 2003 of about $23,400 to $29,000.[Footnote 2] Examiners can be
promoted to GS-10.[Footnote 3]
Between 1998 and 2001, VBA hired about 2,000 new examiners (see figure
1). According to VBA officials, this was the first time VBA had the
authority to hire significant numbers of examiners. These examiners
were hired in anticipation of a large number of future retirements. For
example, in 2000, VBA was expecting the retirement of 1,100 experienced
examiners in the next 5 years. In addition, the hiring of these new
examiners coincided with a growth in the backlog of claims awaiting
decisions. Between 1998 and 2001, the backlog increased by 74 percent
from about 241,000 to about 420,000. VBA has since implemented an
initiative to reduce this backlog.[Footnote 4]
Figure 1: Figure 1. Examiners Hired by VBA, Fiscal Years 1998-2002:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
According to VBA, it takes 2 to 3 years for a newly hired examiner to
become fully productive. After being hired, new examiners receive a
combination of formal training in a central location and on-the-job
training in one of VBA‘s regional offices. Once on the job, these
workers perform a variety of critical tasks, including compiling
medical evidence, assessing the extent of the disability, determining
the level of benefit, handling payment, and considering appeals.
Workforce planning is a key component to maintaining a workforce that
can carry out the tasks critical to an agency‘s mission. Strategic
workforce planning focuses on developing and implementing long-term
strategies--clearly linked to an agency‘s mission and programmatic
goals--for acquiring, developing, and retaining employees. Collecting
data on attrition rates and the reasons for attrition are one part of
conducting workforce planning. Other types of data that can be used in
workforce planning include size and composition of the workforce,
skills inventory, projected retirement rates and eligibility, and
feedback from exit interviews.[Footnote 5] This data can be analyzed to
identify gaps between an agency‘s current and future workforce needs,
which can in turn become the basis for developing strategies to build a
workforce that accommodates future needs.
Attrition At VBA Is Higher For Newly Hired Examiners Than For The
Agency Overall:
In fiscal year 2000, the attrition rate for new examiners at VBA was
about 15 percent, more than twice as high as the 6 percent rate for all
employees who left that year. About 15 percent of the new examiners
hired in fiscal year 2000 left the agency within 1 year of being hired.
VBA calculates attrition by counting employees who leave the agency and
comparing that number to either total employees or a sub-group of total
employees. The methods VBA uses to calculate attrition are consistent
with those used by OPM and other federal agencies.
Attrition for New Employees at VBA Is More Than Twice as High as the
Agency‘s Overall Rate of About Six Percent:
Attrition rates for new VBA examiners were generally higher than those
for all VBA examiners and other employees. As shown in table 1, in
fiscal years 2000 and 2001, overall attrition rates for VBA examiners
and other VBA employees ranged from about 4 percent to about 6 percent.
However, among all new examiners hired in fiscal year 2000, about 15
percent left the agency within 12 months, as shown in figure 2. These
attrition rates reflect all types of attrition--including resignation,
retirement, and termination.[Footnote 6] However, for new hires,
attrition consists predominantly of resignations.
Table 1: Overall Attrition Rates for VBA Examiners, Other VBA, Other
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), and Other Federal Employees,
Fiscal Years 2000-2001:
Fiscal year: 2000; VBA: Examiners: 4.6; VBA: All other white-collar
employees: 6.9; VBA: Agencywide: 6.0; All other VA: 8.2; All other
federal government: 7.4.
Fiscal year: 2001; VBA: Examiners: 6.0; VBA: All other white-collar
employees: 6.6; VBA: Agencywide: 6.4; All other VA: 7.8; All other
federal government: 7.0.
Source: OPM‘s Central Personnel Data File.
Note: GAO performed these calculations by dividing separations by an
average of the total workforce on board at the beginning and end of
each year. The averages could only be calculated for the two years
shown.
[End of table]
Figure 2: Percentage of Examiners Who Left VBA within 2 Years of Their
Hiring Date, Fiscal Years 1998-2000:
[See PDF for image]
Note: Data for fiscal year 2000 do not reflect a full 24-month time
period. A comparable analysis could not be done for fiscal year 2001
because comparable data were not available to reflect a full 24-month
time period.
[End of figure]
According to human capital experts, in general, new employees tend to
leave at higher rates than all other employees. This has been the
experience for federal agencies historically and, according to our
analysis of OPM‘s data, is generally the case governmentwide. Attrition
rates for all federal employees, both new hires and senior staff, were
about 7 percent in fiscal year 2000. [Footnote 7] However, for all new
federal employees--those hired in fiscal year 1998, 1999, and 2000--as
many as 17 percent left within 12 months of being hired. 7:
VBA calculations show that attrition for newly hired examiners is
particularly high or particularly low in certain locations. [Footnote
8] VBA officials acknowledge that, in certain regional offices,
attrition has been high for newly hired examiners. For example, VBA
found attrition rates of 38 percent to 49 percent for new examiners
hired over a 3-year period at four regional offices--Baltimore (38
percent), Chicago (39 percent), Newark (41 percent), New York (49
percent). By contrast, some offices--such as Phoenix, Arizona;
Louisville, Kentucky; Huntington, West Virginia; and Wichita, Kansas--
experienced no attrition among new examiners hired during this period.
VBA Uses Accepted Methods to Calculate Attrition:
The two basic methods VBA uses to calculate attrition are consistent
with methods used by OPM and other federal agencies. Both methods, the
’annual calculation“ and the ’cohort calculation,“ compare employees
who leave the agency to either total employees or a sub-group of total
employees. They provide different ways of looking at attrition trends.
The annual calculation indicates broad attrition patterns from year to
year. In contrast, the cohort calculation tracks attrition over a
period of time for a specific group, and the timeframe and group can
vary to suit the needs of the analysis. Using this method, VBA reported
attrition rates similar to those found by GAO. The following are the
two methods VBA uses:
* Annual calculation. This method calculates attrition by dividing all
employees who left in a given year by an average of employees working
at the agency at the beginning of the year and at the end of the year.
* Cohort calculation. This method calculates attrition by tracking a
specified group or ’cohort“ of employees. The cohort can be defined as
all those hired (new hires only) during a specific timeframe. These new
hires are tracked for selected intervals (3 months, 6 months, etc.).
This method can be adapted by defining the cohort differently (for
example, to track attrition among a subgroup of new hires) and by using
different timeframes for the tracking (e.g., 12 months, 18 months,
etc.). This calculation differs from the annual calculation in that it
does not take an average of the total workforce. VBA used this method
to determine the attrition rate of certain newly hired examiners for a
presentation in 2001 and for additional, more comprehensive
calculations in 2002. VBA plans to use this method to calculate
attrition rate for new examiners at least annually starting in 2003.
According to OPM officials, the annual method is a generally accepted
method used to calculate attrition by federal agencies. OPM officials
also recognized the value of the cohort method for calculations that
require specific time frames or groups of employees, and added that
tracking the attrition of new employees is an important practice. OPM
does not mandate the use of a particular method for the calculation of
attrition, but officials stated that any method used should be clearly
explained.
VBA Lacks Adequate Data On Reasons Employees Leave And Analysis Of
Staff Attrition:
While VBA has descriptive data on how employees separate from the
agency (whether through resignation, termination, retirement, or
transfer), it does not have adequate analytic data on the reasons why
employees, particularly new employees, leave the agency. VBA collects
some data on the reasons for attrition in exit interviews. However,
these data are not systematically collected in a consistent manner and
not compiled or analyzed. Furthermore, VBA has not performed the types
of analysis on its data that would help the agency determine whether it
can reduce its attrition rate. VBA is taking steps to ensure that
attrition data will be available to guide its workforce planning.
VBA Collects Some Data on Types of Separations, but Data on Reasons Are
Limited:
While VBA systematically collects descriptive data on how employees
leave the agency, the data on the reasons employees leave is not
systematically collected or analyzed. As at other federal agencies,
when employees leave VBA, a standard federal ’Form 52“ is filled
out.[Footnote 9] This form records whether the employee is leaving due
to a resignation, termination, retirement, or transfer. Because this
information appears on the form in discrete fields, VBA human resources
staff can easily enter it into the agency‘s computer system to
aggregate information on the types of separations.
The Form 52 also includes a blank space for narrative comments on the
reasons for leaving. This space is primarily intended to be used in the
case of resignation and its use is optional on the part of the
employee. However, according to VBA officials, this area is frequently
left blank. When this area is filled out, it is up to a human resources
employee to decide how to label an employee‘s reason for leaving in the
computer system. Several ’quit codes“ exist to help in this labeling
process. For example, reasons for leaving can be coded as relating to
pay and benefits, supervisory relationship, opportunity for
advancement, or personal reasons, including family responsibilities,
illness, or household relocation. All forms are sent to one of four
human resource centers to be entered into the agency‘s computer system.
Human resources employees in these centers are instructed to code the
reasons for leaving to the best of their ability. However, these staff
members cannot clarify reasons when the information is blank or
ambiguous because they do not have access to either the separated
employee or the regional human resources staff who actually processed
the employee‘s separation. Therefore, VBA officials do not consider the
Form 52 to be a complete or reliable source of information on the
reasons employees resign from VBA.
While VBA conducts exit interviews to collect information on the
reasons employees resign, it does not have a standard process for these
interviews, nor are they conducted consistently for all separating
employees, according to VBA officials. Exit interviews with separating
employees are conducted at regional offices. However, no standard
process exists for such interviews, according to the results of an
internal VA assessment. VBA officials state that the downsizing of
human resources staff in regional offices is at least partly
responsible for the inconsistency with which exit interviews are
conducted. In addition, the data from the interviews that are conducted
are not forwarded to national headquarters to be aggregated and
analyzed. Despite VBA‘s inconsistent use of exit interviews, VA policy
recognizes the importance of exit interviews for determining the
reasons an employee leaves.
Some offices and staff members within VBA have made special efforts to
compile or collect information on the reasons examiners leave the
agency by producing special studies or reports. These include the
following:
* High-Performing Young Promotable Employees (HYPE). In September 2002,
a group of employees, representing six regional offices, prepared a
report based on 72 exit interviews conducted at seven regional offices.
The exit interviews had been conducted over 3 fiscal years: 1999, 2000,
and 2001.
* Loss of New Hires in Veterans Service Centers. At the request of the
head of VBA, the newly organized Office of Performance Analysis and
Integrity (OPAI) issued a report in September 2002 that examined new
hire attrition rates for regional offices individually. The report also
looked at reasons for leaving, based on interviews with the directors
of two regional offices.
* Review of attrition data at certain regional offices. At least two
regional offices have investigated the reasons for attrition on their
own initiative. For example, in October 2002, senior management at the
Newark regional office compiled information on the attrition of
examiners over a 3-year period and the reasons given for why these
examiners left. This study was prompted by concern about high attrition
rates at the Newark office. Portland did a similar review in September
2001.
These special efforts had several common findings. For example, three
reported that inadequate opportunity for training was one of the
reasons examiners left VBA. Two reported workload as a reason for
leaving. Two also identified instances in which examiners resigned as a
result of pending termination for poor performance or conduct. Reports
associated with these efforts touched on other reasons for resignation,
including inadequate opportunity for full utilization of skills,
insufficient pay, and various personal reasons.
The other source of information on reasons examiners left VBA was
anecdotal information provided by regional and other senior human
resources officials. For example, senior human resources officials
stated that reasons for leaving included factors such as inadequate
work space and computer equipment as well as insufficient pay. In
addition, these officials reported that some newly hired examiners left
when they discovered that the job tasks were not what they had
expected. According to a VBA official, certain regional offices are
aware of the types of employers with whom they are competing. For
example, some regional offices report losing employees to a range of
employers in both the public sector, including other federal agencies
(such as SSA and DOL), and the private sector, including firms in the
information technology sector.
VBA has begun to address some of the findings from these special
studies or reports. For example, the HYPE report included several
recommendations. The report recommended that the agency develop a
comprehensive strategic plan that addresses attrition and retention;
the report also recommended that the agency improve and centralize its
exit interview process. Both of these recommendations are in the
process of being implemented at VBA. In addition, according to a VBA
official, certain regional offices have taken steps to offer job
candidates opportunities to observe the work place before being hired.
This effort was undertaken partly in response to information about
employees‘ expectations of their duties and work environment.
VBA Has Not Fully Analyzed Data to Determine Whether Attrition Can Be
Reduced:
VBA has not performed the types of analysis on its data that would help
the agency determine whether it could reduce attrition or identify the
extent to which an attrition problem may exist. To better understand
its own attrition, an agency can take advantage of a range of analyses.
These include the following:
* Comparisons. To understand the degree to which its attrition is a
problem, an agency can compare its own attrition to the attrition of
other federal agencies, especially to the attrition of agencies with
employees who do similar work. While one of VBA‘s special reports did
some broad comparisons of VBA‘s attrition to the attrition at other
federal agencies, VBA has not compared, as we have done, the attrition
of newly hired examiners to the attrition of employees in other parts
of the federal government with comparable job series.
* Attrition modeling. To understand the degree to which attrition is a
problem, an agency can estimate the attrition rates it expects in the
future, providing a baseline against which to measure the actual
attrition it experiences.[Footnote 10] This allows officials to
determine if attrition rates are higher or lower than expected. While
VBA has projected retirement rates for planning purposes, according to
VBA officials, there was no formal or informal process to estimate the
expected attrition rates of the examiners who joined the agency since
1998. In 2002, VA projected future attrition trends for examiners in a
restructuring plan submitted to the Office of Management and Budget,
and officials expect to compare these projections to actual attrition
rates for examiners in the future.
* Cost analysis. To understand the degree to which attrition is a
problem, an agency can estimate the cost of recruiting and training new
employees who leave and their replacements. While VBA‘s human resources
office conducted a partial estimate of attrition costs in 2001, this
estimate did not include all associated costs (including one of the
most important and potentially expensive, the investment lost when a
trained employee leaves).
* Labor market analysis. To understand the degree to which its
attrition is a problem, an agency can evaluate labor market conditions
in locations where it operates. Such an evaluation can provide context
for understanding if an attrition rate is higher than might be expected
in those locations. Using general labor market data, VBA has identified
several locations where it faces significant competition from other
employers, both public and private. This information could be used to
better understand its attrition rate in those locations in the future.
However, this information is not based on the actual employment plans
of separating employees, and VBA does not routinely collect or document
this information. According to a VBA official, collecting data on where
VBA‘s separating employees find employment after VBA would be useful
for developing a more accurate understanding of the employers with whom
VBA is competing.
VBA is taking steps to ensure that attrition data will be available to
guide workforce planning. First, VBA intends to develop a workforce
plan, following a workforce policy approved by VA in January
2003.[Footnote 11] In a related document, VA stated its expectation
that, in the current economy, attrition among examiners may stabilize.
Continued monitoring of attrition rates and improved data on reasons
for attrition would allow VBA to test that assumption. Second, VBA has
recently designated an official to head strategic planning efforts.
While these efforts will include human capital issues, and according to
VBA officials, will address attrition, VBA‘s human resources office is
expected to assume primary responsibility for human capital issues and
to coordinate with the strategic planning office. Obtaining better
attrition data and conducting adequate analysis of attrition and the
reasons for attrition could help VBA target future recruitment efforts
and minimize attrition. For example, VA‘s new automated exit survey,
which VA officials expect to be available in spring 2003, has the
potential to aid VBA in its attrition data gathering and analysis.
Separating employees will be able to answer a series of questions about
the reasons they decided to leave the agency. The survey will provide
confidentiality for the employee, potentially allowing for more
accurate responses. It will also facilitate electronic analysis that
could be broken down by type of job and region.
Concluding Observations:
VBA‘s ability to effectively serve veterans hinges on maintaining a
sufficient workforce through effective workforce planning. While
attrition data are just one part of workforce planning, the data are
important because they can be used to anticipate the number of
employees and the types of skills that need to be replaced. The agency
currently lacks useful information on the reasons new employees leave
and adequate analysis of its staff attrition. In addition, some offices
experience much higher or lower rates. Continuing monitoring of
attrition data by region may point to regions that need special
attention. Sustained attention to both the reasons for attrition and
attrition rates, particularly for new employees, is needed so VBA can
conduct effective workforce planning. Understanding the reasons for
attrition could help the agency minimize the investment in training
lost when a new employee leaves. Furthermore, the new workforce
planning efforts under way at VBA offer an opportunity to improve data
collection on the reasons for attrition and attrition rates.
GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments:
For future contacts regarding this statement, please call Cynthia A.
Bascetta at (202) 512-7101. Others who made key contributions to this
statement are Irene Chu, Ronald Ito, Grant Mallie, Christopher
Morehouse, Corinna Nicolaou, and Gregory Wilmoth.
[End of section]
Related GAO Products:
General Human Capital Reports:
Human Capital: Effective Use of Flexibilities Can Assist Agencies in
Managing Their Workforces. GAO-03-2. Washington, D.C.: December 6,
2002.
Air Traffic Control: FAA Needs to Better Prepare for Impending Wave of
Controller Attrition. GAO-02-591. Washington, D.C.: June 14, 2002.
A Model of Strategic Human Capital Management, Exposure Draft. GAO-02-
373SP. Washington, D.C.: March 15, 2002.
Federal Employee Retirements: Expected Increase Over the Next 5 Years
Illustrates Need for Workforce Planning. GAO-01-509. Washington, D.C.:
April 27, 2001.
Human Capital: A Self-Assessment Checklist for Agency Leaders. GAO/OCG-
00-14G. Washington, D.C.: September 2000.
Department of Veterans Affairs:
Major Management Challenges and Program Risks: Department of Veterans
Affairs. GAO-03-110. Washington, D.C.: January 2003.
High-Risk Series: An Update. GAO-03-119. Washington, D.C.: January
2003.
Veterans Benefits Administration:
Veterans‘ Benefits: Claims Processing Timeliness Performance Measures
Could Be Improved. GAO-03-282. Washington, D.C.: December 19, 2002.
Veterans‘ Benefits: Despite Recent Improvements, Meeting Claims
Processing Goals Will Be Challenging. GAO-02-645T. Washington, D.C.:
April 26, 2002.
Veterans‘ Benefits: Training for Claims Processors Needs Evaluation.
GAO-01-601. Washington, D.C.: May 31, 2001.
Veterans Benefits Administration: Problems and Challenges Facing
Disability Claims Processing. GAO/T-HEHS/AIMD-00-146. Washington,
D.C.: May 18, 2000.
FOOTNOTES
[1] According to VBA, these positions carry the title of Veterans
Service Representative (VSR). VSRs and similar positions, such as
rating specialists, are classified as job series 996, veterans claims
examiner. For our analysis, GAO focused on the 996 job series. For the
purpose of this statement for the record, we are referring to jobs in
this series as examiners.
[2] According to a VBA official, in some cases, they can also start at
GS-9, with a starting salary in 2003 of about $35,500.
[3] VBA is planning to extend competitive promotion potential for this
job series to GS-11.
[4] VBA began to implement this initiative, called Claims Process
Improvement, at all its regional offices in July 2002. For more
information, see Veterans‘ Benefits: Claims Processing Timeliness
Performance Measures Could Be Improved, GAO-03-282 (Washington, D.C.:
December 19, 2002).
[5] For more information, see A Model of Strategic Human Capital
Management, Exposure Draft, GAO-02-373SP (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 15,
2002).
[6] We did not include in our analysis of new hire attrition staff who
left the examiner position but remained in VBA, nor did we include
transfers within VA.
[7] These attrition rates represent employees at all federal agencies
except VA.
[8] According to VBA officials, attrition rates could also be
calculated for certain subgroups of newly hired examiners such as
veterans or minorities. VBA has not calculated attrition rates for
these subgroups.
[9] The Form 52, Request for Personnel Action, is used by all federal
agencies, including VBA.
[10] For more information on attrition modeling, see Air Traffic
Control: FAA Needs to Better Prepare for Impending Wave of Controller
Attrition, GAO-02-591 (Washington, D.C.: June 14, 2002). For additional
information on how attrition data can be used by federal agencies, see
Human Capital: A Self-Assessment for Agency Leaders, GAO/OCG-00-14G
(Washington, D.C.: Sept. 2000) and, for the importance of valid and
reliable data in assessing an agency‘s workforce requirements, see A
Model of Strategic Human Capital Management, Exposure Draft,
GAO-02-373SP (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 15, 2002).
[11] The new VA policy requires workforce plans from all three of VA‘s
administrations--VBA, the Veterans Health Administration, and the
National Cemetery Administration. VA first identified the need for a
workforce policy following a workforce analysis required of all
executive branch agencies by the Office of Management and Budget in May
2001.
