Federal Work/Life Programs
Agencies Generally Satisfied with OPM Assistance, but More Tracking and Information Sharing Needed Gao ID: GAO-11-137 December 16, 2010To improve its ability to recruit and retain federal employees, agencies have implemented a wide range of work/life programs, such as flexible work schedules, child care, and employee assistance programs. The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) plays a key role in guiding federal human capital initiatives, including the implementation of work/life programs. As requested, GAO determined the extent to which: (1) OPM provides assistance and guidance to federal agencies for establishing and enhancing work/life programs; (2) OPM or the federal agencies track, evaluate, or modify work/life programs; and (3) OPM has identified leading practices in the private sector for the implementation of work/life programs and shared this information with federal agencies. To do this, GAO reviewed OPM policy and guidance; surveyed 40 federal officials--20 Chief Human Capital Officers (CHCO) and 20 work/life managers; and interviewed officials from seven private sector companies recognized for the quality of their work/life programs.
OPM's Office of Work/Life/Wellness is available to federal agencies to provide assistance, guidance, and information as agencies develop and implement work/life programs. For example, OPM has established formal working groups, sponsored training for agency officials, promulgated regulations to implement work/life programs, and provided informal guidance to agencies that address issues related to these programs. Of the 33 agency officials who responded to GAO's survey, 24 indicated that OPM's assistance, guidance, and information sharing greatly helped or helped somewhat in implementing work/life programs. Another six agency officials indicated that OPM's assistance, guidance, and information sharing helped in some cases and hindered in others. OPM tracks and collects information on a few work/life programs across the federal government, including health and wellness programs which it recently began tracking in response to a White House initiative. Some federal agencies independently provide OPM with evaluations on other work/life programs. However, when asked, OPM officials said that they did not track or maintain an inventory of these evaluations nor review these evaluations due to the lack of time and available resources. Tracking, analyzing, and sharing information among federal agencies on the effect of work/life programs on agency-intended goals could be helpful for individual agency decision making in a budget-constrained environment. To follow up on the White House health and wellness initiative, OPM held several meetings and conferences with representatives from private sector companies to discuss their health and wellness programs and the effect of these programs on recruitment and retention. Although OPM has developed a health and wellness pilot program based on some of the information obtained from these meetings and conferences, OPM has not systematically shared with federal agencies other information about the private sector's health and wellness programs or other work/life programs. GAO also interviewed officials from seven private sector companies recognized for the quality of their work/life programs to identify leading practices in implementing private sector work/life programs. Private sector officials from four of the seven companies that GAO interviewed indicated that their programs have been effective in increasing employee job satisfaction, resulting in improved recruitment, retention, and workforce productivity. Systematically collecting and disseminating information on the implementation and evaluation of private sector work/life programs could help federal agencies compare their work/life programs with leading practices in the private sector. GAO recommends that OPM assist agencies in implementing their work/life programs by more systematically tracking and evaluating data on the implementation and evaluation of work/life programs and sharing this information with federal agencies. OPM agreed with GAO's recommendations and suggested technical changes which GAO has incorporated as appropriate.
RecommendationsOur recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director: Yvonne D. Jones Team: Government Accountability Office: Strategic Issues Phone: No phone on recordGAO-11-137, Federal Work/Life Programs: Agencies Generally Satisfied with OPM Assistance, but More Tracking and Information Sharing Needed
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-11-137
entitled 'Federal Work/life Programs: Agencies Generally Satisfied
with OPM Assistance, but More Tracking and Information Sharing Needed'
which was released on December 16, 2010.
This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability
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.
United States Government Accountability Office:
GAO:
Report to Congressional Committees:
December 2010:
Federal Work/life Programs:
Agencies Generally Satisfied with OPM Assistance, but More Tracking
and Information Sharing Needed:
GAO-11-137:
GAO Highlights:
Highlights of GAO-11-137, a report to congressional committees.
Why GAO Did This Study:
To improve its ability to recruit and retain federal employees,
agencies have implemented a wide range of work/life programs, such as
flexible work schedules, child care, and employee assistance programs.
The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) plays a key role in guiding
federal human capital initiatives, including the implementation of
work/life programs. As requested, GAO determined the extent to which:
(1) OPM provides assistance and guidance to federal agencies for
establishing and enhancing work/life programs; (2) OPM or the federal
agencies track, evaluate, or modify work/life programs; and (3) OPM
has identified leading practices in the private sector for the
implementation of work/life programs and shared this information with
federal agencies. To do this, GAO reviewed OPM policy and guidance;
surveyed 40 federal officials”20 Chief Human Capital Officers (CHCO)
and 20 work/life managers; and interviewed officials from seven
private sector companies recognized for the quality of their work/life
programs.
What GAO Found:
OPM‘s Office of Work/Life/Wellness is available to federal agencies to
provide assistance, guidance, and information as agencies develop and
implement work/life programs. For example, OPM has established formal
working groups, sponsored training for agency officials, promulgated
regulations to implement work/life programs, and provided informal
guidance to agencies that address issues related to these programs. Of
the 33 agency officials who responded to GAO‘s survey, 24 indicated
that OPM‘s assistance, guidance, and information sharing greatly
helped or helped somewhat in implementing work/life programs. Another
six agency officials indicated that OPM‘s assistance, guidance, and
information sharing helped in some cases and hindered in others.
OPM tracks and collects information on a few work/life programs across
the federal government, including health and wellness programs which
it recently began tracking in response to a White House initiative.
Some federal agencies independently provide OPM with evaluations on
other work/life programs. However, when asked, OPM officials said that
they did not track or maintain an inventory of these evaluations nor
review these evaluations due to the lack of time and available
resources. Tracking, analyzing, and sharing information among federal
agencies on the effect of work/life programs on agency-intended goals
could be helpful for individual agency decision making in a budget-
constrained environment.
To follow up on the White House health and wellness initiative, OPM
held several meetings and conferences with representatives from
private sector companies to discuss their health and wellness programs
and the effect of these programs on recruitment and retention.
Although OPM has developed a health and wellness pilot program based
on some of the information obtained from these meetings and
conferences, OPM has not systematically shared with federal agencies
other information about the private sector‘s health and wellness
programs or other work/life programs. GAO also interviewed officials
from seven private sector companies recognized for the quality of
their work/life programs to identify leading practices in implementing
private sector work/life programs. Private sector officials from four
of the seven companies that GAO interviewed indicated that their
programs have been effective in increasing employee job satisfaction,
resulting in improved recruitment, retention, and workforce
productivity. Systematically collecting and disseminating information
on the implementation and evaluation of private sector work/life
programs could help federal agencies compare their work/life programs
with leading practices in the private sector.
What GAO Recommends:
GAO recommends that OPM assist agencies in implementing their
work/life programs by more systematically tracking and evaluating data
on the implementation and evaluation of work/life programs and sharing
this information with federal agencies. OPM agreed with GAO‘s
recommendations and suggested technical changes which GAO has
incorporated as appropriate.
View [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-137] or key
components. For more information, contact Yvonne Jones at (202) 512-
6806 or jonesy@gao.gov.
[End of section]
Contents:
Letter:
Background:
Most Responding Officials Were Satisfied with OPM's Assistance,
Guidance, and Information Sharing on Work/Life Programs:
OPM Tracks Some Work/Life Programs Governmentwide, While Many of the
Responding Agency Officials Track or Evaluate Some of Their Own Work/
Life Programs:
OPM Does Not Systematically Collect or Share Information on Private
Sector Work/Life Programs:
Conclusions:
Recommendations for Executive Action:
Agency Comments:
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology:
Appendix II: Survey of OPM's Role in Federal Agencies' Work/Life
Programs:
Appendix III: Comments from the Office of Personnel Management:
Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments:
Related GAO Products:
Tables:
Table 1: Examples of Federal Work/Life Programs:
Table 2: Examples of Work/Life Programs at Selected Private Sector
Companies:
Table 3: Federal Departments and Agencies Receiving our Survey and the
Number of Completed Responses:
Table 4: Private Sector Companies Selected as Leaders in Work/Life
Programs:
Figures:
Figure 1: Responding Agency Officials Generally Found OPM Helped in
Implementing Work/Life Programs:
Figure 2: Responding Agency Officials Were Generally Satisfied with
OPM's Assistance with Work/Life Programs:
Figure 3: Responding Agency Officials Were Generally Satisfied with
OPM's Guidance on Work/Life Programs:
Figure 4: Responding Agency Officials Were Generally Satisfied with
OPM's Information Sharing Regarding Work/Life Programs:
Figure 5: Most Responding Agency Officials Track the Usage of Some or
All of Their Work/Life Programs:
Figure 6: Many of the Responding Agency Officials Evaluate Some of
Their Agencies' Work/Life Programs:
Figure 7: Many of the Responding CHCOs Use Information to Modify or
Implement New Work/Life Programs:
Abbreviations:
C.F.R. Code of Federal Regulations:
CHCO: Chief Human Capital Officers:
FY: fiscal year:
HCAAF: Human Capital Assessment and Accountability Framework:
OMB: Office of Management and Budget:
OPM: Office of Personnel Management:
U.S.C. United States Code:
[End of section]
United States Government Accountability Office:
Washington, DC 20548:
December 16, 2010:
The Honorable Joseph I. Lieberman:
Chairman:
The Honorable Susan M. Collins:
Ranking Member:
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs:
United States Senate:
The Honorable Daniel K. Akaka:
Chairman:
The Honorable George V. Voinovich:
Ranking Member:
Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal
Workforce, and the District of Columbia:
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs:
United States Senate:
The Honorable Herb Kohl:
Chairman:
The Honorable Bob Corker:
Ranking Member:
Special Committee on Aging:
United States Senate:
To improve its ability to recruit, retain, and engage the federal
workforce, the federal government has implemented a wide range of
work/life programs, which according to the Office of Personnel
Management (OPM) are designed to create more flexible, responsive work
environments that allow workers to meet the obligations of work and
life. These programs include flexible work schedules, child care, and
telework.[Footnote 1] To that end, OPM assists and guides agencies in
choosing work/life programs that will help attract and retain federal
workers by providing them with tools--such as handbooks and manuals, a
Web site dedicated to work/life programs and issues, and forums to
discuss work/life issues--that an agency may use as it implements
work/life programs.
You expressed an interest in the federal government's ability to
recruit and retain the workforce it needs and engage the employees it
has while competing with the private sector for workforce talent.
Therefore, you asked us to determine the extent to which (1) OPM
provides assistance and guidance to federal agencies for establishing
and enhancing work/life programs and the extent to which agency
officials are satisfied with OPM's assistance and guidance; (2) OPM or
the federal agencies track, evaluate, or modify work/life programs;
and (3) OPM has identified leading practices in the private sector for
the implementation of work/life programs and shared this information
with federal agencies. For the purpose of this report, we defined
work/life programs as workplace programs and policies designed to help
federal employees identify and resolve personal or work-related
issues, and include such programs and policies as flexible scheduling,
child care, assistance for drug and alcohol abuse, and health and
wellness programs.
To address our objectives, we did the following.
* We designed and administered a survey to assess agency perceptions
of OPM's performance during a 1-year period--specifically OPM's
assistance, guidance, and information sharing on work/life programs
and issues.[Footnote 2] We also designed the survey to determine
whether and how the agencies track, evaluate, and modify their own
work/life programs. We selected 20 Chief Human Capital Officers (CHCO)
from federal departments or agencies and 20 work/life program managers
from the same federal departments or agencies to receive the survey.
The CHCOs we selected were members of the CHCO Council.[Footnote 3]
Because a portion of the survey focused on agency perceptions of OPM's
assistance, we excluded OPM's CHCO from our sample. Additionally,
because we intended the survey respondents to speak on behalf of their
department or agency, we excluded two CHCO council members who serve
as proxies for numerous federal agencies, specifically one member
representing small federal agencies and another member representing
federal national security and intelligence agencies. Of the 40
potential respondents, 33 completed our survey.[Footnote 4]
* We reviewed applicable statutes and regulations, past OPM reports,
OPM's 2006-2010 and 2010-2015 strategic plans, written policy,
guidance, directives, and material on OPM's Web site relating to work/
life assistance, guidance, and identification of leading practices.
* We interviewed OPM officials and staff in OPM's Office of Work/Life/
Wellness.
* We reviewed reports and periodical articles about the work/life
programs of leading private sector companies.
* We selected seven private sector companies representing various
industries that have been recognized by human capital associations and
publications as providing their employees with quality work/life
programs. We interviewed the officials from these companies who have
direct knowledge of their companies' work/life programs to obtain
information on the development and implementation of those programs.
However, these seven companies are not representative of all private
sector companies and therefore, we cannot generalize the information
these private sector officials provided about their work/life programs
to other private sector companies.
* We reviewed prior GAO reports on human capital issues.
See appendix I for more information about our scope and methodology.
We conducted this performance audit from August 2009 through December
2010 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing
standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit
to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable
basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.
We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for
our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.
Background:
Employers in both the public and private sectors have realized that
offering work/life programs--such as alternative work schedules, child
care, and health and wellness programs--have become an essential
element in recruiting and retaining their workforces.[Footnote 5] The
federal government, as a major employer, also recognizes that
work/life policies, programs, and practices make good business sense.
[Footnote 6] Congress has recognized the need to provide federal
workers workplace flexibilities and has authorized numerous work/life
programs for federal agencies to implement.[Footnote 7] In addition,
the executive branch has recognized and supported the benefits of
these programs by implementing a range of work/life programs, from
flexible work arrangements to child care assistance. Table 1 lists
some examples of work/life programs federal agencies provide their
employees, as identified by OPM.
Table 1: Examples of Federal Work/Life Programs:
Category: Workplace flexibilities;
Subcategory: Alternative work schedules;
Work/life programs: Flexible scheduling; Job sharing.
Category: Workplace flexibilities;
Subcategory: Leave programs;
Work/life programs: Family leave; Leave bank.
Category: Workplace flexibilities;
Subcategory: Volunteerism/community involvement;
Work/life programs: Blood donation; Tutoring.
Category: Family;
Subcategory: Care giving programs;
Work/life programs: Child care; Elder/dependent care.
Category: Health and wellness;
Subcategory: Flexible spending accounts;
Work/life programs: Dependent care; Health care.
Category: Health and wellness;
Subcategory: Employee assistance programs;
Work/life programs: Drug/alcohol abuse; Smoking cessation.
Category: Health and wellness;
Subcategory: Health promotion;
Work/life programs: Wellness programs; Health screening.
Source: OPM.
[End of table]
OPM plays a key role in fostering and guiding improvements in all
areas of strategic human capital management--including work/life
programs--in the executive branch. As part of that role, OPM can
assist in--and, as appropriate, require--building infrastructures
within agencies to successfully implement and sustain human capital
reforms and related initiatives. For example, OPM promotes human
capital leading practices across federal agencies and conducts audits
of human capital management within the federal government to ensure
compliance with laws, regulations, and policies. To promote
coordination among agencies outside of Washington, D.C., OPM works
with Federal Executive Boards (FEB) to share guidance and leading
practices and obtain feedback from federal agencies on human capital
issues.[Footnote 8] OPM also coordinates its efforts through its
involvement in the CHCO Council, which was established to advise and
coordinate the human capital activities of its members' agencies. The
CHCO Council has expressed its support of the strategic goals
articulated in OPM's 2010-2015 strategic plan, such as governmentwide
initiatives addressing veterans employment, hiring reform, labor-
management relations, diversity, and other efforts to hire the best
employees for federal service.
Additionally, OPM advocates the use of its Human Capital Assessment
and Accountability Framework (HCAAF), a set of tools and strategies
available to federal agencies that assist officials in achieving
results from their human capital programs.[Footnote 9] The framework
guides the assessment of agency human capital efforts, while allowing
enough flexibility for federal agencies to tailor their human capital
efforts to their missions, plans, and budgets.
We have previously recommended that OPM encourage continuous
improvement and assist agencies' efforts in acquiring, developing, and
retaining workforce talent.[Footnote 10] According to OPM officials,
OPM fulfills this role in part by assisting federal agencies and
serving as a clearinghouse of information for agencies in developing
and implementing work/life programs. Within OPM, the office
responsible for this mission is the Office of Work/Life/Wellness--a
component of the Office of Agency and Veterans' Support. OPM's Office
of Work/Life/Wellness provides leadership on work/life issues to the
federal government by partnering with federal agencies to help them
develop and manage work/life programs that meet the human capital
needs of the federal workforce, and providing the policies and
guidance that form the foundation of these programs.[Footnote 11]
We have also previously reported on the need for OPM to continue its
leadership role in identifying and helping agencies apply human
capital flexibilities and the need for agencies to develop management:
infrastructure to make use of available flexibilities.[Footnote 12]
Recently, we reported on the need for agencies to use the
flexibilities available to them, including using these flexibilities
to retain older and more experienced workers.[Footnote 13] In
addition, in December 2002, we reported the views of agency human
capital managers and employee union officers on the effectiveness of
human capital flexibilities in managing federal agency workforces.
These human capital managers and union officers frequently cited
work/life programs as among the effective tools for workforce
management.[Footnote 14]
Most Responding Officials Were Satisfied with OPM's Assistance,
Guidance, and Information Sharing on Work/Life Programs:
OPM's Office of Work/Life/Wellness Provides Assistance, Guidance, and
Information to Assist Federal Agencies in Addressing Work/Life
Programs and Issues:
OPM officials describe OPM's Office of Work/Life/Wellness as a source
of assistance, guidance, and information that agencies may use to
develop their own work/life programs. For example, OPM provides
various tools to assist agencies as they address work/life programs
and issues, such as accessible points of contact, formal working
groups, and training. OPM also provides guidance to agencies by
promulgating regulations and providing informal guidance such as
memoranda and bulletins. In addition OPM shares work/life program
information through tools such as newsletters and reports--for
example, reports on the status of telework and childcare. In its 2006-
2010 strategic plan, OPM indicated that it would work with the federal
executive boards to share guidance and leading practices across the
federal government, and obtain feedback from federal agencies on human
capital issues[Footnote 15]. In addition, one of OPM's 2010-2015
strategic goals focuses on providing "the training, benefits, and
work/life balance necessary for federal employees to succeed, prosper,
and advance in their careers." To meet this goal, OPM proposes to:
* assist agencies to evaluate and revise policies, and to address
employee satisfaction with work/life programs;
* guide agencies in implementing these programs; and:
* provide agencies with information and tools that promote work/life
programs.[Footnote 16]
Responding Agency Officials Indicate Generally Positive Perceptions
about OPM's Assistance, Guidance, and Information Sharing:
Overall, our survey of CHCOs and work/life managers revealed that OPM
has been helpful to agencies in implementing their work/life programs.
As part of our survey, we asked agency officials to respond on behalf
of their departments and/or agencies on how OPM's involvement helped
or hindered their ability to implement work/life programs.[Footnote
17] As shown in figure 1, of the 33 agency officials who responded to
our survey, 24 indicated that OPM's assistance, guidance, and
information sharing greatly helped or helped somewhat in implementing
work/life programs. Another six agency officials indicated that OPM's
assistance, guidance, and information sharing helped in some cases and
hindered in others. Although our survey provided an opportunity for
respondents to elaborate on their responses or cite examples in
support of their responses, none of the agency officials responding to
our survey did so.
Figure 1: Responding Agency Officials Generally Found OPM Helped in
Implementing Work/Life Programs:
[Refer to PDF for image: vertical bar graph]
Response: Greatly helped;
Number of respondents: 12.
Response: Helped somewhat;
Number of respondents: 12.
Response: Helped in some, hindered in others;
Number of respondents: 6;
Response: Hindered somewhat;
Number of respondents: 1.
Source: GAO survey.
Note: Of 33 respondents, 2 answered "Not applicable or Do not know."
[End of figure]
OPM officials stated that the Office of Work/Life/Wellness provides
various tools to assist federal agencies implement work/life programs.
For example, OPM offers training to agency officials that, among other
things, helps them develop action plans to address employee
satisfaction concerns related to work/life programs.[Footnote 18]
Also, OPM has designated points of contact who can assist agency
officials to develop and implement work/life programs. In our survey,
we asked agency officials to indicate how satisfied or dissatisfied
they were with OPM's assistance in developing and implementing
work/life programs (such as accessible OPM points of contact, formal
working groups, informal mentoring, and OPM sponsored training). As
seen in figure 2, most of the 33 agency officials responding to our
survey were either very satisfied or somewhat satisfied with the
timeliness (22), quality (21), accessibility (22), and sufficiency
(23) of OPM's assistance. For example, one agency official stated that
OPM officials respond quickly to requests for assistance on work/life
policy matters, and another agency official stated that OPM's
work/life staff is always very responsive and helpful.
Figure 2: Responding Agency Officials Were Generally Satisfied with
OPM's Assistance with Work/Life Programs:
[Refer to PDF for image: vertical bar graph]
Number of respondents:
Response: Very or somewhat satisfied;
Timeliness: 22;
Quality: 21;
Accessibility: 22;
Sufficiency: 23.
Response: As satisfied as dissatisfied;
Timeliness: 4;
Quality: 5;
Accessibility: 4;
Sufficiency: 3.
Response: Somewhat or very dissatisfied;
Timeliness: 1;
Quality: 1;
Accessibility: 1;
Sufficiency: 1.
Source: GAO survey.
Note: Of the 33 respondents, 3 answered "Did not seek OPM assistance."
[End of figure]
In addition to providing assistance to federal agencies, OPM also
guides federal agencies by promulgating regulations for work/life
programs and issuing programmatic guides and handbooks that explain
the requirements for work/life programs such as employee assistance
programs, part-time employment and job sharing, child care, and
tobacco cessation. In our survey, we asked agency officials to
indicate how satisfied or dissatisfied they were with this guidance.
As seen in figure 3, most of the 33 agency officials responded that
they were either very satisfied or somewhat satisfied with the
timeliness (22), quality (24), accessibility (22), and sufficiency
(22) of the guidance they received from OPM. For example, one official
stated that OPM greatly assisted his/her agency as it expanded its
health and wellness program by providing the agency guidance and by
participating in a summit meeting with the agency.
Figure 3: Responding Agency Officials Were Generally Satisfied with
OPM's Guidance on Work/Life Programs:
[Refer to PDF for image: vertical bar graph]
Number of respondents:
Response: Very or somewhat satisfied;
Timeliness: 22;
Quality: 24;
Accessibility: 22;
Sufficiency: 22.
Response: As satisfied as dissatisfied;
Timeliness: 3;
Quality: 4;
Accessibility: 4;
Sufficiency: 4.
Response: Somewhat or very dissatisfied;
Timeliness: 6;
Quality: 3;
Accessibility: 3;
Sufficiency: 6.
Source: GAO survey.
Note: Of the 33 respondents, 2 answered "Do not know."
[End of figure]
According to OPM officials, the agency also shares information with
federal agencies on leading practices of work/life programs using
various avenues such as posting information to its Web site and
notifying federal agencies through interactive listservs. Our survey
asked how satisfied or dissatisfied agency officials were with OPM's
efforts to share information on leading practices in work/life
programs. As seen in figure 4, most of the 33 agency officials
indicated that they were either very satisfied or somewhat satisfied
with the timeliness (22), quality (23), accessibility (23), and
sufficiency (22) of the information they received from OPM. According
to an official who responded to our survey, OPM has communicated the
importance of these work/life programs and has provided practical
suggestions to support agencies in defining goals and sharing best
practices.
Figure 4: Responding Agency Officials Were Generally Satisfied with
OPM's Information Sharing Regarding Work/Life Programs:
[Refer to PDF for image: vertical bar graph]
Number of respondents:
Response: Very or somewhat satisfied;
Timeliness: 22;
Quality: 23;
Accessibility: 23;
Sufficiency: 22.
Response: As satisfied as dissatisfied;
Timeliness: 4;
Quality: 5;
Accessibility: 3;
Sufficiency: 5.
Response: Somewhat or very dissatisfied;
Timeliness: 4;
Quality: 2;
Accessibility: 4;
Sufficiency: 3.
Source: GAO survey.
Note: Of the 33 respondents, 3 answered "Do not know."
[End of figure]
OPM Tracks Some Work/Life Programs Governmentwide, While Many of the
Responding Agency Officials Track or Evaluate Some of Their Own Work/
Life Programs:
OPM Tracks Some Work/Life Programs Governmentwide:
Our prior work has indicated the need for federal agencies to track
and use data that will allow them to measure a program's effectiveness
including the changes in the program over time. Agencies need such
measurements to help them determine if a particular human capital
program--such as a work/life program--is worth the investment compared
to other available human capital flexibilities targeted at employee
recruitment and retention.[Footnote 19] We also have previously
recommended that OPM disseminate federal agencies' leading practices
in human capital programs to help agencies recruit and retain their
workforces.[Footnote 20] Additionally, OMB's fiscal year 2012 budget
guidance to federal agencies encourages agencies to: reconsider the
basic design of their programs; incorporate the use of data in program
design; foster innovation rooted in research; and finally, encourage
the evaluation of the program.[Footnote 21] Also, as part of its 2010-
2015 strategic plan, OPM proposes to help agencies collect information
that would allow agencies to continually improve their efforts to
provide employees with a work/life balance.[Footnote 22]
OPM tracks and collects information for a few work/life programs,
notably childcare, telework, and health and wellness programs. In July
2009, OPM surveyed federal agencies about their health and wellness
programs and specifically requested information on the: (1) number of
health and wellness programs offered by each agency; (2) number of
employees with access to the programs; (3) number of employees using
the programs/services; (4) cost of the programs; and (5) metrics
gathered on the programs.[Footnote 23] OPM officials used this data to
develop profiles of health and wellness programs across the federal
government, and to help agencies formulate action plans for improving
the health and wellness of federal employees. Using these program
profiles, OPM developed an inventory of health and wellness programs
across the federal government.
In response to OPM's 2009 survey, however, agency officials reported
that they either were unable to develop cost data or that the cost
data could not be broken down into meaningful components such as
services, facilities, and labor. Additionally, OPM officials stated
that the cost data they received provided minimal insight. As a
result, when OPM requested federal agencies to report on their health
and wellness programs for 2010, the request excluded asking for cost
data on agencies' programs. Instead, OPM requested agencies to report
on whether they had developed metrics for measuring their health and
wellness programs rather than asking for the specific metrics. OPM
does not collect information on other programs such as alternative
work schedules, leave programs, and employee assistance programs
(e.g., stress management and smoking cessation).
Many Responding Officials Track and Use Information They Independently
Collect to Evaluate Some of Their Work/Life Programs:
Agency officials responding to our survey indicated that their
agencies track a variety of work/life programs beyond the programs
tracked by OPM. As part of our survey, we asked these officials if
their departments/agencies tracked (measured) the extent to which
agency employees use these work/life programs. Of the 33 agency
officials who responded to our survey, 29 indicated that they track
either all or some of their work/life programs, as shown in figure 5.
Figure 5: Most Responding Agency Officials Track the Usage of Some or
All of Their Work/Life Programs:
[Refer to PDF for image: vertical bar graph]
Response: All of the programs;
Number of respondents: 5.
Response: Some of the programs;
Number of respondents: 24.
Response: None of the programs;
Number of respondents: 2.
Source: GAO survey.
Note: Of the 33 respondents, 2 answered "Do not know."
[End of figure]
Our survey further asked agency officials to specify if their agencies
tracked work/life programs in the following categories: (1)
alternative work schedules; (2) leave programs; (3) volunteerism and
community involvement; (4) care giving; (5) flexible spending; (6)
employee assistance programs; and (7) health promotion. The survey
results showed that agencies were tracking programs across multiple
categories. Specifically, of the 29 officials who indicated that their
agencies track their work/life programs, the majority (20) indicated
that their agencies track programs in four or more of these seven
program categories.[Footnote 24]
While most of the agency officials surveyed indicated that they track
their work/life programs, we asked the officials if their departments
or agencies also evaluated (measured) the extent to which their work/
life programs met their intended goals. These evaluations may be used
to assess the programs' impact on the recruitment and/or retention of
federal employees within the departments or agencies. Of the 33 agency
officials responding to our survey, 21 indicated that they evaluated
either all or some of their work/life programs, as shown in figure 6.
Figure 6: Many of the Responding Agency Officials Evaluate Some of
Their Agencies' Work/Life Programs:
[Refer to PDF for image: vertical bar graph]
Response: All of the programs;
Number of respondents: 3.
Response: Some of the programs;
Number of respondents: 18.
Response: None of the programs;
Number of respondents: 8.
Source: GAO survey.
Note: Of the 33 respondents, 4 answered "Do not know."
[End of figure]
Our survey also asked agency officials to specify if their agencies
evaluated work/life programs in the seven categories listed above. The
survey indicated that most agencies evaluated programs in at least one
work/life program category. Of the 21 respondents who indicated that
their agencies evaluated work/life programs, about one-half (10)
indicated that their agencies evaluate programs in four or more of the
seven program categories.
As a result of the agencies' independent evaluations of their
work/life programs, some agency officials are potentially in a
position to determine: (1) the extent to which their programs improve
their ability to recruit and retain their employees and (2) whether or
not they need to implement, modify, or eliminate work/life programs.
The federal government continues to recognize the need to implement
and modify current work/life programs. A March 2010 report published
by the President's Council of Economic Advisors presented an economic
perspective on workplace policies and practices and their effect on
work/life balance.[Footnote 25] The Council's report cited a survey of
human resource managers that indicated work/life programs, such as
family-supportive policies and flexible hours, were the single most
important factor in private sector companies attracting and retaining
employees.[Footnote 26] We also surveyed agency officials about the
effects of their work/life programs on employee recruitment and
retention. Agency officials responding to our survey indicated that
work/life programs offered by their agencies affect their ability to
recruit and retain agency employees. About half of the officials
indicated that offering work/life programs had a very great or great
effect on their ability to recruit and retain agency employees. About
another third indicated that work/life programs have a moderate effect
on their ability to recruit and retain agency employees.
Agency officials may also use the evaluations of their work/life
programs to modify, implement, or eliminate work/life programs. As
shown in figure 7, 12 out of the 18 CHCOs responding to our survey
indicated that they had modified their work/life programs based on the
program data that they collected and evaluated. Ten of the 18
responding CHCOs had implemented new work/life programs based on the
data they collected and evaluated. However, one of the agency
officials responding to our survey indicated that current budget
constraints affect an agency's ability to implement new programs.
Figure 7: Many of the Responding CHCOs Use Information to Modify or
Implement New Work/Life Programs:
[Refer to PDF for image: vertical bar graph]
Response: Modify program;
Number of respondents, Yes: 12;
Number of respondents, No: 0.
Response: Implement new program;
Number of respondents, Yes: 10;
Number of respondents, No: 2.
Response: Eliminate program;
Number of respondents, Yes: 1;
Number of respondents, No: 11.
Source: GAO survey.
Note: Of the 18 CHCOs who responded, 6 did not answer this question.
[End of figure]
Most of the agency officials responding to our survey indicated that
they track many of their work/life programs. In addition, according to
OPM officials, some federal agencies independently provide OPM with
data and evaluations on various work/life programs. OPM officials
stated that they do not share this information across federal agencies
because they lack the time and resources to maintain an inventory of
these evaluations. OPM officials said that the recent addition of
staff to the Office of Work/Life/Wellness will enable them to review
reports they may receive in the future. At the time of this review,
there were no staff or resources to track, review, or maintain an
inventory of these evaluations. Offering agencies more information
about which work/life programs are in place across the federal
government and their impact on meeting agency-intended goals could be
helpful in a budget-constrained environment. Agency CHCOs could play a
valuable and central role in the selection and collection of
information in or about work/life programs.
OPM Does Not Systematically Collect or Share Information on Private
Sector Work/Life Programs:
OPM Has Collected Information on Some Private Sector Work/Life
Programs but Does Not Presently Share It with Federal Agencies:
Our prior work on federal agencies' human capital efforts demonstrated
the benefits of consulting with the private sector on human capital
practices. For example, federal agencies such as the Internal Revenue
Service and the Veterans Health Administration have incorporated
private sector practices for identifying the critical skills and
training needs of their workforces.[Footnote 27] Also, in its
strategic plan for 2010-2015, OPM defines as one of its goals having a
suite of flexible work/life programs to promote a healthy work/life
balance for federal employees. One of the strategies OPM proposed for
achieving this goal is to evaluate the results of surveys from public
and private sector organizations to identify leading practices across
the sectors. The plan further indicates that OPM will provide federal
agencies with these results to provide the agencies various options
that they may use to compare their work/life programs with leading
private sector practices.[Footnote 28] However, while OPM has
developed a health and wellness pilot program based on discussions
with private sector representatives, it has not yet shared information
about private sector work/life programs with federal agencies.
In May 2009, OPM participated in White House-sponsored meetings with
representatives of large, privately-owned companies to discuss how
health and wellness programs affect the private sector's workforce
recruitment and retention. Also discussed during these meetings was
the administration's WellCheck initiative, which is intended to
improve federal health and wellness programs. These meetings prompted
OPM to collect information about federal agencies' health and wellness
programs in July 2009, as mentioned previously. Subsequently, in early
2010, OPM held two roundtables and several meetings with private
sector company officials to obtain more information about private
sector health and wellness programs. These meetings, according to an
OPM official, helped the government representatives obtain a better
understanding of models for workplace health programs and leading
practices in workplace wellness.
According to OPM officials, the meetings with private sector health
and wellness representatives led to the development of an OPM pilot
program designed to create a healthier and more pleasant work
environment for employees at the headquarters buildings of OPM, the
Department of the Interior, and the General Services Administration,
which are located close to each other. The pilot, known as
WellnessWorks, seeks to develop a shared "work-life" campus by
improving health and wellness facilities at the headquarters locations
for each of the agencies. OPM has hired a wellness coordinator and is
purchasing the services of a wellness service provider for the campus.
The service provider will complement the existing services of the
three agencies and increase the level of services across the campus to
match leading practices in the private sector. WellnessWorks will
offer the employees access to health and wellness services such as:
* an assessment that includes productivity and scientifically defined
areas of well-being, in addition to physical health, mental health,
and health behaviors;
* biometric testing, consisting of height and weight measurement and
blood testing for cholesterol levels;
* programs to encourage healthy behaviors, such as weight management
classes, exercise, tobacco cessation, and chronic disease management;
* face-to-face and Web-based health education resources; and:
* immunizations, allergy shots, and routine injections.[Footnote 29]
OPM officials will evaluate the pilot program and they plan to provide
details on developing this type of collaborative "shared work/life
campus" to federal agencies across the government.
Although OPM used information from the private sector to develop the
WellnessWorks program with the goal of implementing it across the
federal government, OPM has not shared with federal departments and
agencies information about other health and wellness programs, or
other work/life programs implemented in the private sector. Currently,
OPM has not placed information on its Web site about private sector
practices. Additionally, our work showed that none of the agency
officials responding to our survey indicated that OPM provides them
with this type of information. An OPM official told us that the agency
has not considered providing this information because: (1) OPM
officials have been focusing on other work/life programs such as
telework and child care and (2) similar information is readily
available through other sources (e.g., the Society for Human Resources
Management). According to this official, OPM may consider providing
agencies with the information collected from the private sector if the
agencies express an interest in the information and the agencies
understand that OPM is not endorsing or recommending any of the
private sector programs.
Selected Private Companies Offer, Track, and Evaluate a Range of Work/
Life Programs:
To identify useful information available to OPM and federal agencies
concerning private sector work/life programs, we selected seven
private sector companies that have been recognized by human capital
associations and publications as providing their employees with
quality work/life programs: (1) Deloitte; (2) Ernst & Young; (3)
Marriott International; (4) MetLife; (5) General Mills; (6) SC Johnson
& Son; and one company that requested anonymity (see appendix I for
the private sector company selection methodology).[Footnote 30] These
companies, representing various industries, generally offer work/life
programs in the same categories and subcategories and for similar
reasons as federal agencies. Table 2 lists examples of the types of
programs private sector companies offer.
Table 2: Examples of Work/Life Programs at Selected Private Sector
Companies:
Category: Workplace flexibilities;
Subcategory: Alternative work schedules;
Work/life programs: Flexible scheduling; Seasonal work hours.
Category: Workplace flexibilities;
Subcategory: Leave programs;
Work/life programs: Parental leave; Sabbaticals.
Category: Workplace flexibilities;
Subcategory: Volunteerism/community involvement;
Work/life programs: Company-supported employee interest groups.
Category: Family;
Subcategory: Care giving programs;
Work/life programs: Child care subsidies; Emergency child/elder care.
Category: Health and wellness;
Subcategory: Flexible spending accounts;
Work/life programs: Health care.
Category: Health and wellness;
Subcategory: Employee assistance programs;
Work/life programs: Smoking cessation; 24/7 counseling/referral
services.
Category: Health and wellness;
Subcategory: Health promotion;
Work/life programs: Fitness centers and programs; Health education and
counseling.
Source: GAO, based on interviews with seven private sector company
officials.
Note: We used the same categories and subcategories developed by OPM.
[End of table]
The work/life private sector program managers informed us that they
use various sources of information to determine future program needs,
such as employee feedback and demographic analysis of the workforce.
For example, officials from one company said that after concluding a
study of working parents and their families, they decided to expand
their parental leave program well beyond the industry average to help
their employees balance the demands of family and career. Managers at
four of the seven private sector companies told us that they compare
work/life programs offered by their companies with those of other
companies in the same industry or in the same geographic area to make
sure they are competitive for attracting and retaining talent. Also,
managers at two of the seven companies mentioned that they belong to
professional human capital management organizations, which provide
opportunities to share information about work/life program offerings.
The work/life managers from the participating private sector companies
told us that they evaluate their programs on a regular basis to
determine whether the programs are enhancing workforce recruitment and
retention. According to the managers, some programs can be tracked
through usage data. However, they also told us that their companies do
not judge the success or failure of a program based on how frequently
it is used. One manager stated that his/her company encourages
participation and seeks to overcome any barriers to program use, such
as lack of awareness or lack of manager support.
Private sector companies also reported tracking the use of their
flexible work schedule programs by the number of flexibility
agreements on record and by employee time and attendance records to
determine the extent to which company employees are using the
available flexibilities. For programs that do not have usage data, the
company may rely on employee feedback through e-mail, Web site
comments, or personal contact to determine (1) how much a program is
being used and (2) how satisfied users are with the programs. Managers
told us that through this process of tracking and evaluating, they
were able to align the work/life programs they offer with their
employees' needs and thus enhance recruitment and increase retention.
For example, one manager stated the need to develop a business case
for implementing his/her company's work schedule flexibilities by
surveying employees to measure the effect of these flexibilities in
attracting and retaining employees. More than 75 percent of the
employees indicated that the flexibilities were of significant
importance in deciding to remain with the company. Another manager
told us that his/her company steadily tracks the impact of the
work/life programs, and that since the current set of work/life
programs were introduced, employees expressed that there was more
balance between their careers and personal lives.
Managers at four of the seven companies we spoke to indicated that the
work/life programs instituted by their companies had had a great or
very great effect on recruitment, retention, and productivity. One
manager said that work/life programs were a key enabler of the
corporate culture of flexibility and inclusion. Another told us that
work/life programs had a very great effect on achieving the company's
goals of enhancing retention and work satisfaction.
Conclusions:
Overall, agency officials indicated that they were satisfied with
OPM's assistance, guidance, and information sharing as they developed
and implemented work/life programs. However, OPM is potentially
missing opportunities to provide federal agencies with additional
information that may be useful to agencies in their efforts to develop
and implement work/life programs. While OPM has limited its collection
and evaluation of federal work/life programs to only a few, some
federal agencies are independently tracking and collecting work/life
program usage data on a wider range of programs such as alternative
work schedules and employee assistance programs. The agencies are also
using these data to conduct assessments of these programs and use the
results to make programmatic changes. Sharing data among agencies on
the effect of work/life programs on agency-intended goals could be
helpful for agency decision making in a budget-constrained
environment. OPM officials said that they did not track or maintain an
inventory of these evaluations nor review these evaluations. OPM
officials said that the recent addition of staff to the Office of
Work/Life/Wellness will enable them to review reports they may receive
in the future.
OPM's Office of Work/Life/Wellness has met with private sector company
representatives to examine private sector health and wellness programs
and the leading practices used to implement those programs, however
the office does not systematically collect information on other
private sector work/life programs. A more systematic approach for
examining how work/life programs have been implemented and evaluated
in public and private sector organizations, as well as making this
information more readily available, could benefit federal agencies'
own efforts to establish work/life programs. In keeping with its
mission to help federal agencies in their human capital management
efforts, OPM can play a key role in the collection and dissemination
of this type of information. Additionally, by adopting this role, OPM
can make progress on its strategic goal of providing the agencies with
various options that could be used to ensure that their agencies'
work/life program offerings are aligned with leading practices
identified in the public and private sector.
Recommendations for Executive Action:
We recommend that the Director of OPM, working with the CHCO Council,
identify the resources, steps, and timetable necessary to complete the
following three actions:
(1) track on a more systematic basis information already being
collected by individual federal agencies on their work/life programs,
such as program usage data and evaluations;
(2) evaluate the results of work/life program surveys conducted by
leading private sector organizations, as stated in OPM's 2010-2015
strategic plan, that could help federal agencies as they implement
their work/life programs; and:
(3) provide the information from both the public and private sectors,
including other comprehensive evaluations produced by academic
institutions, state entities, and other organizations, to agency
officials--through available avenues such as the CHCO Council and
federal executive boards--that could help them address work/life
program issues and determine if the work/life programs are meeting
their agencies' goals.
Agency Comments:
We provided a draft of this report to the Director of OPM for review
and comment. OPM provided written comments which are reproduced in
appendix III. OPM generally concurred with our recommendations but
requested small modifications to two recommendations that include
private sector work/life programs. OPM also provided technical
comments which we incorporated as appropriate.
OPM concurred with our recommendation that OPM evaluate the results of
work/life program surveys conducted by leading private sector
organizations. However, OPM cautioned that there are enough
differences between private and public sector motivations and cultures
that a direct comparison of policies and practices may not provide
federal agencies with a comprehensive set of "ready-to-use" solutions
as they implement their work/life programs. Also, OPM does not want to
appear to selectively endorse leading practices in the private sector
as solutions for implementing federal work/life programs. We agree
with OPM that some leading private sector practices may not be
applicable to federal agencies and that OPM should not appear to
selectively endorse leading private sector practices. However, we do
believe that communicating these leading practices without endorsing
them could provide federal agencies with additional information that
federal agency officials could use in implementing their work/life
programs. We revised the recommendation to reflect our agreement with
OPM.
OPM also concurred with our recommendation that OPM provide
information from both the public and private sector to agency
officials that could help the agency officials address work/life
program issues and determine if these programs are meeting the
agencies' goals. However, they asked that we add other evaluations of
public and private work/life programs published by academic
institutions, state entities, and other organizations such as the
Sloan Foundation.[Footnote 31] We agree with OPM's assessment that
other available evaluations of public and private sector work/life
programs could provide information to federal agency officials as they
implement work/life programs. We revised the recommendation to reflect
our agreement with OPM.
We are sending this report to other interested parties and to the
Director of OPM. In addition, the report will be available free of
charge at [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov].
If you, or your staff, have any questions about this report, please
contact me at (202) 512-6806 or jonesy@gao.gov. Contact points for our
offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on
the last page of this report. GAO staff that made major contributions
to this report are listed in appendix IV.
Signed by:
Yvonne D. Jones:
Director, Strategic Issues:
[End of section]
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology:
This appendix details the objectives and scope of our report, and the
methodology used to provide information to the requesters about the
role of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) in providing
assistance, guidance, and oversight to federal agencies concerning
work/life programs, and about private sector work/life programs. Our
requesters asked us to determine the extent to which:
(1) OPM provides assistance and guidance to federal agencies for
establishing and enhancing work/life programs;
(2) OPM or the federal agencies track, evaluate, or refine work/life
programs; and:
(3) OPM has identified leading practices in the private sectors for
the implementation of work/life programs and shared this information
with federal agencies.
In order to address the first two objectives, we designed and
administered a Web-based survey (see appendix II for a copy of our
questionnaire and survey results). The survey was conducted using a
self-administered electronic questionnaire which was sent to a
nonprobability sample consisting of 20 Chief Human Capital Officers
(CHCO) at selected federal departments or agencies who also serve as
members of the CHCO Council.[Footnote 32] The same Web-based survey
was also sent to a separate nonprobability sample of 20 work/life
program managers from subcomponents of these departments or agencies.
The purpose of the survey was to obtain respondents' perceptions on
behalf of their departments or agencies of OPM's assistance, guidance,
and information sharing during a one-year period.[Footnote 33] Because
a portion of the survey focused on agency perceptions of OPM's
assistance, we excluded OPM's CHCO from our sample. Additionally,
because we intended the survey respondents to speak on behalf of their
department or agency, we excluded two CHCO Council members who serve
as proxies for numerous federal agencies, specifically one member
representing small federal agencies and another member representing
federal national security and intelligence agencies. Also included in
the survey questionnaire were questions designed to obtain information
on how these agencies track, evaluate, and modify their own work/life
programs. Table 3 lists the federal departments selected for our
survey and the number of respondents who completed our survey.
Table 3: Federal Departments and Agencies Receiving our Survey and the
Number of Completed Responses:
Department/agency: Department of Agriculture;
Survey completed by CHCO: 1;
Survey completed by work/life managers: 1.
Department/agency: Department of Commerce;
Survey completed by CHCO: 1;
Survey completed by work/life managers: 0.
Department/agency: Department of Defense;
Survey completed by CHCO: 1;
Survey completed by work/life managers: 0.
Department/agency: Department of Education;
Survey completed by CHCO: 1;
Survey completed by work/life managers: 0.
Department/agency: Department of Energy;
Survey completed by CHCO: 1;
Survey completed by work/life managers: 1.
Department/agency: Department of Health and Human Services;
Survey completed by CHCO: 1;
Survey completed by work/life managers: 1.
Department/agency: Department of Homeland Security;
Survey completed by CHCO: 0;
Survey completed by work/life managers: 0.
Department/agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development;
Survey completed by CHCO: 1;
Survey completed by work/life managers: 1.
Department/agency: Department of the Interior;
Survey completed by CHCO: 1;
Survey completed by work/life managers: 1.
Department/agency: Department of Justice;
Survey completed by CHCO: 1;
Survey completed by work/life managers: 1.
Department/agency: Department of Labor;
Survey completed by CHCO: 1;
Survey completed by work/life managers: 1.
Department/agency: Department of State;
Survey completed by CHCO: 0;
Survey completed by work/life managers: 1.
Department/agency: Department of Transportation;
Survey completed by CHCO: 1;
Survey completed by work/life managers: 1.
Department/agency: Department of the Treasury;
Survey completed by CHCO: 1;
Survey completed by work/life managers: 1.
Department/agency: Department of Veterans Affairs;
Survey completed by CHCO: 1;
Survey completed by work/life managers: 1.
Department/agency: Environmental Protection Agency;
Survey completed by CHCO: 1;
Survey completed by work/life managers: 1.
Department/agency: General Services Administration;
Survey completed by CHCO: 1;
Survey completed by work/life managers: 1.
Department/agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration;
Survey completed by CHCO: 1;
Survey completed by work/life managers: 0.
Department/agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission;
Survey completed by CHCO: 1;
Survey completed by work/life managers: 1.
Department/agency: Social Security Administration;
Survey completed by CHCO: 1;
Survey completed by work/life managers: 1.
Department/agency: Total;
Survey completed by CHCO: 18;
Survey completed by work/life managers: 15.
Source: GAO.
Note: Thirty-three out of a potential 40 agency officials responded to
our survey.
[End of table]
We pretested the survey instrument with representatives from two
federal agencies during June and July 2010 and administered the survey
to our selected respondents from July through September 2010.
The practical difficulties of conducting any survey may introduce
errors, commonly referred to as nonsampling errors. For example,
difficulties in how a particular question is interpreted, in the
sources of information that are available to respondents, or in how
the survey data are analyzed can all introduce unwanted variability
into survey results. To minimize such nonsampling errors, a social
science survey specialist designed the questionnaire, in collaboration
with GAO staff that had subject matter expertise. As indicated above,
the questionnaire was pretested to ensure that the questions were
relevant, clearly stated, and easy to comprehend. When data were
analyzed, an independent analyst reviewed the computer program used
for the analysis of the survey data. Since this was a Web-based
survey, respondents entered their answers directly into the electronic
questionnaire, thereby eliminating the need to have the data keyed
into a database and avoiding data entry errors. The results of our
survey are not generalizable to all agency officials or to all
agencies because they are based on a nonprobability sample. Also, for
those agency officials responding that their agencies evaluate their
work/life programs, we did not independently determine whether or how
well they actually evaluate their work/life programs.
We reviewed past GAO human capital reports on issues dealing with
work/life programs. We also interviewed OPM work/life officials to
obtain OPM's description of its role in interacting with federal
agencies as they develop and implement work/life programs. This
included reviewing OPM's A New Day for Federal Service: Strategic Plan
2010-2015, its 2006-2010 strategic plan; past OPM reports on work/life
programs; and available written policy, guidance, and directives. We
also visited the agency's Web site to examine the material available
to federal agencies and employees on work/life assistance, guidance,
and identification of leading practices.
In order to address our third objective on the identification of some
leading practices in the private sector, we reviewed publicly
available information sources to identify private sector companies
that are leaders and award winners in providing work/life programs to
their workforces. The awards are based on the types of work/life
programs offered and the diversity of the company's workforce. Some of
the awards include:
* Fortune Magazine, "Best Places to Work"--includes separate awards
for work/life balance, child care, telecommuting, and unusual perks
(2009);
* AARP, "Best Employers" (2008);
* Working Mother's Magazine, "100 Best Companies" (2008);
* Alfred Sloan Awards for Business Excellence in Workplace Flexibility
(2005, 2006);
* Latina Style, "50 Special Report" (2008);
* Black Enterprise, "40 Best Companies for Diversity" (2009); and:
* Diversity Inc., Top 50 (2009).
After reviewing these information sources, we identified 17 companies
that received multiple awards from the sources we reviewed, based on a
process of weighting the awards received. Out of the 17 companies that
we reviewed, 7 agreed to be interviewed. The companies that we
interviewed represented 6 of the 7 industry categories that we
identified.[Footnote 34] Table 4 lists the participating private
sector companies and the industries they represent.
Table 4: Private Sector Companies Selected as Leaders in Work/Life
Programs:
Industry: Audit/consulting;
Company: Deloitte[A].
Industry: Communications;
Company: [B].
Industry: Financial services;
Company: Ernst & Young.
Industry: Hospitality;
Company: Marriott International.
Industry: Insurance/financial products;
Company: MetLife.
Industry: Manufacturing;
Company: General Mills.
Industry: Manufacturing;
Company: SC Johnson & Son.
Source: GAO.
[A] According to a Deloitte official, "Deloitte" means Deloitte LLP
and its subsidiaries.
[B] Company requested anonymity.
[End of table]
We developed a structured interview instrument that we administered to
officials from the participating private sector companies to obtain
information on the development and implementation of work/life
programs within their companies. We also asked the officials to
describe how their companies track, evaluate, and modify their
work/life programs and how this information is used to make decisions
about their work/life programs. Also, for those private sector company
officials responding that their companies evaluate their work/life
programs, we did not independently determine whether or how well they
actually evaluate their work/life programs. However, these seven
companies are not representative of all private sector companies and
therefore, we cannot generalize the information these private sector
officials provided about their work/life programs to other private
sector companies.
We conducted this performance audit from August 2009 through December
2010 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing
standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit
to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable
basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.
We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for
our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.
[End of section]
Appendix II: Survey of OPM's Role in Federal Agencies' Work/Life
Programs:
Survey of OPM's Role in Federal Agencies' Work/Life Programs:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
Please Note: Numbers reported are based on 33 federal
departments/agencies responding to this survey. The total number of
responses for any one question may be less than 33 because all
respondents did not answer all questions.
Introduction:
The U.S. Government Accountability Office, an agency of Congress, is
exploring the implementation of programs that help federal employees
balance both their personal and professional responsibilities. The
Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, the
Senate Select Committee on Aging, and the Senate Subcommittee on
Governmental Management asked GAO to address the extent to which: (1)
the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is providing agencies with
assistance and guidance for establishing and enhancing work/life
programs, and (2) OPM and federal agencies are tracking, evaluating
and/or refining work/life programs. To meet these objectives, GAO
designed this survey to solicit agencies' views on OPM's assistance
and guidance for implementing work/life programs and to determine how
agencies track and evaluate these programs.
GAO is administering this survey to departmental Chief Human Capital
Officers (CHCO) who are members of the CHCO Council and to a sample of
work/life program managers at the agency level within these
departments. In responding to the survey, please feel free to consult
with colleagues as needed to answer the survey questions. We ask that
the CHCO respondents frame their answers from a departmentwide
perspective and that the work/life program managers frame their
answers from their agency's perspective.
To learn more about completing the questionnaire, printing your
responses, and who to contact f you have questions, instructions.
Thank you in advance for your assistance in taking part in our survey.
Survey Respondent:
1. Please provide the following information for the person primarily
responsible for completing this survey in case we need to contact you
to clarify a response.
Name:
Position title:
Department/Agency:
Telephone:
E-mail address:
Work/Life Program Inventory:
2. We have classified several work/life programs available to federal
employees (excluding teleworking/telecommuting and flexiplace) into
seven categories. A number of these programs are required by law while
some programs are authorized but not required.
For each of the seven work/life categories listed below, based on your
current knowledge, which statement(s) best represents the situation in
your department/agency?
Category 1 - Alternative work schedules (such as compressed schedule
and flexible hours schedule) (Select all answers that apply.)
9: We offer at least one program in this category because it is
required by law.
21: We offer at least one program in this category even though it is
not required by law. - See below.
4: We offer at least one program in this category but do not know
whether required or not by law. - See below.
0: We do not offer any programs in this category.
If your department/agency offers any programs in category 1 that are
not required by law or if you do not know if it is required by law,
please provide examples of the specific program(s) you offer.
Data intentionally not reported.
Category 2 ” Leave Programs (such as leave for family care) (Select
all answers that apply.)
28: We offer at least one program in this category because it is
required by law.
6: We offer at least one program in this category even though it is
not required by law. - See below.
6: We offer at least one program in this category but do not know
whether required or not by law. - See below.
0: We do not offer any programs in this category.
If your department/agency offers any programs in category 2 that are
not required by law or if you do not know if it is required by law,
please provide examples of the specific program(s) you offer.
Data intentionally not reported.
Category 3 ” Flexible Spending Accounts (such as dependent care and
health care) (Select all answers that apply.)
16: We offer at least one program in this category because it is
required by law.
10: We offer at least one program in this category even though it is
not required by law. - See below.
8: We offer at least one program in this category but do not know
whether required or not by law. - See below.
2: We do not offer any programs in this category.
If your department/agency offers any programs in category 3 that are
not required by law or if you do not know if it is required by law,
please provide examples of the specific program(s) you offer.
Data intentionally not reported:
Category 4 ” Care Giving Programs (such as child care, elder/dependent
care, and support for care giving) (Select all answers that apply.)
7: We offer at least one program in this category because it is
required by law.
21: We offer at least one program in this category even though it is
not required by law. - See below.
4: We offer at least one program in this category but do not know
whether required or not by law. - See below.
3: We do not offer any programs in this category.
If your department/agency offers any programs in category 4 that are
not required by law or if you do not know if it is required by law,
please provide examples of the specific program(s) you offer.
Data intentionally not reported.
Category 5 ” Employee Assistance Programs (such as stress management,
smoking cessation, and counseling) (Select all answers that apply.)
25: We offer at least one program in this category because it is
required by law.
20: We offer at least one program in this category even though it is
not required by law. - See below.
3: We offer at least one program in this category but do not know
whether required or not by law. - See below.
0: We do not offer any programs in this category.
If your department/agency offers any programs in category 5 that are
not required by law or if you do not know if it is required by law,
please provide examples of the specific program(s) you offer.
Data intentionally not reported.
Category 6 ” Volunteerism/Community Involvement Programs (such as blood
donation and tutoring) (Select all answers that apply.)
3: We offer at least one program in this category because it is
required by law.
26: We offer at least one program in this category even though it is
not required by law. - See below.
4: We offer at least one program in this category but do not know
whether required or not by law. - See below.
2: We do not offer any programs in this category.
If your department/agency offers any programs in category 6 that are
not required by law or if you do not know if it is required by law,
please provide examples of the specific program(s) you offer.
Category 7 ” Health and Wellness Programs (such as fitness programs and
health screening) (Select all answers that apply.)
3: We offer at least one program in this category because it is
required by law.
25: We offer at least one program in this category even though it is
not required by law. - See below.
3: We offer at least one program in this category but do not know
whether required or not by law. - See below.
2: We do not offer any programs in this category.
If your department/agency offers any programs in category 7 that are
not required by law or if you do not know if it is required by law,
please provide examples of the specific program(s) you offer.
Data intentionally not reported.
3. Based on your experience, to what extent, if at all, do your
department's/agency's work/life programs improve the recruitment and
retention of its employees? (Select one answer in each row in a, b,
and c below.)
a. Work/life programs offered that are required by law:
Improves recruitment:
Not applicable, programs not offered: 0;
Very great extent: 6;
Great extent: 11;
Moderate extent: 10;
Some extent: 3;
Little or no extent: 1;
Do not know: 2.
Improves retention:
Not applicable, programs not offered: 0;
Very great extent: 6;
Great extent: 12;
Moderate extent: 9;
Some extent: 2;
Little or no extent: 0;
Do not know: 2.
b. Work/life programs offered that are not required by law but are
authorized by your department/agency:
Improves recruitment:
Not applicable, programs not offered: 0;
Very great extent: 6;
Great extent: 10;
Moderate extent: 13;
Some extent: 1;
Little or no extent: 0;
Do not know: 3.
Improves retention:
Not applicable, programs not offered: 0;
Very great extent: 7;
Great extent: 9;
Moderate extent: 9;
Some extent: 3;
Little or no extent: 0;
Do not know: 3.
c. Work/life programs offered that may or may not be required by law
(i.e., you were not sure):
Improves recruitment:
Not applicable, programs not offered: 5;
Very great extent: 2;
Great extent: 5;
Moderate extent: 7;
Some extent: 2;
Little or no extent: 0;
Do not know: 9.
Improves retention:
Not applicable, programs not offered: 5;
Very great extent: 2;
Great extent: 7;
Moderate extent: 4;
Some extent: 2;
Little or no extent: 1;
Do not know: 8.
Implementing Department/Agency Work/Life Programs:
Please note: All remaining questions in this questionnaire refer to
ALL work/life programs (excluding teleworking/telecommuting and
flexiplace), both those required by law and those not required but
authorized.
4. Based on your experience, how has each of the following factors
helped or hindered your department's/agency's ability to implement
work/life programs? (Select one answer in each row.)
a. OPM involvement (e.g., guidance, assistance, information sharing,
etc.):
Greatly Helped: 12;
Helped somewhat: 12;
Helped in some, hindered in others: 6;
Hindered somewhat: 1;
Greatly hindered: 0;
Not applicable/Do not know: 2.
b. Level of support from your department's/agency's top-level
management:
Greatly Helped: 21;
Helped somewhat: 10;
Helped in some, hindered in others: 2;
Hindered somewhat: 0;
Greatly hindered: 0;
Not applicable/Do not know: 0.
c. Level of support from your department's/agency's mid-level
management:
Greatly Helped: 16;
Helped somewhat: 13;
Helped in some, hindered in others: 3;
Hindered somewhat: 0;
Greatly hindered: 1;
Not applicable/Do not know: 0.
d. Availability of funding necessary for implementation of work/life
program(s):
Greatly Helped: 12;
Helped somewhat: 8;
Helped in some, hindered in others: 0;
Hindered somewhat: 3;
Greatly hindered: 7;
Not applicable/Do not know: 3.
e. Level of employee demand (from too little to too much) for
work/life program(s):
Greatly Helped: 7;
Helped somewhat: 16;
Helped in some, hindered in others: 4;
Hindered somewhat: 0;
Greatly hindered: 1;
Not applicable/Do not know: 4.
f. Labor/management agreements:
Greatly Helped: 4;
Helped somewhat: 8;
Helped in some, hindered in others: 12;
Hindered somewhat: 1;
Greatly hindered: 0;
Not applicable/Do not know: 8.
g. Other factors - Please specify below:
Greatly Helped: 0;
Helped somewhat: 0;
Helped in some, hindered in others: 0;
Hindered somewhat: 1;
Greatly hindered: 2;
Not applicable/Do not know: 11.
Please specify other factors that helped or hindered implementation.
Data intentionally not reported.
5. Please describe how issues related to how jobs are structured or
work is performed by your department's/agency's employees (e.g.,
requirement that employees must work on-site for security reasons)
helps and/or hinders your department's/agency's ability to implement
work/life programs.
Data intentionally not reported.
6. What was the most significant challenge that your department/agency
encountered when trying to implement a work/life program? In your
answer, please include the program being implemented, the challenge
faced, and the end result of the challenge.
Data intentionally not reported.
Departments'/Agencies' Perception of OPM:
In this section, we ask about how you perceive OPM's involvement in
your department's/agency's selection, development, and implementation
of work/life programs. By OPM's involvement, we are referring to any
guidance, assistance, and information they shared with your
department/agency. When answering these questions, please use the
following OPM definitions:
Guidance - includes formal guidance (regulations) and informal
guidance (such as memoranda, e-mails, and OPM bulletins).
Assistance - includes such things as accessible OPM points of contact,
formal working groups, informal mentoring, and OPM sponsored training.
Information sharing - includes such things as interactive listservs,
newsletters, and access to reports.
7. Thinking about the guidance that your department/agency has
received from OPM during the past year, how satisfied or dissatisfied
were you with how OPM met the following criteria? (Select one answer
in each row.)
a. Timeliness:
Did not seek guidance from OPM: 0;
Sought but did not receive guidance from OPM: 0;
Very satisfied: 10;
Somewhat satisfied: 12;
As satisfied as dissatisfied: 3;
Somewhat dissatisfied: 2;
Very dissatisfied: 4;
Do not know: 2.
b. Quality:
Did not seek guidance from OPM: 0;
Sought but did not receive guidance from OPM: 0;
Very satisfied: 13;
Somewhat satisfied: 11;
As satisfied as dissatisfied: 4;
Somewhat dissatisfied: 2;
Very dissatisfied: 1;
Do not know: 2.
c. Ease of obtaining:
Did not seek guidance from OPM: 0;
Sought but did not receive guidance from OPM: 0;
Very satisfied: 10;
Somewhat satisfied: 12;
As satisfied as dissatisfied: 4;
Somewhat dissatisfied: 3;
Very dissatisfied: 2;
Do not know: 2.
d. Sufficiency (in terms of quality or detail):
Did not seek guidance from OPM: 0;
Sought but did not receive guidance from OPM: 0;
Very satisfied: 10;
Somewhat satisfied: 12;
As satisfied as dissatisfied: 4;
Somewhat dissatisfied: 2;
Very dissatisfied: 3;
Do not know: 2.
8. Thinking about the assistance that your department/agency has
received from OPM during the past year, how satisfied or dissatisfied
were you with how OPM met the following criteria? (Select one answer
in each row.)
a. Timeliness:
Did not seek guidance from OPM: 3;
Sought but did not receive guidance from OPM: 0;
Very satisfied: 11;
Somewhat satisfied: 11;
As satisfied as dissatisfied: 4;
Somewhat dissatisfied: 1;
Very dissatisfied: 0;
Do not know: 3.
b. Quality:
Did not seek guidance from OPM: 3;
Sought but did not receive guidance from OPM: 0;
Very satisfied: 16;
Somewhat satisfied: 5;
As satisfied as dissatisfied: 5;
Somewhat dissatisfied: 1;
Very dissatisfied: 0;
Do not know: 3.
c. Ease of obtaining:
Did not seek guidance from OPM: 3;
Sought but did not receive guidance from OPM: 0;
Very satisfied: 10;
Somewhat satisfied: 12;
As satisfied as dissatisfied: 4;
Somewhat dissatisfied: 0;
Very dissatisfied: 1;
Do not know: 1.
d. Sufficiency (in terms of quality or detail):
Did not seek guidance from OPM: 3;
Sought but did not receive guidance from OPM: 0;
Very satisfied: 13;
Somewhat satisfied: 10;
As satisfied as dissatisfied: 3;
Somewhat dissatisfied: 0;
Very dissatisfied: 1;
Do not know: 3.
9. Thinking about the information that OPM has shared with your
department/agency during the past year, how satisfied or dissatisfied
were you with how OPM met the following criteria? (Select one answer
in each row.)
a. Timeliness:
Did not seek guidance from OPM: 0;
Sought but did not receive guidance from OPM: 0;
Very satisfied: 13;
Somewhat satisfied: 9;
As satisfied as dissatisfied: 4;
Somewhat dissatisfied: 3;
Very dissatisfied: 1;
Do not know: 3.
b. Quality:
Did not seek guidance from OPM: 0;
Sought but did not receive guidance from OPM: 0;
Very satisfied: 14;
Somewhat satisfied: 9;
As satisfied as dissatisfied: 5;
Somewhat dissatisfied: 1;
Very dissatisfied: 1;
Do not know: 3.
c. Ease of obtaining:
Did not seek guidance from OPM: 0;
Sought but did not receive guidance from OPM: 0;
Very satisfied: 9;
Somewhat satisfied: 14;
As satisfied as dissatisfied: 3;
Somewhat dissatisfied: 3;
Very dissatisfied: 1;
Do not know: 3.
d. Sufficiency (in terms of quality or detail):
Did not seek guidance from OPM: 0;
Sought but did not receive guidance from OPM: 0;
Very satisfied: 12;
Somewhat satisfied: 10;
As satisfied as dissatisfied: 5;
Somewhat dissatisfied: 1;
Very dissatisfied: 2;
Do not know: 3.
10. Overall, would you say that OPM's direct involvement with your
department/agency during the past year has helped or hindered your
department's/agency's selection, development, and implementation of
work/life programs? (Select one answer in each row. If your
department/agency had no interaction with OPM, please respond "No
interaction with OPM." If OPM's involvement helped your
department/agency in some work/life programs but hindered in others
please respond "Helped in some, hindered in others.")
a. Selection of work/life programs:
No interaction with OPM: 9;
Greatly helped: 6;
Helped somewhat: 11;
Helped in some, hindered in others: 4;
Hindered somewhat: 0;
Greatly hindered: 0;
Do not know: 1.
b. Development of work/life programs:
No interaction with OPM: 8;
Greatly helped: 6;
Helped somewhat: 12;
Helped in some, hindered in others: 4;
Hindered somewhat: 0;
Greatly hindered: 0;
Do not know: 3.
c. Implementation of work/life programs:
No interaction with OPM: 8;
Greatly helped: 6;
Helped somewhat: 12;
Helped in some, hindered in others: 3;
Hindered somewhat: 0;
Greatly hindered: 0;
Do not know: 4.
10a. If in any row of question 10 you answered that OPM's involvement
helped your department/agency in some work/life programs but hindered
in others, please describe what helped and/or hindered your
department/agency.
Data intentionally not reported.
Tracking/Monitoring of Work/Life Programs:
In this section our questions focus on how your department/agency
currently tracks or monitors the work/life programs (excluding
teleworking/telecommuting and flexiplace) offered to its employees.
The next section will focus on how your department/agency evaluates
the work/life programs offered to its employees.
By tracking or monitoring we mean measuring the extent to which your
employees use these programs. This may include checks of time and
attendance records, automated deductions from employees' paychecks,
sign-in sheets at meetings, employee surveys, etc.
11. Does your department/agency currently track or monitor the extent
to which the work/life programs it offers to its employees are
actually used by the employees?
5: Yes, all of the programs - Continue with question 12.
24: Yes, some of the programs - Continue with question 12.
2: No, none of the programs ” Go to page: Evaluation of Work/Life
Programs.
2: Do not know ” Go to page: Evaluation of Work/Life Programs.
12. For each of the work/life programs that your department/agency
currently tracks or monitors, in which of the following ways is this
tracking or monitoring carried out? (Check all answers that apply in
each row. If you track or monitor programs in a way not listed in the
matrix heading, please identify in question 12a.)
a. Alternative work schedules (such as compressed schedule and
flexible hours schedule):
We do not track or monitor this program: 9;
By analyzing time and attendance records: 17;
By monitoring automated deductions from employees' paychecks: 0;
By keeping track of sign-in sheets at meetings: 1;
By conducting employee surveys: 4;
By keeping logs of "contact time" or direct-service delivery hours: 1.
b. Leave Programs (such as leave for family care):
We do not track or monitor this program: 11;
By analyzing time and attendance records: 15;
By monitoring automated deductions from employees' paychecks: 0;
By keeping track of sign-in sheets at meetings: 1;
By conducting employee surveys: 4;
By keeping logs of "contact time" or direct-service delivery hours: 1.
c. Flexible Spending Accounts (such as dependent care and health care):
We do not track or monitor this program: 14;
By analyzing time and attendance records: 2;
By monitoring automated deductions from employees' paychecks: 11;
By keeping track of sign-in sheets at meetings: 0;
By conducting employee surveys: 2;
By keeping logs of "contact time" or direct-service delivery hours: 1.
d. Care Giving Programs (such as child care, elder/dependent care, and
support for care giving):
We do not track or monitor this program: 10;
By analyzing time and attendance records: 1;
By monitoring automated deductions from employees' paychecks: 1;
By keeping track of sign-in sheets at meetings: 7;
By conducting employee surveys: 5;
By keeping logs of "contact time" or direct-service delivery hours: 9.
e. Employee Assistance Programs (such as stress management, smoking
cessation, and counseling):
We do not track or monitor this program: 3;
By analyzing time and attendance records: 0;
By monitoring automated deductions from employees' paychecks: 0;
By keeping track of sign-in sheets at meetings: 9;
By conducting employee surveys: 8;
By keeping logs of "contact time" or direct-service delivery hours: 21.
f. Volunteerism/Community Involvement Programs (such as blood donation
and tutoring):
We do not track or monitor this program: 14;
By analyzing time and attendance records: 1;
By monitoring automated deductions from employees' paychecks: 0;
By keeping track of sign-in sheets at meetings: 7;
By conducting employee surveys: 2;
By keeping logs of "contact time" or direct-service delivery hours: 8.
g. Health and Wellness (such as fitness programs and health
screenings):
We do not track or monitor this program: 6;
By analyzing time and attendance records: 1;
By monitoring automated deductions from employees' paychecks: 2;
By keeping track of sign-in sheets at meetings: 12;
By conducting employee surveys: 8;
By keeping logs of "contact time" or direct-service delivery hours: 12.
12a. If you track or monitor the work/life programs listed above in
any other way, please identify the program and how it is tracked or
monitored.
Data intentionally not reported.
Evaluation of Work/Life Programs:
In this section we ask about how your department/agency may evaluate
the work/life programs (excluding teleworking/telecommuting and
flexiplace) offered to its employees.
By evaluating we mean measuring the extent to which the program is
meeting its goals. The results of the evaluations of work/life
programs may be used to assess the programs' impact on the recruitment
and/or retention of employees.
13. Does your department/agency currently evaluate the work/life
programs it offers to its employees?
3: Yes, all of the programs - Continue with question 14.
18: Yes, some of the programs - Continue with question 14.
8: No, none of the programs - Skip to question 19.
4: Do not know - skip to question 19.
14. Which work/life programs are you currently evaluating (or have you
evaluated)? (Check all answers that apply.)
10: Alternative work schedules (such as compressed schedule and
flexible hours schedule).
4: Leave Programs (such as leave for family care).
6: Flexible Spending Accounts (such as dependent care and health care).
13: Care Giving Programs (such as child care, elder/dependent care,
and support for care giving).
16: Employee Assistance Programs (such as stress management, smoking
cessation, and counseling).
7: Volunteerism/Community Involvement Programs (such as blood donation
and tutoring).
17: Health and Wellness Programs (such as fitness programs and health
screenings).
14a. Please provide examples of programs for each program category
checked.
Data intentionally not reported.
15. Does your department/agency currently use (or has it used) the
results of the evaluation of work/life programs in the following ways?
(Select one answer in each row.)
a. To modify existing work/life program structure based on the data:
Yes: 19;
No: 0;
Do not know: 1.
b. To implement new work/life programs based on the data:
Yes: 15;
No: 3;
Do not know: 2.
c. To eliminate work/life programs based on the data (If yes, please
describe in the space below):
Yes: 2;
No: 16;
Do not know: 2.
d. For other purposes - Please specify below:
Yes: 2;
No: 4;
Do not know: 5.
Please describe the situation whereby a work/life program has been
eliminated based on the data. (Item "c" above)
Data intentionally not reported.
Please specify other purposes for which evaluation results have been
used here. (Item "d" above)
Data intentionally not reported.
16. To what extent, if at all, does your department/agency assess the
possible effects your work/life programs (excluding
teleworking/telecommuting and flexiplace) have on the recruitment and
retention of its employees? (Select one answer in each row.)
a. Recruitment:
Very great extent: 3;
Great extent: 6;
Moderate extent: 5;
Some extent: 2;
Little or extent: 3;
Do not know: 2.
b. Retention:
Very great extent: 3;
Great extent: 6;
Moderate extent: 4;
Some extent: 4;
Little or extent: 2;
Do not know: 2.
17. Overall, would you say that interaction with OPM has helped, had
no effect on, or hindered your department's/agency's ability to
evaluate each of the following categories of work/life programs?
(Select one answer in each row.)
a. Alternative work schedules (such as compressed schedule and
flexible hours schedule):
Not applicable, we had no interaction with OPM: 4;
Greatly helped: 3;
Helped somewhat: 7;
Had no effect: 5;
Hindered somewhat: 0;
Greatly hindered: 0;
Do not know: 2.
b. Leave Programs (such as leave for family care):
Not applicable, we had no interaction with OPM: 3;
Greatly helped: 5;
Helped somewhat: 7;
Had no effect: 3;
Hindered somewhat: 0;
Greatly hindered: 0;
Do not know: 3.
c. Flexible Spending Accounts (such as dependent care and health care):
Not applicable, we had no interaction with OPM: 7;
Greatly helped: 1;
Helped somewhat: 3;
Had no effect: 6;
Hindered somewhat: 0;
Greatly hindered: 0;
Do not know: 4.
d. Care Giving Programs (such as child care, elder/dependent care, and
support for care giving):
Not applicable, we had no interaction with OPM: 4;
Greatly helped: 5;
Helped somewhat: 5;
Had no effect: 2;
Hindered somewhat: 1;
Greatly hindered: 0;
Do not know: 4.
e. Employee Assistance Programs (such as stress management, smoking
cessation, and counseling):
Not applicable, we had no interaction with OPM: 6;
Greatly helped: 2;
Helped somewhat: 7;
Had no effect: 4;
Hindered somewhat: 0;
Greatly hindered: 0;
Do not know: 2.
f. Volunteerism/Community Involvement:
Programs (such as blood donation and tutoring):
Not applicable, we had no interaction with OPM: 5;
Greatly helped: 2;
Helped somewhat: 3;
Had no effect: 6;
Hindered somewhat: 0;
Greatly hindered: 0;
Do not know: 5.
g. Health and Wellness (such as fitness programs and health
screenings):
Not applicable, we had no interaction with OPM: 2;
Greatly helped: 3;
Helped somewhat: 11;
Had no effect: 3;
Hindered somewhat: 0;
Greatly hindered: 0;
Do not know: 2.
18. Overall, how much of a challenge, if any, has been presented by
each of the following to limit your department's/agency's ability to
adequately track or evaluate it's work/life program(s)? (Select one
answer in each row.)
a. Lack of management support:
Very great challenge: 0;
Great challenge: 0;
Moderate challenge: 3;
Some challenge: 8;
No challenge: 9;
Do not know: 1.
b. Limited technology:
Very great challenge: 0;
Great challenge: 4;
Moderate challenge: 5;
Some challenge: 8;
No challenge: 4;
Do not know: 0.
c. Methodological constraints:
Very great challenge: 1;
Great challenge: 3;
Moderate challenge: 3;
Some challenge: 8;
No challenge: 2;
Do not know: 4.
d. Time constraints:
Very great challenge: 4;
Great challenge: 6;
Moderate challenge: 3;
Some challenge: 5;
No challenge: 3;
Do not know: 0.
e. Limited staff resources, skills, or expertise for tracking or
evaluating programs:
Very great challenge: 5;
Great challenge: 6;
Moderate challenge: 5;
Some challenge: 3;
No challenge: 2;
Do not know: 0.
f. Organizational cultural factors ” Please specify below:
Very great challenge: 0;
Great challenge: 1;
Moderate challenge: 5;
Some challenge: 2;
No challenge: 7;
Do not know: 5.
g. Other challenges ” Please specify below:
Very great challenge: 0;
Great challenge: 1;
Moderate challenge: 0;
Some challenge: 1;
No challenge: 4;
Do not know: 5.
Please specify any organizational cultural factors here.
Data intentionally not reported.
Please specify other challenges here.
Data intentionally not reported.
19. If you have any comments about any of the topics covered in this
questionnaire or would like to elaborate on any of your responses,
please use the space below.
Data intentionally not reported.
20. Are you ready to submit your final completed survey to GAO?
(This is equivalent to mailing a completed paper survey to us. It
tells us that your answers are official and final.)
33: Yes, my survey is complete.
7: No, my survey is not yet complete.
[End of section]
Appendix III: Comments from the Office of Personnel Management:
United States Office Of Personnel Management:
Employee Services:
Washington, DC 20415:
Ms. Yvonne D. Jones:
Director, Strategic Issues:
U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO):
441 G Street NW, Room #2440C:
Washington, DC 20548:
Dear Ms. Jones:
Thank you for providing the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM)
the opportunity to comment on the Government Accountability Office
draft report, "Agencies Generally Satisfied with OPM Assistance, but
More Tracking and Information Sharing Needed." We appreciate the
opportunity to provide you with comments about this report.
Response to Recommendation:
Recommendation: We recommend that the Director of OPM, working with
the CHCO Council, identify the resources, steps, and timetable
necessary to complete the following three actions:
1) track on a more systematic basis information already being
collected by individual federal agencies on their work/life programs,
such as program usage data and evaluations;
2) evaluate the results of work/life program surveys conducted by
leading private sector organizations that could help federal agencies
compare their work/life programs with private sector leading practices
as stated in OPM's 2010-2015 Strategic Plan; and;
3) provide the information from both the public and private sectors to
agency officials”through available avenues such as-the CHCO Council
and federal executive boards”that could help them address work/life
program issues and determine if the work/life programs are meeting
their agencies' goals.
Management Response:
We concur. We appreciate the time and effort that GAO has put into
this informative report. The Office of Personnel Management's
Work/Life/Wellness staff would welcome the opportunity to work with
the CHCO Council to identify resources, steps and timetable necessary
to complete the identified actions. Broadly speaking, we agree with
the three actions outlined with the caveat that we have the following
concerns about the emphasis on the private sector:
* We acknowledge the utility of examining leading private sector
programs, policies and practices. However, motivation and culture
differ enough between the two so that direct comparison does not
provide a comprehensive set of ready to use solutions. We ask that GAO
modify the recommendations in the report to include this observation.
* We support careful collaboration with the private sector. Avoiding
the appearance of selective endorsement is a concern and needs to be
factored into the recommendations.
* Comprehensive evaluations of public and private sector work/life
programs have been produced in the academic research, by State
entities, and other organizations such as the Sloan Foundation. We
suggest that GAO's recommendations be expanded to include these.
Technical comments to the draft report are enclosed. Unless otherwise
noted, the suggested revisions are meant to provide technical accuracy
and conform to terminology applicable to the Federal service.
Please contact Ms. Janet Barnes, Deputy Director, Internal Oversight &
Compliance on (202) 606-3270 should your office require additional
information.
Again, my thanks to your office for providing this opportunity to
update and clarify information in the draft report.
Sincerely,
Signed by:
Nancy H. Kichak:
Associate Director Employee Services:
Enclosure:
[End of letter]
Technical Comments on Draft GAO Report:
On page 2, first bullet at bottom of page, "We designed and
administered a survey to assess agency perceptions of OPM's
performance during a one-year period..." The dates of the one-year
period should be specified.
On pages 4 and 5, under "Background", the period of evaluation (i.e.,
the dates) should be given.
On page 6, Table 1, under the Category "health and wellness",
subcategory "health promotion", "worklife programs", the words
"Fitness Programs" should be replaced with "Wellness Programs."
Fitness is a result of physical activity participation at certain
levels as determined by scientific bodies of academics and others, and
is not an accurate title for programs being developed by agencies
under our guidance. Wellness encompasses many other components of
healthy lifestyle, including nutrition, behavior management and more.
Page 23, top of page: "OPM officials stated that they do not share
this information across federal agencies because they lack the time
and resources to maintain an inventory of these evaluations. OPM
officials said that the recent addition of staff to the Office of
Work/Life/Wellness will enable them to review reports in the future."
Comment: We request rewording this statement to say: "OPM officials
said that the recent addition of staff to the Office of
Work/Life/Wellness will enable them to review reports they may receive
in the future. At the time of this engagement, they were not staffed
or resourced to track, review or maintain an inventory of these
evaluations."
Page 30, first paragraph, last two sentences: "OPM officials said that
they do not track or maintain an inventory of these evaluations nor
review these evaluations due to the lack of time and available
resources.
Comment: We request rewording this statement to say: OPM officials
said that they do not currently track or maintain an inventory of
these evaluations nor review these evaluations.
[End of section]
Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments:
Contact:
Yvonne D. Jones, (202) 512-2717, jonesy@gao.gov:
Acknowledgments:
In addition to the contact named above, Steven Lozano, Assistant
Director; Steven J. Berke; Jeffrey Dawson; Karin Fangman; Stuart M.
Kaufman; Melanie Papasian; Joseph L. Santiago; Megan Taylor; and
Gregory H. Wilmoth made key contributions to this report.
[End of section]
Related GAO Products:
Human Capital: Sustained Attention to Strategic Human Capital
Management Needed. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-623T]. Washington, D.C.: April 22,
2009.
Older Workers: Enhanced Communication Among Federal Agencies Could
Improve Strategies for Hiring and Retaining Experienced Workers.
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-206]. Washington, D.C.:
February 24, 2009.
Human Capital: Transforming Federal Recruiting and Hiring Efforts.
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-762T]. Washington,
D.C.: May 8, 2008.
Older Workers: Federal Agencies Have Challenges, but Have
Opportunities to Hire and Retain Experienced Employees. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-630T]. Washington, D.C.: April 30,
2008.
An Assessment of Dependent Care Needs of Federal Workers Using the
Office of Personnel Management's Survey. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-437R]. Washington, D.C.: March 30,
2007.
Highlights of a GAO Forum: Engaging and Retraining Older Workers.
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-438SP]. Washington,
D.C.: February 28, 2007.
Older Workers: Some Best Practices and Strategies for Engaging and
Retaining Older Workers. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-433T]. Washington, D.C.: February
28, 2007.
Office of Personnel Management: Key Lessons Learned to Date for
Strengthening Capacity to Lead and Implement Human Capital Reforms.
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-90]. Washington, D.C.:
January 19, 2007.
Human Capital: Agencies Need Leadership and the Supporting
Infrastructure to Take Advantage of New Flexibilities. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-05-616T]. Washington, D.C.: April 21,
2005.
Human Capital: OPM Can Better Assist Agencies in Using Personnel
Flexibilities. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-03-428].
Washington, D.C.: May 9, 2003.
Major Management Challenges and Program Risks: Office of Personnel
Management. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-03-115].
Washington, D.C.: January 2003.
Human Capital: Effective Use of Flexibilities Can Assist Agencies in
Managing Their Workforces. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-03-2]. Washington, D.C.: December 6,
2002.
[End of section]
Footnotes:
[1] Although telework is offered as a work/life program to the federal
workforce, we have not included it in this report because GAO is
conducting a separate review of the federal telework program.
[2] We asked the survey recipients to focus their perceptions about
OPM's assistance, guidance, and information sharing during the 1-year
period beginning April 2009 and ending April 2010. This time period
coincides with the first year tenure of the new Director of OPM and
would reflect any changes in OPM's policies (or actions) resulting
from the new OPM administration.
[3] The CHCO Council consists of 25 members: the OPM Director, the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Deputy Director for Management
and the CHCOs from the 15 executive departments and an additional 8
federal agency CHCOs designated by the OPM Director. The Council
advises and coordinates the human capital activities of its members'
agencies.
[4] We did not receive survey responses from work/life program
managers at the Department of Commerce, Department of Defense,
Department of Education, Department of Homeland Security, and National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, or from the CHCOs for the
Department of Homeland Security and Department of State (see table 3
in appendix I).
[5] WorldatWork, "Attraction and Retention: The Impact and Prevalence
of Work-Life & Benefit Programs" (Scottsdale, Ariz.: WorldatWork, Oct.
2007) [hyperlink,
http://www.worldatwork.org/waw/adimLink?id=21945&nonav=yes] (accessed
May 14, 2009). WorldatWork is a nonprofit organization that focuses on
human resources issues including compensation and work/life programs.
[6] OPM, A New Day for the Civil Service: Federal Employee Viewpoint
Survey 2010-Results from the 2010 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey
(Washington, D.C., 2010).
[7] For example, Congress has authorized flexible and compressed work
schedules (5 U.S.C. §§ 6120-6133), voluntary leave transfer and leave
bank programs (5 U.S.C. §§ 6331-6340 and §§ 6361-6373), and use of
appropriated funds to support child care centers (40 U.S.C. § 590) and
to subsidize child care (40 U.S.C. § 590(g)).
[8] OPM, Working for America: Strategic and Operational Plan 2006-2010
(Washington, D.C., 2006). The FEBs were established by Presidential
Directive in 1961. FEBs foster communication, coordination, and
collaboration among federal field agencies and serve as a forum for
the exchange of information between Washington and the field about
programs, management strategies, and administrative challenges
including human capital management.
[9] OPM, OPM Fiscal Year 2008 Annual Performance Report. HCAAF offers
guidance and integration so that all involved in transforming human
capital management--such as OPM and the federal agencies--can
understand how to manage human capital programs and how to gauge
progress and results in managing their human capital programs.
[10] GAO, Human Capital: Sustained Attention to Strategic Human
Capital Management Needed, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-623T] (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 22,
2009).
[11] [hyperlink,
http://www.opm.gov/employment_and_benefits/worklife/aboutus]
(Washington, D.C., 2010) (accessed Nov. 2010).
[12] GAO, An Assessment of Dependent Care Needs of Federal Workers
Using the Office of Personnel Management's Survey, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-437R] (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 30,
2007); Human Capital: Agencies Need Leadership and the Supporting
Infrastructure to Take Advantage of New Flexibilities, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-05-616T] (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 21,
2005); Human Capital: OPM Can Better Assist Agencies in Using
Personnel Flexibilities, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-03-428] (Washington, D.C.: May 9,
2003).
[13] GAO, Older Workers: Enhanced Communication among Federal Agencies
Could Improve Strategies for Hiring and Retaining Experienced Workers,
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-206] (Washington, D.C.:
Feb. 24, 2009).
[14] GAO, Human Capital: Effective Use of Flexibilities Can Assist
Agencies in Managing Their Workforces, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-03-2] (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 6, 2002).
[15] 2006-2010 OPM Strategic Plan.
[16] 2010-2015 OPM Strategic Plan.
[17] Agency officials were asked to respond using a five-point scale,
whether OPM's involvement: (1) greatly helped, (2) helped somewhat,
(3) helped in some, hindered in others, (4) hindered somewhat, or (5)
greatly hindered.
[18] In its memo to federal agencies on the 2011 budget submissions,
OMB required agencies to submit action plans that address employee
satisfaction with human capital programs including work/life programs.
[19] GAO, Human Capital: Continued Opportunities Exist for FDA and OPM
to Improve Oversight of Recruitment, Relocation, and Retention
Incentives, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-226]
(Washington, D.C.: Jan. 10, 2010).
[20] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-206].
[21] OMB Memorandum to Agencies' Heads, Fiscal Year 2012 Budget
Guidance, June 8, 2010.
[22] 2010-2015 OPM Strategic Plan.
[23] OPM, "Memorandum for Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies
re: Federal Agency Health and Wellness Reporting Requirements"
(Washington, D.C.: July 14, 2009).
[24] See table 1 for the list of work/life programs subcategories
which were the basis of the categories used in our survey.
[25] The report provided information on: (1) some of the changes in
the private sector workforce that have increased the need for
flexibility in the workplace; (2) the current state of flexible work
arrangements and how many employers have adapted to the changing
realities in the private sector workforce and (3) the economic
benefits of workplace flexibility arrangements.
[26] Executive Office of the President, Council of Economic Advisers,
Work-Life Balance and the Economics of Workplace Flexibility
(Washington, D.C., Mar. 2010). The survey was conducted by Corporate
Voices for Working Families--a nonprofit organization representing the
private sector on corporate and public policy issues involving working
families.
[27] GAO, Human Capital: Selected Agencies' Experiences and Lessons
Learned in Designing Training and Development Programs, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-04-291] (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 30,
2004).
[28] OPM 2010-2015 Strategic Plan.
[29] OPM, Fact Sheet on Federal Employee Health and Wellness
Initiative (2010).
[30] According to a Deloitte official, "Deloitte" means Deloitte LLP
and its subsidiaries.
[31] The Sloan Foundation is a non-profit, philanthropic organization
that among other projects has provided research grants to study work-
family issues such as initiatives to expand workplace flexibility.
[32] The CHCO Council consists of 25 members: the OPM Director, the
Office of Management and Budget Deputy Director of Management, and the
CHCOs from the 15 Executive departments and an additional 8 federal
agency CHCOs designated by the OPM Director.
[33] We asked the survey recipients to focus their perceptions about
OPM's assistance, guidance, and information sharing during the one-
year period beginning with April 2009 and ending April 2010. This time
period coincides with the first year of tenure of the new Director of
OPM and would reflect any changes in OPM's policies (or actions)
resulting from the new OPM administration.
[34] We originally selected one company in the computer/technology
services industry, but that company declined to be interviewed.
[End of section]
GAO's Mission:
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
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 GAO's Web site [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each
weekday, GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence on its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly
posted products every afternoon, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]
and select "E-mail Updates."
Order by Phone:
The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO‘s actual cost of
production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the
publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and
white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO‘s Web site,
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm].
Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or
TDD (202) 512-2537.
Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card,
MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional
information.
To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:
Contact:
Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]:
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov:
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:
Congressional Relations:
Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, dawnr@gao.gov:
(202) 512-4400:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room 7125:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
Public Affairs:
Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov:
(202) 512-4800:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room 7149:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
