[Senate Hearing 111-]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
FINANCIAL SERVICES AND GENERAL GOVERNMENT APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL
YEAR 2011
----------
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 24, 2010
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 2:32 p.m., in room SD-192, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Richard J. Durbin (chairman)
presiding.
Present: Senators Durbin and Collins.
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BERRY, DIRECTOR
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR RICHARD J. DURBIN
Senator Durbin. Good afternoon. I am pleased to convene
this hearing before the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on
Financial Services and General Government.
Our focus is on fiscal year 2011 budget request of the
Office of Personnel Management (OPM). OPM has not appeared
before our subcommittee since 1997. So we have been waiting a
long time to see you.
I welcome my ranking member, Senator Susan Collins of
Maine.
The Office of Personnel Management serves as the principal
adviser to the President on personnel management issues for the
country's 2 million Federal civilian employees. It designs,
develops, and oversees compliance with workforce policies and
sets the guidance in areas of recruiting, selection,
development, and compensation. To facilitate the Federal
employment application process at a single location, OPM
manages the USAJOBS Web site, which: posts 30,000 job vacancies
a day; maintains 15.4 million resumes on file; and sends more
than 500,000 e-mails daily to job seekers.
OPM manages the world's largest single employer-sponsored
health insurance plan with 8 million insured individuals, which
also insures Members of Congress. The agency also administers
retirement benefits for the Federal Government with more than
2.5 million retirees.
In addition, OPM conducts 90 percent of Federal background
investigations each year and provides observers to monitor the
election process as assigned by the Attorney General.
OPM's newly unveiled strategic plan presents goals that
will help prepare our Federal civil service for the 21st
century.
OPM's priority, and one I hope is shared by every Federal
agency, is to recruit and retain the best and the brightest.
Our Nation's civil servants are called on to defend our Nation,
restore confidence in our financial system, administer a
historical economic recovery effort, ensure adequate healthcare
for veterans and others, and search for cures to the most
vexing diseases. So we depend on these men and women who are
dedicating their lives to public service.
I am pleased to note that the 15.4 million resumes I
mentioned OPM has on file are up from 1.9 million just a few
years ago. With the surge of interest in public service, it is
important that appropriate OPM policies and procedures be
reformed to attract the best candidates.
For fiscal year 2011, OPM is requesting $240 million in
discretionary funds, the same as the enacted amount for fiscal
year 2010, of which $95.7 million is for basic operating
expenses. They are requesting an additional 40 full-time
equivalents (FTEs) in the area of retirement processing.
Mr. Berry, since you assumed the directorship last April,
you have undertaken changes and improvements in hiring,
including veterans hiring. And I know that disability hiring
policy changes are a high priority for you.
In addition, you have overseen new efforts in the area of
wellness with funding we provided last year, which we will talk
to you about. I know you intend to recommend changes to the
Federal pay system, increasing telework eligibility, improving
the security clearance process, and getting the retirement
system modernization project on track.
According to an article from a recent Government Executive
magazine--whose cover you graced--with the title ``High
Hopes,'' you have been referred to as a ``change agent,'' ``the
quintessential Energizer bunny,'' and ``shot out of a cannon.''
Given what you hope to accomplish during your tenure, that is
good because it looks like you have your work cut out for you.
I would like to turn now to Senator Susan Collins, the
ranking member.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR SUSAN COLLINS
Senator Collins. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Director Berry, welcome. It is good to see you before us
here today.
I appreciate your leadership at OPM and your efforts to
fulfill the agency's mission to recruit, retain, and honor a
world-class Federal workforce to serve the American people.
I have always been a strong advocate for our Federal
workforce. Because of the good work of our Federal employees,
the United States Government is able to protect our Nation and
provide crucial services to our citizens each and every day.
Without their dedication, this vital work could not be done,
and their commitment to public service makes for a stronger
America.
Many Federal employees place their very lives at risk on a
daily basis. They knowingly put themselves in harm's way. The
very nature of their work--whether it is military personnel, as
Federal law enforcement or intelligence officers, or in other
dangerous callings--puts them on the front lines of an often
challenging or even life-threatening missions. But as the
recent attack on the building in Austin, Texas, and other past
assaults directed at Federal buildings and personnel have
demonstrated, Federal employees can become the target of
terrorists and criminals.
Over the next decade, the Federal Government is facing a
retirement wave, and with it, the loss of leadership and
institutional knowledge at all levels. On average, retirements
from the Federal workforce have exceeded 50,000 a year for a
decade. Those numbers will certainly rise in the near future.
The Office of Personnel Management calculates that 60
percent of the current Federal workforce will be eligible to
retire during the coming years. Federal agencies, which must
already hire more than one-quarter of 1 million new employees
each year, will need to work hard to replace these retirees, as
the private sector and State and local governments will be
competing for the same qualified applicants.
To meet this challenge, agencies must use the recruitment
and retention tools they already have, such as student loan
repayment, recruitment and retention bonuses, and the ability
to rehire Federal annuitants to fill critical needs. That has
been a particular concern of mine. Last year I authored a bill
to allow just that.
OPM also needs to develop an effective and fair pay-for-
performance system that rewards the very best Federal
employees.
Director Berry, you have some very significant
responsibilities that you work to accomplish those goals. And
given fiscal constraints, I will be interested to hear how you
will ensure that OPM will provide employees, agencies, and
retirees with the important service they need but, most of all,
ensure that the public has the qualified workforce we all need.
So, Mr. Chairman, I look forward to working with you on
this issue.
Senator Durbin. Thanks a lot.
Director Berry has quite a background, worked as
legislative director for Congressman Steny Hoyer for 10 years,
Assistant Secretary of Treasury, and the Interior Department's
Director of both the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation and
the National Zoo, which means he will be comfortable here in
Congress.
We will ask questions about the panda later.
I now invite you to present your testimony, and your
written testimony will be part of the record.
Director Berry.
SUMMARY STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BERRY
Mr. Berry. Chairman Durbin and Senator Collins, thank you
so much for this opportunity to appear before you today.
I also want to personally thank both of you for your
incredible leadership over so many years for our Federal
employees and for retirees. On behalf of all of them, let me
just say thank you. I know that if they could be here today,
they would want to express thanks for your constant and
stalwart leadership.
With your indulgence, I would also like to introduce my
Deputy Director, Christine Griffin, who is with me today. Mr.
Chairman, as you mentioned in your opening statement there are
concerns with both diversity and people with disabilities.
Christine is one of the highest-ranking people in the Federal
Government with a disability, and she is doing a phenomenal
job. As I tell people, she is not really disabled, she is
abled-squared. She is amazing and could do anything plus, and
it is just an honor to be with her.
I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you to defend
the President's budget request for the Office of Personnel
Management for fiscal year 2011. I know that I am preaching to
the choir, but I can't overstate the importance of our mission
to recruit, retain, and honor a world-class workforce to serve
America. We are developing plans to achieve these goals, and I
look forward to sharing some of those details with you today.
For fiscal year 2011, OPM has requested $240 million in
discretionary resources. With this money, we will serve the
taxpayers by establishing, implementing, and overseeing all
Federal human resource policies, completing background security
investigations for over 90 percent of the Federal agencies,
ensuring compliance with merit system principles, and
administering of benefits for over 2 million Federal employees,
2.5 million retirees, and their families, totaling over 8
million lives.
Even as we innovate and try to do more, this request stays
level with the funds appropriated to OPM in fiscal year 2010.
The President has asked me to make Government ``cool''
again. And so, we have developed several initiatives to make
the Federal Government the model employer for the 21st century.
Both of you are supporting many of these initiatives, letting
job seekers know that the Federal Government is already a great
employer with the best workforce in the Nation.
In the past year, we have worked hard to expand the
recruitment and hiring of veterans throughout the Government.
Through an Executive order, the President established the
Veterans Employment Initiative, creating a partnership between
OPM, Departments of Labor, Veterans Affairs, and Defense.
OPM is requesting $2.4 million, an increase of $800,000
from fiscal year 2010, for this initiative in 2011. We plan to
use those resources to increase our support and access for
veterans seeking employment with the Federal Government. With
your leadership, we have also provided benefits to support our
soldiers and their families.
I am particularly proud of our efforts to create a new
special hiring authority for agencies that allow them to hire
the spouses of members of our armed forces, who, as you know,
have to move on a regular basis burdening them with a unique
disadvantage. Consequently, we are trying to help them gain
access to Federal employment not in violation of our veterans
hiring program, but rather in addition to it.
OPM also issued guidance in December to expand the paid
leave benefits of members of the National Guard and reservists
to help their families when they are called to active duty. Mr.
Chairman, I want to specifically thank you for your leadership.
This essentially enacts the legislation that you personally
introduced, and for the first time ever, employees from the
civil service sector who serve in the Reserve aren't
disadvantaged by having their pay cut. This legislation has
allowed us to restore their pay and maintain that pay while
they are serving in the military. So God bless you and thank
you for your leadership. We have worked to implement this
legislation so that these reservists are not penalized in any
way with regard to their pay.
Another initiative is our effort to work with agencies to
streamline the Federal hiring process. We are in the final
clearance process with the Office of Management and Budget now
and are ready, once we finish the agency clearance process, to
send to the President a major hiring reform proposal that will
essentially bring the Federal Government into the 21st century,
or I should say the 20th century, where we will just start
using resumes like everybody else.
I think that if we do nothing else, this will be a landmark
shift that will allow us to greatly benefit from progress that
has been made long ago in the private sector.
We requested $4 million for the next year to build
additional and improved assessments that will develop more
shared, registered, and enhanced Government-wide recruitment,
and we can talk about that more in the questions. We are
reforming the Federal security clearance process and are
seeking your authority to meet those demands by increasing our
Investigative Services Division by an additional 160 employees.
In addition, we are taking a measured approach to updating
our retirement systems and will be focused on improving overall
electronic data collection. We must ensure that benefits are
processed quickly and accurately and that our reform measures
are deliberate and don't waste any more of the taxpayers'
money.
I know you all have been very diligent in overseeing this
throughout the years. There have been multiple failures. We
want to make sure that we can guarantee success with regard to
any steps we take on this issue.
In fiscal year 2011, OPM has requested $1.5 million to
develop a better calculator for our retirement processing. This
will allow our caseworkers to process claims more expeditiously
and to meet current needs. Basically, right now we don't have
an automated system. As you know, RSM was disbanded and that
effort closed down. We had started to actually decrease our
staff under the expectation there was going to be a new system.
We are not going to have that system. Consequently, we do
need to increase some staff. I am asking for 40 more employees
so that we can just keep pace with the growth in demand that we
are seeing. We are receiving, just this year, from the Postal
Service alone an additional 18,000 retirements that we will
have to process.
We are looking for additional resources to conduct the
employee viewpoint survey on an annual basis rather than every
other year. We believe that this can be a very effective
management tool.
For the first time ever--and this really surprised me when
I got there. We should have the best health database in the
country. We have the largest single plan, covering 8 to 9
million lives and yet we have never collected any data from it.
And so, we miss, quite frankly, enormous opportunities for
improving cost efficiencies, evaluating which programs are
working better, and determining what the needs of our current
population are.
We want to make sure we can do that well. Thus, we are
asking you for the necessary resources. It is a substantial
investment, but it will allow us to begin collecting data for
the first time ever about our employees' health benefit
program, not at an individual level, but at the level where we
can learn where our weaknesses are and where there are possible
cost savings that could help us control costs in the future.
These priorities and the priorities in our budget reflect
the strategic goals that you have discussed in our strategic
plan: to hire the best, respect the workforce, expect the best
of our workforce, and honor their service. If we want enhanced
performance and superior results from our Federal Government,
we must invest in our employees and attract, hire, and retain
the best workforce.
To do this we must give our people the tools that they need
to succeed and the incentive to perform at their maximum
potential. We must assure employees that their services are and
will continue to be respected and honored. I thank you on
behalf of all Federal employees and retirees for both of your
roles in doing that throughout your careers.
PREPARED STATEMENT
Thank you for this opportunity to be with you today, and I
look forward to answering any questions that you might have.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of John Berry
Chairman Durbin, Ranking Member Collins, and Members of the
Subcommittee: As Director of the Office of Personnel Management, I
appreciate the opportunity to testify before you today on the
President's fiscal year 2011 budget request for the Office of Personnel
Management (OPM). This budget will help us meet our responsibilities
for establishing, implementing, and overseeing the Federal Government's
human resources policies, background security investigations, merit
system compliance, and administration of a broad range of benefits for
the 2 million strong Federal civilian workforce, 2.5 million retirees,
their families and survivors. I look forward to sharing with you the
Administration's vision to recruit, retain, and honor a world-class
workforce to serve America.
Included in the fiscal year 2011 budget request are my strategic
goals for the agency: Hire the Best, Respect the Workforce, Expect the
Best, and Honor Service. These guiding principles have framed my
initiatives of the past year and will continue to guide our activities
and priorities in the next fiscal year.
The President has asked me to make Government ``cool'' again, and
to that end, we have several initiatives to reinforce the Federal
Government to be the best workplace with the best workforce in the
Nation. In the past year, with this subcommittee and Congress' support,
we have worked hard to expand the recruitment and hiring of veterans
throughout the Government; provide benefits to support the war fighter
and his or her family; foster collaboration between labor and
management in order to improve delivery of Government services; reform
the Federal security clearance process, and propose initiatives to
streamline the Federal hiring process. However, many challenges still
remain. Nonetheless, OPM is well-prepared to meet these challenges, and
the priorities outlined in this budget request are critical toward the
success of these efforts.
high priority performance goals
The following High Priority Performance goals are measurable
commitments to the American people. They represent high priorities for
both the Administration and the Office of Personnel Management and are
expected to achieve significant results over the next 12 to 24 months.
Each of the four goals is related to OPM's major performance
improvement initiatives reflected in our budget. The High Priority
Performance Goals include:
Hiring Reform.--80 percent of Departments and major agencies will
meet agreed upon targeted improvements to: Improve hiring manager
satisfaction with applicant quality, improve applicant satisfaction,
and reduce the time it takes to hire.
Telework.--Increase by 50 percent the number of eligible Federal
employees who telework by fiscal year 2011, increase by 50 percent the
number of eligible Federal employees who telework over the fiscal year
2009 baseline of 102,900.
Security Clearance Reform.--Maintain or exceed OPM-related goals of
the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 and
provide the OPM deliverables necessary to ensure that security
clearance reforms are substantially operational across the Federal
government by the end of CY 2010.
Retirement Claims Processing.--Reduce the number of retirement
records OPM receives that are incomplete and require development to
less than 38 percent by the end of fiscal year 2010, 35 percent by the
end of fiscal year 2011, and 30 percent by the end of fiscal year 2012.
Wellness.--By the end of 2011, every agency has established and
begun to implement a plan for a comprehensive health and wellness
program which will achieve a 75 percent participation rate.
opm reorganization
Shortly after becoming OPM Director in April 2009, I tasked the
agency's senior leadership with developing a simplified model for
restructuring the agency's executive offices and program divisions. The
agency and its employee unions were partners throughout this process
with a shared commitment to ensure employees are treated fairly, and to
ultimately make OPM a better and more effective agency.
The foremost reason for reorganizing OPM was to enable our
customers, as well as OPM employees, to see in clear, plain English,
the functions that we perform and the organizations responsible for
implementing them. The five main functional organizations within OPM
now are:
--Employee Services, which provides policy direction and leadership
in designing, developing and promulgating Government-wide human
resources systems and programs;
--Retirement and Benefits, which administers retirement, health, and
life insurance benefit programs for Federal employees,
retirees, their families and survivors;
--Merit System Audit and Compliance, which ensures that Federal
agency human resources programs are effective and meet merit
system principles and related civil service requirements;
--Federal Investigative Services, which ensures the Federal
Government has a suitable workforce that protects National
Security and is worthy of Public Trust; and
--Human Resources Solutions, which provides effective human resources
solutions to assist Federal agencies in achieving their
missions.
There are three newly created offices that I believe will help
improve the agency's operations. First, I created an independent
Ombudsman that will address issues raised by OPM employees and some
customers of OPM. I have also created an Internal Oversight and
Compliance Office that will undertake reviews and assessments of OPM
operations, as well as assist program offices with responses to and
follow up on audits conducted by the OPM Inspector General and
Government Accountability Office. Through these offices we will have an
internal check on OPM's operations that will allow us to better
identify and improve problem areas.
Also, I created an Office of Planning and Policy Analysis. Included
in the OPM budget request is $7 million to start a data warehouse to
analyze the claims experience of participants in the Federal Employees
Health Benefits Program (FEHBP). Through this effort we hope to
identify trends in employee health issues and potentially drive down
costs through a better understanding of the Federal employee and
retiree population's most common healthcare needs.
Under this reorganization, OPM is more streamlined. Our customers--
both internal and external--are better able to understand the services
and products that we provide. The execution of the reorganization has
also made OPM more effective in making the Federal Government the model
employer for the 21st century through successful achievement of
critical priorities.
fiscal year 2011 budget request
The budget request presented to you today continues the path we
began to chart last year in an effort to bring civil service into a new
era. For fiscal year 2011, OPM is requesting $240,071,000 in
discretionary appropriations, the same as enacted for fiscal year 2010.
The total includes appropriations from general funds as well as
limitations on transfers from the earned benefit Civil Service
Retirement and Disability Fund, Federal Employees Health Benefits Fund,
and the Federal Employees Group Life Insurance Fund, all of which are
under OPM's management.
For basic operating expenses of the agency, our request includes
$95,770,000 in general funds for Office of Personnel Management
Salaries and Expenses, $22,564,000 of general funds and trust fund
transfers for Office of the Inspector General Salaries and Expenses.
Also, we are requesting a total of $121,737,000 in transfers from the
Trust Funds for the administration of the civil service retirement and
insurance programs. This funding will provide the resources necessary
to aid in carrying out several major initiatives.
Hiring Reform
The Administration believes that reforming the Federal hiring
process is an urgent priority to attract the best and brightest talent
into the workforce. The current hiring process is cumbersome and slow,
frustrating managers and discouraging many talented individuals from
considering Federal jobs and opportunities. In order to address this
problem, OPM's fiscal year 2011 budget requests $4,000,000 in order to
promote innovative and coordinated approaches to help agencies
streamline their end-to-end hiring process. This synchronization will
better enable agencies to recruit and hire qualified students, mid-
career professionals, and retirees. As part of the Administration's
effort to create a more positive experience for Federal job applicants,
OPM will continue efforts to overhaul the USAJOBS website. The effort
will build on improvements that have already been made to make the site
more user-friendly.
OPM is also committed to increasing employment outreach to
veterans, in accordance with President Obama's Executive Order,
``Employment of Veterans in the Federal Government'' signed on November
9, 2009. This order established the Veterans Employment Initiative,
with the goal of transforming the Federal Government into a model of
veterans' employment. OPM, in collaboration with the Departments of
Defense, Labor and Veterans Affairs, is leading the development and
implementation of a Government-wide Veterans Recruitment and Employment
Strategic Plan to address barriers to entry for Veterans and
transitioning service members pursuing careers in the Federal civil
service. We are requesting $2,400,000 in fiscal year 2011 to advance
this effort.
Finally, this year OPM launched a Federal Diversity Office to make
creation of a diverse workforce a greater priority in the Government.
The Diversity Office is looking at the development of a Government-wide
diversity strategy to support Federal agencies in improving outreach to
and hiring of diverse groups of candidates. In fiscal year 2011, budget
resources will be used to fully staff the Diversity Office and deploy
new policies, processes and procedures for improving diversity and
promoting inclusion across the Federal Government.
Wellness and Work-Life
Availability of health, wellness, and work-life options for Federal
employees is a critical tool for improving the ability of the
Government to recruit and retain a high-performing workforce. In 2010,
OPM received an appropriation of $2,654,000 to develop and operate a
comprehensive worksite wellness pilot program for the downtown
Washington campus including GSA, Interior, and OPM. The development of
Government-wide health and wellness policies and programs to provide
employees with a meaningful balance of work and life will continue to
be a top priority at OPM in fiscal year 2011.
Telework is another essential part of OPM's overall effort to
improve work-life flexibilities for Federal employees. Increased use of
telework in Federal offices across the country, particularly in major
metropolitan areas with large concentrations of employees, would enable
the uninterrupted delivery of Government services if employees were
instructed to work from home due to extreme weather conditions, natural
disasters, or other threats to health, including concerns regarding the
spread of influenza. In fiscal year 2010 and 2011, OPM will continue
its initiative on telework and provide support to agencies, managers,
and employees about how to effectively implement telework programs.
Employee Viewpoint Survey
Since 2002, OPM has conducted a biennial survey of Federal
employees to assist Congress and OPM in determining the overall
direction and needed changes for future HR policy. The survey is also a
valuable tool for agencies to improve employee engagement and
satisfaction as well as to address areas in need of improvement
identified in the survey. Beginning this year, OPM will be conducting
surveys annually and our budget request includes $2,500,000 for this
effort in fiscal year 2011. The improved annual surveys will provide
the data necessary to chart the course for making the Federal workplace
a model for the nation.
Security Clearance Reform
In 2004, Congress passed the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism
Prevention Act of 2004 (IRPTA) which included provisions to address
ongoing concerns regarding the timeliness and quality of personnel
background investigations and employment suitability services. Since
the enactment of IRPTA, OPM has significantly shortened the amount of
time needed to complete initial clearance investigations and has
eliminated the backlog of pending background investigation cases. In
fiscal year 2011, continued efforts will ensure Federal customer
agencies have the information they need to make timely decisions on the
credibility and suitability of Federal employees, contractors, and
military members.
OPM conducts investigations for Federal agencies on a reimbursable
basis through the Revolving Fund. The fiscal year 2011 budget includes
an estimated $970,127,000 in new budget authority for Federal
Investigative Services. This funding will be used to continue the
transformation effort underway for the core FIS technology systems; to
continue making improvements to security questionnaires used to collect
investigative information; for implementation of a training program to
standardize the investigative and suitability adjudicative process for
all background investigations; and to cover fiscal year 2011 core FIS
operational costs necessary to produce a quality and timely background
investigation.
Retirement Systems Modernization
OPM has initiated the Retirement Systems Modernization (RSM)
program to modernize and automate retirement processes to ensure
Federal retirees and annuitants are paid accurately, timely, and
receive high-quality customer service. The Federal Government's
retirement systems face significant challenges and are at high risk of
failure due to technology gaps. These challenges have been identified
in numerous OPM and GAO reports, and congressional staff members have
been briefed on the ongoing response to these challenges. Because of
the strategic importance of this issue, I have asked OPM's Deputy
Director, Christine Griffin, to take the lead on RSM and make this her
top priority. Our budget requests $1,500,000 to stabilize the
retirement systems in fiscal year 2011.
During this fiscal year, our primary focus for modernization
efforts is to lay the foundation for upgrading the retirement
calculator, and to transition from a paper-based operation to an
automated retirement process. OPM is also focused on implementation of
an online retirement application tool that will utilize data gathered
through the Enterprise Human Resources Integration (EHRI) program,
allowing us to gather initial retirement information electronically for
the first time. This capability will help improve the accuracy of
retirement calculations by eliminating the potential for manual data
entry errors and permitting real-time validation of the data provided.
These initiatives will help to ensure that OPM and agency benefits
officers have access to information necessary to perform their duties
of processing claims and providing customer service to employees and
annuitants. However, enhanced efficiencies will not happen overnight.
The transition will require incremental and deliberate change in order
to ensure that past mistakes do not occur again, and that taxpayer
dollars are not wasted on an ineffective effort. In the interim, OPM
must increase staffing levels in order to fulfill its responsibility to
process its anticipated workload in a timely manner.
For fiscal year 2011, we are requesting 40 FTE and an additional
$2,800,000 to increase retirement claims processing staffing levels.
The 40 FTE will permit OPM to process an additional 24,000 claims and
reduce claims processing time from 45 days to 40 days in fiscal year
2011. In 2012, as staff is fully trained and seasoned, they will be
able to process an additional 32,000 claims. The increase in FTE will
assist in reducing the claims processing times to 38 days.
Acquisition Improvement
Finally, the Administration is seeking to strengthen the
acquisition process Government-wide. As a result, they requested a
general provision that provides for $670,210 to increase OPM's
acquisition workforce in order to improve contract oversight. OPM's
Contracting Group has assumed a dramatic increase in contracting
responsibilities over the past several years as a result of the
increased scope of OPM's Government-wide support functions. OPM will
use these requested funds to recruit, hire, and train five additional
Contracting Officers, plus one additional Contracting Officer to
increase staff devoted to small and disadvantaged business utilization.
The agenda I have presented to you reflects a commitment toward a
new day for civil service. If superior results are what we want from
our Federal Government, then we must attract, hire and retain a
talented workforce. We must give them the tools that they need to
succeed, and the incentive to perform to their maximum potential,
including our assurance that their services are and will continue to be
respected and honored.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my formal testimony on the Office of
Personnel Management's fiscal year 2011 budget request. I look forward
to addressing any questions or concerns that you and the Members of the
Subcommittee may have.
Thank you.
NEW ADMINISTRATION WELLNESS INITIATIVES
Senator Durbin. So, Director Berry, the President asked us
to give you $5 million for wellness, for pilot programs to deal
with smoking cessation, disease management, and the like. Tell
me how that is going.
Mr. Berry. Mr. Chairman, the President's budget for fiscal
year 2011 has actually consolidated these funds in the Health
and Human Services (HHS) budget. And so, you will see a
decreased request from that in the 2011 budget. You were very
generous in allowing us to stand this up this year, and so the
first, we are looking at creating demonstration projects where
we can promote wellness in the workplace for Federal employees.
The first one that we are setting up is in our own
headquarters, which will also serve our little campus. Right
across the street from us is the General Services
Administration (GSA) and the Department of the Interior. The
three of us are going to share a new health unit.
Thanks to your support for this fiscal year, we have just
issued a request for proposals from the health carriers that
will come in and provide complete screening--free of charge--
for employees at the workplace, during work hours on a
comprehensive basis, so that people can get their blood sugar
and their cholesterol levels checked and also receive pre-
cancer screenings.
Our belief is that this program is going to produce
enormous savings. Companies that have done this in the private
sector have produced productivity increases of 40 to 50 percent
in the first couple of years alone.
Senator Durbin. Did you consult with those companies when
you were thinking about how to approach this?
Mr. Berry. Absolutely, and a number of our staff have been
going around the country and meeting with some of the more
innovative companies that do this in the workplace well. And
so, I am very excited by this.
We just finished the renovation of our health unit. If you
are ever down in our neighborhood, we welcome you to stop in
and see it. It is now once again a place that you would not
mind getting healthcare. I have to tell you that when I arrived
at OPM, I would not have had a band-aid put on in our health
unit. But we have made extreme advances in this.
We are going to be doing other demonstration projects. In
addition to the one in the District of Columbia, there will be
others conducted around the country. We are going to try to
select units in the Midwest and on the west coast so that we
can get a good sample and bring you back strong data as to the
impact that this will make in the Federal employee community.
NURSING SHORTAGE AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL PERSONNEL MOBILITY PROGRAM
Senator Durbin. I am going to give you a little bit of a
challenge here on a different issue, and it relates to a
national problem, which I think the Federal Government can help
to address.
We anticipate a nursing shortage in America that will grow
to 260,000 registered nurses, which we will need and not have,
by the year 2025, twice as large as this country has seen since
the 1960s, reflects the baby boomers and more healthcare and
more primary care and the critical role that nurses play.
And so, when I looked at this nursing shortage in my State
and across the country, it turned out that one of the major
reasons was the lack of nursing faculty. In other words,
registered nurses (RNs) or those with master's degrees or could
obtain master's degrees coming in to teach.
Now it turns out the Federal Government currently employs
about 53,000 nurses that have the educational background and
expertise to teach the next generation of nurses. Now I
appreciate that you are struggling to find the nurses we need
in the Federal Government. I am hoping that I can talk to you
about some possibilities here because if nurses out of the
Federal workforce teach in nursing schools, they are, in fact,
not only teaching, they are recruiting.
They are telling stories about their careers and why they
chose the Federal Government, which I think may increase the
likelihood that you will have an available nursing pool in the
future. We talked to you--I know that you began to address the
problem through the Intergovernmental Personnel Act Mobility
Program, which allows temporary assignment of personnel between
the Federal Government, State and local governments, colleges,
and universities. But my staff feels there is some hesitation
at your agency.
I would be interested in your perspectives on the potential
benefit of rotating qualified federally employed nurses through
nursing schools, what authorities the OPM has to improve
recruitment of Government nurses in a future pipeline, and
whether you have given any thought to the possibility of
extending the Intergovernmental Personnel Mobility Program to
retired Government nurses. Have you thought about this issue
and how we might address it?
Mr. Berry. Mr. Chairman, thank you, first, for your
leadership in helping to create the opportunity for a program
like this to exist. I think that the IPA Program, the
Intergovernmental Personnel Act Program, that you were
instrumental in creating, is a very powerful tool to achieve
the objectives, just as you have identified. And I am in lock
step with you on this.
You are right to identify that we have a huge nursing
shortage in the Federal Government, especially with regard to
staffing our veterans hospitals. And so, for example, to meet
those needs, we have allowed direct hire authority to the
Veterans Affairs Department, as well as throughout the
Government in that regard.
At the same time, recognizing that shortage, it is a huge
opportunity for us to have some of our more experienced
registered nurses--and, I think yours and Senator Collins idea,
to bring people back and out of retirement who aren't ready to
sit, or play golf full time, and to reengage them to allow us
to outreach, be the recruiters and tell their story, not only
passing on their knowledge to the shortage which exists
throughout our State and local government operations, but in
the Federal Government. I think it is a powerful thing.
The Federal Government should always be in a leadership
role. I really believe we have that responsibility. And so,
prior administrations had somewhat deemphasized this program.
They had even stopped reporting on it to you. So, we didn't
know for a while how many people were doing this, and whether
this program was having an effect or whether agencies were
stepping up to play this role.
We have reinstituted reporting to you on this matter.
Therefore, we are going to start tracking again how many people
are doing this. So we will be able to tell you from year to
year whether we are achieving the goal that you want, which is
making sure that we are stepping up not only in the nursing
program, but in many programs.
I think that you have identified and put your finger on a
critical place that we have got to pay careful attention to,
and that is the nursing shortage throughout the country. And
the IPA Program can allow the Federal Government to play a
leadership role.
If there is any back stepping or slow stepping on my
staff's part, my commitment to you is that I will goose them
along very aggressively. We would be very happy and honored to
work with you and Senator Collins' staff to make sure that we
are aggressively pursuing this program, and that you are proud
of its results.
Senator Durbin. If Senator Collins will spare me one little
vignette here? About 4 or 5 weeks ago, I was in Africa with
Senator Sherrod Brown, and we visited with the president of
Ethiopia, and I discussed with him, among other things, the
fact that so many Ethiopian medical professionals now practice
in the United States. In the Washington, DC, area there are
about 2,500 Ethiopian-trained doctors.
And I said I know your country desperately needs medical
professionals, and we are stealing them away, and I would like
to know your reaction to it. He said, well, we have a plan. And
our plan is called flooding and retention. You want Ethiopian
doctors? We are going to produce more than you could possibly
dream of, and they are going to go to your country and work and
send money back to Ethiopia, and we will keep enough here to
meet our needs.
It is interesting that they have decided rather than to
fight us, to basically say if you want our people, we will
train more of them. And the United States seems to be slow to
get to that point. We just don't seem to be ready to make a
commitment. We know this is looming, and it is going to cause a
lot of problems.
So I hope the Federal Government can inspire and lead in
this area and show some innovation.
Mr. Berry. Mr. Chairman, if I could? I would just like to
give an extra shout out to the Department of Veterans Affairs.
The leadership there, Secretary Shinseki and their Deputy
Secretary Scott Gould, their human resources Assistant
Secretary John Sepulveda, have been phenomenal to work with. On
this issue, I think they take the philosophy that the way to
beat this is not to try to outcompete State and local
government. It is to try to grow the pool together.
They are investing significant resources this year to help
move up not only as we--to get LPNs move to the RN level. We
have all of these pools that with the right accredited
training, we can increase these pipelines. It is an advantage
for us to retain. It is also an attraction for recruitment.
Through the multiple training we can jointly work with
State and local governments so that both benefit from this
program. They are putting real resources on this, millions of
dollars. I think we are going to be able to move the needle on
this this year for the first time in a long time.
Senator Durbin. Well, let us try to work together.
Mr. Berry. Absolutely. Be honored to, sir.
Senator Durbin. Senator Collins.
Senator Collins. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
POSTAL SERVICE OBLIGATION TO RETIREMENT TRUST FUND
Mr. Berry, we held a hearing last week about the Postal
Service's financial crisis, and there are two major issues that
have come up with which the Postal Service is working closely
with OPM. And I want to ask your opinion on both.
First of all, we had testimony from the inspector general
of the Postal Service, who discussed a report that his office
issued, which concluded that the current system of funding the
Postal Service's obligation to the Civil Service Retirement
System has resulted in the Postal Service overpaying by $75
billion, a truly astonishing find.
Now it is my understanding that the OPM determined this
payment amount and explained its rationale in a 2004 letter to
the Postmaster General, and I have read that letter that says
the Board of Actuaries approved it and reviewed it. But this is
a huge difference, and the reason this is important is if, in
fact, there is an overpayment of $75 billion, it would help
solve a lot of the Postal Service's problems.
Getting a handle on this, however, has been extremely
difficult.
Can you tell us whether OPM still stands by the analysis
and payment levels that were established in 2004?
Mr. Berry. Senator, this is a very tough issue, as you have
identified it. I am keenly aware of the challenges the Postal
Service is facing right now and have met with the Postmaster
General as well as the Postal Service inspector general on this
very issue.
Let me answer your question directly. Yes. For the time
being, we do stand by the initial assessment. That assessment,
as you mentioned, was upheld by the Board of Actuaries and the
Government Accountability Office (GAO), not just the Board of
Actuaries.
Now, the Postal Service inspector general has a new
argument that they are advancing. I am very happy to go back
and have that reconsidered. We will reevaluate our position,
reconsidered with GAO and the Board of Actuaries to see if we
are wrong. If so, we will adjust.
My responsibility to you as trustee of the retirement funds
is to make sure that whatever we do, the fund is whole and that
we can retain solvency and pay the claims as they come due.
That being said, I recognize the complexity and the
challenges that are before us, and have made very clear that I
am very willing to sit down with the Treasury Department, OMB,
the Postal Service, and GAO and be a constructive partner in
crafting a solution that guarantees that we can meet the Postal
Service's concern and protect the solvency of the fund. I think
I have made very clear that, in other words, we are very open
minded to try to help however we can.
If, at the end of the day--because, like you, I am not an
actuary, the lawyers and the actuaries say, John, your trustee
responsibilities prohibit you from doing what these other folks
want to do, I will be very happy to come back and tell you that
this might require this change in legislation to do what you
would like to do. This is how I could advise you on how best to
move forward.
Right now, you are exactly right. We need to get everybody
around one table and have people work together to try to crack
this and resolve this once and for all.
Senator Collins. And while you are doing that, you also
need to look at the payments to the retiree health benefits
fund.
Mr. Berry. Yes.
Senator Collins. It is a different issue, but another
issue, and I know that you have been having some meetings on
that as well, but that there is not yet a consensus.
We are just trying--well, let me speak for myself. I am
just trying to get a handle on what is the appropriate payment.
I just left a meeting where a person told me that the inspector
general is wrong and is at one end of the spectrum, and OPM is
wrong and at the other end of the spectrum, and the truth is
somewhere in the middle. I don't know. I am not an actuary.
There are obviously budget implications to shifting from the
Postal Service the obligation to the Treasury, and I understand
that. But it would be nice to know what the answer is in terms
of just doing a factual analysis when we are hearing such
diverse things.
DOMESTIC PARTNER BENEFITS
I will go back to that. I apologize for cutting you off,
but just so in this first round, I could quickly get one more
question in, and that is on the domestic partners benefit bill.
As you know, last October, our Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs Committee held a hearing on the domestic
partners benefits and obligations bill, which I introduced with
Senator Lieberman. This bill would provide the Federal
workforce with the same kinds of benefits that are very
prevalent in the Fortune 500 benefit structure, and those are
the people we are competing with, by the way.
At the conclusion of the hearing--not to give you a hard
time, but at the conclusion of the hearing, you did indicate to
Senator Lieberman and me that ``the cost of the bill is of such
a level that I think we will be able to identify efficiencies
to fully offset the cost over the term of the administration.
If you need a commitment or a promise to that effect, I am
happy to deliver it.''
It has been 5 months since that hearing, and we are still
waiting for those offsets, which, you should understand as a
strong supporter of the bill, is preventing the bill from being
taken up on the Senate floor until we identify those offsets.
And so, where are we on that issue?
Mr. Berry. Senator, first, thank you again for your
leadership on this issue. The administration strongly supports
the legislation that you, Senator Lieberman, Senator Durbin and
many others are supporting. I don't want this to be a catch 22.
Let me make this ironclad promise to you.
Currently, we have an offset that is going through the
clearance process with Office of Management and Budget. We are
waiting for the committee to wrap up its report so that we can
get Congressional Budget Office (CBO) scoring so we can
guarantee that the offset we will give you equals the CBO cost
estimate. Once we know that for sure, then I can meet our word
to you. We have identified, I think, a very good offset.
Now, the chairman mentioned that my last job was Director
of the National Zoo. As you know, especially in these times,
offsets have become a very precious commodity. I feel like
having a good offset is like going into the lion and tiger
house with a plateful of meat. You get a lot of attention.
So, I am sort of loathe to reveal the offset for fear,
quite frankly, that a larger tiger might take it away for
another purpose.
My promise to you would be as soon as the subcommittee is
ready to go to the floor and we have that CBO scoring, we will
have an offset to cover the entire cost of the amendment for
you so that you can move expeditiously to the floor without any
delay.
I don't offer that as trying to be cute, but that is
essentially where we are right now.
Senator Collins. Thank you.
GUARD AND RESERVIST DIFFERENTIAL PAYMENTS
Senator Durbin. You talked a little bit in your opening
about an effort I had underway for years to try to make sure
that those Federal employees who were activated to serve,
deployed as members of the Guard and Reserve would not suffer
any pay loss. State, local governments, private companies have
all stepped forward, and we used to honor them with a special
Web site at the Pentagon, thanking them for their patriotism.
And yet the largest employer of Guard and Reserve in America,
the Federal Government, failed to do the same thing.
So I had one Senator who was an obstacle. I never convinced
him, but I outlasted him and eventually passed in fiscal year
2009 the language necessary for this. Can you give me any
idea--we talked at the time how it was important that those who
qualified be paid on a timely basis. Give me an idea of the
process that a Federal employee who is notified that his or her
unit had been activated, about to be deployed, would follow to
make sure that if they do qualify, they would receive these
payments.
Mr. Berry. Mr. Chairman, again, let me commend you on your
leadership on this issue for so many years. Thank you on behalf
of all of our reservists for delivering this great success.
I apologize for the delay in issuing guidance to the
agencies about this. We got that guidance out in December. The
reason, we found, wasn't that the civilian pay was complicated.
It was the military pay side that was very complicated, trying
to figure out do you include the housing payment? Do you
include the hazard allocation? What is included in terms of
military pay to define what the gap would be to ensure that we
were treating them very fairly.
We finally reached a consensus with the Defense Department
and the Office of Management and Budget on this and were able
to issue that guidance.
The first thing I want to assure you about is the law you
enacted took effect in 2009, March 11, 2009. We didn't get
around to issuing the guidance until last December. Reservists
are eligible for that pay back to the date of enactment. Even
though we have made that clear in the guidance, and we will
make sure that everyone is made whole back to the date of
enactment. I want to promise you that we will ensure that no
one is shortchanged because of our delay in getting that
guidance out because of the complexity.
There are essentially four finance centers that pay
employees on the civilian Department of Defense (DOD) side and
throughout the Federal Government. The GSA runs one; the
Department of Defense has the DFAS center; the Interior
Department has what is called the National Business Center; and
the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has the National
Finance Center. We have been working with them to implement
adjustments to their pay systems so that these calculations can
now be made, and the reservists can be made whole.
And so, that is underway. I don't know if we have an exact
date. If I could supply it to you for the record----
Senator Durbin. Of course, you can.
Mr. Berry [continuing]. The exact date we will be able to
do that?
Senator Durbin. And if you could, and if you don't know at
this moment, the number of Federal employees who are in the
Guard and Reserve. I don't know if you have that. If you don't,
you can provide that to me as well.
Mr. Berry. We estimate that the number could range,
depending on the year, somewhere between 5,000 and 15,000
Federal employees at any one time that are on active military
duty in the Reserve. That is the total number of the estimate
that we gave this morning, 150,000?
We believe that several thousand or so will be eligible for
direct payment under this proposal have been paid less than
what they would have been paid in their civilian job and that
this bill will allow us to make up for that. So it will be
significant, and we will make sure it gets implemented quickly.
[The information follows:]
Status of Reservist Differential Payments
The status of making reservist differential payments varies among
payroll providers. The most recent information we have from the four
major providers is as follows:
General Services Administration (GSA)
On June 1, 2010, GSA reported that it had implemented automated
capability for processing reservist differential during pay period
ending May 8, 2010. GSA made its first reservist differential payments
during pay period ending May 22, 2010.
National Business Center (NBC, Department of the Interior)
On June 2, 2010, NBC reported that since February 2010 it had
manually processed several reservist differential payments. NBC
reported that it continues to remain on schedule to automate the
reservist differential in its Federal personnel/payroll system August
2010 release.
National Finance Center (NFC, Department of Agriculture)
On June 4, 2010, NFC reported that effective April 19, 2010, client
agencies of NFC were able to enter reservist differential payments into
its Special Payment Processing System (SPPS). NFC published processing
instructions on its website via an NFC bulletin dated April 16, 2010.
NFC reported that it had processed a total of 30 payments as of June 4
thru its SPPS system.
NFC also reported that effective May 9, 2010, the programming
modifications for OPM's Update 52 to the Guide to Processing Personnel
Actions (GPPA) related to reservist differential were completed and
available for clients to begin their processing. NFC has published
processing instructions related to these changes on its website via an
NFC bulletin dated May 18, 2010.
NFC reported that it continues to perform the necessary analysis
and research to address the system changes needed for the new Pay
Status/USERRA codes related to the Nature of Action Code (NOAC) changes
for reservist differential as per OPM's Update 61, Update 02, of the
OPM Guide to Data Standards, issued April 1, 2010. Once this task has
been completed, NFC will establish a target implementation date for
this final phase of the project.
Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS, Department of Defense)
On June 9, 2010, DFAS reported that it had a manual workaround in
place to make reservist differential payments. As of pay period ending
May 22, 2010, 331 payments have been made for a total of approximately
$800,000. All of these payments were made to DOD civilians.
On August 17, 2010, DOD reported it had identified approximately
5,558 appropriated-fund DOD employees so far as being eligible for
reservist differential (i.e., had qualifying active duty service).
Approximately 532 of these employees were due retroactive differential
payments. For those 532 employees, the consolidated amount of reservist
differential owed is approximately $1.3 million. The total amounts
covering anywhere from 1 pay period to 24 pay periods ranged from
$10.75 to $26,665.02. The median total figure was $1,518.71. The
average amount (before taxes) is approximately $2,500. DOD is in the
final stages of analyzing a second group of employees that may be
eligible for retroactive reservist differential payments. Payments will
be effected starting September 17, 2010.
On June 24, 2010, DFAS provided non-DOD client agencies procedures
to follow for authorizing reservist differential payments and followed
up with a discussion during a quarterly customer meeting in July 2010.
As of September 2010, DFAS has processed payments for the Departments
of Veterans Affairs and Energy and the Environmental Protection Agency.
HIRING INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES
Senator Durbin. If I could ask one other question, and it
relates to disability policy in hiring. I talked to my staff
because I think Congress is slow to meet the needs when it
comes to the disability community. And I talked to my staff
about our office and said, ``What can we do here?''
I meet a lot of disabled veterans out at Walter Reed and a
lot of folks who have served, come back needing a job, as an
example, disabled veterans and others in the disability
community. It has been hard. It has been more difficult than I
thought it would be.
Sometimes it is matching up our job description with their
talents, and our schedule, as crazy as it is from time to time,
with their personal and family needs. And I am wondering what
you are doing, as you look at the Federal Government, to
address this, whether our problem is unique or we just didn't
go to the right place for information and guidance.
What can we do, should we do as Congress or as the Federal
Government to give talented disabled people a chance to serve
their Government?
Mr. Berry. Mr. Chairman, thank you for your leadership on
the Americans with Disabilities Act, with the amendments. You
have been a stalwart leader over the decades on this issue. I
know you and Tony Coelho and Mr. Hoyer have been partners in
advancing this effort and this initiative, and your leadership
is deeply appreciated.
When you look at the diversity equation in the Federal
Government, the only group that has gone backward have been
people with disabilities. We used to be over 1 percent. We are
now under 1 percent, around 0.5 percent. It is embarrassing.
This is after the passage of the Americans with
Disabilities Act, after the passage of the amendments that you
all secured. We need to do better. And so, one of the reasons
that I sought and recruited Christine Griffin from the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is whenever you deal
with diversity and Federal law, it is a very complicated area,
as you all know, relative from Supreme Court cases on down.
Chris is both an attorney as well as someone who is skilled
on this issue through her practice in the EEOC, where she was a
Commissioner just before becoming Deputy Director of OPM. I
have asked her to lead our effort on behalf of the President of
an initiative that will focus not only on disability, but also
on a diversity initiative that we could present to the
President this summer that is going to try a new approach,
within the scope of the law, that will allow us to better
provide access to all communities in the country, including
people with disabilities.
Now especially for people with disabilities, to focus
specifically on your question, Chris has worked with agencies
across the Government to organize the largest-ever hiring
event, which we are holding at the Washington Convention Center
in April.
What is the date, Chris?
Ms. Griffin. April 26.
Mr. Berry. April 26. And we welcome, if you have time to be
able to join us at some point during that day.
What we have done is, rather than make this just another
job fair, we have conducted outreach through the disability
community and advocacy groups across the country, we have
worked with Federal agencies to identify jobs that are
currently available, and then we have had people apply in
advance of this event so that we can try to do exactly what you
said, Mr. Chairman, match their skills and ability with the
positions that are now available and open in the Federal
Government. And then, using Schedule A authority, what we are
going to do at this hiring event is actually set up interviews
between the agencies where we think those matches are in the
ballpark so that they can interview those candidates at the
Washington Convention Center and, if it works, hire them on the
spot. So we will have OPM staff there to advise agencies and
applicants, and get them started immediately.
We have very powerful tools that you and Congress have
given us with Schedule A authority. They just haven't been used
very effectively. And so, Chris and I are going to work very
hard on this. The goal is to achieve forward momentum and
progress on all fronts on the diversity level. But the place
where we just have to move this needle, because it is the only
one we have fallen backwards on, is with people with
disabilities. They do deserve special attention, and we do have
the ability to do it.
Last, but not least, if I could just thank you all for the
appropriation that you give the Department of Defense to fund
the Technology Support Center because what you have done
through that is essentially take advantage of our market
strength. Now the Federal Government can buy all of the
technical equipment that is needed to accommodate people's
disability in one place and get lower prices because they can
buy them in bulk rather than an agency buying one specialized
piece of equipment. You have centralized that in the Department
of Defense, and then they do it on behalf of all Federal
agencies. And so, for any Federal agency that wants to hire a
person with a disability, if there is a special high-cost
technology accommodation that needs to be made, it is covered
thanks to the program.
The Department of Defense has been working in lock step
with us on this program and they are going to be there with us
on the 26th to help us in case anybody says, well, you know,
``I have the skills to do this job, but I need a special
computer,'' or ``I need this special phone line.''
So, Mr. Chairman, we are committed to this issue. I am with
you 110 percent, and I hope to God by next year, we are going
to be able to move the needle for you.
Senator Durbin. I will ask you.
Senator Collins.
Senator Collins. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
FEDERAL EMPLOYEE PAY
Mr. Berry, I want to ask you about an allegation that I am
hearing with increasing frequency, and that is the average pay
for a Federal employee is almost double the average pay
overall. And because I am hearing this repeated by my
colleagues, by my constituents, by commentators on television
so often, I would like to ask you to address that issue in a
factual way, to help us better understand this charge.
Mr. Berry. Senator, I really appreciate that. There is a
lot of misinformation out there right now.
Many of these jobs that you hear about compare Federal
salaries, sort of the average Federal salary to the average
private sector salary. However, they are not really comparing
apples to apples.
The Federal Government 50 years ago used to be a largely
blue collar operation. Today, it is a significantly white
collar operation, with very high-skilled positions, including
everything from financial regulation and derivative monitoring
to National Institutes of Health (NIH) research, to law
enforcement and cybersecurity. The skill sets that are required
for the Federal Government to meet its responsibilities in the
21st century continue to increase in complexity. The average
Federal salary includes those high-ranking positions. On the
other hand the private sector includes a large number of
service jobs that we do not have in the Federal Government--
restaurant workers, kitchen staff, things like that for which
there are very few counterparts left in the Federal Government
in these areas. And yet that is a significant portion of the
average private sector salary.
And so, you see how if you are going to put in a lot of
lower-paid workers into the average private sector salary, it
is going to be lower than the average Federal salary. However,
you are not comparing like jobs with like jobs.
And so, whenever you do that, whenever you try to compare
like jobs with like jobs and put the level of responsibility
with it and the level of education that is required, Federal
jobs are behind the private sector. So, and I don't want to say
in each and every case because there will be outliers, and
where there are outliers, quite frankly, we need to adjust the
pay system to make sure we are not ahead of the private in
those areas by any significant amount.
But a good case is nurses, Mr. Chairman, to go back to an
earlier example. Only one-third of nurses in the private sector
have a bachelor's degree. Over one-half of the nurses in the
Federal sector have a bachelor's degree.
So, for example, in the USA Today story, they compared
nurses in the private sector to nurses in the public sector,
and the nurses in the public sector were paid, I think,
something like $5,000 more. Well, when you accounted for the
bachelor's degree and the percentage increase, then
immediately, that number evaporates.
Senator Collins. Let me just say that I think you need to
respond to that because that is gaining currency, and it would
be helpful to have in writing your analysis and response to
that. You have raised a number of excellent points, but I don't
think those points are getting out there, and I am starting to
hear this more and more often.
What I hear is a comparison that the private sector, it is
$41,000, and for the average Federal employee, it is like
$70,000 something. And I think that needs to be addressed, and
I would encourage you to do that.
Mr. Berry. And quite frankly, one of the things we are
looking at, Senator Collins, on this issue and what I found was
interesting was that the formula we used was based on Bureau of
Labor Statistics data. Well, over the years, they have stopped
collecting the data at the level that we can really make
careful analysis and comparisons. And so, there may be
requirements needed to change this formula.
And so, I have appointed a task force to wrestle with this
formula so that we can come forward and actually defend with
ironclad validity for you and for the American public exactly
what the facts are based on the data. And so, we are working on
that right now, and as soon as I get that, I will bring that up
and make sure we carefully brief you and the chairman on this
issue.
Senator Collins. That would be very helpful because,
obviously, if there is an imbalance, that is a problem at this
time of great budget strain. But if there isn't, we need to
better make that case and explain why.
FEDERAL LONG-TERM CARE INSURANCE PROGRAM
Let me switch to another issue. You will recall that there
have been a lot of problems in the Federal long-term care
insurance program, and we have talked a lot today about making
the Federal Government the model employer. And believe me, it
has not been a model employer when it comes to that program.
So many people signed up for that program with these false
assurances based on very misleading brochures from the
provider, the insurance provider that indicated there would
never be an increase in premiums if they paid this higher rate
at a particular time. And I have those brochures. Literally, I
personally have those brochures.
So I was so sympathetic to the witnesses who came before us
and now were all faced with a 25 percent premium increase.
Well, adding insult to injury, when the provider sent out the
new forms for us to make our choices, they made further errors
in describing it. That is just so unacceptable, and I think OPM
needs to do a far better job of overseeing that program.
I have a point of personal pride here because I was a
coauthor of the law that created this program because we wanted
to encourage Federal employees to plan for long-term care and
because so many people are under the misimpression that
Medicare covers long-term care, which it doesn't. So--and this
isn't an argument for the CLASS Act, in case my chairman is
about to make that comment. He has a smile on his face. So I
see that coming my way.
But the administration of this program has been far too
lax, and it is not protecting retirees, participants, and
future participants. So participants and beneficiaries are not
getting the protection that they have a right to look to OPM to
provide.
Mr. Berry. Senator Collins, I want to apologize to our
retirees who especially did not have full access to that
information and who were essentially misled and are now put in
this awkward position. This is obviously a program that I have
inherited and am trying to do the best we can, and we will have
recommendations for how we can hopefully prevent this from
happening again.
What I have tried to do to, at least, to ease the blow, if
you will, is to create alternatives so that not every employee
or every member who is in that program would suffer that same
increase. That would only be if they had the highest level of
inflation protection over the long term.
And so, we have tried to create options for the employees
so that they can understand the cost of that inflation
protection in the long term, obviously, it is not the same
level of protection. It is lower inflation protection, but it
would--it lowers, obviously, the cost of the increase as you
create these alternatives.
And so, we worked with the insurer to try to create as many
of those alternatives as we could, and then allow the retirees
who were in the program plenty of time to try to make their
decision as to what level they wanted to pay for. And so, we
have extended that through March to give them the time to
wrestle with this. I know it is a tough decision, and I am very
empathetic to the pain that this is causing them, and I hope we
have given them sufficient choices that they can adjust to the
budget that they find themselves in, as I appreciate many of
these people are on fixed incomes now.
That being said, one of the biggest weaknesses, in my
opinion, as the new person coming into this program here at the
end here, is that when the law was created, because this was an
emerging market, Congress told us that we needed to recompete
this program entirely every 7 years. And so, there are no--
there hasn't been an increase in rate in 7 years because we
were able to enforce that.
But what happens is when you recompete to ensure that you
have people applying and actually stepping up to offer the
service, the market has matured. And so, every 7 years, we will
find ourselves in this exact same position where whoever bids
on the new contract 7 years from now could do the exact same
thing and increase rates all over again.
And so, I think what I would like to--we have got a team
working on this and to work with your staffs. Because the
market has now matured in this program, we may want to look at
a more longer-term contract that we could then enforce more
stability in the program and prevent these spikes every 7
years.
And quite frankly, my biggest fear is, okay, what happens
14 or 21 years from now when some future OPM Director is going
to have to recompete this program and now you have more
retirees taking the benefits than might be joining the program,
and all of the private sector saying, ``I don't know if I want
to join that program.'' And so, we may have no one bid. That
would be a horrible situation.
So we need to, I think, take a longer view on this program
and really design it for the longer term and not in these 7-
year slices. And so, that is a long answer, but I appreciate
the sensitivity of the issue.
Senator Collins. Thank you.
It is a difficult issue because if you lock one provider in
for that many years, you may see a decline in service levels.
That is not necessarily a----
Mr. Berry. Right.
Senator Collins. It is a tradeoff, but I apologize for
going over.
Senator Durbin. No, that is fine.
LESSONS FROM THE 2010 SNOWSTORMS/TELEWORK
Director Berry, I just have one last question. When I was
outside today and it was so sunny and beautiful, and I looked
at the trees budding and blossoming, I thought 6 weeks ago, we
were in the midst of a blizzard, the worst snowstorm in the
history of Washington, which literally shut down the Capitol
and shut down most agencies of the Federal Government for the
better part of a week. What did you learn from that?
Mr. Berry. Ah----
Senator Durbin. Aside from the fact that we need better
snow removal in a lot of places.
Mr. Berry. We are working, Mr. Chairman, with the Council
of Governments in the region. There is going to be on April 5
an after snow event to discuss lessons learned, and there are a
lot of areas we could do better in terms of coordination with
the region with lanes and snow removal. We had it in both
directions.
For example, Key Bridge was plowed--all the lanes on the
bridge were plowed, but then when you got to Arlington, only
two lanes of traffic were open. So that didn't work well. And
vice versa, the same, 14th Street was plowed, but when you got
into the city, only two lanes were open on 14th Street.
So we created these bottlenecks by just not coordinating
and saying, okay, if we are going to open four lanes here, let
us open it the whole way and not pieces. So there is a lot that
we can learn.
I think the biggest thing we learned, and it is actually, I
think, a good news story. The President called me on Wednesday
during the second blizzard to check in and see how things were
going. And I explained to him, I said, you know, Mr. President,
in 1996, which was the last storm of similar import where the
Government was closed for a period of time, less than 1 percent
of the workforce could telework at that time because at that
time, the two biggest obstacles to telework were security,
protecting secure information, and second was technology. You
just didn't have the memory capacity that, for example, this
gentleman has right here on that portable computer.
Bring the clock forward to this past snowstorm a month ago.
Over 35 percent of our workforce we know was online with our
mainframes in many agencies across the Government. Some
agencies, for example, the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO),
had an 85 percent productivity level during the snowstorm while
we were technically closed.
Well, they did that because they had a very aggressive
telework program, the staff had the equipment and the security
all tied up. The last major hurdle that we are trying to defeat
right now is management intransigence. Managers just like--they
think the person has to be at their desk, in that chair, or
they are not doing the job. And we need to move our managers to
be more results-focused. Because quite frankly, if they are
doing a good job defining the result, then who cares where the
work is getting done? Who cares when it is getting done?
Many women and men both with child-raising
responsibilities, would love to do work at night between 9 and
11 p.m. once the kids have gone to bed. And should we, as a
Government, care about that? Yes, we give them the tools to
allow them to get the work done. Maybe they are not working
from 3 to 6 p.m. because they pick the kids up from school and
are helping with the homework but as long as the work gets done
that's what matters.
And so, I think we can still get the 40 hours, but we can
be more flexible in how we approach it. And where agencies that
are doing that like the Patent and Trade Office, when we were
closed, they weren't closed. They accomplished 85 percent
productivity for the taxpayers.
At OPM, we accomplished only about 35 percent in that area,
but we did 95 percent in our background investigations. You
know why? All of our security background investigations, 90
percent of what is done throughout the Government are done out
of people's homes. We have our caseworkers all across the
country working out of their homes. They do it securely, and
they do it professionally. And we can do this.
So I told the President in 12 years, we have got it to a
point where we went from 1 to 30 percent of the Government
being able to operate. Shouldn't the goal really be 80 to 90
percent, where everybody would be like the PTO? So that may be
within the next couple of years, if we really put our shoulders
to this, and we get people the right equipment and we deal with
this management problem of intransigence, we could have 85, 90
percent Government functionality during any event because we
ought to be able to maintain continuity of operations.
And what I ought to be able to say is we're not closed
today. We are on a mobile work day. And whether it is a
snowstorm or whether, quite frankly, if a dirty bomb goes off
somewhere in the city and we might have to evacuate a portion
of the city for a long period of time, we still need to
maintain those Government operations. And so, I think this is
essential for continuity of service. We need to get there, and
telework is the most powerful tool to do it.
And so, that would be my biggest lesson learned, Mr.
Chairman, where I think there is a lot of hope, and we can do a
lot better.
Senator Durbin. Thank you.
Senator Collins.
Senator Collins. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
Senator Durbin. Director Berry, thanks for coming. We are
going to submit some questions to you. If you can get back to
us in a timely fashion, we would appreciate it. Look forward to
working with you. Thank your staff and all the committed people
at OPM.
Mr. Berry. Thank you, sir.
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
were submitted to the Office for response subsequent to the
hearing:]
Questions Submitted by Senator Richard J. Durbin
retirement systems modernization
Question. OPM's processing of Federal employee retirements has long
been recognized as paper-intensive and reliant on antiquated systems
while not providing prompt and complete benefit payments upon
retirement. Since 1987, the agency has attempted to modernize its
retirement process and systems through a series of four initiatives,
none of which has been successfully completed. The following timeline
shows the retirement modernization initiatives from 1987 to present.
In April 2009, GAO reported that OPM's latest retirement
modernization effort (referred to as RetireEZ) remained far from
achieving the modernized capabilities the agency intended. Also, OPM
did not have a complete plan for proceeding with the modernization.
What are OPM's specific plans for retirement modernization, including
program scope, implementation strategy, lines of responsibility and
authority, management processes, schedule, and expected results?
Answer. OPM is deeply committed to modernizing the Federal
retirement system and addressing the issues identified in the
Government Accountability Office's (GAO) April 2009 report regarding
OPM's Retirement Systems Modernization (RSM) program. To ensure that
work on RSM receives the highest level of attention, Deputy Director
Christine Griffin is leading our efforts on this program and she has
made it her top priority. We have also realigned the program to the
Chief Information Officer.
Consistent with Director Berry's ``back-to-basics'' strategy for
the RSM program, priorities for fiscal year 2010 include modernizing
the retirement calculators used to calculate the bulk of Civil Service
Retirement System (CSRS) and Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS)
retirements and establishing key ``building blocks'' to transition from
a paper-based to an automated retirement process. Those ``building
blocks'' include a data warehouse to store and allow access to
retirement data and establishment of a method for agencies and Shared
Service Centers (SSCs) to send electronic retirement information to OPM
and across the government (``data feeds'').
The data warehouse improvements will help OPM to process
retirements faster by enabling collection of retirement data over the
course of an employee's career rather than primarily at the time of
retirement. Collection of this information through recurring data
feeds, and an online retirement application will allow for validation
of data prior to submission, thereby preventing incomplete or erroneous
information from being submitted for retirement processing. Storage of
this information will speed the adjudication process by making clear
what information is available and what information may be outstanding.
Given today's environment where over 30 percent of retirement cases are
incomplete when submitted to OPM for processing, the possibilities
exist to vastly reduce the amount of work required to ``hunt down''
missing information.
Improvements to the retirement calculator consolidate all
calculations into a central rules engine that can be utilized across
retirement processing systems as applicable; and will allow for
integration with the data warehouse, thus eliminating time-consuming
and error-prone manual data entry from today's paper files. This
integration will reduce processing time and claim adjudication errors.
During fiscal year 2010, OPM improved the management of the program
to address the concerns GAO identified in their April 2009 Report.
Specifically, the RSM program was put under the Executive leadership of
Deputy Director Griffin, with a clear strategy, lines of authority and
management best practices implemented and identified in key program
documents including a program Executive Charter. The RSM program
generated cost estimates based on GAO's Cost Estimating and Assessment
Guide and developed a comprehensive project plan, with a schedule and
expected results (Integrated Master Schedule). OPM tracked the RSM
program progress through OPM's Earned Value Management System, which
measured RSM's performance based on adherence to scope, cost and
schedule. We have and will continue to keep Congress and GAO apprised
of our progress in addressing the recommendations made in GAO's 2009
Report.
For fiscal year 2011, the RSM program continues to focus on the
``building blocks'' needed to improve the retirement system and
transition from a paper-based environment, including:
--Modernizing critical calculator and retirement systems;
--Automating manual paper-based retirement system through electronic
data collection and applications;
--Implementing automated tools to improve retirement case processing;
and
--Imaging incoming paper retirement records.
This approach differs from previous modernization attempts in
several ways. First, each of the previous approaches were based on a
complete overhaul and replacement of all retirement processing systems.
The current approach takes a more measured approach in assessing which
systems are operating effectively and targeting specific systems for
replacement or upgrade. The second differentiator is the role of the
government in integrating the various components. In all previous
iterations, OPM relied primarily on vendors, either the prime vendor or
a second vendor to integrate the systems components into a
comprehensive retirement solution. OPM has realized that it was
extremely difficult to identify a contractor with sufficient knowledge
of OPM's current systems and proposed solution components to complete
this task effectively. The current approach puts OPM Federal staff in
this role, augmented by contractors for specific tasks, but with
overall OPM staff leadership. The current approach differs from
previous efforts by focusing on incremental improvements rather than a
``big-bang'' implementation with the completely revamped retirement
system available on day one. This approach allows for much more
efficient use of resources and decreased risk of system failure that
would jeopardize retirement processing operations. The primary
advantage to enabling the success of the current incremental approach
is a Federal-wide standard, The Guide to Retirement Data Reporting,
which defines the data and formats for agencies to send retirement data
feeds to OPM.
Question. For more than two decades, the agency has attempting to
modernize its retirement processes and systems, including in-house and
privately sourced efforts, and none of these has been fully successful.
Most recently, almost 2 years ago, OPM abandoned the latest effort.
Where are you now in your decisionmaking process with regard to
development of a new system?
Answer. OPM senior leadership and the leadership of OPM Retirement
and Benefits have fully endorsed the RSM priorities identified for
fiscal year 2010 and fiscal year 2011, which are consistent with the
Director's ``back to basics'' approach for the program. These
activities move the program in a methodical and deliberate fashion in
order to ensure successful delivery of key ``building blocks.'' These
activities align to the capabilities GAO identified for a modernized
retirement system including upgrading the aging OPM calculators and
moving from a paper-based retirement process to an automated process.
Delivering modern, improved retirement services, including web-enabled
retirement applications, self-service tools, retirement estimators, and
a comprehensive retirement case management system is dependent on first
establishing the core ``building blocks''.
Funding has been approved by OPM's Capital Investment Committee and
is being put in place for the retirement calculator improvements and
development of a pilot online retirement application tool in fiscal
year 2011.
Question. For fiscal year 2011, you are requesting an additional 40
FTE in order to speed the retirement claims processing time. This
staffing is needed because over the past few years, staffing levels
were reduced in anticipation of expected efficiencies which did not
occur. Please elaborate on the nature of the staff to be hired--what
will happen to staffing once the efficiencies occur?
Answer. Retirement processing staffing levels were reduced mainly
through attrition over the past few years in anticipation of increased
automation of retirement processing under prior RSM efforts. Since
Director Berry's ``back-to-basics'' strategy for RSM will not deliver
on significant efficiencies in the short-term, OPM must increase
staffing levels in order to process its anticipated workload in a
timely manner. Beginning in fiscal year 2011, the 40 FTE will permit
OPM to process an additional 24,000 claims. The additional claim
processing will reduce claims processing time by up to 5 days.
Furthermore, the 40 FTE will have a greater impact when the Legal
Administrative Specialists (LAS) have been fully trained and possess
more experience. The LAS's will then be expected to process 32,000 more
claims which will reduce claims processing times by an additional 2 to
4 days. As greater efficiencies are achieved, staffing needs going
forward will be evaluated.
Question. OPM's February 2010 Retirement System Modernization
Quarterly Report to the Appropriations Committee identified two main
components of the retirement modernization program: (1) updating all
computer systems that relate to the administration of retirement
benefits; and (2) transitioning from a process that is heavily
dependent upon the use of paper documents to one that utilizes
electronic data. What has been OPM's specific progress toward
developing these two components? Has OPM developed results-oriented
(i.e., objective, quantifiable, and measurable) performance goals and
measures to use in determining and reporting program progress?
Answer. In terms of updating the computer systems that support the
administration of retirement benefits, OPM has focused on improving the
retirement calculators that perform the bulk of Civil Service
Retirement System and Federal Employee Retirement System retirement
calculations. In fiscal year 2010, the RSM program:
--Completed standardizing 50 percent of rules and calculations. 100
percent will be completed in September 2010 and will be used to
verify that all OPM calculators are using standard, current and
correct calculations.
--Started to code the standard calculations into a new calculator
platform (pilot).
In fiscal year 2011, RSM will continue to code all calculations
into a single calculator with a goal to consolidate OPM calculators in
a modern, up-to-date system.
In terms of transitioning from a paper-based to an automated
retirement system, in fiscal year 2010, the RSM program:
--Established a retirement data warehouse, which meets all security
requirements.
--Transferred over 9 million imaged retirement records to the
warehouse.
--Implemented data feeds to receive data electronically from the
National Business Center and National Finance Center. Three
other Shared Service Centers (SSCs) are providing timelines to
send electronic retirement data via data feeds with OPM (GSA,
DOD and U.S. Postal Service).
--Provided initial access to electronic and imaged retirement
information.
--Completed the Guide to Retirement Data Reporting and publically
posted the data standard, enabling agencies and SSCs to send
retirement data in one format, and share that information
across the Federal government.
The work supporting the transition to a paper-less retirement
system will continue in fiscal year 2011.
In addition to measurement of RSM's performance against the
program's Integrated Master Schedule and Earned Value Management
reporting addressed above, the RSM program has provided results-
oriented program goals in all budget submissions (i.e., Exhibit 300
Capital Asset Plans). To demonstrate this, one of the retirement
program's priority goals is to reduce the percentage of incomplete
retirement records OPM receives from agencies to less than 30 percent
by the end of 2010 and, going forward, to reduce the percentage of
incomplete records to 28 percent by the end of 2011 and 25 percent by
the end of 2012. This is one of only five of the Director's near-term
High Priority Performance Goals, on which OPM is reporting quarterly
progress at Performance.gov.
Question. According to OPM's February 2010 Retirement System
Modernization Quarterly Report to the Appropriations Committee, the
agency has been coordinating with other Federal agencies regarding
timing and application capabilities for its retirement system
modernization. In addition, OPM's report stated that it plans to
continue developing standardization rules through interagency
coordination. To what extent is OPM dependent on other Federal agencies
to modify or make changes to their system(s) in order for OPM to
accomplish its goals for retirement system modernization?
Answer. The key to transitioning to a paperless retirement process
is for OPM to receive electronic data from Shared Service Centers
(SSCs). RSM continues to meet regularly with the SSCs to discuss
retirement data requirements and the steps necessary to begin sending
electronic data versus paper. The SSCs are providing schedules to send
electronic retirement data to OPM. Two SSCs are already providing
retirement data to OPM electronically, and the rest are planning to do
so. Regular meetings and discussions with the SSCs also entail
coordinating the validation checks that can be applied to information
when it comes to OPM in order to verify it is complete and properly
formatted. These requirements are documented in the Guide to Retirement
Data Validations version 1.0. This guide will help OPM identify
problems SSCs may have when sending information to OPM and also any
problems with the data itself. OPM will be able to report these
problems back to the SSCs so they can be corrected in advance of
retirement processing.
Question. OPM's February 2010 Retirement System Modernization
Quarterly Report to the Appropriations Committee included retirement
call center goals for the agency. According to these measures, OPM has
not been meeting agency established customer service standards. For
example, OPM has not met its established goal for answering calls
within an average of 1 minute since August 2009. What steps is OPM
taking to improve the call center's service to Federal employees and
retirees?
Answer. In our commitment to provide high quality customer service,
OPM has taken several steps to improve the Call Center's service by
promoting our Retirement Services Online webpage; focusing on resolving
customer inquiries in the first call; adjusting work schedules; and
employee training.
Many telephone inquiries that are received are transactions that
can be performed by our customers online. Call Center agents are
educating our customers about the online tools that are available 24
hours a day, 7 days a week. This will help customers get their annuity
information faster, view and manage their annuity, and will help reduce
call volume and customer hold times.
Stronger emphasis has also been placed on resolving customer
telephone inquiries in the first call, which will significantly reduce
the number of times a customer needs to contact the Call Center. Call
Transfer Rates have decreased by 40 percent over past 2 years, and
although Average Talk time increased by 18 percent over past year
customers are more satisfied having their inquiries resolved in one
call.
In an effort to adequately staff the Call Center, staffing
schedules have been adjusted to better handle the hourly call volume
during peak times. Higher skilled employees (Customer Service
Specialists) will now handle calls, which will result in improved
resolution rates and improved efficiencies.
Finally, of the current Call Center staff of 84, there are 18 newly
hired customer service specialists. Talk time should come down as new
employees become comfortable and familiar with their positions. We have
already seen a 3 minute decrease in Average-Speed-of-Answer (ASA) in
July 2010 over the previous month (from 15.8 minutes to 12.8 minutes).
However, this may not be sustainable as we return to the busy times of
the year.
Implementing the steps above will improve customer service at the
Call Centers, but not be enough for us to reach the 1 minute goal for
the average speed of answer. This goal is a by-product of past
priorities which was based on the provision that OPM would have a fully
automated retirement system and substantially increased Call Center
staff. Unfortunately, those provisions did not come to fruition.
Nonetheless, customer service is a priority for OPM and we will analyze
this in more detail to further improve our performance.
Question. GAO made recommendations that OPM correct significant
weakness in five key management areas that are vital for effective
development and implementation of a modernized system: cost estimating,
project monitoring (using earned value management), requirements
management, system testing, and project oversight. Specifically, GAO
reported that OPM had not developed a cost estimating plan or
established a performance measurement baseline--prerequisites for
effective cost estimating and earned value management. In addition, the
agency had not established processes and plans to guide system
requirements development work or addressed test activities. Finally,
although OPM's Executive Steering Committee and Investment Review Board
were aware of retirement modernization activities, these bodies did not
exercise effective oversight, which allowed the aforementioned
management weaknesses to persist. Correcting these weaknesses is
critical not only for the success of OPM's retirement modernization,
but also for that of other modernization efforts within the agency.
What is the status of OPM's efforts to address and overcome the program
management weaknesses GAO identified? What steps is OPM taking to
ensure that the program management weaknesses GAO identified are not
adversely impacting the financial systems modernization program?
Answer. OPM has met with the GAO as a follow-up to their April 2009
Report on weaknesses with the technical implementation and management
of the RSM program. RSM's continuous review process is central to fully
adopting the recommendations of GAO to ensure the restructured program
meets its objectives on time and within budget. To this end, RSM
developed a reliable program cost estimate in 2009 in response to GAO
findings and OMB guidance to rejustify further investment. Using GAO's
Guide to Cost Estimation and Assessment the RSM Business Case Analysis
(BCA) was developed and provided to OMB in September 2009 with the BY
2011 Exhibit 300. The BCA was recently updated for 2010 in support of
the BY 2012 program budget and investment justification and provides
more informed basis for acquisition and other planning. RSM established
a new Program Management Baseline in June 2010 based on this
information and updated and continues to develop several documents
which are used in managing the program.
These key documents were specifically cited by the 2009 GAO Report
as inadequate, and have subsequently been updated to correct those
weaknesses, improve program oversight and reflect current program
priorities. Status of these documents follows:
--RSM Executive Steering Committee (ESC) Charter.--This charter was
updated to improve program oversight. The Charter reflects
OPM's reorganization, designating the Chief Information Officer
as the ESC Chair and adding OPM's Deputy Director as an ESC
member.
--RSM Change Control Board Charter.--This Charter reflects OPM's
reorganization and reestablishes standard processes to approve
and manage program requirements.
--Program Management Plan.--The update is currently under review.
This document provides an overview of RSM's governance,
describes program management roles and responsibilities, and
identifies the automated tools used by the program for
management and reporting purposes.
--Requirements Management Plan.--Version 3.0 was approved by the RSM
Change Control Board in March and is currently in use in every
RSM effort to document requirements and calculations for
retirement business processes.
--Test Management Plan.--The plan is currently under review. This
document outlines the testing approach that ensures the
programs deliver the systems and services required by OPM and
that those systems work efficiently to meet the requirements of
the users.
OPM continues to engage with GAO as they follow up on OPM's
progress in addressing the recommendations made in GAO's 2009 Report.
OPM will continue to update our external stakeholders on the program as
the execution progresses.
Question. OPM's February 2010 Retirement System Modernization
Quarterly Report to the Committees on Appropriations discussed the
development of a plan and timeline for the modernization of OPM's
legacy retirement IT systems. What is the specific plan and timeline
for modernizing OPM's legacy retirement IT systems?
Answer. OPM has developed a plan and timeline for modernizing the
32 aging OPM retirement systems, prioritizing modernization of the
systems as follows:
--Fiscal year 2011-2012.--OPM retirement calculators, employee data
systems, Service Credit system and Case Control Systems.
--Fiscal year 2013-2014.--OPM consolidated annuity payment systems
and post-adjudication support systems.
--Fiscal year 2015-2016.--OPM consolidated data repository and
retirement reporting systems.
OPM will undertake modernizing these systems.
implementation of guard and reservist pay
Question. Director Berry, at our hearing on March 24, 2010, you
testified that between 5,000 and 15,000 Guard and Reservists employed
in the Federal Government are eligible for the benefit in a given year,
and that several thousand would require the pay differential. Following
up on that, please answer for the record, how many Guard and Reservists
there are overall in the Federal Government?
Answer. For the purposes of this response, the term ``reservist''
refers to members of the National Guard, as well as members of one of
the Reserves. Based on a recent computer match between DOD records on
reservists and OPM records on Federal civilians, there are (as of March
2010) at least 150,000 Federal civilian employees who are reservists.
(The OPM database does not contain data on all Federal Government
personnel. Among groups excluded from the OPM database are employees of
the Postal Service, the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Federal
Reserve, various intelligence agencies, DOD nonappropriated fund
entities, the judicial branch, and much of the legislative branch).
DOD reports that the total number of reservists as of June 2010 was
about 1,320,000 (including about 1,080,000 in the Ready Reserve). Thus,
about 11.4 percent of all reservists are known to be Federal civilian
employees. DOD reported to OPM that, as of June 2010, 102,644 DOD
civilian employees were reservists (including 87,670 in the Ready
Reserve). Thus, DOD employees make up about two-thirds of the known
Federal civilian employee population of reservists.
As far as the number of reservists who are actually performing
military service, OPM has made changes in its centralized employee data
collection program, which should eventually result in readily available
counts of the number of employees who are absent to perform service in
the uniformed services in each quarter of the calendar year. Based on
special analyses of existing Central Personnel Data File data, we
estimate that 16,429 Federal employees were called to active duty
during fiscal year 2009 and that 16,260 Federal employees were absent
for military service as of the end of September 2009. (The
corresponding estimates for fiscal year 2008 were 14,752 and 12,153.)
Not all of these employees' service is qualifying for a reservist
differential. For example, some active duty service is voluntary--i.e.,
not under the involuntary call-up laws that trigger eligibility for a
reservist differential. Also, about 10 percent of the service is less
than 30 days, which indicates the service is probably annual training
and not qualifying for reservist differential. We note, however, that
agencies may not have been reporting all annual training service if
employees covered the training with paid leave. Thus, the true
percentage of active duty call-ups that are annual training is probably
more than 10 percent. We have changed the reporting requirements so
that agencies should use the Absence--Uniformed Services nature of
action code even for short call-ups covered by paid leave.
Question. Can you provide a breakdown by Federal agency?
Answer. We are able to provide a report showing the result of a
recent OPM-DOD computer match (as of March 2010), which shows counts of
Federal civilian employee reservists by agency. (The OPM database does
not contain data on all Federal Government personnel. Among groups
excluded from the OPM database are employees of the Postal Service, the
Tennessee Valley Authority, the Federal Reserve, various intelligence
agencies, DOD nonappropriated fund entities, the judicial branch, and
much of the legislative branch.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal
Agency Civilian
Reservists
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agency for International Development.................... 55
American Battle Monuments Commission.................... 3
Armed Forces Retirement Home............................ 9
Broadcasting Board of Governors......................... 6
Commodity Futures Trading Commission.................... 3
Consumer Product Safety Commission...................... 9
Corporation for National and Community Service.......... 3
Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency.......... 14
Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board................. 14
Department of Agriculture............................... 1,366
Department of Commerce.................................. 682
Department of Defense (other)........................... 4,623
Department of Education................................. 40
Department of Energy.................................... 484
Department of Health and Human Services................. 821
Department of Homeland Security......................... 8,950
Department of Housing and Urban Development............. 135
Department of Interior.................................. 1,027
Department of Justice................................... 5,634
Department of Labor..................................... 334
Department of State..................................... 249
Department of the Air Force............................. 44,803
Department of the Army.................................. 55,220
Department of the Navy.................................. 9,020
Department of Transportation............................ 2,702
Department of Treasury.................................. 1,297
Department of Veterans Affairs.......................... 10,285
Election Assistance Commission.......................... 1
Environmental Protection Agency......................... 190
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission................. 62
Export-Import Bank of the United States................. 5
Farm Credit Administration.............................. 3
Federal Communications Commission....................... 15
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation................... 73
Federal Election Commission............................. 3
Federal Housing Finance Agency.......................... 2
Federal Labor Relations Authority....................... 3
Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service.............. 1
Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board.............. 3
Federal Trade Commission................................ 7
General Services Administration......................... 284
Government Printing Office.............................. 34
International Boundary and Water Commission............. 11
Merit Systems Protection Board.......................... 5
Millennium Challenge Corporation........................ 3
National Aeronautics and Space Administration........... 341
National Archives and Records Administration............ 58
National Capital Planning Commission.................... 1
National Credit Union Administration.................... 21
National Foundation on Arts and Humanities.............. 2
National Labor Relations Board.......................... 9
National Science Foundation............................. 14
National Security Council............................... 1
National Transportation Safety Board.................... 18
Nuclear Regulatory Commission........................... 168
Office of Administration................................ 4
Office of Government Ethics............................. 6
Office of Management and Budget......................... 9
Office of National Drug Control Policy.................. 2
Office of Personnel Management.......................... 142
Office of Special Counsel............................... 4
Office of the U.S. Trade Representative................. 1
Overseas Private Investment Corporation................. 4
Peace Corps............................................. 4
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.................... 10
Presidio Trust.......................................... 2
Railroad Retirement Board............................... 14
Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board.......... 1
Securities and Exchange Commission...................... 25
Selective Service System................................ 16
Small Business Administration........................... 45
Smithsonian Institution................................. 82
Social Security Administration.......................... 768
U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum.......................... 2
U.S. International Trade Commission..................... 2
U.S. Tax Court.......................................... 2
U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission...... 3
---------------
Total............................................. 150,274
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question. Are you able to get more specific numbers from the
Defense Department about how many eligible for the benefit and how many
would require the pay differential?
Answer. OPM has made changes in employee data collection which
should eventually provide more information on Federal employees absent
for military service, including counts of those performing service that
is qualifying under the reservist differential law.
OPM issued a memorandum to agencies on April 14, 2010, requesting
the following:
``An estimate of the number of employees in your agency with active
duty service between March 11, 2009, and the date of this memorandum
that is qualifying under the reservist differential authority. This
estimate should include all members of the Reserve or National Guard
that have qualifying service, regardless of whether they are eligible
for or are actually receiving reservist differential payments. The data
should be consolidated so that one report is provided to OPM for each
agency.''
Based on agency responses to the above request shown on the table
below, 17,572 employees performed active duty between March 11, 2009,
and April 14, 2010, that is qualifying under the reservist differential
law. (This count does not reflect employees who received reservist
differential payments--only those who had qualifying service.) This
count included some agencies that do not participate in OPM's
centralized employee database, including the Postal Service, which
reported 1,824 employees. DOD had the largest number of employees with
11,704, which represents about two-thirds of the total. These counts
were for a 13-month period, thus including employees with any amount of
qualifying service during that period. A count for employees performing
qualifying service as of a single point in time would produce a smaller
number.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
No. employees
with
qualifying
service
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENTS
Agriculture............................................. 278
Commerce................................................ 37
Defense................................................. 11,704
Education............................................... 3
Energy.................................................. 48
Health and Human Services............................... 44
Homeland Security....................................... 810
Housing and Urban Development........................... 10
Interior................................................ 200
Justice................................................. 1,329
Labor................................................... 18
State................................................... 20
Transportation.......................................... \1\ 129
Treasury................................................ 111
Veterans Affairs........................................ 777
---------------
DEPARTMENTS TOTAL................................. 15,513
===============
INDEPENDENT AGENCIES
BBG..................................................... ..............
Commission on Civil Rights.............................. ..............
Corp National and Community Svc......................... 3
DFNSB................................................... 2
Defense Intelligence Agency............................. 20
Export-Import Bank...................................... ..............
FERC.................................................... ..............
GPO..................................................... 4
GSA..................................................... 10
Missile Defense Agency.................................. ..............
Morris K. Udall Foundation.............................. ..............
NASA.................................................... 18
National Gallery of Art................................. 1
National Geospational Intelligence Agency............... 22
Nuclear Regulatory Commission........................... 4
National Security Agency (NSA).......................... 23
OPIC.................................................... ..............
OPM..................................................... 13
RRB..................................................... 2
SEC..................................................... 2
Selective Service System................................ 1
Small Business Admin (SBA).............................. 5
Smithsonian............................................. 11
SSA..................................................... 70
U.S. Access Board....................................... ..............
U.S. Senate............................................. 13
USAID................................................... 5
USPS.................................................... 1,824
U.S. Trade Rep.......................................... 1
---------------
INDEPENDENT AGENCIES TOTAL........................ 2,059
===============
GRAND TOTAL....................................... 17,572
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 109 of the 129 are FAA employees.
We asked DOD to provide us with more up-to-date data on DOD-
employed employee-reservists. DOD reports that the 11,704 records are
being analyzed in two parts. As a result of the first group analysis,
approximately 5,558 appropriated-fund employees were identified as
being eligible for reservist differential. Approximately 532 were due a
differential payment. For those 532 employees, the consolidated amount
of reservist differential owed is approximately $1.3 million. The total
amounts covered from 1 pay period to 24 pay periods and ranged from
$10.75 to $26,665.02. The median total figure was $1,518.71. The
average amount (before taxes) is approximately $2,500. The second group
of retroactive records is now in its final review stage before
distribution to DOD components to process payment actions. Payments
will be effected starting September 17, 2010. DOD does not currently
have data for service periods covering April 24, 2010, to the present,
as those records are still being analyzed.
At any one point in time, about 13,600 DOD appropriated-fund
employees are in an Absent-U.S. status. Of these, DOD estimates 5,400
are potentially eligible for reservist differential (i.e., called up
under one of the qualifying legal authorities), and 540 are actually
due a differential payment. However, some employees may only be due a
payment for as little as a single pay period, often associated with
first entering or leaving active duty when overseas allowances/payments
are not being paid. Others are due a differential payment every pay
period of absence.
nursing shortage and intergovernmental personnel act mobility program
Question. Following up on the questions I asked at the hearing, I
have an additional question on this topic. I understand that the
Intergovernmental Personnel Mobility Program sets guidelines for the
Departments interested in participating. It is also my understanding
that in 2007, the Department of Defense, through the leadership of the
U.S. Army, engaged in a similar project with the University of
Maryland. OPM was not involved, but can you speak to the possibility of
providing assistance to other agencies that may want to follow the
example of the DOD's effort?
Answer. Even though we do not have the details of the 2007 project
involving the U.S. Army, Department of Defense (DOD), and the
University of Maryland, as the Federal agency responsible for
establishing guidelines and regulations for the administration of the
Intergovernmental Personnel Act Mobility Program (IPA), OPM remains
interested in innovations that would expand the use of the IPA Program
Governmentwide. That could include providing assistance to agencies
that may want to duplicate other agencies' successful efforts.
For example, in March 2010 OPM sponsored a forum that included
representatives from the Department of Defense, the Department of
Health and Human Services, and the Department of Veterans Affairs. The
purpose of the forum was to begin a dialogue with Federal agencies that
have some involvement in the nursing profession to explore what role
the IPA Program could play in addressing the nursing shortage,
particularly the impact of the faculty shortage on the nursing
shortage. Additionally, the Employment Services Division of OPM
recently established a collaborative listserv for representatives of
Federal agencies who administer the IPA program at the operational
level for their agencies. It is our hope that the listserv will act as
a valuable resource to Federal agencies by allowing them to share
ideas, ask questions, and share best practices about the IPA Program
across Government.
Finally, OPM plans to engage policy and programmatic stakeholders,
both within and outside the Federal Government, in recommending
initiatives to promote the IPA Program.
prohibitions on the hiring of immigrants
Question. The Financial Services and General Government
Appropriations bill carries a government-wide general provision
(Section 704) relating to restrictions on the hiring of non-citizens in
the Federal workforce. This provision has been a component of annual
appropriations bills dating back to the Treasury and Post Office
Departments Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 1939. It has been
modified at least 18 times in the past 70 years. As I developed the
fiscal year 2010 bill last summer, I worked with the Chairman of the
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee on revisions to
the language to eliminate discrimination among immigrants based on
their nation of origin. The changes were included as part of our
enacted bill in December (Public Law 111-117, Division C, Section 704).
The modified provision permits the hiring of all legal permanent
residents, refugees, and recipients of asylum, provided that they
affirm that they are seeking citizenship. I note that the President's
fiscal year 2011 budget request proposes to retain the fiscal year 2010
modifications. This provision applies to excepted service positions
since a Ford-era executive order (1976) still prohibits non-citizens
from being employed in the Federal competitive service. What actions
has OPM taken to implement the changes in the law? Has OPM issued
guidance to Federal agencies and updated the website? If not, when do
you expect to do so? What assurances can you give the Committee that
Federal agencies' human resources staff are aware of the changes and
understand that the law no longer prevents them from considering and
hiring immigrants in thousands of Federal positions?
Answer. OPM has provided information for agencies and job
applicants on the USAJOBS website (http://www.usajobs.gov/EI/
noncitizensemployment.asp#icc) regarding the changes to non-citizen
hiring restrictions contained in Section 704. Also, OPM is discussing
the statutory change with the Chief Human Capital Officers (CHCOs), and
has asked CHCOs to inform OPM if agencies seek guidance on
implementation of the new appropriations provision governing Federal
hiring. We note that it is the obligation of each agency and its
counsel to determine the scope of that agency's appropriation law
restrictions in any given year and to ensure that hiring is done in
accordance with such laws. OPM will work with OMB to issue guidance, if
sought, on particular aspects of the new provision.
Question. Under Executive Order 11935, only United States citizens
and nationals (residents of American Samoa and Swains Island) may
compete for, and be appointed to, competitive service jobs. To what
extent has OPM been engaged in discussions with the Administration and
OMB officials to evaluate Federal immigrant hiring policies and
possible revisions to E.O. 11935?
Answer. OPM has had general discussions with OMB regarding Federal
immigrant hiring policies and options for revisions to E.O. 11935.
However, no determination has been made regarding whether revisions are
needed and what they might include.
technology
Question. What percentage of OPM's budget request is allocated for
technology?
Answer. The total for all Information Technology spending (for
example, equipment, software renewals, and applications and systems
development support) budgeted for fiscal year 2011 is $242.85 million,
which is 12 percent of OPM's total resources including appropriated
funds, Common Services funds, and revolving fund activities.
Question. Please describe the programs that would receive major
portions of technology funding for fiscal year 2011.
Answer. OPM's major IT investments in fiscal year 2011 include:
$77.531 million for Enterprise Human Resources Integration (EHRI),
which streamlines and automates information exchanges in order to give
the Federal HR community improved access to employee HR data to improve
workforce planning for hiring, skills development, and retention
strategies; $39.759 million for EPIC Transformation and $27.619 million
for EPIC Operations and Maintenance, which will ensure agencies have
information to make credentialing, suitability and/or security
clearance decisions; $33.484 million for operation and management of
OPM's IT infrastructure, which provides the backbone for OPM's mission-
critical systems; $20.520 million for the Consolidated Business
Information System (CBIS), OPM's core financial budget and procurement
system; $13.621 million for USAJOBS for technology and program
operations to offer Federal agencies and job seekers a modern platform
to support online recruitment and job application; $5.105 million to
develop a data warehouse for the Federal Employees Health Benefit
Program; $3.160 million for Human Resources Line of Business (HR LOB),
which drives improved HR solutions and services through the
establishment of Shared Service Centers service delivery models and
strategies for agencies; and $1.5 million for Retirement Systems
Modernization, a multi-year transformation of the Federal civilian
retirement system.
comprehensive national cybersecurity initiative
Question. The White House recently released the unclassified
version of its Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative--the
government's plan to secure public and private sector computer
networks. To this end, the White House formed an interagency working
group to examine the promotion of cybersecurity. Reportedly, the
working group's efforts would include roles for OPM and the Department
of Defense to create a high performing cybersecurity workforce. What is
OPM doing to help achieve this goal?
Answer. OPM is leading Track 3, Federal Workforce Structure, of the
National Initiative for Cybersecurity Education (NICE). Our primary
objective is to implement strategies to ensure Federal agencies can
attract, recruit, and retain skilled employees to accomplish
cybersecurity missions today and in the future. We are implementing an
incremental approach to understanding and defining cybersecurity work,
developing competency models, analyzing workforce issues, and
developing strategies that may be needed to address Federal workforce
needs. We are working closely with agencies to meet current
requirements, have granted Schedule A hiring authority to several
agencies, and are encouraging the use of existing hiring flexibilities
to meet agency needs.
Question. What are the costs associated with this initiative?
Answer. OPM did not receive any funding under the Comprehensive
National Cybersecurity Initiative (CNCI). OPM is working with NICE
leadership and National Security Staff to identify strategic priorities
and match those to resource needs. OPM formed a NICE Track 3 workgroup,
and personnel from OPM policy and program offices are accomplishing
projects in support of the cybersecurity workforce. Approximately
$23,000 from other objects funding was applied toward facilitated
workshops for Track 3 efforts.
Question. Please explain in detail the particular qualifications
and skills required for positions in the cybersecurity workforce.
Answer. In general, qualification requirements for Federal
positions are based on the occupational series to which each position
is classified. However, defining those requirements for the
cybersecurity workforce is not a simple matter. ``Cybersecurity'' is a
term of art; it is not a specific Federal occupation. Working with
agencies, we have identified at least 18 different occupations
(including Computer Science, Computer Engineering, Information
Technology, Intelligence and Investigations) that cover the different
aspects of cybersecurity work, each having its own education and
experience requirements.
Within its role in NICE, OPM is currently conducting a
Governmentwide study to identify critical competencies needed across
the Federal cybersecurity workforce. This information will help us
correctly identify the occupations involved in cybersecurity work and
the qualification requirements associated with those occupations. We
have gathered initial information from agencies and stakeholders and
will soon be surveying the workforce.
telework and continuity of operations
Question. An oft-cited reason for the lack of progress on telework
implementation in the Federal government is resistance by managers and
supervisors. How many OPM managers and supervisors have or are
teleworking either as an aspect of an ongoing program or in a pilot
program?
Answer. We do no currently have the ability to track and report on
telework instances/participation by individual supervisors. We are in
the process of implementing a new database that will enable us to
capture information regarding the number of supervisors who telework.
In the recent Employee Viewpoint Survey, 56 percent of OPM managers and
supervisors indicated that they telework (either regularly-scheduled,
or on an ad-hoc basis) under the provisions of our ongoing Agency
telework program. Assuming the survey respondents are representative of
the general supervisory population, this equates to approximately 223
supervisors who may telework. Director Berry has been a strong
proponent of telework governmentwide and as the leader of OPM.
Question. What feedback have these managers and supervisors
provided to top OPM management on policy changes or approaches that
could facilitate telework implementation government-wide?
Answer. We recently held managerial/supervisory focus groups on May
24 and 26, 2010, in the District of Columbia and on June 23 and 24,
2010, for supervisors in our field locations. Focus group comments
reflected that supervisors and managers are supportive of telework
flexibilities provided at OPM. They would like to see more consistency
across organizations and expansion of the use of telework arrangements.
In general, they favor encouraging flexibility without micromanaging.
Question. Of the Federal employees who are deemed essential
government-wide, how many are able to telework in an emergency?
Answer. OPM does not have Governmentwide data on the number of
employees deemed ``essential''.
Question. Do you have any government-wide data on how many
essential Federal employees were able to perform mission critical
functions during the 4 days of the snow blizzard in February 2010?
Answer. Based on information we obtained from a special request to
agencies in the area most affected by the snow storms, we estimate the
number of essential Federal employees who worked in the National
Capital Region during the 4 days of the snow blizzard was 13,523.
Question. How many agencies have incorporated telework into their
continuity of operations planning?
Answer. In response to OPM's annual call for 2008 telework data,
56.4 percent of the 78 responding agencies had incorporated telework
into their continuity of operations planning. Based on a preliminary
review of the 2009 data, this number is closer to 70 percent of
responding agencies.
Question. How many essential OPM employees were able to continue
their critical functions?
Answer. All 48 essential OPM employees were able to continue their
critical functions.
Question. What are the savings--or cost avoidance--for each
employee who is able to telework during continuity of operations
situations?
Answer. We do not have per-employee savings data.
Question. What lessons were learned from the snow blizzard?
Answer. In view of the extreme circumstances of the snow events, we
made a special request to the Chief Human Capital Officers (CHCO) Act
agencies. We sought their voluntary responses to a number of questions
in an attempt to identify some success stories emerging from the
events. We received replies from 19 agencies. Following are some of the
overall results.
--Thirteen of the respondents stated that telework was incorporated
into their emergency response plans. Five agencies stated that
telework was not incorporated into their emergency response
plan.
--All agencies that said they had used telework considered it
effective for those individuals who had power and who had their
issued equipment available.
--Agencies that had employees who teleworked experienced little or no
issues with telework.
--No agencies reported that they had incorporated transportation,
sleeping, and food arrangements into plans for emergency
personnel who were required to come into work during the
closure event.
--Several agencies are conducting reviews of their related plans and
policies after the snow closures of February 2010.
--Several agencies are planning on expanding existing telework
opportunities.
Some agencies reported that not all of their employees eligible to
telework had brought the necessary equipment and/or work material home
with them prior to the snow event. Several agencies noted that some
employees were not able to telework effectively through the event as
they did not have necessary ``hard'' files/paperwork.
Clearly, some agencies need to do more to facilitate remote access
by teleworking employees to files stored on their networks. Our query
of the agencies also revealed that there are still some agencies that
have not yet incorporated telework into their emergency response plans,
which all agencies need to do.
Question. Last year, OPM and other agencies (to varying degrees)
established or refined emergency preparedness plans for the possibility
that a pandemic flu might require social distancing and working off-
site. Did these plans enhance agencies' continuity of operations during
the snow blizzard? If so, please elaborate. If not, what emergency
preparedness policies and procedures might be need for future events,
whether they are caused by natural disasters or terrorist acts?
Answer. OPM provided guidance to agencies regarding planning for
pandemic influenza in 2009 (see http://www.opm.gov/pandemic/OPM-
Pandemic_AllIssuances.pdf) which emphasized, among other things, the
importance of agencies and their employees being telework ready. The
blizzard demonstrated that agencies still have work to do when it comes
to having the necessary infrastructure to accommodate telework during
emergencies.
Question. During the February snow blizzard, it was reported that
the cost of closing the Federal government was an estimated $100
million per day. In a radio interview during the blizzard, you
indicated that the estimate was out of date and that a re-estimate was
in order. What factors should be considered and what methodology would
be used for estimating the cost of a 1-day government shutdown? Has OPM
recalculated the cost of a 1-day government-wide closure? If so, what
is the revised estimate? If not, when might a recalculation be
available?
Answer. Factors considered in estimating the cost of closing the
Federal Government include the estimated numbers and pay grades of
employees in the National Capital Region (the area most affected by the
storms), less the number of emergency personnel and estimated
teleworkers who worked during the closure. Our revised estimate of the
cost of a 1-day Governmentwide closure is approximately $71 million.
federal employee recruitment and retention
Question. In January 2010, OPM released its report to Congress,
Recruitment, Relocation and Retention Incentive--these incentives are
often referred to as the ``3Rs.'' In calendar year 2008, 47 agencies
spent a total of $284 million on 39,512 recruitment, relocation, and
retention incentives for Federal employees. Would you elaborate on the
implementation of the 3R programs?
Answer. Agencies have used recruitment, relocation, and retention
incentives (3Rs) to help recruit and retain Federal civilian employees
since the authorities were originally enacted in the early 1990s. In
May 2005, changes in law became effective that provided additional
flexibility to grant 3Rs payments. Under OPM's regulations, agencies
have discretionary authority to grant 3Rs payments to employees without
OPM approval in most situations. Currently, OPM approval is required
only for 3Rs payments in excess of the normal payment limitations
(e.g., for retention incentive payments in excess of 25 percent for
individual employees and 10 percent for a group of employees, up to a
maximum payment of 50 percent) and to cover non-General Schedule
categories of employees under the 3Rs authorities.
Question. Are there categories of occupations and positions that
have received the major portion of these incentives?
Answer. In calendar year 2008, agencies typically paid 3Rs payments
to employees in occupations critical to agency missions, such as
healthcare, engineering, security, and information technology.
Of the top 30 occupations that received recruitment incentives, 7
occupations were in healthcare fields and 7 in engineering fields. The
single occupation for which recruitment incentives were most used was
patent examiners, who accounted for more than 11 percent of all
recruitment incentives paid.
Relocation incentives were spread across a wide array of
occupations. Of the top 10 occupations for which relocation incentives
were used, the two fields in which they were most likely to be used
were occupations in criminal investigating and contracting, accounting
for 7.35 percent and 6.62 percent, respectively.
Retention incentives were primarily used to retain employees in
healthcare occupations, accounting for 34 percent of all retention
incentives paid. Security and engineering occupations each accounted
for almost 8 percent of retention incentives issued. Information
technology employees received 4 percent of retention incentives paid.
Question. How many employees have received more than one of these
incentives--for example, how many, if any, employees received both a
recruitment and relocation incentive?
Answer. OPM's regulations prohibit employees from receiving
recruitment, relocation, and retention incentives concurrently in most
situations. However, the regulations do not limit how many non-
concurrent incentives an employee may receive over the course of his or
her career, provided all the regulatory criteria for these incentives
are met. OPM is currently working with agencies to improve the quality
and accuracy of 3Rs data submitted to OPM's Enterprise Human Resources
Integration (EHRI) data system. Once EHRI data from agencies is
certified to be accurate, OPM expects to be able to track trends such
as how many employees received more than one incentive over the course
of their career.
Question. What improvements, if any, may be considered?
Answer. Over the last year, OPM has led an initiative, in
coordination with an interagency workgroup, to review existing policies
and identify ways to improve the administration and oversight of the
3Rs authorities. In February 2009, OPM issued a memo to agencies
explaining what we found in our review and, as a result, we plan to--
--Develop additional guidance and tools to help agencies write
stronger justifications for 3Rs authorizations, improved 3Rs
plans, and more explicit agency internal monitoring procedures,
with greater emphasis on the consideration of the costs and
benefits of the 3Rs;
--Issue proposed regulations to require agencies to review all
retention incentives and group recruitment incentives at least
annually to determine whether they should be revised or
discontinued; and
--Review the 3Rs data submitted to EHRI for agencies that used the
greatest number of 3Rs. OPM will ask agencies to validate or
certify the data accuracy. Once the 3Rs data is validated, OPM
and agencies will be better able to track 3Rs trends on an
ongoing basis and, if necessary, investigate any 3Rs data
anomaly and take corrective actions immediately.
Question. Are there any preliminary data on the use of the 3Rs in
2009?
Answer. We are currently compiling the calendar year 2009 report
from the data submitted by agencies. We expect to release the report
later this year.
Question. Please describe how OPM has used each of the 3Rs in your
own organization.
Answer. During fiscal year 2010 OPM has granted 1 recruitment and 2
relocation incentives as a recruiting tool for some of our hard-to-fill
positions, including a senior program director position in our USAJobs
program office, a supervisory Criminal Investigator who was relocated
between duty stations within OPM, and a senior Human Resources
Specialist who was relocated between duty stations within OPM.
Question. The Chief Human Capital Officer at the Department of
Homeland Security has testified before Congress on the use of ``virtual
job fairs'' to recruit employees, particularly information technology
staff. Please explain how a ``virtual job fair'' works.
Answer. OPM did not participate in DHS's ``virtual job fair,''
however, on September 14, DHS will present a briefing to OPM on its use
of a virtual job fair to recruit top talent.
Question. To what extent has OPM used this approach to hire
employees?
Answer. OPM has not used this approach to hire employees because of
the lack of 508 compliance (an accessibility issue for individuals with
disabilities) of ``virtual job fair'' sites. We are currently pursuing
a 508-compliant job fair site, and when funds become available, we plan
to pursue the purchase of such a site.
Question. What safeguards are in place to ensure that the merit
system principles codified in Title 5 are upheld?
Answer. As with any recruitment and hiring activity, agencies must
ensure their practices are in conformance with the merit system
principles, as well as with all other applicable provisions of title 5.
In addition, OPM, in its oversight role, will hold agencies accountable
for compliance with the laws and regulations governing recruitment and
selection.
Question. Has the economic downturn slowed the rate of retiring
Federal employees?
Answer. We are not able to determine the specific impact of the
recession on the rate of retirement among Federal employees. However,
we do have historical data as shown with regards to the number of
employees added to the retirement roll each year since 2000 which may
be useful to provide some perspective on the trends in retirement of
Federal employees.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total
Fiscal year retirements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2000.................................................... 77,383
2001.................................................... 77,330
2002.................................................... 74,153
2003.................................................... 81,128
2004.................................................... 90,441
2005.................................................... 94,977
2006.................................................... 103,292
2007.................................................... 92,349
2008.................................................... 86,615
2009.................................................... 87,907
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question. What is the current projection for the retirement of
baby boomers?
Answer. It is difficult to make projections regarding retirements
due to the variety of factors that go into retirement decisions (i.e.
the economy, retirement savings). Accordingly, OPM is not currently
able to provide specific projections regarding the retirement of baby
boomers in the Federal workforce.
Question. What guidance, if any, does OPM provide to departments
and agencies to ease the expected retirements of baby boomers in the
next 5 years?
Answer. To ease the expected effect of retirements, OPM supports
knowledge transfer from one generation of leaders to the next
generation of leaders. OPM has submitted a legislative proposal that
would allow Federal employees covered by the Civil Service Retirement
System or the Federal Employees Retirement System to enter a phased
retirement status at the end of their careers, under certain
circumstances. This would enable agencies to retain the services of
highly valued and experienced employees for longer periods than they
would otherwise be able to. This proposal would require that part of
the individual's time be spent mentoring other employees.
To prepare for an increase in the number of retirements from the
Federal Government, OPM works with agencies to assess leadership needs
and use current leaders to prepare new and emerging leaders for future
assignments and roles. The following are some examples of recent OPM
programs and activities:
--OPM hosted a best practices forum on mentoring when our ``Best
Practices in Mentoring'' booklet was made available to agencies
through the OPM website. OPM participated in a mentoring forum
conducted by and for the Intelligence Community.
--OPM is working with agencies to develop an executive on-boarding
framework. A forum was held for agencies to investigate methods
and techniques to better prepare new Federal executives for
successful executive careers. For example, the National Science
Foundation has initiated a pilot on-boarding program, which
includes a letter from the outgoing executive to his or her
successor, among other features.
--OPM is developing a wiki that will facilitate knowledge sharing for
the training and development community. The wiki will debut
with five initial topics later this summer.
--OPM facilitates knowledge management by hosting best practices
forums or webcasts. Webcasts on leadership development programs
have been offered, which are recorded for posting on OPM's
YouTube channel.
--Best practices forums are hosted quarterly for performance
management and executive resources practitioners. At these
forums, OPM provides agencies with guidance and advice.
Agencies, in turn, present information on their best practices
on a wide variety of topics, including their Senior Executive
Service (SES) career development programs, diversity, and
leadership succession management.
--In the Guide to Strategic Leadership Succession Management Model,
OPM provides recommendations for assessing executive workforce
needs, projecting attrition, and designing strategies for
meeting staffing needs. These guidelines are followed by
agencies in the preparation of their Strategic Leadership
Succession Plans and their Human Capital Management Reports.
--Through the Federal Executive Institute in Charlottesville,
Virginia, OPM offers a course entitled ``Leaders Growing
Leaders; Building Your Organization by Developing Leaders at
Every Level.'' The course offers participating executives the
opportunity to gain experience practicing informal roles as
exemplar, mentor, coach, and teacher to help cultivate the next
generation of leaders. Participants also learn how to frame
their life and work experiences as stories to help others learn
leadership lessons.
Question. The government-wide website, USAjobs.opm.gov, has been
reconfigured. Please discuss the improvements, if any, to the website.
Answer. The refreshed USAJOBS site enhances the user experience by
updating the look and feel, including introducing social media and
increased personalization; improving site navigation, making it easier
to move about the site; enhancing the job search tool so applicants
find the right job for them; streamlining employment information to
ensure guidance is readily available; and providing targeted resources
for those with special needs (students, executives, veterans, and
individuals with disabilities). Also, applicants can now email their
resumes that they created using the USAJOBS resume builder.
Question. Are there enhanced features to assist veterans and
persons with disabilities in their job search?
Answer. All veterans' employment information has been consolidated
onto one site (www.fedshirevets.gov). A resume mining capability has
been added for preference eligible veterans and 30 percent or more
disabled veterans.
For persons with disabilities, a new page has been added to USAJOBS
with information that includes tips for applying competitively or under
the Schedule A appointing authority. Template letters have been created
for download, to be used when applying under Schedule A.
Question. What partnerships have OPM formed to reach out to college
campus to recruit the best talent to public service? Have these efforts
been successful?
Answer. In January 2010, OPM created a Student Programs Office to
promote innovative and coordinated approaches to recruiting and hiring
students into the Federal Government. A significant part of this new
office's role involves collaborating with academia and other
organizations focused on the recruitment of students and recent
graduates into the Federal service.
Through the Call to Serve initiative, OPM works in collaboration
with the Partnership for Public Service to educate a new generation of
leaders about the importance of a strong civil service, help re-
establish links between Federal agencies and college campuses, and
provide students with information about Federal jobs. Through this
network, we are able to reach more than 700 schools and more than 75
Federal agencies. Throughout the year, we nurture these relationships
by providing training workshops, a Federal Service Summit, best
practices, and other key resources relating to Federal employment.
In addition to the Call to Serve initiative, OPM has worked with a
variety of colleges and universities nationwide to promote the Federal
Government as an ideal place to work. Earlier in fiscal year 2010, we
sponsored five Federal Career Days--at Johns Hopkins University, City
College of San Francisco, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
University of New Mexico, and Rutgers University--to showcase the
Federal Government as the most dynamic and progressive employer in the
country as well as a ``cool'' place to work. These schools offer strong
curricula relating to Federal agency mission-critical occupations and
demonstrate a willingness to promote Federal employment opportunities
for their students. In addition to the Federal Career Days, we have
partnered with, and participated in many events at, other colleges,
universities and organizations that have key roles in attracting a
diverse student population into the Federal workforce. Over the past
fiscal year, these have included the American Society of Public
Administration, National Association of Colleges and Employers,
Government College Relations Council, Federal Employed Women, League of
United Latin American Citizens, Southeast Federal Recruiting Council,
Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities (HACU), and Gallaudet
University.
Finally, in 2010 the Presidential Management Fellows (PMF) Program
expanded its outreach to over 30,000 graduate school contacts across
the country. This outreach included e-mail blasts, campus visits,
presentations, and partnering with associations. Recently, OPM Director
John Berry approved a variety of reinvigoration efforts to enhance the
PMF Program:
--Increasing investment in the assessment process to improve the
quality of PMF finalists. For the upcoming PMF Class of 2011,
we are enhancing the PMF assessment process to improve both the
quality of finalists and the applicant experience.
--Improving the PMF Program experience. The Program is in the process
of creating ``PMF Power Packs,'' consisting of current PMFs, to
work on 5 program areas: (1) diversity outreach, (2)
development of a new orientation program ``for PMFs, by PMFs'',
(3) assistance with the new assessment process, including
logistics, event planning, and coordination of the in-person
phase, (4) development of a job-matching process for PMF
finalists, and (5) creation of an alumni program.
--Increasing outreach efforts through strategic partnerships. This
includes work with organizations such as the National
Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration
(NASPAA), National Association for Equal Opportunity in Higher
Education (NAFEO), HACU, etc., to create a marketing and
outreach plan to reach all segments of society. Many Federal
Executive Boards (FEBs) also reach out to local colleges and
universities to share information on Federal employment.
As a result of the aforementioned efforts, we have witnessed an
increase in the number of students and recent graduates entering the
Federal Government through Governmentwide student programs and the PMF
Program. The PMF Program experienced a 70 percent increase in its
number of applicants over the number of PMF applicants from 2009. In
2009, we had approximately 500 Fellows appointed in Federal agencies,
representing the highest number of Fellows appointed in the history of
the program. We are expecting even more in 2010.
work-life programs
Question. What amount and percentage of the OPM budget is allocated
for administration of work/life programs? How many full-time
equivalents (FTEs) are associated with this function? What are the two
most important issues facing the Federal workforce in terms of work/
life issues and what are OPM plans to address these concerns?
Answer. Of OPM's budget of $905 million, 0.42 percent is allocated
for the Governmentwide oversight of work/life programs. There are
currently 6 FTEs allocated for this function.
The two highest priority issues are the Federal telework program
and employee health and wellness. OPM Director John Berry has shown his
commitment to these two areas by establishing a high priority
performance goal for each.
The goal for telework is, by the end of fiscal year 2011, to
increase by 50 percent the number of eligible Federal employees who
telework over the 2009 baseline of 102,900.
Key components of OPM's strategy to meet this goal include: working
with agencies to make sure they have effective telework policies that
translate into successful programs; and developing high-quality and
broadly accessible telework training.
The goal for health and wellness is, by the end of fiscal year
2011, for every agency to have established and begun to implement a
plan for a comprehensive health and wellness program which will achieve
a 75 percent participation rate. Key components of OPM's strategy to
meet this goal include: providing guidance to Federal agencies on what
constitutes a comprehensive health and wellness program and criteria
for assessing the adequacy of agency plans; and producing a training
package aimed at employees and managers that agencies can use to inform
their employees of the value of health and wellness programs.
Another area that we believe to be an important issue facing
Federal employees is dependent care. The range of dependents for which
employees are expected to provide support, and the range of support
necessary for those individuals, is broad. More than half of Federal
employees fall into the age category of adult Americans who are caring
for both elders and children. Providing support through workplace
programs allows Federal employees convenient access to supports and
resources, and facilitates productivity while at work.
OPM's plans to address the dependent care needs of Federal
employees include providing: training and resources for Federal work/
life staff; networking opportunities for agency work/life staff; and
guidance documents and handbooks.
Question. Some versions of the healthcare reform legislation would
assign a role to OPM regarding benefit negotiations and administration
with health insurance providers for plans. How many FTEs and
appropriated monies currently support Federal Employee Health Benefit
Program (FEHBP) administration functions in OPM?
Answer. Currently, OPM is appropriated approximately $11.7 million
to administer the FEHBP, with approximately 90 FTEs. This does not
include the support of the Office of Inspector General, which is
responsible for auditing FEHBP health plans. It also does not include a
proportionate share of accounting or legal services.
[Dollars in millions]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriated
Money FTE
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Policy, including Office of the Actuary. $5.5 22.1
Operations.............................. 6.2 68.0
-------------------------------
Total............................. 11.7 90.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question. What staff would need to be hired and what additional
expertise would be needed if the OPM role were expanded in this area?
How would this added role affect OPM's performance of its core mission?
Answer. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Public Law
111-148), enacted March 23, 2010, gives OPM additional health insurance
plan oversight and administrative responsibilities. Under section 1334,
OPM will contract with health insurance issuers to offer at least 2
multi-State health plans through each State Health Insurance Exchange.
The Exchanges will make available qualified health plans, including
multi-State plans, to the general public beginning in 2014.
This added role will not have any effect on OPM's performance of
its current core mission. OPM will need to develop the capacity,
including additional staff, to manage the Multi-State Plan option(s)
that will be available via State exchanges in 2014. Development of such
capacity includes examining the interaction between multi-State plan
requirements and State insurance regulations, analyzing potential
enrollee demographics and utilization patterns, and modeling potential
premium costs. Work over the next several months will focus on shaping
the OPM role with the Multi-State Plan option from the framework
outlines presented in the new law and identifying the institutional
support that OPM will require to develop and manage this program from
2010 to 2014.
Question. OPM has announced that it is revamping the human capital
survey that is designed to gauge Federal employee views on a variety of
key Federal workforce practices on an annual basis. What are the
significant changes/enhancements in the survey methodology? Will the
data be disaggregated to allow for a more in-depth look into the views
of employees in various offices and units of a department rather than
just the department as a whole?
Answer. Starting in 2010, OPM plans on administering the Federal
Employee Viewpoint survey annually to fulfill the growing need for
Governmentwide standardized data. While changes to the survey in regard
to content, process, and depth of reporting are currently being planned
for the future, some minor changes were made to the FedView survey for
2010 administration. The survey was revised to add items in the areas
of employees' work experience, supervision, leadership, and work/life
issues.
In addition, OPM decided to move questions on Governmentwide
benefits, like life insurance, health insurance, and retirement, to a
separate survey; most agencies supported these changes. OPM already
provides data below department or agency-wide level to allow visibility
into the perceptions of employees within major organizations and
subdivisions, and OPM works with agencies to support their needs for
specialized views or cuts of survey results. In all cases, OPM ensures
the identity of individual respondents is protected.
federal employees and government procurement
Question. Within the government procurement community, the state of
the acquisition workforce is of great interest. Generally, it is
understood that the acquisition workforce as a whole--which is dealing
with complex acquisitions and increased government procurement
spending, and learning new acquisition methods--is undermanned and
undertrained. How is OPM assisting the Office of Federal Procurement
Policy, and other Federal agencies, in bolstering the government's
acquisition workforce?
Answer. OPM has designated the 1102 Series as a Governmentwide
mission-critical occupation. OPM's shared registers include the
contracting series. We also assist agencies with employees in the 1102
Series in providing fiscal year reporting for OFPP on the 1102 Series
workforce strength and 5-year projections of attritions and accretions.
Agency reporting includes:
--Resource data for entry-, mid- and senior-level as part of the
measures reported for each agency's annual Human Capital
Management Report.
--Target acquisition workforce profile and actual attrition at the
end of the reported measurement year.
--Comparison of current workforce targets with actual population to
determine gaps or surpluses.
--Workforce targets and projected attrition for the next fiscal year
(short-term goal).
--Workforce targets and projected attrition for an additional 4
fiscal years in the future (long-term goal).
Agencies this year were to establish targets and project attrition
for fiscal year 2010 and fiscal year 2014. Agencies were also to report
their current population and certifications as of the end of fiscal
year 2009. OPM will continue to work with agencies and assist them with
efforts to provide accurate and complete reporting.
Question. What hiring authority flexibilities can agencies use to
hire acquisition professionals in a timely fashion?
Answer. From September 30, 2007, through September 30, 2012,
agencies have direct hire appointing authority for certain Federal
acquisition-related positions, such as entry-level and senior
contracting positions and all purchasing positions.
Through December 31, 2011, agencies are also authorized to reemploy
annuitants in the acquisition-related positions mentioned above without
offsetting their salaries, as is normally required when reemploying
annuitants. Agencies' decisions to use this authority must be based on
the unusually high or unique qualifications of an individual,
exceptional difficulty in recruiting or retaining a qualified employee,
or a temporary emergency hiring need, which makes the reemployment of
the individual essential.
Question. What constraints exist, if any, that might impede
agencies' efforts to hire and train individuals for their contracting
offices?
Answer. One constraint is the challenge of accurately projecting
future workforce needs. This depends, in part, on how many positions
are defined as having ``inherently governmental'' functions. The
definition of ``inherently governmental'' affects the workload of
contract specialists and informs agencies' decisions regarding the
number of positions they need to fill. A strong desire to avoid over-
hiring can also complicate workforce planning efforts.
In addition, Federal contracting is quite technical and requires
in-depth knowledge of Government policy and regulations, as well as
substantial training and experience to be fully productive. Effective
training programs that are adequately resourced are essential.
Moreover, once their contract specialists are trained, Federal agencies
face competition from non-Federal employers willing to pay more for
employees with Federal work experience and training and credentials.
Question. As the Director of the Office of Management and Budget
noted in a July 2009 memorandum, ``[f]ederal agencies use both Federal
employees and private sector contractors to deliver important services
to citizens.'' His memorandum also stated that overreliance on
contractors ``can lead to the erosion of the in-house capacity that is
essential to effective government performance,'' and counseled that
achieving the best mix of Federal employees and contractor employees
can be accomplished by identifying the proper role of each sector. What
is the human resources perspective on the multisector workforce?
Answer. We believe an effective balance between Federal employees
and contractors can be achieved by taking into account strategic human
capital planning, the concept of ``inherently governmental function''
and ``critical function'' and effective talent management.
--Strategic human capital planning is essential to an understanding
of the full picture of workforce requirements for mission
accomplishment.
--The concept of ``inherently governmental'' function and
``critical'' function must be clearly understood and properly
applied to ensure inherently governmental functions are
performed only by Federal employees and critical functions are
performed by Federal employees to the extent necessary to
ensure the government maintains control of its mission and
operations.
--Effective talent management strategies should be used (including
effective recruiting and retention strategies) to ensure that
agencies have adequate numbers, and the right skill mix, of
employees to accomplish the mission.
Question. What are some of the issues that an agency might
encounter when it has Federal employees and contractor employees
working side-by-side?
Answer. Many of the issues that arise when Federal employees and
contractors have been working side by side concern differences in
systems for pay and reward, discipline, and termination, as well as
general ethical considerations (including organizational and personal
conflicts of interest). Some examples of these differences include:
--Contractor employees are not subject to the various laws governing
Federal employment, which impose various protections and
restrictions.
--There are generally no limits on the compensation that may be
provided to contract employees, while Federal employees
generally are subject to compensation limits. If contract
employees are paid at higher rates than Federal employees
providing similar services, this could create morale problems
within the Federal workforce. It could also lead to Federal
employees leaving Federal service to accept contract jobs.
--A retired Federal employee who works for the agency as a contractor
will receive his or her full annuity whereas that same retired
employee would be subject to the reemployed annuitant salary
offset if working for the agency as a rehired annuitant unless
a waiver is granted. The difference in how retirement is
treated in these scenarios could be viewed as inequitable.
Question. What steps can agencies take to maintain a clear
distinction between the management of its own employees and the
management of contractor employees? That is, how can agencies avoid the
appearance of a supervisor-employee relationship between agency staff
and contractor employees?
Answer. The agency should take appropriate steps to ensure its
employees are made aware when contract employees are performing work
onsite, such as to provide professional and technical services. Such
steps might include requiring contractor employees to wear distinctive
badges, work in clearly identified work areas, and use e-mail addresses
that clearly identify their status as contractors. In addition,
agencies should ensure their employees are not directing the work of
contractor employees but instead that agency contracting officials are
giving direction to the contract supervisor.
Question. Under Office of Management and Budget Circular A-76,
agencies may conduct public-private competitions to determine who--
Federal employees or contractor employees--will perform work that
agency employees had been doing. When a competition results in the
awarding of a contract to a company, the Federal employees are no
longer needed in that function. While it is possible that at least some
of the agency employees will be hired by the contractor, there is no
guarantee that this will happen. What role, if any, has OPM played in
public-private competitions conducted by other agencies?
Answer. There have been no recent public-private competitions, in
part as a result of a statutory moratorium on public-private
competition. However, in past years, when agencies conducted public
private competitions under OMB Circular A-76, OPM worked with agencies
to provide soft landings for affected employees both where work was
converted to private sector performance as well as where work was
retained in-house but involved a reduction in labor. These efforts
included consideration of buyouts and early retirements under OPM's
Voluntary Early Retirement Authority (VERA) and the Voluntary
Separation Incentive Payments (VSIP) Program. OPM's regulations govern
how the agency's workforce is reduced because of that decision. General
and detailed restructuring guidance material is available on OPM's
website, and we offer on-site assistance through our reimbursable
services staff.
Question. Generally speaking, what options are available to Federal
employees who have been displaced by the outcome of a public-private
competition?
Answer. If a permanent Federal employee is separated because of the
contracting decision, the employee may be eligible either for
retirement benefits if the employee meets the age and service
requirements, or for severance pay.
The employee is entitled, by regulation, to reemployment priority
in his or her former agency for 2 years to positions at the same or
lower grade and in the same commuting area. Qualified employees are
offered reemployment based on their tenure and veterans' preference. A
displaced employee is also entitled by regulation to selection priority
for 1 year to positions in other agencies at the same or lower grade in
the same commuting area. This program requires former employees to
apply for positions matching their skills and to be well-qualified for
the positions. Both of these programs provide selection priority over
candidates from outside the agency's permanent workforce.
Question. How might OPM track Federal employees who have been
displaced?
Answer. OPM can track, through the Central Personnel Data File,
those employees who were separated because of a decision to contract
the work under OMB Circular A-76.
federal pay and furloughs
Question. Discussions of Federal pay rates have been prominent in
the news of late with the USA Today articles presenting Federal and
private sector pay comparisons and CNBC commentary calling for salary
rollback. What is OPM's response to these viewpoints?
Answer. We have been closely following stories of Federal pay
during the last few months. However, we view reports published by USA
Today, the Cato Institute, and the Heritage Foundation critical of
Federal workers as simplistic and misleading. Average salary
comparisons as published by the Cato Institute and others ignore the
huge differences in the occupational makeup of the Federal and non-
Federal workforces; they do not reflect the complexity of the work,
level of skill and education required, scope of responsibility/impact,
special requirements such as security clearances, or the location where
the work must happen.
On average, positions in the Federal government generally have a
higher level of education than the private sector positions. About 19
percent of Federal workers have a master's degree, professional degree,
or doctorate versus only 11 percent in the private sector. A full 48
percent of Federal employees have at least a college degree compared to
32 percent in the private sector. For example, the two largest private-
sector occupations today are retail salesperson and cashier, low-paid
occupations not found in Federal service. In contrast, the vast
majority of Federal workers are in professional, administrative, and
technical occupations that are well-paid in the private sector. Job-by-
job comparisons published by USA Today are based on data published by
the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), but the data are improperly used.
The Federal Government uses recognized statistical methods and
professionally conducted pay surveys. BLS economists, working with OPM,
have thoughtfully and carefully compared occupations in the Federal and
non-Federal sectors for more than 50 years to provide Government
policymakers with factual information in making their decisions on
Federal employee salary levels.
When taking into account factors such as differences in
occupational mix, geographic distribution, and level of work, we
believe reports finding that Federal workers are paid substantially
more on average than similarly situated non-Federal workers are false
comparisons.
Question. In early 2009, you discussed sending a legislative
proposal to reform Federal pay setting to Congress. What is the status
of this proposal and what are likely to be the key components of any
pay reform?
Answer. We continue to believe that reform of Federal personnel
systems is vital, but based on experience and research in this field,
especially given the current fiscal situation, we feel it makes more
sense to focus now on enhancing the quality of employee reviews and
feedback so they are more helpful and fair.
Question. The Department of Transportation had to furlough some
employees recently because of an interruption in its appropriated funds
during debate of a bill that would have extended funds for the National
Highway Trust Fund on a short-term basis. What have other departments
and agencies been reporting to OPM about the possibility of furlough
actions this fiscal year?
Answer. We do not have any information from agencies regarding
possible furlough actions this year.
Question. What specific guidance has OPM provided proactively to
the departments and agencies both in general and specifically with
regard to mechanisms that might provide alternatives to furloughs?
Answer. OPM provides guidance to agencies for options on how to
reduce budgetary outlays in order to avoid or minimize the likelihood
of furloughs or other actions such as reduction in force.
OPM's guidance notes that furlough is not a viable option if the
agency is faced with a continuing, rather than temporary, lack of work
and/or funds. For example, an agency may furlough an employee under the
reduction-in-force regulations only when the agency plans to recall the
employee to duty within 1 year in the position the employee held when
furloughed.
Also, the fiscal savings from a furlough are sharply reduced when a
furloughed employee becomes eligible for unemployment compensation that
must be paid by the agency. For example, an employee who is furloughed
for 5 or more consecutive days is generally eligible for unemployment
compensation.
Finally, because furlough is a temporary situation, voluntary early
retirement authority (VERA) and voluntary separation incentive payments
(VSIP) are not an option to lessen the impact of furlough on the agency
and its employees. VERA and VSIP are available only when an agency is
undertaking long-term restructuring actions.
Question. Which departments and agencies are in the forefront with
effective workforce planning models and what specific features of such
workforce planning could be applied across the Federal Government?
Answer. Several agencies, including the Departments of State, the
Department of Transportation, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
have consistently demonstrated effective workforce planning. These
agencies have a defined governance structure for the workforce planning
function, a systematic process that is used for workforce analyses, and
they use automated tools for analyses and staffing projections. All of
these agencies have a seamless integration of the strategic human
capital planning and workforce planning activities.
opm's strategic plan for 2010-2015
Question. As stated prominently on the OPM website, OPM's mission
is Recruiting, Retaining and Honoring a World-Class Workforce to Serve
the American People. What are the most pressing challenges for OPM in
the next fiscal year?
Answer. As the Director stated in his testimony and as are
reflected in OPM's High Priority Performance Goals, the agency's fiscal
year 2011 budget request reflects the strategic goals for the agency:
Hire the Best, Respect the Workforce, Expect the Best, and Honor
Service. These guiding principles also represent the most pressing
challenges for OPM in achieving the vision of making the Federal
government a model employer for the 21st century.
The current Federal hiring process is cumbersome and slow,
frustrating managers and discouraging many talented individuals,
including veterans, from considering Federal jobs and opportunities.
OPM is also challenged to promote greater diversity and inclusion in
the Federal workforce. The development of Government-wide training,
health and wellness policies and programs to provide employees with a
meaningful balance of work and life is another challenge that must be
faced to improve Federal government performance.
The Federal Government's retirement systems face significant
challenges and are at high risk of failure due to technology gaps.
These challenges have been identified in numerous OPM and GAO reports
and improvements are needed to ensure that employees' claims are
settled timely and accurately.
Question. What initiatives or improvements are needed to address
these challenges? What are the costs of these initiatives?
Answer. As stated in the Director's testimony, the Administration
believes that reforming the Federal hiring process is an urgent
priority to attract the best and brightest talent into the workforce.
OPM's fiscal year 2011 budget requests $4,000,000 in order to promote
innovative and coordinated approaches to help agencies streamline their
end-to-end hiring process. OPM is also committed to increasing
employment outreach to veterans. OPM has requested $2,400,000 in fiscal
year 2011 to advance efforts to reduce barriers to entry for Veterans
and transitioning service members pursuing careers in the Federal civil
service.
OPM has initiated the Retirement Systems Modernization (RSM)
program to modernize and automate retirement processes to ensure
Federal retirees and annuitants are paid accurately, timely, and
receive high-quality customer service. OPM has requested $1,500,000 to
stabilize the retirement systems in fiscal year 2011, with a focus on
upgrading the retirement calculator, transitioning from a paper-based
operation to an automated retirement process, and implementing an
online retirement application tool. OPM has also requested an
additional $2,800,000 to increase retirement claims processing staffing
levels and assist in reducing the claims processing times.
Question. Would you describe the key components of OPM's recently
released, A New Day for Federal Service, Strategic Plan 2010-2015?
Answer. The strategic plan positions the agency to make the Federal
government America's model employer. The plan outlines four broad
strategic goals that define OPM's direction for the next 6 years in
order to achieve its mission to Recruit, Retain and Honor a World-Class
Workforce to Serve the American People.
The key components of the plan are the strategic goals that have
been designed to assist agencies in enhancing the experience as
individuals moves from applicant to Federal employee to retiree. The
``Hire the Best'' strategic goal concentrates on improving the Federal
hiring process. The focus of the ``Respect the Workforce'' strategic
goal is on employee retention through training and work-life
initiatives. OPM's ``Expect the Best'' strategic goal strives to
provide the tools and resources necessary for employees to perform at
the highest levels while stressing accountability. Finally, the ``Honor
Service'' strategic goal seeks to recognize the service of Federal
employees through well-designed and well-administered compensation and
retirement benefits programs.
Question. How will the fiscal year 2011 budget request specifically
address each of the strategic plan's goals?
Answer. Each of the strategic goals is related to OPM's major
performance improvement initiatives reflected as in the budget request:
--Hire the Best.--Funding requested will be used to reform Federal
government recruiting and hiring policies, programs and
procedures. The initiative will better enable agencies to
recruit and hire qualified students, mid-career professionals,
and retirees. OPM will continue efforts to revamp the USAJOBS
website, building on improvements that have already been made
to make the site more user-friendly and aligned with the Hiring
Reform initiative. The budget request supports ongoing
Administration efforts to assist veterans to find opportunities
in the Federal workplace, and to promote diversity in the
Federal workforce. Finally, the request continues efforts to
have the information they need to make timely decisions on the
credibility and suitability of Federal employees, contractors,
and military members.
--Respect the Workforce.--The budget request calls for the Federal
government to invest in its employees in order to improve the
results of Federal programs and services. The development of
Government-wide health and wellness policies and programs to
provide employees with a meaningful balance of work and life
will continue to be a top priority in fiscal year 2011 in order
to help continue to attract the best and the brightest for
Federal employment. Focus will continue on the importance of
training throughout an employee's career, as well on programs
and initiatives such as alternative work schedules, telework,
and employee assistance programs that benefit current employees
and help us continue to attract the best and brightest for
Federal service. Resources will also help continue efforts to
encourage labor-management collaboration in the furtherance of
agencies' goals.
--Expect the Best.--Funds requested in the fiscal year 2011 budget
will support OPM's responsibilities to advise and assist
agencies on strategic human resources management. This includes
operational activities to monitor compliance with civil service
laws and regulations, ensure appropriate use of flexibilities
and authorities, and providing agencies with tools, resources,
guidance, education, and evaluation to continuously improve
their human resources operations.
--Honor Service.--The budget request addresses the strategic goal to
honor the service of Federal employees by ensuring timely and
accurate delivery of OPM-administered retirement and insurance
benefits for 2 million Federal retirees. Continued funding for
the Retirement Systems Modernization (RSM) program will go
toward priorities like upgrading the retirement calculator,
automating the manual paper-based retirement system, and
imaging incoming paper retirement records. The implementation
of an online retirement application tool for gathering initial
retirement information electronically from service centers will
help improve the accuracy of retirement calculations.
Altogether, these initiatives will help to ensure that OPM and
agency benefits officers have access to information necessary
to perform their duties of processing claims and providing
customer service to employees and annuitants.
national council on federal labor-management relations
Question. In December 2009, President Obama issued an Executive
Order (EO), Creating Labor-Management Forums to Improve Delivery of
Government Services, which created the National Council on Federal
Labor-Management Relations. The Council will support the creation of
labor management forums across the Federal government to allow agency
managers, employees, and union representatives to discuss agency
operations in a non-adversarial setting. How will the Council ensure
that the forums result in the implementation of productive ideas and
innovation among Federal agencies?
Answer. The Executive order required each agency to develop, and
submit for certification, a written implementation plan which
addressed, among other things (1) how the agency would conduct a
baseline assessment of the current state of labor relations and (2) how
the agency will develop metrics to monitor improvements in such areas
as productivity gains and cost savings resulting from establishment of
labor-management forums. The achievement of productivity gains and cost
savings is clearly dependent on the adoption of productive ideas and
innovation by agencies. The operation and effectiveness of these forums
will be monitored both internally by agencies and externally by the
Council. As discussed below, the Council has adopted general
recommended metrics and has established a work group on metrics, which
is developing more detailed and focused metrics for agencies to use.
Question. Did all Federal agencies meet the March 9 deadline to
submit plans to create labor-management forums?
Answer. While not all Federal agencies met the March 9 deadline to
submit plans, all but a handful of agencies did submit plans by early
April, and plans were received from all agencies by early May.
Question. How many of the plans have been certified? What are the
issues in certifying the plans?
Answer. Fifty of the 51 agency plans have been certified by the
Council. At the request of the National Council, SSA submitted a
revised implementation plan on July 23, 2010. The National Council is
currently evaluating that plan, and working with the agency on
certification.
Question. At this point, what measures has the Council developed to
ensure that these labor-management forums will improve efficiency in
government operations and improve services to clients?
Answer. At its initial meeting in February, the Council adopted
recommended categories of metrics for agency use in establishing and
implementing forums. Those metrics were organized under three broad
goals, the first and most important one being improvement in the
agency's ability to accomplish its mission and deliver high-quality
products and services to the public. At its May meeting, the Council
established a work group to develop more detailed metrics. That work
group has held a number of meetings, will be collecting information
from and drafting guidance for the forums, and expects to make
recommendations for the full Council to adopt this fall.
Question. How can you ensure that these councils will improve
government operations and services to clients?
Answer. The LMF metrics working group is currently exploring
practical answers to this question--to figure out what and how to track
and measure to learn from each LMF experience and apply those lessons
to improving government operations and services. We recognize that the
overriding reason for creating labor-management forums is ``to improve
the productivity and effectiveness of the Federal Government,'' and we
are confident this goal will be achieved.
federal long-term care insurance program
Question. The Federal Long-Term Care Insurance Program (LTC)
insurance program has entered a new contract cycle and OPM has notified
Federal workers enrolled in the Automatic Compound Inflation Option
(ACIO) (about 60 percent of enrollees) that their premiums will
increase 25 percent from current rates. At congressional hearings last
fall, OPM acknowledged that the marketing materials used during the
first contract cycle could have misled enrollees in assuming that
premiums would not increase in the future if that option was chosen.
What processes and procedures does OPM have in place to ensure that
this does not happen again?
Answer. New educational and marketing materials, along with new
applications, were introduced in October 2009. These materials more
prominently and frequently describe the conditions under which premiums
may increase and that premiums are not guaranteed, including in the
sections that describe the different types of inflation protection. We
are also planning new marketing materials and application forms for an
open season which we expect to hold in the spring of 2011. We are
committed to making any other changes needed to make the rate
information clear to current and prospective enrollees.
As an example of what we have done, every enrollee not eligible for
or receiving benefits (e.g., not in a nursing home) received a decision
package in late 2009 outlining options for moving to the new plan
design or avoiding the premium increase (for those facing an increase).
The decision package included background material illustrating the
difference over time between a 4 percent and a 5 percent compound
benefit increase. Historical inflation increase data were also
provided. Modeling tools were available online to allow enrollees to
project the growth of their current daily benefit under each inflation
rate. The decision packages also contained detailed comparisons of
specific benefits and the differences between the original plan, FLTCIP
1.0, and the new plan, FLTCIP 2.0.
In addition, the materials for the new FLTCIP 2.0 benefits are
currently online at www.ltcfeds.com and available by request from LTC
Partners. The new materials, both in hard copy and online, provide
detailed information and graphs that illustrate the difference over
time between 4 percent and 5 percent compounded benefits, as well as
detailed information about other benefit decisions.
The new educational materials state prominently and frequently that
premiums are not guaranteed, and they explain the conditions under
which premiums may increase. In addition, the Agreement and
Acknowledgement section of the application, which requires the
applicant's signature, discloses that premiums are not guaranteed. The
new Benefit Booklet (the contractual statement of benefits) contains on
the second page a section titled, ``When We May Increase Your Premium''
and discloses in several other places that premiums are not guaranteed.
All current and future enrollees will receive a copy of this new
Benefit Booklet.
Finally, Long Term Care Partners conducts hundreds of educational
seminars each year at Federal agencies and meetings of Federal employee
groups like the National Active and Retired Federal Employees
Association (NARFE). They keep in frequent contact with Agency Benefit
Officers to make sure information about the FLTCIP is widely available.
Enrollees and prospective applicants can call Long Term Care Partners
toll-free to speak with a Certified Long Term Care Consultant for
expert assistance in learning about the Program.
Question. Since the stated purpose of the Federal LTC Insurance
program was to encourage people to purchase long-term care insurance
and serve as a model for other employer-sponsored programs across the
Nation, how does OPM intend to restore confidence in the program among
Federal workers and to promote future participation given this issue?
Answer. OPM conducts close contractual oversight of the carrier,
which means we can shape the LTC policies and products. OPM includes
the NAIC Shoppers Guide to Long Term Care Insurance in the Information
Kit provided to all applicants who request a hard copy application.
This Guide is also available online as part of the online application
process. OPM also requires its insurer to price its premiums according
to NAIC rate stability guidelines. It is important that standard rate
stability guidelines be applied universally across the long term care
industry. While we understand there have been concerns about the
program, we take our responsibility very seriously to serve the
interests of enrollees by doing all we can to improve and to promote
the continued success of the Program.
open government
Question. In December 2009, the President issued an Open Government
Directive to Federal agencies instructing them to launch open
government web sites within 60 days, draft open government plans with
long- term steps to improve transparency, and solicit public feedback
on agencies' core mission activities. Please describe OPM's actions to
fulfill the President's open government and transparency initiative.
Answer. In response to the President's Open Government Directive,
OPM has established an Open OPM governance structure that comprises the
Executive Board, their respective representatives on the Core Team and
Component Teams. The Teams will develop and implement actions to ensure
accountability and the sustainability of transparency, participation,
and collaboration at OPM. All Component Teams include OPM employees as
well as members from public/nonprofit groups, other agencies, academia
and unions. The Component Teams will gather information from the
individual team members, exchange ideas and generate innovative options
for solving problems. Those ideas and options will be forwarded to the
Core Team (OPM employees) for analysis and to make recommendations to
OPM leadership on the Executive Board.
It is our policy to integrate Open Government into OPM's ongoing
mission activities, including, but not limited to, partnering with
stakeholders, advising and assisting agencies, working with Congress
and other stakeholders on developing policies, promoting effective and
efficient human resources policies and practices across government
while leading by example. The Open Government ethos will be integrated
into our programs and sustained throughout each of the aforementioned
methods for improving Federal customer service life cycle, from hiring,
employment, retirement to annuitant.
The agency has created an Open OPM web site at http://www.opm.gov/
open/ for providing information on OPM's Open Government activities,
including high-value data sets, the agency's Open Government Plan, and
an Open OPM blog to provide updates and receive feedback from the
public.
Question. Have you received feedback from citizens? If so, can you
summarize some of the responses OPM has received?
Answer. We used the Open OPM Web site to solicit and receive public
suggestions for our Open Government Plan. We have received and
processed more than 1,000 e-mails from the public via our Open
Government e-mail address and have received 58 unique ideas to improve
Open Government through an IdeaScale Web tool. Feedback from the public
focused primarily on the Agency's operations in recruitment, staffing,
retirement, and benefits. The Director's goal ``Expect the Best'' was
echoed in these comments, as was the Vision that ``The Federal
Government will Become America's Model Employer for the 21st Century.''
The Open OPM team continues to receive and respond to feedback from
citizens through the use of a new Searchable FAQs tool on OPM's
website, the Open OPM email address, and the Open OPM Blog.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
Senator Durbin. The session stands recessed.
[Whereupon, at 3:33 p.m., Wednesday, March 24, the
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of
the Chair.]