[House Hearing, 108 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
ACHIEVING DIVERSITY IN THE SENIOR EXECUTIVE SERVICE
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CIVIL SERVICE
AND AGENCY ORGANIZATION
of the
COMMITTEE ON
GOVERNMENT REFORM
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
OCTOBER 15, 2003
__________
Serial No. 108-130
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Reform
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/congress/house
http://www.house.gov/reform
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
92-901 WASHINGTON : DC
____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM
TOM DAVIS, Virginia, Chairman
DAN BURTON, Indiana HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut TOM LANTOS, California
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida MAJOR R. OWENS, New York
JOHN M. McHUGH, New York EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
JOHN L. MICA, Florida PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania
MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York
STEVEN C. LaTOURETTE, Ohio ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland
DOUG OSE, California DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio
RON LEWIS, Kentucky DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois
JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts
TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri
CHRIS CANNON, Utah DIANE E. WATSON, California
ADAM H. PUTNAM, Florida STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts
EDWARD L. SCHROCK, Virginia CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland
JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee LINDA T. SANCHEZ, California
JOHN SULLIVAN, Oklahoma C.A. ``DUTCH'' RUPPERSBERGER,
NATHAN DEAL, Georgia Maryland
CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of
TIM MURPHY, Pennsylvania Columbia
MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio JIM COOPER, Tennessee
JOHN R. CARTER, Texas CHRIS BELL, Texas
WILLIAM J. JANKLOW, South Dakota ------
MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont
(Independent)
Peter Sirh, Staff Director
Melissa Wojciak, Deputy Staff Director
Rob Borden, Parliamentarian
Teresa Austin, Chief Clerk
Philip M. Schiliro, Minority Staff Director
Subcommittee on Civil Service and Agency Organization
JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia, Chairwoman
TIM MURPHY, Pennsylvania DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois
JOHN L. MICA, Florida MAJOR R. OWENS, New York
MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland
ADAH H. PUTNAM, Florida ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of
NATHAN DEAL, Georgia Columbia
MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee JIM COOPER, Tennessee
Ex Officio
TOM DAVIS, Virginia HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
Ronald Martinson, Staff Director
B. Chad Bungard, Deputy Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Chris Barkley, Legislative Assistant/Clerk
Tania Shand, Minority Professional Staff Member
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on October 15, 2003................................. 1
Statement of:
Brown, William A., Sr., P.E., HAIA, president, African
American Federal Executives Association; Jasemine C.
Chambers, Chair, Asian American Government Executives
Network; Manuel Oliverez, president and CEO, National
Association of Hispanic Federal Executives; Shirley
Harrington-Watson, Chair, National Legislative Review
Committee, Blacks in Government; Patricia M. Wolfe,
president, Federally Employed Women; and Linda E. Brooks
Rix, co-chief executive officer, Avue Technologies Corp.... 89
Lovelace, Gail T., Chief Human Capital Officer, General
Services Administration; Jo-Anne Barnard, Chief Financial
Officer, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office; and Dr. Reginald
F. Wells, Deputy Commissioner for Human Resources, Social
Security Administration.................................... 62
Stalcup, George H., Director, Strategic Issues, U.S. General
Accounting Office, accompanied by Ron Stroman, Managing
Director, Office of Opportunity and Inclusiveness, U.S.
General Accounting Office; Ronald P. Sanders, Associate
Director for Strategic Human Resources Policy, Office of
Personnel Management, accompanied by Mark Robbins, General
Counsel, Office of Personnel Management; and Carlton M.
Hadden, Director, Office of Federal Operations, Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission.......................... 10
Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by:
Barnard, Jo-Anne, Chief Financial Officer, U.S. Patent and
Trademark Office, prepared statement of.................... 74
Brown, William A., Sr., P.E., HAIA, president, African
American Federal Executives Association, prepared statement
of......................................................... 93
Chambers, Jasemine C., Chair, Asian American Government
Executives Network, prepared statement of.................. 100
Davis, Hon. Danny K., a Representative in Congress from the
State of Illinois, prepared statement of................... 6
Davis, Hon. Jo Ann, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Virginia, prepared statement of................... 3
Hadden, Carlton M., Director, Office of Federal Operations,
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, prepared statement
of......................................................... 44
Lovelace, Gail T., Chief Human Capital Officer, General
Services Administration, prepared statement of............. 65
Rix, Linda E. Brooks, co-chief executive officer, Avue
Technologies Corp., prepared statement of.................. 127
Sanders, Ronald P., Associate Director for Strategic Human
Resources Policy, Office of Personnel Management, prepared
statement of............................................... 30
Stalcup, George H., Director, Strategic Issues, U.S. General
Accounting Office, prepared statement of................... 12
Wells, Dr. Reginald F., Deputy Commissioner for Human
Resources, Social Security Administration, prepared
statement of............................................... 79
Wolfe, Patricia M., president, Federally Employed Women,
prepared statement of...................................... 116
ACHIEVING DIVERSITY IN THE SENIOR EXECUTIVE SERVICE
----------
WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 15, 2003
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Civil Service and Agency
Organization,
Committee on Government Reform,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:06 p.m., in
room 2247, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Jo Ann Davis
(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Davis of Virginia, Davis of
Illinois, and Norton.
Staff present: Ronald Martinson, staff director; B. Chad
Bungard, deputy staff director and chief counsel; Robert White,
director of communications; Vaughn Murphy, legislative counsel;
Chris Barkley, legislative assistant/clerk; John Landers,
detailee; Tania Shand, minority professional staff member; and
Teresa Coufal, minority assistant clerk.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. A quorum being present, the
Subcommittee on Civil Service and Agency Organization will come
the order.
I want to start today by thanking all of our witnesses for
being here. This hearing is concerned with achieving diversity
among the top ranks of the Federal Civil Service, an important
topic that will only grow in significance in the coming years,
and I do want to mention and to thank our Ranking Member Danny
Davis for requesting this hearing and for playing such a big
role in planning it.
The impetus for this hearing is a General Accounting Office
report from earlier this year. The GAO predicted that over the
next 5 years about half the members of the Senior Executive
Service will leave government. But the GAO analysis suggests
that the racial, ethnic and gender makeup of the SES will
change very little. A diverse SES corps can be a strength for
the Federal Government, and as the GAO report mentions,
diversity is considered so important that it is one of the
eight critical success factors by which the agencies are judged
in the GAO's models of strategic human capital management.
Three Federal agencies are represented here today to share
with us their experiences in achieving diversity in the
workplace. I'm pleased that the Office of Personnel Management
will be revealing its Candidate Development Program today, one
of their efforts to increase minority representation at the top
levels of government. We discussed this program a bit at our
succession planning hearing 2 weeks ago, but today I'm
interested in hearing the full details.
Finally, we're also going to discuss the new No Fear Act
which improves agency accountability for anti-discrimination
and whistleblower protection laws. This is a very new law, but
we would like to hear any initial findings and reactions.
Thank you, and I'm looking forward to hearing your
comments.
I would now like to recognize the ranking minority member
of the subcommittee, Mr. Danny Davis, for any opening
statement.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Jo Ann Davis follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.001
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much, Madam
Chairwoman, and let me first of all thank you for your
leadership and also for your responsiveness and the
relationship that we've had and continue to have as we work on
these issues.
I want to thank you especially for calling this hearing. As
you know, earlier this year I requested that the subcommittee
hold a hearing on diversity in the Federal Senior Executive
Service. That request was based on the findings of two reports
the GAO issued on diversity in the Senior Executive Service
[SES], that were requested by myself and other members of the
Committee on Government Reform.
I thank you for not only holding this hearing this
afternoon but also would like to thank you, Chairman Tom Davis,
and your respective staffs for your hard work in assuring that
the witnesses on panel two appear before us today.
Simply stated, the GAO reports found that there is a lack
of diversity among the SES and that unless there is some
intervention, as predominantly White male SES members retire
they will be replaced for the most part by White women.
Delegate Norton and others and I requested this hearing to help
move us forward on the very important issue of diversifying the
highest and most influential ranks of the Federal work force,
the Senior Executive Service.
The hearing is to focus on the steps the Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission and the Office of Personnel Management
have taken to address the following issues: How these agencies
and others will diversify their respective SES corps, how
effectively we are recruiting minorities for Federal service
and how agencies are being held accountable for discriminatory
practices that hinder diversity and upward mobility in the
workplace.
The Director of the OPM, Kay Cole James, has met and
corresponded with me to discuss the findings in the GAO
reports, and to her credit in April she announced the creation
of a new SES Candidate Development Program. We call it the CDP.
The CDP is the first step in addressing diversity in the SES.
The program was created by OPM to help participants develop
their leadership skills and prepare them for senior executive
positions they will immediately be eligible for upon
completion.
But this is only a first step. As Director James pointed
out when she announced the program in April, out of the 249
graduates from agency-sponsored CDP programs since January
2001, 30 percent were minorities, but only 39 percent of those
249 graduates have been placed in the SES. Agencies and this
subcommittee have a lot more work to do to ensure that we're
not talking about the same problem 10 years from now. This is
not a new problem or one that is confined to Federal service.
The Federal Government, however, should be leading the way in
addressing it.
As GAO stated in its most recent report, diversity can
bring a wide variety of perspectives and approaches to policy
development and implementation, strategic planning, problem
solving and decisionmaking, and can be an organizational
strength that contributes to the achievement of results.
The Federal Government is at risk of failing to realize
these benefits because its work force does not appropriately
reflect the diversity of the people it serves. In last Sunday's
issue the Washington Post Magazine contained an article
entitled, ``Profiles in Courage: Washingtonians Tell the Truth
about Diversity in the Workplace.''
The article profiles 10 people who told their stories about
how race, size, gender or ethnicity impacted their treatment in
the workplace. In one such profile Stacey Davis Stewart tells
of working in the housing and community development business
where there are few Blacks and even fewer women. Stacey Davis
Stewart is the president of the Fannie Mae Foundation. Her
profile is one we can learn from. Ms. Stewart said she was so
tired of being confronted and challenged in the workplace that
her boss had to tell her to speak up in meetings because she
really had good ideas. She was quoted as saying, ``It was like
he had let me out of a cage. When you have a work environment
that values people, look at the talent that unfolds.''
Later in the article she says, ``The perspective I bring as
an African-American female should be something that is highly
valued, but in some cases it is not completely heard or
respected because of the lack of diversity in that group. They
haven't established some way of accepting difference.''
The Federal Government has to do a better job of accepting
difference, whether it is race, ethnicity or gender based, and
create an environment where difference is accepted and
appreciated. As I mentioned, agencies in this subcommittee have
a role to play in assuring that progress is made with regard to
this issue.
I would like this subcommittee to hold quarterly hearings
where agencies would be randomly selected to testify about the
steps they are taking to diversify. By holding quarterly
hearings, this subcommittee can hold agencies accountable for
results. Oversight and accountability are integral to achieving
results, particularly when agencies appear reluctant to testify
on this issue.
Again, I thank you, Chairwoman Davis, for holding this
hearing and welcome the testimony of today's witnesses and look
forward to listening to them.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Danny K. Davis follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.003
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Thank you, Mr. Davis, and I
certainly appreciate you asking for this hearing today. I think
it is a very important subject and I look forward to hearing
from the witnesses. But I'd like to now yield to Ms. Holmes
Norton to see if you have an opening statement.
Ms. Norton. Yes, I do, Madam Chairwoman, and I want to
begin by thanking you for leading this hearing today and
affording the witnesses the opportunity to come forward and
testify on what has been an important subject in the Federal
service now for years, if I may say so, decades. I want to
especially thank Mr. Davis for his consistency on this issue
and his unfailing leadership on what is really a difficult
issue.
The Federal Government initially employed African Americans
when private industry would not, so the African Americans could
get jobs in the lower reaches of government certainly and in
places like the Postal Service when they really would not be
hired in other places, and for that the Federal Government
deserves some considerable credit and has gotten that credit in
the past.
The problem is that is where African Americans stayed and
that the middle and upper reaches of the Federal Government
were simply off limits to African Americans for years, and if
the truth be told, the situation for African Americans did not
begin to improve until the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights
Act. At the same time that it began to improve those in the
private sector, and, yes, it began to improve and again the
Federal Government--which began to use affirmative action--
indeed did better than it had done in prior decades.
As a former chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission, I can say to you, though, without fear of being
contradicted that as hard as at least some in the government
have worked, there has never been a point when the Federal
Government could take pride in what it has done in the middle
and upper reaches of the Federal services, never a point, and
that point has not been reached today. The fact is that civil
servants do not have the same rights to vindicate employment
discrimination as they would have if they worked for any
private company because we have not given them equality of
rights to vindicate discrimination in the Federal service
because they have to go through their own agencies. All of us
would consider it absurd to ask people to apply to AT&T first
in order to vindicate a discrimination complaint against AT&T,
but that is exactly what we still require in the Federal
service, and one begins to wonder if that hasn't had some
impact on the ability of African Americans and others to reach
their more natural places in the Federal service.
I thank the Chair in holding this hearing and the GAO for
their report. The continuing oversight of this committee on
this issue says loudly and clearly the presence in the Civil
Service is not enough, particularly when African Americans have
been in the Civil Service as long as they have over time in the
natural order of things, that they should be more evenly spread
among the various categories of employment.
This is a particularly important time to address this
issue. We face a personnel crisis in the Federal Government
because of the huge number of retirements that face us. Would
it not be a tragedy not to seize this opportunity when we must
replenish the Federal service anyway because so many are
retiring, not to seize this opportunity to make sure we do it
right this time by assuring African Americans, Hispanics and
others a fair opportunity to be represented in the Federal
service.
I can say this. We're not going to get this opportunity
again. Those folks are going to retire almost all at one time,
and we're going to have to hire very quickly, especially in
many of those agencies. If we do not seize this moment now, it
will not pass our way again probably for decades. So the moment
is now.
Thank you very much, Madam Chairwoman.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Thank you, Ms. Holmes Norton.
And Mr. Davis, I want to say thank you for your suggestion
about the quarterly meetings. We'll certainly take a look at
that, and if it's not possible to do the meetings maybe we can
certainly do something like ask for a quarterly report from the
agencies. But we will take a look and see what we can do to
accommodate you.
I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative
days to submit written statements and questions for the hearing
record and that any answers to written questions provided by
the witnesses also be included in the record. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
I ask unanimous consent that all exhibits, documents and
other materials referred to by Members and the witnesses may be
included in the hearing record and that all Members be
permitted to revise and extend their remarks. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
On this first program, we're going to hear from a number of
agencies that have an oversight role in diversity issues. Our
first witness today is George Stalcup, Director of Strategic
Issues at the General Accounting Office. After him will be Ron
Sanders, Associate Director for Strategic Human Resources
Policy at the Office of Personnel Management. Joining him
behind the table will be Mark Robbins, General Counsel at OPM.
Last on this panel will be Mr. Carlton Hadden, Director of the
Office of Federal Operations at the Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission.
We're all very glad to have this group here today, and it
is the practice of this committee to administer the oath to all
witnesses, so if you could please stand I'll administer the
oath. If I could just have the second panel and the third panel
stand at the same time, we can go ahead and administer the
oath. If you will remember when you get up to testify you are
under oath. If you'll raise your right hands, please.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Let the record reflect that the
witnesses have answered in the affirmative, and you may be
seated.
And I would just remind all the witnesses that we do have
your prepared statements on the record. So if you would like to
summarize, you're more than welcome to do that. Mr. Stalcup,
you're recognized first for 5 minutes.
STATEMENTS OF GEORGE H. STALCUP, DIRECTOR, STRATEGIC ISSUES,
U.S. GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE, ACCOMPANIED BY RON STROMAN,
MANAGING DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF OPPORTUNITY AND INCLUSIVENESS,
U.S. GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE; RONALD P. SANDERS, ASSOCIATE
DIRECTOR FOR STRATEGIC HUMAN RESOURCES POLICY, OFFICE OF
PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT, ACCOMPANIED BY MARK ROBBINS, GENERAL
COUNSEL, OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT; AND CARLTON M. HADDEN,
DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF FEDERAL OPERATIONS, EQUAL EMPLOYMENT
OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Mr. Stalcup. Thank you very much, Madam Chairwoman,
Congressman Davis, Congresswoman Norton. I'm pleased to have
this opportunity to discuss attrition within the Senior
Executive Service and the challenge this poses as well as the
opportunity it presents for helping to ensure the gender,
racial and ethnic diversity of the Federal Senior Executive
Corps.
Two weeks ago this subcommittee held a hearing on
succession planning at the Federal level. Our testimony
stressed the importance of succession planning in building a
diverse leadership corps and pointed out some things other
countries have done in this regard. My testimony today
underscores the importance of succession planning and other
practices in ensuring diversity in the Federal Senior Corps and
is based on our January 2003 report on the SES.
The SES generally represents the most senior and
experienced segment of the Federal work force. The potential
loss of more than half of SES members between the years 2000
and 2007 coupled with attrition in the GS-15 and 14 ranks has
important implications for Federal agencies and underscores the
need to focus not only on the present but also future trends
and challenges.
Demographics and the public served by the Federal
Government are changing. Representation by women and minorities
in both the government's executive corps and the succession
pool is crucial if we expect to bring a wider variety of
perspectives and approaches to bear on policy development and
implementation, strategic planning, problem solving and
decisionmaking and to provide the organizational strength that
contributes to achieving results.
A number of organizations have oversight responsibility for
ensuring diversity in the Federal workplace. Key among these
are the other two organizations on today's panel, the Office of
Personnel Management and the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission, which through policy, law and regulations are to,
No. 1, protect Federal workers from unlawful discrimination and
other unlawful work practices and, No. 2, promote equal
opportunity, fairness and inclusiveness.
With these thoughts in mind, I would like to make three
points today. First, in our January 2003 report, we estimated
that 55 percent of the career SES employed by the Federal
Government on October 1, 2000 will have left by October 1,
2007. We also estimated that attrition among the GS-15 and GS-
14 ranks, the key source for executive replacements, while
lower, would still be significant--47 percent at GS-15 level,
34 percent at the GS-14 level.
Second, while the past is not necessarily prolog, if
appointment trends from 1995 to 2000 were to continue, the only
significant change in SES diversity across government by 2007
would be an increase in the number of White women from 19 to 23
percent and an essentially equal decrease in the number of
White men from 67 to 62 percent.
Now as shown on my chart on my right and your left, the
proportion of racial, ethnic and minorities in the SES would
change very little over that time span, from 13.8 to 14.6
percent.
The chart on my left and your right on the top provides
more detail on our projection, with governmentwide SES numbers
by gender, racial and ethnic category. The first set of figures
on that chart represent the number of SES in place on October
1, 2000. The middle set of figures show the number of those
that would still be in place as of October 1, 2007. And the
figures on the right show what the profile that would result if
they were replaced at the same appointment trends that were
used from 1995 to the year 2000.
Now, those numbers represent a governmentwide picture. The
third chart below shows that our projections vary by agency.
For 10 of the 24 large agencies, projections show less minority
representation in 2007 than in the year 2000. For 12 agencies
they showed increases.
My final point is that upcoming retirements and other
attrition will provide the Federal Government with both a
challenge and an opportunity. The challenge will be to develop
succession plans based on inclusive strategies for having
sufficient numbers of senior executives in place to develop and
implement policies and programs of the Federal Government. The
opportunity will be to help ensure diversity in the SES corps
through new appointments. Based in part on our work on the SES
corps and in other human capital areas, we have seen positive
responses on the part of EEOC, OPM and other agencies in this
regard, and commenting on our report last January, agencies
agreed that more needed to be done and pointed to a number of
ongoing and planned efforts aimed at increasing diversity
within the executive branches. I anticipate we will hear more
about those efforts this afternoon.
Continued leadership from OPM and EEOC coupled with a
strong commitment on the part of agency managers through such
actions as succession planning and holding executives
accountable for the diversity in the work forces they manage
would help ensure the diversity of future Federal senior
executive leadership.
Madam Chairwoman and members of this subcommittee, this
concludes my prepared statement and I will be pleased to answer
any questions you may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Stalcup follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.018
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Thank you, Mr. Stalcup.
Mr. Sanders, you're recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Sanders. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, members of the
subcommittee. I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you
today on behalf of Director Kay Cole James to testify on OPM's
efforts to address underrepresentation in the Federal
Government's Senior Executive Service. Mr. Mark Robbins, OPM's
general counsel, is also with me today to address any questions
you may have on the No Fear Act.
Madam Chairwoman, I believe that we all share a goal that
is simply stated, an SES corps that reflects the diversity of
America's citizenry. You can rest assured that the President
and Director James are unequivocally committed to achieving
that goal. It represents a mission imperative. We believe that
a more diverse SES will result in a Federal Government that
better serves our citizens, the ultimate objective of the
President's management agenda, and they appreciate the
leadership you and your subcommittee have provided in this
area.
Madam Chairwoman, the fact is that the SES today is not as
diverse as it should be, and although we've seen some gradual
improvement in this regard, progress remains slow. So the
challenge remains, and it's one that is not amenable to quick
fixes. Rather, as you know only too well, it's all about
succession planning, managing the Federal Government's
leadership development pipeline over a multiyear timeframe and
paying attention to its diversity as we do so.
As your hearing 2 weeks ago underscored, a diverse SES
depends in large part on a diverse candidate pool. That is
where OPM's new Federal SES candidate development program comes
in. Designed to complement the executive development strategies
of individual agencies, including those that already have their
own CDPs, it incorporates the very best practices in leadership
development, lessons drawn from organizations, both public and
private, that have set the standard for connective excellence
and diversity.
In developing our program, we took into account the
Constitutional limits upon efforts of affirmative outreach
toward traditionally underrepresented groups. OPM CDP is
designed to operate within those limits. It is a racially
neutral program. Race plays no part in the candidate selection
process. OPM's challenge is to create a diverse pool of
applicants by ensuring that those qualified members of
traditionally underrepresented groups know about the program
and are encouraged to apply.
We can do this through Constitutionally accepted standards
for outreach. Thus, while a program is not and cannot be
reserved for the exclusive development of leaders from
underrepresented groups, we believe that includes a number of
innovative features that will help us accelerate the
accomplishment of that goal.
First and foremost, our program enjoys the strong
commitment of this administration's most senior leaders,
including the members of the new Chief Human Capital Officers
Council. All of its members are keenly aware of the executive
succession challenge that we all face; and as our program's
ultimate board of directors, they are sensitive to diversity
issues, as they work to ensure continuity of leadership
excellence in their agencies.
Second, our program is uniquely demand driven, designed to
find and develop high caliber successors to replace an agency's
specific projected SES losses. This is in contrast to many
agencies' CDPs, which attract, develop and graduate many
talented candidates who never reach the SES, largely because
they are not part of an effective succession strategy.
Third, while we obviously cannot guarantee the diversity of
our program's candidates, or for that matter the SES itself, we
can increase the odds of both by actively and aggressively
reaching out to all sources for the most diverse pool of
potential executive talent that we can. We've already actively
engaged in the various organizations that represent the
interest of female and minority Federal employees, many of whom
are here today to help us in this regard.
In addition, unlike most agency CDPs, we intend to open our
program to all U.S. citizens, not just current and former
Federal employees, a reservoir of potential talent that is
substantially broader and substantially more diverse than the
typical agency CDP applicant pool. We also intend to conduct
targeted print, electronic and direct marketing to and through
minority, disabled employees and female professional
associations that are potential conduits to that talent pool.
Fourth, our applicant screening and assessment process will
be based on merit and merit alone. Conducted jointly with
participating agencies, OPM will identify the most outstanding
applicants, and participating agencies will then have the
opportunity to select one or more candidates from this finalist
cadre, appointing them to a full-time developmental position at
the GS-14 or 15 level.
Fifth, participants in our program will benefit from a
series of intensive leadership development activity
specifically designed to prepare them for the SES. The program
will be hands-on and experiential, with each individual having
the opportunity to actually practice and demonstrate leadership
in one or more executive level assignments. To support these
assignments, OPM will provide each participating agency with a
temporary SES allocation. Those that graduate will be certified
by an OPM SES qualification review board and be eligible for
noncompetitive promotion to the SES.
Finally, no effort as important as this would be complete
without some means of assuring accountability. We now have such
a mechanism. As part of the President's management agenda, OPM
has established a human capital assessment and accountability
framework as a means of evaluating how well agencies are
managing their people. It includes standards for dealing with
work force diversity and leadership succession. Agencies that
do not meet these standards do not receive high marks; and
those marks are accorded to the President, I can assure you
that they matter.
Can we absolutely guarantee that our program will improve
diversity in the SES? No, we cannot. However, we can and will
do everything we possibly can to ensure that its applicant pool
truly reflects America's diversity, that its candidate
assessment process is absolutely free from any improper bias,
that final selections involve senior agency leaders who
understand the importance of and are committed to leadership
excellence, continuity and diversity, and that agencies are
held accountable for their efforts.
Before I conclude, let me turn briefly to the No Fear Act.
This summer the President delegated to OPM the responsibility
to promulgate regulations implementing the act. Toward that end
we've been working with the Justice Department, the Treasury
Department, Office of Special Counsel and the EEOC. We've also
had discussions with external stakeholders, including the No
Fear Coalition. Regulations implementing the judgment fund
reimbursement provisions of the act have been drafted and are
currently being reviewed by OMB.
Further, we're drafting regulations that will implement the
additional sections of the act.
Madam Chairwoman, in his landmark management agenda the
President has recognized the Federal Government's work force as
one of its most valuable assets, that our employees are a
national resource and that the American people expect them to
be managed efficiently and effectively. They also expect them
to reflect their own diversity, from the front line to the
executive suite. The President and Director James are
unequivocally committed to that goal. Our new CDP represents
part of that commitment, and we believe that it will ensure a
ready reservoir of exceptional SES candidates and eventually an
SES corps that reflects the diversity of America.
I'll be pleased to answer any questions. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Sanders follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.069
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.070
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.071
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.072
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.073
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.074
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.075
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.076
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.077
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.078
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.079
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.080
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Thank you, Mr. Sanders.
Mr. Hadden, thank you for coming, and now you're recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mr. Hadden. Good afternoon, Madam Chairwoman and members of
the subcommittee. I appreciate opportunity to appear before you
today on behalf of Cari M. Dominguez, Chair of the U.S. Equal
Employment Commission. EEOC agrees with GAO that the projected
large losses in the SES ranks over the next few years present
the Federal Government with both a unique challenge and an
opportunity.
As a critical step toward leading the government toward a
more inclusive workplace, the Commission unanimously voted to
approve new guidance effective October 1st of this year to
Federal agencies on how to meet their responsibilities and
structure their EEO programs required by Title VII of the Civil
Rights Act and Section 501 of the Rehab Act of 1973.
It should be noted that prior to the final approval of the
directive, the Commission distributed an earlier draft to
Federal agencies for review and comment pursuant to the
requirements of Executive Order 12067, and much of the input
received from agencies was in fact incorporated into the draft.
The Commission plans to develop operational instructions
for the agencies and anticipates issuing those instructions
before the end of the calendar year to agencies.
The new directive requires agencies to take appropriate
steps to ensure that all employment decisions are free from
discrimination and is designed to reemphasize that the quality
of opportunity for all in the Federal workplace is key to
attracting, developing and retaining top quality employees who
can deliver results, ensure our Nation's continued security,
growth and prosperity.
The directive requires agencies to systematically and
regularly examine their employment policies and practices to
identify and remove barriers to free and open workplace
competition. Plans for addressing barriers will be developed by
the agencies and progress toward removing those barriers will
be monitored by the Commission.
The Commission believes it is critical for agencies to pay
special attention to potential barriers to entry and to those
successor pools of GS-15s and 14s with a focus on those
positions which would typically lead to senior level
management.
In addition, potential barriers should be examined not only
in selection to GS-14 and 15 feeder pools but also the early
development of high potential employees at lower grades and to
other training and developmental opportunities which increase
qualifications for future SES positions.
An important component of the MD-715 is defining of the
following essential elements for structuring model EEO programs
at Federal agencies. It is the Commission's belief that
attainment of a model EEO program at an agency will provide the
infrastructure necessary for the agency to achieve the ultimate
goal of a discrimination-free work environment characterized by
an atmosphere of inclusion and free and open competition for
employment opportunities. The six elements are as follows:
First, demonstrated commitment from agency leadership; second,
integration of EEO into the agency's strategic mission; third,
management and program accountability; fourth, proactive
prevention of unlawful discrimination; fifth, efficiency; and,
sixth, responsiveness and legal compliance.
We also should know that MD-715 addresses the unique
challenges which face employees with disabilities. Although not
addressed by the GAO report, this is an area of particular
concern to the Commission.
In fiscal year 2002 the percentage of employees with
targeted disabilities in the Federal work force decreased for
the 5th consecutive year, stretching this decline to 20 percent
over the last decade. Agencies must make immediate and
significant improvements in the ability to provide
opportunities to qualified individuals with disabilities to
work and compete equally for all levels of positions within the
Federal Government.
Complementing the Commission's efforts with MD-715 is the
recent passage of the No Fear Act. EEOC has responsibility for
issuing governmentwide regulations under Title III of that act,
and that requires agencies post on their public Web sites on a
quarterly basis information pertaining specifically to the
processing of administrative complaints of employment
discrimination filed under 29 CFR, Part 1614.
This summer the Commission voted on proposed interim
regulation under Title III of the No Fear Act. Following the
Commission's vote, the regulation was circulated for agencies
for review, comments were received from 23 agencies. Revisions
were made based on the revised comments, and the Commission
voted to approve the proposed interim regulation late last
week, and that has now been submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget for approval.
The No Fear Act should provide the Federal Government one
more tool to assist in efforts to identify and eliminate
barriers to equal opportunity for all to compete for positions
at senior levels. As the act states, agencies cannot run
effectively if they practice or tolerate unlawful
discrimination. The No Fear Act is designed to hold agencies to
greater accountability in compliance with the nondiscrimination
laws.
Through the various mechanisms available under the act,
agencies should be more aware of and responsive to issues of
discrimination and retaliation in their agencies. We anticipate
that this heightened awareness will be positively reflected in
agency management of personnel practices and, to the extent
that discriminatory practices are placing barriers to equal
employment opportunity in the SES work force, lead toward the
elimination of practices and create a level playing field.
Thank you. I'll be glad to answer any questions that you
may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hadden follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.023
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.024
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.025
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.026
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Thank you, Mr. Hadden, and as I
generally do in this subcommittee, I'm going to begin the
questioning by yielding to my ranking minority member, Mr.
Davis.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much, Madam
Chairwoman, and I certainly want to thank all of the witnesses
for their testimony.
You know I was smiling to myself, because it seems as
though I can't get away from my mother in terms of always
remembering something that she said to us. She used to tell us
that charity begins at home and spreads abroad. And I was
thinking that the first question I might want to ask is would
each one of you discuss the number of SES openings in your
agency and how you go about filling them.
Mr. Stalcup. If I could start out, I could ask Ron Stroman,
who is the Managing Director of our Office of Opportunity and
Inclusiveness, to come to the table--he was sworn in--and
respond to that question.
Mr. Stroman. Thank you, Mr. Davis. Let me begin by talking
about the manner in which we fill the SES positions.
Essentially we have a feeder group that comes from our Band III
employees, our analysts at the Band III level. Essentially what
we do is we have a Candidate Development Program in which staff
is pooled from the Band IIIs, and we have developmental staff
who go through a fairly rigorous SES process. After completion
of that process, they then emerge into the SES. Diversity
principles are essentially one of the cornerstones in selection
of people into the SES. So, for example, in our most recent SES
candidate pool of the nine SES candidates, we have two of those
nine are African American women, and we wanted clearly to make
sure that they were clearly represented.
In terms of the actual numbers in the SES, let me give
those to you, Mr. Davis.
In our career SES pool right now, there are approximately
9.1 percent of the SES is African American, 3.3 percent of that
SES pool is Hispanic, and 4.1 percent is Asian.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you. Mr. Sanders.
Mr. Sanders. Thank you, Mr. Davis. As you know, Director
James practices what she preaches. OPM has just gone through a
major restructuring, perhaps the most dramatic in its
relatively short history, and we've just finished filling
almost 20 new SES positions. We now total about 60 or so SES
positions in the agency, and we're far above the average in the
Federal Government. First, let me point out when we filled
those jobs, we went to all-source recruiting. We opened it up
for everybody. We had almost 1,000 applicants with about half
from outside the Federal Government, half from within. And we
ended up of the 20 positions we selected, one-third of those
were non--former non-Federal employees that came from the
private sector or the military services.
The net result, an SES corps that we believe is a model; 10
percent of OPM's corps is African American, 10 percent
Hispanic, 2 percent Asian Pacific islander. Women constitute 37
percent. We've got two people who are going to enter our own
candidate development program, and we've also brought in for
the first time in several years a class of 20 new Presidential
management interns, and, again, they are just as diverse. Of
those 20, 6 are African American, 12 are women and 4 Hispanic.
Thank you.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much.
Mr. Hadden. The Commission is in a unique position. We are
in a hiring freeze and we don't have SES openings, but the
Commission has in fact planned; and what we have done is
established a candidate development program in fiscal year
2001, and of the candidates in that program, they reflect a
diversity of the Commission. There are 6 candidates and 83
percent are women and 33 percent are Hispanic and 33 percent
are African American.
In regard to the Commission's current profile, the way we
look today, I think we're probably--I don't want to say the
most diverse Federal agency, but I think we're amongst the top.
In fiscal year 2003, minorities constitute 56 percent of the
SESers at the Commission. Women constitute 46 percent of the
SESers at EEOC.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much. Madam
Chairwoman, I know that my time is about to expire. So I'm
going to ask could we have a second round with this group? I
know we've got three panels, but----
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. I think we can allow for a second
round.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Ms. Holmes Norton.
Ms. Norton. From OPM is it Mr.----
Mr. Sanders. Sanders, yes, ma'am.
Ms. Norton. I'm looking at the GAO report, and I'm looking
at page 6, number of SES percentages of women and minorities on
October 1st. And this is where he does projections. With
minorities there are 12 agencies that probability increases.
Eight agencies--I'm just looking at this for the first time, so
you just correct me if I'm wrong--that probability decreases.
And one of them is OPM, in minorities, minus 2.3. Percentage--
and yet the figures you have just given of fairly large numbers
of people in your pool now--and I'm looking at percentage on
October 1, 2007 using current appointment trends and percentage
change from October 1, 2000. And I'm looking at OPM, and I'm
wondering why of all places OPM would be projecting minus 2.3
change in minorities.
Mr. Sanders. Ms. Norton, those are GAO's projections, and
that I think underscores a flaw in their report. It's a flaw
that they recognize. It's grounded on the assumption that what
was will be.
Ms. Norton. Well, that's the only thing they have to go by,
sir.
Mr. Sanders. It is and I'm not faulting their methodology.
Their projections are based on an October 2000 base. It
projects forward to October 2007, and it simply assumes that
the way OPM filled its SES jobs in the past will be the way OPM
fills its SES jobs through 2007. Director James has taken
advantage of the restructuring of the agency to fundamentally
change that assumption. So those projections are wrong, and we
hope that frankly all of them are wrong. I think GAO would
support that. It's simply an extrapolation of history, and we
all know we can change history.
Ms. Norton. What do you have to say, Mr. Stalcup?
Mr. Stalcup. Well, we did make projections. Our point was
to raise the red flag that large numbers would be leaving, and
if the hiring and appointment trends from the late 1990's
persisted through 2007 this is where we would end up. Again,
this was a projection. It was a warning flag. It was in no way
a prediction. In fact, it was just the opposite, of trying to
raise the issue so that in fact change did happen.
Ms. Norton. Could I ask you further, Mr. Stalcup, you're
looking at, I presume, the Federal work force as if in fact
jobs are going to be filled in the normal way in which they
were filled, and yet we are seeing the administration come here
with bills for contracting out huge numbers of jobs, often in
the largest agency. I wonder if we're talking about the same
kind of work force that would be in fact depending on the Civil
Service to do its work.
I recently saw a chart on the growth in Federal employees,
and if you include people who were contracted out, it was a
million employees contracting out over which we have nothing to
say about the gender or virtually nothing to say except through
the normal process that we use on of course private sector
employees and keeping their records; but we have--what you see
are a huge block of jobs that are going outside of the work
force, and I wonder if you've taken that into account in
projecting how many SES positions are going to be available or
might in fact disappear because the Federal work force is
disappearing as we speak.
Mr. Stalcup. Well, again, our projections were based on
what in fact happens from the years 1995 to 2000. During that
course in time undoubtedly there was some contracting out. So
to the extent that dynamic of contracting out goes up after
that period of time, our projection would not have covered
that.
Ms. Norton. That could mean fewer SESs altogether, just
like----
Mr. Stalcup. Again, our study did not cover that. I
understand your question. It is a good question, but it was not
covered in this study.
Ms. Norton. Thank you very much.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Thank you, Ms. Holmes Norton. So
let me, Mr. Stalcup, Mr. Sanders, make sure I understand it.
The projections were based on if we did the same thing
yesterday--if we did what we did yesterday, if we're doing it
today, then we'd be in the same place tomorrow. And in fact
that is not true, at least for OPM, because you changed the way
you were doing things. Is that correct?
Mr. Stalcup. Yes, ma'am.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. When we talk about improving
diversity, there's been a suggestion about one of the ways to
bring more members of the minority groups into the Federal
Government is through the hiring process, but all of that is
based on the fact that--or the assumption that we're going to
have all these retirements or loss of jobs through attrition.
Does that still hold true? I guess this would be to OPM. Do you
all have any projections as to how many vacancies there's going
to be? I mean----
Mr. Sanders. Yes, ma'am. Those retirements will occur.
They've been deferred for various reasons. You know,
anecdotally people say the economy, they're waiting for it to
pick up before they look at a post Federal career, etc. All we
know is that the number of folks who were eligible to retire in
the Senior Executive Service continues to grow. In effect,
we've created a bow wave. If anything, we may see a greater
rate of retirements. Even though the eligibility is creeping
up, the fact is that they may all go over a shorter period of
time once they decide to. So the opportunities are going to be
there. They've just been deferred slightly, and frankly, that
gives us an opportunity to prepare the successor pool for them.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. So we're still looking 2004, 2005
where we can make the greatest change in the percentage of
diversity?
Mr. Sanders. Yes, ma'am.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Mr. Stalcup, I know that recruiting
takes a lot of effort, and if human resources offices and
agencies are understaffed, which I think some probably are,
maybe they need to get outside help for at least a short term.
Do you know, do any of the Federal agencies use what we
call executive head hunters to fill any of their positions and
to bring in greater diversity? Do you know if any of the
agencies are doing that?
Mr. Stroman. Mrs. Davis, no, we're not aware of the use of
executive head hunters in any particular agency, although as
Mr. Stalcup indicated, we did not look at that issue to
determine that. So there is perhaps an outside possibility, but
it's nothing that we examined.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. So if they were using outside
agencies, outside head hunters, how would we control that? I
mean, how would we make the changes for greater diversity if
that were happening, because we don't--I think what you're
saying is you don't know for sure. Right?
Mr. Stroman. Right.
Mr. Stalcup. We don't. But I believe it's factors like that
need to be considered, and what we talked about. The bottom
line message of our report is the need for the long-term
succession planning to be able to know with some certainty
where you're going to be and what your needs are going to be as
the years unfold, so that you can plan ahead and, in fact, have
not only the people immediately available but the pipeline
backing that up that will feed into what you need over time.
Mr. Stroman. The other issue, Mrs. Davis, is that what you
would have to do is if you were contracting with an outside
agency is what you would do with any contractor. That is, if
you wanted diversity to be part and parcel of the pool, the
people that you are recruiting, I think you would have to make
it abundantly clear to the contractor that this was an
important part of what they were expected to do and then hold
them accountable for the results as you would hold your own
employees accountable for those results.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. So it ultimately falls back on the
different agencies and the agency heads?
Mr. Stroman. That's correct.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Which brings me to the question I
personally have is how do we make sure that our agencies and
those who are responsible within the agencies know what they're
supposed to be doing, and how do we get the message out to
them?
Mr. Sanders. I think hearings like this do. I think the
fact that it is now part of the human capital assessment and
accountability framework. It's part of GAO's models. So as we
evaluate agencies, we look at those things. As they evaluate
agencies, they look at them. And hearings like this highlight
them on a periodic basis. The Chief Human Capital Officers
Council has addressed this on a number of occasions. So, too,
has the Interagency Task Force on Hispanic Employment that
Director James chairs. So I can tell you that the awareness has
certainly been elevated, and I think hopefully action will
follow.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. What happens if action doesn't
follow?
Mr. Sanders. I think as I said in my statement, the best we
can do is focus on creating as diverse an applicant pool as we
possibly can at all levels of the Federal Government, including
for SES vacancies, and then we have to trust the merit process
to achieve the right result, the best person for the job.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Those questions were just for my
own personal use, by the way, because I just wanted to make
sure how we're doing it and who is doing it and are we going to
have to hold this hearing every year infinitum until we find
out what we're supposed to be doing.
I'm going to go ahead and stop and let Mr. Davis have a
second round.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Well, thank you very much, Madam
Chairwoman.
Mr. Stalcup, in your testimony as you were giving it, you
indicated that as you spoke with executives in different
agencies, that they all pretty much agreed that something more
needed to be done, that obviously we were not doing enough. Did
any of them indicate that they were going to do anything? I'm
saying they agreed that something needed to be done, but did
they also indicate that they were in the process of doing
something?
Mr. Stalcup. Absolutely. Again, we have a formal comment
process whenever we do any report. So we had written comments
from all the agencies involved, OPM, EEOC and then several of
the line agencies also. And across the board, as you say, all
agreed with the need that more needed to be done. All were able
to cite specific actions that they had under way or on the
drawing board, so to speak, to get that done. The candidate
program that Mr. Sanders referred to is one of those at OPM.
EEOC, during the course of the past year, has issued a new
strategic plan. The witness talked about Management Directive
715, which provides many of the needed actions on the part--I
think now the key is the roadmap is kind of laid out there.
It's going to require follow-through on the part of OPM, EEOC
as well as the agency managers themselves.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Mr. Sanders, you indicated that
progress obviously is slow, that change oftentimes is indeed--
much of the time it's much more covert than overt. But you also
indicated that the new candidate development program was race
neutral, and if it's to be race neutral, how is there assurance
that race will be impacted in terms of changing the composition
of the work force?
Mr. Sanders. Mr. Davis, we can't make that assurance. What
we can assure you of is that we're going to do everything we
possibly can to reach out to ensure that we have an applicant
pool that is as diverse as we possibly can make it. I've
outlined some actions that I think we can take that will
improve the diversity of that applicant pool over agency
experience to date. But once we've done that we have to trust
the merit process to run its course. We can't provide
preference or anything like that. There are Constitutional
limits by which we are bound.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. So we are operating on the theory
that much of the problem had to do with the applicant pool and
that there weren't enough people in the pool that through the
normal process of extracting out the best, that we would also
have the kind of diversity that is desired?
Mr. Sanders. I think all you have to do is look at the
feeder pool of GS-14s and 15s, primarily GS-15s. That's
typically where agencies draw from for candidate development
programs and SES positions. It's not much more diverse than the
SES corps. And that is in gross numbers. It's not talking about
locations and occupations and specific demand and requirements.
So it is kind of a roll of the dice if all you're doing is
looking at GS-15s as your source for executive candidates. One
of the things we know we can do is go beyond that candidate
pool, look outside the confines of the Federal Government.
There's lots of talent out there and, again, increase the
diversity of the people we're considering and trust the merit
process to do its thing.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Let me ask you this. I recently
heard of a situation in an agency where essentially one person
for the last 20 years has pretty much determined who the
individuals were who got promoted or who moved up into the SES
ranks. Could that happen under any scenario that you could
think of in terms of policies and practices?
Mr. Sanders. I suppose it could, but, again, looking
forward I do think one of the subtle but important changes that
has occurred, in part thanks to the actions of the Congress, is
the creation of these new chief human capital officers in the
major departments and agencies. Those are the individuals who
will be held accountable. They have stewardship responsibility
for the way the agency manages its people, and if you looked at
the folks who have been named as CHCOs, as chief human capital
officers, they are far more senior than, for example, agency HR
directors in the past. These are individuals who take that
accountability seriously.
I've sat through a couple of meetings now that the CHCOs
council has had. So while in theory that could happen, one
person could control it and for whatever purposes he or she
wanted, I think that is now changing as we're elevating the
importance of the human capital business and the people who are
responsible for it, again in part thanks to hearings like this.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. And Madam Chairwoman, with your
indulgence my last question would be to Mr. Hadden, and that is
if we find that agencies don't really have the feeder pools
that are necessary, what should happen to make sure that those
feeder pools are in fact adequate?
Mr. Hadden. Well, I think under MD-715, what we would hope
agencies would do, and each agency circumstance may be
different, is to examine what are the factors which caused that
to occur, why aren't there people in the pipeline. That may be
an example of looking at are there training opportunities being
shared throughout the agencies, throughout the organization. We
expect an agency to look at its own particular circumstances.
It's not as easy as a stock answer for how each agency would
deal with that, but we would expect each agency to look at its
own practices, and we would then monitor and see for ourselves
what barriers might have existed to keep that from happening.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much, Madam
Chairwoman. I know that my time is up, and I appreciate the
indulgence.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Thank you, Mr. Davis.
And Mr. Davis, I would just say that we will have written
followup questions for all three of the panels that we would
ask that you would answer and get back to the committee. And so
if you have any further questions, we can certainly do it that
way.
Ms. Holmes Norton.
Ms. Norton. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
Mr. Hadden, in a fairly elliptical sentence in your
testimony, you say, therefore--page 4--EEOC believes it will be
critical for agencies to pay special attention to potential
barriers to entry into those successor pools of GS-15s and 14s.
With a focus on those positions that typically lead to senior
management--senior level management--see, I'm interested--not
so much interested in the 14s and 15s. First of all, those are
verified positions in the Federal Government, too. Those people
have been leaving the Federal Government--the minorities and
Whites, according to the GAO report, have been leaving the
Federal Government and GS-15s at about the same rate. And you
know why? Because these are people that are very much sought
after. You know, they don't need the Federal Government. This
isn't your grandfather's economy, and the private sector knows
how to give health care, the kind the Federal Government
doesn't give, sometimes picking up the whole thing. And we
haven't come close to that. They know how to make bonuses
really get more work out of managers, and people who attain 14
and 15 are very ripe to be picked off.
So we've been concentrating on those levels. Well, you can
concentrate all you want on those levels, but by the time
somebody finally makes his way to 14 or 15 he may be applying
all over the map. Who needs you anymore?
So I really am just as interested in what we are doing to
make the feeder pool fatter and to make people want to stay in
the Federal Government to have enough sense that there is
promotion to get to the place where you can be looked at for
SES. I read the sentence from Mr. Hadden about how you get into
the feeder pools and what you're doing to make sure,
particularly given retirements, given competition, the sexy
place to be, gentlemen, is not the Federal Government these
days. The sexy place to be is in the private sector. So I want
to know what you're going to do to retain people long enough to
get them and what you're going to do to make sure the people
get into the feeder pool so that they can be looked at by the
SES in the first place. That I didn't find in the testimony.
Don't you all speak at once, please.
Mr. Sanders. If that is a general question, I'll take it
on. Starting with the very beginning of the pipeline, we're
really doing a tremendous job bringing in bright young folks to
the Federal service, the Presidential management intern
program, outstanding scholars, the Federal career intern
program. The recruit rates are high, and the diversity
statistics are pretty impressive. For example, in the class of
2003 for Presidential management interns, 21 percent were
minority and almost 60 percent were women.
Ms. Norton. What grades were those interns?
Mr. Sanders. They start at GS-9. So at the beginning of the
pipeline, we're doing quite well. We need more work in the
middle of the pipeline. A number of agencies are doing very
innovative things. IRS, my old place, HHS with its emerging
leaders program, the Department of Labor has really had
remarkable success bringing in MBAs straight into mid-level
positions. OPM is about to develop and deploy an executive
readiness program which is sort of one level down focusing on
high potential 13s and 14s to prepare them for the SES
candidate development program and the next step after that the
SES. Those programs are under way. They're under development.
And that is probably the weakest part of the leadership
development pipeline.
But in terms of keeping good folks, you know this because
Director James has testified on this before and so has Dan
Blair, our Deputy Director. We need to make the general
schedule far more performance based so that when we have
somebody who is on the fast track we can reward them, we can
promote them, we can compensate them and keep them so they can
get to the SES and not have to wait around for 20 or 25 years.
Ms. Norton. You have to watch out how you do that too,
because they can believe there is favoritism.
Finally, let me ask you a question about accountability,
Mr. Sanders. It says at page 10 of this testimony that we can
hold agencies accountable for their efforts in this regard. You
are doing a lot of good work in trying to do the groundwork.
The accountability has always been a major problem here.
And you go on in this testimony to talk about human
capital, benchmarks of red, yellow and green, and apparently
that is how the agency is marked, including the diversity of
the work force and diversity in leadership decisions.
Then you continue to get to the individuals who will be
held accountable. And you speak about a chief human capital
officer and her stewardship for ensuring diversity and
leadership continuity in the agency. What you indicate is that
at least you have a single point of accountability.
I want to know how that person is going to be held
accountable. If this were the private sector, for example, that
person might be held accountable through their compensation.
Diversity would be a specific element of their compensation. It
might even be broken down as to high level diversity and
diversity in the ranks, how the employee was evaluated.
Diversity would be an important part of the evaluation of the
manager or the leader. I want to know any such accountability
notions that are a part of your system of accountability.
Mr. Sanders. Particularly at the level of the chief human
capital officer, for the most part these are senior political
appointees in agencies. So accountability is directly to their
Cabinet secretary, department head, to the President and, in
part, to you all.
I think hearings like this are part of the Federal
Government's accountability mechanism. So while, for example,
we can't reward or penalize them in terms of compensation, what
we can do is put a spotlight on those that do good things, that
make progress, and those that don't.
Our focus will be on making sure that they have----
Ms. Norton. Are these people evaluated?
Mr. Sanders. In terms of formal performance evaluations?
Ms. Norton. In any way.
Mr. Sanders. I think they have their own performance
evaluations individually, and agencies are certainly evaluated
as well.
Ms. Norton. Well, are these people--are these people
evaluated in any way? And if so, can they be evaluated for
their achievement in diversity in the terms in which we are now
discussing?
Mr. Sanders. I think that evaluation occurs as they are
held accountable by their agency head and by the President.
Ms. Norton. Well, I just--for the record, you have not said
to me that anybody will be evaluated or otherwise held
personally accountable for the achievement of diversity
benchmarks. That is what I am looking for.
Mr. Stroman. Ms. Norton, if I can just comment on that, I
can tell you that at the General Accounting Office, the
Comptroller General awards bonuses to his senior managers as a
result of performance at the end of each fiscal year. And one
of the important elements with regard to those bonuses is
diversity; that is, we track what the promotion opportunities
have been during the course of a year, what the senior level
looks like in a particular team, and the Comptroller General
makes a decision. And diversity is an important component.
So I agree with you that money at some point can be made
available and can be used as an important stick to move
diversity forward.
Ms. Norton. Madam Chairwoman, I thank you for your
indulgence. I do want to just say for the record that unless--
it is a part of human nature, and it is a part of the way in
which government and every enterprise has run since the
beginning of time. If an agency holds somebody accountable for
how that agency processes Civil Service, sorry, Social
Security, then you say that is important to this agency.
And unless the agencies are going to be held accountable
for whether they achieve and how much, how far they go in
achieving--and I mean meeting goals. There is a sky--we got
some this year. You will never satisfy at least some members of
this committee unless there are goals set and unless you know
whether those goals have been met.
As far as this member is concerned, there is no
accountability system. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Thank you, Ms. Holmes-Norton.
I would like to clear up something in my own mind. I don't
remember which one of you said it. Are you saying that the
chief human capital operating officer, are they all political
appointees? If so, who do they report to?
Mr. Sanders. No, not all of them. That was a matter for
each agency head to decide. But I do believe the majority of
them are senior political appointees reporting; in many cases
they are assistant secretaries, so they are reporting to their
Cabinet secretary.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. So they come and go with the
Cabinet secretaries when them come and go with the
administration?
Mr. Sanders. Yes, ma'am. The legislation doesn't specify
whether the chief human capital officer is a political
appointee or a career. And, frankly, that is a delicate balance
because you do want somebody who is going to have the voice and
the weight of the department head speaking on human capital
matters. They, of course, have a career staff, including senior
HR folks in the SES who report to them, who provide the
continuity.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Ms. Holmes-Norton, I understand
what you are saying, but I also wonder how you can use
diversity as something to go by when you are counting bonuses
and salaries and the like, if the pool--and I am hearing that
the pool may not be there. If the pool isn't there, how can you
hold the person accountable for not hiring the people if they
don't have the pool to hire from?
Which brings me to my question, I guess of, are there
barriers out there, and what barriers are out there to
achieving what we are looking for here, diversity in the SES
corps?
And, quite frankly, just to give you where I stand, it
would suit me fine if everybody could be hired based on whoever
is hiring them never seeing their names so they can't guess
whether they are male or female, and never seeing their face so
they couldn't see what color, or their height or weight or
anything.
I don't know the magic answer to that question. But if you
can----
Mr. Stalcup. Well, in part, in answer to that question, and
going back to Ms. Norton's question, we are doing a study now
looking at agencies across government in terms of how
specifically they are holding their executives accountable for
elements such as diversity.
We are very early in the stages of that; it is a request
from the Senate side, and that report will be coming out next
year. So it is a key issue, one that we are in agreement with
in terms of importance and one that will help us sort this out.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Let me just say this. If you start
doing that, and you make your senior executives--if you hold
them liable for not having a diverse--for not hiring
minorities, could we be getting to the point where they hire
minorities just because they are minorities rather than hiring
the best person for the job?
Mr. Stalcup. Well, I would hope not. Obviously, our study
also showed--the report that we talked about today--that,
really, numbers is not necessarily a problem. Our study shows,
at least at the GS-15 and 14 levels, that there will be
sufficient numbers, both minority and White people.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. In the pool?
Mr. Stalcup. In the pool, yes, down the road. So that is
not necessarily an issue.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. OK.
Mr. Sanders. Madam Chairwoman, in terms of appointing
people to the Senior Executive Service, frankly that is one of
the most expeditious ways of bringing folks into government.
Not every agency practices it, but as Director James has
demonstrated, and others, you can literally bring SESs on board
in 30 days if you put your mind to it.
You can reach out to a broad candidate pool, not just
Federal Government or former Federal employees, but the private
sector. There is wonderful talent out there. There is wonderful
talent inside as well. You can do this very quickly. You can
move fast. It just takes will.
And it goes back to the issue of accountability and having
somebody now that you all can talk to and point to, as well as
the President saying, what are we doing?
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Well, I am impressed that OPM has
raised their numbers. I am glad to hear that the report was
based on what you used to do, so if you changed what you are
doing, we can get a little higher.
We will have some other questions we will submit to you for
the record, if you can answer them and get them back to us. And
that is open to my colleagues as well. I thank you all of you
for being patient, and for being with us here today.
I would now like to invite our second panel of witnesses to
please come forward to the witness table. On this panel we will
be hearing from some of the agencies themselves.
First is Gail Lovelace, Chief Human Capital Officer for the
General Services Administration. Next we will have Jo-Anne
Barnard, the Chief Financial Officer for the U.S. Patent and
Trademark Office. Third will be Dr. Reginald Wells, the Deputy
Commissioner for Human Resources at the Social Security
Administration.
And we have already sworn you all in. So if you will take
your seat, we will begin with the statements.
We will now recognize you. We will ask you to summarize
your testimony in 5 minutes. Any more complete statements you
may wish to make will be included in the record.
I would like to welcome you, Ms. Lovelace, and thank you
for being with us today. We will begin with you. You are
recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENTS OF GAIL T. LOVELACE, CHIEF HUMAN CAPITAL OFFICER,
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION; JO-ANNE BARNARD, CHIEF
FINANCIAL OFFICER, U.S. PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE; AND DR.
REGINALD F. WELLS, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RESOURCES,
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
Ms. Lovelace. Thank you. Good afternoon, Madam Chairwoman,
members of the subcommittee. I appreciate the opportunity to
appear before you today on behalf of Steven Perry, the
Administrator of GSA. I am Gail Lovelace, GSA's Chief People
Officer, and I am also the Chief Human Capital Officer for GSA.
Today, I will briefly address three issues: the current
level of diversity in GSA's SES work force; recruitment and
development of minorities and women in preparation for SES
positions; and a quick update on the implementation of the No
Fear Act inside GSA.
We believe that GAO is absolutely correct when they write
that diversity can be an organizational strength that
contributes to achieving results. In addition, diversity at the
highest levels of an organization sets a positive and visible
example for the rest of the organization to follow and to
emulate.
The desire to encourage and increase racial, ethnic, gender
and other types of diversity in the Federal work force,
including diversity at the senior executive levels, is explicit
in guidance that covers much of my daily work. The President's
management agenda includes an initiative for the strategic
management of human capital, and this initiative establishes a
goal of ``a diverse work force, including mission-critical
occupations and leadership.''
GSA's Human Capital Strategic Plan, first published in
August of last year, outlines seven human capital goals. Two of
the seven goals are focused on executive leadership and
diversity. As stated in our plan, one of the goals is ``to
ensure that we have a diverse work force.'' Our plan is to
continually assess our work force and take steps to ensure that
there is appropriate representation by minorities, women and
other identified groups in the GSA work force as a whole, and
at various grade levels, certainly including the Senior
Executive Service.
In GSA, we believe that our overall work force is diverse.
Currently, minorities comprise 37.8 percent of the work force;
women represent 45 percent of our overall work force. At the
executive level, GAO's report showed that as of October 1,
2000, 13.8 percent of our Federal career executives were
minorities and 23.6 percent were women.
At that time, GSA's numbers were slightly better than the
average; 14.3 percent were minorities, and 28.6 percent were
women. On September 30, 2003, 3 years later, GSA's numbers have
regrettably declined for minorities, at 10 percent, but
improved for women at 28.8 percent.
For us, there is certainly room for improvement. With 80
career executives in GSA, we represent a very small portion of
the governmentwide total. Even within that small number, we
continue to see movement within our executive ranks. Just since
March of this year, we have lost three women and four minority
executives, either through transfers to the Department of
Homeland Security, retirement or through movement to another
position outside of GSA.
Today, we are recruiting for several career executive
positions. We are well aware of the opportunities that this
presents and will make every effort to ensure that we are
attracting a diverse group of candidates to GSA.
As career senior executives leave the GSA work force, their
vacant positions are filled from within GSA, or from other
sources outside the agency. We are focusing our efforts on
attracting a pool of diverse candidates from both directions.
GSA, like many other agencies, uses a variety of sources to
attract applicants. Our new recruiting branding strategy, ``You
can do that here,'' is being utilized in a variety of settings
to attract applicants to GSA.
In addition to our recruitment efforts, GSA is also focused
on development of internal staff to get them ready to move into
executive positions. We recently established a new five-tier
Leadership Institute that offers leadership development
programs for managers, supervisors, senior specialists and
analysts.
In fiscal year 2002, with the support of OPM, GSA
established our Advanced Leadership Development Program as one
tier of our Leadership Institute. The Advanced Leadership
Development Program is designed to develop future leaders and
plan for executive succession in the coming years.
The impetus for this endeavor is the potential for a
pending leader exodus from GSA. As in many other government
agencies, over half of GSA's executives, supervisors and
managers will be eligible to retire in the next 5 years. It was
deemed prudent to begin an accelerated leadership development
program to prepare for the future.
That program is comprised of three competitive phases, an
application process, an assessment process and executive
interviews. Once the applicant has successfully passed these
phases, they enter into a coaching relationship and begin
various programs required for their development. We are pleased
that in our 2003 program, 25 percent of our participants are
minority, 48 percent are women.
In our external recruitment efforts, we are maximizing the
use of Web-based technology and other supplemental methods of
communication to reach out to new or previously untapped
sources of highly qualified candidates. Most of our executive
vacancy announcements, we have advertised for both Federal
employees and outside applicants. We believe that this
increases our opportunity to attract a more diverse applicant
pool.
We are also considering use of OPM's proposed new Federal
SES Candidate Development program as another opportunity to
increase our diverse pool of candidates.
Before I close, I would like to turn to the No Fear Act. As
required by the Notification and Federal Employee
Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002, GSA is
implementing increased accountability for violations of
antidiscrimination and whistleblower protection laws. We are
moving forward with plans to effectively implement the No Fear
Act, based upon the interim regulations that were issued by the
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and anticipated
guidance from OPM.
Just last week our Associate Administrator for Civil Rights
led a leadership group at GSA in a discussion about the law,
and will continue to share updated information with them as we
implement the plans that we expect to get as a result of
requirements of the new regulations.
We are developing an e-learning module for our OnLine
University, and we are using our Web site to educate our
associates about the act. In addition, our Office of Civil
Rights has installed a new data base that will capture and
report the data required by the act.
In their model, GAO examined career senior executive
service trends between 1995 and 2000. They projected that,
based upon those trends, the proportion of minority men and
women in the SES will remain virtually unchanged. We will be
successful in meeting the challenge of creating a more diverse
work force if at a future date GAO's projection has proven to
be incorrect. That will require a concerted level of effort at
all agencies.
GSA is committed to taking steps needed to improve our
diversity across GSA, including our executive ranks. Thank you
for the opportunity to testify before you today, and I look
forward to any questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Lovelace follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.081
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.082
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.083
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.084
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.085
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.086
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.087
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Thank you, Ms. Lovelace.
Now I would like to recognize Ms. Barnard. I would like to
thank you for being with us today; you are recognized for 5
minutes.
Ms. Barnard. Madam Chairwoman, Ranking Member Davis and
members of the subcommittee, I appreciate the opportunity to
testify today for the USPTO. Americans can be proud that when
they apply for a patent or a trademark, they are relying upon
one of the more diverse agencies in the Federal Government.
This wide diversity is well represented within the agency's
SES ranks. Since 1999, the USPTO has seen substantial increases
in the number of African Americans, Asian Americans and women
on our SES staff. Currently 14 of our 46 SES members are women,
including one Asian American and three African American women.
This represents a 133 percent increase over 1999 when we
had six female SES members on our rolls. During the same 4-year
period, we have increased the number of African Americans in
our SES ranks by 100 percent, from two to four individuals, and
the number of Asian American SESers by 200 percent, from one to
three individuals.
The USPTO's SES diversity profile compares favorably with
that of the Federal Government as a whole. The most recent
governmentwide SES demographics issued by the Office of
Personnel Management in 2001 indicate that governmentwide, 25
percent of SES members are women and nearly 14 percent are
minorities.
At the USPTO, 30 percent of SES members are women, and over
15 percent of all appointments are held by minorities. As we
replace retiring members of our existing SES corps over the
next few years, we expect this diversity to further increase,
because of the significant diversity in the pool of existing
employees that we have.
The USPTO currently has 46 members of the SES; 19 of these
individuals, 41 percent, are now retirement-eligible, or will
become eligible over the next 2 years. Although a few of our
existing SES positions, like my own, are in the financial and
administrative area or the information technology field, the
vast majority of our SES jobs are highly specialized in nature.
In addition to the managerial skills normally required for
SES positions, incumbents and applicants for these jobs possess
extensive intellectual property knowledge in either patent or
trademark law. SES members in the patent business area manage a
work force comprised largely of scientists and engineers. And
those in the trademark area direct a staff of intellectual
property attorneys.
Executives in both of these areas must possess both the
technical knowledge required to direct the work force, and a
high degree of specialized knowledge about intricate, often
complex examination rules, regulations and procedures. Much of
this specialized knowledge can only be acquired through years
of experience in the office. As a result, virtually all of our
patent and trademark SES positions are filled from within the
USPTO.
Diversity is likely to increase in our SES ranks because of
the underlying diversity of the pool of patent and trademark
professionals from which many of our future SES executives are
likely to be drawn. Our current work force presents a
recruitment pool of 370 patent professionals at the GS-15
level, most of whom occupy supervisory and managerial
positions. Of this total, 83 are women, 31 are African
American, 84 are Asian American, 9 are Hispanic and 2 are
Native Americans. We also have 72 attorneys at the GS-15 level,
including 39 women, 4 African Americans, 3 Asian Americans, and
2 Hispanics.
In order to enhance the qualifications of this SES pool,
many of these patent and trademark professionals have taken
advantage of the managerial, supervisory, leadership and
executive management training and development assignments that
we offer and fund. We have put in place and constantly seek to
improve upon developmental opportunities that have included
managerial training provided by the Office of Personnel
Management's Federal Executive Institute and other facilities,
a management certificate program that was designed specifically
for the USPTO by Syracuse University's Maxwell School, in-house
technical and managerial training and opportunities for
numerous career development details throughout the agency.
The USPTO also currently has an SES candidate training
program under development. Our priority is always to select the
best qualified person, regardless of race, national origin, sex
or religion, for each SES position that we fill. Because we
have so many talented men and women and minorities in our
senior supervisory and managerial ranks, we are confident that
many of them will rise to the SES level.
In addition, we will continue to conduct the broadest
possible searches for our financial, administrative and
information technology SES vacancies.
As for the No Fear Act, the USPTO is actively implementing
the reporting and notification requirements pursuant to the act
and the upcoming regulations. We have purchased software that
will aid in meeting the reporting requirements and migration of
current complaint data into a Web-based format is now under
way.
To meet the notification requirements, we have arranged to
place a notification on each employee's printed pay stub, and
on the USPTO Internet Web site. The notice will explain the
rights and protections guaranteed by Federal antidiscrimination
and whistleblower protection laws. We also have incorporated No
Fear Act information into the training module that is given to
all new managers and supervisors at the agency.
The Office of Personnel Management is currently drafting
regulations on the implementation of the reimbursement
requirements of the act.
We are prepared to take any steps necessary to implement
these requirements as soon as the regulations are issued. I
appreciate the opportunity to share this information and to
testify today.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Thank you, Ms. Barnard.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Barnard follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.027
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.028
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.029
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. And Dr. Wells, we appreciate you
being here today, and you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Wells. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and Mr. Davis for
asking me to be here today to discuss the Social Security
Administration's efforts to achieve diversity in its Senior
Executive Service.
I am pleased to have the opportunity to tell you about the
efforts that SSA has made to develop and recruit a diverse work
force as we also address the challenges presented by the
forthcoming retirement wave among career civil servants.
The Social Security Administration is an agency of 65,000
employees working in 1,500 installations nationwide. As
Commissioner Jo Anne B. Barnhart has often said, the men and
women of Social Security are ``the agency,'' and I share her
view that the Social Security work force is the best in
government.
Our goal is to provide the American people with the service
they expect and deserve. To succeed we must understand and meet
the needs of a diverse public. That means we need a high-
performing, well-trained and well-equipped staff, from our
front line right up to our highest executives.
Seventy-one percent of our employees are women, and 44
percent are members of minority groups. Diversity is reflected
in all of the major components, at all levels, including among
our deputy commissioners, regional commissioners and associate
commissioners. We are also a very experienced group, with an
average of 20 years of service, and an average age of 47. That
is both a challenge and an opportunity for SSA, as the agency
faces the massive increase in workloads that the aging of the
baby boomers is already starting to create. Sixty percent of
SES and GS-14s/15s will be eligible for regular retirement by
2008, and we will need to replace 24,000 of 65,000 employees
over the next 10 years. But SSA views this turnover as an
opportunity to increase diversity as we recruit and hire the
work force that will take the agency into the future.
Over the past 4 years, we have hired approximately 12,000
permanent employees. We have focused on ensuring equal
opportunities for all, including minorities and women. Today,
44 percent of our employees are members of minority groups,
compared to 28.5 percent in the civilian labor force and 30.8
percent in the Federal work force. We employ an increasing
number of Hispanics, who now comprise 11.9 percent of SSA's
work force, compared to 12.2 percent of the civilian labor
force and 7.1 percent in the Federal work force. SSA ranks
third among Federal agencies in this area.
Further, SSA is second among major Federal agencies in
hiring Hispanic employees. The Office of Personnel Management's
June 2003 report to the President highlighted SSA as one of the
model agencies for Hispanic hiring.
In October 2002, our SES corps of 123 individuals included
41 minority men and women, representing one-third of the total.
Ninety-four percent of the most recently completed SES
candidate development program class, remaining with the agency,
has been selected for placement in SES positions at SSA.
Of the 30 SES appointees from this class, one-third were
women and 40 percent were minority. However, Commissioner
Barnhart and the entire agency leadership is firmly committed
to continuing our efforts to build a work force that truly
reflects the Nation as a whole.
SSA's long tradition of developing leadership from within
means that a diverse SES corps depends in large part on a
diverse total work force. SSA recruits at historically Black
colleges and universities and Hispanic-serving institutions,
and has cooperative agreements with Native American tribal
colleges and universities.
SSA also uses the Outstanding Scholar Program to recruit
minorities, as well as the authority granted by OPM to use
bilingual registries in hiring. We are also establishing
partnerships with national organizations, such as the National
Association of Colleges and Employers, the Association on
Higher Education and Disability, and the Hispanic Association
of Colleges and Universities.
SSA has three national development programs for employees
from grades GS-9 through GS-15 that will enable the agency to
meet the staffing and leadership challenges of the 21st
century. These programs are considered to be among the best in
government. In addition to our national programs, we offer
numerous regional and component level programs.
I would like to turn for a moment to the Notification and
Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of
2002, also known as the No Fear Act. SSA strongly supports the
implementation of the No Fear Act.
Prior to October 1, 2003, the effective date, SSA took
affirmative steps to comply with the notification provisions of
the new act, and I am pleased to report that SSA has
successfully completed all of the five required steps to inform
employees of their legal protections and rights.
In closing, I would like to emphasize SSA's pride in its
work force and its efforts to promote diversity among its
employees.
Thank you, and I will be glad to answer any questions you
may have.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Thank you, Dr. Wells.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Wells follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.030
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.031
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.032
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.034
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.035
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. I would like to thank all three of
our witnesses for being patient and being here with us today.
Before I go to Mr. Davis, I have a question of Ms. Barnard.
In inviting the Patent and Trademark Office to attend today's
hearing, we were expecting them to send someone very
knowledgeable about the agency's personnel and human resources
functions relating to the Senior Executive Service.
As the CFO, would you explain your role in the management,
selection and oversight of the Senior Executive Service at the
Patent and Trademark Office?
Ms. Barnard. Yes. I am the Chief Financial Officer and the
Chief Administrative Officer. So I also have under me the
Office of Human Resources, and I am responsible for
recruitment, for directing the committee that selects senior
executives, the Performance Review Board, and the Executive
Review Board.
So I am directly involved in the agency's hiring and
training programs.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. For the SES?
Ms. Barnard. Yes.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Thank you.
Mr. Davis.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Well, thank you very much, Madam
Chairwoman.
Ms. Lovelace, I was intrigued with your testimony,
especially the point where there has been some decrease. Could
you explain how that may have happened, or how that could
happen?
Ms. Lovelace. The decrease in the number of minorities and
women that are in our executive ranks comes from the fact that
we have had turnover within the agency. There are people that
have moved to other agencies, have retired, or have transferred
into other positions outside of the government.
We see a decrease in the number of SESers, and an increase
in the number of minorities and women that actually leave the
agency. We in fact will see that the numbers overall in terms
of our percentages will decrease as well.
There are some opportunities inside GSA right now. We are
currently trying to recruit to fill career executive positions,
to fill behind some of those losses. And so I think that is a
unique opportunity for us.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. I certainly agree with your comment,
in terms of indicating that there was opportunity, because as I
looked at the numbers and--you know, I saw that in terms of SES
hires in 2002, there was one Black female, no Black males. And
in 2003, there was one Black male and no Black females.
Do you have your own candidate training program?
Ms. Lovelace. It is not actually a candidate development
program. It is a program to develop people to take on new
leadership roles within GSA. So it is not a formal candidate
development program.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. You did indicate, though, that you
were talking with OPM about possible use of their program?
Ms. Lovelace. Yes. As a matter of fact, we are discussing
this program at my Executive Resources Board at GSA. This
meeting has actually been planned for some time, we will
discuss our use of that program, and discuss the numbers that
you see in front of you in terms of the hiring or lack thereof
of minorities and women inside our executive ranks at GSA.
We realize that there are issues inside GSA, which is why
we have included a very specific goal in our human capital
strategic plan to try to address that issue within GSA.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much.
Ms. Barnard, I was certainly struck, as I looked at your
testimony and as I heard you, in terms of the percentages. I
mean, you look at the percentages in your agency and you say,
Wow. You know, you just--then, of course, you look at the
numbers. And you say, Well, the wow is a little more
understandable; that is, if you are going from one to three, or
you are going from two to four. But, even so, that represents
significant movement.
And I don't mean to downplay that in any kind of way, but
my question is, prior to those years, did the agency have a
formal program that was designed to help move people up and in?
Ms. Barnard. No, we have never had a formal SES development
program, per se. The Department of Commerce has a program in
which we have participated. As part of our human capital
program right now, we are developing, under the aegis of the
President's management agenda, a training program along the
lines of the one Ms. Lovelace talked about, where we will be
offering training to various levels of managers.
As I spoke earlier, we really see our opportunities for
improving the diversity of our work force in that underlying
pool of managers, and because we are so diverse at that level,
we think we will be able to make better inroads than in the
past.
For instance, if you look at the 23 selections that we have
made in the past 4 years in the Senior Executive Service, 22
percent of those have been minorities. So we are having the
minorities developed through our ranks of managers. And that is
where we are placing our emphasis.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Let me just ask both of you quickly.
Would it be just as simple and just as easy, perhaps, to use
the program that OPM has developed? Is there a reason perhaps
to have some other activity?
Ms. Lovelace. The OPM program is not fully developed yet
and has not been made available to agencies. Our Leadership
Institute has actually been in existence for about 3 years; I
believe we are going into our 4th year. We needed to step up
our level of effort before OPM even began development of this
program.
But we will look to see how we can enhance our ability to
recruit minorities and women by use of that program, and see
how it aligns with what we are already doing inside GSA.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. OK.
Dr. Wells, quickly, I don't want to take issue with the
comment that you made about the Social Security Administration
having the best work force in the Federal Government, and I
really don't know about that. But I do know about that bunch
that work out of Region 5 in Chicago, and they are about as
good as they come. So you don't get much better than they are.
Mr. Wells. Thank you, Mr. Davis.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. I have had a wonderful experience
working with them. And they have had some of most committed and
dedicated people that I have ever run into. I mean, they are
out all times of the night, all over the place with us, as we
try and take information to the people.
Let me ask you, how long have you been in Federal
Government service?
Mr. Wells. In the Federal service, well, if you count my
time with District Government, which doesn't actually count
technically, although it is the same retirement system, I have
actually been in the Federal Government proper since 1994.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. So you are a career person?
Mr. Wells. I am, yes, sir.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Not a political----
Mr. Wells. I am not a political, no.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. I am wondering, if having people in
certain positions coming from a career service vantage point
might not make a difference?
I suspect that throughout the Social Security
Administration, there are people like you who have career
service status and rank, and have moved up to certain levels
and have responsibility. That responsibility carries with it
certain continuity, and so there seems to be a level of
professional commitment to doing the job.
That is really what I am trying to get at and to suggest.
Would you comment on that?
Mr. Wells. Mr. Davis, I think--in my experience, I have
been fortunate in that most of the Federal employees I have had
the occasion to work with, both career and political, have been
very dedicated to the work. I have had a very good experience
with that.
There is something to be said for continuity, and that is
why we have the two sides. The career service is for purposes
of keeping things going on an even keel. And clearly in the
case of the Social Security Administration, which has very few
political senior executive positions relative to some other
agencies, we have really enjoyed a lot of continuity with the
careerists that are there.
I happen to be the designated chief human capital officer
for the Social Security Administration. So I am one of the
exceptions that Ron Sanders spoke of. I happen to wear that
hat. I am also the Deputy Commissioner for Human Resources.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. So I kind of gathered that. That was
really the genesis of my question.
And I think it does make a great deal of sense and provides
opportunity for a level of professional thought, action and
continuous commitment. If something doesn't happen, we can
really come back to you 2 years from now and expect that you
will still be there, or we can come back 3 years, 4 years
maybe, and expect that you are still there.
Mr. Wells. I certainly hope to be.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Rather than a political appointee,
you might come back next year and they are gone. And whoever is
there can then say, well, I really didn't have responsibility
for what was going on year before last because I just got here.
Mr. Wells. That is kind of in my genes. I happen to be a
second generation Fed. My mother worked for the Internal
Revenue Service for 45 years. So I don't know if I will go
quite as long as she did, but I am intending to stay here for a
career.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Well, maybe good fruit doesn't fall
too far from the tree. Thank you very much.
Madam Chairwoman, I have no further questions.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Thank you, Mr. Davis.
Dr. Wells, I will just say that if today is any indication
of your loyalty and your commitment to your job--because as I
understand it, you opted to be here rather than Austria; I am
not sure that I would have that kind of dedication--I would
imagine with that kind of commitment, you will probably be here
in 3 or 4 years.
Mr. Davis, I don't think you have to worry about that too
much.
Ms. Barnard, I was just rechecking your statement in the
beginning. I think I heard you say that because of the type of
work and all that you have in the PTO, generally promotions are
from within, the feeder group is from within, you don't go
outside to bring people up into the SES positions.
Did I hear you correctly on that?
Ms. Barnard. We go outside for administrative, for legal,
information technology positions, just as all agencies do. And
actually, that would be the extent that we would rely on OPM's
training program. But the vast majority of our SES positions
are specialized positions. They are patent group directors or
patent managers or people that negotiate treaties worldwide in
the patent and trademark area, or trademark managing attorneys.
Those people we do tend to select come mostly from within
because the nature of the rules and the rules of practice are
things that are learned best through years of experience in the
agency. It is extremely difficult to recruit people who are
familiar with the government rules from the outside. In fact,
we are constantly competing to retain our people because we
have law firms and private industry that are trying to attract
them away from us.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Could you tell me, on the patent
side, what percentage you have of minorities that would be in
the feeder pool, GS-14, 15s?
Ms. Barnard. Of the 370 that we have at the GS-15 level--
let's see, I have those numbers here--83 are women, so that is
approximately 22 percent. About 10 percent, 9 to 10 percent,
are African American; 22 percent are Asian American; less than
1 percent are Hispanic and Native American.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Now, can you tell me in the SES
pool on the patent side your breakdown on minorities?
Ms. Barnard. Pardon?
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. On the patent side, your SESs,
could you give me the breakdown of the minorities?
Ms. Barnard. I don't have that information, but I would be
glad to provide that to you.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Can you get that back to us for the
record?
And less than 1 percent were Hispanic, I think you said.
I want to thank all three of the witnesses for being here
and for being patient today. And we will have other questions
for the record that we will submit to you, if you can get back
to us in writing, and any other questions that we ask that we
didn't get the answers to.
I really appreciate your being here. I will dismiss this
panel and bring in the third panel.
I would like to thank our third panel of witnesses for
being very patient with us.
Today on this panel we have representatives of various
employee groups that are all very interested in today's topic.
From the African American Federal Executive Association we have
its president, William Brown. Second is Jasemine Chambers,
Chair of the Asian American Government Executive Network. Third
we have Manuel Oliverez, president of the National Association
of Hispanic Federal Employees.
Fourth, that will be Shirley Harrington-Watson, National
Legislative Review Committee Chair from Blacks in Government.
And fifth we will hear from Patricia Wolfe, the president of
federally Employed Women. Last, the committee will hear from
Linda Rix, Co-CEO of AVUE Technologies Corp.
And I believe we have sworn you all in. You all were here
when we did the swearing in. Correct. And I will ask that each
of you--we have your prepared statements, so if you would like
to summarize and try to keep to the 5 minutes, we would
certainly appreciate it.
This is a very large panel. And we would like to get
through all of the statements and then have the members of the
committee be able to ask questions.
So I would like first to welcome Mr. Brown. And thank you
again for your patience. And thank you for being with us today.
You are recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENTS OF WILLIAM A. BROWN, SR., P.E., HAIA, PRESIDENT,
AFRICAN AMERICAN FEDERAL EXECUTIVES ASSOCIATION; JASEMINE C.
CHAMBERS, CHAIR, ASIAN AMERICAN GOVERNMENT EXECUTIVES NETWORK;
MANUEL OLIVEREZ, PRESIDENT AND CEO, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
HISPANIC FEDERAL EXECUTIVES; SHIRLEY HARRINGTON-WATSON, CHAIR,
NATIONAL LEGISLATIVE REVIEW COMMITTEE, BLACKS IN GOVERNMENT;
PATRICIA M. WOLFE, PRESIDENT, FEDERALLY EMPLOYED WOMEN; AND
LINDA E. BROOKS RIX, CO-CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, AVUE
TECHNOLOGIES CORP.
Mr. Brown. Madam Chairwoman, Congressman Davis and
Congresswoman Norton, thank you for the opportunity to testify.
In January of this year I retired from Federal service as
the Deputy Director of Military Programs for the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, after a 38\1/2\-year career. I was
fortunate to achieve the rank of Senior Executive, level 5, but
I assure you it was no easy feat. I encountered many obstacles
despite my qualifications.
I was and am a licensed professional engineer, one of the
youngest persons to be inducted in the College of Fellows of
the Engineering Association, an honorary member of the American
Institute of Architects, and I have held a variety of GS-15
positions with the U.S. Air Force.
In January 1995, after applying for 23 SES vacancies, and
making the short list and being interviewed 15 times, I became
the first African American career civil servant sworn into the
Senior Executive Service in the field of engineering in the
entire Department of Defense. Additionally, I was the only
African American promoted to SES in the entire Army that year.
Now, that was just 8\1/2\ years ago. Can you imagine the
number of highly qualified minorities who preceded me and who
were denied the opportunity to serve our Nation at the highest
levels? Just think of where our Nation might be now if
selecting officials had taken advantage of the skills and
experience of the hundreds of highly qualified African
Americans who are willing to stand up for America and put duty,
honor and country before all else.
In February 2002, several African Americans, including
myself, who attended Harvard University, formed the African
American Federal Executive Association. Our goal is very
simple; we promote the professional development and advancement
of minority groups with particular emphasis on African
Americans into the Senior Executive Service. With that, I would
like to provide you a few specific comments.
Most Federal agencies are not serious about diversity. The
good old boy network continues to flourish. Agencies continue
to change the rules of engagement, and minority groups are
pitted against one another for the few vacancies that become
publicly available each year.
The General Accounting report on SES diversity indicates
that with current trends, the number of White SES females will
increase by 4 percent by year 2007, while the number of
minority males and females will only increase by 0.7 percent.
Our Nation can ill afford to wait at this snail's pace for
the complexion of our government leaders to change. The latest
census results indicate our Nation is more diverse than ever.
How long must a citizenry wait before the leadership reflects
the ethnicity of our population? Are we not striving for ethnic
equality in Iraq and Afghanistan? Why then are we not striving
for the same in America?
To help the subcommittee achieve ethnic equality, I offer
several recommendations.
Recommendation No. 1: We recommend endorsement of the OPM-
CDP program. We provided comments during the development, and
while not all of our comments were incorporated, those dealing
with direction, vision, intent and implementation were. We
commend the Honorable Kay Cole James for her leadership and
willingness to consider alternatives to business as usual.
CDP is, however, one option that needs to be included in a
diversity tool box. Much more must be done if diversity is to
be achieved in the near future.
Our second recommendation is that you consider withdrawing
all authority from an agency to hire Senior Service Executives
until that agency achieves diversity in the SES ranks equal to
ethnic representation in the United States as a whole.
In the interim, OPM or a congressionally appointed board
should be given authority to fill all career SES vacancies in
that agency until SES parity is achieved.
Our third recommendation is that you pass legislation
prohibiting Federal agencies from changing the rules of
engagement within 1 year of filling a vacancy. I have observed
firsthand the selection of individuals without a college degree
into the SES corps. None were minorities.
I have also observed discussions on the academic
qualifications of candidates when an African American is one of
the top candidates. Invariably, the discussion always centers
on the African American not having enough degrees or the right
degrees. This changing of the rules when a minority is being
considered must be eliminated. If a degree is required, require
it of all candidates. If it is not required, require it of none
of the candidates.
I recently met with African Americans from a very visible
agency, where an African American has not been promoted beyond
the GS-14 level in the last 20 years.
In this agency, one SES screens all candidates for senior
positions and makes the vacancy selection. No other person is
involved in the selection process. The process being used by
agency ensures that no African American ever gets into the
pipeline to compete for an SES position. Why is this kind of
process being allowed to exist in our government?
Madam Chairwoman, our fourth recommendation is that your
subcommittee put an end to this kind of practice by enacting
legislation requiring all agencies to use a panel of no less
than three individuals to screen applicants for all GS-14 and
above vacancies.
Furthermore, we recommend that the legislation include a
provision that when a minority is among the top three
candidates, the agency be required to justify in writing to the
agency head why the minority was not selected.
We also recommend that the selection panel be required to
include a voting minority at or above the level at which the
position will be filled.
To offset the argument that qualified minorities cannot be
found to serve on the panels, we further recommend that your
legislation include a provision for the agency to hire and
reimburse retired minority Federal employees to sit on the
selection panels.
Finally, Madam Chairwoman, we are finding that complaints
against an agency are not being adjudicated in a timely manner.
I am sure that when agencies realize that under the No Fear Act
they will be required to pay from their budget settlement fees,
they will be quick to resolve complaints as well as take steps
to ensure issues do not reoccur. For these reasons, we support
the No Fear Act.
Madam Chairwoman and members of the subcommittee, I thank
you for the opportunity to share our thoughts with you. I have
always believed that pride in public service occurs when you
treat people with dignity and respect, and you allow them to be
all that they can be. There have been times when this belief
has been tested.
In the final analysis, I was the one of the lucky ones. I
served on diplomatic missions to Russia, Nigeria, Hungary,
France, etc., and I was able to stand tall for America.
But remember, I said I was lucky. What about those who are
not so lucky? What about those who could have made America even
stronger? What about your children, my children, the future
generations to come?
People are America's greatest asset. You have the
opportunity to make America an inclusive rather than exclusive
society by implementing the recommendations that I have
outlined for you. Thank you.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Thank you, Mr. Brown. And thank you
for your service to our country.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Brown follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.036
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.038
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.039
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.040
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Ms. Chambers, you are recognized
for 5 minutes.
Ms. Chambers. Good afternoon, Madam Chairwoman, Mr. Davis
and Ms. Norton.
According to the 2000 U.S. census, there are 12.8 million
Asian Pacific Americans in the U.S. population. That amounts to
4.4 percent. Today, about 87,000 APAs serve in the Federal
executive branch, 56,000 on active duty in the military, and
26,000 in the military Reserves, as well as 56,000 in the U.S.
Postal Service. These 200,000-plus employees do not include
those in the legislative and judicial branches or the national
security agencies.
Despite the participation and contributions, APAs have
largely been absent from the top Federal leadership and
executive positions. Although the number of APAs in the SES
doubled from about 50 to over 100 in the last decade, only 1.7
percent of the current SES members are Asian Pacific Americans,
and that is well below its representation in the entire Federal
work force or in the general population.
According to the GAO report, based on the current
separation and hiring trends, the number of APAs in the career
SES will increase only modestly to 104 by the year 2007, but
still remain at only 1.7 percent of the total SES.
The Asian American Government Executives Network [AAGEN],
shares this extremely alarming observation, and believes that
the actual problems are more severe than reported because of
several reasons.
No. 1, there are 2,900 Asian Pacific Americans in the GS-15
pipeline. However, more than half of the 2,900 APAs serve as
nonsupervisory medical personnel under special pay plans in the
Department of Veterans Affairs, and these positions are not
structured to advance into the SES; and this number can be very
misleading, if you just look at the plain number in the GS-15
pipeline.
Our second observation is, as the Federal Government's
human resource agency, the Office of Personnel Management
itself has not had one Asian Pacific American serving in either
its career SES or at the GS-15 rank. From the year 1990 through
September 30, 2003, the single Asian Pacific American SES was
believed to be brought in on October 1, 2003, a couple of weeks
ago.
And third, to illustrate this pipeline problem, the only
APA SES member in the 65,000-employee Social Security
Administration is expected to retire soon. And in this 65,000
employee agency, there are believed to be only eight Asian
Pacific Americans in the GS-15 pipeline to fill this and other
upcoming vacancies.
And unfortunately, some of these APAs are themselves
eligible to retire soon.
And finally, as another example in the pipeline problem,
out of a class of 50 candidates, only 3 minorities, 1 Asian
Pacific American and 2 Hispanic Americans, and no African-
American, were recently accepted into the SES candidate
development program conducted by the Department of Agriculture.
The Asian American government executive network recognizes
that sound decisions can be made only with good data and good
analysis. We commend the subcommittee and the GAO for producing
a very insightful report.
However, we also note that there are significant data
information gaps about the Federal work force. For example,
OPM's demographic data has become less available to the public.
The most recent demographic profile of the Federal work force
on the OPM Web site dates back to September 30, 2000. That data
more than 3 years old. Timely and reliable information is a
form of public accountability.
Beginning October 1, 2003, the No Fear Act became
effective. The law now requires Federal agencies to disclose
employment complaint statistics on the Internet. The Asian
American government executives network believes that these same
principles underlying the No Fear Act--and that is public
disclosure and accountability--are equally applicable in work
force diversity issues.
In closing, the Asian American government executives
network urges Congress and the administration to proceed to the
next stage of reaching out to the APAs and removing the
employment barriers that prevent APAs from reaching the full
potential, offering true equal opportunities to enter the SES
and other senior positions and also be included in the current
transformation to a 21st century government.
AAGEN concurs with the four GAO recommendations, and in
addition, we propose the following, that the recommendations by
the GAO be linked to specific agency strategic plans and
actions, established performance goals, continuing to monitor
results and consequences of good or poor performance. And No.
2, the Congress continues to exercise oversight by directing
the GAO to conduct annual audits and to hold hearings such as
this to address the progress or the lack of it.
No. 3, the OPM and U.S. Postal Service should be directed
to restore the availability of timely reliable and accurate
demographic work force data to the public, including both the
employment and the applicant pool information.
And finally, the subcommittee continues to include the
Asian American government executives network and the Asian
Pacific American perspectives in the current transformation of
the SES. Madam Chairwoman, Mrs. Davis, Ms. Norton, thank you
very much. This concludes my statement.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Thank you, Ms. Chambers.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Chambers follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.041
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.042
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.043
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.044
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.045
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.046
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.047
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.048
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.049
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.050
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Mr. Oliverez, certainly feel free
to summarize your statement if you would. We have your full
statement in the record. You're recognized for 5 minutes. Thank
you.
Mr. Oliverez. Madam Chairwoman----
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Could you turn your mic on, sir, or
pull it a little closer. Yes.
Mr. Oliverez. My name is Manuel Oliverez, and I am the
president and CEO of the National Association of Hispanic
Federal Executives [NAHFE]. It is an honor for me to represent
for the subcommittee an organization of Hispanic professionals
concerned about Hispanic representation in the Senior Executive
Service. The Hispanic population represents the largest
minority group in the United States, according to U.S. bureau
statistics, and will continue to increase at a rapid rate
within the next few years.
At the present time Hispanics represent more than 13
percent of the total population, and more than 12 percent of
the civilian labor force is Hispanic. Hispanics, according to
the June 2003 OPM report to the President on Hispanic
employment in Federal agencies, represent 6.9 percent of the
Federal work force. Incidentally, Hispanics are the only ethnic
underrepresented group in all of the Federal agencies in the
government.
Hispanic representation at the Senior Executive Service
level is only 3.3 percent, including professionals who receive
senior pay but are not in the senior executive or management
positions. Hispanic representation in the pipeline for senior
executive positions is 4.5 percent, 3.8 percent, 3.3 percent
for GS-13s, 14s and 15s respectively.
NAHFE concurs with the GAO estimates concerning the
upcoming losses of Federal employees in the Senior Executive
Service at the GS-15 and 14 levels. NAHFE maintains that if
current hiring promotion and retention practices continue,
diversity at the senior level of the Federal Government will
continue at the present unacceptable levels, and the level of
Hispanic representation will continue to be a serious concern
to those who design, develop and implement personnel practices
in the Federal Government.
The June 2003 OPM report to the President indicates that
Federal agencies hired more than 13,000 Hispanics or 9.5
percent of all employees hired in the Federal work force during
fiscal year 2002. However, the total number of Hispanic
employees increased by 6,151, or 4.7 percent. NAHFE commends
the Director of OPM, Ms. Kay Cole James, and those members of
the interagency task force on Hispanic employment for their
efforts in this right direction.
However, based on the numbers on Hispanic representation,
NAHFE agrees with GAO that more consistent efforts and
accountability measures are needed to improve diversity in the
Federal work force, especially at the senior executive levels.
Hispanics are affected not only by past and current
discriminatory recruitment hiring, promotion and retention
practices, but also by a lack of participation in succession
planning, developmental assignments and opportunities for
formal and informal training, coaching and mentoring. These
barriers are evident by looking at the numbers of Hispanics
selected for SES positions as well as Hispanic candidates
selected for SES candidate development programs. And to add
insult to injury, many of those that complete the SES training
are not placed in senior positions.
NAHFE appreciates the material that is developed in
Spanish-containing information on employment opportunities in
the Federal Government. However, these resources, as well as
those invested in training candidates for the SES, will not
produce the desired results until other issues are addressed.
Hispanic youth deserves the opportunity to learn about public
service early in their careers, and Hispanics entering the
Federal work force deserve the opportunity to learn about the
Senior Executive Service as early as possible. Career
development is as important as a potential for leadership.
The National Association of Hispanic Federal Executives
would like to thank again the OPM Director for including NAHFE
as a stakeholder in the discussion of issues and policies that
will save diversity in the Federal Government in the future.
NAHFE members are very concerned about the stagnant progress of
Hispanic representation in the Federal work force. In spite of
continued increase in the Hispanic population. Initiatives and
policies will not produce desired results unless there is a
consistent support and commitment for diversity from the White
House, U.S. Congress, cabinet secretaries and agency heads.
NAHFE recognizes and is excited about the President's
management agenda, and specifically about the strategic
management of human capital that provides guidance to Federal
agencies in hiring and retaining policies consistent with
agency mission and critical need.
NAHFE supports a pay for performance initiative that will
definitely encourage performance and will eventually clean the
system of underperformers. And although there may be a need for
checks and balances and tools for managers to justify the
recommendations and decisions, NAHFE believes that ultimately
these policies will encourage Federal employees to maintain and
upgrade their level of skills and performance.
In summary, NAHFE recommends that organizations of Federal
employees and organizations advocating excellence in public
service be given the opportunity to participate in the process.
First of all, nonprofit organizations should have access to
small business, education and training funding opportunities to
assist Federal Departments in the identification, preparation,
training and career development programs of candidates that
will improve diversity in the Federal work force.
NAHFE has identified several initiatives that, given the
adequate attention in funding, will meet the objectives of the
strategic management of human capital. Following those
initiatives--NAHFE initiatives that can help Federal agencies
achieve diversity in the Senior Executive Service level.
The NAHFE annual conferences in development and training
where GS-15s are taught how to prepare their SES packages, the
Hispanic Federal executive summits, we've had six of those for
SESers and GS-15s. Project Tivo, a program for GS-15s, a data
base program. Project NARA, a 5, 7 and 9, 11 data program that
we have on our Web site. The NAHFE mentoring program, the NAHFE
networking initiatives, and the NAHFE Yahoo program where we
have over 250 SESers and GS-15s. We provide daily information
on the opportunities in the system.
These initiatives will ensure the Hispanics possess the
skills to compete for Federal employment at all levels. For
those competing for entry level positions, NAHFE can offer
training and resume preparation, interviewing skills and
general knowledge of requirements for Federal employment.
For those already in the Federal work force, NAHFE can
coordinate seminars and other training opportunities to prepare
Hispanics for the GS-13 to 15 positions. For those GS-14 and
15, however, NAHFE can support OPM efforts to ensure Hispanic
candidates nationwide are aware of the opportunities at the
senior level and understand the preparation and application
process that will allow them to submit competitive application
packages.
All outreach efforts, including the dissemination of
materials in Spanish, will not produce the desired results
until Hispanic candidates are interested in public service and
understand the process and requirements and have access to
training and mentoring opportunities to advance to the senior
level. The increase in Hispanic population not only in
traditionally Hispanic geographical areas demands a comparable
diversity at all levels of the Federal Government, most
critically at the Senior Executive Service level.
NAHFE wants to thank all members of the Subcommittee on
Civil Service and Agency Reorganization, and especially to
Representative Jo Ann Davis, chairwoman of the subcommittee,
for inviting NAHFE to the discussion of issues concerning
diversity at the Senior Executive Service. NAHFE members,
mostly in grades 13, 15 and SES, are excited about the
opportunity to make a difference, and be part of the developing
initiatives and policies that will increase Hispanic
representation at the Senior Executive Service and management
level.
Thank you.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Thank you, Mr. Oliverez. Ms.
Harrington-Watson, and if you could, if you see the yellow
light on, that tells you you have about 30 seconds to wrap it
up. And I'll just repeat, we all have the full statements here.
So if you could do a summary, that would be appreciated. Thank
you, you're recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. Harrington-Watson. Thank you. Honorable Davis,
Honorable Davis and Honorable Norton, I am happy to be here
representing the national president, Mr. Gregory Reed. He is in
Austin, TX on grand jury duty and sends his regrets.
I was just looking at how in depth our presentation is, and
you're absolutely right, 5 minutes would not do us justice, and
I will not infringe upon going over that time.
I'd like to just step through some of the pages and just
raise some issues. Blacks in government, of course, represent
African-American employees on the State, local, county and
national level. And as we're here today to talk about the
section level, we all are here letting you know that we are
very much concerned about GS-9s and 13s who we consider to be
the tremendous feeder pool that, as of today, feel they have no
hope.
We would like to encourage you to help us encourage our
membership, because there is no possibility of increasing the
numbers if we do not get our constituents to apply. And many of
them at this point have given up.
I would like to raise the attention of the panel to page
12. I took the time to go through the entire GAO report, and
you will see there the compilations of how African-American
males and females compare in the 12 top agencies on size and
then also how we fair as relates to SES in the five smallest
agencies.
From this chart alone you see our numbers are very small.
When we looked at our feeder pools of GS-15s and 14s, there is
an alarming statistic that you probably have also reviewed as
you looked at the GAO report, and that is our feeder pool is in
an age range where many of those GS-15s and 14s will be seeking
retirement in the next 5 years.
In our full report, we raise the question of what is going
to happen with reforms as it relates to older workers in
America, and we were very interested in the statistics and the
information that was also provided in the additional GAO report
on older workers in America, GAO 03307.
We wanted to make a couple of recommendations that are also
found in our report. One is that the leadership of America
should not be one that is resting in agencies. We feel that
appropriations are needed to develop future leaders of America,
and we wish to suggest that may be an area that we could look
at in the future, how does Congress finance leadership
development so that it does go back to an appropriate higher
level rather than throughout the individual agencies?
Additionally, we wanted to just raise to you the
possibilities of talking about other certification processes.
Blacks in government feel that we are a tremendous training
ground, as many other large employee organizations, and there
could possibly, with an additional certification process where
our leaders who serve for 2 to 4 years, could be certified by
OPM.
So as an alternative to some of these very expensive
leadership programs, we know that on-job training is one of the
highest levels of training that you could possibly get.
I'd like to just conclude by just saying this is quite an
opportunity. We have said a lot in our comments to you, but we
know that as OPM steps out in the next few months with this
trial program of candidate development, we would like to
suggest strongly that there would be some uniformity in all
CDPs that occur within every agency, also that there would be
some uniformity in the way that nonCDP SESers are hired. CDP
programs only represent 30 percent of all SESes. So where are
the other 70 percent coming from, and exactly how do they get
selected?
We are also concerned about current employees of the
government. They should have a better opportunity to apply for
SES than outside selections.
Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, for giving me this
opportunity, and Blacks in government would just like to go on
record saying we are here to provide assistance and support.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Thank you, Ms. Harrington-Watson,
for staying within the 5-minute time limit and summarizing an
excellent statement that you brought to us.
Ms. Wolfe, you're recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. Wolfe. Thank you. federally employed women [FEW], very
much appreciates the opportunity to testify at this
subcommittee hearing on diversity in the Senior Executive
Service. On behalf of the over 850,000 women employed in the
Federal Government and the military, we thank Chairwoman Davis,
Ranking Member Davis, and Delegate Holmes Norton for conducting
this very important meeting.
FEW is a private nonprofit organization founded in 1968
after Executive Order No. 1375 that added sex discrimination to
the other forms of discrimination prohibited in the Federal
Government was issued.
As a private organization, FEW works to improve the status
of women employed by the Federal Government. This includes
contact with Congress to encourage progressive legislation,
keeping our members informed of issues, and I would just also
like to note that FEW does share delegate Holmes Norton's
concern with the contracting-out issue and its impact on
diversity.
For over 35 years, federally Employed Women has been
working to end sexual discrimination and to enhance
opportunities for the advancement of women in government. We
have an extensive training program at a national level, a
regional level, and we work hard to try to provide women with
the opportunities to enhance their skills so that they will be
ready to take advantage of opportunities should they come
along.
FEW is quite diverse. Approximately one-third of our
membership is comprised of minorities. At this time
approximately 50 percent of our organization's leadership is
comprised of minorities. I'm very proud of this diverse group
of leaders. Our leaders come from about 21 States. FEW has also
instituted a diversity program with the aim of developing
strategies to identify and eliminate barriers within the
Federal Government. This program is led by our national vice
president for diversity.
We also offer diversity training annually at our national
training program and throughout the year at local events.
As we all saw from the stats in the GAO study, we certainly
acknowledge that there has been some improvement for women as a
gender group in the last couple of years. These levels still do
not represent actual employment levels of women and minorities
currently serving in the Federal work force.
In order to better reflect the demographics of the entire
Federal work force, the SES composition should be at least
somewhat comparable to employment levels of both women and
minorities.
OPM and the EEOC have provided some recommendations on how
agencies and Federal departments can enhance diversity in their
SES work forces, and of course we want to applaud OPM's
initiative in creating the SES candidate development program.
They have also included FEW as a stakeholder, and we are very
appreciative of that. We believe that their program, which does
include some rotational assignments, formal training,
mentoring, etc., is definitely geared to helping women and
minorities and disabled Federal workers move into the executive
ranks of government.
This type of program should be the model for all Federal
agencies in creating a high quality SES that reflects the
diversity of the work force.
FEW supports the recommendations of these agencies, and
certainly we applaud the agencies that were represented here
today for their work in this area. We have some additional
measures that we ask might be considered, and they really go to
the thing that I've heard mentioned several times today, the
feeder pools, these succession pools, because we believe that
to have people get into the Federal executive service, the
process has to start a lot sooner than when someone is ready at
the higher level.
Just as a very small starting point, include more women and
minorities at top-level personnel and human resource meetings.
Put more emphasis on providing opportunities for career ladder
positions for women and minorities. Too often they're stuck in
positions that offer no continuous upward mobility to even get
them to the grade level of 14, the necessity for entering the
Senior Executive Service.
We also believe that agencies should provide guidance to
their managers.
Now, just to summarize and mention, FEW also was an active
member of the No Fear Coalition, and we very much support that
initiative.
Again, we appreciate the subcommittee's interest in this
issue and all the support that you have given Federal workers
in the past. I'm very proud of the work that we do for the
Federal Government, and simply want to ensure that all workers
are given the same opportunity to enter the ranks of Senior
Executive Service and that the Senior Executive Service truly
represents the Federal work force. We believe a proactive
approach to diversity will achieve much. I thank you all very
much.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Thank you, Ms. Wolfe.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Wolfe follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.051
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.052
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.053
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.054
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.055
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.056
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.057
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.058
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Ms. Rix, you're recognized for 5
minutes, and feel free to summarize.
Ms. Rix. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman and members of the
subcommittee. We're quite pleased, actually, very honored to be
asked to come and speak before you today. I am the founder and
co-chief executive officer of AVUE Technologies Corp. I started
the company after a 5-year career with the Office of Personnel
Management. The company is exclusively devoted on the practice
of developing and providing services that are work force
management solutions exclusively for the Federal Government
sector.
In addition to the 20 Federal agencies and departments that
are our customers, we provide on a public service basis job
information portals and have partnerships--formal partnerships
signed with region 11 of Blacks in Government, which serves the
Washington, DC, metro area; National Image, which is an
organization that supports the education and employment of
Hispanics and Latinos; the Federal Asian Pacific American
Council; Black Data Processing Associates; and also the Senior
Executives Association.
Our principal effort in providing this public service is
to, in fact, increase the capability of Federal Government
agencies to reach out to a wider and more diverse audience and
encourage individuals to not only apply for Federal positions,
but also to understand the process by which individual Federal
positions are filled and recruited in the Federal Government
sector.
A major feature of AVUE's system for its clients and also
for the senior executive's association is a senior executive's
portal that includes opportunities for employment in the Senior
Executive Service for current employees as well as outside
applicants that may be interested. It includes a wide variety
of tools for applicants so that they understand, for example,
what we mean when we talk about executive corps qualifications,
how are those measured, how does one effectively address that,
how does one build an effective resume to be entered and be
considered fairly in the Senior Executive Service cadre.
Our observations are principally associated around our
experience in the Federal Government sector, and it is also
principally associated around our current clients and a lot of
the successes that they have achieved. We would start with the
observation that SES diversity in and of itself, as you have
heard, I think, a number of times today already, about the
pipeline or the feeder pool, what we have as a basic
observation is that Senior Executive Service diversity cannot
be compartmentalized from general work force diversity, which
cannot be compartmentalized from the available labor pool in
the country, and it is very important not to isolate and not to
feature a comparative analysis of underrepresentation in the
Senior Executive Service against merely the pipeline that
currently feeds the senior executive service.
Now, to paraphrase an earlier comment here, you know, if
you always do what you've always done, you'll always get what
you always got. So we are in the process here of helping our
customer agencies and helping our affiliate partners to go
forward and to establish, in essence, a new trend line and a
new method of evaluation and examination of opportunities.
We feel that external recruitment must be considered as a
fundamental source of representation and the improvement of
representation in the Senior Executive Service. I did not hear
today and I don't know if you are aware of the statistic that
the GS-14 and 15 pipeline in the Federal Government today is
basically filled from within government ranks currently. In
fact, the trend line in looking at OPM's central personnel data
file statistics is that 99 percent of the 14s and 15s in the
Federal Government today come from within. So you must examine
a multifaceted, multitiered layer of how the government goes
through the process of recruiting.
It is also true that agencies do differ substantially as to
what is a good comparative analysis of what they need and what
is available and how we recruit in the Federal Government
sector. I think that MD-715 EEOC's new directive on
accountability measures and the recruitment process along with
the no fear legislation basically reinforces existing the
statute, but adds additional accountability levers into that
statute.
One of the things that is very important here is that
agencies be able to track their applicant flow data to be able
to measure continuously whether their recruitment is, in fact,
effective and whether their recruitment produces the right
result and perhaps their selection process does not or whether
this selection process is, in fact, producing the right result;
but they need to increase their outreach and their recruitment
efforts. At AVUE, our current customer clients currently we
have a statistic that 93.64 percent as of today of all
applicants that apply for Federal Government agency clients
that are AVUE agencies voluntarily report their race, sex and
national origin data.
This is an important statistic. Because of EEOC's
management directive, what this allows us to do is actually
measure concretely and provide metrics on the recruitment
process and on recruitment sources and on where our applicant
prospect pool is coming from, not just the accomplishment as a
result of the selection process.
AVUE provides its client agencies with data that allows
them to see every phase of the process and to see how the
applicant pool progresses through phases of the process.
I am out of time. So I just want to make one last statement
that I think is an important statement here.
It is imperative that the government continue to go through
the process of the most aggressive and most successive outreach
it can possibly utilize to globally disseminate job information
to the widest possible audience. Today we are in danger of
having the Office of Personnel Management make the USA job site
the only information portal for job information. We would urge
you to reconsider that as it is fundamentally contrary to the
entire understanding and mechanisms by which outreach operate.
We need to provide more information to more people and increase
the diversity of our recruitment pool and not do less.
So in closing, what I would like to do is thank you again
for this opportunity and to also say that part of our written
submittal includes some agency success stories relative to how
we are able to actually materially change managerial behavior,
the process and transparency of the process that helps agencies
not only meet their existing objectives and existing
regulation, but new regulations as promulgated by MD-715 and
the No Fear Act. Thank you.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Thank you, Ms. Rix.
And thank you all for your testimonies.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Rix follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.059
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.060
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.061
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.062
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.063
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.064
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.065
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.066
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.067
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.068
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. I'm going to go to Mr. Davis. We
had a lot of testimony there, and I'm sure that we're going to
have questions that we can't get in today in the time limit
that we will submit to you in writing if you could get it back
to us for the record.
And Mr. Davis.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much, Madam
Chairwoman.
Ms. Chambers, let me ask you first. We've talked a great
deal about the Office of Personnel Management candidate
development program. You sort of indicated that OPM itself
didn't have such a good record when it comes to Asian
Americans. Are you suggesting that you don't have confidence in
their program or that their program may not generate the kind
of results that you're looking for?
Ms. Chambers. The candidate development program that OPM is
putting together right now is a new program. It hasn't actually
gone into effect. So, I mean, it's a matter of, you know,
waiting and see how it goes. And so I think they are making a
lot of effort to include groups such as the Asian Pacific
American government networks to give input in the design of the
program and other groups on the panel have also been involved.
But so far the--as far as history goes, the only APA that I'm
aware of that is an SES rank since the last 10 years, 13 years,
was just appointed recently. So hopefully from now on, it will
be much better.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. So you're saying that you do have
hope, but you're just pointing out that the history has not
been so good, and that change appears to be on the way. I'm
saying--my mother used to tell us, you know, what you do speaks
so loudly, I can't hear what you're saying. And, you know, that
sort of resonated a great deal. So you're not saying that you
don't think the program will not net some results, but just up
to this point you have not seen--coming from the leader. Of
course, they haven't always been around and haven't always been
the agency that they are, and so hopefully there is movement.
Ms. Chambers. I think the fact that this subcommittee and
yourself have gotten involved in addressing this issues is
definitely helping to push forward, you know, the momentum,
give it momentum. So appreciate that very much.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you.
Ms. Wolfe, you know, the GAO report suggested that unless
there is some intervention, that the only real change by 2007
will be the diminution of White males but an increase with
White females. No movement necessarily for other population
entities. Do you have any idea as to why they would arrive at
that conclusion?
Ms. Wolfe. I wish I had a magic answer to that. I don't.
Now, again, it may be--now, as Ms. Chambers mentioned,
something to do with history. I think clearly if things are to
change, there has to be more of an outreach effort. There has
to be more of getting people in this pipeline that we keep
talking about. Perhaps agencies could develop some criteria.
Certainly we would encourage them to participate in the OPM
candidate development program, but that's at the end of the
line, so to speak, perhaps develop some criteria for getting
people more in the mid-level manager positions that would again
provide some minorities. And we have the idea of perhaps
including them in different meetings, giving opportunities for
some cross-training rotational assignments, that kind of thing.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. I've always been--I've always looked
at this whole business of subjectivity and tried to figure how
it is that individuals can make decisions on an objective basis
or how a reporter can write a story and not inject some of him
or her self into it, or how an analyst can make an analysis and
not inject some of their feeling about whatever the issue is
into it.
Mr. Brown, do you think that subjectivity--I mean, you
mentioned this one person, whoever might be, that subjectivity
has played too much of a role in making these promotions
happen.
Mr. Brown. Absolutely, Congressman. In fact, my belief is
that we're somewhat focused on the wrong portion of the issue
here. We've been having a lot of talk about getting candidates
into the pipeline and so forth, and I totally support that and
we must do that; but I would offer to you that the bigger issue
is not the pool of candidates, but the pool of selecting
officials and the attitudes and the subjectivity that they use
in making their decisions.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Can I just quickly, Ms. Watson, you
placed a lot of emphasis on concern for the pool. You mentioned
GS-9s and 10's and that kind of thing.
Ms. Harrington-Watson. Yes, sir.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Do you agree with Mr. Brown? That
or----
Ms. Harrington-Watson. Yes. I do agree with his summary,
but let me just add two things between both of these Houses
that I'm sitting in between, those who have made it and the
women pool. When you look from the African-American female
perspective or the African-American male perspective, I can say
that I do terribly disagree with total outside recruitment over
increasing outside recruitment, because you have people, as Mr.
Brown has said, that have been struggling for 10, 15 years
trying to get to a 14- or a 15- and then to see that completely
dashed with any possibilities of ever making it to an SES
because outside recruitment is so heavy already.
We look at this from Blacks in government perspective that
if you look at the age of the average 14 and 15 right now, and
you look at the lack of possibilities, we will not see any
change for African-Americans, because we're not going to be
there in any substantial number to even be considered in a few
years. So our plight is a little more--a little different than
some of the other categories, but there is no substantial
change even in the candidate development concept.
I want to step back to one question you were asking--I
think I heard the question underlying when you were talking to
Ms. Chambers about where is the real problem in the
decisionmaking. When we first went to OPM as stakeholders, it
was raised that every person representing OPM in that room was
a White male that was making decisions on the SES candidate
development program. There were no White females. There were no
Black females. There were no minorities represented. So if all
the decisionmakers on the leadership of our country are coming
from one segment, I would say that we really have not made a
lot of progress.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. So you're saying we've got to train
the trainers essentially. I have no further questions, Madam
Chairwoman, but I appreciate that.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Thank you, Mr. Davis. I'm sure I'm
going to have a lot of questions after I leave here, but right
now I want to zero in on you, Ms. Chambers. And you gave a lot
of statistics there, and I'm hoping you have an answer that I
asked the previous panel. When I asked Ms. Barnart about the
Patent Office, and she gave me a very large percentage of Asian
folks that were working there, I think 22 percent, do you
happen to know what percentage of the SES in the patent side of
the office are Asian?
Ms. Chambers. Well, this is a very interesting question,
because I am from the Patent Trademark Office.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. That's why I'm asking the question.
Ms. Chambers. And I can tell you on the patent side as far
as Asian American--Asian Pacific Americans go, there are--let's
see. There are three Asian Pacific Americans, two males and one
female. And I'm the one female.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Out of--and that is SES?
Ms. Chambers. SES.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Out of how many?
Ms. Chambers. Out of 24 group directors. As Ms. Barnart
said, the group director position is highly technical,
specialized. So they manage the 10 examining groups. So there
are a total of 24 group directors; and of the 24, three Asians
including myself. And as far as--I'm trying to think--African-
American goes, I think there is two African-American women and
no Hispanic.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. No African-American males, just
women?
Ms. Chambers. Just women at this time.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. If our math is right, that's 8
percent Asian Pacific Americans out of 22 percent in the pool.
Is that about right? Eight percent that are SES out of 22
percent in the pool?
Ms. Chambers. Yeah.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. I'm sure I've got a lot of
questions for the rest of you. I've got to tell you, Ms.
Harrington-Watson, you did an excellent job summarizing your
statement, and I really appreciate it. So don't think we missed
anything.
Ms. Harrington-Watson. Thank you. I was wondering if I was
going to get that compliment. I really tried.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. You did an excellent job, you
certainly did. You get an A plus in my book.
I want to thank all of you for being here. We did have a
very long hearing and a lot of witnesses. But we heard a lot.
And I will just say to you, Ms. Harrington-Watson, what you
said about not liking going outside of the Federal Government
to find those who move up, that puts us back, if I'm not
mistaken, Mr. Davis, puts us back in the same dilemma if we did
that. If the diversity level right now is low and if we had to
pull from the pool of the low percentage, we can't ever
increase the percentage.
Ms. Harrington-Watson. Well, let me just give you a
scenario, and just see what you think about this opinion. We
may be talking about low pools, but when there is no selection
within the available pool, that is the real issue at hand. If
you have a limited number, yes, I agree, let's go outside,
let's recruit, really recruit; but in most agencies, you have
anywhere from 5 to 15 percent in those 14, 15 levels already.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Of minorities?
Ms. Harrington-Watson. Of minorities. And they are not
making the highly qualified list.
Now, there are a lot of reasons, many we would like to
explore in the future. In fact, that was one of the questions
to OPM is how can you help us identify what you see as the
shortcoming for minorities when they apply for SES positions,
because as you know when you go through that ECQ process and if
you don't write in the first person, if you don't put certain
data there, then you're just completely knocked out.
So if we're not making the connection in application
processing, let's work on that. If we're not making the
connection based on first line elimination, which happens at
many agencies where the first line supervisor decides which
candidates to even send forward, then let's work on that.
If the certification process is where we're losing those
minorities that we feel like are highly qualified and have been
working in agencies 10, 15 years, then let's work on that.
Right now I would think that we are void on enough data to
understand what are the shortcomings and the inside candidates
receiving true consideration.
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Well, it's certainly a lot of food
for thought for us here, and I'm sure this isn't the last that
we've heard of this subject. And I'm certainly going to work
with my colleague, Mr. Davis, to see what we can do. You know,
it used to be that I thought White females were part of the
minority, but I see here today we're not based on this
breakdown. And everybody told me we've come a long way, baby,
but not necessarily up here on the Hill. So I understand what
you're saying.
Anyway, I thank you all for being here today and for your
patience, and like I said, we will submit questions to you
for----
Mr. Oliverez. Madam Chairwoman, may I say something?
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. Sure.
Mr. Oliverez. (Speaks in Spanish.).
Mrs. Davis of Virginia. I have no idea what you said, but
thank you. Thank you all. Thank you. The hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:50 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
[Additional information submitted for the hearing record
follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.088
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.089
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.090
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.091
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.092
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.093
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.094
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.095
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.096
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.097
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.098
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.099
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.100
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.101
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.102
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.103
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.104
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.105
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.106
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.107
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.108
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.109
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.110
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.111
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.112
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.113
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.114
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.115
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.116
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.117
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.118
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.119
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.120
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.121
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.122
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.123
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.124
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.125
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.126
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.127
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2901.128