Veterans Benefits Administration: Better Staff Attrition Data and Analysis Needed (02/11/2003, GAO-03-452T}

-------------------------Indexing Terms-------------------------
REPORTNUM:   GAO-03-452T
    TITLE:   Veterans Benefits Administration: Better Staff Attrition Data and Analysis Needed
     DATE:   02/11/2003



This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-03-452T 
entitled 'Veterans Benefits Administration: Better Staff Attrition Data 
and Analysis Needed' which was released on February 11, 2003.



This text file was formatted by the U.S. General Accounting Office 

(GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part of a 

longer term project to improve GAO productsï¿½ accessibility. Every 

attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of 

the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text 

descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the 

end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided 

but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed 

version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic 

replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail 

your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this 

document to [email protected].



Testimony:



Before the House Committee on 

Veteransï¿½ Affairs:



United States General Accounting Office:



GAO:



For Release on Delivery Expected at 10:00 a.m. EST:



Tuesday, February 11, 2003:



Veterans Benefits Administration:



Better Staff Attrition Data and Analysis Needed:



Statement for the Record by Cynthia A. Bascetta, Director

Education, Workforce and Income Security Issues:



GAO-03-452T:



GAO Highlights:



Highlights of GAO-03-452T, a statement for the record to the Committee 

on Veteransï¿½ Affairs, House of Representatives.



Why GAO Did This Study:



By the year 2006, the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) projects 

it will lose a significant portion of its mission-critical workforce 

to retirement.  Since fiscal year 1998, VBA has hired over 2000 new 

employees to begin to fill this expected gap.  GAO was asked to 

review, with particular attention for new employees, (1) the 

attrition rate at VBA and the soundness of its methods for 

calculating attrition and (2) whether VBA has adequate data to 

effectively analyze the reasons for attrition. To answer these 

questions, we obtained and analyzed attrition data from VBAï¿½s Office 

of Human Resources, calculated attrition rates for VBA and other 

federal agencies using a governmentwide database on federal 

employment, and interviewed VBA officials about their efforts to 

measure attrition and determine why new employees leave.  





What GAO Found:



About 15 percent of new examiners hired in fiscal year 2000 left 

VBA within 12 months of their hiring date, more than double the 

6 percent rate of all VBA employees who left in fiscal year 2000.  

In general, new hire attrition tends to exceed  the rate for all 

other employees, and VBAï¿½s 15 percent rate is similar to the 

attrition rate for all new federal employees hired between fiscal 

years 1998 and 2000, when as many as 17 percent left within 12 

months of being hired.  



VBA does not have adequate data on the reasons why employees, 

particularly new employees, choose to leave the agency.  VBA has 

descriptive data on how employees leave the agency (whether through 

resignation, retirement, or transfer), but VBA does not have 

comprehensive data on the reasons employees resign.  While VBA 

collects some data on the reasons for attrition in exit 

interviews, these data are limited because exit interviews are 

not conducted consistently, and the data from these interviews 

are not compiled and analyzed. Without such data, VBA cannot 

determine ways to address the reasons employees are leaving. 

Furthermore, VBA has not performed analysis to determine whether 

it can reduce its staff attrition. Improved collection and 

analysis of attrition data, including data on the reasons for 

attrition, could help the agency minimize the lost investment in 

training, particularly when new employees resign.  A forthcoming 

report will explore options for improving VBAï¿½s collection and 

analysis of attrition data.



www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt? GAO-03-452T. To view the full report, 

including the scope and methodology, click on the link above. For 

more information, contact Cynthia Bascetta, Director, Education, 

Workforce and Income Security, 202-512-7101.



Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee:



We are pleased to have the opportunity to comment on efforts undertaken 

by the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) to ensure it has a 

sufficient workforce to process veteransï¿½ claims for disability 

compensation and pension benefits. About 40 percent of VBAï¿½s employees 

work as examiners, who review and process veteransï¿½ disability claims 

at 57 regional offices throughout the country. VBA projects that, of 

its examiners who are eligible to retire, 21 percent will do so by the 

year 2006. Acknowledging the implications of these retirements for the 

quality of services provided to veterans, VBA hired over 2,000 new 

examiners between fiscal years 1998 and 2001. While VBA recognizes the 

importance of retaining its new employees, until 2001 it was not 

regularly calculating an attrition rate for its newly hired employees.



In response to a request from Representative Lane Evans, Ranking 

Democratic Member, we examined (1) the attrition rate at VBA, and the 

soundness of its methods for calculating attrition and (2) the adequacy 

of data VBA has on the reasons for attrition. We focused our analysis 

on new employees because of the investment in training they need to 

reach full productivity. To do our work, we obtained and analyzed 

attrition data from VBAï¿½s Office of Human Resources and interviewed VBA 

officials. We performed calculations of VBAï¿½s attrition rates and 

compared them to those for other federal claims examiners, using a 

governmentwide database on federal civilian employment. We also 

interviewed Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and GAO human capital 

officials to identify generally accepted methods of calculating 

attrition and to determine how federal agencies develop and analyze 

data on attrition and the reasons for attrition. We conducted our work 

between October 2002 and January 2003 in accordance with generally 

accepted government auditing standards. This statement for the record 

is an interim product that summarizes the results to date based on our 

ongoing review of staff attrition at VBA.



In summary, for fiscal years 2000 and 2001, the attrition rate at VBA 

for all employees was about 6 percent. The rate for newly hired 

examiners was more than twice as high in fiscal year 2000, the most 

recent year for which comparable data were available. Specifically, 

about 15 percent of new examiners hired in fiscal year 2000 left the 

agency within 12 months of being hired. This is similar to the 

attrition rate for all new federal employees hired between fiscal years 

1998 and 2000, when as many as 17 percent left within 12 months of 

being hired. It is typical for new hire attrition to exceed overall 

attrition, but the new hire attrition rate was much higher in certain 

VBA regional offices located in major urban areas than it was in other 

regional offices. While VBA has descriptive data on how employees leave 

the agency (whether through resignation, retirement, or transfer), it 

does not have analytic data on the reasons why employees, particularly 

new employees, leave the agency. Without such data, VBA cannot 

determine ways to address why employees are leaving. Furthermore, VBA 

has not performed the types of analysis on its data that would help the 

agency determine whether it can reduce attrition. Such analyses can 

help an agency determine the extent to which an attrition problem may 

exist and provide needed information for effective workforce planning. 

We will be reporting in more detail in a forthcoming report on these 

issues and options for improving VBAï¿½s collection and analysis of 

attrition data.



Background:



VBA provides benefits to about 2.7 million veterans and about 579,000 

surviving spouses, children, and parents. Some of these benefits and 

services include disability compensation and pension, education, loan 

guaranty, and insurance. VBA employs about 5,000 examiners,[Footnote 1] 

and they represent about 40 percent of the agencyï¿½s entire workforce. 

Most examiners are located at 57 regional offices and are responsible 

for reviewing and processing veteransï¿½ disability claims. Typically, 

they begin service at GS-5 or GS-7, grades that have starting salaries 

for 2003 of about $23,400 to $29,000.[Footnote 2] Examiners can be 

promoted to GS-10.[Footnote 3]



Between 1998 and 2001, VBA hired about 2,000 new examiners (see figure 

1). According to VBA officials, this was the first time VBA had the 

authority to hire significant numbers of examiners. These examiners 

were hired in anticipation of a large number of future retirements. For 

example, in 2000, VBA was expecting the retirement of 1,100 experienced 

examiners in the next 5 years. In addition, the hiring of these new 

examiners coincided with a growth in the backlog of claims awaiting 

decisions. Between 1998 and 2001, the backlog increased by 74 percent 

from about 241,000 to about 420,000. VBA has since implemented an 

initiative to reduce this backlog.[Footnote 4]



Figure 1: Figure 1. Examiners Hired by VBA, Fiscal Years 1998-2002:



[See PDF for image]



[End of figure]





According to VBA, it takes 2 to 3 years for a newly hired examiner to 

become fully productive. After being hired, new examiners receive a 

combination of formal training in a central location and on-the-job 

training in one of VBAï¿½s regional offices. Once on the job, these 

workers perform a variety of critical tasks, including compiling 

medical evidence, assessing the extent of the disability, determining 

the level of benefit, handling payment, and considering appeals.



Workforce planning is a key component to maintaining a workforce that 

can carry out the tasks critical to an agencyï¿½s mission. Strategic 

workforce planning focuses on developing and implementing long-term 

strategies--clearly linked to an agencyï¿½s mission and programmatic 

goals--for acquiring, developing, and retaining employees. Collecting 

data on attrition rates and the reasons for attrition are one part of 

conducting workforce planning. Other types of data that can be used in 

workforce planning include size and composition of the workforce, 

skills inventory, projected retirement rates and eligibility, and 

feedback from exit interviews.[Footnote 5] This data can be analyzed to 

identify gaps between an agencyï¿½s current and future workforce needs, 

which can in turn become the basis for developing strategies to build a 

workforce that accommodates future needs.



Attrition At VBA Is Higher For Newly Hired Examiners Than For The 

Agency Overall:



In fiscal year 2000, the attrition rate for new examiners at VBA was 

about 15 percent, more than twice as high as the 6 percent rate for all 

employees who left that year. About 15 percent of the new examiners 

hired in fiscal year 2000 left the agency within 1 year of being hired. 

VBA calculates attrition by counting employees who leave the agency and 

comparing that number to either total employees or a sub-group of total 

employees. The methods VBA uses to calculate attrition are consistent 

with those used by OPM and other federal agencies.



Attrition for New Employees at VBA Is More Than Twice as High as the 

Agencyï¿½s Overall Rate of About Six Percent:



Attrition rates for new VBA examiners were generally higher than those 

for all VBA examiners and other employees. As shown in table 1, in 

fiscal years 2000 and 2001, overall attrition rates for VBA examiners 

and other VBA employees ranged from about 4 percent to about 6 percent. 

However, among all new examiners hired in fiscal year 2000, about 15 

percent left the agency within 12 months, as shown in figure 2. These 

attrition rates reflect all types of attrition--including resignation, 

retirement, and termination.[Footnote 6] However, for new hires, 

attrition consists predominantly of resignations.



Table 1: Overall Attrition Rates for VBA Examiners, Other VBA, Other 

Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), and Other Federal Employees, 

Fiscal Years 2000-2001:



Fiscal year: 2000; VBA: Examiners: 4.6; VBA: All other white-collar 

employees: 6.9; VBA: Agencywide: 6.0; All other VA: 8.2; All other 

federal government: 7.4.



Fiscal year: 2001; VBA: Examiners: 6.0; VBA: All other white-collar 

employees: 6.6; VBA: Agencywide: 6.4; All other VA: 7.8; All other 

federal government: 7.0.



Source: OPMï¿½s Central Personnel Data File.



Note: GAO performed these calculations by dividing separations by an 

average of the total workforce on board at the beginning and end of 

each year. The averages could only be calculated for the two years 

shown.



[End of table]



Figure 2: Percentage of Examiners Who Left VBA within 2 Years of Their 

Hiring Date, Fiscal Years 1998-2000:



[See PDF for image]



Note: Data for fiscal year 2000 do not reflect a full 24-month time 

period. A comparable analysis could not be done for fiscal year 2001 

because comparable data were not available to reflect a full 24-month 

time period.



[End of figure]



According to human capital experts, in general, new employees tend to 

leave at higher rates than all other employees. This has been the 

experience for federal agencies historically and, according to our 

analysis of OPMï¿½s data, is generally the case governmentwide. Attrition 

rates for all federal employees, both new hires and senior staff, were 

about 7 percent in fiscal year 2000. [Footnote 7] However, for all new 

federal employees--those hired in fiscal year 1998, 1999, and 2000--as 

many as 17 percent left within 12 months of being hired. 7:



VBA calculations show that attrition for newly hired examiners is 

particularly high or particularly low in certain locations. [Footnote 

8] VBA officials acknowledge that, in certain regional offices, 

attrition has been high for newly hired examiners. For example, VBA 

found attrition rates of 38 percent to 49 percent for new examiners 

hired over a 3-year period at four regional offices--Baltimore (38 

percent), Chicago (39 percent), Newark (41 percent), New York (49 

percent). By contrast, some offices--such as Phoenix, Arizona; 

Louisville, Kentucky; Huntington, West Virginia; and Wichita, Kansas--

experienced no attrition among new examiners hired during this period.



VBA Uses Accepted Methods to Calculate Attrition:



The two basic methods VBA uses to calculate attrition are consistent 

with methods used by OPM and other federal agencies. Both methods, the 

ï¿½annual calculationï¿½ and the ï¿½cohort calculation,ï¿½ compare employees 

who leave the agency to either total employees or a sub-group of total 

employees. They provide different ways of looking at attrition trends. 

The annual calculation indicates broad attrition patterns from year to 

year. In contrast, the cohort calculation tracks attrition over a 

period of time for a specific group, and the timeframe and group can 

vary to suit the needs of the analysis. Using this method, VBA reported 

attrition rates similar to those found by GAO. The following are the 

two methods VBA uses:



* Annual calculation. This method calculates attrition by dividing all 

employees who left in a given year by an average of employees working 

at the agency at the beginning of the year and at the end of the year.



* Cohort calculation. This method calculates attrition by tracking a 

specified group or ï¿½cohortï¿½ of employees. The cohort can be defined as 

all those hired (new hires only) during a specific timeframe. These new 

hires are tracked for selected intervals (3 months, 6 months, etc.). 

This method can be adapted by defining the cohort differently (for 

example, to track attrition among a subgroup of new hires) and by using 

different timeframes for the tracking (e.g., 12 months, 18 months, 

etc.). This calculation differs from the annual calculation in that it 

does not take an average of the total workforce. VBA used this method 

to determine the attrition rate of certain newly hired examiners for a 

presentation in 2001 and for additional, more comprehensive 

calculations in 2002. VBA plans to use this method to calculate 

attrition rate for new examiners at least annually starting in 2003.



According to OPM officials, the annual method is a generally accepted 

method used to calculate attrition by federal agencies. OPM officials 

also recognized the value of the cohort method for calculations that 

require specific time frames or groups of employees, and added that 

tracking the attrition of new employees is an important practice. OPM 

does not mandate the use of a particular method for the calculation of 

attrition, but officials stated that any method used should be clearly 

explained.



VBA Lacks Adequate Data On Reasons Employees Leave And Analysis Of 

Staff Attrition:



While VBA has descriptive data on how employees separate from the 

agency (whether through resignation, termination, retirement, or 

transfer), it does not have adequate analytic data on the reasons why 

employees, particularly new employees, leave the agency. VBA collects 

some data on the reasons for attrition in exit interviews. However, 

these data are not systematically collected in a consistent manner and 

not compiled or analyzed. Furthermore, VBA has not performed the types 

of analysis on its data that would help the agency determine whether it 

can reduce its attrition rate. VBA is taking steps to ensure that 

attrition data will be available to guide its workforce planning.



VBA Collects Some Data on Types of Separations, but Data on Reasons Are 

Limited:



While VBA systematically collects descriptive data on how employees 

leave the agency, the data on the reasons employees leave is not 

systematically collected or analyzed. As at other federal agencies, 

when employees leave VBA, a standard federal ï¿½Form 52ï¿½ is filled 

out.[Footnote 9] This form records whether the employee is leaving due 

to a resignation, termination, retirement, or transfer. Because this 

information appears on the form in discrete fields, VBA human resources 

staff can easily enter it into the agencyï¿½s computer system to 

aggregate information on the types of separations.



The Form 52 also includes a blank space for narrative comments on the 

reasons for leaving. This space is primarily intended to be used in the 

case of resignation and its use is optional on the part of the 

employee. However, according to VBA officials, this area is frequently 

left blank. When this area is filled out, it is up to a human resources 

employee to decide how to label an employeeï¿½s reason for leaving in the 

computer system. Several ï¿½quit codesï¿½ exist to help in this labeling 

process. For example, reasons for leaving can be coded as relating to 

pay and benefits, supervisory relationship, opportunity for 

advancement, or personal reasons, including family responsibilities, 

illness, or household relocation. All forms are sent to one of four 

human resource centers to be entered into the agencyï¿½s computer system. 

Human resources employees in these centers are instructed to code the 

reasons for leaving to the best of their ability. However, these staff 

members cannot clarify reasons when the information is blank or 

ambiguous because they do not have access to either the separated 

employee or the regional human resources staff who actually processed 

the employeeï¿½s separation. Therefore, VBA officials do not consider the 

Form 52 to be a complete or reliable source of information on the 

reasons employees resign from VBA.



While VBA conducts exit interviews to collect information on the 

reasons employees resign, it does not have a standard process for these 

interviews, nor are they conducted consistently for all separating 

employees, according to VBA officials. Exit interviews with separating 

employees are conducted at regional offices. However, no standard 

process exists for such interviews, according to the results of an 

internal VA assessment. VBA officials state that the downsizing of 

human resources staff in regional offices is at least partly 

responsible for the inconsistency with which exit interviews are 

conducted. In addition, the data from the interviews that are conducted 

are not forwarded to national headquarters to be aggregated and 

analyzed. Despite VBAï¿½s inconsistent use of exit interviews, VA policy 

recognizes the importance of exit interviews for determining the 

reasons an employee leaves.



Some offices and staff members within VBA have made special efforts to 

compile or collect information on the reasons examiners leave the 

agency by producing special studies or reports. These include the 

following:



* High-Performing Young Promotable Employees (HYPE). In September 2002, 

a group of employees, representing six regional offices, prepared a 

report based on 72 exit interviews conducted at seven regional offices. 

The exit interviews had been conducted over 3 fiscal years: 1999, 2000, 

and 2001.



* Loss of New Hires in Veterans Service Centers. At the request of the 

head of VBA, the newly organized Office of Performance Analysis and 

Integrity (OPAI) issued a report in September 2002 that examined new 

hire attrition rates for regional offices individually. The report also 

looked at reasons for leaving, based on interviews with the directors 

of two regional offices.



* Review of attrition data at certain regional offices. At least two 

regional offices have investigated the reasons for attrition on their 

own initiative. For example, in October 2002, senior management at the 

Newark regional office compiled information on the attrition of 

examiners over a 3-year period and the reasons given for why these 

examiners left. This study was prompted by concern about high attrition 

rates at the Newark office. Portland did a similar review in September 

2001.



These special efforts had several common findings. For example, three 

reported that inadequate opportunity for training was one of the 

reasons examiners left VBA. Two reported workload as a reason for 

leaving. Two also identified instances in which examiners resigned as a 

result of pending termination for poor performance or conduct. Reports 

associated with these efforts touched on other reasons for resignation, 

including inadequate opportunity for full utilization of skills, 

insufficient pay, and various personal reasons.



The other source of information on reasons examiners left VBA was 

anecdotal information provided by regional and other senior human 

resources officials. For example, senior human resources officials 

stated that reasons for leaving included factors such as inadequate 

work space and computer equipment as well as insufficient pay. In 

addition, these officials reported that some newly hired examiners left 

when they discovered that the job tasks were not what they had 

expected. According to a VBA official, certain regional offices are 

aware of the types of employers with whom they are competing. For 

example, some regional offices report losing employees to a range of 

employers in both the public sector, including other federal agencies 

(such as SSA and DOL), and the private sector, including firms in the 

information technology sector.



VBA has begun to address some of the findings from these special 

studies or reports. For example, the HYPE report included several 

recommendations. The report recommended that the agency develop a 

comprehensive strategic plan that addresses attrition and retention; 

the report also recommended that the agency improve and centralize its 

exit interview process. Both of these recommendations are in the 

process of being implemented at VBA. In addition, according to a VBA 

official, certain regional offices have taken steps to offer job 

candidates opportunities to observe the work place before being hired. 

This effort was undertaken partly in response to information about 

employeesï¿½ expectations of their duties and work environment.



VBA Has Not Fully Analyzed Data to Determine Whether Attrition Can Be 

Reduced:



VBA has not performed the types of analysis on its data that would help 

the agency determine whether it could reduce attrition or identify the 

extent to which an attrition problem may exist. To better understand 

its own attrition, an agency can take advantage of a range of analyses. 

These include the following:



* Comparisons. To understand the degree to which its attrition is a 

problem, an agency can compare its own attrition to the attrition of 

other federal agencies, especially to the attrition of agencies with 

employees who do similar work. While one of VBAï¿½s special reports did 

some broad comparisons of VBAï¿½s attrition to the attrition at other 

federal agencies, VBA has not compared, as we have done, the attrition 

of newly hired examiners to the attrition of employees in other parts 

of the federal government with comparable job series.



* Attrition modeling. To understand the degree to which attrition is a 

problem, an agency can estimate the attrition rates it expects in the 

future, providing a baseline against which to measure the actual 

attrition it experiences.[Footnote 10] This allows officials to 

determine if attrition rates are higher or lower than expected. While 

VBA has projected retirement rates for planning purposes, according to 

VBA officials, there was no formal or informal process to estimate the 

expected attrition rates of the examiners who joined the agency since 

1998. In 2002, VA projected future attrition trends for examiners in a 

restructuring plan submitted to the Office of Management and Budget, 

and officials expect to compare these projections to actual attrition 

rates for examiners in the future.



* Cost analysis. To understand the degree to which attrition is a 

problem, an agency can estimate the cost of recruiting and training new 

employees who leave and their replacements. While VBAï¿½s human resources 

office conducted a partial estimate of attrition costs in 2001, this 

estimate did not include all associated costs (including one of the 

most important and potentially expensive, the investment lost when a 

trained employee leaves).



* Labor market analysis. To understand the degree to which its 

attrition is a problem, an agency can evaluate labor market conditions 

in locations where it operates. Such an evaluation can provide context 

for understanding if an attrition rate is higher than might be expected 

in those locations. Using general labor market data, VBA has identified 

several locations where it faces significant competition from other 

employers, both public and private. This information could be used to 

better understand its attrition rate in those locations in the future. 

However, this information is not based on the actual employment plans 

of separating employees, and VBA does not routinely collect or document 

this information. According to a VBA official, collecting data on where 

VBAï¿½s separating employees find employment after VBA would be useful 

for developing a more accurate understanding of the employers with whom 

VBA is competing.



VBA is taking steps to ensure that attrition data will be available to 

guide workforce planning. First, VBA intends to develop a workforce 

plan, following a workforce policy approved by VA in January 

2003.[Footnote 11] In a related document, VA stated its expectation 

that, in the current economy, attrition among examiners may stabilize. 

Continued monitoring of attrition rates and improved data on reasons 

for attrition would allow VBA to test that assumption. Second, VBA has 

recently designated an official to head strategic planning efforts. 

While these efforts will include human capital issues, and according to 

VBA officials, will address attrition, VBAï¿½s human resources office is 

expected to assume primary responsibility for human capital issues and 

to coordinate with the strategic planning office. Obtaining better 

attrition data and conducting adequate analysis of attrition and the 

reasons for attrition could help VBA target future recruitment efforts 

and minimize attrition. For example, VAï¿½s new automated exit survey, 

which VA officials expect to be available in spring 2003, has the 

potential to aid VBA in its attrition data gathering and analysis. 

Separating employees will be able to answer a series of questions about 

the reasons they decided to leave the agency. The survey will provide 

confidentiality for the employee, potentially allowing for more 

accurate responses. It will also facilitate electronic analysis that 

could be broken down by type of job and region.



Concluding Observations:



VBAï¿½s ability to effectively serve veterans hinges on maintaining a 

sufficient workforce through effective workforce planning. While 

attrition data are just one part of workforce planning, the data are 

important because they can be used to anticipate the number of 

employees and the types of skills that need to be replaced. The agency 

currently lacks useful information on the reasons new employees leave 

and adequate analysis of its staff attrition. In addition, some offices 

experience much higher or lower rates. Continuing monitoring of 

attrition data by region may point to regions that need special 

attention. Sustained attention to both the reasons for attrition and 

attrition rates, particularly for new employees, is needed so VBA can 

conduct effective workforce planning. Understanding the reasons for 

attrition could help the agency minimize the investment in training 

lost when a new employee leaves. Furthermore, the new workforce 

planning efforts under way at VBA offer an opportunity to improve data 

collection on the reasons for attrition and attrition rates.



GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments:



For future contacts regarding this statement, please call Cynthia A. 

Bascetta at (202) 512-7101. Others who made key contributions to this 

statement are Irene Chu, Ronald Ito, Grant Mallie, Christopher 

Morehouse, Corinna Nicolaou, and Gregory Wilmoth.



[End of section]



Related GAO Products:



General Human Capital Reports:



Human Capital: Effective Use of Flexibilities Can Assist Agencies in 

Managing Their Workforces. GAO-03-2. Washington, D.C.: December 6, 

2002.



Air Traffic Control: FAA Needs to Better Prepare for Impending Wave of 

Controller Attrition. GAO-02-591. Washington, D.C.: June 14, 2002.



A Model of Strategic Human Capital Management, Exposure Draft. GAO-02-

373SP. Washington, D.C.: March 15, 2002.



Federal Employee Retirements: Expected Increase Over the Next 5 Years 

Illustrates Need for Workforce Planning. GAO-01-509. Washington, D.C.: 

April 27, 2001.



Human Capital: A Self-Assessment Checklist for Agency Leaders. GAO/OCG-

00-14G. Washington, D.C.: September 2000.



Department of Veterans Affairs:



Major Management Challenges and Program Risks: Department of Veterans 

Affairs. GAO-03-110. Washington, D.C.: January 2003.



High-Risk Series: An Update. GAO-03-119. Washington, D.C.: January 

2003.



Veterans Benefits Administration:



Veteransï¿½ Benefits: Claims Processing Timeliness Performance Measures 

Could Be Improved. GAO-03-282. Washington, D.C.: December 19, 2002.



Veteransï¿½ Benefits: Despite Recent Improvements, Meeting Claims 

Processing Goals Will Be Challenging. GAO-02-645T. Washington, D.C.: 

April 26, 2002.



Veteransï¿½ Benefits: Training for Claims Processors Needs Evaluation. 

GAO-01-601. Washington, D.C.: May 31, 2001.



Veterans Benefits Administration: Problems and Challenges Facing 

Disability Claims Processing. GAO/T-HEHS/AIMD-00-146. Washington, 

D.C.: May 18, 2000.



FOOTNOTES



[1] According to VBA, these positions carry the title of Veterans 

Service Representative (VSR). VSRs and similar positions, such as 

rating specialists, are classified as job series 996, veterans claims 

examiner. For our analysis, GAO focused on the 996 job series. For the 

purpose of this statement for the record, we are referring to jobs in 

this series as examiners.



[2] According to a VBA official, in some cases, they can also start at 

GS-9, with a starting salary in 2003 of about $35,500.



[3] VBA is planning to extend competitive promotion potential for this 

job series to GS-11.



[4] VBA began to implement this initiative, called Claims Process 

Improvement, at all its regional offices in July 2002. For more 

information, see Veteransï¿½ Benefits: Claims Processing Timeliness 

Performance Measures Could Be Improved, GAO-03-282 (Washington, D.C.: 

December 19, 2002).



[5] For more information, see A Model of Strategic Human Capital 

Management, Exposure Draft, GAO-02-373SP (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 15, 

2002).



[6] We did not include in our analysis of new hire attrition staff who 

left the examiner position but remained in VBA, nor did we include 

transfers within VA.



[7] These attrition rates represent employees at all federal agencies 

except VA.



[8] According to VBA officials, attrition rates could also be 

calculated for certain subgroups of newly hired examiners such as 

veterans or minorities. VBA has not calculated attrition rates for 

these subgroups. 



[9] The Form 52, Request for Personnel Action, is used by all federal 

agencies, including VBA.



[10] For more information on attrition modeling, see Air Traffic 

Control: FAA Needs to Better Prepare for Impending Wave of Controller 

Attrition, GAO-02-591 (Washington, D.C.: June 14, 2002). For additional 

information on how attrition data can be used by federal agencies, see 

Human Capital: A Self-Assessment for Agency Leaders, GAO/OCG-00-14G 

(Washington, D.C.: Sept. 2000) and, for the importance of valid and 

reliable data in assessing an agencyï¿½s workforce requirements, see A 

Model of Strategic Human Capital Management, Exposure Draft, 

GAO-02-373SP (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 15, 2002). 



[11] The new VA policy requires workforce plans from all three of VAï¿½s 

administrations--VBA, the Veterans Health Administration, and the 

National Cemetery Administration. VA first identified the need for a 

workforce policy following a workforce analysis required of all 

executive branch agencies by the Office of Management and Budget in May 

2001.