United Nations: Additional Efforts Needed to Increase U.S.	 
Employment at U.N. Agencies (06-SEP-06, GAO-06-988).		 
                                                                 
The U.S. Congress continues to be concerned about the		 
underrepresentation of U.S. professionals in some UN		 
organizations and that insufficient progress has been made to	 
improve U.S. representation. In 2001, GAO reported that several  
UN agencies fell short of their targets for U.S. representation  
and had not developed strategies to employ more Americans. This  
report reviews (1) U.S. representation status and employment	 
trends at five UN agencies, (2) factors affecting these agencies'
ability to meet employment targets, and (3) the U.S. Department  
of State's (State) efforts to improve U.S. representation and	 
additional steps that can be taken. We reviewed five UN agencies 
that together comprise about 50 percent of total UN		 
organizations' professional staff.				 
-------------------------Indexing Terms------------------------- 
REPORTNUM:   GAO-06-988 					        
    ACCNO:   A60331						        
  TITLE:     United Nations: Additional Efforts Needed to Increase    
U.S. Employment at U.N. Agencies				 
     DATE:   09/06/2006 
  SUBJECT:   Employees						 
	     Employment 					 
	     Hiring policies					 
	     International organizations			 
	     Personnel management				 
	     Personnel recruiting				 

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO Product.                                                 **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
******************************************************************
GAO-06-988

     

     * Results in Brief
     * Background
     * U.S. Is Underrepresented in Three of Five UN Agencies and In
          * U.S. Citizens Are Underrepresented Relative to Targets at Th
          * Increased Hiring of Americans Needed to Meet Several UN Agen
     * While Common Barriers to Increasing U.S. Representation Exis
          * Common Barriers Adversely Affect U.S. Representation at Seve
          * UN Secretariat: Lower Probability of Employment for Young Pr
               * Exam Applicants Less Likely to Be Hired than Associate Exper
               * Lack of Career Development Opportunities Decreases Retention
          * IAEA: Decreasing Pool of American Candidates Limits U.S. Rep
               * Pool of Qualified American Applicants Decreasing
               * Rotation Makes IAEA Employment Less Attractive
          * UNESCO: Long U.S. Absence Contributed to Low Representation
               * Nineteen-Year Absence Decreased the Number of Americans Empl
               * Hiring Freeze Limits Opportunities
          * UNHCR: Difficult Working Conditions and Rigid Human Resource
               * Required Mobility through Hardship Posts Causes Attrition
               * Inflexible Human Resource System Limits Opportunities for Ex
          * UNDP: While Several Common Factors Are the Leading Barriers,
     * State Has Increased Efforts to Promote U.S. Representation,
          * State Recruiting Efforts Focus on Senior Positions, and U.S.
          * State Has Increased Activities to Support Greater U.S. Repre
               * State Increased Resources for Disseminating UN Vacancy Infor
               * U.S. Missions Share U.S. Representation Reports and Discuss
               * State Increased Coordination with U.S. Agencies
               * U.S. Entry-level Representation Declined or Displayed No Tre
          * Additional Steps to Target Professional Positions Exist
               * Roster of Qualified Americans Not Maintained
               * Recruiting and Outreach Efforts Do Not Reach Some Potential
               * State, U.S. Mission, and Agency Web Sites Have Limited Infor
               * U.S. Government Has Not Assessed the Costs and Benefits of S
     * Conclusions
     * Recommendations for Executive Action
     * Agency Comments and Our Evaluation
          * Methodology for Reviewing U.S. Representation Status and Emp
          * Calculating U.S. Representation Levels and Trends
          * Calculating Hiring Projections
          * Methodology for Reviewing Factors Affecting UN Organizations
          * Methodology for Reviewing the U.S. State Department's Curren
          * Percentage of U.S. Citizens in Geographic and Nongeographic
          * Americans Held Geographic and Nongeographic Policy-making an
     * GAO Contact
     * Staff Acknowledgments
     * GAO's Mission
     * Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony
          * Order by Mail or Phone
     * To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs
     * Congressional Relations
     * Public Affairs

Report to Congressional Requesters

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO

September 2006

UNITED NATIONS

Additional Efforts Needed to Increase U.S. Employment at UN Agencies

United Nations United Nations United Nations United Nations ed Nations
United Nations United Nations United Nations United Nations United Nations
United Nations United Nations United Nations United Nations United Nations
United Nations United Nations United Nations United Nations United Nations
United Nations United Nations United Nations United Nations United Nations
United Nations United Nations United Nations United Nations United Nations
United Nations United Nations United Nations United Nations United Nations
United Nations United Nations United Nations United Nations United Nations
United Nations United Nations United Nations United Nations United Nations
United Nations United Nations United Nations United Nations United Nations
United Nations United Nations United Nations United Nations United Nations
United Nations United Nations United Nations United Nations United Nations
United Nations United Nations United Nations

GAO-06-988

Contents

Letter 1

Results in Brief 3
Background 5
U.S. Is Underrepresented in Three of Five UN Agencies and Increased Hiring
of Americans Is Necessary to Meet Employment Targets 8
While Common Barriers to Increasing U.S. Representation Exist, UN Agencies
Also Face Distinct Employment Challenges 12
State Has Increased Efforts to Promote U.S. Representation, but Additional
Options Exist to Target Professional Positions 25
Conclusions 37
Recommendations for Executive Action 38
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 38
Appendix I Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 41
Appendix II Distribution of U.S. Citizens Employed in Professional
Positions at Five UN Agencies 47
Appendix III Trends of U.S. Citizens Employed in Professional Positions at
Five UN Agencies 51
Appendix IV Definitions of Promotion, Internal Hires, and External Hires
55
Appendix V Comments from the Department of State 56
Appendix VI GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 59

Tables

Table 1: U.S. Representation at Five UN Agencies, 2005 8
Table 2: Trends in U.S. Representation at Five UN Agencies (covering
geographic positions at the Secretariat, IAEA, and UNESCO and regular
positions at UNHCR and UNDP) 9
Table 3: Estimated Numbers of U.S. Citizens to Be Hired to Meet Geographic
and Other Targets for 2006 to 2010 11
Table 4: Average Number of JPOs or Associate Experts Sponsored by Leading
Contributors to These Programs, 2001-2005 35
Table 5: Cost and Retention Rate of JPOs and Associate Experts 36
Table 6: Composition of Professional Positions at the Three UN Agencies
with Geographic Positions, 2005 47
Table 7: Percentages of Staff in Professional Positions at the Three UN
Agencies with Geographic Positions, 2005 48
Table 8: Composition of Professional Positions at the Two UN Agencies
without Geographic Positions, 2005 48
Table 9: Percentages of Staff in Professional Positions at the Two UN
Agencies without Geographic Positions, 2005 49
Table 10: Policy-making and Senior-level Positions at Three UN Agencies,
2005 50
Table 11: Definitions of Promotion, Internal Hires, and External Hires at
Five UN Agencies Provided for the Purposes of This Report 55

Figures

Figure 1: Number of Vacancies Filled by Promotions, Internal Candidates,
and External Candidates, 2004 and 2005 Data Combined 14
Figure 2: UN Secretariat National Competitive Recruitment Exam: Four-Year
Average of All Nationalities and for Americans for Each Stage of the Exam
(2001-2004) 18
Figure 3: U.S. Representation in Senior and Policy-making Positions at
Five UN Agencies as a Percentage of Agency Professional Senior and
Policy-making Positions, 2001-2005 26
Figure 4: U.S. Representation in Entry-level Professional Positions as a
Percentage of Agency Entry-level Positions at Five UN Agencies, 2001-2005
31
Figure 5: Trends of U.S. Citizen Representation, by Grade, in Professional
Positions in Five UN Agencies 52

Abbreviations

ALD assignment of limited duration

APSIA Association of Professional Schools of International Affairs

CFE cost free expert

DPKO United Nations Department of Peacekeeping Operations

FTA fixed-term temporary assistance

FTE fixed-term extra-budgetary

IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency

IO Department of State Bureau of International Organization Affairs

JPO Junior Professional Officer

MST monthly short term

NCRE National Competitive Recruitment Exam

PRM Department of State Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration

UNDP United Nations Development Program

UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization

UNHCR Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without further permission from GAO. However, because this
work may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this material
separately.

United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548

September 6, 2006 September 6, 2006

Congressional Requesters: Congressional Requesters:

The U.S. Congress continues to be concerned about the underrepresentation
of American professionals employed by some United Nations (UN)
organizations and that insufficient progress has been made to improve U.S.
representation. In 2001, we reported1 that several UN organizations
continued to fall short of their own targets for American representation2
and had not developed action plans or strategies for achieving equitable
U.S. representation within a specified time frame. In addition, the U.S.
Department of State (State) has annually reported to Congress that
Americans have been underrepresented at a number of UN organizations.3 The
equitable representation of Americans at UN organizations is a priority to
Congress in part because the United States is the largest financial
contributor to most of these organizations. Moreover, according to State,
Americans bring desirable skills, values, and experience that can have a
significant impact on UN organizations' operational effectiveness. The
U.S. Congress continues to be concerned about the underrepresentation of
American professionals employed by some United Nations (UN) organizations
and that insufficient progress has been made to improve U.S.
representation. In 2001, we reported1 that several UN organizations
continued to fall short of their own targets for American representation2
and had not developed action plans or strategies for achieving equitable
U.S. representation within a specified time frame. In addition, the U.S.
Department of State (State) has annually reported to Congress that
Americans have been underrepresented at a number of UN organizations.3 The
equitable representation of Americans at UN organizations is a priority to
Congress in part because the United States is the largest financial
contributor to most of these organizations. Moreover, according to State,
Americans bring desirable skills, values, and experience that can have a
significant impact on UN organizations' operational effectiveness.

To address these concerns, this report reviews (1) U.S. representation
status and employment trends at five UN organizations, (2) factors
affecting these organizations' ability to meet U.S. representation
targets, and (3) State's current efforts to improve U.S. representation
and additional steps that can be taken. To address these concerns, this
report reviews (1) U.S. representation status and employment trends at
five UN organizations, (2) factors affecting these organizations' ability
to meet U.S. representation targets, and (3) State's current efforts to
improve U.S. representation and additional steps that can be taken.

To determine the United States' representation status, identify the trends
in the number of professional positions held by U. S. citizens, and
calculate hiring projections, we analyzed employment data for 2001 through
2005 that we obtained from five UN organizations: the United To determine
the United States' representation status, identify the trends in the
number of professional positions held by U. S. citizens, and calculate
hiring projections, we analyzed employment data for 2001 through 2005 that
we obtained from five UN organizations: the United Nations Secretariat4
and the United Nations Development Program5 (UNDP) in New York; the
International Atomic Energy Agency6 (IAEA) in Vienna; the United Nations
Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization7 (UNESCO) in Paris; and
the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees8 (UNHCR)
in Geneva. Technically, the IAEA is an independent international
organization that has a relationship agreement with the UN. For the
purposes of this report, we refer to the IAEA as a UN agency, or
organization. Throughout this report, UNDP data includes three UNDP
suborganizations: UN Development Fund for Women, UN Volunteers, and UN
Capital Development Fund. Two organizations have formal geographic
targets: the Secretariat and UNESCO. The remaining three UN organizations
do not. IAEA informally calculates a member state to be underrepresented
if its geographic representation is less than half of its percent
contribution to the budget. Using this method, we calculated a U.S.
target. UNHCR and the United States have agreed to an informal target.
UNDP has no targets. We determined the data were sufficiently reliable for
the purposes of this review. We also met with human resources officials
from these five organizations to discuss various aspects of the data. We
selected these agencies because they represent a range of UN agencies with
different funding mechanisms and methods for calculating geographic
representation. These five agencies together comprise approximately 50
percent of total UN organizations' professional staff.9 To assess factors
affecting these organizations' ability to meet the targets, we reviewed UN
agency documents and interviewed UN human resources officials, over 100
Americans employed at the five UN agencies, and U.S. officials. To assess
the strategies used by State to improve U.S. representation, we reviewed
State documents and interviewed State officials and representatives of
U.S. agencies that participated in inter agency task force meetings on UN
employment or that receive vacancy announcements. We conducted our work
from July 2005 through July 2006 in accordance with generally accepted
government auditing standards. Appendix I contains a more detailed
description of our scope and methodology.

1GAO, United Nations: Targeted Strategies Could Help Boost U.S.
Representation, GAO-01-839  (Washington, D.C.: July 27, 2001).

2The Secretariat and several UN organizations have quantitative formulas
that establish targets for equitable geographical representation for
designated professional and senior-level positions. Other agencies have
negotiated informal targets with the United States. Some agencies,
however, do not maintain any targets at all.

3In 1991, Congress enacted legislation requiring the Secretary of State to
report annually on whether UN organizations with geographic targets were
meeting their targets for Americans and whether these organizations were
making good faith efforts to hire more Americans.

4The United Nations was founded in 1945, and the UN Secretariat, headed by
the Secretary-General, carries out the day-to-day work of the
organization. According to the UN Charter, the four purposes of the
organization are to maintain international peace and security; develop
friendly relations among nations; cooperate in solving international
problems and in promoting respect for human rights; and be a center for
harmonizing the acts of nations.

5UNDP was formed in 1965 and is the UN's global development network. UNDP
works with countries to develop solutions to global and national
development challenges.

6IAEA was established in 1957, and works with its member states and other
partners to promote safe, secure, and peaceful nuclear technologies.
IAEA's mission focuses on safety and security, science and technology, and
safeguards and verification.

7UNESCO was founded in 1945 with the purpose of contributing to peace and
security by promoting nations' collaboration through education, science,
and culture to further respect for justice, the rule of law, and human
rights.

8UNHCR was established in 1950 with the mandate of leading and
coordinating international efforts to protect refugees and resolve refugee
problems. The organization's central purpose is to safeguard the rights
and well-being of refugees.

9As of December 31, 2004.

                                Results in Brief

The United States is underrepresented in three of the five UN agencies we
reviewed, and increased hiring of U.S. citizens is needed to meet
agreed-upon employment targets. Based on UN agencies' formal or informal
targets for equitable geographic representation, U.S. citizens are
underrepresented at IAEA, UNESCO, and UNHCR, and equitably represented at
the UN Secretariat, though close to the lower end of its target range.
UNDP has not established a target for U.S. representation, although U.S.
citizens fill about 11 percent of the agency's professional positions.
Given projected staff levels, retirements, and separations for 2006 to
2010, the Secretariat, IAEA, UNESCO, and UNHCR would need to hire more
Americans than they have hired in recent years to meet their minimum
targets for equitable U.S. representation in 2010.

While the UN agencies we reviewed face some common barriers to recruiting
and retaining professional staff, including Americans, they also face
distinct challenges. Most of these barriers and challenges are outside the
U.S. government's control. Six barriers common to UN agencies we reviewed
include nontransparent human resource practices; a limited number of
positions open to external candidates; lengthy hiring processes;
comparatively low or unclear compensation; required staff mobility and
rotation policies; and limited U.S. government support during Americans'
efforts to obtain, or be promoted at, a UN job. These barriers combine
with distinct agency-specific factors to impede recruitment and retention.
For example, candidates serving in professional positions funded by their
member governments are more likely to be hired by the Secretariat than
those who take the Secretariat's entry-level exam; however, the United
States has not funded such positions at the Secretariat. IAEA has
difficulty attracting U.S. employees because the pool of American nuclear
specialists is decreasing. At UNESCO, U.S. representation is low, in part,
because the United States was not a member for 19 years. When the United
States withdrew its membership in 1984, Americans comprised 9.6 percent of
UNESCO's professional staff; when it rejoined in 2003, Americans comprised
only 2.9 percent. UNHCR has difficulty retaining staff, particularly at
the mid-career level, because it has more hardship duty stations than any
other agency. Despite the agency's efforts to increase the hiring of
Americans, attrition keeps overall U.S. representation below the agreed-to
target. Finally, while common barriers are the leading factors affecting
U.S. representation at UNDP, the agency is also seeking to increase the
hiring of senior staff from southern (mostly developing) countries, which
could limit employment opportunities for U.S. citizens.

Since 2001 the Department of State has increased its efforts to support
the goal of achieving equitable U.S. representation at UN organizations,
and additional options exist to target professional positions. State has
targeted efforts to recruit American candidates for senior and
policymaking UN positions and, although it is difficult to directly link
State's efforts to UN hiring decisions, U.S. representation in senior and
policymaking positions has either improved or did not reflect a trend in
each of the five UN agencies we reviewed. State also has undertaken
several efforts to improve overall U.S. representation, including adding
staff to its UN employment office and increasing coordination with other
U.S. agencies that work with UN organizations. For positions below the
senior level, State focuses on "getting the word out" by, for example,
disseminating information on UN vacancies through its Web site, attending
career fairs and conferences, and other means. Despite these efforts, U.S.
representation in entry-level positions has declined or did not display a
trend in four of the five UN agencies we reviewed. Additional steps to
target potential pools of candidates for professional positions include:
maintaining a roster of qualified American candidates; expanding marketing
and outreach activities; increasing UN employment information on U.S.
agency Web sites; and conducting an assessment of the costs and benefits
of sponsoring Junior Professional Officers (JPO), who are entry-level
employees that are financially supported by their home government.

To improve U.S. efforts to increase the employment of Americans at UN
agencies, we are making several recommendations. We recommend that the
Secretary of State (1) provide more consistent and comprehensive
information about UN employment on the State and U.S. mission Web sites
and work with U.S. agencies to expand the UN employment information on
their Web sites; (2) expand targeted recruiting and outreach to more
strategically reach populations of Americans that may be qualified for and
interested in entry- and mid-level UN positions; and (3) conduct an
evaluation of the costs, benefits, and trade-offs of maintaining a roster
of qualified candidates for professional and senior positions determined
to be a high priority for U.S. interests and an evaluation of funding
JPOs, or other gratis personnel, where Americans are underrepresented or
could become underrepresented.

In commenting on a draft of this report, State concurred with and agreed
to implement all of our recommendations. We received technical comments
from State, IAEA, UNESCO, UNHCR, and UNDP, which we have incorporated as
appropriate.

                                   Background

The United Nations is comprised of six principal bodies: the General
Assembly, Security Council, Economic and Social Council, Trusteeship
Council, International Court of Justice, and the Secretariat. The United
Nations system also encompasses funds and programs, such as UNDP, and
specialized agencies, such as UNESCO. These funds, programs, and
specialized agencies have their own governing bodies and budgets, but
follow the guidelines of the UN charter. Article 101 of the UN Charter
calls for staff to be recruited on the basis of "the highest standards of
efficiency, competence, and integrity" as well as from "as wide a
geographical basis as possible." Each UN agency also has its own personnel
policies, procedures, and staff rules. The Secretariat and several
specialized agencies have quantitative formulas that establish targets for
equitable geographical representation in designated professional
positions. Other agencies have negotiated informal targets with the United
States, while some agencies do not have formal or informal targets.

Agencies with formal quantitative targets for equitable representation do
not apply these targets to all professional positions. Instead, these
organizations set aside positions that are subject to geographic
representation from among the professional and senior positions performing
core agency functions, funded from regular budget resources. Positions
that are exempted from being counted geographically include linguist and
peacekeeping positions, and those funded by extra-budgetary resources. In
addition, UN agencies employ staff in short-term positions that also are
not geographically counted. Nongeographic staff members include employees
tied to specific projects (L-staff), employees in assignments of limited
duration (ALD) contracted for 4 years or less, temporary employees
contracted for less than 1 year, and gratis personnel, such as JPOs, who
are funded by member states. In addition, these organizations utilize
various nonstaff positions, such as contractors and consultants.

Of the five agencies we reviewed, three-the Secretariat, IAEA, and
UNESCO-have designated positions subject to geographic distribution. The
Secretariat and UNESCO have established formulas to determine member
states' targets for equitable representation, which consider three
factors: membership status,10 financial contribution,11 and population
size.12 IAEA informally calculates a member state to be underrepresented
if its geographic representation is less than half of its percent
contribution to the budget. Using this method, we calculated a U.S.
target. UNHCR has not established a quantitative formula or positions
subject to geographic representation, but has agreed to an informal target
for equitable U.S. representation. UNDP generally follows the principle of
equitable geographic representation, but has not adopted formal or
informal targets.

The Department of State is the U.S. agency primarily responsible for
leading U.S. efforts toward achieving equitable U.S. representation in UN
organizations. In doing so, State cooperates with at least 17 federal
agencies that have interests in specific UN organizations. A 1970
executive order assigns the Secretary of State responsibility for leading
and coordinating the federal government's efforts to increase and improve
U.S. participation in international organizations through transfers and
details for federal employees.13 The order further calls for each agency
in the executive branch to cooperate "to the maximum extent feasible" to
promote details and transfers through measures such as (1) notifying
well-qualified agency employees of vacancies in international
organizations and (2) providing international organizations with detailed
assessments of the qualifications of employees being considered for
specific positions. In addition, under legislation enacted in 1991,14 the
Secretary of State is required to report to Congress on whether each
international organization with a geographic distribution formula is
making "good faith steps to increase the staffing of United States
citizens and has met its geographic distribution formula." State's Bureau
of International Organization Affairs is responsible for implementing
these requirements.15 While State is responsible for promoting and seeking
to increase U.S. representation in the UN, the UN entities themselves are
ultimately responsible for hiring their employees and achieving equitable
representation.

10Membership status refers to the right of each member state to a number
of positions. For example, in the UN Secretariat, a minimum of about 1 to
14 positions are assigned to each member state. This provision is
especially important for countries with a relatively small population and
small UN assessment, which could receive only one position if a minimum
number of positions were not set.

11Member state contributions are the common factor used by UN
organizations to determine targets or ranges because the level of
budgetary contribution is an inherent factor in a state's membership in
the organization.

12Population size is used to ensure that member states are represented in
keeping with their respective demographic profiles.

13Exec. Order No. 11,552, 35 Fed. Reg. 13,569 (Aug. 24, 1970).

1422 U.S.C. 276c-4.

We previously reviewed U.S. representation in UN organizations and found
that, between 1992 and 2001, Americans were not equitably represented in
the UN system, given the agencies' own targets.16 In addition, the UN
agencies lacked long-range workforce planning strategies to improve the
geographic distribution imbalance. We also reported that State's efforts
to improve U.S. representation in the UN system did not reflect its high
priority status, particularly relative to other member countries. We
recommended that the Secretary of State (1) develop a comprehensive
strategy that specifies performance goals and time frames for achieving
equitable representation of Americans in the UN System and include efforts
to foster interagency coordination, (2) work with human resources
directors of UN organizations to develop plans and strategies for
achieving equitable geographic representation within specified time
frames, and (3) provide copies of State's annual report to Congress on UN
progress to the heads of UN organizations for appropriate attention and
action. State has subsequently implemented these recommendations,
including adding a performance indicator on the UN's employment of
Americans to its performance and accountability documents.17 We also
recommended that State develop guidelines defining its goal of obtaining
an equitable share of senior-level and policy-making positions for U.S.
citizens and that it use these guidelines to assess whether the United
States is equitably represented in high-level positions in UN
organizations. State did not agree with this final recommendation and has
not implemented it.

15State also reports about UN organizations it deems to be of high
interest to the United States.

16 GAO-01-839 .

17State began reporting on this indicator in its Fiscal Year 2002
Performance and Accountability Report.

 U.S. Is Underrepresented in Three of Five UN Agencies and Increased Hiring of
               Americans Is Necessary to Meet Employment Targets

U.S. citizens are underrepresented at three of the five UN agencies we
reviewed: IAEA, UNESCO, and UNHCR. Given projected staff levels,
retirements, and separations for 2006-2010, these agencies need to hire
more Americans than they have in recent years to meet their minimum
targets for equitable U.S. representation in 2010.

U.S. Citizens Are Underrepresented Relative to Targets at Three UN Agencies

Relative to UN agencies' formal or informal targets for equitable
geographic representation, U.S. citizens are underrepresented at three of
the five agencies we reviewed-IAEA, UNESCO, and UNHCR. U.S. citizens are
equitably represented at the UN Secretariat, though at the lower end of
its target range, while the fifth agency-UNDP-has not established a target
for U.S. representation. U.S. citizens fill about 11 percent of UNDP's
professional positions. Table 1 provides information on U.S.
representation at the five UN agencies as of 2005.

Table 1: U.S. Representation at Five UN Agencies, 2005

Source: GAO analysis of Secretariat, IAEA, UNESCO, UNHCR, and UNDP data.

Note: Geographic targets are an average of 2004 and 2005 data. All other
percentages are based on 2005 data for all the agencies.

aUNHCR and UNDP do not have geographic positions; however, UNHCR has
agreed to an informal 13 percent target with the U.S. government. For
these agencies, we calculated the percentage of regular professional
positions filled by U.S. citizens, which includes staff under contracts of
longer fixed term (100-series contracts in UNHCR and 100- and 200-series
contracts in UNDP).

bFor the Secretariat, IAEA, and UNESCO, nongeographic positions include
regular professional positions not subject to geographic distribution,
temporary positions, JPOs, and consultants and contractors. UNESCO was
unable to provide nationality data for its 572 consultants and
contractors, which comprise nearly two thirds of UNESCO's nongeographic
staff; hence the U.S. percentage of nongeographic positions does not
reflect U.S. citizen employment in this category. For UNHCR and UNDP,
nongeographic positions are all other, nonregular professional staff,
which includes temporary staff (limited fixed term at UNHCR and
assignments of limited duration at UNDP), JPOs, and consultants and
contractors. Data provided by the agencies did not differentiate between
support and professional level positions for consultants and contractors.

Table 1 also shows that the percentage of U.S. citizens employed in
nongeographic positions (or nonregular positions in the case of UNHCR and
UNDP) is higher at IAEA, UNHCR, and UNDP and lower at the Secretariat and
UNESCO compared to the percentage of geographic (or regular) positions
held by U.S. citizens. The most notable difference is at the IAEA, where
the percentage of U.S. citizens employed in nongeographic positions is
considerably higher than the percentage employed in geographic positions
due to the high percentage of temporary,18 JPO, and consultant and
contractor positions held by Americans. (See app. II for details on the
composition of Americans in geographic and nongeographic positions.)

As shown in table 2, U.S. citizen representation in geographic positions
in "all grades" between 2001 and 2005 has been declining at UNHCR and
displays no clear trend in "all grades" at the other four UN agencies.

Table 2: Trends in U.S. Representation at Five UN Agencies (covering
geographic positions at the Secretariat, IAEA, and UNESCO and regular
positions at UNHCR and UNDP)

Source: GAO analysis of Secretariat, IAEA, UNESCO, UNHCR, and UNDP data.

18Temporary positions at IAEA include staff on the following contracts:
fixed-term temporary assistance (FTA), fixed-term extra-budgetary (FTE),
monthly short term (MST), and cost-free experts (CFE), the latter which
are financed by member state governments.

Notes:

Trends in U.S. citizen representation refer to the number of U.S. citizens
employed as a percentage of agency employment, in the respective grade,
over the period 2001 to 2005. Increases or decreases are determined by
decidedly positive or negative average changes over the period. For
additional details on our methodology, see appendix I. See appendix III
for graphic illustration of the trends presented in table 2.

For the Secretariat, IAEA, and UNESCO, the trend analysis is for U.S.
citizens in geographic positions from 2001 to 2005. For UNHCR and UNDP,
the trend analysis, also for 2001 to 2005, is for U.S. citizens in regular
professional positions since these agencies do not have geographic
positions. Regular professional positions for UNHCR and UNDP include staff
under contracts of longer fixed-term (100-series contracts for UNHCR and
100-and 200-series contracts for UNDP).

aThe three agencies with geographic targets are the Secretariat, IAEA, and
UNESCO. UNHCR does not have geographic positions, although it has agreed
to an informal target.

bSenior-level positions represent UN position levels D1 and D2, roughly
equivalent to U.S. government Senior Executive Service. Policy-making
positions represent UN position levels of Deputy or Assistant Director
General at IAEA and UNESCO and Under or Assistant Secretary General at the
Secretariat, UNHCR, and UNDP.

cRepresents UN position levels P1 to P3, roughly equivalent to U.S.
government grade levels 9 to 12/13.

dRepresents UN position levels P4 to P5, roughly equivalent to U.S.
government grade levels 13 to 15.

U.S. representation in policymaking and senior-level positions increased
at two agencies --IAEA and UNDP-and displayed no overall trend at the
Secretariat, UNESCO and UNHCR over the full five years. At the
Secretariat, although no trend is indicated, U.S. representation has been
decreasing in policy-making and senior-level positions since 2002. At
UNESCO, the data for 2001 to 2004 did not reflect a trend, but the overall
percentage of Americans increased in 2005, reflecting increased recruiting
efforts after the United States rejoined UNESCO in 2003.19 At UNHCR, the
representation of U.S. citizens in these positions grew steadily from 2001
through 2004, but declined in 2005. Regarding entry-level positions, U.S.
representation in these positions increased at UNESCO, decreased at IAEA,
UNHCR and UNDP, and showed no trend at the Secretariat. (See app. III for
more detailed information on the trends in geographic employment.)

19Between 2003 and 2005, UNESCO increased the number of U.S. nationals
employed in geographic positions from 21 to 30 professionals, an increase
of over 40 percent.

Increased Hiring of Americans Needed to Meet Several UN Agencies' Minimum
Targets

We estimate that each of the four agencies with geographic targets-the
Secretariat, IAEA, UNESCO, and UNHCR-would need to hire U.S. citizens in
greater numbers than they have in recent years to achieve their minimum
targets by 2010, given projected staff levels, retirements, and
separations; otherwise, with the exception of UNESCO,20 U.S. geographic
representation will decline further. As shown in table 3, IAEA and UNHCR
would need to more than double their current average hiring rate to
achieve targets for U.S. representation. The Secretariat could continue to
meet its minimum geographic target for U.S. citizens if it increased its
annual hiring of U.S. citizens from 20 to 23. UNESCO could achieve its
minimum geographic target by increasing its current hiring average of 4.5
Americans to 6 Americans. Although the fifth agency, UNDP, does not have a
target, it would have to increase its annual hiring average of U.S.
citizens from 17.5 to 26 in order to maintain its current ratio of U.S.
regular professional staff to total agency regular professional staff.

Table 3: Estimated Numbers of U.S. Citizens to Be Hired to Meet Geographic
and Other Targets for 2006 to 2010

Source: GAO analysis of Secretariat, IAEA, UNESCO, UNHCR, and UNDP data.

aFor UNHCR and UNDP, which do not have geographic positions, we calculated
the average number of regular professional U.S. staff hired each year,
(2001 to 2005), including separations and retirements. Regular
professional includes staff under contracts of longer fixed term
(100-series contracts in UNHCR and 100- and 200-series contracts in UNDP).

bFor UNHCR, we used the informal target of 13 percent for U.S. citizens,
agreed upon by UNHCR and the U.S. government. For UNDP, we used the target
of 11.1 percent, the average U.S. employment from 2001 through 2005.

20If UNESCO continues to hire at the same rate that it has in the past,
U.S. representation would increase from its current level of 4.1 percent
to 5.1 percent in 2010.

cThe minimum average number of U.S. citizens to be hired each year, 25, is
based on a zero percent rate of growth of staff, which UNHCR officials
indicated was appropriate for 2006 to 2010. From 2001 to 2005, UNHCR's
staff grew at an average annual rate of 6 percent. Under this assumption,
the minimum number of U.S. citizens to be hired annually would increase to
40.

If current hiring levels are continued through 2010, two of the five
agencies-IAEA and UNHCR-would fall substantially below their minimum
targets. In only one agency-UNESCO-would the percentage of geographic
positions filled by U.S. citizens increase under current hiring levels due
in part, to the recent increased hiring of U.S. citizens. (See app. I for
a discussion of our hiring projection methodology.)21

While Common Barriers to Increasing U.S. Representation Exist, UN Agencies Also
                      Face Distinct Employment Challenges

A combination of barriers, including some common factors as well as
agency-specific factors, adversely affects recruitment and retention of
professional staff, including Americans, at each of the five UN agencies.
Barriers common to most UN agencies we reviewed include nontransparent
human resource practices, a limited number of positions open to external
candidates, lengthy hiring processes, comparatively low or unclear
compensation, required mobility and rotation, and limited U.S. government
support. These barriers combine with distinct agency-specific factors to
impede recruitment and retention. For example, candidates serving in
professional UN positions funded by their member governments are more
likely to be hired by the Secretariat than those who take the
Secretariat's entry-level exam; however, the United States has not funded
such positions at the Secretariat. IAEA has difficulty attracting U.S.
employees because the pool of American nuclear specialists is decreasing.
At UNESCO, U.S. representation is below the negotiated target, in part,
because the United States was not a member for 19 years. UNHCR has
difficulty retaining staff, particularly at the mid-career level, because
it has more hardship duty stations than any other agency. UNDP faces
several barriers that are also present at other UN agencies, such as
limited U.S. government support, and is also seeking to increase the
hiring of senior staff from developing countries.

21We performed sensitivity analyses by varying the staff growth and
separation rates. We found that minor changes did not produce major
differences in the results.

Common Barriers Adversely Affect U.S. Representation at Several UN Agencies

We identified six barriers that commonly affect U.S. representation in the
UN agencies we reviewed, although often to differing degrees.

           o  Nontransparent Human Resource Practices: According to Americans
           employed at UN organizations, a key barrier to American
           representation across the five UN agencies we reviewed was the
           lack of transparent human resource management practices. For
           example, some UN managers circumvent the competitive hiring
           process by employing individuals on short-term contracts-positions
           that are not vetted through the regular, competitive process-for
           long-term needs. In addition, some Americans at each of the
           agencies, except IAEA, said that "cronyism" exists and that
           certain individuals only hire their fellow nationals. Others said
           that the perception of U.S. overrepresentation22 hinders managers
           from hiring or promoting U.S. citizens regardless of their skills.
           In response, UN human resource officials expressed concern about
           U.S. employees' perception of "cronyism" and lack of transparent
           practices. UN human resource officials said that hiring processes
           include rigorous reviews involving the personnel division;
           managers; and appointment, promotion and review boards. However,
           the UN Secretary-General also acknowledged in a report to the
           General Assembly that management systems, including human
           resources, lacked transparency.23 
           o  Limited External Opportunities: Recruiting U.S. candidates is
           difficult because agencies offer a limited number of posts to
           external candidates. Each of the organizations we reviewed, except
           IAEA, advertises professional, or P-level, vacancies to current
           employees before advertising them externally in order to provide
           career paths for their staff and to motivate staff. Furthermore,
           the definition of external candidates used at the Secretariat,
           IAEA, UNESCO, and UNHCR is quite broad and may include current
           staff with temporary appointments, JPOs, former staff, or staff in
           other agencies in the UN Common System. In reviewing hiring data,
           we found that three of the five agencies-UNESCO, UNHCR and
           UNDP-filled 50 percent or more of new appointments by promotions
           or other internal candidates rather than by hiring external
           candidates. (See fig. 1. For definitions of promotion, internal
           hire, and external hire, see app. IV.)

22Americans comprised the largest number of geographic professionals at
every agency we reviewed, except UNESCO, where they ranked fourth.

23UN General Assembly, 60th Session. Investing in the United Nations for a
Stronger Organization Worldwide: Report of the Secretary-General
(A/60/692). 7 March 2006.

Figure 1: Number of Vacancies Filled by Promotions, Internal Candidates,
and External Candidates, 2004 and 2005 Data Combined

Note: UNHCR figure based on 2003 to 2004 data.

IAEA fills a large percentage of its positions with external candidates
because, in addition to not giving internal candidates hiring preference,
the agency employs the majority of its staff members for 7 years or less.
Although the data indicate that the Secretariat hires a significant
percentage of external candidates, the Secretariat's definition of
"external candidates," as describe above, includes staff on temporary
contracts and individuals who have previous experience working at the
agency.

           o  Lengthy Hiring Process: For positions that are advertised
           externally, the agencies' lengthy hiring processes can deter
           candidates from accepting UN employment. For example, a report
           from the Secretary General24 states that the average hiring
           process is too slow, taking 174 days from the time a vacancy
           announcement is issued to the time a candidate is selected,
           causing some qualified applicants to accept jobs elsewhere. One
           American at UNESCO noted that his hiring process took about 9
           months, while another said it took about 1 year. At UNHCR, even
           its "fast-track" system used to staff emergency situations takes
           five months, on average. Many Americans that we interviewed
           concurred with the report's sentiment, saying that it is difficult
           to plan a job move when there is a long delay between submitting
           an application and receiving an offer. In March 2006, the
           Secretary General proposed cutting the average recruitment time in
           half.
           o  Comparatively Low or Unclear Compensation: Comparatively low
           salaries and benefits that were not clearly explained were among
           the most frequently mentioned deterrents to UN employment for
           Americans. American employees we interviewed noted that UN
           salaries, particularly for senior and technical posts, are not
           comparable with U.S. government and private sector employment. The
           International Civil Service Commission25 also reported that
           remuneration across the UN common system26 is not competitive in
           the international labor market.27 When candidates consider current
           UN salaries in tandem with UN employee benefits, such as possible
           reimbursement for U.S. taxes and school tuition allowances through
           college, UN compensation may be more attractive. However, U.S.
           citizens employed at IAEA and UNESCO said that their agency did
           not clearly explain the benefits, or explained them only after the
           candidate accepted a position. Incomplete or late information
           hampers a candidate's ability to decide in a timely manner whether
           a UN position is in his or her best interest.

           In addition, difficulty securing spousal employment can decrease
           family income and may also affect American recruitment since many
           U.S. families have two wage earners. At many overseas UN duty
           stations, work permits can be difficult to obtain, the local
           economy may offer few employment opportunities, and knowledge of
           the local language may be required. In addition, Americans with
           whom we spoke said that an unemployed spouse might not be happy as
           such, and might prefer to return to the United States where he or
           she can continue a career. U.S. employees at IAEA (located in
           Vienna) noted that difficulty in securing spousal employment is a
           significant problem for recruiting and retaining U.S.
           professionals at their agency.

           o  Required Mobility or Rotation: UNHCR and UNDP require their
           staff to change posts at least every 3 to 6 years with the
           expectation that staff serve the larger portion of their career in
           the field; the UN Secretariat and UNESCO are implementing similar
           policies. While IAEA does not require its employees to change
           posts, it generally only hires employees for 7 years or less. Such
           policies dissuade some Americans from accepting or staying in a UN
           position because of the disruptions to personal or family life
           such frequent moves can cause.
           o  Limited U.S. Government Support: At four of the five agencies
           we reviewed, all except IAEA, a number of American employees said
           that they did not receive U.S. government support during their
           efforts to obtain a UN job or to be promoted at the job they held.
           The U.S. government currently supports candidates applying for
           director-level, or higher, posts, and puts less emphasis on
           supporting candidates seeking lower-level professional posts.
           State said that only on an exceptional basis is assistance given
           in support of promotions because the U.S.'s general policy is not
           to intervene in internal UN matters, such as promotions. State
           said the UN's "code of conduct"28 makes it clear that it is
           improper for international civil servants to lobby or seek support
           from governments to obtain advancement for themselves and that
           governments should not accede to such requests nor intervene in
           such matters. Although UN employees are international civil
           servants directly hired by UN agencies, some countries facilitate
           the recruitment of their nationals by referring qualified
           candidates, conducting recruitment missions, and sponsoring JPOs
           or Associate Experts.29

           UN Secretariat: Lower Probability of Employment for Young Professionals
			  Taking the Recruitment Exam than Those Participating in Country-
			  Sponsored Program

			  At the entry level, hiring for professional positions is limited
           to an average of 2 percent of individuals invited to take the
           Secretariat's National Competitive Recruitment Exam (NCRE), while
           in contrast, the Secretariat hired an average of 65 percent of
           Associate Experts sponsored by their national government; however,
           the U.S. government has not sponsored any Associate Experts at the
           Secretariat between 2001 and 2005.30 In addition, a lack of career
           development opportunities affects retention.

             Exam Applicants Less Likely to Be Hired than Associate Experts at
				 the Entry Level

           Our review of the Secretariat's data shows individuals who take
           the NCRE31 have a lower probability of being hired than do
           Associate Experts sponsored by their national government at the
           end of their tenure. Of the 3,398 individuals invited to take the
           NCRE each year, the UN Secretariat hired an average of 71
           individuals, or 2 percent, per year from 2001 through 2004. Though
           U.S. citizens fare slightly better than the general population
           (the Secretariat hires an average of 4 percent of Americans
           invited to take the exam), the UN Secretariat hires just an
           average of 7 Americans through the NCRE each year. Employees hired
           from the exam fill geographic posts and count toward country
           representation. Human resource officials noted that individuals
           who are hired through the exam process may be on the roster for 1
           year or more before being hired. Figure 2 shows the number of
           applicants between 2001 and 2004 at various stages of the exam
           from all nationalities and from the United States, respectively.

24UN General Assembly, 60th Session (A/60/692).

25The International Civil Service Commission (ICSC) is an independent
expert body established by the UN General Assembly. Its mandate is to
regulate and coordinate the conditions of service of staff in the UN
common system, while promoting and maintaining high standards in the
international civil service.

26The UN common system represents common standards, methods, and
arrangements applied to salaries, allowances, and benefits for the staff
of the United Nations and those specialized agencies that have entered
into a relationship with it. The common system is designed to avoid
serious discrepancies in terms and conditions of employment, to avoid
competition in recruitment of personnel, and to facilitate the inter
change of personnel.

27UN General Assembly, 60th Session. Report of the International Civil
Service Commission for the year 2005. Supplement No. 30 (A/60/30). 12
August 2005. Official Record.

28United Nations Secretariat, Secretary-General's Bulletin, Status, Basic
Rights and Duties of United Nations Staff Members (ST/SGB/2002/13) 1
November 2002.

29Associate Experts, also known as Junior Professional Officers (JPO) at
other UN agencies, are entry-level employees that are financially
supported by their home country. The sponsoring country may select
candidates for the positions they fund, though the UN agency has the final
decisions as to which candidate actually is hired. The standard length of
Associate Expert and JPO appointments vary by donor, however, most serve
from 1 to 3 years.

30NCRE hiring data are averaged from 2001 through 2004. Associate Expert
retention data are averaged from 2001 through 2003. The average percent of
Associate Experts retained from 1990 through 2003 is 58 percent.

31To meet its geographic targets, the UN Secretariat recruits employees
for its entry-level (grades P1 through P3), geographically-designated
posts through the NCRE. The Secretariat invites citizens of member states
that are underrepresented or at risk of becoming underrepresented to
submit exam applications. A certain number of individuals who meet all
application requirements are invited to take the exam and then must pass
both written and oral portions. However, for each country, a maximum
number of 50 individuals may take the exam per occupational group. If the
number of applicants exceeds 50, only the most qualified (as determined by
the UN) will be allowed to take the exam. Successful individuals are then
put on a roster; not all will actually be hired.

Figure 2: UN Secretariat National Competitive Recruitment Exam: Four-Year
Average of All Nationalities and for Americans for Each Stage of the Exam
(2001-2004)

Note: The number hired from any year could increase, because candidates
who pass the exam can remain on the Secretariat's roster until their
country is equitably represented, though most are offered posts in the
first 1 or 2 years. The Secretariat provided preliminary data for 2005,
but it is incomplete because the hiring process is ongoing for these
applicants.

In contrast, the Secretariat hires an average of 83 individuals each year
who have finished their tenure as Associate Experts. Given that donor
countries together sponsor an average of 128 associate experts each year,
65 percent, on average, have been hired when they finish their tenure.
However, individuals hired at the end of their Associate Expert service
may or may not fill geographic posts. An average of 16 countries32
sponsor33 young professionals in this program each year. The United States
has not sponsored any Associate Experts at the Secretariat since at least
2001; therefore, no Americans have been hired in this manner between then
and July 2006.

32The leading supporters of Associate Experts at the Secretariat, on
average from 2001 to 2005 are: Italy, Germany, Netherlands, France,
Denmark, Sweden, Finland, and Japan. See table 4.

33According to the Secretariat, the cost for sponsoring an Associate
Expert can vary substantially given the individual and the duty station,
ranging from approximately $100,000 to $200,000.

  Lack of Career Development Opportunities Decreases Retention

The lack of career and promotion opportunities is one of the two most
"demotivating" factors for UN employees, according to a 2005 survey of
5,320 UN staff.34 Fifteen of the 19 American employees we interviewed at
the UN Secretariat also cited a lack of career development opportunities
as a factor negatively affecting U.S. retention. Staff also mentioned that
contract distinctions limit career development, as individuals with
short-duration contracts have difficulty obtaining regular posts.
Peacekeepers, for example, work under an assignment of limited duration
that can last up to 4 years. Although they have actual experience working
for the Secretariat, they are considered external candidates and cannot
apply as an internal candidate. Moreover, their time working in field
posts does not count toward promotion eligibility. In recognition of this
seeming inequity, the Secretary General has proposed instituting a single
contract type to expand career opportunities.

IAEA: Decreasing Pool of American Candidates Limits U.S. Representation

Continuing U.S. underrepresentation at IAEA has been described by U.S.
government officials as a "supply-side issue," with the pool of American
candidates with the necessary education and experience decreasing, as
nuclear specialists are aging and few young people have entered that
field. For those candidates that are qualified, IAEA may not be a
particularly attractive place to work owing to its rotation policy.

  Pool of Qualified American Applicants Decreasing

IAEA's Director General reported that the recruitment of staff,
particularly in the scientific and technical areas, is becoming
increasingly difficult because the nuclear workforce is aging and
retiring.35 Similarly, a discussion paper from DOE's Brookhaven National
Laboratory36 stated that American experts in the nuclear industry are
aging and retiring while fewer U.S. citizens are seeking relevant
technical degrees.37 For example, according to the Nuclear Energy
Institute, nearly half of nuclear industry employees are over age 47 and
less than 8 percent of such employees are younger than age 32. The
institute states further that over the next 5 years nuclear companies may
lose an estimated 23,000 workers, representing 40 percent of all jobs in
the sector. IAEA, as with all UN agencies, has a mandatory retirement age
of 62, and according to State officials, the agency generally will not
consider applicants above age 57 because they will not be able to complete
the average 5-year contract. IAEA said it prefers to hire staff who can
fulfill the normal five-year appointment but recently hired a staff member
who would reach the mandatory retirement age in two years. Disqualifying
nuclear specialists over age 57 dramatically limits the already small pool
of qualified Americans able to work at IAEA.

34This survey is cited in the following document, UN General Assembly,
60th Session  (A/60/692).

35Established to accelerate and enlarge the contribution of atomic energy
to peace, health, and prosperity throughout the world, IAEA's work
requires much of its professional staff to be skilled in highly technical
areas such as nuclear engineering and physics. IAEA's demand for qualified
applicants will increase over the next 7 years as staff members retire and
60 percent of the posts subject to geographic distribution become vacant.

36White Paper: Obstacles to Recruiting U.S. Citizens for IAEA Safeguards
Positions. Prepared by the International Safeguards Project Office,
Brookhaven National Laboratory, April 2005, updated December 2005.

  Rotation Makes IAEA Employment Less Attractive

For candidates who are qualified, IAEA may not be an attractive place to
work owing to its rotation policy, particularly given that the agency
tends to hire individuals at the mid-career level. American employees and
U.S. and UN officials we interviewed cited IAEA's 7-year rotation policy
as a disincentive to recruiting and retaining staff. The agency usually
offers international professionals a 3-year contract that can be extended
up to 7 years.38 While IAEA is forthright about not being a "career"
agency, the prospect of working only 3 to 7 years dissuades some Americans
who are unsure if they can find meaningful employment at the end of their
IAEA tenure. According to U.S. government officials who recruit candidates
for IAEA, working at IAEA for a relatively short amount of time is not
worth the risk to Americans already well-established in their careers.
While the U.S. government guarantees its civil servants reemployment
rights after working with an international organization, federally
contracted national laboratories have inconsistent reemployment policies,
which can be negotiated on an individual basis. Private sector firms may
not offer any expectation of reemployment. U.S. government agencies who do
rehire employees may not make use of the IAEA experience or may offer a
salary that does not compensate for the intervening years of work
experience, according to U.S. officials. Moreover, regarding retirement,
some Americans working at IAEA told us that U.S. government agencies do
not count their years at IAEA toward their years in U.S. government
service. In addition, individuals may have to give up their U.S. security
clearance to work at IAEA, which can take more than a year to reinstate.

37Experts in the nuclear power field report that the growth of nuclear
capacity slowed greatly in the 1980s and 1990s due, in part, to safety
problems, the inability to dispose of nuclear waste, the uncontrolled
proliferation of fissile materials, and the lack of economic
competitiveness. As such, the demand for-and therefore the training
of-nuclear specialists decreased.

38According to IAEA officials, at any point in time, about 39 percent of
the staff is granted long-term contracts and stay for more than 7 years.
The Director General decides every long-term contract based on the
program's need, diversity issues, and the person's age and potential for
growth.

UNESCO: Long U.S. Absence Contributed to Low Representation

The United States' 19-year withdrawal from UNESCO contributed to its
current underrepresentation. Increasing American representation in the
future may be complicated by budget restrictions.

  Nineteen-Year Absence Decreased the Number of Americans Employed at UNESCO

The number of Americans employed at UNESCO declined during the 19 years
that the United States was not a member. In 1984, the United
States-accompanied by the United Kingdom in 1985-withdrew from the
organization over concerns about the agency's management and other issues.
During the intervening years, in part because funding decreased
considerably with the withdrawal of these two countries, UNESCO's staff
decreased in size by about one-third. When the United States left UNESCO
in 1984, Americans comprised 9.6 percent of the organization's geographic
professional staff. When it rejoined in 2003, Americans comprised only 2.9
percent. By 2005 that number had increased to 4.1 percent-the third
largest group of nationals UNESCO employed, although still below the
minimum geographic target. Although UNESCO did employ American citizens
during that time, it was not held to any geographic target for Americans
because the United States was not a member.

  Hiring Freeze Limits Opportunities

UNESCO must hire Americans in greater numbers to meet its minimum target
for U.S. representation, which may be difficult in part because UNESCO may
have limited hiring in the future. Vacancies available to external
candidates may decrease given current budget restrictions, as UNESCO has
applied a zero-nominal-growth policy to its regular budget. The
organization thus plans to limit hiring for regular budget positions-which
include all geographic positions-to filling vacancies created by
retirement and other attrition.39

39As an exception, UNESCO advertises D-level positions at headquarters
internally and externally, concurrently.

UNHCR: Difficult Working Conditions and Rigid Human Resource Policies Hamper
Retention and Recruitment

The difficult conditions that accompany much of UNHCR's work, coupled with
the requirement to change duty stations every 4 years, causes attrition at
the mid-career levels. Moreover, various human resource peculiarities,
including the predominance of indefinite contracts and
staff-in-between-assignments, complicate the staffing process.

  Required Mobility through Hardship Posts Causes Attrition

UNHCR's requirement that employees change duty stations every 4 years was
one of the most frequently cited barriers to retaining staff among the
American employees we interviewed. UNHCR's mission to safeguard the rights
and well-being of refugees necessitates work in hardship and high-risk
locations. As such, UNHCR has twice as many hardship duty stations as any
other UN agency. At least one-third of its international professional
staff works in posts where, in some cases, their family may not be allowed
to accompany them. To alleviate the burden of serving in hardship posts,
the majority of international professionals are expected to rotate between
different categories of duty stations. However, a UN Joint Inspection Unit
report found that the staffing system may not always allow staff to rotate
out of the more difficult locations.40 For example, employees who serve in
hardship locations, especially in Africa, are less likely to rotate to
headquarters and other nonhardship locations than other staff. Aside from
possibly having to serve in hardship locations, moving frequently creates
an unstable environment for staff and their families. UNHCR officials
acknowledged that the organization faces a challenge in balancing its
staff's personal and career goals with UNHCR's operational requirements.
Several U.S. government officials noted that attrition among Americans has
counteracted efforts UNHCR has made to hire U.S. citizens. For example, in
2004 and 2005, UNHCR hired 24 Americans, but in the same years 14
Americans left the agency, leaving a net gain of only 10 U.S. citizens.

  Inflexible Human Resource System Limits Opportunities for External Hiring

UNHCR's policy to fill vacancies first with internal candidates coupled
with the reality that most employees have indefinite contracts limits its
external hiring, particularly given its number of
staff-in-between-assignments. Given that UNHCR's workforce requirements
regularly expand and contract, the agency typically has a number of
staff-in-between-assignments for whom it does not have assignments
corresponding to their grades and skills. As of July 2006, UNHCR had 135
such staff. However, human resource officials said that some individuals
have remained in between assignments for an extended period of time-some
as long as 2 years. Because all staff-in-between-assignments have
indefinite, rather than fixed-term, contracts,41 management has difficulty
terminating those that refuse assignments or who lack needed skills, and
the agency gives these staff placement preference over hiring external
candidates. The priority given to placing staff-in-between-assignments
limits the type of open external recruitment needed to ensure that UNHCR
maintains an optimally skilled, dynamic, competitive, and gender-balanced
workforce. In November 2003, to ensure that UNHCR adequately meets its
workforce requirements, management created a policy to terminate the
indefinite appointments of staff members who remained without a post for a
protracted period. UNHCR human resource officials said that new rules
entering into force in September 2006 are intended to reduce the
protracted period from 12-18 months to 6 months. As of July 2006, UNHCR
had terminated one staff who had remained in between assignments for an
excessive period of time.

40U.N. Joint Inspection Unit. Review of Management and Administration in
the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.
(JUI/REP/2004/4). Geneva, 2004.

Despite high mid-level attrition, UNHCR currently limits recruitment to
entry level positions, filling posts with candidates who must now pass an
entry exam. Before introducing the exam in 2004, employees in JPO
positions were allowed to apply to posts as an internal candidate.
However, individuals that have served as JPOs or in other temporary
assignments now must pass the entry exam and be added to the roster of
qualified candidates before being eligible to apply for regular staff
positions. U.S. citizens employed at UNHCR expressed strong concern about
this policy because UNHCR recently hired 67 percent of Americans at the
end of their JPO service into an agency position. Having to take a test
may increase the time it takes to get a post, as the exam is only given
once a year, and could decrease JPO retention.

UNHCR positions offered to external candidates will be further limited due
to budgetary restrictions. As with UNESCO, UNHCR is planning to freeze
hiring from the regular budget this year in order to limit the growth of
the organization and realign the size of the workforce with the budget.
One official estimated that there will be about 30 percent less
recruitment this year because of the hiring freeze.

41By the end of 2004, 83 percent of UNHCR's regular professional staff
held indefinite appointments. As of January 2006, 94 percent of staff at
the P-4 and P-5 levels held indefinite appointments.

UNDP: While Several Common Factors Are the Leading Barriers, UNDP Is Also
Seeking to Improve the North-South Balance of Senior Staff

Several barriers to increasing U.S. representation that are also present
at other UN agencies are the leading factors at UNDP, according to
American employees and other officials with whom we spoke. For example,
many American UNDP employees told us that they did not receive support
from the U.S. government during their hiring process or the course of
their careers. Several of these employees stated that their discussions
with us were the first time they had been contacted by U.S. government
officials during their UNDP careers, and that both they and the U.S.
mission would benefit from increased communication. U.S. staff also
discussed UNDP's nontransparent hiring and personnel management policies,
and the limited opportunities for external candidates, as barriers for
increasing U.S. representation.42 In addition, UNDP's Executive Board has
traditionally managed the organization with the understanding that its
staff be equally represented from northern (mostly developed) and southern
(mostly developing) countries, and has recently focused on improving the
north-south balance of staff at management levels by increasing the hiring
of candidates from southern countries. While this is a worthy goal, some
American staff at UNDP commented that the organization's recent attention
to increasing the hiring of senior staff from southern countries could
increase the difficulty for American candidates seeking these positions. A
senior UNDP official stated that he did not see the increased hiring of
U.S. nationals (to maintain current representation levels) as a realistic
and attainable target, given the above focus as well as profile, donor,
program country, gender, and diversity considerations.

42A senior UNDP official said that UNDP recently reviewed its selection
and placement process to address the issue of transparency and the
majority of UNDP staff commented favorably on the transparency principles
being met. However, UNDP declined to provide us with this review, as it is
an internal working document that includes other sensitive information.

State Has Increased Efforts to Promote U.S. Representation, but Additional
                 Options Exist to Target Professional Positions

State targets its recruitment efforts for senior and policy-making UN
positions, and, although it is difficult to directly link State's efforts
to UN hiring decisions, U.S. representation in these positions has either
improved or displayed no trend in the five UN agencies we reviewed. State
also has increased its efforts to improve overall U.S. representation,
including adding staff to its UN employment office and increasing
coordination with other U.S. agencies; however, despite these efforts,
U.S. representation in entry-level positions has declined or did not
reflect a trend in four of the five UN agencies we reviewed. Additional
steps to target potential pools of candidates for these positions include
maintaining a roster of qualified American candidates; expanding marketing
and outreach activities; and conducting an assessment of the costs and
benefits of sponsoring JPOs.

State Recruiting Efforts Focus on Senior Positions, and U.S. Representation in
These Positions Improved or Showed No Trend

In 2001, we reported that State focused its recruiting efforts for U.S.
citizen employment at UN agencies on senior-level and policy-making
positions, and State officials told us that this focus has continued.
Although it is difficult to directly link State's efforts to UN hiring
decisions, the percentage of U.S. representation in senior and
policy-making positions either increased or did not display a trend at
each of the five UN agencies we reviewed between 2001 and 2005 (see fig.
3).

Figure 3: U.S. Representation in Senior and Policy-making Positions at
Five UN Agencies as a Percentage of Agency Professional Senior and
Policy-making Positions, 2001-2005

Note: For the Secretariat, UNESCO, and IAEA, we used positions subject to
geographic distribution. For UNHCR and UNDP, we used regular professional
positions.

At all five UN agencies, the percentage of Americans employed in senior
and policymaking positions was higher in 2005 than in 2001, but the trends
and magnitude varied somewhat across the agencies, as figure 3 shows. The
U.S. share of senior and policy-making positions has increased at IAEA and
UNDP. The U.S. share of these positions at the other three UN agencies
displayed no trend over the period. At the Secretariat, the U.S. share of
senior and policymaking positions was slightly higher in 2005 than in
2001, although the number and percentage of Americans in these positions
has decreased since 2002. At UNHCR, the number and percentage of U.S.
citizens in these positions grew between 2001 and 2004, but declined in
2005. At UNESCO, the data for 2001 to 2004 did not reflect a trend, but
the percentage of Americans increased in 2005. Overall, Americans hold
over 10 percent of senior and policymaking positions at four of the five
agencies we reviewed. (App. III contains more detailed information on U.S.
citizens employed in all professional positions, by grade, at the five UN
agencies.)

A U.S. mission official told us that the mission focuses its efforts on
vacancies for critical senior jobs because of the influence that these
positions have within the organization. If an American makes the short
list for one of these positions, the U.S. Ambassador or another
high-ranking U.S. mission official contacts the UN agency on behalf of
that candidate. Officials at one of the U.S. missions we visited told us
that the ambassador called UN agency officials on behalf of American
candidates almost weekly. Several senior UN agency positions have recently
been filled by Americans, including the UN Under-Secretary-General for
Management and the Executive Director of UNICEF. UNESCO also recently
hired U.S. citizens for the positions of Assistant Director-General for
Education and the Deputy Assistant Director-General for External
Relations.

As a part of this effort to recruit for high-level positions, State's UN
employment office added a senior advisor in 2004 focused on identifying
and recruiting American candidates for senior-level positions at UN
organizations. This official works closely with the U.S. missions and U.S.
agencies to identify senior-level UN vacancies and assist in the
recruitment and support of Americans as candidates for these positions.
The advisor also focuses on UN senior-level positions that may soon become
vacant, including positions currently held by Americans, as well as by
other nationals. Officials from one U.S. mission told us that it is
critical to find out about vacancies before they become open because of
the lead time needed to find qualified candidates. For those positions
determined to be of particular interest to the United States, the senior
advisor works with mission and agency counterparts to identify appropriate
candidates to apply for the position when it becomes vacant.

State Has Increased Activities to Support Greater U.S. Representation, but the
Employment of Americans in Entry-level Positions Declined or Displayed No Trend
in Four Agencies

Since 2001, State has devoted additional resources and has undertaken
several new initiatives in its role as the lead U.S. agency for supporting
and promoting the employment of Americans in UN organizations, including
adding staff to its UN employment office. State also has begun sharing its
U.S. representation reports with UN officials. Additionally, State has
increased coordination with other U.S. agencies. However, despite these
efforts, U.S. representation in entry-level positions has declined or did
not display a trend in four of the five UN agencies we reviewed.

  State Increased Resources for Disseminating UN Vacancy Information

In 2001, State had two staff members working in its UN employment office,
and since that time has increased the number of staff positions to five,
plus a sixth person who works part-time on UN employment issues.43 The new
staff positions include the official focused on senior-level positions at
UN organizations referred to earlier. According to State, the other staff
in this office recruit candidates for professional positions at career
fairs and in other venues; however, a large portion of their work focuses
on providing information to potential applicants and disseminating
information on UN vacancies and opportunities. A key part of this effort
is the publication and distribution of a biweekly list of UN vacancy
announcements. State officials publish these announcements on the
department's UN employment Web site and also distribute the vacancies to
agency contacts.44 With this list, potential applicants are able to view
externally advertised professional and senior level vacancies throughout
the UN system in one location. Additionally, State recently coordinated
with the Office of Personnel Management to add a link to its UN employment
Web site from the USAJOBS Web site. State's Web site also includes a
brochure with general information on UN employment opportunities and
requirements, and a fact sheet requesting that candidates who have made a
short list for a UN position contact the department for information and
assistance. State's UN employment office staff also attend career fairs
and other outreach activities at universities and professional
associations to discuss UN employment opportunities. For example, State
officials reported that they attended 15 events in 2005, including a
nuclear technology expo and a conference on women in international
security.

State also has increased outreach for the Secretariat's annual National
Competitive Recruitment Exam for entry-level candidates by advertising for
the exam in selected newspapers. The number of Americans invited to take
the exam increased from 40 in 2001 to 277 in 2004. According to State and
UN officials, in 2005, State placed one-day advertisements publicizing
application procedures for the exam in five newspapers across the
country.45

43One of the five staffers told us that she spends about 60 percent of her
time on UN employment issues. The other four staff work on these issues
full time.

44 http://www.state.gov/p/io/empl/ .

45State placed advertisements in the Dallas Morning News, Los Angeles
Times, New York Times, USA Today, and Washington Post.

  U.S. Missions Share U.S. Representation Reports and Discuss Openings with UN
  Officials

Another of State's responsibilities is to collect U.S. employment data
from UN agencies and compile these data in annual reports to Congress.
These reports include State's assessment of U.S. representation at select
UN organizations and these organizations' efforts to hire more Americans.
State now provides these reports to UN agencies, as we recommended in
2001, and does so by sending them to U.S. missions, which share them with
UN officials. U.S. mission officials told us that they periodically meet
with UN officials to discuss U.S. representation and upcoming vacancies.
For example, officials from the U.S. mission in Geneva regularly meet with
UNHCR's Director of Human Resources to discuss efforts to increase U.S.
representation. One outcome of these efforts was that, in 2005, UNHCR
representatives conducted a recruiting mission to the United States,
visiting five graduate schools. In addition, the U.S. mission in Vienna
meets with IAEA's director of human resources on a biweekly basis to
discuss U.S. staffing issues.

  State Increased Coordination with U.S. Agencies

In 2003, State established an inter agency task force to address the low
representation of Americans in international organizations. According to
State, the initial meeting was intended as a first step to coordinate and
re-energize efforts to identify Americans for international organization
staff positions. Since then, task force members have met annually to
discuss U.S. employment issues. Task force participants told us that at
these meetings, State officials reported on their outreach activities and
encouraged agencies to promote the employment of Americans at UN
organizations. One of the topics discussed by task force members was how
to increase support for details and transfers of U.S. agency employees to
UN organizations. In May 2006, the Secretary of State sent letters to the
heads of 23 Federal agencies urging that they review their policies for
transferring and detailing employees to international organizations to
ensure that these mechanisms are positively and actively promoted.46
Transferring and detailing federal employees to UN organizations for
fixed-term assignments could allow Americans to gain UN experience while
providing UN organizations with technical and managerial expertise.47
While the Secretary's letters may help to spur U.S. agencies to clarify
their support for these initiatives, agency officials told us that their
offices lack the resources for staff details, which involve paying the
salary of the detailed staff as well as "backfilling" that person's
position by adding a replacement.48

46Executive Order 11552, issued in 1970, mandates that federal agencies
shall assist and encourage details and transfers of their employees to
international organizations and that State shall lead and coordinate these
efforts. The order also specifies that international organization
vacancies should be brought to the attention of well-qualified federal
employees and that upon the return of an employee to his agency, the
agency shall give due consideration to the experience the employee may
have gained during the detail or transfer.

State also periodically meets one-on-one with U.S. agencies to discuss in
more detail strategies for increasing U.S. representation at specific
organizations. A State official told us that State's UN employment office
holds a few of these one-on-one meetings per year. For example, in 2005,
State met with the Federal Aviation Administration to discuss U.S.
underrepresentation at the International Civil Aviation Organization.
State also participated in a network of agencies and National Laboratories
that work with IAEA, which has discussed ideas to address declining U.S.
representation at that agency.49 The U.S. mission in Vienna conducts
periodic video-conference meetings with State, other U.S. agencies, and
the U.S. national laboratories to discuss upcoming IAEA vacancies and
identify U.S. candidates for these positions.

  U.S. Entry-level Representation Declined or Displayed No Trend in Four of Five
  UN Agencies

Despite the new and continuing activities undertaken by State, U.S.
representation in entry-level positions50 declined or displayed no trend
in four of the five agencies we reviewed. U.S. representation in these
positions declined at IAEA, UNHCR, and UNDP. The representation of
Americans in entry-level positions at the Secretariat displayed no trend
during the time period. At UNESCO, U.S. representation increased from 1.3
percent in 2003 to 2.7 percent in 2004, reflecting the time period when
the United States rejoined the organization (See fig. 4).

47State reported that in fiscal year 2004, 168 federal employees from 16
agencies served on transfer or detail to UN agencies. Of the 84 employees
detailed to UN agencies, the vast majority were from the Department of
Health and Human Services' Center for Disease Control and Prevention, on
assignment at the World Health Organization.

48Transferred employees are paid by the UN organization, while detailed
employees would remain on the U.S. agency's payroll.

49In addition to State's Bureau of International Organization Affairs,
participants in this network include the U.S. Mission in Vienna, State's
Bureau for International Security and Nonproliferation, the Department of
Energy, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and the Argonne and Brookhaven
National Laboratories.

50We define entry-level UN positions as positions in the P1 to P3 grade
levels.

Figure 4: U.S. Representation in Entry-level Professional Positions as a
Percentage of Agency Entry-level Positions at Five UN Agencies, 2001-2005

Note: For the Secretariat, UNESCO, and IAEA we used positions subject to
geographical distribution. For UNHCR and UNDP, we used professional
positions.

Additional Steps to Target Professional Positions Exist

We identified several additional steps to target U.S. representation in
professional positions. These steps include maintaining a roster of
qualified candidates, expanding marketing and outreach activities,
increasing and improving UN employment information on U.S. agency Web
sites, and analyzing the costs and benefits of sponsoring JPOs.

  Roster of Qualified Americans Not Maintained

In 2001, we reported that State had ended its practice of actively
recruiting Americans for UN employment in professional positions. As an
example, we noted that State had previously maintained a roster of
qualified American candidates for professional and technical positions,
but discontinued its use of this roster. State officials told us that the
office has not maintained a professional roster, or the prescreening of
candidates, despite its recent increase in staff resources, because
maintaining such a roster had been resource intensive and because the
office does not actively recruit for UN professional positions at the
entry- and mid-levels. However, State acknowledged that utilizing new
technologies, such as developing a Web-based roster, may reduce the time
and cost of updating a roster. A State official added that it is difficult
to make a direct causal link between current or proposed efforts by the
department and the number of Americans ultimately hired by the UN because
of the many factors at work that State cannot control.

Other U.S. government and UN officials told us that some other countries
maintain rosters of prescreened, qualified candidates for UN positions and
that this practice is an effective strategy for promoting their nationals.
For example, some countries prescreen candidates for positions at the UN
Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO) and thus are able to provide
names of well-qualified applicants when openings arise that need to be
filled quickly. An official also emphasized that peacekeeping in
particular is a "growth area," and the Secretary-General recently reported
that the Peacekeeping budget has increased from $1.25 billion to more than
$5 billion between 1996 and 2005. As discussed earlier, peacekeeping
positions are not counted toward geographic representation targets and
thus the increased hiring of Americans in these positions would not
directly improve the United States' representation status. However, these
positions, along with other nongeographic positions, do provide an entry
point into the UN system.

  Recruiting and Outreach Efforts Do Not Reach Some Potential Applicants

Although State has increased staff resources in its UN employment office,
it has not taken steps that could further expand the audience for its
outreach efforts. For example, State has increased its coordination with
other U.S. agencies on UN employment issues and distributes the biweekly
vacancy announcements to agency contacts. However, some U.S. agency
officials that receive these vacancy announcements told us that they
lacked the authority to distribute the vacancies beyond their particular
office or division. For example, one official commented that the vacancies
were distributed within his nine-person office, but the office is not able
to distribute the vacancies throughout the agency. An official from
another agency commented that State has not established the appropriate
contacts to facilitate agency-wide distribution of UN vacancies, and that
the limited dissemination has neutralized the impact of this effort.
Several inter-agency task force participants also stated that no specific
follow-up activities were discussed or planned between the annual
meetings, and they could not point to any tangible results or outcomes
resulting from the task force meetings.

As discussed earlier, State officials attend career fairs and other
conferences to discuss UN employment opportunities with attendees, but
they have not taken advantage of some opportunities to expand the audience
for their outreach activities. For example, State does not work with the
Association of Professional Schools of International Affairs (APSIA),
which has 19 U.S. member schools.51 A representative of APSIA told us that
the association does not receive vacancy announcements or have contact
with State on UN employment opportunities but would welcome the
opportunity to do so. Although State employees have attended Peace Corps
career fairs to discuss UN employment, officials told us that State does
not advertise in other outlets that reach the population of current and
returned Peace Corps volunteers, such as the Peace Corps jobs hotline
newsletter or the National Peace Corps Association's52 quarterly magazine,
Worldview.

By contrast, a State official told us that the department's Office of
Recruitment, Examination and Employment53-which recruits candidates for
the U.S. Foreign Service Exam-has worked with an advertising firm to
develop a marketing strategy and campaigns focused on targeted pools of
candidates for this exam. This official said that State has had a major
emphasis on increasing the diversity of applicants for the U.S. Foreign
Service, and its marketing campaigns have targeted schools with diverse
student bodies and diversity-focused professional associations. State's
recruiting office also has established an e-mail subscription service on
its Web site that allows individuals to sign up to receive e-mail updates
pertaining to their specific areas of interest. A State recruiting
official commented that targeted campaigns are more effective than general
vacancy announcements or print advertisements, and that the e-mail
subscription service has been worth the cost of implementation. The
official said that the cost of maintaining this service, for which she
stated 100,000 people have signed up thus far, is about $44,000 per year.

  State, U.S. Mission, and Agency Web Sites Have Limited Information on UN
  Employment Opportunities

State's UN vacancy list and its UN employment Web site also have
limitations. For example, the list of vacancies is not organized by
occupation, or even organization, and readers must search the entire list
for openings in their areas of interest. Further, State's UN employment
Web site has limited information on other UN employment programs and does
not link to U.S. agencies that provide more specific information, such as
the Department of Energy's Brookhaven National Laboratory Web site. In
addition, the Web site provides limited information or tools to clarify
common questions, such as those pertaining to compensation and benefits.
For example, the Web site does not provide a means for applicants to
obtain more specific information on their expected total compensation,
including benefits and U.S. income tax. As mentioned earlier, some
American staff in UN agencies told us that in considering whether to apply
for a UN position, information on benefits was not clear. Incomplete or
late information hampers a candidate's ability to decide in a timely
manner whether a UN position is in his or her best interest.

51APSIA also has 11 foreign schools as members.

52The National Peace Corps Association is a nonprofit organization of
returned Peace Corps volunteers, former staff, and friends that works to
foster peace through service, education, and advocacy.

53State's Office of Recruitment does not recruit Americans for UN
positions.

Including State, we reviewed 22 U.S. mission and U.S. agency Web sites,
and they revealed varying, and in many cases limited, information on UN
employment opportunities. Overall, nine of the 22 U.S. Mission and agency
Web sites we reviewed did not have links to UN employment opportunities,
and only seven had links to UN recruiting Web sites. In addition, only six
of the Web sites provided links to State's webpage on UN employment
opportunities. Only three of the Web sites had information on details and
transfers, six had information on JPO or Associate Expert programs, and 13
had no link to information on UN internships. Nearly 60 percent of the
missions and agencies provided some information or links to information on
salaries and benefits.

  U.S. Government Has Not Assessed the Costs and Benefits of Sponsoring JPOs
  Across UN System

The U.S. government currently sponsors JPOs at two of the five UN agencies
that we reviewed, but has not assessed the overall costs and benefits of
supporting JPOs as a mechanism for increasing U.S. representation across
UN agencies.54 Among the five agencies, State has funded a long-standing
JPO program only at UNHCR, sponsoring an average of 15 JPOs per year
between 2001 and 2005. According to State officials, the JPO program at
UNHCR is funded by State's Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration
(PRM),55 which has a separate budget from State's UN employment office in
the International Organization (IO) Affairs Bureau. State officials told
us that the Department's IO Bureau does not fund JPOs or Associate Experts
at any UN agencies, including the Secretariat, which hires an average of
65 percent of Associate Experts following the completion of their
programs. The other JPO sponsorship program among the five agencies we
reviewed is run by the Department of Energy's Brookhaven National
Laboratory, which has supported two JPOs at IAEA since 2004.56 Table 4
provides data on the average number of JPOs and Associate Experts
sponsored by the United States and by leading contributors to JPO programs
at the five UN agencies we reviewed.

54JPO or Associate Expert positions are funded by member states for 2 or 3
years and provide opportunities for young professionals to gain experience
in UN organizations. While, upon completion of the programs, these young
professionals are not guaranteed employment at the agency and must apply
for positions through the regular process, UN officials stated that the
JPO experience provides applicants an advantage over their competitors.
For four of the five agencies we reviewed, JPOs and Associate Experts must
apply for regular positions as external candidates. At UNDP, JPOs may
apply as an internal candidate if they apply before the end of their
tenure.

55According to PRM officials, the bureau has funded 98 JPOs at UNHCR since
1984.

Table 4: Average Number of JPOs or Associate Experts Sponsored by Leading
Contributors to These Programs, 2001-2005

Source: GAO analysis of data from UN Secretariat, IAEA, UNESCO, UNHCR, and
UNDP.

Note: The totals for each agency may not match the sum of the listed
donors because not all donors are included in this table. We included
countries that sponsored 10 or more JPOs across the five UN agencies.
Also, the totals for each row do not necessarily add up to the sum of each
cell in the row due to rounding.

56According to officials, Brookhaven and State's Bureau for International
Security and Non-Proliferation also fund Cost-Free Experts at IAEA. These
are technical specialists who work on short-term projects at IAEA for
periods of 1 to 3 years.

For four of the five agencies we reviewed,57 the percentage of individuals
that were hired for regular positions upon completion of the JPO program
ranged from 34 to 65 percent. In some cases, former JPOs were offered
regular positions and did not accept them, or took positions in other UN
organizations, according to officials with whom we spoke. The estimated
annual cost for these positions to the sponsoring government ranges from
$100,000 to $140,000 at the five UN agencies.58 (See table 5.) This cost
can include salary, benefits, and moving expenses.

Table 5: Cost and Retention Rate of JPOs and Associate Experts

Source: GAO analysis of data from the UN Secretariat, UNDP, UNHCR,UNESCO
and IAEA.

aYearly cost for a JPO/Associate Expert at each agency varies depending on
the individual's qualifications, duty station, and other factors.

bRetention rate for Associate Experts who served in 2001 through 2003. The
average retention rate between 1990 and 2003 is approximately 58 percent

cIAEA did not provide retention rates.

dRetention rate of Associate Experts who completed their contract between
January 2001 and December 2005. Twenty percent were retained on fixed-term
contracts; 14 percent were retained on other types of contracts.

eRetention rate of JPOs and former JPOs retained for UNHCR posts through
the Appointments and Promotions Board from 1996 to 2005. Retention rate of
American JPOs who served at UNHCR between 2001 and 2005 is 67 percent; it
increases to 71 percent if employment at other UN agencies is included.

fRetention rate for JPOs who finished their service between 2001 and 2003.
Retention is defined as JPOs being given a contract of at least 6 months
somewhere in the UN-system.

A PRM official told us that the goals of its JPO program at UNHCR are both
to help the organization accomplish its mission in the field and to help
Americans gain employment at the agency. This official stated that of the
24 American JPOs who completed their service at UNHCR between 2002 and
2005, 16 (or 67 percent) were hired back by the agency, and 1 was hired by
UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. This official also
told us that because the JPO program is actively used by other countries
as a means of getting their nationals into the organization, not
supporting JPOs at UNHCR would put the United States at a disadvantage.

57IAEA did not provide JPO retention rate data.

58As with other UN employees, compensation for JPOs is determined on an
individual basis and takes into consideration marital status, number of
children, duty station, and several other factors.

As shown above, funding JPOs has a cost that must be considered together
with other funding priorities. PRM and IO have acted independently in
their determinations of whether or not to fund JPOs, with the overall
result that State has funded an average of 15 JPOs at one UN agency and
none at any of the other agencies. State has not conducted an assessment
to determine which UN agencies the United States should prioritize in
terms of increasing U.S. employment by funding JPOs. Such an assessment
would also involve weighing the trade-offs between funding JPOs and other
agency programs.

                                  Conclusions

Achieving equitable U.S. representation will be an increasingly difficult
hurdle to overcome at UN organizations. Four of the five UN organizations
we reviewed, all except UNESCO, will have to hire Americans in increasing
numbers merely to maintain the current levels of U.S. representation.
Failure to increase such hiring will lead the four UN organizations with
geographic targets to fall below or stay below the minimum thresholds set
for U.S. employment.

As the lead department in charge of U.S. government efforts to promote
equitable American representation at the UN, the Department of State will
continue to face a number of barriers to increasing the employment of
Americans at these organizations, most of which are outside the U.S.
government's control. For example, lengthy hiring processes and mandatory
rotation policies can deter qualified Americans from applying for or
remaining in UN positions.

Nonetheless, if increasing the number of U.S. citizens employed at UN
organizations remains a high priority for State, it is important that the
department facilitate a continuing supply of qualified applicants for UN
professional positions at all levels. State focuses much of its recruiting
efforts on senior and policy-making positions, and U.S. citizens hold over
ten percent of these positions at four of the five agencies we reviewed.
While State increased its resources and activities in recent years to
support increased U.S. representation overall, additional actions to
facilitate the employment of Americans in entry- and mid-level
professional positions are needed to overcome declining U.S. employment in
these positions and meet employment targets.

                      Recommendations for Executive Action
							 
Because equitable representation of Americans employed at UN organizations
has been a high priority for U.S. interests, we recommend that the
Secretary of State take the following three actions:

           o  provide more consistent and comprehensive information about UN
           employment on the State and U.S. mission Web sites and work with
           U.S. agencies to expand the UN employment information on their Web
           sites. This could include identifying options for developing a
           benefits calculator that would enable applicants to better
           estimate their potential total compensation based on their
           individual circumstances;
           o  expand targeted recruiting and outreach to more strategically
           reach populations of Americans that may be qualified for and
           interested in entry- and mid-level UN positions; and
           o  conduct an evaluation of the costs, benefits, and trade-offs
           of:

                                  Agency Comments and Our Evaluation
			  
			  We received comments from State, which are reprinted in appendix
           V. State concurred with and agreed to implement all of our
           recommendations. State said it attaches high priority to
           increasing the number of Americans at all professional levels in
           the United Nations and other international organizations. We
           received technical comments from State, IAEA, UNESCO, UNHCR, and
           UNDP, which we have incorporated as appropriate.

           As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce the
           contents of this report, we plan no further distribution until 30
           days from the report date. At that time, we will send copies of
           this report to other interested congressional committees. We also
           will provide copies of this report to the Secretary of State; the
           United Nations Secretariat; the International Atomic Energy
           Agency; the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural
           Organization; the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner
           for Refugees; and the United Nations Development Program. We will
           also make copies available to others upon request. In addition,
           this report will be made available at no charge on the GAO Web
           site at http://www.gao.gov .

           If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please
           contact me at (202) 512-9601. Contact points for our Offices of
           Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the
           last page of this report. GAO staff who made major contributions
           to this report are listed in appendix V.

           Thomas Melito, Director International Affairs and Trade

           Congressional Requesters

           The Honorable George V. Voinovich Chairman The Honorable Daniel K.
           Akaka Ranking Minority Member Subcommittee on Oversight of
           Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of
           Columbia Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
           United States Senate

           The Honorable Henry J. Hyde Chairman The Honorable Tom Lantos
           Ranking Minority Member Committee on International Relations
           United States House of Representatives

           Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology
			  
			  In this report we reviewed (1) U.S. representation status and
           employment trends at five United Nations (UN) organizations, (2)
           factors affecting these organizations' ability to meet U.S.
           representation targets, and (3) the U.S. Department of State's
           current efforts to improve U.S. representation and additional
           steps that could be taken.

           We reviewed five UN organizations: the UN Secretariat;
           International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA); UN Educational,
           Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO); Office of the
           United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR); and UN
           Development Program (UNDP).1 Technically, the IAEA is an
           independent international organization that has a relationship
           agreement with the UN. For the purposes of this report, we refer
           to the IAEA as a UN agency or organization. We selected these
           agencies based on a range of factors such as: funding mechanisms
           (including agencies funded through assessed contributions as well
           as those funded primarily through voluntary contributions);
           methods for calculating geographic representation status
           (including agencies using formal geographic distribution formulas
           and those without formal targets for U.S. representation); agency
           size; agency location (including U.S.-based and overseas-based
           organizations); and agencies with varying levels of U.S.
           employment. These five agencies together comprise approximately 50
           percent of total UN organizations' professional staff.

           Methodology for Reviewing U.S. Representation Status and Employment
			  Trends at Five UN Organizations

           To determine the U.S. representation status, identify the trends
           in the number of professional positions held by U.S. citizens, and
           calculate hiring projections, we analyzed employment data for 2001
           through 2005 that we obtained from the five UN organizations. Data
           generally refer to end of the calendar year, except for the
           Secretariat, which is for the year ending June 30. We had
           extensive communications with staff from each organization's
           personnel and budget departments to clarify details regarding the
           data. We determined the data were sufficiently reliable for the
           purposes of this review.

           Calculating U.S. Representation Levels and Trends
			  
			  To determine U.S. representation at the three U.N. agencies with
           geographic targets (the Secretariat, IAEA, and UNESCO), we
           calculated the percentage of U.S. citizens employed in geographic
           positions and compared this percentage with the agency's target.
           We calculated the geographic target for the Secretariat and UNESCO
           as a percentage range, in which the minimum and maximum number of
           national staff, as provided by the agency, is divided by the
           actual (full-time equivalent) geographic staff in the agency. The
           two agencies-the Secretariat and UNESCO-that set geographic
           targets consider three key factors to varying degrees in
           establishing the targets: membership status,2 financial
           contribution,3 and population size.4 The Secretariat and UNESCO
           both use formulas for calculating geographic targets that take
           into account all three factors. For the Secretariat, the factors
           are 55 percent for contribution, 40 percent for membership, and 5
           percent for population. UNESCO's formula consists of a membership
           factor of 65 percent, a contribution factor of 30 percent, and a
           population factor of 5 percent. IAEA informally calculates a
           member state to be underrepresented if its geographic
           representation is less than half of its percent contribution to
           the budget. Using this method, we calculated a U.S. target.

           The remaining two agencies-UNHCR and UNDP-have not adopted formal
           geographic representation targets. However, UNHCR has established
           an informal target with the United States. To determine U.S.
           representation at UNHCR in comparison to this target, we
           calculated the percentage of regular professional positions
           (100-series contracts) filled by U.S citizens. Similarly, at UNDP,
           we calculated U.S. representation as a percentage of regular
           professional positions (100 and 200-series contracts) filled by
           U.S. citizens.5

           For all five UN organizations, we also calculated U.S. citizen
           representation at each grade-policy-making and senior level (such
           as USG/ASG, D1/D2), mid-level (P4/P5), and entry level (P1-P3)-as
           well as for all grades combined. U.S. grade level employment
           representation is calculated by dividing the number of U.S. staff
           at that grade level by the organization's total employment for the
           corresponding grade level. We also calculated U.S. citizen
           representation in nongeographic positions (for the Secretariat,
           IAEA, and UNESCO), and in the nonregular professional positions
           (UNHCR and UNDP)6 as a percentage of nongeographic (or nonregular)
           employment, respectively in these positions.

           To determine whether there was a trend in U.S. representation
           between 2001 and 2005, we determined whether or not the slope of
           the best fitting line through these points would have a computed
           confidence level of 90 percent or more. If there is a trend, the
           sign of the slope (i.e., the coefficient) determines whether the
           trend is increasing or decreasing. A designation of no trend means
           that the confidence level does not reach 90 percent; however, the
           percentage representation of U.S. citizens may have fluctuated
           during the period. We cannot say these trends are statistically
           significant because of the small number of observations, the fact
           that these numbers are the actual population and not a sample, and
           because these numbers are not independent over time. Thus the 90
           percent computation is not an objective criterion indicating
           statistical significance.

           Calculating Hiring Projections
			  
			  Our methodology assumed a gradual approach to the target. We
           calculated the minimum average number of U.S. citizens that each
           agency would need to hire each year between 2006 and 2010 to reach
           their respective percentage targets in 2010. The 2005 U.S. staff
           percentage representation was the starting point and an annual
           percentage increment (or decrement) was added to reach the minimum
           target in 2010. We then projected the required number of U.S.
           staff for each year as that year's percentage target multiplied by
           the projected size of the total staff for that year. The estimated
           number of U.S. staff in the agency in each year, before additional
           hiring of Americans, was based on the prior year's employment,
           less the projected retirements and separations for that year. If
           the projected number of Americans required to meet that year's
           target is greater than the estimated number of Americans in the
           agency, based on the prior year's employment and given departures
           in that year, then the number of Americans the agency has to hire
           is positive; otherwise, it is zero. Summing each year's number of
           Americans required to be hired to achieve each year's target, and
           then dividing by 5, yielded the minimum average number of U.S.
           citizens that the agency would have to hire to achieve the 2010
           target.

           We made three assumptions to calculate the hiring projections.
           First, for the Secretariat, IAEA, and UNESCO, we based our 2006 to
           2010 staff projections on the recent growth rate (2001 through
           2005) of each agency's staff. We calculated the future staff
           growth rate based on an ordinary least squares growth rate of
           staff during 2001 through 2005. UNHCR provided us with an official
           agency projected growth rate of zero percent, and UNDP provided a
           6 percent growth rate that we used in our analysis. Second, we
           projected staff separations for 2006 through 2010 based on an
           average of the separation data that the agencies provided for 2001
           through 2005. Third, we projected U.S. staff separations for 2006
           through 2010 based on the average of U.S. staff separations to
           total staff separations during 2001 through 2005. We did not
           project future retirements because each agency provided their
           official retirement projections for total staff and for Americans.
           In addition, we performed sensitivity analyses by varying the
           staff growth and separation rates. We found that minor changes did
           not produce major differences in the results.

           Methodology for Reviewing Factors Affecting UN Organizationsï¿½
			  Ability To Meet U.S. Representation Targets
			  
			  To review the factors affecting organizations' ability to meet the
           employment targets, we reviewed UN agency documents and
           interviewed UN human resources officials, over 100 Americans
           employed at the five UN agencies, and U.S. officials. At each of
           the five agencies covered in our review, we met with human
           resources officials to discuss efforts taken to achieve equitable
           U.S. representation, the agency's hiring process, personnel
           policies and procedures, types of contracts and positions, and
           factors affecting U.S. representation. These officials also
           provided documents with further explanations of agency human
           resources policies and practices. We also met with State and U.S.
           mission officials and officials from other U.S. agencies that
           interact with the five UN agencies to discuss their views on
           factors impacting U.S. employment at these agencies.

           In addition, we received the views of a total of 112 Americans7
           employed across the five agencies on various UN employment issues.
           We gathered information from these employees through individual
           interviews, interviews in a small-group setting, or through group
           discussions. We also received written comments from some American
           employees. We met with employees in a range of grade levels (G, P,
           D, and ASG), contract types (such as temporary,
           assignment-of-limited-duration, fixed-term, indefinite,
           permanent), and with varying levels of experience at the agency.
           We did not select representative samples of American employees at
           any agency. Some individuals invited to participate in our review
           were unable to due to scheduling conflicts; some did not respond
           to our invitation. The American employees we interviewed as a
           percent of the total number of Americans employed varied at each
           agency. We asked each employee common open-ended questions about
           their background and experience, the hiring process, the extent of
           U.S. government assistance they received, and factors affecting
           U.S. representation.

           Using the information gathered from the American employees, we
           coded comments about the factors affecting American recruitment
           and retention at the UN agencies into about 30 categories. As in
           any exercise of this type, the categories developed can vary when
           produced by different analysts. To address this issue, two
           independent GAO analysts reviewed and verified categorization of
           comments for each agency and suggested new categories. We then
           rectified differences. We then compiled a summary of factors
           across the five agencies and ranked them by the frequency they
           were mentioned. Another independent GAO analyst then reviewed and
           verified the summary compiled of all agency comments. We selected
           the factors affecting U.S. representation discussed in the body of
           this review by analyzing this ranked list in conjunction with
           information we gathered from UN and U.S. officials and our
           analysis of UN employment data.

           Methodology for Reviewing the U.S. State Departmentï¿½s Current
			  Efforts to Improve U.S. Representation and Additional Efforts
			  That Could Be Taken
			  
			  To assess strategies that the Department of State is using to
           improve U.S. representation and additional efforts that could be
           taken, we reviewed documents and interviewed officials from
           State's UN employment office. We discussed activities that State
           has taken since our 2001 report on U.S. representation at UN
           organizations, in response to recommendations made in that report,
           and reviewed State's documentation of these activities. We also
           reviewed other State documents, including its annual reports to
           Congress, U.S. Representation in United Nations Agencies and
           Efforts Made to Employ U.S. Citizens. In addition, we reviewed
           State's performance and accountability plans and reports,
           including State's fiscal year 2007 performance summary and the
           Bureau of International Organization Affairs fiscal year 2007
           performance plan. In addition to meeting with State officials, we
           also met with U.S. agency officials that have participated in
           State's inter agency task force on UN employment or received UN
           vacancy announcements from State, as well as other U.S. agency
           officials. In these meetings, we discussed the activities and
           outcomes of the task force and these officials' views on efforts
           to increase the UN employment of Americans. We also discussed U.S.
           strategies and efforts for increasing U.S. representation with UN
           personnel officials and American employees of UN organizations. We
           also analyzed 22 U.S. agency and U.S. mission Web sites to review
           information that they made available on UN employment
           opportunities.

           We conducted our work in Washington, D.C., New York; Geneva,
           Switzerland; Vienna, Austria; and Paris, France, from August 2005
           to July 2006 in accordance with generally accepted government
           auditing standards.

           Appendix II: Distribution of U.S. Citizens Employed in Professional
			  Positions at Five UN Agencies
			  
			  This appendix provides information on the number and percentage of
           U.S. citizens employed in professional positions at the five UN
           agencies we reviewed. For the three agencies that have geographic
           targets, we provide information on the number and percentage of
           U.S. citizens employed in geographic positions as well as in
           nongeographic positions. For the 2 agencies that do not have
           geographic targets, we provide information on the number and
           percentage of U.S. citizens employed in regular and all other
           professional positions.

           Percentage of U.S. Citizens in Geographic and Nongeographic
			  Positions Is Almost Equal
			  
			  At two of the three UN agencies (the Secretariat and UNESCO) with
           geographic targets, the percentage of geographic positions filled
           by U.S. citizens is slightly higher than the percentage of
           nongeographic positions filled by U.S. citizens. The variation is
           more significant at IAEA where U.S. citizens fill 11.5 percent of
           the geographic positions and 17.1 percent of the nongeographic
           positions. Table 6 shows the number and percentage of U.S.
           citizens employed in geographic and nongeographic positions at the
           three UN agencies with geographic targets.

                        o  maintaining a roster of qualified candidates for
                        professional and senior positions determined to be a
                        high priority for U.S. interests;
                        o  funding Junior Professional Officers, or other
                        gratis personnel, where Americans are
                        underrepresented or in danger of becoming
                        underrepresented.

Appendix I: Methodology Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

Methodology for Reviewing U.S. Representation Status and Employment Trends at
Five UN Organizations

Calculating U.S. Representation Levels and Trends

1Throughout this report, UNDP data includes three UNDP suborganizations:
UN Development Fund for Women, UN Volunteers, and UN Capital Development
Fund.

2Membership status refers to the right of each member state to a number of
positions. For example, in the UN Secretariat, a minimum of about 1 to 14
positions are assigned to each member state. This provision is especially
important for countries with a relatively small population and small UN
assessment, which could receive only one position if a minimum number of
positions were not set.

3Member state contributions are the common factor used by UN organizations
to determine targets or ranges because the level of budgetary contribution
is an inherent factor in a state's membership in the organization.

4Population size is used to ensure that member states are represented in
keeping with their respective demographic profiles.

5At UNDP, 100-series contracts are issued for core functions. They are
fixed-term contracts. The 200-series contracts are used for project posts.

Calculating Hiring Projections

6For the Secretariat, IAEA, and UNESCO, nongeographic positions include
regular professional positions not subject to geographic distribution,
temporary positions, JPOs, and consultants and contractors. For UNHCR and
UNDP, nongeographic positions are all other, nonregular professional
staff, which includes temporary staff (limited fixed term at UNHCR and
assignments of limited duration at UNDP), JPOs, and consultants and
contractors.

Methodology for Reviewing Factors Affecting UN Organizations' Ability To Meet
U.S. Representation Targets

7Specifically, we gathered information from 19 Americans employed at the
UN Secretariat, 28 at IAEA, 15 at UNESCO, 32 at UNHCR, and 18 at UNDP.

Methodology for Reviewing the U.S. State Department's Current Efforts to Improve
U.S. Representation and Additional Efforts That Could Be Taken

Appendix II: Distributi Emplo UN Age Appendix II: Distribution of U.S.
Citizens Employed in Professional Positions at Five UN Agencies

Percentage of U.S. Citizens in Geographic and Nongeographic Positions Is Almost
Equal

Table 6: Composition of Professional Positions at the Three UN Agencies
with Geographic Positions, 2005

Source: GAO analysis of Secretariat, IAEA, and UNESCO data.

aNongeographic positions include nongeographic regular professionals,
temporary staff, JPOs, and consultants and contractors. The agency total
professional staff for UNESCO, 1,638, includes all professional staff
indicated; however, UNESCO was unable to provide nationality data for its
contractors and consultants. Therefore, the U.S. percentage of
nongeographic positions does not include U.S. citizens employed as
contractors and consultants.

Table 7 shows that, on average at the three UN agencies with geographic
positions and targets (the Secretariat, IAEA, and UNESCO), the percentage
of U.S. citizens employed in all professional positions was fairly evenly
divided between geographic positions (51.6 percent) and nongeographic
positions (48.4 percent). However, the representation of U.S. citizens in
geographic and nongeographic positions was close to the average only at
IAEA, where the percentage of U.S. citizens was 55 and 45 percent,
respectively.

Table 7: Percentages of Staff in Professional Positions at the Three UN
Agencies with Geographic Positions, 2005

Source: GAO analysis of Secretariat, IAEA, and UNESCO data.

As shown in table 8, in the two agencies without geographic positions,
UNHCR and UNDP, the percentage of regular professional positions filled by
U.S. citizens is lower than the percentage of "all other" professional
positions filled by U.S. citizens. 1

Table 8: Composition of Professional Positions at the Two UN Agencies
without Geographic Positions, 2005

Source: GAO analysis of Secretariat, IAE, and UNESCO data.

1"All other" professional positions is analogous to nongeographic in that
"all other" and "nongeographic" both include temporary staff, JPOs, and
consultants and contractors. However, nongeographic positions do include
some regular professional positions for the 3 geographic agencies.

aAll other professional staff includes: temporary staff (limited
fixed-term professionals at UNHCR and assignments of limited duration at
UNDP), JPOs, and consultants and contractors. While data provided by the
agencies did not differentiate between support and professional level
positions for consultants and contractors, UNDP indicated that 80 percent
of these positions (known as Special Short-Term Assignments or SSAs) are
for temporary support functions. There were 635 SSAs at UNDP in 2005.

As shown in table 9, at UNHCR and UNDP, the percentage of U.S. citizens in
regular professional positions (staff under contracts of longer fixed
terms) averaged 65.4 percent of the total U.S. professional staff compared
with 34.6 percent for U.S. representation in all other, or more temporary,
professional positions. That is, there are relatively more Americans in
regular professional positions, 65.4 percent, than there are Americans in
all other professional positions, 34.6 percent.

Table 9: Percentages of Staff in Professional Positions at the Two UN
Agencies without Geographic Positions, 2005

Source: GAO analysis of UNHCR and UNDP data.

Americans Held Geographic and Nongeographic Policy-making and Senior Level
Positions at Three UN Agencies

Americans Held Geographic and Nongeographic Policy-making and Senior Level
Positions at Three UN Agencies

At IAEA and UNESCO, over 80 percent of the policy-making and senior-level
positions are geographic. However, these positions are more evenly divided
at the Secretariat, with 54 percent subject to geographic designation and
46 percent not subject to geographic designation. (See table 10).2

Table 10: Policy-making and Senior-level Positions at Three UN Agencies,
2005

Source: GAO analysis of Secretariat, IAEA, and UNESCO data.

2The 24 high-level nongeographic positions that Americans held at the
Secretariat in 2005 included 2 policy-making and 22 senior-level
positions. Significantly, the number of nongeographic policy-making
positions held by U.S. citizens declined at the Secretariat from 7
positions in 2001 to 2 in 2005, while the number of geographic
policy-making positions held by U.S. citizens has remained constant at 3.
During this time, there was virtually no change in the number of
geographic policy-making positions at the Secretariat, but the number of
nongeographic policy-making positions increased by 12 between 2004 and
2005.

Appendix III: Trends of U.S. Citizens Employed in Professional Positions
at Five UN Agencies Appendix III: Trends of U.S. Citizens Employed in
Professional Positions at Five UN Agencies

In "all grades," U.S. citizen representation in geographic positions at
the Secretariat, IAEA, and UNESCO and in regular professional positions at
UNDP displays no trend at the 90 percent confidence level. However, at
UNHCR, U.S. representation decreased in regular professional positions.
Figure 5 shows the trends in U.S. representation, by grade, at each
agency.

Figure 5: Trends of U.S. Citizen Representation, by Grade, in Professional
Positions in Five UN Agencies

aConfidence level 90 percent or higher.

Notes:

For the Secretariat, IAEA, and UNESCO, the trend analysis is for U.S.
citizens in geographic positions, 2001 through 2005; the trend analysis
covers 2001 through 2005 for UNHCR and UNDP and is for U.S. citizens in
regular professional positions since these agencies do not have geographic
positions. Regular professional positions for UNHCR and UNDP include staff
under contracts of longer fixed-term (100-series contracts for UNHCR and
100- and 200-series for UNDP).

Senior-level positions represent UN position levels D1 and D2, roughly
equivalent to U.S. government Senior Executive Service. Policy-making
positions represent UN position levels of Deputy or Assistant Director
General at IAEA and UNESCO and Under or Assistant Secretary General at the
Secretariat, UNHCR, and UNDP. UN position levels P1 to P3 are roughly
equivalent to U.S. government grade levels 9 to 12/13. UN position levels,
P4 and P5 are roughly equivalent to US government grade levels 13 and 15.

As shown in figure 5, U.S. citizen representation in policy making and
senior level positions increased at IAEA and UNDP and increased in entry
level positions at UNESCO. However, U.S. citizen representation in entry
level positions decreased at IAEA, UNHCR, and UNDP. In addition, U.S.
citizen representation decreased in mid-level positions at UNHCR, as well
as over "all grades." The 90 percent confidence interval does not imply
statistical significance. Refer to our methodology for calculating trends
in app. I.

Appendix IV: Definitions of Promotion, Internal Hires, and External Hires

Table 11 provides further information on the terms promotion, internal
hire, and external hire, as provided by each of the five UN agencies we
reviewed for the purposes of this report.

Table 11: Definitions of Promotion, Internal Hires, and External Hires at
Five UN Agencies Provided for the Purposes of This Report

Source: GAO compilation of information from the UN Secretariat, IAEA,
UNESCO, UNHCR and UNDP.

Appendix V: Comments from the Department of State

Appendix VI: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments

                                  GAO Contact

Thomas Melito (202) 512-9601 or [email protected]

                             Staff Acknowledgments

In addition to the person named above Cheryl Goodman, Assistant Director;
Jeremy Latimer; Miriam Carroll; Roberta Steinman; Barbara Shields; and Joe
Carney made key contributions to this report. Martin De Alteriis, Bruce
Kutnick, Anna Maria Ortiz, and Mark Speight provided technical assistance.

(320364)

GAO's Mission

The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its
constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and
accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO
examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies;
and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help
Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's
commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of
accountability, integrity, and reliability.

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost
is through GAO's Web site ( www.gao.gov ). Each weekday, GAO posts newly
released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To have
GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go to
www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to Updates."

Order by Mail or Phone

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of
Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more
copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should
be sent to:

U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM Washington,
D.C. 20548

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 TDD: (202) 512-2537 Fax: (202)
512-6061

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs

Contact:

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm E-mail: [email protected]
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Congressional Relations

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, [email protected] (202) 512-4400 U.S.
Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 Washington,
D.C. 20548

Public Affairs

Paul Anderson, Managing Director, [email protected] (202) 512-4800 U.S.
Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 Washington,
D.C. 20548

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt? GAO-06-988 .

To view the full product, including the scope

and methodology, click on the link above.

For more information, contact Thomas Melito at (202) 512-9601 or
[email protected].

Highlights of GAO-06-988 , a report to congressional requesters

September 2006

UNITED NATIONS

Additional Efforts Needed to Increase U.S. Employment at UN Agencies

The U.S. Congress continues to be concerned about the underrepresentation
of U.S. professionals in some UN organizations and that insufficient
progress has been made to improve U.S. representation. In 2001, GAO
reported that several UN agencies fell short of their targets for U.S.
representation and had not developed strategies to employ more Americans.
This report reviews (1) U.S. representation status and employment trends
at five UN agencies, (2) factors affecting these agencies' ability to meet
employment targets, and (3) the U.S. Department of State's (State) efforts
to improve U.S. representation and additional steps that can be taken. We
reviewed five UN agencies that together comprise about 50 percent of total
UN organizations' professional staff.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that the Secretary of State provide more UN employment
information on State Web sites; expand recruiting to reach qualified
Americans; and evaluate the costs and benefits of maintaining a roster of
qualified U.S. candidates for high priority positions, and of funding
entry-level professional staff where Americans are underrepresented. In
commenting on a draft of this report, State said it concurred with GAO's
recommendations.

The United States is underrepresented at three of the five United Nations
(UN) agencies we reviewed, and increased hiring of U.S. citizens is needed
to meet employment targets. The three agencies where the United States is
underrepresented are the International Atomic Energy Agency; UN
Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization; and the Office of the
UN High Commissioner for Refugees. U.S. citizens are equitably represented
at the UN Secretariat, though close to the lower end of its target range.
The UN Development Program has not established a target for U.S.
representation, although U.S. citizens fill about 11 percent of its
professional positions. Given projected staff levels, retirements, and
separations, IAEA, UNESCO, and UNHCR would need to increase hiring of
Americans to meet their minimum targets for U.S. representation in 2010.

While the five UN agencies face some common barriers to recruiting and
retaining professional staff, including Americans, they also face their
own distinct challenges. Most of these barriers and challenges are outside
of the U.S. government's control. The common barriers include
nontransparent human resource practices, limited external hiring, lengthy
hiring processes, comparatively low or unclear compensation, required
mobility, and limited U.S. government support. UN agencies also face
distinct challenges. For example, at the Secretariat, candidates serving
in professional UN positions funded by their governments are more likely
to be hired than those who take the entry-level exam; however, the United
States has not funded such positions. Also, IAEA has difficulty recruiting
U.S. employees because the number of U.S. nuclear specialists is
decreasing.

Since 2001, State has increased its efforts to achieve equitable U.S.
representation at UN agencies, and additional options exist. State has
targeted efforts to recruit U.S. candidates for senior and policymaking UN
positions, and although it is difficult to link State's efforts to UN
hiring decisions, U.S. representation in these positions has improved or
displayed no trend in the five UN agencies. U.S. representation in
entry-level positions, however, has declined or did not reflect a trend in
four of the five UN agencies despite State's increased efforts. Additional
steps include maintaining a roster of qualified U.S. candidates, expanding
marketing and outreach activities, increasing UN employment information on
U.S. agency Web sites, and assessing the costs and benefits of sponsoring
entry-level employees at UN agencies.

Estimated Number of U.S. Citizens to be Hired to Meet Geographic Targets

Source: GAO analysis of Secretariat, IAEA, and UNESCO hiring data.
*** End of document. ***