Senior Executive Service: Retirement Trends Underscore the Importance of
Succession Planning (Briefing Report, 05/12/2000, GAO/GGD-00-113BR).

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO provided information on the
Senior Executive Service's (SES) retirement trends, focusing on: (1)
trends for the SES workforce governmentwide and for selected agencies
and occupational series through fiscal year (FY) 2005 and how they
compared with the trends over the 7-year period ending FY 1998; and (2)
the implications of SES retirement trends for SES succession planning.

GAO noted that: (1) the proportion of career SES members employed in
selected agencies and occupational series who will be eligible to retire
by the end of FY 2005 varies by agency and occupational series and
differs from the governmentwide rate of 71 percent; (2) the Department
of Veterans Affairs (VA) will have the highest SES regular retirement
eligibility rate of the 14 selected agencies in GAO's review; (3) VA may
have to replace a large number of its career SES members because 82
percent of those members and 81 percent of SES members in health system
administration, who are primarily employed at VA, will be eligible to
retire by September 30, 2005; (4) health system administration will have
the second highest retirement eligibility rate of the eight selected
occupational series included in GAO's review--criminal investigation
will have the highest; (5) conversely, the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), and attorneys
will have the lowest SES retirement eligibility rates by September 30,
2005; (6) both EPA and the attorney series will experience the greatest
increase in the proportion of the career SES workforce to attain
retirement eligibility; (7) the SES retirement trends projected for the
first few years of this decade illustrate that the SES is an aging
workforce; (8) because individuals normally do not enter the SES until
well into their careers, SES retirement eligibility generally is much
higher than for the workforce in general, but SES retirement eligibility
also is growing compared with eligibility early in the 1990s; (9) these
trends highlight the importance of SES succession planning because the
SES retirements will result in a loss in leadership continuity,
institutional knowledge, and expertise among the SES corps with the
degree of the loss varying among agencies and occupations; (10)
available evidence suggests that formal SES succession planning is not
being done universally; (11) SES members from more than 24 agencies said
their agencies do not have a formal succession planning program for the
SES; (12) Office of Personnel Management officials said most agencies
will not likely have formal, comprehensive succession plans; and (13)
studies by the National Academy of Public Administration in 1994 and
1997 showed that formal SES succession planning generally was not being
done in the federal government.

--------------------------- Indexing Terms -----------------------------

 REPORTNUM:  GGD-00-113BR
     TITLE:  Senior Executive Service: Retirement Trends Underscore the
	     Importance of Succession Planning
      DATE:  05/12/2000
   SUBJECT:  Statistical data
	     Strategic planning
	     Personnel recruiting
	     Federal employee retirement programs
	     Human resources utilization
	     Federal employees
	     Personnel management
IDENTIFIER:  Senior Executive Service
	     Civil Service Retirement System
	     Federal Employees Retirement System
	     OPM Central Personnel Data File

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO report.  Delineations within the text indicating chapter **
** titles, headings, and bullets are preserved.                 **
**                                                              **
** 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.                                         **
**                                                              **
** A printed copy of this report may be obtained from the GAO   **
** Document Distribution Center.  For further details, please   **
** send an e-mail message to:                                   **
**                                                              **
**                                            **
**                                                              **
** with the message 'info' in the body.                         **
******************************************************************

United States General Accounting Office
GAO

Briefing Report to the Chairman Subcommittee on

Civil Service Committee on Government Reform

House of Representatives

May 2000

GAO/GGD-00-113BR

SENIOR EXECUTIVE SERVICE
Retirement Trends Underscore the Importance of

Succession Planning

Ordering Copies of GAO Reports
The first copy of each GAO report and testimony
is free. Additional copies are $2 each. Orders
should be sent to the following address,
accompanied by a check or money order made out
to the Superintendent of Documents, when
necessary. VISA and MasterCard credit cards are
accepted, also. Orders for 100 or more copies to
be mailed to a single address are discounted 25
percent.
Order by mail:
U.S. General Accounting Office
P.O. Box 37050
Washington, DC 20013
or visit:
Room 1100
700 4th St. NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW)
U.S. General Accounting Office
Washington, DC
Orders may also be placed by calling (202) 512-
6000 or by using fax number (202) 512-6061, or
TDD (202) 512-2537.
Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available
reports and testimony. To receive facsimile
copies of the daily list or any list from the
past 30 days, please call (202) 512-6000 using a
touch-tone phone. A recorded menu will provide
information on how to obtain these lists.
Viewing GAO Reports on the Internet
For information on how to access GAO reports on
the INTERNET, send e-mail message with "info" in
the body to:
[email protected]
or visit GAO's World Wide Web Home Page at:
http://www.gao.gov

Reporting Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal
Programs
To contact GAO FraudNET use:
Web site:
http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm
E-Mail: [email protected]
Telephone: 1-800-424-5454 (automated answering
system)

United States
General Accounting Office
Washington, D.C. 20548-0001
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300
Address Correction Requested

                    Bulk Rate
               Postage & Fees Paid
                       GAO
                 Permit No. G100

(410417)

Contents
Page 121    GAO/GGD-00-113BR SES Retirement Trends
Letter                                                                      1
                                                                             
Career SES Regular                                                         16
Retirement Trends
                           Regular Retirement Eligibility Rates            17
                           Will Continue to Increase in the
                           Future for Selected SES Cohorts
                           Generally, Under One-Third of All               19
                           Career SES Employed Each Year From
                           1992 Through 1998 Were Eligible to
                           Retire
                           Career SES Regular Retirement Rates             21
                           for 1992 to 1998 Varied Widely; Past
                           and Projected Rates, On Average, Were
                           Similar
                           Career SES Employees Regular                    23
                           Retirement Rates Higher Than Rates
                           for Other Career Employees in 1992 to
                           1998
                           Regular Retirement Eligibility Rates            25
                           for Selected SES Cohorts Generally
                           Will Be Higher at Certain Agencies by
                           the End of Fiscal Year 2005
                           Regular Retirement Eligibility Rates            27
                           Will Be Higher in 7 of the 8 Most
                           Populous Job Series, With Criminal
                           Investigation Series Having the
                           Highest Rate
                                                                             
Implications of Career                                                     28
SES Regular Retirement
Trends
                           Career SES Retirement Trends                    29
                           Underscore the Importance of
                           Succession Planning
                           1999 OPM/SEA Survey Results Highlight           31
                           the Importance of Succession Planning
                           NAPA and OPM Indicate That Formal               33
                           Succession Planning Has Been Rare
                           We and Others Have Recognized the               35
                           Importance of Succession Planning
                           OPM's View of Its Role Regarding                37
                           Succession Planning
                                                                             
Appendixes                 Appendix I: Early Retirement Trends -           38
                           Fiscal Years 1992 Through 1998 and
                           1999 Through 2005
                           Appendix II: Career SES Appointments,           43
                           Accessions, and Separations for
                           Fiscal Years 1992 Through 1998
                           Appendix III: Regular Retirement                45
                           Eligibility Rates By Selected
                           Agencies and Occupational Series for
                           Fiscal Years 1992-1998 and 1999-2005
                           Appendix IV: Scope and Methodology              48
                           Appendix V: Comments From OPM                   52
                           Appendix VI: GAO Contacts and Staff             54
                           Acknowledgments
Tables                     Table I.1:  Early Retirement                    38
                           Eligibility Rates Each Year During
                           Fiscal Years 1992 to 1998 by Selected
                           Agencies
                           Table I.2:  Early Retirement                    39
                           Eligibility Rates Each Year During
                           Fiscal Years 1999 to 2005 by Selected
                           Agencies
                           Table I.3: Early Retirement                     39
                           Eligibility Rates Each Year During
                           Fiscal Years 1992 to 1998 by Selected
                           Occupational Series
                           Table I.4: Early Retirement                     40
                           Eligibility Rates Each Year During
                           Fiscal Years 1999 to 2005 by Selected
                           Occupational Series
                           Table II.1:  Changes in Portion of SES          43
                           Appointments Occupied by Career SES
                           Members in 1992 to 1998
                           Table II.2:  Career SES Accessions and          43
                           Separations During the 1992 to 1998
                           Period
                           Table II.3: Number of Career SES                44
                           Accessions Each Year During Fiscal
                           Years 1992 Through 1998 By Type
                           Table II.4: Number of Career SES                44
                           Separations Each Year During Fiscal
                           Years 1992 to 1998, by Type
                           Table III.1:  Regular Retirement                45
                           Eligibility Rates Each Year During
                           Fiscal Years 1992 to 1998 by Selected
                           Agencies
                           Table III.2:  Regular Retirement                46
                           Eligibility Rates Each Year During
                           Fiscal Years 1999 to 2005 by Selected
                           Agencies
                           Table III.3: Regular Retirement                 46
                           Eligibility Rates Each Year During
                           Fiscal Years 1992 to 1998 by Selected
                           Occupational Series
                           Table III.4: Regular Retirement                 47
                           Eligibility Rates Each Year During
                           Fiscal Years 1999 to 2005 by Selected
                           Occupational Series
                                                                             
Figures                    Figure I.1: About 1 Percent, On                 41
                           Average, of Career SES Retired Early
                           in 1992 to 1998 and Similar Trend
                           Projected Over the Next 7 Years
                           Figure I.2: Career SES Employees                42
                           Generally Retired Early at a Higher
                           Rate Than Other Career Employees
                                                                             

Abbreviations

CDP       candidate development program
CPDF      Central Personnel Data File
CSRS      Civil Service Retirement System
EPA       Environmental Protection Agency
FBI       Federal Bureau of Investigation
FERS      Federal Employees Retirement System
HUD       Department of Housing and Urban
Development
IG        Inspector General
NAPA      National Academy of Public
Administration
NASA      National Aeronautics and Space
Administration
NRC       Nuclear Regulatory Commission
OMB       Office of Management and Budget
OPM       Office of Personnel Management
SEA       Senior Executives Association
SES       Senior Executive Service
VA        Department of Veterans Affairs

B-282485

Page 10     GAO/GGD-00-113BR SES Retirement Trends
     B-282485

     May 12, 2000

The Honorable Joe Scarborough
Chairman, Civil Service Subcommittee
Committee on Government Reform
House of Representatives
 
 Dear Mr. Chairman:

     This briefing report responds to your request
that we describe past and future retirement trends
for career members of the federal government's
Senior Executive Service (SES).1 Members of the
career SES are critical to the execution of agency
missions and the effective management of federal
programs. If a significant number of them were to
retire, this would result in a loss of leadership
continuity, institutional knowledge, and
expertise.

     In response to your request, we agreed to
describe trends in retirement eligibility and in
actual and projected retirements. In doing so, we

ï¿½    Identified the likely regular retirement2
 trends for the federal government's SES workforce
 governmentwide and for selected agencies and
 occupational series through fiscal year 2005 and
 how they compared with the trends over the 7-year
 period ending in fiscal year 1998.
 
ï¿½    Identified the implications of these SES
retirement trends for SES succession
planning-which is a comprehensive, ongoing
strategic process that provides for forecasting
executive resource needs; identifying and
developing potential SES candidates; and selecting
individuals from among a pool of qualified,
diverse candidates to meet executive resource
needs.
In addition, as agreed with your office, we are
providing data on trends in SES early retirement
for fiscal years 1992 through 1998 and projected
trends for fiscal years 1999 through 2005 (see
app. I). We also are providing data for each
fiscal year between 1992 and 1998 on the number of
(1) SES appointments filled by career SES members;
(2) career SES accessions (promotions and outside
hires); and (3) career SES separations, such as
retirements and resignations (see app. II).

We briefed your staff on the results of our work.
This report summarizes and updates information
provided at that briefing.

Results in Brief
     The federal government, as a whole, may need
to replace a substantial number of career SES
members who will become eligible to retire between
September 30, 1999, and September 30, 2005. Our
analysis of the fixed group of almost 6,000 career
SES members employed as of September 30, 1998,
shows that 71 percent will reach regular
retirement eligibility as of the end of fiscal
year 2005. This rate is about 20 percent greater
than the 60 percent of the fixed group of career
SES members employed as of September 30, 1991, who
became eligible to retire over the fiscal years
from 1992 through 1998. An increase in SES
retirement eligibility between these two periods
occurred in 12 of the 14 selected agencies and 7
of the 8 occupations included in our review (see
app. III for regular retirement eligibility rates
by agency and occupational series).

     Although not all of the September 1998 SES
members who become eligible to retire actually
will do so by September 2005, a sizeable
percentage likely will retire. The Office of
Personnel Management (OPM), the central management
agency which oversees SES operations, estimates
that of the almost 6,000 career SES members, about
45 percent will retire during fiscal years 1999
through 2005.3 During the fiscal year 1992 through
1998 period, a total of 39 percent (or 2,553) of
the career SES workforce actually retired.

     Assuming the departing SES members are
replaced and a staffing level of almost 6,000
career SES members is maintained through the end
of fiscal year 2005, on average, 6.4 percent of
career SES members employed each year will likely
retire between fiscal years 1999 through 2005.
This estimated annual percentage of career SES
retirements is about 1-percentage point higher
than the annual average of 5.5 percent of career
SES members who retired each fiscal year between
1992 and 1998. Actual regular retirement rates for
career SES members were consistently higher than
retirement rates for non-SES career employees
during fiscal years 1992 through 1998.

     The proportion of career SES members employed
in selected agencies and occupational series4 who
will be eligible to retire by the end of fiscal
year 2005 varies by agency and occupational series
and differs from the governmentwide rate of 71
percent. For instance, the Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) will have the highest SES regular
retirement eligibility rate of the 14 selected
agencies in our review. VA may have to replace a
large number of its career SES members because 82
percent of those members and 81 percent of SES
members in health system administration, who are
primarily employed at VA, will be eligible to
retire by September 30, 2005. Health system
administration will have the second highest
retirement eligibility rate of the eight selected
occupational series included in our review;
criminal investigation will have the highest.
Conversely, the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA); the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC);
and attorneys will have the lowest SES retirement
eligibility rates by September 30, 2005-65
percent, 65 percent, and 58 percent, respectively.
Both EPA and the attorney series will experience
the greatest increase in the proportion of the
career SES workforce to attain retirement
eligibility. For instance, 32 percent of the SES
employed in EPA as of September 30, 1991, became
eligible to retire by the end of fiscal year 1998,
but 65 percent of those employed as of September
30, 1998, will be eligible to retire by the end of
fiscal year 2005.

     The SES retirement trends projected for the
first few years of this decade illustrate that the
SES is an aging workforce. Because individuals
normally do not enter the SES until well into
their careers, SES retirement eligibility
generally is much higher than for the workforce in
general, but SES retirement eligibility also is
growing compared with eligibility early in the
1990s. These trends highlight the importance of
SES succession planning because the SES
retirements will result in a loss in leadership
continuity, institutional knowledge, and expertise
among the SES corps with the degree of the loss
varying among agencies and occupations. Although
we have not reviewed agencies' succession planning
efforts, available evidence suggests that formal
SES succession planning is not being done
universally. For example, SES members from more
than 24 agencies, in responding to a survey that
OPM and the Senior Executives Association (SEA)
administered in 1999, said their agencies do not
have a formal succession planning program for the
SES. Overall, over half of the respondents to the
survey said this, although the percentage of
respondents from individual agencies who said this
ranged from 17 percent to 87 percent. OPM
officials said they have not surveyed the status
of succession planning in agencies and do not plan
to do so, but the survey results confirm their
anecdotal evidence that most agencies will not
likely have formal, comprehensive succession
plans. Also, studies by the National Academy of
Public Administration (NAPA) in 1994 and 1997
showed that formal SES succession planning
generally was not being done in the federal
government.5

     We believe that placing appropriate emphasis
and attention on SES succession planning will help
agencies ensure that they have a well prepared,
qualified, and diverse group of people available
to fill career SES positions. Such emphasis and
attention on SES succession planning may be
particularly important for agencies that will have
relatively high SES retirement eligibility rates
or agencies with a significant number of career
SES members in occupational series that will have
relatively high retirement eligibility rates. We
have been on record since 1989 in discussing the
importance of succession planning as a good
management practice for any workforce planning
effort.6 In our 1989 report, we stated that
addressing turnover among SES members was one area
where agencies needed to enhance their succession
planning efforts. In 1999, we published a self-
assessment checklist for agency leaders to use as
a tool in quickly assessing their human capital
policies and practices in various areas, including
the area of succession planning.7 The checklist
suggested that agencies examine whether or not
they take steps to ensure continuity in leadership
through executive succession planning.

     Others also have recognized the importance of
placing appropriate emphasis and attention on SES
succession planning. In its 1997 study, NAPA
stated that managing succession and developing
leaders needs to be seen as a primary
responsibility of the career SES, given the
relatively short tenure of political appointees.
In 1998, the President's Management Council
(PMC)8, under the leadership of the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) which plays a role in setting
governmentwide management priorities, identified
three areas related to succession planning where
agencies could take action to strengthen their SES
corps; one of the three areas was to establish an
executive succession planning program.9 In 1999,
OPM's Inspector General (IG) identified succession
planning as a challenge facing OPM and the federal
government as a whole because of, among other
things, the relatively high percentage of SES
members who will be eligible to retire over the
next few years. The OPM IG said that OPM has
recognized the need to take a leadership role in
this area.

     According to OPM officials, agencies should
be paying more attention to succession planning.
Officials said that since OPM issued its Executive
Succession Planning Tool Kit in 1995, OPM has
provided guidance and tools to agencies to assist
them with their succession planning and workforce
planning activities. OPM officials said that OPM's
role is to provide guidance and assistance to
agencies, not to certify whether they have a
succession plan or dictate how they are supposed
to do succession planning. They said that OPM has
provided assistance to agencies either in response
to their requests or by initiating outreach
actions itself and cited several examples of how
assistance has been provided. OPM officials also
said that a workforce planning model that is to be
pilot tested in fiscal year 2000 and made
generally available to agencies in fiscal year
2001 should also be helpful to agencies in
preparing succession plans.

     While these exhortations and tools are
important, we believe that OPM, with its
responsibility for overseeing SES operations,
should take a more proactive role in assessing the
status of agencies' succession planning efforts
and assisting agencies to address this important
human capital challenge. Accordingly, we make
recommendations to that end.

     OPM's director, in providing comments on a
draft of our report, said she agrees that federal
agencies need to focus attention on SES succession
planning. However, she said she does not believe
that an OPM survey of agencies' succession
planning programs would help focus their attention
on succession planning. We did not recommend that
OPM do a survey for that purpose. Rather, we
recommended that OPM take a proactive, systematic
approach to identifying the current status of
succession planning in the federal government and
suggested a survey as one possible means for doing
so.

Background
     Career SES members can participate in several
federal civilian retirement plans, the two largest
of which are the Civil Service Retirement System
(CSRS) and the Federal Employees Retirement System
(FERS). In general, CSRS covers employees who
first entered federal service on or before
December 31, 1983, and FERS covers employees who
first entered federal service after that date. As
of September 30, 1998, the majority of career SES
members participated in CSRS. Over the next few
years, most career SES members will be FERS
participants, because CSRS has been closed to new
entrants since 1983. As more career SES members
become FERS participants, the pension portability
of FERS could have an effect on career SES
retention.

     The eligibility requirements concerning age
and years of service for regular retirement with a
full annuity generally differ under these two
federal retirement plans. Under CSRS, employees
can retire with an immediate, full annuity at ages
55, 60, and 62 with 30, 20, and 5 years of
service, respectively. Employees under FERS can
retire with an immediate, full annuity at ages 60
and 62 with 20 and 5 years of service,
respectively. Also under FERS, employees can
retire with an immediate, full annuity if they
have 30 years of service and have reached the
minimum retirement age, which ranges from ages 55
to 57 and is determined on the basis of when an
employee was born.10 For example, the minimum
retirement age for employees born in 1953 through
1969 is 56.

Scope and Methodology
For our first objective, we calculated and
compared the career SES regular retirement
eligibility rates for fiscal years 1992 to 1998
(computed on the basis of 7,160 career SES members
employed as of September 30, 1991) with the rates
for fiscal years 1999 to 2005 (computed on the
basis of 5,981 career SES members employed as of
September 30, 1998). On the basis of data from
OPM's Central Personnel Data File (CPDF), OPM's
database of federal civilian employees, we
calculated the rates governmentwide and among
selected agencies and occupational series that had
at least 100 career SES members. To calculate the
retirement eligibility rates over this 14-year
period, we used cohort analysis.11 Retirement
eligibility rates calculated as a result of cohort
analysis represent a true picture of the
cumulative percent eligible to retire among each
career SES cohort, not the percent of career SES
eligible to retire in any given year because the
calculations do not take into account those who
enter or leave the SES.

For our first objective, we also computed the
average estimated career SES yearly retirement
rate for fiscal years 1999 through 2005. We
computed the yearly rate on the basis of OPM' s
estimate of the career SES retirement rate for the
entire 7-year period and compared the average
estimated career SES retirement rate for that
period with the average actual career SES
retirement rate for the fiscal year 1992 through
1998 period. OPM's retirement estimate was based
on the actual number of career SES retirements
during fiscal years 1996 through 1998 to eliminate
the effect on the estimate of downsizing through
buyouts and other strategies that occurred during
fiscal years 1994 and 1995 and the increase in
retirements that occurred in fiscal year 1994, 3
years after the substantial 1991 SES pay increase.

     To meet our second objective, we identified
the implications of the SES retirement trends for
SES succession planning through fiscal year 2005
by making observations on the basis of our
analyses of the retirement data from objective 1,
analyses of responses to selected questions
contained in a survey that OPM and the SEA
administered in August 1999 to 6,800 SES members,
review of studies issued by NAPA in 1994 and 1997
on executive succession planning, and discussions
with OPM officials. Appendix IV provides more
details about our scope and methodology.

     We did our work in Washington, D.C., from May
1999 through March 2000 in accordance with
generally accepted government auditing standards.

Conclusions
     The results of our review of career SES
retirement trends point to the importance of
agencies placing appropriate emphasis and
attention on SES succession planning and raise the
question of whether or not agencies are doing so.
The career SES retirement trends projected through
fiscal year 2005 show that about 20 percent more
career SES members will be eligible to retire by
that date than were eligible to retire as of the
end of fiscal year 1998. In addition, the portion
of the career SES workforce that is likely to
retire by the end of fiscal year 2005 will be
slightly higher than the portion of the career SES
workforce that actually retired by the end of
fiscal year 1998. The results of a joint OPM and
SEA survey of SES members in 1999 and NAPA reports
issued in 1994 and 1997 indicated that federal
agencies generally were not doing formal SES
succession planning. Also, the PMC's
identification of executive succession planning as
an area where agencies could strengthen their SES
corps suggests that all agencies do not have a SES
succession planning program.

     From our perspective, it is important for
agencies to place appropriate emphasis and
attention on SES succession planning because it
will help prepare them to deal with the loss of
continuity in SES intellectual capital and
leadership that will result from career SES
retirements. Placing appropriate emphasis and
attention on SES succession planning will also
help agencies ensure that they have a well-
prepared, qualified, and diverse pool of SES
candidates to meet their executive resource needs.

     Although OPM recognizes the importance of
agencies doing SES succession planning, OPM
officials indicated that OPM does not plan to
identify which agencies are not doing such
planning. OPM views its role as assisting agencies
with succession planning, not certifying whether
or not they are doing succession planning or
dictating how they should do it.

Recommendations
     Given the results of our review and the
importance of succession planning as recognized by
us as well as others, we believe that OPM, in
light of its role of overseeing the SES, should
take a proactive, systematic approach to
identifying to what extent agencies are doing
formal SES succession planning. Thus, we recommend
that the Director of OPM take steps to identify
the current status of formal SES succession
planning in the federal government. These steps
could be in the form of conducting a survey of
agencies' succession planning efforts. The purpose
of the survey would be to determine whether or not
agencies have established a comprehensive, ongoing
SES succession planning program that enables them
to forecast their SES resource needs and identify
and develop a pool of qualified, diverse
individuals from which to select potential SES
candidates.

     For agencies that are not doing formal SES
succession planning, we also recommend that the
Director of OPM contact the agencies, ensure that
they are aware of tools or models that OPM or
others have available to assist agencies in doing
succession planning, and periodically follow up to
determine whether the agencies need any additional
assistance.

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation
     We provided a draft of this report to the
Director of OPM for her review and comments. The
Director of OPM provided us written comments on a
draft of this report in a letter dated May 1,
2000. These comments are reprinted in appendix V.

     OPM's director said she agreed with our
report's conclusion that federal agencies need to
focus attention on executive succession planning.
She said that effective succession planning is
central to the development of a world-class corps
of career executives who can deliver the results
that Americans expect.  She also said that OPM
would continue to provide the leadership and
technical tools that agencies need to address this
crucial issue.  She provided further elaboration
on actions that OPM has taken in the recent past
and is now taking to make sure that government
programs will not be jeopardized if large numbers
of career executives decide to retire.

     Although OPM's director agreed with our
conclusion and recognized that effective
succession planning is crucial, she said that OPM,
at this point, does not believe that an OPM survey
of agency succession planning programs would help
focus agencies' attention on succession planning.
We did not suggest a survey for the purpose of
focusing agencies' attention on succession
planning. Rather, we suggested a survey as one
possible means for OPM to identify the current
status of formal succession planning in the
federal government. Our point is that OPM should
take a systematic and proactive approach to
determining whether or not agencies are doing
effective succession planning. We believe that
such an approach, whether it be a survey or some
other means, is necessary to help OPM target its
assistance either to agencies that have not
established a succession planning program or to
agencies that are not doing effective succession
planning.

We are providing copies of this briefing report to
the Director of OPM. We are also providing copies
to Representative Dan Burton and Representative
Henry A. Waxman, Chairman and Ranking Minority
Member, respectively, Committee on Government
Reform; Representative Elijah E. Cummings, Ranking
Minority Member, Subcommittee on Civil Service,
Committee on Government Reform; Senator Fred
Thompson and Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, Chairman
and Ranking Minority Member, respectively,
Committee on Governmental Affairs; and Senator
Thad Cochran and Senator Daniel K. Akaka, Chairman
and Ranking Minority Member, respectively,
Subcommittee on International Security,
Proliferation and Federal Services, Committee on
Governmental Affairs. We will make copies
available to others upon request.

The key contributors to this briefing report are
listed in appendix VI. If you have any questions
about this report, please call me on (202) 512-
8676.

Sincerely yours,

Michael Brostek
Associate Director, Federal Management
 and Workforce Issues
_______________________________
1Career SES members are individuals with civil
service status who are appointed competitively to
SES positions and serve in positions below the top
political appointees in the executive branch of
government.
2 Regular retirement is optional retirement in
which an eligible employee may choose to retire
and receive an immediate, full annuity. For
purposes of this report, we refer to optional
retirement as regular retirement.
3OPM's retirement estimate was based on actual
retirement patterns during fiscal years 1996
through 1998 to eliminate the effect on the
estimate of downsizing through buyouts and other
strategies that occurred during fiscal years 1994
and 1995 and the increase in retirements that
occurred in fiscal year 1994, 3 years after the
substantial 1991 SES pay increase.
4 The agencies we selected were the Departments of
Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Energy, Health and
Human Services, the Interior, Justice, Labor,
Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans
Affairs; the Environmental Protection Agency; the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration; and
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The
occupational series we selected were
administration, attorney, criminal investigation,
economist, general engineering, health systems
administration, physical science, and program
management. We selected these agencies and
occupational series because each had at least 100
career SES members employed as of September 30,
1991, and September 30, 1998.
5 See The State of Executive Succession Planning
in the Federal Government, National Academy of
Public Administration, December 1994 and Managing
Succession and Developing Leadership: Growing the
Next Generation of Public Service Leaders,
National Academy of Public Administration, August
1997.
6 See Managing Human Resources: Greater OPM
Leadership Needed to Address Critical Challenges
(GAO/GGD-89-19, Jan. 19, 1989).
7 See Human Capital: A Self-Assessment Checklist
for Agency Leaders (GAO/GGD-99-179, Sept. 1999).
8 The PMC was established by a Presidential
Memorandum, dated October 1, 1993, to advise and
assist the President and the Vice President in
ensuring that the reforms adopted as a result of
the National Performance Review are carried out
throughout the executive branch. Members of the
Council include the Deputy Director for Management
at OMB, who chairs the Council; chief operating
officers at 14 departments, EPA, and 3 other
executive branch agencies designated by the
Council chair; the Director of OPM; the
Administrator of the General Services
Administration; the Secretary of the Cabinet; and
other officials of executive departments and
agencies that the President may designate from
time to time.
9 The remaining two areas identified by the PMC
were conduct periodic reviews/reassessments of SES
resource allocations and invest in continuing
executive development.
10The minimum retirement age varies depending on an
employee's year of birth. Employees who were born
in or before 1952 can retire at age 55. Those born
in 1953 through 1969 can retire at age 56, and
those born in 1970 or after can retire at age 57.
11 Cohort analysis takes a group of individuals at
a point in time and follows them across time to a
target date. Individuals do not leave (such as
retire or resign) or enter (such as promoted to
SES) the cohort during this time. We calculated
the cumulative percent of career SES eligible to
retire across each of the 7-year periods (fiscal
years 1992 through 1998 and 1999 through 2005)
after determining when each person in the cohort
became or would become eligible to retire.

Briefing Section I
Career SES Regular Retirement Trends
Page 17     GAO/GGD-00-113BR SES Retirement Trends

Note: The cumulative regular retirement
eligibility rates are as of September 30 of each
fiscal year and were computed using cohort
analysis. Cohort analysis takes a group of
individuals at a point in time and follows them
across time to a target date. No individuals leave
(such as resign or retire) or enter (such as
promoted to SES) the cohort during this time.
Rates for the 1992 to 1998 period were calculated
based on the cohort of 7,160 career SES members
employed as of September 30, 1991. Rates for the
1999 to 2005 period were calculated based on the
cohort of 5,981 career SES members employed as of
September 30, 1998. The retirement eligibility
rates calculated as a result of cohort analysis
represent a true picture of the cumulative percent
eligible to retire among each SES cohort, not the
percent of SES eligible to retire in any given
year because the calculations do not take into
account those who enter or leave the SES.
aThe 18-percent increase was computed by
subtracting the 1998 retirement eligibility rate
from the 2005 retirement eligibility rate and
dividing the difference by the 1998 rate.
Source: GAO's analysis of retirement eligibility
data contained in OPM's CPDF.

Regular Retirement Eligibility Rates Will Continue
to Increase in the Future for Selected SES Cohorts
     As of September 30, 2005, 71 percent of the
5,981 career SES members employed by the federal
government as of the end of fiscal year 1998 will
reach regular retirement eligibility. The 2005
retirement eligibility rate represents an 18-
percent increase1 over the 60 percent retirement
eligibility rate as of the end of fiscal year 1998
for the 7,160 career SES members employed as of
September 30, 1991. Over the fiscal year 1999 to
2005 period, retirement eligibility rates for the
SES cohort as of September 30, 1998, will
continually increase each year at an average rate
of about 7 percentage points each year, compared
with the average rate of increase of 5 percentage
points each year that was calculated for the
fiscal year 1992 to 1998 period.

Note: Regular retirement eligibility rates were
calculated based on the number of career SES
members employed as of September 30 of each fiscal
year between 1992 and 1998.
Source: GAO's analysis of retirement eligibility
data contained in OPM's CPDF.

Generally, Under One-Third of All Career SES
Employed Each Year From 1992 Through 1998 Were
Eligible to Retire
     Retirement eligibility calculations for a
fixed cohort, while useful for indicating the loss
of career SES members that may occur from a pool
of career SES members at a point in time, do not
show the actual yearly retirement eligibility
rates that agencies face. Eligibility rates that
take into account replacements for SES who have
retired or separated for other reasons show the
percentage of SES employed in any given year who
are eligible to retire. Thus, although regular
retirement eligibility rates calculated for the
fixed cohort of SES members employed as of
September 30, 1991, continually increased over the
1992 to 1998 period, the portion of SES members
employed each year who were eligible to retire
remained fairly stable.

     For 6 of the 7 years, the portion of employed
career SES members eligible yearly for regular
retirement was between 28 percent and 31 percent.
In 1994, the percentage was higher-37 percent.
This increase was due to SES members delaying
their retirements to earn higher average salaries
following the significant SES pay increase that
occurred in 1991. Retirement annuities are based
on the average salary for the 3 years of highest
salary.

Note: Regular retirement rates are as of September
30 of each fiscal year. The actual yearly rates
for the 1992 to 1998 period were calculated by
dividing the total number of regular retirements
each year during this 7-year period by the number
of career SES members on board as of September 30
of each fiscal year during this period. The
average actual yearly retirement rates for this 7-
year period were computed by dividing the sum of
the total number of career SES regular retirements
by the sum of the total number of career SES
members employed as of the end of each fiscal
year. The average yearly retirement rates for the
1999 to 2005 period were calculated by dividing
OPM's estimated retirement rate of 45 percent by 7
years.
aThe actual retirement rate for fiscal year 1999
was 5.9 percent; 358 career SES members retired as
of the end of that fiscal year.
Source: GAO's analysis of retirement data
contained in OPM's CPDF and of retirement
projections provided by OPM's Office of Workforce
Information.
Career SES Regular Retirement Rates for 1992 to
1998 Varied Widely; Past and Projected Rates, On
Average, Were Similar
     During the fiscal year 1992 through 1998
period, the rate at which career SES members
retired from federal service varied widely from a
low of 2 percent in 1992 to a high of 10 percent
in 1994. The retirements peaked in 1994 because
many career SES members delayed their retirements
after receiving significant salary increases in
1991. Also, the peak in retirements in 1994
coincides with the period that agencies were
planning their downsizing efforts and offered
buyouts to employees to encourage voluntary
retirements. Of the 695 career SES members who
retired during fiscal year 1994, 121 of them
received buyouts. We recognize that unanticipated
events, such as the significant SES pay increase
in 1991 and downsizing through buyouts and other
strategies, altered the retirement patterns in the
recent past and assume that such events could
affect future retirement patterns.

     If the career SES workforce remains staffed
at about 6,000 through the end of fiscal year
2005, on average 6.4 percent (384) of the career
SES workforce will likely retire each year during
fiscal years 1999 through 2005. The number of
career SES members who will have to be replaced
during this 7-year period is about 1 more for
every 100 SES members each year than the number
that had to be replaced during the 1992 to 1998
period. On average, 5.5 percent of the career SES
workforce retired each year during this period. In
total, OPM estimates that 45 percent (2,700) of
the nearly 6,000 career SES members employed as of
October 1, 1998, will retire by the end of fiscal
year 2005. A total of 39 percent of the career SES
workforce retired during fiscal years 1992 through
1998.

Note: Regular retirement rates are as of September
30 of each fiscal year. The career SES and non-SES
career retirement rates for the 1992 to 1998
period were computed by dividing the number of
regular retirements for each group of employees
during this 7-year period by the number of
employees on board in each group as of September
30 of each fiscal year .
Source: GAO's analysis of retirement data
contained in OPM's CPDF.

Career SES Employees Regular Retirement Rates
Higher Than Rates for Other Career Employees in
1992 to 1998
     Career SES employees retired at a higher rate
than other federal career employees during fiscal
years 1992 through 1998. The percentage of non-SES
career employees retiring during this 7-year
period was between 1 percent or 2 percent,
compared with 2 percent to 10 percent for career
SES employees.

     The career SES retirement rate is higher than
the non-SES career retirement rate most likely
because the career SES workforce consists of older
employees with more years of service. As of
September 30, 1998, the average age and length of
service of SES members was 52 and 23 years,
respectively. The rest of the career federal
workforce consists of younger employees with fewer
years of service, which contributes to their
retirement rate being lower than the SES
retirement rate. As of September 30, 1998, the
average age and length of service of the rest of
the federal workforce was 46 and 17 years,
respectively.

Note: Regular retirement eligibility rates as of
September 30, 1998, were calculated based on the
7,160 career SES members employed as of September
30, 1991. Rates as of September 30, 2005 were
calculated based on the 5,981 career SES members
employed as of September 30, 1998.
aDefense data include retirement eligibility rates
for career SES members in the three military
departments-Air Force, Army, and Navy-as well as
the Defense agencies.
bJustice data exclude career SES members in the
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) because FBI
does not report personnel actions to the CPDF.
Source: GAO's analysis of retirement eligibility
data contained in OPM's CPDF.
Regular Retirement Eligibility Rates for Selected
SES Cohorts Generally Will Be Higher at Certain
Agencies by the End of Fiscal Year 2005
     By the end of fiscal year 2005, the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) will have the
highest SES regular retirement eligibility rate
among the 14 selected agencies included in our
review. 2 Eighty-two percent of VA's career SES
members who were employed as of September 30,
1998, will reach regular retirement eligibility by
the end of fiscal year 2005 compared with 66
percent of its career SES members who were
employed as of September 30, 1991, who reached
retirement eligibility by the end of fiscal year
1998.

     In addition to VA, 11 other of the 14
selected agencies' career SES regular retirement
eligibility rates for 2005 will increase above the
1998 rates. For the remaining two
agencies-Interior and the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration (NASA)-the 2005 retirement
eligibility rates will be slightly below the 1998
rates.

     Of the 12 agencies that will experience an
increase in the proportion of their career SES
workforce who will be retirement eligible by 2005,
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will
experience the greatest increase. By 2005, 65
percent of EPA's career SES workforce as of
September 30, 1998, will become retirement
eligible, which represents a 103 percent increase
above the 1998 rate of 32 percent of its career
SES workforce as of September 30, 1991. The
relatively low retirement eligibility rate in 1998
for EPA career SES members appears to indicate
that EPA's career SES population as of September
30, 1991, was younger or had fewer years of
service than the career SES populations at the
other selected agencies as of that date. The
retirement eligibility rates by the end of fiscal
year 2005 for the remaining 11 agencies will range
from 5 percent to 39 percent above the 1998 rates.

     Appendix III contains the retirement
eligibility rates as of the end of each fiscal
year at each of the 14 agencies over the fiscal
year 1992 through 1998 period and the fiscal year
1999 through 2005 period.

Note: According to OPM, an official occupational
classification does not exist for positions in the
SES. Agencies tend to use broad occupational
series, such as program management, when asked
what occupational series best applies to a SES
position even though the subject matter
requirements of the position may be technical. For
the eight job series listed above, the regular
retirement eligibility rates as of September 30,
1998, were calculated based on the 7,160 career
SES members on board as of September 30, 1991.
Rates as of September 30, 2005 were calculated
based on the 5,981 career SES members on board as
of September 30, 1998.
Source: GAO's analysis of retirement eligibility
data contained in OPM's CPDF.

Regular Retirement Eligibility Rates Will Be
Higher in 7 of the 8 Most Populous Job Series,
With Criminal Investigation Series Having the
Highest Rate
     For 7 of the 8 job series that had at least
100 career SES members as of the end of fiscal
years 1991 and 1998, the retirement eligibility
rates for 2005 will be above the rates for 1998.
The attorney series will experience the greatest
increase by 2005. Fifty-eight percent of the
career SES members in this job series will be
eligible to retire by that date, which represents
a 53 percent increase above the 1998 rate of 38
percent. The one remaining job series, criminal
investigation, will have in the future, as it had
in the past, the most career SES members eligible
for retirement.3 By the end of fiscal year 2005,
89 percent of the 152 career SES members employed
in the criminal investigation series as of
September 30, 1998, will be eligible for regular
retirement, which is slightly below the 1998 rate
of 91 percent.

     Employees in the criminal investigation job
series are law enforcement personnel and are
eligible for regular retirement earlier than
nonlaw enforcement personnel. Under CSRS, the
minimum age and years of service requirement for
law enforcement personnel is age 50 with 20 years
of service, compared with age 55 and 30 years of
service for nonlaw enforcement employees. Earlier
retirement eligibility requirements for these
employees most likely contribute to career SES
employees in the criminal investigation job series
having the highest regular retirement eligibility
rate as of the end of fiscal years 1998 and 2005.

     Appendix III contains the retirement
eligibility rates as of the end of each fiscal
year for each of the eight job series over the
fiscal year 1992 through 1998 period and the
fiscal year 1999 through 2005 period.

_______________________________
1 The 18-percent increase was computed by
subtracting the 1998 retirement eligibility rate
from the 2005 retirement eligibility rate and
dividing the difference by the 1998 rate.
2 These 14 agencies were selected because each had
at least 100 career SES members employed as of
September 30, 1991, and September 30, 1998-the
points in time we chose to calculate future
retirement eligibility rates based on fixed
cohorts of SES members. The total number of career
SES members at these agencies represented 83
percent and 81 percent of the career SES
population governmentwide as of the end of fiscal
year 1991 (7,160) and fiscal year 1998 (5,981),
respectively.
3 For clarity of presentation, we selected the 8
job series that had at least 100 career SES
members at the end of fiscal years 1991 and 1998
because the number of job series with at least 100
SES members varied for these two points in time.
As of September 30, 1991, 14 job series had 100 or
more career SES members, but by the end of fiscal
year 1998, 6 of the 14 job series had less than
100 career SES members. These six job series
included aerospace engineering, budget analyst,
electronics engineering, medical officer, nuclear
engineering, and personnel management. Reductions
may have occurred in these six job series as a
result of the downsizing and retirements that
occurred during fiscal years 1994 through 1996. As
of September 30, 1998, 9 job series-the 8 listed
in the chart and the biological science series-had
at least 100 career SES members.

Briefing Section II
Implications of Career SES Regular Retirement
Trends
Page 37     GAO/GGD-00-113BR SES Retirement Trends

Career SES Retirement Trends Underscore the
Importance of Succession Planning
     The career SES retirement trends, while not
painting a picture dramatically different in most
cases from trends in the recent past, nevertheless
underscore the importance of SES succession
planning in federal agencies.  Succession plans
help agencies identify and develop potential
candidates to replace those SES members who will
retire.  They also help agencies to  position
themselves to deal with the loss of continuity in
SES intellectual capital and leadership that will
result from the potential SES retirements.

     Governmentwide, about 20 percent more of the
SES employed as of September 30, 1998, will be
eligible to retire in fiscal year 2005 than became
eligible to retire in fiscal year 1998 from the
SES employed as of September 30, 1991. Further,
the SES retirement eligibility rate will differ
among agencies and especially at an individual
occupational level. From an individual agency
perspective, the SES retirement picture also may
be considerably different now than it was in the
early 1990s.  For instance, only 32 percent of
EPA's career SES members employed as of September
30, 1991, became eligible to retire by fiscal year
1998, but 65 percent of its SES members employed
as of September 30, 1998, will become eligible to
retire by fiscal year 2005.

     The likely retirement of between, on average,
6 and 7 SES members from every 100 SES members
each year from fiscal year 1999 through 2005 is
only about 1 more for every 100 SES members who
actually retired each year between 1992 and 1998.
However, the SES retirement rate consistently
exceeded the 1 to 2 percent retirement rate of non-
SES career civil servants between 1992 and 1998.

1999 OPM/SEA Survey Results Highlight the
Importance of Succession Planning
     Over half (53 percent) of 2,400 respondents
to a 1999 OPM/SEA survey of 6,800 SES members said
their agencies do not have a formal succession
planning program for SES, such as a SES candidate
development program (CDP). Of the more than 24
agencies and departments whose SES members
responded to the survey, the percentage of
respondents who said their agencies did not have
such a program ranged from a low of 17 percent at
the Social Security Administration to a high of 87
percent at the Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD). In 13 of the 14 agencies
included in our review, the percentage of
respondents who said their agencies do not have a
formal SES succession planning program ranged from
a low of 24 percent at Agriculture (which does
have an OPM-approved SES CDP) to a high of 65
percent at the Department of Justice and the EPA
(which do not have an OPM- approved SES CDP).1

     Overall, 54 percent of the survey respondents
agreed that lack of succession planning for
replacement candidates was an obstacle to
executive mobility.  Among the individual
agencies, the percentage of respondents who agreed
ranged from 46 percent of Department of the Army's
SES respondents to 83 percent of HUD's SES
respondents.

     When SES members were asked about when they
will become eligible for retirement, 29 percent
said they were now eligible.  Of the remaining
respondents, 40 percent said they would become
eligible over the next 5 years, 18 percent said
within the next 6 to 10 years, and 12 percent said
within more than 10 years.

     Survey respondents indicated an interest in
leaving the federal government within the next
year.  Twenty-eight percent said they would
probably look for another job outside the federal
government during the next year.  Also, when asked
what would be their reasons for leaving the
federal government if they were to leave within
the next year, the top two reasons that SES survey
respondents cited were desire for a higher paying
job (53 percent) and retirement eligibility (41
percent).  Among the 13 agencies in our study, the
highest percentage of respondents who cited desire
for higher pay as a reason was VA (69 percent);
retirement eligibility was cited most by SES
respondents in Agriculture (49 percent).

NAPA and OPM Indicate That Formal Succession
Planning Has Been Rare
     NAPA studies published in 1994 and 1997
indicated that formal succession planning
generally has not been done.  NAPA reported in
19942 that the federal civil service was no closer
to a governmentwide executive succession plan than
it was at the time of its 19923 study.  NAPA
further reported in 1994 that except for a few
agencies, formal executive succession planning
generally has not been done in the federal
government.  OPM officials said that although NAPA
reported in 1994 that formal succession planning
generally had not been done in the federal
government, agencies were able to deal with the
peak in retirements and the effects of the
downsizing that occurred in 1994.  In 1997, NAPA
reported that of the 27 agencies responding to its
survey, two agencies had a succession planning
program or process; two agencies were planning to
have one in the next year; and four agencies were
planning one in the next 2 years.4

     According to OPM officials, agencies should
be paying more attention to succession planning.
OPM officials said that OPM has not done a formal
survey of agencies' succession planning efforts
and does not plan to do so. As part of the 1999
OPM/SEA survey, SES members were asked whether or
not their agencies have a formal SES succession
planning program.  Over half of the respondents to
that survey said their agencies did not have a
formal program.  These survey results confirmed
anecdotally gathered evidence on the lack of
formal succession planning in agencies, according
to OPM officials.  On the basis of anecdotal
evidence, OPM officials said they have found that
most agencies will not likely have a formal,
comprehensive succession plan.  Instead, agencies
will likely have implemented various components of
succession planning.

We and Others Have Recognized the Importance of
Succession Planning
     We have been on record since 1989 in
discussing the importance of succession planning
as a good management practice for any workforce
planning effort.5  In that report, we said that
addressing SES turnover was one area where
agencies needed to improve their succession
planning efforts.  In 1999, we published a self-
assessment checklist for agency leaders to use as
a tool in quickly assessing their human capital
policies and practices in various areas, including
succession planning.6  The checklist suggested
that agencies examine whether or not they take
steps to ensure continuity in leadership through
executive succession planning.  In assessing their
succession planning efforts, we suggest, among
other things, that agencies look for whether they
have a formal succession plan.

     Others also have recognized the importance of
agencies placing appropriate emphasis and
attention on SES succession planning. In its 1997
study, NAPA said that managing succession and
developing leaders needed to be seen as a primary
responsibility of the career SES given the
relatively short tenure of political appointees.
The PMC, under OMB's leadership in setting
governmentwide management priorities, identified
three areas related to succession planning where
agencies could take action to better manage the
SES corps. OPM said that the PMC identified the
three areas in 1998 as part of its joint effort
with OPM in exploring actions that should be taken
to prepare the SES for the 21st century. The three
areas that were identified consisted of (1)
conducting periodic reviews or reassessments of
SES resource allocations, (2) establishing an
executive succession program, and (3) investing in
continuing executive development.

     In December 1999, OPM's IG, in response to a
request from Senate congressional leaders to
provide an assessment of the most serious
management challenges facing OPM, identified
succession planning as a challenge facing OPM and
the federal government as a whole in light of (1)
the relatively high percentage of SES members who
will be eligible to retire over the next few
years, (2) the dwindling pool of individuals who
will be available for future SES positions due to
governmentwide downsizing and the lower birth
rates of the late 1960s and 1970, and (3) the
government's ability to compete with private
industry for top talent that increasingly is in
demand.  The OPM IG said that OPM has recognized
the need to take a leadership role in this area.

OPM's View of Its Role Regarding Succession
Planning
     OPM, the central management agency
responsible for overseeing SES operations, sees
its role as providing succession planning guidance
and assistance to agencies, according to OPM
officials.  Since issuance of OPM's Executive
Succession Planning Tool Kit , in 1995, they said
OPM has been working with agencies on succession
planning and workforce planning. They said that
OPM's role is not to certify whether or not
agencies have a succession plan or dictate how
they should do succession planning.

     OPM officials cited several examples of
succession planning and workforce planning
assistance that OPM has provided agencies either
in response to their requests or by initiating
actions itself.  For instance, in response to
agencies' requests, OPM said that it has given
advice to agencies, such as the Bureau of the
Census and the Department of Agriculture's Forest
Service, on how they can improve their internal
capacity for succession planning.  OPM said it
developed a succession planning program for the
U.S. Mint that focused on its currency business
line.  OPM also said it has worked with the
General Services Administration's Public Buildings
Service on management succession and workforce
planning.

     OPM also has taken the lead in assisting
agencies with their succession planning and
workforce planning activities.  For example, as
part of its fiscal year 2000 strategic planning
and annual performance planning process, OPM's
Office of Employment Service has committed to
having a data-driven model for workforce planning,
analysis, and forecasting available to agencies in
fiscal year 2001.  The model is to be pilot tested
before the end of fiscal year 2000, according to
OPM officials.  Also by the end of fiscal year
2000, OPM said that it will have state-of-the-art
tools and strategies for recruitment, selection,
and succession planning.  OPM envisions that the
tools and strategies will help agencies select
from a diverse pool of applicants for mission
critical occupations.  OPM's Office of Executive
Resources has committed to take action to focus
agencies' attention on the importance of executive
resources planning and analysis, including
succession planning, to meet current and future
mission requirements.  OPM envisions that agencies
will integrate these activities into their
strategic plans.

_______________________________
1In providing technical comments on a draft of our
report, an OPM official said that SES members from
more than 24 agencies and departments responded to
the survey. This official also said that the
survey was sent to SES members at NRC, and most
likely some of them responded. NRC was one of the
14 agencies included in our review. However, the
official did not know and would not be able to
provide us information on how many SES members
responded from NRC and other agencies that were
not listed among the 24 agencies and departments,
because there is no way to identify the agencies
of the respondents who checked "other" when asked
to identify their current agencies.
2 See The State of Executive Succession Planning
in the Federal Government  National Academy of
Public Administration, December 1994.
3 See Paths to Leadership :  Executive Succession
Planning in the Federal Government  National
Academy of Public Administration, December 1992.
4 See Managing Succession and Developing
Leadership:  Growing the Next Generation of Public
Service Leaders National Academy of Public
Administration, August 1997.
5 See Managing Human Resources:  Greater OPM
Leadership Needed to Address Critical Challenges
(GAO/GGD-89-19). Jan. 19, 1989).
6 See Human Capital:  A Self-Assessment Checklist
for Agency Leaders (GAO/GGD-99-179, Sept. 1999).

Appendix I
Early Retirement Trends - Fiscal Years 1992
Through 1998 and 1999 Through 2005
Page 42     GAO/GGD-00-113BR SES Retirement Trends
Early Retirement Trends
Tables I.1 through I.4 describe the trends in
early retirement eligibility in selected agencies
and in selected occupational series for fiscal
years 1992 through 1998 and projected trends for
fiscal years 1999 through 2005.  Figure I.1
describes how the actual early retirement rates
for fiscal years 1992 through 1998 compare with
the rates projected for fiscal years 1999 through
2005.  Figure I.2 shows that career SES employees
retired early at a higher rate than other career
employees during fiscal years 1992 through 1998.

Employees can retire early under CSRS and FERS
with an immediate, full or reduced annuity. Under
CSRS, employees can retire early with a full
annuity at age 55 with 20 years of service.  They
can also retire with a reduced annuity at (1) any
age under 50 with 25 years of service or (2) age
50 with 20 years of service.  Under FERS,
employees can retire early with a full annuity at
any age with 25 years of service or at age 50 with
20 years of service.  Employees can also retire
early with a reduced annuity under FERS at age 55
with 10 years of service.  However, employees,
including SES members, can retire early if their
agencies seek and obtain authority from OPM or
Congress to offer early retirements and their
agencies include their positions among those
offered the early retirement option.

Table I.1:  Early Retirement Eligibility Rates
Each Year During Fiscal Years 1992 to 1998 by
Selected Agencies
Agency                Number of Percentage of career SES eligible for early
                     career SES        retirement as of September 30:
                                      1992  1993  1994 1995  1996  1997 1998
Agriculture                 302        32    32    31   27    26    24   22
Commerce                    367        35    34    32   35    32    30   27
Defense (Army,            1,404        37    37    37   34    33    30   27
Navy, and Air
Force included)
Energy                      478        36    38    40   38    36    36   34
Environmental               254        27    33    35   41    45    44   46
Protection Agency
Health and Human            481        30    31    29   29    28    28   26
Services
Interior                    234        33    30    31   30    26    23   19
Justice (FBI                296        26    26    29   30    32    28   26
excluded)
Labor                       150        35    35    39   42    39    40   36
National                    568        39    34    30   26    23    20   18
Aeronautics and
Space
Administration
Nuclear Regulatory          212        32    36    37   38    39    39   35
Commission
Transportation              374        34    36    37   38    36    34   30
Treasury                    509        37    38    38   37    38    34   29
Veterans Affairs            317        39    38    41   41    38    35   30
Note:  Data in this table are for career SES
employed as of September 30, 1991.
Source:  GAO's calculation of early retirement
eligibility rates based on retirement data
contained in OPM's CPDF.

Table I.2:  Early Retirement Eligibility Rates
Each Year During Fiscal Years 1999 to 2005 by
Selected Agencies
Agency                  Number of   Percentage of career SES  eligible for
                       career SES                    early
                                        retirement as of September 30:
                                     1999  2000  2001  2002 2003  2004  2005
Agriculture                   279     43    39    36    30   25    21    17
Commerce                      309     42    40    36    30   26    22    17
Defense (Army, Navy,        1,105     44    40    35    28   23    19    17
and Air Force
included)
Energy                        374     47    46    43    35   31    25    21
Environmental                 230     47    47    43    41   37    31    29
Protection Agency
Health and Human              418     34    31    28    25   22    18    14
Services
Interior                      186     45    45    40    32   27    24    22
Justice (FBI                  365     26    26    27    24   22    24    21
excluded)
Labor                         118     50    47    44    35   31    23    18
National Aeronautics          379     30    28    26    24   26    23    20
and Space
Administration
Nuclear Regulatory            180     48    49    49    48   43    37    29
Commission
Transportation                184     42    41    39    36   29    26    18
Treasury                      471     45    43    42    35   30    24    20
Veterans Affairs              261     59    53    45    34   25    20    14
Note:  Data in this table are for career SES
employed as of September 30, 1998.
Source: GAO's calculation of early retirement
eligibility rates based on retirement data
contained in OPM's CPDF.

Table I.3: Early Retirement Eligibility Rates Each
Year During Fiscal Years 1992 to 1998 by Selected
Occupational Series
Occupational series     Number of    Percentage of career SES eligible for
                       career SES                    early
                                        retirement as of September 30:
                                    1992  1993  1994  1995   1996 1997 1998
Administration (301)          785     35    36    38    39     39   37   33
Attorney (905)                737     22    25    29    31     35   39   39
Criminal                      125     15    12    10    11     14   10    4
investigation (1811)
Economist (110)               136     33    40    40    38     37   43   36
General engineering           739     39    37    35    32     29   27   22
(801)
Health system admin.          172     41    39    41    41     35   29   25
(670)
Physical science              527     39    38    35    34     31   27   24
(1301)
Program management          1,275     37    39    39    40     38   35   32
(340)
Note:  Data in this table are for career SES
employed as of September 30, 1991.
Source: GAO's calculation of early retirement
eligibility rates based on retirement data
contained in OPM's CPDF.

Table I.4: Early Retirement Eligibility Rates Each
Year During Fiscal Years 1999 to 2005 by Selected
Occupational Series
Occupational series      Number of   Percentage of career SES eligible for
                        career SES                   early
                                         retirement as of September 30:
                                     1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004 2005
Administration (301)           803    43    41    36    32    28    22   19
Attorney (905)                 783    38    41    41    38    36    31   26
Criminal investigation         152     7     8     7     5     4     2    1
(1811)
Economist (110)                109    38    32    32    31    29    28   25
General engineering            490    38    33    28    23    20    17   14
(801)
Health system admin.           140    61    54    46    34    26    21   14
(670)
Physical science               315    35    34    28    21    19    17   14
(1301)
Program management           1,167    49    47    43    38    32    25   20
(340)
Note:  Data in this table are for career SES
employed as of September 30, 1998.
Source: GAO's calculation of early retirement
eligibility rates based on retirement data
contained in OPM's CPDF.

Figure I.1: About 1 Percent, On Average, of Career
SES Retired Early in 1992 to 1998 and Similar
Trend Projected Over the Next 7 Years

Source:  GAO's calculations of actual and
projected retirement rates based on retirement
data contained in OPM's CPDF and OPM's retirement
projections for the 1999 through 2005 period.

Figure I.2: Career SES Employees Generally Retired
Early at a Higher Rate Than Other Career Employees

Source:  GAO's calculation of actual early
retirement rates based on retirement data
contained in OPM's CPDF.

Appendix II
Career SES Appointments, Accessions, and
Separations for Fiscal Years 1992 Through 1998
Page 44     GAO/GGD-00-113BR SES Retirement Trends
Career SES Appointments, Accessions, and
Separations
     The following tables provide data for each
year during fiscal years 1992 through 1998 on the
number of

ï¿½    SES appointments filled by career SES members
 and changes in the portion of these appointments
 filled by career SES (see table II.1),
ï¿½    career SES accessions and separations (see
table II.2),
ï¿½    career SES accessions by type--appointments
of individuals to SES from outside the federal
government or from another federal agency and
promotions of employees to SES from within their
agencies (see table II.3), and
ï¿½    career SES separations by type, such as
 retirements, resignations, and removals (see table
 II.4).
 

Table II.1:  Changes in Portion of SES
Appointments Occupied by Career SES Members in
1992 to 1998
Fiscal year     Total SES   Number of   Percentage
              appointment  career SES       of SES
                  s as of     members appointments
                September                filled by
                       30               career SES
1992                8,200       7,366           90
1993                7,816       7,340           94
1994                7,509       6,640           88
1995                7,294       6,449           88
1996                6,985       6,191           89
1997                6,885       6,052           88
1998                6,804       5,981           88
Total             (1,396)     (1,385)             
increase (or
decrease)
Percentage of       (21%)       (23%)             
increase (or
decrease)
Source: OPM's CPDF.

Table II.2:  Career SES Accessions and Separations
During the 1992 to 1998 Period
Fiscal              Total       Total   Difference
year          accessionsa separationsb
1992                 496          218          278
1993                 322          332          -10
1994                 486        1,084         -598
1995                 668          771         -103
1996                 547          547            0
1997                 522          531           -9
1998                 585          591           -6
Total              3,626        4,074         -448
aIncludes individuals hired from outside the
federal government, individuals promoted to SES
from within and outside their federal agencies,
and reinstatements.
bIncludes retirements, resignations, and other
separations, such as deaths and removals.
Source:  GAO's analysis of accession and
separation data contained in OPM's CPDF.

Table II.3: Number of Career SES Accessions Each
Year During Fiscal Years 1992 Through 1998 By Type
Fiscal     Appointments   Promotions         Total
Year       from outside    into SESb    accessions
             an agencya
1992                 93          403           496
1993                 53          269           322
1994                 87          399           486
1995                119          549           668
1996                 78          469           547
1997                 84          438           522
1998                128          457           585
Total               642        2,984         3,626
aIncludes individuals appointed to SES from
outside the federal government and from another
federal agency.
bIncludes employees promoted to the SES from
within their agencies.
Source: OPM's CPDF.

Table II.4: Number of Career SES Separations Each
Year During Fiscal Years 1992 to 1998, by Type
Fiscal        Retirements         Resignations          Other         Total
year                                             separationsc   separations
         Regular Early   Othera Volunt Resignatio              
                                  ary ns in lieu
                                             ofb
1992         123    1        4     59          5           26           218
1993         216    4       12     61         16           23           332
1994         695   74      135    109         40           31         1,084
1995         476  185       18     68          2           22           771
1996         334  117       21     59          3           13           547
1997         333  101       17     65          0           15           531
1998         376   99       11     84          7           14           591
Total      2,553  581      218    505         73          144         4,074
aOther retirements include disability retirements,
mandatory retirements, and retirements in lieu of
involuntary actions, such as a reduction in force
(RIF) and transfer to an unwanted location.
bThis type of resignation includes resignations in
lieu of involuntary actions such as transfer to an
unwanted location or a RIF.
cOther separations include deaths,
decertifications, removals, RIFs, and
terminations.
Source:  OPM's CPDF.

Appendix III
Regular Retirement Eligibility Rates By Selected
Agencies and Occupational Series for Fiscal Years
1992-1998 and 1999-2005
Page 47     GAO/GGD-00-113BR SES Retirement Trends

Regular Retirement Eligibility Rates by Selected
Agencies and Occupational Series
     For each of the 14 selected agencies included
in our study, we describe the career SES regular
retirement eligibility rates for fiscal years 1992
through 1998 and for fiscal years 1999 through
2005 in tables III.1 and III.2, respectively.
Tables III.3 and III.4 describe the career SES
regular retirement rates for the eight selected
occupational series for these same two time
periods.

Table III.1:  Regular Retirement Eligibility Rates
Each Year During Fiscal Years 1992 to 1998 by
Selected Agencies
Agency               Number of     Percentage of career SES eligible for
                    career SES                    regular
                                       retirement as of September 30:
                                  1992  1993  1994   1995   1996   1997 1998
Agriculture                302     40    46    52     58     63     68   73
Commerce                   367     29    36    42     46     53     58   63
Defense (Army,           1,404     33    39    44     50     56     61   66
Navy, and Air Force
included)
Energy                     478     18    23    29     36     41     46   51
Environmental              254     11    14    18     20     24     29   32
Protection Agency
Health and Human           481     35    40    46     50     55     60   65
Services
Interior                   234     38    44    49     53     58     63   69
Justice (FBI               296     30    35    40     45     48     56   62
excluded)
Labor                      150     27    34    38     41     45     51   57
National                   568     39    47    55     60     66     71   75
Aeronautics and
Space
Administration
Nuclear Regulatory         212     18    25    29     33     38     42   49
Commission
Transportation             374     32    37    43     45     51     56   63
Treasury                   509     25    29    34     40     46     55   61
Veterans Affairs           317     30    37    41     46     53     59   66
Note:  Data in this table are for career SES
employed as of September 30, 1991.
Source:  GAO's calculation of retirement
eligibility rates based on retirement data
contained in OPM's CPDF.

Table III.2:  Regular Retirement Eligibility Rates
Each Year During Fiscal Years 1999 to 2005 by
Selected Agencies
Agency              Number of  Percentage of career SES eligible for regular
                   career SES         retirement as of September 30:
                                 1999   2000    2001  2002 2003  2004   2005
Agriculture               279     36     43      51    59   66    72     77
Commerce                  309     34     40      48    56   64    70     77
Defense (Army,          1,105     31     39      46    55   64    70     74
Navy, and Air
Force included)
Energy                    374     24     31      39    50   57    66     71
Environmental             230     20     26      36    43   51    60     65
Protection Agency
Health and Human          418     36     41      47    53   60    66     72
Services
Interior                  186     26     31      38    50   58    64     68
Justice (FBI              365     42     46      51    57   61    63     69
excluded)
Labor                     118     30     39      47    57   63    71     77
National                  379     40     46      51    56   59    65     70
Aeronautics and
Space
Administration
Nuclear Regulatory        180     23     29      36    41   49    56     65
Commission
Transportation            184     36     42      49    53   63    69     77
Treasury                  471     28     35      40    51   58    66     71
Veterans Affairs          261     26     34      44    56   67    74     82
Note:  Data in this table are for career SES
employed as of September 30, 1998.
Source: GAO's calculation of retirement
eligibility rates based on retirement data
contained in OPM's CPDF.

Table III.3: Regular Retirement Eligibility Rates
Each Year During Fiscal Years 1992 to 1998 by
Selected Occupational Series
Occupational        Number of  Percentage of career SES eligible for regular
series             career SES         retirement as of September 30:
                                  1992  1993   1994  1995   1996   1997 1998
Administration            785      25    30     34    37     43     48   55
(301)
Attorney (905)            737      17    20     22    26     28     33   38
Criminal                  125      42    53     64    71     76     83   91
investigation
(1811)
Economist (110)           136      20    21     25    30     36     40   51
General                   739      34    42     49    55     60     65   70
engineering (801)
Health system             172      36    45     48    52     60     69   73
admin. (670)
Physical science          527      28    36     43    49     55     61   66
(1301)
Program management      1,275      25    30     36    40     46     53   58
(340)
Note:  Data in this table are for career SES
employed as of September 30, 1991.
Source: GAO's calculation of retirement
eligibility rates based on retirement data
contained in OPM's CPDF.

Table III.4: Regular Retirement Eligibility Rates
Each Year During Fiscal Years 1999 to 2005 by
Selected Occupational Series
Occupational series   Number of    Percentage of career SES eligible for
                     career SES                   regular
                                       retirement as of September 30:
                                   1999   2000  2001 2002   2003  2004  2005
Administration              803     25     32    39   47     55    62    67
(301)
Attorney (905)              783     21     24    30   37     42    50    58
Criminal                    152     66     70    74   81     84    87    89
investigation
(1811)
Economist (110)             109     32     39    44   48     53    57    61
General engineering         490     41     49    56   64     70    75    79
(801)
Health system               140     25     34    43   56     65    73    81
admin. (670)
Physical science            315     37     45    53   62     69    74    77
(1301)
Program management        1,167     27     34    42   51     59    68    74
(340)
Note:  Data in this table are for career SES
employed as of September 30, 1998.
Source: GAO's calculation of retirement
eligibility rates based on retirement data
contained in OPM's CPDF.

Appendix IV
Scope and Methodology
Page 50     GAO/GGD-00-113BR SES Retirement Trends
Calculation of Retirement Eligibility Rates
To meet our first objective of identifying the
likely trends in career SES retirements through
fiscal year 2005 and comparing them with the
trends as of fiscal year-end 1998, we first
examined the trend in regular retirement
eligibility among career SES members
governmentwide and among selected agencies and
occupational series. We calculated the career SES
regular retirement eligibility rates for fiscal
years 1992 to 1998 (computed on the basis of 7,160
career SES members employed as of September 30,
1991) with the rates for fiscal years 1999 to 2005
(computed on the basis of 5,981 career SES members
employed as of September 30, 1998).   We used data
from OPM's CPDF, OPM's database of federal
civilian employees, to calculate the retirement
eligibility rates.

We used cohort analysis to calculate the
retirement eligibility rates governmentwide and
among selected agencies and occupational series
over this 14-year period. Cohort analysis takes a
group of individuals at a point in time and
follows them across time to a target date.
Individuals do not leave (such as retire or
resign) or enter (such as hired or promoted into
SES) the cohort during this time. We calculated
the cumulative percent of career SES eligible to
retire across each of the 7-year periods (1992
through 1998 and 1999 through 2005) after
determining when each person in the cohort became
or would become eligible to retire. Retirement
eligibility rates calculated as a result of cohort
analysis represent a true picture of the
cumulative percent eligible to retire among each
career SES cohort, not the percent of career SES
eligible to retire in any given year because the
calculations do not take into account those who
enter or leave the SES. In calculating the
retirement eligibility rates, we assumed that the
career SES members had no breaks in federal
service.

     We then compared the retirement eligibility
rates of career SES members governmentwide for
fiscal years 1992 through 1998 with the retirement
eligibility rates for fiscal years 1999 through
2005. We also compared the retirement eligibility
rates over this 14-year period for 14 agencies and
8 occupational series.  We selected these agencies
and occupational series because each had at least
100 career SES members as of September 30, 1991,
and September 30, 1998-the points in time we chose
to calculate future retirement eligibility rates
based on fixed cohorts of career SES members. The
FBI, an agency within the Department of Justice
was excluded from our review because actual
retirement data on FBI employees are not available
in OPM's CPDF. The purpose of our comparisons was
to identify the extent of changes in the
eligibility rates over time by selected agencies
and by selected occupational series.

Calculation of Projected Retirement Rate for
Fiscal Years 1999 Through 2005
     Also for our first objective, we computed the
average estimated annual SES retirement rate for
fiscal years 1999 through 2005 on the basis of
OPM's estimate of the SES retirement rate for that
entire 7-year period. To estimate the number of
career SES retirements that would likely occur
during October 1, 1998, through September 30,
2005, OPM examined actual regular retirements that
occurred during fiscal years1996 through 1998.
OPM's estimate was based on retirement patterns
during this 3-fiscal year period to eliminate the
effect on the estimate of downsizing and buyouts
that occurred in 1994 and 1995 and the increase in
retirements that occurred in 1994, 3 years after
the substantial 1991 SES pay increase. Because
OPM's retirement estimate was based on actual
retirement patterns that took place during fiscal
years 1996 through 1998, we are not able to
definitively say that this same retirement pattern
will continue in fiscal years 1999 through 2005.

     Career SES members employed as of October 1,
1995, and separately as of October 1, 1997, were
categorized into intervals defined by the number
of years that their retirement eligibility dates
were before or after those respective dates.  For
October 1, 1995, employment, the proportion of
individuals in an interval who retired between
October 1, 1995, and September 30, 1998, estimated
the probability of retiring during a 3-year
period.  Similarly, for October 1, 1997,
employment, the proportion of individuals in an
interval who retired between October 1, 1997, and
September 30, 1998, estimated the probability of
retiring during a 1-year period.  Separate
retirement probabilities were made for employees
in CSRS and FERS.  These 3-year and 1-year
retirement probabilities were applied to career
SES members employed as of October 1, 1998, to
estimate retirement probabilities for a 7-year
period.  The number of career SES members in a
particular interval who were predicted not to
retire during the first 3 and/or 6 years were
"aged" to place them in the appropriate interval
for predicting their retirement probability during
the next 3 and/or 1 year time periods.  Retirement
projections were made separately for CSRS and FERS
employees, and then the results were combined.

     We compared the average estimated annual SES
retirement rate for the fiscal year 1999 through
2005 period with the average actual SES retirement
rate for the fiscal year 1992 through 1998 period.
The purpose of this comparison was to provide some
context of how the estimated future SES retirement
rate related to the SES retirement rate of the
recent past. We also computed the average
retirement rates for SES and non-SES career
employees for each fiscal year between 1992 and
1998. We then compared the retirement rates for
these two groups to provide some perspective on
whether career SES employees retired at a higher
or lower rate than other career employees during
fiscal years 1992 through 1998.

Bases for Retirement Implications
     To meet our second objective of identifying
the implications of the SES retirement trends
through fiscal year 2005, we made observations on
the basis of our analyses of the retirement data
from objective 1, analyses of responses to
selected questions contained in a survey that OPM
and SEA administered in August 1999 to 6,800 SES
members, review of studies issued by NAPA in 1994
and 1997 on executive succession planning, and
discussions with OPM officials. The SES survey
sought the views of career, noncareer, and limited
term SES members on various aspects of the SES.1
A total of 2,470 SES members responded to the
survey-2,362 (96 percent) career SES, 86 (3
percent) noncareer SES, and 22 (1 percent) limited
term SES.

     For purposes of identifying implications of
the SES retirement trends, our analyses of the SES
survey results focused on whether or not a
substantial portion of the respondents indicated,
for example, that their agencies did not have a
formal succession planning program for SES or that
they might leave the federal government in the
next year. In doing our analyses of the responses
to selected questions contained in the SES survey,
we used summary data provided by OPM. OPM provided
us summary data to protect the confidentiality of
the survey respondents.

     In addition to providing data on regular
retirement trends and the implications of these
trends, we developed and reviewed data on career
SES early retirement trends for fiscal years 1992
through 1998 and for fiscal years 1999 through
2005. We also obtained and reviewed data for each
fiscal year between 1992 and 1998 on the number of
(1) SES appointments filled by career SES members;
(2) career SES accessions (promotions and outside
hires); and (3) career SES separations, such as
retirements, resignations, and reductions in
force.

     We provided a draft of this report to the
Director of OPM for her review and comments. The
Director of OPM provided us written comments on a
draft of this report in a letter dated May 1,
2000. These comments are reprinted in appendix V.

     We did our work in Washington, D.C., from May
1999 through March 2000 in accordance with
generally accepted government auditing standards.

_______________________________
1 The following four types of appointments exist
within the SES: (1) career appointments, which are
made through a competitive process by OPM's
Qualifications Review Board; (2) noncareer
appointments, which are made by agencies after
receiving noncareer appointing authority from OPM;
(3) limited-term appointments, which are
nonrenewable and noncompetitive appointments for
up to 3 years in position that will expire; and
(4) limited-emergency appointments, which are
nonrenewable and noncompetitive appointments for
up to 18 months to meet an urgent need.  OPM must
approve each proposed use of limited appointment
authority.

Appendix V
Comments From OPM
Page 53     GAO/GGD-00-113BR SES Retirement Trends

Appendix VI
GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments
Page 54     GAO/GGD-00-113BR SES Retirement Trends
GAO Contacts
Michael Brostek (202) 512-8676

Acknowledgments
     In addition to the individuals named above,
Richard W. Caradine, Mary Y. Martin, Gregory H.
Wilmoth, Steven J. Berke, Alan N. Belkin,
Katherine M. Raheb, and Jena Y. Sinkfield made key
contributions to this report.

*** End of Document ***