Federal Employment: How Government Jobs Are Viewed on Some College
Campuses (Letter Report, 09/09/94, GAO/GGD-94-181).
GAO discussed the federal government's image and competitive posture
among new graduates with placement officials at 13 colleges and
universities. GAO also surveyed students who had graduated during the
1991-92 academic year from four other universities. As a rule, the
placement officials GAO interviewed said that graduates of their schools
had little interest in working for the federal government. The reasons
mentioned most often were (1) low, noncompetitive starting salaries; (2)
burdensome and lengthy hiring process; (3) inadequate and ineffective
federal recruiting; (4) poor image of government work and employees; and
(5) lack of information on federal job availability. The graduates
responding to GAO's survey tended to confirm the placement officials'
views. Overall, more than 75 percent of the 884 respondents who had
sought employment or remained in the jobs they had before graduation
said that they did not apply for federal jobs. Of the 884 graduates, 224
said that they had not landed suitable jobs at the time they completed
their questionnaires. Yet, about 70 percent of these respondents said
that they did not seek federal job opportunities. In general, the
respondents' views of federal employment were not based on firsthand
information. The sources most often cited as the basis for their
opinions were "general observations" and "common knowledge." Office of
Personnel Management (OPM) officials said that the findings underscored
the need to make the government a more attractive employer. OPM
officials described several changes in federal recruiting, hiring, and
job information dissemination. The officials stressed, however, that the
government is downsizing and there will be fewer opportunities for new
college graduate to find federal jobs in the next several years.
--------------------------- Indexing Terms -----------------------------
REPORTNUM: GGD-94-181
TITLE: Federal Employment: How Government Jobs Are Viewed on Some
College Campuses
DATE: 09/09/94
SUBJECT: Hiring policies
Personnel management
Personnel recruiting
Surveys
Fair employment programs
Federal agencies
Public service employment
Public relations
Colleges/universities
Career planning
IDENTIFIER: Outstanding Scholar Program
Administrative Careers with America Program
Federal Occupation and Career Information Program
**************************************************************************
* 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. Major divisions and subdivisions *
* of the text, such as Chapters, Sections, and Appendixes, are *
* identified by double and single lines. The numbers on the right end *
* of these lines indicate the position of each of the subsections in the *
* document outline. These numbers do NOT correspond with the page *
* numbers of the printed product. *
* *
* No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although figure *
* captions are reproduced. Tables are included, but may not resemble *
* those in the printed version. *
* *
* A printed copy of this report may be obtained from the GAO Document *
* Distribution Facility by calling (202) 512-6000, by faxing your *
* request to (301) 258-4066, or by writing to P.O. Box 6015, *
* Gaithersburg, MD 20884-6015. We are unable to accept electronic orders *
* for printed documents at this time. *
**************************************************************************
Cover
================================================================ COVER
Report to Congressional Committees
September 1994
FEDERAL EMPLOYMENT - HOW
GOVERNMENT JOBS ARE VIEWED ON SOME
COLLEGE CAMPUSES
GAO/GGD-94-181
Federal Employment: How Government Jobs Are Viewed
Abbreviations
=============================================================== ABBREV
ACWA - Administrative Careers With America
OPM - Office of Personnel Management
Letter
=============================================================== LETTER
B-258083
September 9, 1994
The Honorable John Glenn
Chairman
The Honorable William V. Roth, Jr.
Ranking Minority Member
Committee on Governmental Affairs
United States Senate
The Honorable William L. Clay
Chairman
The Honorable John T. Myers
Ranking Minority Member
Committee on Post Office
and Civil Service
House of Representatives
During the past several years, studies by our office have shown that
federal agencies were at a disadvantage in recruiting and retaining
employees.\1 We believe this situation is cause for concern, since
attracting bright people to public service is an important step in
building and maintaining a quality federal workforce for the future.
To shed additional light on this issue, we prepared this report under
our statutory authority and not at the request of the Committees. We
are addressing the report to you since the matters fall under your
Committees' jurisdictions. The report is intended to provide
information and analysis on new college graduates' attitudes and
perceptions about the federal service.
We used two approaches to obtain information on how new college
graduates view federal service as a career choice. First, we
discussed the federal government's image and competitive posture
among new graduates with placement officials at 13 colleges and
universities. (See app. II for a listing of the schools.) We
selected these 13 schools to obtain a mix of geographic locations,
enrollment sizes, levels of minority enrollment, and public or
private funding. Second, we administered a questionnaire survey to
individuals who graduated during the 1991-1992 academic year from
four other universities. These four schools were selected using the
same criteria as that used for the placement official interviews.
The individuals surveyed were those who had received bachelor's
degrees in the areas of engineering, business and management, social
sciences, agriculture and natural resources, mathematics, and health
professions. According to the Office of Personnel Management (OPM),
these were the areas of study for about 80 percent of new federal
hires with college degrees.
The four schools whose graduates we surveyed included a private
university located in the East, a predominantly minority public
university located in the South, and two public universities located
in the Midwest and West. We do not identify these schools because of
privacy and confidentiality concerns for the graduates and
institutions. Rather, we refer to them as School 1, School 2, School
3, and School 4 for reporting purposes. General descriptive
information about the schools is in appendix III.
Between December 1992 and April 1993, 985 graduates returned usable
questionnaires.\2 Of these 985 graduates, 884 said they had sought
employment as of the time they responded to the questionnaire or
remained in the jobs they had before graduation. The remaining 101
graduates said they either had not sought employment or had decided
to pursue graduate degrees immediately upon completion of their
undergraduate studies. Although limited in its coverage, this survey
was the first effort of which we are aware in which firsthand
information has been obtained from new college graduates on how they
view the federal government as a potential employer.
The interviews with placement officials and the graduate survey
provided insights into the thoughts and considerations of recent
college graduates as they went through the job search process.
However, because the colleges and universities included in our study
were not statistically valid random samples of all colleges and
universities in the United States, it cannot be presumed that the
study results represented the views of all college graduates. More
information about the objective, scope, and methodology for this
report is included in appendix I. Appendix IV contains all questions
asked of the graduates and their responses by school.
--------------------
\1 See, for example, Recruitment and Retention: Inadequate Federal
Pay Cited as Primary Problem by Agency Officials (GAO/GGD-90-117,
Sept. 11, 1990), Federal Recruiting: College Placement Officials'
Views of the Government's Campus Outreach Efforts (GAO/GGD-92-48BR,
Jan. 31, 1992), and Federal Recruiting: Comparison of Applicants
Who Accepted or Declined Federal Job Offers (GAO/GGD-92-61BR, Mar.
20, 1992).
\2 A usable questionnaire was one received from a respondent who
received a bachelor's degree between September 1, 1991, and August
31, 1992; received a degree in one of the selected fields of study;
and completed the questionnaire.
RESULTS IN BRIEF
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :1
As a rule, the placement officials we interviewed said graduates of
their schools had little interest in working for the federal
government. The officials identified several reasons for the
graduates' attitudes. The reasons mentioned most frequently were (1)
low, noncompetitive starting salary; (2) burdensome and lengthy
hiring process; (3) inadequate and ineffective federal recruiting;
(4) poor image of government work and employees; and (5) lack of
information on federal job availability.
The graduates responding to our survey tended to confirm the
placement officials' views. Although the results varied somewhat by
school, the respondents generally believed the factors important to
them in selecting an employer were more often present in nonfederal
employment than in federal employment. For example, only 13 percent
of the 884 respondents who had sought employment or remained in the
jobs they had before graduation thought federal employment was
superior in the factor most commonly cited as being important in
graduates' employment decisions: opportunities for career growth.
Overall, more than 75 percent of the 884 respondents who had sought
employment or remained in the jobs they had before graduation said
they did not apply for federal jobs. They gave reasons similar to
those mentioned by the placement officials: lack of information, low
starting salaries, burdensome application process, and inadequate
federal recruiting. Of the 884 graduates, 249 said they had not yet
located suitable employment at the time they completed their
questionnaires. Yet, about 70 percent of these respondents said they
did not seek federal job opportunities.
In general, the respondents' views of federal employment were not
based on firsthand information. The sources most often cited as the
basis for their opinions were "general observations" and "common
knowledge." "Job recruiters" were cited as a source of information by
only 12 percent of all respondents who had sought employment or
remained in the jobs they had before graduation.
In commenting on our review results, OPM officials said the findings
confirmed the need for the actions OPM was taking to make the
government a more attractive employer. The officials described a
number of changes in federal recruiting, hiring, and job information
dissemination practices that had been made, or were in process or
planned, to improve the government's competitive posture. They said
they believed our findings would be more positive if the review were
repeated today. The officials stressed, however, that the government
is downsizing and there will be reduced opportunities in the next
several years for new college graduates to find federal jobs. While
we did not examine the actions the OPM officials described, the
actions appear to be worthwhile steps to make it easier for
prospective employees to learn about and obtain information about
federal jobs.
MOST COLLEGE PLACEMENT
OFFICIALS SAID NEW GRADUATES
DID NOT VIEW THE GOVERNMENT AS
AN ATTRACTIVE EMPLOYER
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :2
Of the 13 schools we visited, a placement official at only 1 school
said the school's graduates had considerable interest in federal
employment. At six schools, the placement officials said graduates
had little to some interest in federal employment, and officials at
four schools said graduates' interest in federal jobs varied
depending on their majors and the federal agency where the job
openings existed. At another school, officials said graduates were
not interested in federal jobs. In the remaining case, belief that
the federal government was not an attractive employer, as well as low
student interest, led the school to discontinue its federal career
fairs.
The factor most often mentioned by the placement officials as a
reason why graduates did not consider working for the federal
government was starting salaries. Placement officials at 12 of the
13 schools said graduates did not think federal salaries were
competitive with those of nonfederal employers. For example, one
official said pay was a "big problem" and students usually asked
about it first. Another official said, "Students and graduates
always complain about federal salaries. The amount of money that
federal agencies offer will not attract an Outstanding Scholar."\3
Three of the 12 officials linked the problems with salary levels to
graduates in certain fields of study. One official, while talking
about graduates in engineering, said, "Often the federal government
is considered the employer of last resort because the salaries are
not competitive."
At 11 schools, placement officials cited the hiring process as a
reason why graduates did not seek federal jobs. The officials
characterized the entire process from completing the SF-171
application form to receiving a job offer as burdensome, complicated,
and time-consuming. Among the comments the officials made were "the
federal hiring process contains bodacious hurdles," "the SF-171 is
overwhelming for recent graduates," and "the entire federal hiring
process has a bad reputation." One hiring process, the Administrative
Careers With America (ACWA) program, was of concern to four
officials.\4
Individuals can take an ACWA examination and, if they score high
enough, their names are entered on registers of job candidates
maintained by OPM. These individuals are considered for job openings
when agencies request certificates of eligible candidates from OPM if
they are among the highest ranked candidates. The placement
officials said graduates were generally unwilling to take an
examination. Two officials also added that the length of time from
the examination to when one would be considered for federal
employment was too long.\5
Placement officials at 10 of the 13 schools mentioned inadequate
on-campus recruiting by federal agencies as a factor contributing to
graduates' lack of interest in federal employment. In general, the
officials felt federal recruiting efforts were lacking. For example,
placement officials at one school felt federal recruiters were not as
effective as nonfederal recruiters and were not aggressive in
explaining the attributes of federal employment. An official at
another school said federal recruiters did not discuss specific job
opportunities during interviews. Officials at two other schools
stated that federal recruiters did not make jobs at their agencies
sound very interesting to graduates. They added that federal
agencies, unlike many nonfederal employers, seldom paid for
prospective employees to visit their agencies and become familiar
with their work.
Placement officials at three schools said federal agencies sometimes
sent recruiters to their schools when the agencies knew they would
not be hiring any new employees. The officials said this practice
created a bad reputation for the agencies since graduates expected
recruiters to be seeking candidates for job vacancies. As one
placement director said, "Federal agencies should not attend college
job fairs when they are experiencing hiring freezes and can't offer
employment." Officials at three schools also mentioned instances in
which agencies had withdrawn employment offers previously made to
graduates. They said this was apparently done because of hiring
freezes, but such withdrawals were very detrimental to the federal
government's image on college campuses.
Of the placement officials at the 10 schools who said federal
recruiting efforts were lacking, officials at 4 schools expressed
concern about the federal government's hiring practices under the
Outstanding Scholar Program. Under this program, agencies can make
employment offers to job candidates with superior academic records
(grade point average of 3.5 or higher on a 4-point scale or upper 10
percent of their graduating class) without following the government's
central examination and ranking procedures. The officials said the
program causes graduates with lesser academic records to be excluded
from employment consideration. One official explained that he felt
this was a mistake since many graduates who have less than a 3.5
grade point average are very talented and have excellent leadership
and work experiences.
Placement officials at seven schools stressed that the federal
government suffered from a poor image on their campuses which, in
turn, influenced graduates' interest in federal employment. Some of
the comments the officials made illustrating the situation were
"graduates view government work as uninteresting and unimportant,"
"the image of the federal worker is not great," and "the phrase `good
enough for government work' is often heard among recent graduates."
Six schools' placement officials believed the federal government did
not make sufficient information on employment opportunities available
to graduates. They said information was hard to get or confusing.
As one official said, "There is no one handout that can explain how
to look for a federal job. What few materials I have found have
exception after exception to the instructions, making it difficult
even for me to comprehend, and I'm in the business." Among these six
schools was the school at which a placement official perceived a high
level of interest in federal employment. The official at this school
said the students and graduates were frustrated by how hard it is to
get accurate information on federal job opportunities.
--------------------
\3 Under the Outstanding Scholar Program, graduates can qualify for a
federal job on the basis of superior academic achievement. According
to OPM, 45.5 percent of the new hires into entry level professional
and administrative jobs were from the Outstanding Scholar Program and
other direct hire methods between July 1992 and June 1993. See page
6 for more information on the Outstanding Scholar Program.
\4 Applicants for jobs covered by ACWA may take one of six written
examinations administered by OPM depending on the occupational
category in which the applicant is seeking employment. The six
occupational categories for which written tests are used include (1)
health, safety, and environmental; (2) writing and public
information; (3) business, finance, and management; (4) personnel,
administration, and computer; (5) benefits review, tax, and legal;
and (6) law enforcement and investigations. For a seventh category,
largely social science, written examinations are not used. Instead,
OPM rates and ranks applicants on the basis of a review of their
education and experience.
\5 Use of the ACWA program by federal agencies has been low.
Agencies have filled jobs primarily through other mechanisms. See
Federal Hiring: Testing for Entry-Level Administrative Positions
Falls Short of Expectations (GAO/GGD-94-103, Mar. 30, 1994).
GRADUATES GENERALLY CONFIRMED
PLACEMENT OFFICIALS' VIEWS
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :3
Although the questionnaire respondents' views about federal
employment varied somewhat among the four schools in our survey, most
of the graduates did not view the federal government as an employer
of choice. They generally thought nonfederal employers were better
than federal employers in meeting factors important to them in
choosing an employer for whom they would like to work.
In the questionnaire, we listed 22 factors that could influence job
seekers in selecting an employer for whom they would like to work.
Of the 22 factors, at least 75 percent of the respondents from each
school identified 4 factors as being of very great or great
importance to them. These four factors were (1) opportunities for
career growth, (2) promotion opportunities, (3) opportunities to
apply education and skills, and (4) opportunities for challenging
assignments. Another six factors were considered to be of very great
or great importance by 75 percent or more of the respondents from at
least one school. Table 1 shows the level of importance attached to
each of the 22 factors by respondents who said they sought employment
or remained in the jobs they had before graduation.
Table 1
Factors of Very Great and Great
Importance to Graduates in Selecting an
Employer
(Numbers in percent)
School School School
1 School 3 4
(N=143 2 (N=498 (N=144
Employment factor ) (N=99) ) )
------------------------------------------------ ------ ------ ------ ------
Opportunities for career growth 91.6 97.0 93.0 93.8
Promotion opportunities 82.5 96.0 83.9 87.5
Opportunities to apply education and skills 80.4 97.0 80.9 89.6
Opportunities for challenging assignments 86.7 87.9 83.1 82.6
Job security 58.7 96.0 77.1 95.1
Opportunities to "make a difference" 70.6 91.9 73.1 77.1
Health insurance 54.6 93.9 74.5 84.7
Retirement program 15.4 85.9 48.6 64.6
Cost of living where the job is located 27.3 75.8 46.0 56.9
Life insurance 14.0 79.8 31.7 53.5
Salary amount 51.1 72.7 54.4 74.3
Ability to balance work and personal life 48.3 69.7 60.6 70.1
Public image and reputation of the employer 60.8 69.7 47.6 60.4
Assistance/Cooperation provided to prospective 50.4 74.8 48.6 62.5
employees by the organization's employees
Location of the job 56.6 55.6 53.0 60.4
Physical working environment 37.1 65.7 52.6 61.8
Amount of paid time off (holidays, vacations, 24.5 59.6 40.6 60.4
personal days, sick days)
Savings plan 14.7 70.7 40.4 54.2
Flexibility of work schedule 17.5 45.5 29.1 41.7
Opportunity to work at home or other locations 4.9 30.3 12.1 12.5
outside the office
Childcare assistance the employer provides 6.3 29.3 7.6 16.7
Eldercare assistance the employer provides 1.4 27.3 5.4 5.6
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: N is the number of respondents who said they had sought
employment or remained in the jobs they had before graduation. The
percentages are based on N.
Source: GAO survey (see app. IV, question 14).
The questionnaire then asked respondents to compare, on the basis of
their personal knowledge and/or experience, their perceptions of
these employment factors in the federal and nonfederal sectors.
Somewhat different views were expressed by respondents from each of
the four schools, but overall, the respondents felt the factors they
identified as most important to them were superior in the nonfederal
sector. For example, only about 13 percent of the respondents
thought the federal government was better in the category of
opportunities for career growth compared to about 36 percent who
thought nonfederal opportunities were better. The other respondents
thought opportunities for career growth were about the same in both
employment sectors or said they had no basis to judge. Table 2 shows
how the respondents, as a whole, viewed the four employment factors
considered most important.
Table 2
Graduates' Views of Federal and
Nonfederal Employment for the Factors
Considered Most Important to Graduates
in Selecting an Employer
(Numbers in percent)
About the
Nonfederal Federal same for
better better federal
than than and No basis
Important factors federal nonfederal nonfederal to judge
-------------------------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
Opportunities for career growth 35.8 12.8 27.8 21.2
Promotion opportunities 31.1 16.9 25.0 24.6
Opportunities to apply education 22.7 12.3 39.7 23.0
and skills
Opportunities for challenging 31.5 11.1 30.5 24.8
assignments
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: These percentages are based on the 884 respondents who said
they had sought employment or remained in the jobs they had before
graduation. The percentages do not add to 100 percent because those
respondents who did not answer are not shown in this table.
Source: GAO survey (see app. IV, question 15).
The respondents were also asked to compare federal agencies' and
nonfederal employers' recruiting and hiring practices. As shown in
table 3, respondents from each school rated nonfederal employers to
be better for each of the five recruiting and hiring practices listed
in the questionnaire.
Table 3
Graduates' Views of Federal and
Nonfederal Employers' Recruiting and
Hiring Practices
(Numbers in percent)
Nonfed Federa Nonfed Federa Nonfed Federa Nonfed Federa
Recruiting and eral l eral l eral l eral l
hiring practices better better better better better better better better
---------------- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
Availability of 60.8 9.8 51.5 15.2 61.2 9.8 68.8 9.7
information
about job
opportunities
Recruiting 76.2 0.7 56.6 7.1 67.3 4.6 66.0 5.6
presence on
campus
Ease of job 67.1 0.0 57.6 7.1 63.3 1.2 59.7 0.7
application
procedures
Speed of job 45.5 0.0 51.5 7.1 42.4 1.0 40.3 0.7
offers
Examination 37.1 4.9 42.4 13.1 33.3 6.0 34.0 5.6
requirement
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: N is the number of respondents who said they had sought
employment or remained in the jobs they had before graduation. The
percentages are based on N and do not add to 100 percent because
those respondents who answered (1) federal and nonfederal employers
the same and (2) no basis to judge, or did not answer are not shown
in the table.
Source: GAO survey (see app. IV, question 15).
Figure 1 shows that of the four schools, graduates of the
predominantly minority university (School 2) expressed the greatest
interest in possible federal employment with 43 percent saying they
applied for federal jobs.\6 At the other three schools, the
percentages of graduates who said the federal government was among
the employers to which they applied ranged from 13 to 23 percent.
Overall, about 76 percent of all graduates who had sought jobs or
remained in the jobs they had before graduation said they did not
apply for federal employment.
Figure 1: Most Graduates Said
They Did Not Apply for Federal
Jobs
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Note: N is the number of respondents who said they had sought
employment or remained in the jobs they had before graduation. The
percentages are based on N.
Source: GAO survey (see app. IV, question 6).
The lack of interest in federal employment was not because all of the
graduates had found jobs they wanted elsewhere. In fact, 249 (28
percent) of the 884 respondents who had sought jobs or remained in
the jobs they had before graduation said they had not yet located
suitable employment at the time they completed their questionnaires.
These graduates were still unemployed, in temporary jobs, or had
begun graduate work after unsuccessful job searches. Even though
they had not found suitable employment, about 70 percent of these
respondents said they did not apply for federal jobs (see fig. 2).
About half said they had given some consideration to seeking federal
employment but did not apply, and about 20 percent said they had no
interest whatsoever in working for the federal government.
Figure 2: Most Graduates Who
Did Not Find Suitable
Employment Did Not Apply for
Federal Jobs
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Note: N is the number of respondents who said they had not yet
located suitable employment at the time they completed their
questionnaires. The percentages are based on N.
Source: GAO survey (see app. IV, questions 2 and 6).
The graduates gave many reasons why they did not pursue federal
careers. Table 4 shows that among the reasons they mentioned most
often were a lack of information about federal jobs, the inability to
identify specific job openings, low starting salaries, the federal
job application process, and no federal recruiting on campus. The
graduates' views about federal employment were consistent with the
findings in other reports we have issued.\7
Table 4
Graduates' Reasons for Not Applying for
Federal Jobs
(Numbers in percent)
School School School
1 School 3 4
(N=116 2 (N=376 (N=123
Reasons ) (N=55) ) )
------------------------------------------------ ------ ------ ------ ------
Did not have information about federal jobs 37.1 60.0 61.7 61.8
Unable to identify specific job openings 48.3 49.1 51.6 39.0
Starting salary too low 40.5 18.2 16.0 18.7
Application process too burdensome 37.9 21.8 20.5 17.1
No federal recruiters visited my campus 21.6 18.2 22.9 35.8
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: N is the number of respondents who said they did not apply for
or had no interest in a federal job. The percentages are based on N.
Source: GAO survey (see app. IV, question 7).
The respondents often elaborated on their reasons for not seeking
federal employment in comments attached to their questionnaires. The
reason most frequently mentioned in the written comments concerned
the lack of information about federal job opportunities. For
example, one graduate thought that "Most people have no idea how to
apply for a federal job, including myself. The government should
make this information readily available to graduates." Another
graduate said
"I was very interested in working for the federal government. I
could not find how to get information about job openings in my
field. Do I look in the yellow pages? At the library, what do
I look under? It was very confusing to the point where I gave
up. This is where you are losing a lot of people. They don't
know what route to take."
Yet another said, "It has been virtually impossible for me to apply.
I called
. . . and mailed . . . for information and still cannot get the
proper information about job opportunities."
Some of the written comments concerning the other reasons given by
graduates for not pursuing federal employment were as follows:
"The salaries are miserably low. I was offered about
$19,500/year with [the government]. About $31,200/year with [a
private sector employer]. It makes me question the government's
ability to hire qualified and `bright' personnel with salaries
like that."\8
"Three observations on why the federal government isn't
attractive: (1) . . . the public's attitude has been that
government is the problem, not the solution. Why be part of the
problem?; (2) if you're coming out of college $50,000 in debt,
you need a job that pays enough . . . . Federal jobs are not
perceived to offer sufficient salaries; [and] (3) public
perception is that the more glamorous jobs always go to
political appointees, not those who work their way up through
the organization. More opportunities for advancement exist in
private sector jobs."
"In today's job market people must apply to many different
employers. I couldn't justify the time necessary to go through
the federal application process."
"The application process for getting a federal job needs help.
I signed up to take a civil service exam for business last
November. I wasn't notified of the test date until sometime in
the spring. By the time I received my test results in May, I
already had a job lined up . . . . The entire process . .
. took way too long."
"It actually never occurred to me to seek employment through the
government. While going through the job search process, I do
not recall talking to government recruiters, seeing any
literature or knowing anyone who had considered the government
as a job."
"I know federal jobs exist, but most college students are
influenced most by recruiters coming to campus. Federal
recruiters did not come to [my] campus. This hinders the
gathering of information about the good and bad points of
federal jobs."
The questionnaire revealed that the respondents had little firsthand
information to use in making their comparisons between federal and
nonfederal employment. Many of the graduates said their views were
based on general observations and/or common knowledge. As shown in
figure 3, information sources that should provide more factual
information, such as employment literature and job recruiters, were
cited very infrequently by the respondents.
Figure 3: Graduates' Sources
for Comparing Federal and
Nonfederal Employment
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Note 1: Respondents were asked to check each information source that
they used. Therefore, the bars total more than 100 percent.
Note 2: These percentages are based on the 884 respondents who said
they had sought employment or remained in the jobs they had before
graduation.
Source: GAO survey (see app. IV, question 16).
--------------------
\6 Includes respondents who said they applied for a federal job or
already had a federal job before graduation.
\7 In Federal Recruiting: College Placement Officials' Views of the
Governments' Campus Outreach Efforts (GAO/GGD-92-48BR, Jan. 31,
1992), we found a lack of employment information, limited recruiting
visits, and complaints about the complexity of the application
process among the 40 schools we surveyed. In Federal Recruiting:
Comparison of Applicants Who Accepted or Declined Federal Job Offers
(GAO/GGD-92-61BR, Mar. 20, 1992), we found most applicants for
federal entry-level administrative and professional positions during
the time period studied were not new college graduates. The most
prevalent reason applicants gave for declining federal job offers was
uncompetitive salaries. In Federal Employment: Poor Service Found
at Federal Job Information Centers (GAO/GGD-92-116, July 28, 1992),
we found obtaining federal job information was frequently a
time-consuming and arduous task.
\8 This graduate's field of study was engineering.
OPM'S OBSERVATIONS ON REVIEW
RESULTS
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :4
We provided the results of our review to OPM, and on June 6, 1994,
and again on July 15, 1994, we met with OPM's Associate Director for
Career Entry and other OPM officials to discuss their reactions and
observations.
The OPM officials said they found the information to be valuable as
it confirmed the need for actions that OPM was taking to make the
federal government an attractive employer of persons who aspire to be
public servants. However, the officials felt the government is a
more competitive employer than the review results indicate. They
said a number of changes in federal recruiting, hiring, and job
information dissemination practices had been made, and others were in
process or planned, to improve the government's competitive posture.
The officials also said they believed the results would be more
positive if our review were repeated today. They noted, for example,
that 45.5 percent of the new hires into federal entry-level
professional and administrative positions between July 1992 and June
1993 qualified as Outstanding Scholars.
The OPM officials provided the following paragraph to summarize the
actions OPM was taking to enhance federal hiring:
"Major changes are under way to improve the Federal hiring
process. (1) Federal employment information is now more
comprehensive and more accessible - job opportunity listings now
include excepted service positions, temporary positions, etc.,
and listings are accessible 7 days a week, 24 hours a day by
telephone or computer. (2) OPM is eliminating the SF 171, the
standard application form that imposed significant burdens on
applicants to complete. (3) OPM is now using automated
application techniques where applicants respond to
questionnaires by telephone or on optically scanned forms. If
asked to submit a written summary of their relevant
qualifications, applicants have the option of using resumes,
curricula vitae, or whatever other format they choose. (4) OPM
is eliminating its central registers and examining for specific
positions on a job-by-job basis so that applicants know the
actual job openings for which they are applying. (5) OPM
expects to give agencies the option to use written tests later
in the screening process, so that unqualified applicants need
not take tests. In general, jobseekers will soon find that the
best way to get considered for Federal employment is to access
the Federal employment information system, find job openings
that match their interests and qualifications, and follow the
simple instructions on how to apply. Their application will be
rated and referred to agencies in record time."
The OPM officials emphasized that federal employment information is
available to prospective employees through nationwide data systems
that are accessible 24 hours a day, every day, by telephone or
computer. The officials described these systems as follows:
(1) Career America Connection - a telephone-based system that
identifies current federal job opportunities throughout the country.
Users may request information/application packages for jobs of
interest. The packages are mailed within 24 hours.
(2) Federal Job Opportunities Board - a computer-based bulletin board
system with information about federal job openings, pay rates, job
fairs and career days, and general employment information.
In addition, the OPM officials described the Federal Occupation and
Career Information System, a computer-based system that provides an
overview of 600 federal occupations, qualification information,
salary amounts, job locations, and advice on completing application
forms. It contains work interest tests and sample practice
examinations to help users identify occupations of interest and
explore federal career opportunities.
While the officials felt there was no lack of available employment
information, they said the real issue was how to make the existence
of this information known to new graduates and other intended users.
The officials said OPM had placed touch-screen computers in over 100
OPM and agency offices and building lobbies to make the information
in these systems accessible to the public and plans further
enhancements and increased marketing of the three systems. According
to these officials, one possible enhancement was adding the
capability to apply electronically through any of the systems.
Additionally, the officials said they plan to (1) expand OPM's
outreach efforts to the National Association of Schools of Public
Affairs and Administration and the College Placement Council and (2)
directly communicate to students through press releases to college
and university newspapers and a series of articles in placement
community publications.
The officials said OPM had made particular efforts in the past 2
years to disseminate federal career information to minority students
through in-depth work with Historically Black Colleges and
Universities, the Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities,
and the College Placement Council. The officials felt our survey
results indicated this effort had some success because graduates of
the predominantly minority school in our survey showed a more
positive view of federal employment than the graduates from the three
other schools.
The OPM officials acknowledged that agency performance in recruiting
on college campuses has been and continues to be a problem. They
said OPM has developed a new training course, "Recruiting Foundations
for Program Managers," in an attempt to improve the professionalism
of federal recruiters. The officials said the course provides line
managers and human resource specialists with tools to plan, build,
upgrade, and manage their recruiting programs. The officials
stressed, however, that the federal government is downsizing and
there will be reduced opportunities in the next several years for new
college graduates to find federal jobs. They said care must be taken
to ensure that federal recruiting and outreach programs are realistic
in emphasizing the limited prospects for employment.
As an overall observation on our findings, the OPM officials said
they have become convinced that the government's employment image
suffers because students and graduates tend not to clearly understand
that federal employment represents the opportunity to serve the
public. They said much of the information students receive about
government comes from newspapers or television. According to the
officials, social, political, and economic issues are often cast as
"problems" or "crises," leaving a negative spin on the government's
competence or efficiency, while little attention is given by the
media to the actual work performed by public servants in resolving
the problems of the nation. They believed academia was also partly
responsible for the void of positive information. The officials also
believed that most students attending colleges, universities, and
high schools have little understanding of the government, its
relationship to them, or its positive impact on their lives. The
officials said it will take a relentless effort among the public and
private sectors, academia, constituency groups, and effective
employment information services to restore the luster to public
service.
CONCLUSIONS
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :5
Because our work was limited to placement officials in 13 schools and
graduates from 4 universities, these findings may not be
representative of how federal employment was viewed by all graduates
across the country. However, we believe it is meaningful that most
placement officials and graduates we surveyed independently agreed
that the federal government was not an employer of choice on college
campuses and had quite similar views on why this situation existed.
Moreover, in explaining why some graduates did not seek careers with
the federal government, the review results, while limited, suggest
obstacles that need to be addressed if federal agencies are to be
able to hire quality employees in the future. Clearly, if the views
we found were widely held, efforts to improve the image and
attractiveness of federal employment by emphasizing to prospective
employees the challenges and opportunities it affords, better
disseminating information on job openings, enhancing recruiting
efforts, and developing more competitive employment policies would be
in order.
We have not reviewed the actions OPM said it had taken and plans to
take to improve federal recruiting, hiring, and job information
dissemination processes. However, as OPM described them, the actions
appear to be the kinds of efforts that are needed to make federal
employment opportunities more accessible to new graduates and other
potential employees. To the extent that these actions will improve
the image of federal employment, they should help make public service
a more attractive career choice to talented graduates in the future.
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :5.1
We are sending copies of this report to other congressional
committees, the Director of OPM, and other interested parties.
Copies will also be made available to others upon request.
The major contributors to this report are listed in appendix V. If
you have any questions, please contact me on (202) 512-5074.
Nancy Kingsbury
Director
Federal Human Resources
Management Issues
OBJECTIVE, SCOPE, AND METHODOLOGY
=========================================================== Appendix I
The objective of this study was to gather information on how college
graduates view the federal government as a potential employer. To
accomplish this, in part, we visited placement officials at 13
colleges and universities to discuss their perceptions of recent
graduates' views of the government's attractiveness as an employer.
(See app. II for a listing of the colleges and universities.) We
judgmentally selected the 13 schools on the basis of their geographic
locations, enrollment sizes, levels of minority enrollment, and
public or private funding.
We also sent questionnaires to graduates of four other universities.
We selected these universities using the same criteria as that used
for the placement official interviews. For privacy and
confidentiality reasons, we do not identify the schools whose
graduates we surveyed. The schools included a private university
located in the East, a predominately minority public university
located in the South, and two public universities located in the
Midwest and West. Appendix III includes general descriptive
information about each university.
We surveyed graduates whom the universities indicated had received
bachelor's degrees between September 1, 1991, and August 31, 1992.
The survey was limited to graduates with academic majors in fields of
study identified by OPM as the fields of study for more than 80
percent of all employees with college degrees hired by federal
agencies in fiscal year 1989, which was the latest information
available when we began our work.\1 The fields of study included were
engineering, business and management, social sciences, agriculture
and natural resources, mathematics, and health professions. We did
not verify the accuracy and completeness of the lists of graduates
and their majors provided by the universities.
We pretested the questionnaire to assure ourselves that respondents
would interpret the questions correctly and could provide the
information requested. We did pretests with 6 recent graduates, and
the placement officials at the 13 schools we visited also reviewed
the questionnaire. During our visits with the placement officials,
some expressed concerns about the success of the survey, stating that
the graduates' addresses maintained by the schools were likely to be
out of date because of moves since graduation and, on the basis of
their experiences, recent graduates were often unwilling to respond
to questionnaires. Thus, we knew the possibility of a low response
rate existed. To lessen that possibility, we (1) did the initial
mailing in December 1992 because we suspected that many addresses
were the addresses of graduates' parents and hoped the questionnaires
would arrive when the graduates were home for the holidays, (2) did
follow-up mailings in January and February 1993, and (3) planned to
do additional follow-ups if the response rate was under 50 percent.
We sent questionnaires to 1,533 graduates and received 985 usable
responses, for an overall response rate of 64.3 percent. While this
rate was lower than we normally prefer, it was much higher than
anticipated by many of the placement officials. We considered this
rate to be very good given the circumstances of the survey. Also,
when ineligible respondents and undeliverable questionnaires were
excluded, the completion rate was 73.1 percent. Table I.1 shows the
disposition of the questionnaires mailed and the response and
completion rates for each school.
Table I.1
Analysis of Questionnaire Returns
School School School School
Category 1 2 3 4 Total
-------------------- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
============================================================
Total mailed 320 195 806 212 1,533
Undeliverable 19 5 83 7 114
Ineligibles\a 27 10 34 0 71
Incomplete responses 0 0 2 2 4
Overt refusals 0 1 3 1 5
Questionnaires not 91 71 146 46 354
returned
============================================================
Total usable returns 183 108 538 156 985
Response rate 57.2% 55.4% 66.7% 73.6% 64.3%
percentage\b
Completion rate 66.8% 60.0% 78.1% 76.1% 73.1%
percentage\c
------------------------------------------------------------
\a Ineligibles were those respondents who said they did not receive a
bachelor's degree between September 1, 1991, and August 31, 1992,
were not in the majors we selected at that particular school, or were
not U.S. citizens and hence not eligible for federal employment.
\b Response rate is the number of usable returns as a percentage of
the total number mailed.
\c Completion rate is the number of usable returns as a percentage of
the total number mailed less those not delivered and ineligible.
We were particularly interested in the views of recent graduates who
said they had sought employment since graduation or remained in the
jobs they had before graduation. Accordingly, the questions in the
questionnaire were directed to these graduates. Of the 985 usable
responses, 884 were from graduates who said they had looked for jobs
or remained in the jobs they had before graduation.
Because the colleges and universities included in our study were not
statistically valid random samples of all colleges and universities
in the United States, it cannot be presumed that the study results
represented the views of all college graduates.
We discussed this report with OPM's Associate Director for Career
Entry and other OPM officials in June and July 1994. Their comments
are summarized on pages 15 to 18. Our audit work was done from May
1992 through September 1993 in accordance with generally accepted
government auditing standards.
--------------------
\1 The information was based on questionnaire responses to an OPM
survey from 12,194 of 25,646 federal employees hired in fiscal year
1989.
THIRTEEN COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY
PLACEMENT OFFICES VISITED
========================================================== Appendix II
College/University Location
---------------------------------------------- ------------
California State University, Long Beach Long Beach,
CA
Emory University Atlanta, GA
Georgia Institute of Technology Atlanta, GA
Georgia State University Atlanta, GA
Macalester College St. Paul, MN
Marquette University Milwaukee,
WI
Spelman College Atlanta, GA
University of Minnesota Minneapolis,
MN
Institute of Technology
Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs
Carlson School of Management
University of Richmond Richmond, VA
University of Southern California Los Angeles,
CA
University of Virginia Charlottesvi
lle, VA
School of Engineering and Applied Sciences
College of Arts and Sciences
McIntire School of Commerce
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Milwaukee,
WI
Virginia Commonwealth University Richmond, VA
------------------------------------------------------------
PROFILES OF THE FOUR SCHOOLS IN
THE COLLEGE GRADUATE SURVEY
========================================================= Appendix III
SCHOOL 1
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix III:0.1
School 1 is located in a large city in the East. The school is a
private institution awarding bachelor's, master's, and doctoral
degrees. Seventy-two percent of its undergraduates in the 1990-1991
academic year were white, and 10 percent were foreign nationals. The
school awarded about 1,500 bachelor's degrees in the 1990-1991
academic year.
--------------------
\1 This information is from Profiles of American Colleges, 19th
edition (Hauppauge, NY: Barron's Educational Series, Inc., 1992).
SCHOOL 2
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix III:0.2
School 2 is located in the South. It is a public institution
awarding bachelor's, master's, and doctoral degrees. Ninety-four
percent of its undergraduates in the 1990-1991 academic year were
black. The school awarded about 800 bachelor's degrees in the
1990-1991 academic year.
SCHOOL 3
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix III:0.3
School 3 is located in the West. It is a public land grant
institution awarding bachelor's, master's, and doctoral degrees.
Eighty-four percent of its undergraduates in the 1990-1991 academic
year were white. The school awarded about 3,000 bachelor's degrees
in the 1990-1991 academic year.
SCHOOL 4
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix III:0.4
School 4 is located in the Midwest. The school is a public
institution awarding associate, bachelor's, and master's degrees.
Ninety-three percent of its undergraduates in the 1990-1991 academic
year were white. The school awarded about 1,500 bachelor's degrees
in the 1990-1991 academic year.
QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES
========================================================== Appendix IV
The questionnaire was 11 pages long and included 21 questions. We
estimate respondents took about 15 minutes to complete the
questionnaire. We promised respondents that their responses would be
confidential, combined with others, and reported only in summary
form. In the questionnaire, we asked about the reasons for the
employment decisions graduates made upon graduation from college,
their experiences, if any, with the federal recruiting and hiring
processes, and the extent to which they considered the federal
government as an employment possibility.
The question wording and the response categories shown in this
appendix are the same as in the questionnaire itself, except in
questions 14, 15, and 17. For questions 14 and 15 we combined
response categories for ease of presentation. The original response
categories for these questions were:
Question 14 - (1) of little or no importance, (2) of some
importance, (3) of moderate importance, (4) of great importance,
(5) of very great importance, and (6) no basis to judge; and
Question 15 - (1) federal much better than nonfederal, (2) federal
generally better than nonfederal, (3) about the same for federal
and nonfederal, (4) nonfederal generally better than federal,
(5) nonfederal much better than federal, and (6) no basis to
judge.
We combined categories (1) and (2) and categories (4) and (5) for
both questions. In question 17, we created categories on the basis
of the frequency and distribution of the graduates' years of birth.
The percentages in the columns many not add to 100 percent because we
rounded the percentages to the nearest tenth.
A. DEGREE INFORMATION
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix IV:1
Question 1. According to our information, you received a bachelor's
degree between September 1, 1991, and August 31, 1992. Is this
correct? (1,033 respondents.)
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
1. Yes 183 97.3 108 91.5 538 94.2 156 100.0 985 95.4
2. No\a 5 2.7 10 8.5 33 5.8 0 0.0 48 4.6
No answer 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
================================================================================
Total 188 100.0 118 100.0 571 100.0 156 100.0 1,033 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a Respondents who did not receive a bachelor's degree in the time
period were asked to stop and return the questionnaire to GAO.
B. JOB STATUS
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix IV:2
For the purpose of this section, if a respondent had more than one
job since graduation, we asked the respondent to consider the first
job held in responding to questions 2, 3, 4, and 5. If the
respondent continued with the same job as before graduation, we asked
the respondent to consider that job to be the first job.
Question 2. Which of the following best describes your work status
since graduation? (985 respondents.)
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
1. 13 7.1 15 13.9 74 13.8 36 23.1 138 14.0
Continued
with same
employer
as before
graduatio
n
2. Could 18 9.8 37 34.3 132 24.5 31 19.9 218 22.1
not find
suitable
permanent
employmen
t; worked
in a
temporary
job or
was
unemploye
d\a
3. Began 35 19.1 9 8.3 35 6.5 9 5.8 88 8.9
work on a
graduate/
professio
nal
degree
without
seeking
employmen
t\b
4. Began 6 3.3 11 10.2 13 2.4 1 0.6 31 3.1
work on a
graduate/
professio
nal
degree
after
unsuccess
fully
seeking
employmen
t\a
5. Self- 2 1.1 0 0.0 10 1.9 1 0.6 13 1.3
employed\c
6. Did not 5 2.7 0 0.0 5 0.9 3 1.9 13 1.3
seek
employmen
t\b
7. Entered 88 48.1 32 29.6 233 43.3 68 43.6 421 42.7
a
permanent
job
8. Other 16 8.7 4 3.7 36 6.7 7 4.5 63 6.4
================================================================================
Total 183 100.0 108 100.0 538 100.0 156 100.0 985 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a Respondents who answered with this category were asked to go to
question 6.
\b Respondents who answered with this category were asked to stop and
return the questionnaire to GAO.
\c Respondents who answered with this category were asked to go to
question 5.
C. EMPLOYER INFORMATION
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix IV:3
Question 3. Which of the following categories best describes your
first employer? (622 respondents, the number of respondents who
answered categories 1, 7, or 8 for question 2.)
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
1. Private 81 69.2 22 43.1 226 65.9 67 60.4 396 63.7
company
2. State/ 3 2.6 7 13.7 21 6.1 5 4.5 36 5.8
Local
governmen
t
3. Federal 4 3.4 2 3.9 14 4.1 3 2.7 23 3.7
government
(as a
civilian
employee)
4. Private 7 6.0 3 5.9 4 1.2 5 4.5 19 3.1
college,
universit
y, or
other
education
al
instituti
on
5. 11 9.4 6 11.8 22 6.4 13 11.7 52 8.4
Nonprofit
organizat
ion
6. 2 1.7 0 0.0 19 5.5 5 4.5 26 4.2
Military
service
7. Other 7 6.0 9 17.7 33 9.6 11 9.9 60 9.7
No answer 2 1.7 2 3.9 4 1.2 2 1.8 10 1.6
================================================================================
Total 117 100.0 51 100.0 343 100.0 111 100.0 622 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question 4. About how long after applying for your first job did you
receive the job offer? (622 respondents, the number of respondents
who answered categories 1, 7, or 8 for question 2.)
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
1. No 20 17.1 8 15.7 65 19.0 29 26.1 122 19.6
wait. I
was hired
on the
spot
2. Less 35 29.9 17 33.3 120 35.0 32 28.8 204 32.8
than 1
month
3. At 23 19.7 7 13.7 40 11.7 12 10.8 82 13.2
least 1
month,
but less
than 2
months
4. At 10 8.6 5 9.8 26 7.6 10 9.0 51 8.2
least 2
months,
but less
than 3
months
5. At 6 5.1 1 2.0 13 3.8 9 8.1 29 4.7
least 3
months,
but less
than 4
months
6. At 5 4.3 2 3.9 14 4.1 3 2.7 24 3.9
least 4
months,
but less
than 6
months
7. 6 5 4.3 3 5.9 14 4.1 3 2.7 25 4.0
months or
more
8. Don't 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
remember
9. Not 11 9.4 6 11.8 42 12.2 13 11.7 72 11.6
applicable
(did not
apply for
a new job
after
graduatio
n)
No answer 2 1.7 2 3.9 9 2.6 0 0.0 13 2.1
================================================================================
Total 117 100.0 51 100.0 343 100.0 111 100.0 622 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question 5. Overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied were/are you with
your first job? (635 respondents, the number of respondents who
answered categories 1, 5, 7, or 8 for question 2.)
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
1. Very 49 41.2 12 23.5 93 26.4 37 33.0 191 30.1
satisfied
2. 41 34.5 17 33.3 150 42.5 47 42.0 255 40.2
Generally
satisfied
3. As 18 15.1 14 27.5 53 15.0 18 16.1 103 16.2
satisfied
as
dissatisf
ied
4. 5 4.2 3 5.9 40 11.3 8 7.1 56 8.8
Generally
dissatisf
ied
5. Very 4 3.4 4 7.8 10 2.8 1 0.9 19 3.0
dissatisf
ied
No answer 2 1.7 1 2.0 7 2.0 1 0.9 11 1.7
================================================================================
Total 119 100.0 51 100.0 353 100.0 112 100.0 635 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. THE JOB SEARCH PROCESS
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix IV:4
Question 6. Which of the following best describes the extent to
which you sought federal employment since graduation? (884
respondents, the number of respondents who answered categories 1, 2,
4, 5, 7, or 8 for question 2.)
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
1. Already 5 3.5 1 1.0 14 2.8 4 2.8 24 2.7
had a
federal
job and
did not
consider
another
one\a
2. No 56 39.2 9 9.1 165 33.1 54 37.5 284 32.1
interest
in a
federal
job and
made no
efforts
to
identify
vacancies
or
applicati
on
procedure
s
3. 60 42.0 46 46.5 211 42.4 69 47.9 386 43.7
Considered
a federal
job, but
did not
apply
4. Applied 16 11.2 36 36.4 78 15.7 11 7.6 141 16.0
for a
federal
job, but
did not
receive a
job
offer\b
5. Applied 0 0.0 2 2.0 5 1.0 0 0.0 7 0.8
for a
federal
job, but
did not
accept a
job
offer\c
6. 4 2.8 4 4.0 16 3.2 4 2.8 28 3.2
Accepted
a federal
job\b
No answer 2 1.4 1 1.0 9 1.8 2 1.4 14 1.6
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a Respondents who answered with this category were asked to go to
question 14.
\b Respondents who answered with this category were asked to go to
question 11.
\c Respondents who answered with this category were asked to go to
question 9.
Question 7. Which of the following reasons, if any, best describe
the main reasons you did not apply for or had no interest in a
federal job? (670 respondents, the number of respondents who
answered categories 2 or 3 for question 6.)
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
1. Never 21 18.1 5 9.1 113 30.1 35 28.5 174 26.0
occurred
to me to
consider
federal
employmen
t
2. Did not 43 37.1 33 60.0 232 61.7 76 61.8 384 57.3
have
informati
on about
federal
jobs
3. No 25 21.6 10 18.2 86 22.9 44 35.8 165 24.6
federal
recruiter
s visited
my campus
4. My 5 4.3 8 14.6 89 23.7 23 18.7 125 18.7
field of
study was
not
related
to
federal
employmen
t as I
perceived
it
5. 25 21.6 4 7.3 52 13.8 9 7.3 90 13.4
Nonfederal
recruiter
s were
more
effective
in
explainin
g
employmen
t
opportuni
ties
6. 47 40.5 10 18.2 60 16.0 23 18.7 140 20.9
Starting
salary
too low
7. 44 37.9 12 21.8 77 20.5 21 17.1 154 23.0
Applicati
on
process
too
burdensom
e
8. Unable 56 48.3 27 49.1 194 51.6 48 39.0 325 48.5
to
identify
specific
job
openings
9. Not 18 15.5 1 1.8 39 10.4 10 8.1 68 10.2
interested
in
available
job
openings
10. Poor 34 29.3 6 10.9 77 20.5 11 8.9 128 19.1
image and
reputatio
n of the
governmen
t
11. Did 5 4.3 2 3.6 14 3.7 4 3.3 25 3.7
not want
to take
the
required
test
12. Did 4 3.5 8 14.6 18 4.8 2 1.6 32 4.8
not
qualify
for the
Outstandi
ng
Scholar
Program
13. 3 2.6 2 3.6 15 4.0 9 7.3 29 4.3
Discourag
ed by
family,
friends,
or others
14. No 8 6.9 7 12.7 50 13.3 15 12.2 80 11.9
jobs
available
in
geographi
c
location(
s)
desired
15. 2 1.7 0 0.0 2 0.5 2 1.6 6 0.9
Inadequate
benefits
16. Other 32 27.6 7 12.7 66 17.6 15 12.2 120 17.9
No answer 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
================================================================================
Total 116 100.0 55 100.0 376 100.0 123 100.0 670 100.0
responden
ts\a
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a This total represents the number of respondents who should have
answered this question. The columns do not add to the totals because
respondents were to check all categories that applied, i.e.,
respondents could select multiple reasons.
Question 8. Please review your responses to question 7 and indicate
which, if any, was the most important reason you did not seek a
federal job. (670 respondents, the number of respondents who
answered categories 2 or 3 for question 6.) Note: Respondents
answering question 8 were asked to skip to question 14.
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
1. Never 6 5.2 3 5.5 38 10.1 14 11.4 61 9.1
occurred
to me to
consider
federal
employmen
t
2. Did not 15 12.9 17 30.9 114 30.3 39 31.7 185 27.6
have
informati
on about
federal
jobs
3. No 2 1.7 0 0.0 3 0.8 2 1.6 7 1.0
federal
recruiter
s visited
my campus
4. My 3 2.6 3 5.5 18 4.8 8 6.5 32 4.8
field of
study was
not
related
to
federal
employmen
t as I
perceived
it
5. 3 2.6 0 0.0 6 1.6 1 0.8 10 1.5
Nonfederal
recruiter
s were
more
effective
in
explainin
g
employmen
t
opportuni
ties
6. 13 11.2 7 12.7 10 2.7 6 4.9 36 5.4
Starting
salary
too low
7. 12 10.3 0 0.0 17 4.5 6 4.9 35 5.2
Applicati
on
process
too
burdensom
e
8. Unable 15 12.9 9 16.4 41 10.9 19 15.5 84 12.5
to
identify
specific
job
openings
9. Not 4 3.5 0 0.0 14 3.7 4 3.3 22 3.3
interested
in
available
job
openings
10. Poor 15 12.9 3 5.5 27 7.2 3 2.4 48 7.2
image and
reputatio
n of the
governmen
t
11. Did 1 0.9 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.8 2 0.3
not want
to take
the
required
test
12. Did 0 0.0 0 0.0 4 1.1 1 0.8 5 0.8
not
qualify
for the
Outstandi
ng
Scholar
Program
13. 1 0.9 0 0.0 2 0.5 2 1.6 5 0.8
Discourag
ed by
family,
friends,
or others
14. No 0 0.0 4 7.3 15 4.0 4 3.3 23 3.4
jobs
available
in
geographi
c
location(
s)
desired
15. 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Inadequate
benefits
16. Other 22 19.0 3 5.5 40 10.6 10 8.1 75 11.2
No answer 4 3.5 6 10.9 27 7.2 3 2.4 40 6.0
================================================================================
Total 116 100.0 55 100.0 376 100.0 123 100.0 670 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question 9. Which of the following reasons, if any, best describe
the main reasons you applied for but did not accept a federal job
offer? (7 respondents, the number of respondents who answered
category 5 for question 6.) Note: The percentages are not shown in
this table because the number of respondents is small.
All
School School School School school
Category 1 2 3 4 s
-------------------- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
1. Accepted a 0 1 2 0 3
nonfederal job
before receiving a
federal job offer
2. Salary too low 0 1 3 0 4
3. Not in geographic 0 1 0 0 1
location desired
4. Inadequate 0 0 1 0 1
benefits
5. Advised not to 0 0 2 0 2
accept by family,
friends, or others
6. Did not have 0 0 0 0 0
enough information
about the job
7. Not interested in 0 0 2 0 2
doing type of work
required by the job
8. Not related to 0 0 0 0 0
field of study
9. Cost of living in 0 1 0 0 1
area too high
10. Did not want to 0 0 0 0 0
work for federal
agency offering job
11. Other 0 1 1 0 2
No answer 0 0 0 0 0
============================================================
Total respondents\a 0 2 5 0 7
------------------------------------------------------------
\a This total represents the number of respondents who should have
answered this question. The columns will not add to the totals
because respondents were to check all categories that applied, i.e.,
respondents could select multiple reasons.
Question 10. Of the reasons checked in question 9, which, if any,
was the most important reason you declined a federal job offer? (7
respondents, the number of respondents who answered category 5 for
question 6.) Note: The percentages are not shown in this table
because the number of respondents is small.
All
School School School School school
Category 1 2 3 4 s
-------------------- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
1. Accepted a 0 1 0 0 1
nonfederal job
before receiving a
federal job offer
2. Salary too low 0 0 1 0 1
3. Not in geographic 0 1 0 0 1
location desired
4. Inadequate 0 0 0 0 0
benefits
5. Advised not to 0 0 2 0 2
accept by family,
friends, or others
6. Did not have 0 0 0 0 0
enough information
about the job
7. Not interested in 0 0 2 0 2
doing type of work
required by the job
8. Not related to 0 0 0 0 0
field of study
9. Cost of living in 0 0 0 0 0
area too high
10. Did not want to 0 0 0 0 0
work for federal
agency offering job
11. Other 0 0 0 0 0
No answer 0 0 0 0 0
============================================================
Total 0 2 5 0 7
------------------------------------------------------------
Question 11. Applicants for most entry-level federal professional
and administrative positions must take Administrative Careers With
America (ACWA) exams unless they qualify under the Outstanding
Scholar Program (i.e., upper 10 percent of graduating class or grade
point average of 3.50 or better). Did you take any ACWA exams? (176
respondents, the number of respondents who answered categories 4, 5,
or 6 for question 6.)
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
1. Yes 2 10 6 14.3 10 10.1 1 6.7 19 10.8
2. No 18 90 31 73.8 81 81.8 13 86.7 143 81.3
3. Not 0 0.0 2 4.8 3 3.0 0 0.0 5 2.8
sure
No answer 0 0.0 3 7.1 5 5.1 1 6.7 9 5.1
================================================================================
Total 20 100.0 42 100.0 99 100.0 15 100.0 176 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question 12. Which of the following reasons, if any, best describe
why you did not take an ACWA exam? (143 respondents, the number of
respondents who answered category 2 for question 11.)
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
1. Since I 1 5.6 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.7
had no
interest
in
federal
employmen
t, there
was no
reason to
take the
exam
2. I had 10 55.6 16 51.6 54 66.7 5 38.5 85 59.4
no
informati
on on the
ACWA exam
requireme
nt
3. I 4 22.2 5 16.1 10 12.4 3 23.1 22 15.4
qualified
as an
Outstandi
ng
Scholar
and knew
I did not
have to
take an
exam to
be
considere
d for
federal
employmen
t
4. ACWA 7 39.0 7 22.6 27 33.3 6 46.2 47 32.9
exams
were not
required
for the
federal
job(s) of
interest
to me
5. The 0 0.0 2 6.5 1 1.2 0 0.0 3 2.1
exam
location
was too
inconveni
ent for
me
6. The 0 0.0 3 9.7 1 1.2 1 7.7 5 3.5
times
and/or
dates the
exam(s)
were
scheduled
were too
inconveni
ent for
me
7. I had 1 5.6 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 7.7 2 1.4
no
interest
in taking
another
exam
after
taking so
many
exams in
college
8. Others 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 7.7 1 0.7
who had
taken an
ACWA exam
recommend
ed I not
take it
9. I was 1 5.6 2 6.5 2 2.5 1 7.7 6 4.2
not
convinced
a written
exam
would
adequatel
y measure
my
abilities
to do a
job
10. The 3 16.7 2 6.5 5 6.2 1 7.7 11 7.7
nonfederal
employer(
s) I was
consideri
ng did
not
require
an exam
to
qualify
for
employmen
t
11. I am 0 0.0 2 6.5 2 2.5 0 0.0 4 2.8
not a
good exam
taker
12. Other 3 16.7 4 12.9 7 8.6 1 7.7 15 10.5
No answer 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 1.2 0 0.0 1 0.7
================================================================================
Total 18 100.0 31 100.0 81 100.0 13 100.0 143 100.0
responden
ts \a
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a This total represents the number of respondents who should have
answered this question. The columns do not add to the totals because
respondents were to check all categories that applied, i.e.,
respondents could select multiple reasons.
Question 13. Of the reasons checked in question 12, which, if any,
was the most important reason you did not take an ACWA exam? (143
respondents, the number of respondents who answered category 2 for
question 11.)
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
1. Since I 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
had no
interest
in
federal
employmen
t, there
was no
reason to
take the
exam
2. I had 6 33.3 12 38.7 38 46.9 5 38.5 61 42.7
no
informati
on on the
ACWA exam
requireme
nt
3. I 1 5.6 4 12.9 4 4.9 3 23.1 12 8.4
qualified
as an
Outstandi
ng
Scholar
and knew
I did not
have to
take an
exam to
be
considere
d for
federal
employmen
t
4. ACWA 5 27.8 2 6.5 17 21.0 3 23.1 27 18.9
exams
were not
required
for the
federal
job(s) of
interest
to me
5. The 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
exam
location
was too
inconveni
ent for
me
6. The 0 0.0 3 9.7 1 1.2 1 7.7 5 3.5
times
and/or
dates the
exams(s)
were
scheduled
were too
inconveni
ent for
me
7. I had 1 5.6 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.7
no
interest
in taking
another
exam
after
taking so
many
exams in
college
8. Others 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
who had
taken an
ACWA exam
recommend
ed I not
take it
9. I was 0 0.0 2 6.5 0 0.0 1 7.7 3 2.1
not
convinced
a written
exam
would
adequatel
y measure
my
abilities
to do a
job
10. The 1 5.6 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.7
nonfederal
employer(
s) I was
consideri
ng did
not
require
an exam
to
qualify
for
employmen
t
11. I am 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
not a
good exam
taker
12. Other 3 16.7 3 9.7 3 3.7 0 0.0 9 6.3
No answer 1 5.6 5 16.1 18 22.2 0 0.0 24 16.8
================================================================================
Total 18 100.0 31 100.0 81 100.0 13 100.0 143 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question 14. Of how much importance, if any, are the following
factors to you in selecting an employer for whom you would like to
work? (884 respondents.)
A. EMPLOYER AND NATURE
OF WORK
---------------------------------------------------- Appendix IV:4.0.1
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Of some, 20 14.0 8 8.1 83 16.7 21 14.6 132 14.9
little,
or no
importanc
e
Of 42 29.4 14 14.1 134 26.9 31 21.5 221 25.0
moderate
importanc
e
Of very 72 50.4 74 74.8 242 48.6 90 62.5 478 54.1
great or
great
importanc
e
No basis 3 2.1 0 0.0 26 5.2 2 1.4 31 3.5
to judge
No answer 6 4.2 3 3.0 13 2.6 0 0.0 22 2.5
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Of some, 12 8.4 11 11.1 75 15.1 12 8.3 110 12.4
little,
or no
importanc
e
Of 39 27.3 16 16.2 174 34.9 42 29.2 271 30.7
moderate
importanc
e
Of very 87 60.8 69 69.7 237 47.6 87 60.4 480 54.3
great or
great
importanc
e
No basis 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 0.4 1 0.7 3 0.3
to judge
No answer 5 3.5 3 3.0 10 2.0 2 1.4 20 2.3
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Of some, 3 2.1 1 1.0 9 1.8 3 2.1 16 1.8
little,
or no
importanc
e
Of 10 7.0 9 9.1 64 12.9 21 14.6 104 11.8
moderate
importanc
e
Of very 124 86.7 87 87.9 414 83.1 119 82.6 744 84.2
great or
great
importanc
e
No basis 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 0.4 0 0.0 2 0.2
to judge
No answer 6 4.2 2 2.0 9 1.8 1 0.7 18 2.0
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Of some, 3 2.1 1 1.0 11 2.2 3 2.1 18 2.0
little,
or no
importanc
e
Of 19 13.3 0 0.0 71 14.3 11 7.6 101 11.4
moderate
importanc
e
Of very 115 80.4 96 97.0 403 80.9 129 89.6 743 84.1
great or
great
importanc
e
No basis 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 0.4 0 0.0 2 0.2
to judge
No answer 6 4.2 2 2.0 11 2.2 1 0.7 20 2.3
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Of some, 11 7.7 1 1.0 24 4.8 3 2.1 39 4.4
little,
or no
importanc
e
Of 25 17.5 5 5.1 98 19.7 27 18.8 155 17.5
moderate
importanc
e
Of very 101 70.6 91 91.9 364 73.1 111 77.1 667 75.5
great or
great
importanc
e
No basis 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 0.4 1 0.7 3 0.3
to judge
No answer 6 4.2 2 2.0 10 2.0 2 1.4 20 2.3
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Of some, 3 2.1 0 0.0 5 1.0 1 0.7 9 1.0
little,
or no
importanc
e
Of 3 2.1 1 1.0 19 3.8 6 4.2 29 3.3
moderate
importanc
e
Of very 131 91.6 96 97.0 463 93.0 135 93.8 825 93.3
great or
great
importanc
e
No basis 1 0.7 0 0.0 1 0.2 0 0.0 2 0.2
to judge
No answer 5 3.5 2 2.0 10 2.0 2 1.4 19 2.2
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------- --------------------------------------------------
7. Other 64 respondents gave and rated other factors
concerning the employer and nature of the work.
------------------------------------------------------------
B. SALARY, BENEFITS, AND
PROMOTIONS
---------------------------------------------------- Appendix IV:4.0.2
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Of some, 11 7.7 3 3.0 18 3.6 0 0.0 32 3.6
little,
or no
importanc
e
Of 54 37.8 22 22.2 196 39.4 37 25.7 309 35.0
moderate
importanc
e
Of very 73 51.1 72 72.7 271 54.4 107 74.3 523 59.2
great or
great
importanc
e
No basis 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 0.4 0 0.0 2 0.2
to judge
No answer 5 3.5 2 2.0 11 2.2 0 0.0 18 2.0
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Of some, 68 47.6 2 2.0 82 16.5 10 6.9 162 18.3
little,
or no
importanc
e
Of 39 27.3 10 10.1 163 32.7 41 28.5 253 28.6
moderate
importanc
e
Of very 22 15.4 85 85.9 242 48.6 93 64.6 442 50.0
great or
great
importanc
e
No basis 9 6.3 0 0.0 2 0.4 0 0.0 11 1.2
to judge
No answer 5 3.5 2 2.0 9 1.8 0 0.0 16 1.8
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Of some, 21 14.7 0 0.0 32 6.4 4 2.8 57 6.5
little,
or no
importanc
e
Of 37 25.9 3 3.0 82 16.5 17 11.8 139 15.7
moderate
importanc
e
Of very 78 54.6 93 93.9 371 74.5 122 84.7 664 75.1
great or
great
importanc
e
No basis 1 0.7 0 0.0 1 0.2 0 0.0 2 0.2
to judge
No answer 6 4.2 3 3.0 12 2.4 1 0.7 22 2.5
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Of some, 36 25.2 6 6.1 86 17.3 13 9.0 141 16.0
little,
or no
importanc
e
Of 65 45.5 32 32.3 199 40.0 43 29.9 339 38.4
moderate
importanc
e
Of very 35 24.5 59 59.6 202 40.6 87 60.4 383 43.3
great or
great
importanc
e
No basis 2 1.4 0 0.0 1 0.2 0 0.0 3 0.3
to judge
No answer 5 3.5 2 2.0 10 2.0 1 0.7 18 2.0
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Of some, 71 49.7 4 4.0 168 33.7 18 12.5 261 29.5
little,
or no
importanc
e
Of 43 30.1 13 13.1 155 31.1 48 33.3 259 29.3
moderate
importanc
e
Of very 20 14.0 79 79.8 158 31.7 77 53.5 334 37.8
great or
great
importanc
e
No basis 4 2.8 0 0.0 6 1.2 1 0.7 11 1.2
to judge
No answer 5 3.5 3 3.0 11 2.2 0 0.0 19 2.2
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Of some, 67 46.9 6 6.1 138 27.7 24 16.7 235 26.6
little,
or no
importanc
e
Of 43 30.1 21 21.2 146 29.3 39 27.1 249 28.2
moderate
importanc
e
Of very 21 14.7 70 70.7 201 40.4 78 54.2 370 41.9
great or
great
importanc
e
No basis 5 3.5 0 0.0 2 0.4 3 2.1 10 1.1
to judge
No answer 7 4.9 2 2.0 11 2.2 0 0.0 20 2.3
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Of some, 5 3.5 1 1.0 15 3.0 4 2.8 25 2.8
little,
or no
importanc
e
Of 14 9.8 1 1.0 51 10.2 13 9.0 79 8.9
moderate
importanc
e
Of very 118 82.5 95 96.0 418 83.9 126 87.5 757 85.6
great or
great
importanc
e
No basis 0 0.0 0 0.0 3 0.6 1 0.7 4 0.5
to judge
No answer 6 4.2 2 2.0 11 2.2 0 0.0 19 2.2
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------- ------------------------------------------------
15. Other 30 respondents gave and rated other factors
concerning salary, benefits, and promotions.
------------------------------------------------------------
C. PERSONAL
CONSIDERATIONS
---------------------------------------------------- Appendix IV:4.0.3
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Of some, 13 9.1 0 0.0 24 4.8 1 0.7 38 4.3
little,
or no
importanc
e
Of 41 28.7 1 1.0 82 16.5 5 3.5 129 14.6
moderate
importanc
e
Of very 84 58.7 95 96.0 384 77.1 137 95.1 700 79.2
great or
great
importanc
e
No basis 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
to judge
No answer 5 3.5 3 3.0 8 1.6 1 0.7 17 1.9
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Of some, 11 7.7 11 11.1 63 12.7 14 9.7 99 11.2
little,
or no
importanc
e
Of 46 32.2 30 30.3 163 32.7 42 29.2 281 31.8
moderate
importanc
e
Of very 81 56.6 55 55.6 264 53.0 87 60.4 487 55.1
great or
great
importanc
e
No basis 1 0.7 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 0.2
to judge
No answer 4 2.8 2 2.0 8 1.6 1 0.7 15 1.7
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Of some, 41 28.7 5 5.1 72 14.5 16 11.1 134 15.2
little,
or no
importanc
e
Of 57 39.9 17 17.2 187 37.6 45 31.3 306 34.6
moderate
importanc
e
Of very 39 27.3 75 75.8 229 46.0 82 56.9 425 48.1
great or
great
importanc
e
No basis 2 1.4 0 0.0 1 0.2 0 0.0 3 0.3
to judge
No answer 4 2.8 2 2.0 9 1.8 1 0.7 16 1.8
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Of some, 88 61.5 34 34.3 306 61.5 64 44.4 492 55.7
little,
or no
importanc
e
Of 12 8.4 28 28.3 88 17.7 35 24.3 163 18.4
moderate
importanc
e
Of very 9 6.3 29 29.3 38 7.6 24 16.7 100 11.3
great or
great
importanc
e
No basis 30 21.0 6 6.1 56 11.2 20 13.9 112 12.7
to judge
No answer 4 2.8 2 2.0 10 2.0 1 0.7 17 1.9
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Of some, 93 65.0 38 38.4 329 66.1 81 56.3 541 61.2
little,
or no
importanc
e
Of 9 6.3 26 26.3 62 12.5 34 23.6 131 14.8
moderate
importanc
e
Of very 2 1.4 27 27.3 27 5.4 8 5.6 64 7.2
great or
great
importanc
e
No basis 33 23.1 4 4.0 71 14.3 21 14.6 129 14.6
to judge
No answer 6 4.2 4 4.0 9 1.8 0 0.0 19 2.2
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Of some, 87 60.8 37 37.4 289 58.0 76 52.8 489 55.3
little,
or no
importanc
e
Of 32 22.4 29 29.3 122 24.5 37 25.7 220 24.9
moderate
importanc
e
Of very 7 4.9 30 30.3 60 12.1 18 12.5 115 13.0
great or
great
importanc
e
No basis 12 8.4 0 0.0 19 3.8 13 9.0 44 5.0
to judge
No answer 5 3.5 3 3.0 8 1.6 0 0.0 16 1.8
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Of some, 74 51.8 21 21.2 162 32.5 40 27.8 297 33.6
little,
or no
importanc
e
Of 38 26.6 31 31.3 180 36.1 41 28.5 290 32.8
moderate
importanc
e
Of very 25 17.5 45 45.5 145 29.1 60 41.7 275 31.1
great or
great
importanc
e
No basis 2 1.4 0 0.0 3 0.6 3 2.1 8 0.9
to judge
No answer 4 2.8 2 2.0 8 1.6 0 0.0 14 1.6
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Of some, 19 13.3 7 7.1 53 10.6 9 6.3 88 10.0
little,
or no
importanc
e
Of 50 35.0 20 20.2 133 26.7 33 22.9 236 26.7
moderate
importanc
e
Of very 69 48.3 69 69.7 302 60.6 101 70.1 541 61.2
great or
great
importanc
e
No basis 0 0.0 1 1.0 1 0.2 0 0.0 2 0.2
to judge
No answer 5 3.5 2 2.0 9 1.8 1 0.7 17 1.9
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Of some, 27 18.9 6 6.1 64 12.9 10 6.9 107 12.1
little,
or no
importanc
e
Of 58 40.6 25 25.3 159 31.9 43 29.9 285 32.2
moderate
importanc
e
Of very 53 37.1 65 65.7 262 52.6 89 61.8 469 53.1
great or
great
importanc
e
No basis 0 0.0 0 0.0 3 0.6 1 0.7 4 0.5
to judge
No answer 5 3.5 3 3.0 10 2.0 1 0.7 19 2.2
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------- ------------------------------------------------
25. Other 40 respondents gave and rated other factors
concerning personal considerations.
------------------------------------------------------------
D. OTHER FACTORS
---------------------------------------------------- Appendix IV:4.0.4
---------- ------------------------------------------------
26. Other 61 respondents gave and rated other factors
concerning selection of an employer.
------------------------------------------------------------
Question 15. Please compare, based on your personal knowledge and/or
experience, your perceptions of the following employment practices
and conditions of federal agencies versus non federal employers.
(884 respondents.) Note: In most cases, these are the same factors
listed in question 14.
A. RECRUITING AND HIRING
---------------------------------------------------- Appendix IV:4.0.5
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Federal 14 9.8 15 15.2 49 9.8 14 9.7 92 10.4
better
than
nonfedera
l
About the 25 17.5 22 22.2 87 17.5 15 10.4 149 16.9
same
Nonfederal 87 60.8 51 51.5 305 61.2 99 68.8 542 61.3
better
than
federal
No basis 9 6.3 8 8.1 47 9.4 14 9.7 78 8.8
to judge
No answer 8 5.6 3 3.0 10 2.0 2 1.4 23 2.6
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Federal 1 0.7 7 7.1 23 4.6 8 5.6 39 4.4
better
than
nonfedera
l
About the 16 11.2 22 22.2 67 13.5 14 9.7 119 13.5
same
Nonfederal 109 76.2 56 56.6 335 67.3 95 66.0 595 67.3
better
than
federal
No basis 11 7.7 10 10.1 66 13.3 25 17.4 112 12.7
to judge
No answer 6 4.2 4 4.0 7 1.4 2 1.4 19 2.2
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Federal 0 0.0 7 7.1 6 1.2 1 0.7 14 1.6
better
than
nonfedera
l
About the 8 5.6 19 19.2 38 7.6 12 8.3 77 8.7
same
Nonfederal 96 67.1 57 57.6 315 63.3 86 59.7 554 62.7
better
than
federal
No basis 34 23.8 13 13.1 131 26.3 43 29.9 221 25.0
to judge
No answer 5 3.5 3 3.0 8 1.6 2 1.4 18 2.0
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Federal 0 0.0 7 7.1 5 1.0 1 0.7 13 1.5
better
than
nonfedera
l
About the 12 8.4 16 16.2 44 8.8 15 10.4 87 9.8
same
Nonfederal 65 45.5 51 51.5 211 42.4 58 40.3 385 43.6
better
than
federal
No basis 61 42.7 23 23.2 231 46.4 67 46.5 382 43.2
to judge
No answer 5 3.5 2 2.0 7 1.4 3 2.1 17 1.9
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Federal 7 4.9 13 13.1 30 6.0 8 5.6 58 6.6
better
than
nonfedera
l
About the 7 4.9 19 19.2 55 11.0 19 13.2 100 11.3
same
Nonfederal 53 37.1 42 42.4 166 33.3 49 34.0 310 35.1
better
than
federal
No basis 70 49.0 23 23.2 235 47.2 65 45.1 393 44.5
to judge
No answer 6 4.2 2 2.0 12 2.4 3 2.1 23 2.6
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------- --------------------------------------------------
6. Other 6 respondents gave and rated other employment
practices and conditions concerning recruiting and
hiring.
------------------------------------------------------------
B. EMPLOYER AND NATURE
OF WORK
---------------------------------------------------- Appendix IV:4.0.6
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Federal 3 2.1 18 18.2 41 8.2 8 5.6 70 7.9
better
than
nonfedera
l
About the 41 28.7 29 29.3 143 28.7 31 21.5 244 27.6
same
Nonfederal 39 27.3 16 16.2 102 20.5 39 27.1 196 22.2
better
than
federal
No basis 54 37.8 33 33.3 202 40.6 61 42.4 350 39.6
to judge
No answer 6 4.2 3 3.0 10 2.0 5 3.5 24 2.7
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Federal 6 4.2 31 31.3 32 6.4 16 11.1 85 9.6
better
than
nonfedera
l
About the 36 25.2 29 29.3 156 31.3 36 25.0 257 29.1
same
Nonfederal 82 57.3 21 21.2 254 51.0 64 44.4 421 47.6
better
than
federal
No basis 11 7.7 16 16.2 49 9.8 25 17.4 101 11.4
to judge
No answer 8 5.6 2 2.0 7 1.4 3 2.1 20 2.3
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Federal 7 4.9 25 25.3 42 8.4 24 16.7 98 11.1
better
than
nonfedera
l
About the 38 26.6 31 31.3 159 31.9 42 29.2 270 30.5
same
Nonfederal 66 46.2 16 16.2 167 33.5 29 20.1 278 31.5
better
than
federal
No basis 26 18.2 25 25.3 123 24.7 45 31.3 219 24.8
to judge
No answer 6 4.2 2 2.0 7 1.4 4 2.8 19 2.2
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Federal 14 9.8 30 30.3 50 10.0 15 10.4 109 12.3
better
than
nonfedera
l
About the 58 40.6 33 33.3 205 41.2 55 38.2 351 39.7
same
Nonfederal 44 30.8 12 12.1 120 24.1 25 17.4 201 22.7
better
than
federal
No basis 20 14.0 22 22.2 115 23.1 46 31.9 203 23.0
to judge
No answer 7 4.9 2 2.0 8 1.6 3 2.1 20 2.3
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Federal 26 18.2 25 25.3 75 15.1 24 16.7 150 17.0
better
than
nonfedera
l
About the 44 30.8 28 28.3 143 28.7 39 27.1 254 28.7
same
Nonfederal 43 30.1 21 21.2 167 33.5 34 23.6 265 30.0
better
than
federal
No basis 22 15.4 23 23.2 104 20.9 43 29.9 192 21.7
to judge
No answer 8 5.6 2 2.0 9 1.8 4 2.8 23 2.6
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt Number nt r nt
--------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ------ ----- ----- -----
Federal 7 4.9 37 37.4 45 9.0 24 16.7 113 12.8
better
than
nonfeder
al
About the 33 23.1 21 21.2 152 30.5 40 27.8 246 27.8
same
Nonfedera 73 51.1 22 22.2 185 37.2 36 25.0 316 35.8
l better
than
federal
No basis 24 16.8 16 16.2 106 21.3 41 28.5 187 21.2
to judge
No answer 6 4.2 3 3.0 10 2.0 3 2.1 22 2.5
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------- ------------------------------------------------
13. Other 11 respondents gave and rated other employment
practices and conditions concerning the employer
and nature of the work.
------------------------------------------------------------
C. SALARY, BENEFITS, AND
PROMOTIONS
---------------------------------------------------- Appendix IV:4.0.7
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Federal 2 1.4 37 37.4 85 17.1 27 18.8 151 17.1
better
than
nonfedera
l
About the 14 9.8 16 16.2 89 17.9 28 19.4 147 16.3
same
Nonfederal 109 76.2 32 32.3 221 44.4 48 33.3 410 46.4
better
than
federal
No basis 12 8.4 13 13.1 92 18.5 39 27.1 156 17.7
to judge
No answer 6 4.2 1 1.0 11 2.2 2 1.4 20 2.3
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Federal 8 5.6 53 53.5 115 23.1 34 23.6 210 23.8
better
than
nonfedera
l
About the 21 14.7 14 14.1 92 18.5 31 21.5 158 17.9
same
Nonfederal 90 62.9 19 19.2 178 35.7 39 27.1 326 36.9
better
than
federal
No basis 17 11.9 12 12.1 102 20.5 38 26.4 169 19.1
to judge
No answer 7 4.9 1 1.0 11 2.2 2 1.4 21 2.4
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Federal 53 37.1 50 50.5 266 53.4 66 45.8 435 49.2
better
than
nonfedera
l
About the 17 11.9 22 22.2 84 16.9 24 16.7 147 16.6
same
Nonfederal 12 8.4 7 7.1 29 5.8 12 8.3 60 6.8
better
than
federal
No basis 55 38.5 19 19.2 110 22.1 40 27.8 224 25.3
to judge
No answer 6 4.2 1 1.0 9 1.8 2 1.4 18 2.0
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Federal 49 34.3 52 52.5 250 50.2 59 41.0 410 46.4
better
than
nonfedera
l
About the 25 17.5 19 19.2 101 20.3 24 16.7 169 19.1
same
Nonfederal 9 6.3 8 8.1 31 6.2 15 10.4 63 7.1
better
than
federal
No basis 53 37.1 18 18.2 108 21.7 44 30.6 223 25.2
to judge
No answer 7 4.9 2 2.0 8 1.6 2 1.4 2 2.2
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Federal 51 35.7 57 57.6 276 55.4 76 52.8 460 52.0
better
than
nonfedera
l
About the 27 18.9 21 21.2 93 18.7 19 13.2 160 18.1
same
Nonfederal 17 11.9 7 7.1 22 4.4 11 7.6 57 6.5
better
than
federal
No basis 42 29.4 13 13.1 97 19.5 36 25.0 188 21.3
to judge
No answer 6 4.2 1 1.0 10 2.0 2 1.4 19 2.2
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Federal 34 23.8 44 44.4 154 30.9 49 34.0 281 31.8
better
than
nonfedera
l
About the 28 19.6 24 24.2 135 27.1 29 20.1 216 24.4
same
Nonfederal 9 6.3 6 6.1 23 4.6 10 6.9 48 5.4
better
than
federal
No basis 66 46.2 24 24.2 177 35.5 54 37.5 321 36.3
to judge
No answer 6 4.2 1 1.0 9 1.8 2 1.4 18 2.0
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Federal 24 16.8 38 38.4 124 24.9 36 25.0 222 25.1
better
than
nonfedera
l
About the 27 18.9 25 25.3 143 28.7 29 20.1 224 25.3
same
Nonfederal 16 11.2 10 10.1 44 8.8 16 11.1 86 9.7
better
than
federal
No basis 69 48.3 25 25.3 178 35.7 61 42.4 333 37.7
to judge
No answer 7 4.9 1 1.0 9 1.8 2 1.4 19 2.2
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Federal 6 4.2 39 39.4 70 14.1 34 23.6 149 16.9
better
than
nonfedera
l
About the 27 18.9 26 26.3 138 27.7 30 20.8 221 25.0
same
Nonfederal 67 46.9 14 14.1 160 32.1 34 23.6 275 31.1
better
than
federal
No basis 36 25.2 18 18.2 120 24.1 43 29.9 217 24.6
to judge
No answer 7 4.9 2 2.0 10 2.0 3 2.1 22 2.5
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------- ------------------------------------------------
22. Other 6 respondents gave and rated other employment
practices and conditions concerning salary,
benefits, and promotions.
------------------------------------------------------------
D. PERSONAL
CONSIDERATIONS
---------------------------------------------------- Appendix IV:4.0.8
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Federal 76 53.2 64 64.7 322 64.7 55 38.2 517 58.5
better
than
nonfedera
l
About the 25 17.5 18 18.2 69 13.9 37 25.7 149 16.9
same
Nonfederal 12 8.4 6 6.1 31 6.2 19 13.2 68 7.7
better
than
federal
No basis 22 15.4 10 10.1 66 13.3 31 21.5 129 14.6
to judge
No answer 8 5.6 1 1.0 10 2.0 2 1.4 21 2.4
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Federal 24 16.8 24 24.2 111 22.3 20 13.9 179 20.3
better
than
nonfedera
l
About the 21 14.7 25 25.3 92 18.5 28 19.4 166 18.8
same
Nonfederal 5 3.5 5 5.1 20 4.0 9 6.3 39 4.4
better
than
federal
No basis 87 60.8 44 44.4 263 52.8 85 59.0 479 54.2
to judge
No answer 6 4.2 1 1.0 12 2.4 2 1.4 21 2.4
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Federal 22 15.4 22 22.2 107 21.5 16 11.1 167 18.9
better
than
nonfedera
l
About the 18 12.6 22 22.2 90 18.1 23 16.0 153 17.3
same
Nonfederal 5 3.5 3 3.0 9 1.8 10 6.9 27 3.1
better
than
federal
No basis 92 64.3 51 51.5 281 56.4 93 64.6 517 58.5
to judge
No answer 6 4.2 1 1.0 11 2.2 2 1.4 20 2.3
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Federal 8 5.6 18 18.2 27 5.4 12 8.3 65 7.4
better
than
nonfedera
l
About the 26 18.2 24 24.2 111 22.3 26 18.1 187 21.2
same
Nonfederal 39 27.3 18 18.2 154 30.9 30 20.8 241 27.3
better
than
federal
No basis 64 44.8 38 38.4 197 39.6 74 51.4 373 42.2
to judge
No answer 6 4.2 1 1.0 9 1.8 2 1.4 18 2.0
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Federal 23 16.1 26 26.3 32 6.4 16 11.1 97 11.0
better
than
nonfedera
l
About the 26 18.2 25 25.3 119 23.9 32 22.2 202 22.9
same
Nonfederal 46 32.2 23 23.2 191 38.4 40 27.8 300 33.9
better
than
federal
No basis 42 29.4 24 24.2 147 29.5 54 37.5 267 30.2
to judge
No answer 6 4.2 1 1.0 9 1.8 2 1.4 18 2.0
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Federal 39 27.3 19 19.2 101 20.3 13 9.0 172 19.5
better
than
nonfedera
l
About the 47 32.9 40 40.4 189 38.0 52 36.1 328 37.1
same
Nonfederal 13 9.1 14 14.1 63 12.7 22 15.3 112 12.7
better
than
federal
No basis 38 26.6 25 25.3 135 27.1 55 38.2 253 28.6
to judge
No answer 6 4.2 1 1.0 10 2.0 2 1.4 19 2.2
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Federal 5 3.5 19 19.2 42 8.4 17 11.8 83 9.4
better
than
nonfedera
l
About the 35 24.5 46 46.5 194 39.0 48 33.3 323 36.4
same
Nonfederal 48 33.6 6 6.1 104 20.9 24 16.7 182 20.6
better
than
federal
No basis 49 34.3 26 26.3 148 29.7 52 36.1 275 31.1
to judge
No answer 6 4.2 2 2.0 10 2.0 3 2.1 21 2.4
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------- ------------------------------------------------
30. Other 1 respondent gave and rated other employment
practices and conditions concerning personal
considerations.
------------------------------------------------------------
Question 16. Which of the following sources, if any, were the bases
for making your comparisons in question 15? (884 respondents.)
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
1. Current 21 14.7 11 11.1 52 10.4 16 11.1 100 11.3
or past
federal
employmen
t
2. Current 70 49.0 33 33.3 201 40.4 55 38.2 359 40.6
or past
nonfedera
l
employmen
t
3. Common 93 65.0 54 54.6 245 49.2 76 52.8 468 52.9
knowledge
4. General 111 77.6 64 64.7 352 70.7 89 61.8 616 69.7
observati
ons
5. Family 70 49.0 30 30.3 195 39.2 44 30.6 339 38.4
members
or
friends
6. College 17 11.9 13 13.1 47 9.4 22 15.3 99 11.2
professor
(s)
7. College 18 12.6 14 14.1 32 6.4 13 9.0 77 8.7
placement
office/
career
counselor
s
8. Job 11 7.7 15 15.2 63 12.7 19 13.2 108 12.2
recruiter
(s)
9. 38 26.6 22 22.2 100 20.1 28 19.4 188 21.3
Employment
literatur
e
10. 66 46.2 37 37.4 184 37.0 43 29.9 330 37.3
Person(s)
with
federal
employmen
t
experienc
e
11. 68 47.6 24 24.2 140 28.1 32 22.2 264 29.9
Person(s)
with
nonfedera
l
employmen
t
experienc
e
12. Other 7 4.9 5 5.1 34 6.8 10 6.9 56 6.3
No answer 12 8.4 4 4.0 26 5.2 5 3.5 47 5.3
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
responden
ts\a
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a This total represents the number of respondents who should have
answered this question. The columns do not add to the totals because
respondents were to check all categories that applied, i.e.,
respondents could select multiple reasons.
E. GENERAL BACKGROUND
INFORMATION
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix IV:5
Question 17. In what year were you born? (884 respondents.)
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Before 0 0.0 17 17.2 85 17.1 28 19.4 130 14.7
1967
1967 1 0.7 7 7.1 53 10.6 8 5.6 69 7.8
1968 3 2.1 12 12.1 102 20.5 18 12.5 135 15.3
1969 15 10.5 33 33.3 160 32.1 46 31.9 254 28.7
1970 112 78.3 26 26.3 88 17.7 41 28.5 267 30.2
After 1970 7 4.9 3 3.0 1 0.2 2 1.4 13 1.5
No answer 5 3.5 1 1.0 9 1.8 1 0.7 16 1.8
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question 18. Are you male or female? (884 respondents.)
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
1. Male 77 53.9 32 32.3 322 64.7 47 32.6 478 54.1
2. Female 62 43.4 66 66.7 167 33.5 95 66.0 390 44.1
No answer 4 2.8 1 1.0 9 1.8 2 1.4 16 1.8
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question 19. Which of the following categories best describes your
racial/ethnic background? (884 respondents.)
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
1. 4 2.8 0 0.0 7 1.4 0 0.0 11 1.2
Hispanic
2. White 118 82.5 5 5.1 441 88.6 140 97.2 704 79.6
(non-
Hispanic)
3. Black 9 6.3 89 89.9 5 1.0 3 2.1 106 12.0
(non-
Hispanic)
4. 1 0.7 0 0.0 3 0.6 0 0.0 4 0.5
American
Indian/
Alaskan
Native
5. Asian/ 5 3.5 0 0.0 28 5.6 0 0.0 33 3.7
Pacific
Islander
6. Other 2 1.4 1 1.0 6 1.2 0 0.0 9 1.0
No answer 4 2.8 4 4.0 8 1.6 1 0.7 17 1.9
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question 20. Using the following scale, what was your Grade Point
Average (GPA) for all of your undergraduate courses? Note: We asked
respondents to use the following scale: A=4.0; B=3.0; C=2.0; D=1.0;
F=0.0. (884 respondents.)
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
1. 3.5- 68 47.6 10 10.1 73 14.7 38 26.4 189 21.4
4.0
2. 3.0- 60 42.0 40 40.4 241 48.4 67 46.5 408 46.2
3.4
3. 2.5- 11 7.7 41 41.4 160 32.1 31 21.5 243 27.5
2.9
4. 2.0- 0 0.0 7 7.1 12 2.4 7 4.9 26 2.9
2.4
5. Less 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
than 2.0
6. Don't 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 0.4 0 0.0 2 0.2
remember
or don't
know
No answer 4 2.8 1 1.0 10 2.0 1 0.7 16 1.8
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question 21. What was your class standing? (884 respondents.)
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
1. Class 9 6.3 23 23.2 113 22.7 45 31.3 190 21.5
standing
was not
calculate
d at my
school
2. In 23 16.1 14 14.1 62 12.5 23 16.0 122 13.8
upper 10
percent
of class
3. In 33 23.1 19 19.2 65 13.1 17 11.8 134 15.2
upper 25
percent
of class
(but not
in upper
10
percent)
4. In 26 18.2 12 12.1 49 9.8 7 4.9 94 10.6
upper 50
percent
of class
(but not
in upper
25
percent)
5. In 16 11.2 3 3.0 4 0.8 1 0.7 24 2.7
lower 50
percent
of class
6. Don't 32 22.4 26 26.3 195 39.2 51 35.4 304 34.4
remember
or don't
know
No answer 4 2.8 2 2.0 10 2.0 0 0.0 16 1.8
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
F. COMMENTS
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix IV:6
Question 22. If you have any comments on this survey, or any
questions you think we should have asked but did not, please enter
them in the space below or attach additional sheets. Also, if you
have any suggestions for ways of making the federal government a more
attractive employer, please write them below.
Of the 884 respondents who sought employment or stayed with the same
employer as before graduation, 299, or 33.8 percent, provided written
comments.
Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce Numbe Perce
Category r nt r nt r nt r nt r nt
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Comments 52 36.4 28 28.3 176 35.3 43 29.9 299 33.8
provided
No 91 63.6 71 71.7 322 64.7 101 70.1 585 66.2
comments
provided
================================================================================
Total 143 100.0 99 100.0 498 100.0 144 100.0 884 100.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MAJOR CONTRIBUTORS TO THIS REPORT
=========================================================== Appendix V
GENERAL GOVERNMENT DIVISION,
WASHINGTON, D.C.
Robert E. Shelton, Assistant Director, Federal Human Resources
Management Issues
Laura G. Shumway, Assignment Manager
Jeffery A. Bass, Evaluator-in-Charge
Margaret M. Schauer, Social Science Analyst
William R. Chatlos, Social Science Analyst
James M. Fields, Social Science Analyst
Jerome T. Sandau, Social Science Analyst