COMPARISON OF

CENTRAL PERSONNEL DATA FILE

AND

OFFICIAL PERSONNEL FOLDER RECORDS

FISCAL YEAR 1994

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL	OFFICE OF WORKFORCE

MANAGEMENT	INFORMATION	JULY 1996

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION	1

Sample	1

Error Definition	2

STATUS FILE	4

Data Element Coverage	4

Data Sources	4

Error Rate by Data Element	6

Discussion of Error Rate by Data Element	8

DYNAMICS FILE	20

Selection of Records	20

Data Element Coverage	20

Data Sources	21

Error Rate by Data Element	23

Discussion of Error Rate by Data Element	26

CONCLUSIONS	38

APPENDICES	40

1. Status File Records by Data Element	40

2. Status Data Elements by Error Range	42

3. Status File Changes in Error Rates	43

4. Dynamics Records by Nature of Action	45

5. Dynamics File Records by Data Element	49

6. Dynamics Data Elements by Error Range	51

7. Dynamics File Changes in Error Rates	52

INTRODUCTION

The Central Personnel Data File is an automated personnel information system containing information on most of the Federal civilian workforce. The system was established in 1972 and covers approximately 2.1 million employees. Central Personnel Data File consists of two major files - the status file which is a "snapshot" record of each employee as of a specific date and the dynamics file which consists of copies of each personnel action taken (hire, promotion, separation) during a three month period. Personnel actions are taken in individual Government offices throughout the world and entered into agency personnel systems. These actions are then reported through the agency systems to Central Personnel Data File.

The same personnel actions are also recorded on Standard Forms 50 and other forms filed in the Official Personnel Folder. Each Federal employee has an Official Personnel Folder that documents his or her employment history. The Official Personnel Folder contains long-term records that might impact an employee's status or service. Most of the data reported to the Central Personnel Data File are also in the employee's Official Personnel Folder.

This study is designed to determine how accurately information in the Central Personnel Data File status and dynamics files matches the information in the Official Personnel Folders. The Study is designed to assess Government-wide data only. It is not designed to estimate the accuracy of data from individual agencies nor of individual code values.

This Study covers the September 1994 Central Personnel Data File Status file and the fiscal year 1994 Central Personnel Data File Dynamics files.

Sample

The Study sample was drawn from separated rather than active employees. We did this because we can obtain the Official Personnel Folders of separated employees from a single source, the National Personnel Records Center. This simplifies the study process without influencing the results. In past studies, we found no statistically significant differences between error rates for active and separated employees.

The sample was drawn from employees who:

separated between September 1 and December 31, 1994;

were on the September 1994 Central Personnel Data File status file;

were not on the December 1994 Central Personnel Data File status file.

For this purpose, transfers were not included as separations. The sample included 135 employees.

Error Definition

An error is defined as a value found in the Central Personnel Data File that is not the same value as that found in the Official Personnel Folder. For this Study, the data element value must have been available in both Central Personnel Data File and the Official Personnel Folder. If the particular data element value could not be found in the Official Personnel Folder, it was excluded from the Study. If the data element did not have a value in Central Personnel Data File, that is, it was either blank or asterisks, it was excluded from the error counts. The value either matched or it did not match. If it did not match, it was an error. The error rate is the number of values that do not match divided by the total number of available values (matches + non-matches), expressed as a percentage.

This is a different calculation than normally used in determining Central Personnel Data File error rates. For this Study, Central Personnel Data File errors - that is, values identified as invalid by Central Personnel Data File edits and replaced by asterisks in Central Personnel Data File files - were treated as unavailable. They were excluded from the error counts and error rate calculations.

This Study focused solely on whether or not data element values found in both Central Personnel Data File and the Official Personnel Folder matched. There was no effort to determine if the Official Personnel Folder data element value was itself correct. For example, if an Official Personnel Folder document (Standard Form 50) showed no frozen service, we did not research the employee's history to determine if there actually were 2 years and 3 months of frozen service. If Official Personnel Folder coding showed that the employee's education level was recorded as high school graduate in the agency personnel system but the application showed that the employee actually had a Bachelor's Degree, we matched the Central Personnel Data File value against the Official Personnel Folder coding (high school), not against the actual value (Bachelor's Degree). The only variation on this practice occurred when the Official Personnel Folder did not have a code indicating how the data were recorded in the agency personnel system. In those cases, we constructed an Official Personnel Folder code based on the actual value. The differences in the comparison (Central Personnel Data File value with Official Personnel Folder value or Central Personnel Data File value with actual value) may have impacted the error rates for specific data elements.

STATUS FILE

Data Element Coverage

Agencies submit 48 data elements on each Central Personnel Data File status file record. One data element, social security number, was used to identify the appropriate record; it was not, therefore, used in the Study. Of the remaining 47 data elements, 35 are included in the Study. The other 12 data elements were not included either because they are not part of the Official Personnel Folder or because the data applied to such a small number of employees Governmentwide that the sample would be insufficient to give an accurate result.

The following data elements were excluded because they are not part of the Official Personnel Folder:

a.	Organizational component;

b.	Race or national origin;

c.	Handicap;

d.	Functional classification;

e.	Supervisory status;

f.	Special pay table identifier.

The following data elements were excluded because of insufficient sample size:

a.	Retained pay plan;

b.	Retained grade;

c.	Retained step;

d.	Staffing differential;

e.	Supervisory differential;

f.	Retention allowance.

Data Sources

Central Personnel Data File data were identified by social security number and extracted from the September 1994 status file. Most of the comparable Official Personnel Folder data were extracted from the last Standard Form 50, "Notification of Personnel Action," with both effective and approval dates prior to September 30, 1994. If there were actions dated between September 17 and September 30, 1994, we used the September 17 action for employees in agencies that submit Central Personnel Data File data as of the end of the pay period and the September 30 action for those in agencies that submit as of the end of the month.

The following data elements were extracted from sources other than the Standard Form 50 closest to September 1994:

Data Element Source Creditable Military Service Remark on the latest accession or conversion. If not available, computed from the Standard Form 144 (Statement of Prior Federal Service), information on the application, DD 214, and/or Standard Form 180 Current Appointment Authority Legal authority on the last accession or conversion prior to September 1994 Education Level Application, including school transcript or list of college courses (Office of Personnel Management Form 1170) FERS Coverage Remark on latest appointment or change in retirement plan. If not available, determined from information on Standard Form 50's documenting earlier retirement coverage and presence/absence of employee's FERS election Frozen Service Remark on latest accession or conversion. If not available, computed from information on the application and earlier personnel actions Health Plan Standard Form 2809 (Health Benefits Registration Form) in effect in September 1994. If not available, Standard Form 1150 (Record of Leave Data) Instructional Program Application, including school transcript or list of college courses (Office of Personnel Management Form 1170) Pay Status Determined based on whether Leave Without Pay action was still in effect in September 1994. All intermittent employees were treated as in pay status as required by Central Personnel Data File submission requirements. Rating of Record Agency performance rating form with appraisal ending date or approval date closest and prior to September 30, 1994 Sex DD 214 or Standard Form 2809 (Health Benefits Registration Form) or Name on the application or a reference to husband/wife on any forms in Official Personnel Folder US Citizenship Application or Standard Form 61-B (Declaration of Appointee) Veterans Status Determined based on information on the application and/or DD 214 Year Degree or Certificate Attained Application, including school transcript or list of college courses (Office of Personnel Management Form 1170)

Error Rate by Data Element

The following table shows the data elements included in the Study, the number of values that matched (Central Personnel Data File and Official Personnel Folder values were the same), the percent that matched (using the total of matched and non-matched values as a base), the number of values that did not match, and the percent errors (percent that did not match).

PERCENTAGES OF MATCHES AND ERRORS BY DATA ELEMENT Data Elements Match % Match Not Match % Error Agency/Subelement 134 99.3% 1 0.7% Annuitant Indicator 135 100% 0 0% Bargaining Unit 135 100% 0 0% Basic Pay 135 100% 0 0% Creditable Military Service 105 95.5% 5 4.5% Current Appointment Authority 127 95.5% 6 4.5% Date of Birth 135 100% 0 0% Duty Station 135 100% 0 0% Education Level 123 91.8% 11 8.2% FEGLI 135 100% 0 0% FERS Coverage 134 99.3% 1 0.7% FLSA 135 100% 0 0% Frozen Service 128 99.2% 1 0.8% Grade 135 100% 0 0% Health Plan 122 96.8% 4 3.2% Instructional Program 130 100% 0 0% Locality Adjustment 135 100% 0 0% Occupation 135 100% 0 0% Pay Basis 135 100% 0 0% Pay Plan 134 99.3% 1 0.7% Pay Rate Determinant 135 100% 0 0% Pay Status 134 100% 0 0% Personnel Office Identifier 134 99.3% 1 0.7% Position Occupied 135 100% 0 0% Rating of Record 75 94.9% 4 5.1% Retirement Plan 135 100% 0 0% Service Computation Date 133 99.3% 1 0.7% Sex 133 98.5% 2 1.5% Step 135 100% 0 0% Tenure 134 99.3% 1 0.7% US Citizenship 135 100% 0 0% Veterans Status 128 94.8% 7 5.2% Veterans Preference 135 100% 0 0% Work Schedule 134 99.3% 1 0.7% Year Degree 128 98.5% 2 1.5%

The following table summarizes the range of errors by data element.

Percent of Errors Number of Data Elements Percentage of Data Elements 0 19 54 Less than 1% 8 23 1 - 4.9% 5 14 5% and above 3 9

Appendix 1 shows the total number of records for which values could be derived from Official Personnel Folder data, the number of values that matched, the number of blanks in Central Personnel Data File, the number of asterisks in Central Personnel Data File, and the number of values that did not match.

Appendix 2 shows the individual data elements by error range.

Appendix 3 shows the error rate by data element for this Study - September 1994 - compared to the error rate for the last study - September 1991.

Discussion of Error Rate by Data Element

General:

Comparisons of Central Personnel Data File values with values that were recorded in standard codes and could be taken directly from a form in the Official Personnel Folder are more reliable than comparisons with values that were recorded in nonstandard terms or were computed from other information in the Official Personnel Folder. In the latter case, the differences in information available when the data were recorded by the employing agency and during this study may have caused value mismatches. This may account in part for the difference in error rates between data elements found on the Standard Form 50 and all other data elements. Data elements on the Standard Form 50 are also subject to an additional quality control review. The employee receives a copy of the Standard Form 50 and may ask the agency to correct erroneous information. Information that is only retained in the agency personnel information system is not readily available for the employee's review. Of the 22 data elements found on the Standard Form 50, 16 or 72% had no errors. Only three or 23% of the 13 data elements not found on the Standard Form 50 had no errors. Where appropriate, the more detailed information below discusses the possible impact of the data source(s) on the error rate.

Data Elements With No Errors:

Data Element	Comments

Bargaining Unit	Central Personnel Data File code "6666" may be submitted when an activity is being reorganized and the bargaining unit is being impacted. This code was considered a match for any code in the Official Personnel Folder.

Instructional	The value for this data element was taken from the major field

Program	of study listed on the application. Since there are many instructional programs that are very similar, we believed we would introduce errors by selecting a value and then comparing it with the Central Personnel Data File value. For this field, we verified the Central Personnel Data File value, that is, checked that the meaning of the Central Personnel Data File code was the same as the field of study listed on the application.

Locality	The value for this data element was taken from the Standard Form 50 but

Adjustment	instructions for recording this value on that form differ from those for reporting the value to the Central Personnel Data File. On the Standard Form 50, "0" is used for all employees who do not receive a locality adjustment. In the Central Personnel Data File, "0" is used for employees who are eligible for a locality adjustment but do not receive any additional money (usually because their special rate is higher than locality pay). Blanks are used for employees who are not eligible for locality adjustments (for example, wage system employees). Central Personnel Data File blanks were counted as matching Official Personnel Folder "0's" when the employee was not eligible for locality pay.

Data Elements With Errors: Data Element Comments Agency/Subelement Errors: 1

The value for this data element was taken from the Standard Form 50. Certain agencies used subelement codes on the Standard Form 50 that did not match the code in the Central Personnel Data File but had the same meaning or used subelements internally but used "00" as the subelement code in the Central Personnel Data File. These values were counted as matches.

The only unmatched record showed a value in the Central Personnel Data File that did not appear in the Official Personnel Folder until October 1994. Because agencies frequently resubmit their Central Personnel Data File data using later effective dates, we believe this error was the result of a resubmission using the October subelement. Creditable Military Service Errors: 5

Creditable military service must be reported to the Central Personnel Data File on all employees who were appointed or converted on or after October 1, 1986. A remark showing the creditable military service is required on all Standard Form 50's effective on/after October 1986 that document appointments, conversions and changes in service computation date due to military service. For employees who were last appointed prior to October 1986, the Central Personnel Data File field is to be blank - indicating not required; the creditable military service can be reported on a voluntary basis at the agency's option.

Creditable Military Service

(continued) If the data were required but there was no remark on the appropriate Standard Form 50, we computed the creditable military service from the Official Personnel Folder records (application, declaration of appointee, DD 214, previous personnel actions). Of the 84 records where creditable military service was required, we computed 50. We also computed the value for all 51 records where creditable military service was voluntarily reported to the Central Personnel Data File. Central Personnel Data File blanks were counted as matches if creditable military service was not required (for example, if the employee were last appointed prior to October 1986). There were 28 such records. If the data were required but were reported to the Central Personnel Data File as blanks, the record was counted as blank and excluded from the error computations. There were 25 such records.

In all five cases counted as errors, the Central Personnel Data File had a value of "0" and there was no remark documenting the creditable military service. (We computed the service from Official Personnel Folder documents.) In four of the five cases, the creditable military service was reported on a voluntary basis, that is, blanks would have been correct but "0" was not. Agencies appear to be confused between blanks and zeroes - they appear to be submitting them interchangeably, for example, 22 of the 25 blank records should have had values of "0."

Of the total 135 cases, only 21 had values other than "0" or blank. Of these 21, 13 had Central Personnel Data File values that matched Official Personnel Folder values; 3 were blank; and 5 were unmatched or errors. Current Appointment Authority Errors: 6

Current appointment authority (CAA) must be reported to the Central Personnel Data File for all excepted service and Senior Executive Service employees and for competitive service employees appointed or converted since January 1, 1982. For employees appointed prior to 1982, the CAA may be reported as "ZZZ."

Of the six errors, three could have been reported as "ZZZ," that is, the employee was appointed prior to 1982. The legal authority code structure changed in 1982 and the errors on these three cases could be due to differences between the agency's selection of the most appropriate code from the revised structure and the selection made during the study process.

The three other errors involved use of related codes but not the exact code found on the appointment. These were codes for: (1) miscellaneous law in lieu of Schedule A agency- specific authority; (2) Office of Personnel Management delegated authority in lieu of Office of Personnel Management authority delegated by specific region; (3) first year in multi-year temporary appointment in lieu of second year in multi-year temporary appointment. Education Level Errors: 11

The Central Personnel Data File does not require that education level be reported on temporary employees. Central Personnel Data File blanks were counted as matches for such employees. Education Level (continued) In four cases, the Central Personnel Data File showed the employee with a high school education or some college while the Official Personnel Folder showed the employee had a college degree or higher. In the other seven cases, the educational attainment was within the same grouping (for example, less than high school, some college but no degree) but not the same education level. Nine of the 11 errors showed the employee with less educational attainment in the Central Personnel Data File than was shown in the Official Personnel Folder.

There is no way to trace the coding of education level so we could not develop any explanation for the high error rate on this data element. FERS Coverage Errors: 1

The Central Personnel Data File requires FERS coverage be reported only on employees covered by one of the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS) retirement plans. Central Personnel Data File blanks were counted as matches for employees for whom this item is not required.

The only error was a Central Personnel Data File value showing automatic coverage for an employee whose Official Personnel Folder contained a Change in Retirement Plan documenting FERS election. The agency system probably did not use this action to generate the correct value for the Central Personnel Data File. Frozen Service Errors: 1

The definition of frozen service has changed at least four times since it was first required on accessions and conversions dated on/after July 1987 where the employee had Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS) retirement coverage. If the data were required in the Central Personnel Data File but there was no remark on the appropriate Standard Form 50, we computed the frozen service from earlier personnel actions in the Official Personnel Folder. In computing frozen service, we used the definition in effect at the time the data element was first required for that employee. Of the 28 records where frozen service was required, we computed 11.

Central Personnel Data File blanks were counted as matches if frozen service was not required (for example, if the employee was not covered by FERS or was last appointed prior to July 1987). There were 47 such records.

There were also 55 records where the employee was not covered by FERS and where blanks would have been the appropriate frozen service value but "0" was submitted to Central Personnel Data File. We counted these records as matches.

If the data were required but were reported to the Central Personnel Data File as blanks, the record was counted as blank and excluded from the error computations. There were 6 such records.

The only error was a case where frozen service was required, was not shown in a remark on the personnel action, was computed during the Study as 9 years and 7 months but reported to the Central Personnel Data File as "0". Health Plan Errors: 4

Eight Official Personnel Folders did not include documentation of health insurance.

All four errors were shown in the Central Personnel Data File as pending (eligible but has not selected health plan). Three of the four were shown as ineligible in the Official Personnel Folder; one had declined coverage.

All of the records that showed specific enrollment (choice of a particular plan and option) had the same values in the Official Personnel Folder and the Central Personnel Data File. Pay Plan Errors: 1

The Official Personnel Folder showed pay plan "GG" (similar to General Schedule) while the Central Personnel Data File showed "CG" (corporate graded - also similar to General Schedule but limited to a specific agency). Personnel Office Identifier Errors: 1

The Official Personnel Folder contained a realignment action effective prior to September 1994 and this action had a different personnel office identifier than the value reported to the Central Personnel Data File. The Central Personnel Data File value was on an earlier action in the Official Personnel Folder. It appears that the system reporting to the Central Personnel Data File did not update the personnel office identifier when the realignment action was processed. Rating of Record Errors: 4

There are two Central Personnel Data File codes that indicate there is no rating of record - one for employees not yet rated and one for those excluded from ratings. Since there is no Official Personnel Folder documentation of either of these situations, we could not include those codes in the comparisons. 41 records had Central Personnel Data File codes indicating there was no rating of record; there was no Official Personnel Folder documentation of a rating for any of these employees. There were 15 records where the Central Personnel Data File indicated a rating of record had been issued but there was no documentation of the rating in the Official Personnel Folder.

Of the four errors, two were shown as outstanding or level 5 in the Official Personnel Folder but as exceeds satisfactory or level 4 in the Central Personnel Data File and two were shown as exceeds satisfactory or level 4 in the Official Personnel Folder but as outstanding or level 5 in the Central Personnel Data File.

There are possible explanations for two errors. In one case, the rating in the Official Personnel Folder was 2 years old; since employees are generally rated every year, the mismatch could have been due to missing Official Personnel Folder documentation. In another case, the rating was changed in July 1994; the Central Personnel Data File reflected the pre- July rating. Since there was no indication of when the rating was updated in the agency's system (there are no effective dates or processing dates on the Official Personnel Folder documentation of ratings), the lag time between when the rating was effective and when it was recorded could account for the mismatch. Service Computation Date Errors: 1

The erroneous record showed a date of May 1980 in the Central Personnel Data File compared to July 1993 in the Official Personnel Folder. The employee was an intermittent who did not earn leave and had been employed in 1980, separated, and reemployed in 1993. Sex Errors: 2

One erroneous record showed the employee as female in Central Personnel Data File but he was identified as a male from Official Personnel Folder documents (reference to a wife on SF 61B, check of Mr. as title in application). The other erroneous record showed the employee as male in the Central Personnel Data File but she was identified as female from Official Personnel Folder documents (reference to husband on application). Both employees were intermittents. Tenure Errors: 1

The erroneous record showed tenure code "0" in the Official Personnel Folder and code "3" in the Central Personnel Data File. The employee was on a temporary appointment.

One record was counted as a match because the latest Official Personnel Folder document (a Reduction in Force notice) showed the same tenure code as was in the Central Personnel Data File. An earlier action in the Official Personnel Folder showed that the tenure code changed from "2" to "1" but this change was not reflected in later Official Personnel Folder documents nor in Central Personnel Data File. Veterans Status Errors: 7

Five of the seven errors were records where the Central Personnel Data File showed the employee was not a veteran while the application showed military service prior to the Vietnam era. These five records were for Agriculture County Committeemen, local farmers who are given intermittent appointments so they can review and approve farm loans. All County Committeemen were: coded with no veterans' preference (Standard Form 50 and Central Personnel Data File); given no service credit for military service (Standard Form 50 and Central Personnel Data File); and coded as non-veterans for veterans status. It appears that all County Committeemen were given a standard coding because of the unusual nature of their appointments whether or not that coding was applicable to the individual employee. The sixth error showed an employee as a non-veteran in the Central Personnel Data File when the employee had served in Vietnam. At the time the employee's record was coded, the employee did not have veterans preference. Some agency personnelists believed that if the employee did not have veterans preference, he/she was not a veteran for veterans status purposes either. This may account for the difference in this case.

The seventh error showed the employee had service before Vietnam (code B) in the Central Personnel Data File while the Official Personnel Folder showed the service was after Vietnam (code P). This appears to be a coding error. Work Schedule Errors: 1

The erroneous record showed the employee was part-time in the Central Personnel Data File but full time in the Official Personnel Folder. Year Degree Errors: 2

Central Personnel Data File blanks were counted as matches if the education level was one for which the Central Personnel Data File does not allow submission of the year degree (that is, education level less than college degree for appointments prior to October 1993, other than college degrees, associate degrees, or completion of an occupational program for appointments on/after October 1993).

One erroneous record showed a date of 1965 in the Official Personnel Folder compared to 1968 in the Central Personnel Data File; the other showed 1949 in the Official Personnel Folder compared to 1947 in the Central Personnel Data File.

DYNAMICS FILE

Selection of Records

The dynamics records included in this Study were the personnel actions and rating of record updates found in the 135 Official Personnel Folders in the sample. The actions were those effective and approved during fiscal year 1994, that is, October 1, 1993 thru September 30, 1994. Rating of record updates do not have official effective dates. Central Personnel Data File submission instructions require that agencies use the end of the rating period as the effective date on the Central Personnel Data File action but some agencies use other dates - the date approved by a reviewing official, date processed. Rating of record updates were included in the Study if the end of the appraisal period or the latest signature date (employee, reviewing official, etc.) was within the fiscal year.

Appendix 4 shows the personnel actions included in the study by nature of action code. The appendix includes the number of actions found only in the Official Personnel Folder (not reported to the Central Personnel Data File) and the number found only in the Central Personnel Data File (no Official Personnel Folder record). Data element comparisons were done only for actions that were in both the Official Personnel Folder and the Central Personnel Data File. There were 418 such actions.

Data Element Coverage

Agencies submit 57 data elements on each Central Personnel Data File dynamics file record. Three data elements (nature of action, effective date, and social security number) were used to identify the appropriate record; that is, those items must have matched for the action to have been included in the data element comparison. They were not, therefore, used in the Study.

Employee name is submitted with the dynamics file records but is not part of the Central Personnel Data File dynamics files used for statistical output. Employee name was excluded from the Study.

Four other data elements are used only for data processing purposes (to identify and process corrections and cancellations) and were excluded from the Study.

Of the remaining 49 data elements, 40 were included in the Study. The other nine data elements were excluded either because they are not part of the Official Personnel Folder or because the data applied to such a small number of employees Governmentwide that the sample would be insufficient to give an accurate result.

The following data elements were excluded because they are not part of the Official Personnel Folder:

a.	Organizational component;

b.	Race or national origin;

c.	Handicap;

d.	Supervisory status;

e.	Individual/group award;

f.	Benefit amount.

The following data elements were excluded because of insufficient sample size:

a.	Staffing differential;

b.	Supervisory differential;

c.	Retention allowance.

Data Sources

The Central Personnel Data File values were taken from the dynamics records for the employee, identified by social security number, in the December 1993, March 1994, June 1994, and September 1994 files. The Official Personnel Folder values were generally taken from the Standard Form 50's effective and approved during the period October 1, 1993 through September 30, 1994. Central Personnel Data File dynamics records included actions documenting issuance of a performance rating (nature of action code 009). Agency performance rating forms were matched to the Central Personnel Data File 009 actions for the value of the rating. If the agency reported any other data on Central Personnel Data File 009 actions, the Official Personnel Folder values were taken from the Standard Form 50 effective closest and prior to the effective date of the 009. Prior data were generally taken from the Standard Form 50 effective closest and prior to the date of the action.

The following data elements were extracted from a source other than the Standard Form 50 documenting the action or, for prior data, the Standard Form 50 documenting the most recent previous action:

Data Element Source Creditable Military Service Remark on the latest accession or conversion. If not available, computed from the Standard Form 144 (Statement of Prior Federal Service), information on the application, DD 214, and/or Standard Form 180 Current Appointment Authority For an accession or conversion, the legal authority on the action. For all other actions, the legal authority on the last accession or conversion prior to the effective date of the action Education Level Application, including school transcript or list of college courses (Office of Personnel Management Form 1170) Frozen Service If not shown in a remark on the action, taken from a remark on a previous action or computed from information on the application and earlier personnel actions Instructional Program Application, including school transcript or list of college courses (Office of Personnel Management Form 1170) Previous Retirement Coverage If not shown in a remark on the action, taken from a remark on a previous action or determined based on review of retirement plan on earlier actions Rating of Record Agency performance rating form with appraisal ending date or approval date closest and prior to the effective date of the action Sex DD214 or Standard Form 2809 (Health Benefits Registration Form) or Name on the application or a reference to husband/wife on any forms in Official Personnel Folder Veterans Status Determined based on information on the application Year Degree or Certificate Attained Application, including school transcript or list of college courses (Office of Personnel Management Form 1170)

Error Rate by Data Element

In the Central Personnel Data File status file, each data element is reported on each record with blanks generally equivalent to the code for not applicable. In the study of status data elements, we attempted to compare each data element's Official Personnel Folder and Central Personnel Data File values, including Central Personnel Data File blanks that meant not applicable. We excluded only those cases where we were not able to compute a value from the Official Personnel Folder data. (See Appendix 1.) In the Central Personnel Data File dynamics file, the particular data elements reported vary depending on the type of action. For example, creditable military service is reported on accessions, conversions, and changes in service computation date due to military service. It is not required on any other actions. Central Personnel Data File blanks on the dynamics file do not necessarily equate to not applicable as they do in the status file. In the study of dynamics data elements, we compared Official Personnel Folder and Central Personnel Data File values only if the data element was either required on that particular action or was voluntarily reported to the Central Personnel Data File on the action. Because of these differences in reporting requirements, the base for determining the error rate on dynamics data elements can vary significantly from data element to data element. For example, the base for year degree is 107 so that 7 errors equal a 6.5% error rate. The base for current appointment authority is 374 so that 16 errors equal a 4.3% error rate.

In the Central Personnel Data File status file comparisons, one record equaled one employee. If an employee's veterans status was miscoded, that would equate to one error. In the dynamics file comparisons, each personnel action was counted separately. An employee could have no personnel actions, two actions, or ten actions. If one employee's veterans status was miscoded, that miscoding could appear not at all, twice, or ten times. The dynamics file comparison deals with personnel actions, not employees.

The following table shows the data elements included in the study, the number of values that matched (Central Personnel Data File and Official Personnel Folder values were the same), the percent that matched (using the total of matched and non-matched values as a base), the number of values that did not match, and the percent errors (percent that did not match).

PERCENTAGE OF MATCHES AND ERRORS BY DATA ELEMENT Data Elements Match % Match Not Match % Error Agency/Subelement 417 99.8% 1 0.2% Award Amount 58 100% 0 0% Basic Pay 376 99.2% 3 0.8% Creditable Military Service 105 95.5% 5 4.5% Current Appointment Authority 358 95.7% 16 4.3% Date of Birth 417 100% 0 0% Duty Station 380 100% 0 0% Education Level 347 92.8% 27 7.2% Frozen Service 96 100% 0 0% Grade 380 100% 0 0% Instructional Program 109 100% 0 0% Legal Authority 341 98.3% 6 1.7% Locality Adjustment 205 98.6% 3 1.4% Occupation 377 100% 0 0% Pay Basis 377 100% 0 0% Pay Plan 374 98.7% 5 1.3% Pay Rate Determinant 380 100% 0 0% Personnel Office Identifier 415 99.5% 2 0.5% Position Occupied 379 100% 0 0% Previous Retirement Coverage 102 100% 0 0% Prior Basic Pay 347 98.0% 7 2.0% Prior Duty Station 348 99.4% 2 0.6% Prior Grade 352 98.9% 4 1.1% Prior Locality Adjustment 147 98.0% 3 2.0% Prior Occupation 355 100% 0 0% Prior Pay Basis 352 99.7% 1 0.3% Prior Pay Plan 351 98.6% 5 1.4% Prior Pay Rate Determinant 359 100% 0 0% Prior Step 356 99.4% 2 0.6% Prior Work Schedule 350 98.9% 4 1.1% Rating of Record 270 95.7% 12 4.3% Retirement Plan 382 100% 0 0% Service Computation Date 368 98.4% 6 1.6% Sex 377 98.7% 5 1.3% Step 379 99.7% 1 0.3% Tenure 381 100% 0 0% Veterans Status 379 99.0% 4 1.0% Veterans Preference 381 100% 0 0% Work Schedule 377 99.0% 4 1.0% Year Degree 100 93.5% 7 6.5%

The following table summarizes the range of errors by data element.

Percent of Errors Number of Data Elements % of Data Elements 0 16 40 Less than 1% 7 17.5 1 - 4.9% 15 37.5 5% and above 2 5

Appendix 5 shows the total number of records for which values could be derived from Official Personnel Folder data, the number of values that matched, the number of blanks in the Central Personnel Data File, the number of asterisks in the Central Personnel Data File, and the number of values that did not match.

Appendix 6 shows the individual data elements by error range.

Appendix 7 shows the error rate by data element for this Study - fiscal year 1994 - compared to the error rate for the last study - fiscal year 1989.

Discussion of Error Rate by Data Element

Although most of the Official Personnel Folder data element values were taken from the Standard Form 50, they were not always taken from the Standard Form 50 documenting that particular action. Standard Form 50 completion instructions differ significantly from Central Personnel Data File reporting requirements. Standard Form 50 instructions allow almost any data element to be blank on some action. In most cases, the Standard Form 50's showed the values for most data elements but there were some exceptions.

Prior data

The Central Personnel Data File requires that prior data be reported on all actions other than accessions, returns to duty, and rating of record updates. Standard Form 50 instructions require the prior pay data be completed only if it is changing; prior duty station and prior work schedule are not on the Standard Form 50. We extracted the appropriate Official Personnel Folder prior data element values from the closest Standard Form 50 that was effective and approved prior to the date of the action and had values in the field. Prior data (one or more data elements) were computed on 79% of the records in the Study.

Pay adjustments

The Central Personnel Data File requires that pay adjustment actions documenting a general pay increase include most data elements, including all prior and current pay fields. These actions may be documented in the Official Personnel Folder with printouts or a copy of the wage schedule on which only the revised basic pay may be shown. On pay adjustments documented with a printout or similar form, we extracted as many of the Official Personnel Folder pay data values as possible from the Official Personnel Folder document but used most values from the closest Standard Form 50 that was effective and approved prior to the general pay increase and had values in the field. In cases where we could not determine what the appropriate Official Personnel Folder value should have been, we excluded that data element from the comparison.

Awards

The Central Personnel Data File requires that all regular pay data and the award amount be reported on each award action. The Standard Form 50 documents the award amount in the basic pay field and leaves all other pay data blank. On these actions, we extracted the Official Personnel Folder pay data values from the closest Standard Form 50 that was effective and approved prior to the award's effective date and had values in the field. Awards were 14% of the records in the Study.

Rating of record updates

The Central Personnel Data File requires only minimal data on all rating of record updates (date of birth, personnel office identifier, rating of record) but allows any other data elements to be reported on an optional basis. These actions are not documented on Standard Form 50's but on agency forms. There are generally no data other than the rating on the Official Personnel Folder documents. We extracted appropriate Official Personnel Folder values for all data elements from the closest Standard Form 50 (or 50's) that was effective and approved prior to the action's Central Personnel Data File effective date and had values in the field. Rating of record updates were 13% of the records in the Study.

The relatively extensive reconstruction of Official Personnel Folder data for the dynamics comparisons may have impacted error rates. In some cases, the data we extracted were taken from actions that predated the record being compared by several months. If changes in data values were not documented properly in the Official Personnel Folder, the resulting comparison could be erroneous. Discussion of the possible impact on particular data elements is included in the appropriate notes below.

Data Elements with Errors: Data Element Comments Agency/Subelement Errors: 1

The value for this data element was taken from the Standard Form 50. Certain agencies used subelement codes on the Standard Form 50 that did not match the code in the Central Personnel Data File but had the same meaning or used subelements internally but used "00" as the subelement code in the Central Personnel Data File. These values were counted as matches.

The only unmatched value was on a reassignment that changed the employee from one subelement to another. The Central Personnel Data File showed the old subelement (the subelement prior to the reassignment). Subsequent actions showed the correct subelement. Basic Pay Errors: 3

In two of the three erroneous records, pay data were not recorded on the Official Personnel Folder form documenting the specific action but were extracted from previous records. (One action was an award; the other a rating of record update.) In both cases, the pay data appeared to be correct for the date the actions were processed but not for their effective dates. (In one case, a general pay increase occurred in the period between effective and processing dates; in the other, the employee received a Within Grade Increase between the two dates.) Awards and rating of record updates are not generally processed in the same way as other actions. The time that elapses between initiation (effective date) and approval (processing date) may be significantly longer than for other actions. Agency internal processing systems do not generally process retroactive actions, that is, actions that predate the last action processed, without extensive intervention. Given these circumstances, it appears that the agency systems report the pay data current as of the processing date rather than the effective date on many of the awards and rating of record updates submitted to the Central Personnel Data File. Creditable Military Service Errors: 5

All five errors were cases where the Central Personnel Data File value was "0" but Official Personnel Folder documents indicated there was creditable military service. In all five cases, we calculated the service. None of the Standard Form 50's documenting the action had a remark showing the creditable military service. The absence of the remark may indicate that the agency did not calculate the service and reported a default value of "0." Current Appointment Authority Errors: 16

Current appointment authority (CAA) code "ZZZ" is the equivalent of not applicable; it can be reported to the Central Personnel Data File for competitive service employees last appointed or converted prior to January 1, 1982.

Seven of the 16 CAA errors could have been reported as "ZZZ." The legal authority code structure changed in 1982 and these seven errors could be due to differences between the agency's selection of the most appropriate code from the revised structure and the selection made during the study process. Seven other errors involved use of related codes but not the exact code found on the appointment. These involved reporting Central Personnel Data File codes for: (1) miscellaneous law in lieu of the Official Personnel Folder code for Schedule A agency-specific authority (four errors); and (2) Office of Personnel Management (OPM) delegated authority in lieu of the Official Personnel Folder code for OPM authority delegated by specific region (three errors).

Two errors were reporting to Central Personnel Data File the code indicating an appointment from a Civil Service Certificate rather than the Official Personnel Folder code for conversion from a TAPER appointment. Education Level Errors: 27

Of the 27 erroneous records, 10 had Official Personnel Folder and Central Personnel Data File codes that indicated the same educational attainment grouping (less than high school, high school graduate, etc.) but not the same education level (specific code).

Five errors were records where the Central Personnel Data File showed the employee had a high school degree and the Official Personnel Folder showed completion of 10 hours of college work. Another five errors were records on a temporary intermittent employee reported to the Central Personnel Data File as a high school graduate but who was actually an M.D. Legal Authority Errors: 6

Four of the errors may have been caused by agencies correcting inappropriate legal authority codes in their Central Personnel Data File submissions but not reflecting those corrections on the Standard Form 50's. Two codes shown in the Official Personnel Folder were not authorized for use with the corresponding nature of action (realignment and removal); two other Official Personnel Folder codes were inappropriate for the specific situation (performance awards for wage system employees with legal authority for General Schedule employees). The Central Personnel Data File codes were the appropriate codes.

The other two errors involved submitting Central Personnel Data File codes for: the current appointment authority rather than the legal authority on a pay adjustment action; and the legal authority code indicating a resignation rather than the code for a resignation caused by Reduction in force. Locality Adjustment Errors: 3

In one error, the difference between the Official Personnel Folder and the Central Personnel Data File locality adjustment amount was $1.

In another error, the locality adjustment was reported to the Central Personnel Data File as "0" rather than the accurate amount for a special rate employee.

In the third error, the amount was correct for the date the rating of record update was processed but not the date it was effective. (See discussion under basic pay.) Pay Plan Errors: 5

In each of the errors the Official Personnel Folder showed pay plan "GG" (similar to General Schedule) while the Central Personnel Data File showed "CG" (corporate graded - also similar to General Schedule but limited to a specific agency). Personnel Office Identifier Errors: 2

Both errors were on actions (pay adjustment and rating of record update) that were processed after a realignment changed the personnel office identifier. The Central Personnel Data File value on both actions was the Official Personnel Folder value prior to the realignment. Prior Basic Pay Errors: 7

(Prior pay data were not generally shown on the Official Personnel Folder record documenting the action. We extracted the data from earlier documents. See general discussion.)

In five of the seven errors, prior pay data were copied from the current pay data when the action was reported to the Central Personnel Data File. Since the action changed one or more of the prior pay fields (prior basic pay, prior grade, prior locality adjustment, prior step), whichever field(s) changed were mismatches between the Central Personnel Data File and the reconstructed Official Personnel Folder data.

In one case, the prior pay data were taken from the employee's last promotion rather than the most recent prior action.

In one case, the prior data were correct for the date the action was processed but not for the effective date. (See discussion under basic pay.)

The errors in the prior pay data elements are all due to the same causes but the number of errors varies depending on which field(s) the action changed. Prior Duty Station Errors: 2

In both records with errors, the action changed the duty station but the Central Personnel Data File value for prior duty station was copied from the new (changed) duty station rather than the duty station immediately prior to the action. Prior Grade Errors: 4

See prior basic pay. Prior Locality Adjustment Errors: 3

See prior basic pay. Prior Pay Basis Errors: 1

The Official Personnel Folder document showed the employee changing from pay basis PW (piecework) to PH (per hour) on a form documenting a wage system pay increase. The current pay basis was reported to Central Personnel Data File as the prior pay basis. Prior Pay Plan Errors: 5

In each of the five errors the Official Personnel Folder showed pay plan "GG" (similar to General Schedule) while Central Personnel Data File showed "CG" (corporate graded - also similar to General Schedule but limited to a specific agency). Prior Step Errors: 2

See prior basic pay. Prior Work Schedule Errors: 4

Three of the erroneous records showed the employee as part time in the Central Personnel Data File but full time in the Official Personnel Folder. One showed the employee as full time in the Central Personnel Data File but part time in the Official Personnel Folder. Rating of Record Errors: 12

Five of the erroneous records showed the employee was not yet rated in the Central Personnel Data File but there was a rating in the Official Personnel Folder. Because there is no real effective or processing date on Official Personnel Folder rating documents, we used the end of the rating period or the last signature date as the effective date. The ratings may not have been processed by the effective date used in the Study, thus causing the errors.

Five of the erroneous records showed ratings of exceeds fully successful in the Central Personnel Data File but outstanding in the Official Personnel Folder. Processing/effective date differences (delays in updating agency systems) appear to have caused at least two of these errors.

The other two erroneous records showed ratings of outstanding in the Central Personnel Data File but exceeds fully successful in the Official Personnel Folder.

Service Computation Date Errors: 6

Five of the erroneous records showed a date of July 1956 in the Central Personnel Data File but a date of August 1954 in the Official Personnel Folder. This employee had a change in service computation date that changed the day but not month/year. It is not clear if this change could have resulted in the erroneous date being reported to the Central Personnel Data File.

The other erroneous record reported the appointment date (April 1994) to the Central Personnel Data File rather than the service computation date (March 1983). Sex Errors: 5

Four erroneous records showed the employee as female in the Central Personnel Data File but the employee was determined to be a male from Official Personnel Folder records.

The other error showed the employee as male in the Central Personnel Data File but the employee was determined to be female from Official Personnel Folder records. Step Errors: 1

The erroneous step was on a rating of record update. The Central Personnel Data File step appeared to be correct for the date the rating of record update was processed but not for its effective date (the end of the rating period). The employee received a Within Grade Increase changing the step during the period between the rating of record's effective date and its processing date.

See basic pay. Veterans Status Errors: 4

In three of the four errors the Central Personnel Data File showed service before Vietnam (code B) while the Official Personnel Folder showed service after Vietnam (code P). These mismatches appear to be the result of a coding error. Since veterans status coding does not appear on any Official Personnel Folder forms, we cannot verify what information was actually contained in the agency personnel system.

In the other error the Central Personnel Data File showed no military service while the Official Personnel Folder showed service before Vietnam. This employee was a County Committeeman. These employees' records appear to have followed a standard coding practice where military service data were not collected or credited. Work Schedule Errors: 4

In three of the errors the Central Personnel Data File showed part time but the Official Personnel Folder showed full time. The other error showed full time in the Central Personnel Data File but part time in the Official Personnel Folder. Year Degree Errors: 7

In three of the errors the year degree reported to the Central Personnel Data File was 1900, while the date extracted from Official Personnel Folder documents was 1987 (one record) or 1990 (two records).

In two of the errors the Central Personnel Data File showed 1947 while the Official Personnel Folder showed 1949. In two other errors the Central Personnel Data File showed 1968 while the Official Personnel Folder showed 1965. All four appear to involve coding errors. Since year degree coding does not appear on any forms, we cannot verify what information was actually contained in the agency personnel information system.

CONCLUSIONS

In general, the values for the data elements in the Central Personnel Data File match those found in the Official Personnel Folders. There are, however, certain discrepancies about which users of Central Personnel Data File data should be cautioned.

Status File

Creditable Military Service and Frozen Service

Although blanks and zeroes technically have different meanings, the distinctions do not appear clear to those calculating the creditable military and/or frozen service. Blanks and zeroes appear to be reported to the Central Personnel Data File interchangeably. Central Personnel Data File data do not reliably distinguish between those who have no creditable military or frozen service and those for whom the service was not calculated.

Education Level

Education level values appear reliable for determining general educational groupings (less than high school, high school graduate, some college, etc.) but less reliable when used to determine the precise education level.

Health Plan

Health plan values for those enrolled in a particular health plan appear reliable. There are differences in the Official Personnel Folder and Central Personnel Data File values indicating the reasons employees are not enrolled - ineligible, cancelled, pending.

Veterans Status

Veterans status data for Department of Agriculture county committeemen appear to be unreliable. Data for other employees appear adequate.

Dynamics File

Awards and Rating of Record Updates

Central Personnel Data File data on awards and rating of record updates may not reflect the employee's actual status as of the effective date of the action. Those using Central Personnel Data File records in longitudinal studies should consider excluding awards and rating of record updates if the focus of the study is on when grade or other pay data changes occurred.

Education Level

Education level values appear reliable for determining general educational groupings (less than high school, high school graduate, some college, etc.) but less reliable when used to determine the precise education level.

Prior Data

Central Personnel Data File prior data values are frequently copies of the current data values rather than reflections of the values as they were immediately prior to the action being reported. Users should be cautious in drawing conclusions from comparisons of Central Personnel Data File prior and current values.

Veterans Status

Veterans status data for Department of Agriculture county committeemen appear to be unreliable. Data for other employees appear adequate.

Data Elements Official Personnel Folder Records Official Personnel Folder & Central Personnel Data File Values Match Central Personnel Data File

Blank Central Personnel Data File

Value Is Asterisks Official Personnel Folder & Central Personnel Data File

Values Do Not Match Agency/Subelement 135 134 1 Annuitant Indicator 135 135 Bargaining Unit 135 135 Basic Pay 135 135 Creditable Military Service 135 105 25 5 Current Appointment Authority 135 127 2 6 Date of Birth 135 135 Duty Station 135 135 Education Level 134 123 11 FEGLI 135 135 FERS Coverage 135 134 1 FLSA 135 135 Frozen Service 135 128 6 1 Grade 135 135 Health Plan 127 122 1 4 Instructional Program 132 130 2 Locality Adjustment 135 135 Occupation 135 135 Pay Basis 135 135 Pay Plan 135 134 1 Pay Rate Determinant 135 135 Pay Status 134 134 Personnel Office Identifier 135 134 1 Position Occupied 135 135 Rating of Record 79 75 4 Retirement Plan 135 135 Service Computation Date 134 133 1 Sex 135 133 2 Step 135 135 Tenure 135 134 1 US Citizenship 135 135 Veterans Status 135 128 7 Veterans Preference 135 135 Work Schedule 135 134 1 Year Degree 134 128 3 1 2

0 Errors

Annuitant Indicator Grade Pay Status Bargaining Unit Instructional Program Position Occupied Basic Pay Locality Adjustment Retirement Plan Date of Birth Occupation Step Duty Station Pay Basis US Citizenship Federal Employees

Group Life Insurance Pay Rate Determinant Veterans Preference Fair Labors Standards Act

Less Than 1% Error

Agency/Subelement Pay Plan Tenure FERS Coverage Personnel Office Identifier Work Schedule Frozen Service Service Computation Date

1 - 4.9% Error

Creditable Military Service Health Plan Year Degree Current Appointment Authority Sex

5% and Above Errors

Education Level Rating of Record Veterans Status

Data Elements % Error

Fiscal Year 1994 % Error

Fiscal Year 1991 Change

1994-1991 Agency/Subelement 0.7% 2.3% -1.6% Annuitant Indicator 0.0% 1.2% -1.2% Bargaining Unit 0.0% 2.3% -2.3% Basic Pay 0.0% 2.3% -2.3% Creditable Military Service 4.5% Not available Current Appointment Authority 4.5% 5.2% -0.7% Date of Birth 0.0% 1.2% -1.2% Duty Station 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Education Level 8.2% 2.5% 5.7% FEGLI 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% FERS Coverage 0.7% 0.0% 0.7% FLSA 0.0% 3.5% -3.5% Frozen Service 0.8% Not available Grade 0.0% 1.2% -1.2% Health Plan 3.2% 2.1% 1.1% Instructional Program 0.0% 1.2% -1.2% Locality Adjustment 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Occupation 0.0% 1.2% -1.2% Pay Basis 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Pay Plan 0.7% 0.0% 0.7% Pay Rate Determinant 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Pay Status 0.0% 2.3% -2.3% Personnel Office Identifier 0.7% 1.2% -0.5% Position Occupied 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Rating of Record 5.1% 16.3% -11.2% Retirement Plan 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Service Computation Date 0.7% 2.3% -1.6% Sex 1.5% 2.3% -0.8% Step 0.0% 2.4% -2.4% Tenure 0.7% 0.0% 0.7% US Citizenship 0.0% 1.2% -1.2% Veterans Status 5.2% 2.3% 2.9% Veterans Preference 0.0% 1.2% -1.2% Work Schedule 0.7% 0.0% 0.7% Year Degree 1.5% 1.2% 0.3%

Nature of Action Code Used in Study (Found in both Official Personnel Folder & Central Personnel Data File) Found in Official Personnel Folder only Found in Central Personnel Data File only Total 009 56 1 19 76 100 1 1 101 1 1 108 1 1 115 7 7 117 3 3 140 1 1 171 16 16 280 3 3 292 2 2 302 6 1 7 303 3 3 304 4 4 312 2 2 317 7 7 330 1 1 350 1 1 355 11 11 356 9 9 357 2 2 430 6 6 460 8 8 472 1 1 501 1 1 508 1 1 515 8 1 9 571 9 9 702 3 3 703 2 2 713 3 3 721 7 1 8 760 10 10 769 1 1 780 3 3 781 11 1 12 782 2 2 790 11 3 14 792 2 2 4 800 2 4 6 825 7 2 9 866 1 1 872 4 2 6 877 20 2 22 880 2 2 881 4 4 882 11 11 883 1 1 885 22 4 26 889 5 5 891 12 12 892 1 1 893 23 1 24 894 27 1 28 895 51 11 2 64 TOTAL 418 19 40 477

Notes on Records Not Used in the Study:

The Study was not designed to assess the completeness of Central Personnel Data File dynamics files nor to identify the reasons records might be found in the Official Personnel Folder but not in Central Personnel Data File or vice versa. There are, however, circumstances that may have impacted on the availability of some records. Readers of this report should be aware of those circumstances before drawing any conclusions about Central Personnel Data File file completeness.

Over half of the actions found in the Official Personnel Folder but not in the Central Personnel Data File were locality pay actions (nature of action code 895). Locality pay was initiated in January 1994. Prior to that, nature of action code 895 had been used to grant Interim Geographic Adjustments (IGA). Agencies were not required to submit personnel actions documenting the initial IGA's in their Central Personnel Data File dynamics files. Some agencies assumed that this exemption applied to the initial locality pay actions as well.

Approximately half of the actions found in the Central Personnel Data File but not in the Official Personnel Folder were rating of record updates (nature of action code 009). Rating of record documentation is not kept in the Official Personnel Folder during active service. These documents are added to the Official Personnel Folder when the employee separates. They are added to the "temporary" portion of the Official Personnel Folder and all other temporary documents are removed. This procedure was in place in 1994 but was overlooked or misunderstood by some personnel offices.

Realignments (nature of action code 790) and Changes in data element (nature of action code 800) are often system-generated actions that affect very large numbers of employees, for example, everyone in an agency. Because so many actions are created at once and are not personal (specific to the employee), the personnel office may be exempted from filing the actions in the Official Personnel Folder or may miss some actions when filing.

Data Elements Official Personnel

Folder

Records Official Personnel Folder and

Central Personnel Data File Values Match Central Personnel Data File

Blank Central Personnel Data File Value Is

Asterisks Official Personnel Folder and

Central Personnel Data File Values Do Not Match Agency/Subelement 418 417 1 Award Amount 58 58 Basic Pay 380 376 1 3 Creditable Military Service 119 105 9 5 Current Appointment Authority 382 358 8 16 Date of Birth 417 417 Duty Station 380 380 Education Level 374 347 27 Frozen Service 96 96 Grade 381 380 1 Instructional Program 117 109 4 4 Legal Authority 351 341 4 6 Locality Adjustment 217 205 9 3 Occupation 378 377 1 Pay Basis 378 377 1 Pay Plan 381 374 2 5 Pay Rate Determinant 380 380 Personnel Office Identifier 417 415 2 Position Occupied 379 379 Previous Retirement Coverage 126 102 24 Prior Basic Pay 357 347 3 7 Prior Duty Station 350 348 2 Prior Grade 359 352 3 4 Prior Locality Adjustment 165 147 13 2 3 Prior Occupation 356 355 1 Prior Pay Basis 356 352 3 1 Prior Pay Plan 358 351 2 5 Prior Pay Rate Determinant 359 359 Prior Step 361 356 3 2 Prior Work Schedule 354 350 4 Rating of Record 282 270 12 Retirement Plan 382 382 Service Computation Date 374 368 6 Sex 382 377 5 Step 381 379 1 1 Tenure 381 381 Veterans Status 383 379 4 Veterans Preference 381 381 Work Schedule 381 377 4 Year Degree 120 100 5 8 7

0 Errors

Award Amount Occupation Prior Occupation Date of Birth Pay Basis Prior Pay Rate Determinant Duty Station Pay Rate Determinant Retirement Plan Frozen Service Position Occupied Tenure Grade Previous Retirement Coverage Veterans Preference Instructional Program

Less Than 1% Error

Agency/Subelement Prior Duty Station Prior Step Basic Pay Prior Pay Basis Step Personnel Office Identifier

1 - 4.9% Error

Creditable Military Service Prior Basic Pay Rating of Record Current Appointment Authority Prior Grade Service Computation Date Legal Authority Prior Locality Adjustment Sex Locality Adjustment Prior Pay Plan Veterans Status Pay Plan Prior Work Schedule Work Schedule

5% and Above Error

Education Level Year Degree

Data Elements % Error

Fiscal Year 1994 %Error

Fiscal Year 1989 Change

1994 - 1989 Agency/Subelement 0.2% Not available Award Amount 0.0% Not available Basic Pay 0.8% 3.3% -2.5% Creditable Military Service 4.5% Not available Current Appointment Authority 4.3% 3.4% 0.9% Date of Birth 0.0% 1.6% -1.6% Duty Station 0.0% 1.2% -1.2% Education Level 7.2% 1.6% 5.6% Frozen Service 0.0% Not available Grade 0.0% 1.2% -1.2% Instructional Program 0.0% 0.9% -0.9% Legal Authority 1.7% 3.3% -1.6% Locality Adjustment 1.4% Not available Occupation 0.0% 1.0% -1.0% Pay Basis 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Pay Plan 1.3% 0.0% 1.3% Pay Rate Determinant 0.0% 0.7% -0.7% Personnel Office Identifier 0.5% 0.4% 0.1% Position Occupied 0.0% 0.9% -0.9% Previous Retirement Coverage 0.0% Not available Prior Basic Pay 2.0% 8.6% -6.6% Prior Duty Station 0.6% Not available Prior Grade 1.1% 1.8% -0.7% Prior Locality Adjustment 2.0% Not available Prior Occupation 0.0% 1.0% -1.0% Prior Pay Basis 0.3% 0.2% 0.1% Prior Pay Plan 1.4% 0.3% 1.1% Prior Pay Rate Determinant 0.0% Not available Prior Step 0.6% 3.0% -2.4% Prior Work Schedule 1.1% Not available Rating of Record 4.3% 33.7% -29.4% Retirement Plan 0.0% 2.1% -2.1% Service Computation Date 1.6% 3.5% -1.9% Sex 1.3% 0.6% 0.7% Step 0.3% 2.6% -2.3% Tenure 0.0% 1.6% -1.6% Veterans Status 1.0% 1.9% -0.9% Veterans Preference 0.0% 0.7% -0.7% Work Schedule 1.1% 0.9% 0.2% Year Degree 6.5% Not available