<DOC>
[108th Congress House Hearings]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access]
[DOCID: f:97034.wais]
FIRST YEAR ON THE JOB: CHIEF HUMAN CAPITAL OFFICERS
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CIVIL SERVICE
AND AGENCY ORGANIZATION
of the
COMMITTEE ON
GOVERNMENT REFORM
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
MAY 18, 2004
__________
Serial No. 108-236
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Reform
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/congress/house
http://www.house.gov/reform
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
97-034 WASHINGTON : 2004
____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512ÿ091800
Fax: (202) 512ÿ092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402ÿ090001
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM
TOM DAVIS, Virginia, Chairman
DAN BURTON, Indiana HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut TOM LANTOS, California
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida MAJOR R. OWENS, New York
JOHN M. McHUGH, New York EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
JOHN L. MICA, Florida PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania
MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York
STEVEN C. LaTOURETTE, Ohio ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland
DOUG OSE, California DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio
RON LEWIS, Kentucky DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois
JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts
TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri
CHRIS CANNON, Utah DIANE E. WATSON, California
ADAM H. PUTNAM, Florida STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts
EDWARD L. SCHROCK, Virginia CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland
JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee LINDA T. SANCHEZ, California
NATHAN DEAL, Georgia C.A. ``DUTCH'' RUPPERSBERGER,
CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan Maryland
TIM MURPHY, Pennsylvania ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of
MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio Columbia
JOHN R. CARTER, Texas JIM COOPER, Tennessee
MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee ------ ------
PATRICK J. TIBERI, Ohio ------
KATHERINE HARRIS, Florida BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont
(Independent)
Melissa Wojciak, Staff Director
David Marin, Deputy Staff Director/Communications Director
Rob Borden, Parliamentarian
Teresa Austin, Chief Clerk
Phil Barnett, Minority Chief of Staff/Chief Counsel
Subcommittee on Civil Service and Agency Organization
JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia, Chairwoman
TIM MURPHY, Pennsylvania DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois
JOHN L. MICA, Florida MAJOR R. OWENS, New York
MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland
ADAH H. PUTNAM, Florida ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of
NATHAN DEAL, Georgia Columbia
MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee JIM COOPER, Tennessee
Ex Officio
TOM DAVIS, Virginia HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
Ron Martinson, Staff Director
B. Chad Bungard, Deputy Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Reid Voss, Clerk
Tania Shand, Minority Professional Staff Member
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on May 18, 2004..................................... 1
Statement of:
James, Kay Coles, Director, U.S. Office of Personnel
Management................................................. 3
Mihm, Chris, Managing Director, Strategic Issues, U.S.
General Accounting Office; Reginald Wells, Deputy
Commissioner, Human Resources, Social Security
Administration; and Kevin Simpson, executive vice president
and general counsel, Partnership for Public Service........ 19
Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by:
James, Kay Coles, Director, U.S. Office of Personnel
Management, prepared statement of.......................... 7
Mihm, Chris, Managing Director, Strategic Issues, U.S.
General Accounting Office, prepared statement of........... 22
Simpson, Kevin, executive vice president and general counsel,
Partnership for Public Service, prepared statement of...... 52
Wells, Reginald, Deputy Commissioner, Human Resources, Social
Security Administration, prepared statement of............. 44
FIRST YEAR ON THE JOB: CHIEF HUMAN CAPITAL OFFICERS
----------
TUESDAY, MAY 18, 2004
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Civil Service and Agency
Organization,
Committee on Government Reform,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:06 p.m., in
room 2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Jo Ann Davis
(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Jo Ann Davis of Virginia, Davis of
Illinois, Norton and Van Hollen.
Staff present: Ron Martinson, staff director; B. Chad
Bungard, deputy staff director and chief counsel; John Landers,
OPM detailee; Chris Barkley, professional staff member; Reid
Voss, clerk; Christopher Lu, minority deputy chief counsel;
Tania Shand, minority professional staff member; Earley Green,
minority chief clerk; and Teresa Coufal, minority assistant
clerk.
Ms. Davis of Virginia. We have some other Members on their
way but for the sake of time, we are going to go ahead and get
started.
The Civil Service Subcommittee is called to order.
Thank you for being here today. An important provision of
the Homeland Security Act of 2002 created the position of Chief
Human Capital Officer [CHCO], at major Federal agencies to
improve the Federal Government's ability to select, train and
manage a high performing work force. In creating this new
position, Congress recognized that Federal employees are the
Government's biggest asset and drive its performance.
I have called this oversight hearing to examine how the
Chief Human Capital Officers Act has been implemented in the
Federal Government's major departments and agencies since
enactment a year ago and to make sure that the CHCO Council
consists of high quality CHCOs committed to strategically
managing the work force. Congress intends that the CHCO
position will make a positive difference in the performance of
the Federal Government bringing the most efficient and most
effective service at the best value to the taxpayers.
CHCOs' duties include working closely with the agency head
to develop and implement an effective personnel policy. Workers
should be treated fairly and the mission of the agency must
become the top priority of every employee. Balancing both
priorities is crucial and requires an official to understand
both the needs of employees and a broader view of how well an
agency is serving the American public. Because of this, it was
Congress' intent that CHCOs be placed among agency leadership
underscoring the importance of personnel policy. Furthermore,
the Homeland Security Act created the Chief Human Capitol
Officers Council to elevate the importance of personnel policy
governmentwide. The Federal Government is moving toward a
personnel system that is increasingly merit-based. With a
majority of Federal workers moving to new pay systems under the
Departments of Defense and Homeland Security, it is imperative
to have top level leadership guide this transition. During this
time, it will be essential for the Chief Human Capital Officers
to bridge that crucial gap between agency heads and human
resources departments.
With all of this in mind, the subcommittee will today look
at how the addition of the CHCO position and the CHCO Council
has impacted our Federal agencies. There are certainly lessons
to be learned and successes to be shared since enactment a year
ago. Additionally, and maybe more importantly, our witnesses
will also give us a glimpse of what we are to expect in the
months and years to come.
Thank you all for being here today and thank you for your
patience while we did the transition from one subcommittee
hearing to another. We look forward to hearing all your
testimony.
I will now turn to our ranking member, Danny Davis, for an
opening statement.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much, Madam
Chairwoman. I want to thank you for calling this hearing.
As we know, Chief Human Capital Officers will assist agency
heads in carrying out the agency's responsibilities for
selecting and developing training and managing a high quality,
productive work force in accordance with merit systems
principles. The best part of the Federal Government is the
thousands of dedicated men and women who work on behalf of
taxpayers each and every day. All of the services Americans
rely on their Government to provide, from protecting our
homeland to regulating our markets, would be severely
threatened unless we improve the way Government manages its
most important assets, its workers.
CHCOs must have the vision and leadership skills to
integrate the agency's human capital needs with its mission and
program goals while balancing the needs and rights of the work
force. Having been engaged in public interest work for more
than 30 years, I believe there is no more fulfilling profession
than working for the Government and helping to improve the
lives of all Americans, particularly those who are less
fortunate. It is troubling then when I hear that young people
are indifferent to the notion of public service. Young people
seeking job stability will continue to be indifferent to
Federal employment when they find that their jobs can be
contracted out and the weakening basic Civil Service
protections will certainly not draw young people and highly
skilled workers to Federal Civil Service.
CHCOs will have to confront and overcome these challenges.
The CHCO must help agencies adopt a long term commitment for
hiring, implementation, professional development, performance
awards and retention approaches that support the agency's
mission and create a results oriented culture.
I look forward to hearing how we have done so far, how
CHCOs have been developed, organized and put together in order
to fulfill this mission. I seriously believe, Madam Chairwoman,
that the notion that Government cannot do its work as well as
those outside of Government is one that needs to be dispelled
and the only way we can do it is to make sure that we recruit,
retain and develop the most highly motivated, most highly
prepared and most highly dedicated work force that we can put
together.
I thank you again for calling this hearing and look forward
to hearing the witnesses.
Ms. Davis of Virginia. Thank you, Mr. Davis. I totally
concur with your last couple of statements and appreciate
having you on this committee for that reason.
I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative
days to submit written statements and questions for the hearing
record and that any answers to written questions provided by
the witnesses also be included in the record. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
I ask unanimous consent that all exhibits, documents and
other materials referred to by Members and the witnesses be
included in the hearing record and that all Members be
permitted to revise and extend their remarks. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
On the first panel, we are going to hear today from the
Honorable Kay Coles James, Director, U.S. Office of Personnel
Management.
It is standard practice for this committee to administer
the oath to all witnesses and if all the witnesses on both
panels could please stand, I will administer the oath to all of
you at one time.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Ms. Davis of Virginia. Let the record reflect that the
witnesses have answered in the affirmative and you may be
seated.
Director James, it is a pleasure to have you here today. We
look forward to hearing your testimony. I know you are on a bit
of a time crunch, so with that we will let you get started. You
are recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF KAY COLES JAMES, DIRECTOR, U.S. OFFICE OF
PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
Ms. James. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I want to thank you
and the other Members for the opportunity to be here today. I
am going to give an abbreviated statement but I would ask that
the full text be entered into the record.
Ms. Davis of Virginia. Without objection, so ordered.
Ms. James. The passage of this important legislation
reconfirms a goal that we all share, providing a Government of
service to the American people envisioned by our President in
his management agenda. The CHCO Act provides additional
conduits for advancing this very important agenda.
First, the statute requires the heads of 24 departments and
agencies to appoint a Chief Human Capital Officer. In April
2003, OPM issued a memo on the designation of these important
new positions. The memo noted that Chief Human Capital Officers
will require different competencies from those traditionally
found in an agency's human resources staff function. We also
advised that, although not required by statute, the spirit of
the law would best be fulfilled by designating individuals as
CHCOs who serve as integral members of the agency's leadership
team.
I am pleased to report that the individuals selected as
Chief Human Capital Officers are talented professionals who
bring a wealth of experience to their positions. Many have
served the Federal Government with distinction as career senior
executives while others serve as top level political
appointees. Demonstrating a longstanding need for high level
attention to be focused on human resources issues, several
agencies not listed in the act embraced its spirit and
designated Chief Human Capital Officers as well. These include
the Central Intelligence Agency, Federal Labor Relations
Authority, Internal Revenue Service, and the Peace Corps.
Second, as the act establishes a Chief Human Capital
Officer's Council, I as the OPM Director am honored to serve as
the Chair of the Council. Under the statute, the Council is
composed of Cabinet department Chief Human Capital Officers and
others designated by the OPM Director. Employing this
authority, I asked the Chief Human Capital Officers of several
large executive agencies and a representative sample of small
agencies to serve on the Council as well.
The Council has had a very active first year. Less than 3
weeks after the act took effect, I convened its inaugural
meeting. To emphasize the importance that the President placed
on the strategic management of human capital, we met for our
first meeting in the Indian Treaty Room at the White House.
Calling the meeting to order, I described the new body as a
make stuff happen kind of council. It has in fact been just
that.
Since last June, the Council has met six times, adopted a
charter, established an executive committee to help steer the
Council and initiated five subcommittees to address important
governmentwide human capital issues. We have conducted a 2-day
retreat, drafted a tactical plan for the current fiscal year,
created a Chief Human Capital Officers Academy and this is a
forum for members to share their best practices and appointed
an executive director to oversee the daily operations of our
council. Let me say that probably one of the best things we did
was to get Mike Dovilla, who I think was involved in drafting
that legislation, from Senator Voinovich's staff. I think he
has forgiven me for that but he is serving very well in that
capacity and has a vested interest in its success and making
sure that it is active.
The Council subcommittees are focused on some of the key
areas for Federal Civil Service modernization. We all know that
one of our biggest issues right now is to fix the hiring
process. So that was one of the first subcommittees we named.
To complement OPM's efforts to encourage agencies to adopt a
45-day hiring model, the Subcommittee on the Hiring Process is
also exploring ways to expedite the recruitment, evaluation and
appointment of top talent to Federal positions. Dr. Chu from
the Defense Department heads up that particular subcommittee.
We believe that one of the most important issues facing the
Federal work force today is our emergency preparedness and the
safety of our Federal work force. Gail Lovelace from the
Department of GSA is preparing and helping us to ensure
agencies know how to best protect our Federal work force and
she is doing a fantastic job at that.
Otto Wolfe is heading the Subcommittee on Performance
Management, and the full Council has played a very integral
role in developing regulations for the new SES Performance.
Based Compensation Plan is under the leadership of that
particular subcommittee. Bill Leidinger from Education is
heading the Subcommittee on Leadership Development and
Succession Planning and is considering individual training and
development as a part of the strategic plans for our work force
and is looking at our long-term strategic needs for leadership.
The Subcommittee on Employee Conduct and Poor Performers is
reviewing statutes and regulations for ways to streamline the
process needed to counsel and, if necessary, terminate
employees who are not performing at an acceptable level. Pat
Pizella from the Department of Labor is working on that
subcommittee.
The CHCO Academy is proving a very productive forum. While
the subcommittees are working, we are also having a monthly
meeting with this particular academy. It is, in fact,
discussing human resource issues, and the forum meets monthly
to consider such topics as current work force flexibilities and
compensation reform. Next month, I will be leading a session on
some of the potential options being considered for the next
wave of reform of the American Civil Service.
In addition to these accomplishments, the Council already
has become more than a body that simply discusses issues. OPM
is actively including the Council in considering and making
policy recommendations. Draft regulations to implement the
President's recent Executive order establishing the
Presidential Management Fellows Program includes language that
will give an important role to the Chief Human Capital
Officers.
Chief Human Capital Officers are assisting agency heads in
enforcing OPM's policy that there is no place in the Federal
employment or in our Government at all for degrees or
credentials from diploma mills. So the Chief Human Capital
Officers play an important role in that issue. Our CHCOs are
communicating internally our policies on adjudication of
background investigations and security clearances, also a very
important function that we have, and having someone in the
agencies at a very high level that has that as part of their
agenda is very important.
CHCOs are playing an integral role in observing veterans
preference statutes and regulations as they hire new employees.
Next week, the Council will hold a joint meeting with veteran
services organizations on the important issue of veterans
preference in hiring. We thought it was very important to do
this in conjunction with our Governmentwide celebrations of
Memorial Day. This event will take place at Walter Reed Army
Medical Center and it is a very appropriate location to reflect
on the valuable contributions many of our Nation's veterans
have made in the service and after their military service
providing them opportunities for the American Civil Service.
With a quick look ahead, next week's meeting will celebrate
the body's first anniversary and prominently featured on our
agenda is a dialog with representatives of several Federal
employee labor unions providing the Council valuable input from
these important stakeholders.
Our first annual report to Congress is forthcoming and this
document will contain information about the Council's progress
during the first fiscal year. To enhance our communications
among the Chief Human Capital Officers and with external
stakeholders, OPM will soon launch a Web site containing key
information about the Council.
The Chief Human Capital Officers Council is adding value to
the public policy dialog on the future of America's Civil
Service. The appointment of CHCOs across the Federal Government
has elevated the institutional profile of the strategic
management of human capital as never before. This important law
is having a positive effect on how we manage the Government's
most important resource, people. The members of the Council
take seriously these important responsibilities and with
continued attention to the President's charge to achieve
results, our Civil Service will only grow stronger as it
continues to provide the Nation with critical services that our
citizens expect.
Thank you again for the opportunity to discuss OPM's
progress in implementing the Chief Human Capital Officers Act
and I would be pleased to respond to any questions you may
have.
[The prepared statement of Ms. James follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.004
Ms. Davis of Virginia. Thank you very much, Director James.
I will turn now to our ranking member, Mr. Davis, for
questions.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much.
Madam Director, it is clear that implementation of the
Human Capital Officers' activity has hit the ground running.
You have done a lot of things. My question is how do internal
stakeholders fit into the scheme of things and how do we make
sure they have input to the processes?
Ms. James. With the strategic management of human capital
Governmentwide, one of the core values and principles of the
management of human capital is that you must involve the
stakeholders at every level. So it would be incumbent upon each
of the individual Chief Human Capital Officers when they come
to the meetings, to come prepared with that kind of input to
enrich the dialog. So it would be important that, internally in
each of the departments, they are meeting with stakeholders,
both inside and outside of their agencies and bringing that to
the table as well.
As I suggested, also the legislation calls for us to be
involved at least on an annual basis in a dialog with our
external stakeholders. We will be doing that next week with
what I believe to be a very important meeting out at Walter
Reed, where we will have the representatives of labor as well
as the representatives of our veterans service organizations.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. I guess half of the CHCOs have other
areas of responsibility, significant other areas of
responsibility. Are we finding there is ample time for them to
be engaged in the other work they have to do and still pay the
kind of attention to human capital development that they are
charged with the responsibility for?
Ms. James. In all candor, Congressman, that is not true in
every case. I am concerned that some of our Chief Human Capital
Officers are stretched far too thin and I am convinced that as
we proceed with this through the year, some of that may be
corrected. We will see, I am sure, that some of our Chief Human
Capital Officers will say their plates are too full, and there
will be some adjustments made. I can't tell you that every
Chief Human Capital Officer can focus as much as I would like
to see them focus on these important issues. I think we are
going through a shakedown cruise.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. I think it is an absolutely
important activity. It has been my experience in life that
those things to which we give the time, energy and attention
are where the areas of accomplishment really are. Since we have
programmed this in as something we really want to do, then we
will have to find a way to make sure those individuals have the
ample opportunity to do that.
Ms. James. We have a pretty aggressive schedule that
includes not only the meetings of the Council but the
subcommittee meetings, the executive committee meetings, and we
never want to meet for the sake of meeting. If we are meeting,
it is because there are some substantive policy issues to be
discussed, decisions to be made and as a result of that, it is
important for people to be there and engaged and in most cases,
that is in fact the case.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much. I don't have
any other questions. I appreciate the implementation that is
taking place and thank you very much for being here.
Ms. James. Thank you.
Ms. Davis of Virginia. Thank you, Mr. Davis.
Let me just followup on what our ranking member was asking.
Based on what you said, that some of them do have too much on
their plate, is it your vision that eventually a the CHCOs will
be exclusively CHCOs or will they always have to have that just
as a part of the title?
Ms. James. I would be less than honest with you if I didn't
admit that I believe there is sufficient work on the strategic
management of human capital for that to be a full portfolio.
Having said that, I do believe that agency heads and Cabinet
Secretaries know best how to run their departments and what the
workload is. We will continue to press ahead with the important
work that we do and if we hit any snags I will have those
conversations with the Chief Human Capital Officers and with
the heads of those agencies and if we need to make adjustments
I am sure we will.
Ms. Davis of Virginia. You referenced in your opening
statement, I believe, something regarding the Human Resources
Directors. I guess I was along with some of those other people
when CHCOs were developed, what is the head of Human Resources
for. What do you see as the intended relationship between the
CHCO and the Human Resources Director?
Ms. James. I see it as a very close, collaborative working
relationship. I would say, however, that when the legislation
was passed, we envisioned a different set of core competencies
for those who serve at the Chief Human Capital Officer level,
and I would say that we envisioned that would be an individual
who has leadership, who works closely with and has the trust
and respect of the agency head, is a policy person and who is
involved in the long-term strategic planning for that agency
and has access to the highest level policymakers in that
organization and sits at the table with those individuals when
policy is being made.
The Human Resources Directors in those agencies are vital
people. They have technical skills and knowledge that is so
important and so relevant. We have found in our operations
that, in many cases, our meetings consist of both, that the
Human Resources Directors as well as the Chief Human Capital
Officers attend and are involved in the important dialog and
discussion.
Ms. Davis of Virginia. You just said when you were
answering me that you originally envisioned the CHCOs as being
one thing. Are they something different than what you
envisioned?
Ms. James. Not really. We were very pleased at the level of
the skill sets and the individuals that were selected by agency
heads. There were those who were concerned that they were going
to all be political people in the agencies. That is just not
the case. We have a great mix of senior, non-career and career
executives who come together and share a common mission, which
is the strategic management of human capital for our Federal
Government. It is an excellent mix. It is a great body. My only
concern at this point is burnout and wearout because this is
such an important issue and the issues are so overwhelming that
it requires a great deal of time. That would be the only note
of caution that I would sound at this time.
Ms. Davis of Virginia. You have been going at it now a
year. What do you see as your biggest success with the Council
and where do you think your challenges remain other than the
burnout?
Ms. James. Our biggest successes I think have been
identifying the problems and coming up with the strategic plan
to take on what we believe to be the tough stuff and having
highly skilled, dedicated leaders in the Federal Government now
focused on these issues. I believe the legislation has been a
tremendous success as far as that is concerned. Having a
conduit at the very highest levels of these agencies now where
these issues are being addressed and talked about is critical.
Our biggest challenges are producing results in these
areas. Yes, we have a Subcommittee on Hiring, but are we fixing
the hiring process.
Ms. Davis of Virginia. That was one of my biggest
questions.
Ms. James. My biggest challenge is not how you develop
metrics but holding them accountable, the agencies accountable
to produce results in these areas. I think a lot of times
people are confused about the actual role of the Office of
Personnel Management. We don't hire people for the Federal
Government. Hiring is done at the agency level. We can produce
workshops, we can put out memos, we can encourage, we can
audit, we can do analysis but at the end of the day, to fix
that will require the agencies to step up to the plate to do
that.
I think having the Council as a conduit to have leadership
now focused on these issues is important. The challenge is
going to be to encourage, motivate, cajole, whatever the word
is we can use, force, we don't have the authority to do that,
agencies to produce results in these various areas is going to
be our toughest mission.
Ms. Davis of Virginia. I certainly hope you are able to
correct the hiring process because that has been a real concern
of mine from what I have heard throughout my district and I
know other members have stressed the same thing, that it takes
too long to hire a Federal employee, so they go somewhere else.
The major issues you are currently discussing in the
Council, do you anticipate any legislative proposals?
Ms. James. Yes, we do. We encourage the Council that this
isn't just a meeting to attend and check it off your schedule.
We really are hoping that policy will be developed, that
legislative proposals will come out of that. We are getting
back reports now from some of our subcommittees and from that
you will see suggestions for legislation, for policy changes.
It is not always legislation that is required; sometimes it is
just a change in policy, sometimes it can be done by Executive
order, but if legislation is required, we will be back here
asking you and the subcommittee for your support to continue
fixing some of these very difficult issues.
Ms. Davis of Virginia. We would probably rather you fix it
yourself but if you can't we are here.
Thank you, Director James.
We have been joined by Ms. Norton. I will go to you for
questions for 5 minutes.
Ms. Norton. Nice to see you, Director James.
Ms. James. Nice to see you as well.
Ms. Norton. Some of us have been very concerned about the
role and future of human capital in the Federal Government
because of the competing forces of various kinds, such as many
more options for people about where to work. I am not sure we
are getting the best and the brightest the way we always have.
Your work force could retire on you tomorrow or much of it
could, and yet you are competing with Fortune 500 types who go
after the best talent. I really have a series of questions
about the future of the Civil Service, frankly.
I would like to know, the Federal Government had something
to kind of fall into its lap beginning with the Great
Depression; with not a lot of options, the best and the
brightest came to the Federal Government. Then there was a
period in the 1960's when Government was very much appreciated;
nobody was telling civil servants what many of them hear, which
is who needs Government, and whole bunches of young people
flocked to the Government. They weren't terribly interested in
business then. Now they are everywhere.
I am interested in how you are going to replace a work
force of the kind you inherited and that our country inherited
as half of them could retire tomorrow and leave, and what you
are doing to compete with folks who are prepared to pay them
more, not do a whole bunch of reorganization so that they don't
know whether they will have a job, who will give them full
health benefits. What is your program for maintaining and
attracting a work force, not just a work force, particularly in
the era of terrorism when we are asking things of the work
force we never thought we would ask the civilian work force,
how are you going to compete? What are you doing to compete
with the private sector which spends all of its waking hours
looking for precisely the kind of talent we need in the Federal
Government today?
Ms. James. Great question and the answer is very long and
convoluted but I will try to be as precise as I can in the time
that we have. There is good news and there is bad news. I tried
to explain this to Congressman Davis when he was holding my
feet to the fire about attracting more minorities, particularly
into our Senior Executive Service, which is a very real concern
of mine. The bad news is that we don't do as well as we would
like to do and the good news is, it is because there are so
many opportunities that exist for minorities outside of the
Government that it is no longer adequate for the Federal
Government just to open the doors and people perhaps will come.
We have to be more aggressive, we have to be more competitive
and we have to do something that the Federal Government has not
done a great deal of which is targeted recruiting, which is
going out and going after those individuals.
If you look at a young student coming out of a graduate
school today that is excellent in their academics, has been
involved in volunteerism and community service, and has certain
skill sets, they are a hot commodity and will be sought after
by the corporate environment. The good news is that those
individuals, one thing we know about them is that they are
attracted to the opportunity to work somewhere they feel they
can make a meaningful and significant difference. We also know
that those young individuals aren't necessarily interested as
some of us were in our generation of perhaps coming to work at
the Federal Government for 30 years. We know that they may
come, give a portion of their lives, 5 years, 7 years,
something like that, if they believe they can do meaningful
work, if they believe they will receive some skill sets,
training, if they believe they will have opportunities they
couldn't have in the private sector.
I have never been one of those individuals who believed
that we have a hard time attracting people to come to the
Federal Government. We have done job fairs all over the country
and I invited some this committee staff to come to New York to
observe a phenomena that I believe is incredible. We went to
the job fair and we offered Federal opportunities and I asked
them to come over and look at the sight I saw out of that
window. We had 15,000 people in New York City who were there to
apply for jobs within the Federal Government. I hear sometimes,
``That may be nice, Kay, but those individuals are not the
cream of the crop, they are not the best and brightest, they
don't have the skill sets that we are looking for.''
We decided to do some analysis of those people to see if in
fact that was the case and that data is coming back but I can
tell you my own experience as I walked those lines. Those were
highly talented, skilled people who were there, ready and
willing to come to work. Our problem was----
Ms. Norton. My time is almost up. I just want to ask
because I certainly would believe that. I just want to ask, for
example, to take the law school where I taught full-time and
still teach one course, the best law school in this region,
Georgetown, do you send folks to Georgetown to interview young
people coming out of Georgetown to try to get them to come to
the Federal Government?
Ms. James. OPM does for Governmentwide, but our agencies
and again, you have to remember, OPM doesn't hire anybody.
Ms. Norton. I understand that. My question was, do you
advise people.
Ms. James. Yes, we do.
Ms. Norton. To in fact send people. You are going to get
people, there is unemployment. The reason I asked about lawyers
in particular is that it is a market where one can now recruit
lawyers of a rather high rank because it is hard to make
partner in a law firm today because they use so many contract
lawyers.
Unless OPM is doing the same kind of recruitment on the
ground that law firms and businesses do, which is not saying
here are some jobs and let us count and see how many people out
there will sign up, you will never know whether you are getting
the best. You know where the best and the brightest are. I
would be very interested in seeing an example of what your
recruitment programs look like.
Ms. James. We do, and one particular one that you may be
interested in was one that was a little bit controversial, but
I was committed to it so I did it and that was for Black
History Month. I said to the folks at OPM, I wasn't
particularly interested in another program in the auditorium
with singing and that sort of thing, why don't we go to black
colleges and universities and recruit on those campuses and do
something real which is to tell them about the opportunities
that we have. So we had a job fair at Howard University, we
went to Hampton University.
Ms. Norton. I don't know whether that would have been
controversial, I appreciate that you went.
Ms. James. That is another whole story. We will have that
conversation.
Ms. Norton. Madam Chairwoman, I do have other questions but
I will wait for another round.
Ms. Davis of Virginia. Thank you, Ms. Norton.
We have been joined by Mr. Van Hollen. Mr. Van Hollen, do
you have any questions?
Mr. Van Hollen. Just a few. Thank you for being here again.
I apologize if I am going over territory already covered
but in terms of the recruitment tools that were provided under
the legislation we are reviewing, do you believe the tools
available to you have been adequate and successful in
attracting new talented people to the Federal Government in
areas where we have pressing needs or are there additional
tools that you need to accomplish that mission?
Ms. James. Congressman, I really truly believe that we
needed the legislation, we needed those flexibilities in order
to attract America's best and brightest and get them hired
quickly in a reasonable length of time. My biggest challenge,
however, is getting our agencies to use those tools. So we are
encouraging them, we are monitoring, we are training and we are
doing everything that we can. I would suggest that it will take
a little bit more time before I can answer fully for you
whether or not those tools are being used to the best of the
agencies' abilities.
It is discouraging to me that when we have the authority
for direct hire, that it is not being used as much as it could
and should be. As an example, before we do a hiring fair, we
bring those individuals together and say at the hiring fairs,
we call them hiring fairs for a reason. We want people to get
hired. Make sure you send people who have the authority to hire
people and who will use the flexibilities that Congress has
given us.
One of the pushbacks that I have said to the agencies is do
not send hostesses to hiring fairs, people to pass out
keychains and brochures. Send people to hiring fairs who have
the authority to make job offers, to evaluate and to interview
candidates. Those are some of the kinds of things we are
working with, so I can't answer your question just yet about
how effective and what more we need. We are struggling to get
people to use the flexibilities that you have granted us and
given us.
Mr. Van Hollen. Let me just ask. There were a couple
stories. I am sure you know yesterday in the Washington Post
and I don't know if this issue has been raised but there was a
front page article about Federal pay and then another article
about the DOD new reorganization plan. On the first issue, the
pay question, first of all, it was a long article and I don't
know if you have any general response. I would be interested in
your general response. The second issue that sort of comes to
mind is it talked about bonuses and a whole spectrum of bonuses
from small bonuses to large bonuses and given our whole debate
with respect to performance pay and whether or not that bonus
system is in some ways serving that purpose now and what the
distinctions are between performance pay and rewarding through
the bonus systems and the authorities that already exist.
Ms. James. My general comment would be that I have always
been concerned about how awards are used in our Government with
our work force. I think that the systems are good, the various
awards programs and systems. I am concerned about how they are
administered. I think if you look at the performance of some of
the agencies and look at how freely they expend bonuses and
compare the two, it begs the question, is it really
performance-based and what are you basing that performance on.
So I think there is a lot of work to be done there.
Should we have performance-based pay? Yes. Is it being
effectively administered at this point? I have some concerns.
Mr. Van Hollen. It obviously is a longer discussion to get
into all those issues. Let me ask while we have you here, in
terms of the DOD reorganization effort, I know there has been a
question about to what extent your office has been able to be
involved and have input in that process. Are you satisfied with
the level of input that you have had? Can you give us an update
on what you see as the challenge?
Ms. James. I thought that the article was fairly accurate.
The only thing that was wrong was the headline because it
talked about Rumsfeld's plan. Rumsfeld was the solution, he was
not the problem, because when it got to his level in the
organization, he and Secretary England were very quick to act.
We are very pleased about where we are in the process right
now, the level of input, the ability for OPM to be involved,
and I think, as a result of that, we are going to see a far
better product. Stakeholders are and will continue to be
included, and the employees in that department deserve an
excellent personnel system, and I think at the end of that
process, that is what they are going to have.
Mr. Van Hollen. Thank you.
Ms. Davis of Virginia. Thank you, Mr. Van Hollen.
Director James, I want to thank you for being here. I am
going to assume the complete response you weren't able to give
to Ms. Norton when you said the problem up in New York was the
fact that you couldn't get the agencies to do the hiring?
Ms. James. That is a part of the problem, yes. They are
actually doing better because after the first two hiring fairs
when we had hostesses and we said no, we want real people that
can explain programs and actually make job offers, some of the
agencies are stepping up to the plate. What we want to do is
say we are even considering not allowing them to participate in
the hiring fair unless they have real jobs they are
interviewing for because those people who stood in line for 4
hours for the opportunity to work for our Government deserve
better. They didn't come for keychains, they came for jobs.
Ms. Davis of Virginia. Thank you, Director James. I just
want to ask you one question for the record. What is the status
of the law enforcement officers report that was due to this
committee on April 30th?
Ms. James. That report is in review. I understand they are
waiting on comments. It is currently at OMB and when they
receive the comments from all the various agencies, I am sure
it will be released to the committee.
Ms. Davis of Virginia. Thank you, Director James. I know
you have another commitment, so we are going to allow you to
go.
Ms. James. We are going to go train some Foreign Service
executives.
Ms. Norton. Could I ask her another?
Ms. Davis of Virginia. Actually she has to go give a
speech, so if you could take your questions for the record for
Director James.
Ms. James. If it is a quick one, I am happy to answer.
Ms. Davis of Virginia. If you could answer quickly because
we do have four votes coming up and a mark up, plus we have
another panel.
Ms. Norton. I would like to ask the question. You mentioned
apparently in your testimony something about the diploma mills.
I appreciate that you raised this yourself. I also appreciate
when you are dealing with huge numbers of employees what it
would take to somehow do an investigation. Is it possible that
one could have a list of accredited colleges and that is all
you need and you would never have to worry?
Ms. James. The quick answer, no. The reason that is a no
and the reason it is a sticky problem is by the very nature of
the diploma mills, they pop up and go down, change the names,
and so you can't have one quick list of accredited schools. You
also have schools that for whatever philosophical or
ideological reason have decided not to go through the
accreditation process. So it may be a very valid learning
institution, but for some reason did not want to go through
that process. So, it isn't quite that easy. We have looked at
several different categories. We are going after this one
aggressively, but if you put a name on the list and say this is
a diploma mill, they drop off the list because they change
their name, and they are back.
Ms. Norton. The kind of list I am talking about would be a
list of bona fide universities. You start there and then you
have to watch out for the offenders.
Ms. James. Yes, we have that. That is not where our problem
is. We have that, and we currently use that, but that is not
what is causing the problem.
Ms. Norton. Are you saying that you can't get a hold of
this or that you are going to get a hold of it? I understand
the complexity that you have described.
Ms. James. We are going to get a hold of it and are working
with Congress for some potential solutions on how we are going
to get that done. I am not sure that we have all of the tools
right now that we need to make that happen but we want to work
with you to come up with some ideas and suggestions for getting
that done.
Ms. Norton. I think we have it now everywhere in the United
States at the State level and city levels as well. One of the
things we might look to is to see whether or not any
jurisdiction has found a way to get a hold of this problem.
Perhaps that could be a model for all of us.
Ms. Davis of Virginia. Thank you so much, Director James,
and thank you, Ms. Norton, for bringing up that important
subject.
Ms. James. Thank you.
Ms. Davis of Virginia. I will now ask our second panel of
witnesses to come forth. We have already sworn you in, so we
will first hear from Mr. Chris Mihm, Managing Director,
Strategic Issues, U.S. General Accounting Office. Then we will
hear from Dr. Reginald Wells, Chief Human Capital Officer and
Deputy Commissioner, Human Resources, Social Security
Administration and Mr. Kevin Simpson, executive vice president
and general counsel, Partnership for Public Service.
Again, thank you all for joining us here today. I am going
to recognize the panel for an opening statement in the order I
called you but I would ask that you summarize your testimony in
5 minutes and any more complete statement you have, we will
enter into the record.
We will begin first with you, Mr. Mihm.
STATEMENTS OF CHRIS MIHM, MANAGING DIRECTOR, STRATEGIC ISSUES,
U.S. GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE; REGINALD WELLS, DEPUTY
COMMISSIONER, HUMAN RESOURCES, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION;
AND KEVIN SIMPSON, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT AND GENERAL
COUNSEL, PARTNERSHIP FOR PUBLIC SERVICE
Mr. Mihm. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. It is always an
honor and a pleasure to appear before you and the subcommittee.
I am pleased to be here to discuss the progress in
implementing the Chief Human Capital Officers Act. As you know
and as you have discussed with Director James, Congress
recently sought to modernize Federal human capital policies by
allowing certain agencies, most notably Defense and Homeland
Security, to adopt more flexible approaches to their human
capital management. At the same time, Congress has provided
agencies across the executive branch with additional tools and
authorities needed to strategically manage their work forces.
The success of these and related initiatives will depend in
large measure on the existence of high quality Human Capital
Officers and a strategic and effective Human Capital Officers
Council.
My written statement describes the different approaches
that agencies used in selecting their officers, creating the
position and the key responsibilities of those officials. In
the interest of time this afternoon, I will focus my comments
on the third issue covered in my written statement, the initial
steps taken by the Chief Human Capital Officers Council and
some suggested next steps.
As you observed in your opening statement, Madam
Chairwoman, an effective and strategic Human Capital Officers
Council is vital to meeting Congress' goals under the CHCO Act
as well as addressing the Federal Government's human capital
challenges. Recent experience has shown us that interagency
councils can be important leadership strategies in both
developing policies that are sensitive to implementation
concerns and gaining consensus and consistent follow through
within the executive branch.
The Chief Financial Officers and Chief Information Officers
Councils have been particularly effective in this regard. The
Chief Human Capital Officers Council can play an equally useful
role. Director James discussed many of the Council's activities
over the last year. However, the Council does not yet have a
strategic plan to help guide its work and to serve as a
benchmark for measuring progress, although we understand that
there is a draft. The shared understandings that can be
developed as part of the planning process are particularly
important to councils since they play a vital leadership and
coordination role. This I believe is exactly the point that Mr.
Davis was making when he discussed with the Director the
importance of stakeholder involvement.
Thus, the timely completion of the Council's strategic plan
is important to provide a sense of direction for the Council as
well as to communicate to Congress and other stakeholders the
role the Council will play and how it will meet its
responsibilities. The Council has created five subcommittees as
Director James discussed covering the hiring process,
performance management, leadership development, succession
planning, employee conduct and poor performers and finally
emergency preparedness.
We understand that three of those five subcommittees, those
dealing with hiring process, leadership development and
succession planning and employee conduct and poor performers
have drafted their first reports for review by the Council's
executive committee. However, these reports have not released
to the public. At the request of the chairwoman, Mr. Davis and
others in Congress, we have undertaken a large body of work in
recent years that should prove helpful to the council and its
subcommittees as they develop their initiatives. This work
which includes the five areas covered by the Council's
subcommittees, is detailed in my written statement along with
suggestions on the specific issues for the subcommittee to
pursue.
In addition to the important areas covered by the Council's
subcommittees, our work in GAO suggests the Council should
ensure that its efforts address agencies' need for guidance,
assistance, knowledge and leading practice in other key, cross-
cutting areas including developing the capabilities for
successful use of the flexibilities that were discussed
earlier, strategic human capital planning, looking into the
future and making sure we win the war on talent as Ms. Norton
was discussing, and transforming human capital or HR offices to
be able to be true strategic partners with business with
program managers rather than just transactional organizations.
In conclusion, the need to transform the way the Government
does business will only increase the importance of integrating
human capital or people approaches with agencies program plans
and strategies. While the initial steps taken over this first
year have shown important progress, this coming year will be
especially critical to leveraging the progress that has already
been made and achieving significant accomplishments and
facilitating lasting change. A strong and effective Chief Human
Capital Officers Council can serve an instrumental role in
helping Federal agencies
transform their operations and dramatically improve their
performance.
This concludes my statement. I will be happy to take any
questions you may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Mihm follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.023
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.024
Ms. Davis of Virginia. Thank you very much, Mr. Mihm.
Dr. Wells, it is good to have you before our committee
again. You are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Wells. Thank you, very much, Madam Chairwoman.
Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to
discuss my role as SSA's Chief Human Capital Officer, and how
the Chief Human Capital Officers Act, enacted as an act that is
part of the Homeland Security Act, provides valuable assistance
in meeting some of the human capital challenges that the Social
Security Administration faces.
As you know, the Chief Human Capital Officers Act of 2002
was signed into law with the promulgation of the Homeland
Security Act of 2002. This act established the Chief Human
Capital Officer and the Chief Human Capital Officers Council. I
am proud to serve as SSA's Chief Human Capital Officer and as a
member of the Chief Human Capital Officers Council. The Chief
Human Capital Officer position and the formation of a national
Chief Human Capital Officers Council have renewed focus on
management of human resources as a form of capital investment
and accountability for the use of that investment.
As SSA's Deputy Commissioner for Human Resources and CHCO,
I am responsible for providing leadership on the agency's work
force development strategies, recruiting, succession planning,
diversity strategies and other human capital initiatives. I am
actively engaged in those activities on a daily basis. In this
dual role, I advise the Commissioner and senior staff in
carrying out SSA's responsibilities for selecting, developing,
training and managing a high-quality, productive work force in
accordance with merit system principles. As such, I have a seat
at the table that allows me to discuss human capital goals at
the executive level.
The CHCO position and the formation of a National Chief
Human Capital Officers Council are important to our agency
because of our mission at SSA. Our mission is to ensure that
Social Security and Supplemental Security Income claims are
processed quickly and accurately and that over 45 million
Social Security beneficiaries and Supplemental Security Income
recipients receive their benefits in correct amounts and on
time every month of the year. As of January 2004, over 64,000
SSA employees were delivering services through a network of
over 1,500 district and hearing offices throughout the country
in 10 regions.
SSA recognizes that it is the dedication and hard work of
its employees that enables this agency to meet its commitments
to the public. These commitments require that we continue
effective human capital planning to ensure that we are
successful in our mission. The Chief Human Capital Officers Act
of 2002 is an important tool in our efforts to fulfill our
goals. Effective human capital planning in our environment
presents unique challenges. We face increasing retirement and
disability claims, workloads resulting from our aging national
population. As the baby boomers reach their peak retirement
years, we must plan carefully to ensure that trained employees
will be in place to do the work, and at the same time, maintain
our quality standards.
The same time as our agency faces dramatically increasing
workloads, we also face the fact that many of our dedicated
employees are baby boomers themselves. SSA's employee
retirement wave will not only affect our ability to deliver
service to the American public but it will also result in a
significant drain of institutional knowledge. SSA will be faced
with the continuing challenge of hiring and retaining a highly-
skilled and diverse work force in what is expected to be a very
competitive job market.
At SSA, we are fortunate that we have been planning for
quite some time how to address many of these human capital
challenges. The Chief Human Capital Officers Act is Congress'
recognition of the fact that human resources are another form
of capital investment that we make in order to carry out our
mission. I am confident that SSA will meet the challenges we
face through effective human capital planning. To this end, I
am pleased to report that SSA has implemented a comprehensive
human capital plan which provides a high-level focus for human
planning efforts. It is directly linked to the SSA strategic
plan. The human capital plan closely tracks outcomes and helps
us to focus on the results of our human capital initiatives.
I would also like to point out the importance of the Chief
Human Capital Officers Council which provides a valuable forum
for our agency to discuss a wide range of human resources
issues, such as modernization of human resources systems, the
impact of legislation affecting human resources operations and
organizations, recruitment and retention strategies, emergency
preparedness guidelines and safety measures, work force
flexibilities and competitive sourcing. Collectively, the
members of the Council use their insights and experiences to
address government-wide work force issues.
Thank you again, for holding this hearing. The enactment of
the Chief Human Capital Officers Act will support SSA and other
participating Government agencies as we face the human resource
challenges presented in the 21st Century.
I would be happy to answer any of your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Wells follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.025
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.026
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.027
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.028
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.029
Ms. Davis of Virginia. Thank you very much, Dr. Wells.
Mr. Simpson, thank you for being here with us today and you
are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Simpson. Thank you very much for the opportunity to
appear before your subcommittee today.
I serve as the executive vice president and general counsel
of the Partnership for Public Service, a non-partisan, non-
profit organization dedicated to revitalizing the Federal Civil
Service.
Since the position of the Chief Human Capital Officer was
created, the Partnership has had many opportunities to work
closely with those officers, with the community of Federal HR
directors, with OPM Director, Kay Coles James, and her team and
with the executive director of the Council, Mike Dovilla. We
applaud their accomplishments to date and we are especially
heartened by the continued commitment to effective
congressional oversight that this hearing represents.
In our work with the Federal Government agencies, we have
noted many positive developments in connection with the Chief
Human Capital Officers. The level of discourse about human
capital management issues in the Federal space has increased.
Agency managers are being integrated more tightly into the
discussion. There is greater collaboration among agencies and
more energy around the issues of strategic planning. NASA has
become the first agency to go to green on OMB's human capital
management score card followed by Labor. OPM Director James has
rightly and consistently championed the successes of those two
agencies and encouraged other agencies to model their best
practices. More importantly, I can report to you that the Chief
Human Capital Officers feel well supported by this committee
and its staff.
As the committee considers its oversight role going
forward, it is worth recalling two of the key underlying goals
of the original legislation, one, to improve strategic planning
and two, to encourage the development of metrics to gauge
progress on work force management issues. On the first issue,
strategic human capital planning, the Chief Human Capital
Officers should be responsible for identifying the talent needs
that exist now as well as those that will predictively arise in
the future, given attrition and other factors. Once those needs
have been identified, then proactive strategies have to be
developed by the Chief Human Capital Officers to meet those
needs.
On this topic I would commend to your attention the
Partnership's recent report on bioterrorism which outlines some
of the serious work force challenges being faced by agencies
responsible for our bioterror defense. The basic conclusion of
the report was that we can't get the people we need and we
can't keep the people we have. One reason for that was a lack
of adequate work force planning.
In the face of increasing difficulties in recruiting the
technical expertise they needed, agencies did not necessarily
have plans in place to overcome these difficulties. I would
suggest this subcommittee should look for the CHCOs to be
proactive in responding to work force challenges, especially
where the data is showing a downward trend. The Chief Human
Capital Officer Council in particular is an institution that is
well suited to coordinate a strategic response across agencies
in situations like these where several agencies are pursuing
the talent pool.
The second goal was to try to develop a series of metrics
that gave progress on human capital goals. If you measure it,
it can change. This is an explicit charge of the Chief Human
Capital Officer legislation and it is central to the
effectiveness of your own congressional oversight. The Chief
Human Capital Officers should be able to explain to Congress
which measures they regularly track and most importantly, how
that information is then used to shape agency policy, planning
and results. In our view, the administration's Presidential
management agenda and the accompanying balanced score card have
already laid the groundwork for the HR metrics that should be
adopted by the Government. Having established this important
conceptual framework, the priority for the next year should be
to safeguard the consistency of these benchmarks to ensure
their interpretation is consistent and transparent to the
agencies that will be required to live by them and to show
progress by them.
The other crucial aspect of the Chief Human Capital Officer
legislation was the creation of the Chief Human Capital Officer
Council, which really represented a profound congressional
commitment to a collaborative approach to work force issues
across government agencies. To date, as described by Director
James, the Chief Human Capital Officer Council has begun to
fulfill that promise by forming subcommittees and developing
responses to the major challenges all of the offices face, such
as the need for transformation of the HR function and
performance management. The Chief Human Capital Officer for the
Department of Education, for example, leads one subcommittee
that has done some great work on leadership development.
This progress, however, could be undermined by changes in
agency leadership that invariably accompany every Presidential
transition, regardless of who is elected. The Partnership would
make two suggestions in this regard. First, the subcommittee
might consider asking the Council to develop a point of view on
the continuity issue and to offer its own recommended
solutions. It would be instructive, for example, to learn how
the CFO and the CIO communities deal with transition issues.
Second, it may be appropriate to review the staffing
resources available to the Director of OPM for the Council. The
Executive Director of the Council, for example, could benefit
from dedicated staff that would allow him to expand his
coordinating function. The committee might also examine where
the newly appointed officers are receiving consistent guidance
and orientation about how to fulfill the responsibilities of
their position. I would also humbly suggest that good
government groups such as the Partnership have a considerable
interest in this issue that could be leveraged to support the
Council's planning and transition efforts.
In closing, there is no doubt in my mind that the creation
of the Chief Human Capital Officers was an important pre-
condition to the broader transformations that will be necessary
to improve the Government's ability to deliver results.
Congress has signaled the seriousness of its intent by
demanding accountability, measures of progress and increased
collaboration. You have the ingredients to drive organizational
change on an incredibly large scale and you and the Chief Human
Capital Officers have our support in that enterprise.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Simpson follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.030
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.031
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.032
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.034
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.035
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.036
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.038
Ms. Davis of Virginia. Thank you very much, Mr. Simpson.
Mr. Wells, I want to ask you a question. In the November
2002 law that President Bush signed into legislation for the
Department of Homeland Security, it contained several resource
reforms including the ability for agencies to use category
ranking hiring method instead of the rule of three. It also
provided governmentwide authority for voluntary separation
incentive payments and voluntary early retirement. More
recently, we in Congress enacted the Student Loan Repayment
Program. Is the Social Security Administration using these
flexibilities and are there any other personnel flexibilities
that you need to help transform your work force? I know you are
having a bit of a difficult time there.
Mr. Wells. Yes, Madam Chairwoman, we are using a number of
those flexibilities, however, not all. There are reasons why we
have decided not to use them all. I think where flexibilities
are concerned, you really do have to consider the particular
culture, institutional aspects of the organization, size, a lot
of dimensions and variables.
With regard to early retirement, that is something we have
actually used very strategically to help flatten the retirement
wave. We analyzed some 6 to 7 years ago that we would in fact
have a certain number of retirements hitting us in the
beginning of the decade and we started using early retirement
as a mechanism for having those retirements happen at a little
more steady pace than might have happened had we not offered it
as an option.
With regard to tuition reimbursement, that is not a
flexibility we are currently using. The ability to administer
that in a way that would not create other issues for us and
given the resource limitations, it makes it very difficult to
consider that one as we have looked at it from various angles.
It has not been one of the things we have had to resort to for
purposes of recruitment. I will knock on wood here that we have
actually done quite well. We have had, I guess, last year
something like 3,500-3,700 retirements or people leaving the
agency and we were able to replenish without a tremendous
amount of difficulty at this stage.
One of the other flexibilities you mentioned, categorical
ranking, is something we are studying right now. We have to
think through all the nuances of it as it relates to how we are
accustomed to doing business and we should have some results on
how we are going to use it very shortly. I can report back to
the committee on its use. I think we are certainly viewing it
as a very favorable option over the rule of three.
Ms. Davis of Virginia. Are there other personnel
flexibilities you can think of that you need we might be able
to help you with?
Mr. Wells. There are a number that we have put together and
we would be more than happy to submit those to the committee as
well.
Ms. Davis of Virginia. If you would do that, we would
certainly appreciate it. I am going to ask one more quick
question and go to my colleagues.
Mr. Simpson, it is going to be you because my ears perked
up when Director James said that some of the CHCOs were
political appointees. I know that the Partnership for Public
Service has said that shouldn't be, something to that effect.
Could you elaborate on that?
Mr. Simpson. Early on during the initial legislative debate
about the Chief Human Capital Officer legislation, I believe we
did express a preference that perhaps the Chief Human Capital
Officers should all be career but we are very sensitive to the
other side of the argument and it really was important to us
that the Officers have a seat at the table as it were and
sometimes a political appointee is really the best candidate
for the job for that reason.
I think actually the way it is working right now as
Director James described, it is a good mix from everything that
I have heard, from my understanding. There is a lot of synergy
and give and take between the different experiences these two
different categories of officers bring. I would not suggest
what we have heard and the input we have received means that we
ought to revise the act itself to require career officers. It
is a little too soon for that but I do think Director James was
quite candid and forthright in suggesting that even some of the
political appointees need to focus their attention and energies
on the substantial responsibilities of the position itself.
Ms. Davis of Virginia. Thank you.
I am going to yield back my time and go to our Ranking
Member, Mr. Davis.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Mr. Simpson and Mr. Mihm, how
important do you think it is for the CHCOs to report directly
to their agency heads? They must directly to the agency
director. How important do you think that is?
Mr. Simpson. To my mind, it is very important. It signals a
commitment from the very top of the agency to the importance of
human capital as a matter of critical importance to the agency.
Your agency mission is not going to be accomplished unless you
have your human capital shop in order. Jack Welch, the head of
GE, used to say we spend 70 percent of our time on the people
thing and the day we get the people thing wrong, we have really
messed up. I think that is a model that should be emulated in
the Government space.
Mr. Mihm. I would agree Mr. Davis. It is important that
they report to the highest level of the organization. The thing
we need to keep in mind is that a number of management
positions now report to the head of the agency, CFO, CIO,
CHCOs. This fact has been given some impetus of the notion of
creating Chief Operating Officers within agencies often at the
deputy level or an equivalent through which the various
management functions could report up so they are able to have
the high level of attention they deserve but it is not
necessarily all going into the Office of the Secretary. My
understanding is the Select Committee on Homeland Security is
considering that model with the Department of Homeland Security
creating a Chief Operating Officer, basically elevating the
entire management function up to the next level.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Let me ask each of you do you think
one can do this effectively on a part-time basis, that is with
other duties and responsibilities as well? I will start with
you, Mr. Mihm.
Mr. Mihm. I would take Director James' point that I think
it will be exceedingly difficult over time to devote the
necessary time and attention if it is dual-headed or even
triple-headed with other functions. The key differences she was
pointing out between a HR Director and a Chief Human Capital
Officer and it is characterized by Dr. Wells' comments about a
seat at the table is that it is much more than responsibility
for the traditional HR categories which are important enough.
It is being able to be a real leader in much of the
transformation that is going on within an organization. If we
are vesting with these top officials technology, financial
management, administration, other management functions, it gets
exceedingly difficult to see when they are going to be able to
sleep.
Mr. Wells. Mr. Davis, I am very happy that I wear both
hats, that is I am the Deputy Commissioner for Human Resources
and the Chief Human Capital Officer, so I am probably a little
biased. I struggle with doing a really good job at it with that
full responsibility. I think it is a full-time job. I
appreciated the Director's forthright remarks about some of the
challenges that some of my colleagues face, and from talking to
some of them, I can certainly appreciate that they do.
I think some of it depends, frankly, on the agency. I can
see where that may play a role and the amount of support a
particular executive may have surrounding them, but I certainly
feel that having direct access to the head of the agency is
critical. If you don't have the seat at the table, if you are
not able to have that direct access, it would strike me, as you
indicated earlier in your remarks, that we do things well, that
we pay attention to and put effort into. I would certainly
agree with that.
Mr. Simpson. My own sense, Congressman Davis, is it is a
big portfolio, it is a substantial portfolio of responsibility
that each Chief Human Capital Officers needs to focus on. If
you look into the private sector and look at comparable
positions, a chief people officer at a large corporation for
example, I doubt you would find many models where those
responsibilities are shared, one person has those
responsibilities as well as significant other portfolios.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. I have no further questions. Thank
you, Madam Chairwoman.
Ms. Davis of Virginia. Thank you, Mr. Davis.
We have four votes but I believe we have time for 5 minutes
for Ms. Norton to ask questions.
Ms. Norton. Let me quickly ask Mr. Mihm a question. You
have indicated that in addition to essential operations, there
should be some focus on border agency operations. I wonder if
you saw any indication that the Emergency Preparedness
Subcommittee or any part of CHCOs is looking beyond emergency
matters? I ask that in light of what happened here. When
anthrax occurred here in the Senate, there were many, many
employees who simply couldn't work at all. Nobody had arranged
for them to work from home, a lot of government waste occurred
during that time. How will we avoid that under the present CHCO
situation?
Mr. Mihm. In fact we have done quite a bit of work on this.
The issue first arose in the mind of members here in Congress
in terms of requesting our work, is that they had been noticing
a lot of the work on continuity of operations and there had
been discussions of critical infrastructure and the need to
protect critical infrastructure and they noted their chiefs
were not considering people as part of our critical
infrastructure. We are worried about protecting technology,
desks and office buildings but we are not so much worried about
people. So we were asked to look at the people considerations
within continuity of operations plans. Here is the essential
issue.
Emergency preparedness and response at the Federal level
with both FEMA guidance and the existing OPM guidance is
actually pretty good from the standpoint of worrying about
immediate health and safety issues of employees. That is
obviously our overriding immediate concern. We were identifying
a large set of issues that I think are exactly on point of what
you are suggesting. Once we have had an incident and we have an
emergency response team that is kind of restanding up the
agency, how do we reengage the broader group of employees that
may be out there whether through distributed workplaces or
technology or alternative work locations or all the rest? We
don't really know yet what the Emergency Preparedness
Subcommittee and the CHCO Council is coming up with, although
as I mentioned in my statement we are making available to them
our work and our suggestions on what they should look at. We
have been working with OPM in terms of giving them the earlier
report and have been working very closely with FEMA and FEMA
did accept our recommendations about the need to expand
guidance on continuity of operations plans.
Ms. Norton. I certainly would like to see people able to
work from home. Talking about backup, we really do need
particularly since essential is very narrowly defined.
Mr. Mihm. Yes, Ma'am.
Ms. Norton. You say in your testimony, Mr. Simpson, you
humbly suggest a good government group such as your own be
considered in this issue and could be leverage to support. Are
you saying you haven't been consulted?
Mr. Simpson. We were just trying to make it clear that we
were willing to be helpful to the administration.
Ms. Norton. I am asking, have you been consulted? Have you
had any input?
Mr. Simpson. We feel that we have had input into the
process, yes. We consult regularly with the Chief Human Capital
Officers and with the HR community. We think it is a very free
and open exchange. One of the reasons we formed our perspective
is that in fact transition is going to present some real
challenges, and we wanted to offer to be helpful if somebody
thought we could be helpful in that way.
Ms. Norton. It looks like it is already happening, Mr.
Simpson. Thank you very much.
Ms. Davis of Virginia. Thank you, Ms. Norton.
We are going to have to break for four votes, so rather
than holding the panel, if members have additional questions
for our witnesses, they can submit them for the record and we
will get the witnesses to agree to get them back to us for the
record.
I would like again to thank each and every one of you for
being here and for your patience.
With that, the hearing is now adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:20 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned,
to reconvene at the call of the chair.]
[Additional information submitted for the hearing record
follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.053
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.054
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.055
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.056
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.057
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.058
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.059
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.060
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.039
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.040
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.041
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.042
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.043
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.044
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.045
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.046
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.047
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.048
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.049
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.050
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.051
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7034.052
<all>