a

GAO

United States Government Accountability Office

Report to Congressional Requesters

July 2005 FEDERAL STUDENT 

LOAN REPAYMENT 

PROGRAM

OPM Could Build on 

Its Efforts to Help 

Agencies Administer 

the Program and 

Measure Results

GAO-05-762
What GAO Found

United States Government Accountability Office

Why GAO Did This Study

Highlights

Accountability Integrity Reliability

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-762.

To view the full product, including the scope 

and methodology, click on the link above. 

For more information, contact Eileen Larence, 

(202) 512-6806, larencee@gao.gov. 

Highlights of GAO-05-762, a report to 

congressional requesters 

July 2005

FEDERAL STUDENT LOAN REPAYMENT 

PROGRAM 

OPM Could Build on Its Efforts to Help 

Agencies Administer the Program and 

Measure Results 

The largest users among GAO’s 10 selected executive branch agencies 

primarily employed their SLR programs as broad-based retention tools 

aimed at keeping more recently hired employees with the knowledge and 

skills critical to their agencies. Officials at these agencies said the program 

also has an indirect positive effect on their recruitment efforts because job 

candidates are aware of the benefit and find the incentive attractive. Other 

agencies used the program as a recruitment and retention tool on a case-bycase basis, offering repayments to highly qualified individuals in occupations 

where the labor market is competitive. Agencies not using the program 

reported no real need to do so at this time because they are not facing 

significant recruitment and retention challenges. 

Agencies have a large degree of discretion in structuring their SLR programs, 

and they were tailoring program aspects to meet their unique needs. Those 

using their programs as broad-based retention tools operated them centrally, 

while those making loan repayments on a case-by-case basis had 

decentralized programs operated by their component units. Agencies also 

varied in the size of their loan repayments depending on the results they 

were trying to achieve. 

Although agencies believe it is a useful tool, officials described the program 

as time consuming and cumbersome to operate. They suggested that more 

automation and consolidation of program activities would make the program 

more efficient and easier to operate. Officials also suggested ways to make 

the program more effective. Since the SLR program is relatively new, 

agencies did not yet have comprehensive data to assess the program’s 

impact, although they will need to establish a baseline of measures now for 

future assessments of the program. Currently, anecdotal evidence indicates 

that employees value the program, and agency officials believe the incentive 

will become more attractive to agencies once administrative problems are 

reduced. 

OPM has taken a number of steps to provide agencies with information and 

guidance on implementing the program. Human capital officials recognized 

OPM’s efforts, but felt they could use more assistance on the technical 

aspects of operating the program, more coordination in sharing lessons 

learned in implementing it, and help consolidating some of the program 

processes. OPM and the CHCO Council have an important role in assisting 

agencies with implementing their SLR programs. They may also be able to 

help agencies assess their own program results as well as develop a common 

set of metrics to provide information to Congress on the impact of the SLR 

program governmentwide. 

As federal workers retire in greater 

numbers, agencies will need to 

recruit and retain a new wave of 

talented individuals. Agencies 

need to determine if the federal 

student loan repayment (SLR) 

program is one of the best ways to 

make maximum use of available 

funds to attract and keep this key 

talent. 

 

GAO was asked to identify (1) why 

agencies use or are not using the 

program; (2) how agencies are 

implementing the SLR program; 

and (3) what results and 

suggestions agency officials could 

provide about the program and 

how they view the Office of 

Personnel Management’s (OPM) 

role in facilitating its use. Ten 

agencies were selected to provide 

illustrative examples of why and 

how agencies decided to use or 

chose not to use the program. 

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that OPM work 

with the Chief Human Capital 

Officers (CHCO) Council to 

determine more efficient ways to 

administer the SLR program and to 

measure its results. GAO also 

recommends that the selected 

agencies using the SLR program 

extensively build on current efforts 

to measure the impact of their SLR 

programs. OPM generally agreed 

with the recommendations. The 

selected agencies either generally 

supported the recommendations or 

did not express an overall opinion 

about them. 
Page i GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

Contents

Letter 1

Results in Brief 3

Background 7

Selected Agencies’ Use of the SLR Program Largely Depended on 

Their Unique Recruitment and Retention Needs 11

Agencies Tailored SLR Program Administration to Meet Their 

Unique Needs 15

Agency Officials Suggested Ways to Make the SLR Program More 

Efficient and Effective, but Agencies Do Not Yet Have Processes 

to Assess the Long-term Impact of Their Programs 18

Conclusions 26

Recommendations for Executive Action 27

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 28

Appendixes

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 31

Appendix II: Background Information on the Case Study Agencies 33

Appendix III: Comments from the Office of Personnel Management 38

Appendix IV: Comments from the Department of State 40

Appendix V: Comments from the Department of Justice 42

Appendix VI: Comments from the Department of Energy 44

Appendix VII: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 46

Table Table 1: Summary of Selected Agencies’ SLR Program Features 16

Figure Figure 1: Fiscal Year 2004 Benefits Provided by Users of the 

Student Loan Repayment Program 9
Contents

Page ii GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further 

permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or 

other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to 

reproduce this material separately.

Abbreviations

ASD alternative service delivery

CHCO Chief Human Capital Officers

CRS Congressional Research Service

DOD Department of Defense

DOE Department of Energy

DOJ Department of Justice

DOS Department of State

DOT Department of Transportation

EEOC Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

GSA General Services Administration

OPM Office of Personnel Management

SBA Small Business Administration

SEC Securities and Exchange Commission

SLR student loan repayment

SSA Social Security Administration 
Page 1 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, D.C. 20548

A

July 22, 2005 Letr

The Honorable George V. Voinovich

Chairman

The Honorable Daniel K. Akaka

Ranking Member

Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, 

the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

United States Senate

The Honorable Richard J. Durbin

United States Senate

The Honorable Jon Porter

Chairman

Subcommittee on the Federal Workforce and Agency Organization

Committee on Government Reform

House of Representatives

At a time when rising educational debt has the potential to drive college 

and professional school graduates away from public service and into higher 

paid private sector jobs, student loan repayment is viewed as one tool the 

federal government can use to attract and keep valuable talent. Congress 

passed a law in 1990 authorizing agencies to repay, at their discretion, their 

employees’ student loans as a means to recruit and retain a talented 

workforce.1

 In 2001, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) issued 

final regulations to implement the federal student loan repayment (SLR) 

program. The regulations were subsequently changed in 2004 to reflect 

legislative amendments that increased the ceiling on annual and total loan 

repayments. The provisions of the federal SLR program legislation initially 

authorized student loan repayments of up to $6,000 per year to a total of 

$40,000 per employee. These ceilings were later increased to a maximum 

amount of $10,000 per calendar year and a total of $60,000. Income and 

employment taxes are withheld from the repayment amount, and an 

employee seeking student loan repayment must sign a written service 

1

The law was enacted in 1990 (Pub. L. No. 101-510, § 1206(b) (Nov. 5, 1990)) and amended in 

2000 (Pub. L. No. 106-398, § 1122 (Oct. 30, 2000)) and 2003 (Pub. L. No. 108-123 (Nov. 11, 

2003) and Pub. L. No. 108-136, § 1123 (Nov. 24, 2003)). 5 U.S.C, § 5379. 
Page 2 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

agreement to work for the agency for at least 3 years. The law requires that 

agencies make the loan repayments directly to the lending institutions. 

After a slow start, agencies’ use of the SLR program has increased 

substantially since 2001. OPM reported that federal agencies increased the 

number of employees receiving student loan repayments by 42 percent in 

fiscal year 2004 compared to the previous fiscal year (from 2,077 to 2,945 

employees) and increased their overall financial investment in the program 

by 79 percent (from $9.18 million to $16.42 million). Most of these 

repayments, approximately 81 percent, were made by five agencies, 

including GAO. In making these investments, agencies were required to 

address a range of issues, such as funding and criteria for participation, to 

determine whether a SLR program was desirable or feasible for them. 

Funding is particularly important given that the law providing authority to 

establish the programs does not provide separate or additional funding to 

implement them. Instead, agencies generally need to reallocate funds from 

existing pay and benefits programs or other recruitment and retention 

incentives to repay employees’ student loans. Consequently, agencies must 

determine whether to use the SLR program given available funds and other 

tools to recruit and retain key talent. 

To obtain a better understanding of agencies’ use of the federal SLR 

program, you asked us to identify (1) why selected executive branch 

agencies are using or not using the program, (2) how agencies are 

implementing the SLR program, and (3) what results and suggestions 

agency officials could provide about the program and how they view OPM’s 

role in facilitating its use. 

To address our objectives, we identified a set of federal agencies varying in 

size and mission that had established SLR programs, were in the process of 

establishing programs, or had chosen not to use them. We then selected 10 

agencies to provide illustrative examples of why and how agencies decided 

to use the program or chose not to use it. We selected the Department of 

State (DOS), the Department of Justice (DOJ),2

 and the Securities and 

Exchange Commission (SEC) because they were among the largest users 

of the program through fiscal year 2004, and the General Services 

Administration (GSA) and the Department of Energy (DOE) because they 

2

DOJ, in addition to the SLR programs administered by its units, implemented the Attorney 

Student Loan Repayment Program in 2003 to address both the recruitment and retention 

challenges the department faces in managing its attorney workforce.
Page 3 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

used their programs on a more case-by-case basis. We selected the 

Department of Transportation (DOT) and the Department of Commerce 

(Commerce) because they were initiating programs, and the Social 

Security Administration (SSA), the Equal Employment Opportunity 

Commission (EEOC), and the Small Business Administration (SBA) 

because they did not use the program. Background information on the 

agencies appears in appendix II. We reviewed available documentation, 

such as strategic workforce plans, SLR implementation plans, and other 

documents associated with administering the program. To obtain 

governmentwide data on agencies’ use of the program and to help identify 

our case study agencies, we reviewed and analyzed OPM’s annual reports 

to Congress on the SLR program.3

 We interviewed agency officials, such as 

human capital officers, SLR program managers, and recruitment directors, 

from the selected agencies, as well as officials from OPM and other 

relevant parties. We conducted our review in Washington, D.C., in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards from 

July 2004 through June 2005. Detailed information on our scope and 

methodology appears in appendix I.

Results in Brief The agencies’ decisions to use the SLR program were largely based on how 

well the program met each agency’s unique recruitment and retention 

needs. Six of our case study agencies were using the program, one was just 

beginning to implement it, and three had chosen not to implement it. DOS, 

DOJ, and SEC, the largest users among the case study agencies, reported 

using the program primarily for broad-based retention efforts aimed, in 

many cases, at retaining more recently hired employees with knowledge 

and skills critical to the agencies. Officials at these agencies said that the 

program had a strong indirect effect on their recruitment efforts as well, 

because job candidates know the program exists and find it attractive. 

Officials from three other agencies, GSA, DOE, and DOT, said they offer 

student loan repayments in recruiting specific individuals, such as 

Presidential Management Fellows, and in occupations where the labor 

market is competitive, such as engineering. In addition, they offer student 

loan repayments to employees with skills critical to the agency that they 

need to retain. Officials at Commerce, which recently offered its first 

3

U.S. Office of Personnel Management, Federal Student Loan Repayment Program

(Washington, D.C.: 2001), Federal Student Loan Repayment Program (Washington, D.C.: 

2002), Federal Student Loan Repayment Program (Washington, D.C.: 2003), and Federal 

Student Loan Repayment Program (Washington, D.C.: 2004). 
Page 4 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

repayment, said the department will also use the program on a case-by-case 

basis for both recruitment and retention. SSA, EEOC, and SBA officials 

reported having no real need to implement the program at this time, 

because their agencies are not facing significant recruitment and retention 

challenges. SSA officials, for example, said the agency’s recruitment needs 

generally do not require a focus on individuals with highly technical or 

unique qualifications. 

Likewise, agencies are implementing the SLR program to meet their unique 

needs by tailoring various aspects of their programs. For example, the 

agencies using the SLR program more extensively and primarily as a broadbased retention tool operated their programs centrally, while the agencies 

using student loan repayments on a case-by-case basis decentralized 

operations to units within the agencies. DOS, for example, centrally funds 

and administers the program for all units within the department, such as 

the Bureau of Consular Affairs. DOE, on the other hand, allows its units to 

implement their own programs, primarily because they have diverse needs, 

including different geographic labor markets. Agencies also varied the 

amount of recipients’ loan repayments to achieve particular results. The 

DOJ attorney program, for example, offers the largest loan repayments to 

attorneys in the lowest salary positions to attract a broader base of 

individuals who otherwise may not have been interested in these positions. 

Agencies also varied the length of service required before an employee can 

become eligible for the program. For instance, SEC, an agency that reports 

little difficulty recruiting candidates but has a relatively high attrition rate, 

requires employees to serve at least 1 year before becoming eligible to 

participate in the program. Because program participants sign a 3-year 

service agreement, the agency is likely to retain these employees for a 

minimum of 4 years. 

Agency officials provided suggestions for making the SLR program more 

efficient and effective, but agencies using the SLR program did not yet have 

comprehensive data on the extent to which it is aiding them in their 

recruitment and retention efforts. For example, most officials agreed that 

the program is cumbersome to administer and proposed that certain 

changes, such as more automation of the application and loan repayment 

processes and consolidation of other program activities, could make it 

more efficient. In particular, an official at DOT indicated that alternative 

approaches could be explored to increase the cost effectiveness of 

administrative functions for agencies that use the program extensively. For 

example, one approach may be to create shared services—similar to the 

approach used to provide payroll services, wherein a small number of 
Page 5 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

agencies service multiple agencies. Officials also suggested changes to the 

program they believed would increase its effectiveness by making the 

program more attractive to candidates and employees, such as reducing 

the 3-year service agreement. As for determining program results, although 

the program is still relatively new to most agencies, establishing now what 

data and indicators they will track to determine the program’s effects, as 

well as a baseline to measure the changes over time, is important for future 

assessments of the program. All agencies are tracking the number of SLR 

recipients who do not fulfill their service agreements and stated that few 

are leaving the agency before their agreements expire, indicating the 

program is having at least a short-term positive impact on retention. As for 

longer-term measures of effect, agency officials identified several 

indicators they could track, such as participant attrition rates and survey 

data measuring employee attitudes about the program. Officials stated that 

they would need to track attrition rates of loan repayment recipients for at 

least a 3-year cycle because recipients sign at least a 3-year service 

agreement and are less likely to leave during this time frame. Nevertheless, 

agencies could establish the tracking systems now, and could conduct the 

employee surveys on a periodic basis to gauge program results.

Finally, agency officials’ views were mixed on OPM’s role in facilitating 

their use of the SLR program. They suggested that more coordination 

among agencies, which OPM could facilitate, would help with program 

implementation and administration. OPM has taken a number of steps to 

provide agencies with program information and guidance, including 

making reference materials, such as questions and answers on 

administering student loan repayments, available on its Web site, and 

sponsoring a forum for program managers. Since a number of the changes 

in program administration, such as more automation of the process or 

establishing shared-service arrangements, would benefit all agencies using 

the program, OPM, as the central human capital office, is well-positioned to 

help implement these program improvements. In addition, continued OPM 

support, such as the forums and training sessions on the program, could be 

helpful. Some of this assistance could also include working with the 

agencies to develop indicators and measures of program results, which in 

turn could help OPM to assess and report on program results 

governmentwide.

Given the challenges cited in administering the program and its potential to 

grow, simplifying and consolidating administrative tasks, sharing lessons 

learned, and assessing results will help ensure agencies make maximum 

use of funds to recruit and retain key talent, a critical goal in an era of fiscal 
Page 6 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

constraints. In light of this, we recommend that the Director of OPM, in 

conjunction with the Chief Human Capital Officers (CHCO) Council,4

continue to work with agencies using the program to determine the most 

important program improvements to implement, especially those that 

would have governmentwide benefits, such as shared service 

arrangements, and the most cost-effective ways to implement them. OPM 

could also help agencies identify possible data to collect, and indicators to 

use, to track long-term program results, as well as possible 

governmentwide indicators OPM could use to report overall program 

results to Congress. We are also recommending to our selected agencies 

making extensive use of the SLR program that they continue their efforts to 

measure the impact of their programs.

We provided a draft of this report to the Director of OPM and to our 10 

selected agencies for their review and comment. We received written 

comments from OPM, DOS, DOJ, and DOE, which are included in 

appendixes III, IV, V, and VI respectively. OPM and DOS concurred with 

our recommendations. DOJ did not comment specifically on the 

recommendations but stated that the department has already started to 

develop ways to measure the impact of the attorney student loan 

repayment program on retention. DOE offered two opinions on our 

recommendations to OPM. First, DOE stated that the report did not fully 

describe OPM’s efforts in assessing program implementation as part of its 

annual reporting process to Congress. We added language in the report to 

expand on what OPM included in its most recent report. DOE also 

suggested that GAO recommend that OPM assist agencies in measuring the 

effectiveness of specific incentives such as student loan repayments by 

including questions about them in the Federal Human Capital Survey. 

While this may be an effective method to collect data on program results, 

we did not prescribe the measures of effectiveness OPM should use but 

recommended that it work jointly with agencies and the CHCO Council to 

design these measures. These four agencies, as well as several of the 

remaining agencies, also provided technical comments, which we have 

incorporated as appropriate. 

4

The CHCO Council, headed by the Director of OPM, is responsible for advising and 

coordinating agencies’ efforts concerning modernization of their human resources systems, 

improvement of the quality of human resources information, and legislation on human 

resources operations and organizations.
Page 7 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

Background In 1989, the National Commission on the Public Service found that the 

federal government experienced difficulties in recruiting and retaining a 

quality workforce.5

 The commission recommended that a student loan 

forgiveness program be established, and the SLR program was proposed in 

response to that recommendation. The reasons underlying enactment of 

the federal SLR program continue today and include the impending 

retirements of large numbers of federal workers and the difficulty, at times, 

in attracting the right individuals to public service to help fill the gaps. 

Today’s college graduates are entering the workforce with even more 

substantial education loans than in 1989, and studies indicate that 

educational debt prevents many graduates from choosing employers in 

which they are interested but that provide lower salaries. A 2002 

Congressional Budget Office study concluded that federal employees in 

selected professional and administrative occupations tend to hold jobs that 

paid less than comparable jobs in the private sector. The report stated that 

the jobs that show the greatest pay disadvantage for federal workers make 

up an increasing share of federal employment.6

 

The provisions of the federal student loan repayment program legislation 

authorize student loan repayments as recruitment or retention incentives 

for highly qualified federal job candidates or current employees. In 

retention situations, however, the SLR program may be used only when an 

employee is likely to leave for employment outside the federal government, 

not to another federal agency. As mentioned previously, agencies are 

authorized to provide an employee with a maximum repayment amount of 

$10,000 per calendar year up to a total of $60,000, with the payments 

included in gross income for both income and employment tax purposes. 

An employee who separates voluntarily from the agency, who does not 

maintain an acceptable level of performance, or who violates any of the 

conditions of the service agreement becomes ineligible to continue to 

receive the benefit and must reimburse the agency for the total amount of 

any repayment benefits received. Under the law, student loans made, 

insured, or guaranteed under the Higher Education Act of 1965 or health 

education assistance loans made or insured under the Public Health 

5

The National Commission on the Public Service, Leadership for America; Rebuilding the 

Public Service, Task Force Reports to the National Commission on the Public Service

(Washington, D.C.: 1989).

6

Congressional Budget Office, Measuring Differences between Federal and Private Pay

(Washington, D.C.: November 2002).
Page 8 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

Service Act are eligible for repayment. The SLR program legislation covers 

executive and select legislative branch agencies and government 

corporations such as the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.7

Authorizing legislation also requires OPM to annually report to Congress on 

agency program use. According to OPM, the Department of Health and 

Human Services was the only agency to make a student loan repayment in 

fiscal year 2001. More agencies began using the program in fiscal year 

2002, with 16 of them reporting to OPM that they had repaid some 

employees’ student loans. Participation increased again in fiscal year 2003 

with 24 agencies distributing more than $9.18 million among a total of 2,077 

recipients. During fiscal year 2004, 28 agencies provided 2,945 employees 

with a total of more than $16.42 million in student loan repayments. 

Compared to fiscal year 2003, this represents a 42 percent increase in the 

number of employees receiving the benefit and a 79 percent increase in the 

agencies’ overall financial investment in the program. As figure 1 shows, 

five agencies invested the most funding on student loan repayments in 

fiscal year 2004. These five agencies also made the greatest number of 

loan repayments. 

7

5 U.S.C. § 5379(a)(1)(A).
Page 9 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

Figure 1: Fiscal Year 2004 Benefits Provided by Users of the Student Loan 

Repayment Program

As with other human capital flexibilities, Congress has directed that 

agencies use the incentive strategically; therefore, some agencies may not 

need to make large numbers of student loan repayments to use the program 

effectively, or need to use the program at all to manage their workforces.

GAO is one of the top five agencies accounting for most of the student loan 

repayments made in fiscal year 2004. GAO implemented its SLR program 

in fiscal year 2002 for employees who indicated interest and were willing to 

make a 3-year commitment to stay with the agency. The objective of the 

program is to facilitate the recruitment and retention of highly qualified 

employees by (1) providing an incentive for selected candidates to accept a 

GAO position that may otherwise be difficult to fill and (2) retaining highly 

competent employees with knowledge or skills critical to GAO. At the 

current time, GAO’s program is used mostly to retain top talent. The goal is 

to retain employees longer than 3 years, after which they are more likely to 

consider a longer-term career at GAO. The agency focuses on retaining 

recently hired staff because of the considerable time and effort expended 

on selecting these employees and the substantial amount of money 

required to train new hires who will replace retiring employees. The 

program’s operating plan specifies groups or categories of employees who 

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

Dollars in millions

Agency

Source: OPM data.

DOS DOD SEC DOJ GAO All other

agencies

3.611

3.079

3.294

1.919

1.142

3.379
Page 10 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

will be considered for student loan repayment for retention purposes based 

on job series. Analysts and financial auditors, for example, generally 

received the same amount of loan repayment, $5,000 in fiscal year 2004. 

Employees in often hard-to-fill job series—such as economists and 

attorneys—are considered for GAO’s maximum loan repayment, $6,000 in 

fiscal year 2004, on a case-by-case basis. To help measure the effectiveness 

of its program, GAO distributed a survey to program recipients in 2004. 

More than 50 percent of respondents confirmed that the program had some 

influence over their decision to stay with GAO. 

Pending legislation in the House of Representatives and the Senate would 

exclude student loan repayments from gross income for federal tax 

purposes. The Generating Opportunity by Forgiving Educational Debt for 

Service bill would, in effect, increase the amount of the student loan 

repayment benefit by relieving federal employees of the obligation to pay 

income tax on the repayments their federal agencies have provided them.8

 

Those in favor of eliminating the tax argue that, with the current program, 

the federal government is taxing its own ability to recruit and retain 

employees. They also note that loan repayments made by educational 

institutions or nonprofit organizations to encourage public service are not 

counted as taxable income for the recipient. 

Legislation was also introduced but not passed in the last Congress to 

authorize a separate SLR program for federal employees in national 

security positions. The Homeland Security Federal Workforce Act would 

grant authority to the heads of selected agencies to establish a pilot SLR 

program to recruit or retain highly qualified professional personnel 

employed by their agencies in national security positions.9

 This pilot 

program, which would remain in effect for 8 years, would be limited to 

agencies with national security responsibilities, namely national security 

positions in the Departments of Defense, Energy, Homeland Security, 

Justice, State, and the Treasury; the Central Intelligence Agency; and the 

National Security Agency. The proposed SLR program is similar to the 

existing one except that the legislation will authorize the appropriation of 

funding specifically for the loan repayments. However, actual funding of 

the loan repayments may be at the discretion of Congress via annual 

8

H.R. 1765, introduced on April 21, 2005, Generating Opportunity by Forgiving Educational 

Debt for Service Act of 2005. S. 1255, introduced on June 16, 2005.

9

S. 589, introduced on March 11, 2003, Homeland Security Federal Workforce Act.
Page 11 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

appropriations acts. The legislation also requires that, no later than 4 years 

after its enactment, the OPM Director report to the appropriate 

congressional committees on the status of the programs established and 

the success of such programs in recruiting and retaining employees for 

national security positions.

Selected Agencies’ Use 

of the SLR Program 

Largely Depended on 

Their Unique 

Recruitment and 

Retention Needs

DOS, DOJ, and SEC used the SLR program more extensively and primarily 

as a broad-based tool to retain more recently hired employees in specific 

positions that require knowledge or skills critical to the agency. GSA, DOE, 

and DOT, on the other hand, used it in on a case-by-case basis as an 

incentive to either recruit selected highly qualified candidates or retain 

employees with skills critical to the agency. Commerce recently started to 

offer repayments, also on a case-by-case basis, for recruitment and 

retention. At this time, SSA, EEOC, and SBA were satisfied with their 

efforts using other recruitment and retention tools and have not needed to 

use the program.

DOS, DOJ, and SEC Use the 

Program Primarily to Retain 

Employees

DOS heads the list of federal agencies in the number of employees 

participating in, and funds expended on, student loan repayments. The 

department began using the program in fiscal year 2002 and reported 

making loan repayments for 734 employees in fiscal year 2004. 

Repayments totaled approximately $3.6 million. Officials from DOS noted 

that many of their recently hired employees have student loan debts. For 

example, most of the Presidential Management Fellows entering the 

department have eligible student debt, which automatically qualifies them 

for the benefit. DOS uses its program primarily to recruit current 

employees for foreign service hardship posts, and also to retain employees 

in civil service positions that are difficult to fill. The department has 

determined that offering the program to candidates who accept or remain 

in positions at the most difficult posts, such as those experiencing 

hazardous political or health-related conditions, helps attract candidates to 

seek these assignments or encourages employees to remain in them. 

Employees, or potential employees, in certain historically difficult-to-fill 

civil service occupational series may also qualify for the program. These 

positions range from those requiring historians with a Ph.D. in history to 

passport and visa examiners working throughout the country. While DOS 

primarily uses the program for retention, its recruiters also report that the 

SLR program is of great interest on college campuses across the country, 

thereby indirectly helping recruiting. The department noted that student 
Page 12 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

loan repayments are only one of several incentives and benefits available to 

those considering a State Department career, but that the repayments are 

an important part of its overall benefits package.

While DOJ made only one student loan repayment in fiscal year 2002, it 

began using the program extensively in fiscal year 2003. In fiscal year 2004, 

the department reported making 331 repayments totaling approximately 

$1.9 million, with the majority of payments made on behalf of attorneys, 

special agents, and intelligence analysts. DOJ’s use of the SLR program is 

unique in that there is a centrally administered departmentwide program 

for attorneys, as well as unit-run programs for a variety of other positions. 

According to the attorney SLR program officials, DOJ uses the program 

mostly to retain experienced attorneys. About 10 percent of the loan 

repayments is being used for recruitment, including qualifying new 

attorneys entering the department under the Honors Program.10 An 

attorney SLR program manager reported that DOJ advertises the program 

heavily to law students because it perceives the program to be an effective 

indirect recruiting tool. 

In terms of DOJ’s unit-run programs, 12 of its 16 components reported 

using the SLR program in fiscal year 2004, according to a DOJ human 

capital official. For example, the Bureau of Prisons found the program 

helped to retain highly skilled and experienced employees who would 

consider seeking employment in the private sector, as well as attract 

candidates who normally would not be interested in working with the 

agency due to the salary level. 

SEC, which began using the SLR program in the last half of fiscal year 2003, 

reported making 384 student loan repayments totaling approximately $3.3 

million in fiscal year 2004. Most of these repayments were made on behalf 

of attorneys. According to SEC officials, the agency generally does not 

have trouble attracting job candidates, but it does have a relatively high 

attrition rate. An official remarked that the agency has a highly skilled 

workforce comprised largely of securities attorneys, accountants, and 

examiners, many of whom are highly sought after by the private sector, and 

it historically has been a challenge for SEC to retain them. SEC, therefore, 

uses the program only for retention. SEC officials said that thus far they 

have had only a few employees leave before the 3-year service agreement 

10The Attorney General’s Honors Program is DOJ’s recruitment program for entry-level 

attorneys and is the only way DOJ hires graduating law students.
Page 13 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

was completed. In addition, they reported that a large percentage of 

employees are reapplying for benefits, indicating their willingness to stay 

with the agency long enough to reduce or pay off their student loan debt. 

Although the program is used for retention, SEC advertises in its 

recruitment efforts that the benefit is available after 1 year of service, 

making it an indirect recruiting incentive. Officials noted that SEC also 

uses other recruitment and retention incentives, but uses those incentives 

on a strategic basis to recruit and retain highly qualified employees with 

qualifications critical to SEC’s mission.

GSA, DOE, and DOT Target 

Repayments to Both Recruit 

and Retain Specific 

Individuals for Certain 

Occupations; Commerce 

Also Intends to Use Its 

Program for These Reasons

GSA units generally determine the use of incentive pay, including student 

loan repayments, on a case-by-case basis. GSA guidance on the program 

states that student loan repayments are not an entitlement, but rather a 

recruitment and retention incentive that may be used optionally by a 

manager who would not otherwise be able to recruit or retain a highly 

qualified employee with qualifications critical to GSA missions. An official 

noted that SLR authorizations are based on the particular recruitment or 

retention situation, whether the position is a critical need or difficult to fill, 

and the ability of the unit to fund the repayments. In fiscal year 2004, GSA 

repaid 17 loans at a total cost of approximately $93,000. The agency 

reported that it uses the SLR program for both recruitment and retention, 

although most of the repayments in fiscal year 2004 were for recruitment. 

GSA plans to increase its use of the program only if the number of critical 

vacancies increases and the number of available candidates decreases. 

DOE uses the SLR program on a case-by-case basis determined by factors 

such as labor market conditions that may affect recruiting efforts. Each 

case must be justified by the recommending official, concurred with by the 

respective financial and human capital staffs, and approved by a top 

manager authorized to grant the incentive. DOE reported spending 

approximately $87,000 on 36 repayments in fiscal year 2004 and using the 

program almost equally for recruitment and retention. Student loan 

repayments were offered to employees in a variety of different 

occupations, such as engineering and financial analysis. According to a 

DOE official, program use is expected to increase in incremental amounts 

annually for recruiting entry-level engineers and scientists, but not for 

retention purposes. Because DOE views the SLR program as more 

expensive than other incentives, managers are asked to be selective about 

their SLR offers. DOE has developed recruitment and retention 

worksheets to help managers determine the cost of a loan repayment 
Page 14 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

compared to using other incentives, so they can evaluate the most strategic 

use of resources. 

DOT began using the program in fiscal year 2004 by making six loan 

repayments totaling approximately $53,000. Three of these were made on 

behalf of Presidential Management Fellows. The agency made the 

repayments for both recruitment and retention purposes. DOT officials 

speculated that the program will play a role in future hiring, as it appears to 

be a more valuable tool for entry-level employees who are more likely to 

have student loans. Agency officials also said that since DOT views the 

program as an expensive benefit and because the agency is now operating 

with a lower budget, they will use the program sparingly. Since repayment 

will be a targeted benefit, a human capital official noted that it probably 

will not be featured in the standard DOT recruitment materials or 

brochures. 

Commerce is planning to use the program to recruit and retain specific 

individuals in mission-critical occupations, such as statisticians. It recently 

reported offering its first student loan repayment to an applicant who 

turned it down because of the length of the service agreement. Commerce 

intends to use the SLR program for both retention and recruitment, 

depending on the needs of its units. For example, the National Institute of 

Standards and Technology, which needs technical staff, will most likely use 

it for recruitment, while the Office of General Counsel, with a high turnover 

rate for attorneys, will likely use it for retention.

SSA, EEOC, and SBA 

Reported They Have No 

Need to Implement the SLR 

Program at This Time

According to SSA officials, the agency has not needed the SLR program to 

recruit or retain staff. The agency meets its hiring needs through a national 

recruiting program and generally does not focus its recruitment efforts on 

individuals with highly technical or unique qualifications. Therefore, SSA is 

able to meet its hiring targets without extensive use of special incentives. 

When needed, officials said the agency has successfully used recruitment 

bonuses, retention allowances, relocation bonuses, and above-minimum 

salaries to recruit and retain highly qualified individuals for hard-to-fill 

positions. The officials believed that these other incentives provided 

recipients with greater flexibility to use their bonuses or allowances to 

meet their own needs, whether to repay student loans or for other reasons. 

The officials acknowledged, however, that if SSA cannot continue to 

successfully recruit or retain employees through its national recruiting 

program or the use of other flexibilities, they would reconsider their 

decision not to use the SLR program.
Page 15 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

According to agency officials, EEOC does not use the SLR program 

because of fiscal constraints and because the organization has qualities 

that attract and retain employees without the program. In addition, the 

agency has not used other recruitment and retention incentives recently. 

An EEOC human capital official noted that the agency has lost 350 

employees in the last 3 and a half years and will likely lose more employees 

in the near future. Rather than having to use monetary recruitment or 

retention incentives, agency officials remarked that individuals are drawn 

to work at EEOC primarily because of the mission it pursues. On the basis 

of anecdotal evidence, they also believe that employees stay with EEOC to 

a large degree because of the positive work-life balance the agency offers 

them.

According to SBA officials, the agency is doing very limited hiring and 

rarely needs to offer recruitment and retention incentives. SBA officials 

explained that the agency recruited 156 employees during fiscal year 2004 

and was able to successfully recruit the desired talent without using the 

incentive. The officials further stated they were not aware of candidates 

not accepting a position at SBA because the agency lacked a SLR program. 

As SBA becomes more targeted in its recruitment activities, agency 

officials remarked that they will consider using the SLR program along with 

other recruitment flexibilities.

Agencies Tailored SLR 

Program 

Administration to Meet 

Their Unique Needs

To address needs unique to their organizations, agencies customized 

aspects of their SLR programs. Table 1 illustrates some implementation 

differences among our selected agencies.
Page 16 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

Table 1: Summary of Selected Agencies’ SLR Program Features

Source: GAO presentation.

Agency Program features

U.S. Department of State • Centrally administered and centrally funded 

• Participation criteria post or position based

• Self-nominating participation

• Annual loan repayments generally $4,700 

• Multiple application periods annually 

U.S. Department of Justice • Centrally administered departmentwide attorney SLR 

program and separate unit-run programs

• Self-nominating attorney program participation; 

manager-recommended unit-run participation 

• Attorney program requires $10,000 minimum loan 

debt

• Attorney program gives the most support to lowest 

salaried participants—up to $6,000 annually

• Higher salaried attorneys receive only matching loan 

repayments

• Attorney program selections by administrative panel

U.S. Securities and Exchange 

Commission

• Centrally administered and centrally funded

• Self-nominating or manager-recommended 

participation 

• One-year qualifying length of service required for 

program participation 

• 75 percent of fiscal year 2004 repayments were 

$10,000 

• Additional year of service required for each renewal

U.S. General Services 

Administration

• Decentralized administration and unit-based funding 

• Manager-nominated participation on a case-by-case 

basis

• Fiscal year 2004 loan repayments were generally 

$6,000

U.S. Department of Energy • Decentralized administration and unit-based funding

• Manager-nominated participation on a case-by-case 

basis

• Repayment amounts vary widely—maximum of 

approximately $6,000 annually

• Service agreements between units do not necessarily 

transfer 

• Additional years of service not always required for 

renewals 

• Current students also eligible to participate

U.S. Department of 

Transportation

• Decentralized administration and unit-based funding 

• Manager-nominated participation on a case-by-case 

basis

• Fiscal year 2004 repayments averaged $9,000

• Recipients can transfer between units without 

breaking the service agreement
Page 17 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

Agencies Operated Their 

Programs Differently

Agencies centralized SLR program operations at the department level to 

coordinate departmentwide needs or decentralized operations to their 

individual units to offer them needed flexibility. The agencies operating 

their programs centrally used the SLR program primarily as a broad-based 

retention tool, while the agencies running decentralized programs used 

student loan repayments on a case-by-case basis. DOS, for example, has a 

centrally operated and funded SLR program that serves the specific 

recruitment and retention needs of all units within the department, such as 

those of the Bureau of Consular Affairs. In contrast, DOJ runs both 

centralized and decentralized programs. For example, the DOJ attorney 

SLR program is centrally administered, although as of fiscal year 2004, the 

recipient’s unit agency had to bear the costs of the repayments. Starting in 

fiscal year 2005, almost 30 percent of the program costs are being paid 

centrally with the balance coming from the individual DOJ units that 

participate. DOJ units offering repayments to employees in a wide variety 

of positions operate and fund these programs. GSA, DOE, and DOT have 

decentralized programs. Managers in individual units nominate specific 

candidates or employees for participation in the program, and the units 

provide the funding for the loan repayments. DOE, for example, allows its 

units to implement their own programs, primarily because they have 

diverse needs, including different geographic labor markets. The National 

Nuclear Security Administration, an agency within DOE, issues its own 

human capital program requirements and guidelines, consistent with 

overall departmental human capital policy, and administers its own SLR 

program at its various sites and locations across the country.

Agencies also varied the amount of the loan repayment, depending on the 

results they needed to achieve. For example, to make the benefit 

meaningful to its employees, SEC has repaid the maximum amount 

allowable of $10,000, unless the loan balance is less than that amount. DOJ, 

for its attorney SLR program, offers a maximum amount of $6,000 annually 

to attorneys with salaries below $74,000 to attract a broad base of 

individuals who otherwise may seek employment in the private sector. For 

attorneys with higher salaries, DOJ matches the recipient’s own annual 

repayment amount up to a maximum of $6,000. A DOS official said the 

department’s goal is to offer meaningful loan repayments to the largest 

number of individuals possible, so DOS has repaid the same amount for all 

eligible employees, which for the past 3 years has been $4,700. If a 

recipient’s outstanding loan balance is less, DOS repays the lower amount. 
Page 18 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

Agencies Shape Their 

Participation and Selection 

Criteria to Address Their 

Unique Needs

Agencies varied the length of time employees were required to wait before 

becoming eligible for the SLR program depending on results they were 

trying to achieve. For example, the DOJ attorney SLR program has no 

longevity requirements. Attorneys may apply during the first application 

period following their employment. Officials are concerned that they could 

miss opportunities to hire highly qualified law students with large student 

loan debts, who may be unable to accept DOJ’s entry-level positions 

because of economic concerns. Officials said the application process is 

self-nominating, and an attorney must have a qualifying student loan debt 

base of at least $10,000 to be eligible for the program. SEC officials said the 

agency has few problems attracting employees but historically has had 

challenges retaining them, often because SEC experience makes 

employees very marketable in the private sector. The agency has tailored 

its program participation criteria to address this need by requiring 

employees to complete at least 1 year of employment with SEC before they 

are eligible for the program. With the 3-year service agreement, SEC then 

has the potential to retain employees for at least 4 years, which also helps 

to ensure a greater return from recruitment and training costs. 

Agency Officials 

Suggested Ways to 

Make the SLR Program 

More Efficient and 

Effective, but Agencies 

Do Not Yet Have 

Processes to Assess 

the Long-term Impact 

of Their Programs 

Officials from agencies using the program agreed that certain changes, 

such as more automation of the application and loan repayment processes 

and consolidation of some other program activities, would help to improve 

the program’s administration. Several officials also suggested ways they 

believed would increase the program’s effectiveness by making it more 

attractive to candidates and employees, such as reducing the length of the 

service agreement. As for assessing the results of their programs, agencies 

did not yet have processes in place to gauge long-term effects on their 

recruitment and retention efforts. Officials from agencies with SLR 

programs did note several indicators they plan to use, and suggested that 

anecdotal evidence indicates employees value the SLR program. They 

stated that since the program is relatively new, they did not yet have 

enough data to track long-range statistical trends that would help them 

measure program results. Nevertheless, it will be important for these 

agencies to establish, up front, goals for their programs, a recruitment and 

retention baseline from which they can monitor changes that result from 

the program, and the data they will collect to measure these changes in 

order to assess long-term effects. 
Page 19 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

Most Agency Officials 

Agreed That the Program Is 

Cumbersome to Administer 

and Suggested Ways It 

Could Be More Efficient

While the agencies using the program believe it is a useful tool, officials 

characterized it as cumbersome to administer. Human capital offices 

generally administer the program and are performing some tasks and 

activities that are uncharacteristic of their function and unique to the 

program. Program administrators, for example, must interact with a large 

number of lending institutions, verify loans, and, at times, act as collection 

agencies. An official from DOS remarked that, aside from the Department 

of Education, which administers student loans, there are few federal 

workers who have knowledge of the student loan business. Therefore, 

agency staff must develop expertise and establish and modify procedures 

to operate the program. The official noted that for the 734 DOS employees 

who received the loan repayments in fiscal year 2004, the department made 

almost 800 individual transactions to 55 different lending institutions. The 

agencies were either not tracking administrative costs associated with 

operating the program or were just starting to track them. The agency 

officials said they were absorbing the time and costs associated with the 

program into their regular operations. 

Agency officials reported that processing loan repayments involves many 

steps that can include time-consuming complications. SEC officials, for 

example, said their entire administrative process, prior to actual payment 

distribution to the various lenders, can take more than 3 months. This 

process involves steps such as verifying that the employee has a loan 

eligible for repayment, verifying the amount of the outstanding loan 

balance, and eventually, ensuring that the loan repayment is applied to the 

correct outstanding loan. SEC officials also noted that its payroll provider 

cannot make electronic transfers of loan repayments, requiring them to 

issue paper checks that are burdensome and sometimes applied to the 

wrong account. Furthermore, the Department of Education, one of the 

largest student loan lenders through its Direct Loan Program, is unable to 

accept electronic transfers of funds from agencies for loan repayments. 

According to an Education official, they are looking at ways to collect 

direct loan repayments electronically. Other complications included 

processing repayments for employees who have loans with multiple 

lenders, distinguishing private loans that are not eligible for the program 

from federally guaranteed student loans, and having recipients supply 

incorrect addresses for their lenders. In addition, officials said that 

administrative problems with the various payroll providers, who process 

the loan payments, were a concern. A DOT official, for example, said they 

were using a payroll system that was being phased out through OPM’s 
Page 20 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

e-payroll initiative.11 The official remarked that it was costly for DOT to 

incorporate the loan repayments into this outdated payroll system, causing 

the agency to experience delays in implementing the program. An official at 

DOE said its payroll provider had been unable to provide biweekly loan 

repayment options until recently.

Officials from most of the agencies using the program suggested ways to 

help administer the program more efficiently, primarily through more 

automation and consolidation of activities. 

• SEC human capital officials said that automation of SLR program 

activities, such as the ability to make electronic fund transfers for all 

repayments, would make the process far easier. They also suggested 

implementing an electronic signature to help expedite the SLR 

application process and recommended that some of the responsibility 

for making the program operate more smoothly be shifted to SLR 

recipients. For example, SEC requires recipients to provide verification 

to the human capital office that their loan repayments were applied 

correctly. In addition, SEC officials estimated that about 1 month of 

their processing time could possibly be eliminated if each of the various 

lenders had one designated representative to work with federal agencies 

on resolving loan repayment problems. 

• A program manager at DOS suggested creating a central database of 

student loans and student loan lenders to assist with processing steps 

such as verifying the correct names and mailing addresses.

• A human capital official at DOE said OPM should require payroll service 

providers to use processes for student loan repayments similar to those 

used for other incentives, such as recruitment bonuses. 

• An official at DOT indicated that alternative approaches could be 

explored to increase the cost effectiveness of administrative functions 

for agencies that use the program extensively. For example, one 

approach may be to create shared services, similar to the approach used 

11The e-payroll initiative is one of OPM’s five e-government initiatives aimed at changing the 

way human capital functions and services are carried out in the federal government. OPM is 

leading the effort to collapse the operations of 22 executive branch agencies that currently 

run payroll systems into what will eventually only be two systems.
Page 21 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

to provide payroll services, wherein a small number of agencies service 

multiple agencies. 

• Finally, agency officials suggested that more sharing of best practices 

with other federal agencies experiencing similar challenges would help 

with implementing the SLR program. DOS and DOJ officials said they 

consulted with each other about whether to centralize or decentralize 

their programs and shared program document templates. This type of 

collaboration could help agencies beginning to implement the program 

avoid some of the growing pains experienced by the current user 

agencies. 

DOJ’s attorney SLR program, in particular, found a number of ways to 

increase its program’s efficiency. For example, DOJ maintains a Web page 

that is updated regularly to make the SLR process transparent to applicants 

and inform all eligible attorneys about the program. The department 

credited the Web page with reducing the need to respond to questions 

about the program. In addition, DOJ standardized the application process 

for the attorney SLR benefit by posting request, validation, and review 

forms on its Web site in form-fillable versions. The department also 

credited a process that requires applicants to submit a valid, signed service 

agreement at the time of application for expediting the repayment process. 

The presigned service agreement includes a release authorizing loan 

holders to discharge financial information to the department for loan 

validation at the same time it eliminates the need for the department to 

secure service agreements after selections are made.12 DOJ’s attorney SLR 

program also reported learning it could reduce administrative burdens by 

only validating loan information for the attorneys actually selected to 

receive SLR benefits.

While agency officials could suggest ways to improve the program’s 

administration, individual agencies may find it difficult to design some of 

the program improvements for themselves, and some of these changes 

could be more beneficial when implemented governmentwide. For 

example, it may be more effective to automate portions of the repayment 

process for all user agencies, rather than have each agency individually 

pursue this. Likewise, the President’s Management Agenda calls for the 

federal government to “support projects that offer performance gains that 

12The service agreement contains a clause stipulating that it is void if the attorney does not 

receive the benefit.
Page 22 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

transcend traditional agency boundaries.” Sharing services across 

agencies for specific SLR administrative activities may present an 

opportunity for program managers to purchase human capital services 

from specialized providers, such as they currently do for payroll services, 

thereby reducing costs through economies of scale and freeing their staff to 

focus on more strategic rather than administrative activities. In prior work, 

we identified similar opportunities for agencies to use alternative service 

delivery (ASD) for a range of human capital activities, and recommended 

that OPM work with the CHCO Council to promote the innovative use of 

ASD.13 OPM, in written comments, agreed with this role. 

Agency Officials Also 

Suggested Ways to Make the 

Program More Effective

Agency officials identified several program characteristics they believe 

impede the program. Likewise, OPM’s fiscal year 2004 report to Congress 

on the SLR program noted common impediments. Of the barriers agencies 

reported to both GAO and OPM, the most frequently cited included 

difficulty in funding the program, the tax liability associated with the 

repayments, and the length of the required service agreement. A DOE 

human capital official, for example, remarked that factors, such as 

detailing its employees to Iraq, have created more competing budget needs 

within units; in one case, a unit wanted to use the incentive but determined 

it could not commit to SLR payments because of the cost of overtime 

premiums for detailed employees. In addition, on the basis of comments 

they have received from program recipients and candidates who decided 

not to participate in the program, officials from several of the agencies we 

reviewed remarked that eliminating the tax liability and reducing or 

prorating the service agreement could make the program more attractive.

For example, officials from four agencies felt that eliminating the tax 

liability on loan repayments would make the program more attractive to 

candidates and recipients, and therefore, more effective. Currently, after 

withholding income and payroll taxes, the actual repayment amount 

applied to the employee’s loan is only about 62 percent of the total 

payment. According to officials, this diminishes the program’s value and 

makes it a less attractive incentive. Additionally, because the repayment is 

taxable, an official noted they can never completely pay off a recipient’s 

loan. A DOS official also remarked that many of the questions they answer 

about the program concern the tax liability issue. As mentioned previously, 

13GAO, Human Capital: Selected Agencies’ Use of Alternative Service Delivery Options for 

Human Capital Activities, GAO-04-679 (Washington, D.C.: June 25, 2004).
Page 23 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

legislation is pending in Congress that would exclude loan repayments 

from gross income for federal tax purposes. In testimony on a previous 

draft of this legislation, we stated that the legislation had merit, would help 

to further leverage existing SLR program dollars, and would help agencies 

in their efforts to attract and retain top talent.14 The loss of revenue from 

this change, however, would need to be balanced against other pressing 

federal budget needs. 

Agency officials had varying views about the service agreements. For 

example, DOE officials suggested that the service period should be 

comparable to other recruitment and retention incentives. OPM 

regulations state that recruitment bonuses, for instance, require a minimum 

service period of 6 months. The DOE officials suggested that when the SLR 

benefit is used for recruitment, a minimum of a 6-month commitment 

would also be appropriate. Along the same lines, an SEC official remarked 

that employees felt the repayment should be prorated if they left the agency 

before their 3-year commitment is fulfilled. On the other hand, a DOJ 

official not in favor of reducing the length of the service agreement thought 

the 3-year agreement retained employees for an appropriate time and that 

enough flexibility in waiving the agreement was present to avoid situations 

that might be unfair to some recipients.

Agency Officials Say They 

Plan to Assess the 

Program’s Impact but Need 

More Data to Determine 

Long-term Effects

Agencies using the program had not yet established processes to measure 

the extent to which the SLR program was helping them to meet their 

recruitment and retention needs. Agencies need such measurements to 

help them determine if the program is worth the investment compared to 

other available human capital incentives, such as recruitment and retention 

bonuses. Agencies are tracking the extent to which employees comply 

with, or do not complete, the terms of their service agreements. Several 

officials remarked that almost all employees are completing their terms of 

service, indicating the program is helping retention, at least in the short 

term. 

Agency officials did report that based on anecdotal evidence, they believe 

the program helps to make their agency more attractive to potential job 

candidates and helps them retain high quality employees. A GSA official 

said that, although it has not surveyed employees formally, informal 

14GAO, Human Capital: Building on the Current Momentum to Address High-Risk Issues, 

GAO-03-637T (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 8, 2003). 
Page 24 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

feedback from them about the program is positive, and GSA managers 

using the program report being able to fill their positions with candidates 

who have the qualifications desired. An SEC official noted that the 

program appears to be attractive to prospective hires because the agency 

receives numerous inquiries about how the program works. DOS 

recruiters also report that one of the questions frequently asked by those 

considering federal service is the level of the department’s assistance in 

paying off student loans. 

When asked about ways to measure the program’s long-term effects, 

officials from several agencies suggested tracking the attrition rates of 

program recipients as one measure. However, the officials noted that to do 

so, they would need to monitor attrition rates for at least 3 years, since 

recipients sign a 3-year service agreement and relatively few leave during 

this time. Monitoring the number of employees who resign after the agency 

repaid their loans could indicate whether recipients were working for the 

agency just long enough to have their student loans repaid. Fiscal year 

2006 will be the first year a substantial cohort of federal employees would 

have completed the minimum 3-year service requirement.15 In addition, a 

DOJ official believed that reviewing the attrition rates and career paths of 

its Honors Attorneys participating in the program would be helpful, since 

these are generally highly sought-after individuals. Thus, if DOJ’s attrition 

rates decline, this could indicate that the SLR program is having a positive 

impact. DOJ is also adding questions to its honors program application 

about awareness of the attorney SLR program and whether it influenced 

the applicant’s decision to apply. 

Recognizing that agencies in some cases will need multiyear data to 

measure the SLR program’s long-term effects, it is nevertheless important 

that agencies using the program decide on and put in place program goals 

and methods to track indicators of success when they implement the 

program. This will help them to establish an initial data baseline they can 

use to track changes as a result of the program, determine what data they 

should collect over time, and begin to collect that data. In addition, 

agencies would not have to wait to implement other options for monitoring 

program effects. For example, several agency officials noted that they will 

use employee survey data or responses from exit interviews to gauge how 

15An individual employee’s cycle will vary depending on the number of years the employee 

receives student loan repayments and the service agreement attached to additional 

repayments.
Page 25 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

much impact the SLR incentive had on employees’ decisions to join or stay 

with the agency. Agencies could conduct such surveys and collect these 

data now or when initiating their programs, and periodically over time, as 

an indicator of program results. 

We recognize that gauging the program’s direct effect on recruitment and 

retention trends may be difficult because student loan repayments are not 

likely to be the only major factor in an employee’s decision to join or stay 

with an agency, although the incentive may help to tip the scale in the 

agency’s favor. Other factors, such as labor market conditions, could also 

affect these decisions. In prior work, we have described similar difficulties 

federal managers face in developing useful, outcome-oriented measures of 

performance and proposed that agencies collaborate more to develop 

strategies to identify performance indicators and measure contributions to 

specific outcomes.16 We also recognize that OPM and the CHCO Council 

could help to facilitate this coordination.

OPM and the CHCO Council 

Have an Important Role in 

Assisting Agencies with the 

SLR Program

As the President’s agent and adviser for human capital activities, OPM’s 

overall goal is to aid federal agencies in adopting human resources 

management systems that improve their ability to build successful, highperforming organizations. Likewise, legislation creating the CHCO Council 

highlighted the importance of agencies sharing information and 

coordinating their human capital activities, and we have reported that the 

CHCO Council could help facilitate such coordination. OPM has taken a 

number of steps to provide agencies with information and guidance on the 

SLR program. For example, OPM posts informational materials on its Web 

site including a fact sheet, applicable laws and regulations, questions and 

answers, sample agency plans, and OPM’s annual reports to Congress 

about the SLR program. In its fiscal year 2004 report to Congress, OPM 

reported more extensively on agencies’ experiences with implementing the 

program than it had in previous years. For instance, the report included 

information on the barriers agencies faced in implementing the program 

and whether agencies were using specific metrics for measuring program 

effectiveness. In September 2004, OPM held a focus group to explore 

whether the agency is a good source of program information and what 

types of problems agencies are typically encountering with the program. 

According to OPM, the focus group included representatives from several 

16See for example, GAO, Results-Oriented Government: GPRA Has Established a Solid 

Foundation for Achieving Greater Results, GAO-04-38 (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 10, 2004).
Page 26 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

agencies using the SLR program. These representatives shared successes 

with the SLR program, obstacles they faced in using it, and suggestions for 

program improvements.

Agency officials’ comments about OPM’s assistance were mixed. DOS 

officials said they consulted with OPM in the early stages of their 

implementation process, but DOJ officials reported they had not requested 

assistance from OPM. SEC officials noted that while their contact with 

OPM had been limited, they would have liked more concrete answers to 

their detailed questions involving program implementation. DOT officials 

see themselves as having primarily a reporting relationship with OPM. A 

DOE official commented that OPM has been a strong advocate of the SLR 

program, providing the guidance the agency needed to implement it. 

Nevertheless, a number of these officials suggested that more coordination 

across the agencies using the program would be helpful, and OPM may be 

in the best position to do this.

As we previously highlighted, agency officials pointed to the need to 

partner with other agencies to find more efficient ways to implement their 

SLR programs. They said some improvements would involve sharing 

information more readily, such as ways to tailor the program to fit their 

particular needs, as well as easing administrative burdens associated with 

the program. Given the range and cumbersome nature of the activities 

involved in operating the program, officials said they could use help in 

identifying improvements to the program. For example, OPM, working 

with the CHCO Council, could sponsor additional forums, an interagency 

working group, or even training sessions, to encourage information 

sharing. One topic for these forums and this collaboration could also be 

developing measures of program effectiveness. OPM itself, in its most 

recent report to Congress on the SLR program, stated that an agency 

challenge has been to determine appropriate measures. By helping 

agencies address this challenge, OPM could help to determine if there is a 

common subset of measures or indicators that agencies could track and 

report to OPM to assess the SLR program’s impact governmentwide.

Conclusions Federal agencies have a large degree of discretion in structuring SLR 

programs to meet their unique needs, and the SLR program shows promise 

as an effective tool for attracting and retaining the talent needed to sustain 

the federal workforce. The federal government faces potential workforce 

problems now and in the years ahead, including the fact that its employees 

are retiring in greater numbers. Therefore, recruiting and retaining a new 
Page 27 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

wave of talented individuals, who view the federal government as an 

employer of choice, is imperative. To address how best to meet this human 

capital challenge, agencies will need to be able to identify and select the 

recruitment and retention incentives that are most appropriate and 

effective for achieving this goal. In addition, to make the most effective use 

of monetary incentives such as the SLR program, streamlined and efficient 

administrative processes for implementing such programs need to be in 

place, and decision makers need concrete evidence that such programs are 

achieving agency and overall federal workforce goals.

OPM, working with the CHCO Council, may be in the best position to help 

agencies work together to identify potential SLR program changes and then 

determine the most cost-effective ways to implement them. If the program 

continues to grow, making it easier to administer will help ensure agencies 

make maximum use of available funds to recruit and retain key talent, so 

critical in a time of fiscal constraints. Likewise, OPM and the CHCO 

Council could build on efforts to date and continue to facilitate 

coordination across agencies, in particular helping them to determine what 

data to collect and assess as indicators of the program’s results. In 

addition, OPM may be able to better report to Congress on the impact of 

the SLR program governmentwide if it works with the agencies to 

determine if there is a subset of common indicators all agencies could 

annually track and report to OPM. 

Recommendations for 

Executive Action

Consistent with OPM’s ongoing efforts in this regard, we recommend that 

the Director of OPM, in conjunction with the CHCO Council, take the 

following actions to help improve the SLR program’s efficiency and ease of 

administration, and to assess results:

• Working with the agencies, determine where program streamlining and 

consolidation of agencies’ administrative tasks are most feasible and 

appropriate, and design ways to implement these program 

improvements, especially those that could be implemented 

governmentwide and the most cost-effective ways to implement them. 

Examples of program improvements that could provide valuable help to 

agencies and ease the administrative burden include creating a central 

database of student loan lender information and establishing a shared 

service center arrangement for student loan repayments.

• Continue and expand on its efforts to provide agencies assistance and to 

help facilitate coordination and sharing of leading practices by, for 
Page 28 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

example, conducting additional forums, sponsoring training sessions, or 

using other methods.

• Help agencies determine ways in which they can monitor long-term 

program effects on their recruitment and retention needs, such as 

determining data to collect and use as indicators of effects. This, in 

turn, could provide a consistent set of governmentwide indicators that 

would allow OPM to assess, and report to Congress on, the program’s 

overall results achieved.

In addition, with respect to the selected agencies using the SLR program 

most extensively, we recommend the following actions:

• The Secretary of State: Build on current efforts to measure the impact 

of DOS’s SLR program by determining now what indicators DOS will use 

to track program success, what baseline DOS will use to measure 

resulting program changes over time, what data DOS needs to begin to 

collect, and whether DOS could use periodic surveys to track employee 

attitudes about the program as additional indicators of success. 

• The United States Attorney General: Build on current efforts to measure 

the impact of DOJ’s Attorney Student Loan Repayment Program by 

determining now what indicators the department will use to track 

program success, what baseline DOJ will use to measure resulting 

program changes over time, what data DOJ needs to begin to collect, 

and whether DOJ could use periodic surveys to track employee 

attitudes about the program as additional indicators of success.

• The Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission: Build on 

current efforts to measure the impact of SEC’s SLR program by 

determining now what indicators SEC will use to track program 

success, what baseline SEC will use to measure resulting program 

changes over time, what data SEC needs to begin to collect, and 

whether SEC could use periodic surveys to track employee attitudes 

about the program as additional indicators of success. 

Agency Comments and 

Our Evaluation

We provided a draft of this report to the Director of OPM, the Secretary of 

State, the Attorney General, the Chairman of SEC, the Administrator of 

GSA, the Secretary of Energy, the Secretary of Transportation, the 

Secretary of Commerce, the Commissioner of SSA, the Chair of EEOC, and 

the Administrator of SBA. OPM, DOS, DOJ, and DOE provided written 
Page 29 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

comments on the draft report, which are included in appendixes III, IV, V, 

and VI respectively. SBA provided a comment on the report via e-mail and 

the Director of the Office of Human Resources Management stated, on 

behalf of the Secretary of Commerce, that it concurred with the report. 

SEC, DOT, SSA, and EEOC provided technical comments, and where 

appropriate, we have made changes to the report to reflect all of the 

agencies’ technical comments. GSA reported that it had no comments on 

this report.

The following summarizes significant comments provided by the agencies.

• OPM generally agreed with the recommendations and stated that it will 

continue its efforts to promote effective human capital strategies and, as 

part of these efforts, will work with the CHCO Council to improve the 

administration of the SLR program and facilitate the sharing of best 

practices to improve program efficiency. OPM also stated that it would 

assist the agencies in establishing data requirements for tracking the use 

of student loan repayments and noted the agency anticipates a greatly 

improved ability to track and measure the success of the SLR program.

• DOS fully supported the recommendations and stated that it looks 

forward to working constructively with OPM to identify possible areas 

of program consolidation and to share best practices. The department 

reported that it is committed to establishing additional program 

indicators this year and is aware of the need to measure and track the 

impact the SLR program has had on both civil and foreign service 

recruitment and retention efforts.

• DOJ did not express an opinion about the report or the 

recommendations but stated that the department has already started to 

develop ways to measure the impact of the attorney SLR program on 

attorney retention. DOJ also emphasized that it will most likely take a 

number of years of data collection before it accumulates sufficient data 

to provide meaningful statistics.

• DOE stated that the report did not fully describe the efforts of OPM in 

assessing program implementation as part of its annual reporting 

process to Congress. We added language in the report to more 

comprehensively characterize what OPM included in its most recent 

report. DOE also suggested that GAO recommend that OPM assist 

agencies in measuring the effectiveness of specific student loan 

repayment, recruitment, and retention incentives by including questions 
Page 30 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

in the Federal Human Capital Survey. While this may be a feasible and 

effective approach to collecting data on program results, we did not 

prescribe the methods OPM should develop or use to measure the 

effectiveness of the program, but instead recommended that OPM work 

jointly with the agencies and the CHCO Council to devise these means. 

• SBA said that the agency will periodically monitor the use of the 

program in other agencies through the CHCO Council so that should the 

need arise, SBA will be in a position to implement the best aspects of 

other agencies’ programs. 

We are sending copies of this report to other interested congressional 

parties, the Director of OPM, the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, 

the Chairman of the SEC, and the heads of the other federal agencies 

discussed in this report. In addition, we will make copies available to other 

interested parties upon request. This report also will be made available at 

no charge on GAO’s Web site at http://www.gao.gov. If you or your staff 

have any questions about this report, please contact me at (202) 512-6806 

or larencee@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of Congressional 

Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of the report. 

Other contributors are acknowledged in appendix VII.

Eileen Regen Larence

Director, Strategic Issues
Page 31 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

Appendix I

Objectives, Scope, and Methodology ApApenednxidexiIs

The objectives of our review were to identify

• why selected executive branch agencies are using or not using the 

student loan repayment (SLR) program,

• how agencies are implementing the SLR program, and

• what results and suggestions agency officials could provide about the 

program and how they view the Office of Personnel Management’s 

(OPM) role in facilitating the program’s use. 

To address these objectives, we first reviewed and analyzed OPM’s annual 

reports to Congress on the SLR program1

 to obtain governmentwide data 

on agencies’ use of the program and to help identify our case study 

agencies. We also consulted with an official at the Congressional Research 

Service (CRS) to discuss its research on the SLR program, and we reviewed 

CRS’s reports to Congress on student loan repayment for federal 

employees. We interviewed officials from the Partnership for Public 

Service, an organization with an objective of helping to recruit and retain 

excellence in the federal workforce, to hear its views on the program’s 

effectiveness governmentwide, and officials from GAO’s human capital 

office to get background information on program implementation.

We then identified a set of federal agencies varying in size and mission that 

had established SLR programs, were in the process of establishing 

programs, or had chosen not to use them. We selected the Department of 

State (DOS), the Department of Justice (DOJ), and the Securities and 

Exchange Commission (SEC) as case study agencies because they were 

among the largest users of the SLR program in fiscal years 2003 and 2004, 

while the General Services Administration (GSA) and the Department of 

Energy (DOE) are users of the program but give fewer loan repayments on 

a case-by-case basis. 

We selected the Department of Transportation (DOT) and the Department 

of Commerce (Commerce) because they are large departments that were in 

1

U.S. Office of Personnel Management, Federal Student Loan Repayment Program

(Washington, D.C.: 2001), Federal Student Loan Repayment Program (Washington, D.C.: 

2002), Federal Student Loan Repayment Program (Washington, D.C.: 2003), and Federal 

Student Loan Repayment Program (Washington, D.C.: 2004). 
Appendix I

Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

Page 32 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

the process of implementing SLR programs. Since we started our review, 

DOT has begun to make loan repayments. The Social Security 

Administration (SSA), the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

(EEOC), and the Small Business Administration (SBA) are among the 

larger agencies that have chosen not to use the program. The agency 

selection process was not designed to be representative of the use of the 

SLR program in the federal government as a whole, but rather to provide 

illustrative examples of why and how agencies decided to use the program 

or chose not to use it. 

We interviewed agency officials, such as human capital officers, SLR 

program managers, and recruitment directors, from the selected agencies, 

and obtained available documentation, such as strategic workforce plans, 

recruitment and retention worksheets, SLR implementation plans, and 

other documents associated with administering the program. In addition, 

we met with officials from OPM to gain a governmentwide perspective of 

agencies’ SLR programs and with officials from the Department of 

Education to discuss the department’s Direct Loan Program and its 

interaction with agencies making student loan repayments. After 

reviewing and analyzing agency responses, we used the supporting 

documents that some of the agencies provided to further develop our 

analysis of their use of the program. We did not observe or evaluate the 

operation of the agencies’ SLR programs. To assess the reliability of the 

number of employees receiving student loan repayments and SLR 

repayment cost data, we compared the OPM-reported data with data we 

received from the selected agencies. We determined the data were 

sufficiently reliable for the purposes of the report. Our review was 

conducted in accordance with generally accepted government auditing 

standards from July 2004 through June 2005.
Page 33 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

Appendix II

Background Information on the Case Study 

Agencies ApendxiI

This appendix provides background information on our 10 case study 

agencies. These agencies varied in their mission and size. The agencies 

also face unique recruitment and retention challenges and have different 

strategies for addressing them.1

U.S. Department of 

State (DOS)

DOS is a cabinet-level federal agency responsible for U.S. foreign affairs 

and diplomatic initiatives with a mission of creating a more secure, 

democratic, and prosperous world for the benefit of the American people 

and the international community. Headquartered in Washington, D.C., DOS 

has 250 embassies and consulates worldwide with approximately 40,000 

employees comprised of foreign service employees, civil service 

employees, and foreign service national employees. DOS’s recruitment 

goals include outreach to a broader segment of the U.S. population by 

increasing its presence at business and other professional schools. DOS 

also recruits top quality candidates with management skills and language 

skills in Arabic, Chinese, and other difficult languages. 

U.S. Department of 

Justice (DOJ)

DOJ is a cabinet-level agency whose mission is to lead foreign and 

domestic counterterrorism efforts, enforce federal laws, provide legal 

advice to the President and to all other federal agencies, investigate federal 

crimes and prosecute violators, operate the federal prison system, and 

ensure the civil rights of all Americans. DOJ is headquartered in 

Washington, D.C., and has 61 unit agencies nationwide. The department 

has approximately 100,000 employees working in occupations such as 

security and protection, legal, compliance and enforcement, and 

information technology. Currently, DOJ’s hiring challenges relate to 

combating terrorism. The department places priority on hiring candidates 

with foreign language and intelligence analysis expertise and Federal 

Bureau of Investigation counterterrorism agents. DOJ is moving to develop 

and implement a departmentwide recruitment strategy that focuses on 

leveraging resources for common occupations, sharing “best practices” 

cases on the Internet, establishing relationships with targeted universities, 

and participating in job and career fairs.

1

We gathered information on the agencies from our interviews with agency officials, agency 

Web sites, and from a 2005 report, Where the Jobs Are: The Continuing Growth of Federal 

Job Opportunities, by the Partnership for Public Service and the National Academy of 

Public Administration. 
Appendix II

Background Information on the Case Study 

Agencies

Page 34 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

U.S. Securities and 

Exchange Commission 

(SEC)

SEC’s mission is to protect investors; maintain fair, orderly, and efficient 

markets; and facilitate capital formation. The agency is headquartered in 

Washington, D.C., and has 11 regional and district offices. SEC has 

approximately 3,800 employees in occupations such as securities 

attorneys, accountants, and examiners. The agency has developed a 

formal, centralized recruiting program to coordinate its recruiting efforts 

for these occupations. The agency also recently created the SEC Business 

Associates Program to introduce business professionals to regulation of 

the securities markets and the work of the commission. Individuals with 

master’s degrees in business or other related fields can apply directly to the 

program. The program offers 2-year internships designed to provide onthe-job training for talented individuals, with eligibility for conversion to a 

permanent position.

U.S. General Services 

Administration (GSA)

GSA’s mission is to help federal agencies better serve the public by offering, 

at best value, superior workplaces, expert solutions, acquisition services, 

and management policies. Headquartered in Washington, D.C., GSA has 

regional offices in 11 cities nationwide. The agency has over 12,000 

employees working in information technology, accounting and budgeting, 

administrative and program management, and business and industry. 

Currently, GSA’s workforce is relatively stable, with an average separation 

rate of 5 to 6 percent. The agency hires an average of 900 employees 

annually. GSA seeks candidates who have strong customer service, 

acquisition, information technology, realty, financial management, and 

project management skills.

U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE)

DOE is a cabinet-level agency whose mission is to advance the national, 

economic, and energy security of the United States; promote scientific and 

technological innovation in support of that mission; and ensure the 

environmental cleanup of the national nuclear weapons complex. 

Headquartered in Washington, D.C., DOE has regional power 

administrations, laboratories, and technology centers nationwide. The 

department has approximately 15,000 employees who work in engineering, 

physical sciences, compliance and enforcement, and quality assurance. 

DOE’s recruiting efforts focus on information technology, foreign affairs, 

and intelligence, as well as areas such as physical sciences and project 

management. The department’s outreach efforts include participation in 

job and career fairs, partnerships with minority organizations, and 
Appendix II

Background Information on the Case Study 

Agencies

Page 35 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

distribution of position vacancy announcements to a variety of minority 

and advocacy organizations.

U.S. Department of 

Transportation (DOT)

DOT is a cabinet-level agency whose mission is to serve the United States 

by ensuring a fast, safe, efficient, accessible, and convenient transportation 

system that meets national interests and enhances the quality of life of the 

American people, today and into the future. The department is 

headquartered in Washington, D.C., and has offices nationwide. DOT has 

approximately 56,000 employees who work in various professional fields 

such as community planning and engineering. The department is focused 

on sustaining its current workforce numbers. DOT’s top priority will be to 

recruit air traffic controllers because roughly half of the number of current 

air traffic controllers could retire by 2012. In 2003, DOT created a 

Corporate Recruitment Workgroup that coordinates participation at 

various recruitment conferences and career fairs. The department has also 

addressed some of its entry-level hiring needs by developing a Career 

Residency Program, a 2-year program with a goal of broadening the search 

for talented transportation specialists, engineers, and information 

technology professionals.

U.S. Department of 

Commerce 

(Commerce)

Commerce is a cabinet-level agency whose mission is to promote economic 

growth and security through export growth, sustainable economic 

development, and economic information and analysis. Headquartered in 

Washington, D.C., Commerce’s unit agencies, such as the National Oceanic 

and Atmospheric Administration, the Bureau of the Census, and the 

International Trade Administration, have offices nationwide. The 

department has more than 36,900 employees in a variety of professional 

fields. Commerce estimates it could lose one-fifth of its current workforce 

to retirement by 2007, and the department plans to focus its recruitment 

efforts on a variety of positions such as mathematical statisticians, 

chemists, patent examiners, and trade specialists. Commerce is developing 

comprehensive college outreach relations and partnerships to recruit 

entry-level workers and coordinate and partner with trade associations, 

professional societies, and alumni organizations to attract experienced 

applicants.
Appendix II

Background Information on the Case Study 

Agencies

Page 36 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

U.S. Social Security 

Administration (SSA)

SSA’s mission is to advance the economic security of the nation’s people 

through compassionate and vigilant leadership in shaping and managing 

America’s social security programs. Headquartered in Baltimore, 

Maryland, SSA has regional and field offices nationwide. The agency has 

approximately 65,000 employees in a variety of professional fields 

including the social sciences and information technology. Over the past 

several years, SSA has aggressively recruited between 3,000 to 4,000 

employees, most at the entry level. SSA focuses recruiting efforts on 

positions providing direct service to the public, such as claims 

representatives as well as information technology professionals. SSA has 

created a National Recruitment Coordinator position to develop an 

agencywide recruitment strategy and marketing campaign that highlights 

the work and impact of the agency. The agency’s recruitment and 

marketing plan coordinates nationwide and on-campus recruitment. SSA 

has also recently launched a new campaign to attract veterans to the 

agency.

U.S. Equal 

Employment 

Opportunity 

Commission (EEOC)

EEOC’s mission is to ensure equality of opportunity by vigorously 

enforcing federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination through 

investigation, conciliation, litigation, coordination, adjudication, education, 

and technical assistance. The agency is headquartered in Washington, D.C., 

and has 51 field offices nationwide. EEOC has approximately 2,500 

employees working in various positions such as attorneys, mediators, and 

investigators. On the basis of historical trends, EEOC will separate, due to 

expected retirements, at least 100 employees annually for the next few 

years. Depending on the amount of separation savings, EEOC may have 

the opportunity to backfill selected positions based on workload and other 

factors. In addition, EEOC recently announced plans to reorganize the 

agency by reducing levels of management, opening two new field offices, 

and strengthening the existing field offices. 

U.S. Small Business 

Administration (SBA)

SBA’s mission is to maintain and strengthen the nation’s economy by aiding, 

counseling, assisting, and protecting the interests of small businesses, and 

by helping families and businesses recover from national disasters. 

Headquartered in Washington, D.C., SBA has regional offices nationwide. 

The agency has approximately 3,000 employees working in business 

analysis, contracting, and financial analysis. Currently, SBA recruitment is 

limited to replacing those who leave the agency. The Office of Human 

Resources centrally manages recruitment from headquarters and uses its 
Appendix II

Background Information on the Case Study 

Agencies

Page 37 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

recruitment Web site to communicate with prospective candidates. SBA 

recruitment and outreach efforts also involve using on-line newspapers to 

advertise work opportunities. 
Page 38 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

Appendix III

Comments from the Office of Personnel 

Management ApendxiI
Appendix III

Comments from the Office of Personnel 

Management

Page 39 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

Note: Page numbers in 

the draft report may differ 

from those in this report.
Page 40 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

Appendix IV

Comments from the Department of State ApendxiIV
Appendix IV

Comments from the Department of State

Page 41 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program
Page 42 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

Appendix V

Comments from the Department of Justice ApendxiV
Appendix V

Comments from the Department of Justice

Page 43 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program
Page 44 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

Appendix VI

Comments from the Department of Energy ApendxiVI

Note: Page numbers in 

the draft report may differ 

from those in this report.
Appendix VI

Comments from the Department of Energy

Page 45 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program
Page 46 GAO-05-762 Student Loan Repayment Program

Appendix VII

GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments ApendxiVI

GAO Contact Eileen Larence, (202) 512-6806 or larencee@gao.gov

Acknowledgments Trina Lewis, Judith Kordahl, Kyle Adams, Jerome Brown, Sarah Jaggar, 

Ashutosh Joshi, Jessica Kemp, Matthew Myatt, and Tara Stephens also 

made key contributions to this report.

(450338)
GAO’s Mission The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; 

and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help 

Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s 

commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability.

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost 

is through GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts 

newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To 

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go to 

www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to Updates.”

Order by Mail or Phone The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. 

A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of 

Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 

more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders 

should be sent to:

U.S. Government Accountability Office

441 G Street NW, Room LM

Washington, D.C. 20548

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Contact:

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Congressional 

Relations

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 

Washington, D.C. 20548

Public Affairs Paul Anderson, Managing Director, AndersonP1@gao.gov (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548