FEDERAL HIRING

OPM Needs to 

Improve Management 

and Oversight of 

Hiring Authorities

Report to Congressional Committees 

August 2016

GAO-16-521

United States Government Accountability Office
United States Government Accountability Office

Highlights of GAO-16-521, a report to 

congressional committees

August 2016

FEDERAL HIRING 

OPM Needs to Improve Management and Oversight of 

Hiring Authorities

Why GAO Did This Study

Federal agencies face human capital 

challenges as a large percentage of 

employees become eligible to retire 

and agencies compete with the private 

sector for critical skills. To acquire 

needed talent, agencies need a hiring 

process that is applicant friendly, 

flexible, and meets policy 

requirements, such as hiring on the 

basis of merit. 

GAO was asked to review the extent to 

which federal hiring authorities were 

meeting agency needs. This report 

examines (1) the hiring authorities 

agencies used in fiscal year 2014 (the 

most recent data at the time of the 

review), (2) the extent to which case 

study agencies and OPM assessed the 

effectiveness of hiring authorities, and 

(3) how OPM ensured that agencies 

understood how to use hiring 

authorities effectively.

To meet these objectives, GAO 

analyzed OPM data and documents, 

and interviewed OPM and officials from 

three agencies selected on the basis of 

recent high hiring levels in critical skill 

occupations. 

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that the Director of 

OPM, working with agencies, 

strengthen hiring efforts by (1) 

analyzing the extent to which federal 

hiring authorities are meeting agencies’

needs; (2) using this information to 

explore opportunities to refine, 

eliminate, or expand authorities as 

needed, and (3) sustain the Hiring 

Excellence Campaign’s efforts to 

improve agency hiring and leverage

prior initiatives, as appropriate. OPM 

generally concurred with these 

recommendations.

What GAO Found

A hiring authority is the law, executive order, or regulation that allows an agency 

to hire a person into the federal civil service. Of the 105 hiring authorities used in 

fiscal year 2014, agencies relied on 20 for 91 percent of the 196,226 new 

appointments made that year. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) officials 

said they do not know if agencies rely on a small number of authorities because 

agencies are unfamiliar with other authorities, or if they have found other 

authorities to be less effective. The competitive examining hiring authority, 

generally seen as the traditional method for federal hiring, was the single most 

used authority in fiscal year 2014, but accounted for less than 25 percent of all

new appointments.

Agencies Relied on 20 Hiring Authorities for Nearly All New Hires in Fiscal Year 

2014 

While OPM—the agency responsible for overseeing the delegated hiring 

authority and managing federal civilian personnel data—tracks data on agency 

time-to-hire, manager and applicant survey results, and compliance audits to 

assess the hiring process, this information is not used by OPM or agencies to 

analyze the effectiveness of hiring authorities. As a result, OPM and agencies do 

not know if authorities are meeting their intended purposes. By analyzing hiring 

authorities, OPM and agencies could identify improvements that could be used to 

refine authorities, expand access to specific authorities found to be highly 

efficient and effective, and eliminate those found to be less effective. 

OPM’s Hiring Excellence Campaign consists of a number of multi-agency, inperson events and is OPM’s latest initiative designed to address long-standing 

challenges with federal hiring. OPM officials described the objectives, strategies, 

and measures by which the campaign will be measured and sustained. Going 

forward it will be important for OPM to sustain the campaign’s efforts and

incorporate lessons learned, if any, from similar prior or existing efforts to 

improve federal hiring. 

View GAO-16-521. For more information, 

contact Robert Goldenkoff at (202) 512-2757 

or goldenkoffr@gao.gov.
Page i GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

Letter 1

Background 5

Agencies Relied on 20 Authorities for Over 90 Percent of New 

Hires in Fiscal Year 2014 8

Three Selected Agencies and OPM Need to Better Assess the 

Effectiveness of Hiring Authorities to Strengthen Hiring Efforts 15

OPM Manages Numerous Hiring Reform Initiatives and Tools 20

Conclusions 23

Recommendations for Executive Action 24

Agency Comments 24

Appendix I Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 26

Appendix II Selected Agencies’ Strategies for Improving the Effectiveness of their 

Hiring Efforts 31

Appendix III United States Office of Personnel Management 33

Appendix IV GAO Contact and Acknowledgments 37

Tables

Table 1: Description of the 20 Hiring Authorities, Within and 

Outside of Title 5, Most Used in Fiscal Year 2014 10

Table 2: Examples of OPM Tools to Help Agencies Implement 

Hiring Authorities 22

Figures

Figure 1: Agencies Relied on 20 Hiring Authorities Within and 

Outside of Title 5 for Nearly All New Hires Made in Fiscal 

Year 2014 9

Figure 2: More Than a Third of Hiring Authorities Used in Fiscal 

Year 2014 Were Available to a Limited Number of 

Agencies 14

Contents
Page ii GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

Abbreviations 

AFMC Air Force Materiel Command 

CAP Goal Cross Agency Priority Goal

CFO chief financial officer

CHCO chief human capital officer

DEU delegated examining unit

DOD Department of Defense 

DOE Department of Energy 

EHRI Enterprise Human Resources Integration 

FAA Federal Aviation Administration 

HR human resources 

HRME human resources management evaluations

NIH National Institutes of Health 

OMB Office of Management and Budget 

OPM Office of Personnel Management 

REDI Recruitment, Engagement, Diversity, and 

Inclusion Strategy 

STEM Science, Technology, and Mathematical 

Title 5 Title 5 of the United States Code

TSA Transportation Security Administration 

VA Veterans Affairs 

VEOA Veterans Employment Opportunities Act

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

United States. The published product 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.
Page 1 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

441 G St. N.W.

Washington, DC 20548

August 2, 2016

The Honorable Elijah E. Cummings

Ranking Member

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

House of Representatives

The Honorable James Lankford

Chairman

Subcommittee on Regulatory Affairs and Federal Management

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

United States Senate

The Honorable Heidi Heitkamp

Ranking Member

Subcommittee on Regulatory Affairs and Federal Management

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

United States Senate

The Honorable Stephen Lynch

House of Representatives

Federal agencies face a number of long-standing human capital 

management challenges. For example, a large percentage of employees 

will become eligible to retire in the near future which could produce gaps 

in an agency’s institutional knowledge and leadership if not effectively 

managed.1 Addressing those gaps could be difficult as agencies also face 

stiff competition for critical skills from the private sector. To ensure 

agencies have the talent they need to meet their vital missions, federal 

agencies must have a hiring process that is simultaneously applicant 

friendly, sufficiently flexible to enable agencies to meet their needs, and 

consistent with statutory requirements, such as hiring on the basis of 

merit.

 1

Of the federal employees onboard at the end of September 2014, 31 percent will be 

eligible to retire by the end of fiscal year 2019. See GAO, Human Capital: Update on 

Strategic Management Challenges for the 21st Century, GAO-15-619T (Washington, D.C. 

May 20, 2015).

Letter
Page 2 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

An important component of the hiring process is the hiring authority used 

to bring applicants onboard. A hiring authority is the law, executive order, 

or regulation that allows an agency to hire a person into the federal civil 

service. Amongst other roles, hiring authorities determine the rules (or a 

subset of rules within a broader set) that agencies must follow throughout 

the hiring process. These rules may include whether a vacancy must be 

announced, who is eligible to apply, how the applicant will be assessed, 

whether veterans’ preference applies, and how long the employee may 

stay in federal service.

In our 2002 report on human capital flexibilities, we noted that for many 

years prior, federal managers had complained that federal hiring 

procedures—particularly those associated with the most commonly used 

hiring authority, “competitive examining”—were rigid and complex. These 

managers often expressed the need for more flexibility within a system 

that has traditionally been based on a “one-size-fits-all approach” with 

uniform rules across government set forth in Title 5 of the United States 

Code (Title 5).2 More agencies have sought approval to use additional 

hiring authorities from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and 

from the Congress that allow for greater flexibility from the competitive 

examination process under Title 5.

Our 2002 report also found that it is important for agencies to assess 

which human capital flexibilities—including hiring authorities—are the 

most appropriate and effective for managing their workforces and 

addressing their human capital challenges.3 However, we have found that 

agency officials may not be aware of which hiring authorities are available 

or when best to use them. For example, in 2011 we reported that 

agencies could not provide data on whether the different hiring authorities 

they used allowed them to hire more or better qualified cybersecurity 

professionals, or whether the hiring authority chosen allowed them to 

bring the applicants on board more quickly.4

 2

GAO, Human Capital: Effective Use of Flexibilities Can Assist Agencies in Managing 

Their Workforces, GAO-03-2 (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 6, 2002).

3

GAO-03-2.

4

GAO, Cybersecurity Human Capital: Initiatives Need Better Planning and Coordination, 

GAO-12-8 (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 29, 2011).
Page 3 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

If agency officials are not taking a strategic approach in determining 

which hiring authorities are most effective at meeting merit, policy, and 

mission goals, they risk significantly hindering their ability to recruit, hire, 

retain, and manage their human capital. You asked us to examine the 

extent to which hiring flexibilities were meeting agency needs. This report 

examines (1) the hiring authorities agencies used in fiscal year 2014 (the 

most recent year for available data when we began our review), (2) the 

extent to which selected agencies and OPM assessed the effectiveness 

of hiring authorities used for selected occupations in helping meet hiring 

needs, and (3) how OPM ensured that agencies have the assistance and 

information needed to use the hiring authorities effectively. 

To address our first objective, we analyzed data from OPM’s Enterprise 

Human Resources Integration (EHRI) personnel database for fiscal year 

2014, which was the most recent year that data were available.5 We used 

EHRI’s “current appointment authority” code to identify the hiring 

authorities agencies used for a particular hiring action. To calculate the 

new appointments made with each hiring authority, we aggregated the 

hiring actions using EHRI’s “nature of action” codes for new appointments 

in the competitive or excepted services, including full- and part-time, and 

permanent and non-permanent staff. Additionally, we used OPM 

documentation to match the current appointment authority codes with a 

name and citation to applicable laws, regulations, and executive orders. 

We also examined laws, regulations, and additional OPM materials to 

obtain a description of the most frequently used hiring authorities 

government-wide in fiscal year 2014.

To address our second objective, we focused on three critical skill 

occupational areas at three agencies as illustrative case examples: 

Information Technology Specialists; Contract Specialists; and Science, 

Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) occupations. We 

selected these areas because our prior work on mission critical 

occupations, identified these as skills gaps. Using OPM’s EHRI database, 

we selected three agencies—the Air Force Materiel Command (AFMC), 

 5

EHRI (formerly Central Personnel Data File–CPDF) is the primary government-wide 

source for information on federal employees. The EHRI data we analyzed cover executive 

branch civilian employees, but do not cover the U.S. Postal Service, legislative or judicial 

branch employees, or intelligence agencies. OPM transitioned from CPDF to EHRI as of 

fiscal year 2010.
Page 4 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

Department of Energy (DOE), and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) 

because they hired the selected occupations in fiscal year 2014 and used

a variety of hiring authorities to fill those vacancies.

At each agency we interviewed case study agency officials to learn about 

which hiring authorities agencies used for our selected occupations, 

reasons for using these authorities, and the extent to which agencies 

were measuring their effectiveness. Additionally, we identified and 

reviewed OPM and selected agency policies for, and documentation of, 

hiring authority oversight. To obtain a broader, government-wide 

perspective on the hiring process, we reviewed such information as 

OPM’s time-to-hire data and the Chief Human Capital Officers’ (CHCO) 

applicant and management satisfaction surveys. We also interviewed 

knowledgeable officials at OPM and the Merit Systems Protection Board 

about the effectiveness of federal hiring authorities.

To address our third objective, we reviewed online tools and guidance 

from the OPM website as well as OPM documents, training resources, 

handbooks, and fact sheets. We interviewed knowledgeable officials from 

OPM about the resources they provide to agencies, as well as officials 

from our selected case agencies about their experiences and satisfaction 

with OPM’s resources. Further, we reviewed documents and reports on 

prior federal hiring reform efforts that included changes to hiring 

authorities. We interviewed OPM and Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) officials about the impact of these previous reform efforts and 

current efforts, such as the fiscal year 2015 Cross Agency Priority Goal 

on People and Culture. See appendix I for a more detailed discussion of 

our scope and methodology.

We conducted this performance audit from May 2015 through August

2016 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing 

standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to 

obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for 

our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe 

that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings 

and conclusions based on our audit objectives.
Page 5 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

Selecting applicants based on their qualifications instead of patronage 

has been the foundation of the federal hiring system for more than 130 

years. Congress passed the Pendleton Act in 1883, establishing that 

federal employment should be based on merit.6 The nine merit system 

principles were later codified as part of the Civil Service Reform Act of 

1978.7 The first merit principle requires that agencies recruit qualified 

individuals from appropriate sources to achieve a work-force from all 

segments of society. It also requires that selection and advancement 

should be determined solely on the basis of relative ability, knowledge,

and skills after fair and open competition. This assures that all receive 

equal opportunity.

In this report, “Title 5” refers to the government-wide personnel 

management laws and related provisions generally applicable to federal 

employment.

Title 5 outlines the rules agencies must follow to hire employees, such as 

the competitive examining hiring authority.8 Competitive examining has 

been the traditional method for making appointments to competitive 

service positions. The competitive examining process requires agencies 

to notify the public that the government will accept applications for a job, 

screen applications against minimum qualification standards, apply 

selection priorities such as veterans’ preference, and assess applicants’

relative competencies or knowledge, skills, and abilities against jobrelated criteria to identify the most qualified applicants.9 Federal agencies 

typically assess applicants by rating and ranking them based on their 

experience, training, and education.

 6

Act of January 16, 1883, ch. 27, 22 Stat. 403

7

Pub. L. No. 95-454, § 101, 92 Stat. 1111, 1113-14 (Oct. 13, 1978), codified at 5 U.S.C. § 

2301(b).

8 Title 5 outlines the rules agencies must follow to make appointments in the competitive 

service, excepted service, and the Senior Executive Service. 

9

5 U.S.C. §§ 3304-3319 and 5 C.F.R. parts 332 and 337.

Background

Competitive Examining 

Has Been the Traditional 

Method of Hiring
Page 6 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

Congress and the President have created a number of additional hiring 

authorities—beyond competitive examining—to expedite the hiring 

process or to achieve certain public policy goals. In some cases, 

Congress created hiring authorities outside of Title 5 granting access 

directly to specific agencies. For example, provisions under Title 42 of the 

United States Code provide authority for the Department of Health and 

Human Services to hire individuals to fill mission critical positions in 

science and medicine. In other cases, Congress and the President 

created authorities under Title 5 which permitted hiring actions to be 

taken by means other than competitive examining. Through authority 

delegated by the President, OPM has authorized excepted service 

appointment authorities for when it is not feasible or practical to use 

competitive examining. Examples of some exceptions to the competitive 

hiring process include the following:

• Filling critical skills gaps. Congress created “direct hire authority” to 

help agencies fill vacancies in the competitive service under certain 

circumstances. Congress authorized OPM to permit agencies to use 

direct hire authority for a position or group of positions where OPM 

has determined that there is either a severe shortage of candidates or 

a critical hiring need for such positions.10 This direct hire authority 

expedites the typical hiring process associated with the competitive 

examining hiring authority in Title 5 by eliminating competitive rating 

and ranking procedures and veterans’ preference.11 Congress has 

also provided direct-hire authority directly to agencies for specified 

purposes.

• Employment of veterans. Congress created a hiring authority called 

the Veterans’ Recruitment Appointment authority that allows for 

certain exceptions from the competitive examining process. 

Specifically, agencies may appoint eligible veterans without 

 105 U.S.C. § 3304(a)(3).

11Importantly, agencies must comply with public notice requirements with respect to any 

position an agency seeks to fill using direct-hire authority. 5 C.F.R. § 3304(a)(3)(A) and 5 

C.F.R. § 337.203.

Congress and the 

President have Created 

Alternatives to Competitive 

Examining
Page 7 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

competition under limited circumstances or otherwise through 

excepted service hiring procedures.

12

• Employment of students and recent graduates. To ensure that the 

federal government continued to compete effectively for students and 

recent graduates, a 2010 executive order created the Pathways 

Program. Pathways replaced two former student programs and 

incorporated the Presidential Management Fellows program.13

OPM decentralized and delegated many personnel decisions to federal 

agencies. It also has encouraged agencies to use human capital 

flexibilities, such as hiring authorities, to help tailor their personnel 

approaches to accomplish their missions. In January 1996, for example, 

OPM delegated competitive examining authority to federal agencies for 

virtually all positions in the competitive service.14 OPM is responsible for 

ensuring that the personnel management functions it delegates to 

agencies are conducted in accordance with merit system principles, and 

the standards established by OPM for conducting those functions.15

The exceptions authorized under Title 5 to the competitive examining 

process, and the creation of exceptions to hiring rules through new 

agency-specific non-Title 5 hiring authorities mentioned above, also affect 

 1238 U.S.C. § 4214(b) and 5 C.F.R. § 307.103. If an agency has more than one candidate 

for the same job and one (or more) is a preference eligible, veterans’ preference 

procedures under part 302 of 5 C.F.R. apply.

13Exec. Order 13562, Recruiting and Hiring Students and Recent Graduates. 75 Fed. 

Reg. 82585 (Dec. 27, 2010). See, 5 C.F.R. part 213, subpart D and 5 C.F.R. part 362.

14Federal civil service employees, other than those in the Senior Executive Service are 

employed in either the competitive service, 5 U.S.C. §2102(a), or the excepted service, 5 

U.S.C. § 2103(a). The competitive service examination process is one of the processes 

intended to ensure that agencies’ hiring activities comply with merit principles. Excepted 

service positions are those positions which are excepted from the competitive service by 

or pursuant to statute, by the President, or by OPM. 5 C.F.R. § 213.101. OPM may except 

positions from the competitive service, for example, when it determines that appointments 

into such positions through competitive examination are not practicable or for recruitment 

of certain types of students (or individuals who recently completed qualifying educational 

programs). 5 C.F.R. § 6.1(a) and §213.102(b). The excepted service is comprised of Title 

5 excepted service authorities (over which OPM has jurisdiction) and non-Title 5 excepted 

service authorities (over which OPM has no jurisdiction).

155 U.S.C. § 1104(b).

OPM and Agency 

Coordination and 

Oversight Roles
Page 8 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

oversight responsibilities. Oversight of hiring actions depends on the 

origin of the authorized exception. For example, if the position was 

excepted from the competitive service by OPM, OPM is responsible for 

ensuring that the hiring actions taken to fill those positions are consistent 

with merit principles and other relevant Title 5 laws and regulations.16

However, if Congress directly granted an agency authority to appoint 

individuals into the excepted service without regard to Title 5 and OPM 

authority, generally the agency (rather than OPM) must ensure that it is 

meeting relevant standards under that grant of authority or additional 

oversight provisions detailed by Congress.

Further, the Chief Human Capital Officers (CHCO) Act of 2002

established the CHCO Council to advise and coordinate the activities of 

member agencies on such matters as the modernization of human 

resources systems, improved quality of human resources information, 

and legislation affecting human resources operations and organizations.17

The CHCO Council is chaired by the Director of OPM and serves to 

coordinate and collaborate on the development and implementation of 

federal human capital policies.

Our analysis of OPM data found that overall, agencies used a relatively 

small number of hiring authorities to fill nearly all of the vacancies in 2014, 

and a large number of hiring authorities to fill the small proportion of 

positions that remained. Specifically, we found that agencies used 105 

hiring authority codes for 196,226 new appointments in fiscal year 2014. 

These appointments were for competitive service positions, as well as for 

excepted service positions, made under both Title 5 and agency-specific 

non-Title 5 authorities. However, of these 105 authorities, agencies used 

just 20 hiring authority codes for more than 178,000 (91 percent) of the 

new appointments, while using 85 hiring authority codes for the 18,000 (9 

percent) remaining new appointments (see fig. 1).

 16OPM’s authority to except positions from the competitive service originates from the 

President who is authorized to do so by Congress. 5 U.S.C. § 3302 and 5 C.F.R. § 

213.102.

17Pub. L. No. 107-296, title XIII, § 1303, 116 Stat. 2135, 2288-89 (Nov. 25, 2002).

Agencies Relied on 

20 Authorities for 

Over 90 Percent of 

New Hires in Fiscal 

Year 2014
Page 9 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

Figure 1: Agencies Relied on 20 Hiring Authorities Within and Outside of Title 5 for Nearly All New Hires Made in Fiscal Year

2014
Page 10 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

As noted, Congress and the President have created a number of 

additional hiring authorities—beyond competitive examining—intended to 

address positions that cannot be filled through competitive examining in 

order to expedite the hiring process or to achieve certain public policy 

goals, such as facilitating the entrance of certain groups into the civil 

service.

Importantly, our analysis provides only a snapshot of a single fiscal year.

The use of hiring authorities was influenced by particular hiring levels at 

certain agencies. For example, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) 

used the Title 38 hiring authority—the second most used authority—to 

hire almost 8,000 nurses and more than 3,000 medical officers in fiscal 

year 2014 in response to increased demands for healthcare providers.

Of the 20 top-used hiring authorities, agencies relied most heavily on 

three types of authorities: (1) the competitive examining hiring authority, 

(2) other Title 5 hiring authorities, and (3) agency-specific hiring 

authorities (non-Title 5 as well as Title 5). Each of these is discussed in 

greater detail below (see table 1 for a description of all 20 hiring authority 

codes most commonly used in fiscal year 2014).

Table 1: Description of the 20 Hiring Authorities, Within and Outside of Title 5, Most Used in Fiscal Year 2014

Hiring authority Description Service type

Available 

governmentwide?

Competitive Examining Vacancies open to the public and posted on USAJobs. Applicants 

ranked and selections made by category ratinga Veterans’ preference 

applies.

Competitive Yes

Department of Veterans 

Affairs, Title 38 Exclusively for Veterans Affairs to hire certain medical occupations. 

Excepted No

Schedule A, Agencyspecific Authorityb Allows agencies to meet a hiring need that has not been remedied by 

using competitive examining, with justification and OPM approval.

Excepted Yes

Defense National Guard 

Technician

Unique non-Title 5 hiring authority used strictly for appointment of 

National Guard technicians. Appointees maintain a dual status as both a

federal employee and state national guard member.

c

Excepted No

Veterans Employment 

Opportunities Act 

Allows eligible veterans to apply for positions announced under merit 

promotion procedures when an agency accepts applications from 

outside its own workforce. 

Competitive Yes

Other law, executive 

order, or regulation

Authorities granted by law, executive order, or regulation for which no 

specific OPM-designated hiring authority code exists. 

Unknown Unknown

Pathways Internship Targets students at qualifying educational institutions. Interns eligible to 

be s noncompetitively converted to competitive service under specified 

conditions. 

Excepted Yes
Page 11 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

Hiring authority Description Service type

Available 

governmentwide?

Temporary Appointment, 

based on prior temporary 

federal service

Allows agencies to noncompetitively reappoint former temporary 

employees (who have not already served the maximum time allowed) 

and noncompetitively appoint others eligible for certain career 

conditional appointments. 

Competitive Yes

Veterans Recruitment 

Appointment 

Allows agencies to appoint eligible veterans up to the GS-11 or 

equivalent level without regard to competitive examining procedures. 

Appointees are converted to competitive service appointments after 2 

years of satisfactory service.

Excepted Yes

Alternative Personnel 

System, Department of 

Agriculture

Provides hiring flexibility exclusively to the Forest Service and the 

Agricultural Research Serviced.

d

Competitive No

Transportation Security 

Administration (TSA) Provides hiring flexibility exclusively to TSA. 

Excepted No

Government-wide Direct 

Hire Authority

Allows agencies to fill positions OPM has determined have a severe 

candidate shortage or a critical hiring need. Public notice is required but 

not the application of veterans’ preference or applicant rating and 

ranking. 

Competitive Yes

Reinstatement Allows former eligible federal employees to reenter the competitive 

service without competing with the public.

Competitive Yes

Pathways Recent 

Graduates

Targets individuals who have recently received a degree or certificate 

from a qualifying institution. After completion, eligible for noncompetitive conversions to competitive service under specified 

conditions. 

Excepted Yes

Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) Provides hiring flexibility exclusively to FAA. 

Excepted No

Schedule A, Severe 

Physical Disabilities

Allows agencies to appoint persons with severe physical disabilities. 

Allows for non-competitive conversion to competitive service after 2 

years of satisfactory service. 

Excepted Yes

Department of Defense 

(DOD) Expedited Hiring 

Authority

Allows DOD to hire qualified candidates for certain acquisition and 

health care occupations using direct-hire procedures where DOD has 

determined a shortage of candidates or critical hiring needs.

Competitive No

Demonstration Project, 

Defense Lab 

Allows DOD to hire science and technology personnel at Research Labs 

with modification or waiver of some Title 5 provisions.

Competitive and 

Excepted

No

Schedule A, Temporary, 

less-than-full time 

positions, critical need

Allows managers to meet a short-term critical hiring need to fulfill the 

mission of an agency for up to 30-days with one 30-day extension. 

Excepted Yes

Schedule A, Attorneys Enables agencies to hire attorneys because OPM cannot develop 

qualification standards or examine for attorney positions by law.

Excepted Yes

Sources: OPM’s “Hiring Toolkit” on HRU.gov, OPM website, Code of Federal Regulations, and information from Department of Defense, Department of Energy, and the National Institutes of Health. |

GAO-16-521

a

Category rating, authorized for use in competitive examining under 5 U.S.C. §3319, is required pursuant to presidential memorandum.

See, Presidential Memorandum, Improving the Federal Recruitment and Hiring Process, (May 11, 2010).

b

Schedule A appointing authorities cover positions when the competitive examining process is not practicable using the competitive 

service qualification standards. 

c

32 U.S.C. § 709(b).

d

This authority began as an OPM-approved demonstration project in 1990 and was later made permanent by Congress. Pub. L. No. 

105-277, § 749, 112 Stat. 2681, 2681-32 (Oct. 21, 1998). According to OPM, this authority is now managed by the Department of 

Agriculture.
Page 12 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

Competitive examining hiring authority. While the Title 5 competitive 

examining hiring authority—has been the traditional method for federal 

hiring—was the single most used hiring authority in fiscal year 2014, it 

accounted for less than a quarter of all new appointments governmentwide.18 Further, only 3 of the 24 agencies covered under the Chief 

Financial Officers (CFO) Act of 1990, as amended—the Department of 

Justice, the Small Business Administration, and the Department of the 

Treasury—used the competitive examining hiring authority for a majority 

of their new appointments in fiscal year 2014.19 At the same time, 6 of the 

24 CFO Act agencies used competitive examining for less than 10 

percent of all new appointments in fiscal year 2014. They include the 

Departments of Agriculture, and Transportation, VA, U.S. Agency for 

International Development, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and the 

National Science Foundation.20

Other Title 5 hiring authorities. In addition to competitive examining, in 

fiscal year 2014, agencies often used other Title 5 hiring authorities 

available to all agencies. For example, agencies used direct hire—which 

waives the rating and ranking process and the application of veterans’

preference under competitive examining for certain critical needs, or 

when there is a severe shortage of candidates. In other instances, 

agencies used special hiring authorities to hire veterans, students, and 

recent graduates.

With respect to direct hire, OPM provided agencies with government-wide 

direct hire authorities for certain IT specialists and medical occupations, 

among other critical needs occupations.21 This enables an agency with 

delegated examining authority to hire, after public notice is provided, any 

 18In order to use the competitive examining hiring authority, an agency must establish a 

delegated examining agreement with OPM.

19The CFO Act agencies are the executive branch agencies listed at 31 U.S.C. § 901(b).

20According to OPM, the NRC is excepted from competitive examining under provisions of 

title 42 of the United States Code.

21See https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/hiring-authorities/direct-hireauthority/#url=Governmentwide-Authority for a current listing of occupations approved for 

direct hire authority under 5 U.S.C. § 3304 and 5 C.F.R. part 337, subpart B.
Page 13 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

qualified applicant without regard to certain competitive hiring 

requirements such as category rating and veterans’ preference.22

Additionally, agencies often used hiring authorities related to hiring 

veterans and students or recent graduates. For example, the Veterans 

Employment Opportunities Act (VEOA), a competitive service 

appointment authority, was the fifth most frequently used hiring authority 

code for new appointments in fiscal year 2014.23 One of our case agency 

officials told us that they used VEOA to recruit veterans eligible to apply 

for positions announced under merit promotion procedures.

Fiscal year 2014 was one of the first years agencies used two new 

Pathways excepted service hiring authorities for interns and recent 

graduates. These authorities are to be used as a supplement to, not a 

substitute for, the competitive hiring process. Pathways Programs are 

tools for agencies because of their focus on students and recent 

graduates. For example, nearly all of the 24 CFO Act agencies used at 

least one of the three Pathways Programs (the third being the 

Presidential Management Fellowship), and two agencies—the National 

Aeronautics and Space Administration and the National Science 

Foundation—used the Pathways Internship authority for more than 50 

percent and 30 percent, respectively, of their new hires. At the same time, 

7 of the 24 CFO Act agencies that used at least one of the Pathways 

authorities used it for less than 5 percent of their new appointments in 

fiscal year 2014.

Agency-specific hiring authorities. Agencies also relied heavily on 

hiring authorities that are only available to specific agencies. As shown in 

figure 2, in fiscal year 2014, 38 percent of all new federal appointments 

were made using hiring authorities designated only for specific agencies.

 22Category rating is a method of identifying the pool of eligible candidates from which a 

selecting official can choose while preserving veterans’ preference. Eligible candidates are 

rated by being placed in one of two or more predefined quality categories instead of being 

rated by individual numeric score order. Names of all eligible candidates in the highest 

quality category are referred on the certificate of eligibles to the selecting official for 

consideration.

235 C.F.R. § 335.106.
Page 14 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

Figure 2: More Than a Third of Hiring Authorities Used in Fiscal Year 2014 Were 

Available to a Limited Number of Agencies

Figure note 1: We rounded the percentages used in this figure to the nearest whole percent. As a 

result, the sum of the percentages in the figure do not equal 100 percent.

a

OPM uses a single hiring authority code for all “other laws, executive orders, and regulations,” which 

was the sixth most used hiring authority code for new appointments in fiscal year 2014 and accounted 

for approximately 5 percent of new appointments government-wide that year.

Agency-specific hiring authorities can be authorized directly by Congress 

or may be provided to the agency by OPM. As previously noted, VA used 

Title 38 hiring authorities—attributable to the second most used hiring 

authority code—to hire for medical occupations in fiscal year 2014. In 

addition, two of the most used non-Title 5 hiring authorities related to 

entire agency-components—the Transportation Security Administration 

and Federal Aviation Administration—were provided by Congress with 

additional flexibility in hiring agency personnel for all occupations.
Page 15 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

OPM also provided special Title 5 excepted service hiring authorities to 

certain agencies. OPM annually publishes a consolidated listing of all 

agency specific Title 5 excepted service hiring authorities granted under 

Schedules A, B, or C in the Federal Register.24 Schedules A, B, C, and D 

refer to distinct suites of authorities that enable agencies to hire in those 

circumstances when it is not practicable to use competitive service 

qualification standards or to rate applicants using traditional competitive 

examining procedures, when recruiting certain types of students (or 

others who have recently completed certain educational programs), or to 

fill positions of a confidential or policy-determining nature.25 For example, 

OPM granted a Schedule A hiring authority to the General Services 

Administration and Office of Management and Budget to hire digital 

services staff as a part of the President’s Management Agenda’s Smarter 

Information Technology (IT) Delivery Initiative through September 2017

and 2016, respectively. In May 2015, OPM approved government-wide 

Schedule A hiring authority for digital services staff for all agencies 

working on IT projects as part of this initiative, also through September 

2017.

 24OPM is required to publish a consolidated listing of all Schedule A, B, and C hiring 

authorities, current as of June 30 of each year, annually in the Federal Register. 5 CFR § 

213.103(c). Schedule A, B, C, and D appointing authorities available for use by all 

agencies are contained in the Code of Federal Regulations. See 5 C.F.R. part 213.

25See, 5 C.F.R. part 213.

Three Selected 

Agencies and OPM 

Need to Better 

Assess the 

Effectiveness of 

Hiring Authorities to 

Strengthen Hiring 

Efforts
Page 16 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

In our 2002 report, we found that to address their human capital 

challenges, it is important for agencies to assess and determine which 

human capital flexibilities, including hiring authorities, are the most 

appropriate and effective for managing their workforces.26 Among other 

things, such assessments help ensure that agencies use hiring authorities 

as part of an overall human capital strategy. By helping agencies to better 

understand the impact that different authorities have on the pool of 

available candidates, agencies could use hiring authorities more 

strategically to achieve specific talent management and public policy 

goals such as closing mission critical skills gaps, employment of veterans, 

and increased workforce diversity. Assessments can also better ensure 

that agencies first identify and use the flexibilities already available under 

existing laws and regulations and only seek additional flexibilities when 

necessary based on sound business cases.

Moreover, given agencies’ reliance on a relatively small number of 

authorities in 2014, assessments of authorities’ effectiveness could help 

inform whether there are opportunities to refine, consolidate, or reduce 

the number of available authorities to simplify the hiring process, or 

whether provisions of some agency-specific authorities should be 

expanded to more agencies. Indeed, OPM officials said they do not know 

if agencies rely on a small number of authorities because agencies are 

unfamiliar with other authorities, or if they have found other authorities to 

be less effective in meeting their needs.

As part of its hiring reform efforts, in 2010 the administration launched the 

Hiring Reform Initiative, which was aimed at improving the effectiveness 

of the hiring process. To gauge agencies’ progress in meeting those 

goals, OPM tracked improvements in time-to-hire and manager and 

applicant satisfaction levels as key indicators for jobs posted on the USA 

jobs website. Time-to-hire and satisfaction surveys are useful metrics of 

the effectiveness of the hiring process as a whole. Neither OPM nor the 

selected agencies used or explored the potential for this information to 

analyze the effectiveness of individual, or the different types, of hiring 

authorities. Without this information, it is difficult for OPM and agencies to 

 26GAO, Human Capital: Effective Use of Flexibilities Can Assist Agencies in Managing 

Their Workforces. GAO-03-2 (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 6, 2002).

Selected Agencies and 

OPM Do Not Measure the 

Effectiveness of Individual 

Hiring Authorities in 

Meeting Agencies’ Needs
Page 17 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

assess the impact specific hiring authorities are having on the 

administration’s reform efforts and other goals. 

As one example, OPM requires agencies to report time-to-hire 

information for all job announcements posted on USAjobs.gov.27

However, neither OPM nor officials from our selected agencies said they 

used this data to analyze the effectiveness of individual hiring authorities. 

Likewise, OPM surveys managers and applicants to gauge their opinions 

of the application process. OPM officials said while they conduct some 

government-wide analysis of these surveys and brief the CHCO Council 

on trends and findings, they have not analyzed the relative effectiveness 

of individual hiring authorities.

OPM officials said that the time-to-hire, manager satisfaction, and 

applicant satisfaction databases were located in different systems, thus 

making it difficult to analyze or identify trends. Further, OPM officials said 

they view the use of hiring authorities as case-specific and in some cases 

tied to agency-specific goals, which makes it difficult to compare them to 

one another and develop meaningful conclusions about how they are 

used.

However, there are several potential benefits to understanding the 

relative effectiveness of different authorities for particular agency 

requirements. First, different types of hiring authorities have different 

procedures associated with them. By analyzing the effectiveness of hiring 

authorities, OPM and agencies could identify improvements that could be 

used to refine those procedures. Second, Congress and OPM could 

provide more agencies access to specific authorities found to be highly 

effective. Third, authorities found to be less effective could be revised or 

eliminated by Congress or OPM, thus helping to ensure only those hiring 

tools found to be the most useful were available to agencies.

Moreover, a better understanding of the relative effectiveness of different 

hiring authorities could enhance agencies’ awareness of the implications 

different authorities may have on the composition of their workforce. For 

example, when agencies use one hiring authority to achieve a particular 

public policy objective, it may have implications for the attainment of a 

 27Excepted service hiring under Schedules A, B, and C does not require public notice.
Page 18 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

different objective. In its 2015 report, the U.S. Merit Systems Protection 

Board found that when agencies used veteran-specific hiring authorities 

in fiscal year 2012, they hired between 50 and 60 percent more men than 

women, not surprising given the active duty military is over 80 percent 

male.28 Better information on the impact different authorities have on the 

applicant pool could help agencies use hiring authorities more 

deliberatively to accomplish different hiring outcomes.

Officials from our selected agencies—AFMC, Energy, and NIH—said that 

they had not used time-to-hire data or manager and applicant satisfaction 

survey data to evaluate specific hiring authorities. Like OPM, officials from 

the selected agencies said they have focused their efforts and used this 

information to better understand and improve the overall hiring process 

but had not considered it for analyzing the use of individual authorities. 

Given that an individual agency may only use a subset of all authorities, 

an agency-specific analysis may not reveal many differences across 

authorities. However, compiling agency evaluations of the range of 

authorities available would likely provide greater insight. A number of 

factors can determine how and whether agencies get the talent they 

desire. Selected agencies described for us additional strategies they use 

to help meet their workforce requirements. These are discussed in 

greater detail in appendix II).

Despite the importance of assessing the effectiveness of individual hiring 

authorities, there are some limitations to using available OPM data for this 

type of analysis. The hiring authority codes used in OPM’s EHRI 

database are a tool for tracking the use of hiring authorities across the 

federal government. However, the codes are not a perfect one-for-one 

match for individual hiring authorities, and some hiring authority codes 

represent an unknown number of authorities. For example, the hiring 

authority codes for “Digital Service Experts” are also used to track the use 

of other hiring authorities. As a result, it is unclear how frequently these 

particular digital services authorities are used.

 28Merit Services Protection Board, The Impact of Recruitment Strategy On Fair and Open 

Competition for Federal Jobs (Washington, D.C.: January 2015).

Improved Hiring Authority 

Data Could Identify the 

Most Effective Hiring 

Authorities
Page 19 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

Similarly, OPM uses a single hiring authority code for all “other laws, 

executive orders, and regulations,” which was the sixth most used hiring 

authority code for new appointments in fiscal year 2014.

As a result of these data limitations, OPM is unable to use its own data to 

determine the extent to which special hiring authorities like these are 

being used, to determine (or aid agencies in determining) whether they 

are meeting their intended purpose, if refinements are needed, or whether 

they should be expanded for other agencies with similar needs. With this 

analysis, OPM could revise authorities within its authority and work with 

agencies to develop legislative proposals as warranted to revise 

authorities beyond its authority.

OPM is responsible for executing, administering, and enforcing the civil 

service rules and regulations and the laws governing the civil service, 

including those pertaining to hiring.29 Additionally, OPM is required to 

establish and maintain oversight over delegated personnel activities, 

including delegated competitive examining activities, to ensure agencies 

are acting in accordance with the merit system principles and the relevant 

standards established by OPM, such as compliance with applicable laws, 

rules, regulations, executive orders, and OPM policies.30 OPM monitors 

overall implementation and identifies corrective actions when deficiencies 

are found. OPM conducts this oversight through three primary means: 

delegated examining unit audits, human resource management 

evaluations, and special studies.

• Delegated examining audits: OPM oversees agencies’ use of the 

delegated examining authority for competitive service. These audits 

focus on compliance with merit principles and other key goals. To a 

lesser extent they consider the effectiveness of the overall hiring 

process, but typically do not analyze the effectiveness of specific 

hiring authorities.

• Human resource management evaluations: OPM and agencies 

evaluate how well human capital programs, align with agency mission 

and goals and comply with the merit system principles, laws, and 

 295 U.S.C. § 1103(a)(5).

305 U.S.C. § 1104(b).

OPM Conducted 

Compliance Audits and 

Evaluations, but Did Not 

Analyze the Effectiveness 

of Authorities Subject to Its 

Oversight
Page 20 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

regulations. In contrast to the delegated examining unit audits, 

officials said that human resource management evaluations provide 

an opportunity for identifying best hiring practices at agencies.

• Special studies: OPM officials said they periodically conduct special 

studies of hiring issues. For example, officials said OPM is currently 

studying the use of Pathways Programs government-wide. Officials 

said the study will identify trends in agencies’ usage, highlight notable 

practices by agencies, identify any challenges within the programs, 

and assess whether the programs are being used as intended.

OPM’s oversight functions provide an in-depth understanding of agency 

hiring, and could provide important information to help OPM identify 

opportunities to streamline and consolidate federal hiring authorities. 

However, OPM officials identified two challenges to analyzing audit 

findings to understand the effectiveness of hiring authorities. First, OPM 

does not maintain all the different types of audit reports in a single, 

centralized location. Conducting a government-wide analysis would 

require manually piecing together reports from different systems. 

However, even identifying trends within the audit type could provide 

leading practices for OPM to share and opportunities for agencies to 

improve their use of hiring authorities. According to OPM officials, OPM is 

developing a new database capable of housing all audit findings, which 

will enable it to conduct this analysis in future years.

OPM officials said a second challenge to government-wide analysis of 

hiring authorities is that OPM’s oversight is limited to the hiring authorities 

established in Title 5. According to OPM, the evaluation or oversight 

requirements, if any, of non-Title 5 excepted service hiring authorities are 

authority-specific. Since non-Title 5 excepted service hiring authorities are 

granted to agencies directly by Congress, OPM does not generally have a 

direct oversight role under these authorities.

In recent years, OPM has launched several initiatives and provided 

agencies with tools to address federal hiring challenges. In 2008, for 

example, OPM and the CHCO Council partnered to lead the End-to-End 

Hiring Roadmap, which aimed to improve the hiring process from an 

applicant perspective. Then, in 2010, the President’s Hiring Reform 

initiative aimed to address impediments to recruiting and hiring highly 

qualified employees into the federal civilian workforce. Also in 2010, OPM 

began an effort to increase employment of veterans. In 2011, OPM 

started a new initiative to increase employment of students, and recent 

graduates, in part by educating agencies about new or existing hiring 

OPM Manages 

Numerous Hiring 

Reform Initiatives and 

Tools
Page 21 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

authorities for these groups. OPM also established the Veterans 

Employment Program Office and Office of Diversity and Inclusion. In 

2015, OPM introduced the Recruitment, Engagement, Diversity, and 

Inclusion (REDI) Strategy. REDI’s objective, in part, was to improve the 

quality of the hiring process by meeting with HR professionals and hiring 

managers to ensure they understand current hiring flexibilities through

guidance and resources, referred to as “untying the knots” sessions.

Since 2014, OPM and the Presidential Personnel Office have led the 

People and Culture Cross-Agency Priority Goal intended to deploy a 

world-class workforce by creating a culture of excellence and enabling 

agencies to hire the best talent from all segments of society.31 As part of 

this goal OPM with OMB’s assistance, kicked off a new initiative in early

2016—the Hiring Excellence Campaign—designed to improve the federal 

hiring process. According to OPM officials, one of the objectives of the 

campaign is to raise awareness and effective use of hiring authorities by 

managers and human resource professionals and to address 

administrative and other obstacles that may be impeding the 

government’s ability to recruit and hire the best talent. Officials said the 

campaign will feature a series of multi-agency, in-person discussions 

about hiring and assessment policies and corresponding guidance led by 

OPM and OMB officials. The events are to be in locations with high 

concentrations of human resources specialists, where agencies have 

been hiring for hard-to-fill occupations, among other factors.

OPM’s Hiring Excellence Campaign is designed to bring together agency 

hiring specialists and hiring managers to discuss hiring tools and 

opportunities for improving the hiring process, and therefore could help 

agencies make better use of available hiring authorities. The campaign’s 

ultimate effectiveness will depend to a large degree on OPM’s ability to 

implement the effort as planned and ensure it generates lasting 

improvements. To help in this regard, OPM officials said they have 

identified objectives, strategies, and baseline measures to track the 

 31The GPRA Modernization Act of 2010, or GPRAMA, requires the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) to coordinate with agencies to: (1) establish outcome-oriented, federal 

government priority goals (known as cross-agency priority (CAP) goals) with annual goals 

and quarterly performance targets and milestones; and (2) report quarterly on a single 

website now known as Performance.gov the results achieved for each CAP goal 

compared to the targets. 31 U.S.C. §§ 1115(a), 1120(a), and 1122(c)(5).
Page 22 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

success of the campaign. Further, OMB officials said they were 

identifying agency-specific hiring authority subject matter experts to assist 

in the discussions where audiences may have questions about non-Title 5 

hiring authorities. OPM officials said they are developing a project plan for 

implementing the campaign. These activities could help improve OPM’s 

management, monitoring, and oversight of the Hiring Excellence 

Campaign and will need to be implemented as planned. Given the 

similarities between the Hiring Excellence Campaign and OPM’s prior 

efforts to improve federal hiring, it will also be important for OPM to 

ensure that the campaign leverages these prior initiatives, incorporates 

relevant lessons learned, if any, and ensures there is no unnecessary 

overlap or duplication with other efforts to improve federal hiring.

In addition to the initiatives noted above OPM makes available a variety 

of resources to help agencies make better use of hiring authorities, as 

shown in table 2.

Table 2. Examples of OPM Tools to Help Agencies Implement Hiring Authorities

Resource Description

Hiring Toolkit The Hiring Toolkit, available on the HR University web site, describes the fundamentals of federal 

hiring, the hiring process, competitive and excepted service hiring, veteran’s appointing authorities, 

hiring authorities and pay. It complements the interactive Hiring Decision Tool, which matches 

potential hiring flexibilities with hiring needs.

End-to-End Hiring Roadmap The End-to-End Hiring Roadmap is a timeline tool based on a generic process model for conducting 

efficient, high-quality hiring. The purpose of this is to help identify similar steps in agencies’ hiring 

processes and diagnose areas of greatest need for improvement.

Delegated Examining 

Operations Handbook

The Delegated Examining Operations Handbook provides assistance to agencies with delegated 

examining authority under Title 5 and applies to competitive examining only. The handbook provides 

agencies with guidance, options, and specific operational procedures designed to ensure that 

examining programs comply with merit system laws and regulations.

Vet Guide The Vet Guide consolidates the laws and regulations that affect the employment of veterans in the 

federal government in one central location. The guidebook describes veteran’s preference and special 

hiring authorities for veterans.

Hiring Excellence The Hiring Excellence website provides information, tools, and guidance to hiring specialists and hiring 

managers to assist in agency hiring. The website includes, among other things, information about 

strategic recruitment, assessment and selection, hiring authorities, and diversity and inclusion. 

Source: GAO summary of OPM data. | GAO-16-521

Officials from our selected agencies reported mixed impressions about 

OPM’s online resources, including some of the above examples. During 

our discussion groups, some hiring managers and HR specialists said 

they found OPM’s resources useful, some said OPM’s website and 

guidance were fragmented and difficult to use, and some officials said 
Page 23 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

they were not familiar with OPM’s tools and resources and relied on 

agency-specific policies and tools. Officials familiar with OPM’s resources 

said they most often relied on agency-specific policies and procedures 

before turning to OPM’s resources and guidance on hiring authorities. 

While OPM’s resources may be developed and targeted for different 

users, without additional review these tools may not be having their 

intended effect. We have previously recommended, and continue to 

encourage OPM ensure agencies are getting the needed guidance and 

tools by evaluating the communication and effectiveness of relevant tools

or leading practices created by OPM or agencies to address crosscutting 

human capital challenges.32

Given the long-standing human capital challenges and difficulties in filling 

critical skills gaps, federal agencies need to have an assortment of 

effective tools to bring qualified applicants onboard as well as to meet 

public policy goals. In fiscal year 2014, 20 authorities were used to make 

around 90 percent of new appointments. 

A critical first step in understanding if and which authorities are meeting 

agency needs is for OPM and agencies to analyze if and how specific 

authorities contribute to the effectiveness of the hiring process. This 

information would help OPM and agencies better manage the suite of 

hiring authorities and identify opportunities to simplify and improve the 

hiring process by refining, consolidating, or eliminating some authorities

or by expanding provisions of some agency-specific authorities to more 

agencies. Likewise, agencies could make more strategic use of the hiring 

authorities, selecting those that data have shown are best suited for their 

particular talent needs and other objectives. However, despite the metrics 

available to assess their performance, OPM and our selected agencies 

do not measure the effectiveness of hiring authorities.

Finally, while OPM has launched several initiatives to reform the hiring 

process over the last several years, some of the issues they were 

designed to address, including improving agencies’ use of federal hiring 

authorities, remain. Going forward, it will be important for OPM to ensure 

that its most recent initiative, the Hiring Excellence Campaign, is 

 32GAO. Human Capital: Strategies to Help Agencies Meet Their Missions in an Era of 

Highly Constrained Resources. GAO-14-168 (Washington, D.C.: May 7, 2014).

Conclusions
Page 24 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

implemented as planned, as well as to ensure that there is no 

unnecessary overlap or duplication with earlier efforts.

To help strengthen the government’s ability to compete in the labor 

market for top talent, we recommend that the Director of OPM, in 

conjunction with the CHCO Council, take the following actions to improve 

the federal hiring process:

1. For hiring authorities for which OPM oversees, conduct a study or 

assessment of specific hiring authorities and/or processes to gain 

insight into why these agencies relied on the authorities, the 

relationship between the agencies’ choices and the agency mission 

and broader public policy goals, consistent with merit systems 

principles, and determine whether modernization is necessary. For 

agency-specific hiring authorities and/or processes, OPM should 

collaborate with the CHCO Council to obtain similar insights agencies 

may have regarding their authorities and/or processes and to 

determine whether there are lessons learned which may be relevant 

to government-wide modernization efforts. 

2. Use this information to determine whether opportunities exist to refine, 

consolidate, eliminate, or expand agency-specific authorities to other 

agencies and implement changes where OPM is authorized, including 

seeking presidential authorization (as necessary) in order to do so. In 

cases where legislation would be necessary to implement changes, 

OPM should work with the CHCO Council to develop legislative 

proposals.

3. As OPM continues with the implementation of the Hiring Excellence 

Campaign, determine ways to sustain aspects of the campaign that 

focus on equipping agencies with information, tools, and support to 

strengthen their knowledge and ability to attract and hire top talent 

beyond the active roll out of the campaign and leverage prior related 

efforts through such activities as incorporating applicable lessons 

learned and that there is no unnecessary overlap and duplication 

across their individual efforts.

We provided a draft of this product to the Acting Director of OPM and the 

Director of OMB for comment. We also provided relevant portions of this 

product to the Secretaries of the Department of the Air Force, Department 

of Energy, and Department of Health and Human Services for technical 

comment. Technical comments were received from OPM, OMB, and the 

Air Force, and incorporated, as appropriate. 

Recommendations for 

Executive Action

Agency Comments
Page 25 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

In written comments, reproduced in appendix III, OPM generally 

concurred with our findings and recommendations. 

As agreed with your offices, unless you publicly announce the contents of 

this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 30 days from the 

report date. At that time, we will send copies to the appropriate 

congressional committees, the Director of the Office of Personnel 

Management, and other interested parties. In addition, the report will be 

available at no charge on the GAO website at http://www.gao.gov.

If you or your staff have any questions about this report please contact 

me at (202) 512-2757 or goldenkoffr@gao.gov. Contact points for our 

Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on 

the last page of this report. GAO staff who made key contributions to this 

product are listed in appendix IV.

Robert Goldenkoff 

Director

Strategic Issues 
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 26 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

This report examines: (1) the hiring authorities agencies used in fiscal 

year 2014 (the most recent year for available data when we began our 

review), (2) the extent to which selected agencies and OPM assessed the 

effectiveness of hiring authorities used for selected occupations in helping 

meet hiring needs, and (3) how OPM ensured that agencies have the 

assistance and information needed to use the hiring authorities 

effectively.

To address our first objective, we used Office of Personnel Management 

(OPM) Enterprise Human Resources Integration (EHRI) data, which 

contains personnel action and workforce data for most federal civilian 

employees.1 We analyzed government-wide and agency-level EHRI data 

from fiscal year 2014, which was the most recent year that data were 

available during our review. We primarily used the following EHRI data 

variables: (1) “current appointment authority 1 and 2” to describe the 

hiring authorities agencies used; and (2) “nature of action” codes to 

identify new appointments into federal service. First, we used OPM’s 

“current appointment authority” codes in EHRI to determine which hiring 

authorities agencies used in fiscal year 2014. According to OPM’s Guide 

to Data Standards—the guidance document that describes data elements 

in EHRI—the current appointment authority code is a mandatory data 

code that describes the law, executive order, rule, regulation, or other 

basis that authorizes an employee’s most recent conversion or accession 

action. Each agency must record the appointment authority codes for 

each hiring action in its own personnel system, which is then submitted to 

OPM’s EHRI data warehouse. Second, to calculate the new appointments 

made with each hiring authority, we aggregated the hiring actions using a 

subset of EHRI’s “nature of action” codes. Nature of action codes capture 

information about the type of personnel action being tracked, such as 

whether the action was an appointment, conversion, or separation. We 

limited our analysis to include nature of action codes for new full- and 

part-time, and permanent and non-permanent federal appointments in the 

 1

EHRI (formerly Central Personnel Data File (CPDF)) is the primary government-wide 

source for information on federal employees. The EHRI data we analyzed include 

executive branch civilian employees, but do not include the postal service, most legislative 

or judicial branch employees, or intelligence agencies. OPM transitioned from CPDF to 

EHRI as of fiscal year 2010. 

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 27 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

competitive or excepted services.

2 We also excluded certain groups 

outside of the scope of this engagement.3 Using these parameters, we 

aggregated the hiring actions for new appointments by current 

appointment authority in fiscal year 2014, and we sorted the current 

appointment authority codes from most used to least used governmentwide.

Sometimes agencies entered two current appointment authority codes for 

the same hiring action. Based on OPM documentation, we determined 

certain situations in which OPM instructed agencies to enter two codes 

for a single hiring action.4 However, there were a number of situations in 

which OPM could not provide documentation explaining why agencies 

should enter two current appointment authority codes. For these 

instances, we generally counted each current appointment authority code 

agencies entered as a single hiring authority “use.” We confirmed our 

methodology for describing government-wide use of hiring authorities with 

OPM.

Additionally, we used OPM documentation to match the current 

appointment authority codes with a name and citation in applicable laws, 

regulations, and executive orders. We examined laws, OPM regulations, 

and additional OPM materials to obtain a description of the most 

frequently used hiring authorities government-wide in fiscal year 2014. 

We reviewed OPM’s EHRI data for reasonableness and the presence of 

any obvious or potential errors in accuracy and completeness. On the 

basis of these procedures, we believe the data are sufficiently reliable for 

use in the analyses presented in this report.

To assess the extent that hiring authorities are effective in helping meet 

the needs of selected agencies, we focused on three occupations at three 

 2

To limit the analysis to new federal appointments, we only examined hiring actions for the 

following nature of action codes found in OPM’s EHRI data: 100, 101, 107, 108, 115, 120, 

122, 124, 140, 141, 170, 171, and 190.

3

For example, we excluded senior executive service appointments, presidential 

appointments, and conversions from other federal appointments.

4

For example, when using a government-wide direct hiring authority, OPM instructed 

agencies to enter the current appointment authority code AYM first and a second current 

appointment authority code for the OPM-approved direct hiring authority occupation, such 

as Information Technology Specialist (Information Security) or Contract Specialist. 
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 28 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

agencies as case examples. Based on our prior work on governmentwide mission-critical occupations and skills gaps, we focused on the 

following occupations: Information Technology Specialists, Contract 

Specialists, and Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics

(STEM) occupations.5 We reviewed OPM’s list of white collar 

occupational groups and included occupations within groups that 

appeared to be related to STEM.6 Specifically, we aggregated hiring 

actions for the occupations within the following occupational groups: (1) 

Natural Resources Management and Biological Science Group; (2) 

Medical, Hospital, Dental, and Public Health Group; (3) Veterinary 

Medical Science Group; (4) Engineering and Architecture Group; (5) 

Physical Sciences Group; and (6) Mathematical Sciences Group. 

Using data from OPM’s EHRI database, we made a nonprobability, 

judgmental selection of three case agencies based on two primary 

factors. First, we only considered agencies that hired our selected 

occupations in fiscal year 2014. Second, we selected agencies that used 

a variety of hiring authorities for these occupations in fiscal year 2014. 

Based on these factors, we selected the following case agencies: Air 

Force Materiel Command (AFMC), Department of Energy (DOE), and the 

National Institutes of Health (NIH). At AFMC, DOE, and NIH, we 

interviewed human resources (HR) policy officials to learn about which 

hiring authorities agencies used for our selected occupations, reasons for 

using these authorities, and ways that agencies were measuring the 

effectiveness of the authorities. We also covered these topics with HR 

specialists and hiring managers for our selected occupations at each 

case agency using a series of group discussions that we conducted using 

a standardized set of questions.

In addition to the case study approach, we also identified available 

government-wide data sources on the effectiveness of the hiring process. 

For example, we reviewed OPM time-to-hire data government-wide and 

by agency. We reviewed the Chief Human Capital Officers’ (CHCO) 

 5

For more information, see GAO, High Risk Series: An Update, GAO-15-290

(Washington, D.C.: Feb. 11, 2015), and Federal Workforce: OPM and Agencies Need to 

Strengthen Efforts to Identify and Close Mission-Critical Skills Gaps, GAO-15-223

(Washington, D.C.: Jan. 30, 2015)

6

For more information, see Office of Personnel Management, Handbook of Occupational 

Groups and Families (Washington, D.C.: May 2009).
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 29 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

Applicant Satisfaction Survey and the CHCO Manager Satisfaction 

Survey, which provided information on the applicant and hiring manager 

experience with the hiring process. Further, we reviewed governmentwide reporting on the administration’s hiring policy goals, such as

increasing the employment of veterans and people with disabilities in the 

federal workforce.7 We also interviewed knowledgeable officials at OPM

and the Merit Systems Protection Board about the effectiveness of federal 

hiring authorities.

We also assessed the extent to which OPM’s oversight of hiring 

authorities evaluated their effectiveness. Specifically, we identified 

relevant laws and policies that outline OPM’s oversight responsibilities for 

hiring authorities and interviewed OPM on the implementation, results, 

and analysis of these oversight efforts. We identified and reviewed OPM’s 

policy documents that describe the key components of OPM’s oversight 

program for hiring authorities, Delegated Examining Unit (DEU) audits 

and Human Resources Management Evaluations (HRME). Examples of 

policy documents we reviewed included the Practitioner’s Guide: How to 

Conduct a Delegated Examining Audit and Merit System Audit and 

Compliance Evaluator Handbook. We interviewed knowledgeable OPM 

officials about oversight activities related to Title 5 hiring as well as 

officials at our selected case agencies—AFMC, Energy, and NIH—who 

are responsible for working with OPM on these oversight reviews. For 

both OPM and the selected case agencies, we interviewed 

knowledgeable agency officials about the types of analyses they 

conducted based on audit findings and how, if at all, they shared 

information on any lessons learned. In addition to reviewing oversight of 

Title 5 hiring, we also reviewed documentation from our case agencies 

and interviewed case agency officials about non-Title 5 hiring authority 

oversight procedures.

To assess the extent that OPM ensures agencies have the assistance 

and information needed to use hiring authorities effectively, we identified 

online tools and guidance from OPM’s website as well as OPM 

documents, such as online trainings, handbooks, toolkits, and hiring 

 7

For more information, see Office of Personnel Management, Report on the Employment 

of Individuals with Disabilities in the Federal Executive Branch, Fiscal Year 2014

(Washington, D.C.: October 2015) and Employment of Veterans in the Federal Executive 

Branch, Fiscal Year 2014 (Washington, D.C.: July 2015).
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 30 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

authority fact sheets.8 We interviewed selected case agency officials to 

gauge their awareness of and satisfaction with these resources. We 

reviewed documentation on previous OPM initiatives that focused in part 

on making improvements to hiring authorities. These initiatives included 

OPM’s End-to-End Hiring Roadmap, OPM’s responses to the 2010 hiring 

reform executive orders, the Recruitment, Engagement, Diversity, and 

Inclusion initiative, and OPM’s work on cross-agency priority (CAP) goals. 

We interviewed officials from OPM, the Office of Management and 

Budget, and our selected case agencies to discuss these initiatives, 

particularly about measuring impact and sustainability. We reviewed

OPM’s plans for its most recent hiring initiative—the Hiring Excellence 

Campaign, which is part of the “People and Culture” CAP goal—with 

practices outlined in our prior work that are associated with success of 

such interagency efforts.9

We conducted this performance audit from May 2015 to August 2016 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain 

sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 

findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that 

the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our finding and 

conclusions based on our audit objectives.

 8

www.HRU.gov was created by Chief Human Capital Officers Council as an online 

platform that hosts courses that are identified as the best HR training across government. 

9

GAO, Managing for Results: Implementation Approaches Used to Enhance Collaboration 

in Interagency Groups, GAO-14-220 (Washington, D.C. Feb. 14, 2014).
Appendix II: Selected Agencies’ Strategies for 

Improving the Effectiveness of their Hiring 

Efforts

Page 31 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

• Institute formalized recruitment meetings with human resources 

(HR) staff and hiring managers to discuss recruitment strategy.

HR specialists and hiring managers at NIH said they used recruitment 

meetings to clarify the needs for the position, characteristics of an 

ideal applicant, possible applicant pools, and potential hiring 

authorities to use. They also discussed the use of professional or 

private-sector organizations to identify applicants and of broader 

recruitment topics, such as agency goals for diversity and veteran 

hiring. Hiring managers told us that these meetings helped them 

target the intended applicant pools for their open positions.

• Use specialized experience statements to help ensure a better fit 

between the applicant and the position. Hiring managers at Air 

Force Materiel Command (AFMC) and Department of Energy (DOE)

said specialized experience statements—an explicit description 

provided in the job announcement—helps ensure that applicants 

possess the knowledge, skills, and abilities to perform the work of the 

position. Without using a specialized experience statement, AFMC 

officials told us that it can be difficult for HR specialists to filter out 

unqualified applicants. Hiring managers felt that specialized 

experience statements helped improve the quality of applicants on 

certificate lists.

• Actively recruit, particularly among preference groups such as 

veterans, to direct qualified applicants to the job announcement.

Hiring managers at NIH and DOE said they used professional 

networking sites, university contacts, and professional organizations 

to target potential applicants who may not be actively searching for a 

new employment opportunity. For example, hiring managers at NIH 

reported using LinkedIn to identify and send potential job applicants to 

specific vacancy announcements for hard-to-fill IT positions. 

Sometimes these applicants would be eligible for excepted service 

hiring authorities. NIH officials said it enabled them to hire them more 

quickly than through a competitive examining process. Hiring 

managers said that they have used this recruiting technique to 

successfully identify qualified veterans for several IT positions.

• Use global job announcements when possible to reduce 

duplication of effort and to share quality applicant lists. Officials 

from DOE and NIH said that using global or open vacancy 

announcements allowed hiring officials to make multiple selections 

from a single vacancy announcement. For example, NIH uses an 

agency-wide recruitment strategy for commonly filled positions across 

the institutes. Under this initiative, NIH posts one vacancy 

announcement for a specific position. Then, any of the 27 institutes 

Appendix II: Selected Agencies’ Strategies 

for Improving the Effectiveness of their Hiring 

Efforts
Appendix II: Selected Agencies’ Strategies for 

Improving the Effectiveness of their Hiring 

Efforts

Page 32 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

can use it to fill a vacancy for that position. Hiring managers at NIH 

told us that using the global recruitment saved them the time of 

creating multiple, similar announcements. It also allowed them to 

review a large number of resumes to find quality applicants.

• Include subject matter experts in the assessment process to 

filter out applicants who are not qualified. Hiring managers for 

STEM occupations at DOE involved subject matter experts in the 

assessment process to help HR specialists determine which resumes 

met technical job qualifications. After the HR specialists conducted the 

initial screening to determine which applicants were eligible to apply 

for the position, DOE’s subject matter experts reviewed these 

resumes without applicant identifying information and provided 

documentation to show whether the applicants met technical job 

requirements. HR personnel were then able to use subject matter 

expert feedback to complete applicant assessments and assign a 

qualification rating. Officials told us that this process has resulted in 

better qualified applicant on certificate lists.
Appendix III: United States Office of Personnel 

Management

Page 33 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

Appendix III: United States Office of 

Personnel Management
Appendix III: United States Office of Personnel 

Management

Page 34 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring
Appendix III: United States Office of Personnel

Management

Page 35 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring
Appendix III: United States Office of Personnel 

Management

Page 36 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring
Appendix IV: GAO Contact and 

Acknowledgments

Page 37 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

For further information regarding this statement, please contact Robert 

Goldenkoff, Director, Strategic Issues, at (202) 512- 2757 or 

GoldenkoffR@gao.gov

Individuals making key contributions to this statement include: Chelsa 

Gurkin (Assistant Director), Rebecca O’Connor (Analyst-in-Charge), Sara 

L. Daleski, Christopher Falcone, Karin Fangman, Ellen Grady, Shelley 

Rao, David Richards, and Elizabeth Wood.

Appendix IV: GAO Contact and 

Acknowledgments

GAO Contacts

Staff 

Acknowledgments

(451150)
Appendix IV: GAO Contact and 

Acknowledgments

Page 38 GAO-16-521 Federal Hiring

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.

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 

cost is through GAO’s website (http://www.gao.gov). Each weekday 

afternoon, GAO posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, 

and correspondence. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted 

products, go to http://www.gao.gov and select “E-mail Updates.”

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of 

production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the 

publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and 

white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s website, 

http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 

TDD (202) 512-2537.

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, 

MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information.

Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and YouTube.

Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E-mail Updates. 

Listen to our Podcasts and read The Watchblog.

Visit GAO on the web at www.gao.gov.

Contact:

Website: http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512-

4400, U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 

7125, Washington, DC 20548

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, DC 20548

GAO’s Mission

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

Order by Phone

Connect with GAO

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Congressional 

Relations

Public Affairs

Please Print on Recycled Paper.