PERFORMANCE PLAN SUMMARY

FY 2015 Annual Performance Report and FY 2017 Annual Performance Plan—U.S. Department of Education 101 

Goal 6. U.S. Department of Education Capacity: 

Improve the organizational capacities of the Department to 

implement the Strategic Plan. 

Goal Leader: Andrew Jackson 

Objective 6.1: Effective Workforce. Continue to build a skilled, diverse, and engaged 

workforce within the Department. Objective Leader: Cassandra Cuffee-Graves 

Metric 6.1.A: Staffing gaps percentage106

 

Metric 6.1.B: EVS Employee Engagement Index107

Metric 6.1.C: Time to hire108

Metric 6.1.D: Effective Communication Index109

Objective 6.2: Risk Management. Improve the Department’s program efficacy through 

comprehensive risk management, and grant and contract monitoring. Objective Leaders: Phil 

Maestri and Jim Ropelewski 

Metric 6.2.A: Percentage of A-133 Single Audits Overdue for resolution 

Metric 6.2.B: Compliance rate of contractor evaluation performance reports110

Objective 6.3: Implementation and Support. Build Department capacity and systems to 

support states’ and other grantees’ implementation of reforms that result in improved outcomes, 

and keep the public informed of promising practices and new reform initiatives. Objective 

Leader: Heather Rieman 

Metric 6.3.A: Percentage of states who annually rate the Department’s technical 

assistance as helping build state capacity to implement education reforms 

Objective 6.4: Productivity and Performance Management. Improve workforce productivity 

through information technology enhancements, telework expansion efforts, more effective 

process performance management systems, and state-of-the-art leadership and knowledge 

management practices. Objective Leaders: Danny Harris, Cassandra Cuffee-Graves, and 

Denise Carter

 

106 Percent resulting from dividing number of all agency positions into unfilled agency vacancies. Metric is being removed at the end 

of the FY 2015 reporting period. Please refer to appendix B for details pertaining to the removal and addition of metrics. 

107 Based on positive Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS, also referred to as “EVS”) responses.

108 The Department’s target for completing hiring actions is 90 days (as measured from Request to Recruit date to Tentative Offer 

date). This metric measures the percentage of hiring actions completed within 90 days. An increase in the time to hire rate means 

more hiring actions are completed within the target timeframe, the hiring process is more efficient, and vacancies are filled on a 

more timely basis. 

109 Based on positive FEVS responses. 

110 As reported in the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) reporting tool at www.ppirs.gov. Government use of 

PPIRS is required by Federal Acquisition Regulation Subpart 42.15, and government wide annual reporting performance targets are 

set by the Office of Management and Budget in the March 6, 2013, memorandum titled, “Improving the Collection and Use of 

Information about Contractor Performance and Integrity.” The PPIRS compliance metric “calculates the number of completed 

evaluations against the contract actions that should have had an evaluation completed. This number is displayed as a percentage”

(https://www.cpars.gov/pdfs/Improving_Compliance.pdf).
PERFORMANCE PLAN SUMMARY

FY 2015 Annual Performance Report and FY 2017 Annual Performance Plan—U.S. Department of Education 102 

Metric 6.4.A: Number of Department information technology (IT) security incidents 

Metric 6.4.B: EVS Results-Oriented Performance Culture Index111

Metric 6.4.C: EVS Leadership and Knowledge Management Index112

Metric 6.4.D: Total usable square footage 

Metric 6.4.E: Rent cost

Goal 6 Discretionary Resources

$0 $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500

FY 2015

FY 2016

FY 2017

$469

$491

$537

(Dollars in millions)

Major Discretionary Programs and Activities113 Supporting Goal 6 Performance Metrics 

[Dollars in Millions]

POC Account Obj. Program

FY 2015 

Appropriation

FY 2016 

Appropriation

FY 2017 

President’s 

Budget

OIG OIG Office of Inspector General 58 59 62

PA PA Program Administration: Building 

modernization 0 1 24

PA PA Program Administration: Salaries and 

expenses 411 431 450

TOTAL, GOAL 6 469 491 537

POC = Principal Office Component 

NOTES: Many programs may have sub-activities that relate to other goals. Detail may not add to total due to rounding. 

 

111 Based on positive FEVS responses. 

112 Based on positive FEVS responses. 

113 All the programs listed are discretionary programs, as distinct from mandatory programs. These include both competitive and 

noncompetitive programs. 
PERFORMANCE PLAN SUMMARY

FY 2015 Annual Performance Report and FY 2017 Annual Performance Plan—U.S. Department of Education 103 

Public Benefit 

To ensure the achievement of the Department’s mission critical objectives, grants and contract 

management remain a strategic focus for improvement in long- and short-term initiatives. 

Additionally, fortifying human capital strategies, competencies and resources, along with the 

continuous improvement of IT security and technologically enhanced work environments, 

continue to be priorities. These activities support grantees, schools, students, families, and 

communities in achieving their educational and economic goals, while also continuing to hold 

recipients of the Department’s funding accountable to clear financial requirements and legal 

obligations. 

The Department continues to focus on human capital management to acquire and develop its 

workforce; increase diversity and inclusion and improve employee engagement; rethink how it 

monitors and intervenes with high-risk grantees and contractors; enhance workforce productivity 

through information technology; safeguard its assets and stakeholders from cybersecurity 

threats; continue to improve and integrate effective performance management; and transform 

the way the Department interacts with states, districts, IHEs, and other grantees and 

stakeholders. These efforts will improve performance results, increase stakeholder 

collaboration, and lead to greater employee engagement. 

In FY 2015, the Department was a leader in the broader grant community to implement 

successfully the new Uniform Guidance regulations prescribed and updated by the President’s 

Office of Management and Budget. The Department created an online repository of resources 

and conducted frequent outreach to help grantees follow the new rules, which reduce burden 

while strengthening controls against waste, fraud, and abuse. 

Using a strategic approach in FY 2015, the Department strengthened Human Resources (HR) 

operations by reducing hiring lead times, improving executive recruitment strategies, revising 

outdated HR policies, expanding training opportunities, and improving management practices.
PERFORMANCE PLAN SUMMARY

FY 2015 Annual Performance Report and FY 2017 Annual Performance Plan—U.S. Department of Education 104 

Goal 6: Details

U.S. Department of 

Education 

Indicators of Success

Baseline

Actuals

Current 

Year 

Target

Current 

Year 

Results

Actual-to-Target

2015 Out-Year Targets Trend Line 

(Actuals)

2013 2014 2015 2015

Missed Exceeded

2016 2017

6.1.A. Staffing gaps 

percentage114

FY: 2013

15% 15% 4% 4.3% 15% MET

15.

0%

4.3

%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

6.1.A

NA NA

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

2013 2014 2015

New Metric

Percent of selections made 

per job opportunity 

announcement (JOA)

FY:

2015

46.4%

NA NA 46.4% NA NA 48.7% 51.2%

6.1.B. EVS Employee 

Engagement Index

FY: 2012

64.7% 66% 67% 68% 69% NOT 

MET

69.

0%

68.

0%

60.0%

61.0%

62.0%

63.0%

64.0%

65.0%

66.0%

67.0%

68.0%

69.0%

6.1.B

71% 72%

61.0%

63.0%

65.0%

67.0%

69.0%

2013 2014 2015

6.1.C. Time to hire FY: 2013

65% 65% 85% 67.6% 68% NOT 

MET

68.

0%

67.

6%

55.0%

56.0%

57.0%

58.0%

59.0%

60.0%

61.0%

62.0%

63.0%

64.0%

65.0%

66.0%

67.0%

68.0%

69.0%

6.1.C

69% 70%

0.0%

20.0%

40.0%

60.0%

80.0%

100.0%

201320142015

 

114 Metric being removed at the end of the FY 2015 reporting period and being replaced with the metric identified as “New Metric” directly below it. If there is no corresponding “New 

Metric” identified, new metric TBD. Please refer to appendix B for details pertaining to the removal and addition of metrics. The proposed FY 2016 and 2017 targets for the metric being 

removed were both NA. 
PERFORMANCE PLAN SUMMARY

FY 2015 Annual Performance Report and FY 2017 Annual Performance Plan—U.S. Department of Education 105 

U.S. Department of 

Education 

Indicators of Success

Baseline

Actuals

Current 

Year 

Target

Current 

Year 

Results

Actual-to-Target

2015 Out-Year Targets Trend Line 

(Actuals)

2013 2014 2015 2015

Missed Exceeded

2016 2017

6.1.D. Effective 

Communication Index

FY: 2012

48% 49.6% 50% 51% 50% MET

50.

0%

51.

0%

45.0%

46.0%

47.0%

48.0%

49.0%

50.0%

51.0%

6.1.D

51% 52%

48.0%

49.0%

50.0%

51.0%

52.0%

2013 2014 2015

6.2.A. Percentage of A-133 

Single Audits Overdue for 

resolution

FY: 2012

57% 52% 37% 20% 43% MET

43.

0%

20.

0%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

6.2.A

37% 31%

0.0%

20.0%

40.0%

60.0%

2013 2014 2015

6.2.B. Compliance rate of 

contractor evaluation 

performance reports

FY: 2013

85% 85% 97% 98% 100% NOT 

MET

100

.0%

98.

0%

75.0%

80.0%

85.0%

90.0%

95.0%

100.0%

6.2.B

100% 100%

75.0%

80.0%

85.0%

90.0%

95.0%

100.0%

2013 2014 2015
PERFORMANCE PLAN SUMMARY

FY 2015 Annual Performance Report and FY 2017 Annual Performance Plan—U.S. Department of Education 106 

U.S. Department of 

Education 

Indicators of Success

Baseline

Actuals

Current 

Year 

Target

Current 

Year 

Results

Actual-to-Target

2015 Out-Year Targets Trend Line 

(Actuals)

2013 2014 2015 2015

Missed Exceeded

2016 2017

6.3.A. Percentage of states 

who annually rate the 

Department’s technical 

assistance as helping build 

state capacity to implement 

education reforms115

FY: 2013

54% 54% 75% 69% 67% MET

67.

0%

69.

0%

55.0%

57.0%

59.0%

61.0%

63.0%

65.0%

67.0%

69.0%

71.0%

6.3.A

77% 85%

0.0%

20.0%

40.0%

60.0%

80.0%

2013 2014 2015

6.4.A. Number of

Department IT security 

incidents

FY: 2012

756 755 445 580 682 MET

682

580

500

520

540

560

580

600

620

640

660

680

700

6.4.A

551116 523117

0

200

400

600

800

2013 2014 2015

6.4.B. EVS ResultsOriented Performance 

Culture Index

FY: 2012

53% 54% 56% 57% 56% MET

56.

0%

57.

0%

50.0%

52.0%

54.0%

56.0%

58.0%

6.4.B

57% 58%

52.0%

53.0%

54.0%

55.0%

56.0%

57.0%

58.0%

2013 2014 2015

 

115 In FY 2016, the metric’s data source will be changed to the 2015 Grantee Satisfaction Survey. Thus, in FY 2016, the baseline and targets will be updated to reflect the change. 

There is also variability with this metric due to ESEA reauthorization and the impact on the programs included. 

116 FY 2016 target was reduced based on actual incidents reported in FY 2015 and then reducing that actual by 5%. 

117 FY 2017 target was reduced by 5% from the FY 2016 target. 
PERFORMANCE PLAN SUMMARY

FY 2015 Annual Performance Report and FY 2017 Annual Performance Plan—U.S. Department of Education 107 

U.S. Department of 

Education 

Indicators of Success

Baseline

Actuals

Current 

Year 

Target

Current 

Year 

Results

Actual-to-Target

2015 Out-Year Targets Trend Line 

(Actuals)

2013 2014 2015 2015

Missed Exceeded

2016 2017

6.4.C. EVS Leadership and 

Knowledge Management 

Index

FY: 2012

60% 61% 61% 62% 62% MET

62.

0%

62.

0%

50.0%

52.0%

54.0%

56.0%

58.0%

60.0%

62.0%

64.0%

6.4.C

63% 64%

55.0%

56.0%

57.0%

58.0%

59.0%

60.0%

61.0%

62.0%

63.0%

2013 2014 2015

6.4.D. Total usable square 

footage

FY: 2012

1,563,641 1,573,317 1,533,239 1,530,864 1,525,937 NOT 

MET

1,52

5,93

7

1,53

0,86

4

1,450,000

1,456,500

1,463,000

1,469,500

1,476,000

1,482,500

1,489,000

1,495,500

1,502,000

1,508,500

1,515,000

1,521,500

1,528,000

1,534,500

1,541,000

6.4.D

1,459,937 TBD

1,500,000

1,515,000

1,530,000

1,545,000

1,560,000

1,575,000

1,590,000

201320142015

6.4.E. Rent cost FY: 2014

$74.3M $71.7M $74.1M $72.7M $80.3M MET

$80

,30

0,0

00

$72

,72

0,0

99

68,000,000

70,000,000

72,000,000

74,000,000

76,000,000

78,000,000

80,000,000

82,000,000

6.4.E

$80,300,000 TBD

70,000,000

71,000,000

72,000,000

73,000,000

74,000,000

75,000,000

201320142015

NA = Not applicable. 

TBD = To be determined. 

Academic Year (AY) is a collegiate year spanning August–May; School Year (SY) spans August–July and is aligned with a P–12 school year; Fiscal Year (FY) corresponds to a federal 

fiscal year; Calendar Year (CY) spans January–December. 

Data Sources and Frequency of Collection: 

6.1.A. Mission Critical Occupation (MCO) Staffing Gap Report; quarterly 

6.1.B. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS); annually 

6.1.C. Federal Personnel/Payroll System (FPPS) Datamart; quarterly 
PERFORMANCE PLAN SUMMARY

FY 2015 Annual Performance Report and FY 2017 Annual Performance Plan—U.S. Department of Education 108 

6.1.D. OPM FEVS; annually 

6.2.A. Office of the Chief Financial Officer’s (OCFO) Audit Accountability & Resolution Tracking System (AARTS); annually 

6.2.B. Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) www.ppirs.gov “PPIRS Compliance Report”; annually

6.3.A. Baseline is from the Race to the Top State Lead Survey, n=19. Future data will come from the Annual Grantee Satisfaction Survey; annually 

6.4.A. Operational Vulnerability Management Solution (OVMS) System; quarterly 

6.4.B. OPM FEVS; annually 

6.4.C. OPM FEVS; annually 

6.4.D. Department’s Master Space Management Plan; annually 

6.4.E. Department’s Master Space Management Plan; annually 

Note on performance metrics and targets: These metrics were established as a part of the FY 2014–18 Strategic Plan. Metrics may be updated or revised to 

reflect awareness of more accurate data or clarifications. Such updates or revisions are identified in footnotes. 
PERFORMANCE PLAN SUMMARY

FY 2015 Annual Performance Report and FY 2017 Annual Performance Plan—U.S. Department of Education 109 

Analysis and Next Steps by Objective

Objective 6.1: Effective Workforce 

Explanation and Analysis of Progress: 

The Department’s staffing gaps have been successfully reduced and continue to maintain a 

stable, minimum level of 4–5 percent, which is well below the FY 2015 target level of 

15 percent. The Department also continues to reduce hiring lead times and completed 

approximately 68 percent of hiring actions within 90 days from the date the action was received 

to the tentative job offer. In FY 2015, the Department opened a new career center to assist 

employees in reaching their career development goals and successfully developed, marketed 

and deployed a boot-camp style supervisory training course for supervisors and managers. This 

mandatory three-day Supervisor Essentials course is facilitated by Department subject matter 

experts and provides new and existing supervisors with the essential tools in a participatory 

environment that encourages students to develop cross-component networks to share best 

practices. Additionally, the Department received full OPM certification for its Senior Executive 

Service performance management program for the first time in eight years. 

The Department’s strategic goals are vast: supporting postsecondary education, CTE, adult 

education, elementary and secondary education, early learning, equity, and continuous 

improvement of the education system. To achieve its objectives, the Department’s workforce 

must have the right skills and be led by skilled and engaging supervisors and managers. The 

Department is enhancing employee productivity by aligning priorities and goals at every level in 

the organization with the Department’s strategic objectives. The Department has achieved 

consistent, incremental progress in Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS) results. Since 

2010, the Department has improved scores in the Employee Engagement Index of the FEVS 

from 62.6 percent to 68 percent in 2015. In FY 2015, the Department implemented a successful 

engagement strategy that resulted in 50 percent of subcomponents increasing their employee 

engagement scores between 1 and 12 percent, and 72 percent of subcomponents achieving 

employee engagement scores above the governmentwide average. 

The Office of Human Resources (OHR) worked with all Departmental offices to prioritize the 

revision and updating of key human capital policies, conducted extensive outreach efforts to 

hiring managers, and expanded supervisory and managerial training and development 

opportunities. 

Human capital management plays a critical role in the Department’s ability to fulfill its mission. 

By effectively planning for workforce changes, addressing skill gaps, and providing timely

guidance and hands-on options for recruitment, staffing, and retention, the Department can 

provide consistent oversight, execution, and support for its programs. 

Challenges and Next Steps: 

The Department has improved managers’ awareness of key hiring activities and timelines. 

Classification and hiring activities have been automated for real-time tracking, which allows HR 

staff to focus on more complex questions. In FY 2016, the Department will continue outreach 

efforts to hiring managers on personnel flexibilities and improve HR tracking tools to support 

managers in hiring the best employees for their positions. 
PERFORMANCE PLAN SUMMARY

FY 2015 Annual Performance Report and FY 2017 Annual Performance Plan—U.S. Department of Education 110 

Objective 6.2: Risk Management 

Explanation and Analysis of Progress: 

Risk management focuses on creating an environment where grant and loan funds are used for 

the right purpose and achieve program success. The Department has worked to increase its 

ability to provide the right technical assistance and oversight to help grantees achieve program 

goals. Some of that work is accomplished through improving the quality and thoroughness of 

risk assessments conducted by the Department assuring that grantees are ready to manage the 

funds awarded. During FY 2015 the Department conducted preaward risk reviews for 

100 percent of competitive grant programs. Other work has included improving the program 

staffs’ skills in the area of fiscal monitoring through training and technical assistance. In 

FY 2015, the Department far exceeded its goal of timely audit resolution—the target was set at 

no more than 43 percent resolved overdue, and the actual percentage achieved was 

20 percent. This was achieved by focusing on timeliness and fostering close working 

relationships with programs and support offices. In addition, a comprehensive training program 

to support the implementation of the new Uniform Guidance was developed and implemented 

for both grantees and Department staff, which included a strand on audit-related requirements. 

Risk management is also an essential aspect of contract monitoring, which is achieved by 

actively assessing program and performance risks inherent in contracts through oversight and 

support and issuance of policy and guidance to program and contract officials. The Department 

has sustained high performance in compliance with contractor performance reporting 

requirements, leading the government with a 98 percent compliance rate for FY 2015. Only four 

agencies reached a compliance rate of 90 percent in FY 2015, and the average compliance rate 

of all 64 agencies reported was only 30 percent.118

 

Challenges and Next Steps: 

The Department will continue to monitor contractor performance reporting requirements and 

work to attain the 100 percent compliance goal set by OMB. 

The Department will continue collaborating with offices to reduce the number of overdue audits 

and leverage audit follow-up data to manage grantee risk by providing additional technical 

assistance and training on audit requirements related to the Uniform Guidance. The Department 

will focus its work with program offices to increase understanding and application of the results 

of Entity Risk Reviews related to audit data, with an emphasis on strategies to mitigate risk 

through effective and timely corrective action and follow-up. 

Collecting quantitative data on the risk posed by grant recipients, and the extent to which the 

Department makes progress building capacity to address this risk, remains a challenge. Building 

the capacity of the Department to conduct more sophisticated analysis of data, both structured 

and unstructured, will be critical to addressing that challenge. The Department will work toward 

building quality, accessible sources of data on grant and grantee performance, sharing 

information about risks and mitigation across program offices, and building the grant staff 

capacity—in both knowledge and numbers—to monitor the financial and administrative 

components of grant performance. 

These efforts will ultimately improve the capacity of our grantees to provide quality programs 

and services. 

 

118 Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) (www.ppirs.gov) “PPIRS Compliance Report.”
PERFORMANCE PLAN SUMMARY

FY 2015 Annual Performance Report and FY 2017 Annual Performance Plan—U.S. Department of Education 111 

Objective 6.3: Implementation and Support 

Explanation and Analysis of Progress: 

2015 was the first year of implementation for OESE’s new Office of State Support (OSS). The 

reorganization was approved in the fourth quarter of FY 2014 and OSS was created in early 

October. OSS is designed to provide improved state-centered support across related 

Department programs and offer more transparent, higher quality, and better differentiated 

support to meet the varied needs among states. The matrix organization model adopted by OSS 

ensures that a state has a primary contact within the Department and this individual serves as 

the liaison across key state-administered grant programs and major federal funding streams that 

flow to each state and district. By consolidating processes and technical assistance, the 

Department will be able to more effectively customize its outreach to individual states and model 

the critical partnerships that states should have with their respective districts. 

The office is working to deepen staff knowledge and build or pilot systems and routines that 

allow OSS to support states with implementation through a systemic approach to technical 

assistance and the design and implementation of key processes, such as performance 

management and knowledge management, in order to ensure sustainability. 

Educator equity is one area of increased attention and support during the past year. In July 

2014, the Department announced the Excellent Educators for All initiative designed to move 

America toward the day when every student in every public school is taught by excellent 

educators. An Equitable Access Support Network (EASN) was set up to provide support and 

technical assistance to states to ensure that they had strong plans and targeted strategies so 

that students in poverty and minority children are not taught at higher rates than other children 

by inexperienced, unqualified, or out-of-field teachers. 

Challenges and Next Steps: 

Transitioning to the new OSS is a significant change that will take time to implement fully. OESE 

and OSS leadership are still establishing new processes and procedures, and the transition will 

take place gradually. Compounded by budget constraints, continuing challenges include 

staffing, appropriate professional development, and support for staff. 

Building new and stronger relationships with states and stakeholders requires significant 

outreach and effort. The Department continues to communicate with stakeholders and 

grantees—through printed publications, the PROGRESS blog, OSS technical assistance, 

YouTube videos, and speeches—and broadly share lessons learned across grantees and 

nongrantees and with the general public about the reforms being implemented at the state and 

local levels. Next steps also include launching an updated state performance review, 

implementing against a new strategic technical assistance plan, and adjusting plans to prepare 

for ESSA implementation.

Objective 6.4: Productivity and Performance Management 

Explanation and Analysis of Progress: 

The Department takes pride in fostering a culture where managers and employees have the 

information and technology to perform their jobs well even when they are not physically 

onsite.The Department instituted tools and techniques for managers and employees to make 

performance goal setting, tracking, and feedback a regular work practice throughout the year. 
PERFORMANCE PLAN SUMMARY

FY 2015 Annual Performance Report and FY 2017 Annual Performance Plan—U.S. Department of Education 112 

Additionally, some supervisors used a best practice performance feedback worksheet with 

questions tied to FEVS results which enhanced proactive communication and built trust within 

work teams. The Department also developed a revised telework training course, How to Make 

Telework Really Work. Training sessions incorporated discussion on changes to the 

Department’s updated telework policy and provided a forum for managers and employees to 

ask questions about telework and any concerns regarding space reduction and modernization 

plans. The Department saw an increase in the use of telework as a viable and effective tool that 

enabled employees to meet professional responsibilities while also offering a mechanism to 

reduce work/life stress.

To improve efficiencies and reduce costs associated with the Grant Award Notification process, 

the Department issued a Grant Bulletin establishing policy and guidance to support e-signature 

for formula grants. 

In FY 2015, the Department implemented the second year of the ED Space Modernization 

Initiative, finalized space designs for two major subcomponents, and worked with the General 

Services Administration (GSA) to develop an aggressive construction schedule for the first 

major phase of the initiative in the Department’s headquarters building. The Department 

identified business requirements, conducted market research with a broad group of 

stakeholders, and completed procurement for an automated hoteling and conference room 

reservation system. Department staff in San Francisco and Chicago were engaged in the 

process of redefining requirements for new space when current leases expire and worked with 

GSA to find federally owned space in San Francisco to avoid a large rent increase in 2014; the 

resulting solution will save the Department $15 million in avoided rent and construction costs in

2017–18. The Department worked closely with its labor union partners to address space 

challenges in Washington, DC and regional office locations. 

Challenges and Next Steps: 

The Department adopted a creative and dramatic response to reduce overall administrative 

expenses through emergency space consolidation in the Washington, DC area. As a result, the 

Department will achieve substantial cost avoidance in FY 2016 and FY 2017. Though the 

strategy was developed with full collaboration and commitment of Department leadership, the 

affected principal offices, OCIO, and GSA, potential challenges include maintaining morale and 

productivity and sustaining recent gains in employee engagement. 

Selected Strategies to Achieve Goal 6

The Department will build on the success of HR improvements of FY 2015 by continuing to 

strengthen HR operations, improving executive recruitment strategies, revising outdated HR 

policies, expanding training opportunities in critical areas, and improving labor relations 

management practices. 

While continued focus on the IT automated response capabilities has led to reductions in the 

number of security incidents in FY 2016 and FY 2017, additional training for the Department’s 

third-party partners will reduce the potential for personally identifiable information disclosures 

and ensure the proper protection of our customers’ information. The Department’s cybersecurity 

focus will remain on data protection and control. The Department will continue implementing 

various capabilities to control the flow of sensitive information, and prevent access to related 

systems, data, or other critical information and infrastructure by unauthorized individuals. These 

new capabilities with existing protective measures will ensure the protection of employee and 

customer data. 
PERFORMANCE PLAN SUMMARY

FY 2015 Annual Performance Report and FY 2017 Annual Performance Plan—U.S. Department of Education 113 

Finally, the Department must continue its work in developing customized change management 

strategies necessary to successful space redesign and reduce the Department’s physical 

footprint. By consolidating units, renegotiating leases, and making reductions in the needed 

space, the Department will save rent costs.