U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

44–008 PDF 2008

OPPORTUNITIES EXIST TO IMPROVE SENIOR EXECUTIVE SERVICE DIVERSITY IN LEGISLATIVE

BRANCH AGENCIES

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON FEDERAL WORKFORCE,

POSTAL SERVICE, AND THE DISTRICT

OF COLUMBIA

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT

AND GOVERNMENT REFORM

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

NOVEMBER 13, 2007

Serial No. 110–67

Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/index.html

http://www.house.gov/reform

(II)

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM

HENRY A. WAXMAN, California, Chairman

TOM LANTOS, California

EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York

PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania

CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York

ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland

DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio

DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois

JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts

WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri

DIANE E. WATSON, California

STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts

BRIAN HIGGINS, New York

JOHN A. YARMUTH, Kentucky

BRUCE L. BRALEY, Iowa

ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of

Columbia

BETTY MCCOLLUM, Minnesota

JIM COOPER, Tennessee

CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland

PAUL W. HODES, New Hampshire

CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut

JOHN P. SARBANES, Maryland

PETER WELCH, Vermont

TOM DAVIS, Virginia

DAN BURTON, Indiana

CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut

JOHN M. MCHUGH, New York

JOHN L. MICA, Florida

MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana

TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania

CHRIS CANNON, Utah

JOHN J. DUNCAN, JR., Tennessee

MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio

DARRELL E. ISSA, California

KENNY MARCHANT, Texas

LYNN A. WESTMORELAND, Georgia

PATRICK T. MCHENRY, North Carolina

VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina

BRIAN P. BILBRAY, California

BILL SALI, Idaho

JIM JORDAN, Ohio

PHIL SCHILIRO, Chief of Staff

PHIL BARNETT, Staff Director

EARLEY GREEN, Chief Clerk

DAVID MARIN, Minority Staff Director

SUBCOMMITTEE ON FEDERAL WORKFORCE, POSTAL SERVICE, AND THE DISTRICT OF

COLUMBIA

DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois

ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of

Columbia

JOHN P. SARBANES, Maryland

ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland

DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio, Chairman

WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri

STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts

KENNY MARCHANT, Texas

JOHN M. MCHUGH, NEW YORK

JOHN L. MICA, Florida

DARRELL E. ISSA, California

JIM JORDAN, Ohio

TANIA SHAND, Staff Director

(III)

C O N T E N T S

Page

Hearing held on November 13, 2007 ...................................................................... 1

Statement of:

Bransford, William L., general counsel, Senior Executives Association;

Shirley A. Jones, president, Blacks in Government, GAO USACE Chapter; and Lieutenant Sharon Blackmon-Malloy, president, U.S. Capitol

Black Police Association ............................................................................... 91

Blackmon-Malloy, Sharon ......................................................................... 103

Bransford, William L. ............................................................................... 91

Jones, Shirley A. ........................................................................................ 96

Copeland, Curtis W., Specialist in American National Government, Congressional Research Service ......................................................................... 6

Elzy, Nadine, Director, Office of Equal Employment Opportunity, Government Printing Office; Ronald Stroman, Managing Director, Office of

Opportunity and Inclusiveness, Government Accountability Office; Teresa Bailey, Director, Office of Equal Employment Opportunity/Conciliation Programs, Office of the Architect of the Capitol; Stephanie Ruiz,

Director, Human Resources, Congressional Budget Office; Dennis

Hanratty, Director, Human Resources Services, Library of Congress;

and Daniel Nichols, Assistant Chief of Police, U.S. Capitol Police ........... 22

Bailey, Teresa ............................................................................................ 45

Elzy, Nadine .............................................................................................. 22

Hanratty, Dennis ....................................................................................... 60

Nichols, Daniel .......................................................................................... 71

Ruiz, Stephanie ......................................................................................... 51

Stroman, Ronald ........................................................................................ 29

Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by:

Bailey, Teresa, Director, Office of Equal Employment Opportunity/Conciliation Programs, Office of the Architect of the Capitol, prepared statement of ........................................................................................................... 47

Blackmon-Malloy, Lieutenant Sharon, president, U.S. Capitol Black Police Association, prepared statement of ...................................................... 106

Bransford, William L., general counsel, Senior Executives Association,

prepared statement of ................................................................................... 93

Copeland, Curtis W., Specialist in American National Government, Congressional Research Service, prepared statement of .................................. 8

Davis, Hon. Danny K., a Representative in Congress from the State

of Illinois, prepared statement of ................................................................ 4

Elzy, Nadine, Director, Office of Equal Employment Opportunity, Government Printing Office, prepared statement of .............................................. 25

Hanratty, Dennis, Director, Human Resources Services, Library of Congress, prepared statement of ........................................................................ 62

Jones, Shirley A., president, Blacks in Government, GAO USACE Chapter, prepared statement of ............................................................................ 98

Nichols, Daniel, Assistant Chief of Police, U.S. Capitol Police, prepared

statement of ................................................................................................... 73

Ruiz, Stephanie, Director, Human Resources, Congressional Budget Office, prepared statement of ........................................................................... 53

Stroman, Ronald, Managing Director, Office of Opportunity and Inclusiveness, Government Accountability Office, prepared statement of ....... 31

(1)

OPPORTUNITIES EXIST TO IMPROVE SENIOR

EXECUTIVE SERVICE DIVERSITY IN LEGISLATIVE BRANCH AGENCIES

TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2007

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON FEDERAL WORKFORCE, POSTAL

SERVICE, AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM,

Washington, DC.

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2 p.m., in room

2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Danny K. Davis (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

Present: Representatives Davis of Illinois, Norton, and Clay.

Staff present: Tania Shand, staff director; Caleb Gilchrist, professional staff member, Lori Hayman, counsel; LaKeshia Myers, editor/staff assistant; Susan Ragland, GAO detailee; Teresa Coufal,

clerk; and Leneal Scott, information officer.

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. The subcommittee will come to order. Mr.

Marchant, I understand, is having some difficulty with his flight,

therefore, he may get here as we continue, but currently, he has

not made it yet. And we’ll just kind of play that by ear.

So let me thank those of you who have come and I want to welcome all of the witnesses, all of those who are in attendance. I

want to welcome to you the Federal Workforce, Postal Service, and

District of Columbia Subcommittee hearing on Senior Executive

Service, women and minorities are underrepresented in most legislative branch agencies. The hearing will examine diversity at the

executive level positions in legislative branch agencies and explore

agency succession planning efforts, including the extent to which

there is diversity at the GS–15 feeder pool levels or throughout the

agencies’ work force. Hearing no objection, the Chair and any other

Members who are here will make opening statements and all Members will have 3 days to submit statements for the record.

Good afternoon, the subcommittee hearing is being held to examine diversity in the senior ranks of congressional support agencies.

Democratic legislatures are traditionally supposed to represent a

broad spectrum of the national population to assure that they will

reflect the interest and outlooks of all people. Therefore, while it

is important that the Congress itself represents the national diversity, it is equally important that the agencies that support Congress be broadly representative of the people it serves. Skilled persons reflecting all of the American people should have a hand in

supporting the legislative process, whether it is to assist the ConVerDate 11-MAY-2000 16:34 Sep 26, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\44008.TXT KATIE PsN: KATIE
2

gress in making laws, or in overseeing the operations of the executive branch. Diversity in the senior levels of executive and legislative branch agencies brings a variety of perspectives and approaches to policy development and implementation.

Today the subcommittee released a report, the first of its kind,

analyzing the racial and gender diversity of the senior executive

core of six legislative branch agencies: The Government Accountability Office [GAO]; the Library of Congress [LOC]; the Congressional Budget Office [CBO]; the Government Printing Office [GPO];

the Capitol Police; and the Architect of the Capitol.

The report, which was based on information provided to the subcommittee by these agencies, found that women and minorities in

the Senior Executive Service [SES], are underrepresented in most

legislative branch agencies. The SES, at each legislative branch

agency, was less diverse in terms of minorities than its work force

at a whole in fiscal year 2007, and less diverse in terms of women

in four of the six agencies.

Some agencies, GS–15 feeder or successor pools, were less diverse than their SES core. The report also found that in some

agencies the average tolled compensation for minorities and women

in fiscal year 2007 was less than their non minority and male counterparts. All of these agencies work for us, the U.S. Congress, while

we can provide oversight of these agencies, we cannot monitor their

day-to-day efforts to improve diversity in their agencies. That is the

role of their respective diversity offices.

Each legislative branch agency has a diversity office that exists

to ensure that the agency’s personnel policies and practices are

fair, merit-based and promote the opportunity for all employees to

maximize their contributions to the agency’s mission. What Congress can do is ensure that these offices have effective programs in

place to address the problems raised in the subcommittee report

and the independence to do something about them.

I will soon formally ask all legislative branch inspector generals

to review the diversity offices of their sister agencies. The IGs will

be tasked with reviewing the programs the diversity offices have in

place to address diversity concerns, how these programs are being

evaluated to determine if they are yielding the desired results, the

accuracy of the dispute and discrimination data being reported to

Congress, and whether the diversity offices are sufficiently independent of the agencies general counsel and agency head.

Here are two examples of why it is necessary for Congress to

take action. It is my understanding that employees at the LOC do

not receive written performance appraisals. If this is the case, then

on what basis are employees being promoted? How can an employee prove he or she was wrongly denied a promotion if their performance is not being documented? It is the responsibility of LOC’s

diversity office to raise these issues and challenge management on

them.

In 2006, GAO restructured its pay bands and promoted employees based, in large part, on performance ratings. GAO knew, however, before implementing the restructuring, that African-Americans were receiving lower performance ratings than their White

counterparts. It comes as no surprise that the restructuring had

and continues to have a negative impact on African-Americans.

3

GAO’s diversity office should have engaged in challenging management and ensuring that a restructuring did not take place that

negatively impacted a group of employees. It apparently failed to

do so.

I will ask the legislative branch IGs to report their findings to

the subcommittee in June 2008. Their reports will help determine

if agency diversity officers have the programming and influence to

address the disparities raised in the subcommittee report.

I would like to caution the legislative branch agencies in comparing themselves to the executive branch when it comes to diversity

in the SES. The executive branch is doing poorly in that regard

and the legislative branch agencies are only doing slightly better.

All of these agencies take pride in saying that they hire the best

and the brightest. If that is the case, what is then preventing minorities and women from moving into their top ranks? Today’s witnesses are here to help us answer that question, and I thank them

for taking the time to do so.

I will indicate again, though that all Members will have 5 legislative days in which to submit statements for the record because

of their inability to be here today.

[The prepared statement of Hon. Danny K. Davis follows:]

4

5

6

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. We will begin with our witnesses and our

first witness is Dr. Curtis Copeland, who is currently a specialist

in American National Government at the Congressional Research

Service within the U.S. Library of Congress. His specific area of expertise is Federal rulemaking and regulatory policy. Welcome Dr.

Copeland, we thank you for being here and you know the drill,

you’ve done this so often. So if you would stand and raise your

right-hand.

[Witness sworn.]

Mr. DAVIS. The record will reflect that the witness answered in

the affirmative. And again, we thank you for your presence and for

the work that you do and you may proceed.

STATEMENT OF CURTIS W. COPELAND, SPECIALIST IN AMERICAN NATIONAL GOVERNMENT, CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE

Mr. COPELAND. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am here today to

present the data that were used in the subcommittee’s report on

racial and gender diversity and SES and SES-equivalent positions

within six legislative branch agencies: GAO, LOC, CBO, GPO, the

AOC and the Capitol Police. Most of my comments will be in terms

of percentages and will be depicted in figures shown on these TV

screens. However, it is important to realize that because of the relatively small size of each agency’s SES core, a slight change in the

number of minorities or women in the agencies can substantially

effect the resulting percentages.

Together, the six legislative branch agencies had a total of 346

SES officials during fiscal year 2007. Of these officials, 16.8 percent

were minorities, about the same percentages in the executive

branch, which had 16 percent. However, the legislative branch

agencies had a somewhat higher percentage of women in their SES

ranks, about 36 percent compared to 29 percent in the executive

branch.

The agencies differed substantially in their levels of SES diversity, as this first figure shows, less than 8 percent of the SES core

at CBO were minorities compared to about 20 percent at the LOC

and AOC. The composition of the minorities of SES population at

the agencies also differed. For example, four of the six agencies, all

except GAO and the LOC, had no Asian senior executives in 2007.

The six agencies differed greatly in the percentage of their SES

who were women, ranging from less than 12 percent at GPO to

more than 40 percent at LOC and GAO. To put these numbers into

context, the subcommittee’s report compared the diversity of the

agency’s SES core to the work forces as a whole.

As this figure shows, none of the agencies SES core had as high

a percentage as their overall work forces. And as this figure shows

the percentage of SES who were women was less than in the total

work force than four of the six agencies, all but the Capitol Police

and the AOC. However, we should recognize that these two agencies also had the lowest percentage of women in their overall work

forces.

In some cases, there were substantial differences between the diversity of the agency’s work forces as a whole and the diversity of

their SES core. For example, whereas nearly 60 percent of the

7

GPO’S work force was minorities in 2007, the percentage of minorities in the agency’s SES stood at about 12 percent, nearly 50 percentage points lower.

Another way to put these diversity figures into context is by looking at trends over time. This figure shows the—it soon will be up—

shows the percentage of women in the legislative branch agencies

SES has gone up somewhat since 2002, from less than 32 percent

to nearly 36 percent. However, the trend line from minorities has

been rather flat since 2002 going from 161⁄2–171⁄2 percent to 16.8

percent, so the percentage of minorities in the legislative branch

agencies actually went down by a little less than a percentage

point.

Most SESers are hired from the GS–15 ranks, as you mentioned,

so that the diversity of these GS–15 successor pools can be provide

an indication of how diverse the SES may be in the future.

As this figure shows, the percentage of minorities at the GS–15

level was somewhat less than the percentage of the SES in four of

the six legislative branch agencies, all but GAO and GPO. The situation for women was just the opposite. As this figure shows, the

percentage of GS–15s who were women was greater than the

women in the SES in four of the six agencies, all except the LOC

and the AOC.

Finally, the subcommittee’s report examined the extent to which

women and minorities, once they got into the SES, received comparable salaries, bonuses and awards when compared to non minorities and men.

Table 3, which is on the last page of my written statement, provides the data on this—these salary comparisons or total compensation comparisons, it shows that on average, looking across all

of the legislative branch agencies minorities and non minorities in

the SES earned almost exactly the same total compensation. And

women on average received about 1 percent more than men.

However, there were some substantial difference in SES total

compensation within the agencies. For example, women in the SES

at the LOC received an average of $4,000 per year more than their

male counterparts. On the other hand, at CBO, women received an

average of about $10,000 less than men, and minorities received

about $6,000 less than non minorities.

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my prepared statement. I would

be happy to answer any questions.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Copeland follows:]

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. Well, thank you very much. And again,

I want to thank you for being here.

You note in your testimony that the percentage rate of women

increased was slight, about 4 percentage points between 2002 and

2007. If that rate was to continue, how long would it take for

women to become, say, half of the legislative branch SES?

Mr. COPELAND. Right. The percentage of women rose from 31.6

percent to 35.8 percent across the 6 legislative branch agencies,

which is about 8/10 of a percentage point a year. So at that rate,

given that they are currently at 35.8 percent, the—at that rate, it

would take about 17 years for women to reach the 50 percent

mark.

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. I guess that’s about as long as it would

take a snail to get to Baltimore. Do you know what a similar rate

would be for the executive branch?

Mr. COPELAND. Yes, in the executive branch, the percentage of

women in the SES rose from 251⁄2 percent in 2002 to 28.9 percent.

And so at that rate, given the distance between that current statistic and 50 percent, it would take about 30 years for women in the

executive branch SES to reach 50 percent.

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. I mentioned successor pools in my opening statement, of course you have mentioned successor pools. Why

are these pools so important?

Mr. COPELAND. Primarily, because most at least in the executive

branch, GAO has testified before this subcommittee back in May

that most of the people in the SES were drawn from the GS–15

ranks. And so if you have a successor pool at the 15—at the GS–

15 level, which is less diverse, than the current SES and you draw

in proportion to their representation in that GS–15 successor pool,

then your SES in the future will actually become less diverse.

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. And so, in addition to work at the direct

level of the SES, there is also seemingly need to do some work at

the GS–15 successor pool level as well, would you agree?

Mr. COPELAND. I would agree that the subcommittee’s report

reaches the conclusion that in order for agencies to achieve levels

of diversity that they currently don’t have, they either have to increase the percentage of women and minorities in those successor

pools, hire from outside of those successor pools or both.

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. Although I know that you can’t take a position about what level of representation there should be if Congress did decide that SES should mirror the representation within

the agency’s work force as a whole, but what would you see as the

advantages or disadvantages if that was to happen?

Mr. COPELAND. Well, certainly the literature suggests that having a leadership of an agency that is reflective of the work force

as a whole has a number of advantages in terms of morale, in

terms of following the management initiatives and so forth.

The disadvantage of emulating the work force as a whole is if the

work force as a whole isn’t very diverse, then emulating that non

diversity would yield a non diverse SES. So in fact, we have seen

that in some of the agencies here, that some of the agencies in

these six legislative branch agencies are much less diverse than

others. And so an agency that is 85 percent White emulating that

would yield an SES that would be 85 percent White.

21

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. I know that for many years now, we’ve

had great debate and great discussion about the concept of quotas,

and yet we continue to have sort of as a goal the notion as it was

reflected in the Preamble to the Constitution that all men, and I

guess maybe at some point in time, women crept into that, I guess,

if you go with the biblical definition, they say that when they say

men, they also meant woman, or woman as they called it in some

religious groups, but this notion that if America is to ever become

the America that we all talk about, would it seem likely that some

kind of something close to proportional share of opportunities as

well as other things would ultimately come into being, would that

make sense for the work force?

Mr. COPELAND. As you know, CRS doesn’t take a position on any

initiatives like that, but that certainly seems to be the guiding

premise between a lot of the affirmative action programs that are

place in agencies now, they are attempting to try and move toward

that as a goal.

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. Well, let me thank you very much, we appreciate your testimony and we appreciate the continuing work

that you and your agency does. We appreciate your being here.

Mr. COPELAND. Thank you.

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. We will then proceed to our next panel.

I will go ahead and introduce them as they are being seated. Ms.

Nadine Elzy is the Director of Office of Equal Employment Opportunity for the U.S. Government Printing Office, and as such, she

directs the activities of the affirmative action programs, and counseling, and complaints processing divisions within the Office.

Mr. Ronald Stroman is the Managing Director of GAO Office of

Opportunity and Inclusiveness. Mr. Stroman is responsible for reviewing GAO’s human capital policies and practices to ensure they

are fair, merit-based and promote the opportunity for all GAO employees to maximize their contributions to the Agency’s mission.

Ms. Theresa Bailey is the Director of the Architect of the Capitol’s Equal Employment Opportunity and Conciliation Programs.

She has more than 20 years of progressively responsible human resources experience primarily in equal employment opportunity, affirmative employment, diversity and employee relations.

Ms. Stephanie Ruiz is the Director of Human Resources for the

Congressional Budget Office [CBO]. At CBO, she is responsible for

human resources and payroll-related functions, including, but not

limited to recruitment, EEO benefits and compensation. She also

advises management on matters related to human resources and

contributes to the development of the agency’s budget which is 90

percent compensation.

Mr. Dennis Hanratty is the Director for Human Resources Services at the Library of Congress. He has served in this position since

August 2005. He has worked in human resources since 1993, first

helping to manage all human resources functions and then managing human resources planning and technology.

And Mr. Daniel Nichols was appointed as the assistant chief of

police for the Capitol Police last January. Inspector Nichols entered

duty with the U.S. Capitol Police in 1983. Assistant Chief Nichols

is recognized as an accomplished leader who builds the effective

teams as strong communication skills and uses innovative apVerDate 11-MAY-2000 16:34 Sep 26, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\44008.TXT KATIE PsN: KATIE
22

proaches to improve the protection of the capital, the congressional

community and visitors.

Thank you all for being here and if you would stand and raise

your right hands.

[Witnesses sworn.]

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. The record will show that the witnesses

answered in the affirmative. And please know that because the

other Members are not here, it’s not because they are not interested in the subject matter of what is taking place. This is our last

week before we recess and people are trying to get as many things

done as they possibly can. And so there’s all kinds of activity taking place. There are some weather-related difficulty, some Members are experiencing in terms of getting back today, but we shall

proceed and thank you so much and we will begin with you, Ms.

Elzy.

STATEMENT OF NADINE ELZY, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF EQUAL

EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY, GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE; RONALD STROMAN, MANAGING DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF

OPPORTUNITY AND INCLUSIVENESS, GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE; TERESA BAILEY, DIRECTOR, OFFICE

OF EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY/CONCILIATION

PROGRAMS, OFFICE OF THE ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL;

STEPHANIE RUIZ, DIRECTOR, HUMAN RESOURCES, CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE; DENNIS HANRATTY, DIRECTOR, HUMAN RESOURCES SERVICES, LIBRARY OF CONGRESS; AND DANIEL NICHOLS, ASSISTANT CHIEF OF POLICE, U.S. CAPITOL POLICE

STATEMENT OF NADINE ELZY

Ms. ELZY. Good afternoon, Chairman Davis and members of the

subcommittee. Thank you for inviting the Government Printing Office to be here. I’m Nadine Elzy, GPO’s Director of EEO. My prepared statement at the same time has been submitted for the

record, and with your permission, I will summarize my remarks.

The head of the agency wanted to be here to testify before you

today, but I’m glad that instead I am able to present the agency’s

testimony because for me, it is also a personal testimony. I am

committed personally to insuring EEO.

I came to GPO in December 1997 as the EEO Director. I must

admit that I thought at that point I had stepped backward into a

time warp. I asked another of the senior managers, do you think

GPO is diverse? His response was, well, the agency is about 60 percent Black. I replied by asking, well, in your opinion, is the agency

diverse, because when I go to a senior staff meeting, I am the only

female and the only minority. I’m not saying the only Black executive, I meant the only minority and the only female, period. At that

point in GPO’s history, there were no females at the grade 15.

There were four Black males, one Hispanic male and one Asian

male at the GS–15. I define diversity as an organization that reflects the composition of our Nation.

Let’s fast forward 5 years to 2002. In 2002, we had 3,048 employees, of those, 32 were at the grade 15, at that point we had 1 female, 4 Black males and 1 Asian male. There had been no changes

23

whatsoever in the representation of females or minorities in the

senior level.

Now let’s take one other jump that is to fiscal year 2007 and like

at the agency’s diversity, GPO now has 23 females, 1 Hispanic, 17

Blacks, 6 Asians and 1 Native American at the grade 15. These are

some of the employees who are in a position to ascend to GPO’s future senior level positions.

In 2002, there was one female in SL as a GPO, in 2004 to 2005,

there were five females in SL positions. We currently have three

females, at this level. Females represent 28.4 percent of employees

in the Federal executive service. They currently represent 12 percent at GPO.

In 2002, there was one minority in the SLS. At the end of fiscal

year 2007, we have three minorities employed in the SLS. Minorities represent 16 percent of employees in the Federal executive

service, and 12 percent of employees in senior pay level positions

at GPO.

Do we have a way to go? Yes. Are we doing better than we did

in 1997 in 2002? Most definitely. We are doing better by placing

qualified minorities and females in positions at the grade 13 to 15,

which will prepare them to become GPO’s future leaders. We also

want to ensure that these supervisors and managers know the

agency’s perspective on equity in the workplace. To ensure this, it

was required by the head of the agency that during fiscal year

1997—2007, every manager and supervisor participate in EEO

training. This was included as a core commitment in fiscal year

2007 for each senior level service employee.

What are some of the other efforts we have made to improve our

diversity? We have changed our outlook. We realize the importance

of a diverse work force. We have expanded our college outreach efforts to include other than predominantly White college campuses.

We are visiting Morehouse, Spelman, Clark Atlanta, Florida A&P,

Prairie View, all of which are historically Black colleges and universities.

We have included recruitment and outreach efforts to the University of Texas El Paso, New Mexico State, the University of New

Mexico, the University of Miami, California State Los Angeles, all

of which are Hispanic-serving institutions. We have recruited at

the University of California Berkeley, which is the No. 1 public

university in the country and which has a very diverse population.

In an effort to ensure that our organization is representative of

this country’s diversity we have also hired students from the National Training Institute for the Deaf, the Rochester Institute of

Technology. GPO has one of the largest percentage of employees

with disabilities and those with targeted disabilities in the entire

Federal Government. Presently almost 7 percent of GPO’s population has a disability and almost 2 percent of those are employees

who have targeted disabilities. The Federal Government’s average

is less than 1 percent. GPO, ranked as one of the top five agencies

for the employment of people with disabilities in the Federal Government.

Again, we who are involved in EEO at GPO, and most especially,

the Public Printer Tapella, clearly recognize that attaining diversity in GPO’s management rights has a ways to go, and we are

24

firmly committed to achieving this goal. As a result, I no longer feel

as though I have walked backward into a time warp. I feel as

though I am part of an agency that is moving forward with great

speed and effort in the right direction. It is an organization that

wants to utilize the skills and abilities of all of its employees to

move us forward in the 21st century.

Mr. Chairman and members of committee, this concludes my prepared statement and I will be pleased to answer any questions you

may have.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Elzy follows:]

25

26

27

28

29

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. Thank you very much and we’ll go to Mr.

Stroman.

STATEMENT OF RONALD STROMAN

Mr. STROMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ms. Norton. Good

afternoon, I am Ron Stroman, the Managing Director of the Office

of Opportunity and Inclusiveness at the U.S. Government Accountability Office. I am pleased to be here today to address an issue of

such vital importance to GAO and to the Congress; diversity and

our Senior Executive Service. GAO’s mandate to support the Congress in meeting its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and insure the accountability of the Federal

Government requires a highly skilled and diverse work force and

leadership team.

The diversity of our leaders increases the range of perspectives

and problem solving approaches and creates higher value solutions

for the Congress and for the American people. It is also true that

it is important giving the increasing numbers of African American,

Hispanic, Asian, women, Members of Congress, we issue reports of

concern to those communities. It is important that we have representation of those communities involved in those report making

processes.

The Office of Opportunity and Inclusiveness was created by the

comptroller in 2001 to transform the agency’s diversity management practicers. Since then, we worked closely with the agency’s

top managers to improve diversity management practices at GAO.

As an indicator of our success, GAO’s analyst and specialist population is more diverse than the relevant civilian labor force, specifically the percentages of GAO analysts and specialist staff as of October 2006 exceeded the 2000 relevant labor force percentages for

African-American, Hispanic, Asian Americans, as well as for

women.

The diversity of our leadership team has also improved over the

years. In fiscal year 2000, minorities represented 14 percent of the

SES and SL core. As of fiscal 2007 about 18 percent of the SES SL

members were minorities. Similarly the representation of minorities as a Band III, the SES feeder pool increased from 12 percent

in 2000 to 19 percent in 2005. And the representation of women in

the SES as well as at the Band III and Band II levels increased.

Figure 2 and 3 in my testimony illustrates changes in the percentages of minorities and women respectively. We have made

progress—although we have made progress, we still have work to

do. We are committed to improving the representation of all minorities on the leadership team, in particular, the representation of

Hispanic and Asian-American staff should be improved.

As shown in table 1 of my testimony, percentages of GAO’s Hispanic staff members at the SES level, and Asian staff at Band III

level were lower than government wide percentages. However, for

both these groups the percentages in the feeder pool staff at the

lower level either equals or exceeded the government wide percentages.

We therefore expect that we will be prepared to move these staff

into senior management positions. GAO is also—ONI is also workVerDate 11-MAY-2000 16:34 Sep 26, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\44008.TXT KATIE PsN: KATIE
30

ing closely with the GAO executive committee and teams managing

directors to ensure sufficient opportunities of being developed.

One of GAO’s strategic objectives is to build and maintain a work

environment that is fair and unbiased and inclusive and that offers

the opportunity for all employees to realize their full potential. Several efforts and processes support our strategic commitment to diversity.

As shown in figure 4 of my testimony our work force planning

and recruitment processes, training opportunities, reviews of

human capital processes and the selection process for the Senior

Executive Service helped to support and maintain our efforts at diversity in the Senior Executive Service.

Our agency’s top leadership is fully committed to creating an environment that is fair and unbiased and has value diversity. Having a diverse work force and leadership cadre is an essential strategic component to GAO’s success. While the diversity of our work

force and leadership team has improved, there are areas that still

need to be addressed. Our efforts to enhance diversity and Senior

Executive Service coupled with incorporating our core diversity

principles into our human capital processes should enable us to

continue to improve diversity of our future leadership team. Thank

you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. Thank you very much, Mr. Stroman and

we will proceed to Ms. Bailey.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Stroman follows:]

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

STATEMENT OF TERESA BAILEY

Ms. BAILEY. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, and members of the

subcommittee. Thank you for this opportunity to discuss the AOC’s

efforts to identify, attract, hire and retain a diverse work force, as

well as training to promote current stats to rise through the ranks

to our executive level positions, thereby increasing diversity among

the senior level management.

The ALC is firmly committed to equal employment opportunity

and affirmative employment. We recognize the inherent value of diverse and inclusive work force because we all benefit from working

in an environment that brings together people with different background, skills and experiences.

As one of our core values we strive to integrate diversity at every

level as we carry out our mission to serve Congress and the American people. Even before the launch of our first strategic plan in

2003, the AOC has been dedicated to employing a diverse work

force consisting of individuals with a variety of skills and institutional knowledge. We have defined our strategic goals and strategies in our human capital plan, which is an important component

of our strategic plan.

The human capital plan outlines activities that will ensure we

are adequately addressing the needs of our work force while at the

same time addressing the future needs of our organization by developing strong leaders and managers. One of the ways we are assisting our work force is developing the skills they need to become

effective managers and grow their careers is through participation

in our leadership development program. This program establishes

parameters and competencies for the training and development of

supervisors, managers and executives, and helps develop the skills

needed to perform effectively in these positions.

In addition, the program’s participants serve as a pool of welltrained and qualified applicants for consideration for higher more

senior managerial positions.

In 2006, we enhanced our agency leadership development program through employee participation and the Council For Excellence and Government Fellowship Program with the selection of

three staff members. This development program is designed to improve the performance and accountability of government workers

and is targeted specifically for those at GS–14 and GS–15 levels.

Next year which will have two more employees participate in this

program.

Additionally we proactively worked to recruit diverse new hires

by expanding our outreach efforts to attract a diverse candidate

pool. AOC career opportunities are advertised nationwide in OPMs,

USAJobs Web site. We also have contracted for system for implementing our human capital strategy. One of the tools that we utilize heavily is the Contractors Association with various diverse organizations, societies, colleges and universities, and professional

associations that allow us to electronically distribute an unlimited

number of vacancy announcements. In addition, our recruitment

manager conducts training sessions with staff on how to most effectively use our resources.

The AOC has also participated in a number of recruitment

events to increase awareness of job opportunities in our agency.

46

This past summer, we attended the federally Employed Women’s

Job Fair Conference, and Mayor Fenty’s D.C.-wide Job Fair. Over

the past several years, we have been participating and Representative Albert Wynn’s annual job fair, and later this week, we will be

attending the Asian Job Fair.

We are now finalizing our affirmative employment program,

which further delineates our commitment to equal employment opportunity. Once the policy is implemented, we will develop an affirmative employment plan that will identify specific action-oriented strategy efforts to achieve a more diverse work force. While

the AOC utilizes an array of recruitment sources and techniques to

generate an adequate pool of diverse, qualified applicants for job

vacancies, our efforts under the affirmative employment plan will

be expanded to include targeted recruitment initiatives, cooperative

efforts with colleges and universities and stronger partnerships

with national professional associations and local community organizations.

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to note that our efforts have borne

fruit. A comparative analysis of AOC-wide and work force data between 2002 and 2007 shows that at the GS–15 and SES equivalent

levels the AOC has made significant progress in the recruitment

and selection of women candidates making up 23.1 percent and

35.76 percent those ranks respectively. This is an increase over the

2002 levels of 7.7 percent in the GS–15 ranks and 20 percent of the

SES equivalents.

Persons of color now represent 12.8 percent of GS–15 positions

and 21.4 percent of SES equivalent positions. The AOC is deeply

committed to our goal in attracting and retaining a diverse work

force. However, we do recognize that we still have work to do.

Throughout programs and initiatives we will demonstrate our actions speak volumes, and our work force will better reflect our society and we will be even more successful as a result of the rich diversity of our employees.

This concludes my statement, I will be happy to answer any

questions subsequently you may have.

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. Thank you very much.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Bailey follows:]

47

48

49

50

51

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. And we will go to Ms. Ruiz.

STATEMENT OF STEPHANIE RUIZ

Ms. RUIZ. Mr. Chairman, Ms. Norton. The Congressional Budget

Office leadership shares your interest in a work force diversity and

is strongly committed to a representative work force. We think this

is an important issue, and thank you for bringing attention to it.

Today I will address the following key issues, the benefits of and

the need for CBO’s recruitment of a diverse work force at all levels,

the challenge of recruiting staff skilled in the fields necessary to

carry out the analyses CBO does for the Congress, the aggressive

diversity recruiting efforts CBO undertakes annually, and finally

CBO’s recent progress toward greater work force diversity.

CBO needs representative work force at all levels because the

broad range of our analytical product benefit from diverse experiences and viewpoints of all of its analysts. Perhaps the less obvious

reason is that given the specialized nature of our work, CBO managers must have substantive knowledge of the policy areas in

which their analysts work and experience with the methodologies

used to perform these analyses.

The needs for substantive experience coupled with CBO’s small

size and flat organizational structure results in the majority of

CBO’s staff managers being promoted from within. Therefore, we

must recruit a diverse work force at all levels so junior staff can

gain the requisite expertise to take on broader roles in our agency.

Roughly 80 percent of CBOs work force professional staff hold

Ph.D.s or has Masters degrees generally in economics or public policy. The demographics of individuals completing Ph.D.s in economics poses a tremendous challenge in achieving a diverse work force

at CBO.

In 2005, there were approximately 1,000 individuals who completed a Ph.D. in economics in the United States. Only 30 percent

of them are women. Foreign nationals made up the majority, more

than 2/3, and although we can hire some foreign nationals, this

limits the overall pool and the diversity over the pool from which

we can draw.

Even more striking is that among the 284 U.S. citizens that entered the labor market from those 1,000 Ph.D.s, only 4.3 percent

were members of underrepresented minority groups. That’s 44 people in the entire Nation. The numbers are even more disheartening

given the small share of the new Ph.D. economist who enter government service, only 16 percent in 2005.

Recruiting Master’s level employees is somewhat less of a problem given the demographics, the National Association of Schools of

Public Affairs Administration reports that of those completing

MPPs and MPAs in 2005, 57 percent were female and 28 percent

minorities. Not surprisingly, given these statistics, CBO must be

both aggressive and creative in its recruiting efforts in order to

achieve a diverse staff.

CBO makes special efforts to reach out to women and minority

candidates, we provide information on relevant employment opportunities to such groups as women and international security and

the committee on the status of women in the economics profession.

52

In college recruiting we—we target historically Black colleges

and universities, HBCUs and Hispanic serving institutions, HSIs

that have programs from which CBO may draw candidates. We

host a substantive internship program that is focused on graduate

students and is managed with an eye toward diversity. CBO interns perform analyses and are introduced to the challenge and reward of public service. One goal over the program is to encourage

these interns to consider CBO employment full-time upon graduation. And results suggests that we have been successful, about 8

percent of our current work force are former interns. In the past

5 years, the intern class has been between 36 and 50 percent female, and in most years, it has been approximately 30 percent minority.

Since most students who pursue Ph.D.s in economics were economics undergraduates, CBO does a number of things to encourage

underrepresented—underrepresented economic students to pursue

advance degrees and to prepare them for CBO positions. Specifically we present information to Morehouse/Spelman’s joint economic club, we meet with Howard on economics majors and we participate annually in programs designed to increase minority representation and Master’s and Ph.D. programs, including the public

policy international affairs program, which prepares under represented students for advanced degrees leading to careers in public

service. And the American Economics Association Summer Program and Minority Scholarship program which prepares talented

under graduates for doctoral programs in economics and related

disciplines.

In the end, a few students from underrepresented groups enter

advanced degree programs in economics and public policy, we have

little hope of recruiting staff and grooming future managers who

are representative of the rich diversity of the U.S. population. Like

his predecessor, CBO’s new Director Peter Orszag is committed to

diversity. During his short tenure, 48 percent of the CBO staff

hired have been women, including one female SES equivalent and

9 percent has been minorities.

As the Human Resources Director, I know that he and our new

Deputy Bob Sunshine have reached out to female candidates for positions. Last June, Dr. Orszag personally addressed the American

Economics Association Summer Minority Scholars when they visited CBO for seminars about the agency and our work and met informally with CBO economists.

Despite our efforts, CBO’s work force is not as diverse as we

would like it to be. CBO’s most valuable resources are strong staff

and in pursuit of that end we dedicate a great deal or resources

to our recruitment program, including speaking with students from

more than 60 campuses. An important focus has been and must

continue to be the recruitment of a diverse work force at all levels

within an organization.

Thank you, again, for the opportunity to discuss this important

issue. I would be delighted to hear any ideas you or others may

have to improve the results of our diversity program and to take

whatever questions you may as well.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Ruiz follow:]

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. Thank you very much. And we’ll go to

Mr. Henratty.

STATEMENT OF DENNIS HANRATTY

Mr. HENRATTY. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to

discuss diversity throughout the Library of Congress—the Library’s

senior level diversity has increased dramatically since 1990. Then

only 12.4 percent of our senior level work force was minority compared with 20 percent today. The Library’s current executive committee is comprised of 29 percent minorities and 57 percent women.

The Library has made a concerted effort to build and nurture diversity throughout its work force, even as the size of the Library

today reflects nearly 1,200 fewer staff than when Dr. Billington

was sworn in as Librarian of Congress 20 years ago.

As of June 2007, the latest date for which governmentwide statistics are available, minorities comprised 20 percent of the Library’s senior leadership. In comparison, 15 percent of SES executives governmentwide are minorities. Also for the same period, 44

percent of the Library’s senior leadership positions are held by

women, compared with 29 percent of SES executives governmentwide. The Library also exceeds government wide levels of racial

and gender diversity for the key GS–13 to GS–15 pay cluster, the

Library’s future leaders. Diversity at the Library’s senior level has

remained fairly constant in recent years. We’ve hired 42 permanent

employees at the senior level since fiscal year 2002. Of these 19

percent were minorities and 45 percent were women.

By most measures diversity has improved among the ranks of

the higher general schedule grade levels. Those who along with

those recruited from outside the agency will be the next generation

of Library senior managers. At the GS–15 level, minority representation has increased from 13 percent in 2002 to 17 percent in 2007.

While the percentage of Hispanics in this group has remained

below that in the general population, the number of Hispanics at

the GS–15 level in the Library has more than doubled at the same

period. The percentage of women has remained stable.

The Library’s effort to achieve a diverse work force are evident

through the entire process of recruiting, screening and collecting

new employees to fill vacancies. The Office of Workforce Diversity

develops target recruitment plans in collaboration with our service

units based upon an analysis of the Library’s work force profile.

The information is used to identify specific areas to focus our targeted recruitment efforts.

The Library’s merit selection system keeps the goal of a diverse

work force at the forefront throughout the process and includes two

discrete areas where the diversity of the applicant pool is examined. First we create a recruitment plan for each individual vacancy, identifying underutilized groups in the Library’s population

compared with the civilian labor force.

Second, we compare the pool of applicants to be considered for

an interview with the underutilization data that’s been identified

in the recruitment plan. When the applicant pool contains members of underutilized groups, they will be added to create a list of

up to 12 ranked candidates instead of forwarding the names of only

7 candidates.

61

We also fill permanent positions through targeted recruitment

outside of our merit selection plan. For example, under the HACU

cooperative education program, qualified students may be converted non competitively to permanent conditional positions following successful completion of a minimum of 640 hours of career-related work at the Library. The Library also provides staff development program to enhance our staff’s opportunities to advance to

management positions.

For example, our leadership development program selects staff

and grades GS–11 through GS–13 from diverse backgrounds for a

year-long training and development program to prepare them to

compete for leadership and management positions at the Library.

Since the program’s inception in 1995, six leadership development

classes have graduated 57 staff, of those, 65 percent have been minorities and 70 percent of the graduates have been women, 54 percent have received new jobs or promotions since they graduated

from the program, and a full two-thirds of these were minorities.

Another example is the comprehensive development intern program which we can conduct periodically as resources permit. The

program has been an excellent means for staff, including minorities, to move from clerical and technical to professional positions in

grades GS–9 through GS–12 for example four African-American

women have moved to professional ranks in my own office human

resources services through this program.

Finally let me reassure the committee that my office tracks to

completion of annual performance appraisals throughout the Library and works with service units to ensure that any performance

appraisals that are not completed on time will be completed during

the next quarter. Our new master labor agreement with AFSCME

Local 2477, the employee’s union, contains a comprehensive performance management article that includes performance planning,

midyear reviews, annual reviews and individual development

plans.

And management and labor are working collaboratively to implement these provisions throughout the year. I will be happy to answer any questions that you may have about the library’s diversity

employment or its senior level system.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hanratty follows:]

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. Thank you very much, Mr. Hanratty.

And we will go to Mr. Nichols.

STATEMENT OF DANIEL NICHOLS

Mr. NICHOLS. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.

Ms. Norton, how are you? Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today on the important matter of diversity in the

workplace. The vision of the Chief of the U.S. Capitol Police encompasses the importance of including a wide variety of perspectives

and approaches, including policy development and its implementation within the department.

Currently, our department is comprised of 2,085 employees, 80

percent of which are sworn law enforcement officers, and 20 percent are civilian employees. U.S. Capitol Police values and champions diversity at all levels of the department. Diversity brings to

us a wider variety of perspectives and approaches to enrich our decisionmaking. According to the latest Bureau of Justice Statistics

Bulletin for Law Enforcement Officers, the U.S. Capitol Police

sworn work force is comprised of 34.7 percent minority representation. Currently, at our SES equivalent positions, 43 percent are occupied by women and minorities. While we will be never be complacent in our efforts, we are proud of our achievements regarding

diversity.

Our ability to maintain a diverse work force differs between our

sworn and civilian populations. With regard to sworn employees, to

obtain optimum diversity at the SES equivalent level requires

planning many years beforehand. Because we do not hire supervisory/managerial sworn employees from external organizations,

our succession planning and efforts to enhance the diversity of the

pool of sworn employees must be concentrated on recruitment efforts for entry level sworn positions and retention of those employees. In the 2002 to 2006 time period, we have found that our recruitment efforts for entry level sworn positions have resulted in

minority race/ethnicity representation ranging between 36 to 38

percent.

Our recruiting program of the department is a nationwide effort.

While a significant number of applicants are from the Washington

metropolitan area, which is itself a diversified employment market,

our recruiters travel nationwide to targeted recruiting events that

are geared toward women and minority candidates. In addition, a

continual nationwide advertising campaign complements the recruiting efforts of the department.

From September 2002 to September 2006, the department’s work

force has undergone significant changes both in terms of size and

diversity. The sworn overall leadership ranks increased by 16 percent in size, and the population from which to select new leaders

grew by almost 30 percent. Within the overall leadership group, the

U.S. Capitol Police increased its minority representation to 30 percent, which represents a 13 percent increase over this 4-year period.

Within the civilian side of the police department, we have professionalized the ranks of our administrative processes and functions.

In 2002, women and minorities representation in civilian SES

equivalent positions was 40 percent. Today that percentage has inVerDate 11-MAY-2000 16:34 Sep 26, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\44008.TXT KATIE PsN: KATIE
72

creased to 47 percent. Our efforts in developing a strategic human

capital plan includes the development of a department work force

plan as well as a succession plan. The department is actively working to incorporate strategic work force diversity principles into

planning tools that we believe will facilitate our goal of becoming

the Federal Government’s premiere law enforcement agency. We

believe we have been successful to date, but clearly we strive for

continued growth, responsibility and new opportunities for both the

department’s sworn and civilian work force.

Mr. Chairman, Ms. Norton, that concludes my statement, and I

will be pleased to answer any questions you may all may have.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Nichols follows:]

73

74

75

76

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. Thank you very much. And I want to

thank each one of our witnesses. And I have one question I would

just like for each one of you to take a shot at answering. I have

noted that all of your agencies hire the best and the brightest. We

all work with a diverse network of associations and universities

when looking for new hires. We all collect diversity and appraisal

data, and have programs in place and programs that we are developing to support diversity, and yet we all have poor records. Would

you venture an opinion or a guess as to why? I mean, it is kind

of like asking, why have we not made any more progress than what

we have made?

Perhaps we begin with you, Ms. Elzy.

Ms. ELZY. I think we have made significant progress in the last

5 years as far as our feeder pool. I think that, from my perspective,

GPO was a very male-dominated organization because of the trades

and the crafts that it traditionally was. However, if you have noticed, we have made significant changes in our Grade 15 feeder

pool. We went up from 2002 when we had 3 percent females to almost 30 percent in 2007. Minorities in the Grade 15 went from 19

percent to almost 32 percent. So we have been really striving to ensure that we will have a more diverse pool of individuals who will

be prepared to move into the senior level positions.

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. All right.

Mr. Stroman.

Mr. STROMAN. Certainly it is a complicated question, Mr. Chairman. Let me say that our biggest problems at the SES level are

with Hispanics and Asians. And certainly, given the increase in the

demographic changes within the Hispanic and Asian community, I

think that has created a need for us to reach out and develop processes to reach out to the Asian and Hispanic community. If you

look at our feeder pool, however, numbers for the SES with regard

to both of those organizations, both of those groups, they look reasonably good.

On the other hand, I think, you know, the reality is that, you

know, for GAO, like much of the Federal Government, up until the

early 1970’s, we were a segregated institution. And the Federal

Government was a segregated—where we were segregated up until

the early 1970’s. It was really as a result of the Civil Rights Act

of 1964. It was as a result of litigation that took place in the 1970’s

and 1980’s that really forced the changes that we are—that we

have made thus far. We are in the process of trying to put into

place processes within the human capital processes that I think are

needed to make these changes.

And quite honestly, Mr. Chairman, you know, when you look at

the composition of our offices, we are trying to do this without

much in the way of legislation which would empower us to do that.

Most of our offices are structured in a way which says that—which

we have statutory and legislative responsibility to process complaints of discrimination. There is very little that gives us the authority to implement diversity principles within the human capital

processes. We are trying to implement that and do that. But there

is no real legislation which allows us to do that. It is as a result

of our efforts, I think, working with senior managers, but I think

77

much of the work is hamstrung by that lack of legislative hammer

that would be helpful in implementing.

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. Ms. Bailey, based upon your vast human

resources experience?

Ms. BAILEY. Well, I do think that we have made progress as well

over the last 5 years. But I think one of the primary factors hindering our ability to further diversify senior level staff is the fact that

we are dealing with a very competitive marketplace. We are competing against other government agencies and private sector employers who are offering things that we are not in a position to do.

So what it means for us is trying to figure out a way how we can

distinguish ourselves as an employer of choice and also developing

methods so that we can build name recognition. Not a lot of people

know what the AOC or who the AOC is. So that is one of the areas

that we need to focus our attention. Then, I think, if we get there,

we can better attract diverse talent.

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. Ms. Ruiz.

Ms. RUIZ. Similarly to my colleagues on the panel, I would say

that we, too, have made definite efforts and have had successes in

improving our diversity. In 1997, 10 years ago, the minority makeup of our professionals and management staff was 5.6 percent, and

now, as of January this past year, it was 13.8 percent. So it has

more than doubled. So we have seen strides. And I will point out

to you another thing, which is that we are very much struggling

against the demographics that I described. In the early 1970’s,

there were less than 10 percent women in Ph.D. economics programs. We are delighted that number has increased to 30 percent

in 2005 and anticipate, hope, expect that it will continue to do so.

And to that end, you don’t see many other agencies of 230 employees going out and making grass roots efforts to grow pools.

When we are at Morehouse, we have senior executives who are saying to these young men, saying, please consider these as options.

These are interesting and exciting options.

And then, like my colleague at the AOC, we struggle against

competitive markets. Any Ph.D. economist coming into the market

who is worth their salt can go to Wall Street and make significantly more than any of our economists. A few years ago, we had

a terrific financial economist, and he took an opportunity that was

almost twice as much compensation as our director was making.

Our current director took a pay cut to come to CBO. The reality

is, we can’t compete at that level.

Despite all of that, I am very encouraged. Dr. Orszag, our new

director, is very committed to this. Recently, on his own initiative,

he started some discussions with some economists that he knows

about how to increase our pool and things we could do differently

and more things we can do. And so I am very excited by that and

encouraged by it.

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. Thank you very much.

Mr. Hanratty.

Mr. HANRATTY. Mr. Chairman, historically the largest challenge

that the library has had in terms of ensuring diversity of its senior

level was to ensure the diversity of the GS–15 successor pool. And

in 2002, minorities comprised 13 percent of that successor pool. But

today that number is 17 percent. And this is largely a consequence

78

of promotions. During that same period of 2002 to 2007, minorities

accounted for 21 percent of all promotions at the library to GS–15.

So I think that this bodes very well for the future.

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. Thank you very much.

Mr. Nichols.

Mr. NICHOLS. Thank you, sir. Your question really drives to the

heart of the challenge that we face. If you look at the history of

the U.S. Capitol Police, we have been a structure of sworn employees for our history up until about 10 years ago, when we started

to civilianize. When we started the civilianization effort, we were

able to bring talent and diversity from outside the organization into

very senior civilian positions that had never existed before.

But clearly the decisions that were made 20 to 30 years ago with

regard to diversity aren’t where we are today. And we are still

struggling with those decisions. The feeder group that we have has

to walk in the front door and then be filtered up through the police

department as a means of competitive testing and promotional

processes. If you look at our history, we didn’t even bring female

police officers on the police department until the early 1970’s. So

we have only had the experience of female officers—actually, the

first African American female officer was brought on about 30

years ago. So we are still trying to struggle with the feeder group

and bring people up through the ranks. And that does impact the

sworn diversity at our top executive level of the police department.

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. Well, thank you all very much.

Ms. Norton.

Ms. NORTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I must thank you for the steadfastness you have shown ever

since you have come to Congress as ranking member and now as

the Chair of this subcommittee in pressing this issue of minority

representation where one might most expect it, in the Federal Government. Mr. Chairman, almost all these agencies boasted about

their minority representation have been the subject of lawsuits. We

take special note of them here in the Congress, because, frankly,

it is a matter of some embarrassment that we who are here, particularly in this committee and subcommittee, trying to get the private sector to do the right thing often see lawsuits against our own

agencies.

Mr. Chairman, I am going to have a bill for next year that would

allow Federal workers—and legislative workers may be different—

to apply directly to the EEOC like everybody else. The agency I

chaired, I see no reason for the disparate treatment at least for

Federal workers. We, of course, passed the bill that said that all

laws that apply to us should apply to everyone. That is why Mr.

Stroman’s comment about how you need some laws; you don’t need

any more laws than the private sector needs—you are held under

Title 7 the way everybody else is, so I don’t see why you would

need more legislation to proceed. Somehow others have been able

to improve the top ranks. We are even beginning to get Blacks who

are CEOs who can be fired because they have not produced enough

revenue, as we have seen from two recently. The figures on the

percentage of women and minorities are impressive.

To tell you, as a native Washingtonian since my father’s time, for

decades the Federal Government has had a larger percentage. It

79

was a little bit ahead of the private sector. The more you are able

to show large numbers in the ranks, the greater the burden on you

to show why they are not rising through the ranks like everybody

else does. And we have seen it both for women, slight improvements; for minorities, virtually none.

By the way, Ms. Bailey, you mentioned that you had gone to a

number of local job fairs, and I commend you for that. As somebody

who has had a job fair where literally we have had up to 10,000

residents come every year, we have never seen the AOC there.

And I think, Mr. Chairman, that Chairman Brady has taken—

this is the chairman of the Administration Committee—is to be

commended, because the first time I have seen any movement from

AOC at all was when they had a special forum for small businesses

at the Congressional Black Caucus weekend. And we need to see

some action on employees as well. And I am pleased that Chairman

Brady has taken this special interest.

Mr. Stroman, before I ask you questions about what has been a

most troublesome issue in this committee, may I ask you, do you

understand that you don’t need any more laws than other Federal

agencies have in order to try to improve the ranks of the SES and

of minorities in general at GAO?

Mr. STROMAN. Yes. Let me address that, Ms. Norton. What I

mean is that all of the civil rights offices in the executive committee to our legislative branch committees are essentially focused on

complaint processing. I mean, when you look at the legislation that

we have in place now, most of the——

Ms. NORTON. Excuse me, who are focused on complaint processing?

Mr. STROMAN. Yes, ma’am.

Ms. NORTON. Who are?

Mr. STROMAN. The civil rights offices within the executive and

legislative branch offices, the statutory legislation essentially gives

them the authority to process complaints of discrimination. What

we are talking with regard to increasing diversity requires oversight over the human capital processes within each of the agencies.

And that is what I mean.

Ms. NORTON. I am not sure I understand.

Mr. STROMAN. OK.

Ms. NORTON. If anything, they shouldn’t have jurisdiction to

process their own complaints. And that is exactly what I am going

to take from them.

Mr. STROMAN. No, no, I understand that. But I am saying, when

you look at the statutory legislation of each of the civil rights offices, the legislation itself empowers them to process complaints of

discrimination. It says nothing about personnel practices. It says

nothing about recruitment. It says nothing about your ability to review ratings.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Stroman, I am not sure what you are referring

to. As a former Chair of the EEOC, I am here to tell you that they

and the private sector at least in one respect are held to the same

standard. And that is the standard of Title VII.

Mr. STROMAN. No, I understand that, Ms. Norton.

Ms. NORTON. Maybe if you would like to suggest some more legislation you need. I am distressed to hear you talk about the comVerDate 11-MAY-2000 16:34 Sep 26, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\44008.TXT KATIE PsN: KATIE
80

plaint process because that has been precisely the problem with the

legislative branch agencies. And what we are talking about is not

a complaint process, but whether these agencies are conscious of

the need to reach out to overcome these disparities and whether

they are conscious about what others in the Federal Government

and in the private sector have done to help minorities rise. And I

don’t think—if you need more legislation, I think you will find a

subcommittee and a committee willing to give it.

Actually, I have a question for you about a very troubling GAO

issue. I am wondering whether your office alerted GAO management of the disparities in ratings between African Americans and

Caucasians when the Comptroller General was involved in the new

effort to restructure that agency, creating huge turmoil, where this

committee noted that African Americans had received consistently

lower performance ratings than their White counterparts and the

danger of using those ratings in the appraisal of effort that was underway some months ago.

Mr. STROMAN. Yes. The answer is, yes, Ms. Norton. In fact, we

were—our office put into place a process to publicize those ratings.

Ms. NORTON. So you alerted the management that the process

they were going through would build in these disparities?

Mr. STROMAN. We alerted management to the consequences of

moving forward with the reorganization.

Ms. NORTON. Why did GAO proceed to restructure the bands in

2006 if your office alerted management that it would have a negative and perhaps ultimately an illegal effect on African Americans?

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. Ms. Norton, could I just, before he answers, I understand the Second Chance is coming up, and I am

going to ask Mr. Clay if he would take the Chair until I run over

and make a statement, since it is my bill.

Mr. CLAY. Mr. Chairman, would it be possible for Ms. Norton to

take the Chair? I do have a doctor’s appointment. I just wanted to

get my 5 minutes in.

Ms. NORTON. Ms. Norton is going down to speak on the Second

Chance.

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. I will run and do it and then come back.

Ms. NORTON. You only have 20 minutes. We may have to recess.

I will keep going here. And my office needs to tell me when Mr.

Davis begins because his bill, Second Chance bill, is enormously

important. I am sorry, Mr. Stroman, you were about to answer my

question.

Mr. STROMAN. Yes, ma’am. As I indicated, yes, we did alert the

Comptroller.

Ms. NORTON. But you don’t know why they went ahead. They ignored you is what you are saying?

Mr. STROMAN. There was a decision made that the best way to

deal with it would be to bring in an independent, outside contractor

to review and to look at the underlying causes for the disparity.

Ms. NORTON. So why didn’t they stop until the independent——

Mr. STROMAN. It was a decision that the Comptroller General

made to go forward with the reorganization, Ms. Norton.

Ms. NORTON. Well, you have recently hired a consulting firm——

Mr. STROMAN. Yes, ma’am.

81

Ms. NORTON [continuing]. To conduct an independent assessment

of the factors that could influence rating differences——

Mr. STROMAN. That is correct.

Ms. NORTON [continuing]. Between African Americans and others. But this committee learned that a study was recommended by

Blacks in Government in 2004. So you had noticed that people

were watching, recommended a study. You have gone ahead. Why

wasn’t a study conducted when you had this notice from an outside

organization as well that a study of the kind you have now authorized would be necessary to keep a disparate effect from resulting?

Mr. STROMAN. Well, all I can tell you, Ms. Norton, is that the discussion with regard to contractors came up with regard to the reorganization. And at that point, it was the decision——

Ms. NORTON. Well, let me ask you this, Mr. Stroman. Will the

study——

Mr. STROMAN. Yes, ma’am.

Ms. NORTON [continuing]. Include a review of the impact that the

Band II restructuring has had on African Americans?

Mr. STROMAN. We know what the impact is. The question becomes, what are the causes of the disparities within the ratings?

The impact has been, it has had certainly a disproportionate impact on African Americans at the Band II–B level. That there is no

question about.

Ms. NORTON. Who is selecting the employees who will participate

in the focus groups that are being interviewed by the consulting

firm?

Mr. STROMAN. Yes, ma’am, the contractor. It was a random selection process by the contractor.

Ms. NORTON. This subcommittee had a very troublesome hearing

about essentially the report that denied COLAs in 2006 to people

after the survey was done. And it is bad enough that we have disparate impact, but then these employees were said to be,

colloquially, overpaid, and so, for the first time in the history of the

Federal Government, there have been employees who have been

denied their COLAs. And as I understand it, they continue to be

denied their COLAs even though this committee in the strongest

terms has indicated that was unacceptable. What are you doing to

see to it that these employees get their COLAs the way 2 million

other employees of the Federal Government get their COLAs and

to therefore mitigate the continuing disparate impact of the original action taken?

Mr. STROMAN. Well, that, Ms. Norton, you would have to address

to the Comptroller.

Ms. NORTON. Yeah, what is your office recommending? It is going

to have a disparate impact. The COLAs have caused a conflagration in, of all places, the GAO. You have a union—I love unions,

but that is a bad way to get one—you have a union now because

the employees rose up against the way in which this was implemented both for African Americans and for others. You are the

EEO office. What are you doing to see to it that African Americans

and others who may be in this group do not continue to have their

COLAs denied? That is all I am asking. I know that you are—I

didn’t ask you what GAO was doing. You are the guy in charge of

the EEO. What are you doing?

82

Mr. STROMAN. I understand. We are having—we are having discussions with the Comptroller General. Ultimately, he has to make

the call with regard——

Ms. NORTON. I know who is in charge, Mr. Stroman. I’ll tell you

who is going to have to make the call, Mr. Chairman, and the

Chair. The Congress of the United States is going to have to make

the call because it is an outrage that nothing has happened thus

far. And you know what, liability is building up for us, Mr. Chairman. If you keep denying COLAs to people who should have received them, then there are going to be more and more employees

wanting their COLAs going back to when they didn’t receive them.

And you know what, I got a hard time telling them that there is

no basis to get COLAs you should have received 5 years ago because somehow or the other the Treasury of the United States is

going to have to come up with them now. And Mr. Chairman, I will

be back.

Mr. CLAY [presiding]. Thank the gentlelady from the District of

Columbia. Let me start with Ms. Elzy. Let me ask you about what

steps does GPO plan to take to increase the representation of minorities and women in its SES?

Ms. ELZY. We have a lot of things in place where we are trying

to—we have a fellows program, so we can give them additional

skills, individuals who are interested in progressing into leadership

positions. And as I previously stated, we are doing very well as far

as the promotion and hiring of individuals into the 13 to 15 grade

level. And it significantly increased over the last 5 years.

Mr. CLAY. And how does this differ from what GPO has done in

the past?

Ms. ELZY. In the past, I think it was a big cultural change for

GPO to go ahead and have minorities and females in more leadership positions. And I do think that they are making a significant

change. There has been an increase from 1997 to 2005 and, again,

from 2005 to 2007 in both SES and Grade 15.

Mr. CLAY. And what does GPO plan to do to increase the representation of Asian American officials in the SES ranks?

Ms. ELZY. We have recently promoted more Asians into the

Grade 15 and also into the Grades 13 to 15.

Mr. CLAY. All right. Thank you so much for that. Let me go to

Ms. Bailey. What steps does the AOC plan to take to increase the

representation of minorities and women in its SES?

Ms. BAILEY. The AOC has and will continue to engage in a number of efforts to affirmatively recruit minorities and women into

their SES and GS–15 positions. In the 11 months that I have been

there, I have been working to develop and implement the agency’s

Affirmative Employment Program. And that will include and has

included a number of good faith efforts to increase our diversity.

And they include targeted recruitment initiatives for women, minorities and persons with disabilities; expanding our recruitment

efforts when the pool fails to identify sufficient diversity in the applicant pool for any given position. We are building partnerships

with professional associations. Right now we are heavily recruiting

for the CVC, to staff that. We have been working with the American Association of African American Museums, for example. We

are cooperatively working with colleges and universities. And I

83

think it is important to note that, earlier this year, the leadership

determined that all of our senior leaders would be required to attend a mandatory training program in EEO in diversity so they

would understand what the goal is and the commitment is to diversity, to increase diversity at those levels.

Mr. CLAY. What did you find? What was the situation when you

came 11 months ago to the AOC? What did you find that was just

glaring disparities? Did you see any glaring disparities?

Ms. BAILEY. Well, in the absence of analyzing our work force

data, because that has not yet occurred, I am not really in a position to determine or share with you what the numbers reveal. But

I do recognize that there is some work to do just based upon the

report that came out today in our own cursory analysis of the data

from 2002 to 2007.

Mr. CLAY. Now the architect hires the people who wear the blue

shirts; right?

Ms. BAILEY. Correct.

Mr. CLAY. Don’t you employ them?

Ms. BAILEY. Correct.

Mr. CLAY. OK. Let me share with you one of my concerns. As a

college student, I worked on the Hill in the late 1970’s. And I came

back 17 years later. And some of the same people still worked there

making the same salary. Now does the COLA apply to them, too,

where they have missed years of COLAs?

Ms. BAILEY. No, they have been entitled to, as far as I know—

I probably would need to check further—but I have not heard nor

am I aware that they have not gotten the COLAs that all the other

employees are entitled to. But I will be happy to research that information.

Mr. CLAY. Would you, Ms. Bailey? Because I have heard from numerous employees of the Architect who say that they are attempting to raise a family and they make woefully low salaries. And

these are people that I have known for almost 30 years who have

worked in this position. And that should be looked at.

Ms. BAILEY. I will do that.

Mr. CLAY. The whole salary structure in your office is woefully

insufficient. And if you have somebody working 30 years and they

are making $24,000 a year, there is something wrong.

Ms. BAILEY. I agree. I agree.

Mr. CLAY. And so it tells me that perhaps they didn’t receive

COLAs either. I would love for you to report back to this committee.

Ms. BAILEY. I will do that, sir.

Mr. CLAY. Let me also ask you, minorities and women in the

AOC’s GS–15 level successor pool comprised a smaller percentage

than its SES corps. Now the report, I want to say said that—what

does AOC intend to do to improve minority and female representation at the GS–15 level? Go ahead and try to answer.

Ms. BAILEY. Pretty much what I have already outlined. We are

going to make sure that we develop targeted recruitment initiatives

for candidates at that level; really build our partnerships with professional associations with the backgrounds that we are looking for.

Mr. CLAY. Ms. Bailey, can you pull the mike closer, please?

Ms. BAILEY. Sure.

84

Mr. CLAY. It is hard to hear.

Ms. BAILEY. As I said before, we are going to be targeting specific

recruitment initiatives for women, minorities at that level, building

our partnerships with professional associations in the fields that

we are looking for. We know that is an area that we need to address. And that serves as the feeder pool for our SES equivalents.

And so we are ready and prepared to make the necessary—or implement the necessary actions to increase diversity at those levels.

Mr. CLAY. At 7.9 percent of the top positions filled with minorities, what has been the obstacles in the past of recruiting qualified

bona fide minorities?

Ms. BAILEY. As I said earlier, in the 11 months that I have been

there, I really believe it is our ability to compete with the labor

market the way that it is. I think we need to do some work in establishing ourselves as an employer of choice and getting people to

recognize what the AOC is and what we do. I don’t think there is

a lot of name recognition for our agency. So that is one of the areas

that we need to work on and develop.

Mr. CLAY. OK. Thank you for that response.

Ms. Ruiz, we understand from your testimony that CBO faces

challenges in improving its minority and female representation in

SES corps. The report just released from this committee says that

an applicant pool is devoid of diversity, your applicant pool. What

do you all—in what ways do CBO’s planned efforts to increase its

representation differ from what it has done in the past?

Ms. RUIZ. Yes, sir. A couple of things. No. 1, I came to CBO as

an H.R. Specialist in 1999. And that was the first time that the

agency put together a comprehensive recruitment plan. And since

that time, we have established a very solid, comprehensive recruitment plan that we review and analyze every year. A big component

of that is grass roots outreach to students from HBCUs, large flagship institutions that have minority populations that are greater

than others, and other individuals who would be underrepresented

in the economics pool.

The reality is, it takes about 5 to 7 years to get a Ph.D. And so

any efforts that we would be—any results that we would be seeing

from those efforts would just now be coming to fruition. And we are

seeing increases in the diversity. The pool is nearly devoid. I

wouldn’t say that there are no minority candidates. In 2005, there

were 44 individuals who completed Ph.D.s in economics.

The second part of our problem is compensation. Like my colleague from the AOC said, we are public service. And so we have

to rely on our organization’s importance to the Congress, the service that we provide to the public and other kinds of things like

that. As Dr. Orszag said—Dr. Orszag is our new director—as he

said recently, he has to make CBO an exciting and creative and

challenging place to work because individuals coming out of Ph.D.

programs in economics can go to Wall Street and earn twice what

they make at CBO. They can go into academia at the top schools

and make more than they make at CBO. So we have that challenge

as well to face.

Mr. CLAY. Well, right now, have you worked outside of the box

to try to attract economists and Ph.D.s to your agency?

85

Ms. RUIZ. Yes, sir. There are a couple of organizations. The

American Economics Association is the primary economics or professional association for economists. The AEA, the American Economics Association, does a couple of things. They have a committee

on the status of women in the economics profession, and we work

with them, provide them all of our announcements, talk with them

about creative ideas to increase women within our work force. More

importantly, we think, they provide a summer program to top talent undergraduate students identified. Principally, these are students who have economics undergrads, but oftentimes math as

well, because that is a strong leader to economics. And what they

do is they take these students onto campuses across the country.

The campus rotates. It was recently at Duke. I believe it has moved

to California for the coming year. And they provide students a couple of things, academic preparation in econometrics and higher statistical math to help them prepare for Ph.D. programs, and they introduce them to employers who will be able to show them the benefits of pursuing a degree in economics. CBO for the last 5 years has

participated in that program 4 of the last 5 years. We have done

everything from send staff to do seminars there about our work.

Three of our directors in the past years have actually gone to the

program and met with the students or met with the students individually when they have come to CBO. Last summer, we were delighted that the folks were at Duke, and so they were able to bring

up about 50 students and faculty to CBO. We hosted them for a

luncheon and informal meetings, dialog with our economists. And

then we did a seminar. Dr. Orszag, our new director, spoke with

them about CBO and the importance of our work. And then two of

our more junior economists presented work to show how exciting

and dynamic the types of things we can do can be.

Mr. CLAY. How many of those students are on track to come in

to join your agency?

Ms. RUIZ. Well, we have all of their contact information, and they

are still undergraduates, sir. So if they left undergraduate programs last year and entered econ programs, the yield rate from

this program I wouldn’t know the rates of, but I would expect that

it is not 100 percent.

Mr. CLAY. Do you offer internships to these students?

Ms. RUIZ. Yes, sir, we do.

Mr. CLAY. How many do you give a year?

Ms. RUIZ. We have had one intern from the AEA’s summer minority program and—or excuse me, from a similar program, the

PPIA, which is similar, but for students pursuing masters degrees.

And generally, our internship program we manage with an eye toward diversity. And in fact, our intern pool in the last 5 years has

been between 30 and 50 percent—excuse me, between 36 and 50

percent female, and generally around 30 percent minority, the low

number being 21 percent, the high number being 36.5 percent. And

interestingly, sir, if I could add——

Mr. CLAY. Sure.

Ms. RUIZ [continuing]. We have been very successful when we

have worked with students on campuses or in PPIA or similar programs to then have those folks come on as internships and then

have them join us as full-time employees. We find that it is about

86

establishing a relationship with the student that can start earlier.

We are more successful in that regard than in just going out and

talking to masses.

Mr. CLAY. OK. Thank you for that response.

Let me go to Mr. Stroman. The first payouts under GAO’s new

pay system began in January 2006. The number of resignations by

African Americans at GAO in 2006, 20 of them, was 90 percent

higher than the average of the previous 7 years, which was 11 per

year on average. Also, 2006 evidenced the second highest number

of transfers to other agencies by African Americans in the last 8

years. What, other than the implementation of GAO’s new pay system, could be causing those trends?

Mr. STROMAN. Well, I have to take a look at who actually transferred, Mr. Clay, but certainly I would suspect that the reorganization played an important role in those decisions.

Mr. CLAY. Well, it is 20 in 2006. On average, it is 11 per year.

GAO’s new pay-for-performance system was approved in 2004 and

began to be implemented shortly thereafter. The average number

of resignations by GAO women since 2004 was about 20 percent

higher than in the previous 5 years. And the number of women

transferring to other agencies has increased each year since 2004.

So what steps does GAO plan to take to increase?

Mr. STROMAN. Well, again, Mr. Clay, I would need to look at the

statistics. I believe——

Mr. CLAY. I am just sharing with you the statistics.

Mr. STROMAN. No, I understand. What I am saying, though, is

I believe that the women who left were in the administrative classifications. But I need to go back and take a look at that. And I think

certainly there are limiting opportunities in the administrative

field than there are in the professional field. But I would certainly,

again, be happy to provide that to you for the record.

Mr. CLAY. OK. Next question. GAO had the lowest percentage of

Hispanics in its SES among the six legislative branch agencies specifically. How does GAO plan to address this gap?

Mr. STROMAN. Well, again, if you look into our feeder pool, which

is immediately under the GS—I mean the SES, our feeder pool

numbers are at governmentwide levels. So we believe that the feeder pool puts us in a very good position. And if you go down below

that to the Band II and the Band Is, the percentages of Hispanics

in those bands are even higher. So over the next several years, we

think that the feeder pools will allow ascension into the SES at a

commensurate level.

Mr. CLAY. So you have representative levels of——

Mr. STROMAN. Yes. At the level immediately below the SES,

there’s representative levels. And below that level there’s even

higher representation.

Mr. CLAY. OK. Thank you so much for that response.

Turning to Mr. Hanratty, although the Library of Congress had

a slightly higher percentage of minorities in its SES than did the

other legislative branch agencies in fiscal year 2007, the percentage

of minorities in the SES decreased each year except for fiscal year

2007, when it remained steady. Has the Library made any effort

to identify what factors contributed to this downward trend? And

if so, what have you found?

87

Mr. HANRATTY. Yes, Mr. Chairman, I believe that the principal

factor that was contributing to the downward trend was the relatively comparatively small feeder pool at the GS–15 level. And

that is an issue that we have addressed. We have made substantial

gains since fiscal year 2002. As I mentioned previously, we have

gone from 13 percent to 17 percent of minorities at the GS–15

level. So that, as senior level positions emerge, we have a much

stronger feeder pool. And so that is—in our opinion, that is the

principal factor that contributed to the downward trend between

2002 and 2007. And I believe we have addressed that.

Mr. CLAY. Would you say, I guess, the smaller feeder pools in the

past were a result of the culture of the Library and the people that

made the decisions to supply these feeder pools or to select those

who would be on track for promotions?

Mr. HANRATTY. No, I wouldn’t say it is a consequence of a cultural issue. I think we had—in 2001, we completely revamped our

merit selection system. And that was in response to our settlement

agreement from the early 1990’s. And we built in a number of additional checks and balances that did not exist in that previous system. For example, creating recruitment plans at the individual vacancy level. And second, ensuring that, at the applicant pool stage,

that the pool is enriched with underutilized candidates. So I think

those factors have really resulted in the increase that you are now

seeing at the GS–15 level. And I believe that will bear fruit in the

coming years with respect to the senior level as well.

Mr. CLAY. If we called you back here next year would representation of minorities in the SES, would you be able to come back here

and tell us that it has increased?

Mr. HANRATTY. I would certainly hope so, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. CLAY. And would it have increased exponentially?

Mr. HANRATTY. I can’t say for certain. But we will certainly do

our very best, and we are doing our very best right now to ensure

that we have as strong a minority presence at the senior level as

possible.

Mr. CLAY. OK. If I were to walk over to the Library and just pick

out any employee and talk to them, what kind of reaction would

I get from say an African American female who had been there 20

years? What kind of reaction? What kind of evaluation of the agency would she give me?

Mr. HANRATTY. Well, I can’t say, Mr. Chairman. But I feel confident that we have put into place a number of excellent programs

to enhance minority representation at the Library. I mentioned at

the beginning of my testimony the close collaboration that we have

established with the AFSCME Local 2477. That is the employees

union. They are representing the paraprofessional employees at the

Library of Congress. As a result of this close collaboration that we

have with AFSCME Local 2477, we are developing as we speak a

career development program aimed specifically at that GS–2 to

GS–8 level. We hope to have a pilot in place within the next few

months. And then following the successful review of that pilot, to

implement that program on a larger scale at the end of the fiscal

year. So we are taking very aggressive steps in trying to ensure

that opportunities exist not merely for those at the top but also

throughout the ranks of the Library of Congress.

88

Mr. CLAY. OK. Let me ask you about pay. Minority SES officials at the Library received on average $1,699 less than nonminorities

in fiscal year 2007. Why do you think that is and what does the

Library intend to do to address this issue? And what role does the

Library’s Performance Review Board play in issuing performancebased pay and awards? And are there minority and women members on that board?

Mr. HANRATTY. We have a Performance Review Board, Mr.

Chairman, that reviews the appraisals from each of the service

units. And it is specifically designed to ensure equity and consistency across ratings. So that is a check and balance that exists right

in the system right now. The disparity that you indicated in terms

of total compensation between minorities and nonminorities again

is a relatively small percentage. We are talking about 1 percent in

terms of total compensation. But the point I would like to make is

that it is going to be very difficult to achieve equity across minorities, nonminorities, men, women, at any given slice of time because

we may be having employees coming into the senior level system

at a relatively low level as opposed to those who have been in the

system for a number of years and have reached the statutory cap

for pay. So you could have two individuals who are coming into the

system or who are being rated at the same time in the system; one

might have a pay several thousand dollars lower than the employee

who has been there for several years. So you have that built in factor that will be very difficult to address in any particular year.

Mr. CLAY. Mr. Hanratty, that is an interesting way to explain

the facts. Now you say it is 1 percent. But I bet you it makes a

difference to the people who get the 1 percent less. And you have

thrown out some facts that may or may not be true, whether time

served and all of that. Just as I explained to Ms. Bailey, there are

people who have been here for 30 years and haven’t received adequate pay increases. And I am willing to bet it is the same at the

Library. This is about equity and fairness. This is about paying

people what they are worth, paying them what they deserve. Now

how do you think those employees feel who are getting $1,700 less

a year than their counterpart? That is probably not too rewarding

for them. And it probably has an effect on morale when you are

paying somebody who does the same job less. This is about equity

and fairness. And so, I mean, I hear what you are saying, but it

certainly doesn’t make it right. And it is not a good reason. I would

ask that the Library take a look at pay equity.

Mr. HANRATTY. We will.

Mr. CLAY. Thank you.

Mr. Nichols, you testified that the sworn Capitol Police work

force is comprised of 34.7 percent minority representation, in contrast to the data that the USCP provided to us, which showed that

minorities comprised 38.7 percent of the work force. Similarly, you

state that 43 percent of Capitol Police SES positions are occupied

by women and minorities. The data from Capitol Police in fiscal

year 2007 showed 3 minorities, which is 13 percent of the SES, and

6 women, which is 26.1 percent, which ads up to 39.1 percent, not

43 percent. Further, your statement begins by stating that the department is comprised of 2,085 employees. And 80 percent of 2,085

is 1,668, which according to your statement is the number of sworn

89

law enforcement officers. However, the information provided to the

subcommittee was that the number of staff was 2,001 at the Capitol Police. Can you explain these differences?

Mr. NICHOLS. I would have to go back and look at the information that was provided to the committee. The question I have is if

the two recruit classes were included in the statistical information

that was provided to you. Because they haven’t been sworn in as

police officers yet. They shouldn’t be carried on our rolls, because

they haven’t been sworn in as police officers. That may account for

the disparity on the sworn side.

Mr. CLAY. And that is explainable. I mean, that is understandable. Your total number of SES total in the department is what?

Mr. NICHOLS. Twenty-one.

Mr. CLAY. Twenty-one?

Mr. NICHOLS. Yes, sir.

Mr. CLAY. All right.

Mr. NICHOLS. And if I could explain, that is also broken down between sworn and civilian. That is the total SES complement of the

police department.

Mr. CLAY. I see.

Mr. NICHOLS. So the SES equivalent for a sworn is a deputy chief

or above.

Mr. CLAY. What steps does the Capitol Police plan to take to increase the representation of minorities and women in its SES? Are

there some who are on track now to be promoted?

Mr. NICHOLS. There are some who are on track now. I have

had—you asked the person who preceded me what somebody would

say if you talked to them about their feelings on their agency. I

have had these conversations. I think that the one thing that we

have to do is to build confidence in the promotional process that

it is fair and open and that the door is open. If you want to take

advantage of going up through the ranks of the police department,

regardless of your gender or ethnicity, that the opportunity is

there. Perhaps we haven’t done a good job of imparting that level

of confidence in the minority officers in the past, but we have to

do that.

We are also on a track, the chief and I, when we were lieutenants on the police department recommended to the chief at the

time that we partner with Johns Hopkins University so that we

can start to mentor and groom officers at various official levels and

give them the skills and capabilities to move up in an agency that

is as complex as the U.S. Capitol Police has become. We are a legislative law enforcement agency, but when you get up to the very

high levels, it is a business that we are running. And you have to

understand the business concepts in addition to the law enforcement concepts. So we are trying to lay the foundation and make

sure that we have a diverse group of people who are eligible to go

through that program as well as many others.

The other thing that I have seen, Mr. Clay, is the mentoring that

should be done by the people at my level and the people immediately below me with the feeder group needs to be embraced. And

we really need to facilitate that better, to share with the younger

officers who are coming up through the ranks the experience that

we have had, how we make these decisions, how the different

90

pieces of the agency work together and talking to people of different aspects of the police department. I can tell you that the mentoring side of our agency is not where it needs to be.

Mr. CLAY. Has the chief embraced a mentoring program or a

mentoring process?

Mr. NICHOLS. It is something that we are looking at right now.

There are various ways. One, as I said, we have done the educational side. We have gone to the FBI National Academy. We have

a fellowship with the International Association of Chiefs of Police.

We have partnered with Johns Hopkins University, which the chief

and I both graduated from. We are looking at George Washington

University. And we are also looking at the military college.

So we are laying the foundation for the education. We are bringing transparency and fairness to the promotional process. But the

next piece of the pie that we need to fill is the mentoring. We have

a good model we want to follow with the Air Force National Guard,

Air National Guard, that is probably a good fit for U.S. Capitol Police.

Mr. CLAY. How about the part of your statement that you do not

hire supervisory managerial sworn employees from external organizations? I mean, that may be an obstacle to actually increasing

your ranks at the GS–15 level and above.

Mr. NICHOLS. Well, it is something we want to look at, Mr. Clay,

but what I don’t want to do is bring in—somebody on the sworn

side, bring in somebody from a GS–15, because that means we are

taking away a position from a career U.S. Capitol Police employee

who can move up and fill that position either himself or herself. So

what we really want to do on the sworn side is, and even to a large

extent on the civilian side, but especially on the sworn side because

of the way we are structured, is make that career path within the

U.S. Capitol Police open and inclusive and transparent so that people engage in the promotional process. I think that the conversations I have had with people is, the one thing that has probably

worked against us over the years is that, that there is a perception,

whether it is real or not, there is a perception that certain people

won’t get promoted no matter how well they do in the process.

Well, we need to work on that perception, because that chills the

effect of people moving up through the ranks. So to bring somebody

from the outside will just further delay our ability to bring people

up from within.

Mr. CLAY. Thank you for that response.

Let me thank the entire panel for their responses. And we hope

that when we invite you back we, will have better data to look at.

Let me thank you all again for being here. This panel is dismissed,

and we will set up for panel three. Thank you.

Thank you for joining us.

Panel three consists of three witnesses, and they are: William

Bransford, who is currently the general counsel and lobbyist for the

Senior Executives Association. Mr. Bransford is a partner in the

law firm of Shaw, Bransford, Veilleux & Roth, PC, where he has

practiced since 1983. His practice is concentrated on the representation of Federal executives, managers and employees before the

U.S. District Courts, the Merit Systems Protection Board, the

EEOC and the Office of Special Counsel.

91

Welcome, Mr. Bransford.

Also we have Ms. Shirley Jones, who is the current president of

the GAO Chapter of Blacks in Government. She was first elected

president in 2005 and was re-elected in January 2007. Ms. Jones

is assistant general counsel in the Office of General Counsel at the

U.S. Government Accountability Office. In this role, she is responsible for supervising the legal support for the strategic issues mission team work related to tax policy and administration.

Welcome, Ms. Jones.

Lieutenant Sharon Blackmon-Malloy is president of the U.S.

Capitol Black Police Association. She has served in this capacity for

8 years. Lieutenant Blackmon-Malloy joined the U.S. Capitol Police

force in October 1982 and, after 25 years of dedicated law enforcement service, retired last month.

Welcome to all three.

And it is the policy of the Oversight and Government Reform

Committee to swear you in. Would you all please stand and raise

your right hands?

[Witnesses sworn.]

Mr. CLAY. Let the record reflect they have answered in the affirmative.

We will begin with Mr. Bransford.

STATEMENTS OF WILLIAM L. BRANSFORD, GENERAL COUNSEL, SENIOR EXECUTIVES ASSOCIATION; SHIRLEY A. JONES,

PRESIDENT, BLACKS IN GOVERNMENT, GAO USACE CHAPTER; AND LIEUTENANT SHARON BLACKMON-MALLOY,

PRESIDENT, U.S. CAPITOL BLACK POLICE ASSOCIATION

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM BRANSFORD

Mr. BRANSFORD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Senior Executives Association appreciates the subcommittee’s focus on the important topic of how to promote diversity in the senior ranks of

Government.

We believe the SES of the future must fully represent the diversity of America. It is not only the right thing to do, but achieving

diversity will pay dividends by producing a Government led by executives who are even better to respond to and provide services to

all Americans. SEA believes this is achievable only through proper

data, a strong pipeline and, most of all, strong central leadership

on this issue.

Legislative branch agencies tend to follow the same guidelines as

those in the executive branch when it comes to career executive

personnel. We understand that the systems vary in different agencies, but merit selection plans apply, and general principles of requiring executive leadership qualifications are also applicable.

Executive and legislative branch agencies also share similar

problems when it comes to their SES corps. Both have concerns

about diversity and developing the pipeline of candidates being

trained and recruited to become a part of the SES.

SEA has stated its support in the past for greater collection of

data on the SES. We would like to see OPM, the Office of Personnel Management, be a greater guide for the SES by collecting better data. Consolidating policies and programs into one office and

92

acting as a clearinghouse for agencies in need of guidance, the central office will be invaluable in guiding the SES to greater diversity.

A central OPM SES resource office can provide best practices for

both executive and legislative branch agencies. SEA believes that

legislative branch agencies could be required to meet periodically

with a central SES resource office at the Office of Personnel Management. Without such an office, as is currently the case, there will

continue to be no central voice of leadership on SES matters, and

many agencies will continue to implement SES policy differently on

issues ranging from diversity to pay and performance issues.

SEA would also suggest legislative branch agencies consider a

council which provides coordination for sharing best practices on

diversity and addressing pipeline issues. This would contribute to

ensuring best practices when it comes to hiring a diverse work

force, not to mention the cohesiveness of the SES corps and general

work force best practices as a whole.

SEA believes that structural changes to hiring practices can help

and should focus on both the selection process and pipeline development. SEA supports a proven model to allow for what we have

termed Executive Resources Board Diversity Subcommittees. It is

modeled after a process developed by former Secretary of Energy

Bill Richardson, which proved successful during his tenure.

This subcommittee would have oversight responsibility, including

authority to review SES selections and to reverse any selection that

it deemed did not provide significant outreach to or consideration

of minority and women candidates. Further, this subcommittee

would be responsible for ensuring a diverse pipeline through guiding minority outreach and leadership development for SES recruitment.

We believe that Executive Resources Board Diversity Subcommittees consisting of agency senior executives, a majority of whom

must be either minority or female, would be an effective way for

legislative branch agencies to assure a diverse Senior Executive

Service. Such a strong leadership group would provide proactive

monitoring and management of diversity.

SEA applauds Chairman Davis for taking the first steps to address issues concerning diversity, proper oversight and providing

much needed data on the SES corps. SEA believes it is necessary

to begin improving the candidate pipeline, addressing pay concerns,

and, most of all, have better leadership if we are going to achieve

diversity in the SES.

Thank you very much. I look forward to your questions.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Bransford follows:]

93

94

95

96

Mr. CLAY. Thank you so much for your testimony.

Ms. Jones, you may proceed.

STATEMENT OF SHIRLEY JONES

Ms. JONES. Mr. Chairman, thank you for this opportunity.

For the last 3 years, I have served as the president of the GAO

Chapter of Blacks in Government. I am here to share the chapter’s

efforts to ensure equal opportunity and to effect change that will

lead to increased diversity at all levels, but particularly at the SES

and equivalent levels where the most important agencies decisions

are in fact made.

I believe that the broad issues that I will present here will be

similar to those present at other agencies where African American

staff are underrepresented at the management level.

These views in no way represent the views of the U.S. Government Accountability Office.

Comptroller General David Walker previously made a statement

regarding diversity at GAO that our chapter agrees with. In his

July 24, 2006, CG chat, he said, ‘‘America’s strength is its diversity.

As a public-sector employer and as a public servant with public

trust, GAO has the responsibility to lead by example and reflect

the diversity of this country.’’

This quote is particularly noteworthy for two primary reasons.

First, if we are to achieve equal opportunity and the level playing

field that BIG and African American staff have spoken out about,

then there must be a strong demonstrated commitment to diversity

from top management.

But the quote was also important because, along with it, Mr.

Walker also acknowledged that there continues to be a significant

difference between the average performance appraisal scores between African American staff and Caucasian staff at GAO. This acknowledgement was particularly important to our BIG chapter because this is a longstanding issue that our chapter had brought to

GAO management even before Mr. Walker’s tenure but particularly

in the 2 years preceding his acknowledgment.

For example, prior to the restructuring at GAO and split of

GAO’s Band II, our chapter wrote a letter to Comptroller General

Walker in 2004 stating our concern that African American staff, in

particular, would be at a distinct disadvantage in the placement

decisions. We specifically noted that GAO’s appraisal data showed

that African American employees at all band levels were consistently receiving the lowest performance appraisal scores. In that

2004 letter, we recommended that GAO initiate a study before proceeding with the restructuring to determine why African Americans consistently receive the lowest appraisals in the agency. Performance appraisal scores for 2003 through 2005 were ultimately,

however, one of three major criteria used to make placement decisions and was the primary criterion that kept a large percentage

of staff from being placed into Band II–B.

In that letter and on numerous other occasions since then, we

have also voiced concerns about African American staff being infrequently assigned analyst-in-charge opportunities, thereby preventing them from gaining valuable leadership opportunities.

97

So with a history of expressing concerns about the significantly

lower appraisal scores, lack of individual control over staffing assignments and other issues that would prevent African American

staff from advancing, Mr. Walker’s acknowledgment was particularly important. I personally believed and hoped that it signaled a

commitment to initiate change at the agency that would enhance

diversity.

In conclusion, I believe the significant difference in appraisal

scores and diversity issues in general are of personal concern to

Comptroller General Walker. Our concern continues to be, however, that this commitment from top management has to also be

evident in the action of front-line managers who are deciding on

appraisal scores, making analyst-in-charge decisions, staffing individuals to high-risk and high-visibility jobs and making other professional development decisions that may disparately impact African American staff.

I also think that Mr. Walker and the agency took a positive step

in rolling out a formal mentoring program. It is clear, however,

that mentoring itself is not a cure. Rather, as this hearing indicates, in addition to mentors it is critical that African Americans

and other minority staff who share our diverse traits are represented at the SES and upper-management levels so they can, in

turn, serve as sponsors and advocates.

Finally, our chapter is particularly encouraged by GAO’s decision

to bring in an outside consultant to study the differences in appraisal scores. We are hopeful that the study will, in fact, make

some actionable recommendations that will ultimately lead to

greater diversity.

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared statement. I will be

happy to answer any questions you may have.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Jones follows:]

98

99

100

101

102

103

Mr. CLAY. Thank you very much, Ms. Jones.

Ms. Blackmon-Malloy, you may proceed.

STATEMENT OF SHARON BLACKMON-MALLOY

Ms. BLACKMON-MALLOY. Thank you. Good afternoon, sir, Acting

Clay and the committee members. My name is Sharon BlackmonMalloy. I am a recently retired lieutenant from the U.S. Capitol Police force, and I am also the current president of the U.S. Capitol

Black Police Association.

I am here today to speak about the serious underrepresentation

in the upper-level ranks, in the ranks of captain and above in particular. I would like to provide some recommendations about correcting this problem. I thank you for this opportunity to speak

about these issues. And I have previously submitted my testimony

in its full capacity to the subcommittee.

The U.S. Capitol Police Force, where I worked for a period of 25

years, is entrusted with the responsibility of securing and protecting the U.S. Capitol, the House and State office buildings and adjacent grounds, Member of Congress, their staffs and a multitude of

visitors to the U.S. Capitol campus.

The Capitol Police Black Police Association was formed in 1990.

In the early 1990’s, our mission was to increase diversity in our police force and remedy discrimination practices in the area of hiring,

job assignments, promotions and training. And as you can see

today, we are still fighting those same struggles.

It should be noted that between the period of 1990 and 1993 in

this agency, members of the Black Police Association testified in

Congress several times about diversity and other related topics. In

1993, there was only 29 percent of the U.S. Capitol Police force African American, as compared to September 2006 in which it remained 29 percent. See attached data in my full text testimony.

Thus, there has been no change in African American representation within this force over a 13-year period.

There has been no progress in the upper ranks of captain and

above, where an African American woman has never served. In

fact, it took 176 years for an African American woman to be promoted to the rank of lieutenant, which occurred in November 2004.

I hope that it will not take another 176 years for an African American woman to achieve the rank of captain in this U.S. Capitol Police force. I also hope that our recommendations for a greater diversity and less discrimination will not fall on deaf ears this time

around.

Recommendations: To start effecting change, Congress must have

the will and the commitment to provide oversight and ensure responsibility and accountability for noncompliance and seriously enforce those measures. We don’t need any more laws. Just like Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton stated, the laws are on the

book. We need to enforce what we have and abide by them.

And if that does not occur, we need to—for instance, there could

be a series of penalties for an agency’s violations in the area of diversity and discrimination. And some of the consequences could

start with salary decreases. Then you are going to promote and

proceed to demotions, demotions in a particular rank. And if that

doesn’t work, removal from the force, because if you’re not complyVerDate 11-MAY-2000 16:34 Sep 26, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00107 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\44008.TXT KATIE PsN: KATIE
104

ing with what we have in place, then your organization shouldn’t

be condoning it, nor should Congress continue to allow it to happen.

We took some data from the Office of Personnel Management,

and it gives us a wealth of knowledge and opportunity and gives

you examples of how you can go about creating that diverse work

force. We don’t have it at this time. So there are resources out

there, a multitude of resources, that could assist us in overcoming

these issues, so 20 years from now, my daughter is not sitting here

testifying before your kids, telling you that we told you about this

20 years ago.

We can look at the area of recruitment to start, and that was

some of the OPM data. In the area of recruitment, we had a White,

male lieutenant who stayed in that rank for 20 years or more.

Now, that is clearly unacceptable. It is mainly the norm with this

agency, and that cannot continue. You cannot have a commander

of recruiting stay in a position for that amount of time and expect

change to come. It is just not going to happen until those things

are remedied.

Hiring: We can ask our human resources division what can we

do better to ensure that we are complying with the Nation as a

whole and looking at the standards in which we are required to

hire a diverse group. We want this Nation to look like—we want

the Capitol Police force to look like the Nation that it represents.

But if you look at it today, that is clearly not happening.

Then how do you retain them once you hire them? There is a

wealth of information that is in my testimony. It will take too

much time to go into it.

And commitment, commitment is the foundation for a successful

effort to build a diverse, high-quality work force. This must be communicated through actions that will start from the top management, because if you’re not committed and you’re not demonstrating commitment to this change, it is not going to happen. So it

starts from the top, and it filters down.

And that’s what we’re asking you to help us do today. We need

to encourage our leadership that creates an environment of inclusion and valued differences, clearly assign adequate resources to diversity activities. And if you ask our offices today if, do we feel as

though we’re included in the decisionmaking process, 99 percent

are going to say no, because we feel isolated. We are isolated from

the rank lieutenant on down. And there’s a disconnect between the

rank of captain and above. So we have a long way to go.

We need to ensure that our employees are trained in the intercultural communications to address differences. What is your difference that’s so different from mine? And if you really look at it,

we are no different from each other, if you only gave each other the

opportunity to share those thoughts and ideas, and we can grow

from learning from each other. But if you keep it separate, then we

will be back here another 20 years from now.

In conclusion, we are seeking a serious commitment from Congress, and this branch of Government is a natural place to start.

We do not need the last plantation operating on the doorstep of

Congress. Agencies like the U.S. Capitol Police force and the FedVerDate 11-MAY-2000 16:34 Sep 26, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00108 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\44008.TXT KATIE PsN: KATIE
105

eral Government in general should be a Nation and a world leader

in promoting equality and justice for all.

It is my hope that our leaders will take pride in ensuring that

15 years from now we do not find ourselves testifying before Congress concerning the underrepresentation of women and minorities

within any branch of Government.

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my formal testimony. And, again,

I would like to thank you for giving me an opportunity to appear

before this subcommittee. And I will be available for any questions

that anybody might have. Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Lieutenant Blackmon-Malloy follows:]

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

Mr. CLAY. Thank you, Ms. Malloy. Now, I want to know how you

really feel.

Let me ask you, you spent how many years——

Ms. BLACKMON-MALLOY. Twenty-five years, sir.

Mr. CLAY. Twenty-five years, and you made it to the rank of lieutenant.

Ms. BLACKMON-MALLOY. Yes, sir.

Mr. CLAY. And you said there had never been an African American female above that rank?

Ms. BLACKMON-MALLOY. That’s correct, sir. Actually we have—in

2004, when I did obtain the rank of lieutenant, there was never a

lieutenant even in that rank. So the ranking structure goes from

sergeant lieutenant, then captain, then inspector and so forth.

Mr. CLAY. Let me ask you, I assume you retired because you had

the time. What were your impressions of your total experience on

the Capitol Police Force? You said you started in 1982?

Ms. BLACKMON-MALLOY. Yes, sir.

Mr. CLAY. OK. And then, what were your feelings the day you

left about your total experience with the force?

Ms. BLACKMON-MALLOY. I can start from the beginning, if you

want, briefly——

Mr. CLAY. No, we don’t have that kind of time, but——

Ms. BLACKMON-MALLOY. It’s going to be really brief. I can tell

you my experience when I walked in the door.

Mr. CLAY. Yes, go ahead.

Ms. BLACKMON-MALLOY. And I walked in—I was here approximately 6 months; I knew then that we had some issues. And so I

dedicated my entire career, for the most part, to trying to effect

change, and that’s what I’ve done.

The day that I left, I walked away with pride and joy. There

have been changes. And the most progressive chief that we have

had was Chief Terrance Gainer. And under his leadership, we had

better morale, we had more promotions and we had more training.

So we did progress during my 25-year tenure, so I want to make

sure that is stated in the record as well.

Mr. CLAY. You know, Mr. Nichols testified that there are African

American Capitol Policemen that are on track to be at the SES

level. How much stock do you put in that?

Ms. BLACKMON-MALLOY. Without taking a lot of time—I can give

you an example. The last captain’s promotion process, we did have

outside contractors. And, you know, thanks to our efforts, we have

been able to obtain that over the years. And with those outside contractors, it was the captains process—and I have competed in all

processes. And at one point I called—I was doing the fellowship

program, so I called back and I was trying to get some assistance,

some mentorship that we need to get to the next rank. And I found

that the majority of people that was in a position to mentor me,

they were part of the process. They had to excuse themselves from

assisting.

So it has been that way throughout my entire career, either as

far as promotions—there is just too many—there is not enough African Americans willing to reach back and pull someone with them.

So we have to struggle on our own and do the best that we can,

while we sit back and watch other people, in particular White

116

males, sail through the process. They accelerate their promotion

track, if you want to call it. And there’s not a diversity program

or there’s no diversity program in place where you see them moving and they get promoted.

So it can happen. It can happen in the next 6 months; it can happen the next year. It doesn’t have to take 20-something years. So

it definitely can happen.

Mr. CLAY. And I couldn’t agree with you more. I hope 20 years

from now your children are not here telling my children this same

story. It should not be generational. If it is a culture change that’s

needed in the Capitol Police, then that’s what ought to take place.

And that’s upon us, Mr. Chair, to impress that on the hierarchy

of the police force.

Thank you for your response.

Ms. Jones, what do you think is the cause for significant difference in ratings between African Americans and Caucasian staff

at each band level at GAO? I heard you say top management and

front-line management must also be diverse, too, or culturally sensitive.

Ms. JONES. Right.

Mr. CLAY. Is there much cultural training over there or sensitivity training given at GAO?

Ms. JONES. I can’t speak to that. I’m not sure if there is sensitivity training. I’m sure it’s available. I don’t know if they are taking

advantage of it.

Mr. Stroman, from the previous panel, has in the past cited insufficient or poor communication between African Americans and

supervisors. I agree that’s one of the reasons for the differences in

appraisal scores, but I would like to offer a couple more reasons.

First, I believe—I would like to believe, as Mr. Walker does, that

there’s not widespread intentional bias against African American

employees. But I do believe the infrequent assignment of African

Americans as analysts-in-charge and assigning them to high-risk

and high-profile jobs, the lack of those opportunities for African

American staff leaves their supervisors to place less value on their

work.

Also, I believe the performance appraisal system itself is a large

factor. Putting aside the subjectivity of any performance appraisal

system, GAO’s system allows employees to be rated without the assistance of written narratives. Now, I don’t want to dismiss GAO’s

decision to do away with a written narrative, because I know they

did do it in consultation with the Employee Advisory Council. And

that was because they wanted to cut down on the amount of time

that people were spending on doing the performance appraisals.

But that has also had the unintended effect of allowing these appraisal scores to basically be unjustified.

So I believe those are two very important reasons for the low appraisal scores for African Americans.

Mr. CLAY. Thank you for that response.

Mr. Bransford, in your written statement you indicate that OPM

should play a more prominent role in improving both executive and

legislative branch diversity.

117

Given the different roles of the branches of Government, would

you support the idea of the legislative branch agencies council you

envision be a clearinghouse and liaison with OPM?

Mr. BRANSFORD. Yes, sir, Mr. Clay, I would. I think the idea of

the council, of getting legislative branches together would help. But

I think OPM, governmentwide, has the potential to provide tremendous leadership and information. And I think we can be creative,

and it can do nothing but help.

Mr. CLAY. Thank you for your response.

And I will turn it over to the chairman, Mr. Davis.

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS [presiding]. Thank you very much, Mr.

Clay. And let me say I hope you will be here 20 years from now

to carry on. I don’t intend to be. But, no, let me thank you for taking over the duties and handling the rest of this hearing.

Mr. Bransford, let me ask you, you indicate that this council may

be able to coordinate best practices and give people the opportunity

to see and know what’s taking place and what’s going on in other

places.

How would you feel about the requirement that promotions be

based upon recommendations that a panel of at least three individuals would sit on and that at least one of them must be a woman

and one of them must be a minority, and that this panel could

make recommendations and suggestions relative to promotions?

Mr. BRANSFORD. Mr. Chairman, that, of course, is present in the

legislation that’s been introduced for the executive branch agencies

as a requirement to come into the SES whenever a vacancy announcement is posted for an SES position.

The Senior Executives Association has concerns about putting

that in as the only way to get into the SES. And we are suggesting

and hoping to make a case that agencies either have a panel, as

you suggest, as a clearinghouse or a diversity subcommittee, as we

also suggest; one or the other. In other words, they exercise active,

aggressive leadership to make sure that the SES is diverse or they

have a clearinghouse, whatever that agency culture is.

The concern we have is that putting a requirement of a minority

and a woman, three people on a panel, would delay the process,

would be a bureaucratic exercise and, we think, over time, would

lose its effectiveness.

I understand the concept and the principle, but we do think it

is a good option. And we think that if an agency doesn’t do an executive panel as a clearinghouse to get into the SES, then it ought

to demonstrate aggressive leadership to promote diversity, one or

the other.

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. Ms. Jones, we just listened to testimony

a few minutes ago from representatives who suggested that part of

the problem is that many highly qualified, well-trained females and

African Americans have other options and that there’s competitiveness in terms of where people go. We heard testimony about people

leaving and going out and earning two, three times more than they

would have been earning in the agency or more than what the director earns.

Do you think there is a pool of qualified individuals who work

for the Government who could move up to these ranks?

118

Ms. JONES. Chairman Davis, I definitely think there is a highly

qualified pool that exists currently in the Government and outside

the Government.

The statements that the previous panelist made in that regard

I hear all the time. I recruit for GAO, and I strongly disagree with

that statement. There are highly qualified African Americans and

other minorities who want to be dedicated public servants. Of

course there are going to be highly qualified candidates that will

choose the higher-paying jobs over public service, but there are just

as many who would forego those salaries and work here, just as I

do.

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. Lieutenant Malloy, based upon your analysis, if things don’t change, most of us would probably be gone by

the time there is some serious movement within the ranks of the

Capitol Police.

You made some recommendations and some suggestions that I

certainly find intriguing and concur with, but do you think that

there’s anything else that could be done on the recruitment end

that would assist in the upward movement of individuals within

the department?

Ms. BLACKMON-MALLOY. Yes, that’s correct. I think currently—

I met with Assistant Chief Nichols before I left the force, and that

was one of the issues that we had raised. And they are working to

make improvements in that area as we speak. So there is something in place; it just has to actually be implemented.

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. How do you feel about this notion of panels where at least there are representatives from the most affected

minority groups being on the panel that make recommendations?

I have friends who are police officers, and many of them can’t get

sergeant because the supervisor won’t recommend them. I have one

friend who’s got a doctorate’s degree who is just frustrated to death

because he can’t get beyond the rank of patrolman in the Chicago

Police Department, because he can’t get a recommendation from

his supervisors for merit selection to move up to the ranks of sergeant. I mean, I haven’t been able to figure it out. I interact with

him quite frequently. He seems to be a pretty intelligent guy. He’s

about 50 years old, you know, about as responsible as you can get.

But he has a doctorate’s degree and can’t make sergeant in the police department.

So how do you feel about this notion of individuals on panels?

Ms. BLACKMON-MALLOY. Yes, in response to your question, with

our agency I think for the last 6 years we’ve used outside agencies

as far as promotion process for sergeants and lieutenants. And we

do have outside panels who are a diverse group, so we have accomplished that mission without our ongoing efforts to effect change.

But once you get past the rank of lieutenant, that rank, which

is underrepresented by African American women—it currently has

three White females and one Hispanic—the problem we are facing

now is we do have an outside promotion process company comes in.

Then there’s a two-part process. There’s an oral review panel, and

then after which there’s an evaluation. But in the evaluation period

you have your same supervisors that you work with sitting on the

panel. So that’s another hurdle we have to work to overcome.

119

We support outside panels 100 percent, and it has been effective

over the past 6 years or so. But when we get behind the rank of

lieutenant, then we’re back to square one again, because the agency is involved in making the decisions, and they are your supervisors. And that clearly should not be acceptable in 2007.

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. Let me ask each one of you—and perhaps

this might be my last question. How important a role do you think

that subjectivity ought to play in the movement of individuals from

one level of employment to the next level? Is subjectivity a major

factor or does it play a major role, in your mind.

Mr. BRANSFORD. Mr. Chairman, what my experience has taught

me is the higher you go in Government, the more subjectivity

comes into the process. And I don’t think it can be eliminated completely.

But I was somewhat stunned to learn that written comments at

GAO were eliminated and that there is a problem with accountability. I think most of my experience, particularly at the executive

level or the GS–15 level, in performance appraisals there are comments, there are justifications for them. And I think that even

though subjectivity comes into it, there needs to be some accountability, some way to judge whether that subjectivity that is being

exercised is reasonable.

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. Ms. Jones.

Ms. JONES. I agree with Mr. Walker that, in our system, there

has to be some level of subjectivity because we don’t make widgets,

so you just can’t count productivity in that manner.

Where I disagree with the agency is in their oversight. Our agency believes it has some oversight over the appraisal process, but it

is obviously somewhat broken. So there needs to be more management oversight and sufficient controls in place to ensure that

there’s equity in rewarding and recognizing staff through these appraisal scores but also in ensuring that they have opportunities to

be on the jobs at GAO that are more highly valued.

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. Lieutenant.

Ms. BLACKMON-MALLOY. Yes, I think I can speak for the majority

of the agency employees when it comes to subjectivity. We all agree

that is going to be with us, but if there is no documentation to support what you are saying, then we are back to square one again,

where we are bringing in our own biases.

But if there is a process in place and you can clearly the document why this person shouldn’t receive A, B, C, or D, and it is documented and it can be articulated as such, then, yes, we will support it. But anything different than that, then there’s going to be

problems.

Mr. DAVIS OF ILLINOIS. Well, let me thank all of you for being

here, for participating and for your testimony and for your answers.

I can’t help but be struck by the testimony that you were giving

when I came in. And it reminded me when there was an effort to

abolish slavery, and every time somebody would come up with a

good plan, there would be a lot of buts about it, a lot of things that

could happen, until finally Frederick Douglass got a little agitated

and suggested that there were those amongst us who would profess

a love for freedom but yet deprecate agitation. And he was of the

120

opinion that when we do that, it means that we want the rain

without the thunder and the lightening.

And so I guess in some instances we want to make sure that we

have a diverse work force, but we don’t want to do anything different than what we’ve been doing all along. Or we want individuals to feel like they can rise to the top based upon merit, based

upon preparation, based upon hard work, but somehow or another

they just never get there.

Well, I can assure you that this committee intends that there be

some movement on this issue, certainly during the time that I’m

chairman of it.

And it’s agonizing, quite frankly. I have seen personally so many

instances of discrimination. I have seen some of the brightest people that I’ve ever encountered be stymied, because they just

reached the point of knowing that, in that particular situation, they

will never be able to go beyond a certain level. And so, they are

never able to experience the fulfillment of the American dream or

the notion that to every man and every woman is chance, is golden

opportunity to become whatever his manhood, womanhood, talent

and ambitions combined to make him or her. That’s sort of the

promise of America.

And so, we appreciate all of you helping us, hopefully to move

in the direction of that promise. It’s been a good hearing.

I want to thank our staff for their staff work.

Thank all of you for being here.

And this meeting is adjourned.

[Whereupon, at 4:42 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

Æ