Management and 

Performance Challenges 

Facing the FEC for FY 2023

November 14, 2022
1050 First Street NE Washington, DC 20463 | www.fec.gov/oig

MEMORANDUM

TO: The Commission

FROM: Christopher Skinner

SUBJECT: Inspector General (IG) Statement Summarizing the Management and 

Performance Challenges Facing the Federal Election Commission (FEC) for 

FY 2023

DATE: November 14, 2022 

In accordance with the Reports Consolidation Act of 2000, the Federal Election Commission

(the “FEC” or “Commission”) Office of Inspector General (OIG) identifies the most serious 

management and performance challenges facing the Commission and provides a brief 

assessment of the Commission’s progress in addressing those challenges.1 By statute this 

report is required to be included in the FEC’s Agency Financial Report. 

The Government Performance and Results Modernization Act of 2010 defines major

management challenges as programs or management functions that are vulnerable to waste,

fraud, abuse and mismanagement and where a failure to perform well could seriously affect 

the ability of the FEC to achieve its mission objectives. Each challenge is related to the 

FEC’s mission and reflects continuing vulnerabilities and emerging issues. The FEC OIG 

identified the top management and performance challenges facing the Commission as the 

following:

1. Growth of campaign spending

2. Identifying and regulating unlawful foreign contributions

3. Continuity of operations

4. Human capital management

5. Cybersecurity

Further attention to the management challenges identified in this report will improve the 

Commission’s ability to execute its mission. The FEC OIG encourages the Commission to 

continue to focus on addressing the management challenges discussed herein. We hope that 

1 The Reports Consolidation Act of 2000 permits agency comment on the IG’s statements. Accordingly, we 

provided senior management a draft of our statement for comment on October 26, 2022. 
FEC OIG 2023-11-002

this report, accompanied by the oversight work we perform throughout the year, assists the 

Commission in its efforts to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of its programs and 

operations. 

We appreciate the Commission’s collaboration throughout the year in addressing the 

management challenges process. Please contact me if you have any concerns regarding the 

identified challenges.

cc: Alec Palmer, Staff Director and Chief Information Officer

John Quinlan, Chief Financial Officer 

Lisa Stevenson, Acting General Counsel
Table of Contents

Introduction and Approach............................................................................................................................ 1 

Management and Performance Challenge: Growth of Election Spending.................................................... 1 

Management and Performance Challenge: Identifying and Regulating Unlawful Foreign Contributions... 4 

Management and Performance Challenge: Continuity of Operations........................................................... 5 

Management and Performance Challenge: Human Capital Management..................................................... 6 

Management and Performance Challenge: Cybersecurity ............................................................................ 8 

FY 2022 Management Challenges Not Included in FY 2023 Report ........................................................... 8 

Appendix: Hotline Poster............................................................................................................................. 9 
Management and Performance Challenges Facing the FEC in FY 2023 1 

Introduction and Approach

Why do we publish this report?

In accordance with the Reports Consolidation Act of 2000, the Federal Election Commission 

(the “FEC” or “Commission”) Office of Inspector General (OIG) identifies the most serious 

management and performance challenges facing the Commission and provides a brief 

assessment of the Commission’s progress in addressing those challenges. By statute, this report 

is required to be included in the FEC’s Agency Financial Report. 

What are management challenges?

The Government Performance and Results Modernization Act of 2010 identifies major 

management challenges as programs or management functions that are vulnerable to waste, 

fraud, abuse, and mismanagement, and where a failure to perform well could seriously affect the 

ability of the agency to achieve its mission objectives. Each challenge area is related to the 

agency’s mission and reflects both continuing vulnerabilities and emerging issues. The FEC 

OIG identified the top management and performance challenges facing the Commission as the 

following: 

• Growth of election spending 

• Identifying and regulating unlawful foreign contributions 

• Continuity of operations 

• Human capital management 

• Cybersecurity

How did we identify these challenges?

We identified the Commission’s major management and performance challenges by 

recognizing and assessing key themes from OIG audits, special reviews, hotline complaints, 

investigations, and an internal risk assessment, as well as reports published by external oversight 

bodies, such as the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and the Government Accountability 

Office (GAO). Additionally, we reviewed previous management challenge reports to determine 

if those challenges remain significant for this submission. Finally, we considered publicly 

available information and internal Commission records. As a result, we identified five key 

management and performance challenges, which are detailed herein. 

Management and Performance Challenge: Growth of Election Spending 

In recent years, federal campaign fundraising and spending have increased dramatically, 

particularly since the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. FEC in 2010. The 

rapid growth of contributions to campaigns and committees, both in total dollars and in the 

number of contributions, has not been met with corresponding budgetary resources for the FEC 

to provide campaign finance oversight. 
Management and Performance Challenges Facing the FEC in FY 2023 2

Total spending on federal election campaigns during presidential years increased from $3.1 

billion in 2000 to approximately $14.4 billion for the 2020 election cycle, nearly a 5-fold 

increase. Spending on the 2022 mid-term elections reached $5.6 billion through September 30, 

2022, nearly equaling the $5.7 billion spent for the entirety of the 2018 mid-term election cycle. 

Projected spending for the full 2022 mid-term is $7.7 billion based on historical precedents. 

projection:

7.7 Bpartial cycle

 $-

 $2.0

 $4.0

 $6.0

 $8.0

 $10.0

 $12.0

 $14.0

 $16.0

1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022*

BILLIONS

*2022 actual through September 30, 2022; light blue indicates mid-term election cycles

Federal Election Spending: 1998 - 2022

Figure: Total spending on congressional, presidential, and party committees per election cycle 

reported to the FEC by all filers. The totals in this figure include PAC expenditures to campaign 

committees. All data is obtained from FEC filings. The 2022 projection is based on 2018 percentages.

The total number of transactions subject to FEC regulation and oversight has also dramatically

increased, especially in recent years. Transactions are reported in mandatory filings with the FEC 

and are comprised of itemized details of receipts (including contributions), disbursements (including 

expenditures), and other financial activity. 

Some highlights of transaction growth, which is illustrated on the following page, include: 

• Between 1980 and 2002, the total number of transactions subject to FEC regulation and 

oversight increased from approximately 602,000 to nearly 3.0 million per election cycle. 

• In the 2018 election cycle, the FEC handled nearly 270 million transactions.

• That number exceed 616 million transactions in the 2020 election cycle.

• The number of transactions for the 2022 mid-term cycle is expected to surpass the 2020 

presidential cycle. 
FEC Total Transactions (1980 - 2022)

Management and Performance Challenges Facing the FEC in FY 2023 3 

 

 

 

3.0 M

616 M

433M through 09/30/22

Projected 629 M

0 M

100 M

200 M

300 M

400 M

500 M

600 M

700 M

2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022

Continued: 2002 - 2022

0.6M

3.0M

0.0M

0.5M

1.0M

1.5M

2.0M

2.5M

3.0M

3.5M

1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002

1980 - 2002

By 2018, the FEC handled 

nearly 270 million transactions in that 

cycle. That number exceeded 616 

million in 2020 and is expected to 

surpass 629 million for 2022. 

Between 1980 and 2002, the 

total number of transactions subject to 

FEC regulation and oversight increased 

from approximately 602,000 to nearly 

3.0 million per election cycle. 
Management and Performance Challenges Facing the FEC in FY 2023 4

Despite dramatic increases in campaign expenditures and the number of transactions subject 

to FEC regulation and oversight, the Commission’s budget has remained largely static and has 

even faced recent reductions. Since 2008, the FEC’s budget has increased by an average of only 

1.4% per year. Those increases have not kept up with inflation, which has averaged 

approximately 2.5% per year over the same period. Indeed, the FEC’s 2022 budget was 

approximately 14.3% less than its 2008 budget when adjusted for inflation.1

 

$61.5 M

$74.5 M

$52.7 M

$0

$10

$20

$30

$40

$50

$60

$70

$80

$90

$100

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

MILLIONS

FEC Annual Appropriations: 2008 - 2022

Appropriation (Actual) Adjusted for Inflation (2008 $'s)

Figure: Annual congressional budget appropriations to the FEC, as reported in Congressional budget 

justifications. Inflation adjustment from Bureau of Labor Statistics published annual CPI data. 

In addition, the nature of federal campaigns has evolved in recent years. Online fundraising, 

the influence of dark money, and potential foreign electoral influence continue to place further 

strain on the FEC’s ability to provide oversight of federal campaigns. As such, absent additional 

resources, the FEC faces challenges in successfully regulating campaign finance. 

Management and Performance Challenge: Identifying and 

Regulating Unlawful Foreign Contributions 

Identifying and regulating unlawful foreign campaign contributions continues to pose a 

significant challenge to the FEC. As campaign expenditures and the number of transactions 

subject to FEC regulation and oversight increase, potential contributions by foreign nationals 

also increase, which demands greater scrutiny by agency regulators. However, an August 2021 

OIG report found that the FEC’s practice of relying on filers’ self-certifications concerning 

potential foreign contributions poses a national security risk and provides insufficient oversight 

1 This is not merely due to recent inflation during 2021-2022. As shown in the accompanying chart, the FEC’s annual 

budget evinces a pattern of decline dating back to 2011 when adjusted for inflation. 
Management and Performance Challenges Facing the FEC in FY 2023 5

of possible illegal foreign donations. Indeed, numerous recent cases highlight the risk of 

unlawful foreign influence in U.S. elections. 

The Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (FECA), related statutes, and implementing 

regulations prohibit direct and indirect contributions to candidates, political committees, and 

inaugural committees by foreign nationals. As noted above, campaign expenditures and 

transactions subject to FEC regulation and oversight have dramatically increased in recent years. 

However, as previously noted, the FEC’s budget has remained static, if not reduced, over the 

same period. Indeed, the FEC’s FY 2022 budget was approximately 14% less than its 2008 

budget when adjusted for inflation. The increase in transactions subject to review, in conjunction 

with declining resources (in real terms), poses a challenge for the FEC in identifying and 

regulating unlawful contributions. 

Moreover, recent cases demonstrate that the risk of foreign electoral influence is real and not 

hypothetical. For example, a matter that came before the Commission in 2016, and was decided 

in October 2021, involved a consultant for a super PAC that supported a presidential candidate. 

The consultant allegedly solicited a $2 million contribution from representatives of a foreign 

national. The Commission ultimately reached a settlement with the super PAC. Numerous other 

reported cases further illustrate the risk. 

Notwithstanding these risks, an August 2021 investigative report by the OIG found that the 

FEC’s current practices provide limited oversight of potential foreign contributions. 

Specifically, the OIG investigation found that the FEC identifies many potential foreign national 

donations based on the reported addresses of donors, but generally defers to a committee’s selfcertification that it verified the U.S. citizenship of those donors. However, that practice does not 

appear to be memorialized in policy and relies heavily on the good faith and due diligence of 

filers. 

Accordingly, the OIG recommended that the FEC update and memorialize its practice 

concerning donors with foreign addresses to identify unlawful foreign donations more 

effectively. However, we recognize that the FEC’s resources are significantly constrained as 

detailed above. As such, identifying and regulating foreign contributions will likely continue to 

challenge the FEC.

Management and Performance Challenge: Continuity of Operations 

Recent and dramatic changes in workplace dynamics due to the COVID-19 pandemic pose 

many management and performance challenges for the FEC. Federal agencies, including the 

FEC, have implemented various return-to-office policies after the expiration of evacuation orders 

that mandated remote work during the height of the pandemic. However, substantial uncertainty

remains regarding how the post-pandemic work environment will look for the FEC, how the 

FEC’s telework policies will affect retention and recruitment, and how the agency would respond 

to a future pandemic or similar event that disrupts operations. 

The FEC implemented a pilot program that provides more telework opportunities than were 

available to most employees prior to the pandemic. However, that pilot program will end in 

March 2023. Significant disagreements remain among stakeholders, including the 

Commissioners, FEC managers, and the FEC workforce, concerning the degree to which the 
Management and Performance Challenges Facing the FEC in FY 2023 6

FEC should permanently embrace telework and remote work. Moreover, if the Commissioners 

themselves are unable to agree upon permanent changes to agency policies, it may result in much 

more limited telework and remote work options for FEC employees. 

The OIG has observed concerns about the impact of limited telework and remote work 

options on employee morale and attrition in the course of numerous recent engagements. 

Concerns include potential employee turnover, given that greater telework and remote work 

options appear to be permanent expectations for the modern public and private sector

workplaces. As such, many stakeholders at the FEC have expressed concerns that, absent 

continued telework and remote work flexibilities, FEC employees may seek telework and remote

employment options elsewhere, resign, or retire, if eligible. The OIG will further evaluate this 

issue in future engagements; however, FEC leadership should prioritize further study of this and 

related concerns. 

Management and Performance Challenge: Human Capital Management

Human capital management is the process of acquiring, training, managing, and retaining 

employees to effectively execute the agency’s mission. In prior management challenge reports 

the OIG identified, among other things, the unusual salary structure of certain senior leaders at 

the Commission (including Commissioners), the practice of agency personnel serving in acting 

positions for extended periods of time, and the Commission’s attempt to address these issues 

through repeated legislative recommendations to Congress. 

These challenges have a direct impact on the Commission’s management of human capital. 

For example, the problems brought about by the challenged senior salary structure, coupled with 

declining staffing levels and increased workload, appear to have contributed to the recent 29th 

out of 29 ranking among small agencies that the FEC received in the Partnership for Public 

Service’s 2021 Best Places to Work in the Federal Government report.2 

Commissioner Pay: The FECA specifies that FEC Commissioners are to be paid equivalent 

to level IV of the Executive Schedule; however, pay for political appointees at the FEC has been 

frozen since 2019 with little increases over the last 10 years. As a result, some personnel in the 

GS 15 and Senior Level (SL) positions earn higher salaries than the FEC Commissioners. This 

unique salary structure has a direct impact on Commissioner morale and may indirectly impact 

staff morale throughout the agency. The problem is intensified by the high costs of living and 

working in Washington, D.C. that commissioners must bear to serve term appointments. 

Salary Structure (Staff Director and General Counsel): Currently, the senior leadership 

roles of the Staff Director and Chief Information Officer (CIO) are occupied by the same 

individual and have been since August 2011. Information technology is ever evolving, which 

affects all government agencies. Without a fully dedicated CIO to focus on technological issues, 

to ensure resources are properly allocated, and that adequate processes are in place for the 

protection and safeguards of the agency, the agency will remain at risk. 

2 See Partnership for Public Service Survey Results and Rankings. 
Management and Performance Challenges Facing the FEC in FY 2023 7

Similarly, the Deputy General Counsel for Law is concurrently serving as the Acting General 

Counsel and has been doing so since September 2016.3

 This has potential to put the agency at 

risk of not effectively and efficiently meeting its mission requirements, as robust internal 

dialogue and diversity of opinion are essential to ensuring the agency considers competing legal 

theories and courses of action. 

The FECA requires the Staff Director to be paid at Level IV and the General Counsel to be 

paid at Level V of the Executive Schedule. Further, this statutory requirement provides that both 

positions supervise personnel at the GS 15 and SL pay scales, who may have higher salaries than 

Levels IV or V of the Executive Schedule. This disparity creates significant challenges in 

recruitment and retention of talent for two of the most senior career positions at the FEC. 

Management previously reported that the Commission adopted legislative recommendations 

in 2021, 2018, 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013 and 2011 that urged Congress to remove the 

statutory references to the Executive Schedule in FECA with respect to the FEC Staff Director 

and General Counsel Positions. The removal of that reference would ensure the two positions be 

compensated under the same schedule as the Commission’s other senior managers. 

Declining Staffing Levels: Despite dramatic increases in campaign expenditures and the 

number of transactions subject to FEC regulation and oversight (see management challenge #1), 

the Commission reported that staffing levels have decreased by over 17.5% since 2012.4

 The 

agency maintained an average of 295-296 employees throughout FY 2022. The increase in 

workload combined with declining staffing levels has resulted in performance benchmark and 

morale challenges. Additionally, the FEC must focus on employee retention challenges as the 

Commission continues to define its new normal in a hybrid work environment. 

Morale: The FEC ranked last (29/29) among small agency workplaces in the 2021 

Partnership for Public Service report. Each year, the Partnership for Public Service ranks federal 

workplaces by analyzing employee engagement and satisfaction scores across all federal 

agencies. Specifically, these results refer to the commitment of the workforce, job and 

organizational satisfaction, and employee desire to achieve results. The rankings are separated 

by large, medium, and small agencies and the data used for compiling these rankings is collected 

by OPM through its Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS). Additionally, the OPM

published preliminary results from the 2022 FEVS survey and the data indicated that employee

morale across the federal government fell two points in 2022. 

The foregoing human capital challenges are impacting the FEC’s ability to achieve its 

mission objectives effectively and efficiently. Despite the internal resource constraints and 

emerging external issues beyond the Commission’s control, we encourage the Commission to

continue to invest in the recruitment of quality employees, training employees, and motivating 

employees to complete mission objectives. 

3 The FEC posted a job announcement for the General Counsel position on USAJOBS with an opening application 

date of September 30, 2021, and a closing date of October 22, 2021. As of October 26, 2022, the position remains 

unfilled.

4 The FEC reported 293 employees on board as of September 2022—a 17.5% decrease compared to FY 2012 (355). 
Management and Performance Challenges Facing the FEC in FY 2023 8

Management and Performance Challenge: Cybersecurity

Protecting data, systems, and networks from threats remains a top challenge. The FEC was 

established to protect the integrity of federal campaign finance by providing transparency and 

enforcing and administering federal campaign finance laws. In doing so, the FEC discloses 

campaign finance data to the public and as a result, encounters large volumes of webpage traffic 

from stakeholders and members of the public. In efforts to streamline transparency initiatives 

and improve business processes, the Commission is more technology reliant today, as is society; 

as such, it is imperative that the Commission continue to prioritize cybersecurity.

Cybersecurity encompasses attempts from criminals and adversaries to obtain sensitive 

information linked to government networks, personal identifiable information, intellectual 

property, and other sensitive data. Cyber threats may arise from phishing, ransomware, or other 

malware attacks and can infiltrate any level within an organization. In response to ever-growing 

threats, the Commission has partnered with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the 

Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), an operational component under 

DHS, to improve its overall security posture by identifying, protecting, and responding to 

network vulnerabilities. We encourage the agency to continue to utilize these partnerships and 

work to develop the in-house expertise to protect the network. 

It is essential that the Commission continue to maintain the integrity and availability of its 

information, as it looks to modernize its systems, which includes moving towards a cloud 

environment. We recognize that federal agencies have struggled to compete with the private 

sector for cyber expertise and talent; however, the Commission should continue to seek and 

adequately compensate industry experts to manage the FEC’s cybersecurity requirements. We

encourage the Commission to continue to be proactive in establishing a cybersecurity framework 

and strengthen internal controls to mitigate external threats from entering the FEC’s network. 

Conclusion

The OIG presents these challenges as ongoing issues facing the FEC in FY 2023. These

challenges impede efficiency and effectiveness in the management of FEC operations and 

programs. The OIG remains dedicated to independent oversight to ensure accountability of the 

mission of the FEC. 

FY 2022 Management Challenges Not Included in FY 2023 Report

All FY 2022 management challenges have been included in this report although some have 

been updated, retitled, and/or consolidated. 
Appendix: Hotline Poster
Management’s Response to the Office of Inspector General’s Statement on the 

Federal Election Commission’s Management and Performance Challenges1

November 9, 2022 

In its Statement on the FEC’s Management and Performance Challenges (“Statement”), the 

Office of the Inspector General (“OIG”) identified five overarching management and 

performance challenges for inclusion in the FEC’s Agency Financial Report for Fiscal Year 

2022. Management’s response to the OIG’s Statement is below.

Challenge 1: Growth of Campaign Spending 

In its Statement, OIG describes how the FEC’s budget has not kept pace with inflation. Without 

an appropriate level of funding, the agency will be unable to fund several modernization projects 

and hire and retain staff needed to address the increased volume of campaign finance data, 

specifically, and increased FECA related activity, generally. Over the past several years, the FEC 

has advocated for increases to its budget in its annual submissions to Congress. For example, for 

FY 2023 the FEC requested a 9.63 percent increase in its appropriation. 

As illustrated in the OIG’s description of this management challenge, increases in the amount of 

money raised and spent in federal elections, and changes in the way political committees raise and 

report contributions, have resulted in explosive growth in the number of campaign finance 

transactions reported to the FEC each election cycle. Each of these transactions represents a data 

element that must be received by the FEC, added to our database and disclosed and made 

searchable on the FEC website and via the FEC campaign finance Application Programming 

Interface (API). 

The FEC receives campaign finance reports, statements and other disclosure documents from more 

than 16,000 political committees and other filers. During the 2020 election cycle, these filers 

reported more than 600 million financial transactions, which were reviewed by FEC staff and 

disclosed to the public on the FEC’s website and through the agency’s API. This volume of data 

is more than double the number of transactions reported in the previous election cycle, and a nearly 

400% increase compared to 2016, the last presidential election cycle. With the steep rise in 

transactions reported every election cycle comes a heavier burden on the FEC’s API to quickly 

search across the FEC’s campaign finance database and display the data requested by the public. 

In FY 2015 the FEC proactively launched a comprehensive, multi-year IT Modernization project

in part in response to projected increases in campaign finance activity. The IT Modernization plan 

outlines reducing the agency’s physical data center footprint by migrating applications to a cloud 

environment, modernizing internal applications, modernizing the electronic filing platform, 

adopting open-source software solutions, and increasing the use of shared services. 

Budget and staffing constraints have limited the FEC’s progress, but the agency has accomplished 

some of the plan’s goals. As part of the FEC’s website redesign, the FEC redesigned its website 

1 Management consists of the agency’s senior managers, including the Staff Director, Acting General 

Counsel and Chief Financial Officer. 
and migrated both the website and the campaign finance database that supports it to a cloud 

environment. In addition to providing faster and easier access to campaign finance data hosted in 

the cloud, this migration allowed the agency to shut down one of its physical data centers during 

FY 2018, realizing attendant costs associated with maintaining that data center. During FY 2020, 

the FEC made additional database enhancements to improve database performance and control 

costs of hosting and maintaining the database. Over the past several years, the FEC has concluded

the migration to a cloud environment of the FEC’s primary campaign finance database, which 

contains over forty years of transaction-level campaign finance data reported to the agency, the 

searchable legal systems and related databases, almost all legacy mission-critical applications and 

some of its infrastructure. As a result of these efforts, the FEC has been able to reduce its physical 

datacenter footprint, and it plans to continue to do so. 

During FY 2022, the FEC completed the initial migration, commonly known as a lift and shift, of 

legacy applications to a cloud environment. The FEC is in the process of decommissioning old 

servers located in physical data centers to continue efforts to reduce the agency’s physical data 

center footprint. Planning is underway to modernize mission-critical internal applications to ensure 

they take advantage of all the cost-saving benefits of cloud-native technologies. The trends in 

campaign finance activity of increasing spending, increasing transactions and increasing API hits 

illustrate how crucial it is for the agency to continue to implement new programs and systems to 

ensure the timely disclosure of campaign finance data. The migration of campaign finance data to 

a cloud environment and modernization of applications migrated to the cloud during previous 

fiscal years are essential components of these efforts. Modernizing the applications and data 

pipelines will permit users to utilize all the advantages of the cloud, which will help the agency to 

efficiently, fairly and effectively achieve its mission objectives. Data pipelines are a set of 

automated methods and procedures that process raw data files received from filers into the primary 

campaign database for internal agency use and for public consumption on FEC.gov. They are 

essential to processing and reviewing campaign finance disclosure information in compliance with 

the statutory mandates as well as government-wide customer service initiatives. 

To continue to mitigate an anticipated steep rise in future costs from maintaining physical 

datacenters, the FEC will continue to pursue its IT modernization plan which requires investment 

now and over the next several years to continue cloud migration and realize improvements in its 

IT processes. The FEC will continue to strive to implement the recommendations of this study 

during FY 2023 and FY 2024, by modernizing migrated legacy applications to ensure they take 

full advantage of cloud-native technology, with the goal of generating efficiencies in future years 

while maintaining high levels of service to the public. Applications prioritized for modernization 

would include solutions for the Reports Analysis Division’s review process as well as the voting 

and certification system used by the Commission.

Efforts to modernize the FEC’s eFiling system are also essential components of the agency’s 

efforts to ensure the timely disclosure of this increasing volume of campaign finance data. The 

FEC is currently working to upgrade its eFiling platform. In FY 2017, the Commission published 

a study of its current eFiling platform, including a survey of the existing functionality of the FEC’s 

free filing software and an in-depth investigation of needs expressed by filers. The FEC is relying 

on the recommendations of this study to improve its eFiling platform to allow greater operating 

system flexibility for users when generating filings for submission to the Commission, and to 
increase the consistency and accuracy of reporting. The FEC’s new eFiling platform will improve 

ease of filing for users by allowing greater operating system flexibility when generating filings for 

submission to the Commission, as well as the process for validating filings prior to acceptance and 

generate modern file outputs that will provide for more flexibility in accessing data. In addition, 

the modernization efforts will provide for seamless integration with the data portion of the website 

and, therefore, more efficient use of the agency’s resources. The FEC will continue development

in FY 2023 and work toward implementation of the new eFiling platform during FY 2024. 

Challenge 2: Identifying and regulating unlawful foreign contributions

Management has undertaken a number of actions over the last several years to prioritize 

enforcement of the foreign national prohibition. Along with cases that are statute-of-limitations 

imperiled when OGC receives them, foreign national prohibition cases are assigned to OGC staff 

attorneys before any other class of cases. OGC has also modified its Status of Enforcement reports 

to the Commission so that the Commission is provided with complete data on every foreign 

national prohibition case on a quarterly basis. Further, OGC has revised its procedures so that it 

may more efficiently track the progress of all foreign national prohibition matters through the 

enforcement process. OGC has also modified its case management software to make it easier to 

run reports for the Commission concerning all foreign national prohibition matters. 

Moreover, requirements for committee actions to prevent the receipt of foreign national, or other 

illegal, contributions are extensive. All committee treasurers are required by regulation to examine 

all contributions received for evidence of illegality. 11 C.F.R. 103.3(b). Contributions that present 

genuine questions as to whether they were made by foreign nationals, such as by coming from a 

foreign address or being drawn on a non-U.S. bank, may be, within ten days of receipt, either 

deposited in the campaign depository or returned to the contributor. If deposited, the treasurer 

shall make his or her best efforts to determine the legality of the contribution, including at least 

one written or oral request for evidence of legality. If the contribution cannot be determined to be 

legal, the treasurer shall refund the contribution within 30 days of receipt. 11 C.F.R. 103.3(b)(1). If 

the treasurer determines that the contribution did not appear to be made by a foreign national, but 

later discovers that it is illegal based on new evidence not available at the time of deposit, the 

treasurer shall refund the contribution within 30 days of discovering the illegality. 11 C.F.R. 

103.3(b)(2). Any contribution which appears to be illegal but is deposited in a campaign 

depository may not be used for any disbursements until the contribution has been determined to 

be legal, and the receiving committee must either establish a separate account for such 

contributions or maintain sufficient funds to make any required refunds. 11 C.F.R. 

103.3(b)(4). The treasurer must keep a written record noting the basis for the appearance of 

illegality of any such contribution, and if a committee’s disclosure report is due while resolution 

of a contribution’s legality is still pending, a statement to that effect must be included in the 

disclosure report. 11 C.F.R. 103.3(b)(5).

In another document, OIG has suggested additional requirements for disclosure to the Commission 

about suspected foreign national contributions. However, legal and practical concerns block 

immediate implementation of additional requirements for disclosure. Disclosure of additional 

information would require a legislative change, which of course is solely the purview of 

Congress. Specifics as to what must be reported to the Commission as part of disclosure reports 

are exhaustively described in 52 U.S.C. 30104. Moreover, given that all disclosure reports must 
be made available to the public, 52 U.S.C. 30111(a)(4), reporting of information such as 

contributors’ U.S. passport numbers, as suggested elsewhere by OIG, would potentially raise 

serious privacy concerns.

In its Statement, OIG recounts its recommendation that the FEC update and memorialize its 

practice concerning donors with foreign addresses to identify unlawful foreign contributions more 

effectively. That practice is already memorialized and regularly updated. The practice is based 

on a regulation, duly promulgated by the Commission, 11 C.F.R. § 110.20(a)(7), which provides 

a regulatory safe harbor for these situations. The practice is memorialized in the Reports Analysis 

Division’s Policies and Procedures, which are updated for every election cycle and approved by 

the Commission, and which are publicly available on FEC.gov, with certain redactions unrelated 

to this practice. 

Finally, Management notes that as of July 1, 2022, only five cases on OGC-Enforcement 

Division’s docket pertain to FECA’s foreign national prohibition, which is a marked reduction 

over recent years. 

Challenge 3: Continuity of Operations 

Upon returning additional employees to the physical workplace in late-February 2022, the FEC 

implemented a one-year Expanded Workplace Flexibilities Pilot Program that provides 

significantly expanded telework options for employees as compared to the agency’s prepandemic policies. Under the Pilot Program, over 98 percent of FEC employees now participate 

in the agency’s telework program on a regular or episodic basis. OIG notes that significant 

disagreements may remain among stakeholders, including the Commissioners, concerning the 

degree to which the FEC should permanently embrace telework and remote work when the Pilot 

Program ends in March 2023. 

However, the one-year Pilot Program was specifically designed to test and evaluate the impact of 

providing expanded telework flexibilities on FEC operations before determining the agency’s 

new permanent program. The Pilot Program policies require management to complete informal 

and formal assessments of program operations, effectiveness, and impacts during the one-year 

Pilot period. Management is currently conducting its formal assessment using data from agencywide surveys of employees and supervisors, performance metrics, and cost-evaluations. Results 

of the assessment will be shared with Commissioners and the FEC workforce, and will be 

utilized by management in developing recommendations to the Commission for the permanent 

telework program. 

The FEC’s Office of Human Resources has also implemented exit surveys to gather data on 

potential reasons for employee departures, including whether the current telework program is 

impacting attrition. In addition, the agency has begun collecting data regarding whether the 

FEC’s telework policies might affect the agency’s recruitment efforts. 

Challenge 4: Human Capital Management 
As the OIG recognizes, the FEC continues to confront a heavy workload alongside relatively flat 

funding levels that have contributed to the reduced staffing levels the FEC has seen over the past 

several years. Over the past decade, the FEC has been able to meet its statutory mission 

primarily due to efficiencies gained by reassigning staff using details, maximizing operational 

efficiencies through reorganizations, and improving technology and processes, among other 

efficiencies. However, in recent years the FEC has begun to exhaust the benefits that can be 

gained through such efficiencies and has, in some situations, reduced performance targets in 

response to these reductions in staffing amid increasing campaign finance activity. The FEC 

intends to continue its current efforts to maintain the current high performance of staff and the 

excellent service that they provide to the public. A critical part of this effort is obtaining 

adequate funding, promoting adequate staffing levels across the agency, and ensuring 

improvements in the agency’s salary structure to be able to compete and retain top talent in 

leadership positions.

As identified by the OIG, the FEC Commissioners are currently compensated at level IV of the 

Executive Schedule (EX) as specified in FECA. The full compensation for this level in 2022 is 

$176,300. However, the compensation for certain political appointees, including Members of the 

FEC, has been frozen. A pay freeze has been in effect since 2014, which set commissioner pay 

at 2013 levels. A small adjustment was made in 2019, which set the frozen pay level at 

$158,500, or 1.9% more than the 2013 amount. EX salaries are uniform nationwide, while the 

General Schedule (GS) salaries include locality adjustments. The relatively high cost of living in 

the Washington, D.C. region means that salaries at the top of the GS scale applicable to FEC 

employees have outpaced frozen salaries on the EX scale. Thus, the pay freeze exacerbates a 

salary discrepancy where commissioners receive less compensation than FEC employees in 

Senior Level (SL) positions, and less compensation than some agency employees in the GS-14 

and GS-15 positions, including many of their direct reports. Under these circumstances, it may 

be difficult to find individuals willing to serve as FEC commissioners in the future, and 

recruitment will be limited to a smaller pool of potential commissioners due to this salary 

constraint. While FEC management is not responsible for recruiting potential commissioners, the 

lack of quorum that could result from vacant commissioner seats would be a management 

challenge for the FEC. Looking ahead to May 1, 2023, it is very likely that the terms of four of 

the six Commissioners serving at that point will have expired. An expired term leaves a 

commissioner serving in a hold-over capacity and eligible to be replaced at any time.

In addition, section 306 of FECA links salaries to Level IV and Level V of the Executive 

Schedule for the Staff Director and General Counsel. Both positions supervise personnel at the 

GS-15 and Senior Level pay scales, which often provide higher salaries than Levels IV and V of 

the Executive Schedule. The Commission has proposed removing the statutory references to the 

Executive Schedule, so that the Staff Director and General Counsel would be compensated under 

the same schedule as the Commission’s other senior managers. This revision will remedy the 

current situation where the Commission’s top managers are compensated at a lower rate than 

many of their direct reports and will ensure that the Commission can retain highly qualified 

individuals to serve in those positions as well as enable it to remain competitive in the 

marketplace for federal executives when filing the current vacancy or when further vacancies 

arise.
Management continues to fully support the Commission’s ongoing efforts to change the salary 

structure for key leadership positions of Staff Director and General Counsel. Meanwhile, the 

Commission has implemented interim solutions for these positions that, very importantly, have 

allowed the Commission to maintain consistency and needed stability in its two most senior staff 

leadership positions. Moreover, the Commission has been able to continue to receive the services 

of agency leaders who were selected for these positions after substantial experience working in 

positions of significant responsibility for the FEC. Instability in these positions has been the 

subject of prior management challenges identified by the OIG, and the Commission attributes the 

stability in these positions that has been achieved to the use of the interim solutions. 

In recent years, the FEC has also been challenged to recruit and retain talent necessary to meet 

the agency’s workload and hiring goals across the agency, in part as a result of the FEC’s 

relatively flat funding levels over this period. Indeed, between FY 2012 and FY 2022, the FEC’s 

overall staffing levels were reduced by over 17 percent. The agency’s challenges in filling 

leadership positions on a permanent basis were compounded by the lapse in appropriations from 

December 22, 2018 to January 25, 2019 and the FEC’s loss of a quorum between September 

2019 and May 2020 and again between July and December 2020. An affirmative vote of four 

FEC Commissioners is required to permanently fill any position at the GS-15 level or higher. 

Upon resumption of operations following the lapse in appropriations in FY 2019, the 

Commission prioritized filling several critical senior management positions. Leveraging the 

FEC’s partnership with OPM HR Solutions, the agency was able to move efficiently through the 

hiring process and in the summer of 2019 filled the positions of Inspector General, Associate 

General Counsel for Policy, and Assistant General Counsel for Administrative Law. However, 

upon losing quorum in September 2019, the Commission could not approve selections at the GS15 or Senior Level. During the brief period in FY 2020 when the Commission had a quorum, the 

position of Director of Human Resources was filled. Following the resumption of a quorum in 

December 2020, led by its Personnel Committee, the Commission again prioritized filling critical 

management vacancies and since that time eight GS-15 management vacancies and one Senior 

Level vacancy, the Associate General Counsel for Enforcement, were filled. The Commission 

and its senior managers continue to prioritize hiring, particularly management positions that 

result in cascading details and vacancies. Indeed, in this fiscal year alone, the agency 

permanently filled eight management positions that were previously filled in an “acting” 

capacity. Currently, only two supervisory positions are filled in an “acting” capacity.

Finally, the agency has undertaken significant efforts to increase morale and employee 

satisfaction across the agency, including instituting an Employee Engagement Steering 

Committee, and supporting the implementation of the Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Council. 

The Engagement Steering Committee was established to help foster improved employee 

engagement across the agency. The Steering Committee, through the FEVs results and internal 

surveys, identifies key areas for improvement. Some of the areas that have been identified have 

been better and more frequent communication from management to staff, more transparency in 

the hiring and budget processes, and suggested improvements with work/life balance issues. The 

Steering Committee also works with offices across the Agency to promote training and 

development opportunities to the FEC workforce and co-sponsors Public Service Recognition 

Week. The Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Council was established to promote diversity, equity 

and inclusion efforts across the agency. Through its efforts, the Council has put on numerous 

programs and trainings, organized the first ever Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Week, and have 
made several recommendations to help improve hiring, promotion, and retention throughout the 

agency. 

Management recently received preliminary data from the 2022 Federal Employee Viewpoint 

Survey (FEVS) and is in the process of evaluating the data and preparing it for publication. The 

FEC’s score on OPM’s Employee Engagement Index, which measures employees’ perceptions 

of senior leaders, supervisors, and the intrinsic work experience, increased by two percentage 

points from 2021 to 2022 (72% to 74%). While the agency has yet to receive full data 

comparison reports for the 2022 FEVS, management notes that the FEC’s increase is in contrast 

with the overall government-wide reduction in EEI scores identified by OIG.

Challenge 5: Cybersecurity

The FEC developed a comprehensive cybersecurity program led by the Chief Information Security 

Officer (CISO) to protect critical infrastructure from the cyber threats. The FEC’s overarching 

strategy to protect the security and privacy of its systems and network begins with the adoption of 

the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Risk Management Framework and 

NIST IT security control “best practices.” NIST Special Publication 800-37 Rev. 2 – Risk 

Management Framework for Information Systems and Organizations,” identifies seven steps 

essential to the successful execution of the risk management framework (RMF):

• Prepare to execute the RMF from an organization- and a system-level perspective by 

establishing a context and priorities for managing security and privacy risk. 

• Categorize the system and the information processed, stored, and transmitted by the 

system based on an analysis of the impact of loss. 

• Select an initial set of controls for the system and tailor the controls as needed to reduce 

risk to an acceptable level based on an assessment of risk. 

• Implement the controls and describe how the controls are employed within the system 

and its environment of operation. 

• Assess the controls to determine if the controls are implemented correctly, operating as 

intended, and producing the desired outcomes with respect to satisfying the security and 

privacy requirements. 

• Authorize the system or common controls based on a determination that the risk to 

organizational operations and assets, individuals, other organizations, and the Nation is 

acceptable. 

• Monitor the system and the associated controls on an ongoing basis to include 

assessing control effectiveness, documenting changes to the system and environment of 

operation, conducting risk assessments and impact analyses, and reporting the security 

and privacy posture of the system. 

The FEC currently employs this continuous monitoring and ongoing authorization approach to 

assess the risk to systems and networks and allow the authorizing official to determine whether 

that risk is acceptable. Three of the FEC’s major systems follow the formal Authority to Operate 

(ATO) process: the General Support System, the FEC website and the FEC’s eFiling system.

Robust Security Architecture

As a result of, and in support of, the RMF, the FEC’s Office of the Chief Information Officer 

(OCIO) continues to take steps to implement a robust security architecture. For example, in 

partnership with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the OCIO has collaborated with 
FEC stakeholders and technical experts to identify, protect, detect and respond to the impact of 

known and unknown threats, continuously assessing security controls and addressing residual and 

new risks. 

As identified in OIG’s description of this management challenge, the FEC has proactively pursued 

three significant joint efforts with DHS over the past two years to better identify and remediate 

emerging threats to the FEC’s systems and networks. In addition, the FEC maintains ongoing 

information security efforts, including our security operation center and the applications for 

continuous diagnostics and mitigation, and implementing security controls to address identified 

cybersecurity gaps. These efforts help to ensure that identified risks are appropriately addressed 

and that its cybersecurity program and security architecture will continue to safeguard the agency’s 

infrastructure, networks, and applications against cyber threats and malicious activities. 

Continuous Monitoring and Mitigation

OCIO Security has worked with DHS to improve security capability by integrating with the 

Continuous Diagnostics and Mitigation (CDM) program. OCIO Security has also introduced the 

use of secure baselining standards, such as the use of Defense Information Systems Agency 

(DISA) Security Technical Implementation Guides (STIGs) and Benchmarks. System hardening 

and secure baselining practices are being expanded in OCIO teams. The OCIO security team has 

developed a privileged user account agreement and a new password policy to add administrative 

controls to supplement the technical access controls. The addition of the new password policy and 

multi-factor authentication (MFA) has improved the security posture of authentication types within 

the FEC’s information systems. 

Cloud-First Initiative

The FEC has also adopted a cloud first initiative for security, accessibility and recoverability. 

The FEC has migrated many legacy applications and systems to the cloud. Leveraging cloud 

computing allows the Commission to take advantage of cloud service providers’ significant 

resources and expertise dedicated to maintaining the highest level of security. Hosting 

information, data and systems in the cloud will allow the FEC to better leverage government and 

industry best practices, such as DevSecOps, which improves our security posture by adding 

security mechanisms into the development and operation processes. Adopting a cloud first 

initiative will ultimately result in the consolidation and the modernization of all FEC’s 

application and systems. Moreover, in cloud architecture, the security controls are built into the 

native configuration. In addition, by utilizing the cloud service providers’ robust disaster 

recovery solutions, the FEC eliminates the need to maintain physical disaster recovery sites, 

which are costly to maintain and secure. The FEC has already completed the migration of its 

largest database, the campaign finance database, and its website to a cloud environment. The 

FEC’s new website, launched in May 2017, uses FedRAMP Authorized cloud services, which 

provides a standardized approach to security assessment, authorization, and continuous 

monitoring for cloud products and services.

Building a Cybersecurity Culture

At the same time, the FEC is working to build a cybersecurity culture among its employees. The 

first line of defense in maintaining the protection and integrity of the agency’s network is the 

ongoing education of employees about their role in identifying and preventing malicious actors—
internal or external—from compromising the FEC’s systems and networks. Efforts to build a 

cybersecurity culture include steps to educate staff about FEC IT security policies and to ensure 

staff awareness of potential cybersecurity threats, such as phishing scams. The FEC promotes this 

cybersecurity culture in part through annual, mandatory IT security trainings and through yearround communication and notices to staff from the CISO. This year, the FEC implemented 

additional trainings for all staff to help staff recognize and avoid social engineering attempts.

Building Capacity in the Information Security Office

The FEC has also taken steps to build capacity in its Information Security Office. In April 2019, 

the FEC entered into a partnership with the Partnership for Public Service to participate in the 

Cybersecurity Talent Initiative. This selective, cross-sector program, which provides loan 

forgiveness to top bachelors and masters graduates around the United States in exchange for at 

least two-years’ service at a federal agency, addresses the immediate cybersecurity talent 

deficiency faced by Federal government agencies by attracting service-minded individuals to 

government who might not otherwise have applied. During FY2020, the FEC completed the 

selection process and brought on board an individual for a two-year cybersecurity fellowship. In 

the past two years, FEC actively participated in the CTI program, attended the CTI's leadership 

panel discussions, and encouraged the cybersecurity analyst from the CTI program to actively 

participate in CTI training activities as well as training outside of CTI. However, with a two-year 

limit on the fellowship, and in the hopes of retaining employees with cybersecurity expertise, the 

Commission has created a permanent position to replace this fellowship position. FEC has recently 

filled this security position with a cybersecurity engineer/analyst.