2012 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey Results

EMPLOYEES INFLUENCING CHANGE

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION 

AGENCY MANAGEMENT REPORT

UNITED STATES 

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT

Over’

687,000’

Federal’

Employees’ 

Opinions’
TABLE OF CONTENTS

About this Report 3

The 2012 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey 4

Results at a Glance 5

Strengths 6

Challenges 7

Increases and Decreases 8

Above and Below 9

Indices 10

Decision Aid 13

Work/Life Programs 18

Diversity 21

Appendices

Appendix A: Item Results and Benchmarks 23

Appendix B: Survey Respondent Characteristics 29

Appendix C: Trend Analysis 32

Appendix D: Human Capital Assessment and Accountability Framework Ratings by Subagency 37

Appendix E: Employee Engagement Index Ratings by Subagency 38

Appendix F: Global Satisfaction Index Ratings by Subagency 39

Appendix G: 2012 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS) Methods 40
2012 FEDERAL EMPLOYEE VIEWPOINT SURVEY 3 

ABOUT THIS REPORT

Understanding the views of Federal employees

Federal employees hold positions that are critical to the health, safety and welfare of our nation. It is important 

to have an in-depth understanding of employee views to ensure that the Federal Government is able to attract 

and retain the best, most talented employees to fill these key positions. 

Assessing your agency’s strengths and challenges

The Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS) is a key tool in assessing which policies, programs and other 

aspects of the work environment are viewed positively by employees, as well as finding out which aspects are 

not working so well. This report is designed specifically to provide agency leadership with insight into the 

unique strengths and challenges of their individual employee populations. 

Comparisons to past survey results and governmentwide averages are included throughout the report to ensure 

meaningful and action-oriented content. These comparisons highlight areas that have improved or declined, 

and provide benchmarks for interpreting the 2012 results. 

Multiple perspectives of your agency’s results

This report provides a broad but interconnected picture of your results, and includes...

■■

■■

■■

■■

■■

■■

■■

■■

Strengths and Challenges: Results for the 10 survey items with the highest percent positive and highest 

percent negative responses;

Increases and Decreases: Survey items that increased or decreased by 5 or more percentage points since 2011;

Above and Below: Survey items where your agency leads and trails the Federal Government average by 5 

or more percentage points;

Indices: 

– Human Capital Assessment and Accessibility Framewor

Employee Engagement

Global Satisfaction;

Decision Aid: A summary table highlighting your agency’s positive, neutral and negative results;

Work/Life Programs: A breakdown of your agency’s participation rates and satisfaction ratings of 

these programs;

Diversity: Your agency’s survey respondent characteristics;

Appendices: A set of appendices that show results benchmarked against agency high/low results and percentile 

scores; unweighted demographic item results; a trend analysis of 2008, 2010, 2011 and 2012 results; HCAAF, 

employee engagement and global satisfaction results for each subagency; and a description of the survey methods.

What do the survey results represent?

The results represent a snapshot in time of the perceptions of the Federal workforce. Statisticians weighted 

returned survey data to adjust for differences between characteristics of the respondents and the population 

of Federal employees surveyed. The governmentwide results have a plus or minus one percent margin of error. 
2012 FEDERAL EMPLOYEE VIEWPOINT SURVEY 4 

THE 2012 FEDERAL EMPLOYEE 

VIEWPOINT SURVEY

What did the survey measure?

The 98-item survey included 84 items that measured Federal employees’ perceptions about how effectively 

agencies manage their workforce, as well as 14 demographic items. The survey was grouped into eight topic areas:

■■

■■

■■

■■

■■

■■

■■

■■

Personal Work Experiences

Work Unit

Agency

Supervisor/Team Leader

Leadership

Satisfaction

Work/Life Programs

Demographics

What’s new?

More than 687,000 Federal employees participated in this survey.

Employees from 37 Departments/large agencies and 45 small/independent agencies, comprising 97 percent of 

the executive branch workforce, participated in this year’s survey. Four new agencies that did not participate in 

the 2011 survey also chose to participate this year. The governmentwide response rate was 46.1 percent. 

Expanded eligibility criteria

In past FEVS administrations, only full-time permanent employees were surveyed. In 2012, the eligibility criteria 

were expanded to include both full-time and part-time permanent, non-seasonal employees who were on board 

with their agencies as of October 2011. 

New survey items

The demographic section measuring Federal workforce diversity was expanded in 2012 with the addition of 

three new items addressing gender identity and sexual orientation, disability status and veteran status.

When were employees surveyed?

Previous survey field periods were limited to approximately two months, but in 2012 OPM extended the field 

period to three months (April-June 2012) to accommodate surveying over 1.6 million Federal employees. 

Agency launch dates were staggered throughout this timeframe, and each agency was offered a 6 week administration period but could opt for a shorter administration period. The survey was administered electronically, 

with paper versions provided to employees without internet access.
RESULTS AT A GLANCE 5 

YOUR AGENCY RESPONSE

Field Period

May 16, 2012 – June 29, 2012

Response Rate

53% (748 out of 1,402 

employees responded)

Agency results have a margin of error of +/- 2%

RESULTS AT A GLANCE

Strengths & Increases

46 items had positive ratings of 65 percent or more (strengths)

2 items increased by 5 percentage points or more since the 2011 survey

Challenges & Decreases

2 items had negative ratings of 35 percent or more (challenges)

5 items decreased by 5 percentage points or more since the 2011 survey

Governmentwide Comparisons

45 items were 5 percentage points or more above the Governmentwide average

2 items were 5 percentage points or more below the Governmentwide average

Indices

68 percent positive on Global Satisfaction

70 percent positive on Employee Engagement

HCAAF Rankings Out of 37 Agencies

4th on Leadership & Knowledge Management (5th in 2011)

8th on Results-Oriented Performance Culture (7th in 2011)

5th on Talent Management (7th in 2011)

25th on Job Satisfaction (24th in 2011)

UNDERSTANDING YOUR RESULTS

When comparing to past survey results or governmentwide results, it is useful 

to apply rules of thumb to determine which findings are notable. Although 

significance tests could be run on each comparison, it is impractical to do so; 

even small differences will be significant when analyzing results of large agencies. 

Positive ratings are the sum of the two positive categories (e.g., Strongly Agree/Agree 

or Very Satisfied / Satisfied), and negative ratings are the sum of the two negative 

categories (e.g., Strongly Disagree /Disagree or Very Dissatisfied /Dissatisfied).

■■

■■

■■

■■

Items that are 65 percent or more positive are considered strengths

Items that are 35 percent or more negative are considered challenges

Items that are 30 percent or more neutral suggests uncertainty, 

presenting an opportunity for more agency communication

A difference of 5 percentage points or more is considered notable
STRENGTHS 6 

2012 G’wide 2012 FERC

STRENGTHS

Focusing on challenges facing the workforce is critical, but it is equally important to acknowledge areas of strength. 

Examining positive employee feedback can lead to a better understanding of which programs, policies and other 

aspects of the organization are viewed favorably by employees. Your agency’s 10 highest percent positive responses 

are displayed in Figure 1 below, along with the 2012 governmentwide percent positive for comparison.

FIGURE 1 MOST POSITIVE RESPONSE ITEMS FOR YOUR AGENCY

When needed I am willing to put in the extra effort 

to get a job done. (Q. 7)

96% 2012 Governmentwide.

97% 2012 FERC.

How satisfied are you with the following Work/Life 

programs in your agency? Alternative Work Schedules 

(AWS) (Q. 80)

89% 2012 Governmentwide.

95% 2012 FERC.

How satisfied are you with the following Work/Life 

programs in your agency? Health and Wellness Programs 

(for example, exercise, medical screening, quit smoking 

programs) (Q. 81)

80% 2012 Governmentwide.

90% 2012 FERC.

I am constantly looking for ways to do my job better. (Q. 8) 91% 2012 Governmentwide.

90% 2012 FERC.

My supervisor supports my need to balance work and 

other life issues. (Q. 42)

77% 2012 Governmentwide.

88% 2012 FERC.

In the last six months, my supervisor/team leader has 

talked with me about my performance. (Q. 50)

77% 2012 Governmentwide.

87% 2012 FERC.

How would you rate the overall quality of work done 

by your work unit? (Q. 28)

83% 2012 Governmentwide.

87% 2012 FERC.

My supervisor/team leader treats me with respect. (Q. 49) 79% 2012 Governmentwide.

86% 2012 FERC.

Employees are protected from health and safety hazards 

on the job. (Q. 35)

77% 2012 Governmentwide.

84% 2012 FERC.

The work I do is important. (Q. 13) 91% 2012 Governmentwide.

84% 2012 FERC.
CHALLENGES 7 

2012 G’wide 2012 FERC

CHALLENGES

Examining the most negative responses and identifying potential themes is useful in determining aspects of 

your agency that may benefit from targeted action. Figure 2 below displays your agency’s 10 highest percent 

negative responses, along with the 2012 governmentwide percent negative for comparison. 

FIGURE 2 MOST NEGATIVE RESPONSE ITEMS FOR YOUR AGENCY

In my work unit, steps are taken to deal with a poor 

performer who cannot or will not improve. (Q. 23)

43% 2012 Governmentwide.

40% 2012 FERC.

Pay raises depend on how well employees perform 

their jobs. (Q. 33)

50% 2012 Governmentwide.

40% 2012 FERC.

In my work unit, differences in performance are recognized 

in a meaningful way. (Q. 24)

37% 2012 Governmentwide.

33% 2012 FERC.

How satisfied are you with your opportunity to get 

a better job in your organization? (Q. 67)

35% 2012 Governmentwide.

30% 2012 FERC.

Creativity and innovation are rewarded. (Q. 32) 32%2012 Governmentwide.

29% 2012 FERC.

Promotions in my work unit are based on merit. (Q. 22) 37% 2012 Governmentwide.

29% 2012 FERC.

Awards in my work unit depend on how well employees 

perform their jobs. (Q. 25)

34% 2012 Governmentwide.

28% 2012 FERC.

How satisfied are you with the information you 

receive from management on what’s going on in your 

organization? (Q. 64)

27% 2012 Governmentwide.

25% 2012 FERC.

Employees have a feeling of personal empowerment 

with respect to work processes. (Q. 30)

29% 2012 Governmentwide.

25% 2012 FERC.

In my organization, leaders generate high levels of 

motivation and commitment in the workforce. (Q. 53)

31% 2012 Governmentwide.

25% 2012 FERC.
INCREASES AND DECREASES 8 

INCREASES AND DECREASES

Agency items that increased and decreased the most from 2011

Taking a look at survey items that have increased or decreased the most since 2011 can help you understand where 

your agency has made improvements and where future action may need to be focused. Table 1 displays the items 

that had the greatest changes (5 or more percentage points) in percent positive rating. If your agency had more 

than 10 items that changed by 5 percentage points or more, only the 10 items with the greatest changes are shown. 

TABLE 1 GREATEST INCREASES AND DECREASES IN POSITIVE RESPONSES

 Percent Positive

2011 2012 Difference

Increased the Most

How satisfied are you with the following Work/Life programs in your agency? Telework (Q. 79) 57 79 +22

How satisfied are you with the following Work/Life programs in your agency? Employee Assistance 

Program (EAP) (Q. 82) 74 83 +9

Decreased the Most

Employees are recognized for providing high quality products and services. (Q. 31) 64 56 -8

How satisfied are you with the following Work/Life programs in your agency? Child Care Programs 

(for example, daycare, parenting classes, parenting support groups) (Q. 83) 82 76 -6

Managers review and evaluate the organization’s progress toward meeting its goals and objectives. (Q. 57) 66 61 -5

How satisfied are you with the policies and practices of your senior leaders? (Q. 66) 54 49 -5

Awards in my work unit depend on how well employees perform their jobs. (Q. 25) 52 47 -5
ABOVE AND BELOW 9 

ABOVE AND BELOW

Agency items above and below the 2012 Governmentwide average

Table 2 allows you to see where your agency ratings are higher and lower than the governmentwide average, 

and only survey items that are 5 percentage points above or below the governmentwide average are displayed. 

If your agency had more than 10 items that differ from the average, only the 10 items with the greatest differences 

are shown.

TABLE 2 ITEMS ABOVE AND BELOW THE 2012 GOVERNMENTWIDE AVERAGE ON PERCENT POSITIVE

Percent Positive

FERC G’wide Difference

Leading the Government

My work unit is able to recruit people with the right skills. (Q. 21) 64 43 +21

I have sufficient resources (for example, people, materials, budget) to get my job done. (Q. 9) 67 48 +19

Promotions in my work unit are based on merit. (Q. 22) 48 34 +14

My workload is reasonable. (Q. 10) 73 59 +14

Physical conditions (for example, noise level, temperature, lighting, cleanliness in the workplace) allow 

employees to perform their jobs well. (Q. 14) 81 67 +14

My organization’s leaders maintain high standards of honesty and integrity. (Q. 54) 68 55 +13

My supervisor supports my need to balance work and other life issues. (Q. 42) 88 77 +11

The workforce has the job-relevant knowledge and skills necessary to accomplish organizational goals. (Q. 29) 83 72 +11

Overall, how good a job do you feel is being done by the manager directly above your immediate 

supervisor/team leader? (Q. 60) 69 58 +11

Senior leaders demonstrate support for Work/Life programs. (Q. 62) 65 54 +11

Trailing the Government

The work I do is important. (Q. 13) 84 91 -7

In my most recent performance appraisal, I understood what I had to do to be rated at different 

performance levels (for example, Fully Successful, Outstanding). (Q. 19) 63 68 -5
INDICES: HCAAF 10 

2012 G’wide 2012 FERC 2011 FERC

INDICES

Human Capital Assessment and Accountability Framework (HCAAF)

The HCAAF indices were created to guide governmentwide efforts to support agency mission results with 

strong human capital strategies, and they provide consistent metrics for measuring progress toward HCAAF 

objectives. For more information on these metrics, refer to OPM’s website: www.opm.gov/hcaaf_resource_

center/assets/hcaaf_ssm.pdf.

Figure 3 shows your agency results with appropriate comparisons for the four HCAAF indices: Leadership 

and Knowledge Management, Results-Oriented Performance Culture, Talent Management and Job Satisfaction.

FIGURE 3 HCAAF INDICES – POSITIVE RESPONSES

Leadership & 

Knowledge 

Management

60% 2012 Governmentwide.

67% 2012 FERC.

68% 2011 FERC.

Results-Oriented 

Performance 

Culture

52% 2012 Governmentwide.

58% 2012 FERC.

60% 2011 FERC.

Talent 

Management

59% 2012 Governmentwide.

65% 2012 FERC.

65% 2011 FERC.

Job Satisfaction

66% 2012 Governmentwide.

65% 2012 FERC.

67% 2011 FERC.

The LEADERSHIP & KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT INDEX indicates the extent to which employees hold their leadership in high regard, both overall and on specific facets 

of leadership. It is made up of items 10, 35, 36, 51, 52, 53, 55, 56, 57, 61, 64 and 66.

The RESULTS-ORIENTED PERFORMANCE CULTURE INDEX indicates the extent to which employees believe their organizational culture promotes improvement in 

processes, products and services and organizational outcomes. It is made up of items 12, 14, 15, 20, 22, 23, 24, 30, 32, 33, 42, 44 and 65.

The TALENT MANAGEMENT INDEX indicates the extent to which employees think the organization has the talent necessary to achieve organizational goals. It is made up 

of items 1, 11, 18, 21, 29, 47 and 68.

The JOB SATISFACTION INDEX indicates the extent to which employees are satisfied with their jobs and various aspects thereof. It is made up of items 4, 5, 13, 63, 67, 

69 and 70.
INDICES: EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT 11

2012 G’wide 2012 FERC 2011 FERC

Employee Engagement

An engaged employee is seen as one who is immersed in the content of the job and energized to spend extra effort 

in job performance. The 2012 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey does not contain direct measurements of 

employee engagement such as passion, commitment and involvement. However, it does include questions that 

cover most, if not all, of the conditions likely to lead to employee engagement (e.g., leadership, opportunity to 

use skills, etc.). OPM created an index using these items, and excluded any items measuring satisfaction in order 

to differentiate this index from a job satisfaction index. 

Figure 4 shows your agency’s results with appropriate comparisons on the Employee Engagement Index and its 

component indices: Leaders Lead, Supervisors and Intrinsic Work Experiences. 

FIGURE 4 EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT INDEX – POSITIVE RESPONSES

Employee

Engagement

65% 2012 Governmentwide.

70% 2012 FERC.

71%2011 FERC.

Employee Engagement is comprised of

Leaders Lead

54% 2012 Governmentwide.

63% 2012 FERC.

65%2011 FERC.

Supervisors

71% 2012 Governmentwide.

78% 2012 FERC.

78%2011 FERC.

Intrinsic Work 

Experiences

71% 2012 Governmentwide.

69% 2012 FERC.

71%2011 FERC.

LEADERS LEAD reflects the employees' perceptions of the integrity of leadership, as well as leadership behaviors such as communication and workforce motivation. 

It is made up of items 53, 54, 56, 60 and 61.

SUPERVISORS reflects the interpersonal relationship between worker and supervisor, including trust, respect and support. It is made up of items 47, 48, 49, 51 and 52.

INTRINSIC WORK EXPERIENCES reflects the employees' feelings of motivation and competency relating to their role in the workplace. It is made up of items 3, 4, 6,11 

and 12.
Global Satisfaction

OPM created the Global Satisfaction Index to provide a more comprehensive indicator of employees’ 

overall work satisfaction. The index is a combination of employees’ satisfaction with their job, their pay 

and their organization, plus their willingness to recommend their organization as a good place to work.

Figure 5 shows your agency’s results with appropriate comparisons on the Global Satisfaction Index and the 

individual components of the index.

FIGURE 5 GLOBAL SATISFACTION INDEX – POSITIVE RESPONSES

Global 

Satisfaction

63% 2012 Governmentwide.

68% 2012 FERC.

70% 2011 FERC.

Global Satisfaction is comprised of 

Job 

Satisfaction

68% 2012 Governmentwide.

69% 2012 FERC.

72% 2011 FERC.

Pay 

Satisfaction

59% 2012 Governmentwide.

60% 2012 FERC.

63% 2011 FERC.

Organization 

Satisfaction

59% 2012 Governmentwide.

66% 2012 FERC.

70% 2011 FERC.

Recommend 

Organization

67% 2012 Governmentwide.

76% 2012 FERC.

76% 2011 FERC.

JOB SATISFACTION is item 69. Considering everything, how satisfied are you with your job?

PAY SATISFACTION is item 70. Considering everything, how satisfied are you with your pay?

ORGANIZATION SATISFACTION is item 71. Considering everything, how satisfied are you with your organization?

RECOMMEND ORGANIZATION is item 40. I recommend my organization as a good place to work.

INDICES: GLOBAL SATISFACTION 12 

2012 G’wide 2012 FERC 2011 FERC
DECISION AID 13 

DECISION AID

Transforming your results into action

To assist your agency in determining where to focus action planning efforts, Table 3 provides a straightforward 

way to identify strengths, challenges and neutral areas. You can also use the two comparison columns on the 

right to find out if your agency has made progress since 2011 and to compare your agency results to the 2012 

governmentwide average. 

Your 2012 results (first three columns)

 GREEN SHADED CELL The item is 65 percent 

positive or higher. This is an area of strength 

in your agency.

 GOLD SHADED CELL The item is 30 percent neutral 

or higher. This is an area for more communication 

in your agency. 

 BROWN SHADED CELL The item is 35 percent 

negative or higher. This is an area of challenge 

in your agency.

Comparisons to % Positive (last two columns)

GREEN NUMBER Your 2012 percent positive was 5 

or more percentage points higher than this number.

BROWN NUMBER Your 2012 percent positive was 5 

or more percentage points lower than this number.

TABLE 3 DECISION AID

2012 FERC %

Comparisons to 

% Positive

Positive Neutral Negative ‘11 FERC

’12 G’wide

Average

My Work Experience

1. I am given a real opportunity to improve my skills in my organization. this is an area of strength in your agency.

70 14 16 70 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

63

2. I have enough information to do my job well. this is an area of strength in your agency.

77 13 10 78 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

72

3. I feel encouraged to come up with new and better ways of 

doing things. 54 23 23 56 58

4. My work gives me a feeling of personal accomplishment. this is an area of strength in your agency.

69 18 13 70 72

5. I like the kind of work I do. this is an area of strength in your agency.

80 14 5 78 84

6. I know what is expected of me on the job. this is an area of strength in your agency.

80 12 8 79 80

7. When needed I am willing to put in the extra effort to get a job done. this is an area of strength in your agency.

97 2 1 97 96

8. I am constantly looking for ways to do my job better. this is an area of strength in your agency.

90 8 2 89 91

9. I have sufficient resources (for example, people, materials, budget) 

to get my job done. this is an area of strength in your agency.

67 15 18 67 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

48
DECISION AID 14 

TABLE 3 DECISION AID (cont’d)

2012 FERC %

Comparisons to 

% Positive

Positive Neutral Negative '11 FERC

’12 G’wide

Average

10. My workload is reasonable. this is an area of strength in your

73 agency.

12 14 71 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

59

11. My talents are used well in the workplace. 59 18 24 61 59

12. I know how my work relates to the agency's goals and priorities. this is an area of strength in your

83 agency.

11 6 86 84

13. The work I do is important. this is an area of strength in your

84 agency.

12 4 85 Your agency's 2012 performance was lower.

91

14. Physical conditions (for example, noise level, temperature, lighting, 

cleanliness in the workplace) allow employees to perform their 

jobs well.

this is an area of strength in your

81 agency.

9 9 80 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

67

15. My performance appraisal is a fair reflection of my performance. this is an area of strength in your

70 agency.

13 17 70 69

16. I am held accountable for achieving results. this is an area of strength in your

79 agency.

14 7 82 83

17. I can disclose a suspected violation of any law, rule or regulation 

without fear of reprisal. 63 22 15 63 61

18. My training needs are assessed. 51 26 24 49 53

19. In my most recent performance appraisal, I understood 

what I had to do to be rated at different performance levels 

(for example, Fully Successful, Outstanding)

63 17 21 66 Your agency's 2012 performance was lower.

68

My Work Unit

20. The people I work with cooperate to get the job done. this is an area of strength in your

82 agency.

11 8 83 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

73

21. My work unit is able to recruit people with the right skills. 64 19 16 65 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

43

22. Promotions in my work unit are based on merit. 48 23 29 49 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

34

23. In my work unit, steps are taken to deal with a poor 

performer who cannot or will not improve. 31 29 this is an area of challenge in your agency.

40 33 29

24. In my work unit, differences in performance are recognized

in a meaningful way. 40 27 33 40 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

34

25. Awards in my work unit depend on how well employees perform 

their jobs. 47 25 28 Your agency's 2012 performance 

52was lower. Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.41

26. Employees in my work unit share job knowledge with each other. this is an area of strength in your

79 agency.

11 10 79 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

72

27. The skill level in my work unit has improved in the past year. 61 26 13 65 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

55

28. How would you rate the overall quality of work done by your 

work unit? this is an area of strength in your

87 agency.

11 2 86 83
DECISION AID 15 

TABLE 3 DECISION AID (cont’d)

2012 FERC %

Comparisons to 

% Positive

Positive Neutral Negative '11 FERC

’12 G’wide

Average

My Agency

29. The workforce has the job-relevant knowledge and skills necessary 

to accomplish organizational goals. this is an area of strength in your

83 agency.

11 6 81 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

72

30. Employees have a feeling of personal empowerment with respect 

to work processes. 47 28 25 50 45

31. Employees are recognized for providing high quality products 

and services. 56 24 20 Your agency's 2012 performance was lower.

64 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.48

32. Creativity and innovation are rewarded. 41 this is an area for more communication in your agency.

30 29 45 38

33. Pay raises depend on how well employees perform their jobs. 28 this is an area for more communication in your agency.

32 this is an area of challenge in your agency.40 32 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.22

34. Policies and programs promote diversity in the workplace (for 

example, recruiting minorities and women, training in awareness 

of diversity issues, mentoring).

61 25 14 64 57

35. Employees are protected from health and safety hazards

on the job. this is an area of strength in your

84 agency.

11 4 86 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

77

36. My organization has prepared employees for potential 

security threats. this is an area of strength in your

81 agency.

13 5 79 78

37. Arbitrary action, personal favoritism and coercion for partisan 

political purposes are not tolerated. 59 24 17 60 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

51

38. Prohibited Personnel Practices (for example, illegally discriminating 

for or against any employee/applicant, obstructing a person’s 

right to compete for employment, knowingly violating veterans’ 

preference requirements) are not tolerated.

this is an area of strength in your

72 agency.

18 10 72 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

66

39. My agency is successful at accomplishing its mission. this is an area of strength in your

82 agency.

14 4 83 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

76

40. I recommend my organization as a good place to work. this is an area of strength in your

76 agency.

16 8 76 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

67

41. I believe the results of this survey will be used to make my agency 

a better place to work. 49 28 23 52 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

42

My Supervisor/Team Leader

42. My supervisor supports my need to balance work and other 

life issues. this is an area of strength in your

88 agency.

5 6 86 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

77

43. My supervisor/team leader provides me with opportunities 

to demonstrate my leadership skills. this is an area of strength in your

69 agency.

16 15 73 65

44. Discussions with my supervisor/team leader about my performance 

are worthwhile. this is an area of strength in your

65 agency.

17 18 66 62
DECISION AID 16 

TABLE 3 DECISION AID (cont’d)

2012 FERC %

Comparisons to 

% Positive

Positive Neutral Negative '11 FERC

’12 G’wide

Average

45. My supervisor/team leader is committed to a workforce representative 

of all segments of society. this is an area of strength in your

68 agency.

23 9 71 64

46. My supervisor team leader provides me with constructive suggestions 

to improve my job performance. 64 18 18 65 61

47. Supervisors/team leaders in my work unit support employee 

development. this is an area of strength in your

72 agency.

17 11 73 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

65

48. My supervisor/team leader listens to what I have to say. this is an area of strength in your

81 agency.

10 9 82 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

74

49. My supervisor/team leader treats me with respect. this is an area of strength in your

86 agency.

7 7 86 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

79

50. In the last six months, my supervisor/team leader has talked with 

me about my performance. this is an area of strength in your

87 agency.

7 6 89 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

77

51. I have trust and confidence in my supervisor. this is an area of strength in your

73 agency.

14 12 75 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

66

52. Overall, how good a job do you feel is being done by your 

immediate supervisor/team leader? this is an area of strength in your

77 agency.

13 10 76 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

68

Leadership

53. In my organization, leaders generate high levels of motivation 

and commitment in the workforce. 50 25 25 51 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

43

54. My organization's leaders maintain high standards of honesty 

and integrity. this is an area of strength in your

68 agency.

20 12 69 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

55

55. Managers/supervisors/team leaders work well with employees of 

different backgrounds. this is an area of strength in your

70 agency.

19 11 73 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

63

56. Managers communicate the goals and priorities of the organization. 64 19 17 67 62

57. Managers review and evaluate the organization's progress toward 

meeting its goals and objectives. 61 25 14 Your agency's 2012 performance was lower.

66 62

58. Managers promote communication among different work units 

(for example, about projects, goals, needed resources). 58 23 19 62 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

53

59. Managers support collaboration across work units to accomplish 

work objectives. 64 21 15 68 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

57

60. Overall, how good a job do you feel is being done by the manager 

directly above your immediate supervisor/team leader? this is an area of strength in your

69 agency.

19 12 68 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

58

61. I have a high level of respect for my organization’s senior leaders. this is an area of strength in your

65 agency.

20 15 67 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

54

62. Senior leaders demonstrate support for Work/Life programs. this is an area of strength in your

65 agency.

21 14 67 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

54
DECISION AID 17 

TABLE 3 DECISION AID (cont’d)

2012 FERC %

Comparisons to 

% Positive

Positive Neutral Negative '11 FERC

’12 G’wide

Average

My Satisfaction

63. How satisfied are you with your involvement in decisions that 

affect your work? 55 22 23 58 52

64. How satisfied are you with the information you receive from 

management on what's going on in your organization? 53 21 25 53 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

48

65. How satisfied are you with the recognition you receive for doing 

a good job? 54 23 23 58 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

48

66. How satisfied are you with the policies and practices of your 

senior leaders? 49 this is an area for more communication in your agency.

30 21 Your agency's 2012 performance was lower.54 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.43

67. How satisfied are you with your opportunity to get a better job 

in your organization? 40 this is an area for more communication in your agency.

31 30 40 36

68. How satisfied are you with the training you receive for your 

present job? 57 24 18 57 54

69. Considering everything, how satisfied are you with your job? this is an area of strength in your

69 agency.

17 14 72 68

70. Considering everything, how satisfied are you with your pay? 60 20 20 63 59

71. Considering everything, how satisfied are you with your organization? this is an area of strength in your

66 agency.

19 15 70 Your agency's 2012 performance was higher.

59
WORK/LIFE PROGRAMS 18 

WORK/LIFE PROGRAMS

Work/Life programs provide employees with resources to effectively balance their responsibilities both inside 

and outside of the workplace. The Work/Life program participation and satisfaction results for your agency are 

displayed in this section, beginning with telework in Figure 6 below. Participation and satisfaction ratings for all 

other work/life programs are listed in Figures 8 and 9 on the following pages.

The Telework Enhancement Act of 2010 encouraged Federal agencies to expand their use of telework as a strategic 

management tool. Telework can be an important factor in attracting and retaining the best employees, improving 

morale and increasing the capacity to achieve agency mission and goals. This critical tool can also help reduce 

the cost of transit, in addition to providing flexibility in severe weather circumstances, emergencies, or other 

workplace disruptions. The telework figures below provide a snapshot of your agency’s teleworking status, and 

are helpful in determining whether or not more effort should be focused on increasing telework in your agency.

FIGURE 6 ELIGIBILITY TO TELEWORK (Question 72)

Yes 91%

No 7%

Not Sure 2%

FIGURE 7 TELEWORK STATUS (Question 73)

FERC G’wide

FERC.

60%

TELEWORK

40%

DO NOT

TELEWORK

Governmentwide.

25%

TELEWORK

76%

DO NOT

TELEWORK

5% I telework 3 or more days per week. FERC

3% Governmentwide

26% I telework 1 or 2 days per week. FERC

8% Governmentwide

12% I telework, but no more than 1 or 2 days per month. FERC

4% Governmentwide

I telework very infrequently, on an unscheduled 

or short-term basis. 17% FERC

10% Governmentwide

I do not telework because I have to be physically 

present on the job. 2% FERC

35% Governmentwide

2% I do not telework because I have technical issues. FERC

6%Governmentwide

I do not telework because I did not receive approval, 

even though I have the kind of job where I can telework. 11% FERC

22% Governmentwide

25% I do not telework because I choose not to telework. FERC

13% Governmentwide

Note: The sum of percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.
WORK/LIFE PROGRAMS 19 

Yes No Not Available

FIGURE 8 PARTICIPATION IN WORK/LIFE PROGRAMS (Questions 74-78)

Alternative Work 

Schedules (AWS)

78%Yes.

22%No.<1%Not Available.

Health and Wellness 

Programs (for example, 

exercise, medical screening, 

quit smoking programs)

42%Yes.

50%No.8%Not Available.

Employee Assistance 

Program (EAP)

8%Yes.

87%No.5%Not Available.

Child Care Programs 

(for example, daycare, 

parenting classes, parenting 

support groups)

5%Yes.

84%No.11%Not Available.

Elder Care Programs 

(for example, support 

groups, speakers)

3%Yes.

85%No.12%Not Available.
WORK/LIFE PROGRAMS 20 

FIGURE 9 SATISFACTION WITH WORK/LIFE PROGRAMS (Questions 79-84)

Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied

Alternative Work 

Schedules (AWS)

95%Satisfied.

4%Neutral.1%Dissatisfied.

Health and Wellness 

Programs (for example, 

exercise, medical screening, 

quit smoking programs)

90%Satisfied.

9%Neutral.1%Dissatisfied.

Employee Assistance 

Program (EAP)

83%Satisfied.

16%Neutral.2%Dissatisfied.

Child Care Programs 

(for example, daycare, 

parenting classes, parenting 

support groups)

76%Satisfied.

21%Neutral.3%Dissatisfied.

Elder Care Programs 

(for example, support 

groups, speakers)

75%Satisfied.

20%Neutral.5%Dissatisfied.

Telework

79%Satisfied.

12%Neutral.9%Dissatisfied.

Note: Only respondents who reported participating in these programs were included in the results above.
DIVERSITY 21 

DIVERSITY

Your agency’s survey respondent characteristics

Figure 10 displays a few of the attributes of your agency’s workforce. Understanding the characteristics of 

employees is a critical component of many organizational activities, such as workforce planning, recruiting, 

training and the availability of work/life programs and flexibilities.

FIGURE 10 WORKFORCE DIVERSITY

GENDER

Male 56%

Female 44%

AGE

25 and Under 3%

26-29 11%

30-39 24%

40-49 21%

50-59 26%

60 or Older 16%

SELF-IDENTIFY AS

Heterosexual or Straight 84%

Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, 

or Transgender 3%

I prefer not to say 13%

 VETERAN

Yes 9%

No 91%
DIVERSITY 22 

FIGURE 10 WORKFORCE DIVERSITY (cont’d)

 DISABILITY

Yes 7%

No 93%

PAY GRADE

Federal Wage System 0%

GS 1-6 <1%

GS 7-12 21%

GS 13-15 74%

SES 3%

SL/ST 1%

Other 1%

LENGTH OF SERVICE 

WITH AGENCY

< 1 Year 3%

1-3 Years 25%

4-5 Years 15%

6-10 Years 19%

11-20 Years 12%

> 20 Years 25%

SUPERVISORY STATUS

Non-Supervisor 63%

Team Leader 20%

Supervisor/Manager 13%

Executive 4%
APPENDIX A 23 

APPENDIX A

Item results and benchmarks

Your agency’s percent positive for each survey item is listed in the left column, and benchmarks are listed on 

the right for comparison purposes. The benchmark scores were compiled from the results for Departments and 

large agencies with 800 or more employees. Note that these benchmarks are based on 37 agencies where Army, 

Army Corps of Engineers, Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps and Other Defense agencies/activities are rolled up 

into Department of Defense.

The following benchmark scores are listed to allow you to compare your agency’s percent positive with the 

results of other agencies:

The highest and lowest percent positive scores

Represent the agency that scored the highest/lowest for that survey item. 

The 90th, 50th, 10th percentiles

Compare your percent positive score with the percentile scores for each item. If your agency had a positive score 

of 83 percent for an item and the benchmark for the 90th percentile was 80 percent positive, then you can conclude 

that your agency is above the 90th percentile of agency scores for that item. In other words, your agency scored 

higher than at least 90 percent of the benchmark agencies.
APPENDIX A 24 

APPENDIX A ITEM RESULTS AND BENCHMARKS

FERC

% Positive

2012 FEVS Benchmarks

 % Positive

2012 High

Percentile

90th 50th 10th Low

My Work Experiences

‡1. I am given a real opportunity to improve my skills in my organization. 70 80 79 65 55 52

2. I have enough information to do my job well. 77 83 81 73 64 60

3. I feel encouraged to come up with new and better ways of 

doing things. 54 77 68 60 51 43

‡4. My work gives me a feeling of personal accomplishment. 69 82 80 74 69 63

‡5. I like the kind of work I do. 80 89 87 83 79 77

6. I know what is expected of me on the job. 80 86 84 79 72 70

7. When needed I am willing to put in the extra effort to get a job done. 97 99 98 97 95 94

8. I am constantly looking for ways to do my job better. 90 94 92 91 88 85

9. I have sufficient resources (for example, people, materials, budget) 

to get my job done. 67 71 61 50 40 34

‡10. My workload is reasonable. 73 73 71 59 50 44

‡11. My talents are used well in the workplace. 59 69 68 59 52 48

‡12. I know how my work relates to the agency's goals and priorities. 83 90 89 85 79 75

‡13. The work I do is important. 84 95 94 90 87 81

‡14. Physical conditions (for example, noise level, temperature, lighting, 

cleanliness in the workplace) allow employees to perform their 

jobs well.

81 85 81 70 61 55

‡15. My performance appraisal is a fair reflection of my performance. 70 82 76 67 62 51

16. I am held accountable for achieving results. 79 91 88 83 77 72

17. I can disclose a suspected violation of any law, rule or regulation without 

fear of reprisal. 63 79 75 62 54 44

‡18. My training needs are assessed. 51 66 61 50 42 38

‡19. In my most recent performance appraisal, I understood what I had to do 

to be rated at different performance levels (for example, Fully Successful, 

Outstanding).

63 81 73 66 58 41

Note: Items included on the Annual Employee Survey are noted by a double dagger (‡).
APPENDIX A 25 

APPENDIX A ITEM RESULTS AND BENCHMARKS (cont’d)

FERC

% Positive

2012 FEVS Benchmarks

 % Positive

2012 High

Percentile

90th 50th 10th Low

Note: Items included on the Annual Employee Survey are noted by a double dagger (‡).

My Work Unit

‡20. The people I work with cooperate to get the job done. 82 89 84 76 69 67

‡21. My work unit is able to recruit people with the right skills. 64 75 58 48 35 34

‡22. Promotions in my work unit are based on merit. 48 59 52 39 30 24

‡23. In my work unit, steps are taken to deal with a poor performer who 

cannot or will not improve. 31 42 38 30 26 24

‡24. In my work unit, differences in performance are recognized in a 

meaningful way. 40 47 45 35 30 21

25. Awards in my work unit depend on how well employees perform 

their jobs. 47 58 55 44 37 31

26. Employees in my work unit share job knowledge with each other. 79 86 82 74 69 61

27. The skill level in my work unit has improved in the past year. 61 65 63 56 50 48

28. How would you rate the overall quality of work done by your 

work unit? 87 94 90 85 82 72

My Agency

‡29. The workforce has the job-relevant knowledge and skills necessary to 

accomplish organizational goals. 83 85 83 73 62 53

‡30. Employees have a feeling of personal empowerment with respect to work 

processes.

47 62 58 46 35 33

31. Employees are recognized for providing high quality products 

and services. 56 71 67 51 43 37

‡32. Creativity and innovation are rewarded. 41 63 53 41 31 26

‡33. Pay raises depend on how well employees perform their jobs. 28 43 38 25 17 13

34. Policies and programs promote diversity in the workplace (for example, 

recruiting minorities and women, training in awareness 

of diversity issues, mentoring).

61 77 67 59 50 47

‡35. Employees are protected from health and safety hazards on the job. 84 93 87 78 62 57

‡36. My organization has prepared employees for potential security threats. 81 86 83 76 69 53
APPENDIX A 26 

APPENDIX A ITEM RESULTS AND BENCHMARKS (cont’d)

37. Arbitrary action, personal favoritism and coercion for partisan political 

purposes are not tolerated. 59 71 62 53 46 38

38. Prohibited Personnel Practices (for example, illegally discriminating

for or against any employee/applicant, obstructing a person’s right to 

compete for employment, knowingly violating veterans’ preference 

requirements) are not tolerated.

72 81 76 67 61 52

39. My agency is successful at accomplishing its mission. 82 89 84 77 68 55

40. I recommend my organization as a good place to work. 76 81 77 68 55 46

41. I believe the results of this survey will be used to make my agency 

a better place to work. 49 65 56 47 38 36

My Supervisor/Team Leader

‡42. My supervisor supports my need to balance work and other life issues. 88 89 88 80 74 69

43. My supervisor/team leader provides me with opportunities to demonstrate 

my leadership skills. 69 80 76 67 60 57

‡44. Discussions with my supervisor/team leader about my performance are 

worthwhile. 65 73 70 63 58 56

45. My supervisor/team leader is committed to a workforce representative of 

all segments of society. 68 78 73 67 61 58

46. My supervisor team leader provides me with constructive suggestions to 

improve my job performance. 64 71 69 63 57 53

‡47. Supervisors/team leaders in my work unit support employee development. 72 81 75 68 61 56

48. My supervisor/team leader listens to what I have to say. 81 86 83 76 73 68

49. My supervisor/team leader treats me with respect. 86 88 86 81 77 75

50. In the last six months, my supervisor/team leader has talked with me 

about my performance. 87 91 89 82 73 62

‡51. I have trust and confidence in my supervisor. 73 78 73 67 62 58

‡52. Overall, how good a job do you feel is being done by your immediate 

supervisor/team leader? 77 83 77 70 66 60

Note: Items included on the Annual Employee Survey are noted by a double dagger (‡).

FERC

% Positive

2012 FEVS Benchmarks

 % Positive

2012 High

Percentile

90th 50th 10th Low
APPENDIX A 27 

APPENDIX A ITEM RESULTS AND BENCHMARKS (cont’d)

Leadership

‡53. In my organization, leaders generate high levels of motivation 

and commitment in the workforce. 50 60 54 44 34 32

54. My organization's leaders maintain high standards of honesty 

and integrity. 68 75 70 56 48 40

‡55. Managers/supervisors/team leaders work well with employees of different 

backgrounds. 70 79 73 65 58 52

‡56. Managers communicate the goals and priorities of the organization. 64 78 73 64 53 43

‡57. Managers review and evaluate the organization's progress toward 

meeting its goals and objectives. 61 78 73 63 52 44

58. Managers promote communication among different work units 

(for example, about projects, goals, needed resources). 58 69 62 54 47 40

59. Managers support collaboration across work units to accomplish work 

objectives. 64 75 67 59 47 45

60. Overall, how good a job do you feel is being done by the manager directly 

above your immediate supervisor/team leader? 69 73 71 61 52 49

‡61. I have a high level of respect for my organization’s senior leaders. 65 70 65 56 46 42

62. Senior leaders demonstrate support for Work/Life programs. 65 80 69 57 45 43

My Satisfaction

‡63. How satisfied are you with your involvement in decisions that

affect your work? 55 67 64 53 45 40

‡64. How satisfied are you with the information you receive from management 

on what's going on in your organization? 53 67 65 50 42 37

‡65. How satisfied are you with the recognition you receive for doing

a good job? 54 65 63 51 42 40

‡66. How satisfied are you with the policies and practices of your 

senior leaders? 49 62 54 45 35 32

‡67. How satisfied are you with your opportunity to get a better job 

in your organization? 40 49 47 36 30 25

‡68. How satisfied are you with the training you receive for your 

present job? 57 71 62 54 44 42

Note: Items included on the Annual Employee Survey are noted by a double dagger (‡).

FERC

% Positive

2012 FEVS Benchmarks

 % Positive

2012 High

Percentile

90th 50th 10th Low
APPENDIX A 28 

APPENDIX A ITEM RESULTS AND BENCHMARKS (cont’d)

‡69. Considering everything, how satisfied are you with your job? 69 77 74 69 63 58

‡70. Considering everything, how satisfied are you with your pay? 60 71 68 61 56 50

71. Considering everything, how satisfied are you with your organization? 66 75 69 62 53 43

Work/Life Programs

72. Have you been notified that you are eligible to telework? (See page 18)

73. Please select the response below that best describes your teleworking situation. (See page 18)

74 - 78. Do you participate in the following Work/Life programs? (See page 19)

79 - 84. How satisfied are you with the following Work/Life programs in your agency?*

79. Telework 79 87 84 75 63 38

80. Alternative Work Schedules (AWS) 95 97 95 90 81 71

81. Health and Wellness Programs (for example, exercise, medical 

screening, quit smoking programs) 90 93 90 82 74 55

82. Employee Assistance Program (EAP) 83 91 86 78 72 62

83. Child Care Programs (for example, daycare, parenting 

classes, parenting support groups) 76 94 85 73 54 0

84. Elder Care Programs (for example, support groups, speakers) 75 100 83 70 63 46

* The 2012 work/life program satisfaction results only include employees who indicated that they participated in the program. 

Note: Items included on the Annual Employee Survey are noted by a double dagger (‡).

FERC

% Positive

2012 FEVS Benchmarks

 % Positive

2012 High

Percentile

90th 50th 10th Low
APPENDIX B 29 

APPENDIX B

This appendix displays your agency’s unweighted survey respondent characteristics.

APPENDIX B SURVEY RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS (Unweighted Data)

2012 FERC 

Percentages

Demographic Characteristics

85. Where do you work?

 Headquarters 86

 Field 14

‡86. What is your supervisory status?

 Non-Supervisor 63

 Team Leader 20

 Supervisor 10

 Manager 3

 Executive 4

‡87. Are you:

 Male 56

 Female 44

‡88. Are you Hispanic or Latino?

 Yes 5

 No 95

‡89. Are you:

 American Indian or Alaska Native 1

 Asian 6

 Black or African American 17

 Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 1

 White 73

 Two or more races (not Hispanic or Latino) 4

90. What is your age group?

 25 and under 3

 26-29 11

 30-39 24

 40-49 21

 50-59 26

 60 or older 16

Note: Items included on the Annual Employee Survey are noted by a double dagger (‡).
APPENDIX B 30 

APPENDIX B SURVEY RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS (Unweighted Data) (cont’d)

2012 FERC 

Percentages

91. What is your pay category/grade?

 Federal Wage System (ex. WB, WD, WG, WL, WM, WS, WY) 0

 GS 1-6 <1

 GS 7-12 21

 GS 13-15 74

 Senior Executive Service 3

 Senior Level (SL) or Scientific or Professional (ST) 1

 Other 1

92. How long have you been with the Federal Government (excluding military service)?

 Less than 1 year 1

 1 to 3 years 20

 4 to 5 years 15

 6 to 10 years 18

 11 to 14 years 7

 15 to 20 years 6

 More than 20 years 33

93. How long have you been with your current agency (for example, Department of Justice, 

Environmental Protection Agency)?

 Less than 1 year 3

 1 to 3 years 25

 4 to 5 years 15

 6 to 10 years 19

 11 to 20 years 12

 More than 20 years 25

94. Are you considering leaving your organization within the next year, and if so, why?

 No 68

 Yes, to retire 6

 Yes, to take another job within the Federal Government 13

 Yes, to take another job outside the Federal Government 9

 Yes, other 4

95. I am planning to retire:

 Within one year 4

 Between one and three years 8

 Between three and five years 9

 Five or more years 79
APPENDIX B 31 

APPENDIX B SURVEY RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS (Unweighted Data) (cont’d)

2012 FERC 

Percentages

96. Do you consider yourself to be one or more of the following?

 Heterosexual or Straight 84

 Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual or Transgender 3

 I Prefer Not to Say 13

97. Have you ever served on Active Duty in the US Armed Forces (Air Force, Army, Coast Guard, Marine Corps 

or Navy)?

 Yes 9

 No 91

98. Are you an individual with a disability?

 Yes 7

 No 93
APPENDIX C 32 

APPENDIX C

Trend analysis: 2008 vs. 2010 vs. 2011 vs. 2012 results

Appendix C consists of a set of trend tables which displays your agency’s positive results for each item for the 

last four survey administrations. The last column of the table indicates whether or not there were significant 

increases, decreases, or no changes in positive ratings from 2008 to 2010 (the first arrow), from 2010 to 2011 

(the second arrow), and from 2011 to 2012 (the last arrow). Arrows slanting up indicate a statistically significant 

increase, and arrows slanting down indicate a statistically significant decrease. Horizontal arrows indicate the 

change was not statistically significant. For example, symbols indicate there was no significant change in 

positive ratings from 2008 to 2010, but there was a significant increase in positive ratings from 2010 to 2011, 

and from 2011 to 2012. Similarly, symbols indicate there was a significant decrease from 2008 to 2010, 

but there were no significant changes in positive ratings from 2010 to 2011 or from 2011 to 2012.

APPENDIX C TREND ANALYSIS

Percent Positive Significant 

Trends 2008 2010 2011 2012

‡1. I am given a real opportunity to improve my skills in my organization. 71 71 70 70 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

2. I have enough information to do my job well. 82 80 78 77 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

3. I feel encouraged to come up with new and better ways of doing things. 63 57 56 54 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡4. My work gives me a feeling of personal accomplishment. 75 72 70 69 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡5. I like the kind of work I do. 78 80 78 80 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

6. I know what is expected of me on the job. — 81 79 80 NA No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

7. When needed I am willing to put in the extra effort to get a job done. — 96 97 97 NA No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

8. I am constantly looking for ways to do my job better. — 89 89 90 NA No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

9. I have sufficient resources (for example, people, materials, budget) 

to get my job done. 71 69 67 67 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡10. My workload is reasonable. 73 72 71 73 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡11. My talents are used well in the workplace. 67 62 61 59 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡12. I know how my work relates to the agency's goals and priorities. 87 86 86 83 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡13. The work I do is important. 87 86 85 84 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡14. Physical conditions (for example, noise level, temperature, lighting,

cleanliness in the workplace) allow employees to perform their jobs well. 88 83 80 81 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

Note: Items included on the Annual Employee Survey are noted by a double dagger (‡). An "NA" indicates that the item was not included in the survey that year or 

there were too few respondents to conduct trend analyses.
APPENDIX C 33 

APPENDIX C TREND ANALYSIS (cont’d)

Percent Positive Significant 

Trends 2008 2010 2011 2012

Note: Items included on the Annual Employee Survey are noted by a double dagger (‡). An "NA" indicates that the item was not included in the survey that year or 

there were too few respondents to conduct trend analyses.

‡15. My performance appraisal is a fair reflection of my performance. 67 67 70 70 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 Significant increase in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

16. I am held accountable for achieving results. 86 82 82 79 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

17. I can disclose a suspected violation of any law, rule or regulation 

without fear of reprisal. 61 63 63 63 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡18. My training needs are assessed. 53 51 49 51 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡19. In my most recent performance appraisal, I understood what I had

to do to be rated at different performance levels (for example, Fully

Successful, Outstanding).

69 61 66 63 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 Significant increase in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡20. The people I work with cooperate to get the job done. 90 83 83 82 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡21. My work unit is able to recruit people with the right skills. 60 63 65 64 Significant increase in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡22. Promotions in my work unit are based on merit. 53 49 49 48 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡23. In my work unit, steps are taken to deal with a poor performer who 

cannot or will not improve. 36 35 33 31 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡24. In my work unit, differences in performance are recognized in a 

meaningful way. 48 45 40 40 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

25. Awards in my work unit depend on how well employees perform 

their jobs. 60 54 52 47 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

26. Employees in my work unit share job knowledge with each other. 81 78 79 79 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

27. The skill level in my work unit has improved in the past year. 59 62 65 61 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

28. How would you rate the overall quality of work done by your work unit? 87 87 86 87 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡29. The workforce has the job-relevant knowledge and skills necessary to 

accomplish organizational goals. 80 80 81 83 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡30. Employees have a feeling of personal empowerment with respect to 

work processes. 51 55 50 47 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

31. Employees are recognized for providing high quality products and 

services. — 62 64 56 NA No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡32. Creativity and innovation are rewarded. 53 47 45 41 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡33. Pay raises depend on how well employees perform their jobs. 38 34 32 28 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

34. Policies and programs promote diversity in the workplace (for example, 

recruiting minorities and women, training in awareness of diversity 

issues, mentoring).

70 63 64 61 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.
APPENDIX C 34 

APPENDIX C TREND ANALYSIS (cont’d)

Percent Positive Significant 

Trends 2008 2010 2011 2012

Note: Items included on the Annual Employee Survey are noted by a double dagger (‡). An "NA" indicates that the item was not included in the survey that year or 

there were too few respondents to conduct trend analyses.

‡35. Employees are protected from health and safety hazards on the job. 87 86 86 84 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡36. My organization has prepared employees for potential security threats. 85 82 79 81 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

37. Arbitrary action, personal favoritism and coercion for partisan political 

purposes are not tolerated. 61 61 60 59 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

38. Prohibited Personnel Practices (for example, illegally discriminating

for or against any employee/applicant, obstructing a person’s right to

compete for employment, knowingly violating veterans’ preference 

requirements) are not tolerated.

76 71 72 72 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

39. My agency is successful at accomplishing its mission. — 82 83 82 NA No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

40. I recommend my organization as a good place to work. 76 76 76 76 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

41. I believe the results of this survey will be used to make my agency a 

better place to work. — 49 52 49 NA Significant increase in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡42. My supervisor supports my need to balance work and other life issues. 86 86 86 88 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

43. My supervisor/team leader provides me with opportunities to 

demonstrate my leadership skills. — 68 73 69 NA Significant increase in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡44. Discussions with my supervisor/team leader about my performance 

are worthwhile. 67 66 66 65 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

45. My supervisor/team leader is committed to a workforce representative 

of all segments of society. — 66 71 68 NA Significant increase in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

46. My supervisor team leader provides me with constructive suggestions 

to improve my job performance. — 62 65 64 NA No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡47. Supervisors/team leaders in my work unit support employee development. 75 71 73 72 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

48. My supervisor/team leader listens to what I have to say. — 80 82 81 NA No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

49. My supervisor/team leader treats me with respect. — 86 86 86 NA No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

50. In the last six months, my supervisor/team leader has talked with me 

about my performance. — 89 89 87 NA No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡51. I have trust and confidence in my supervisor. 75 73 75 73 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡52. Overall, how good a job do you feel is being done by your immediate 

supervisor/team leader? 78 75 76 77 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡53. In my organization, leaders generate high levels of motivation and 

commitment in the workforce. 49 50 51 50 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.
APPENDIX C 35 

APPENDIX C TREND ANALYSIS (cont’d)

Percent Positive Significant 

Trends 2008 2010 2011 2012

Note: Items included on the Annual Employee Survey are noted by a double dagger (‡). An "NA" indicates that the item was not included in the survey that year or 

there were too few respondents to conduct trend analyses.

54. My organization's leaders maintain high standards of honesty and 

integrity. 61 69 69 68 Significant increase in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡55. Managers/supervisors/team leaders work well with employees of 

different backgrounds. 78 71 73 70 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡56. Managers communicate the goals and priorities of the organization. 66 67 67 64 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡57. Managers review and evaluate the organization's progress toward 

meeting its goals and objectives. 68 66 66 61 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

58. Managers promote communication among different work units 

(for example, about projects, goals, needed resources). 66 60 62 58 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

59. Managers support collaboration across work units to accomplish 

work objectives. — 68 68 64 NA No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

60. Overall, how good a job do you feel is being done by the manager 

directly above your immediate supervisor/team leader? — 70 68 69 NA No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡61. I have a high level of respect for my organization’s senior leaders. 65 64 67 65 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 Significant increase in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

62. Senior leaders demonstrate support for Work/Life programs. — 63 67 65 NA Significant increase in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡63. How satisfied are you with your involvement in decisions that affect 

your work? 63 61 58 55 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡64. How satisfied are you with the information you receive from 

management on what's going on in your organization? 54 52 53 53 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡65. How satisfied are you with the recognition you receive for doing 

a good job? 66 61 58 54 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡66. How satisfied are you with the policies and practices of your senior 

leaders? 54 51 54 49 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 Significant increase in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡67. How satisfied are you with your opportunity to get a better job in 

your organization? 44 44 40 40 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡68. How satisfied are you with the training you receive for your present job? 60 58 57 57 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡69. Considering everything, how satisfied are you with your job? 74 72 72 69 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

‡70. Considering everything, how satisfied are you with your pay? 65 71 63 60 Significant increase in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

71. Considering everything, how satisfied are you with your organization? 69 71 70 66 Significant increase in positive ratings 

from 2008 to 2010.

 No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2010 to 2011.

 Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.
APPENDIX C 36 

Percent Positive Significant 

Trends 2008 2010 2011 2012

APPENDIX C TREND ANALYSIS (cont’d)

79 -84. How satisfied are you with the following Work/Life programs in 

your agency?*

79. Telework — — 57 79 NA NA Significant increase in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

80. Alternative Work Schedules (AWS) — — 97 95 NA NA No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

81. Health and Wellness Programs (for example, exercise, medical 

screening, quit smoking programs) — — 93 90 NA NA Significant decrease in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

82. Employee Assistance Program (EAP) — — 74 83 NA NA Significant increase in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

83. Child Care Programs (for example, daycare, parenting 

classes, parenting support groups) — — 82 76 NA NA No significant change in positive ratings 

from 2011 to 2012.

84. Elder Care Programs (for example, support groups, speakers) — — 71 75 NA NA NA

* The 2012 and 2011 work/life program satisfaction results only include employees who indicated that they participated in the program. Because participation questions 

were new in 2011, percentages from previous years are not displayed.

Note: Items included on the Annual Employee Survey are noted by a double dagger (‡). An "NA" indicates that the item was not included in the survey that year or 

there were too few respondents to conduct trend analyses.
APPENDIX D 37 

APPENDIX D

Human Capital Assessment and Accountability Framework ratings by subagency

To provide an in-depth understanding of your agency’s HCAAF results, this appendix displays HCAAF results for each 

subagency. This targeted information is useful in highlighting notably high or low subagency results on each of the 

indices, and can be a starting point in information sharing across the agency. Subagencies that are strong in certain 

categories may be able to share their best practices with others that are encountering challenges in the same areas. 

APPENDIX D HCAAF RATINGS

2012 Percentage

Leadership 

& Knowledge 

Management

Results-Oriented 

Performance

Talent 

Management

Job 

Satisfaction

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 67 58 65 65

Office of Administrative Law Judges 63 59 67 59

Office of Administrative Litigation 52 49 48 56

Office of Electric Reliability 64 60 57 64

Office of Energy Market Regulation 63 54 60 64

Office of Energy Policy & Innovation 78 67 74 78

Office of Energy Projects 66 59 71 67

Office of Enforcement 66 57 63 64

Office of External Affairs 75 62 68 67

Office of Secretary 80 68 76 70

Office of the Chairman and Commissioners 92 81 88 98

Office of the Executive Director 72 59 63 67

Office of the General Counsel 75 62 71 66

Other 59 70 57 60
APPENDIX E 38 

APPENDIX E

Employee engagement index ratings by subagency

This appendix provides a detailed look at employee engagement in your agency. Each subagency’s overall Employee 

Engagement Index score is listed in the column on the right, and scores for each of the component indices are 

broken out in the columns on the left. Examining subagency results is important in taking action to improve 

employee engagement, as it allows leadership to easily spot high or low results in specific parts of the agency. 

APPENDIX E EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT RATINGS

2012 Percentage

Leaders Lead Supervisors

Intrinsic Work 

Experiences

Employee 

Engagement Index

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 63 78 69 70

Office of Administrative Law Judges 58 74 72 68

Office of Administrative Litigation 38 71 65 58

Office of Electric Reliability 60 79 65 68

Office of Energy Market Regulation 58 76 65 66

Office of Energy Policy & Innovation 77 89 71 79

Office of Energy Projects 62 80 69 70

Office of Enforcement 69 69 69 69

Office of External Affairs 67 88 75 76

Office of Secretary 79 80 80 80

Office of the Chairman and Commissioners 90 97 96 94

Office of the Executive Director 68 73 72 71

Office of the General Counsel 72 83 73 76

Other 33 94 71 66
APPENDIX F 39 

APPENDIX F

Global satisfaction index ratings by subagency

Analyzing Global Satisfaction by subagency will help your agency take targeted action in improving overall 

employee satisfaction. Each subagency’s overall Global Satisfaction Index score is listed in the column on the 

right, and scores for each component of the index are broken out in the columns on the left. 

APPENDIX F GLOBAL SATISFACTION RATINGS

2012 Percentage

Job Satisfaction Pay Satisfaction

Organization 

Satisfaction

Recommend 

Organization

Global 

Satisfaction Index

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 69 60 66 76 68

Office of Administrative Law Judges 77 45 90 90 76

Office of Administrative Litigation 56 54 48 56 54

Office of Electric Reliability 65 64 63 74 67

Office of Energy Market Regulation 60 61 55 71 62

Office of Energy Policy & Innovation 87 76 75 96 84

Office of Energy Projects 72 67 67 76 71

Office of Enforcement 70 52 71 76 67

Office of External Affairs 56 57 56 76 61

Office of Secretary 85 63 70 77 74

Office of the Chairman and Commissioners 100 100 100 100 100

Office of the Executive Director 72 57 69 78 69

Office of the General Counsel 70 53 74 87 71

Other 87 38 52 60 59
APPENDIX G 40 

APPENDIX G

2012 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS) methods

The FEVS measures employees’ perceptions of conditions within their agencies which contribute to their organization’s 

success. The survey provides general indicators of how well the Federal Government manages personnel. OPM and 

agency managers use these indicators in developing policy and planning actions to improve agency performance 

and evaluate individual agencies’ progress towards long-term goals. 

Federal employees have an intimate knowledge of the workings of the government at every level. The FEVS 

gives them the voice they need to point out inefficiencies and jobs well done. Senior managers can then use this 

information to make government more effective, and more responsive to the needs of the American people. This 

year, the FEVS reaches deeper into the government than it has in previous survey administrations. Reports are 

now offered to help managers at lower levels, resulting in a greater potential to celebrate successes and identify 

opportunities for change across each agency. 

Survey items

The 98-item survey included 14 demographic questions and 84 items that measured Federal employees’ perceptions 

about how effectively agencies manage their workforces. The 98 items in the questionnaire are grouped into 

eight topic areas that respondents see as they proceed through the survey: Personal Work Experiences, Work 

Unit, Agency, Supervisor/Team Leader, Leadership, Satisfaction, Work/Life and Demographics. 

Survey sample

The 2012 survey was directed at full-time and part-time, permanent, non-seasonal employees. A total of 82 agencies 

participated in the survey effort, consisting of 37 Departments/large agencies and 45 small/independent agencies. 

Nearly all participating agencies chose to have the survey administered as a census, that is, they wanted all of 

their eligible employees to be invited to take the survey.

The sampling frame was based on lists of employees from all agencies participating in the survey. Employees 

were grouped into 1,754 sample subgroups corresponding to agency, subagency and supervisory status reporting 

requirements. A total of 1,622,375 employees were invited to participate from 82 agencies. These agencies comprise 

97 percent of the executive branch workforce.

Data collection

Survey administration

The survey was administered from April-June 2012. Agency launch dates were staggered throughout this timeframe, 

and each agency was offered a six week administration period but could opt for a shorter administration period.

Survey mode

The 2012 FEVS was a self-administered Web survey. OPM distributed paper versions of the survey to components 

of agencies that did not have internet access (less than 1 percent).

Response rate

Of the 1,492,418 employees who received the FEVS, 687,687 completed the survey for a governmentwide response 

rate of 46.1 percent.
APPENDIX G 41 

Data weighting

Data collected from the 2012 survey respondents were weighted to produce survey estimates that accurately 

represent the survey population. Unweighted data could produce biased estimates of population statistics. The 

weights developed for the 2012 FEVS take into account the variable probabilities of selection across the sample 

domains, nonresponse and known demographic characteristics of the survey population. Thus, the final data 

set reflects the agency composition and demographic makeup of the Federal workforce within plus or minus 

1 percentage point.

Data analysis

In performing statistical analyses for this report, OPM employed a number of grouping procedures to simplify 

presentations. Most of the items had six response categories: Strongly Agree, Agree, Neither Agree nor Disagree, 

Disagree, Strongly Disagree and No Basis to Judge/Do Not Know. In some instances, these responses are collapsed 

into one positive category (Strongly Agree and Agree), one negative category (Strongly Disagree and Disagree) 

and a neutral category (Neither Agree nor Disagree). We conducted analyses on all survey items for the various 

demographic categories. More detailed survey statistics are available in the published Federal Employee Viewpoint 

Survey Data volumes for this survey and can be downloaded from OPM’s Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey 

website: www.FedView.opm.gov.

"Do Not Know" and "No Basis to Judge" responses

Responses of Do Not Know/No Basis to Judge were removed before calculation of percentages. In 2006 and 

2008, all responses were included in the calculations. To ensure comparability, data from previous years were 

recalculated, removing Do Not Know/No Basis to Judge responses, before any calculations with prior survey 

data were carried out.

Satisfaction with Work/Life Programs 

In 2012, the work/life program satisfaction ratings only include employees who indicated that they participate in the 

specific work/life program. The 2011 work/life program satisfaction data were recalculated for comparison purposes.

Index development

The 2012 FEVS includes six indices: the four HCAAF (Human Capital Assessment and Accountability Framework) 

Indices, the Employee Engagement Index and the Global Satisfaction Index. These indices provide a dependable 

and consistent method for Federal agencies to assess different facets of the workforce.

HCAAF Indices

The HCAAF Indices were developed to help agencies meet the requirements of OPM’s mandate under the Chief 

Human Capital Officers Act of 2002 to design systems, set standards and develop metrics for assessing the 

management of Federal employees. The FEVS provides supplementary information to evaluate Leadership and 

Knowledge Management, Results-Oriented Performance Culture and Talent Management, and provides an 

additional index on Job Satisfaction.

The Index scores were calculated by averaging the percent positive responses on the items within the Index. 

For example, if the item-level percent positive responses for a four-item Index were 20 percent, 40 percent, 60 

percent and 80 percent, the HCAAF rating would be the average of these four percentages (20 + 40 + 60 + 80) 

divided by 4 = 50 percent.
APPENDIX G 42 

Employee Engagement Index

The Employee Engagement Index was developed using a combination of theory and statistical analysis. Several 

items from the FEVS were selected based on a rationalization they would be representative of dimensions similar 

to other engagement “driver” measures. Items which used a satisfaction scale were excluded so as to differentiate 

between satisfaction and engagement. 

An initial exploratory factor analysis revealed three factors consisting of sixteen items (Leadership, Supervision 

and Intrinsic Work Experience) with a single, underlying factor (Conditions Conducive to Employee Engagement). 

A confirmatory factor analysis was repeated with an independent dataset, which further supported the threefactor model. One item was removed for theoretical and statistical reasons, resulting in the fifteen-item, threefactor model.

Global Satisfaction Index

OPM created the Global Satisfaction Index to provide a more comprehensive indicator of employees’ overall 

work satisfaction. The index is a combination of employees’ satisfaction with their job, their pay and their 

organization, plus their willingness to recommend their organization as a good place to work.
United States 

Office of Personnel Management

Planning and Policy Analysis

1900 E Street, NW

Washington, DC 20415

www.FedView.opm.gov