Report to the Ranking Democratic 

Member, Committee on Veterans’ 

Affairs, House of Representatives 

United States General Accounting Office 

GAO 

April 2003 VETERANS 

BENEFITS 

ADMINISTRATION 

Better Collection and 

Analysis of Attrition 

Data Needed to 

Enhance Workforce 

Planning 

GAO-03-491 
About 16 percent of new examiners hired in fiscal year 2001 left VBA within 

12 months of their hiring date, more than double the 6 percent rate for all 

VBA employees who left that year. In general, new hire attrition tends to 

exceed the rate for all other employees, and VBA’s 16 percent rate is similar 

to the attrition rate for all new federal employees hired in recent years, when 

as many as 17 percent left within 12 months of being hired. 

VBA does not have adequate data on the reasons why employees, 

particularly new employees, choose to leave the agency. VBA has 

descriptive data on whether employees leave the agency through 

resignation, termination, retirement, or transfer, but does not yet have 

comprehensive data on the reasons employees resign. While VBA collects 

some data on the reasons for attrition in exit interviews, these data are 

limited because exit interviews have not been conducted consistently, and 

the data from these interviews are not compiled and analyzed. Without such 

data, VBA cannot determine ways to address why employees are leaving. 

Furthermore, VBA has not performed analysis to determine whether it can 

reduce its staff attrition. Despite recent steps to improve the collection and 

analysis of data on the reasons for attrition, an overall strategy for the 

collection and analysis of attrition data could help guide workforce planning 

and determine the extent to which attrition and its costs could be reduced. 

Percentage of Examiners Who Left Within 2 Years of Their Hiring Date, FY 1998-2001 

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18 17.6

4.5

14.7

4.0

16.3 15.8

5.5

1.8

Percentage who left within 12 and 24 months of hiring

Source: OPM's Central Personnel Data File.

1998 1999 2000 2001

Year of hire

0-12 months 13-24 months

Note: Data for fiscal year 2001 do not reflect a full 24-month time period. 

By the year 2006, the Veterans 

Benefits Administration (VBA) 

projects it will lose a significant 

portion of its mission-critical 

workforce to retirement. VBA has 

hired over 2,000 new employees to 

begin to fill this expected gap. 

GAO was asked to review: (1) the 

attrition rate at VBA, particularly 

for new employees who examine 

veterans’ claims, and the agency’s 

methods for calculating attrition; 

and (2) the adequacy of VBA’s 

analysis of attrition data, including 

the reasons for attrition. To 

answer these questions, GAO 

analyzed attrition data from VBA’s 

Office of Human Resources, 

calculated attrition rates for VBA 

and other federal agencies using a 

governmentwide database on 

federal employment, and 

interviewed VBA officials about 

their efforts to measure attrition 

and determine why new employees 

leave. 

To ensure that VBA collects and 

analyzes information on the 

reasons for attrition, particularly 

for new hires, GAO recommends 

that the Secretary of Veterans 

Affairs (VA) direct the Under 

Secretary for Benefits to develop a 

strategy for the systematic 

collection and analysis of attrition 

data, including attrition rates, 

reasons for leaving, and cost data; 

and that VBA integrate the results 

of its attrition analysis into its 

workforce plan. VA concurred with 

GAO’s recommendation. 

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-03-491.

To view the full report, including the scope 

and methodology, click on the link above. 

For more information, contact Cynthia A. 

Bascetta at (202) 512-7101 or 

bascettac@gao.gov. 

Highlights of GAO-03-491, a report to the 

Ranking Democratic Member, Committee 

on Veterans' Affairs, House of 

Representatives 

April 2003

VETERANS BENEFITS ADMINISTRATION

Better Collection and Analysis of Attrition 

Data Needed to Enhance Workforce 

Planning 
Page i GAO-03-491 Veterans Benefits Administration 

Letter 1

Results in Brief 1

Background 3

Attrition at VBA Is Higher for Newly Hired Examiners Than for the 

Agency Overall 5

VBA Lacks Adequate Data on Reasons Employees Leave and 

Analysis of Staff Attrition 9

Conclusions 14

Recommendation 14

Agency Comments 14

Appendix I Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 16 

Objectives 16

Scope and Methodology 16

Appendix II Comments from the Department of Veterans Affairs 18 

Appendix III GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments 20 

GAO Contacts 20

Acknowledgments 20

Related GAO Products 21 

General Human Capital Reports 21

Department of Veterans Affairs 21

Veterans Benefits Administration 21

Table 

Table 1: Overall Attrition Rates for VBA Examiners, Other VBA, 

Other Department of Veterans Affairs, and Other Federal 

Employees, Fiscal Years 2000-2002 6

Figures 

Figure 1. Examiners Hired by VBA, Fiscal Years 1998-2002 4

Figure 2: Percentage of Examiners Who Left VBA within 2 Years of 

Their Hiring Date, Fiscal Years 1998-2001 6

Contents 
Page ii GAO-03-491 Veterans Benefits Administration 

Abbreviations 

CPDF Central Personnel Data File 

OMB Office of Management and Budget 

OPM Office of Personnel Management 

SSA Social Security Administration 

VA Department of Veterans Affairs 

VBA Veterans Benefits Administration 

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

United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further 

permission from GAO. It may contain copyrighted graphics, images or other materials. 

Permission from the copyright holder may be necessary should you wish to reproduce 

copyrighted materials separately from GAO’s product. 
Page 1 GAO-03-491 Veterans Benefits Administration 

April 28, 2003 

The Honorable Lane Evans 

Ranking Democratic Member 

Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

House of Representatives 

Dear Mr. Evans: 

The Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) projects that 21 percent of its 

employees who examine veterans’ claims and are eligible to retire will do 

so by the year 2006. To prevent the potential disruptions in service to 

veterans applying for disability compensation that could result from these 

retirements, as well as to address a large claims backlog, VBA hired over 

2,000 new examiners between fiscal years 1998 and 2002. While VBA 

recognizes the importance of retaining its new employees, until 2001 it was 

not regularly calculating an attrition rate for its newly hired employees. 

Because of the concern that VBA maintain a sufficient workforce, you 

asked us to examine (1) the attrition rate at VBA, particularly for new 

employees who examine veterans’ claims, and the agency’s methods for 

calculating attrition; and (2) the adequacy of VBA’s analysis of attrition 

data, including the reasons for attrition. 

To do our work, we obtained and analyzed attrition data from VBA’s Office 

of Human Resources and interviewed VBA officials. We focused our 

analysis on new employees because of the investment in training they 

need to reach full productivity. We calculated VBA’s attrition rates and 

compared them to those for other federal new hires, using a 

governmentwide database on federal civilian employment. We also 

interviewed Office of Personnel Management (OPM) officials to identify 

generally accepted methods of calculating attrition and to determine how 

federal agencies develop and analyze data on attrition and the reasons for 

attrition. We conducted our work between October 2002 and February 

2003 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing 

standards. 

Using OPM data for fiscal year 2001, we calculated the attrition rate at 

VBA for newly hired examiners at about 16 percent, more than double the 

6 percent rate for all VBA employees. The attrition rate for newly hired 

United States General Accounting Office 

Washington, DC 20548 

Results in Brief 
Page 2 GAO-03-491 Veterans Benefits Administration 

examiners is similar to the attrition rate for all new federal employees 

hired in recent years. Specifically, between fiscal years 1998 and 2001, as 

many as 17 percent left within 12 months of being hired. While it is typical 

for new hire attrition to exceed overall attrition, the new hire attrition rate 

was much higher in certain VBA regional offices located in major urban 

areas than it was in other regional offices. For example, in the Newark 

regional office, 40 percent of examiners hired in fiscal year 2001 left within 

the first year of employment, while no newly hired examiners in Wichita 

left. VBA calculates attrition by counting employees who leave the agency 

and comparing that number to either total employees or a subgroup of 

total employees. The methods VBA uses to calculate attrition are 

consistent with those used by OPM and other federal agencies, and VBA’s 

calculations are similar to those we used for this report. 

While VBA has descriptive data on whether employees leave the agency 

through resignation, termination, retirement, or transfer, it does not yet 

have adequate analytic data on the reasons why employees, particularly 

new examiners, leave the agency. VBA has also not conducted the types of 

analysis that would help the agency determine whether its attrition, 

particularly for newly hired examiners, is excessive. Efforts to collect 

better data on the reasons for attrition, for example by using exit 

interviews, are under way, but it will take some time before the results can 

be fully analyzed. Without such analysis, VBA cannot determine ways to 

address the reasons employees are leaving. Furthermore, VBA has not 

fully analyzed the cost implications of its attrition, nor has it performed 

the types of analysis, such as comparisons of its own attrition to that of 

other federal employees who perform similar work, that would help the 

agency determine the significance of its attrition rate, particularly for 

newly hired examiners. However, recent requirements approved by the 

Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) will begin to provide VBA the 

opportunity to enhance the collection and analysis of attrition data. For 

example, a VA-wide policy approved in January 2003 requires the use of 

attrition data to guide workforce planning. 

Because information on staff attrition is essential for effective workforce 

planning, we are recommending that the Secretary of Veterans Affairs 

direct the Under Secretary for Benefits to develop a strategy for the 

systematic collection and analysis of attrition data at VBA. Furthermore, 

we recommend that the results be integrated into the agency’s workforce 

plan. VA concurred with our recommendation. 
Page 3 GAO-03-491 Veterans Benefits Administration 

VBA provides benefits to about 2.7 million veterans and about 

579,000 surviving spouses, children, and parents. These benefits and 

services include disability compensation and pension, education, loan 

guaranty, and insurance. VBA employs about 5,000 examiners,1

 and they 

represent about 40 percent of the agency’s entire workforce. Most 

examiners are located at 57 regional offices and are responsible for 

reviewing and processing veterans’ disability claims. Typically, they begin 

service at GS-5 or GS-7 and can be promoted to GS-10.2

Between 1998 and 2002, VBA hired over 2,000 new examiners (see fig. 1). 

According to VBA officials, this was the first time VBA had the authority to 

hire significant numbers of examiners. These examiners were hired in 

anticipation of a large number of future retirements. For example, in 

2000, VBA was expecting the retirement of 1,100 experienced examiners in 

the subsequent 5 years. The hiring of these new examiners coincided with 

a growth in the backlog of claims awaiting decisions. Between 1998 and 

2001, the backlog increased by 74 percent from about 241,000 to about 

420,000. VBA has since implemented an initiative to reduce this backlog.3

 1

According to VBA, these positions carry the title of Veterans Service Representative. These 

positions and similar ones, such as rating specialists, are classified as job series 996, 

veterans claims examiner. For our analysis, we focused on the 996 job series. For this 

report, we are referring to jobs in this series as examiners. 

2

According to a VBA official, in some cases, they can also start at GS-9. In 2003, basic 

starting salaries for GS-5 and GS-7 are about $23,400 and $29,000, respectively, not counting 

locality pay, and for those hired at the GS-9 level, the corresponding starting salary is about 

$35,500. VBA is planning to extend competitive promotion potential for this job series to 

GS-11. 

3

VBA began to implement this initiative, called Claims Process Improvement, at all of its 

regional offices in July 2002. For more information, see U.S. General Accounting Office, 

Veterans’ Benefits: Claims Processing Timeliness Performance Measures Could Be 

Improved, GAO-03-282 (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 19, 2002). 

Background 
Page 4 GAO-03-491 Veterans Benefits Administration 

Figure 1. Examiners Hired by VBA, Fiscal Years 1998-2002 

According to VBA, it takes 2 to 3 years for a newly hired examiner to 

become fully productive. After being hired, new examiners receive a 

combination of formal training in a central location and on-the-job training 

in one of VBA’s regional offices. Once on the job, these workers perform a 

variety of critical tasks, such as compiling medical evidence, assessing the 

extent of the disability, determining the level of benefit, handling payment, 

and considering appeals. 

Workforce planning, which can be guided by different types of data, is a 

key component to maintaining a workforce that can carry out the tasks 

critical to an agency’s mission. Strategic workforce planning focuses on 

developing and implementing long-term strategies—clearly linked to an 

agency’s mission and programmatic goals—for acquiring, developing, and 

retaining employees. In addition to data on attrition rates and the reasons 

for attrition, data that can guide workforce planning include size and 

composition of the workforce, skills inventory, projected retirement 

eligibility and retirement rates, and feedback from exit interviews.4

 These 

 4

For more information, see U.S. General Accounting Office, A Model of Strategic Human 

Capital Management, Exposure Draft, GAO-02-373SP (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 15, 2002). 

New examiners hired

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

FY98 FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02

Source: VBA.
Page 5 GAO-03-491 Veterans Benefits Administration 

data can be analyzed to identify gaps between an agency’s workforce and 

its current and future needs. This insight can, in turn, become the basis for 

developing strategies to build a workforce that accommodates those 

needs. 

We calculated the fiscal year 2001 attrition rate for new examiners at VBA 

at about 16 percent, more than twice as high as the 6 percent rate for all 

employees who left that year. About 16 percent of new examiners hired in 

fiscal year 2001 left the agency within 1 year of being hired. According to 

human resources experts, it is typical for new employees to leave at higher 

rates than all other employees. However, minimizing attrition is important 

because of the high costs of hiring and training new examiners. VBA 

calculates attrition by counting employees who leave the agency and 

comparing that number to either total employees or a subgroup of total 

employees. The methods VBA uses to calculate attrition are consistent 

with those used by OPM and other federal agencies. 

Attrition rates for new VBA examiners were generally higher than those 

for all VBA examiners and other employees. As shown in table 1, in fiscal 

years 2000, 2001, and 2002, overall attrition rates for VBA examiners and 

other VBA employees ranged from about 4 percent to 8 percent. However, 

among all new examiners hired in fiscal year 2001, about 16 percent left 

the agency within 12 months, as shown in figure 2.5

 These attrition rates, 

for all employees as well as for newly hired examiners, reflect all types of 

attrition—including resignation, retirement, and termination.6

 New hire 

attrition consists predominantly of resignations. 

 5

Since we issued our statement, Veterans Benefits Administration: Better Staff Attrition 

Data and Analysis Needed GAO-03-452T (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 11, 2003), OPM issued 

2002 data, which we used to update this analysis. For further information about our 

methodology, see appendix I. 

6

We did not include in our analysis of new hire attrition staff who left the examiner position 

but remained in VBA, nor did we include transfers within VA. 

Attrition at VBA Is 

Higher for Newly 

Hired Examiners 

Than for the Agency 

Overall 

Attrition for New 

Employees at VBA Is More 

Than Twice as High as the 

Agency’s Overall Rate of 

About 6 Percent 
Page 6 GAO-03-491 Veterans Benefits Administration 

Table 1: Overall Attrition Rates for VBA Examiners, Other VBA, Other Department of 

Veterans Affairs, and Other Federal Employees, Fiscal Years 2000-2002 

 VBA 

Fiscal year Examiners

All other 

employees Agencywide All other VA

All other 

federal 

government

2000 4.6 6.9 6.0 8.2 7.4

2001 6.0 6.6 6.4 7.8 7.0

2002 7.0 8.1 7.6 7.6 6.5

Source: OPM’s Central Personnel Data File. 

Note: GAO performed these calculations by dividing separations by an average of the total workforce 

on board at the beginning and end of each year. The averages could only be calculated for the years 

shown. For all categories of employees shown, attrition rates were calculated based on white-collar 

employees only. 

Figure 2: Percentage of Examiners Who Left VBA within 2 Years of Their Hiring 

Date, Fiscal Years 1998-2001 

Note: Data for fiscal year 2001 do not reflect a full 24-month time period. A comparable analysis could 

not be done for fiscal year 2002 because comparable data were not available to reflect a full 24-

month time period. 

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18 17.6

4.5

14.7

4.0

16.3 15.8

5.5

1.8

Percentage who left within 12 and 24 months of hiring

Source: OPM's Central Personnel Data File.

1998 1999 2000 2001

Year of hire

0-12 months

13-24 months
Page 7 GAO-03-491 Veterans Benefits Administration 

According to human capital experts, in general, new employees tend to 

leave at higher rates than all other employees, and some of this attrition 

may even be desirable. Higher attrition among new hires has been the 

experience for federal agencies historically and, according to our analysis 

of OPM’s data, is generally the case governmentwide. The attrition rate for 

all federal employees, both new hires and senior staff, was 7 percent in 

fiscal year 2001.7

 However, for all new federal employees—those hired in 

fiscal years 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001—as many as 17 percent left within 

12 months of being hired. In some instances, according to a VBA official, 

such attrition may even be desirable. For example, a newly hired employee 

may turn out not to be a good fit for the agency. 

The attrition rates we calculated for VBA’s newly hired examiners are 

similar to those that the Social Security Administration (SSA) found 

among its own new hires doing comparable work. As part of its own 

workforce planning efforts, SSA has collected data on new hire attrition. 

Of its employees who examine and process benefit claims, SSA found 

attrition rates that ranged from about 15 percent for those hired in 1998 to 

about 14 percent for those hired in 2000.8

VBA calculations show, and agency officials acknowledge, that attrition 

for newly hired examiners is particularly high or particularly low in certain 

locations.9

 Specifically, VBA found attrition rates of 38 percent to 

49 percent for new examiners hired over a 3-year period at four regional 

offices—Baltimore (38 percent), Chicago (39 percent), Newark 

(41 percent), and New York (49 percent). By contrast, some offices—such 

as Phoenix, Louisville, Huntington, and Wichita—experienced no attrition 

among new examiners hired during this period. 

 7

These attrition rates represent employees at all federal agencies except VA. 

8

SSA’s analysis focused on claims representatives, service representatives, and teleservice 

representatives. We could not duplicate this analysis because OPM’s Central Personnel 

Data File does not break out job series into the kinds of subcategories that SSA was able to 

use by accessing its own records. According to SSA officials, SSA plans to issue a report 

including its attrition and other workforce analyses in spring 2003. 

9

According to VBA officials, attrition rates could also be calculated for certain subgroups of 

newly hired examiners such as veterans or minorities. VBA has not calculated attrition 

rates for these subgroups. 
Page 8 GAO-03-491 Veterans Benefits Administration 

The two basic methods VBA uses to calculate attrition are consistent with 

methods used by OPM and other federal agencies. Each method, the 

“annual calculation” and the “cohort calculation,” compares employees 

who leave the agency to either total employees or a subgroup of total 

employees. They provide different ways of looking at attrition trends. The 

annual calculation indicates broad attrition patterns from year to year. In 

contrast, the cohort calculation follows a particular group of employees 

over time to see how many leave the agency, and the group or the 

timeframe can vary to suit the needs of the analysis. VBA’s calculations 

using this method are similar to ours. For example, VBA found that, of all 

examiners hired in 2001, 18 percent had left within 2 years of their hiring 

date, while our calculations using OPM data showed a corresponding rate 

of 17.6 percent. The following are the two methods VBA uses: 

• Annual calculation. This method calculates attrition by dividing all 

employees who left in a given year by an average of employees working at 

the agency at the beginning of the year and at the end of the year. 

• Cohort calculation. This method calculates attrition by following a 

specified group or “cohort” of employees to see how many leave the 

agency. The cohort can be defined as all those hired (new hires only) 

during a specific timeframe. These new hires are tracked for selected 

intervals (3 months, 6 months, etc.). This method can be adapted by 

defining the cohort differently (e.g., to track attrition among a subgroup of 

new hires) and by using different timeframes for the tracking (e.g., 

12 months, 18 months, etc.). This calculation differs from the annual 

calculation in that it does not use an average of the total workforce. VBA 

used this method to determine the attrition rate of certain newly hired 

examiners for a presentation in 2001 and for additional, more 

comprehensive calculations in 2002. VBA plans to use this method to 

calculate attrition rate for new examiners at least annually starting in 2003. 

According to OPM officials, the annual method is a generally accepted 

method used to calculate attrition by federal agencies. OPM officials also 

recognized the value of the cohort method for calculations that require 

specific time frames or groups of employees and added that tracking the 

attrition of new employees is an important practice. OPM does not 

mandate the use of a particular method for the calculation of attrition, but 

officials said that any method used should be clearly explained. 

VBA Uses Accepted 

Methods to Calculate 

Attrition 
Page 9 GAO-03-491 Veterans Benefits Administration 

While VBA has descriptive data on whether employees leave the agency 

through resignation, termination, retirement, or transfer, it does not yet 

have adequate information to analyze the reasons why employees, 

particularly new employees who examine veterans’ claims, leave the 

agency. While efforts to collect these data—for example, through an 

automated exit interview process—are under way, it will take some time 

before the results can be fully analyzed. Furthermore, VBA has not 

performed the types of analysis on its data, such as an analysis of the costs 

of attrition, that would help the agency determine whether its attrition, 

particularly for new examiners, is excessive. VBA is taking steps to ensure 

that attrition data will be available to guide its workforce planning. 

While VBA systematically collects descriptive data on whether employees 

leave the agency through resignation, termination, retirement, or transfer, 

the data on the reasons employees leave have not been systematically 

collected or analyzed. Without such analysis, VBA cannot determine the 

extent to which its attrition of newly hired examiners could be reduced. As 

at other federal agencies, when employees leave VBA, a standard federal 

“Form 52” is filled out.10 This form records whether the employee is leaving 

due to a resignation, termination, retirement, or transfer. Because this 

information appears on the form in discrete fields, VBA human resources 

staff can easily enter it into the agency’s computer system to aggregate 

information on the types of separations. 

The Form 52 also includes a blank space for narrative comments on the 

reasons for leaving. This space is primarily intended to be used in the case 

of resignation, and its use is optional on the part of the employee. 

According to VBA officials, this area is frequently left blank. When this 

area is filled out, it is up to a human resources employee to decide how to 

label an employee’s reason for leaving in the computer system. Several 

“quit codes” exist to help in this labeling process. For example, reasons for 

leaving can be coded as relating to pay and benefits, supervisory 

relationship, opportunity for advancement, or personal reasons, including 

family responsibilities, illness, or household relocation. All forms are sent 

to one of four human resource centers to be entered into the agency’s 

computer system. Human resources employees in these centers are 

instructed to code the reasons for leaving to the best of their ability. 

However, these staff members cannot clarify reasons when the 

 10The Form 52, Request for Personnel Action, is used by all federal agencies, including VBA. 

VBA Lacks Adequate 

Data on Reasons 

Employees Leave and 

Analysis of Staff 

Attrition 

VBA Collects Some Data 

on Types of Separations, 

but Data on Reasons Are 

Limited 
Page 10 GAO-03-491 Veterans Benefits Administration 

information is blank or ambiguous because they do not have access to 

either the separated employee or the regional human resources staff who 

actually processed the employee’s separation. Therefore, VBA officials do 

not consider the Form 52 to be a complete or reliable source of 

information on the reasons employees resign from VBA. 

Another source of information on reasons why examiners leave VBA is 

exit interviews. However, according to VBA officials, exit interviews have 

not been consistently conducted for all separating employees. VBA 

officials said that the downsizing of human resources staff in regional 

offices is at least partly responsible for the inconsistency with which exit 

interviews have been conducted in the past. In addition, the data from the 

interviews that were conducted have not been forwarded to national 

headquarters to be aggregated and analyzed. Existing VA policy has 

recognized the importance of exit interviews for determining the reasons 

an employee leaves, but it has not explicitly required the department to 

conduct them. To ensure more systematic collection of information about 

the reasons employees leave, as of February 2003, VA planned to change 

existing policy to require the department to offer exit surveys to 

separating employees, according to a VA official. Both VA and VBA told us 

they have plans to require that exit surveys be offered by spring 2003. 

Some offices and staff members within VBA have made special efforts to 

compile or collect information on the reasons examiners leave the agency 

by producing special studies or reports. These include the following: 

• High-Performing Young Promotable Employees (HYPE). In 

September 2002, a group of employees, representing six regional offices, 

prepared a report based on 72 exit interviews conducted at seven regional 

offices. The exit interviews had been conducted over 3 fiscal years: 

1999, 2000, and 2001. The report included recommendations that the 

agency develop a comprehensive strategic plan to address attrition and 

retention and improve and centralize its exit interview process. 

• Loss of New Hires in Veterans Service Centers. At the request of the 

head of VBA, the newly organized Office of Performance Analysis and 

Integrity (OPAI) issued a report in September 2002 that examined new hire 

attrition rates for regional offices individually. The report also looked at 

reasons for leaving, based on interviews with the directors of two regional 

offices. 

• Review of attrition data at certain regional offices. At least two 

regional offices have investigated the reasons for attrition in their own 
Page 11 GAO-03-491 Veterans Benefits Administration 

offices. For example, in October 2002, senior management at the Newark 

regional office compiled information on the attrition of examiners over a 

3-year period and the reasons these examiners left. This study was 

prompted by concern about high attrition rates at the Newark office. 

Portland did a similar review in September 2001. 

These special efforts had several common findings. For example, three 

reported that inadequate opportunity for training was one of the reasons 

examiners left VBA. Two reported dissatisfaction with workload or 

employees’ descriptions of the job as too difficult as reasons for leaving. 

Two also identified instances in which examiners resigned as a result of 

pending termination for poor performance or conduct. Reports associated 

with these efforts touched on other reasons for resignation, including 

inadequate opportunity for full utilization of skills and various personal 

reasons. 

The other source of information on reasons examiners left VBA was 

anecdotal information provided by regional and other senior human 

resources officials. For example, senior human resources officials said 

that reasons for leaving included factors such as inadequate work space 

and computer equipment as well as insufficient pay. According to a VBA 

official, certain regional offices are aware of the types of employers with 

whom they are competing. For example, some regional offices report 

losing employees to a range of employers in both the public sector, 

including other federal agencies (such as SSA and the Department of 

Labor), and the private sector, including information technology firms. In 

addition, these officials reported that some newly hired examiners left 

when they discovered that the job tasks were not what they had expected. 

Certain regional offices have taken steps to respond to some of these 

findings. For example, some have offered job candidates opportunities to 

observe the work place before being hired. 

While all of these sources of information provide examples of reasons why 

examiners left VBA, no comprehensive analysis of the reasons for attrition 

has yet been conducted, due in large part to the inconsistency with which 

exit interviews have been conducted and the fact that data on reasons for 

leaving have not been compiled nationwide. Without such analysis, VBA 

cannot yet determine the extent to which attrition among newly hired 

examiners involves reasons that could be addressed by the agency, such as 

work environment, or the reasons the agency cannot control, such as 

personal reasons and market conditions. As a result, VBA has lacked 

important information that could help the agency determine the extent to 

which attrition could be reduced. 
Page 12 GAO-03-491 Veterans Benefits Administration 

VBA has not performed the types of analysis on its data that would help 

the agency determine the extent to which an attrition problem may exist. 

To better understand its own attrition, an agency can take advantage of 

a range of analyses. These include the following: 

• Comparisons. To understand the degree to which its attrition is a 

problem, an agency can compare its own attrition to the attrition of other 

federal agencies, especially to the attrition of agencies with employees 

who do similar work. While one of VBA’s special reports did some broad 

comparisons of VBA’s attrition to the attrition at other federal agencies, 

VBA has not compared the attrition of newly hired examiners to the 

attrition of employees in other parts of the federal government with 

comparable job series, nor has it coordinated with other agencies to share 

attrition data. 

• Attrition modeling. To understand the degree to which attrition is a 

problem, an agency can estimate the attrition rates it expects in the future, 

providing a baseline against which to measure the actual attrition it 

experiences.11 This allows officials to determine if attrition rates are higher 

or lower than expected. While VBA has projected retirement rates for 

planning purposes, according to VBA officials, there was no formal or 

informal process to estimate the expected attrition rates of the examiners 

who joined the agency since 1998. In 2002, VA projected future attrition 

trends for examiners in a restructuring plan submitted to the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB), and officials expect to compare these 

projections to actual attrition rates for examiners in the future. 

• Cost analysis. To understand the degree to which attrition is a problem, 

an agency can estimate the cost of recruiting and training new employees 

who leave and the cost of recruiting and training their replacements. While 

VBA’s Office of Human Resources conducted a partial estimate of attrition 

costs in 2001, this estimate did not include all associated costs. For 

 11For more information on attrition modeling, see U.S. General Accounting Office, Air 

Traffic Control: FAA Needs to Better Prepare for Impending Wave of Controller Attrition, 

GAO-02-591 (Washington, D.C.: June 14, 2002). For additional information on how attrition 

data can be used by federal agencies, see Human Capital: A Self-Assessment for Agency 

Leaders, GAO/OCG-00-14G (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 2000) and, for the importance of valid 

and reliable data in assessing an agency’s workforce requirements, see A Model of Strategic 

Human Capital Management, Exposure Draft, GAO-02-373SP (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 15, 

2002). 

VBA Has Not Fully 

Analyzed Data to 

Determine Whether 

Attrition Is Excessive 
Page 13 GAO-03-491 Veterans Benefits Administration 

 example, the investment lost when a trained employee leaves was not 

included, although it is one of the most important and potentially 

expensive costs. 

• Labor market analysis. To understand the degree to which its attrition is 

a problem, an agency can evaluate labor market conditions in locations 

where it operates. Such an evaluation can provide context for 

understanding if an attrition rate is higher than might be expected in those 

locations. Using general labor market data, VBA has identified several 

locations where it faces significant competition from other employers, 

both public and private. This information could be used to better 

understand its attrition rate in those locations in the future. However, this 

information is not based on the actual employment plans of separating 

employees, and VBA does not routinely collect or document this 

information. According to a VBA official, collecting data on where VBA’s 

separating employees find employment after VBA would be useful for 

developing a more accurate understanding of the employers with whom 

VBA is competing. 

VBA is taking steps to ensure that attrition data will be available to guide 

workforce planning. First, according to a VBA official, VBA developed a 

workforce plan, following a workforce policy approved by VA in January 

2003.12 In a related document, VA stated its expectation that, in the current 

economy, attrition among examiners may stabilize. However, VBA cannot 

test that assumption without continued monitoring of attrition rates and 

improved data on reasons for attrition. Second, VBA has recently 

designated an official to head strategic planning efforts. While these 

efforts will address attrition and other human capital issues, a VBA official 

told us that its Office of Human Resources is expected to assume primary 

responsibility for human capital issues and to coordinate with the strategic 

planning office. Third, VA’s new automated exit survey, which VA officials 

expect to be available in spring 2003, has the potential to aid VBA in its 

attrition data gathering and analysis. Separating employees will be able to 

answer a series of questions about the reasons they decided to leave the 

agency. The survey will provide confidentiality for the employee, 

potentially allowing for more accurate responses. The survey will also 

facilitate electronic analysis that could be broken down by type of job and 

 12The new VA policy requires workforce plans from all three of VA’s administrations—VBA, 

the Veterans Health Administration, and the National Cemetery Administration. VA first 

identified the need for a workforce policy following a workforce analysis required of all 

executive branch agencies by OMB in May 2001. 
Page 14 GAO-03-491 Veterans Benefits Administration 

region. As of March 2003, VBA had created and filled a new position 

intended to help VBA implement the automated exit survey, among other 

responsibilities. 

VBA’s ability to effectively serve veterans hinges on maintaining a 

sufficient workforce through effective workforce planning. While attrition 

data are just one part of workforce planning, the data are important 

because they can be used to anticipate the number of employees and the 

types of skills that need to be replaced. While VBA officials told us about 

plans under way to better manage new hire attrition, the agency currently 

lacks useful analysis of the reasons new employees leave. Furthermore, 

while it is typical for new hires to leave their jobs at higher rates than 

other employees, and this phenomenon is not unique to VBA, VBA has not 

yet analyzed whether its new hire attrition is excessive, nor has it analyzed 

the cost implications of such attrition to the agency. Such analysis can 

help an agency determine the extent to which attrition could be reduced. 

Sustained attention to both attrition rates and reasons for attrition, 

particularly for new employees, can help VBA conduct more effective 

workforce planning. Understanding the reasons for attrition could also 

help the agency minimize the investment in training lost when a new 

employee leaves. 

To ensure that VBA collects and analyzes information on the reasons for 

attrition, particularly for new employees, we recommend that the 

Secretary of Veterans Affairs direct the Under Secretary for Benefits to 

develop a strategy for the systematic collection and analysis of attrition 

data. This could include the calculation of attrition rates, analysis of the 

reasons for leaving, and estimation of the costs associated with new hire 

attrition. Furthermore, we recommend that VBA integrate the results of its 

attrition analysis into its workforce plan. 

In its written comments on a draft of this report (see app. II), VA agreed 

with our findings and conclusions and concurred with our 

recommendation. VBA is targeting July 1, 2003 for the implementation of 

an exit survey process to develop data on reasons for employee turnover 

and the costs of new hire attrition. VBA is also in the process of 

developing its workforce plan as part of overall departmental efforts. This 

should better position VBA to integrate the results of its analysis of 

attrition into its workforce plan. 

Conclusions 

Recommendation 

Agency Comments 
Page 15 GAO-03-491 Veterans Benefits Administration 

As agreed with your office, unless you publicly release its contents earlier, 

we will make no further distribution of this report until 10 days after its 

issue date. At that time, we will send copies of this report to the Secretary 

of the Department of Veterans Affairs, appropriate congressional 

committees, and other interested parties. We will also make copies of this 

report available to others on request. The report will also be available at 

no charge on GAO’s Web site at http://www.gao.gov. 

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please call me at 

(202) 512-7101. Other contacts and contributors to this report are listed in 

appendix III. 

Sincerely yours, 

Cynthia A. Bascetta 

Director, Education, Workforce, 

 and Income Security Issues 
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology 

Page 16 GAO-03-491 Veterans Benefits Administration 

The objectives of our review were to determine: (1) the attrition rate at the 

Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA), particularly for new employees 

who examine veterans’ claims, and VBA’s methods for calculating 

attrition; and (2) the adequacy of VBA’s analysis of attrition data, including 

the reasons for attrition. We conducted our work between October 2002 

and February 2003 in accordance with generally accepted government 

auditing standards. 

To determine the attrition rate for newly hired veterans claims examiners 

at VBA, we analyzed data from the Office of Personnel Management’s 

(OPM) Central Personnel Data File (CPDF). Using the CPDF data, we 

identified the newly hired veterans claims examiners and followed them 

over time to see how many left VBA. We identified all new hires for fiscal 

years 1998 through 2002 by using personnel action codes for accessions 

and conversions to career or career conditional positions. Accessions 

include new hires and hires of individuals returning to the government. 

Conversions are primarily temporary federal government employees 

whose positions are made permanent. Next, we determined whether these 

individuals had personnel actions indicating they had separated from VBA. 

Separation (attrition) included resignations, retirements, terminations, and 

deaths. We did not include a small percentage of individuals with 

inconsistent data such as multiple or different hiring or separation dates. 

The small percentage of employees with inconsistent data is congruent 

with the generally reliable data in the CPDF we have reported previously. 

(See U.S. General Accounting Office, OPM’s Central Personnel Data File: 

Data Appear Sufficiently Reliable to Meet Most Customer Needs, 

GAO/GGD-98-199 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 30, 1998)). By subtracting the 

hire date from the separation date, we determined how long individuals 

worked before separating. We also noted those individuals who had not 

separated within specific time periods such as 0 to 12 months and 13 to 

24 months. We calculated the attrition rate for a specific time period by 

dividing the number of individuals who left within that time period by the 

total number of new hires tracked for that time period. Since we issued 

our statement,1

 OPM issued 2002 data, which we used to update this 

analysis. The additional year of data resulted in a small number of 

additional employees who had multiple, different separation dates. 

Because we excluded all instances of employees with multiple records and 

because some of these instances corresponded to records previously 

 1

GAO-03-452T.

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology 

Objectives 

Scope and 

Methodology 
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology 

Page 17 GAO-03-491 Veterans Benefits Administration 

included in our original analysis, the additional year of data resulted in 

some revisions to our original analysis. 

To determine overall attrition rates for veterans claims examiners at VBA 

(not just new hires), we analyzed data from the CPDF for fiscal years 2000 

through 2002. For each fiscal year, we counted the number of permanent 

employees with personnel actions indicating they had separated from 

VBA. We divided the total number of separations for each fiscal year by 

the average of the number of permanent employees in the CPDF as of the 

last pay period of the fiscal year before the fiscal year of the separations 

and the number of permanent employees in the CPDF as of the last pay 

period of the fiscal year of separations. To place the overall attrition rates 

for VBA claims examiners in context, we compared VBA’s rates to those 

for employees in other occupations and agencies (all other white-collar 

VBA employees, all other white-collar employees in the Department of 

Veterans Affairs, and all other white-collar employees in the executive 

branch of the federal government). 

To determine VBA’s methods for calculating attrition, we interviewed VBA 

officials and reviewed VBA’s calculations. We also interviewed OPM 

officials to identify generally accepted methods of calculating attrition. To 

determine the adequacy of VBA’s data on the reasons for attrition and its 

analysis of attrition data, we reviewed VBA reports with information about 

the reasons for attrition, interviewed VBA officials to determine how VBA 

collects data on the reasons employees leave the agency, and interviewed 

a VA official about a new initiative to develop and implement an 

automated exit survey. To determine the adequacy of VBA’s analysis of its 

attrition, we reviewed VBA efforts to analyze attrition, interviewed VBA 

officials, and interviewed OPM officials and relied on our prior reports on 

federal human capital issues to determine how federal agencies develop 

and analyze data on attrition and the reasons for attrition. 
Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of Veterans Affairs 

Page 18 GAO-03-491 Veterans Benefits Administration 

Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of Veterans Affairs 
Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of Veterans Affairs 

Page 19 GAO-03-491 Veterans Benefits Administration 
Appendix III: GAO Contacts and Staff 

Acknowledgments 

Page 20 GAO-03-491 Veterans Benefits Administration 

Irene Chu, (202) 512-7102 

Chris Morehouse, (202) 512-7214 

In addition to those named above, others who made key contributions to 

this report are Ronald Ito, Grant Mallie, Corinna Nicolaou, and Gregory 

Wilmoth. 

Appendix III: GAO Contacts and Staff 

Acknowledgments 

GAO Contacts 

Acknowledgments 
Related GAO Products 

Page 21 GAO-03-491 Veterans Benefits Administration 

High-Risk Series: Strategic Human Capital Management. GAO-03-120. 

Washington, D.C.: January 2003. 

Human Capital: Effective Use of Flexibilities Can Assist Agencies in 

Managing Their Workforces. GAO-03-2. Washington, D.C.: December 6, 

2002. 

Air Traffic Control: FAA Needs to Better Prepare for Impending Wave of 

Controller Attrition. GAO-02-591. Washington, D.C.: June 14, 2002. 

A Model of Strategic Human Capital Management, Exposure Draft. 

GAO-02-373SP. Washington, D.C.: March 15, 2002. 

Federal Employee Retirements: Expected Increase Over the Next 5 Years 

Illustrates Need for Workforce Planning. GAO-01-509. Washington, D.C.: 

April 27, 2001. 

Human Capital: A Self-Assessment Checklist for Agency Leaders. 

GAO/OCG-00-14G. Washington, D.C.: September 2000. 

Major Management Challenges and Program Risks: Department of 

Veterans Affairs. GAO-03-110. Washington, D.C.: January 2003. 

High-Risk Series: An Update. GAO-03-119. Washington, D.C.: January 

2003. 

Veterans’ Benefits: Claims Processing Timeliness Performance Measures 

Could Be Improved. GAO-03-282. Washington, D.C.: December 19, 2002. 

Veterans’ Benefits: Despite Recent Improvements, Meeting Claims 

Processing Goals Will Be Challenging. GAO-02-645T. Washington, D.C.: 

April 26, 2002. 

Veterans’ Benefits: Training for Claims Processors Needs Evaluation. 

GAO-01-601. Washington, D.C.: May 31, 2001. 

Veterans Benefits Administration: Problems and Challenges Facing 

Disability Claims Processing. GAO/T-HEHS/AIMD-00-146. Washington, 

D.C.: May 18, 2000. 

Related GAO Products 

General Human 

Capital Reports 

Department of 

Veterans Affairs 

Veterans Benefits 

Administration 

(130206) 

The General Accounting Office, the audit, evaluation and investigative arm of 

Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional responsibilities 

and to help improve the performance and accountability of the federal 

government for the American people. GAO examines the use of public funds; 

evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides analyses, 

recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make informed 

oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s commitment to good government 

is reflected in its core values of accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

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

through the Internet. GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov) contains abstracts and fulltext files of current reports and testimony and an expanding archive of older 

products. The Web site features a search engine to help you locate documents 

using key words and phrases. You can print these documents in their entirety, 

including charts and other graphics. 

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and 

correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as “Today’s Reports,” on its Web site 

daily. The list contains links to the full-text document files. To have GAO e-mail 

this list to you every afternoon, go to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to daily 

E-mail alert for newly released products” under the GAO Reports heading. 

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. A 

check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of Documents. 

GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more copies mailed to a 

single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should be sent to: 

U.S. General Accounting Office 

441 G Street NW, Room LM 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm 

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

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

Jeff Nelligan, managing director, NelliganJ@gao.gov (202) 512-4800 

U.S. General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

GAO’s Mission 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony 

Order by Mail or Phone 

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Public Affairs