GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

February 6, 2012

Congressional Committees 

Subject: Federal Employees’ Compensation Act: Benefits for Retirement-Age Beneficiaries

In 2010, the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act (FECA)1 program paid approximately $2.8 billion 

in total cash and medical benefits to federal employees who sustained injuries or illnesses while 

performing federal duties; about $1.9 billion of that was for cash benefits.2

We examined (1) the characteristics and associated compensation costs of long-term, full-time FECA 

beneficiaries, for USPS and non-USPS employees; (2) how wage compensation benefits for 

retirement-age, long-term, full-time FECA beneficiaries compare with federal retirees’ annuities (not 

including USPS employees); and (3) the experiences of states that limit state workers’ compensation 

benefits for workers at retirement age. For the first question, we could include USPS employees 

because Labor provided us with data on FECA beneficiaries for all federal agencies, including USPS. 

However, we could not include USPS employees in answering the second question. Our analysis 

required determining the work histories for FECA beneficiaries and retired annuitants, using an Office 

of Personnel Management (OPM) database to obtain these work histories. USPS employees are not 

included in the OPM database.

U.S. Postal Service 

(USPS) has the largest number of FECA beneficiaries. The Department of Labor (Labor), which 

oversees the program, categorizes FECA beneficiaries into groups based on their ability to work, 

length of time receiving benefits, and type of injury. There are some beneficiaries who have been 

receiving benefits for longer than 90 days, and are completely unable to work. We refer to this group 

as long-term, full-time beneficiaries. Because there are no time or age limits for receiving FECA 

benefits, long-term, full-time beneficiaries include people at or older than retirement age. 

3

 1

Codified at 5 U.S.C.§ 8101 et seq.

We subsequently obtained data from USPS; however, the data were 

missing a significant amount of information necessary to determine the work histories of USPS 

2

Cash benefits are paid for lost wages, loss of, or loss of use of, a body part or function (schedule awards), and death of an

employee as a result of a workplace injury (survivor benefits). Schedule awards and survivor benefits can be in addition to 

any benefits payable for lost wages. The total for cash benefits includes amounts for long-term, full-time benefits; shortterm benefits; part-time benefits; schedule awards; and survivor benefits. 

3

USPS employees are not included in OPM’s Central Personnel Data File (CPDF) because USPS does not report 

personnel data to OPM. 

United States Government Accountability Office 

Washington, DC 20548

 
Page 2 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

employees for the years covered by our analysis.4

To determine characteristics and compensation costs of long-term, full-time FECA beneficiaries, we 

analyzed data from the Department of Labor’s FECA claimant database for chargeback year 2010.

According to USPS officials, they changed data 

systems in 1995 and some key data were not available.

5

(References to FECA data in 2010 from this point forward refer to the chargeback year.) We 

conducted this analysis for these FECA beneficiaries, using their full retirement age as set forth in 

the Social Security Act.6 To compare FECA benefit levels with federal retirees’ annuities, we 

conducted an analysis of retirees who were at least 55 years old and long-term, full-time FECA 

beneficiaries of the same age who did not work for the USPS who were covered by the Civil Service 

Retirement System (CSRS) in 2010.7 We focused on this age group of FECA beneficiaries because 

the minimum age of retirement eligibility under CSRS is 55 years old and using the lower age 

increased the number of individuals we could include in our analysis. We compared the FECA 

benefits to the annuities of federal retirees who were similar in terms of demographics, agencies they 

worked for, occupations, retirement plans, incomes prior to injury or retirement, and years of federal 

service at the point of the FECA beneficiaries’ date of injury. The analysis did not distinguish 

between FECA beneficiaries who have no dependents, and received 66-2/3 percent of their preinjury 

salaries and those beneficiaries with dependents who received 75 percent of their preinjury salaries. 

Because FECA benefits are not taxed, and in order to make those benefits comparable to annuities 

that are taxed, our analysis accounted for the effects of federal and state income taxes on retirees’ 

annuities.8 Our comparison did not include individuals receiving part-time Loss of Wage Earning 

Capacity (LWEC) benefits. These individuals do not receive full disability benefits from FECA, 

because it has been determined that they are capable of working part-time or with restrictions.9

 4

For example, we needed a service computation date to determine the length of service for annuitants. However, the 

service computation data we received from USPS for the period 1988 to 2010 was missing these data for 16 to 90 percent 

of employees, depending on the year.

For 

our review of the state workers’ compensation programs, we conducted case studies in four states 

that limit these benefits by retirement age—Kentucky, Minnesota, Montana, and Tennessee—out of 

a total of eight states that have age-based workers’ compensation limits, as identified by the 

Workers’ Compensation Research Institute. We interviewed workers’ compensation board officials 

and private sector attorneys who specialize in workers’ compensation about their experiences in 

managing these programs, specifically relating to retirement-age limitations.

5

FECA benefits are paid out of the Employees’ Compensation Fund, and most are charged back to the employees’ agency. 

Labor’s chargeback year for FECA agency billing purposes ends June 30. 

6

The age at which an individual can receive full retirement benefits under the Social Security Act (known as the “full 

retirement age” or the “normal retirement age,” or NRA) ranges from 65 to 67, depending on the individual’s year of birth. 

For those born in 1937 and earlier, NRA is 65; for those born in years 1943-1954, the NRA is 66; for those born in 1960 and 

later, the NRA is 67; for years of birth in between those just cited, the NRA is interpolated by 2 months per year of birth. 

See http://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/nra.html.

7

We included only FECA recipients who were covered by CSRS because the majority of annuitants currently receiving 

annuities are covered by CSRS. According to OPM, approximately 81 percent of fiscal year 2010 employee annuitants 

were CSRS annuitants.

8

We used the National Bureau of Economic Research’s (NBER) TAXSIM to determine federal and state income taxes for 

annuitants. TAXSIM is NBER's FORTRAN program for calculating liabilities under U.S. federal and state income tax laws 

from individual data. The TAXSIM Model (http://www.nber.org/taxsim) simulates the U.S. federal and state income tax 

rules. See Daniel Richard Feenberg and Elizabeth Coutts, “An Introduction to the TAXSIM Model,” Journal of Policy 

Analysis and Management, vol. 12, no. 1(winter, 1993), 189-194. 

9

In general, part-time benefits are determined by calculating the difference between the employee’s preinjury and postinjury 

monthly wages.
Page 3 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

Enclosures I and II contain a detailed description of our scope and methodology.

We requested comments on a draft of this report from Labor, OPM, and USPS. The agencies’ 

comments are discussed at the end of this report. 

We conducted this performance audit from February 2011 through February 2012 in accordance with 

generally accepted government auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and 

perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 

findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained 

provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.

Background

Labor’s Division of Federal Employees’ Compensation in the Office of Workers’ Compensation 

Programs (OWCP) administers the FECA program. This program provides cash benefits and 

medical benefits to federal employees who suffer temporary or permanent disabilities resulting from 

work-related injuries or diseases. FECA cash benefits include payments for wages lost when 

employees cannot work because of work-related disabilities due to traumatic injuries or occupational 

diseases; schedule awards for loss of, or loss of use of, a body part or function; death benefits for 

survivors; and burial allowances. Medical benefits include vocational rehabilitation and medical care 

for injured workers. FECA cash benefits are not taxed.

OWCP charges agencies for whom injured employees worked for benefits provided. These agencies 

subsequently reimburse Labor’s Employees’ Compensation Fund from their next annual

appropriation. USPS and the Department of Veterans Affairs have the largest number of FECA 

beneficiaries, as shown in table 1.10

 10USPS receives no annual appropriations for purposes other than revenue forgone on free and reduced rate mail. USPS 

generates revenue through the sale of postage and postal-related products and services and borrows money from the U.S. 

Treasury via the Federal Financing Bank. It has relied increasingly on this debt to fund its operations. According to USPS, 

it paid $1.3 billion for workers’ compensation costs in 2010. 
Page 4 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

Table 1: Number of FECA Beneficiaries per Agency in 2010

Agency All FECA beneficiaries

Number Percentage 

USPS 130,483 43

Department of Veterans Affairs 26,157 9 

Department of Homeland Security 25,408 8 

Navy 19,919 6 

Army 19,852 6 

Air Force 12,728 4 

Department of Justice 11,001 4 

Department of Agriculture 10,691 3 

Department of the Interior 9,205 3 

Defense agenciesa 6,101 2 

Other agenciesb 35,360 12

Total 306,905 100

Source: GAO analysis of Labor data.

a

Defense Agencies covered include the Defense Contract Audit Agency, Defense Logistics Agency, and the Defense Contract 

Management Agency, among others. 

b

The remaining agencies listed each have less than 2 percent of the total number of beneficiaries receiving workers’ compensation 

benefits, and fewer than 5,275 beneficiaries each. 

Eligible workers with temporary or permanent total disabilities who have no spouse or dependent 

generally receive wage-loss compensation equal to 66-2/3 percent of their salary at injury. Those 

with a spouse or dependent receive 75 percent. OWCP can reduce wage-loss compensation based 

on employees’ wage-earning capacities when Labor determines they are capable of working again. 

OWCP provides wage-loss compensation until claimants can return to work in either their original 

positions or other suitable positions that meet medical work restrictions.

Claimants are not allowed to receive FECA benefits at the same time they receive certain other 

federal disability or retirement benefits.11

 11Employees eligible for FECA benefits could also be eligible for retirement disability benefits from OPM or Social Security 

Disability Insurance benefits. Depending on which benefits employees are entitled to, employees might have to make an 

election between them. In many cases in which individuals receive benefits from different programs simultaneously, one 

benefit would likely be offset against the other to some extent. 

For example, claimants are not allowed to receive both 

FECA wage-loss-compensation payments and disability payments from the Department of Veterans 

Affairs for the same injury. Further, claimants cannot receive federal retirement benefits, such as 

CSRS or Federal Employees’ Retirement System (FERS) benefits, paid through OPM concurrently 

with FECA wage-loss benefits; they must elect to receive one or the other. However, the law 

authorizing FECA does not require beneficiaries to “retire” at a certain age by, for example, 

transitioning to a federal pension program like CSRS. They can continue receiving FECA wage-loss 

compensation payments for as long as they remain unable to work due to a workplace injury.
Page 5 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

Typically, federal workers participate in one of two retirement systems, which are administered by 

OPM: CSRS or FERS.12 CSRS covers most civilian federal employees who were hired before 1984. 

Under CSRS, employees generally do not pay Social Security taxes or earn Social Security benefits. 

Federal employees first hired in 1984 or later are covered by FERS.13

Concerns that beneficiaries remain in the FECA program past traditional retirement age have led to 

two types of proposals to change the program. As we have discussed in previous work, one type of 

proposal would convert FECA benefits to regular federal employee retirement benefits at retirement 

age. A second type of proposal would convert FECA benefits to a retirement-age FECA benefit.14

States also administer individual state workers’ compensation programs for injured workers, but 

FECA and the state programs differ in important ways. For example, the FECA program provides 

coverage for injured workers from one fund, administered by Labor. In contrast, in states, multiple 

private insurers generally pay most claims, and state programs typically provide coverage for both 

private and public sector workers. In addition, state compensation awards may often be appealed to 

state courts. In contrast, FECA is intended to be nonadversarial and remedial in nature.15

Summary 

In 2010, 31,880—or 10 percent—of all FECA beneficiaries were long-term, full-time beneficiaries and 

10,873 of those—or 34 percent—were at full retirement age, as defined under the Social Security 

Act. Of the $1.9 billion total in cash benefits paid to FECA beneficiaries, over half (58 percent) went 

to long-term, full-time beneficiaries. Of that half, long-term, full-time beneficiaries at or above full 

Social Security retirement age received 21 percent. This analysis covered all FECA beneficiaries, 

including USPS and non-USPS employees.

Compared to their federal CSRS retired counterparts, non-USPS long-term, full-time FECA 

beneficiaries typically received higher benefits in 2010. The median annual FECA benefit of $35,614 

was about 26 percent higher than the median annual annuity received by retirees, which was 

$28,289, after adjusting for the effects of taxes. The difference between FECA benefits and CSRS 

annuities is typically larger when the FECA beneficiary was injured after fewer years of service. The 

differences between annual FECA and CSRS benefits in our comparison are largely explained by the 

benefit calculation formulas used for each set of benefits. The CSRS formula generally awards a 

smaller percentage of salary than the FECA formula for most workers, except those with long tenure. 

 12Under both CSRS and FERS, the date of employees’ eligibility to retire with an annuity depends on their age and years of 

service. The amount of the retirement annuity is determined by three factors: the number of years of service, the accrual 

rate at which benefits are earned for each year of service, and the salary base to which the accrual rate is applied. In both 

CSRS and FERS, the salary base is the average of the highest 3 consecutive years of basic pay. This is often called “high3” pay. Under both systems, a worker with at least 30 years of service can retire at the age of 55 (for FERS, this is true if 

the worker was born before 1948). 

13All federal employees who are enrolled in FERS pay Social Security taxes and earn Social Security benefits. Federal 

employees enrolled in either CSRS or FERS also may contribute to the federal 401(k)-like program, the Thrift Savings Plan 

(TSP); however, only employees enrolled in FERS are eligible for employer matching contributions to the TSP.

14GAO, Federal Workers’ Compensation: Questions to Consider in Changing Benefits for Older Beneficiaries, 

GAO-11-854T (Washington, D.C.: July 26, 2011); and Federal Employees' Compensation Act: Issues Associated With 

Changing Benefits for Older Beneficiaries, GAO/GGD-96-138BR (Washington, D.C.: Aug. 14, 1996). 

15A federal employee or surviving dependent is not entitled to sue the United States or recover damages for such injury or 

death under any other law for a work injury.
Page 6 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

It is important to note that our finding regarding the difference in benefits levels does not allow us to 

conclude whether such a difference exists for USPS employees or for current or future annuitants 

under FERS, a population that is increasing given that FERS covers federal employees first hired in 

1984 or later. USPS employees were not included in this analysis because USPS could not provide 

sufficient data to reliably determine its employees’ work histories for the years covered by our 

analysis.

We examined the experiences of four states that limit state workers’ compensation benefits based on 

retirement age: Kentucky, Minnesota, Montana, and Tennessee. State officials and attorneys in 

those states highlighted several aspects of their experiences with these provisions, including cost 

savings, legal challenges, and financial hardships for some beneficiaries. For example, a workers’

compensation board official from Kentucky stated there has been a decrease in workers’ 

compensation costs since the retirement-age limitation went into effect; however, their office could 

not attribute the savings to this provision because they lack statistical data since private insurance 

carriers pay the benefits rather than the state.

In 2010, Long-Term, Full-Time FECA Beneficiaries, Many at Retirement Age, 

Received More Than Half of All FECA Cash Benefits

A sizable portion of FECA beneficiaries who received cash benefits16 are long-term, full-time 

beneficiaries.17 Many of these were at or above full Social Security retirement age. Of the 306,905 

individuals who received FECA benefits in 2010, about 79,261 received cash benefits (see fig. 1).18

Somewhat less than half (31,880) of these recipients were classified as long-term, full-time 

beneficiaries. Among long-term, full-time beneficiaries, about 34 percent (10,873) were at retirement 

age and most were injured more than 20 years ago.19

 16In 2010, of the 79,261 people who received cash benefits, 24,549 received short-term benefits, 10,594 received part-time 

benefits, 7,596 received schedule awards, and 4,642 received survivor benefits.

This analysis covered all FECA beneficiaries, 

including USPS and non-USPS employees.

17This group of long-term, full-time beneficiaries does not include those individuals receiving part-time benefits, schedule 

awards, and survivor benefits.

18Because of the way Labor maintains its data, it is not possible to know whether an individual whose case closed in 2010 

did or did not receive cash benefits. Cases may be closed for various reasons, including re-employment or because an 

individual has recovered from their work-related injury.

19Our method of analysis ensured that only those who had reached full Social Security retirement age in 2010 were 

included in this calculation. About 11 percent (32,563 of 306,905) of all FECA beneficiaries are eligible for full retirement

under the Social Security Act.
Page 7 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

Figure 1: Number of FECA Beneficiaries Receiving FECA Cash Benefits in 2010

Note: Because of the way Labor maintains its data, it is not possible to know whether an individual whose case closed in 2010 did or did 

not receive cash benefits. For additional information on FECA case status and compensation, see enclosure IV. 

Long-term, full-time beneficiaries received 58 percent of total cash benefits in 2010. In addition, 21 

percent of all cash benefits was paid to long-term, full-time, retirement-age beneficiaries, who were 3 

percent of all FECA beneficiaries, as shown in figure 2.

Figure 2: FECA Beneficiaries and Cash Benefits Received in 2010

Note: Because of the way Labor maintains its data, it is not possible to know whether a case closed in 2010 did or did not receive cash 

benefits. For additional information on FECA case status and compensation, see enclosure IV. 

Although long-term, full-time beneficiaries received over half of all cash benefits paid in 2010, most of 

these individuals (89 percent) received less than $50,000 per year in cash benefits (see enc. IV, 

table 18). The median annual cash benefit was about $34,000 per year. A small number of FECA 
Page 8 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

beneficiaries received more than $100,000 in benefits in 2010. That year, 116 individuals (or less 

than 1 percent of long-term, full-time beneficiaries) received more than $100,000.20

We calculated that one-third of long-term, full-time beneficiaries were injured more than 20 years 

ago, as shown in figure 3. Labor’s data system is not designed in a way that would allow us to 

determine the cumulative total amount of time a person has been receiving FECA benefits. Given 

these constraints, we calculated how long long-term, full-time beneficiaries had been receiving 

benefits from their date of injury. This calculation does not account for any possible breaks in 

benefits during that time—e.g., if an employee returned to work. As a result, this proxy probably 

overestimates the time they have been receiving FECA benefits of any kind. 

USPS employees 

made up about one-third of these individuals receiving over $100,000. While our analysis shows that 

about one-third of long-term, full-time beneficiaries were retirement age, a number of beneficiaries 

were between the ages of 50 and 59 and approaching retirement age (see enc. IV, table 15).

Enclosure IV provides detailed information on the characteristics of three groups: (1) all FECA 

beneficiaries, (2) long-term, full-time FECA beneficiaries, and (3) long-term, full-time retirement-age 

FECA beneficiaries.

Figure 3: Years from the Date of Injury for Long-Term, Full-Time Beneficiaries in 2010

Note: Labor does not maintain this data in a way that would allow us to determine the cumulative total amount of time a FECA beneficiary 

has received benefits since the date of injury. 

 20Of all FECA beneficiaries, 407 received $100,000 or more in cash benefits in 2010. According to Labor, this can occur if 

a beneficiary received lump sum schedule award payments, retroactive claims payments, or payments provided for by 

special legislation.
Page 9 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

In 2010, Long-Term, Full-Time, Non-USPS, FECA Beneficiaries Typically 

Received Cash Benefits That Were Higher Than CSRS Annuities

In this analysis, we compared non-USPS long-term, full-time FECA beneficiaries who were covered 

by CSRS and at least 55 years old to an equivalent group of actual CSRS recipients of the same 

age.21

Annual Non-USPS FECA Cash Benefits Were Typically Higher 

Than Federal CSRS Annuities

Enclosure II provides more detailed information on our comparison of the benefits and 

annuities for the non-USPS FECA beneficiaries and CSRS retirees.

In 2010, the FECA benefits of long-term, full-time beneficiaries we analyzed were typically higher 

than the retirement annuities of CSRS retirees (see table 2).22 These FECA beneficiaries received a 

median annual benefit of $35,614, while the comparison group of CSRS retirees received a median 

annual annuity of $29,196, before adjusting for taxes. The median FECA benefit was $7,325 higher 

than the median annual annuity received by retirees, which was $28,289, after adjusting for taxes.

23

The difference between FECA benefits and CSRS annuities is typically larger when the FECA 

beneficiary was injured after fewer years of service. The median annual FECA benefit for 

beneficiaries with 10 or fewer years of service when injured was $12,450 more than the median 

CSRS annuity. In contrast, the median annual FECA benefit for beneficiaries with 30 or more years 

of service when injured—and thus closer to retirement—was $3,692 more than the median CSRS 

annuity.24 

 21The available historical data on federal employees limited our analysis to those who (a) were non-USPS, and (b) had 

electronic records in the OPM current employee database between 1988 and 2010.

22This analysis only included cash benefits for long-term, full-time beneficiaries, who are considered unable to work in any 

capacity, for 2010. This analysis does not include closed cases, claims with medical payments only, FECA beneficiaries 

who received survivor benefits, or schedule awards. The analysis also does not distinguish between FECA beneficiaries 

who have no dependents, and received 66-2/3 percent of their preinjury salaries and those beneficiaries with dependents 

who received 75 percent of their preinjury salaries. Further, this analysis does not include individuals receiving part- time 

Loss of Wage Earning Capacity (LWEC) benefits. In general, part-time benefits are determined by calculating the 

difference between the employee’s preinjury and postinjury monthly wage. These individuals do not receive full disability 

benefits from FECA, because it has been determined that they are capable of working part-time or with restrictions. 

23Unlike FECA benefits, a portion of each CSRS retiree’s annuity is taxed. Because OPM uses complex formulas to 

determine the taxed portion of the annuity, we estimated federal and state income taxes using the National Bureau of 

Economic Research’s (NBER) TAXSIM program. TAXSIM is NBER's program for calculating liabilities under U.S. federal 

and state income tax laws from individual data. The TAXSIM Model (http://www.nber.org/taxsim) simulates the U.S. federal 

and state income tax rules. See Daniel Richard Feenberg and Elizabeth Coutts, “An Introduction to the TAXSIM Model,” 

Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, vol. 12, no. 1 (winter, 1993), 189-194. We could not estimate taxes for a 

number of annuitants; therefore, in our tax analyses, we assumed these annuitants owed zero taxes. 

24Our analysis showed that 71 percent of FECA beneficiaries had higher benefits than their retiree counterparts before 

taxes; 77 percent had higher benefits after adjusting for taxes. Given the trend shown here, the remaining 29 percent of 

FECA beneficiaries (23 percent after taxes) whose benefits were lower than their retiree counterparts’ annuities most likely 

were injured later in their careers and after many years of service.
Page 10 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

Table 2: Comparison of Median Non-USPS Annual FECA Cash Benefits and CSRS Annuities

Median annual 

FECA benefit

Median annual 

CSRS annuity 

before taxes

Median annual 

CSRS annuity 

after taxes

Difference between 

median annual FECA 

benefit and CSRS 

annuity after taxes 

All long-term, full-time FECA 

beneficiaries

$35,614a $29,196 $28,289 $7,324

Years of serviceb

Less than 10 $29,256 $16,806 $16,806c $12,450

10 to 19 $32,911 $23,226 $22,956 $9,956 

20 to 29 $38,303 $32,244 $31,007 $7,296

30 or more $43,932 $43,020 $40,240 $3,692

Source: GAO analysis of Labor and OPM data.

Notes: Statistics on FECA benefits apply to cash benefits received by beneficiaries who were at least 55 years old and covered by CSRS. 

Statistics on annuities apply to CSRS retirees who were at least 55 years old. Due to the limited historical data available on federal 

employees, both groups include only employees who had electronic records between 1988 and 2010 and were not USPS employees. 

a

This analysis included only wage-loss replacement payments for long-term, full-time beneficiaries. Schedule awards and survivor benefits 

are not included. 

b

We matched the FECA beneficiary and the annuitant on equivalent years of service at the point of the FECA beneficiary’s date of injury. 

c

At this income level, many of the recipients had no tax liability. 

The differences between annual FECA and CSRS benefits in our comparison are largely explained 

by the benefit calculation formulas used for each set of benefits. The FECA formula awards 66 2/3 

percent (for individuals) or 75 percent (for those with dependents) of the salary at time of injury. The 

benefit also increases over time by the FECA cost of living adjustment (COLA).25

See enclosure III for detailed information on the differences in FECA and retirement benefits and 

annuities for non-USPS long-term, full-time beneficiaries and non-USPS retirees, with respect to 

differences in each of the following factors: years of service at the time of injury, years since exit from 

federal service, maximum prior income, and age in 2010.

The CSRS formula 

generally awards a smaller percentage of salary than the FECA formula for most workers, except 

those with long tenure. Also, FECA beneficiaries with a dependent have higher benefits, while the 

provision of a joint and survivor annuity under CSRS generally provides a survivor benefit that lowers 

the amount received by the beneficiary (thus increasing the differences between FECA benefits and 

retirement annuities). Other factors may affect such comparisons, as well. By contrast, as seen in 

table 2, differences due to taxes are relatively small.

 25This is an annual adjustment of FECA benefits based on changes in the Consumer Price Index.
Page 11 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

Selected States That Set Age Limits for Workers’ Compensation Programs 

Reported Savings, Legal Challenges, and Financial Hardships for Some 

Beneficiaries

We examined experiences in four states—Kentucky, Minnesota, Montana, and Tennessee—that limit 

workers’ compensation benefits for wage-loss compensation based on retirement age.26 These 

states generally restrict wage-loss benefits for workers who reach retirement age if they have an 

injury rated as a “permanent total disability”—i.e., a condition that prevents a return to work.27

Kentucky, Montana, and Tennessee consider workers “retired”28 when they are eligible for full 

retirement benefits under the Social Security Act.29

Table 3: Retirement-Age Limits of Wage-loss Benefits for Permanent Total Disability in Selected State Workers’ 

Compensation Programs

The remaining state—Minnesota—presumes 

people are “retired from the labor market” upon reaching 67 years of age. However, that person may 

present evidence to challenge this presumption, such as proof that they were already working past 

age 67 when injured, according to a state official. (See table 3.)

State Retirement-age Limitations Year enacted

Kentucky Wage-loss benefits end when claimant qualifies for full retirement benefits under the 

Social Security Act or 2 years after the claimant’s last injury, whichever is later.

1996

Minnesota Wage-loss benefits end when claimant reaches age 67. 1996

Montana Wage-loss benefits end when claimant receives or is eligible to receive full retirement 

benefits under the Social Security Act or alternative retirement system. 

1981

Tennessee • Wage-loss benefits end when claimant is, by age, eligible for full retirement benefits 

under the Social Security Act.

• If a person is injured after age 60, wage-loss benefits continue for a maximum of 

260 weeks (5 years), with the compensation rate reduced by half of the amount of 

any Social Security benefits received during the period of the award.a

1994

Source: State workers’ compensation officials.

a

A person after age 60 may receive a maximum of 260 weeks for any work injury, whether it is permanent total or permanent partial 

disability. Since permanent total disability benefits end with full retirement eligibility, many persons older than 60 elect permanent partial 

disability even if they are unable to return to work with the preinjury employer, according to a state workers’ compensation official. 

 26According to the Workers’ Compensation Research Institute (WCRI) review of state workers’ compensation laws as of 

January 2010, eight states limit workers’ compensation benefits by age. We initially selected five of those states—

Kentucky, Minnesota, Montana, North Dakota, and Tennessee—that limit workers’ compensation benefits for workers at 

retirement age, according to WCRI. We did not receive information from officials in North Dakota on their experiences 

within time frames that would have allowed us to include them in this report. There are other states that limit workers’ 

compensation benefits based on an age other than retirement age. For example, Florida limits workers’ compensation 

benefits at age 75, according to the WCRI review. See Ramona Tanabe, Workers’ Compensation Laws as of January 

2010, WCRI (Cambridge, MA: October 2010). 

27Injured workers with a permanent total disability continue to receive medical care benefits after reaching retirement age 

under the workers’ compensation program in all four states, according to workers’ compensation officials. Montana defines 

permanent total disability as a condition that prevents a return to regular employment, which means work on a recurring 

basis, according to a workers’ compensation official.

28However, Kentucky allows workers with a permanent total disability to receive wage-loss benefits from the state for up to 

2 years after the employees’ last injury, so workers in Kentucky may in some instances continue receiving wage-loss 

benefits after reaching retirement age.

29Although most employees are covered by Social Security, federal law generally allows states to enter into voluntary 

agreements to provide Social Security coverage to certain state and local government employees. In the four states we 

reviewed, the percentage of state and local government workers covered by Social Security ranged from about 75 percent to 

94 percent in 2007, according to prior GAO work. See GAO, Social Security Administration: Management Oversight Needed to 

Ensure Accurate Treatment of State and Local Government Employees, GAO-10-938 (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 4, 2010).
Page 12 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

Stakeholders we interviewed from the four states highlighted several aspects of their experiences 

regarding retirement-age limitations on workers’ compensation benefits, including cost savings, legal 

challenges, and financial challenges for beneficiaries. Stakeholders included state workers’

compensation board officials and private attorneys who specialize in workers’ compensation cases.

Cost Savings

Workers’ compensation board officials from three of the states said that adding the retirement-age 

limitation lowered costs, but officials from two states could not quantify the savings. For example, a 

Minnesota workers’ compensation official said the state made many other changes simultaneously to 

its workers’ compensation program, such as setting a new type of maximum weekly rate for all wageloss benefits and a new minimum weekly benefit rate for permanent total disability benefits; 

consequently, the workers’ compensation office was unable to attribute savings to a single provision. 

A workers’ compensation board official from Kentucky stated there has been a decrease in workers’ 

compensation costs since the retirement-age limitation went into effect; however, the official’s office 

could not attribute the savings to this provision because it lacked statistical data since private 

insurance carriers pay the benefits rather than the state. A workers’ compensation official from 

Montana told us that the official’s office did not calculate the cost impact of the retirement-age 

limitation; however, the official referred us to a 2005 report by the state’s audit organization that 

estimated that repealing the retirement-age limitation would cost the Montana workers’ compensation 

fund $228 million to $302 million for nonsettled permanent total disability claims that arose between 

1981 and 2004.30

Legal Challenges

Private attorneys from three of the states said that legal challenges to the retirement-age limitation 

have been raised in their states, but the courts have generally upheld the retirement-age limitation. 

For example, according to attorneys in Montana, in one case the state’s supreme court did not find a 

rational basis to overturn the retirement-age limitation for workers receiving permanent total disability 

benefits. In another case, however, the court established that workers receiving permanent partial 

disability benefits can continue to receive them past retirement age. The state courts in Kentucky and 

Tennessee have upheld the constitutionality of the retirement-age limitation of workers’ 

compensation benefits, according to private attorneys from those states.

Financial Hardships for Some Beneficiaries

Private attorneys from all four states told us that individuals whose benefits end when they reach 

retirement age can face financial challenges. For example, attorneys in Kentucky said some people 

work into their 80s because they need the income and cannot afford to retire. These attorneys said 

that if such workers suffer a work-related injury at age 67, they potentially lose 15 to 20 years of 

earnings, even though their wage-loss benefits would cover only 2 years. In addition, the Kentucky 

attorneys noted that while wage-loss benefits continue for older beneficiaries who are ineligible for 

full retirement Social Security benefits, wage-loss benefits cease for a claimant who qualifies for 

even a small amount of Social Security retirement benefits.

 30Legislative Audit Division, State of Montana, Financial Audit for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2005, Montana State 

Fund (Helena, MT: October 2005).
Page 13 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

Agency Comments

We provided a draft of this report to Labor, OPM, and USPS for review and comment. In its 

comments (see enclosure V), USPS said that under current statute, FECA provides benefits greater 

than those provided under the traditional federal retirement systems for injured workers who are 

retirement age. USPS added that it has become imperative that this matter be addressed through 

legislative change. Labor provided technical comments, which we incorporated in the report as 

appropriate. OPM indicated that it did not have any comments.

We are sending copies of this report to the Secretary of Labor, the U.S. Postmaster General, the 

Director of OPM, interested committees, and others. In addition, the report is available at no charge 

on the GAO website at http://www.gao.gov. 

If you or your staff have questions about this report, please contact Andrew Sherrill at (202) 512-

7215 or sherrilla@gao.gov or Phillip Herr at (202) 512-2834 or herrp@gao.gov. Contact points for 

our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this 

report. Key contributors to this report are listed in enclosure VI.

Andrew Sherrill

Director, Education, Workforce 

and Income Security Issues

Phillip Herr

Managing Director, Physical Infrastructure Issues

Enclosures
Page 14 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

List of Congressional Committees 

The Honorable Susan M. Collins

Ranking Member

Committee on Homeland Security 

and Government Affairs

United States Senate 

The Honorable Thomas R. Carper

Chairman

Subcommittee on Federal Financial

Management, Government Information,

Federal Services, and International Security

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

United States Senate

The Honorable Claire McCaskill

Chair

Ad Hoc Subcommittee on Contracting Oversight

Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs

United States Senate

The Honorable Tom Coburn

Ranking Member

Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations

Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs

United States Senate

The Honorable Darrell Issa

Chairman

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

House of Representatives
Page 15 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

Enclosure I: Details on Audit Scope and Methodology

To determine the characteristics and benefits for Federal Employees’ Compensation Act (FECA) 

beneficiaries, we collected data from Department of Labor’s (Labor) Integrated Federal Employees’ 

Compensation System (iFECS), FECA’s claimant database for chargeback year 201031

To determine if FECA beneficiaries’ benefits were higher or lower than federal retirees’ annuities, we 

assembled data from Labor’s iFECS and the Office of Personnel Management’s (OPM) annuitant 

database and Central Personnel Data File (CPDF), a central personnel database that has reliable 

longitudinal data starting in fiscal year 1988. Our analysis focused on long-term, full-time FECA 

beneficiaries who were covered by Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS). We excluded FECA 

recipients who were part of the FERS retirement system, because there are more CSRS employee 

annuitants currently receiving annuities. We excluded those FECA beneficiaries and retirees from 

our analysis who were not working after 1988.

to calculate 

the number of beneficiaries by age and length of time receiving benefits from their injury date, including 

those in the program past Social Security full retirement age. Because Labor’s iFECS system does not 

track the length of time each beneficiary was receiving benefits, we used injury date as a proxy. We 

also calculated and reported FECA benefits based on various recipient characteristics, such as 

agency, benefit type, as well as total costs associated with cash benefits for FECA beneficiaries who 

are past Social Security full retirement age. We assessed the reliability of the data by (1) electronically 

testing required data elements, (2) reviewing existing information about the data and the system that 

produced them, and (3) interviewing agency officials knowledgeable about the data. We determined 

that the data we reviewed were reliable for the purposes of this report.

We excluded U.S. Postal Service (USPS) FECA beneficiaries from our analysis because USPS 

could not provide reliable, comparable data on its employees. For example, we needed a service 

computation date to determine the length of service for annuitants.32

Exclusion of USPS employees and our selection criteria left us with approximately 4,000 non-USPS 

FECA beneficiaries and approximately 301,000 CSRS annuitants. We accounted for federal and 

state taxes on retirees’ annuities using the NBER TAXSIM model, in order to make after-tax 

comparisons with FECA benefits (which are not taxed). We could not calculate taxes for some 

annuitants; therefore, we assumed that these annuitants owed zero taxes. Enclosure II describes in 

more detail how we compared non-USPS FECA benefits to non-USPS retirement annuities.

However, the service 

computation data we received from USPS for the period 1988 to 2010 were missing these data for 

16 percent to 90 percent of employees, depending on the year. Furthermore, data in 1988 and 1989 

were missing a significant amount of information we needed.

To determine the experiences in states that limit workers’ compensation benefits for workers at 

retirement age, we conducted case studies in four states that do so—Kentucky, Minnesota, Montana, 

and Tennessee. To identify the states, we first reviewed reports and interviewed officials from 

several organizations, including Workers Compensation Research Institute (WCRI); National 

Academy of Social Insurance; Workers’ Injury Law & Advocacy Group; and National Council on 

Compensation Insurance. We analyzed WCRI’s Workers’ Compensation Laws as of January 2010

 31FECA benefits are paid out of the Employees’ Compensation Fund, and most are charged back to the employees’ 

agency. Labor’s chargeback year for FECA agency billing purposes ends June 30, 2010. 

32A service computation date is a date that is used to determine benefits and is generally based on how long the person 

has been in the federal service.
Page 16 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

(Cambridge, MA: October 2010) to identify states that limit benefits by retirement age but did not 

independently verify the information contained in this compilation. Of the eight states that, according 

to the WCRI review, limit workers’ compensation benefits by age, we selected five states that limit 

workers’ compensation benefits for workers at retirement age: Kentucky, Minnesota, Montana, North 

Dakota and Tennessee. We spoke with stakeholders in all of the states, except for North Dakota. We 

did not receive information from officials in North Dakota on their experiences within time frames that 

would have allowed us to include them in this report.

In each of the four states, we interviewed workers’ compensation board officials who manage and 

maintain state-level workers’ compensation programs to discuss their experiences in administering 

workers’ compensation benefits, particularly for older workers; and private sector attorneys who 

specialize in workers’ compensation within their states to discuss their experiences handling cases 

involving older workers. We also reviewed specific elements of state law for the four selected states 

and, as appropriate, verified our analysis of state laws with cognizant state officials.
Page 17 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

Enclosure II: Methodological Details on the Comparison of FECA and CSRS 

Annuity Benefits

Overview of the Matched Comparison Group Method

Comparing FECA benefits and retirement annuities requires us to estimate something that cannot be 

observed in the real world: the retirement benefits that FECA beneficiaries would have earned if they 

were never injured. We can observe either annuity or FECA payments at retirement age, depending 

on whether employees happened to be injured during their careers. In contrast, we cannot observe 

the counterfactual payment that the FECA beneficiaries would have received if they had not become 

sick or injured. The fact that employees become sick or injured prevents us from observing what they 

would have earned had they not become sick or injured.

How do we estimate the counterfactual annuity incomes of FECA beneficiaries, given that we cannot 

observe them directly? One simple method would be to calculate the difference between annuity and 

FECA payments for retirement-age beneficiaries. If a typical beneficiary received more than a typical 

annuitant, one might conclude that structural features of the FECA program made those benefits 

more generous.

The problem with the simple comparison is that it reflects characteristics of employees who are 

injured, in addition to characteristics of the FECA and CSRS annuity programs. An employee’s work 

environment, long-term health, and attitudes toward risk could affect both income and the chance of 

receiving FECA benefits. FECA beneficiaries and annuitants may vary with respect to these 

characteristics when we observe them in 2010. For example, employees with physically demanding 

jobs, such as letter carriers and border patrol agents, may have higher risks of being injured and 

lower incomes than employees who work in less hazardous conditions and remain healthy enough to 

retire. FECA benefits might appear less generous, when, in fact, the difference is due to lower prior 

earnings among employees more prone to workplace injury.

In a matched comparison group analysis, we compare FECA beneficiaries to annuitants who have 

similar incomes and potential to be injured on the job. By comparing FECA beneficiaries to 

annuitants with similar demographics, work environments, periods of employment, and incomes prior 

to injury or retirement, we can better isolate the difference in benefits due to program characteristics 

alone. If we match the groups on all characteristics that affect both income and the chance of 

becoming injured, statistical theory ensures that a simple comparison between groups can estimate 

the counterfactual annuity income that FECA beneficiaries would have earned.

Theory of the Matched Comparison Group Method

For all employees, let Di equal 1 if the employees become eligible for FECA benefits and 0 otherwise. 

Let Yid and Yir equal the employees’ potential FECA and retirement annuity benefits that they could 

have earned if they were injured or worked to retirement, respectively. Because employees in the 

population of interest either get injured or remain healthy and retire, their observed benefits at 

retirement age equal

Yi = Di Yid + (1 - Di)Yir . 

This makes clear that the observed benefits depend on both (1) whether the employees are injured 

(and the factors that lead to injury) and (2) the program features that determine Yid and Yir. We need 
Page 18 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

to estimate the expected difference between what FECA beneficiaries earn and what they would 

have earned in annuity benefits if they had not been injured. This is given by

j = E(Yid – Yir | Di = 1) = E(Yid | Di = 1) – E(Yir | Di = 1) .

In statistics, this parameter is known as the Average Treatment Effect for the Treated. Here, the 

treatment effect of interest is the mean difference in retirement-age earnings in the potential states of 

injury and retirement, among those who were actually receiving FECA benefits in 2010.

The key assumption required to estimate j from the observed earnings and group membership data

is that Di is independent of (Yid, Yir), conditional on a vector of covariates Xi. In other words, FECA 

and annuity benefits are unrelated to the propensity to be injured among employees who have 

similar background characteristics. Using this assumption and the available data, causal inference 

theory ensures that j = E(Yi | Xi , Di = 1) – E(Yi | Xi, Di = 0), which can be estimated from the observed 

data by replacing the random variables with their sample values and consistent estimators of sample 

means.

We can estimate j using various methods, including statistical models that specify a functional form 

for E(Yi | Xi, Di). In contrast, the matched comparison group method selects a sample of annuitants 

such that the empirical distributions of the covariates are as similar as possible to the covariate 

distributions for the FECA beneficiaries. Achieving this covariate balance conditions the comparison 

of sample means on Xi and estimates j without bias, assuming the treatment is unrelated to the 

potential outcomes among employees with the same characteristics (or “conditionally ignorable”).33

Matching Methods

To construct the matched samples, we used a computer algorithm that selected the single closest 

annuitant for each FECA beneficiary, measured on the Mahalanobis measure of multivariate 

distance in Xi, and then returned each annuitant to the pool of potential matches after matching each 

FECA beneficiary. (This is known as one-to-one Mahalanobis matching with replacement.34) With 

about 75 annuitants available to match for each FECA beneficiary, we were able to combine exact 

matching and matching in distribution. Because occupation and agency may strongly affect work 

environment and income, we created one matched sample that was exactly matched on these 

variables. Exact matching potentially reduces the sample available to match on other variables, so 

we created a second sample that matched on the proportion of each group that had a “blue collar 

occupation,” as defined by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM).35

Although our data are not a probability sample, we calculated the standard error of the difference in 

mean benefits to assess the uncertainty of our estimates, using standard formulas for differences in 

For all versions of the 

analysis, we assessed covariate balance using the sample moments and quantiles before and after 

matching.

 33Matching allows us to control for the propensity to get injured on the job without making assumptions about the functional 

form of the relationships among Yi, Xi, and Di. We use this nonparametric method of adjusting for the covariates, instead of 

parametric models, because we lack substantial prior knowledge on how federal employees become injured.

34We matched directly on Xi, rather than on an estimate of the propensity score, E(Di | Xi ). This avoided making potentially 

inaccurate assumptions about the functional form relating employees’ characteristics to their chance of being injured.

35Examples of blue-collar occupations include aircraft electrician, roofer, and forklift operator.
Page 19 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

means between independent samples. Our large sample sizes suggested that the estimated 

variances would have been small, regardless of the particular method used.

Population of Interest and Data Sources

We analyzed two populations of federal employees: those who were long-term, full-time FECA 

beneficiaries and at least 55 years old on June 30, 2010, and those who were CSRS annuitants on 

approximately the same date who were in the same age group. These individuals did not include 

those who received survivor benefits.36

The limited availability of historical data on federal employees also determined the population we 

analyzed. OPM’s Central Personnel Data File (CPDF) was the primary source of data available on 

employment histories. The database contained information measured on the last day of each fiscal 

year since 1988. This period covered 54 percent of the people receiving long-term, full-time cash 

benefits in chargeback year 2010 who were at least 55 years old and who did not work for USPS. As 

a result, we could analyze only this subset of employees who worked after 1988.

We assumed that the retirement age began at 55 years and 

limited our analysis to these subpopulations of both groups. We focused on this age group because 

96 percent of annuitants in 2010 were at least 55 years old and because a younger group provides 

more data for analysis. In addition, 55 is the minimum age of retirement eligibility under CSRS.

The OPM personnel file provided relatively complete data on these employees. Data were available 

for an average of 63 percent of each employee’s career, with 75 percent of employees having data 

for at least 71 percent of their careers.37

We constructed the final data for analysis using the OPM personnel data, an administrative database 

on FECA beneficiaries from the Department of Labor (Labor), and an administrative database on 

annuitants from OPM. First, we selected from the Labor database the subset of FECA beneficiaries 

who worked for agencies other than USPS, were at least 55 years old in 2010, and received longterm, full-time cash benefits in chargeback year 2010 (14,983 people).

Data on the analysis variables were missing for only 0.4 to 

1.8 percent of employees, depending on the variable. Although the limited scope of the OPM 

personnel data limits our analysis to employees working since 1988, this subset of people likely 

resembles current and future federal employees more closely than the employees we could not 

analyze.

38

The final dataset included approximately 301,000 annuitants and 4,000 FECA beneficiaries, 

depending on the variables required for analysis. These groups are smaller than the populations that 

Labor and OPM originally provided, due to our screening by age and retirement system and the lack 

We then selected all 

employees who received annuities and were at least 55 years old in 2010 from the OPM annuitant 

database (866,391 people). Finally, we matched the FECA beneficiaries and annuitants to their 

historical personnel data from OPM and kept for analysis only those employees working after 1988 

who were covered by the CSRS retirement system.

 36This analysis does not distinguish between FECA beneficiaries who have no dependents, and received 66-2/3 percent of 

their preinjury salaries and those beneficiaries with dependents who received 75 percent of their preinjury salaries.

37We measured coverage rates using the ratio of the length of time an employee was observed in the CPDF to the time 

elapsed between the minimum service computation year and the final year of employment observed in the CPDF.

38FECA benefits are paid out of the Employees’ Compensation Fund and most are charged back to the employees’ agency. 

Labor’s chargeback year for FECA agency billing purposes ends June 30, 2010.
Page 20 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

of OPM personnel data for employees working prior to 1988. Consequently, our results generalize 

only to the population of non-USPS, long-term, full-time FECA beneficiaries working after 1988 who 

were at least 55 years old in 2010.

Measurement of Characteristics for Matching Analysis

In this section, we describe the variables we used to conduct the analysis and our measurement of 

important concepts. We measured most of the variables prior to the FECA beneficiary’s last date of 

employment.39

• Benefits

This created a comparison group of annuitants with similar work histories prior to 

when the matched FECA beneficiary left federal employment.

The benefit for FECA beneficiaries was their annual gross cash payments for chargeback year 2010, 

and the benefit for annuitants was their annual annuity income in fiscal year 2010. Using the TaxSim 

program developed by the National Bureau of Economic Research, we estimated the amount of 

taxes each annuitant might have paid on the gross benefit to create an after-tax measure.40

• First year of federal employment

Because 

FECA benefits are not subject to income tax, the adjustment helped ensure that we compared aftertax benefits for both groups. Due to missing and inconsistent data from OPM, we could not estimate 

taxes for 414 of the approximately 301,000 annuitants in our population of interest. We assumed that 

these annuitants owed zero taxes, which overestimated after-tax benefits. In addition, we assumed 

that each annuitant had a spouse older than the age of 65—the scenario for which taxes are 

lowest—because data on the annuitants’ families were not available. These assumptions reduce any 

differences between after-tax annuities and FECA benefits for other otherwise equivalent employees.

We measured the first year of federal employment for both groups using the earliest service 

computation date for leave purposes in OPM’s personnel data. For employees who started after 

1988, the earliest date likely equals their starting date because the personnel data would have 

covered their first year working and would not have reflected later adjustments due to lapses in 

service. For employees who started before 1988, the minimum date would equal the starting date for 

those workers who were employed continuously (at least 75 percent of workers in the OPM 

personnel data).

• Last year of federal employment

We measured the last year of federal employment for both groups as the latest year in which the 

OPM personnel data recorded the employee as being on board.

• Length of service

 39To do this, we created subsets of the FECA beneficiaries according to their final year of federal employment and then 

found matched annuitants with similar covariates measured up to this year. We combined the year-specific samples to 

create an overall matched sample.

40Daniel Richard Feenberg and Elizabeth Coutts, “An Introduction to the TAXSIM Model,” Journal of Policy Analysis and 

Management, vol. 12, no 1 (winter 1993), 189-194. Accessed via the Internet on Nov. 30, 2011, at 

http://www.nber.org/~taxsim/taxsim-calc9/index.html.
Page 21 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

Our data allowed us to measure the length of service for FECA beneficiaries on (1) the date of injury, 

(2) the date of last employment, and (3) the date of entering the long-term, full-time benefit rolls. We 

chose to measure length of service as the time between the last year of employment and the 

maximum service computation date in OPM’s personnel data. The maximum service computation 

date reflects adjustments for multiple spells of employment. Consequently, the time elapsed between 

the last year of employment and the service computation date should measure length of service at 

the time of separation.

We calculated the same measure of length of service for annuitants, even though OPM provided the 

measure it used for calculating annuity benefits. For most employees, the OPM measure differed 

from the measure we calculated from OPM’s personnel data by no more than 1.4 years, but we used 

our calculated measure to ensure that we measured length of service the same way for FECA 

beneficiaries and annuitants.

• Spells of employment

We used OPM’s personnel data to calculate the number of spells of employment from 1988 through 

2010. Our measure underestimates the number of spells for employees who were working prior to 

1988 and had more than one spell of employment. This error is likely to be slight, however, given that 

at least 75 percent of employees in OPM’s personnel data after 1988 worked continuously. We 

controlled for number of spells to construct comparable work histories and to approximate an 

employee’s risk preferences, assuming that having more spells is correlated with accepting more 

occupational risk.

• Prior income

We measured income during each employee’s career using salary data from OPM’s personnel data. 

We measured the minimum, median, and maximum incomes for the employees’ career for the 

portion of their career prior to the date of disability. (For annuitants, we measured income prior to 

their matched FECA beneficiaries’ last years of employment.)

• Occupation, agency, education, and gender

We used “occupation groups” defined by OPM to measure the type of work each employee 

performed. These groups included occupations that involved a similar type of work, such as the 

“engineering and architecture” group that included occupations involving “civil engineering” and 

“architecture.” We used two-digit agency codes to identify the employing agency, such as the 

Departments of Commerce and Defense. For the FECA beneficiaries, we measured occupation and 

agency as close to the injury date as possible. For the annuitant group, we measured occupation and 

agency in the annuitants’ last year of employment. Since occupation and agency do not change 

frequently over time, the exact timing of the measurements should not be consequential.

We used OPM’s personnel data file to determine gender and education for both groups of employees 

on the same dates as the measures of occupation and agency.
Page 22 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

Balance of Characteristics before and after Matching

Table 4 and figure 4 describe the characteristics of the FECA beneficiaries and annuitants, prior to 

matching. As compared to the annuitants, the FECA beneficiaries stopped working at an earlier age, 

had fewer years of service, had lower prior incomes, were less educated, and were more likely to 

have an occupation defined by OPM as “blue-collar.” This suggests that the injured employees were 

more likely to have jobs that involved lower-paid physical labor. Despite these differences, the 

median FECA beneficiary earned 12.2 percent ($3,886) more in gross benefits than the median 

annuitant prior to matching.

Table 4: Characteristics of FECA Beneficiaries and Annuitants before Matching

FECA beneficiaries Annuitants

 25th 

percentile Median Mean

75th 

percentile

25th 

percentile Median Mean

75th 

percentile

Outcome

FECA cash benefits or 

CSRS annuity income in 

2010 (nominal dollars)

$28,779 $35,638 $39,922 $46,634 $20,868 $31,752 $36,296 $47,472

FECA cash benefits or 

estimated after-tax CSRS 

annuity income in 2010 

(nominal dollars)

$28,779 $35,638 $39,922 $46,634 $20,856 $30,570 $33,917 $43,932

Covariates

First year of employment 1970 1974 1974 1978 1966 1970 1970 1975

Last year of employment 1990 1994 1995 1999 1993 1997 1998 2003

Age in 2010 60 65 66.4 72 63.1 68.7 69.5 75.3

Age in first year of 

employment

23.8 29 30.2 35.3 22.3 26.8 28.9 34.3

Age in last year of 

employment

46.1 51.3 51.5 56.8 53.7 56.5 56.9 60.6

Years of servicea 15.6 21 21.1 26 23.6 28.7 27.9 32.5

Spells of employment 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

Minimum prior income 

(2011 dollars)

$38,409 $47,230 $50,655 $58,107 $39,331 $50,573 $55,398 $66,676

Median prior income 

(2011 dollars)

$41,248 $49,829 $54,191 $62,734 $42,772 $55,772 $60,617 $73,469

Maximum prior income 

(2011 dollars)

$43,380 $52,738 $57,217 $66,555 $45,861 $61,047 $66,128 $81,356

No high school degree 

(percent)

20.6 13.3

High school degree 

(percent)

35.4 32

Some college (percent) 28 28.1

College degree (percent) 8.9 13.8

Graduate degree (percent) 6.9 12.8

OPM blue-collar occupation 

(percent)

38.4 14.3

Occupation group Various Various

Agency Various Various

Source: GAO analysis of Labor and OPM data.

Note: Populations include 4,006 FECA beneficiaries and 301,433 retired workers who were at least 55 years old in 2010, working after 

1988, and covered by the CSRS retirement system. Some percentages do not total 100 percent, due to rounding. 

a Length of service is the time between the last year of employment and the maximum service computation date in OPM’s personnel data. 
Page 23 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

Figure 4: Covariate Density Estimates for FECA Beneficiaries and Annuitants before Matching

Our matching algorithm effectively corrected for these imbalances, as shown in table 5 and figure 5. 

The balance measures reflect the results of our analysis that used exact matching on occupation and 

agency. All covariates are well-balanced in both the means and various quantiles. Other measures of 

the sample distribution of the covariates, such as the ratio of variances and mean differences 

between all empirical quantiles, showed similarly strong balance. We achieved similar balance when 

we substituted an indicator for blue-collar occupation instead of exactly matching on occupation and 

agency.
Page 24 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

Table 5: Characteristics of FECA Beneficiaries and Annuitants after Matching

FECA beneficiaries Retired

 25th 

percentile Median Mean

75th 

percentile

25th 

percentile Median Mean

75th 

percentile

Outcome

Before tax annuity or

FECA cash benefits in 

2010 (nominal dollars)

$28,853 $35,614 $39,946 $46,504 $20,409 $29,196 $33,813 $41,967

After-tax annuity or 

FECA cash benefits in 

2010 (nominal dollars)

$28,853 $35,614 $39,946 $46,504 $20,400 $28,289 $31,775 $39,335

Covariates

First year of 

employment

1970 1974 1974 1978 1970 1974 1973 1978

Age in 2010 61 65 66.5 72 61.1 65.3 66.6 71.7

Age in first year of 

employment

23.8 29 30.3 35.4 23.3 28.2 29.6 34.6

Age in last year of 

employment

45.9 51 51.2 56.3 45.6 50.8 50.8 55.8

Years of servicea 15.6 20.8 20.9 25.6 16.3 21.2 21.2 26.1

Spells of employment 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

Minimum prior income 

(2011 dollars)

$38,466 $47,342 $50,784 $58,174 $39,235 $47,682 $50,924 $58,073

Median prior income 

(2011 dollars)

$41,211 $49,803 $54,178 $62,710 $41,798 $50,026 $54,113 $62,319

Maximum prior income 

(2011 dollars)

$43,277 $52,511 $57,016 $66,384 $43,873 $52,513 $57,275 $66,944

No high school degree 

(percent)

 20.7 20.2 

High school degree 

(percent)

 35.5 36.5 

Some college (percent) 27.9 27.9 

College degree 

(percent)

 9 8.6 

Graduate degree 

(percent)

 6.9 6.9 

Occupation group Same Same 

Agency Same Same 

Source: GAO analysis of Labor and OPM data.

Note: Populations include 3,864 disabled and 3,864 matched retired workers who were at least 55 years old in 2010, working after 1988, 

and covered by the CSRS retirement system. The number of disabled workers excludes 142 who could not be matched. After-tax 

estimates assume that taxpayers had a spouse older than 65. Some percentages do not total 100 percent, due to rounding. 

a

Years of service were based on the amount of time between the employees’ earliest date of service and the FECA beneficiaries’ date of 

injury. 
Page 25 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

Figure 5: Covariate Density Estimates for FECA Beneficiaries and Annuitants after Matching

We found results similar to those in table 6 of enclosure III using samples matched on the proportion 

of each group having a blue-collar occupation instead of exactly matched on occupation and agency. 

Using this alternative matched sample, the median before-tax estimates of the difference in benefits 

for all FECA beneficiaries varied by no more than 1 percent from the estimates we produced using 

the matched sample described above. 
Page 26 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

Enclosure III: Difference in Benefits between non-USPS FECA Beneficiaries and 

Matched Retired Employees

Entries are the difference in FECA beneficiaries versus matched annuitant benefits, using the 

retirement comparison and exact matching on occupation and agency. After-tax estimates assume 

that the taxpayer had a spouse of the same age.

For additional technical information on methodology in comparing FECA benefits to retirement 

annuities, refer to enclosure II.

Table 6: Differences in Benefits between Non-USPS FECA Beneficiaries and Matched Retired Employees

Dollars (2010)

Proportional difference between FECA 

benefit and annuity (percent)

Before taxes After taxes Before taxes After taxes

Group Median Mean Median Mean Median Mean Median Mean

Overall 6,418 6,133 7,324 8,172 22 18.1 25.9 25.7

Years of servicea

Less than 10 12,450 9,352 12,450 10,071 74.1 44.6 74.1 49.8

10 to 19 9,685 8,219 9,956 9,494 41.7 29.9 43.4 36.2

20 to 29 6,059 5,603 7,296 8,013 18.8 15 23.5 22.9

30 or more 912 740 3,692 4,619 2.1 1.6 9.2 10.6

Years since exitb

Less than 4 5,675 7,297 7,781 10,525 14.8 17 21.5 26.5

4 to 7 6,237 5,705 7,941 8,351 18.1 14.6 24.3 22.9

8 to 11 12,280 11,003 13,010 12,971 44.8 32.7 48.7 40.9

12 or more 13,030 12,652 13,145 13,702 60.9 49.5 61.8 55.9

Maximum prior income

1st quartile 6,295 6,006 6,325 6,358 33.6 30.4 33.9 32.8

2nd quartile 7,315 7,060 7,772 7,841 29.5 27.4 31.9 31.3

3rd quartile 5,990 6,195 7,412 7,930 18 18.3 23.3 24.6

4th quartile 4,031 6,157 8,686 11,377 7.6 11.1 17.9 22.7

Age in 2010

55 to 59 2,015 1,823 3,632 4,702 5.8 4.7 11 13

60 to 64 4,409 4,211 5,781 6,623 13.6 11.5 18.7 19.3

65 to 69 6,693 6,286 7,682 8,238 22.7 18.3 27 25.4

70 and older 11,159 10,834 11,337 12,041 49.2 39.8 50.4 46.2

Source: GAO analysis of Labor and OPM data.

a

Years of service were based on the amount of time between the employees’ earliest date of service and the FECA beneficiaries’ date of 

injury. 

b

Years since exit measures the time elapsed between the employees’ last year of federal employment and 2010. 
Page 27 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

Enclosure IV: Characteristics of (1) All FECA Beneficiaries, (2) Long-Term, FullTime FECA Beneficiaries, and (3) Long-Term, Full-Time Retirement-Age FECA 

Beneficiaries for 201041

All FECA Beneficiaries

Table 7: Distribution of Benefit Type for All FECA Beneficiaries (2010)

 All USPS Non-USPS 

 Number of FECA 

beneficiaries Percent

Number of FECA 

beneficiaries Percent

Number of FECA 

beneficiaries Percent

Medical 

benefits only

109,913 35.8% 52,891 40.5% 57,022 32.3%

Long-term, fulltime 31,880 10.4% 12,349 9.5% 19,531 11.1%

Part-time 10,594 3.5% 2,501 1.9% 8,093 4.6%

Short-term 24,549 8.0% 15,567 11.9% 8,982 5.1%

Schedule 

award

7,596 2.5% 3,816 2.9% 3,780 2.1%

Survivor 

benefits

4,642 1.5% 625 0.5% 4,017 2.3%

Closed case 108,495 35.4% 39,398 30.2% 69,097 39.2%

Other 9,236 3.0% 3,336 2.6% 5,900 3.3%

Total 306,905 100.0% 130,483 100.0% 176,422 100.0%

Source: GAO analysis of Labor data.

Note: Other includes administrative reviewed, reopened, case retired or awaiting retirement, claim under development, claim unreviewed, 

claim destroyed, and claims with overpayments. 

Table 8: Distribution of Age for All FECA Beneficiaries (2010)

All USPS Non-USPS 

 Number of FECA 

beneficiaries Percent

Number of FECA 

beneficiaries Percent

Number of FECA 

beneficiaries Percent

Less than 20 1,404 0.5% 29 0.0% 1,375 0.8%

20-29 20,548 6.7% 3,273 2.5% 17,275 9.8%

30-39 39,194 12.8% 13,933 10.7% 25,261 14.3%

40-49 70,829 23.1% 35,883 27.5% 34,946 19.8%

50-59 102,336 33.3% 53,143 40.7% 49,193 27.9%

60-64 36,076 11.8% 15,556 11.9% 20,520 11.6%

65 and older 36,333 11.8% 8,655 6.6% 27,678 15.7%

Missing, not 

applicable

185 0.1% 11 0.0% 174 0.1%

Total 306,905 100.0% 130,483 100.0% 176,422 100.0%

Median Age 52 years 52 years 52 years 

Source: GAO analysis of Labor data.

 41All data presented in this enclosure are from chargeback year 2010. See enclosure I for more information on the source of 

the data.
Page 28 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

Table 9: Distribution of Gender for All FECA Beneficiaries (2010)

 All USPS Non-USPS 

 Number of FECA 

beneficiaries Percent

Number of FECA 

beneficiaries Percent

Number of FECA 

beneficiaries Percent

Male 171,927 56.1% 62,745 48.1% 109,182 62.1%

Female 134,311 43.9% 67,696 51.9% 66,615 37.9%

Total 306,238 100.0% 130,441 100.0% 175,797 100.0%

Source: GAO analysis of Labor data.

Note: Total excludes 667 cases where gender was missing. 

Table 10: Years from Date of Injury to 2010 for All FECA Beneficiaries

 All USPS Non-USPS 

 Number of 

FECA 

beneficiaries Percent

Number of 

FECA 

beneficiaries Percent

Number of 

FECA 

beneficiaries Percent

Less than 1 year ago 114,321 37.2% 42,880 32.9% 71,441 40.5%

1 to 5 years ago 104,829 34.2% 51,174 39.2% 53,655 30.4%

6 to 10 years ago 30,779 10.0% 17,985 13.8% 12,794 7.3%

11 to 20 years ago 29,182 9.5% 12,599 9.7% 16,583 9.4%

21 to 30 years ago 16,012 5.2% 3,514 2.7% 12,498 7.1%

31 to 40 years ago 9,244 3.0% 1,910 1.5% 7,334 4.2%

41 or more years ago 2,538 0.8% 421 0.3% 2,117 1.2%

Total 306,905 100.0% 130,483 100.0% 176,422 100.0%

Source: GAO analysis of Labor data.

Table 11: Distribution of Annual Cash Benefits for All FECA Beneficiaries (2010)

 All USPS Non-USPS 

 Number of 

FECA 

beneficiaries Percent

Number of 

FECA 

beneficiaries Percent

Number of 

FECA 

beneficiaries Percent

$0 221,522 73.4% 93,555 73.4% 127,967 73.4%

$1 - $9,999 23,368 7.7% 12,268 9.6% 11,100 6.4%

$10,000 - $19,999 14,519 4.8% 6,206 4.9% 8,313 4.8%

$20,000 - $29,999 15,394 5.1% 4,741 3.7% 10,653 6.1%

$30,000 - $39,999 16,160 5.4% 8,386 6.6% 7,774 4.5%

$40,000 - $49,999 5,558 1.8% 1,654 1.3% 3,904 2.2%

$50,000 - $59,999 2,172 0.7% 265 0.2% 1,907 1.1%

$60,000 - $69,999 1,252 0.4% 138 0.1% 1,114 0.6%

$70,000 - $79,999 681 0.2% 62 0.0% 619 0.4%

$80,000 - $89,999 386 0.1% 35 0.0% 351 0.2%

$90,000 - $99,999 407 0.1% 25 0.0% 382 0.2%

$100,000 or more 407 0.1% 88 0.1% 319 0.2%

Total 301,826 100.0% 127,423 100.0% 174,403 100.0%

Median benefit 

(excluding $0)

$21,504 $17,371 $23,574 

Source: GAO analysis of Labor data.

Note: Table excludes cases where benefits were less than zero. Amounts less than zero are due to accounting for, for example, 

chargebacks to the claim for overpayments. 
Page 29 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

Table 12: Distribution of Annual Medical Benefits for All FECA Beneficiaries (2010)

 All USPS Non-USPS 

 Number of 

FECA 

beneficiaries Percent

Number of 

FECA 

beneficiaries Percent

Number of 

FECA 

beneficiaries Percent

$0 79,305 26.0% 23,071 17.8% 56,234 32.1%

$1 - $9,999 203,493 66.7% 95,254 73.4% 108,239 61.7%

$10,000 - $19,999 13,715 4.5% 6,998 5.4% 6,717 3.8%

$20,000 - $29,999 4,228 1.4% 2,136 1.6% 2,092 1.2%

$30,000 - $39,999 1,793 0.6% 929 0.7% 864 0.5%

$40,000 - $49,999 907 0.3% 457 0.4% 450 0.3%

$50,000 - $59,999 532 0.2% 273 0.2% 259 0.1%

$60,000 - $69,999 349 0.1% 175 0.1% 174 0.1%

$70,000 - $79,999 189 0.1% 90 0.1% 99 0.1%

$80,000 - $89,999 158 0.1% 79 0.1% 79 0.0%

$90,000 - $99,999 99 0.0% 53 0.0% 46 0.0%

$100,000 or more 386 0.1% 185 0.1% 201 0.1%

Total 305,154 100.0% 129,700 100.0% 175,454 100.0%

Median benefit 

(excluding $0)

$888 $975 $823 

Source: GAO analysis of Labor data.

Note: Table excludes cases where benefits were less than zero. Amounts less than zero are due to accounting for, for example, 

chargebacks to the claim for overpayments. 

Table 13: Distribution of Total Annual Benefits (Cash and Medical Benefits Combined) for All FECA 

Beneficiaries (2010)

 All USPS Non-USPS 

Number of 

FECA 

beneficiaries Percent

Number of 

FECA 

beneficiaries Percent

Number of 

FECA 

beneficiaries Percent

$0 56,688 18.8% 17,064 13.4% 39,624 22.8%

$1 - $9,999 173,538 57.6% 81,301 63.8% 92,237 53.1%

$10,000 - $19,999 19,117 6.3% 8,547 6.7% 10,570 6.1%

$20,000 - $29,999 16,079 5.3% 5,685 4.5% 10,394 6.0%

$30,000 - $39,999 14,921 5.0% 6,661 5.2% 8,260 4.8%

$40,000 - $49,999 9,044 3.0% 4,098 3.2% 4,946 2.8%

$50,000 - $59,999 4,615 1.5% 1,766 1.4% 2,849 1.6%

$60,000 - $69,999 2,637 0.9% 854 0.7% 1,783 1.0%

$70,000 - $79,999 1,511 0.5% 437 0.3% 1,074 0.6%

$80,000 - $89,999 926 0.3% 290 0.2% 636 0.4%

$90,000 - $99,999 691 0.2% 182 0.1% 509 0.3%

$100,000 or more 1,411 0.5% 475 0.4% 936 0.5%

Total 301,178 100.0% 127,360 100.0% 173,818 100.0%

Median benefit 

(excluding $0)

$1,563 $1,463 $1,707

Source: GAO analysis of Labor data.

Note: Table excludes cases where benefits were less than zero. Amounts less than zero are due to accounting for, for example, 

chargebacks to the claim for overpayments. 
Page 30 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

Long-Term, Full-Time FECA Beneficiaries42

Table 14: Distribution of Long-Term, Full-Time Beneficiaries (2010) 

 All USPS Non-USPS 

 Number of long-term, 

full-time beneficiaries Percent

Number of long-term, 

full-time beneficiaries Percent

Number of long-term, 

full-time beneficiaries Percent

Long term, 

full-time 

31,880 100.0% 12,349 38.7% 19,531 61.3%

Source: GAO analysis of Labor data. 

Table 15: Distribution of Age of Long-Term, Full-Time Beneficiaries (2010) 

 All USPS Non-USPS 

 Number of long-term, 

full-time beneficiaries Percent

Number of long-term, 

full-time beneficiaries Percent 

Number of long-term, 

full-time beneficiaries Percent

Less than 20 7 0.0% 0 0.0% 7 0.0%

20-29 187 0.6% 64 0.5% 123 0.6%

30-39 1,090 3.4% 591 4.8% 499 2.6%

40-49 4,299 13.5% 2,474 20.0% 1,825 9.3%

50-59 9,544 29.9% 4,871 39.4% 4,673 23.9%

60-64 5,147 16.1% 1,876 15.2% 3,271 16.7%

65 and older 11,606 36.4% 2,473 20.0% 9,133 46.8%

Total 31,880 100.0% 12,349 100.0% 19,531 100.0%

Median age 60 years 56 years 63 years 

Source: GAO analysis of Labor data. 

Table 16: Distribution of Gender of Long-Term, Full-Time Beneficiaries (2010) 

 All USPS Non-USPS 

 Number of long-term, 

full-time beneficiaries Percent

Number of long-term, 

full-time beneficiaries Percent 

Number of long-term, 

full-time beneficiaries Percent

Male 17,705 55.5% 5,554 45.0% 12,151 62.2%

Female 14,174 44.5% 6,795 55.0% 7,379 37.8%

Total 31,879 100.0% 12,349 100.0% 19,530 100.0%

Source: GAO analysis of Labor data. 

Note: Table excludes cases where gender was missing. 

 

42This group of long-term, full-time beneficiaries does not include those individuals receiving part-time benefits, schedule 

awards, and survivor benefits. 
Page 31 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

Table 17: Years from Date of Injury to 2010 for Long-Term, Full-Time Beneficiaries

 All USPS Non-USPS 

 Number of longterm, full-time 

beneficiaries Percent 

Number of longterm, full-time 

beneficiaries Percent 

Number of longterm, full-time 

beneficiaries Percent

Less than 1 year ago 1,110 3.48% 674 5.46% 436 2.23%

1 year ago 1,437 4.51% 923 7.47% 514 2.63%

2 years ago 1,171 3.67% 711 5.76% 460 2.36%

3 years ago 1,131 3.55% 613 4.96% 518 2.65%

4 years ago 1,053 3.30% 605 4.90% 448 2.29%

5 years ago 1,107 3.47% 575 4.66% 532 2.72%

6 years ago 1,106 3.47% 580 4.70% 526 2.69%

7 years ago 1,144 3.59% 585 4.74% 559 2.86%

8 years ago 1,019 3.20% 564 4.57% 455 2.33%

9 years ago 1,040 3.26% 569 4.61% 471 2.41%

10 years ago 1,042 3.27% 540 4.37% 502 2.57%

11-15 years ago 4,072 12.77% 1,716 13.90% 2,536 12.06%

16-20 years ago 4,126 12.94% 1,212 9.81% 2,914 14.92%

21-25 years ago 3,870 12.14% 867 7.02% 3,003 15.38%

26-30 years ago 2,731 8.57% 486 3.94% 2,245 11.49%

31-35 years ago 2,497 7.83% 571 4.62% 1,926 9.86%

36-40 years ago 1,396 4.38% 351 2.84% 1,045 5.35%

41 or more years ago 828 2.60% 207 1.68% 621 3.18%

Total 31,880 12,349 19,531

Source: GAO analysis of Labor data.

Note: Some percentages do not total 100 percent, due to rounding. 
Page 32 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

Table 18: Distribution of Annual Cash Benefits for Long-Term, Full-Time Beneficiaries (2010)

 All USPS Non-USPS 

 Number of longterm, full-time 

beneficiaries Percent

Number of longterm, full-time 

beneficiaries Percent

Number of longterm, full-time 

beneficiaries Percent

$0 163 0.5% 70 0.6% 93 0.5%

$1 - $9,999 1,096 3.4% 691 5.6% 405 2.1%

$10,000 - $19,999 3,161 9.9% 1,170 9.5% 1,991 10.2%

$20,000 - $29,999 7,558 23.7% 1,812 14.7% 5,746 29.5%

$30,000 - $39,999 12,391 38.9% 6,899 56.0% 5,492 28.2%

$40,000 - $49,999 4,029 12.7% 1,339 10.9% 2,690 13.8%

$50,000 - $59,999 1,411 4.4% 159 1.3% 1,252 6.4%

$60,000 - $69,999 848 2.7% 83 0.7% 765 3.9%

$70,000 - $79,999 501 1.6% 36 0.3% 465 2.4%

$80,000 - $89,999 261 0.8% 16 0.1% 245 1.3%

$90,000 - $99,999 298 0.9% 10 0.1% 288 1.5%

$100,000 or more 116 0.4% 39 0.3% 77 0.4%

Total 31,833 100.0% 12,324 100.0% 19,509 100.0%

Median benefit 

(excluding $0)

$33,554 $34,459 $32,492 

Source: GAO analysis of Labor data.

Note: Table excludes cases where benefits were less than zero. Amounts less than zero are due to accounting for, for example, 

chargebacks to the claim for overpayments. 

Table 19: Distribution of Annual Medical Benefits for Long-Term, Full-Time Beneficiaries (2010)

 All USPS Non-USPS 

Number of longterm, full-time 

beneficiaries Percent

Number of longterm, full-time 

beneficiaries Percent

Number of longterm, full-time 

beneficiaries Percent

$0 6,946 21.8% 1,555 12.6% 5,391 27.6%

$1 - $9,999 17,026 53.5% 6,931 56.2% 10,095 51.8%

$10,000 - $19,999 4,177 13.1% 2,053 16.6% 2,124 10.9%

$20,000 - $29,999 1,551 4.9% 747 6.1% 804 4.1%

$30,000 - $39,999 754 2.4% 377 3.1% 377 1.9%

$40,000 - $49,999 452 1.4% 225 1.8% 227 1.2%

$50,000 - $59,999 272 0.9% 133 1.1% 139 0.7%

$60,000 - $69,999 188 0.6% 95 0.8% 93 0.5%

$70,000 - $79,999 105 0.3% 49 0.4% 56 0.3%

$80,000 - $89,999 83 0.3% 37 0.3% 46 0.2%

$90,000 - $99,999 57 0.2% 29 0.2% 28 0.1%

$100,000 or more 228 0.7% 105 0.9% 123 0.6%

Total 31,839 100.0% 12,336 100.0% 19,503 100.0%

Median benefit 

(excluding $0)

$4,931 $6,056 $4,016

Source: GAO analysis of Labor data.

Note: Table excludes cases where benefits were less than zero. Amounts less than zero are due to accounting for, for example, 

chargebacks to the claim for overpayments. 
Page 33 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

Table 20: Distribution of Total Annual Benefits (Cash and Medical Benefits Combined) for Long-Term, Full-Time 

Beneficiaries (2010)

 All USPS Non-USPS 

 Number of longterm, full-time 

beneficiaries Percent

Number of longterm, full-time 

beneficiaries Percent

Number of longterm, full-time 

beneficiaries Percent

$0 11 0.0% 2 0.0% 9 0.0%

$1 - $9,999 639 2.0% 352 2.9% 287 1.5%

$10,000 - $19,999 2,067 6.5% 749 6.1% 1,318 6.8%

$20,000 - $29,999 5,507 17.3% 1,237 10.0% 4,270 21.9%

$30,000 - $39,999 9,366 29.4% 4,241 34.4% 5,125 26.3%

$40,000 - $49,999 6,207 19.5% 2,993 24.3% 3,214 16.5%

$50,000 - $59,999 3,124 9.8% 1,248 10.1% 1,876 9.6%

$60,000 - $69,999 1,794 5.6% 582 4.7% 1,212 6.2%

$70,000 - $79,999 1,136 3.6% 323 2.6% 813 4.2%

$80,000 - $89,999 647 2.0% 189 1.5% 458 2.3%

$90,000 - $99,999 475 1.5% 116 0.9% 359 1.8%

$100,000 or more 870 2.7% 300 2.4% 570 2.9%

Total 31,843 100.0% 12,332 100.0% 19,511 100.0%

Median benefit 

(excluding $0)

$38,282 $39,177 $37,289 

Source: GAO analysis of Labor data.

Note: Table excludes cases where benefits were less than zero. Amounts less than zero are due to accounting for, for example, 

chargebacks to the claim for overpayments. 

Retirement-Age Beneficiaries on Long-Term, Full-Time Rolls43

Table 21: Distribution of Retirement-Age Beneficiaries on Long-Term, Full-Time Rolls (2010)

All USPS Non-USPS 

 Number of 

retirement-age 

beneficiaries Percent

Number of 

retirement-age 

beneficiaries Percent

Number of 

retirement-age 

beneficiaries Percent

Long term, full-time 10,873 100.0% 2,286 21.0% 8,587 79.0%

Source: GAO analysis of Labor data.

 43Includes only those FECA beneficiaries on the long-term, full-time rolls who were of full retirement age as set forth in the 

Social Security Act.
Page 34 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

Table 22: Distribution of Gender of Retirement-Age Beneficiaries on Long-Term, Full-Time Rolls (2010)

 All USPS Non-USPS 

 Number of 

retirement-age 

beneficiaries Percent

Number of 

retirement-age 

beneficiaries Percent

Number of 

retirement-age 

beneficiaries Percent

Male 7,200 66.2% 1,472 64.4% 5,728 66.7%

Female 3,673 33.8% 814 35.6% 2,859 33.3%

Total 10,873 100.0% 2,286 100.0% 8,587 100.0%

Source: GAO analysis of Labor data.

Note: Table excludes case where gender was missing. 

Table 23: Years from Date of Injury to 2010 for Retirement-age Beneficiaries on Long-Term, Full-Time Rolls (2010)

 All USPS Non-USPS 

 Number of 

retirement-age 

beneficiaries Percent 

Number of 

retirement-age 

beneficiaries Percent 

Number of 

retirement-age 

beneficiaries Percent

Less than 1 year ago 28 0.26% 11 0.48% 17 0.20%

1 year ago 30 0.28% 13 0.57% 17 0.20%

2 years ago 37 0.34% 16 0.70% 21 0.24%

3 years ago 39 0.36% 19 0.83% 20 0.23%

4 years ago 44 0.40% 13 0.57% 31 0.36%

5 years ago 64 0.59% 20 0.87% 44 0.51%

6 years ago 72 0.66% 32 1.40% 40 0.47%

7 years ago 88 0.81% 27 1.18% 61 0.71%

8 years ago 82 0.75% 20 0.87% 62 0.72%

9 years ago 109 1.00% 43 1.88% 66 0.77%

10 years ago 118 1.09% 36 1.57% 82 0.95%

11-15 years ago 703 6.47% 193 8.44% 510 5.94%

16-20 years ago 1,424 13.10% 240 10.50% 1,184 13.79%

21-25 years ago 1,973 18.15% 306 13.39% 1,667 19.41%

26-30 years ago 1,843 16.95% 298 13.04% 1,545 17.99%

31-35 years ago 2,126 19.55% 475 20.78% 1,651 19.23%

36-40 years ago 1,289 11.86% 320 14.00% 969 11.28%

41 or more years ago 804 7.39% 204 8.92% 600 6.99%

Total 10,873 2,286 8,587

Source: GAO analysis of Labor data.

Note: Some percentages do not total 100 percent, due to rounding. 
Page 35 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

Table 24: Distribution of Annual Cash Benefits for Retirement-Age Beneficiaries on Long-Term, Full-Time Rolls (2010) 

 All USPS Non-USPS 

 Number of 

retirement-age 

beneficiaries Percent

Number of 

retirement-age 

beneficiaries Percent 

Number of 

retirement-age 

beneficiaries Percent

$0 12 0.1% 0 0.0% 12 0.1%

$1 - $9,999 84 0.8% 20 0.9% 64 0.7%

$10,000 - $19,999 900 8.3% 97 4.2% 803 9.4%

$20,000 - $29,999 2,889 26.6% 340 14.9% 2,549 29.7%

$30,000 - $39,999 4,119 37.9% 1,551 67.8% 2,568 29.9%

$40,000 - $49,999 1,382 12.7% 213 9.3% 1,169 13.6%

$50,000 - $59,999 597 5.5% 29 1.3% 568 6.6%

$60,000 - $69,999 399 3.7% 19 0.8% 380 4.4%

$70,000 - $79,999 259 2.4% 8 0.3% 251 2.9%

$80,000 - $89,999 120 1.1% 1 0.0% 119 1.4%

$90,000 - $99,999 88 0.8% 3 0.1% 85 1.0%

$100,000 or more 20 0.2% 5 0.2% 15 0.2%

Total 10,869 100.0% 2,286 100.0% 8,583 100.0%

Median benefit 

(excluding $0) 

$33,620 $34,459 $33,019 

Source: GAO analysis of Labor data. 

Note: Table excludes cases where benefits were less than zero. Amounts less than zero are due to accounting for, for example, 

chargebacks to the claim for overpayments. 

Table 25: Distribution of Annual Medical Benefits for Retirement-Age Beneficiaries on Long-Term, Full-Time Rolls (2010) 

 All USPS Non-USPS 

 Number of 

retirement-age 

beneficiaries Percent

Number of 

retirement-age 

beneficiaries Percent 

Number of 

retirement-age 

beneficiaries Percent

$0 4,492 41.4% 829 36.3% 3,663 42.7%

$1 - $9,999 5,506 50.7% 1,252 54.8% 4,254 49.6%

$10,000 - $19,999 540 5.0% 124 5.4% 416 4.9%

$20,000 - $29,999 134 1.2% 30 1.3% 104 1.2%

$30,000 - $39,999 63 0.6% 16 0.7% 47 0.5%

$40,000 - $49,999 32 0.3% 11 0.5% 21 0.2%

$50,000 - $59,999 17 0.2% 2 0.1% 15 0.2%

$60,000 - $69,999 23 0.2% 9 0.4% 14 0.2%

$70,000 - $79,999 16 0.1% 3 0.1% 13 0.2%

$80,000 - $89,999 11 0.1% 0 0.0% 11 0.1%

$90,000 - $99,999 8 0.1% 3 0.1% 5 0.1%

$100,000 or more 19 0.2% 6 0.3% 13 0.2%

Total 10,861 100.0% 2,285 100.0% 8,576 100.0%

Median benefit (excluding $0) $1,620 $1,937 $1,500

Source: GAO analysis of Labor data. 

Note: Table excludes cases where benefits were less than zero. Amounts less than zero are due to accounting for, for example, 

chargebacks to the claim for overpayments. 
Page 36 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

Table 26: Distribution of Total Annual Benefits (Cash and Medical Benefits Combined) for Retirement-Age 

Beneficiaries on Long-Term, Full-Time Rolls (2010) 

 All USPS Non-USPS 

 Number of 

retirement-age 

beneficiaries Percent

Number of 

retirement-age 

beneficiaries Percent 

Number of 

retirement-age 

beneficiaries Percent

$0 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

$1 - $9,999 74 0.7% 11 0.5% 63 0.7%

$10,000 - $19,999 711 6.5% 78 3.4% 633 7.4%

$20,000 - $29,999 2,510 23.1% 260 11.4% 2,250 26.2%

$30,000 - $39,999 3,848 35.4% 1,330 58.2% 2,518 29.3%

$40,000 - $49,999 1,731 15.9% 414 18.1% 1,317 15.3%

$50,000 - $59,999 789 7.3% 89 3.9% 700 8.2%

$60,000 - $69,999 457 4.2% 39 1.7% 418 4.9%

$70,000 - $79,999 358 3.3% 24 1.0% 334 3.9%

$80,000 - $89,999 164 1.5% 12 0.5% 152 1.8%

$90,000 - $99,999 115 1.1% 5 0.2% 110 1.3%

$100,000 or more 112 1.0% 24 1.0% 88 1.0%

Total 10,869 100.0% 2,286 100.0% 8,583 100.0%

Median benefit (excluding $0) $35,457 $36,019 $35,142

Source: GAO analysis of Labor data. 

Note: Table excludes cases where benefits were less than zero. Amounts less than zero are due to accounting for, for example, 

chargebacks to the claim for overpayments. 
Page 37 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

Enclosure V: Comments from the U.S. Postal Service
Page 38 GAO-12-309R Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

Enclosure VI: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments

GAO Contacts

Andrew Sherrill at (202) 512-7215 or sherrilla@gao.gov, and Phillip Herr at (202) 512-2834 or 

herrp@gao.gov

Staff Acknowledgments

In addition to the contacts named above, key contributors to this report were Patrick Dibattista, H. 

Brandon Haller, James Bennett, Michelle Bracy, Tonnye Conner-White, Melinda Cordero, Carla 

Craddock, Robert Heilman, Gene Kuehneman, Christopher Morehouse, James Rebbe, Jeff Tessin, 

Walter Vance, Kathleen van Gelder, and James Whitcomb.

(131064)
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety 

without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain 

copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be 

necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately.
The Government Accountability 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 GAO’s website (www.gao.gov). Each weekday afternoon, 

GAO posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, and 

correspondence. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products, 

go to www.gao.gov and select “E-mail Updates.”

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of 

production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the 

publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and 

white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s website, 

http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 

TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, 

MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information.

Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and YouTube. 

Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E-mail Updates. Listen to our Podcasts. 

Visit GAO on the web at www.gao.gov. 

Contact:

Website: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

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

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512-

4400, U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 

7125, Washington, DC 20548

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, DC 20548

GAO’s Mission

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony 

Order by Phone

Connect with GAO

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs

Please Print on Recycled Paper.