U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board

Congressional

Budget 

Justification 

FY 2018

Prepared for the 

Committee on Appropriations

May 2017
Table of Contents

Introduction.............................................................................................................................1

Events impacting MSPB operations...............................................................................................................1

FY 2018 Budget Request ....................................................................................................... 2

Appropriation Language.................................................................................................................................. 2

Strategic Goals and Strategic Objectives....................................................................................................... 3

FY 2018 request by Object Class................................................................................................................... 3

Schedule O Object Classification.................................................................................................................. 8

Schedule Q Employment Summary ........................................................................................................... 9

About MSPB .................................................................................................................................................... 9

MSPB Organization ........................................................................................................................................ 9

Adjudication ..................................................................................................................................................... 9

Mediation Appeals Program ........................................................................................................................ 10

Merit Systems Studies and OPM Oversight ...............................................................................................11

Management Support.................................................................................................................................... 12

Information Technology................................................................................................................................12

Human Resources ..........................................................................................................................................13

Financial Management .................................................................................................................................. 13

Equal Employment Opportunity .................................................................................................................14

Organization Chart.........................................................................................................................................15
1

U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board

Congressional Budget Justification for

Fiscal Year 2018

Introduction

The U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) FY 2018 budget request is $46,835,000,

1 to support 

235 Full Time Equivalents (FTEs). Our request will fund the anticipated FY 2018 pay raise, as well as

continue our commitment to improve our information technology (IT) infrastructure including 

developing and maintaining the offsite data center migration and electronic adjudication projects. In 

addition to improving the security and reliability of MSPB’s networks, these improvements will 

advance MSPB internal business processes. 

In general, MSPB resources are dedicated primarily to processing appeals from Federal employees 

involving, among others, adverse actions, whistleblower claims and veterans issues. We estimate

that MSPB’s administrative judges (AJs) will receive their normal workload of approximately 6,200

appeals and other cases in our regional and field offices. MSPB also expects the Board members

will receive a typical workload of approximately 1,100 petitions for review at headquarters. 

MSPB has no control as to the number of cases that are filed, or over legislation that may affect our

jurisdiction and the manner in which we adjudicate appeals. Therefore, it is imperative MSPB receives

the requested funds to maintain and train the adjudication staff so that the number of cases and 

processing times remain at a manageable, effective and efficient level. Fully funding our request

should ensure MSPB is able to attract and maintain staff at a time when approximately 20 percent of

our current staff is eligible for retirement, including 30 percent of our AJs. Sufficient funds are also

required to ensure our IT infrastructure is sound, secure, and efficient, which will help to facilitate

processing of appeals and reduce costs. 

MSPB is thankful for the appropriations it has received in the last several years and that the Congress

recognizes the unique challenges MSPB faced recently in adjudicating over 32,000 furlough appeals

(more than five times MSPB’s normal workload) and the significant impact on its IT infrastructure. 

Below we discuss a few significant issues that have impacted, and may impact, MSPB’s operations 

over the remainder of FY 2017 and in FY 2018.

Events Impacting MSPB Operations

There are a number of events which have had, and could have, an effect on MSPB’s operations: 

certain pending legislation in the Congress; budget reductions leading to appealable furloughs or 

reductions-in-force (RIFs); and the lack of a quorum of Board members. 

Numerous bills have been introduced in the Congress which, if passed and signed by the President, 

would have a significant impact on MSPB operations. Specifically, several of these bills would more 

than likely: (1) increase the number of appeals and petitions for review to the MSPB by expanding the 

types of employees who may file an MSPB appeal; and (2) sharply decrease the amount of time in 

which MSPB has to adjudicate these appeals. For example, the VA Accountability First Act of 2017 

 1 This amount includes $2.345 million for administrative expenses to adjudicate retirement appeals to be transferred from

the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund.
2

would provide MSPB appeal rights to approximately 190,000 Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) 

employees who do not now have them. Currently, there are approximately 1.7 million Federal 

employees over whom the Board has jurisdiction, and those employees file appeals at a rate of 0.387 

percent per year. Assuming that appeal rate holds true for the 190,000 newly covered VA employees 

that would yield approximately 735 additional initial appeals per year. Given the average petition for 

review rate of 17 percent of all initial appeals, we estimate that we will have to process an additional 

125 petitions for review per year as a result of this legislation. The VA Accountability First Act would 

also require MSPB AJs to issue decisions within 45 days of the filing of the appeal.

Another VA-specific bill – the VA Accountability First and Appeals Modernization Act of 2017 –

would require MSPB AJs to decide appeals filed by VA employees within 60 days of the appeal being 

filed. Yet another bill – the Federal Employees Accountability Act of 2017 – would require MSPB AJs 

to adjudicate appeals from all Federal employees within 45 days of the appeal being filed. Historically, 

the regional and field offices have adjudicated initial appeals in approximately 120 days. MSPB 

Headquarters currently adjudicates the petition for review component of the appeal within an average 

of 185 days. Thus, the timeframes being proposed by the Congress are vastly shorter.

The MSPB has had some recent experience with similarly shortened adjudication timeframes with 

appeals filed under the Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act of 2014. That law requires 

MSPB AJs to adjudicate disciplinary actions against members of the Senior Executive Service at the 

VA within 21 days. While that Act does not permit filing petitions for review, Office of Appeals 

Counsel staff members have been called upon to assist with these cases. Experience has shown that to 

adjudicate an initial appeal within 21 days, several MSPB staff members, including administrative 

judges and attorneys, must work exclusively on that appeal for the entire 21-day period. We anticipate 

that a similar amount of work would be required to adjudicate a petition for review under the 

proposed time restrictions. If the number of employees who have MSPB appeal rights is expanded 

and the processing time strictly curtailed, MSPB would require either additional staffing, a radical 

change to the existing appeals process or both to handle the increased workload.

Additionally, it appears that there could be significant Government-wide budget reductions in FY 

2018 and beyond. If that occurs, agencies may use furloughs and/or reductions in force (RIFs) to 

address budget shortfalls. Inasmuch as furloughs and RIFS are actions appealable to MSPB, the level 

of appeals could drastically increase over the next several years. 

Finally, MSPB has lacked a quorum of Board members since early January 2017. Although agencies 

and appellants can file petitions for review of AJ decisions with the Board, the Board cannot issue 

decisions unless it has a quorum. With a quorum, the Board will issue on average approximately 90

PFR decisions each month. Without a quorum, those PFRs will simply wait for the nomination and 

confirmation of at least one additional Board member before decisions can be issued again. In short, 

there will be a backlog of PFR decisions until MSPB has a quorum.

FY 2018 Budget Request

Appropriation Language

For necessary expenses to carry out functions of the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board pursuant 

to Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1978, the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, and the Whistleblower

Protection Act of 1989 (5 U.S.C. 5509 note), including services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, rental

of conference rooms in the District of Columbia and elsewhere, hire of passenger motor vehicles,

direct procurement of survey printing, and not to exceed $2,000 for official reception and 
3

representation expenses, $44,490,000, to remain available until September 30, 2019, and in addition

not to exceed $2,345,000, to remain available until September 30, 2019, for administrative expenses

to adjudicate retirement appeals to be transferred from the Civil Service Retirement and Disability

Fund in amounts to be determined by the Merit Systems Protection Board.

Strategic Goals

Our FY 2018 Performance Budget Justification is structured on the basis of MSPB FY 2016– FY

2018 Strategic Plan. The agency’s performance goals cover the critical components of two strategic

goals, and our performance measures support MSPB’s ability to manage and report performance over

time. The strategic goals and objectives are:

Strategic Goal 1: Serve the public interest by protecting Merit System Principles and 

safeguarding the civil service from Prohibited Personnel Practices.

Strategic Objectives:

1A: Provide understandable, high-quality resolution of appeals supported by fair and efficient 

adjudication and alternative dispute resolution (ADR) processes.

1B: Enforce timely compliance with MSPB decisions.

1C: Conduct objective, timely studies of the Federal merit systems and human capital management 

issues.

1D: Review and act upon the rules, regulations, and significant actions of the Office of Personnel

Management, as appropriate.

Strategic Goal 2: Advance the public interest through education and promotion of stronger 

merit systems, adherence to Merit System Principles, and prevention of Prohibited

Personnel Practices.

Strategic Objectives:

2A: Inform, promote, and/or encourage actions by policy-makers, as appropriate, that strengthen

Federal merit systems laws and regulations.

2B: Support and improve the practice of merit, adherence to MSPs, and prevention of PPPs in the 

workplace through outreach.

2C: Advance the understanding of the concepts of merit, MSPs, and PPPs through the use of 

educational standards, materials, and guidance established by MSPB.

FY 2018 Request by Object Class

The FY 2018 budget request covers the estimated costs for necessary operational needs. As 

reflected in the following tables, 81 percent of the MSPB FY 2018 budget request provides for 

payroll and benefit expenses. The remaining 19 percent is comprised of rent and internet services, 
4

interagency agreements for various administrative services, supplies and equipment (including IT 

hardware and software), official travel, printing, maintenance, and miscellaneous services. 

To the extent possible, most costs have been straight-lined or reduced. MSPB expects to continue

to maintain quality services in support of the agency functions and meet the goals and objectives of

the Strategic Plan. With the requested amount, MSPB is prepared to undertake mission critical

tasks in FY 2018 that will allow MSPB to achieve its strategic goals in an efficient and cost-effective

manner.

Our request assumes overall funding to remain at the same level in FY 2018 as was enacted for FY 

2016. MSPB’s request has considered possible budget cutbacks to its spending while maintaining the 

performance and quality of the MSPB mission. A discussion of our more significant changes from the

FY 2017 Continuing Resolution (CR) funding level follows:

Personnel Compensation & Benefits – an increase of $685,000

MOC Description

FY 2017

CR

(000)

FY 2018

Request

(000)

Increase

(decrease)

over FY 2017

(000)

11 Personnel

Compensation $27,425 $28,000 $575

12 Benefits $7,590 $7,700 $110

Approximately 81 percent of the agency’s funding is for personnel compensation and benefit costs,

which make up the largest amount of our budget submission. Thus, any reduction in resources

affects our ability to hire and maintain a highly qualified staff at the requested FTE level. Our

request assumes a 1.9 percent pay increases in FY 2018.

Travel & Transportation of Persons – decrease of $20,000

MOC Description

FY 2017

CR

(000)

FY 2018

Request

(000)

Increase

(decrease)

over FY

2017

(000)

21 Travel & Transportation of

Persons

$300 $280 ($20)

To meet our mission, AJs must frequently travel to hearing sites located a considerable 

distance from the various regional and field offices. In the past two years travel costs have 

been decreasing and we believe the trend should continue with travel costs expected to 

stabilize at $280,000 per year.
5

Transportation of Things – decrease of $5,000

MOC Description

FY 2017

CR

(000)

FY 2018

Request

(000)

Increase

(decrease)

over FY

2017

(000)

22 Transportation of Things $40 $35 ($5)

This category covers freight related costs and various courier services. Costs are expected to

decrease as equipment purchases are scaled backed.

Rent, Communications, & Utilities – decrease of $50,000

MOC Description

FY 2017

CR

(000)

FY 2018

Request

(000)

Increase

(decrease)

over FY 2017

(000)

23 Rent, Communications & 

Utilities $4,215 $4,165 ($50)

The agency makes rental payments to the General Services Administrations (GSA) for office space in 

our Washington Headquarters as well as all of our regional and field offices. Our request includes an 

increase of $25,000 to cover expected increases in rent. The balance of our request for this object class

will be for the Internet services, and mandated Managed Trusted Internet Protocol services as well as

other telecommunication services such as Voice Over Internet protocol and video conferencing. A 

change in vendors for various telecommunication services is expected to reduce costs by $75,000.

Printing – no increase requested

MOC Description

FY 2017

CR

(000)

FY 2018

Request

(000)

Increase

(decrease)

over FY

2017

(000)

24 Printing $75 $75 $0

The Government Printing Office (GPO) has two printing programs (printing of case files and our

Issues of Merit newsletters) specifically designed for MSPB.
6

Other Contractual Services – decrease of $125,000

MOC Description

FY 2017

CR

(000)

FY 2018

Request

(000)

Increase

(decrease)

over FY 2017

(000)

25 Other Contractual Services $3,710 $3,585 ($125)

This object class includes the Agency’s Reimbursable Service Agreements (RSA) with BFS for 

accounting, purchasing, and travel-related services and our RSA with the Department of Agriculture

Animal and Plant Health Inspections Service (APHIS) for personnel services.

Other RSAs included in this object class fund are Administrative Law Judges (agreements with the 

Coast Guard, Environmental Protection Agency, and Federal Trade Commission), as well as 

agreements with the National Archives and Records Administration for records management 

storage. This category includes court reporting services, employee training, ADP hardware and

software maintenance renewals, license renewals for software, and the operation and maintenance

of non-ADP equipment. Our request includes ongoing costs for our planned conversion to 100

percent electronic processing system to improve the delivery and efficiency of our adjudication

services. MSPB plans to reduce training costs by $125,000. 

IT Infrastructure

Additionally, MSPB requests $400,000 to complete the migration of our IT infrastructure to the cloud 

which began in FY 2017. The migration of MSPB’s data center from our headquarters building to the 

cloud is a complex project. The project involved up-front costs (requested in our FY 2017

Congressional Budget Justification) as well as annual recurring costs. All MSPB business application

and database servers have been or will be migrated to the cloud. This migration, along with MSPB’s 

request for $600,000 in support of modernizing our core business applications (the legacy, 

antiquated LawManager, eDocs document management system, and HotDocs document assembly 

system), enables MSPB to realize the full potential of 100 percent electronic adjudication. This 

results in more efficient case processing and compliance with Federal records management

requirements. In an effort to accommodate the rapidly growing workloads and the new processing

time requirements, MSPB needs to take advantage of the efficiencies that e-adjudication can

provide. MSPB piloted mandated electronic filing of appeals and pleadings by agencies and 

appellant representatives in two of our eight regional/field offices a decade ago. With modernized 

systems functioning in the cloud, MSPB will mandate electronic filing in all eight of our offices and 

at headquarters as part of our e-adjudication efforts. 
7

Supplies & Materials – no increase requested

MOC Description

FY 2017

CR

(000)

FY 2018

Request

(000)

Increase

(decrease)

over FY

2017

(000)

26 Supplies & Materials $150 $150 $0

Expenses for supplies and materials are not expected to increase in FY 2018.

Equipment – decrease of $400,000

MOC Description

FY 2017

CR

(000)

FY 2018

Request

(000)

Increase

(decrease)

over FY

2017

(000)

31 Equipment $900 $500 ($400) 

As in the past, most of our equipment expenditures will be for replacing items due to breakdowns as 

well as equipment that have exceeded its useful life such as servers, laptops, copiers, printers,

scanners, and video teleconferencing equipment. Additionally, this category includes office furniture 

purchases. Many of these items (laptops and some printers) were replaced in FY 2016 and FY 2017 

and their useful life should extend well into FY 2019. Therefore, we expect our purchases of 

equipment will decrease by approximately $400,000.
8

Budget Schedule – Schedule O - Object Classification (In Thousands of Dollars)

FY 2016 

Actual

FY 2017 

CR

FY 2018 

Request Change

Direct Obligations:

Personnel Compensation $25,838 $27,425 $28,000 $575

Civilian Personnel Benefits 7,337 7,590 7,700 110

Travel of Persons 289 300 280 (20)

Transportation of Things 69 40 35 (5)

Rental Payments to GSA 3,565 3,600 3,625 25

Rental Payments to Others 60 65 65 0

Communications, Utilities, and 

Miscellaneous Charges 496 550 475 (75)

Printing and Reproduction 50 75 75 0

Other Services 1,027 1,450 1,325 (125)

Other Purchases of Goods and 

Services from Government Accounts 1,635 1,650 1,650 0

Maintenance of Facilities 22 35 35 0

Maintenance of Equipment 575 575 575 0

Supplies & Materials 279 150 150 0

Equipment/Lease Improvements 1,130 900 500 (400)

Direct Obligations... $42,372 $44,405 $44,490 $85

Reimbursable Obligations... 2,345 2,341 2,345 4

Total New Obligations... $44,717 $46,746 $46,835 $89

A full-year 2017 appropriation for this account was not enacted at the time the budget was prepared; therefore, the budget 

assumes this account is operating under the Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2017 (P.L. 114–254). The amounts 

included for 2017 reflect the annualized level provided by the continuing resolution.
9

Schedule Q - Employment Summary

FY 2016 

Actual

FY 2017

CR

FY 2018

Request Change

Direct:

 Civilian full-time equivalent employment 206 220 220 0

Reimbursable:

 Civilian full-time equivalent employment 15 15 15 0

Total... 221 235 235 0

About MSPB

MSPB has its origin in the Pendleton Act of 1883, which established the Civil Service Commission

(CSC) and a merit-based employment system for the Federal Government. The Pendleton Act was

passed after the assassination of President Garfield by a disgruntled Federal job seeker and grew out of

the 19thcentury reform movement to curtail the excesses of political patronage in Government and 

ensure a stable highly qualified workforce to serve the public. Over time, it became clear that the CSC

could not properly, adequately, and simultaneously set managerial policy, protect the merit systems,

and adjudicate appeals. Concern over the inherent conflict of interest in the CSC’s role as both rulemaker and judge was a principal motivating factor behind the passage of the Civil Service Reform Act

of 1978 (CSRA). The CSRA replaced the CSC with three new agencies: MSPB as the successor to the

Commission; OPM to serve as the President’s agent for Federal workforce management policy and 

procedure; and the Federal Labor Relations Authority to oversee Federal labor-management relations.

The CSRA also codified for the first time the values of the merit systems as the MSPs and defined the

PPPs.

MSPB Organization

The Board Members include the Chairman, Vice Chairman, and Board Member. Board Members 

are appointed by the President, confirmed by the Senate, and serve overlapping, non-renewable 7-

year terms. No more than two of the three Board Members can be from the same political party. 

The Board Members adjudicate the cases brought to the Board. The Chairman, by statute, is the

chief executive and administrative officer of MSPB. The Office Directors report to the Chairman 

through the Executive Director. The agency has its headquarters in Washington, DC with six

regional and two field offices located throughout the United States.

Adjudication

The majority of the cases brought to MSPB are appeals of adverse actions – that is, removals, 

suspensions of more than 14 days, reductions in grade or pay, and furloughs of 30 days or less. The

next largest number of cases involves appeals of OPM and some agency determinations in 

retirement matters. The Congress has given MSPB jurisdiction to hear cases and complaints filed

under a variety of other laws to include the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment
10

Rights Act (USERRA), 38 U.S.C. § 4301 et seq.; the Veterans Employment Opportunity Act (VEOA),

5 U.S.C. § 3309 et seq.; the Whistleblower Protection Act (WPA), Pub. Law. No. 101-12, 103 Stat. 16; 

The Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2012 (WPEA), Pub. Law 112-199; Veterans

Access, Choice and Accountability Act of 2014, Pub. Law 113-146; 5 U.S.C. § 4304; and 5 U.S.C. §

7513.

Other types of actions that may be appealed to MSPB include: performance-based removals or 

reductions in grade; denials of within-grade salary increases; reduction-in-force actions; suitability

determinations; OPM employment practices (the development and use of examinations, 

qualification standards, tests, and other measurement instruments); denials of restoration or

reemployment rights; and certain terminations of probationary employees.

An appellant files an appeal with the appropriate MSPB regional or field office having geographical 

jurisdiction. An AJ in the office assures that the parties receive the due process procedures called

for in the law and MSPB’s regulations and, after providing a full opportunity to develop the record 

on all relevant matters, issues an initial decision. Unless a party files a PFR with MSPB, the initial

decision becomes final 35 days after issuance. Any party, or OPM or the Office of Special Counsel, 

may petition the full Board in Washington to review the initial decision. The Board’s decision on a

PFR constitutes the final administrative action on the appeal.

In appellate cases, the Board’s final decision, whether it is an initial decision of an AJ that has 

become final or the Board’s decision on a PFR, may be appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for

the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit) or, in cases involving allegations of discrimination, to a U.S. 

district court or the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Cases involving allegations of

reprisal for whistleblowing may be appealed to any of the numbered US. Circuit Courts of Appeal.

If a party believes that the other party is not complying with an MSPB order or MSPB-approved 

settlement agreement, the party can file a Petition for Enforcement with the regional or field office

that issued the initial decision. If the AJ finds compliance, that constitutes an initial decision and the 

party may file a PFR with MSPB. If the AJ finds non-compliance, the case is referred to MSPB’s

General Counsel, who is charged with enforcing compliance. The Board also has authority to award 

attorney fees pursuant to the WPA and WPEA. To the extent the law makes it easier to prove 

whistleblower retaliation, it is also likely that the Board will receive and adjudicate additional fee 

motions.

In addition to adjudicating cases on the merits, MSPB also provides Alternative Dispute Resolution

(ADR) services to assist parties in resolving the case. Use of these services is voluntary, provides the

parties more control of the process and can result in effective resolution of a case. In addition, 

resolving a case through ADR procedures can save time and reduce costs to the appellant, agency,

MSPB, and Government-wide associated with the more formal regulations and procedures involved 

with adjudication on the merits.

Mediation Appeals Program

The Mediation Appeals Program (MAP) offers the services of the agency’s trained and certified 

mediators as an alternative to the formal appeal processes and procedures of MSPB’s regulations.

Mediators facilitate a discussion between the parties in a confidential setting to help them identify

issues and barriers to agreement that will aid in resolving their disputes and settling the appeal 

quickly, economically, and to the benefit of all concerned. Unlike traditional mediation, MAP
11

charges no fees. Both parties must agree to its use before the appeal will be accepted for the MAP 

process, and both must agree on its resolution before any settlement is concluded. Unlike the 

traditional appeal process, the parties control the result of the case under the skilled guidance of

the mediator, who plays no role in deciding the appeal, should accord not be reached.

Importantly, because almost all mediations occur near the beginning of adjudication, MAP saves

time and money for the Federal employees and agencies who resolve their cases through this

process.

Because of these advantages, MAP has become a popular and successful program, as shown by the 

fact that a greater number of cases have been mediated almost each year since the program’s

inception. Moreover, while MAP had been settling approximately half the case mediated, in recent 

years the settlement rate in mediation has reached and exceeded 60 percent, and cases that settled 

after return to adjudication have added to that percentage. Even where the case is resolved by an 

AJ’s decision, the mediation process often helps sharpen the parties’ focus on the matters truly in 

dispute and the resolution they seek. Moreover, based on the evaluations the parties are asked to

complete at the end of each mediation, more than 95 percent of the participants have stated that

they would use MAP again.

Merit Systems Studies and OPM Oversight

MSPB has the statutory responsibility to conduct studies of the civil service and other merit systems in 

the Executive Branch and submit the resulting reports to the President and the Congress. The studies 

support strong and viable merit systems, which protect the public’s interest in a high quality, 

professional workforce managed under the merit system principles and free from prohibited 

personnel practices. The studies are based on objective, independent research that assesses and 

evaluates Federal merit system policies, operations, and practice from a long-term perspective. This 

prospective function, in conjunction with the agency’s adjudication of individual appeals and our 

authority to review human resource regulations, ensures that MSPB has the full legal authority 

necessary to oversee Federal merit systems at both the systemic and individual level. MSPB studies 

address the variety of challenges facing the Federal Government in managing its workforce.

Reports Issued In FY 2016

Training and Development for the Senior Executive Service: A Necessary Investment (December 2015). This 

report examines current practices on how career senior executives -- who manage major programs and 

organizations and provide continuity during Presidential transitions -- are trained and developed. 

Unfortunately, the review indicates that the “systematic development” envisioned in the Civil Service 

Reform Act of 1978 is more vision than reality. To that end, the report contains information to help 

agencies determine a development strategy that aligns with agency goals and resources and effectively 

addresses executives’ training needs. In addition, the report discusses common barriers to SES training 

and offers strategies to mitigate them.

Preventing Nepotism in the Federal Civil Service (June 2016). Nepotism -- employing or advocating for the 

employment of a close relative -- is a serious offense that can reduce the effectiveness of an agency’s 

operations and diminish the public’s trust in Government. This report discusses the criminal and civil 

prohibitions against nepotism and outlines the steps that agencies should take to prevent nepotism.

The Merit System Principles: Guiding the Fair and Effective Management of the Federal Workforce (September 

2016). Given MSPB’s mission to protect the merit system principles (MSPs) and promote an effective 
12

Federal workforce free of prohibited personnel practices (PPPs), MSPB can and should play a clear 

role in educating managers, human resources staff, and employees about the meaning and importance 

of the MSPs. This report assesses how well Federal employees believe they are protected by the MSPs, 

consolidates information on the MSPs to serve as a reference guide for supervisors and employees, 

and evaluates and summarizes current agency training practices regarding the MSPs and PPPs. The 

report recommends that agencies ensure that employees receive training on the MSPs and PPPs that is 

timely, tailored to their level of responsibility, provided by experts, and delivered effectively.

Survey Activity

In the summer of 2016 MSPB administered the Merit Principles Survey (MPS) to employees in 

26 departments and agencies. The MPS yielded a rich trove of data to support studies on topics such 

as freedom from prohibited personnel practices, sexual harassment in the Federal workplace, dual 

career paths for supervisors and technical specialists, employment of persons with disabilities, 

employee engagement, the effectiveness of the HR workforce, and dealing with poor performers.

In April 2017, MSPB made the results of the MPS public -- with appropriate adjustments and 

redactions to preserve respondent confidentiality -- by posting data sets and explanatory material 

online. This proactive disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act was intended to meet the 

demonstrated interest among academics and good government groups in information about the 

Federal workforce.

Studies Activity in FY 2017

In FY 2017 MSPB released a series of articles on the adverse action process intended to guide 

stakeholders who participate in the discipline and appeals system and policymakers who may wish to 

consider making changes to that system. In addition, MSPB released Addressing Misconduct in the Federal 

Civil Service: Management Perspectives, which announced research findings on Federal managers’ 

knowledge of the disciplinary rules and use of the adverse action system. MSPB also issued a 

pamphlet for agency leaders and managers explaining how the merit system principles serve as a guide 

for the fair and effective management of the Federal workforce. Further, MSPB issued a schematic 

representation of the review processes available to Federal employees who are subjected to major 

disciplinary actions, with the aim of educating policymakers and others who have an interest in how 

the redress system operates. Ongoing MSPB studies include the effectiveness of the HR workforce, 

sexual harassment in the Federal workplace, the performance management system for General 

Schedule employees, prohibited personnel practices, and employment of persons with disabilities, 

among other topics.

Management Support

Information Technology

MSPB’s primary mission is to provide for independent adjudication of appeals of personnel actions 

for Federal employees. Generally, at least half or more of the appeals filed with the agency are from

pro se appellants -- employees representing themselves. Pro se appellants do not generally have equal 

knowledge of the case filing process or equal access to the information available, especially if they are 

stationed overseas. Yet, they are expected to file an appeal and to respond to orders in a timely 

manner or risk having their cases dismissed. MSPB’s electronic filing system, e-Appeal Online,

allows Federal agencies and employees instant access to filings and issuances through the internet as 
13

soon as they are uploaded. Parties who file electronically can also receive acknowledgement orders

from the agency by e-mail instantaneously, rather than through the regular mail. 

MSPB is modernizing its core business applications and implementing new electronic case

management workflow systems to process and track each initial appeal and PFR filed with the

agency. This functionality is integrated with MSPB’s e-Appeal, and provides document

management, and document assembly capabilities to allow our AJ’s and attorneys to more 

efficiently create legal documents that are pre-populated with case data. The new system replaces 

legacy systems for these functions which prevented MSPB’s progress to all electronic adjudication. 

The implementation of the new system will continue through FY 2018 as we operate our legacy 

systems in parallel with the modern system prior to cutover. In addition, we will complete the 

migration of MSPB’s IT infrastructure in the cloud, which began in FY 2017. Finally, we will 

prepare for a lifecycle refresh of laptop computers and peripherals in FY 2019 to coincide with the 

sunset of Windows 7 and the need to upgrade our operating system to realize the capabilities of our

new core business applications.

Human Resources

MSPB contracts with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service (APHIS) for selected human resources administrative and operational services

through an interagency agreement. The agreement is developed between the two agencies and 

monitored within the Financial and Administrative Services Division, which is located in

headquarters. The services listed in the agreement are not meant to be all-inclusive and the two 

agencies work together in a mutually cooperative manner to handle HR issues that arise that

may not be specifically addressed in the interagency agreement.

MSPB contracts with Federal Occupational Health (FOH), a service unit within the U.S. Department

of Health and Human Services’ Program Support center, to provide basic occupational health

services to all of its employees throughout the country. In addition, the agency contracts with FOH

to offer all of its employee’s access to an employee assistance program (EAP). The EAP assists the

agency in addressing productivity issues by providing both prevention and intervention for employee

problems, which ultimately improves employee health and functioning, as well as workplace

performance. MSPB’s agreement with FOH provides for a comprehensive EAP, delivering shortterm, problem-focused counseling and a variety of services. While many health and wellness

activities and accommodations are not equally available to each MSPB employee with respect to

workplace or onsite availability of services, the agency does strive to ensure that each employee

understands that it fully supports a healthy and safe work place for all employees.

Financial Management

MSPB has initiated cross-servicing agreements with BFS for its accounting, financial auditing, 

purchasing, and travel-related services and support. BFS has processed our administrative payments

and prepared our accounting reports since FY 2002. MSPB has received an unqualified (unmodified) 

opinion on its audits since the agency has been subject to audits of its financial statements.

The agency also has an agreement in place with APHIS for personnel services and the USDA 

National Finance Center (NFC) for processing of payroll and payroll-related activities including

earnings and leave statements, W-2 information, and debt management. Our cross-servicing
14

relationships with these organizations have provided MSPB with timely responses and more

accurate processing of information from larger pools of knowledgeable staff than would be

possible with smaller in-house staff. APHIS, BFS and NFC have the resources to stay current

with the latest technologies so they can provide these services more efficiently and economically.

Equal Employment Opportunity

The Office of Equal Employment Opportunity (OEEO) plans, implements, and evaluates MSPB's 

affirmative employment programs and initiatives, advises senior executives, managers and

supervisors about these programs and initiatives and provides all employees training on rights and

remedies available under anti-discrimination laws and whistleblower protection laws. OEEO

provides counseling, complaint and alternative dispute resolution processes to current and former

MSPB employees and applicants for employment who allege employment discrimination. OEEO

provides similar processes to individuals who allege disability discrimination in their access to MSPB

programs and activities. The office evaluates and reports MSPB's complaints data and workforce 

demographics by occupation and grade to the Congress, the Equal Employment Opportunity

Commission, the OPM and other external stakeholders.
15

Organization Chart

U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board

`

VICE CHAIRMAN CHAIRMAN MEMBER

Executive

Director

Equal Employment

Opportunity

Administrative

Law Judge

Appeals Counsel Clerk of the

Board

General Counsel Policy and

Evaluation

Regional

Operations

Financial and 

Administrative 

Management

Information 

Resources 

Management

Regional Offices

Atlanta, Chicago, 

Dallas, 

Philadelphia,

San Francisco, and

Washington, DC

Human Resources Management services are provided by

USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) Business Services.

Payroll services are provided by USDA's

National Finance Center.

Field Offices

Denver and

New York

Accounting services are provided by the Department of the Treasury’s

Bureau of Fiscal Services.