U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board

Congressional

Budget

Justification

FY 2017

Prepared for 

Committee on Appropriations

February 2016
Table of Contents

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

External Events impacting MSPB operations..............................................................................................2

FY 2017 Budget Request ..........................................................................................................3

Appropriation Language..................................................................................................................................3

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

FY 2017 request by Object Class...................................................................................................................4

Schedule O Object Classification..................................................................................................................9

Schedule Q Employment Summary ...........................................................................................................10

About MSPB...................................................................................................................................................10

MSPB Organization .......................................................................................................................................10

Adjudication ....................................................................................................................................................10

Mediation Appeals Program ........................................................................................................................11

Merit Systems Studies and OPM Oversight ...............................................................................................12

Management Support.....................................................................................................................................14

Information Technology................................................................................................................................14

Human Resources ..........................................................................................................................................14

Financial Management ...................................................................................................................................15

Equal Employment Opportunity .................................................................................................................15

Organization Chart.........................................................................................................................................16
1

The U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board

Performance Budget Justification for Fiscal Year 2017

Introduction

The last two years have been challenging for the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB). A 

large percentage of MSPB’s in Fiscal Year (FY) 2014 and FY 2015 was focused on adjudicating the 

more than 32,000 furlough appeals filed as a result of the sequestration cuts that were initiated in FY 

2013. During the last two years, MSPB has made progress in reducing the number of pending cases 

at headquarters and the number of total pending appeals. As of December 2015, nearly 97% of the 

furlough appeals have been adjudicated. In doing so, in FY 2015, the regional and field offices 

processed a record number of nearly 25,400 initial and addendum appeals, and HQ staff processed 

3,120 cases. However, further budget reductions due to the effect of resuming sequester cuts or 

reduced appropriations increases the likelihood that agencies will be compelled to take adverse 

personnel actions – such as furloughs or reductions-in-force - against their employees. Such a 

scenario could lead to large numbers of appeals being filed in the future. 

Our proposed FY 2017 request of $47,428,0001 and 235 Full Time Equivalents (FTE) is $593,000 

(1.3%) more than the FY 2016 enacted level of $46,835,000. This modest increase will fund the 

anticipated FY 2017 pay raise, as well as continue our efforts towards developing and maintaining 

the hosted planned data center migration and electronic adjudication projects addressing our 

informational technology (IT) infrastructure needs. MSPB is thankful for the appropriations it has 

received in the last several years and that Congress recognizes the unique challenges MSPB faced 

recently in adjudicating over 32,000 furlough appeals (more than 5 times MSPB’s normal workload). 

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 in each of the next two years the administrative judges (AJs) will receive about 6,200 appeals 

and other cases in our regional and field offices; and Board members will receive approximately 

1,100 cases at headquarters. 

MSPB has no control as to the number of cases we receive from current and former employees, 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 level. Fully funding 

our request should ensure MSPB is able to attract and maintain staff at a time when approximately 

20% of our current staff is eligible for retirement, including 30% of our administrative judges. 

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. 

 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

External Events Affecting MSPB Operations

There are several external matters that have occurred and may occur which have and could have an 

impact MSPB’s operations in the next couple of years, which could then require additional 

resources. 

The Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act of 2014 has adversely affected the processing of 

cases involving non-Veterans Administration (VA) Senior Executive Service (SES) employee appeals, 

including whistleblowers, veterans, and retirees who have the right to file appeals with MPSB. 

Additionally, legislation recently passed in the House and Senate expands the VA SES appeals 

procedures to the rest of the Department’s General Schedule employees (S. 1082; S. 1117; and H.R. 

1994). 2 Chairman Susan Tsui Grundmann provided testimony to the Senate Committee on Veterans’ 

Affairs on the potential effect this legislation will have on due process for these employees in relation 

to those provided generally to other Federal civil servants. 3 As it relates to MSPB, the new legislation 

would require that MSPB AJs issue a decision within 45 days, without affording subsequent appeal to 

the Presidentially appointed and Senate confirmed MSPB Board Members, nor to the Court. The 

legislation also expands MSPB appeal rights to tens of thousands of medical personnel in the VA who 

do not currently have the right to appeal to MSPB. If this legislation became law, it would be 

extremely difficult for MSPB to meet the requirements of the new VA legislation without significant 

additional resources. 

Additionally, we continue to experience work related to appeals and claims filed under the 

Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act (WPEA). For example, in FY 2014, MSPB received 

451 whistleblower retaliation claims. In FY 2015, MSPB received 583 whistleblower retaliation 

claims. 

Although MSPB has adjudicated nearly all of the more than 32,400 furlough appeals filed in FY 

2013, there has also been a longer-term impact on other non-furlough appeals. In short, processing 

and adjudicating the 32,000 furlough appeals has meant that other appeals to MSPB have been 

delayed in being adjudicated. Finally, as we have noted in our FY 2016 budget request, the flood of 

these furlough appeals put an unexpected strain on our IT infrastructure and case processing 

systems. 

The WPEA provided additional rights to whistleblowers and others who engage in protected activity 

in the Federal Government. The law expanded the scope of protected disclosures, broadened MSPB’s 

whistleblower jurisdiction, expanded options for granting corrective action, and permitted review of 

MSPB decisions by multiple Federal Courts of Appeals. 4 These changes have increased the number of 

whistleblower cases filed with MSPB and increased the processing complexity of whistleblower cases. 5

Many whistleblower cases are being resolved formally or informally at the Office of Special Counsel. 

The more complex and contentious cases that remain unresolved are often the cases filed with MSPB. 

 2 Legislation recently introduced in the House (H.R. 4358) expands the VA SES provisions to all SES members across 

Government. 3 Chairman Grundmann’s testimony is available on MSPB’s website at www.mspb.gov. 4 The original two-year pilot for MSPB whistleblower decisions to be appealed to other circuit courts beyond the U.S. Court of 

Appeals for the Federal Circuit was extended for an additional three years by the All Circuit Review Extension Act (P.L. 113-170). 5 The number of whistleblower initial appeals filed in 2015 increased to 583 cases which was over 130 more whistleblower cases than 

were filed in 2014. 
3

Thus, we still anticipate that the WPEA may lead to more and lengthier hearings in these cases and 

more addendum appeals. 

FY 2017 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), as amended, 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 representation expenses, $45,083,000, to remain available until September 30, 

2018, and in addition not to exceed $2,345,000, to remain available until September 30, 2018, 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 2017 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.
4

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 2017 request by Object Class

Our proposed FY 2017 request of $47,428,000 is $593,000 (1.3%) more than the FY 2016 enacted 

level of $46,835,000. With this level of funding, MSPB expects to continue to maintain quality 

services in support of the agency functions and meet the goals and objectives of the Strategic Plan. 

Our request includes inflationary adjustments common to most Federal agencies. With the 

requested amount, MSPB is prepared to undertake mission critical tasks in FY 2017 that will allow 

MSPB to achieve its strategic goals in an efficient and cost-effective manner. Major cost increases 

include $498,000 to cover increased personnel costs to include the FY 2016 and FY 2017(anticipated)

pay raises and increase in transit benefit costs, and $15,000 for an expected increase to our Interagency agreement with the Bureau of Fiscal Services (BFS) for accounting services. 

A discussion of our more significant changes from the FY 2016 President’s request follows:

Personnel Compensation & Benefits – an increase of $498,000

MOC Description

FY 2016

Enacted

(000)

FY 2017 

Request

(000)

Increase 

(decrease) 

over FY 2016

(000)

11 Personnel 

Compensation $27,090 $27,483 $393

12 Benefits $6,855 $6,960 $105

Approximately 78% 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 1.6% pay increase in FY 2017.
5

Travel & Transportation of Persons – no increase requested

MOC Description

FY 2016

Enacted

(000) 

FY 2017

Request

(000)

Increase 

(decrease) 

over FY 

2016

(000)

21 Travel & Transportation of 

Persons $455 $455 $0

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

distance from the various regional offices. Under the WPEA, the U.S. Court of Appeals for 

the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C. no longer has exclusive jurisdiction over appeals 

filed by whistleblowers, MSPB’s headquarters General Counsel attorneys may be required to 

travel to various Federal courts of appeals to represent the agency.

Transportation of Things – no increase requested

MOC Description

FY 2016

Enacted

(000) 

FY 2017

Request

(000)

Increase 

(decrease) 

over FY 

2016

(000)

22 Transportation of Things $85 $85 $0

This category covers freight related costs and various courier services.

Rent, Communications, & Utilities – an increase of $80,000

MOC Description

FY 2016

Enacted

(000) 

FY 2017

Request

(000)

Increase 

(decrease) 

over FY 2016

(000)

23 Rent, Communications & 

Utilities $4,725 $4,805 $80

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 $80,000 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 
6

services as well as other telecommunication services such as Voice Over Internet protocol and video 

conferencing.

Printing – no increase requested

MOC Description

FY 2016

Enacted

(000)

FY 2017

Request

(000)

Increase 

(decrease) 

over FY

2016

(000)

24 Printing $150 $150 $0

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

Issues of Merit newsletters) specifically designed for MSPB.

Other Contractual Services – an increase of $15,000

MOC Description

FY 2016

Enacted

(000) 

FY 2017

Request

(000)

Increase 

(decrease) 

over FY 2016

(000)

25 Other Contractual Services $4,205 $4,220 $15

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. We are requesting

$15,000 for our RSA with BFS for additional accounting reports required under the Digital 

Accountability and Transparency Act.

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 for ongoing costs for our planned conversion to 100% 

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

IT Infrastructure

Additionally, MSPB requests $275,000 for ongoing data hosting costs for our planned data center 

hosted offsite. The need for an offsite data center for MSPB was identified long ago, but was never 

fulfilled due to a lack of funds. This need became even more evident as MSPB's case volume 

increased due to the tens of thousands of furlough appeals. Furthermore, in July 2015, MSPB 
7

experienced a major system outage during an operating system upgrade that resulted in a loss of the

entire virtual server environment. As part of our recovery effort and restoration process, MSPB is 

currently assessing our IT systems with the assistance of a contractor. The findings from this 

assessment will require MSPB to incur additional costs to MSPB and support the need for a data 

center hosted offsite. The need will become even greater as MSPB converts to a 100% electronic 

adjudication (“e-Adjudication”). An offsite data center will provide better reliability by minimizing 

the system outages related to power and air conditioning issues that MSPB has experienced with the 

data center currently located at our headquarters location, provide the space and services for more 

capacity, scalability, and recovery, if and when needed.

The migration of MSPB’s data center from our headquarters building to a data center hosted offsite 

will be a complex project. The project will involve up-front costs (requested in our FY 2016

Congressional Budget Justification) for additional hardware and software licensing and the physical 

migration, as well as annual recurring costs for the leasing of the hosting center and payment for 

services. All MSPB business system application and database servers will need to be relocated to the 

new data center and duplicated at a disaster recovery site. MSPB's virtual desktop infrastructure 

(VDI) will also have to be relocated. MSPB needs to design the network communication from the 

new data center to MSPB headquarters and each of the six regional and two field office locations 

and change our business applications to point to the new data center location (new IP addresses, 

domain names, etc.). MSPB will also need to consider relocating the web and Shoretel phone servers 

and determine how to remotely administer the network, servers, database and applications once they 

have been moved. 

E-Adjudication will allow MSPB to process cases more efficiently and comply with Federal records 

management directives requiring that agencies convert records to electronic format. 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 has piloted the 

concept of mandated electronic filing of appeals and pleadings by agencies and appellant 

representatives in two of our eight offices. Going forward, MSPB expects to mandate electronic 

filing in all eight of our offices as part of our effort to convert to e-adjudication. Although MSPB’s 

e-Adjudication initiative unfortunately suffered some delays due to the system outage in July 2015, 

MSPB has been able to reinvigorate those efforts.

The requests for funding for the hosted data center and e-adjudication project were submitted as 

part of our FY 2016 request. This FY 2017 request includes funds for the ongoing costs of hosting 

and maintaining the data center and recurring costs to maintain the e-adjudication system. Without 

adequate funds to make investments such as these in our present infrastructure, it will be difficult to 

improve and meet our mission. 
8

Supplies & Materials – no increase requested

MOC Description

FY 2016

Enacted

(000) 

FY 2017

Request

(000)

Increase 

(decrease) 

over FY 

2016

(000)

26 Supplies & Materials $190 $190 $0

Expenses for supplies and materials are not expected to increase in FY 2017.

Equipment – no increase requested

MOC Description

FY 2016

Enacted

(000) 

FY 2017

Request

(000)

Increase 

(decrease) 

over FY 

2016

(000)

31 Equipment $735 $735 $0

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 also includes office 

furniture purchases.
9

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

FY 2015 

Actuals

FY 2016 

Enacted

FY 2017 

Requested Change

Direct obligations:

Personnel compensation 22,954 27,090 27,483 393

Civilian personnel benefits 6,364 6,855 6,960 105

Travel of persons 280 455 455 0 

Transportation of things 34 85 85 0 

Rental payments to GSA 3,485 3,800 3,875 75

Rental payments to others 99 120 125 5

Communications, utilities, and 

miscellaneous charges 641 805 805 0

Printing and reproduction 50 150 150 0

Other services 1,110 2,040 2,040 0

Other purchases of goods and 

services from Government 

accounts 946 1,530 1,545 15

Maintenance of facilities 22 35 35 0

Maintenance of equipment 304 600 600 0

Supplies & Materials 114 190 190 0

Equipment/Lease Improvements 935 735 735 0

Direct Obligations... 37,338 44,490 45,083 593

Reimbursable Obligations... 2,345 2,345 2,345 0

Total New Obligations...

 

$39,683

 

$46,835 $47,428 $593 

Additionally, for FY 15 actuals, MSPB incurred $6,180,000 in obligations utilizing FY 14/15 carryover funds. 
10

Schedule Q - Employment Summary

FY 2015 

Actual

FY 2016

Enacted

FY 2017

Request Change

Direct:

 Civilian full-time equivalent employment 205 233 220 -13

Reimbursable:

 Civilian full-time equivalent employment 15 15 15 0

Total... 220 248 235 -13

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 19th century 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 rule-maker 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. 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 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; The 
11

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

U.S.C. § 7513; and those set out at 5 C.F.R. § 1201.3 

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.

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 

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, 
12

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 cases mediated (nearly 

60% when those that settle after return to the traditional adjudication track are considered), in recent 

years the success rate in MAP alone has increased so that approximately two-thirds of the cases 

mediated are now being settled. 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% 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 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 2015 and Q1 of FY 2016

• Veterans’ Employment Redress Laws in the Federal Civil Service (November 2014). The Veterans 

Employment Opportunities Act of 1998 (VEOA) provides an avenue for veterans to seek 

redress for violations of their preference rights or right to consideration for certain 

vacancies. The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 

(USERRA) provides an avenue for redress for individuals who are discriminated against 

based on a military service obligation or denied their reemployment rights following such 

service. This report discusses the statutes and case law surrounding redress procedures 

under VEOA and USERRA and the important ways in which those two laws differ.

• Fair and Open Competition for Federal Employment (January 2015). The principle of fair and open 

competition for filling jobs is a longstanding and fundamental element of Federal merit 

systems. Changes in technology and policy, including a near-complete decentralization of 

Federal hiring authority and a proliferation of noncompetitive hiring authorities, have 

materially changed the nature and extent of job competitions. This report discusses the ideal 

and implementation of fair and open competition and explores whether changes to policy or 

practice may be needed.
13

• Research Agenda 2015 - 2018 (February 2015). MSPB has a statutory responsibility to conduct 

objective, non-partisan studies that assess and evaluate Federal merit systems policies, 

operations, and practices. See 5 U.S.C. § 1204(a)(3). These Government-wide studies take a 

long-term perspective on merit and management of the Federal workforce and provide 

recommendations to the President, Congress, and Federal agencies on how to manage 

Federal employees in a way that is both principled and effective. The research agenda, 

developed with stakeholder input, addresses both continuing imperatives, such as achieving a 

workforce free of prohibited personnel practices, and contemporary issues, such as making 

the best possible use of advances in technology and the impact of policy changes on the 

Federal workforce. This document describes MSPB's Office of Policy and Evaluation's 

activities for a four-year research cycle and includes a list of topics for 2015-2018 making up 

the research agenda.

• What is Due Process in Federal Civil Service Employment? (May 2015). This report explains the 

interaction between the U.S. Constitution and adverse personnel actions in a merit-based 

civil service. It discusses the current civil service laws for adverse actions and the history 

behind their formation, and explains why the Constitution requires that any system to 

remove a public employee for cause must include: (1) An opportunity for the individual to 

know the charges and present a defense; and (2) the opportunity to appeal a removal 

decision before an impartial adjudicator. The report also contains an appendix that corrects 

some misperceptions people may have about how the current civil service operates.

• 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.

Planned Survey Activity

• Merit Principles Survey 2016. MSPB last conducted its flagship survey, the Merit Principles 

Survey (MPS), in 2010. In mid-2016 MSPB will invite about 120,000 federal employees to 

respond to another installment of the MPS, which will provide 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.

Reports Planned For Issuance in FY 2016

• Merit System Principles Education. Given MSPB’s mission to protect the merit system principles 

(MSPs) and promote an effective 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. Accordingly, the 
14

report of this study will: (1) Assess how well Federal employees believe they are protected 

by the MSPs; (2) consolidate information on the MSPs to serve as a reference guide for 

supervisors and employees; and (3) evaluate and summarize current agency training practices 

regarding the MSPs and PPPs.

• Nepotism. It is a prohibited personnel practice to employ or advocate for the employment or 

advancement of a close relative. This report will discuss the extent to which employees 

perceive that nepotism is occurring and provide recommended steps to help agencies, the 

U.S. Office of Personnel Management, supervisors, and employees to reduce instances of 

nepotism.

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 

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.

The agency has also implemented an agency-wide, electronic Case Management System (CMS). The 

system is used to process and track each initial appeal and PFR filed with the agency. CMS has also 

been integrated with MSPB's e-Appeal, document management, and document assembly systems to 

allow our Administrative Judges and Attorneys to more efficiently create legal documents that are 

pre-populated with case data. In addition, MSPB has implemented an agency-wide, web-based 

office calendar system to make staff aware of scheduled events, such as hearings, leave, and 

outreach.

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 
15

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 short-term, 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 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 

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. OEEO also works with MSPB employees 

to provide Special Emphasis Observance Programs and the biennial Unity Day Program to promote 

the value of diversity and inclusiveness in achieving the agency's mission.
16

Organization Chart

U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board

`

 CHAIRMAN MEMBER

General Counsel

Equal Employment

 Opportunity

Clerk of the

Board

Administrative 

Law Judge Regional

 Operations

Appeals Counsel Policy and 

Evaluation

Regional Offices 

Atlanta, Chicago,

Dallas,

Philadelphia,

San Francisco, and

Washington, DC 

Field Offices 

Denver and

New York

Financial and

Administrative

Management

Information 

Resources 

Management

Executive 

Director

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.

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

Bureau of Fiscal Services.

VICE CHAIRMAN