i n s i g h t s & a n a l y s e s f o r F e d e r a l h u m a n c a p i t a l m a n a g e m e n t

I s s u e s of

M  R I 

a publication of

the U.S. Merit Systems

Protection Board,

Office of Policy

and Evaluation

W h a  ’ 

I n s d 

Director’s 

Perspective

Page 3

Preventing Prohibited 

Personnel Practices

Page 4

A Primer on Shared 

Certificates

Page 5

Employee Removal 

Notice Checklists

Page 6

STAR 

Performance Appraisals

Page 7

S e p t e m b e r 2 0 2 3 

Despite the renewed attention given to sexual harassment in recent years, sexual 

harassment and other forms of gender-based discrimination continue. The Merit Systems 

Protection Board (MSPB), as part of its role as a guardian of Federal merit systems, 

has surveyed employees regarding their experiences with sexual harassment in the 

Federal workplace since 1979. Our recent research brief, Sexual Harassment in Federal 

Workplaces: 2021 Update, compares results from the most recent Merit Principles Surveys 

(MPSs), which were administered in 2016 and 2021.

Much has changed in Federal workplaces and beyond in the years since MSPB 

administered the MPS 2016. The 2017 #MeToo movement brought the discussion of sexual 

harassment and sexual assault to the forefront. Then, the pandemic greatly changed how 

and where many employees work. Therefore, the MPS 2021, which was administered 

between January and April 2021, included a period of “maximum telework” for some of the 

Government’s workforce. This may have influenced responses to questions that required 

employees to base their answers on experiences in the prior 2 years.

As shown in the 

figure to the right, 

17.5 percent of 

women and nearly 

8 percent of men 

reported experiencing 

one or more 

instances of sexual 

harassment. That is 

a slight decrease in 

sexual harassment 

compared to 2016, 

but still represents an 

unacceptable level in 

Federal workplaces.

As seen in the table on the next page, women remain more likely to perceive that they 

are sexually harassed than men on every type of sexual harassment behavior, except for 

Sexual Harassment in Federal 

Workplaces: 2021 Update

Percent of Employees Indicating They Experienced Sexual Harassment 

At Least Once in the Preceding 2 Years, 2016 and 2021
I s s u e s of

M  R I 

i n s i g h t s & a n a l y s e s f o r F e d e r a l 

h u m a n c a p i t a l m a n a g e m e n t

U.S. Merit Systems

Protection Board

ACTING CHAIRMAN 

AND VICE CHAIRMAN

Cathy A. Harris

BOARD MEMBER

Raymond A. Limon

Office of Policy and Evaluation

DIRECTOR

Tiffany J. Lightbourn, Ph.D.

DEPUTY DIRECTOR

Suzanne O. Kaasa, Ph.D.

Our Mission

The MSPB Office of Policy and 

Evaluation conducts studies to 

assess the health of Federal merit 

systems and to ensure they are free 

from prohibited personnel practices.

Issues of Merit

We offer insights and analyses on 

topics related to Federal human 

capital management, particularly 

findings and recommendations 

from our independent research.

Reuse Permission

We invite you to reuse any of our 

articles. If you do, please include 

attribution, such as: Originally 

published in Issues of Merit, a 

publication of the Office of Policy 

and Evaluation, U.S. Merit Systems 

Protection Board.

For More Information

Contact us at:

www.mspb.gov/studies

STUDIES@mspb.gov

(202) 254-4517 

(800) 209-8960, Option #2

V/TDD: (800) 877-8339

U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board

Office of Policy and Evaluation

1615 M Street, NW

Washington, DC 20419

2 Issues of Merit September 2023

(continued from previous page)

unwelcome exposure to sexually oriented material. The most frequently perceived 

sexual harassment behaviors for women and men include an unwelcome invasion 

of personal space; unwelcome sexual teasing, jokes, comments, or questions; and 

derogatory or unprofessional terms related to sex or gender. 

% of All 

Respondents

% of Female 

Respondents

% of Male 

Respondents

All Behaviors

Any type of sexual harassment 

behavior (of 12) experienced

12.6% 17.5% 7.8%

Gender Harassment

Unwelcome exposure to sexually 

oriented conversations

4.2% 5.7% 2.9%

Unwelcome sexual teasing, 

jokes, comments, or questions

5.5% 8.2% 3.1%

Derogatory or unprofessional 

terms related to sex or gender

5.3% 7.0% 3.6%

Unwelcome exposure to sexually 

oriented material

1.4% 1.3% 1.4%

Unwanted Sexual Attention

Unwelcome invasion of personal 

space

6.4% 9.0% 3.7%

Unwelcome sexually suggestive 

looks or gestures

3.7% 6.2% 1.5%

Unwelcome communications of 

a sexual nature

3.2% 4.9% 1.7%

Sexual Coercion

Pressure for dates 1.3% 2.2% 0.5%

Stalking (intrusion into your 

personal life)

1.4% 1.9% 0.8%

Offer of preferential treatment 

for sexual favors (quid pro quo)

0.5% 0.6% 0.4%

Pressure for sexual favors 0.6% 1.0% 0.3%

Sexual assault or attempted 

sexual assault

<0.5% 0.5% <0.5%

As discussed in our previous sexual harassment report and in our recent 

research brief, sexual harassment harms employees who experience or observe it, the 

organization, and even potentially the public, due to the negative impact on agency 

performance. Therefore, agencies should remain vigilant and strive to eliminate all 

forms of sexual harassment. By understanding what types of behaviors employees are 

experiencing, agencies can better formulate approaches to effectively address them and 

prevent them from recurring. 

Types of Sexual Harassment Behaviors Experienced, 2021
3 Issues of Merit September 2023

D i r e c t o r ’ s P e r s p e c t i v e

Going Beyond Dashboards

To effect real organizational change, leaders need to look beyond what is happening in the 

organization to identify why it is happening. 

 Once again, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has 

successfully administered the Governmentwide Federal Employee 

Viewpoint Survey (FEVS), and agency leaders are on the edge of their seats 

waiting to see how their agencies did. Data from sources like the FEVS 

are important tools in helping ensure that agencies can identify workforce 

trends, assess the effects of management practices, and gauge whether 

existing policies create optimal conditions for mission accomplishment. 

There are different kinds of data that can be useful for these purposes, including employee- and customer-survey data, 

workforce data trends, performance measurement results, etc. The FEVS is just one of many data sources available to 

agency decision-makers to help them identify their organization’s strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities to improve. 

For data to be actionable, it needs to be accessible, understandable, and interpretable by many types of stakeholders. 

The Government doesn’t have a lack of data, but it has struggled with making data available to decision-makers in a 

usable format. Recently, however, OPM has taken steps to try to resolve that issue. 

OPM created the new Data Portal, an enterprise-wide source for human capital data across the Federal Government. 

It hosts many different kinds of data sources and dashboards that are accessible to agency leaders, employees, 

stakeholders, and the public. This is progress in terms of providing actionable data, all in one location. I encourage you 

to explore the website and all it has to offer, including the interactive FEVS and Hiring Manager Satisfaction Survey 

dashboards, the Federal Cyber Workforce data dashboard, and the Federal workforce statistics offered through the 

FedScope application. 

But I also encourage you not to stop there. Having access to data is important, but using the data in a meaningful 

way is what creates change. Dashboards play a critical role in telling you what is going on in the agency—e.g., your 

agency’s employee engagement level is X percent based on survey responses. They can also tell you how you compare 

to other agencies in that category—yes, you’re doing much better than a comparable agency on this one data point, but 

maybe not as well as other agencies. However, dashboards won’t explain why a phenomenon is occurring—e.g., why the 

engagement level is at X percent. For that, you need to dig deeper into the data.

To get to the why behind the what, you need to have experienced staff who can take you from visualization to 

insight. I call these people human capital strategists, and they are not easy to come by. They have advanced analytical 

skills that are in high demand, so you will need to invest in recruiting, developing, and retaining employees with these 

kinds of skill sets. 

There are many strategies for exploring why something is happening. Advanced statistical analyses can identify 

relationships among your data and predict future events based on past trends. Qualitative data sources, such as focus 

groups, exit interviews, and stay interviews, can be plumbed to gain insight into how employees feel, why they feel that 

way, and what changes could be made to address those perceptions. As you use additional analytical strategies to explore 

the available data, you can articulate potential explanations and then test your assumptions to see what works to address 

issues, what doesn’t, and where to go from there. 

Ultimately, understanding the why is how you change the what. To understand the why, you need to go beyond 

looking at the dashboards to digging into what is driving the 

results they present. When you identify the story behind the data, 

you will be in a stronger position to effect real change in the 

organization. Director, Policy and Evaluation

Tiffany J. Lightbourn, Ph.D.
4 Issues of Merit September 2023

The 14 prohibited personnel practices (PPPs), codified at 5 U.S.C. § 2302, are a set of behaviors that agency 

officials are not permitted to engage in when they take (or fail to take) personnel actions. They include actions such 

as discrimination, manipulating recruitment actions to favor an individual, and retaliation against whistleblowers. As 

discussed in our report Perceptions of Prohibited Personnel Practices: An Update, perceptions of PPPs correlate with 

several negative outcomes, including decreases in employee engagement and increases in employees’ intent to leave the 

organization. As part of our core mission, MSPB has conducted extensive research on the PPPs, and we have identified 

steps supervisors can take to not only prevent PPPs but also reduce misunderstandings that may lead to employee 

perceptions of PPPs. The most appropriate means to prevent PPPs or perceptions of PPPs will depend on precisely what 

is occurring and why. However, as shown in the following infographic, MSPB has identified some core principles that 

are applicable to a wide range of situations. 

Steps Supervisors Can Take to Prevent PPPs

MSPB’s research highlights core principles that can guide supervisors in preventing prohibited 

personnel practices.

Many of these principles interact with each other to establish an organization’s culture, particularly in how the 

organization supports (or does not support) ethical decision-making. Supervisors should model desired behaviors so 

others see what is expected. When making decisions, supervisors should be as transparent as legally possible and explain 

not only why they made the decisions but also how those decisions support organizational excellence. When possible, 

supervisors should involve employees in the decision-making process to gain their buy-in and to offer an additional 

check on the supervisor’s decisions. Agencies should ensure that supervisors understand the PPPs and how to avoid 

Accountability

Counsel or discipline employees (as 

needed) to safeguard the ethical culture 

and to protect subordinates from abuse.

Clarity

Establish clear ethical requirements and 

behavior expectations.

Education

Ensure that you and other officials are 

educated about the 14 PPPs and how to 

avoid them.

Communality

Involve and empower others (as suitable) 

to offer a check on your decision-making 

process.

Transparency

To the extent possible, explain your decisions and how they support the 

interests of the organization.

Demonstration

Model ethical behaviors to those above 

or below you and set cultural 

expectations that others will do the 

same.
5 Issues of Merit September 2023

them, and leaders must set clear expectations for how they expect other supervisors in the organization to behave. 

Finally, supervisors should be held accountable for ensuring an ethical culture free of PPPs to protect employees. 

To ensure that their actions are in line with these core principles, supervisors may benefit from conducting selfexaminations by regularly asking themselves evaluative questions: Am I being clear on my ethical expectations? 

What steps have I taken to create a safe environment for employees to express their concerns? This deliberate pause is 

important because there is a difference between knowing that something matters and being mindful of it. Engaging in 

self-examination can move supervisors from the first category to the second, thereby increasing the chance they will 

engage in the desired behaviors, which in turn can prevent PPPs or misunderstandings about what management is doing. 

There are definitive steps supervisors can take when a specific problem is occurring. For instance, our report 

explains that the PPP employees most consistently perceive is the manipulation of recruitment actions to favor an 

individual. One way to reduce this PPP—or misperceptions that it is occurring—may be the use of subject matter experts 

(SMEs) to design the recruitment announcement, develop the assessment plan, and apply the assessments. 

As a more specific example, when hiring for a research analyst position, supervisors can task other analysts who 

are already in the work unit to collectively advise on what skills are needed, how those skills can be measured, and 

how to apply those measures when reviewing resumes. These SMEs can even serve on interview panels to identify the 

best candidates to refer to the selecting official. By empowering existing employees to provide this kind of input, the 

supervisor can demonstrate a commitment to merit-based hiring and transparency, use the collective wisdom of the group 

to further communality, and set clear expectations that hiring decisions will be free from prohibited actions. 

These core principles of leading by example, transparency, empowerment, education, clarity, and accountability are 

not new, but our extensive research—which can be found in the published PPP reports on our website—demonstrates 

that they could be the key to ensuring that the Federal workplace is free of PPPs. 

On March 18, 2016, the Competitive Service Act of 2015 was enacted to allow agencies to share competitive 

certificates issued under delegated examining (DE) procedures to facilitate faster hiring and reduce applicant burden. 

To use shared certificates, agencies need to follow a set of procedures laid out in the Delegated Examining Operations 

Handbook and all applicable regulations. In short, the process involves the requirements shown below. More information 

is available from OPM’s Hiring Experience Group and the Chief Human Capital Officers Implementing Policy Guidance 

and FAQs. 

A Primer for Using Shared Certificates

Adapted from: Competitive Service Act Implementation, OMB MAX, May 2023.
6 Issues of Merit September 2023

Federal regulations (5 C.F.R. § 1201.21) spell out what information an 

agency must provide to an employee when issuing a decision notice for a 

personnel action that is appealable to MSPB. This list includes informing 

the employee whether “the election of any applicable grievance procedure 

will result in waiver of the employee’s right to file an appeal with the 

Board.” The importance of complying with this regulation was made clear 

in a recent Board decision, Kaszowski v. Air Force (2023 MSPB 15). 

Ms. Kaszowski initially pursued a union-filed grievance of her removal, 

but the union unilaterally declined to pursue arbitration on her behalf. She 

then filed an appeal with MSPB. In the initial decision, the administrative 

judge (AJ) noted that an election of the union’s grievance process serves as waiver of an employee’s MSPB appeal rights 

because, under 5 U.S.C. § 7121(e)(1), an employee may challenge an adverse action by filing either a grievance under 

the negotiated grievance procedures or an MSPB appeal, but she cannot do both. 

The appellant then filed a petition for review with the Board. In its subsequent decision, the Board noted that 

5 C.F.R. § 1201.21 explicitly states that the agency must inform the employee of the consequences of selecting one 

of the routes for redress—namely, that it is a waiver of the other route. In Ms. Kaszowski’s case, the notice did state 

that the first method she selected would serve as an election to proceed under that method, but it did not state that she 

would forever lose the other option. Because this information was missing, her selection of the union grievance was 

not a knowing and informed election, and, therefore, MSPB jurisdiction was not waived. Accordingly, her appeal was 

remanded to the AJ for adjudication.

How can agencies avoid making mistakes like these? Common practices in technical occupations like pilots and 

surgeons suggest one option: checklists. No matter how experienced a person might be in their occupation, it is easy to 

forget small details in the process of doing so many things. Of course, a surgeon knows to wash their hands or make sure 

they are about to perform the correct procedure on the right patient. But many hospitals nevertheless have the surgical 

team go through a checklist to make sure that every step—no matter how mundane—has been done correctly. 

In the case of 5 C.F.R. § 1201.21, the regulation is already shaped as a list. The points are too lengthy to enumerate 

here, but if you follow the link, you will see that the regulation includes a set of elements that must be provided to the 

employee. This makes it easy for any agency to use the exact language as a checklist, ticking off each piece to make sure 

they have included it in their notice. For agencies that use standardized language for all their notices, it may make sense 

to regularly check that language against the latest laws, regulations, and case decisions to ensure that the agency’s word 

choices are still fully compliant. As the saying goes, an ounce of prevention can be worth a pound of cure. 

Making a Checklist for Employee Removal 

Notices

To avoid unnecessary appeals, agencies can create a checklist 

that covers the necessary steps for employee removal notices.

MSPB Research Available Online

Did you know that MSPB’s research is available online? If you click on the links below, you can find:

• Official reports issued to the President and Congress that go back to 1981 when we published our first 

report, on sexual harassment;

• Research briefs that update and build on prior MSPB research or address trending topics; 

• Issues of Merit newsletters going back to the first issue in 1996; and

• Merit Principles Survey data sets from our most recent surveys, with methodologies, fact sheets, and data 

dictionaries.
7 Issues of Merit September 2023

As Federal employees, we are accustomed to the annual ritual of performance appraisals. It is a time for reflection, 

introspection, and a fair evaluation of our accomplishments over the past year. However, many of us struggle with 

articulating our achievements in a manner that truly reflects our contributions. Therefore, as you approach this 

year’s performance appraisal season, you should consider a proven strategy to help showcase your accomplishments 

effectively—the STAR technique. It can significantly improve the clarity with which you communicate your 

accomplishments and their impact.

Summarize each accomplishment. STAR is an acronym that stands for situation, task, action, and result. The 

STAR technique is a structured approach to answering questions and presenting information. It is often recommended 

to both hiring managers1 and applicants2 preparing for job interviews. It is also an excellent tool for summarizing your 

accomplishments before your appraisal. To get started, for each accomplishment, write down:

• Situation: Begin by setting the stage. Describe the context within which you performed a task or faced a 

challenge at work. Be specific but concise.

• Task: Explain the responsibility or issue you were assigned or encountered. What was the problem you needed 

to solve? Was it a routine task or something new?

• Action: Describe the steps you took to address the task or challenge. Highlight your initiative, leadership, 

problem-solving, and any other competencies you employed.

• Result: Present the outcome of your actions. Be sure to quantify the impact where possible. Did you save time, 

increase efficiency, improve customer satisfaction, or achieve a significant project milestone?

STAR in your performance discussion. STAR technique narratives are also useful when discussing these 

achievements with your supervisor. Your accomplishment summaries can help you articulate your achievements in a 

clear, concise, and compelling manner. Once you have the above written down:

• Prepare: Reflect on your work over the past year. Identify the key accomplishments you want to highlight. 

Make sure that you have a STAR narrative for each key accomplishment.

• Practice: Before your appraisal, practice with your STAR narratives. This will help you present your 

accomplishments smoothly and confidently. It will also give you a chance to refine your descriptions and make 

sure they are as clear and impactful as possible.

• Present: Then, during the appraisal discussion with your supervisor, use your STAR narratives to discuss your 

achievements. Be sure to tailor your descriptions to your audience. Remember, your supervisor might not 

be familiar with every project or task you have worked on. Provide enough context to make your narrative 

understandable but keep it brief and focused.

Why STAR works. The STAR technique allows you to demonstrate your competencies and contributions in a way 

that is both concrete and memorable. It lets you tell a story, which is far more engaging and impactful than a dry list of 

tasks and responsibilities. It also forces you to focus on outcomes and results, which are often the most important part of 

your performance from a supervisor’s perspective.

The STAR technique can be a powerful tool in your self-assessment toolkit. It is an opportunity to shine, to show 

your supervisor the value you bring to your role, and to ensure that your accomplishments are recognized and rewarded. 

So, as performance appraisal time approaches, take time to reflect on your achievements using the STAR technique. 

You—and your supervisor—might be surprised at how much you have accomplished.  

Stellar Performance Appraisals

Using the STAR technique to present accomplishments at performance appraisal time.

1

 Fernandez, C. (2006). The behavioral event interview: Avoiding interviewing pitfalls when hiring. Journal of Public Health 

Management and Practice: JPHMP, 12, 590–593. 2

 White, P., Mickelson, S., & Brumm, T. (2005). Helping students become interview stars. 2005 Annual Conference Proceedings, 

10.685.1-10.685.7. https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--15486