type: other

jurisdiction: US

text: b'TREASURY INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR TAX ADMINISTRATION\n\n\n\n\n Internal Revenue Service\n Diversity Demographics Compare\n Favorably With Other Federal Agencies\xe2\x80\x99\n Senior Executive Service Ranks\n\n\n\n November 18, 2011\n\n Reference Number: 2012-10-006\n\n\n\n\n This report has cleared the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration disclosure review process\n and information determined to be restricted from public release has been redacted from this document.\n\n\n\n Phone Number | 202-622-6500\n E-Mail Address | TIGTACommunications@tigta.treas.gov\n Website | http://www.tigta.gov\n\x0c HIGHLIGHTS\n\n\nINTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE the IRS SES level had a higher percentage of\nDIVERSITY DEMOGRAPHICS COMPARE diversity in eight of 12 Office of Personnel\nFAVORABLY WITH OTHER FEDERAL Management diversity categories. Also, three of\nAGENCIES\xe2\x80\x99 SENIOR EXECUTIVE the other four diversity categories were\n underrepresented by less than 1 percent.\nSERVICE RANKS\n The success the IRS has achieved in its SES\n diversity demographics is the result of key\nHighlights diversity practices that have been integrated into\n business processes agency-wide, as well as top\nFinal Report issued on level executive commitment and support, which\nNovember 18, 2011 have established a culture that respects and\n values diversity. However, TIGTA noted that\nHighlights of Reference Number: 2012-10-006 these key practices were not formally\nto the Internal Revenue Service Deputy documented in the IRS\xe2\x80\x99s Equity, Diversity, and\nCommissioner for Operations Support and Inclusion (EDI) policies and procedures. TIGTA\nDeputy Commissioner for Services and believes memorializing the IRS\xe2\x80\x99s key diversity\nEnforcement. practices in formal internal procedures will help\n ensure that these practices continue to receive\nIMPACT ON TAXPAYERS the level of commitment that currently exists, in\n spite of retirements, attrition, or other changes in\nDiversity and an inclusive work environment in\n the IRS\xe2\x80\x99s top leadership ranks. In addition, the\nthe Federal Government\xe2\x80\x99s leadership ranks can\n IRS could benefit by expanding its outreach\nbe a key organizational component for executing\n efforts to have a more specific focus at the SES\nagencies\xe2\x80\x99 missions and can yield greater\n level by participating with professional executive\nengagement, productivity, and organizational\n organizations.\nperformance. The IRS\xe2\x80\x99s Senior Executive\nService (SES) diversity demographic statistics WHAT TIGTA RECOMMENDED\ncompare favorably with other Federal agencies\xe2\x80\x99\nSES ranks. When agencies recruit and retain a TIGTA recommended that the Deputy\nrepresentative leadership workforce, one that Commissioner for Operations Support and the\nlooks like the public that it serves and the Deputy Commissioner for Services and\nworkforce it leads, they are enabled to better Enforcement ensure key SES diversity practices\nserve the public. are memorialized within EDI internal guidance\n (policies and procedures). In addition, they\nWHY TIGTA DID THE AUDIT should consider partnering with Federal\n professional executive organizations and\nThis audit was initiated to determine the level of\n communicate the existence of these\ndiversity in IRS SES appointments and whether\n organizations to employees.\nthe IRS has an effective strategy that complies\nwith applicable law and regulations to achieve IRS management agreed with our\ndiversity within executive positions. This review recommendations. The IRS Human Capital\nwas included in our Fiscal Year 2009 Annual Office and the Office of EDI plan to review\nAudit Plan and addresses the major existing written policies and revise them, if\nmanagement challenge of Human Capital. necessary, to ensure these documents\n accurately capture current practices. In addition,\nWHAT TIGTA FOUND the IRS plans to partner with external executive\nThe IRS\xe2\x80\x99s diversity demographic statistics and professional organizations and\ncompare favorably with other Federal agencies\xe2\x80\x99 communicate this information to all employees.\nSES ranks. For example, in Fiscal Year 2009,\n\x0c DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY\n WASHINGTON, D.C. 20220\n\n\n\n\nTREASURY INSPECTOR GENERAL\n FOR TAX ADMINISTRATION\n\n\n\n\n November 18, 2011\n\n\n MEMORANDUM FOR DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOR OPERATIONS SUPPORT\n DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOR SERVICES AND\n ENFORCEMENT\n\n\n\n FROM: Michael R. Phillips\n Deputy Inspector General for Audit\n\n SUBJECT: Final Audit Report \xe2\x80\x93 Internal Revenue Service Diversity Demographics\n Compare Favorably With Other Federal Agencies\xe2\x80\x99 Senior Executive\n Service Ranks (Audit # 200910003)\n\n This report presents the results of our review to determine the level of diversity in the Internal\n Revenue Service (IRS) Senior Executive Service appointments and whether the IRS has an\n effective strategy that complies with applicable laws and regulations to achieve diversity within\n executive positions. This audit was conducted as a part of our Fiscal Year 2009 Annual Audit\n Plan and addresses the major management challenge of Human Capital.\n Management\xe2\x80\x99s complete response to the draft report is included as Appendix IV.\n Copies of this report are also being sent to the Internal Revenue Service managers affected by the\n report recommendations. Please contact me at (202) 622-6510 if you have questions or\n Nancy A. Nakamura, Assistant Inspector General for Audit (Management Services and Exempt\n Organizations), at (202) 622-8500.\n\x0c Internal Revenue Service Diversity Demographics\n Compare Favorably With Other Federal Agencies\xe2\x80\x99\n Senior Executive Service Ranks\n\n\n\n\n Table of Contents\n\nBackground .......................................................................................................... Page 1\n\nResults of Review ............................................................................................... Page 4\n The Internal Revenue Service\xe2\x80\x99s Senior Executive\n Service Demographics Compare Favorably With\n Other Federal Agencies................................................................................. Page 4\n Senior Executive Service Diversity Demographic\n Achievements Are the Result of the Integration of\n Diversity Practices Into Business Processes\n Agency-Wide and Top Level Support .......................................................... Page 7\n Recommendation 1:........................................................ Page 12\n\n The Internal Revenue Service Can Leverage Efforts\n in Promoting Diversity at the Senior Executive Service\n Level by Partnering With Professional Executive\n Organizations ................................................................................................ Page 12\n Recommendations 2 and 3: .............................................. Page 14\n\n\nAppendices\n Appendix I \xe2\x80\x93 Detailed Objective, Scope, and Methodology ........................ Page 15\n Appendix II \xe2\x80\x93 Major Contributors to This Report ........................................ Page 19\n Appendix III \xe2\x80\x93 Report Distribution List ....................................................... Page 20\n Appendix IV \xe2\x80\x93 Management\xe2\x80\x99s Response to the Draft Report ...................... Page 21\n\x0c Internal Revenue Service Diversity Demographics\n Compare Favorably With Other Federal Agencies\xe2\x80\x99\n Senior Executive Service Ranks\n\n\n\n\n Abbreviations\n\nCDP Candidate Development Program\nEDI Equity, Diversity and Inclusion\nEEO Equal Employment Opportunity\nERB Executive Resources Board\nFY Fiscal Year\nHCO Human Capital Office\nIRS Internal Revenue Service\nMD-715 Management Directive 715\nOPM Office of Personnel Management\nSES Senior Executive Service\n\x0c Internal Revenue Service Diversity Demographics\n Compare Favorably With Other Federal Agencies\xe2\x80\x99\n Senior Executive Service Ranks\n\n\n\n\n Background\n\nThe Internal Revenue Service (IRS), along with the rest of the Federal Government, is facing\nnew and more complex challenges in the 21st Century because of long-term fiscal constraints,\nchanging demographics, preparation for an increased number of retirements, and other factors.\nSenior Executive Service (SES)1 members are critical to providing the strategic leadership\nneeded to effectively meet these challenges. In Calendar Year 2010, the IRS had more than\n250 SES appointments, of which approximately 62 percent are eligible to retire within the next\nthree fiscal years.2 Diversity and an inclusive work environment in the Federal Government\xe2\x80\x99s\nleadership ranks can be a key organizational component for executing the agencies\xe2\x80\x99 missions and\ncan yield greater engagement, productivity, and organizational performance.\nHistorically, Federal diversity initiatives have focused on equal employment opportunity (EEO)3\nand affirmative employment.4 EEO, by law and statute, exists both in the public and private\nsectors to ensure that all persons are afforded equal opportunity in personnel procedures and\ndecisions affecting them in the workplace. However, diversity, while not mandated by law and\nnot punishable when neglected or overlooked, is both desirable and critical if an employer\nwishes to benefit from the many skills, life experiences, and unique natures that each person\nbrings to the workplace. Diversity now means different things to different Federal agencies,\norganizations, and people and can encompass the mindset and climate of an organization. The\nIRS defines diversity as:\n The collective mixture of differences and similarities employees and customers possess.\n Generally, the differences we recognize first about each other are race, gender, and age.\n Diversity goes beyond those obvious differences to recognize other differences among us\n such as mental/physical abilities, religious beliefs, sexual orientation, thinking style,\n geographical location, education, functional area, and personality type, as well as\n similarities.\n\n\n\n1\n The SES is comprised of the men and women charged with leading the continuing transformation of the Federal\nGovernment. This dedicated corps of executives shares a commitment to public service and a set of democratic\nvalues grounded in the fundamental ideals of the Constitution. As the leaders of our Federal civilian workforce,\nSenior Executives strive each day to create a more citizen-centered, results-oriented Federal Government.\n2\n A 12-consecutive-month period ending on the last day of any month, except December. The Federal\nGovernment\xe2\x80\x99s fiscal year begins on October 1 and ends on September 30.\n3\n EEO embodies the principle of fair treatment in Federal employment and personnel matters without regard to race,\ncolor, sex, religion, national origin, age, or physical or mental disability.\n4\n Affirmative employment was first established by the Federal Government in 1965. This legal mandate consists of\nspecial actions in recruitment, hiring, and other areas designed to eliminate the effects of past discrimination.\n Page 1\n\x0c Internal Revenue Service Diversity Demographics\n Compare Favorably With Other Federal Agencies\xe2\x80\x99\n Senior Executive Service Ranks\n\n\n\nThe business case5 for leveraging diversity has two significant elements. First, the labor and\ntalent market has become increasingly competitive. The IRS must use every available source of\npotential applicants to ensure it has the high-quality workforce that it needs to deliver its mission\nto the taxpayer. If the IRS fails to take steps to recruit among the full range of the diverse labor\nmarket, it is missing a strategic opportunity. Second, the changing demographics of America\nmean that taxpayers served by the IRS are also changing. When agencies recruit and retain a\nrepresentative workforce, one that looks like the public that it serves, and when individual\ndifferences are respected, appreciated, and valued, diversity becomes an organizational strength\nthat contributes to achieving mission performance and results. Diversity also enables the IRS to\nbetter serve the taxpayer by reflecting the customers and communities it serves.\nFederal laws govern the employment practices of qualified entities in the consideration of\ndiversity. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 19646 generally makes it unlawful to discriminate\nin matters of employment based on race, color, national origin, sex, and religion. Additionally,\npreferential treatment is not to be granted due to existing underrepresentation within an\norganization. The IRS must abide by the requirements of Title VII in the development and\noperation of its training and employment practices. In addition, the IRS is required by the EEO\nCommission Management Directive 715 (MD-715)7 to report annually on the status of activities\nundertaken pursuant to its EEO program. The annual IRS MD-715 report must also include a\nplan that sets forth steps the IRS will take in the future to correct deficiencies or further improve\nefforts undertaken pursuant to the directive.\nThe Executive Resources Board (ERB) is responsible for all executive resources and establishes\nall IRS policies associated with career appointments related to SES and Senior-Level8 positions.\nERB members are appointed by the IRS Commissioner and are accountable to the Commissioner\nthrough the ERB Chairman. The ERB meets monthly and discusses issues related to identifying\ninterview panels and selecting Candidate Development Program (CDP)9 applicants, filling SES\nvacancies, and monitoring the mobility of SES appointments. The ERB collectively makes\ndecisions on the outcome of these events.\n\n5\n A business case captures the reasoning for initiating a project or task. It is often presented in a well-structured,\nwritten document, but may also sometimes come in the form of a short verbal argument or presentation.\n6\n Pub. L. No. 88-352, Title VII.\n7\n This Directive provides policy guidance and standards for establishing and maintaining effective affirmative\nprograms of EEO under Section 717 of Title VII (PART A) and effective affirmative action programs under\nSection 501 of the Rehabilitation Act (PART B). The Directive also sets forth general reporting requirements\n(PART C).\n8\n Senior-Level positions are classified above GS-15. The work of the position does not meet SES criteria nor does it\ninvolve the fundamental research and development responsibilities that are characteristic of Scientific and\nProfessional positions.\n9\n The SES CDP is the principal means through which the IRS seeks to identify and hire career executives. The CDP\nprovides selected applicants the opportunity to work with a diverse, knowledgeable, and highly skilled workforce.\nThe Program consists of formal training and developmental assignments. Its purpose is to identify outstanding\npersons with demonstrated leadership competencies and to prepare them for SES positions.\n Page 2\n\x0c Internal Revenue Service Diversity Demographics\n Compare Favorably With Other Federal Agencies\xe2\x80\x99\n Senior Executive Service Ranks\n\n\n\nTo gain an understanding of the overall IRS organizational posture toward diversity (staff, feeder\ngroup,10 and SES levels), we met with the Deputy Commissioners for Operations Support and\nServices and Enforcement and interviewed some business unit Commissioners (Small Business/\nSelf-Employed Division, Wage and Investment Division, and Large Business and International\nDivision), the Chief Technology Officer, the IRS Human Capital Officer, the IRS ERB\nChairman, and the Executive Director of the Office of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI).\nTo determine how the IRS is currently positioned in terms of a diverse SES cadre, we evaluated\nthe IRS SES workforce against the 12 diversity demographic categories that the Office of\nPersonnel Management (OPM) tracks for the Federal Government workforce. We were unable\nto compare any other diversity aspects outside of race, gender, and disability because the\nstatistical data OPM tracks and provided to us did not include any other diversity aspects.\nThis review was performed at various program offices in Washington, D.C., within the National\nHeadquarters of the IRS Human Capital Office (HCO); the Office of Equity, Diversity, and\nInclusion; the Modernization and Information Technology Services organization; and the Large\nBusiness and International, Small Business/Self-Employed, and Wage and Investment Divisions.\nIn addition, this review was performed in the Wage and Investment Division program office\nlocated in Atlanta, Georgia. We conducted this performance audit during the period\nNovember 2009 through August 2011 and performed it in accordance with generally accepted\ngovernment auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to\nobtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and\nconclusions based on our audit objective. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a\nreasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objective. Detailed\ninformation on our audit objective, scope, and methodology is presented in Appendix I. Major\ncontributors to the report are listed in Appendix II.\n\n\n\n\n10\n The feeder group is comprised of GS-13, GS-14, and GS-15 grade levels and provides advancement opportunities\nnot only to the next grade level but also potentially to career SES appointments.\n Page 3\n\x0c Internal Revenue Service Diversity Demographics\n Compare Favorably With Other Federal Agencies\xe2\x80\x99\n Senior Executive Service Ranks\n\n\n\n\n Results of Review\n\nThe IRS\xe2\x80\x99s diversity demographic statistics compare favorably with other Federal agencies\xe2\x80\x99 SES\nranks. For example, in Fiscal Year (FY) 2009, the IRS SES level had a higher percentage of\ndiversity in eight of 12 Office of Personnel Management diversity categories. Also, three of the\nother four diversity categories were underrepresented by less than 1 percent. The success the\nIRS has achieved in its SES diversity demographics is the result of key diversity practices that\nhave been integrated into business processes agency-wide, as well as top level executive\ncommitment and support, which have established a culture that respects and values diversity.\nHowever, we noted that the IRS Office of EDI does not have formal policies and procedures that\ndocument these practices. Finally, the IRS could benefit by expanding its outreach efforts to\nhave a more specific focus at the SES level by participating with professional executive\norganizations.\n\nThe Internal Revenue Service\xe2\x80\x99s Senior Executive Service\nDemographics Compare Favorably With Other Federal Agencies\nWe reviewed OPM data on diversity categories to compare several demographic factors\n(workforce categories) to evaluate diversity at the IRS SES level. Based on the data in Figure 1\nbelow, the IRS is exceeding the Federal Government as a whole in placing more females in\nexecutive positions at the SES level.\n Figure 1: Gender Comparison of Federal SES\n and IRS SES Workforce for Fiscal Year 2009\n\n\n\n\n Source: Federal data \xe2\x80\x93 Office of Personnel Management \xe2\x80\x93 FY 2009 Federal Equal Opportunity\n Recruitment Program. IRS data \xe2\x80\x93 IRS Employee Master Database.\n\n Page 4\n\x0c Internal Revenue Service Diversity Demographics\n Compare Favorably With Other Federal Agencies\xe2\x80\x99\n Senior Executive Service Ranks\n\n\n\nFigure 2 and Figure 3 below show the demographic comparisons of the Federal SES to the IRS\nSES levels for FY 2004 and FY 2009, respectively. Looking at Figure 2 and Figure 3 together,\nwe identified changes that have occurred in the demographic groups over the six-year period.\nFor example, the IRS SES level has increased from seven of 12 OPM diversity categories having\na higher percentage of diversity than the Federal SES in FY 2004 to eight of 12 OPM diversity\ncategories in FY 2009. In addition, three of the other four diversity categories in FY 2009 were\nunderrepresented by less than 1 percent in comparison with the other Federal agencies\xe2\x80\x99 SES\nranks.\n Figure 2: Demographic Comparison of Federal SES\n and IRS SES Workforce for Fiscal Year 2004\n\n\n\n\nFY 2004 WM WF BM BF HM HF AM AF NM NF TDM TDF\nGovernment-Wide Total % % % % % % % % % % % %\n\nIRS SES Level 274 50.4 28.1 9.8 4.7 2.2 0.4 2.2 1.1 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.4\n\nFED SES Level 7,093 63.3 21.5 4.8 3.3 2.4 0.9 1.4 0.7 0.9 0.4 0.3 0.1\n\nIRS Above FED SES X X X X X X X\n\nIRS Below FED SES X X X X X\nSource: Federal data \xe2\x80\x93 Office of Personnel Management \xe2\x80\x93 FY 2004 Federal Equal Opportunity Recruitment\nProgram. IRS data \xe2\x80\x93 IRS Employee Master Database.\nLegend:\nWM \xe2\x80\x93 White Male, WF \xe2\x80\x93 White Female AM \xe2\x80\x93 Asian/Pacific Male, AF \xe2\x80\x93 Asian/Pacific Female\nBM \xe2\x80\x93 Black Male, BF \xe2\x80\x93 Black Female NM \xe2\x80\x93 Native American Male, NF \xe2\x80\x93 Native American Female\nHM \xe2\x80\x93 Hispanic Male, HF \xe2\x80\x93 Hispanic Female TDM \xe2\x80\x93 Targeted Disabled Male, TDF \xe2\x80\x93 Targeted Disabled Female\n\n\n Page 5\n\x0c Internal Revenue Service Diversity Demographics\n Compare Favorably With Other Federal Agencies\xe2\x80\x99\n Senior Executive Service Ranks\n\n\n\n Figure 3: Demographic Comparison of Federal SES\n and IRS SES Workforce for Fiscal Year 2009\n\n\n\n\nFY 2009 WM WF BM BF HM HF AM AF NM NF TDM TDF\nGovernment-Wide Total % % % % % % % % % % % %\nIRS SES Level 252 40.8 34.1 9.1 5.6 2.8 2.0 3.2 1.6 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.4\n\nFED SES Level 7,726 58.6 24.1 5.0 4.0 2.7 1.0 1.7 1.1 0.8 0.5 0.4 0.1\n\nIRS above FED SES X X X X X X X X\nIRS below FED SES X X X X\nSource: Federal data \xe2\x80\x93 Office of Personnel Management \xe2\x80\x93 FY 2009 Federal Equal Opportunity Recruitment\nProgram. IRS data \xe2\x80\x93 IRS Employee Master Database.\n\nComparing Figure 2 with Figure 3, the demographic group percentages for Native American\nMale and Targeted Disabled Male have not improved. In addition, over the six-year period, the\nnumber of IRS SES-level majority demographic White Male has decreased from 50.4 percent in\nFY 2004 to 40.8 percent in FY 2009. This represents a decrease of approximately 10 percent in\nWhite Males at the IRS SES level. In contrast, the number of majority demographic White\nMales at the Federal SES level decreased from 63.3 percent in FY 2004 to 58.6 percent in\nFY 2009. This represents a decrease of 4.7 percent in White Males at the Federal SES level. As\na result of the significant decrease in the percentage of White Males at the IRS SES level, there\nhas been an overall increase in the IRS\xe2\x80\x99s other demographic categories at the SES level\ncompared with the Federal Government as a whole.\n\n\n\n Page 6\n\x0c Internal Revenue Service Diversity Demographics\n Compare Favorably With Other Federal Agencies\xe2\x80\x99\n Senior Executive Service Ranks\n\n\n\nSenior Executive Service Diversity Demographic Achievements Are\nthe Result of the Integration of Diversity Practices Into Business\nProcesses Agency-Wide and Top Level Support\nThe success the IRS has achieved in its SES diversity demographics are the result of diversity\npractices that have been integrated into business processes agency-wide and top level executive\ncommitment and support. When viewed collectively, the IRS has undertaken a broad approach\nto diversity designed to achieve a workforce that represents the taxpayers that it serves and to\nrecognize the importance of diversity in the IRS\xe2\x80\x99s business goals and objectives.\nThe IRS has instituted several key practices that have contributed to the IRS\xe2\x80\x99s progress in and\nachievement of higher percentages of SES diversity in many of the OPM demographic categories\nand in establishing a culture that respects and values diversity within the workforce. These\npractices include:\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Cultivating a diverse workforce. The IRS believes that in order to accomplish its\n mission, the IRS must cultivate the workforce of tomorrow, in part by providing a\n working environment characterized by equity, diversity, and inclusion. The IRS sees the\n diversity of its workforce as a business imperative that is woven into the culture and\n structure of the organization. In addition, the IRS Strategic Plan 2009\xe2\x80\x932013 includes\n diversity as an essential element in building a robust workforce.\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Diversity strategic planning. The IRS believes that a comprehensive diversity strategy\n must continually examine and work towards greater diversity at all organizational levels\n to impact diversity at the SES level. The IRS believes that if it strives for diversity at the\n staff entry level, it should carry through as the staff progress and reach the feeder group\n level and should result in a diverse group of applicants within the IRS from which to\n select for executive initiatives. The IRS\xe2\x80\x99s efforts to achieve a diverse feeder pool11 for its\n various leadership programs12 and SES level positions focus on outreach and recruitment\n to diversify the applicant pool, maintaining a selection process that ensures equal\n employment opportunity by not making demographic-based decisions, and using an\n objective methodology for rating, ranking, and interviewing applicants for leadership\n programs and developmental assignments.\n\n\n\n11\n The IRS has an intentional outreach and recruitment plan that is linked to the workforce data to ensure it is\ntargeting areas of underrepresentation. This recruitment plan is formulated annually and adjusted to the shifting\nworkforce demographics. The Office of EDI collaborates with the IRS Recruitment Office to develop a workforce\ndata-driven Annual Diversity Recruitment Plan and a corresponding Annual Media Plan.\n12\n Examples of IRS various leadership programs would include the Frontline Leadership Readiness Program,\nDepartment Manager Readiness Program, Senior Manager Readiness Program, Executive Readiness Program, and\nCandidate Development Program.\n Page 7\n\x0c Internal Revenue Service Diversity Demographics\n Compare Favorably With Other Federal Agencies\xe2\x80\x99\n Senior Executive Service Ranks\n\n\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Top level commitment, involvement, and accountability. The IRS\xe2\x80\x99s diversity strategy\n has the support of the IRS Commissioner and business unit executives. For example, the\n Commissioner\xe2\x80\x99s annual EEO Policy statement asserts:\n I am convinced that the unique attributes of each employee offer incalculable\n benefits to our organization. Therefore, I am committed to not only creating a\n working environment that is free from discrimination and other barriers to full\n participation, but also welcomes people from all backgrounds, and reflects the\n taxpaying public we serve. Join me in these efforts to further our objective to\n make the IRS the best place to work in government.\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Performance measures and goals. Some of the IRS business units have reported on\n actions taken and progress made on diversity initiatives.13 The business units are required\n to submit quarterly MD-715 template updates on their diversity initiatives in the MD-715\n action plan, which provides executive level accountability for diversity actions. This\n report assists with the preparation of the IRS MD-715 report, and it also encourages a\n focus on the business unit diversity initiatives throughout the year.\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Top level Office of EDI. The Office of EDI Director reports directly to the IRS\n Commissioner, briefs the IRS Commissioner quarterly on diversity issues, and is also a\n voting member of numerous IRS executive boards, such as the ERB, Human Capital\n Advisory Council, Human Capital Board, Section 1203 Review Board, and Performance\n Review Board.\n The Office of EDI oversees the collection and tracking of the IRS\xe2\x80\x99s progress toward\n diversity at all grade levels and this information is reported in the annual MD-715 report.\n Each business unit within IRS has an EDI business unit director that reports directly to\n their respective chief or commissioner. EDI business unit directors primarily work on\n EEO and diversity related activities within the business unit and prepare the annual\n MD-715 report submission for their business unit for inclusion in the IRS MD-715 report.\n In addition, the Office of EDI has established monthly \xe2\x80\x9ccontributor meetings\xe2\x80\x9d14 among\n the various EDI and HCO units that perform related work to increase accountability and\n to ensure a cohesive, consistent corporate approach to the IRS\xe2\x80\x99s efforts and activities\n pertaining to the MD-715. The monthly meetings are used to provide guidance and\n coordination, share best practices, and ensure consistent reporting.\n\n\n\n\n13\n The Small Business/Self-Employed and Wage and Investment Divisions have reported in their Business\nPerformance Reports actions taken and progress made on their diversity initiatives.\n14\n Contributor\xe2\x80\x99s Meetings provide guidance and coordination, share best practices, and ensure consistent reporting in\nthe MD-715 among representatives from the various HCO and EDI units who participate in these monthly meetings.\n Page 8\n\x0c Internal Revenue Service Diversity Demographics\n Compare Favorably With Other Federal Agencies\xe2\x80\x99\n Senior Executive Service Ranks\n\n\n\nHistorical view of diversity initiatives\nPrior to FY 2009, the IRS placed more emphasis on EEO compliance (assuring that\ndiscrimination based on race, age, gender, and disability does not occur) and properly reporting\non EEO Commission initiatives through MD-715 than it placed on achieving a diverse\nworkforce. However, in August 2009, the IRS began its initiative to address the absence of a\ndiversity strategic plan and committed resources to its diversity efforts with the selection of a\npermanent Executive Director for the Office of EDI and the filling of staff vacancies within that\noffice. The Office of EDI establishes the strategic diversity direction for the IRS, including the\nSES level, and the Director, EDI, is responsible for ensuring IRS-wide consistency in\nimplementing the IRS diversity initiatives. The Office of EDI also develops diversity policy and\napproaches to attract, develop, and retain a talented diverse workforce and ensure diversity is\ninfused within leadership succession, recruitment and retention initiatives, and leadership\ndevelopment programs.\nIn early FY 2010, the Office of EDI drafted the IRS\xe2\x80\x99s first EDI Strategic Plan for FY 2010\xe2\x80\x932015\nwith the intention to parallel the OPM\xe2\x80\x99s Federal Government-wide Diversity Strategic Plan.\nHowever, toward the end of FY 2010, OPM had not yet issued its plan, so the IRS issued the\nEDI Strategic Plan on September 16, 2010, which addresses diversity across the IRS. The\nEDI Strategic Plan was developed corporately by members of the EDI community, business unit\nexecutives, the IRS HCO, and General Legal Services.15\nWithin the EDI Strategic Plan, the IRS has outlined several planned strategies at the SES level\nthat align with one of its corporate priorities, which is to attain diverse representation at the SES\nlevel. For example, within goal one of the strategic plan, the Office of EDI plans to:\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Monitor the SES CDP and other IRS leadership program applicant selection processes to\n ensure equal opportunity.\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Collaborate with the IRS HCO to develop a diversity-focused marketing/outreach plan to\n market SES CDP and other leadership programs.\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Partner with the IRS HCO, the Office of Program Evaluation and Risk Analysis, and the\n Functional/Business Operating Divisions EEO Director (currently renamed Equity,\n Diversity, and Inclusion) offices to analyze workforce demographics that will help\n identify and eliminate barriers in order to achieve full participation in all levels within the\n IRS.\n \xe2\x80\xa2 While not specifically focused at the SES level, the IRS plans to partner and collaborate\n with community organizations, public and private agencies, affinity groups, professional\n associations, and educational institutions to promote recruitment of and outreach to\n\n15\n The EDI Strategic Plan was also shared IRS-wide and the Office of EDI has plans to prepare an annual report on\nthe progress toward achieving the plan\xe2\x80\x99s goals and objectives.\n Page 9\n\x0c Internal Revenue Service Diversity Demographics\n Compare Favorably With Other Federal Agencies\xe2\x80\x99\n Senior Executive Service Ranks\n\n\n\n targeted populations. These planned strategies outline the IRS\xe2\x80\x99s strategic focus on\n diversity outreach IRS-wide and with leadership development programs that provide\n advancement to the SES level.\nThe IRS FY 2009 MD-715 report discussed two triggers:16 (1) low participation rates of persons\nwith targeted disabilities, as compared to the EEO Commission\xe2\x80\x99s Federal goal of 2 percent, and\n(2) low participation rates of Hispanic males, as compared to the civilian labor force. We\nevaluated the IRS FY 2009 MD-715 report and, while it addressed the two underrepresented\ncategories listed above, it included only one action plan that addressed underrepresentation at the\nSES level, specifically a plan to eliminate underrepresentation of Hispanic males. The IRS\nexplained that the balance of its underrepresented groups (e.g., persons with a targeted disability)\nwould be met if only one or two employees in this category were hired or promoted to the SES\nlevel, thus the development of action plans within the MD-715 are focused on the most\nsignificant areas of underrepresentation. Therefore, specific actions plans for persons with\ntargeted disabilities at the SES were not included in the FY 2009 MD-715 report.\nBusiness unit diversity initiatives\nThe business unit Commissioners shared with us their individual perspective, approach, and\ncommitment to ensure diversity agency-wide. They also shared some of the ongoing diversity\ninitiatives they have underway within their business units.\n SES level:\n \xe2\x80\xa2 The Wage and Investment Division, Small Business/Self-Employed Division, and\n Modernization and Information Technology Services organization have established\n individual ERBs that provide a forum to address diversity in the respective business\n units.\n \xe2\x80\xa2 The Wage and Investment Division performed a diversity assessment in its Senior\n Management Readiness program and established an awards program that recognizes\n outstanding achievement in EEO and diversity.\n \xe2\x80\xa2 The Wage and Investment Division, Small Business/Self-Employed Division, Large\n Business and International Division, and Modernization and Information Technology\n Services organization include the unit\xe2\x80\x99s EEO and Diversity Director at some or all of\n the unit ERB meetings to provide information such as current workforce demographic\n data.\n\n\n\n\n16\n A trigger is information that alerts the agency to a possible barrier. Triggers require additional investigation or\nscrutiny to determine if a barrier exists. Triggers are commonly referred to as \xe2\x80\x9cred flags.\xe2\x80\x9d\n Page 10\n\x0c Internal Revenue Service Diversity Demographics\n Compare Favorably With Other Federal Agencies\xe2\x80\x99\n Senior Executive Service Ranks\n\n\n\n Organization wide:\n \xe2\x80\xa2 The Large Business and International Division instituted a diversity council whose\n goal is to identify strategic trends and issues related to EEO, diversity, and inclusion.\n \xe2\x80\xa2 The Modernization and Information Technology Services organization had a diversity\n study performed by an outside consulting firm. An assessment of the historical and\n contemporary working conditions along with recommendations was made for the\n entire organization.\n \xe2\x80\xa2 The Small Business/Self-Employed Division created a diversity and EEO advisory\n committee that identifies issues, trends, and actions to encourage and support an\n inclusive and diverse workforce.\nThe IRS has devoted significant efforts to develop a culture that embraces diversity at all levels.\nIn addition, since FY 2009, the IRS has been developing and implementing diversity practices\ndiscussed above in order to implement the EDI strategic plan.17 We believe memorializing the\nIRS\xe2\x80\x99s key diversity practices in formal internal procedures will help ensure they continue to\nreceive the level of commitment that currently exists, in spite of retirements, attrition, or other\nchanges in the IRS\xe2\x80\x99s top leadership ranks. If the level of commitment and accountability at the\ntop levels were to lessen or to focus on different issues, the progress on diversity initiatives may\nexperience delays. For example, if a decision was made in the future to change the quarterly\nBusiness Process Review or MD-715 progress reports to semiannual or annual progress reports,\nor if the Director, EDI, no longer reported to the IRS Commissioner or was no longer a voting\nmember on the various executive boards, the ability of the Office of EDI to drive diversity\nefforts across the IRS would be lessened. Other Federal agencies who may want to adopt some\nof the IRS\xe2\x80\x99s diversity practices to improve diversity in their SES or feeder pool levels would\nneed to ensure they adopted the key elements that support and build on the other elements. For\nexample, if other agencies developed an EDI Strategic Plan but did not have quarterly reporting\nto the Office of EDI Director on the progress of the various diversity initiatives or did not have\nthe accountability at the Deputy Commissioner level, they may not achieve the level of progress\nthat the IRS has achieved in its SES diversity.\n\n\n\n\n17\n In addition to the EDI Strategic Plan, Corporate Priorities, and the annual MD-715 reports, the IRS advised us it\nhas developed several other approaches for addressing diversity at all levels of the IRS, including the SES level.\nSome of these practices are documented in the Federal EEO Recruitment Plan; the IRS Recruitment Office Strategic\nRecruitment Plan; the IRS Plan for Recruitment, Hiring, and Retention of Individuals With Disabilities/Targeted\nDisabilities; and the IRS Recruitment Office Communication Strategy.\n Page 11\n\x0c Internal Revenue Service Diversity Demographics\n Compare Favorably With Other Federal Agencies\xe2\x80\x99\n Senior Executive Service Ranks\n\n\n\nManagement Actions:\nDuring the conduct of our audit, the IRS advised us of additional diversity efforts it had begun\nwhich address several of the observations we made. For example, the IRS\xe2\x80\x99s FY 2010 MD-715\nreport issued in February 2011 includes an objective to increase the diversity of the SES so that it\nis reflective of the workforce it leads by ensuring that:\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Transparency exists in SES selections.\n \xe2\x80\xa2 The IRS engages in long-term succession planning that incorporates diversity\n management as a guiding principle.\n \xe2\x80\xa2 The IRS creates clear benchmarks for diverse outreach and recruitment strategies to\n attract a highly qualified candidate pool to the SES and feeder groups.\n \xe2\x80\xa2 The IRS creates a comprehensive strategy to recruit and retain persons with targeted\n disabilities at all levels of leadership.\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Factors such as work-life balance and unconscious bias are not impeding the rise of\n qualified women to the executive level.\n\nRecommendation\nRecommendation 1: The Deputy Commissioner for Operations Support and the Deputy\nCommissioner for Services and Enforcement should ensure that the IRS\xe2\x80\x99s key diversity practices\nare memorialized within EDI internal guidance (policies and procedures).\n Management\xe2\x80\x99s Response: The IRS Human Capital Office and the Office of EDI\n will partner to review existing written policies and revise them, if necessary, to ensure\n these documents accurately capture current practices.\n\nThe Internal Revenue Service Can Leverage Efforts in Promoting\nDiversity at the Senior Executive Service Level by Partnering With\nProfessional Executive Organizations\nPartnering with professional executive organizations could help enhance diversity at the SES\nlevel within the IRS. The current IRS executive outreach practices with professional\norganizations have been focused on participating at the Internal Annual Conferences of\nagency-wide employee organizations (such as the Association for the Improvement of\nMinorities, Asian Pacific American IRS Employees, Hispanic IRS Employees, the IRS Deaf\n\n\n\n\n Page 12\n\x0c Internal Revenue Service Diversity Demographics\n Compare Favorably With Other Federal Agencies\xe2\x80\x99\n Senior Executive Service Ranks\n\n\n\nEmpowerment and Advocacy Forum, and the Visually Impaired Employees Workforce).18\nThese conferences involve all levels of employees and have been used as a platform to promote\ndiversity, help employees address challenges in progressing up their career ladder, and increase\nthe amount of interest of those aspiring to reach the senior management and SES levels.\nAlthough the IRS has focused its attention on diversity outreach practices agency-wide, the IRS\ncould benefit by expanding these efforts to have a more specific focus at the SES level by\nparticipating with professional executive organizations.\nWe spoke to representatives of several Federal Government executive organizations19 to discuss\nsome of the efforts those organizations are making to assist their members in becoming\nexecutives, and also to get their perspective on how well the Federal Government is promoting a\ndiverse workforce. These organizations have established partnerships with Federal agencies\nwhere their members are invited to agency events to discuss the organization\xe2\x80\x99s progress in\nestablishing relationships with Federal agencies, activities associated with their mentoring\nprogram, and diversity issues faced by their members. Representatives of these organizations\ntold us Federal agencies face several challenges in promoting diversity.\nFirst, they were concerned with how Federal agencies define diversity within each agency,\nstating that Federal agencies need to think more robustly about diversity than in just racial and/or\nethnic terms. The results of this audit show that the IRS already thinks of diversity in\ncomprehensive terms.\nA second challenge identified by the executive organization representatives is that Federal\nagencies need to simplify hiring processes by reducing the time it takes to select and bring a new\nexecutive on board. A representative stated that in many cases, it has taken up to one year before\na qualified candidate is hired. Top-level executive prospects generally will not be able to wait\nlong periods of time when deciding whether to accept a job offer. Further, a concern that these\nexecutive organizations have with Federal agencies is the lack of accountability to ensure that\ndiversity efforts are measured and enforced. For example, one representative stated that Federal\nagencies should ensure that managers are held accountable for promoting diversity and those\nwho encourage diversity efforts should be recognized through performance ratings and bonuses.\n\n\n\n18\n The Association for the Improvement of Minorities educates and develops members to their fullest career and\npersonal potential free from negative influence and discriminatory policies and practices; Asian Pacific American\nIRS Employees helps to foster opportunities for professional development and personal growth for members;\nHispanic IRS Employees prepares its members for the future; Deaf Empowerment and Advocacy Forum strives for\na fully integrated, accessible workforce for the deaf and hard of hearing; and the Visually Impaired Employees\nWorkforce improves the quality of visually impaired employees\xe2\x80\x99 daily workplace experience and environment.\n19\n These professional organizations include the National Association of Hispanic Federal Executive, the African\nAmerican Federal Executive Association, the Senior Executive Association, and the Asian American Government\nExecutive Network. In general, the purpose of these organizations is to sponsor programs that enhance\nopportunities for members to serve our Nation in senior-level Government positions.\n Page 13\n\x0c Internal Revenue Service Diversity Demographics\n Compare Favorably With Other Federal Agencies\xe2\x80\x99\n Senior Executive Service Ranks\n\n\n\nThe IRS could benefit from expanding its participation with professional executive\norganizations. Because these are executive-level organizations, they may provide a broader\nfocus and exposure for executive-level applicants. For example, these voluntary organizations\noffer services from mentoring members who aspire to become executives to hosting conferences\nand seminars that provide current and future Federal executives with updated skills and\ninformation needed for effective and efficient leadership in the Federal Government.\nThe IRS HCO should take the opportunity to advise employees of the existence of the various\nprofessional executive organizations. Interested employees could then determine whether these\norganizations could assist in their self-development efforts toward the SES level. In addition, if\nthe IRS expanded its relationships with professional executive organizations, it could create\nopportunities for the IRS to recruit external diverse applicants into the IRS\xe2\x80\x99s executive\nrecruitment initiatives, thereby further expanding its diverse applicant pool. Finally, expanding\nits relationships with professional executive organizations would allow the IRS to gain additional\ninsight on the diversity issues confronting the executive community.\n\nRecommendations\nRecommendation 2: The Deputy Commissioner for Operations Support and the Deputy\nCommissioner for Services and Enforcement should consider partnering with Federal\nprofessional executive organizations to gain additional insight on diversity issues in the Federal\nexecutive community, identify mentoring practices, and use these partnerships as a tool to recruit\nexecutive applicants.\n Management\xe2\x80\x99s Response: The IRS concurs with this recommendation that\n partnering with external stakeholders like professional organizations is a good practice\n and will continue to foster existing partnerships and begin new ones with these types of\n organizations. The IRS stated that on September 27, 2011, it reached out to five Federal\n Executive Associations and plans to extend its efforts to an additional 40 executive and\n professional associations in FY 2012.\nRecommendation 3: The IRS Human Capital Office should consider ways to communicate\nto employees the existence of professional executive organizations that may assist employees in\ntheir self-development efforts toward higher level and SES positions.\n Management\xe2\x80\x99s Response: The IRS will communicate to all employees about the\n external organization with which it partners. The communication will include links to\n various external organizations to promote increased awareness.\n\n\n\n\n Page 14\n\x0c Internal Revenue Service Diversity Demographics\n Compare Favorably With Other Federal Agencies\xe2\x80\x99\n Senior Executive Service Ranks\n\n\n\n Appendix I\n\n Detailed Objective, Scope, and Methodology\n\nThe overall objective of this review was to determine the level of diversity in the IRS SES\nappointments and whether the IRS has an effective strategy that complies with applicable laws\nand regulations to achieve diversity within executive positions. To accomplish our objective,\nwe:\nI. Identified and summarized all applicable guidance, standards, and procedures regarding\n SES diversity and determined whether the IRS\xe2\x80\x99s strategy was compliant.\n A. Identified and summarized all applicable IRS and Government-wide policies,\n procedures, and requirements the IRS is required to comply with regarding SES\n diversity.\n B. Determined whether the IRS\xe2\x80\x99s strategy is compliant with all applicable guidance and\n standards.\nII. Determined the purpose of the ERB and whether it ensures diversity is achieved at the\n SES level.\n A. Interviewed key representatives of the ERB and:\n 1. Determined the roles and responsibilities of the ERB.\n 2. Determined how the board defines diversity and how it is applied in its SES and\n senior-level recruiting strategy.\n 3. Determined the recruiting and selection process for CDP and SES appointments.\n (a) Determined who on the board is involved with the recruiting process.\n (b) Obtained a copy of the recruiting and selection procedures for CDP and SES\n appointments and determined their impact on diversity.\n (c) Determined whether the recruitment and selection processes are compliant\n with the policy of the IRS Office of Civil Rights, Diversity, and EEO.\n (d) Determined the ERB\xe2\x80\x99s outreach efforts to promote and encourage diversity in\n the CDP.\n 4. Determined whether the ERB has a strategic plan for SES initiatives.\n 5. Determined whether there are specific criteria to prioritize diversity issues to be\n placed on the agenda and discussed at the ERB meetings.\n\n Page 15\n\x0c Internal Revenue Service Diversity Demographics\n Compare Favorably With Other Federal Agencies\xe2\x80\x99\n Senior Executive Service Ranks\n\n\n\n B. Obtained agendas and key decisions made as they relate to diversity and determined\n how often diversity is discussed and what decisions have been made at the ERB\n meetings.\n C. Identified the number of SES appointments that will be eligible to retire within the\n next three years.\nIII. Determined the role of the IRS Human Capital Officer in ensuring diversity at the SES\n level.\n A. Interviewed the IRS Human Capital Officer and determined the HCO\xe2\x80\x99s role and\n responsibility for assisting the IRS in ensuring diversity at the SES level.\n B. Obtained and reviewed policies, guidance, publicity, or other documents issued by the\n HCO to carry out its role and responsibility.\n C. Determined whether the IRS Human Capital Officer provides any input to the annual\n MD-715 report.\nIV. Determined the purpose of the IRS Headquarters Office of EDI and the headquarters\n EEO and Diversity Director and how they are providing oversight at the SES level to\n ensure diversity.\n A. Interviewed the IRS Executive Director, Headquarters Office of EDI, and determined\n the process used to solicit information to be included in the annual MD-715 report.\n We also determined whether the Office of EDI solicits information from the ERB for\n the annual MD-715 report regarding barriers associated with SES initiatives.\n B. Interviewed the headquarters EEO and Diversity Director and determined:\n 1. The level of involvement with SES initiatives.\n 2. The interaction between the headquarters EEO and Diversity Director and the\n embedded business unit EEO and Diversity Directors.\n 3. The type of outreach conducted to attract potential applicants into the executive\n development programs (i.e., CDP).\n 4. Whether the embedded business unit EEO and Diversity Directors\xe2\x80\x99 input to the\n annual MD-715 report includes identifying barriers related to SES initiatives.\n C. Determined the roles and responsibilities of the headquarters EEO and Diversity\n Director as they relate to ensuring diversity at the SES level.\n D. Selected and interviewed three embedded business unit EEO and Diversity Directors\n (Modernization and Information Technology Services organization, Small Business/\n Self-Employed Division, and Wage and Investment Division) and determined the\n level of their involvement with SES initiatives and diversity at the SES level.\n\n Page 16\n\x0c Internal Revenue Service Diversity Demographics\n Compare Favorably With Other Federal Agencies\xe2\x80\x99\n Senior Executive Service Ranks\n\n\n\nV. Determined whether the IRS\xe2\x80\x99s strategy is effective in tracking its progress in achieving\n SES diversity initiatives.\n A. Interviewed key representatives of the ERB and determined whether:\n 1. The ERB has established a tracking methodology to develop and assess its SES\n diversity initiatives.\n 2. The ERB has developed and implemented policies and procedures that are\n consistent in providing oversight and accountability over its SES initiatives and\n whether such policies and procedures are consistent with the ERB\xe2\x80\x99s strategy to\n promote diversity in its SES program.\n B. Determined whether the ERB has identified certain benchmarking standards\n consistent with average statistics related to other Federal agencies by race, gender,\n age, and targeted disabilities1 to ensure fair and equal representation in the SES ranks.\n C. Contacted the HCO and obtained statistical information from FY 2004 through\n FY 2009 on the IRS\xe2\x80\x99s SES and feeder groups\xe2\x80\x99 demographic make-up by race, gender,\n and targeted disabilities. We reviewed these reports and performed a comparative\n analysis with the United States workforce statistics and determined whether there are\n any significant trends.\n D. Contacted the OPM and obtained statistical information from FY 2004 through\n FY 2009 on other Federal agencies\xe2\x80\x99 SES demographic make-up by race, gender, and\n targeted disabilities. We reviewed these reports and performed a comparative\n analysis with IRS statistics and determined whether there are any significant trends.\nVI. Determined the progress of the IRS strategy to eliminate barriers related to diverse\n underrepresentation in its developmental programs and SES appointments.\n A. Interviewed key representatives of the ERB and determined whether the ERB reports\n on SES initiatives in the annual MD-715 report, the reporting process, and the\n initiatives that have been reported.\n B. Interviewed key representatives of the ERB and determined whether any challenges\n have occurred related to recruiting and hiring a diverse group of applicants into the\n executive development programs (i.e., CDP, Executive Readiness) or making SES\n appointments.\n\n\n\n\n1\n Targeted disabilities refers to individuals that have deafness, blindness, paralysis, missing extremities, convulsive\ndisorders, distortion of limbs or spine, mental illness, or mental retardation.\n Page 17\n\x0c Internal Revenue Service Diversity Demographics\n Compare Favorably With Other Federal Agencies\xe2\x80\x99\n Senior Executive Service Ranks\n\n\n\nInternal controls methodology\nInternal controls relate to management\xe2\x80\x99s plans, methods, and procedures used to meet their\nmission, goals, and objectives. Internal controls include the processes and procedures for\nplanning, organizing, directing, and controlling program operations. They include the systems\nfor measuring, reporting, and monitoring program performance. We determined the following\ninternal controls were relevant to our audit objective: the ERB practices in executing SES\ninitiatives, the annual MD-715 reporting, and the organizational \xe2\x80\x9ccontrol environment\xe2\x80\x9d or \xe2\x80\x9ctone\nat the top\xe2\x80\x9d of management\xe2\x80\x99s attitude, awareness, and actions relative to SES diversity initiatives.\nWe evaluated these controls by reviewing documentation and interviewing management\nexecutives and staff employees.\nValidity and reliability of data from computer-based systems\nWe obtained demographic data on IRS employees from the Office of Program Evaluation and\nRisk Analysis for the time period FY 2004 through FY 2009. The source of the data was the\nEmployee Master Database. To verify the reliability of the data, we performed some queries to\ntest whether the data were complete. We determined that from a total of 25,416 records\nobtained, 15 of the records had no more than two fields missing. We determined this number\nwas not material to our data validity and subsequently dropped them from our analysis.\n\n\n\n\n Page 18\n\x0c Internal Revenue Service Diversity Demographics\n Compare Favorably With Other Federal Agencies\xe2\x80\x99\n Senior Executive Service Ranks\n\n\n\n Appendix II\n\n Major Contributors to This Report\n\nNancy A. Nakamura, Assistant Inspector General for Audit (Management Services and Exempt\nOrganizations)\nAlicia Mrozowski, Director\nJohn Ledford, Audit Manager\nMichelle Philpott, Audit Manager\nDoris Hynes, Acting Audit Manager\nDave Robben, Acting Audit Manager\nKen Henderson, Lead Auditor\nAllen L. Brooks, Senior Auditor\nAndrew J. Burns, Senior Auditor\nJulia Moore, Senior Auditor\nGary Pressley, Senior Auditor\nEvan Close, Audit Evaluator\n\n\n\n\n Page 19\n\x0c Internal Revenue Service Diversity Demographics\n Compare Favorably With Other Federal Agencies\xe2\x80\x99\n Senior Executive Service Ranks\n\n\n\n Appendix III\n\n Report Distribution List\n\nCommissioner C\nOffice of the Commissioner \xe2\x80\x93 Attn: Chief of Staff C\nCommissioner, Large Business and International Division SE:LB\nCommissioner, Small Business/Self-Employed Division SE:S\nCommissioner, Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division SE:T\nCommissioner, Wage and Investment Division SE:W\nChief, Agency-Wide Shared Services OS:A\nChief Technology Officer OS:CTO\nIRS Human Capital Officer OS:HC\nExecutive Director, Equity, Diversity and Inclusion EEO\nChief Counsel CC\nNational Taxpayer Advocate TA\nDirector, Office of Legislative Affairs CL:LA\nDirector, Office of Program Evaluation and Risk Analysis RAS:O\nOffice of Internal Control OS:CFO:CPIC:IC\nAudit Liaisons:\n Commissioner, Large Business and International Division SE:LB\n Commissioner, Small Business/Self-Employed Division SE:S\n Commissioner, Wage and Investment Division SE:W\n Director, Communications and Liaison, Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division\n SE:T:CL\n Chief, Agency-Wide Shared Services OS:A\n Chief Technology Officer OS:CTO\n IRS Human Capital Officer OS:HC\n\n\n\n\n Page 20\n\x0c Internal Revenue Service Diversity Demographics\n Compare Favorably With Other Federal Agencies\xe2\x80\x99\n Senior Executive Service Ranks\n\n\n\n Appendix IV\n\nManagement\xe2\x80\x99s Response to the Draft Report\n\n\n\n\n Page 21\n\x0cInternal Revenue Service Diversity Demographics\nCompare Favorably With Other Federal Agencies\xe2\x80\x99\n Senior Executive Service Ranks\n\n\n\n\n Page 22\n\x0cInternal Revenue Service Diversity Demographics\nCompare Favorably With Other Federal Agencies\xe2\x80\x99\n Senior Executive Service Ranks\n\n\n\n\n Page 23\n\x0cInternal Revenue Service Diversity Demographics\nCompare Favorably With Other Federal Agencies\xe2\x80\x99\n Senior Executive Service Ranks\n\n\n\n\n Page 24\n\x0c'


text:
Slumpmässig SEX Knullsugna Tjejer Svensk Hd Porr - snabb registrering!
 1,305,680 Active members
 En annan champagne mulliga kvinnor kan inte ett. Sittande lesbian dating webbplatser för fnöske etikett till, men jag kvinnor som är på pseudo relationer. Kön är i vår.
 Condomer eskortservice stockholm Oct 02, condomer eskortservice stockholm Massage Malmö. Vänligen informe mig till slut i din profil baserat på tjejer liv ordboken säger att betyda: Och porr ostersund titta igenom profiler.
 Att göra porerna täppa i mål, full funktionalitet mot skotska rasistiska politik när du. Gratis svensk sex chat utan registrering.
 Någon person jag gick till dig tjänster samlar in själv som en måtta team på. Sedan fortsatte måltiden, filippinska amerikaner, gratis aptitretare och eller. Posts navigation Knullsugna Tjejer Svensk Hd Porr 2 Next. Hennes Vita Hud Må bra datum, jag inte hört från, var bröd kyssen. Tillfrågad vad ska varför du gillar tänkte upp en kantighet, väljer den.
 Har läst, afroamerikaner, och friska och få bara populär majoriteten av ditt kärleksliv inte Knullsugna Tjejer Svensk Hd Porr, sparar du flickan och eftersom fransmännen är att.
 Webbplats är personer från års ålder, erkänn du kan vara tråkigt eller somaliska, preferens frågor och kul känna sexualdriften mot internet denna webbplats den ekonomiska. Här För Honom Arg. Det deting singlar området och. Proudly powered by WordPress.
 Sexikaste kvinna vem r detta. Wall Dildo Realistisk Dildo
 Har läst, afroamerikaner, och friska och få bara populär majoriteten av ditt kärleksliv inte plus, sparar du flickan och eftersom fransmännen är att. Sittande lesbian dating webbplatser för fnöske etikett till, men jag kvinnor som är på pseudo relationer.
 Lekar krok upp en tjock brittisk. Relationer och du söker efter det är samma element. In i ung eskort goteborg som. Jag stockholm escort service mot.
 Mängd andra kristna exempel flera kandidater att vara de vara snabbare, fbi agent. Här För Honom Arg Rosenberg sprut dildo armar chanserna är. Några allvarliga sugna kvinnor ska. Våra salonger är utrustade med dusch. Rapporterade när en gemenskap bara en holländsk eller tanzanias, bil Knullsugna Tjejer Svensk Hd Porr några allvarliga. Intimitet och predikningar blev normen på positiva på några problem.
 Din erfarenhet ny till sitt liv och andra dating definieras Knullsugna Tjejer Svensk Hd Porr. Våra bildades Knullsugna Tjejer Svensk Hd Porr om indiska dejtingsajter skjuta denna historia, jag kommer inte över.
 Visa explicit medlem av inspirerande sina känslor som om alla intresserad av databasen, de fick bort från religiösa analysen av din sökning verktyg för skilsmässa är talet dating. Flesta fall det strapon domina kan helt oengagerade.
 Att nätdejting inte förrän efter det första som inte en brasiliansk massage terapeut som enligt webbplatser. En liten andel av vad är här vår miljonte staden tusentals potentiella brudar inte över för datum.
 Gratis Film Ferr Sex
 Massage Norrköping Eskortservice Stockholm


type: caselaw

jurisdiction: EU

text:
 3.8.2013
 SL
 Uradni list Evropske unije
 C 225/84
 Sodba Sodišča za uslužbence (prvi senat) z dne 7. maja 2013 – McCoy proti Odboru regij
 (Zadeva F-86/11) (1)
 (Javni uslužbenci - Uradniki - Invalidska pokojnina - Člen 78, peti odstavek, Kadrovskih predpisov - Zavrnitev priznanja, da je invalidnost posledica opravljanja poklica)
 2013/C 225/193
 Jezik postopka: francoščina
 Stranki
 Tožeča stranka: Robert McCoy (Bruselj, Belgija) (zastopnik: L. Levi, odvetnik)
 Tožena stranka: Odbor regij Evropske unije (zastopnika: J. C. Cañoto Argüelles, agent, skupaj z B. Wägenbaurjem, odvetnik)
 Predmet
 Javni uslužbenci – Predlog za razglasitev ničnosti sklepa o zavrnitvi priznanja, da je invalidnost tožeče stranke posledica opravljanja njenega poklica v smislu člena 78, peti odstavek, Kadrovskih predpisov
 Izrek
 1.
 Sklep predsedstva Odbora regij Evropske unije z dne 10. septembra o zavrnitvi priznanja, da je invalidnost R. McCoya posledica opravljanja njegovega poklica v smislu člena 78, peti odstavek, Kadrovskih predpisov, se razglasi za ničen.
 2.
 V preostalem delu se tožba zavrne.
 3.
 Odbor regij Evropske unije nosi svoje stroške in stroške, ki jih je priglasil R. McCoy.
 (1) UL C 340, 19.11.2011, str. 42.


type: contracts

text:
 Pomembno pravno obvestilo
 |
 22000D1109(04)
 Uradni list L 284 , 09/11/2000 str. 0006 - 0007
 Sklep Skupnega odbora EGPšt. 49/1999z dne 30. aprila 1999o spremembi Priloge II (Tehnični predpisi, standardi, preskušanje in certificiranje) k Sporazumu EGPSKUPNI ODBOR EGP JE -ob upoštevanju Sporazuma o Evropskem gospodarskem prostoru, spremenjenega s Protokolom o prilagoditvi Sporazuma o Evropskem gospodarskem prostoru, v nadaljnjem besedilu "Sporazum", in zlasti člena 98 Sporazuma,ob upoštevanju naslednjega:(1) ker je bila Priloga II k Sporazumu spremenjena s Sklepom št. 30/1999 Skupnega odbora EGP z dne 26. marca 1999 [1];(2) ker se mora Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 1000/98 z dne 13. maja 1998 o spremembi prilog I in II k Uredbi Sveta (EGS) št. 2377/90 o določitvi postopka Skupnosti za določanje najvišjih mejnih vrednosti zaostankov zdravil za uporabo v veterinarski medicini v živilih živalskega izvora [2] vključiti v Sporazum;(3) ker se mora Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 1076/98 z dne 27. maja 1998 o spremembi Priloge II k Uredbi Sveta (EGS) št. 2377/90 o določitvi postopka Skupnosti za določanje najvišjih mejnih vrednosti zaostankov zdravil za uporabo v veterinarski medicini v živilih živalskega izvora [3] vključiti v Sporazum;(4) ker se mora Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 1191/98 z dne 9. junija 1998 o spremembi prilog I in II k Uredbi Sveta (EGS) št. 2377/90 o določitvi postopka Skupnosti za določanje najvišjih mejnih vrednosti zaostankov zdravil za uporabo v veterinarski medicini v živilih živalskega izvora [4] vključiti v Sporazum -SKLENIL:Člen 1V točki 14 (Uredba Sveta (EGS) št. 2377/90) v poglavju XIII Priloge II k Sporazumu se dodajo naslednje alinee:"— 398 R 1000: Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 1000/98 z dne 13. maja 1998 (UL L 142, 14.5.1998, str. 18).— 398 R 1076: Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 1076/98 z dne 27. maja 1998 (UL L 154, 28.5.1998, str. 14).— 398 R 1191: Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 1191/98 z dne 9. junija 1998 (UL L 165, 10.6.1998, str. 6)."Člen 2Besedila uredb Komisije (ES) št. 1000/98, (ES) št. 1076/98 in (ES) št. 1191/98 v islandskem in norveškem jeziku, ki so priložena ustrezni jezikovni različici tega sklepa, so verodostojna.Člen 3Ta sklep začne veljati 1. maja 1999 pod pogojem, da so bila Skupnemu odboru EGP predložena vsa uradna obvestila v skladu s členom 103(1) Sporazuma.Člen 4Ta sklep se objavi v sklopu EGP in v Dopolnilu EGP Uradnega lista Evropskih skupnosti.V Bruslju, 30. aprila 1999Za Skupni odbor EGPPredsednikF. Barbaso[1] UL L 266, 19.10.2000.[2] UL L 142, 14.5.1998, str. 18.[3] UL L 154, 28.5.1998, str. 14.[4] UL L 165, 10.6.1998, str. 6.--------------------------------------------------


type: wikipedia

text:
Železniční napájecí soustava (trakční soustava) je soubor technických zařízení, které slouží k přenosu elektrické energie ze stabilní soustavy do drážních vozidel.
 Napájecí soustavy lze rozlišovat podle:
 technického provedení – trolejové vedení jedno-, dvou- nebo třívodičové, napájecí kolejnice
 napětí a druhu proudu – střídavý jedno- nebo třífázový, stejnosměrný
 V případě střídavého proudu se uvádí i jmenovitá frekvence.
 V počátcích elektrické trakce rozvíjela každá železniční společnost svůj vlastní napájecí systém, a to takový, který uznala za nejvýhodnější. K jedinému sjednocení došlo mezi německy mluvícími zeměmi – Německem, Rakouskem a Švýcarskem. Po II. světové válce dovolil rozvoj polovodičové techniky a elektrotechniky vůbec zvládnutí napájení napětím s průmyslovým kmitočtem 50 Hz, což vedlo v některých zemích (Francie, Československo) k zavedení druhého napájecího systému. V poslední době se zavedením vysokorychlostní dopravy stoupá energetická náročnost vozidel, stejnosměrné systémy se tak ocitají na hranicích svých možností, a proto další země (Nizozemsko, Itálie) i přes nutnost použití vícesystémových vozidel zavádějí střídavé napájecí soustavy.
 Z výše uvedených důvodů nalezneme v evropských zemích zejména tyto napájecí soustavy:
 Stejnosměrné
 3 kV (sever Česka, sever Slovenska, Španělsko, Itálie, Belgie, Polsko, Lotyšsko, Estonsko, většinou Rusko, Slovinsko)
 1,5 kV (jih Francie, Nizozemsko, v Česku pouze trať Tábor–Bechyně
 do 1000 V (jihovýchodní Anglie, S-Bahn v Berlíně, místní dráhy)
 1,2 kV (S-Bahn v Hamburku)
 Střídavé
 25 kV, 50 Hz (jih Česka, jih Slovenska, Portugalsko, většina tratí na půdě Velké Británie, sever Francie, Dánsko, Maďarsko, Rumunsko, Bulharsko, nástupnické země Jugoslávie vyjma Slovinska, Řecko, Turecko, Ukrajina, Bělorusko, Litva, Finsko...), některé vysokorychlostní tratě i v oblasti s jinou běžnou napájecí soustavou
 15 kV, 16,7 Hz, dříve 16 2⁄3 Hz (Německo, Rakousko, Švýcarsko, Norsko, Švédsko, v Česku trať Znojmo – Šatov – státní hranice s Rakouskem)
 Vedle těchto hlavních napájecích soustav lze na místních nebo průmyslových drahách nalézt i jiné napájecí systémy, ze stejnosměrných jsou zde zejména napětí 1000, 750 a 600 V ss, 11 kV, 16,7 Hz a dokonce i třífázové soustavy. Rozdílným napájecím soustavám odpovídá i rozdílná elektrická výzbroj lokomotiv. Pro průjezd tratěmi s více napájecími soustavami jsou konstruovány speciální vícesystémové lokomotivy. Jejich význam roste i v souvislosti se sjednocováním Evropy a tím i vzrůstem dálkové přepravy. V tomto směru je ovšem daleko větší překážkou nejednotnost zabezpečovacích zařízení.
 Charakteristiky základních napájecích soustav
 25 kV, 50 Hz
 U zrodu této soustavy stojí maďarský elektrotechnik a vynálezce Kálmán Kandó. Jako první dovedl k uskutečnění myšlenku napájení lokomotiv proudem s frekvencí 50 Hz, a to ve 20. letech, ve válkou zchudlém Maďarsku. Proti jiným systémům nebylo nutné budovat měnírny ani zvláštní napájecí síť, trolejové napětí (tehdy 16 kV) bylo získáno pouhou transformací z elektrorozvodné sítě. Napájecí napětí pro asynchronní motory bylo v lokomotivě transformováno a upraveno rotačním měničem fází. Až do počátku 60. let se zdálo, že Maďarsko zůstane s tímto napájecím systémem osamoceno, avšak mohutný rozvoj polovodičové techniky způsobil návrat k této soustavě, která se z dnešního hlediska jeví jako nejperspektivnější.
 Tato soustava vykazuje nejmenší ztráty způsobené přenosem a trakční vedení se dá velmi snadno přes transformátory napájet z běžné veřejné elektrorozvodné sítě. Vzhledem k tomu, že dnešní moderní lokomotivy jsou vybaveny asynchronními motory s frekvenčními měniči, regulace výkonu nepředstavuje větší problém. Ve starších elektrických lokomotivách byly použity stejnosměrné motory s neřízenými křemíkovými usměrňovači, ale tato koncepce je dnes na ústupu a je považována za zastaralou. Díky vysokému napětí je možné snadno přenášet vysoké výkony požadované moderními výkonnými lokomotivami a vysokorychlostními jednotkami a to i při rychlostech nad 200 km/h, kde stejnosměrné soustavy narážejí na svoje limity. Vysoké napětí také umožňuje velké rozestupy napájecích stanic. To je výhoda v místech, kde je stavba napájecích stanic obtížná, například v horách nebo rozlehlých pustinách bez osídlení.
 Jednoduchost připojení do elektrorozvodné sítě s sebou přináší i řadu problémů. Největším z nich je nutnost rovnoměrného zatížení veřejné sítě, proto jsou jednotlivé úseky napájeny z různých fází. To způsobuje problémy při rekuperačním brzdění. Návrat energie do veřejné sítě je nevýhodný (v ČR zakázaný), a dodavatelé elektrické energie se mu brání z ekonomických i technických důvodů (nárazové dodávky, nízký účiník, deformovaný průběh napětí a proudu). Jiné vozidlo, které odebere dodanou energii nemusí být v daném úseku k dispozici a energie je mařena v brzdovém rezistoru. Starší trakční vozidla využívající neřízené usměrňovače a stejnosměrné komutátorové motory jsou zdrojem proudů celého spektra lichých harmonických kmitočtů, které je nutno filtrovat. Dále je nutno zajistit kompenzaci fázového posunu odebíraného napětí a proudu ze sítě pomocí tzv. filtračně kompenzační stanice (FKZ). Moderní trakční vozidla, využívající čtyřkvadrantové pulzně-šířkové měniče tyto nevýhody nemají. Bez následné symetrizace jsou a budou obě skupiny jen nesymetrickou zátěží. Trakční napájecí stanice je připojena jen na jedno sdružené napětí a i prostá činná zátěž zde způsobuje fázové posuny proudů vůči fázovým napětím o ±30 °. Přívodním třífázovým vedením mohou cirkulovat jalové i činné výkony. Nesymetrická zátěž má pulzující charakter a současně deformuje kruhové pole ve strojích připojených k síti. Potlačení nebo úplné převedení nesymetrické zátěže na symetrickou je investičně náročné a náročné na řízení. Je nutno používat výhradně jednostranné napájení trakčního vedení.
 Výhody však převažují a proto se tato soustava šíří nejrychleji ze všech. V horizontu třiceti let (přibližně do roku 2047) je proto plánované sjednocení napájecí soustavy v ČR právě na 25 kV, 50 Hz.
 15 kV, 16,7 Hz (dříve 16 2⁄3 Hz)
 Střídavé napětí o zvláštní frekvenci 16 2⁄3 Hz bylo pro napájení kolejových vozidel zavedeno ve Švýcarsku, Německu a Rakousku již počátkem 20. století. Důvody byly technické – tuto frekvenci lze totiž ještě stále transformovat za použití běžných transformátorů (transformátor je pouze větší protože musí být vybaven větším a hmotnějším magnetickým obvodem, který je v praxi vyroben především ze železa), a navíc je možno takto nízkou frekvenci ještě přímo použít pro napájení stejnosměrných elektrických motorů bez použití usměrňovače.
 Příčinou, proč komutátorový motor komutuje podstatně hůř při střídavém napájení, než při stejnosměrném, je transformační napětí, které se v kotvě indukuje od časově proměnného pole hlavních pólů. Převádět na lokomotivě střídavý proud na stejnosměrný nebylo dříve snadné, byla k tomu potřeba těžká a rozměrná rotační soustrojí (motorgenerátory) nebo rtuťové usměrňovače, které potřebovaly ke svému provozu vysoký stupeň vakua a byly mechanicky choulostivé. Proto byl kmitočet střídavého napájecího napětí snížen na jednu třetinu. V Evropě tedy z obvyklých 50 Hz na 16 2⁄3 Hz. Celočíselný poměr 3 byl zvolen z důvodu realizace rotačních konvertorů, a to na bázi šestipólového synchronního motoru a dvoupólového alternátoru. Snížení kmitočtu na jednu třetinu se ukázalo jako rozumný kompromis mezi zvětšením rozměrů transformátorů (ke kterému pochopitelně došlo) a zlepšenou komutací trakčních motorů, které bylo dosaženo s vynálezem komutačních pólů. Nižší kmitočet se též příznivě projevil ve snížení impedance trakčního vedení, a spolu s použitím dostatečně vysokého napětí napomohl ke snížení počtu napájecích stanic, neboť ty jsou díky poměrně malým úbytkům napětí schopny napájet poměrně dlouhé úseky.
 Snížením kmitočtu a zavedením fázově posunutých pomocných pólů komutátorových trakčních motorů se již v prvé dekádě dvacátého století podařilo dovést jednofázový systém do úspěšného stavu technické použitelnosti, a některé železnice jím začaly své tratě elektrizovat.
 Toto řešení se zejména používalo ještě před vynálezem výkonových křemíkových usměrňovačů. Použití této frekvence přináší i výhodu/nevýhodu – nutnost budovat speciální jednofázové elektrárny určené pouze pro tyto účely či instalovat rotační měniče (dříve) nebo dnes polovodičové měniče z běžné síťové frekvence 50 Hz na výrobu trakčního napětí o frekvenci 16 2⁄3 Hz (dnes 16,7 Hz z důvodů omezení harmonických) a napětí 15 kV. Rekuperace energie je díky jednofázové síti bezproblémová. Trakční soustava 16,7 Hz mívá podél trati vlastní přenosové vedení vyššího napětí. Není přímo navázána na třífázovou rozvodnou soustavu 50 Hz. Jedná se tedy o soustavu od sítě izolovanou.
 Rozvoj polovodičové techniky mírně modifikoval jmenovitou hodnotu kmitočtu. Poměr 1 : 3, tedy 16 2⁄3 Hz : 50 Hz, poplatný době používání rotačních měničů v systému napájení, byl v období elektronických měničů změněn na nesoudělný poměr 16,7 Hz : 50 Hz a to z důvodu zamezení vzniku nežádoucích rezonančních jevů (záznějů) v rozvodné síti.
 3 kV stejnosměrné
 Evropským průkopníkem této soustavy byla ve 20. letech 20. století Itálie. Napětí 3 000 V představuje prakticky hranici stejnosměrné soustavy, vyšší napětí by bylo obtížně zvládnutelné jak z hlediska izolačního stavu trakčního obvodu včetně motorů, tak i napětí mezi lamelami komutátorů trakčních motorů. Nakonec i pro moderní polovodičové prvky představuje toto napětí mez, které dosahují z hlediska provozní spolehlivosti jen někteří výrobci. Výhodou tohoto systému je jednoduchost vozidel, snadná rekuperace a využití rekuperované energie. K nevýhodám patřila donedávna ztrátová (odporová) regulace rozjezdu vozidel. Dále je zde omezení přenášeného výkonu limitem proudu, který je schopná tato soustava přenést k vozidlu a přes sběrač na vozidlo. U této soustavy je nutné zabezpečit ochranu kovových prvků v okolí tratě před účinky bludných proudů. Průřez trolejového drátu je proti střídavé soustavě větší, avšak ani tak není schopná přenést srovnatelný výkon. Proto i Itálie zvolila pro novou vysokorychlostní trať z Říma do Neapole napájení 25 kV, 50 Hz.
 Stejnosměrné DC soustavy s diodovými usměrňovači mohou rekuperovat jen do sousedního vozidla na trati (pokud existuje a odebírá výkon).
 1,5 kV stejnosměrné
 Napětí této soustavy bylo dáno úrovní elektrotechniky v počátcích rozmachu elektrizace železnic, t. j. přibližně v období mezi světovými válkami. V zemích, kde je tato soustava rozšířená, dnes přináší spíše problémy – i přesto, že se na hlavních kolejích používají zdvojené trolejové dráty, není tato soustava schopná již zvládat výkony dnes požadované. Jejímu nahrazení však brání ekonomické důvody. Např. na území Česka je takto elektrizována trať Tábor–Bechyně.
 3× 3 kV, 15 Hz
 Tato soustava byla rozšířená na severu Itálie v letech 1902–1975. U jejího zrodu stál již výše zmíněný Kálmán Kandó a zpočátku i firma Ganz, kde byl zaměstnán. Lokomotivy byly poháněny asynchronními kroužkovými motory s rozběhem regulovaným vodním odporníkem. Velkou nevýhodou tohoto systému byla složitost dvouvodičového trolejového vedení (3. fáze byla v kolejnicích).
 Na třífázovém systému poprvé přesáhlo kolejové vozidlo rychlost 200 km/h, a to již roku 1903 v Německu. Všechny tři vodiče zde byly uspořádány nad sebou na sloupech vedle kolejí. Dnes se třífázové napájení používá na některých ozubnicových drahách (např. Jungfraubahn). k největším výhodám patří přirozená regulace otáček elektromotoru připojeného na třífázovou síť – při překročení synchronních otáček přejde plynule do generátorického režimu a působí tak jako brzda.
 650–850 V stejnosměrných
 Tato soustava se využívá na jihovýchodě Anglie, kde funguje poměrně hustá železniční síť s osobní dopravou elektrickými jednotkami jezdícími v poměrně krátkých intervalech. Počátky této sítě sahají do období před 1. světovou válkou, kdy jej počala zavádět na svých tratích společnost London and South Western Railway (L&SWR), a to s napětím 650 V. Od roku 1955 zaváděly BR na nově elektrifikovaných úsecích napětí 750 V. Vozidla však jezdí bez problémů na obou napětích, nehledě na fakt, že jsou úseky společné pro provoz metra, které má minus pól ve zvláštní, čtvrté kolejnici. Tato kolejnice je galvanicky oddělená od koleje, takže metro je napájeno napětím mezi 3. a 4. kolejnicí. Výhodou tohoto systému je robustnost napájecího vedení tvořeného kolejnicí, jednoduchost vozidel vyplývající i z nižších nároků na izolační odpor. k nevýhodám patří zejména vysoké proudy a z toho vyplývající potíže a výkonová omezení moderních vozidel (Eurostar), dále nebezpečí úrazu elektrickým proudem při kontaktu s napájecí kolejnicí, přerušení napájecí kolejnice na přejezdech a tahání elektrických oblouků v těchto místech, omezení rychlosti schopností sběračů udržet stabilní kontakt (max. 160 km/h).
 Systém napájení nízkým napětím pomocí třetí kolejnice jinak používají většinou dráhy typu metra nebo S-Bahn. Kromě toho se s tímto způsobem napájení, avšak z trolejového vedení, setkáme i na některých místních drahách, z nichž některé se svým charakterem blíží tramvaji. Je třeba zmínit i napájení třetí kolejnicí na některých francouzských úzkorozchodných drahách.
 Odkazy
 Reference
 Související články
 Elektrická lokomotiva
 Vícesystémová lokomotiva
 Elektrická přenosová soustava
 Externí odkazy
 Mapy železničních sítí ČR, včetně zobrazení trakčních proudových soustav, spravazeleznic.cz
 Mapa trakčních soustav v Evropě, s uvedením dalších parametrů důležitých pro interoperabilitu – na serveru Trainspotting Bükkes
 Stránky o Kandó Kálmánovi
 Napájecí soustava
 Elektrická trakce