United Nations Organizations: Enhanced Efforts Needed to Increase U.S. Employment at UN Agencies
Published: 2007-08-01T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: This testimony discusses ways to improve the representation of American professionals at United Nations (UN) organizations. The U.S. Congress continues to be concerned about the underrepresentation of American professionals employed by some UN organizations and that insufficient progress has been made to improve U.S. representation. The equitable representation of Americans at UN organizations is a priority to Congress in part because the United States is the largest financial contributor to most of these organizations. Moreover, according to the U.S. Department of State (State), Americans bring desirable skills, values, and experience that can have a significant impact on UN organizations' operational effectiveness. This testimony is based on a report that we issued on September 6, 2006. This testimoney will discuss (1) U.S. representation status and employment trends at five UN organizations, (2) factors affecting these organizations' ability to meet U.S. representation targets, and (3) State's efforts to improve U.S. representation and additional efforts that can be taken.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: The United States was underrepresented in three of the five UN agencies we reviewed, and increased hiring of U.S. citizens is needed to meet agreed-upon employment targets. Based on UN agencies' formal or informal targets for equitable geographic representation, U.S. citizens were underrepresented at IAEA, UNESCO, and UNHCR, and equitably represented at the UN Secretariat, though close to the lower end of its target range. UNDP had not established a target for U.S. representation, although U.S. citizens filled about 11 percent of the agency's professional positions. Given projected staff levels, retirements, and separations for 2006 to 2010, the Secretariat, IAEA, UNESCO, and UNHCR would need to hire more Americans than they have hired in recent years to meet their minimum targets for equitable U.S. representation in 2010. Summary While the UN agencies we reviewed faced some common barriers to recruiting and retaining professional staff, including Americans, they also faced distinct challenges. Most of these barriers and challenges were outside of the U.S. government's control. Six barriers common to UN agencies we reviewed included nontransparent human resource practices; a limited number of positions open to external candidates; lengthy hiring processes; comparatively low or unclear compensation; required staff mobility and rotation policies; and limited U.S. government support during Americans' efforts to obtain, or be promoted at, a UN job. These barriers combined with distinct agency-specific factors to impede recruitment and retention. For example, candidates serving in professional positions funded by their member governments were more likely to be hired by the Secretariat than those who took the Secretariat's entry-level exam; however, the United States had not funded such positions at the Secretariat. In addition, IAEA had difficulty attracting U.S. employees because the number of U.S. nuclear specialists was decreasing. State has increased its efforts to support the goal of achieving equitable U.S. representation at UN organizations, and additional options exist to target professional positions. State has targeted efforts to recruit U.S. candidates for senior and policymaking UN positions, and, although it was difficult to directly link State's efforts to UN hiring decisions, U.S. representation in senior and policymaking positions either improved or did not reflect a trend in each of the five UN agencies we reviewed. State also has undertaken several efforts to improve overall U.S. representation, including adding staff to its UN employment office and increasing coordination with other U.S. agencies that work with UN organizations. For positions below the senior level, State focused on "getting the word out" by, for example, disseminating information on UN vacancies through its Web site, attending career fairs and conferences, and other means. Despite these efforts, U.S. representation in entry-level positions declined or did not display a trend in four of the five UN agencies we reviewed. Additional options to target potential pools of candidates for professional positions include: maintaining a roster of qualified American candidates; expanding marketing and outreach activities; increasing UN employment information on U.S. agency Web sites; and conducting an assessment of the costs and benefits of sponsoring Junior Professional Officers (JPO), who are entry-level employees that are financially supported by their home government.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: they have taken in response to our September 2006 recommendations. We  conducted our work for the September 2006 report from July 2005 through  July 2006 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing  standards.
subsections: section_title: Background
paragraphs: The United Nations comprises six principal bodies, including the General  Assembly and the Secretariat, as well as funds and programs, such as  UNDP, and specialized agencies, such as UNESCO. These funds,  programs, and specialized agencies have their own governing bodies and  budgets, but follow the guidelines of the UN Charter. Article 101 of the UN  Charter calls for staff to be recruited on the basis of “the highest standards  of efficiency, competence, and integrity” as well as from “as wide a  geographical basis as possible.” Each UN agency has developed its own  human resource policies and practices, and staff rules.
Of the five agencies we reviewed, three—the Secretariat, IAEA, and  UNESCO—had quantitative formulas that establish targets for equitable  geographical representation in designated professional positions. UNHCR  had not established a quantitative formula or positions subject to  geographic representation, but had agreed to an informal target for  equitable U.S. representation. UNDP generally followed the principle of  equitable geographic representation, but had not adopted formal or  informal targets. Agencies with formal quantitative targets for equitable  representation do not apply these targets to all professional positions.  Instead, these organizations set aside positions that are subject to  geographic representation from among the professional and senior  positions performing core agency functions, funded from regular budget  resources. Positions that are exempt from being counted geographically  include linguist and peacekeeping positions, positions funded by extra- budgetary resources, and short-term positions. In addition, these  organizations utilize various nonstaff positions, such as contractors and  consultants.
The Department of State is the U.S. agency primarily responsible for  leading U.S. efforts toward achieving equitable U.S. employment  representation in UN organizations. While State is responsible for  promoting and seeking to increase U.S. representation in the UN, the UN  entities themselves are ultimately responsible for hiring their employees  and achieving equitable representation.
section_title: U.S. Was Underrepresented in Three of Five UN Agencies and Increased Hiring of Americans Is Necessary to Meet Employment Targets
paragraphs: U.S. citizens were underrepresented at three of the five UN agencies we  reviewed: IAEA, UNESCO, and UNHCR. Given projected staff levels,  retirements and separations for 2006-2010, these agencies need to hire  more Americans than they have in recent years to meet their minimum  targets for equitable U.S. representation in 2010.
subsections: section_title: U.S. Citizens Were Underrepresented Relative to Targets at Three UN Agencies
paragraphs: Relative to UN agencies’ formal or informal targets for equitable  geographic representation, U.S. citizens were underrepresented at three of  the five agencies we reviewed–IAEA, UNESCO, and UNHCR. U.S. citizens  were equitably represented at the UN Secretariat, though at the lower end  of its target range, while the fifth agency–UNDP–had not established a  target for U.S. representation. U.S. citizens filled about 11 percent of  UNDP’s professional positions. Table 1 provides information on U.S.  representation at the five UN agencies as of 2005.
Table 1 also shows that the percentage of U.S. citizens employed in  nongeographic positions (or nonregular positions in the case of UNHCR  and UNDP) was higher at IAEA, UNHCR, and UNDP and lower at the  Secretariat and UNESCO compared to the percentage of geographic (or  regular) positions held by U.S. citizens.
As shown in table 2, U.S. citizen representation in geographic positions in  “all grades” between 2001 and 2005 had been declining at UNHCR and  displayed no clear trend at the other four UN agencies.
U.S. representation in policy-making and senior-level positions increased  at two agencies -–IAEA and UNDP—and displayed no overall trend at the  Secretariat, UNESCO, and UNHCR over the full five years. At the  Secretariat, although no trend was indicated, U.S. representation had been  decreasing in policy-making and senior-level positions since 2002. At  UNESCO, the data for 2001 to 2004 did not reflect a trend, but the overall  percentage of Americans increased in 2005, reflecting increased recruiting  efforts after the United States rejoined UNESCO in 2003. At UNHCR, the  representation of U.S. citizens in these positions grew steadily from 2001  to 2004, but declined in 2005.
section_title: Increased Hiring of Americans Needed to Meet Several UN Agencies’ Minimum Targets
paragraphs: We estimated that each of the four agencies with geographic targets–the  Secretariat, IAEA, UNESCO, and UNHCR–would need to hire U.S. citizens  in greater numbers than they had in recent years to achieve their minimum  targets by 2010, given projected staff levels, retirements, and separations;  otherwise, with the exception of UNESCO, U.S. geographic representation  will decline further. As shown in table 3, IAEA and UNHCR would need to  more than double their current average hiring rate to achieve targets for  U.S. representation. The Secretariat could continue to meet its minimum  geographic target for U.S. citizens if it increased its annual hiring of U.S.  citizens from 20 to 23. UNESCO could achieve its minimum geographic  target by increasing its current hiring average of 4.5 Americans to 6  Americans. Although the fifth agency, UNDP, did not have a target, it  would have to increase its annual hiring average of U.S. citizens from 17.5  to 26 in order to maintain its current ratio of U.S. regular professional staff  to total agency regular professional staff.
If current hiring levels are maintained through 2010, two of the five  agencies–IAEA and UNHCR–would fall substantially below their minimum  targets. In only one agency–UNESCO–would the percentage of geographic  positions filled by U.S. citizens increase under current hiring levels, due in  part to the recent increased hiring of U.S. citizens.
section_title: While Common Barriers to Increasing U.S. Representation Existed, UN Agencies Also Faced Distinct Employment Challenges
paragraphs: A combination of barriers, including some common factors as well as  agency-specific factors, adversely affected recruitment and retention of  professional staff, including Americans, at each of the five UN agencies.  These barriers combined with distinct agency-specific factors to impede  recruitment and retention.
subsections: section_title: Common Barriers Adversely Affected U.S. Representation at Several UN Agencies
paragraphs: We identified the following six barriers that affected U.S. representation in  the UN agencies we reviewed, though often to differing degrees:    Nontransparent human resource practices. A key barrier to American  representation across the five UN agencies was the lack of transparent  human resource management practices, according to Americans employed  at UN organizations. For example, some UN managers circumvented the  competitive hiring process by employing individuals on short-term  contracts—positions that were not vetted through the regular, competitive  process—for long-term needs.
Limited external opportunities. Recruiting U.S. candidates was  difficult because agencies offered a limited number of posts to external  candidates. Each of the organizations we reviewed, except IAEA,  advertised professional vacancies to current employees before advertising  them externally in order to provide career paths and motivation for their  staff. We found that three of the five agencies—UNESCO, UNHCR, and  UNDP—filled 50 percent or more of new appointments through  promotions or with other internal candidates rather than by hiring  external candidates. IAEA filled a large percentage of its positions with  external candidates because, in addition to not giving internal candidates  hiring preference, the agency employed the majority of its staff members  for 7 years or less. Although the data indicated that the Secretariat hired a  significant percentage of external candidates, the Secretariat’s definition  of “external candidates” included staff on temporary contracts and  individuals who had previous experience working at the agency.
Lengthy hiring process. The agencies’ lengthy hiring processes can deter  candidates from accepting UN employment. For example, a report from  the Secretary General stated that the average hiring process was too slow,  taking 174 days from the time a vacancy announcement was issued to the  time a candidate was selected, causing some qualified applicants to accept  jobs elsewhere. Many Americans that we interviewed concurred with the  report, saying that it was difficult to plan a job move when there was a  long delay between submitting an application and receiving an offer. In  March 2006, the Secretary General proposed cutting the average  recruitment time in half.
Low or unclear compensation. Comparatively low salaries and benefits  that were not clearly explained were among the most frequently  mentioned deterrents to UN employment for Americans. American  employees we interviewed noted that UN salaries, particularly for senior  and technical posts, were not comparable with U.S. government and  private sector salaries. When candidates consider UN salaries in tandem  with UN employee benefits, such as possible reimbursement for U.S. taxes  and school tuition allowances through college, UN compensation may be  more attractive. However, U.S. citizens employed at IAEA and UNESCO  said that their agency did not clearly explain the benefits, or explained  them only after a candidate had accepted a position. Incomplete or late  information hampered a candidate’s ability to decide in a timely manner  whether a UN position was in his or her best interests. In addition,  difficulty securing spousal employment can decrease family income and  may also affect American recruitment since many U.S. families have two  wage earners. At many overseas UN duty stations, work permits can be  difficult to obtain, the local economy may offer few employment  opportunities, and knowledge of the local language may be required.
Required mobility or rotation. UNHCR and UNDP required their staff  to change posts at least every 3 to 6 years with the expectation that staff  serve the larger portion of their career in the field; the UN Secretariat and  UNESCO were implementing similar policies. While IAEA did not require  its employees to change posts, it generally only hired employees for 7  years or less. Such policies dissuaded some Americans from accepting or  staying in a UN position because of the disruptions to personal or family  life such frequent moves can cause.
Limited U.S. government support. At four of the five agencies we  reviewed—all except IAEA—a number of American employees said that  they did not receive U.S. government support during their efforts to obtain  a UN job or to be promoted at the job they held. The U.S. government  supported candidates applying for director-level, or higher, posts, and put  less emphasis on supporting candidates seeking lower-level professional  posts. Although UN employees are international civil servants directly  hired by UN agencies, some countries facilitate the recruitment of their  nationals by referring qualified candidates, conducting recruitment  missions, and sponsoring JPOs or Associate Experts.
section_title: Agency-specific Factors Adversely Affected U.S. Representation at Several UN Agencies
paragraphs: Distinct agency-specific factors also impeded recruitment and retention.  For example,    Candidates serving in professional positions funded by their member  governments were more likely to be hired by the Secretariat than those  who took the Secretariat’s entry-level exam; however, the United States  had not funded such positions at the Secretariat. At the entry level, hiring  for professional positions was limited to an average of 2 percent of  individuals invited to take the Secretariat’s National Competitive  Recruitment Exam. In contrast, the Secretariat hired an average of 65  percent of Associate Experts sponsored by their national government.
Continuing U.S. underrepresentation at the IAEA was described by U.S.  government officials as a “supply-side issue,” with the pool of American  candidates with the necessary education and experience decreasing, as  nuclear specialists are aging and few young people are entering the  nuclear field.
The United States’ 19-year withdrawal from UNESCO contributed to its  underrepresentation. When the United States left UNESCO in 1984,  Americans comprised 9.6 percent of the organization’s geographic  professional staff. When it rejoined in 2003, Americans comprised only 2.9  percent. By 2005 that number had increased to 4.1 percent—the third  largest group of nationals UNESCO employed, although still below the  minimum geographic target.
The difficult conditions that accompany much of UNHCR’s work, coupled  with the requirement to change duty stations every 4 years, contributed to  attrition at the mid-career levels. UNHCR’s requirement that employees  change duty stations every 4 years was one of the most frequently cited  barriers to retaining staff among the American employees we interviewed.  UNHCR’s mission to safeguard the rights and well-being of refugees  necessitates work in hardship and high-risk locations. As such, UNHCR  has twice as many hardship duty stations as any other UN agency.
Several barriers to increasing U.S. representation were the leading factors  at UNDP and were also present at other UN agencies, according to  American employees and other officials. In addition, UNDP’s Executive  Board had traditionally managed the organization with the understanding  that its staff be equally represented from northern (mostly developed) and  southern (mostly developing) countries, and had recently focused on  improving the north-south balance of staff at management levels by  increasing the hiring of candidates from southern countries.
section_title: State Increased Efforts to Promote U.S. Representation, but Additional Options Exist to Target Professional Positions
paragraphs: State targeted its recruitment efforts for senior and policy-making UN  positions, and, although it was difficult to directly link State’s efforts to UN  hiring decisions, U.S. representation in these positions either improved or  displayed no trend in the five UN agencies we reviewed. State also  increased its efforts to improve overall U.S. representation; however,  despite these efforts, U.S. representation in entry-level positions declined  or did not reflect a trend in four of the five UN agencies. Additional  options exist to target potential pools of candidates for these positions.
subsections: section_title: State Recruiting Efforts Focused on Senior Positions, and U.S. Representation in These Positions Improved or Showed No Trend
paragraphs: State focused its recruiting efforts for U.S. citizen employment at UN  agencies on senior-level and policy-making positions because of the  influence that these positions have within the organization. Although it is  difficult to directly link State’s efforts to UN hiring decisions, the  percentage of U.S. representation in senior and policymaking positions  either increased or did not display a trend at each of the five UN agencies  we reviewed between 2001 and 2005. The U.S. share of senior and  policymaking positions increased at IAEA and UNDP, whereas the U.S.  share of these positions at the other three UN agencies displayed no trend  over that period.
section_title: State Increased Activities to Support Greater U.S. Representation, but the Employment of Americans in Entry-level Positions Declined or Displayed No Trend in Four Agencies
paragraphs: Since 2001, State has devoted additional resources and undertaken several  new initiatives in its role as the lead U.S. agency for supporting and  promoting the employment of Americans in UN organizations. First, State  increased resources for disseminating UN vacancy information. State  increased the number of staff positions from two to five, and added a sixth  person who worked part-time on UN employment issues. One of the new  staff focused on recruiting Americans for senior-level positions at UN  organizations. According to State, the other staff have been recruiting  candidates for professional positions at career fairs and other venues;  however, a large portion of their work has been focused on providing  information to potential applicants and disseminating information on UN  vacancies and opportunities. In addition, State has increased outreach for  the Secretariat’s annual National Competitive Recruitment Exam for entry- level candidates by advertising it in selected newspapers. The number of  Americans invited to take the exam increased from 40 in 2001 to 277 in  2004. State reported that 178 Americans in 2007 were invited to take the  exam.  Second, U.S. missions have shared U.S. representation reports and  discussed openings with UN officials. State prepares annual reports to  Congress that provide data on U.S. employment at UN agencies as well as  State’s assessment of U.S. representation at selected UN organizations and  these organizations’ efforts to hire more Americans. State is providing  these reports to UN agencies, as we recommended in 2001. U.S. mission  officials told us that they periodically meet with UN officials to discuss  U.S. representation and upcoming vacancies.
Finally, State has increased coordination with U.S. agencies. In 2003, State  established an interagency task force to address the low representation of  Americans in international organizations. Since then, task members have  met annually to discuss U.S. employment issues. Task force participants  told us that at these meetings, State officials reported on their outreach  activities and encouraged agencies to promote the employment of  Americans at UN organizations. One of the topics discussed by task force  members was how to increase support for details and transfers of U.S.  agency employees to UN organizations. In May 2006, the Secretary of State  sent letters to the heads of 23 federal agencies urging that they review  their policies for transferring and detailing employees to international  organizations to ensure that these mechanisms are positively and actively  promoted. While the Secretary’s letters may help to spur U.S. agencies to  clarify their support for these initiatives, agency officials told us that their  offices lacked the resources for staff details, which involve paying the  salary of the detailed staff as well as “backfilling” that person’s position by  adding a replacement. State also has been periodically meeting one-on- one with U.S. agencies to discuss the employment situation and recruiting  efforts at specific UN organizations. A State official told us that State’s UN  employment office meets with a few U.S. agencies per year to discuss UN  agency staffing issues.
Despite the new and continuing activities undertaken by State, U.S.  representation in entry-level positions declined or displayed no trend in  four of the five agencies we reviewed. U.S. representation in these  positions declined at IAEA, UNHCR, and UNDP. The representation of  Americans in entry-level positions at the Secretariat displayed no trend  during the time period. At UNESCO, U.S. representation increased from  1.3 percent in 2003 to 2.7 percent in 2004, reflecting the time period when  the United States rejoined the organization.
section_title: Additional Options to Target Professional Positions Exist
paragraphs: We identified several options to target U.S. representation in professional  positions, including the following:    Maintaining a roster of qualified candidates. Prior to 2001, State had  maintained a roster of qualified American candidates for professional and  technical positions, but discontinued it. State officials told us that they  have not maintained a professional roster, or the prescreening of  candidates, despite the recent increase in staff resources, because  maintaining such a roster had been resource intensive and because the  office does not actively recruit for UN professional positions at the entry-  and mid-levels. However, State acknowledged that utilizing new  technologies, such as developing a Web-based roster, may reduce the time  and cost of updating a roster. Other U.S. government and UN officials told  us that some other countries maintained rosters of prescreened, qualified  candidates for UN positions and that this practice was an effective  strategy for promoting their nationals. In July 2007, State officials said that  they began researching Internet-based options for compiling a roster of  potential U.S. candidates.  State estimated the cost to set up such a roster  at about $100,000, but had not received funding for the roster.
Expanding marketing and outreach activities. State had not taken  steps that could further expand the audience for its outreach efforts. For  example, while State had increased its coordination with other U.S.  agencies on UN employment issues and distributed the biweekly vacancy  announcements to agency contacts, U.S. agency officials that received  these vacancy announcements told us that they lacked the authority to  distribute the vacancies beyond their particular office or division. One  official commented that State had not established the appropriate contacts  to facilitate agency-wide distribution of UN vacancies, and that the limited  dissemination had neutralized the impact of this effort. Several inter- agency task force participants also stated that no specific follow-up  activities were discussed or planned between the annual meetings, and  they could not point to any tangible results or outcomes resulting from the  meetings. State also had not taken advantage of opportunities to expand  the audience for its outreach activities. For example, State did not work  with the Association of Professional Schools of International Affairs to  reach potential candidates or advertise in some outlets that reach Peace  Corps volunteers. In July 2007, State officials said they continue to  outreach to new groups and attend new career fairs but have faced  difficulty in identifying pools of candidates with the required skills and  experience.
Increasing and improving UN employment information on U.S.  agency Web sites. State’s UN vacancy list and its UN employment Web  site had limitations. For example, the list of vacancies was not organized  by occupation, or even organization, and readers had to search the entire  list for openings in their areas of interest. Further, State’s UN employment  Web site had limited information on other UN employment programs and  did not link to U.S. agencies that provide more specific information, such  as the Department of Energy’s Brookhaven National Laboratory Web site.  In addition, the Web site provided limited information or tools to clarify  common questions, such as those pertaining to compensation and  benefits. For example, the Web site did not provide a means for applicants  to obtain more specific information on their expected total compensation,  including benefits and U.S. income tax. Since we issued our report, State  has added a UN pamphlet on benefits and compensation to its Web site. In  July 2007, State officials told us they are exploring ways to improve the  information available on UN compensation and benefits. For our 2006  report, we reviewed 22 additional U.S. mission and U.S. agency Web sites,  and they revealed varying, and in many cases limited, information on UN  employment opportunities. Overall, 9 of the 22 U.S. mission and agency  Web sites did not have links to UN employment opportunities. Nearly 60  percent of the missions and agencies provided some information or links  to information on salaries and benefits. We updated our analysis in July  2007 and found the situation had worsened somewhat. Eleven of the 22  U.S. mission and agency Web sites did not have links to UN employment  opportunities and only about 50 percent of these Web sites provided some  information or links to information on salaries and benefits.
Analyzing the costs and benefits of sponsoring JPOs. The U.S.  government sponsored JPOs at two of the five UN agencies that we  reviewed, but had not assessed the overall costs and benefits of supporting  JPOs as a mechanism for increasing U.S. representation across UN  agencies. Among the five agencies, State had funded a long-standing JPO  program only at UNHCR, sponsoring an average of 15 JPOs per year  between 2001 and 2005. The Department of Energy’s Brookhaven National  Laboratory also had supported two JPOs at IAEA since 2004. For four of  the five agencies we reviewed, the percentage of individuals that were  hired for regular positions upon completion of the JPO program ranged  from 34 to 65 percent. In some cases, former JPOs were offered regular  positions and did not accept them, or took positions in other UN  organizations. The estimated annual cost for these positions to the  sponsoring government ranged from $100,000 to $140,000 at the five UN  agencies. State officials told us in July 2007 that they had not assessed the  overall costs and benefits of supporting JPOs.
section_title: Conclusions
paragraphs: Achieving equitable U.S. representation will be an increasingly difficult  hurdle to overcome at UN organizations. Four of the five UN organizations  we reviewed, all except UNESCO, will have to hire Americans in  increasing numbers merely to maintain the current levels of U.S.  representation. Failure to increase such hiring will lead the four UN  organizations with geographic targets to fall below or stay below the  minimum thresholds set for U.S. employment.
As the lead department in charge of U.S. government efforts to promote  equitable American representation at the UN, State will continue to face a  number of barriers to increasing the employment of Americans at these  organizations, most of which are outside the U.S. government’s control.  For example, lengthy hiring processes and mandatory rotation policies can  deter qualified Americans from applying for or remaining in UN positions.
Nonetheless, if increasing the number of U.S. citizens employed at UN  organizations remains a high priority for State, it is important that the  department facilitate a continuing supply of qualified applicants for UN  professional positions at all levels. State focuses much of its recruiting  efforts on senior and policy-making positions, and U.S. citizens hold over  10 percent of these positions at four of the five agencies we reviewed.  While State has increased its resources and activities in recent years to  support increased U.S. representation overall, additional actions to  facilitate the employment of Americans in entry- and mid-level  professional positions are needed to overcome declining U.S. employment  in these positions and meet employment targets.
Because equitable representation of Americans employed at UN  organizations has been a high priority for U.S. interests, we recommended  that the Secretary of State take the following actions:    provide more consistent and comprehensive information about UN  employment on the State and U.S. mission Web sites and work with U.S.  agencies to expand the UN employment information on their Web sites.  This could include identifying options for developing a benefits calculator  that would enable applicants to better estimate their potential total  compensation based on their individual circumstances;   expand targeted recruiting and outreach to more strategically reach  populations of Americans that may be qualified for and interested in entry-  and mid-level UN positions; and   conduct an evaluation of the costs, benefits, and trade-offs of:    maintaining a roster of qualified candidates for professional and senior  positions determined to be a high priority for U.S. interests; funding Junior Professional Officers, or other gratis personnel, where  Americans are underrepresented or in danger of becoming  underrepresented.
In commenting on a draft of our 2006 report, State concurred with and  agreed to implement all of our recommendations.  In July 2007, State  officials updated us on the actions they have taken in response to our 2006  report recommendations.
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, this concludes my  prepared statement. I would be pleased to answer any questions that you  may have.
subsections: section_title: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
paragraphs: Should you have any questions about this testimony, please contact  Thomas Melito, Director, at (202) 512-9601 or MelitoT@gao.gov. Other  major contributors to this testimony were Cheryl Goodman, Assistant  Director; Jeremy Latimer; Miriam Carroll; R.G. Steinman; Barbara Shields;  Lyric Clark; Sarah Chankin-Gould; Joe Carney; and Debbie Chung. Martin  De Alteriis, Bruce Kutnick, Anna Maria Ortiz, Mary Moutsos, Mark Speight,  and George Taylor provided technical assistance.
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the  United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further  permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or  other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to  reproduce this material separately.