Department of State: Integrated Action Plan Could Enhance Efforts to Reduce Persistent Overseas Foreign Service Vacancies
Released: 2019-03-06T00:00:00


Highlights: section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: State staffs Foreign Service employees to more than 270 embassies and consulates worldwide to advance U.S. foreign policy and economic interests. In 2009 and 2012, GAO identified ongoing Foreign Service staffing gaps.

GAO was asked to review State's Foreign Service staffing. This report examines (1) vacancies in State's Foreign Service staffing at overseas posts, (2) reported effects of Foreign Service vacancies on diplomatic readiness, and (3) State's efforts to address Foreign Service vacancies. To address these objectives, GAO analyzed State's Global Employment Management System data as of March 2018. The system includes information on Foreign Service and Civil Service positions, including the total number of authorized Foreign Service positions and whether each position is filled or vacant. GAO also reviewed its relevant prior reports and State workforce planning documents. In addition, GAO interviewed State staff at 10 overseas posts, selected on the basis of large numbers of Foreign Service vacancies and diversity in the types of Foreign Service positions that were vacant at these posts, among other factors.

section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: The Department of State's (State) data show persistent Foreign Service vacancies at overseas posts since 2008. According to the data, 13 percent of overseas Foreign Service positions were vacant as of March 2018. This percentage is similar to the percentages GAO reported for 2008 and 2012, when 14 percent of these positions were vacant. In addition, State's data show persistent vacancies at overseas posts in generalist positions that help formulate and implement U.S. foreign policy and in specialist positions that support and maintain the functioning of overseas posts. State's data also show persistent Foreign Service vacancies at overseas posts with State's highest foreign policy priorities and in regions with security risks that could threaten U.S. foreign policy interests.

According to staff at overseas posts, Foreign Service vacancies adversely affect State's ability to carry out U.S. foreign policy. Staff at overseas posts told us that vacancies increase workloads, contributing to low morale and higher stress for Foreign Service staff and that vacancies in Political and Economic positions—20 percent and 16 percent, respectively—limit the reporting on political and economic issues that posts are able to provide to State headquarters. Notably, officials also stated that vacancies in specialist positions may heighten security risks at overseas posts and disrupt post operations. For instance, some overseas post staff said that vacancies in Information Management positions had increased the vulnerability of posts' computer networks to potential cybersecurity attacks and other malicious threats.

State described various efforts—implemented by multiple offices in the department —to help address overseas Foreign Service vacancies, but these efforts are not guided by an integrated action plan to reduce persistent vacancies. An example of State's efforts is the “Hard-to-Fill” program, which allows Civil Service staff an opportunity to fill a Foreign Service vacancy on a single overseas tour. According to GAO's 2017 High-Risk Series report, an agency should design and implement an action plan—integrated across its relevant offices—that defines the root causes of all skills gaps and suggests corrective measures. However, State has not developed such an action plan for reducing persistent overseas Foreign Service vacancies. Without developing an integrated action plan, overseas Foreign Service vacancies may persist. As a result, State's ability to achieve U.S. foreign policy goals and help ensure secure and efficient operations could be adversely impacted.

section_title: What GAO Recommends
paragraphs: GAO recommends that State develop an integrated action plan that defines the root causes of persistent Foreign Service vacancies at overseas posts and suggests corrective measures to reduce such vacancies. State concurred with our recommendation and noted that it will take steps to develop an integrated action plan.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: To advance U.S. foreign policy and economic interests, the Department  of State (State) had staffed Foreign Service employees to about 9,850  overseas positions at more than 270 overseas posts worldwide as of  March 31, 2018. Those Foreign Service employees play a critical role in  achieving U.S. foreign policy goals. However, as we reported in 2009  and 2012, State has faced challenges in meeting its overseas staffing  needs, resulting in Foreign Service staffing gaps that put diplomatic  readiness at risk.

We were asked to review staffing for State’s Foreign Service at overseas  posts. In this report, we examine (1) vacancies in State’s Foreign Service  staffing at overseas posts, (2) reported effects of Foreign Service  vacancies on diplomatic readiness, and (3) State’s efforts to address  Foreign Service vacancies.

To address these objectives, we analyzed State’s personnel data on  Foreign Service staffing at overseas posts from State’s Global  Employment Management System (GEMS) as of March 2018. We also  interviewed State officials from the Bureau of Human Resources and the  Bureau of Consular Affairs, as well as State officials representing the  Offices of the Executive Director for State’s six regional bureaus. In  addition, we interviewed staff at 10 overseas posts. We conducted  interviews in person with staff at 3 of these posts—the U.S. Embassy in  Beijing, China; the U.S. Consulate in Shanghai, China; and the U.S.  Embassy in New Delhi, India—and conducted telephone interviews with  staff at the other 7 posts—the U.S. Embassies in Abuja, Nigeria; Bogota,  Colombia; Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo; Kabul,  Afghanistan; Mexico City, Mexico; and N’Djamena, Chad; and the U.S.  Consulate in Frankfurt, Germany. We also reviewed State workforce  planning documents and budget documents, such as State’s Five Year  Workforce and Leadership Succession Plan: Fiscal Years 2016-2020  and Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review. We did not  assess whether the total number of authorized overseas Foreign Service  positions was appropriate or met State’s needs.

In addition, we reviewed State Office of Inspector General (OIG) reports  as well as our 2012 and 2009 reports on human capital challenges at  State and effective strategic human capital management across the  federal government. In particular, our 2017 report High-Risk Series:  Progress on Many High-Risk Areas, While Substantial Efforts Needed on  Others states that strategic human capital management is a high-risk  issue across the federal government, and lists five key elements as a  road map for agency efforts to improve and ultimately address such  issues. For our third objective, we assessed whether State’s efforts to  address vacancies were guided by a corrective action plan that identifies  the root causes of persistent Foreign Service vacancies at overseas posts  and suggests corrective measures to reduce such vacancies. Appendix I  contains a more detailed description of our objectives, scope, and  methodology.

We conducted this performance audit from August 2017 to March 2019 in  accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.  Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain  sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our  findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that  the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and  conclusions based on our audit objectives.
subsections: section_title: Background
paragraphs: State is the lead agency involved in implementing American foreign policy  and representing the United States abroad. According to State and  USAID’s joint strategic plan for fiscal years 2018 through 2022, State’s  goals are to (1) protect America’s security at home and abroad, (2) renew  America’s competitive advantage for sustained economic growth and job  creation, (3) promote American leadership through balanced  engagement, and (4) ensure effectiveness and accountability to the  American taxpayer.

State’s Foreign Service employees serve in a variety of functions at  overseas posts as either generalists or specialists. Foreign Service  generalists help formulate and implement U.S. foreign policy and are  assigned to work in one of five career tracks: consular, economic,  management, political, or public diplomacy. Generalists at overseas posts  collect information and engage with foreign governments and citizens of  foreign countries and report the results of these interactions back to State  headquarters in Washington, D.C., among other functions. Foreign  Service specialists abroad support and maintain the functioning of  overseas posts and serve in one of 25 different skill groups, in positions  such as security officer or information management. Specialists at  overseas posts play a critical role in ensuring the security and  maintenance of the posts’ facilities, computer networks, and supplies as  well as the protection of post staff, their family members, and local staff,  among other functions.

State may require Foreign Service employees to be available for service  anywhere in the world, as needed, and State has the authority to direct  Foreign Service employees to any of its posts overseas or to its  headquarters in Washington, D.C. However, as noted in our 2012  report, State generally does not use this authority, preferring other means  of filling high-priority positions, according to State officials. The process  of assigning Foreign Service employees to their positions typically begins  when they receive a list of upcoming vacancies for which they may  compete. Foreign Service employees then submit a list of positions for  which they would like to be considered, known as bids, to the Office of  Career Development and Assignments and consult with their career  development officer. The process varies depending on an officer’s grade  and functional specialty, and State uses a variety of incentives to  encourage Foreign Service employees to bid on difficult-to-fill posts.

State groups countries of the world—and corresponding U.S. overseas  posts in these countries—into areas of responsibility under six geographic  regional bureaus:

Bureau of African Affairs

Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs

Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs

Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs

Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs

Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs  Overseas posts report to State headquarters through their respective  regional bureaus. For example, because the Bureau of African Affairs has  responsibility for developing and managing U.S. policy concerning parts  of the African continent, U.S. overseas posts in Nigeria report through the  bureau to State headquarters.

According to State officials, State maintains personnel data on State  employees in its GEMS database. GEMS includes information on Foreign  Service and Civil Service positions; in particular, it shows the total number  of authorized Foreign Service positions at State and whether each  position is currently filled or vacant. As displayed in figure 1, the GEMS  data show that the majority of Foreign Service employees (73 percent)  work in positions at overseas posts. However, some Foreign Service staff  (27 percent) are assigned to positions in the United States, where they  may complete required language or other training, serve as desk officers  for the regional bureaus, or work in other functions at State headquarters.
subsections: section_title: Overseas Foreign Service Vacancies Have Persisted over Time While Overseas Foreign Service Staffing Has Increased, Staffing Gaps Persist
paragraphs: According to State data, the number of both staffed and vacant overseas  Foreign Service positions increased between 2008 and 2018. As shown  in figure 2, the number of positions staffed grew from 6,979 in 2008 to  8,574 in 2018—a more than 20 percent increase. Despite the increase in  the number of positions staffed, our analysis found that as of March 31,  2018, overall, 13 percent of State’s overseas Foreign Service positions  were vacant. This vacancy percentage is similar to the percentages of  vacancies in overseas Foreign Service positions that we reported in 2012  and 2008. In 2012, we reported that 14 percent of State’s overseas  Foreign Service positions were vacant as of October 31, 2011, and we  reported that the same percentage of overseas Foreign Service  positions—14 percent—were vacant as of September 30, 2008.

According to State officials, State’s ability to hire Foreign Service  employees to fill persistent vacancies has been affected by factors such  as reduced appropriations. For instance, according to State officials and  State’s Five Year Workforce Plan, because of funding cuts enacted in  fiscal year 2013, State could only hire one employee for every two leaving  the Foreign Service. From fiscal years 2014 to 2016, funding for State’s  annual appropriations supported hiring to replace Foreign Service  employees projected to leave the agency, according to State officials.  These officials indicated, however, that Foreign Service hiring was again  impacted from January 2017 through May 2018 by a hiring freeze. As a  result, State hired below levels required to replace full projected attrition  of Foreign Service employees.

section_title: State’s Data Show Higher Vacancy Rates in Foreign Service Specialist Positions Compared to Foreign Service Generalist Positions
paragraphs: While State’s data show persistent vacancies in both generalist and  specialist positions at overseas posts, specialist positions remain vacant  at a higher rate. State’s data show that 12 percent (680 of 5,660) of  overseas Foreign Service generalist positions were vacant as of March  31, 2018, a slight decrease from the 14 percent of overseas Foreign  Service generalist positions that we reported vacant in 2012. State’s  data also show that 14.2 percent (594 of 4,188) of all overseas Foreign  Service specialist positions were vacant, close to the 14.8 percent  vacancy rate that we reported in 2012.
subsections: section_title: Foreign Service Generalists
paragraphs: State’s data show persistent vacancies in Foreign Service generalist  positions responsible for analysis, engagement, and reporting at overseas  posts. As shown in table 1, among Foreign Service generalist career  tracks, the political, economic, and “other” tracks had the largest  percentage of vacant positions, with, respectively, 20 percent, 16 percent,  and 14 percent of positions vacant as of March 31, 2018. Our 2012 report  noted vacancies in the same three career tracks. Political officers at  overseas posts are responsible for collecting and analyzing information  on political events, engaging with foreign governments, and reporting  back to State headquarters. Economic officers at overseas posts work  with foreign governments and other U.S. agencies on technology,  science, economic, trade, and environmental issues. The “other”  generalist career track includes positions designated as “Executive” or  “International Relations,” which, according to State officials, may be filled  by generalists from any of State’s five career tracks.

State’s data show persistent vacancies in Foreign Service specialist  positions that support and maintain the functioning of overseas posts.  Among the 10 largest Foreign Service specialist skill groups, security  officer, office management specialist, and information management had  the largest percentages of vacant positions. As shown in figure 3, in these  three groups, respectively, 16 percent, 16 percent, and 14 percent of  positions were vacant. The vacancies in these three specialist skill groups  are persistent; in 2012, we reported that the same three groups had the  largest numbers of vacant positions. Security officers are typically  responsible for responding to various threats to the physical security of  overseas posts and for ensuring the protection of post staff, their family  members, and local staff. Office management specialists provide  professional management and administrative support. Information  management staff are typically responsible for maintaining and ensuring  the security of State’s computer networks and communications systems  at overseas posts.

section_title: State Faces Challenges Recruiting Personnel to Fill Some Foreign Service Specialist Positions That Often Require Specialized Skills and Competencies
paragraphs: State officials said that State has had difficulty in recruiting and hiring  Foreign Service employees to fill specialist positions in some skill groups  at overseas posts. According to State officials and staff at overseas posts,  some vacant specialist positions are more difficult to fill than others  because candidates for these positions must often possess skills in fields  such as medicine or information technology that tend to be highly sought  after in the private sector. According to staff at overseas posts, it is not  uncommon for specialist candidates in these fields to choose higher- paying jobs in the private sector rather than specialist positions in the  Foreign Service. Additionally, in some circumstances, State must  compete with other federal agencies to recruit specialists from the same  limited pool of talent. Consequently, according to State officials, State has  been unable to attract and retain personnel with the skills necessary to fill  some Foreign Service specialist positions, which has led to persistent  vacancies in specialist positions.

Vacancies in Foreign Service specialist positions at overseas posts  present additional challenges because specialized skills and  competencies are often required to perform the work of these positions.  According to State officials, because Foreign Service generalists may be  assigned to work outside of their career tracks, in some circumstances,  State has more flexibility in filling a generalist vacancy than a specialist  vacancy. For example, generalists outside the consular career track can  serve as a consular officer for one or more tours of duty. However,  specialist positions often require specialized skills or experience that  generalists may not possess. In addition, according to staff at overseas  posts, it is generally not possible for a Foreign Service specialist from one  skill group to perform the work of a Foreign Service specialist from a  different skill group. For instance, a Foreign Service specialist assigned  to the medical section at a post will not be able to help address the  workload of a vacant position in the information management section.  Thus, according to staff at overseas posts, vacancies in specialist  positions at the posts may create greater challenges than vacancies in  generalist positions.

section_title: State’s Data Show Persistent Foreign Service Vacancies at Overseas Posts with State’s Highest Foreign Policy Priorities
paragraphs: According to State’s data, as of March 31, 2018, overseas posts with  State’s highest foreign policy priorities had the highest percentages of  vacant Foreign Service positions. Using its Overseas Staffing Model  process, State assigns each embassy to one of seven categories based  primarily on the level and type of work required to pursue the U.S.  government’s diplomatic relations with the host country at post. As we  previously reported, the rankings are closely associated with the  department’s foreign policy priorities; the higher the category, the greater  the resources needed to conduct the work of the overseas post and the  higher the post’s foreign policy priority. For example, the highest-level  category, level 5+, includes the largest, most comprehensive full-service  posts, where the host country’s regional and global role requires  extensive U.S. personnel resources. The lowest-level category includes  small embassies with limited requirements for advocacy, liaison, and  coordination in the host country’s government. As shown in table 2,  according to State’s data, as of March 31, 2018, overseas posts in the  “Embassy 5+” category had the highest percentage of vacant positions.  The results of this analysis were similar to those we reported in 2012.

section_title: State’s Data Show Higher Vacancy Rates in Regions with Security Risks That Could Threaten U.S. Foreign Policy Interests
paragraphs: While State has Foreign Service vacancies worldwide, as of March 31,  2018, the highest percentages of vacancies were in the South and  Central Asian Affairs Bureau (SCA) and Near Eastern Affairs Bureau  (NEA)—bureaus representing regions with heightened security risks that  could threaten U.S. foreign policy interests, according to State. SCA,  which includes countries such as Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India, faces  a host of security and stability challenges that could threaten U.S.  interests, according to a February 2018 report from State’s Office of  Inspector General. NEA includes countries, such as Egypt, Iraq, and  Saudi Arabia, which have faced numerous security threats in recent years  that could also threaten U.S. interests overseas.

As shown in figure 4, among State’s regional bureaus, as of March 31,  2018, SCA and NEA had the highest percentages of overseas Foreign  Service vacancies at 21 percent (238 of 1,115 positions) and 18 percent  (234 of 1,279 positions), respectively. In 2012, we reported that these  two bureaus also had the highest percentages of overseas Foreign  Service vacancies among regional bureaus.

section_title: Overseas Foreign Service Vacancies Have Adverse Effects on State’s Diplomatic Readiness Vacancies in Overseas Foreign Service Positions Increase Workloads and Affect Employee Morale, According to Staff at Overseas Posts
paragraphs: Vacancies in Foreign Service positions at overseas posts increase  workloads and adversely affect the morale of Foreign Service employees.  According to State officials in headquarters and staff at overseas posts,  when a Foreign Service position at an overseas post is vacant, Foreign  Service employees at that post are generally responsible for covering the  workload of the vacant position. Further, Foreign Service employees at  some posts—particularly posts with fewer Foreign Service staff—may be  responsible for covering the workload of multiple vacant positions. For  example, at two African posts we heard examples of Foreign Service  employees covering the workload of multiple vacant Foreign Service  positions. As a result of increased workloads, Foreign Service employees  are also more likely to have less time available to perform some important  functions, according to staff at overseas posts. According to staff at  overseas posts, such functions include training and supervising entry- level Foreign Service employees, local staff, and eligible family members  (EFM); reducing the risk of fraud, waste, and abuse; improving and  innovating processes at post that could reduce inefficiencies; initiating  and implementing projects that could enhance various diplomatic efforts;  and conducting maintenance of systems.

In addition, according to staff at overseas posts, vacancies adversely  affect staff morale. Staff at multiple posts said that vacancies and the  resulting increased workloads had created substantial stress and  increased “burnout” of Foreign Service employees at the posts. They  noted that these levels of stress and burnout had contributed to Foreign  Service employees’ ending their overseas assignments early for medical  or personal reasons. These curtailments, in turn, had increased the  overall vacancies and their effects at overseas posts.

section_title: Vacancies in Overseas Foreign Service Generalist Positions, Especially in the Political and Economic Career Tracks, Adversely Affect State’s Diplomatic Readiness
paragraphs: According to staff at overseas posts, vacancies in Foreign Service  generalist positions at overseas posts adversely affect State’s diplomatic  readiness. Among Foreign Service generalist career tracks, the political  and economic career tracks had the two largest percentages of vacant  positions—20 percent and 16 percent, respectively—as of March 31,  2018.

According to staff at overseas posts, vacancies in political and economic  positions at overseas posts—particularly posts with fewer Foreign Service  employees—limit the amount of reporting on political and economic  developments that posts are able to submit back to State headquarters.  For example, Foreign Service employees from three posts in Africa told  us that persistent, long-term vacancies in those posts’ political and  economic positions had constrained their abilities to provide full reporting  on political and economic developments in their host countries. According  to staff at overseas posts, reporting on political and economic  developments in other countries—submitted by overseas posts back to  State headquarters—is essential for State to make informed foreign policy  decisions. Foreign Service employees from two posts in large countries in  East and South Asia also told us that vacancies in these sections had  limited their capacity to engage with host government officials on  important, strategic issues for the United States, such as reducing nuclear  proliferation or enhancing trade and investment relationships with the  United States. Vacancies in the political and economic career tracks at  overseas posts could adversely affect State’s ability to achieve two of the  goals in State and USAID’s joint strategic plan for fiscal years 2018  through 2022—(1) renew America’s competitive advantage for sustained  economic growth and job creation and (2) promote American leadership  through balanced engagement.

section_title: Vacancies in Overseas Foreign Service Specialist Positions May Heighten Security Risks at Overseas Posts and Disrupt Post Operations
paragraphs: According to staff at overseas posts, vacancies in Foreign Service  specialist positions at overseas posts may heighten the level of security  risk at the posts and disrupt post operations. Among Foreign Service  specialist skill groups with the highest number of vacant positions,  security officer, office management specialist, and information  management had the largest percentages of vacant positions—16  percent, 16 percent, and 14 percent, respectively—as of March 31, 2018.
subsections: section_title: Security Officer
paragraphs: According to staff at overseas posts, vacancies in security officer  positions at overseas posts reduce the amount of time that security staff  can spend identifying, investigating, and responding to potential security  threats to the post. Security officers are also responsible for identifying  and analyzing host-country intelligence-gathering efforts at their  respective overseas posts—and post staff told us that, because of  vacancies in these positions, some security officers had been unable to  complete this work for their posts, potentially increasing the risk of foreign  government officials gaining access to sensitive information. Also, post  staff told us that security officer vacancies limit the amount of time that  security officers present at posts can devote to important security  oversight activities, including regular training, drilling, and supervising of  local guard forces and security contractors. Post staff noted, for example,  that security officers at overseas posts should conduct regular training  and drilling exercises to evaluate their local guard force’s effectiveness in  searching a vehicle entering the post compound for explosive devices.  According to post staff, when these important security oversight activities  are not properly and regularly conducted, the level of security risk at  these overseas posts may increase.

section_title: Information Management
paragraphs: According to State officials in headquarters and staff at overseas posts,  as well as reporting by State’s OIG, vacancies in information  management positions at overseas posts have increased the vulnerability  of posts’ computer networks to potential cybersecurity attacks and other  malicious threats. State officials told us that the Foreign Service had  faced chronic shortages of information management staff available to fill  these positions worldwide. According to State officials, because of  ongoing information management vacancies, some required tasks—such  as conducting planned network maintenance—were performed  infrequently or not at all. In another example, staff at overseas posts said  that because of vacancies, information management staff had been  unable to regularly check their computer system logs to ensure that  security breaches had not taken place. Post staff added that, if a breach  did occur, vacancies could increase the amount of time needed to identify  an attack and deploy countermeasures, further increasing the risks to  posts’ computer networks. Inspections conducted by State’s OIG from fall  2014 to spring 2016 found that information management staff at 33  percent of overseas posts had not performed various required information  management duties. According to State’s OIG, neglect of these duties  may leave the department vulnerable to increased cybersecurity attacks.

section_title: Office Management Specialist
paragraphs: According to staff at overseas posts, the office management specialist  position at overseas posts has evolved considerably over time; these  specialists increasingly play a critical role in ensuring that the work of  overseas posts is effectively completed. Post staff said that office  management specialists provide administrative and other support  services to other Foreign Service employees and are assigned to various  sections of post. For example, staff at one post noted that office  management specialists assigned to the Security Officer sections at  overseas posts reduce the workload of security officers by completing  more routine security tasks and allowing the security officers to focus on  more challenging or involved tasks necessary to secure overseas posts.  Post staff told us that vacancies in office management specialist positions  reduce the amount of work that can be completed by other Foreign  Service employees at overseas posts. For example, when office  management specialist positions assigned to the Security Officer or  Information Management sections of posts are vacant, these vacancies  further exacerbate the higher number of vacancies that already exist in  these sections. According to staff at overseas posts, higher numbers of  office management specialist vacancies require other Foreign Service  employees to spend a significant amount of time on administrative tasks,  reducing the amount of time these staff can spend on mission-critical  activities.

section_title: State Described Various Efforts to Address Overseas Foreign Service Vacancies, but These Efforts Are Not Guided by an Integrated Action Plan to Reduce Persistent Vacancies State Officials Described Various Efforts to Help Address Vacancies
paragraphs: Officials in headquarters and at overseas posts described various State  efforts to help address overseas Foreign Service vacancies. According to  State officials, Foreign Service vacancies at overseas posts are a  complex problem that multiple offices within State address on an  individual basis.
subsections: section_title: State’s Efforts to Address Overseas Foreign Service Vacancies Are Not Guided by an Integrated Action Plan to Reduce Persistent Vacancies
paragraphs: State’s various efforts to address overseas Foreign Service vacancies are  not guided by an integrated action plan to reduce persistent vacancies.  Our 2017 High-Risk Series report calls for agencies to, among other  things, design and implement action plan strategies for closing skills  gaps. The action plan should (1) define the root cause of all skills gaps  within an agency and (2) provide suggested corrective measures,  including steps necessary to implement solutions. This report also  emphasizes the high risk that mission-critical skills gaps in the federal  workforce pose to the nation.

While various State offices have implemented the efforts we identified,  State lacks an action plan that is integrated—or consolidated—across its  relevant offices to guide its efforts to address persistent overseas Foreign  Service vacancies. Moreover, some staff at overseas posts  acknowledged that the efforts State has taken to help address vacancies  have not reduced persistent Foreign Service vacancies, notably in  specialist positions. In response to our inquiry about an action plan, State  officials said that the agency does not have a single document that  addresses Foreign Service staffing gaps at overseas posts. Instead, State  officials directed us to State’s Five Year Workforce Plan: Fiscal Years  2016-2020, stating that it was the most comprehensive document that  outlines State’s efforts to address Foreign Service vacancies at overseas  posts. The workforce plan notes that it provides a framework to address  State’s human capital requirements and highlights State’s challenges and  achievements in recruiting, hiring, staffing, and training Foreign Service  staff. However, in reviewing the portions of the workforce plan that State  indicated were most relevant, we found that the workforce plan does not  include an integrated action plan that defines the root causes of the  persistent overseas Foreign Service vacancies we identified or suggest  corrective measures to reduce vacancies in these positions, including  steps necessary to implement solutions.

State officials also noted that they frequently meet to discuss and address  workforce issues. For example, they said they convene a multi-bureau  planning group that meets biweekly to discuss strategic workforce issues  such as hiring needs based on attrition and other issues. However,  according to State officials, this group has not developed an action plan to  reduce persistent Foreign Service vacancies at overseas posts.

State lacks an integrated action plan to guide its efforts to address  persistent Foreign Service vacancies that includes corrective measures to  address the root causes of the vacancies. Without defining the root  causes of persistent Foreign Service vacancies at overseas posts and  identifying appropriate corrective measures, overseas vacancies may  persist and continue to adversely affect State’s ability to achieve U.S.  foreign policy goals.

section_title: Conclusions
paragraphs: Foreign Service generalists and specialists at overseas posts are critical  to advancing U.S. foreign policy and economic interests abroad.  However, for at least a decade, the Foreign Service has had persistent  vacancies in both generalist and specialist positions at overseas posts. In  particular, large numbers of vacant positions have persisted over time in  certain overseas Foreign Service positions, such as information  management and security officer positions. These vacancies in critical  positions at overseas posts have adversely affected State’s ability to carry  out its mission effectively and threaten State’s ability to ensure the  security and safety of its employees, their families, and post facilities.  While State has made some efforts to address Foreign Service  vacancies, addressing chronic vacancies in critical positions at overseas  posts requires a thoughtful, coherent, and integrated action plan that  defines the root causes of persistent Foreign Service vacancies at  overseas posts along with suggested corrective measures to reduce such  vacancies, following what was called for in our 2017 High-Risk Series  report. Developing such an action plan would help State address its  persistent staffing gaps, improve its ability to achieve U.S. foreign policy  goals, and help ensure secure and efficient operations.

section_title: Recommendation for Executive Action
paragraphs: The Secretary of State should develop an integrated action plan that  defines the root causes of persistent Foreign Service vacancies at  overseas posts and provides suggested corrective measures to reduce  such vacancies, including steps necessary to implement solutions.  (Recommendation 1)

section_title: Agency Comments
paragraphs: We provided a draft of this report to State for review and comment. In its  comments, reproduced in appendix III, State concurred with our  recommendation. State also noted that it has taken actions and identified  some causes of vacancies, but acknowledged that it lacks an integrated  action plan and will take steps to develop such a plan. State also provided  technical comments, which we incorporated as appropriate.

We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate congressional  committees, the Secretary of State, and other interested parties. In  addition, the report is available at no charge on the GAO website at  http://www.gao.gov.

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact  me at (202) 512-6881 or bairj@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of  Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page  of this report. GAO staff who made key contributions to this report are  listed in appendix IV.

section_title: Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology
paragraphs: This report examines (1) vacancies in the Department of State’s (State)  Foreign Service staffing at overseas posts, (2) reported effects of Foreign  Service vacancies on diplomatic readiness, and (3) State’s efforts to  address Foreign Service vacancies.

To address these three objectives, we interviewed State officials from the  department’s Bureau of Human Resources and Bureau of Consular  Affairs as well as State officials representing the Offices of the Executive  Director for State’s six regional bureaus. We also interviewed staff at 10  overseas posts. We conducted in-person interviews with staff at 3 of  these posts—the U.S. Embassy in Beijing and the U.S. Consulate in  Shanghai, China, and the U.S. Embassy in New Delhi, India. We  conducted telephone interviews with staff at the other 7 posts—the U.S.  Embassies in Abuja, Nigeria; Bogota, Colombia; Kinshasa, Democratic  Republic of the Congo; Kabul, Afghanistan; Mexico City, Mexico; and  N’Djamena, Chad; and the U.S. Consulate in Frankfurt, Germany. We  used the following criteria to select overseas posts for interviews: (1)  posts with larger numbers of Foreign Service vacancies; (2) posts with  diversity in the types of Foreign Service positions that were vacant; (3)  posts with higher relative importance to U.S. economic, national security,  and other foreign policy interests; and (4) posts in a range of geographic  locations by State region.

To examine vacancies in State’s Foreign Service staffing at overseas  posts, we analyzed State’s personnel data on Foreign Service staffing at  overseas posts from the department’s Global Employment Management  System (GEMS), as of March 2018. Our analysis of the GEMS data  includes Foreign Service positions filled by permanent Foreign Service  employees as well as positions filled by nonpermanent Foreign Service  employees, such as Consular Fellows. This analysis does not include the  number of staffed and vacant positions at overseas posts in Libya, Syria,  and Yemen, which, at the time of our review, were in suspended  operations status, as well as U.S. Mission Somalia, which was operating  under special circumstances at a different location.

To calculate vacancy rates, we divided the total number of positions by  the number of positions listed as vacant in GEMS. For example, a post  with 10 positions and 2 vacancies would have a vacancy rate of 20  percent. We calculated vacancy rates for each of the following categories:  type (i.e., generalist or specialist), function (e.g., consular or information  management), regional bureau (i.e., Bureau of African Affairs or Bureau  of Western Hemisphere Affairs), and embassy and nonembassy rankings  from State’s Overseas Staffing Model (i.e., Embassy 3+ or 5).

According to State officials, the data in GEMS have a number of  limitations:

The number of vacant positions at overseas posts listed in GEMS  may be overstated, because State has not yet decided to remove  some of these positions from its database.

Some of the vacancies in GEMS are short-term or temporary. Foreign  Service employees periodically rotate out of their positions at their  overseas posts, sometimes creating temporary vacancies until the  positions are filled by incoming Foreign Service employees.

The GEMS data show larger numbers of vacant Foreign Service  positions at posts in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan than actually  were unstaffed at these posts. According to State officials, this  discrepancy results from State’s relying heavily on shorter-term  assignments to fill Foreign Service positions at these locations. These  shorter-term assignments are not reflected in GEMS, and the  positions therefore appear vacant.

The GEMS data may not reflect Foreign Service employees who have  been temporarily reassigned from one overseas post to another.

The GEMS data may show positions as filled although the Foreign  Service employee filling the position has not yet arrived at post.

To assess the reliability of the GEMS database, we asked State officials  whether State had made any major changes to the database since our  2012 report, when we assessed the GEMS data to be sufficiently reliable.  State officials indicated that no major changes had been made. We also  tested the data for completeness, confirmed the general accuracy of the  data with officials at selected overseas posts, and interviewed  knowledgeable officials from State’s Office of Resource Management and  Organizational Analysis concerning the data’s reliability. We found the  GEMS data to be reliable for the purpose of determining the numbers and  percentages of vacant Foreign Service positions at overseas posts. We  did not validate whether the total number of authorized overseas Foreign  Service positions was appropriate or met State’s needs.

We also reviewed State workforce planning documents and budget  documents, such as State’s Five Year Workforce and Leadership  Succession Plan: Fiscal Years 2016-2020 and Quadrennial Diplomacy  and Development Review. In addition, we reviewed State Office of  Inspector General reports as well as our previous reports on human  capital challenges at State and effective strategic human capital  management across the federal government. In particular, our report  High-Risk Series: Progress on Many High-Risk Areas, While Substantial  Efforts Needed on Others notes that strategic human capital management  is a high-risk issue across the federal government and lists five key  elements as a road map for agency efforts to improve and ultimately  address such issues. For our third objective, we assessed whether  State’s efforts to address vacancies were guided by a corrective action  plan that identifies the root causes of persistent Foreign Service  vacancies at overseas posts and suggests corrective measures to reduce  such vacancies, including steps necessary to implement solutions.

We conducted this performance audit from August 2017 to March 2019 in  accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.

Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain  sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our  findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that  the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and  conclusions based on our audit objectives.

section_title: Appendix II: Analysis of Vacant Foreign Service Positions at Overseas Posts in Various Categories as of March 31, 2018
subsections: section_title: Management 10 largest specialist skill groups at overseas posts Security Officer

section_title: Staffed positions at overseas posts Overseas posts by Overseas Staffing Model category Embassy 1 or 2 655
paragraphs: The “Economic” generalist career track includes positions from the “Science Officer” staffing skill  group in the GEMS data.  170 Foreign Service employees were not staffed to one of the six regional bureaus.

section_title: Appendix III: Comments from the Department of State

section_title: Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
subsections: section_title: GAO Contact

section_title: Staff Acknowledgments
paragraphs: In addition to the contact named above, Godwin Agbara (Assistant  Director), Ian Ferguson (Analyst-in-Charge), Anthony Costulas, Natalia  Pena, Debbie Chung, Chris Keblitis, Reid Lowe, Justin Fisher, and  Alexander Welsh made key contributions to this report.

Fast facts: The Department of State's Foreign Service staff at posts around the world provide a range of services, such as processing visa applications and promoting U.S. interests abroad.

Since 2008, State has had trouble filling some positions at these posts, notably in information management and security, but State doesn't have a plan to address this issue. Chronic vacancies increase Foreign Service staff workloads, raise stress, and lower morale. Without identifying and addressing persistent vacancies, the work and security of overseas personnel suffer.

We recommended that State develop a plan to define the causes of and reduce persistent vacancies.

Question-summary annotations: questions: question: What does the data from the Department of State show for Foreign Service vacancies?
answer: The Department of State's (State) data show persistent Foreign Service vacancies at overseas posts since 2008. According to the data, 13 percent of overseas Foreign Service positions were vacant as of March 2018.
child_questions: question: How are the results similar to the GAO for Foreign Service positions?
answer: This percentage is similar to the percentages GAO reported for 2008 and 2012, when 14 percent of these positions were vacant.

question: What vacancies does State's data show?
answer: In addition, State's data show persistent vacancies at overseas posts in generalist positions that help formulate and implement U.S. foreign policy and in specialist positions that support and maintain the functioning of overseas posts.

question: Where did the data show vacancies and what risk does it produce?
answer: State's data also show persistent Foreign Service vacancies at overseas posts with State's highest foreign policy priorities and in regions with security risks that could threaten U.S. foreign policy interests.

questions: question: How  did staff at oversea posts say on vacancies?
answer: Staff at overseas posts told us that vacancies increase workloads, contributing to low morale and higher stress for Foreign Service staff and that vacancies in Political and Economic positions—20 percent and 16 percent, respectively—limit the reporting on political and economic issues that posts are able to provide to State headquarters.

question: How did officials state about vacancies?
answer: Notably, officials also stated that vacancies in specialist positions may heighten security risks at overseas posts and disrupt post operations.
child_questions: question: How did vacancies affect overseas post staff?
answer: For instance, some overseas post staff said that vacancies in Information Management positions had increased the vulnerability of posts' computer networks to potential cybersecurity attacks and other malicious threats.

question: How does Foreign Service vacancies affect US foreign policy?
answer: According to staff at overseas posts, Foreign Service vacancies adversely affect State's ability to carry out U.S. foreign policy.

questions: question: How has State addressed the issue?
answer: State described various efforts—implemented by multiple offices in the department —to help address overseas Foreign Service vacancies, but these efforts are not guided by an integrated action plan to reduce persistent vacancies.
child_questions: question: How has State attempted to fill Foreign Service vacancies?
answer: An example of State's efforts is the “Hard-to-Fill” program, which allows Civil Service staff an opportunity to fill a Foreign Service vacancy on a single overseas tour.

question: What did the GAO's report say about measures to fix this issue?
answer: According to GAO's 2017 High-Risk Series report, an agency should design and implement an action plan—integrated across its relevant offices—that defines the root causes of all skills gaps and suggests corrective measures.

question: What are the key differences between the GAO report and what State is doing?
answer: However, State has not developed such an action plan for reducing persistent overseas Foreign Service vacancies. Without developing an integrated action plan, overseas Foreign Service vacancies may persist. As a result, State's ability to achieve U.S. foreign policy goals and help ensure secure and efficient operations could be adversely impacted.

questions: question: What did the GAO report examine?
answer: This report examines (1) vacancies in State's Foreign Service staffing at overseas posts, (2) reported effects of Foreign Service vacancies on diplomatic readiness, and (3) State's efforts to address Foreign Service vacancies.
child_questions: question: What data did GAO analyze to address the objectives of the report?
answer: To address these objectives, GAO analyzed State's Global Employment Management System data as of March 2018.

question: What type of data did State's Global Employment Management System contain?
answer: The system includes information on Foreign Service and Civil Service positions, including the total number of authorized Foreign Service positions and whether each position is filled or vacant.

question: How did GEO select staff to interview?
answer: In addition, GAO interviewed State staff at 10 overseas posts, selected on the basis of large numbers of Foreign Service vacancies and diversity in the types of Foreign Service positions that were vacant at these posts, among other factors.