GSA has identified the core competencies—knowledge, skills, and abilities—and related training to meet the government-wide requirements of the Act for federal and contract employees and has begun implementing the requirements for its own personnel but has not yet finalized compliance methods for contractors. In 2011, GSA began working to create an approach for federal buildings personnel to use to satisfy the Act’s requirements by demonstrating proficiency in the core competencies. To develop the core competencies, GSA contacted more than 20 federal agencies and subagencies that hold and operate buildings and coordinated meetings with officials as well as with representatives from professional societies, industry associations, non- profit organizations, and private training groups. GSA held follow-on consultations with agencies it identified as holding large amounts of federal real property, since those agencies cover the vast amount of federal real property holdings. In June 2012, GSA published a set of core competencies for federal buildings personnel, began creating software tools for demonstrating and documenting proficiency in the core competencies, and announced a list of GSA-recommended training courses linked to the core competencies and covering the topics of facility management and the operation of high- performance buildings. Although 7 core-competency areas are called for in the Act, in developing them, GSA expanded them to 12. In addition to the 7 categories of building operations, building maintenance, energy management, sustainability, water efficiency, safety, and building performance measures, GSA identified 5 more: technology; design; project management; business, budget and contracting; and leadership and innovation as core competency areas. Under these 12 areas, GSA identified 43 core competencies and 232 specific demonstrations of each core competency that GSA called “performances.” Employees demonstrate proficiency in the core competencies relevant to their positions by completing performances that show they have gained skills and knowledge through experience and training. GSA laid out all these elements in what it calls a competency model. Under GSA’s approach, the individual agency defines what actual compliance means for its own particular employees. GSA envisions employees working with their supervisors to document the tasks and training. In addition, GSA developed—along with DOE officials and in consultation with representatives of other federal departments and agencies, industry, and academia—a recommended curriculum related specifically to the fields of facility management and the operation of high-performance buildings. To help agencies prioritize training efforts, GSA has since streamlined this approach by designating as high-priority 9 competency areas, 21 core competencies, and 88 performances that could potentially have the most impact on building operating efficiency and cost. GSA—working with an informal body of facility representatives from various landholding agencies—identified 3 career areas of responsibility most closely aligned with the core competencies: facility management, energy management, and facilities operations and maintenance. GSA did this to develop consistent guidance that could help agencies whose employees may have similar titles but perform different functions assign the appropriate performances to the appropriate personnel. See figure 1 for a visual representation of GSA’s competency model. As required by the Act, GSA made annual updates to the core competencies and recommended curriculum in 2013 and 2014. In the 2014 update, GSA created a new, more rigorous process requiring independent subject matter experts to review potential private and government training offerings and assess how well they aligned with the core competencies. This effort resulted in an increase of courses in the recommended curriculum from 12 no-cost government courses to 135 government and private courses. Currently, 107 of 135 courses—almost 80 percent—are provided by private training organizations, and 28 are provided by or in collaboration with government agencies. Also in the 2014 update, GSA announced recommended methods for buildings personnel who are federal employees to both demonstrate proficiency in the core competencies and take steps to improve professional development. To assist in this approach, GSA has launched two software tools, which were described and partially demonstrated for us by the GSA official responsible for leading GSA’s implementation efforts. The first is a basic assessment tool agencies can use to determine whether buildings personnel have demonstrated the core competencies related to their positions, and are therefore in compliance with the Act. Through an online exam format, the official said the tool allows workers to demonstrate knowledge by answering a series of questions about the 88 high-priority performances related to their positions. The tool was designed to take into account any existing certificates or advanced training the employee may have already earned. According to the official, the other tool is a professional development system that moves beyond basic compliance by allowing employees to plan and accomplish advanced training related to the core competencies through creating individual training plans linked to GSA-approved government and private training options. According to the official responsible for leading GSA’s implementation efforts, to potentially help coordinate government-wide implementation, GSA has drafted a charter for an interagency advisory board composed of facilities operations and maintenance personnel and human capital executives at federal landholding agencies. The official said that to date no such group has championed the implementation of the Act’s requirements across the federal government. While GSA shares internal guidance and procedures informally on its www.fmi.gov website and through presentations to industry associations, the Federal Facilities Council, and individual agencies, GSA could expand its advisory role through such a group and, according to the official, provide examples of best practices and guidelines for implementation, and seek consensus on them. However, according to GSA officials, previous experience suggests that without being formally established in law or by executive order, participation by other agencies would likely be too low to be effective. There is no planned GSA completion date for creating this interagency advisory board. GSA has taken steps to implement the requirements of the Act for its employees using its core competency approach but has yet to complete all its planned work. In 2014, GSA directed its Public Buildings Service (PBS) personnel in occupational series covered by the Act to take a web- based inventory of their completed training. GSA then assessed their training against the high-priority performances for their occupational series and identified areas where the employees needed improvement. Specifically, GSA found that collectively, the 1,142 employees who participated in the inventory had completed 36 percent of the required performances for their positions. In a July 2014 report on the assessment effort, GSA specified seven methods for PBS workers to voluntarily improve their proficiency levels in the core competencies. For example, GSA encouraged workers to use individual development plans to guide their training and identified free online training for energy management and water efficiency, which the official responsible for leading GSA’s implementation efforts indicated were two competency areas revealed in the PBS assessment as areas in which employees needed additional training. In addition, GSA developed a formal on-the-job training program that includes a guide, mentoring activities, and checklists to help reinforce knowledge gained. GSA also updated PBS’s building manager job descriptions for existing and new staff by (1) rewriting them to include high-priority performances related to the core competencies and (2) including the high-priority performances in each employee’s performance review criteria. GSA has started—but has yet to complete—the following tasks to continue its implementation of the Act for its own employees: Although GSA has rewritten job descriptions and performance assessment criteria for approximately 640 PBS employees to include high-priority performances, GSA has yet to determine whether the agency is ready to transfer the employees to the new job descriptions and performance assessment criteria. GSA plans to update previously identified gaps in Act-related training for PBS employees by requiring them to complete a new inventory of their training, which GSA’s official in charge of implementation estimated will be completed after September 2015. GSA will then assess their training against the high- priority performances for their positions. According to the official responsible for leading GSA’s implementation efforts, GSA is still exploring a way for PBS employees participating in structured on-the-job training to have the training verified in person by GSA’s subject matter experts. However, according to this official, while the technical content for the training is complete, GSA is still finalizing its process to select, vet, and monitor the performance of subject matter experts, and GSA has not specified a completion date. GSA has not yet determined how many GSA contract staff are subject to the Act and is still in the planning stages for implementing potential methods for contractor compliance. GSA officials said they have discussed—but have not yet begun—a number of tasks related to contractor training. GSA has drafted standard contract language requiring companies bidding for facility operations and maintenance work to provide documentation. The companies would be required to describe how certain contract employees subject to the Act who could work in GSA-held buildings have either demonstrated the core competencies relevant to their positions or are currently participating in continuing education related to them. According to the GSA official responsible for leading GSA’s implementation efforts, GSA plans to conduct a pilot project to test the proposed language and approach using a GSA contract, and if successful, the language could be applied later to Federal Supply Schedule contracts and incorporated by other agencies into their own internal operations and maintenance contracts for buildings personnel. In addition, the official noted that GSA is committed to implementing this approach but has not determined a target completion date. Similarly, he said GSA has considered using contract language related to the core competencies as a compliance mechanism for contract workers in federally leased buildings, but added that GSA has focused on buildings personnel who are federal and contract employees working in federally owned facilities because the agency considers those employees a higher priority than contractors working in leased federal facilities. Of the five agencies we reviewed—two, the Departments of Defense (DOD) and Energy (DOE)—have taken some actions to respond to the Act while three—the Departments of Justice (DOJ), the Interior (DOI), and Veterans Affairs (VA)—have not yet determined how to respond.