This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-13-742 
entitled 'DHS Recruiting and Hiring: DHS Is Generally Filling Mission-
Critical Positions, but Could Better Track Costs of Coordinated 
Recruiting Efforts' which was released on September 17, 2013. 

This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as 
part of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. 
Every attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data 
integrity of the original printed product. Accessibility features, 
such as text descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes 
placed at the end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, 
are provided but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format 
of the printed version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an 
exact electronic replica of the printed version. We welcome your 
feedback. Please E-mail your comments regarding the contents or 
accessibility features of this document to Webmaster@gao.gov. 

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. 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. 

United States Government Accountability Office: 
GAO: 

Report to Congressional Requesters: 

September 2013: 

DHS Recruiting and Hiring: 

DHS Is Generally Filling Mission-Critical Positions, but Could Better 
Track Costs of Coordinated Recruiting Efforts: 

GAO-13-742: 

GAO Highlights: 

Highlights of GAO-13-742, a report to congressional requesters. 

Why GAO Did This Study: 

With more than 240,000 employees doing diverse jobs, DHS’s workforce 
supports the department’s multiple missions to prevent terrorism and 
enhance security and ensure resilience from disasters, amongst others. 
Given these missions, it is important that DHS effectively recruit and 
hire employees with the appropriate skills. Within DHS, the Office of 
the Chief Human Capital Officer (OCHCO) is responsible for human 
capital policy development and implementation. GAO has previously 
reported on DHS’s challenges in attracting and retaining a qualified 
workforce. GAO was asked to assess DHS’s recruiting and hiring 
strategies. This report addresses the extent to which (1) DHS and four 
selected components have implemented recruiting and hiring strategies 
to fill MCOs, and (2) DHS has assessed these efforts. To conduct its 
work, GAO reviewed recruiting strategies and data on MCO hiring and 
losses, and interviewed officials from OCHCO and the four DHS 
components selected for this review based on their varieties of MCOs 
and recruiting strategies. Information from these components cannot be 
generalized to all of DHS, but provides insights. 

What GAO Found: 

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and selected components are 
implementing strategies to fill mission-critical occupations (MCO), 
which are those occupations most critical to an agency’s mission. In 
2011, the Office of Diversity and Inclusion (D&I)—which coordinates 
component recruiting efforts—developed the Coordinated Recruiting and 
Outreach Strategy (CROS). Through the CROS, D&I intends to better 
coordinate and link component recruiting and outreach efforts to 
hiring for DHS mission and workforce needs (for all positions, 
including MCOs), and to leverage resources as well as reduce 
recruiting costs, among other things. D&I has begun to implement the 
CROS through various means, including requiring components to develop 
their own outreach and recruiting plans that align with the CROS. 
However, D&I has been limited in its ability to implement some 
elements of the CROS—-such as recruiter training—-because of budget 
constraints, according to D&I officials. The components selected for GAO
’s review—the National Protection and Programs Directorate, 
Transportation Security Administration (TSA), U.S. Citizenship and 
Immigration Services, and U.S. Secret Service (USSS)—have also 
implemented various strategies to recruit and hire MCOs. In addition, 
these four components have generally been able to address hiring needs 
for MCOs. For example, USSS data show that vacancy rates were 
generally below 3 percent for MCO positions during fiscal years 2010 
through 2012. Still, some officials have reported experiencing 
challenges attracting qualified candidates because of factors such as 
financial constraints and regional competition, among other things. 
For example, TSA has been challenged in filling certain positions in 
some areas where competition for other jobs makes it difficult to 
attract qualified candidates. 

D&I is taking steps to assess implementation of the CROS, but could 
improve efforts to track recruiting costs. D&I assesses progress in 
implementing the CROS by tracking and monitoring component performance 
for six measures, such as compliance with data-tracking requirements. 
These measures are aligned with the two overarching goals of the CROS; 
however, they do not include targets to measure DHS’s progress in 
achieving the goals over the period the strategy covers (2012–2017). 
D&I officials stated that they are gathering baseline data on these 
measures and plan to use these data to help develop targets in the 
future. In addition, three of the CROS’s six annual measures are 
associated with its goal of recruiting a highly qualified workforce. 
However, DHS does not require components to report the information 
needed to accurately assess component performance for one of these 
measures—which calls for standardized data tracking of recruiting and 
outreach activities. D&I has developed a database for components to 
use to track recruiting efforts and costs, but it does not require 
that all components use this tool or provide data to DHS in a 
consistent manner. D&I officials said that since some components have 
their own tracking systems, they do not want the tracking systems to 
duplicate efforts. D&I acknowledges the importance of obtaining 
comprehensive and consistent cost information from components, but has 
not determined whether and how it will do so. As a result, D&I does 
not know the total amount of money being spent on recruiting and 
outreach throughout DHS, nor is it able to fully track component 
recruiting costs—and therefore cannot measure the results of the 
second goal in the CROS of optimizing outreach and recruiting 
resources. 

What GAO Recommends: 

GAO recommends that DHS require all components to provide recruiting 
cost information in a consistent manner. DHS concurred with GAO’s 
recommendation. 

View GAO-13-742. For more information, contact David C. Maurer at 
(202) 512-9627 or maurerd@gao.gov. 

[End of section] 

Contents: 

Letter: 

Background: 

DHS and Selected Components Are Implementing Recruiting and Hiring 
Strategies to Fill Mission-Critical Occupations: 

D&I Is Taking Steps to Assess Implementation of the CROS, but Could 
Improve Tracking of Recruiting Costs: 

Conclusions: 

Recommendation for Executive Action: 

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation: 

Appendix I: Mission-Critical Occupations for Selected Department of 
Homeland Security Components: 

Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Homeland Security: 

Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments: 

Tables: 

Table 1: Office of Diversity and Inclusion (D&I) Efforts to Implement 
the Coordinated Recruiting and Outreach Strategy (CROS): 

Table 2: Recruiting Strategies of Selected Components in Our Review: 

Table 3: Number of Hires and Losses for Transportation Security 
Officers (TSO), Fiscal Years 2010-2012: 

Table 4: Number of U.S. Secret Service Hires and Losses, and Vacancy 
Rates for Mission-Critical Occupations (MCO), Fiscal Years 2010-2013 
(as of March 2013): 

Table 5: Number of New Hires and Losses for all National Protection 
and Programs Directorate Mission-Critical Occupations, Fiscal Years 
2010-2013 (as of May 2013): 

Table 6: Goals, Objectives, and Performance Measures in the 
Coordinated Recruiting and Outreach Strategy (CROS): 

Table 7: Mission-Critical Occupations (MCO) for the Four Components in 
Our Review: 

Figure: 

Figure 1: Total Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Employees 
Onboard and Mission-Critical Occupation (MCO) Employees Onboard, from 
Fiscal Years 2008-2012: 

Abbreviations: 

CRC: Corporate Recruiting Council: 

CROS: Coordinated Recruiting and Outreach Strategy: 

CS&C: Office of Cybersecurity and Communications: 

CSORP: Component Specific Outreach and Recruiting Plan: 

D&I: Office of Diversity and Inclusion: 

DHS: Department of Homeland Security: 

FPS: Federal Protective Service: 

GPRA: Government Performance and Results Act: 

ISO: immigration services officer: 

IT: information technology: 

LEO: law enforcement officer: 

MCO: mission-critical occupation: 

NPPD: National Protection and Programs Directorate: 

OCHCO: Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer: 

OPM: Office of Personnel Management: 

TSA: Transportation Security Administration: 

TSO: transportation security officer: 

USCIS: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services: 

USSS: U.S. Secret Service: 

[End of section] 

GAO:
United States Government Accountability Office: 
441 G St. N.W. 
Washington, DC 20548: 

September 17, 2013: 

Congressional Requesters: 
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is the third-largest cabinet-
level department in the federal government, with over 240,000 
employees doing diverse jobs covering aviation and border security, 
emergency response, cybersecurity analysis, and chemical facility 
inspection.[Footnote 1] To address the increasingly complex national 
security challenges associated with its wide array of 
responsibilities, it is important that DHS have programs and policies 
in place to effectively recruit and hire employees with the 
appropriate skills to meet its various mission requirements. In recent 
years, we, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), and other parties 
have identified major challenges to recruitment and hiring in the 
federal government broadly and at DHS specifically, such as passive 
recruitment strategies and insufficient workforce planning. For 
example, passive recruitment strategies, such as infrequent or no 
outreach to college campuses, can create missed opportunities to 
expose potential employees to information about federal jobs. Also, we 
have found that federal agencies made limited use of hiring 
flexibilities that could better position them to efficiently hire well-
qualified candidates for jobs.[Footnote 2] We have also reported that 
in order to ensure that organizations are reaching out to diverse 
pools of talent, agencies must consider active recruitment strategies, 
such as widening the selection of schools from which they recruit, 
building formal relationships with targeted schools and colleges to 
ensure the cultivation of talent for future applicant pools, and 
partnering with multicultural professional organizations and speaking 
at their conferences to communicate their commitment to diversity to 
external audiences and strengthen and maintain relationships. 

Specific to DHS, we have reported that the department faces challenges 
in attracting and retaining a qualified workforce, particularly in the 
areas of acquisitions, information technology, and cybersecurity. For 
example, in November 2011, we reported on workforce planning 
challenges for cybersecurity personnel in the federal government. 
[Footnote 3] We found, among other things, that the agencies we 
analyzed—-including DHS-—faced challenges in filling these highly 
technical occupations. In addition, our work in identifying high-risk 
areas in the federal government has identified DHS management, 
including the function of human capital management, as a high-risk 
area. In a September 2010 letter to DHS based on our prior work, we 
reported on the need for DHS to develop and demonstrate sustained 
progress in implementing a recruiting and hiring strategy that is 
targeted to fill both short- and long-term needs, and specifically to 
fill identified human capital gaps, including diversity and foreign 
language gaps. 

Under the authority of DHS’s Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer 
(OCHCO), DHS’s Office of Diversity and Inclusion (D&I) provides 
department-wide leadership and guidance on diversity and inclusion 
management related to recruitment and outreach, career development, 
and workforce inclusion, among other things.[Footnote 4] DHS’s 
components operate within the human capital framework established and 
overseen by OCHCO, and their respective component-level human capital 
offices, or their equivalents, work with DHS OCHCO to manage human 
capital efforts at each of the components. 

The process of recruiting and hiring involves developing and 
implementing strategies to advertise positions and attract top 
candidates as well as assessing applicants’ relative competencies or 
knowledge, skills, and abilities against job-related criteria to 
identify the most qualified candidates to potentially hire. This 
includes identifying mission-critical occupations (MCO), which are 
those occupations that most directly affect an agency’s ability to 
perform its mission, and determining the specific skills and 
competencies required to meet both current and future programmatic 
needs. At DHS, MCOs constitute a large proportion of the workforce, 
highlighting the importance of an effective DHS recruiting and hiring 
strategy to ensure these critical occupations are filled. 

Given the importance of recruiting and hiring to DHS’s mission to 
prevent terrorism, secure our borders and cyberspace, and ensure 
resilience to disasters, you asked us to assess DHS’s recruiting and 
hiring strategies. This report addresses (1) the extent to which DHS 
and selected components have implemented recruiting and hiring 
strategies to fill MCOs, and (2) the extent to which DHS has assessed 
these efforts. 

To address the extent to which DHS and selected components have 
implemented recruiting and hiring strategies to fill MCOs, we reviewed 
DHS’s primary recruiting strategy—-the Coordinated Recruiting and 
Outreach Strategy (CROS) for fiscal years 2012-2017—-and OCHCO’s 
efforts to facilitate implementation of the CROS among DHS’s 
components. To gain an understanding of component efforts to address 
CROS provisions, as well as component efforts to develop and implement 
their own recruiting and hiring strategies, we selected four DHS 
components—the National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD), 
the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), the U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration Services (USCIS), and the U.S. Secret Service (USSS)—
and reviewed documentation developed in response to the CROS as well 
as their respective recruiting and hiring strategies.[Footnote 5] We 
selected these components because they provided a cross section of 
varied missions, critical occupations, and recruiting strategies 
within DHS. For example, NPPD contains many of DHS’s cybersecurity 
personnel—who hold positions for which DHS has faced challenges in 
recruiting and hiring in recent years. Though the results of our 
review of these components cannot be generalized to DHS as a whole, 
they provide valuable insights into recruiting and hiring efforts and 
challenges within the department. In addition to reviewing these 
components’ efforts to adhere to the CROS and develop their own 
recruiting strategies, we also analyzed workforce hiring data when 
available and appropriate.[Footnote 6] To determine the reliability of 
these data, we reviewed documentation on the data systems and 
interviewed officials responsible for working with the data systems. 
Through this work, we determined these data were sufficiently reliable 
for our purposes. To gain further insights into the development of 
recruiting strategies and efforts, challenges faced in hiring for 
MCOs, and efforts to mitigate such challenges, we interviewed OCHCO 
officials responsible for overseeing department-wide recruiting and 
hiring strategies and efforts, and human capital officials in the four 
components included in our review at their headquarters and at 
selected field locations. We selected the four field locations based 
on input from the DHS components, who identified the regional offices 
that experienced successes or challenges in recruiting and hiring. 
[Footnote 7] While the views and information shared by these components’
regional representatives cannot be generalized to all regions or 
employees within each component, they provide insight into field-level 
recruiting and hiring experiences. 

To address the extent to which DHS has assessed efforts to implement 
the CROS, we assessed DHS’s efforts to ensure that components complied 
with reporting provisions of the CROS by reviewing documentation (such 
as component-specific strategies) prepared in response to the CROS, 
and also compared elements of the CROS with leading practices for 
workforce planning identified in our prior work, as well as general 
strategic planning.[Footnote 8] We supplemented this review by 
interviewing OCHCO officials responsible for ensuring implementation 
of the CROS, as well as component officials who have worked with OCHCO 
in implementing this strategy. 

We conducted this performance audit from November 2012 to September 
2013 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. 

Background: 

Federal Recruiting and Hiring Process: 

Recruiting and hiring involves developing and implementing strategies 
to advertise positions and attract top candidates as well as assessing 
applicants’ relative competencies or knowledge, skills, and abilities 
against job-related criteria to identify the most qualified 
candidates. The federal hiring process typically includes notifying 
the public that the government is accepting applications for a job; 
screening applications against minimum qualification standards; and 
assessing applicants’ relative competencies or knowledge, skills, and 
abilities against job-related criteria to identify the most qualified 
applicants. Federal civil service employees, other than those in the 
Senior Executive Service, are employed in either the competitive 
service or the excepted service.[Footnote 9] The majority of the 
federal civilian workforce obtains positions through the open 
competitive service examination process, which is intended to ensure 
that hiring complies with merit principles. Applicants for competitive 
service positions generally compete against one another through the 
competitive examination process. 

Federal agencies follow similar processes of identifying and selecting 
the most qualified candidates. This process generally includes, among 
other things, rating and ranking candidates and preparing ranked lists 
of the best-qualified candidates; selecting candidates to interview; 
conducting reference checks and applying veterans’ preference 
criteria; and making job offers, including conducting any 
preemployment checks (such as medical examinations) and security 
clearance checks. However, variation in how this process is carried 
out may occur across the four DHS components selected for our review. 
For example, TSA hires for all occupations as a member of the excepted 
service, while NPPD, USCIS, and USSS are part of the federal 
competitive service, though NPPD and USSS also hire for certain 
positions under excepted service appointing authorities. Specific to 
TSA, under the Aviation and Transportation Security Act, TSA is 
generally exempt from the provisions of Title 5 of the U.S. Code as 
well as the policies and procedures OPM established under Title 5, in 
order to adapt hiring processes to align with the unique demands of 
the agency’s workforce.[Footnote 10] Thus, TSA may adapt hiring 
processes as needed to meet agency needs, and has established its own 
hiring flexibilities. For example, TSA has an approved interchange 
agreement from OPM to allow permanent TSA employees to apply and be 
selected for vacancies in competitive service agencies. 

DHS Recruiting and Hiring Roles and Responsibilities: 

Within DHS, OCHCO is responsible for ensuring that DHS has the 
programs, policies, processes, and resources to recruit, hire, train, 
and retain its overall workforce. OCHCO’s strategic human capital 
agenda includes, among other things, recruiting a diverse workforce, 
hiring veterans, and improving the hiring process. Within OCHCO, 
specifically with respect to recruiting, D&I focuses on coordinating 
and leveraging component resources to achieve departmental recruiting 
and outreach goals, which are to reduce recruiting costs, increase 
efficiencies, and increase the diversity of applicant pools. While D&I 
administers human resource services related to recruiting and hiring 
for DHS headquarters, individual DHS components are primarily 
responsible for the active recruiting and hiring of employees for 
their components—that is, identifying their own occupational needs, 
including monitoring workforce data on grade, seniority, demographics, 
and attrition rates. Individual components also have their own 
recruiting and hiring budgets and are responsible for reaching out to 
potential applicants through job fairs, recruiting events, and other 
marketing efforts. Individual components manage their own application 
and hiring processes, including evaluation of potential candidates 
through selection. 

OCHCO human capital programs and initiatives are supported, developed, 
and implemented through various cross-component councils, as well as 
implementation of DHS strategic human capital goals and priorities. 
For example, in May 2010, as part of its role in facilitating 
department-wide recruiting efforts, D&I led the development of the 
Corporate Recruiting Council (CRC), which holds monthly meetings with 
recruitment officers from DHS components as a means to encourage 
coordination and sharing of recruiting and hiring practices and 
strategies. CRC is chaired by D&I and has representatives from all of 
DHS’s components. Through the CRC, D&I focuses on presenting a “one DHS”
 image by serving as the focal point for department-wide recruitment 
procedures and guidance, leveraging resources, and facilitating 
coordination and information sharing among components on recruiting 
events, best practices, and strategies. 

Recruiting and Hiring as an Element of Strategic Workforce Planning: 

We have previously reported on the importance of strategic workforce 
planning and focusing on developing long-term strategies for 
acquiring, developing, and retaining an organization’s total 
workforce.[Footnote 11] Strategic workforce planning includes the 
determination of critical skills and competencies—-such as the 
identification of MCOs-—to meet both current and future programmatic 
needs and developing strategies tailored to address gaps in the 
number, skills, competencies, and deployment of the workforce. 
[Footnote 12] DHS has developed and, in November 2012, updated a 
workforce planning guide that provides steps, tools, and resources 
that components are to use to plan for current and future 
organizational and workforce needs. One key element of strategic 
workforce planning is recruiting and hiring, which is intended to 
identify and acquire employees with the necessary skills and 
competencies to meet agency programmatic needs.[Footnote 13] In 
December 2012, we reported on strategic workforce planning efforts at 
DHS—specifically, that while DHS had taken steps that are generally 
consistent with leading principles in managing departmental strategic 
workforce planning, OCHCO had made limited progress in developing an 
oversight approach for monitoring and evaluating component-level 
efforts.[Footnote 14] To provide a basis for monitoring and assessment 
of department-wide workforce planning efforts, we recommended that DHS 
identify and document additional performance measures, document 
policies and procedures to use the results of audits related to 
component-level workforce planning, and integrate the results of these 
audits with components’ annual operational plans and review these 
plans. DHS concurred with these recommendations and has reported 
taking steps to address them, but they are not yet fully implemented. 

In 2011, at the direction of OCHCO, DHS’s components identified their 
MCOs. OCHCO validated that these MCOs represent those jobs that are 
most critical to accomplishment of the mission, rather than simply the 
jobs that are most populous within each component (although some MCOs 
are the most populous within a component). For example, USCIS’s sole 
MCO is the immigration services officer (ISO) position, while one of 
TSA’s five MCOs is its transportation security officer (TSO).[Footnote 
15] DHS completed the process of revalidating the MCOs that represent 
those occupations most critical for DHS to fulfill its mission in 
August 2013 and plans to do so again every 2 years hereafter.[Footnote 
16] See appendix I for a list of all MCOs for the four components in 
our review. 

As shown in figure 1, the size of DHS’s workforce has grown in recent 
years and the majority of DHS’s workforce is composed of MCOs. 

Figure 1: Total Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Employees Onboard 
and Mission-Critical Occupations (MCOs) Onboard, from Fiscal Years 2008 
Through 2012: 

[Refer to PDF for image: stacked vertical bar graph] 

Year: 2008; 
DHS employees in MCOs: 143,633; 
DHS employees not in MCOs: 34,112. 

Year: 2009; 
DHS employees in MCOs: 151,113; 
DHS employees not in MCOs: 36,263. 

Year: 2010; 
DHS employees in MCOs: 153,146; 
DHS employees not in MCOs: 37,252. 

Year: 2011; 
DHS employees in MCOs: 159,738; 
DHS employees not in MCOs: 39,500. 

Year: 2012; 
DHS employees in MCOs: 158,595; 
DHS employees not in MCOs: 40,388. 

Source: GAO analysis of Enterprise Human Resource Integration data. 

Note: The total DHS employee count does not include U.S. Coast Guard 
military members or DHS employees in intelligence-related positions. 
According to DHS, these groups account for approximately 40,000 
additional staff. 

This figure represents all occupational series that contain MCOs. In 
some instances, MCO positions are subsets of the occupational series 
that cannot be identified more granularly (e.g., cybersecurity 
personnel are a subset of information technology [IT] specialists). 
Thus, this figure likely overstates the true proportion of MCOs within 
DHS. 

[End of figure] 

Our High-Risk Work Related to DHS Recruiting and Hiring Efforts: 

Side bar: 

DHS Management Functions High-Risk Area: 

Of the 31 specific actions and outcomes DHS needs to achieve in this 
high-risk area, 1 is focused exclusively on recruiting and hiring. 
Specifically, DHS needs to implement a recruiting and hiring strategy 
that is targeted to fill both short- and long-term needs, and identify 
human capital gaps, including diversity and foreign language gaps. 

[End of side bar] 

In January 2003, we designated implementing and transforming DHS as a 
high-risk area because DHS had to transform 22 existing agencies—-
several with major management challenges—-into one department. Human 
capital-—including recruiting and hiring efforts-—is among the 
challenges we have identified that DHS faces in implementing and 
transforming itself. To address this high-risk designation, DHS needs 
to achieve 31 specific actions and outcomes, 1 of which is related to 
recruiting and hiring. These actions and outcomes are based on the 
issues we have identified and recommendations made through our work at 
DHS. 

In January 2011, DHS issued its initial Integrated Strategy for High 
Risk Management, which included key management initiatives (e.g., 
Workforce Strategy, Workforce Planning and Balanced Workforce, and 
Outreach and Targeted Recruitment) and corrective actions to address 
these high-risk areas as well as the actions and outcomes we 
identified as needed to address the high-risk designation. DHS agreed 
with these actions and outcomes and designated senior DHS officials to 
be responsible for implementing them. DHS provided updates of its 
progress in implementing these initiatives, including recruiting and 
hiring, in later versions of the strategy in June 2011, December 2011, 
and June 2012. In its September 2012 update to the June 2012 
Integrated Strategy for High Risk Management, describing DHS’s 
progress in implementing a recruiting and hiring strategy that is 
targeted to fill both short- and long-term needs, and specifically to 
fill identified human capital gaps, including diversity and foreign 
language gaps, DHS reported that it has partially addressed this 
outcome, which we validated in December 2012.[Footnote 17] In our most 
recent high-risk update, in February 2013, we reported that DHS needs 
to continue to demonstrate sustained progress in addressing this 
outcome.[Footnote 18] In its June 2013 update, DHS reported that it 
has now mostly addressed this outcome.[Footnote 19] We are continuing 
to evaluate the appropriateness of this designation as part of our 
ongoing high-risk work, and plan to use the results from this report 
to inform our own evaluations of this outcome in our future high-risk 
updates. 

DHS and Selected Components Are Implementing Recruiting and Hiring 
Strategies to Fill Mission-Critical Occupations: 

DHS has developed and taken steps to implement a coordinated 
recruiting and outreach strategy and address resource constraints. In 
addition, the four components we selected for review have various 
efforts under way to develop and implement their own targeted 
recruiting and hiring strategies. Components reported that they have 
generally been successful in filling MCOs. 

DHS Has Developed and Taken Steps to Implement a Coordinated 
Recruiting and Outreach Strategy and Address Budgetary Constraints: 

While DHS components are largely responsible for specific activities 
and efforts to recruit and hire for their MCOs, DHS has taken steps to 
help ensure greater coordination and resource sharing among 
components. Specifically, in 2011, D&I—-through the CRC—-developed the 
CROS to better coordinate and link component recruiting and outreach 
efforts to hiring for DHS mission and workforce needs (for all 
positions, including MCOs), and leverage resources as well as reduce 
recruiting costs, among other things. The CROS provides a high-level 
strategy that supports DHS’s goal from its Workforce Strategy for 
Fiscal Years 2011-2016 to “recruit a highly qualified and diverse 
workforce.” It is designed to, among other things, guide outreach and 
recruitment efforts across DHS, leverage all outreach and recruiting 
resources, and integrate recruiting and outreach plans across DHS. 

According to D&I officials, the CROS was largely developed to help 
relieve some of the fragmentation of component recruitment efforts, 
reflecting a recent DHS-wide emphasis on having components work 
together to present an image of “one DHS”-—rather than individual 
components-—to potential applicants at outreach events.[Footnote 20] 
One means of doing this is by having components coordinate to share 
booth space under the DHS banner at recruiting events. For example, if 
USSS and TSA are both hoping to hire law enforcement officers, they 
might agree to share the registration fee at a recruiting event (or 
take turns paying fees at alternate events) and have staff from each 
component together at one table to speak to potential applicants about 
their respective positions. D&I officials state that this sharing of 
resources is important to the department, as devoting additional 
resources to increasing overall recruiting efforts has not been a high 
priority for DHS over the past year, given budget constraints. Other 
D&I efforts to implement the CROS across DHS are shown in table 1. 

Table 1: Office of Diversity and Inclusion (D&I) Efforts to Implement 
the Coordinated Recruiting and Outreach Strategy (CROS): 

Effort: Component Specific Outreach and Recruiting Plan (CSORP); 
Description: Beginning in 2012, D&I began directing components to 
develop CSORPs that align with the CROS. The CSORPs are component-
level plans developed annually and intended to cover a 5-year period, 
with a focus on veterans and diversity outreach efforts, to help 
components identify and organize their focus in recruiting efforts.[A] 
CSORPs are also intended to provide D&I—which reviews the reports 
annually—with greater ability to monitor components’ plans to link 
recruiting efforts with mission-critical occupation (MCO) hiring 
needs. Components in our review generally developed these CSORPs, but 
three of the four plans we reviewed did not include all the directed 
elements (e.g., MCO hiring needs, veterans targets, outreach efforts 
by population, planned recruiting and outreach expenditures).[B] 

Effort: “Top 25” list of recruitment events; 
Description: In 2012, D&I, working with components through the 
Corporate Recruiting Council (CRC), established a “Top 25” list of 
recruitment events that components have identified as having large 
pools of diverse applicants.[C] D&I encourages components to partner 
to attend these events and touts development of this list as an 
important development of the CRC. 

Effort: Shared database on recruiting events; 
Description: In 2012, D&I implemented a shared database that allows 
components to report information on recruiting events (e.g., costs, 
key population groups recruited, approximate number of attendees) in 
an attempt to gather consistent information from components on 
recruiting events. 

Effort: MCO Onboard Diversity Snapshots; 
Description: On a quarterly basis, D&I reviews “MCO onboard diversity 
snapshots,” which present data on current levels of employment by 
race/ethnicity and gender, focused on law enforcement officer (LEO) 
and LEO-related positions. D&I considers LEO and LEO-related positions 
the priority MCOs for DHS, since D&I stated these represent the 
majority of all MCO positions. Thus, these positions have been the 
focus of D&I’s review of component efforts to fill MCOs. These data 
provide D&I leadership with information on how the components are 
doing in staffing these positions for each of these applicant groups, 
as well as opportunities to potentially increase outreach to groups 
they may consider underrepresented. 

Source: GAO analysis of DHS information. 

[A] In general, CSORPs are expected to identify each component’s key 
recruiting and outreach officials; annual veterans and disabled 
veterans hiring targets for 5 years; MCOs targeted for recruitment; 
plans for recruiting and outreach by race, ethnicity, and gender 
(i.e., underrepresented groups as identified by components); and 
estimated recruiting and outreach costs. This aligns with DHS’s 
department-wide emphasis on increased hiring of veterans and other 
diversity populations. 

[B] For example, while USSS provided all requested items in its fiscal 
years 2012 through 2016 CSORP, USCIS, TSA, and NPPD did not provide 5-
year veterans hiring targets in the CSORP (though D&I reports that all 
components do provide OCHCO with annual reports discussing their 
efforts to recruit veterans and meet annual veteran hiring targets). 
D&I officials informed us that in their first year of reviewing 
CSORPs, they were less concerned with whether the components provided 
every element called for in the D&I-provided template than if the 
plans identified key MCO hiring needs and the components’ outreach 
efforts to find applicants to meet those needs. 

[C] Examples include conferences and job fairs held by associations 
such as the National Native American Law Enforcement Association, 
National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives, Hispanic 
American Police Command Officer Association, and Women in Federal Law 
Enforcement. 

[End of table] 

D&I officials have emphasized that their role is to assist components 
in coordinating and linking recruiting efforts, ensure that component 
recruiting efforts are tied to filling MCOs, and review high-level 
data on diversity employment in DHS, rather than explicitly telling 
components how they should go about recruiting and hiring for 
positions. D&I officials said they have fulfilled their role by 
developing and implementing the CROS and facilitating components’ 
efforts to coordinate and share effective recruiting practices through 
the CRC. Officials from all four components we interviewed generally 
spoke well of the CRC as a helpful vehicle for sharing information on 
recruiting and hiring among components and coordinating recruiting 
efforts when feasible, and on the role of D&I in facilitating 
recruiting and hiring efforts. While component officials noted that 
they support in concept DHS efforts to coordinate recruiting, 
officials from two of the four components we interviewed voiced 
concerns that the efforts to have components represent themselves 
simply as DHS entities—or have representatives from other components 
speak to potential job applicants on their behalf—could make it 
difficult for some components to communicate the unique aspects of 
their missions and occupations. D&I officials stated that it is not 
DHS’s intent to take away components’ identities, but to encourage 
collaboration, and that they have gotten positive feedback on these 
efforts from components in the field. 

While D&I has taken steps to implement the CROS across DHS, D&I has 
been limited in its ability to implement some elements, largely 
because of budget constraints, according to D&I officials. For 
example, in accordance with a CROS objective to coordinate recruitment 
planning procedures to reduce duplication of effort and travel costs, 
D&I planned to roll out “one DHS” training for component recruiters at 
five regional sites to encourage coordinated and shared recruiting 
efforts at the field level. However, D&I suspended this effort after 
training at the first two sites because of budgetary constraints, and 
has not determined when the budget will allow it to continue the 
training efforts. In the meantime, D&I is considering hosting webcasts 
or video teleconferences to train recruiting officials in the field 
who may be interested in learning about other components. In addition, 
the CROS calls for an annual marketing plan and process to centralize 
recruiting-related advertising to create a unified image of DHS to job 
seekers. However, according to D&I officials, budgetary constraints 
have also placed this work on hold. 

Selected Components Have Implemented Various Recruiting and Hiring 
Strategies and Efforts: 

In addition to preparing CSORPs, the four components we selected for 
review have various efforts under way to develop and implement their 
own targeted recruiting and hiring strategies. For example, all 
components generally reported forming relationships with and targeting 
colleges and universities, and attending recruiting events that serve 
veterans and diverse populations (e.g., Women in Federal Law 
Enforcement and the Wounded Warriors Program). While not required by 
OCHCO, components may develop their own specific targeted recruitment 
strategies to guide their efforts in identifying the best possible 
candidates for their unique missions and occupational requirements. 
For example, as explained in table 2, TSA and USSS have developed 
targeted recruiting strategies, while USCIS has elected not to develop 
such a strategy, and NPPD plans to develop one in the future. 

Table 2: Recruiting Strategies of Selected Components in Our Review: 

Component: Transportation Security Administration (TSA); 
Strategy/approach to recruiting: TSA has an overall strategic 
recruitment plan for its transportation security officers (TSO) agency-
wide.[A] TSA has also developed a number of more targeted plans aimed 
at recruiting TSOs (and personnel for other positions) for specific 
airports. For example, in 2010 TSA developed a recruiting strategy 
specifically for TSOs at an airport in the southeastern United States. 
This strategy identified target populations for recruiting (e.g., 
members of the military), outreach organizations, and local 
publications and marketing events in the area that could be used to 
better “brand” TSA for potential applicants. According to TSA 
officials, these types of targeted recruiting strategies help them to 
take into account area workforce demographics; specific airport needs 
(e.g., more woman TSOs); and specific recruitment events and outreach 
organizations, which could increase the likelihood that the component 
can register and track the success of particular recruiting and 
outreach efforts stemming from each recruiting strategy. In addition, 
TSA has a strategy specific to veterans’ recruiting. 

Component: United States Secret Service (USSS); 
Strategy/approach to recruiting: USSS produces an annual recruiting 
and outreach plan that contains projected staffing targets for key 
occupations and a number of goals, activities, and performance 
measures based largely on levels of outreach (e.g., attend a certain 
number of events for military and diversity groups; advertise via 
brochures and electronic newsletters; and conduct employment 
information sessions with educational institutions, professional 
organizations, and the public). While efforts to implement this plan 
are not directly tied to hiring specific numbers of employees, they 
provide USSS with a roadmap for increasing outreach to certain 
diversity areas. In addition, USSS prepares annual recruitment 
accomplishment reports that provide details on the number and types of 
recruitment events attended during the fiscal year—-broken out by 
target populations—-as well as estimated cost savings through reduced 
registration fees.[B] For example, USSS reported attending 691 
recruiting events in fiscal year 2012 targeting a number of 
populations. 

Component: United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS); 
Strategy/approach to recruiting: USCIS does not have a component-level 
targeted recruiting and outreach strategy. According to USCIS 
officials, it does not have any problems attracting sufficient numbers 
of applicants to fill its immigration services officer (ISO) slots—its 
sole mission-critical occupation (MCO).[C] There are needs for ISOs 
with different skill sets in different offices and regions of the 
nation, officials said, so a national “one size fits all” recruiting 
strategy would not be optimal for them. Officials added that they may 
consider developing such a strategy once USCIS has completed ongoing 
efforts to refine its workforce planning efforts and staffing 
allocation model. In the meantime, much of USCIS’s recruiting efforts 
have focused on veterans’ outreach events. 

Component: National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD); 
Strategy/approach to recruiting: NPPD has not developed a component-
level recruiting strategy, or a human capital strategy, because—
following its human resource authority designation in 2009—recent 
efforts have been focused on creating its directorate-level strategic 
plan. NPPD officials stated that they plan to develop a human capital 
strategic plan-—to include a recruiting and hiring strategy—pending 
approval of resources for fiscal year 2014. Officials report a number 
of ongoing efforts, such as use of special hiring authorities, to 
improve recruiting and hiring among cybersecurity personnel and 
Federal Protective Service (FPS) officers—-two key MCOs.[D] 

Source: GAO analysis of DHS information. 

[A] TSOs—-the MCO that represents TSA’s most populous occupation—are 
responsible for implementing TSA security procedures by screening 
passengers, baggage, and cargo. 

[B] According to the 2012 recruitment accomplishment report, USSS 
estimates savings of approximately $35,000 in fiscal year 2012. USSS 
also states that despite an 85 percent cut in recruitment budget for 
2012, it cut back on the number of events by 12 percent compared with 
the number of events for 2011. It was able to do this by, among other 
things, focusing on outreach through no-cost information sessions at 
colleges, high schools, and military installations, and providing 
tours to potential applicants at its headquarters and training center. 

[C] USCIS has one MCO—the ISO subset within the1801 series (General 
Inspection, Investigation, & Compliance)—which includes field and 
service operations, call centers, refugee and asylum officers, and 
fraud detection and national security officers. According to USCIS 
officials, ISOs constitute over 44 percent of its workforce. 

[D] FPS officers include sworn law enforcement officers and trained 
security experts who provide security assessments, inspections, and 
oversight for contract guards, and respond to crimes in progress. 

[End of table] 

In addition to their recruiting and outreach efforts, components in 
our review have taken steps to streamline the hiring process and 
reduce the time-to-hire.[Footnote 21] We have reported in the past 
that time-consuming and paperwork-intensive processes pose challenges 
to recruiting and hiring in the federal government.[Footnote 22] As 
part of larger federal hiring reforms to address this and other 
issues, DHS components track time-to-hire for certain MCOs and 
commonly filled positions.[Footnote 23] According to OCHCO, components 
are directed by DHS to report these data to OCHCO on a quarterly 
basis, and OCHCO gathers and reports the time-to-hire data to OPM. OPM 
has established a time-to-hire target of 80 days for all federal 
agencies. DHS component officials generally state that they have been 
challenged in meeting OPM targets, and officials from two components 
said that it may not be possible to meet the 80-day OPM target because 
of the many steps involved in their hiring process. For example, many 
DHS positions require extensive background checks, and some require 
security clearances, which lengthen the time it takes to bring someone 
onboard. USCIS, for example, reports that in the fourth quarter of 
fiscal year 2012, its average time to hire ISOs was 117 days. However, 
USCIS officials stated that they did not believe this time frame was 
driving candidates away from seeking positions, adding that they 
rarely make job offers that are not accepted. In addition, components 
are studying their time-to-hire data and seeking ways to reduce this 
time in an effort to meet OPM targets. TSA reports that it has been 
able to reduce time-to-hire for its management, administrative, and 
professional positions from an average of approximately 112 days to 
104 days between the first and second quarters of fiscal year 2013 and 
is exploring efforts to further streamline the hiring process, such as 
developing a standard job announcement.[Footnote 24] TSA is also 
working to reduce time-to-hire for its TSOs by working closely with 
airport hiring officials to determine the appropriate size of their 
“ready pool” for hiring.[Footnote 25] USSS also reported making 
efforts to reduce time-to-hire by moving more quickly to complete 
qualification exams and reviews of those results. 

Selected Components Have Generally Been Successful in Filling MCOs: 

Components in our review have generally been successful in filling 
MCOs, in part because of the various strategies and efforts discussed 
above, as well as less attrition of current MCO employees, with the 
exception of cybersecurity personnel. Component officials stated that 
in assessing the state of their MCO workforces, they regularly review 
varied workforce data—-such as hires, losses, and vacancy rates-—and 
meet with hiring officials from their program offices to determine how 
well specific occupational needs are being met or what challenges may 
be affecting them.[Footnote 26] It is important to note that there are 
multiple indicators that agencies can use to determine the health of 
their workforces and their success in filling MCOs and other 
positions. We present data on hires, losses, and vacancy rates, when 
available, because these are indicators that the selected components 
use to assess their workforce health and to identify recruiting and 
hiring needs.[Footnote 27] 

TSA. TSA has generally been successful in recruiting and hiring for 
its MCOs, including TSOs, as illustrated by table 3 (which shows 
hiring outpacing losses over the last 3 fiscal years) and comments 
from TSA officials.[Footnote 28] 

Table 3: Number of Hires and Losses for Transportation Security 
Officers (TSO), Fiscal Years 2010-2012: 

Fiscal Year: 2010; 
Hires: 4,059; 
Losses: 4,002. 

Fiscal Year: 2011; 
Hires: 8,787; 
Losses: 4,682. 

Fiscal Year: 2012; 
Hires: 5,947; 
Losses: 5,620. 

Source: TSA. 

Notes: Transportation Security Officers are responsible for 
implementing TSA security procedures by screening passengers, baggage, 
and cargo. 

[End of table] 

TSA human capital officials stated that they assess success in hiring 
TSOs by reviewing data and meeting with program officials to discuss 
whether hiring needs at particular airports are being met. TSA 
produces a weekly report that captures the number of TSOs that need to 
be hired to meet certain airports’ needed TSO allocations, as well as 
the number of candidates that have been certified for the ready pool. 
The report also contains the number of TSOs that have been brought 
onboard over the prior 2 months and those projected to be brought 
onboard the next month. When airport hiring needs are identified, TSA 
human capital officials said they examine the weekly report to ensure 
that there are enough candidates in the ready pool; if not, officials 
work to identify job fairs and outreach efforts in that airport’s 
geographic area to recruit more candidates. TSA human capital 
officials noted that they also meet with program offices’ hiring 
managers to get feedback on recruiting and hiring processes and 
challenges that may need to be addressed. 

TSA human capital officials cited a number of factors that contribute 
to the agency’s success in filling TSO positions. In particular, 
officials said that their development and use of hiring flexibilities 
has been helpful in attracting candidates for TSO positions. For 
example, TSA-—working in collaboration with OPM—has established a 
policy allowing part-time TSOs to purchase health insurance at the 
same rate as full-time employees. This is a benefit that is not 
available to employees hired by competitive service agencies. 
According to TSA officials, this flexibility has been useful in hiring 
TSOs because many TSOs are hired on a part-time basis. 

TSA officials reported facing some challenges in hiring TSOs, 
particularly in certain geographic areas, such as remote areas or 
locations where there is greater competition for qualified candidates. 
As one example, TSA officials reported that in North Dakota, 
burgeoning oil field work offers greater pay for qualified applicants. 
To mitigate these challenges, officials reported using more direct e-
mail and radio communications to potential job seekers, or visiting 
one-stop employment centers. Officials informed us that these hiring 
challenges have not affected TSA’s ability to meet its mission as 
overtime pay is used to fund additional shift coverage, among other 
things. 

USSS. USSS has generally been able to fill MCO positions. As shown in 
table 4, vacancy rates were generally below 3 percent for MCO 
positions during fiscal years 2010 through 2012. 

Table 4: Number of U.S. Secret Service Hires and Losses, and Vacancy 
Rates for Mission-Critical Occupations (MCO), Fiscal Years 2010-2013 
(as of March 2013): 

Fiscal year: 2010; 

Data: Hires; 
Special agents: 162; 
Uniformed Division police officers: 205; 
Special officers: 3; 
Protective/physical support officers: 4; 
MCOs total: 374 

Data: Losses; 
Special agents: 122; 
Uniformed Division police officers: 125; 
Special officers: 8; 
Protective/physical support officers: 7; 
MCOs total: 262 

Data: Vacancy; 
Special agents: 0.25%; 
Uniformed Division police officers: 0.93%; 
Special officers: N/A; 
Protective/physical support officers: N/A; 
MCOs total: 0.4% 

Fiscal year: 2011; 

Data: Hires; 
Special agents: 91; 
Uniformed Division police officers: 135; 
Special officers: 4; 
Protective/physical support officers: 3; 
MCOs total: 233 

Data: Losses; 
Special agents: 120; 
Uniformed Division police officers: 69; 
Special officers: 3; 
Protective/physical support officers: 5; 
MCOs total: 197 

Data: Vacancy; 
Special agents: 0.45%; 
Uniformed Division police officers: -1.43%; 
Special officers: N/A; 
Protective/physical support officers: N/A; 
MCOs total: -0.08% 

Fiscal year: 2012; 

Data: Hires; 
Special agents: 0; 
Uniformed Division police officers: 21; 
Special officers: 8; 
Protective/physical support officers: 2; 
MCOs total: 31 

Data: Losses; 
Special agents: 100; 
Uniformed Division police officers: 56; 
Special officers: 6; 
Protective/physical support officers: 7; 
MCOs total: 169 

Data: Vacancy; 
Special agents: 2.99%; 
Uniformed Division police officers: 2.95%; 
Special officers: 0.74%; 
Protective/physical support officers: 2.22%; 
MCOs total: 2.87% 

Fiscal year: 2013[A]; 

Data: Hires; 
Special agents: 0; 
Uniformed Division police officers: 0; 
Special officers: 2; 
Protective/physical support officers: 0; 
MCOs total: 2 

Data: Losses; 
Special agents: 59; 
Uniformed Division police officers: 27; 
Special officers: 3; 
Protective/physical support officers: 3; 
MCOs total: 92 

Data: Vacancy; 
Special agents: 4.69%; 
Uniformed Division police officers: 4.99%; 
Special officers: 12.84%; 
Protective/physical support officers: 4.26%; 
MCOs total: 4.99% 

Source: United States Secret Service. 

Notes: Special agents are criminal investigators who investigate 
violations of U.S. laws, perform security surveys and background 
investigations, and assist U.S. Attorneys. They also perform 
protective duties such as advance security surveys of domestic 
locations. Uniformed Division police officers ensure protection of 
officials and their families, designated embassies, and other 
specified federal property, among other things. Special officers 
maintain security posts, monitor and operate communications systems, 
and inspect and operate protective vehicles, among other things. 
Protective/physical support officers plan, develop, and implement a 
technical security program for major protective advance trips 
involving designated protectees, and conduct technical investigative 
support functions, among other things. 

N/A (not available) means that USSS did not collect these data for 
those positions during the applicable time frame. 

[A] As of March 2013. 

[End of table] 

While USSS officials stated that when funding is available, they 
generally have been able to fill their MCO positions; they added that 
funding constraints in fiscal year 2012 limited their recruiting, 
outreach, and hiring efforts, which led to higher vacancy rates in 
fiscal years 2012 and 2013 to date. For example, because of funding 
constraints, USSS did not hire any special agents (who conduct 
criminal investigations and ensure protection of officials and their 
families) in fiscal year 2012 or in 2013 to date, and hiring for 
Uniformed Division police officers (who provide protection for 
property such as the White House and Vice President’s residence) has 
not kept pace with losses in fiscal year 2012 or 2013 to date, as 
shown in table 4. For the special agents, officials stated that while 
their protective mission is adequately staffed, there are now fewer 
man hours to support field office investigative responsibilities. 
However, USSS officials told us that Uniformed Division protective 
responsibilities have largely not been affected as USSS has 
reprogrammed staff from administrative and training functions, 
increased overtime, and reduced noncritical training. 

USCIS. Data on job applications, hires, and losses—-as well as 
discussions with USCIS officials—-show that USCIS has not faced 
challenges hiring ISOs, who hold the only MCO position within USCIS. 
Specifically, USCIS officials told us they receive thousands of 
applicants for vacant ISO positions, and have been able to fill these 
vacancies without difficulty. For example, during 2012, USCIS received 
applications from over 27,000 minimally qualified applicants for 
approximately 200 ISO vacancies, and through April of fiscal year 
2013, USCIS had approximately 329 ISO new hires compared with 77 
losses.[Footnote 29] 

NPPD. NPPD has experienced some successes and challenges in filling 
its MCOs. As shown in table 5, NPPD’s new hires have outpaced losses 
for all MCOs component-wide since fiscal year 2010. 

Table 5: Number of New Hires and Losses for all National Protection 
and Programs Directorate Mission Critical Occupations, Fiscal Years 
2010-2013 (as of May 2013): 

Fiscal year: 2010; 
Hires: 145; 
Losses: 52. 

Fiscal year: 2011; 
Hires: 144; 
Losses: 69. 

Fiscal year: 2012; 
Hires: 182; 
Losses: 89. 

Fiscal year: 2013[A]; 
Hires: 123; 
Losses: 66. 

Source: National Protection and Programs Directorate. 

Note: These data include interns and summer hires for all NPPD MCO 
positions as defined in appendix I. 

[A] As of May 2013. 

[End of table] 

Despite these component-wide successes, NPPD has recently struggled 
with filling some key MCOs, such as those for FPS officers and 
cybersecurity personnel.[Footnote 30] For example, NPPD officials 
informed us that despite receiving a large number of applicants, FPS 
has faced challenges in meeting its statutorily mandated target levels 
for officers, which have increased in recent years.[Footnote 31] As of 
June 2013, FPS had 955 officers onboard versus a target of 1,007 
officers. While there is no specific target for vacancy rates, 
officials noted that they hope to meet their target level for officers 
onboard this fiscal year. Officials cited the rigorous and lengthy 
preemployment background, medical, and drug checks as a primary 
challenge in hiring at FPS. To mitigate this challenge, NPPD officials 
reported accepting a larger qualified applicant pool during the 
preemployment process and increasing the use of Veterans Hiring 
Authority and direct hire authority at job fairs, wherein FPS can make 
tentative job offers on the spot pending clearance of background and 
other checks. 

As of June 2013, CS&C—-the NPPD subcomponent that houses cybersecurity 
personnel—-had a vacancy rate of 22 percent. In attempting to fill 
cybersecurity positions, NPPD officials reported facing some 
challenges because of the length of time taken to conduct security 
checks needed to grant Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information 
clearances when needed, low pay in comparison with that of private 
sector positions, and lack of clearly defined skill sets or a unique 
occupational series for these positions. We have previously reported 
on a number of these and other related challenges in the federal 
cybersecurity workforce.[Footnote 32] NPPD has taken a number of steps 
to mitigate the challenges of filling cybersecurity positions, such as 
using direct hire authority/flexibilities and establishing 
relationships with “centers of academic excellence” to create a 
pipeline of qualified candidates to hire. NPPD officials also noted 
that there are ongoing department-wide efforts to better define and 
strengthen the required skill set for DHS cybersecurity personnel, 
including pursuit of a specific cybersecurity personnel job series, 
which officials expect to ultimately better inform recruiting and 
hiring. 

D&I Is Taking Steps to Assess Implementation of the CROS, but Could 
Improve Tracking of Recruiting Costs: 

D&I has established performance measures to assess progress in 
implementing the goals and objectives of the CROS, and plans to 
develop performance targets in future iterations of the CROS to better 
track component performance. D&I could better measure department-wide 
recruiting and outreach costs by tracking recruiting costs from all 
DHS components in a consistent manner. In addition, DHS is taking 
steps to better measure return on investment for recruiting and 
outreach activities, a key focus of the CROS. 

D&I Plans to Better Assess CROS Implementation through Performance 
Targets, but Could Better Measure Department wide Recruiting Costs: 

D&I assesses departmental and component progress in implementing the 
CROS by tracking and monitoring component efforts for six performance 
measures that are aligned with six corresponding objectives and two 
long-term goals (shown in table 6). 

Table 6: Goals, Objectives, and Performance Measures in the 
Coordinated Recruiting and Outreach Strategy (CROS): 

Goals/objectives: 

Goal 1: Recruit a highly qualified and diverse workforce: 

Objective 1.1: Establish enterprise-wide outreach and recruiting 
plans, ensuring links to overarching strategies and statutory 
requirements; 
Performance measure: Percentage of DHS headquarters and component 
recruiting and outreach portfolios fully developed; 
Fiscal year 2012 performance measure result: 100 percent[A]; 

Objective 1.2: Standardize tracking and data reporting on recruiting, 
outreach, and marketing activities; 
Performance measure: Percentage of DHS headquarters and components in 
compliance with tracking and data-reporting requirements; 
Fiscal year 2012 Performance measure result: 62 percent. 

Objective 1.3: Develop methodologies that foster the creation of 
focused recruitment and outreach strategies based upon workforce 
planning and mission-critical needs; 
Performance measure: Percentage of components with data-driven 
targeted recruitment and outreach plans that link to organizational 
needs; 
Fiscal year 2012 Performance measure result: 100 percent[A]. 

Goal 2: Optimize outreach and recruiting resources enterprise-wide: 

Objective 2.1: Coordinate recruitment and outreach planning procedures 
to reduce duplication of effort and travel costs; 
Performance measure: Percentage decrease in recruiting cost, by 
component; 
Fiscal year 2012 Performance measure result: $22,590 in savings in 
fiscal year 2012. 

Objective 2.2: Establish annual planning mechanisms that ensure the 
coordination of outreach and recruiting resources; 
Performance measure: Percentage decrease in component-specific 
participation at outreach and recruiting events; 
Fiscal year 2012 Performance measure result: D&I is revisiting this 
objective and its milestones because of the changing budget 
environment. 

Objective 2.3: Establish a planning framework to create a unified 
image of DHS to applicants and job seekers, maintaining DHS branding 
guidelines; 
Performance measure: Percentage increase in booth sharing and shared 
advertising; 
Fiscal year 2012 Performance measure result: Deferring until 2014 
because of budgetary constraints. 

Source: DHS Coordinated Recruiting and Outreach Strategy (CROS). 

[A] D&I officials reported that 100 percent compliance in these 
measures was achieved through component preparation of Component 
Specific Outreach and Recruiting Plans (CSORP). However, as we noted 
earlier, not all components provided all elements called for in D&I’s 
CSORP template. The officials reported that their reviews of CSORPs 
were more subjective and focused on whether the components identified 
MCO hiring needs and efforts planned to meet those needs. 

[End of section] 

While these measures are aligned with and cover key aspects of 
performance related to the goals and objectives outlined in the CROS, 
they do not include performance targets to track long-term, short-
term, or interim component progress toward achieving the goals of the 
CROS over the period the strategy covers (2012-2017). As shown in 
table 6, all six measures in the CROS use percentages to 
quantitatively indicate the extent to which the measure is being 
achieved. However, none of these measures identify a target 
percentage, or standard, against which to assess component 
performance. For example, the performance measure for objective 2.2 
calls for a percentage decrease in component-specific participation at 
recruiting events, but it does not identify any target percentages to 
assess component performance in achieving the measure or goal 2 in the 
CROS, which is to optimize outreach and recruiting resources 
enterprise-wide. In addition, one of the measures (1.1) calls for 
components to have fully developed recruiting and outreach portfolios, 
which the CROS defines as including both short-and long-term workforce 
plans, strategic and tactical plans, and diversity snapshots. While 
D&I officials indicated that all components have fully developed 
recruiting and outreach portfolios--which D&I views as the CSORPs--the 
CSORPs do not uniformly include long-term planning as defined in the 
CROS (3 to 5 years). More specifically, CSORPs for the four components 
in our review focused on current-year efforts to reach out to 
underrepresented populations, and one contained a target for long-term 
veterans hiring. D&I revised the CSORP development template for fiscal 
year 2013 to focus on current-year efforts and did not request that 
components include long-term goals or targets in their CSORPs. 
Officials stated that they made this change to gather more baseline 
data before focusing on longer-term goals. 

A performance measure should tell an organization how well it is 
achieving its goals, and GPRA defines a performance goal as a target 
level of performance expressed as a tangible, measurable objective, 
against which actual achievement can be compared, including a goal 
expressed as a quantitative standard, value, or rate.[Footnote 33] In 
addition, both the CROS and our prior work highlight the need for 
recruiting and outreach strategies to be linked directly to short-and 
long-range plans, and our prior work has also stated that measures, 
such as outputs or intermediate outcomes, can be used to show progress 
or contribution to intended results.[Footnote 34] 

D&I officials stated that they and the components are in the early 
stages of implementing and assessing the CROS and are continuing to 
obtain performance data to establish a baseline level of performance 
for the six measures they have, including assessing the extent to 
which the measures themselves are appropriate and identifying the 
necessary actions and activities required to achieve their long-term 
goals. Given this, and the uncertainty associated with current federal 
budget and hiring constraints, D&I officials said that they felt it 
was premature to call for the CROS and CSORPs to identify short-term, 
interim, or long-term targets associated with their performance 
measures. However, D&I officials said they recognize the need to 
establish clearer links in the CROS between the actions being taken 
and the extent to which they are helping DHS and the components 
achieve the long-term goals of the CROS, in part by developing targets 
for measures. D&I officials told us they plan to address these issues 
in future updates to the CROS. Taking steps to update the CROS to 
include performance targets to measure and link component efforts with 
a desired set of outcomes is an important step to help clarify the 
ultimate desired outcomes of DHS's recruiting and outreach strategy 
and the specific actions DHS and components need to take on a short-
term or interim basis to achieve the long-term goals outlined in the 
CROS. 

In addition, one of the objectives in the CROS (2.1) is to coordinate 
recruitment and outreach planning procedures to reduce duplication of 
effort and travel costs. D&I has developed a database for components 
to use to track recruiting and outreach efforts and costs, but it does 
not require that all components use this database or enter data in a 
consistent manner. As a result, D&I does not have the information 
required to accurately assess component performance for this 
objective. D&I officials said that since many components have their 
own systems for tracking the costs associated with recruiting outreach 
activities (e.g., events attended, occupations for which they are 
recruiting, and number of attendees), they do not want the components 
to duplicate efforts by having them enter the same type of information 
in the DHS shared database. D&I officials reported that components 
saved approximately $22,590 in fiscal year 2012 by sharing booth space 
at recruiting events coordinated through the CRC. However, D&I is 
unaware of the total costs of all recruiting and outreach activities 
department-wide, and D&I officials said this amount does not represent 
any savings from events or activities that may have been coordinated 
outside of the CRC. The CROS states that "consistent tracking and 
reporting of recruiting and marketing data will assist DHS and its 
components in informed decision-making and the development of resource 
allocation plans for strategic outreach, recruiting and marketing 
activities each fiscal year," and one of its objectives calls for 
standardized tracking and data reporting of recruiting and outreach 
activities. The Standard for Program Management calls for an 
identification of program financial sources and resources, including 
the establishment of baseline costs as a primary financial target 
programs can be measured against.[Footnote 35] 

D&I officials said they are revisiting the usefulness of the shared 
database versus the time and resources spent by components to enter 
data, and are also considering other options for obtaining this cost 
information from components, including development of a template 
components could fill out and provide back to D&I. D&I officials 
acknowledged that obtaining comprehensive and consistent cost 
information from all components in a manner that will ensure 
consistent and complete reporting of such data would be a worthwhile 
endeavor, but officials have not determined whether and how they will 
do so. As a result, D&I does not have a baseline of all recruiting 
costs from which to measure ongoing cost savings, making it difficult 
to determine how well department resources are being leveraged through 
component coordination or assess the extent to which they are 
achieving the second goal of the CROS of optimizing outreach and 
recruiting resources department-wide. Requiring all components to 
provide recruiting cost information in a consistent manner would 
enable D&I to better track overall recruiting costs, which would help 
it to assess the extent to which recruiting costs are being reduced by 
components as a result of increased coordination and leveraging 
resources, as called for in the CROS. 

DHS Is Taking Steps to Address Challenges in Determining Return on 
Investment for Recruiting and Outreach Activities: 

The CROS discusses the importance of establishing return on investment 
for recruiting and outreach events.[Footnote 36] According to D&I and 
all component officials we interviewed, tracking return on investment 
has primarily been the responsibility of each component, and has 
generally been conducted informally. D&I officials said that 
determining return on investment for their recruiting and outreach 
activities can be challenging. For example, D&I officials said 
information provided by candidates or new hires at recruiting events 
or during the hiring process is voluntary, which makes it difficult to 
reliably determine the reasons an individual was interested in DHS or 
became an employee. Nevertheless, components in our review have taken 
steps to better determine return on investment for recruiting and 
outreach events. For example, three of the four components prepare and 
review after-action reports to identify events that led to interaction 
with promising candidates. 

D&I officials said that OPM is working with departments within the 
federal government to compile applicant data to help better link 
applicants and new hires to various recruiting and outreach efforts, 
which D&I officials said could help them better determine their return 
on investment for various recruiting and outreach events. D&I 
officials told us they anticipate obtaining data later this calendar 
year, noting that the data would provide information on each candidate 
through the entire hiring cycle from initial application up to 
selection. D&I officials told us that officials from other departments 
said that they believe the response rate will be about 40 to 50 
percent. While this response rate would not represent all or most new 
hires, D&I officials said analysis of this information could help them 
better understand the nature of the applicants it is getting, 
including new hires that resulted from specific recruiting events or 
the percentage of new hires that came from colleges and universities 
it visited or targeted. This type of information could assist D&I in 
making more informed decisions in the future about where to spend 
limited funds on recruitment and outreach efforts. 

Conclusions: 

As DHS faces increasingly complex national security challenges, it is 
important that it effectively recruit and hire employees with the 
appropriate skills to meet its mission requirements. In recent years, 
we and others have identified challenges to recruiting and hiring in 
the federal government in general and within DHS in particular. While 
DHS and selected components are implementing strategies to fill MCOs, 
and generally report that they are able to fill MCO positions, DHS 
could better assess its efforts to implement the CROS and achieve 
recruiting cost savings by requiring all components to provide 
recruiting cost information in a consistent manner. Doing so would 
help DHS better track the amount of resources being spent on 
recruiting and outreach throughout DHS and assess the extent to which 
increased coordination and leveraging resources have decreased 
recruiting costs. 

Recommendation for Executive Action: 

To help ensure that DHS has comprehensive data to help track 
recruiting costs and coordinated efforts, we recommend that the 
Secretary of Homeland Security direct OCHCO to take the following 
action: 

* require all components to provide D&I with recruiting cost 
information in a consistent manner to allow better tracking of overall 
recruiting costs and use this information to assess the extent to 
which recruiting costs are being reduced by components as a result of 
increased coordination and leveraging resources as called for in the 
CROS. 

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation: 

We provided a draft of this report to DHS for review and comment. On 
September 9, 2013, DHS provided written comments, which are reprinted 
in appendix II, and provided technical comments, which we incorporated 
as appropriate. DHS concurred with our recommendation and described 
actions planned to address it. Specifically, DHS stated that through 
the CRC, DHS will develop and implement a system to consistently track 
and analyze overall recruiting costs by all components. This 
information could help DHS assess the degree to which recruiting costs 
are being reduced through component coordination--as called for in the 
CROS. DHS expects to complete this effort by December 31, 2013. If 
fully implemented, DHS's planned actions will address the intent of 
this recommendation. 

We are sending copies of this report to the Secretary of Homeland 
Security, appropriate congressional committees, and other interested 
parties. This report is also available at no charge on the GAO website 
at [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. 

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please 
contact me at (202) 512-9627 or maurerd@gao.gov. Contact points for 
our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found 
on the last page of this report. Key contributors to this report are 
listed in appendix III. 

Signed by: 

David C. Maurer: 
Director: 
Homeland Security and Justice Issues: 

List of Requesters: 

The Honorable Thomas R. Carper: 
Chairman: 
The Honorable Tom Coburn, MD: 
Ranking Member: 
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs: 
United States Senate: 

The Honorable Claire McCaskill: 
Chair: 
Subcommittee on Financial and Contracting Oversight: 
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs: 
United States Senate: 

The Honorable Jeff Duncan: 
Chairman: 
Subcommittee on Oversight and Management Efficiency: 
Committee on Homeland Security: 
House of Representatives: 

[End of section] 

Appendix I: Mission-Critical Occupations for Selected Department of 
Homeland Security Components: 

Table 7 presents the occupational series and positions considered to 
be mission-critical occupations for the components in our review. 

Table 7: Mission-Critical Occupations (MCO) for the Four Components in 
Our Review: 

Component: National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD); 

Series: 80; 
Occupation: Security Administration; 
MCO Job description: Security specialist (NPPD-wide): analyzes; 
interprets; 
implements; assesses; and coordinates security policies, processes, 
and procedures in matters related to personnel security, physical 
security, cyber security, information security, and industrial 
security programs. 

Series: 301; 
Occupation: Miscellaneous Administration and Program (Subset); 
MCO Job description: Information management analyst: responsible for 
day-to-day operations involving cyber security tasks and identifying, 
resolving, and eliminating events that may lead to possible system 
threats. Personnel holding this position also recommend modifications 
to agency security plans and evaluate system goals, objectives, and 
priorities. 

Series: 343; 
Occupation: Management and Program Analysis (Subset); 
MCO Job description: 
Management and program analyst (Infrastructure Security Compliance 
Division; the series includes two discrete positions); 
Mission Support: This position entails developing and tracking 
budgets; answering questions regarding vision and requirements of new 
spending; negotiating cost and logistics of new training; coordinating 
sponsored training; aligning new hires to billets; tracking personnel 
actions; supporting the reception of new 
staff; and developing operating procedures for training, hiring, or 
acquisitions; 
Policy: This position entails conducting outreach programs, responding 
to external inquiries, summarizing programs operations data, revising 
tools and policies, drafting regulations, reviewing inspection 
documents; managing programs, and issuing orders mandating compliance 
to delinquent facilities; 
Program analyst (Cybersecurity & Communications [CS&C]): provides 
acquisition strategy and plays a major role involving information 
technology (IT) procurement; plans, develops and manages 
administrative functions related to the efficiency and effectiveness 
of the enterprise acquisition system; and studies and interprets 
legislation, policy statements, rules, regulations, directives and 
other regulatory material to determine their intent and effect on 
operations. 

Series: 391; 
Occupation: Telecommunication (Subset); 
MCO Job description: Telecommunications specialist (CS&C): ensures the 
accuracy of the telecommunications service priority database; resolves 
system support and telecommunications interface problems; briefs 
senior federal executives, emergency responder organizations, and 
communications sector private industry entities on Telecommunications 
Service Priority Program functions and initiatives. 

Series: 854; 
Occupation: Computer Engineer; 
MCO Job description: 
Computer engineer (NPPD-wide): provides advice and guidance on the 
implementation of systems engineering process; and formulates, 
develops, and administers NPPD systems engineering process, planning 
and technology; 
Computer engineer (CS&C): manages, supervises, leads, or performs 
professional engineering and scientific work involving the design, 
construction, and operation of computer systems, including hardware 
and software and their integration. 

Series: 855; 
Occupation: Electronics Engineer; 
MCO Job description: Electronics engineer (CS&C): manages, supervises, 
leads, and performs professional engineering and scientific work for 
purposes such as communication, computation, sensing, control, 
measurement, and navigation. 

Series: 1550; 
Occupation: Computer Science (Subset); 
MCO Job description: Computer scientist: responsible for the 
application of, or research into, computer science methods and 
techniques to store, manipulate, transform, or present information by 
means of computer systems. The position develops software, high-speed 
computing, real-time data acquisition, computer graphics, and 
integrated computer systems. 

Series: 1801; 
Occupation: General Inspection, Investigation, & Compliance; 
MCO Job description: 
Border and transportation security officer (NPPD-wide): reviews 
existing and proposed legislative and regulatory requirements and 
translates requirements of new legislation; recommends program 
development, planning, coordination, direction, and assessment 
activities relating to immigration eligibility; formulates 
interdiction policies, procedures, and guidelines; validates program 
studies and assessments; provides technical and operational guidance 
for operations; and evaluates efficiency and effectiveness for special 
projects programs; 
Chemical security inspector (Office of Infrastructure Protection 
(OIP)): functions as subject matter expert on physical and technical 
security protective measures and procedures, and in reviewing and 
evaluating chemical facility physical, personnel, information and 
cyber security plans and countermeasures; plans, coordinates, 
participates in or leads joint team inspections and compliance audits, 
including preparing field, compliance assistance and after-action 
reports; responsible for chemical facility situational awareness and 
management, emergency preparedness, and critical incident 
management; 
Protective security advisor (OIP): serves as liaison among Department 
of Homeland Security (DHS) and other federal agencies, state and local 
government, and the private sector on critical infrastructure security 
compliance matters; functions as an expert on physical security 
protective measures and procedures; reviews and interprets directives, 
program changes, legal initiatives and DHS guidelines and develops and 
implements local critical infrastructure policies, procedures and 
directives. 

Series: 1811; 
Occupation: Criminal Investigation(Subset); 
MCO Job description: Criminal Investigator (Federal Protective Service 
[FPS]): conducts criminal and administrative investigations, plans and 
coordinates investigative processes, serves as case agent for 
interagency investigations, and may lead teams of criminal 
investigators and law enforcement officers. Personnel holding this 
position also provide coordination and guidance for multi-
jurisdictional and inter-regional investigations and prepare reports 
of investigation and intelligence studies and direct and coordinate 
working groups on law enforcement activities and intelligence issues. 

Series: 2210; 
Occupation: Information Technology (Subset); 
MCO Job description: 
Information technology specialist (CS&C): functions as a technical 
expert in two or more assigned areas, including policy and planning, 
security, application software, operating systems, network service, 
data management, systems administration, and customer support. 
Personnel in this position are responsible for planning, designing, 
adapting, developing, acquiring, documenting, testing, implementing, 
integrating, maintaining and modifying systems; 
Information technology specialist (U.S.-Computer Emergency Readiness 
Team): oversees and coordinates response to cyber incidents, provides 
on-site incident response, advises on strategies to protect and secure 
sensitive information and systems, monitors and plans for change in 
federal IT security policy and legislation, and analyzes and responds 
to software and hardware vulnerabilities. Personnel in this position 
are also responsible for interfacing with the DHS National Operations 
Center during cyber incidents and implementing IT security projects and 
initiatives; 
Information technology specialist (Network Security Deployment): 
develops deployment strategies for and leads efforts to coordinate and 
install cyber security network equipment and software at federal 
facilities, conducts testing, monitors network architecture and 
transmission protocols, and resolves cyber security network issues. 
Personnel in this position also identify network requirements, define 
and maintain network architecture, and determine the configuration and 
optimization of network cyber security installations. 

Component: Transportation Security Administration (TSA); 

Series: 132; 
Occupation: Intelligence; 
MCO Job description: Intelligence officer: provides intelligence 
support and threat briefings; liaises with the Joint Terrorism Task 
Forces and state, local, and tribal law enforcement officials and 
intelligence fusion centers; serves as a technical advisor; 
contributes to the development of high-level briefs and detailed and 
complex studies. 

Series: 340; 
Occupation: Program Management (Federal Security Director Subset); 
MCO Job description: Federal security director: provides operational 
direction for federal security at airports projected to have a small 
workforce, few checkpoints, and be directly involved in the national 
interest. The federal security director is the ranking TSA authority 
responsible for the leadership and coordination of TSA security 
activities. 

Series: 1801; 
Occupation: General Inspection, Investigation, & Compliance; 
MCO Job description: 
Transportation security inspector: conducts regulatory inspections/
investigations and supports criminal investigations related to alleged 
or suspected security violations by identifying, collecting, and 
preserving evidence used to support enforcement actions; 
Federal air marshal: deployed worldwide on passenger flights of U.S. 
carriers to detect, deter, and defeat hostile acts targeting U.S. 
airports, crews, and passengers. 

Series: 1802; 
Occupation: Component: Compliance Inspection and Support; 
MCO Job description: Component: Transportation security officer: 
Implements security-screening procedures that are central to TSA 
objectives and that will serve to protect the traveling public by 
preventing any deadly or dangerous objects from being transported on 
an aircraft, in part by assisting in conducting screening of 
passengers, baggage and cargo. 

Series: 1811; 
Occupation: Criminal Investigation; 
MCO Job description: Criminal investigator: conducts, monitors, and 
coordinates criminal and administrative investigations and inspections; 
responds to security violations; interviews and interrogates witnesses 
and suspects; reviews transportation security measures and operations; 
identifies problem areas and recommends solutions; documents 
violations and prepares criminal and civil cases; and tests security 
systems for compliance. 

Component: United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS); 

Series: 1801; 
Occupation: General Inspection, Investigation, & Compliance 
(Immigration Services Officer Subset); 
MCO Job description: Immigration services officer: responsible for the 
adjudication of applications and petitions for benefits and 
privileges. Personnel in the position also perform assignments in the 
following areas: data integrity, security, customer support, liaison, 
communications, interviews, analysis, and training. 

Component: United States Secret Service (USSS); 

Series: 80; 
Occupation: Security Administration (Physical Security Specialist (Law 
Enforcement) Subset); 
MCO Job description: Physical security specialist: plans, develops and 
implements a comprehensive technical security program for major 
protective advance trips involving designated protectees; and conducts 
technical investigative support functions and activities in the United 
States and overseas. The position holder also serves as agency 
technical authority in one of the technical security specialized 
programs and senior technical advisor for large-scale protective 
activities. 

Series: 83; 
Occupation: Police; 
MCO Job description: 
Officer (Uniformed Division [UD]): ensures the protection of officials 
and their families, designated embassies, and other specified federal 
property; enforces laws, statutes, and ordinances; investigates 
accidents and crimes; arrests suspects; and appears in court. The 
position also covers designated security posts, preparation of 
incident reports, response to security alarms, and interviews of 
unauthorized persons seeking admission to protected areas; 
Sergeant, lieutenant, captain, deputy/assistant chief and chief 
perform, supervise or manage duties above and, depending upon position, 
engage in planning, policy development and administration of UD 
activities and operations. 

Series: 1802; 
Occupation: Compliance Inspection and Support (Special 
Officer/Physical Security Subset); 
MCO Job description: 
Protective support technician: performs driving and technical 
protective support duties associated with the security of protective 
operations and movements and the secure transportation of armored 
vehicles used in those movements; 
Special officer: maintains designated protective security posts; 
inspects all operational, safety, emergency, and convenience equipment 
of protective vehicles to ensure peak operating condition; drives 
protective vehicle or follow-up; controls the movement of persons into 
and around multiple Secret Service facilities and associated areas; 
monitors and operates various communications equipment; and employs 
various advanced X-ray screening technologies in order to detect and 
identify high-risk items. 

Series: 1811; 
Occupation: Criminal Investigation; 
MCO Job description: Criminal investigator: investigates specified 
violations of U.S. laws, performs security surveys and background 
investigations, and works with U.S. Attorneys in preparing and 
presenting federal cases. Protection duties include advance security 
surveys of domestic locations, covering designated security posts, and 
keeping close to designated protectees. 

Source: GAO analysis of DHS data. 

[End of table] 

[End of section] 

Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Homeland Security: 

U.S. Department of Homeland Security: 
Washington, DC 20528: 

September 9, 2013: 

David C. Maurer: 
Director, Homeland Security and Justice: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street, NW:
Washington, DC 20548: 

Re: Draft Report GAO-13-742, "DHS Recruiting and Hiring: DHS is 
Generally Filling Mission Critical Positions, but Could Better Track 
Costs of Coordinated Recruiting Efforts" 

Dear Mr. Maurer, 

Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this draft 
report. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) appreciates the 
U.S. Government Accountability Office's (GAO's) work in planning and 
conducting its review and issuing this report. 

We are pleased to note GAO's recognition of the Department's efforts 
to develop and implement the DHS Coordinated Recruiting and Outreach 
Strategy (CROS) for Fiscal Years 2012-2017). The CROS provides DHS 
with an efficient approach to filling its mission critical occupations 
with high caliber talent. 

The draft report contained one recommendation for executive action, 
and DHS concurs. Specifically, GAO recommended that the Secretary of 
Homeland Security direct the Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer 
(OCHCO) to: 

Recommendation 1: Require all components to provide OCHCO Diversity 
and Inclusion (D&I) with recruiting cost information in a consistent 
manner to allow better tracking of overall recruiting costs and use 
this information to assess the extent to which recruiting costs are 
being reduced by components as a result of increased coordination and 
leveraging resources as called for in the CROS. 

Response: Concur. OCHCO D&I will work through the DHS Corporate 
Recruitment Council (CRC) to develop and implement a system to 
consistently track and analyze overall recruiting costs. The CRC is 
led by the D&I National Recruitment Advisor and is composed of 
Component representation throughout the Department, including 
Headquarters. Moving forward, all Components will be required to 
provide D&I with recruiting cost information in a consistent manner to 
allow better tracking of overall recruiting costs. This information 
will enable the Department to assess the extent to which recruiting 
costs are being reduced by Components as a result of increased 
coordination, as called for in the CROS. Estimated Completion Date: 
December 31, 2013. 

Again, thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this 
draft report. Technical comments were provided under separate cover. 
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. We look 
forward to working with you in the future. 

Sincerely, 

Signed by: 

Jim H. Crumpacker: 
Director: 
Departmental GAO-OIG Liaison Office: 

[End of section] 

Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments: 

GAO Contact: 

David C. Maurer, (202) 512-9627 or maurerd@gao.gov: 

Staff Acknowledgments: 

In addition to the contact named above, Adam Hoffman, Assistant 
Director; Adam Couvillion, Analyst-in-Charge; Dave Bieler; Chris 
Ferencik; Christine Hanson; Tracey King; Lara Miklozek; and Amanda 
Miller made significant contributions to the work. 

[End of section] 

Footnotes: 

[1] This total includes military staff in the U.S. Coast Guard and 
intelligence-related positions. Our review generally focuses on 
civilian, nonintelligence personnel, which results in a total of 
approximately 200,000 DHS employees. 

[2] GAO, Human Capital: Transforming Federal Recruiting and Hiring 
Efforts, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-762T] 
(Washington, D.C.: May 8, 2008). This report addresses recruiting and 
hiring efforts across the federal government, and includes work 
reviewing DHS. 

[3] GAO, Cybersecurity Human Capital: Initiatives Need Better Planning 
and Coordination, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-12-8] 
(Washington, D.C.: Nov. 29, 2011). 

[4] In addition, D&I manages departmental efforts to increase the 
employment of veterans within DHS, and also leads efforts to 
investigate allegations of workplace harassment and provide resolution 
and corrective action when appropriate and necessary. 

[5] DHS has seven operational components—Customs and Border 
Protection, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Immigration and 
Customs Enforcement, TSA, U.S. Coast Guard, USCIS, USSS—as well as 
NPPD, the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center, and several 
headquarters offices, for which OCHCO largely provides personnel 
processing. Within NPPD, there are four different subcomponents: 
Federal Protective Service (FPS), Office of Cybersecurity and 
Communications (CS&C), Office of Infrastructure Protection, and Office 
of Biometric Identity Management (which has replaced the United States 
Visitor and Immigration Status Indicator Technology program as of 
March 2013). FPS is a federal law enforcement agency that provides 
integrated security and law enforcement services to federally owned 
and leased buildings, facilities, properties, and other assets. CS&C 
is responsible for enhancing the security, resilience, and reliability 
of the nation’s cyber and communications infrastructure. The Office of 
Biometric Identity Management provides biometric identification 
services that help federal, state, and local government decision 
makers accurately identify the people they encounter and determine 
whether those people pose a risk to the United States. 

[6] As discussed later in this report, components use a variety of 
data to monitor and assess the success of their recruiting and hiring 
efforts. To provide illustrative examples of these data, we present 
the following information in this report: TSA hires and losses from 
fiscal years 2010 through 2012; USSS hires, losses, and vacancy rates 
from fiscal years 2010 through March of 2013; USCIS hires and losses 
through April of fiscal year 2013, as well as the number of qualified 
applications received during 2012; and NPPD hires and losses from 
fiscal years 2010 through May of 2013, as well as vacancy rates for 
the CS&C subcomponent and number of FPS officers as of June 2013. 

[7] Specifically, we spoke with USCIS officials in Texas, USSS 
officials in New York, and TSA officials at airports in Colorado and 
Alaska. 

[8] See, for example, GAO, Human Capital: Key Principles for Effective 
Strategic Workforce Planning, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-04-39] (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 11, 
2003); Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) (Pub. L. No. 103-
62, 107. Stat 285 (1993)); and Project Management Institute, The 
Standard for Program Management, Third Edition © (Newtown Square, 
Pennsylvania: 2013). [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-04-39] addresses key strategic 
workforce planning principles for aligning an organization’s human 
capital program with its current and emerging mission and programmatic 
goals, and developing long-term strategies for acquiring, developing, 
and retaining staff to achieve programmatic goals. GPRA was enacted to—
among other things—improve federal program effectiveness, 
accountability, and service delivery, in part through requiring 
performance plans with goals that establish target levels of 
performance against which achievement can be compared. While the 
practices called for through GPRA are required at the federal 
department/agency level, we have previously reported that they can 
serve as leading practices for planning at lower levels within federal 
agencies, such as individual programs or initiatives. For example, see 
GAO, Foreign Aid Reform: Comprehensive Strategy, Interagency 
Coordination, and Operational Improvements Would Bolster Current 
Efforts, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-192] 
(Washington, D.C.: Apr. 17, 2009). The Standard for Program Management 
outlines supporting processes for program management, including 
program cost budgeting and estimation. 

[9] 5 U.S.C. §§ 2102(a), 2103(a). Only certain positions are in the 
excepted service and are excepted from the competitive examination 
process. Positions may be excepted from the competitive service by 
statute, by the President, or by OPM. 5 C.F.R. § 213.101. OPM may 
except positions from the competitive service when it determines that 
appointments into such positions through competitive examination are 
not practicable. 5 C.F.R. § 6.1(a). Excepted appointments can be under 
either Schedule A (e.g., chaplain and attorney positions), Schedule B 
(e.g., Student Career Experience Program and Senior Executive Service 
candidate development program positions), or Schedule C (e.g., 
political appointee positions). 5 C.F.R. Part 213, Subpart C. 

[10] 49 U.S.C. § 114(n), 49 U.S.C. § 40122(g). 

[11] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-04-39]. 

[12] As we reported in September 2012, OPM and the Chief Human Capital 
Officers Council (a body composed of chief human capital officers of 
24 executive agencies, chaired by OPM, to advise and assist the head 
of the agency and other agency officials in their strategic human 
capital efforts) established a working group in September 2011 to 
identify and mitigate critical skills gaps as a means to address the 
federal government’s human capital high-risk area. See GAO, Human 
Capital Management: Effectively Implementing Reforms and Closing 
Critical Skills Gaps Are Key to Addressing Federal Workforce 
Challenges, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-12-1023T] 
(Washington, D.C.: Sept. 19, 2012). In conjunction with OPM efforts to 
identify and mitigate skill gaps, 
DHS’s OCHCO is overseeing a pilot project to assess competency gaps 
for selected MCOs at DHS. 

[13] DHS’s Workforce Planning Model identifies five steps for 
effective workforce planning—(1) set a strategic direction; (2) 
identify supply and demand discrepancies; (3) develop an action plan; 
(4) implement the action plan; and (5) monitor, evaluate, and revise. 
Within these five steps are 15 elements, 1 of which involves 
recruitment, hiring, training, and placement. See GAO, DHS Strategic 
Workforce Planning: Oversight of Departmentwide Efforts Should Be 
Strengthened, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-13-65] 
(Washington, D.C.: Dec. 3, 2012). In addition to recruiting and 
hiring, training is also a key element in the workforce planning model 
and can help address skill and competency gaps. We have ongoing work 
examining training programs at DHS and plan to report the results of 
our review in 2014. 

[14] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-13-65]. 

[15] ISOs are responsible for the adjudication of applications and 
petitions for immigration benefits and privileges. TSOs implement 
security screening procedures to protect the traveling public by, in 
part, assisting in conducting screening of passengers, baggage, and 
cargo. 

[16] According to OCHCO, the revalidated MCO list is awaiting review 
and approval by the Chief Human Capital Officer. 

[17] In reporting on progress in addressing high-risk outcomes, GAO 
and DHS generally use the following nomenclature: fully addressed = 
outcome is fully addressed; mostly addressed = progress is significant 
and a small amount of work remains; partially addressed = progress is 
measurable, but significant work remains; and initiated = activities 
have been initiated to address outcome, but it is too early to report 
progress. 

[18] GAO, High-Risk Series: An Update, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-13-283] (Washington, D.C.: February 
2013). 

[19] DHS, Integrated Strategy for High Risk Management (Washington, 
D.C.: June 27, 2013). 

[20] According to D&I, this “one DHS” vision was widely communicated 
to the department’s components via a memo from the Secretary of 
Homeland Security announcing DHS’s Workforce Strategy in December 
2010. In particular, the Secretary stated that “the time for 
fragmented, duplicative, and sometimes competing branding and 
recruitment is over,” and called for development of a coordinated 
recruitment strategy presenting a unified image of DHS. 

[21] “Time-to-hire” is a measure of the amount of time taken to bring 
an employee onboard, from the date a new hire action is authorized 
through the date a new employee begins working. 

[22] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-762T]. 

[23] A presidential memorandum dated May 11, 2010, called on federal 
agencies to overhaul the way they recruit and hire the civilian 
workforce to, among other things, improve the ability to select high-
quality candidates efficiently and quickly. The memorandum also 
directed federal agencies to report on and attempt to reduce time-to-
hire for mission-critical and commonly filled occupations. Memorandum, 
Improving the Federal Recruitment and Hiring Process, 75 Fed. Reg. 
27,157 (May 11, 2010). 

[24] TSA’s management, professional, and administrative positions 
cover all employees except for TSOs, entry-level federal air marshals, 
and Senior Executive Service. 

[25] The ready pool refers to TSO candidates who have passed all 
assessments, including background and medical checks, and are eligible 
to receive a job offer from the airport(s) to which they applied, 
which helps to ensure that qualified candidates are available for hire 
at all times. Once job opportunity announcements are posted, 
candidates are then processed through each of the subsequent 
assessment steps as the airports’ hiring needs dictate.TSA tracks time-
to-hire for its TSO positions in two different manners. As reported to 
OPM through OCHCO, time-to-hire consists of the time taken for an 
airport to formally open a position for hiring until a new hire is 
brought on board (or, the time taken to move an applicant from the 
ready pool to onboard status). As of March 2013, this average time-to-
hire was 37 days for TSOs. However, to better capture the “end to end” 
time to hire TSOs, TSA also internally tracks the average amount of 
time elapsed between a new hire’s submission of an application until 
he or she is brought on board. This average time-to-hire is 
approximately 150 days. TSA officials explained that this time frame 
is greatly affected by the length of time an applicant may have to 
wait between filling out an initial application and reporting to TSA 
for further assessments, which in turn is affected by the hiring needs 
of that applicant’s airport of choice. 

[26] For the purposes of this report, “losses” refer to employees that 
have left a component because of resignation, retirement, or other 
separation from the component. 

[27] There are a number of factors and events that can influence 
vacancy rates at various points in time and for variable durations, 
including changes in staffing allocations, attrition of staff, budget 
factors, and changes in hiring processes—and vacancy rates fluctuate 
throughout the year. There is also no generally agreed-upon standard 
for acceptable vacancy rates. 

[28] TSA officials informed us that they generally do not track 
vacancy rates for positions but rely on program offices to report to 
them on job needs to be filled. 

[29] USCIS tracks and reviews vacancy rates by office (e.g., Field 
Operations, Service Center Operations), but does not track these rates 
by position (e.g., ISOs). The 27,000 minimally qualified applicants 
cited here were deemed minimally qualified after initial screening and 
prior to any screening conducted by USCIS. 

[30] FPS officers are sworn law enforcement officers and trained 
security experts who provide security assessments, inspections, and 
oversight for contract guards, and respond to crimes in progress. 
Cybersecurity personnel are spread throughout a number of different 
occupational series within NPPD, but are generally concentrated in the 
Information Technology (2210) series. Thus, there is not a specific 
occupational series that houses all cybersecurity personnel, and NPPD 
could not provide us with hire and loss data for cybersecurity 
personnel alone. See [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-12-8] 
for further information on the difficulties faced by federal agencies 
in determining the size of their cybersecurity workforce, in part 
because of this lack of a specific job series. 

[31] See, e.g., Pub. L. No. 113-6, 127 Stat. 198, 355 (2013). 

[32] See [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-12-8]. 

[33] Pub. L. No. 103-62, 107 Stat. 285 (1993). GPRA was intended to 
address several broad purposes, including strengthening the confidence 
of the American people in their government; improving federal program 
effectiveness, accountability, and service delivery; and enhancing 
congressional decision making by providing more objective information 
on program performance. GPRA requires agencies to establish goals and 
targets to define the level of performance to be achieved by a program 
and express such goals in an objective, quantifiable, and measurable 
form. If an agency, in consultation with the Office of Management and 
Budget, determines that it is not feasible to express performance 
goals in an objective, quantifiable, and measurable form, an 
alternative form may be authorized. This alternative form should 
include separate descriptive statements of a minimally effective 
program and a successful program, or an alternative that would allow 
for an accurate independent determination of whether the program 
activity's performance meets the criteria of the description; or state 
why it is infeasible to express a performance goal in any form. 31 
U.S.C. § 1115(c). 

[34] GAO, Agency Performance Plans: Examples of Practices That Can 
Improve Usefulness to Decisionmakers, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO/GGD/AIMD-99-69] (Washington, D.C.: 
Feb. 26, 1999). This report illustrates how agency performance plans 
can better articulate a results orientation by using intermediate 
goals and measures to show progress or contribution to intended 
results, among other things. 

[35] Project Management Institute, The Standard for Program Management. 

[36] To calculate return on investment, the benefit (return) of an 
investment is divided by the cost of the investment; the result is 
expressed as a percentage or a ratio. 

[End of section] 

GAO’s Mission: 

The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and 
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting 
its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the 
performance and accountability of the federal government for the 
American people. GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates 
federal programs and policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, 
and other assistance to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, 
and funding decisions. GAO’s commitment to good government is 
reflected in its core values of accountability, integrity, and 
reliability. 

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony: 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 
cost is through GAO’s website [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each 
weekday afternoon, GAO posts on its website newly released reports, 
testimony, and correspondence. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly 
posted products, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov] and select 
“E-mail Updates.” 

Order by Phone: 

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of 
production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the 
publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black 
and white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s 
website, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm]. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 
TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, 
MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional 
information. 

Connect with GAO: 

Connect with GAO on facebook, flickr, twitter, and YouTube.
Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E mail Updates. Listen to our Podcasts.
Visit GAO on the web at [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. 

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs: 

Contact: 
Website: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]; 
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov; 
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470. 

Congressional Relations: 

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov: 
(202) 512-4400: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7125: 
Washington, DC 20548. 

Public Affairs: 

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov: 
(202) 512-4800: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7149: 
Washington, DC 20548. 

[End of document]