This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-11-137 
entitled 'Federal Work/life Programs: Agencies Generally Satisfied 
with OPM Assistance, but More Tracking and Information Sharing Needed' 
which was released on December 16, 2010. 

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 Committees: 

December 2010: 

Federal Work/life Programs: 

Agencies Generally Satisfied with OPM Assistance, but More Tracking 
and Information Sharing Needed: 

GAO-11-137: 

GAO Highlights: 

Highlights of GAO-11-137, a report to congressional committees. 

Why GAO Did This Study: 

To improve its ability to recruit and retain federal employees, 
agencies have implemented a wide range of work/life programs, such as 
flexible work schedules, child care, and employee assistance programs. 
The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) plays a key role in guiding 
federal human capital initiatives, including the implementation of 
work/life programs. As requested, GAO determined the extent to which: 
(1) OPM provides assistance and guidance to federal agencies for 
establishing and enhancing work/life programs; (2) OPM or the federal 
agencies track, evaluate, or modify work/life programs; and (3) OPM 
has identified leading practices in the private sector for the 
implementation of work/life programs and shared this information with 
federal agencies. To do this, GAO reviewed OPM policy and guidance; 
surveyed 40 federal officials—20 Chief Human Capital Officers (CHCO) 
and 20 work/life managers; and interviewed officials from seven 
private sector companies recognized for the quality of their work/life 
programs. 

What GAO Found: 

OPM’s Office of Work/Life/Wellness is available to federal agencies to 
provide assistance, guidance, and information as agencies develop and 
implement work/life programs. For example, OPM has established formal 
working groups, sponsored training for agency officials, promulgated 
regulations to implement work/life programs, and provided informal 
guidance to agencies that address issues related to these programs. Of 
the 33 agency officials who responded to GAO’s survey, 24 indicated 
that OPM’s assistance, guidance, and information sharing greatly 
helped or helped somewhat in implementing work/life programs. Another 
six agency officials indicated that OPM’s assistance, guidance, and 
information sharing helped in some cases and hindered in others. 

OPM tracks and collects information on a few work/life programs across 
the federal government, including health and wellness programs which 
it recently began tracking in response to a White House initiative. 
Some federal agencies independently provide OPM with evaluations on 
other work/life programs. However, when asked, OPM officials said that 
they did not track or maintain an inventory of these evaluations nor 
review these evaluations due to the lack of time and available 
resources. Tracking, analyzing, and sharing information among federal 
agencies on the effect of work/life programs on agency-intended goals 
could be helpful for individual agency decision making in a budget-
constrained environment. 

To follow up on the White House health and wellness initiative, OPM 
held several meetings and conferences with representatives from 
private sector companies to discuss their health and wellness programs 
and the effect of these programs on recruitment and retention. 
Although OPM has developed a health and wellness pilot program based 
on some of the information obtained from these meetings and 
conferences, OPM has not systematically shared with federal agencies 
other information about the private sector’s health and wellness 
programs or other work/life programs. GAO also interviewed officials 
from seven private sector companies recognized for the quality of 
their work/life programs to identify leading practices in implementing 
private sector work/life programs. Private sector officials from four 
of the seven companies that GAO interviewed indicated that their 
programs have been effective in increasing employee job satisfaction, 
resulting in improved recruitment, retention, and workforce 
productivity. Systematically collecting and disseminating information 
on the implementation and evaluation of private sector work/life 
programs could help federal agencies compare their work/life programs 
with leading practices in the private sector. 

What GAO Recommends: 

GAO recommends that OPM assist agencies in implementing their 
work/life programs by more systematically tracking and evaluating data 
on the implementation and evaluation of work/life programs and sharing 
this information with federal agencies. OPM agreed with GAO’s 
recommendations and suggested technical changes which GAO has 
incorporated as appropriate. 

View [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-137] or key 
components. For more information, contact Yvonne Jones at (202) 512-
6806 or jonesy@gao.gov. 

[End of section] 

Contents: 

Letter: 

Background: 

Most Responding Officials Were Satisfied with OPM's Assistance, 
Guidance, and Information Sharing on Work/Life Programs: 

OPM Tracks Some Work/Life Programs Governmentwide, While Many of the 
Responding Agency Officials Track or Evaluate Some of Their Own Work/ 
Life Programs: 

OPM Does Not Systematically Collect or Share Information on Private 
Sector Work/Life Programs: 

Conclusions: 

Recommendations for Executive Action: 

Agency Comments: 

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology: 

Appendix II: Survey of OPM's Role in Federal Agencies' Work/Life 
Programs: 

Appendix III: Comments from the Office of Personnel Management: 

Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments: 

Related GAO Products: 

Tables: 

Table 1: Examples of Federal Work/Life Programs: 

Table 2: Examples of Work/Life Programs at Selected Private Sector 
Companies: 

Table 3: Federal Departments and Agencies Receiving our Survey and the 
Number of Completed Responses: 

Table 4: Private Sector Companies Selected as Leaders in Work/Life 
Programs: 

Figures: 

Figure 1: Responding Agency Officials Generally Found OPM Helped in 
Implementing Work/Life Programs: 

Figure 2: Responding Agency Officials Were Generally Satisfied with 
OPM's Assistance with Work/Life Programs: 

Figure 3: Responding Agency Officials Were Generally Satisfied with 
OPM's Guidance on Work/Life Programs: 

Figure 4: Responding Agency Officials Were Generally Satisfied with 
OPM's Information Sharing Regarding Work/Life Programs: 

Figure 5: Most Responding Agency Officials Track the Usage of Some or 
All of Their Work/Life Programs: 

Figure 6: Many of the Responding Agency Officials Evaluate Some of 
Their Agencies' Work/Life Programs: 

Figure 7: Many of the Responding CHCOs Use Information to Modify or 
Implement New Work/Life Programs: 

Abbreviations: 

C.F.R. Code of Federal Regulations: 

CHCO: Chief Human Capital Officers: 

FY: fiscal year: 

HCAAF: Human Capital Assessment and Accountability Framework: 

OMB: Office of Management and Budget: 

OPM: Office of Personnel Management: 

U.S.C. United States Code: 

[End of section] 

United States Government Accountability Office: 
Washington, DC 20548: 

December 16, 2010: 

The Honorable Joseph I. Lieberman: 
Chairman: 
The Honorable Susan M. Collins: 
Ranking Member: 
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs: 
United States Senate: 

The Honorable Daniel K. Akaka: 
Chairman: 
The Honorable George V. Voinovich: 
Ranking Member: 
Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal 
Workforce, and the District of Columbia: 
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs: 
United States Senate: 

The Honorable Herb Kohl: 
Chairman: 
The Honorable Bob Corker: 
Ranking Member: 
Special Committee on Aging: 
United States Senate: 

To improve its ability to recruit, retain, and engage the federal 
workforce, the federal government has implemented a wide range of 
work/life programs, which according to the Office of Personnel 
Management (OPM) are designed to create more flexible, responsive work 
environments that allow workers to meet the obligations of work and 
life. These programs include flexible work schedules, child care, and 
telework.[Footnote 1] To that end, OPM assists and guides agencies in 
choosing work/life programs that will help attract and retain federal 
workers by providing them with tools--such as handbooks and manuals, a 
Web site dedicated to work/life programs and issues, and forums to 
discuss work/life issues--that an agency may use as it implements 
work/life programs. 

You expressed an interest in the federal government's ability to 
recruit and retain the workforce it needs and engage the employees it 
has while competing with the private sector for workforce talent. 
Therefore, you asked us to determine the extent to which (1) OPM 
provides assistance and guidance to federal agencies for establishing 
and enhancing work/life programs and the extent to which agency 
officials are satisfied with OPM's assistance and guidance; (2) OPM or 
the federal agencies track, evaluate, or modify work/life programs; 
and (3) OPM has identified leading practices in the private sector for 
the implementation of work/life programs and shared this information 
with federal agencies. For the purpose of this report, we defined 
work/life programs as workplace programs and policies designed to help 
federal employees identify and resolve personal or work-related 
issues, and include such programs and policies as flexible scheduling, 
child care, assistance for drug and alcohol abuse, and health and 
wellness programs. 

To address our objectives, we did the following. 

* We designed and administered a survey to assess agency perceptions 
of OPM's performance during a 1-year period--specifically OPM's 
assistance, guidance, and information sharing on work/life programs 
and issues.[Footnote 2] We also designed the survey to determine 
whether and how the agencies track, evaluate, and modify their own 
work/life programs. We selected 20 Chief Human Capital Officers (CHCO) 
from federal departments or agencies and 20 work/life program managers 
from the same federal departments or agencies to receive the survey. 
The CHCOs we selected were members of the CHCO Council.[Footnote 3] 
Because a portion of the survey focused on agency perceptions of OPM's 
assistance, we excluded OPM's CHCO from our sample. Additionally, 
because we intended the survey respondents to speak on behalf of their 
department or agency, we excluded two CHCO council members who serve 
as proxies for numerous federal agencies, specifically one member 
representing small federal agencies and another member representing 
federal national security and intelligence agencies. Of the 40 
potential respondents, 33 completed our survey.[Footnote 4] 

* We reviewed applicable statutes and regulations, past OPM reports, 
OPM's 2006-2010 and 2010-2015 strategic plans, written policy, 
guidance, directives, and material on OPM's Web site relating to work/ 
life assistance, guidance, and identification of leading practices. 

* We interviewed OPM officials and staff in OPM's Office of Work/Life/ 
Wellness. 

* We reviewed reports and periodical articles about the work/life 
programs of leading private sector companies. 

* We selected seven private sector companies representing various 
industries that have been recognized by human capital associations and 
publications as providing their employees with quality work/life 
programs. We interviewed the officials from these companies who have 
direct knowledge of their companies' work/life programs to obtain 
information on the development and implementation of those programs. 
However, these seven companies are not representative of all private 
sector companies and therefore, we cannot generalize the information 
these private sector officials provided about their work/life programs 
to other private sector companies. 

* We reviewed prior GAO reports on human capital issues. 

See appendix I for more information about our scope and methodology. 

We conducted this performance audit from August 2009 through December 
2010 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: 

Employers in both the public and private sectors have realized that 
offering work/life programs--such as alternative work schedules, child 
care, and health and wellness programs--have become an essential 
element in recruiting and retaining their workforces.[Footnote 5] The 
federal government, as a major employer, also recognizes that 
work/life policies, programs, and practices make good business sense. 
[Footnote 6] Congress has recognized the need to provide federal 
workers workplace flexibilities and has authorized numerous work/life 
programs for federal agencies to implement.[Footnote 7] In addition, 
the executive branch has recognized and supported the benefits of 
these programs by implementing a range of work/life programs, from 
flexible work arrangements to child care assistance. Table 1 lists 
some examples of work/life programs federal agencies provide their 
employees, as identified by OPM. 

Table 1: Examples of Federal Work/Life Programs: 

Category: Workplace flexibilities; 
Subcategory: Alternative work schedules; 
Work/life programs: Flexible scheduling; Job sharing. 

Category: Workplace flexibilities; 
Subcategory: Leave programs; 
Work/life programs: Family leave; Leave bank. 

Category: Workplace flexibilities; 
Subcategory: Volunteerism/community involvement; 
Work/life programs: Blood donation; Tutoring. 

Category: Family; 
Subcategory: Care giving programs; 
Work/life programs: Child care; Elder/dependent care. 

Category: Health and wellness; 
Subcategory: Flexible spending accounts; 
Work/life programs: Dependent care; Health care. 

Category: Health and wellness; 
Subcategory: Employee assistance programs; 
Work/life programs: Drug/alcohol abuse; Smoking cessation. 

Category: Health and wellness; 
Subcategory: Health promotion; 
Work/life programs: Wellness programs; Health screening. 

Source: OPM. 

[End of table] 

OPM plays a key role in fostering and guiding improvements in all 
areas of strategic human capital management--including work/life 
programs--in the executive branch. As part of that role, OPM can 
assist in--and, as appropriate, require--building infrastructures 
within agencies to successfully implement and sustain human capital 
reforms and related initiatives. For example, OPM promotes human 
capital leading practices across federal agencies and conducts audits 
of human capital management within the federal government to ensure 
compliance with laws, regulations, and policies. To promote 
coordination among agencies outside of Washington, D.C., OPM works 
with Federal Executive Boards (FEB) to share guidance and leading 
practices and obtain feedback from federal agencies on human capital 
issues.[Footnote 8] OPM also coordinates its efforts through its 
involvement in the CHCO Council, which was established to advise and 
coordinate the human capital activities of its members' agencies. The 
CHCO Council has expressed its support of the strategic goals 
articulated in OPM's 2010-2015 strategic plan, such as governmentwide 
initiatives addressing veterans employment, hiring reform, labor-
management relations, diversity, and other efforts to hire the best 
employees for federal service. 

Additionally, OPM advocates the use of its Human Capital Assessment 
and Accountability Framework (HCAAF), a set of tools and strategies 
available to federal agencies that assist officials in achieving 
results from their human capital programs.[Footnote 9] The framework 
guides the assessment of agency human capital efforts, while allowing 
enough flexibility for federal agencies to tailor their human capital 
efforts to their missions, plans, and budgets. 

We have previously recommended that OPM encourage continuous 
improvement and assist agencies' efforts in acquiring, developing, and 
retaining workforce talent.[Footnote 10] According to OPM officials, 
OPM fulfills this role in part by assisting federal agencies and 
serving as a clearinghouse of information for agencies in developing 
and implementing work/life programs. Within OPM, the office 
responsible for this mission is the Office of Work/Life/Wellness--a 
component of the Office of Agency and Veterans' Support. OPM's Office 
of Work/Life/Wellness provides leadership on work/life issues to the 
federal government by partnering with federal agencies to help them 
develop and manage work/life programs that meet the human capital 
needs of the federal workforce, and providing the policies and 
guidance that form the foundation of these programs.[Footnote 11] 

We have also previously reported on the need for OPM to continue its 
leadership role in identifying and helping agencies apply human 
capital flexibilities and the need for agencies to develop management: 

infrastructure to make use of available flexibilities.[Footnote 12] 
Recently, we reported on the need for agencies to use the 
flexibilities available to them, including using these flexibilities 
to retain older and more experienced workers.[Footnote 13] In 
addition, in December 2002, we reported the views of agency human 
capital managers and employee union officers on the effectiveness of 
human capital flexibilities in managing federal agency workforces. 
These human capital managers and union officers frequently cited 
work/life programs as among the effective tools for workforce 
management.[Footnote 14] 

Most Responding Officials Were Satisfied with OPM's Assistance, 
Guidance, and Information Sharing on Work/Life Programs: 

OPM's Office of Work/Life/Wellness Provides Assistance, Guidance, and 
Information to Assist Federal Agencies in Addressing Work/Life 
Programs and Issues: 

OPM officials describe OPM's Office of Work/Life/Wellness as a source 
of assistance, guidance, and information that agencies may use to 
develop their own work/life programs. For example, OPM provides 
various tools to assist agencies as they address work/life programs 
and issues, such as accessible points of contact, formal working 
groups, and training. OPM also provides guidance to agencies by 
promulgating regulations and providing informal guidance such as 
memoranda and bulletins. In addition OPM shares work/life program 
information through tools such as newsletters and reports--for 
example, reports on the status of telework and childcare. In its 2006-
2010 strategic plan, OPM indicated that it would work with the federal 
executive boards to share guidance and leading practices across the 
federal government, and obtain feedback from federal agencies on human 
capital issues[Footnote 15]. In addition, one of OPM's 2010-2015 
strategic goals focuses on providing "the training, benefits, and 
work/life balance necessary for federal employees to succeed, prosper, 
and advance in their careers." To meet this goal, OPM proposes to: 

* assist agencies to evaluate and revise policies, and to address 
employee satisfaction with work/life programs; 

* guide agencies in implementing these programs; and: 

* provide agencies with information and tools that promote work/life 
programs.[Footnote 16] 

Responding Agency Officials Indicate Generally Positive Perceptions 
about OPM's Assistance, Guidance, and Information Sharing: 

Overall, our survey of CHCOs and work/life managers revealed that OPM 
has been helpful to agencies in implementing their work/life programs. 
As part of our survey, we asked agency officials to respond on behalf 
of their departments and/or agencies on how OPM's involvement helped 
or hindered their ability to implement work/life programs.[Footnote 
17] As shown in figure 1, of the 33 agency officials who responded to 
our survey, 24 indicated that OPM's assistance, guidance, and 
information sharing greatly helped or helped somewhat in implementing 
work/life programs. Another six agency officials indicated that OPM's 
assistance, guidance, and information sharing helped in some cases and 
hindered in others. Although our survey provided an opportunity for 
respondents to elaborate on their responses or cite examples in 
support of their responses, none of the agency officials responding to 
our survey did so. 

Figure 1: Responding Agency Officials Generally Found OPM Helped in 
Implementing Work/Life Programs: 

[Refer to PDF for image: vertical bar graph] 

Response: Greatly helped; 
Number of respondents: 12. 

Response: Helped somewhat; 
Number of respondents: 12. 

Response: Helped in some, hindered in others; 
Number of respondents: 6; 

Response: Hindered somewhat; 
Number of respondents: 1. 

Source: GAO survey. 

Note: Of 33 respondents, 2 answered "Not applicable or Do not know." 

[End of figure] 

OPM officials stated that the Office of Work/Life/Wellness provides 
various tools to assist federal agencies implement work/life programs. 
For example, OPM offers training to agency officials that, among other 
things, helps them develop action plans to address employee 
satisfaction concerns related to work/life programs.[Footnote 18] 
Also, OPM has designated points of contact who can assist agency 
officials to develop and implement work/life programs. In our survey, 
we asked agency officials to indicate how satisfied or dissatisfied 
they were with OPM's assistance in developing and implementing 
work/life programs (such as accessible OPM points of contact, formal 
working groups, informal mentoring, and OPM sponsored training). As 
seen in figure 2, most of the 33 agency officials responding to our 
survey were either very satisfied or somewhat satisfied with the 
timeliness (22), quality (21), accessibility (22), and sufficiency 
(23) of OPM's assistance. For example, one agency official stated that 
OPM officials respond quickly to requests for assistance on work/life 
policy matters, and another agency official stated that OPM's 
work/life staff is always very responsive and helpful. 

Figure 2: Responding Agency Officials Were Generally Satisfied with 
OPM's Assistance with Work/Life Programs: 

[Refer to PDF for image: vertical bar graph] 

Number of respondents: 

Response: Very or somewhat satisfied; 
Timeliness: 22; 
Quality: 21; 
Accessibility: 22; 
Sufficiency: 23. 

Response: As satisfied as dissatisfied; 
Timeliness: 4; 
Quality: 5; 
Accessibility: 4; 
Sufficiency: 3. 

Response: Somewhat or very dissatisfied; 
Timeliness: 1; 
Quality: 1; 
Accessibility: 1; 
Sufficiency: 1. 

Source: GAO survey. 

Note: Of the 33 respondents, 3 answered "Did not seek OPM assistance." 

[End of figure] 

In addition to providing assistance to federal agencies, OPM also 
guides federal agencies by promulgating regulations for work/life 
programs and issuing programmatic guides and handbooks that explain 
the requirements for work/life programs such as employee assistance 
programs, part-time employment and job sharing, child care, and 
tobacco cessation. In our survey, we asked agency officials to 
indicate how satisfied or dissatisfied they were with this guidance. 
As seen in figure 3, most of the 33 agency officials responded that 
they were either very satisfied or somewhat satisfied with the 
timeliness (22), quality (24), accessibility (22), and sufficiency 
(22) of the guidance they received from OPM. For example, one official 
stated that OPM greatly assisted his/her agency as it expanded its 
health and wellness program by providing the agency guidance and by 
participating in a summit meeting with the agency. 

Figure 3: Responding Agency Officials Were Generally Satisfied with 
OPM's Guidance on Work/Life Programs: 

[Refer to PDF for image: vertical bar graph] 

Number of respondents: 

Response: Very or somewhat satisfied; 
Timeliness: 22; 
Quality: 24; 
Accessibility: 22; 
Sufficiency: 22. 

Response: As satisfied as dissatisfied; 
Timeliness: 3; 
Quality: 4; 
Accessibility: 4; 
Sufficiency: 4. 

Response: Somewhat or very dissatisfied; 
Timeliness: 6; 
Quality: 3; 
Accessibility: 3; 
Sufficiency: 6. 

Source: GAO survey. 

Note: Of the 33 respondents, 2 answered "Do not know." 

[End of figure] 

According to OPM officials, the agency also shares information with 
federal agencies on leading practices of work/life programs using 
various avenues such as posting information to its Web site and 
notifying federal agencies through interactive listservs. Our survey 
asked how satisfied or dissatisfied agency officials were with OPM's 
efforts to share information on leading practices in work/life 
programs. As seen in figure 4, most of the 33 agency officials 
indicated that they were either very satisfied or somewhat satisfied 
with the timeliness (22), quality (23), accessibility (23), and 
sufficiency (22) of the information they received from OPM. According 
to an official who responded to our survey, OPM has communicated the 
importance of these work/life programs and has provided practical 
suggestions to support agencies in defining goals and sharing best 
practices. 

Figure 4: Responding Agency Officials Were Generally Satisfied with 
OPM's Information Sharing Regarding Work/Life Programs: 

[Refer to PDF for image: vertical bar graph] 

Number of respondents: 

Response: Very or somewhat satisfied; 
Timeliness: 22; 
Quality: 23; 
Accessibility: 23; 
Sufficiency: 22. 

Response: As satisfied as dissatisfied; 
Timeliness: 4; 
Quality: 5; 
Accessibility: 3; 
Sufficiency: 5. 

Response: Somewhat or very dissatisfied; 
Timeliness: 4; 
Quality: 2; 
Accessibility: 4; 
Sufficiency: 3. 

Source: GAO survey. 

Note: Of the 33 respondents, 3 answered "Do not know." 

[End of figure] 

OPM Tracks Some Work/Life Programs Governmentwide, While Many of the 
Responding Agency Officials Track or Evaluate Some of Their Own Work/ 
Life Programs: 

OPM Tracks Some Work/Life Programs Governmentwide: 

Our prior work has indicated the need for federal agencies to track 
and use data that will allow them to measure a program's effectiveness 
including the changes in the program over time. Agencies need such 
measurements to help them determine if a particular human capital 
program--such as a work/life program--is worth the investment compared 
to other available human capital flexibilities targeted at employee 
recruitment and retention.[Footnote 19] We also have previously 
recommended that OPM disseminate federal agencies' leading practices 
in human capital programs to help agencies recruit and retain their 
workforces.[Footnote 20] Additionally, OMB's fiscal year 2012 budget 
guidance to federal agencies encourages agencies to: reconsider the 
basic design of their programs; incorporate the use of data in program 
design; foster innovation rooted in research; and finally, encourage 
the evaluation of the program.[Footnote 21] Also, as part of its 2010- 
2015 strategic plan, OPM proposes to help agencies collect information 
that would allow agencies to continually improve their efforts to 
provide employees with a work/life balance.[Footnote 22] 

OPM tracks and collects information for a few work/life programs, 
notably childcare, telework, and health and wellness programs. In July 
2009, OPM surveyed federal agencies about their health and wellness 
programs and specifically requested information on the: (1) number of 
health and wellness programs offered by each agency; (2) number of 
employees with access to the programs; (3) number of employees using 
the programs/services; (4) cost of the programs; and (5) metrics 
gathered on the programs.[Footnote 23] OPM officials used this data to 
develop profiles of health and wellness programs across the federal 
government, and to help agencies formulate action plans for improving 
the health and wellness of federal employees. Using these program 
profiles, OPM developed an inventory of health and wellness programs 
across the federal government. 

In response to OPM's 2009 survey, however, agency officials reported 
that they either were unable to develop cost data or that the cost 
data could not be broken down into meaningful components such as 
services, facilities, and labor. Additionally, OPM officials stated 
that the cost data they received provided minimal insight. As a 
result, when OPM requested federal agencies to report on their health 
and wellness programs for 2010, the request excluded asking for cost 
data on agencies' programs. Instead, OPM requested agencies to report 
on whether they had developed metrics for measuring their health and 
wellness programs rather than asking for the specific metrics. OPM 
does not collect information on other programs such as alternative 
work schedules, leave programs, and employee assistance programs 
(e.g., stress management and smoking cessation). 

Many Responding Officials Track and Use Information They Independently 
Collect to Evaluate Some of Their Work/Life Programs: 

Agency officials responding to our survey indicated that their 
agencies track a variety of work/life programs beyond the programs 
tracked by OPM. As part of our survey, we asked these officials if 
their departments/agencies tracked (measured) the extent to which 
agency employees use these work/life programs. Of the 33 agency 
officials who responded to our survey, 29 indicated that they track 
either all or some of their work/life programs, as shown in figure 5. 

Figure 5: Most Responding Agency Officials Track the Usage of Some or 
All of Their Work/Life Programs: 

[Refer to PDF for image: vertical bar graph] 

Response: All of the programs; 
Number of respondents: 5. 

Response: Some of the programs; 
Number of respondents: 24. 

Response: None of the programs; 
Number of respondents: 2. 

Source: GAO survey. 

Note: Of the 33 respondents, 2 answered "Do not know." 

[End of figure] 

Our survey further asked agency officials to specify if their agencies 
tracked work/life programs in the following categories: (1) 
alternative work schedules; (2) leave programs; (3) volunteerism and 
community involvement; (4) care giving; (5) flexible spending; (6) 
employee assistance programs; and (7) health promotion. The survey 
results showed that agencies were tracking programs across multiple 
categories. Specifically, of the 29 officials who indicated that their 
agencies track their work/life programs, the majority (20) indicated 
that their agencies track programs in four or more of these seven 
program categories.[Footnote 24] 

While most of the agency officials surveyed indicated that they track 
their work/life programs, we asked the officials if their departments 
or agencies also evaluated (measured) the extent to which their work/ 
life programs met their intended goals. These evaluations may be used 
to assess the programs' impact on the recruitment and/or retention of 
federal employees within the departments or agencies. Of the 33 agency 
officials responding to our survey, 21 indicated that they evaluated 
either all or some of their work/life programs, as shown in figure 6. 

Figure 6: Many of the Responding Agency Officials Evaluate Some of 
Their Agencies' Work/Life Programs: 

[Refer to PDF for image: vertical bar graph] 

Response: All of the programs; 
Number of respondents: 3. 

Response: Some of the programs; 
Number of respondents: 18. 

Response: None of the programs; 
Number of respondents: 8. 

Source: GAO survey. 

Note: Of the 33 respondents, 4 answered "Do not know." 

[End of figure] 

Our survey also asked agency officials to specify if their agencies 
evaluated work/life programs in the seven categories listed above. The 
survey indicated that most agencies evaluated programs in at least one 
work/life program category. Of the 21 respondents who indicated that 
their agencies evaluated work/life programs, about one-half (10) 
indicated that their agencies evaluate programs in four or more of the 
seven program categories. 

As a result of the agencies' independent evaluations of their 
work/life programs, some agency officials are potentially in a 
position to determine: (1) the extent to which their programs improve 
their ability to recruit and retain their employees and (2) whether or 
not they need to implement, modify, or eliminate work/life programs. 
The federal government continues to recognize the need to implement 
and modify current work/life programs. A March 2010 report published 
by the President's Council of Economic Advisors presented an economic 
perspective on workplace policies and practices and their effect on 
work/life balance.[Footnote 25] The Council's report cited a survey of 
human resource managers that indicated work/life programs, such as 
family-supportive policies and flexible hours, were the single most 
important factor in private sector companies attracting and retaining 
employees.[Footnote 26] We also surveyed agency officials about the 
effects of their work/life programs on employee recruitment and 
retention. Agency officials responding to our survey indicated that 
work/life programs offered by their agencies affect their ability to 
recruit and retain agency employees. About half of the officials 
indicated that offering work/life programs had a very great or great 
effect on their ability to recruit and retain agency employees. About 
another third indicated that work/life programs have a moderate effect 
on their ability to recruit and retain agency employees. 

Agency officials may also use the evaluations of their work/life 
programs to modify, implement, or eliminate work/life programs. As 
shown in figure 7, 12 out of the 18 CHCOs responding to our survey 
indicated that they had modified their work/life programs based on the 
program data that they collected and evaluated. Ten of the 18 
responding CHCOs had implemented new work/life programs based on the 
data they collected and evaluated. However, one of the agency 
officials responding to our survey indicated that current budget 
constraints affect an agency's ability to implement new programs. 

Figure 7: Many of the Responding CHCOs Use Information to Modify or 
Implement New Work/Life Programs: 

[Refer to PDF for image: vertical bar graph] 

Response: Modify program; 
Number of respondents, Yes: 12; 
Number of respondents, No: 0. 

Response: Implement new program; 
Number of respondents, Yes: 10; 
Number of respondents, No: 2. 

Response: Eliminate program; 
Number of respondents, Yes: 1; 
Number of respondents, No: 11. 

Source: GAO survey. 

Note: Of the 18 CHCOs who responded, 6 did not answer this question. 

[End of figure] 

Most of the agency officials responding to our survey indicated that 
they track many of their work/life programs. In addition, according to 
OPM officials, some federal agencies independently provide OPM with 
data and evaluations on various work/life programs. OPM officials 
stated that they do not share this information across federal agencies 
because they lack the time and resources to maintain an inventory of 
these evaluations. OPM officials said that the recent addition of 
staff to the Office of Work/Life/Wellness will enable them to review 
reports they may receive in the future. At the time of this review, 
there were no staff or resources to track, review, or maintain an 
inventory of these evaluations. Offering agencies more information 
about which work/life programs are in place across the federal 
government and their impact on meeting agency-intended goals could be 
helpful in a budget-constrained environment. Agency CHCOs could play a 
valuable and central role in the selection and collection of 
information in or about work/life programs. 

OPM Does Not Systematically Collect or Share Information on Private 
Sector Work/Life Programs: 

OPM Has Collected Information on Some Private Sector Work/Life 
Programs but Does Not Presently Share It with Federal Agencies: 

Our prior work on federal agencies' human capital efforts demonstrated 
the benefits of consulting with the private sector on human capital 
practices. For example, federal agencies such as the Internal Revenue 
Service and the Veterans Health Administration have incorporated 
private sector practices for identifying the critical skills and 
training needs of their workforces.[Footnote 27] Also, in its 
strategic plan for 2010-2015, OPM defines as one of its goals having a 
suite of flexible work/life programs to promote a healthy work/life 
balance for federal employees. One of the strategies OPM proposed for 
achieving this goal is to evaluate the results of surveys from public 
and private sector organizations to identify leading practices across 
the sectors. The plan further indicates that OPM will provide federal 
agencies with these results to provide the agencies various options 
that they may use to compare their work/life programs with leading 
private sector practices.[Footnote 28] However, while OPM has 
developed a health and wellness pilot program based on discussions 
with private sector representatives, it has not yet shared information 
about private sector work/life programs with federal agencies. 

In May 2009, OPM participated in White House-sponsored meetings with 
representatives of large, privately-owned companies to discuss how 
health and wellness programs affect the private sector's workforce 
recruitment and retention. Also discussed during these meetings was 
the administration's WellCheck initiative, which is intended to 
improve federal health and wellness programs. These meetings prompted 
OPM to collect information about federal agencies' health and wellness 
programs in July 2009, as mentioned previously. Subsequently, in early 
2010, OPM held two roundtables and several meetings with private 
sector company officials to obtain more information about private 
sector health and wellness programs. These meetings, according to an 
OPM official, helped the government representatives obtain a better 
understanding of models for workplace health programs and leading 
practices in workplace wellness. 

According to OPM officials, the meetings with private sector health 
and wellness representatives led to the development of an OPM pilot 
program designed to create a healthier and more pleasant work 
environment for employees at the headquarters buildings of OPM, the 
Department of the Interior, and the General Services Administration, 
which are located close to each other. The pilot, known as 
WellnessWorks, seeks to develop a shared "work-life" campus by 
improving health and wellness facilities at the headquarters locations 
for each of the agencies. OPM has hired a wellness coordinator and is 
purchasing the services of a wellness service provider for the campus. 
The service provider will complement the existing services of the 
three agencies and increase the level of services across the campus to 
match leading practices in the private sector. WellnessWorks will 
offer the employees access to health and wellness services such as: 

* an assessment that includes productivity and scientifically defined 
areas of well-being, in addition to physical health, mental health, 
and health behaviors; 

* biometric testing, consisting of height and weight measurement and 
blood testing for cholesterol levels; 

* programs to encourage healthy behaviors, such as weight management 
classes, exercise, tobacco cessation, and chronic disease management; 

* face-to-face and Web-based health education resources; and: 

* immunizations, allergy shots, and routine injections.[Footnote 29] 

OPM officials will evaluate the pilot program and they plan to provide 
details on developing this type of collaborative "shared work/life 
campus" to federal agencies across the government. 

Although OPM used information from the private sector to develop the 
WellnessWorks program with the goal of implementing it across the 
federal government, OPM has not shared with federal departments and 
agencies information about other health and wellness programs, or 
other work/life programs implemented in the private sector. Currently, 
OPM has not placed information on its Web site about private sector 
practices. Additionally, our work showed that none of the agency 
officials responding to our survey indicated that OPM provides them 
with this type of information. An OPM official told us that the agency 
has not considered providing this information because: (1) OPM 
officials have been focusing on other work/life programs such as 
telework and child care and (2) similar information is readily 
available through other sources (e.g., the Society for Human Resources 
Management). According to this official, OPM may consider providing 
agencies with the information collected from the private sector if the 
agencies express an interest in the information and the agencies 
understand that OPM is not endorsing or recommending any of the 
private sector programs. 

Selected Private Companies Offer, Track, and Evaluate a Range of Work/ 
Life Programs: 

To identify useful information available to OPM and federal agencies 
concerning private sector work/life programs, we selected seven 
private sector companies that have been recognized by human capital 
associations and publications as providing their employees with 
quality work/life programs: (1) Deloitte; (2) Ernst & Young; (3) 
Marriott International; (4) MetLife; (5) General Mills; (6) SC Johnson 
& Son; and one company that requested anonymity (see appendix I for 
the private sector company selection methodology).[Footnote 30] These 
companies, representing various industries, generally offer work/life 
programs in the same categories and subcategories and for similar 
reasons as federal agencies. Table 2 lists examples of the types of 
programs private sector companies offer. 

Table 2: Examples of Work/Life Programs at Selected Private Sector 
Companies: 

Category: Workplace flexibilities; 
Subcategory: Alternative work schedules; 
Work/life programs: Flexible scheduling; Seasonal work hours. 

Category: Workplace flexibilities; 
Subcategory: Leave programs; 
Work/life programs: Parental leave; Sabbaticals. 

Category: Workplace flexibilities; 
Subcategory: Volunteerism/community involvement; 
Work/life programs: Company-supported employee interest groups. 

Category: Family; 
Subcategory: Care giving programs; 
Work/life programs: Child care subsidies; Emergency child/elder care. 

Category: Health and wellness; 
Subcategory: Flexible spending accounts; 
Work/life programs: Health care. 

Category: Health and wellness; 
Subcategory: Employee assistance programs; 
Work/life programs: Smoking cessation; 24/7 counseling/referral 
services. 

Category: Health and wellness; 
Subcategory: Health promotion; 
Work/life programs: Fitness centers and programs; Health education and 
counseling. 

Source: GAO, based on interviews with seven private sector company 
officials. 

Note: We used the same categories and subcategories developed by OPM. 

[End of table] 

The work/life private sector program managers informed us that they 
use various sources of information to determine future program needs, 
such as employee feedback and demographic analysis of the workforce. 
For example, officials from one company said that after concluding a 
study of working parents and their families, they decided to expand 
their parental leave program well beyond the industry average to help 
their employees balance the demands of family and career. Managers at 
four of the seven private sector companies told us that they compare 
work/life programs offered by their companies with those of other 
companies in the same industry or in the same geographic area to make 
sure they are competitive for attracting and retaining talent. Also, 
managers at two of the seven companies mentioned that they belong to 
professional human capital management organizations, which provide 
opportunities to share information about work/life program offerings. 

The work/life managers from the participating private sector companies 
told us that they evaluate their programs on a regular basis to 
determine whether the programs are enhancing workforce recruitment and 
retention. According to the managers, some programs can be tracked 
through usage data. However, they also told us that their companies do 
not judge the success or failure of a program based on how frequently 
it is used. One manager stated that his/her company encourages 
participation and seeks to overcome any barriers to program use, such 
as lack of awareness or lack of manager support. 

Private sector companies also reported tracking the use of their 
flexible work schedule programs by the number of flexibility 
agreements on record and by employee time and attendance records to 
determine the extent to which company employees are using the 
available flexibilities. For programs that do not have usage data, the 
company may rely on employee feedback through e-mail, Web site 
comments, or personal contact to determine (1) how much a program is 
being used and (2) how satisfied users are with the programs. Managers 
told us that through this process of tracking and evaluating, they 
were able to align the work/life programs they offer with their 
employees' needs and thus enhance recruitment and increase retention. 
For example, one manager stated the need to develop a business case 
for implementing his/her company's work schedule flexibilities by 
surveying employees to measure the effect of these flexibilities in 
attracting and retaining employees. More than 75 percent of the 
employees indicated that the flexibilities were of significant 
importance in deciding to remain with the company. Another manager 
told us that his/her company steadily tracks the impact of the 
work/life programs, and that since the current set of work/life 
programs were introduced, employees expressed that there was more 
balance between their careers and personal lives. 

Managers at four of the seven companies we spoke to indicated that the 
work/life programs instituted by their companies had had a great or 
very great effect on recruitment, retention, and productivity. One 
manager said that work/life programs were a key enabler of the 
corporate culture of flexibility and inclusion. Another told us that 
work/life programs had a very great effect on achieving the company's 
goals of enhancing retention and work satisfaction. 

Conclusions: 

Overall, agency officials indicated that they were satisfied with 
OPM's assistance, guidance, and information sharing as they developed 
and implemented work/life programs. However, OPM is potentially 
missing opportunities to provide federal agencies with additional 
information that may be useful to agencies in their efforts to develop 
and implement work/life programs. While OPM has limited its collection 
and evaluation of federal work/life programs to only a few, some 
federal agencies are independently tracking and collecting work/life 
program usage data on a wider range of programs such as alternative 
work schedules and employee assistance programs. The agencies are also 
using these data to conduct assessments of these programs and use the 
results to make programmatic changes. Sharing data among agencies on 
the effect of work/life programs on agency-intended goals could be 
helpful for agency decision making in a budget-constrained 
environment. OPM officials said that they did not track or maintain an 
inventory of these evaluations nor review these evaluations. OPM 
officials said that the recent addition of staff to the Office of 
Work/Life/Wellness will enable them to review reports they may receive 
in the future. 

OPM's Office of Work/Life/Wellness has met with private sector company 
representatives to examine private sector health and wellness programs 
and the leading practices used to implement those programs, however 
the office does not systematically collect information on other 
private sector work/life programs. A more systematic approach for 
examining how work/life programs have been implemented and evaluated 
in public and private sector organizations, as well as making this 
information more readily available, could benefit federal agencies' 
own efforts to establish work/life programs. In keeping with its 
mission to help federal agencies in their human capital management 
efforts, OPM can play a key role in the collection and dissemination 
of this type of information. Additionally, by adopting this role, OPM 
can make progress on its strategic goal of providing the agencies with 
various options that could be used to ensure that their agencies' 
work/life program offerings are aligned with leading practices 
identified in the public and private sector. 

Recommendations for Executive Action: 

We recommend that the Director of OPM, working with the CHCO Council, 
identify the resources, steps, and timetable necessary to complete the 
following three actions: 

(1) track on a more systematic basis information already being 
collected by individual federal agencies on their work/life programs, 
such as program usage data and evaluations; 

(2) evaluate the results of work/life program surveys conducted by 
leading private sector organizations, as stated in OPM's 2010-2015 
strategic plan, that could help federal agencies as they implement 
their work/life programs; and: 

(3) provide the information from both the public and private sectors, 
including other comprehensive evaluations produced by academic 
institutions, state entities, and other organizations, to agency 
officials--through available avenues such as the CHCO Council and 
federal executive boards--that could help them address work/life 
program issues and determine if the work/life programs are meeting 
their agencies' goals. 

Agency Comments: 

We provided a draft of this report to the Director of OPM for review 
and comment. OPM provided written comments which are reproduced in 
appendix III. OPM generally concurred with our recommendations but 
requested small modifications to two recommendations that include 
private sector work/life programs. OPM also provided technical 
comments which we incorporated as appropriate. 

OPM concurred with our recommendation that OPM evaluate the results of 
work/life program surveys conducted by leading private sector 
organizations. However, OPM cautioned that there are enough 
differences between private and public sector motivations and cultures 
that a direct comparison of policies and practices may not provide 
federal agencies with a comprehensive set of "ready-to-use" solutions 
as they implement their work/life programs. Also, OPM does not want to 
appear to selectively endorse leading practices in the private sector 
as solutions for implementing federal work/life programs. We agree 
with OPM that some leading private sector practices may not be 
applicable to federal agencies and that OPM should not appear to 
selectively endorse leading private sector practices. However, we do 
believe that communicating these leading practices without endorsing 
them could provide federal agencies with additional information that 
federal agency officials could use in implementing their work/life 
programs. We revised the recommendation to reflect our agreement with 
OPM. 

OPM also concurred with our recommendation that OPM provide 
information from both the public and private sector to agency 
officials that could help the agency officials address work/life 
program issues and determine if these programs are meeting the 
agencies' goals. However, they asked that we add other evaluations of 
public and private work/life programs published by academic 
institutions, state entities, and other organizations such as the 
Sloan Foundation.[Footnote 31] We agree with OPM's assessment that 
other available evaluations of public and private sector work/life 
programs could provide information to federal agency officials as they 
implement work/life programs. We revised the recommendation to reflect 
our agreement with OPM. 

We are sending this report to other interested parties and to the 
Director of OPM. In addition, the report will be available free of 
charge at [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. 

If you, or your staff, have any questions about this report, please 
contact me at (202) 512-6806 or jonesy@gao.gov. Contact points for our 
offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on 
the last page of this report. GAO staff that made major contributions 
to this report are listed in appendix IV. 

Signed by: 

Yvonne D. Jones: 
Director, Strategic Issues: 

[End of section] 

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology: 

This appendix details the objectives and scope of our report, and the 
methodology used to provide information to the requesters about the 
role of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) in providing 
assistance, guidance, and oversight to federal agencies concerning 
work/life programs, and about private sector work/life programs. Our 
requesters asked us to determine the extent to which: 

(1) OPM provides assistance and guidance to federal agencies for 
establishing and enhancing work/life programs; 

(2) OPM or the federal agencies track, evaluate, or refine work/life 
programs; and: 

(3) OPM has identified leading practices in the private sectors for 
the implementation of work/life programs and shared this information 
with federal agencies. 

In order to address the first two objectives, we designed and 
administered a Web-based survey (see appendix II for a copy of our 
questionnaire and survey results). The survey was conducted using a 
self-administered electronic questionnaire which was sent to a 
nonprobability sample consisting of 20 Chief Human Capital Officers 
(CHCO) at selected federal departments or agencies who also serve as 
members of the CHCO Council.[Footnote 32] The same Web-based survey 
was also sent to a separate nonprobability sample of 20 work/life 
program managers from subcomponents of these departments or agencies. 
The purpose of the survey was to obtain respondents' perceptions on 
behalf of their departments or agencies of OPM's assistance, guidance, 
and information sharing during a one-year period.[Footnote 33] Because 
a portion of the survey focused on agency perceptions of OPM's 
assistance, we excluded OPM's CHCO from our sample. Additionally, 
because we intended the survey respondents to speak on behalf of their 
department or agency, we excluded two CHCO Council members who serve 
as proxies for numerous federal agencies, specifically one member 
representing small federal agencies and another member representing 
federal national security and intelligence agencies. Also included in 
the survey questionnaire were questions designed to obtain information 
on how these agencies track, evaluate, and modify their own work/life 
programs. Table 3 lists the federal departments selected for our 
survey and the number of respondents who completed our survey. 

Table 3: Federal Departments and Agencies Receiving our Survey and the 
Number of Completed Responses: 

Department/agency: Department of Agriculture; 
Survey completed by CHCO: 1; 
Survey completed by work/life managers: 1. 

Department/agency: Department of Commerce; 
Survey completed by CHCO: 1; 
Survey completed by work/life managers: 0. 

Department/agency: Department of Defense; 
Survey completed by CHCO: 1; 
Survey completed by work/life managers: 0. 

Department/agency: Department of Education; 
Survey completed by CHCO: 1; 
Survey completed by work/life managers: 0. 

Department/agency: Department of Energy; 
Survey completed by CHCO: 1; 
Survey completed by work/life managers: 1. 

Department/agency: Department of Health and Human Services; 
Survey completed by CHCO: 1; 
Survey completed by work/life managers: 1. 

Department/agency: Department of Homeland Security; 
Survey completed by CHCO: 0; 
Survey completed by work/life managers: 0. 

Department/agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development; 
Survey completed by CHCO: 1; 
Survey completed by work/life managers: 1. 

Department/agency: Department of the Interior; 
Survey completed by CHCO: 1; 
Survey completed by work/life managers: 1. 

Department/agency: Department of Justice; 
Survey completed by CHCO: 1; 
Survey completed by work/life managers: 1. 

Department/agency: Department of Labor; 
Survey completed by CHCO: 1; 
Survey completed by work/life managers: 1. 

Department/agency: Department of State; 
Survey completed by CHCO: 0; 
Survey completed by work/life managers: 1. 

Department/agency: Department of Transportation; 
Survey completed by CHCO: 1; 
Survey completed by work/life managers: 1. 

Department/agency: Department of the Treasury; 
Survey completed by CHCO: 1; 
Survey completed by work/life managers: 1. 

Department/agency: Department of Veterans Affairs; 
Survey completed by CHCO: 1; 
Survey completed by work/life managers: 1. 

Department/agency: Environmental Protection Agency; 
Survey completed by CHCO: 1; 
Survey completed by work/life managers: 1. 

Department/agency: General Services Administration; 
Survey completed by CHCO: 1; 
Survey completed by work/life managers: 1. 

Department/agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration; 
Survey completed by CHCO: 1; 
Survey completed by work/life managers: 0. 

Department/agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission; 
Survey completed by CHCO: 1; 
Survey completed by work/life managers: 1. 

Department/agency: Social Security Administration; 
Survey completed by CHCO: 1; 
Survey completed by work/life managers: 1. 

Department/agency: Total; 
Survey completed by CHCO: 18; 
Survey completed by work/life managers: 15. 

Source: GAO. 

Note: Thirty-three out of a potential 40 agency officials responded to 
our survey. 

[End of table] 

We pretested the survey instrument with representatives from two 
federal agencies during June and July 2010 and administered the survey 
to our selected respondents from July through September 2010. 

The practical difficulties of conducting any survey may introduce 
errors, commonly referred to as nonsampling errors. For example, 
difficulties in how a particular question is interpreted, in the 
sources of information that are available to respondents, or in how 
the survey data are analyzed can all introduce unwanted variability 
into survey results. To minimize such nonsampling errors, a social 
science survey specialist designed the questionnaire, in collaboration 
with GAO staff that had subject matter expertise. As indicated above, 
the questionnaire was pretested to ensure that the questions were 
relevant, clearly stated, and easy to comprehend. When data were 
analyzed, an independent analyst reviewed the computer program used 
for the analysis of the survey data. Since this was a Web-based 
survey, respondents entered their answers directly into the electronic 
questionnaire, thereby eliminating the need to have the data keyed 
into a database and avoiding data entry errors. The results of our 
survey are not generalizable to all agency officials or to all 
agencies because they are based on a nonprobability sample. Also, for 
those agency officials responding that their agencies evaluate their 
work/life programs, we did not independently determine whether or how 
well they actually evaluate their work/life programs. 

We reviewed past GAO human capital reports on issues dealing with 
work/life programs. We also interviewed OPM work/life officials to 
obtain OPM's description of its role in interacting with federal 
agencies as they develop and implement work/life programs. This 
included reviewing OPM's A New Day for Federal Service: Strategic Plan 
2010-2015, its 2006-2010 strategic plan; past OPM reports on work/life 
programs; and available written policy, guidance, and directives. We 
also visited the agency's Web site to examine the material available 
to federal agencies and employees on work/life assistance, guidance, 
and identification of leading practices. 

In order to address our third objective on the identification of some 
leading practices in the private sector, we reviewed publicly 
available information sources to identify private sector companies 
that are leaders and award winners in providing work/life programs to 
their workforces. The awards are based on the types of work/life 
programs offered and the diversity of the company's workforce. Some of 
the awards include: 

* Fortune Magazine, "Best Places to Work"--includes separate awards 
for work/life balance, child care, telecommuting, and unusual perks 
(2009); 

* AARP, "Best Employers" (2008); 

* Working Mother's Magazine, "100 Best Companies" (2008); 

* Alfred Sloan Awards for Business Excellence in Workplace Flexibility 
(2005, 2006); 

* Latina Style, "50 Special Report" (2008); 

* Black Enterprise, "40 Best Companies for Diversity" (2009); and: 

* Diversity Inc., Top 50 (2009). 

After reviewing these information sources, we identified 17 companies 
that received multiple awards from the sources we reviewed, based on a 
process of weighting the awards received. Out of the 17 companies that 
we reviewed, 7 agreed to be interviewed. The companies that we 
interviewed represented 6 of the 7 industry categories that we 
identified.[Footnote 34] Table 4 lists the participating private 
sector companies and the industries they represent. 

Table 4: Private Sector Companies Selected as Leaders in Work/Life 
Programs: 

Industry: Audit/consulting; 
Company: Deloitte[A]. 

Industry: Communications; 
Company: [B]. 

Industry: Financial services; 
Company: Ernst & Young. 

Industry: Hospitality; 
Company: Marriott International. 

Industry: Insurance/financial products; 
Company: MetLife. 

Industry: Manufacturing; 
Company: General Mills. 

Industry: Manufacturing; 
Company: SC Johnson & Son. 

Source: GAO. 

[A] According to a Deloitte official, "Deloitte" means Deloitte LLP 
and its subsidiaries. 

[B] Company requested anonymity. 

[End of table] 

We developed a structured interview instrument that we administered to 
officials from the participating private sector companies to obtain 
information on the development and implementation of work/life 
programs within their companies. We also asked the officials to 
describe how their companies track, evaluate, and modify their 
work/life programs and how this information is used to make decisions 
about their work/life programs. Also, for those private sector company 
officials responding that their companies evaluate their work/life 
programs, we did not independently determine whether or how well they 
actually evaluate their work/life programs. However, these seven 
companies are not representative of all private sector companies and 
therefore, we cannot generalize the information these private sector 
officials provided about their work/life programs to other private 
sector companies. 

We conducted this performance audit from August 2009 through December 
2010 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. 

[End of section] 

Appendix II: Survey of OPM's Role in Federal Agencies' Work/Life 
Programs: 

Survey of OPM's Role in Federal Agencies' Work/Life Programs: 

U.S. Government Accountability Office: 

Please Note: Numbers reported are based on 33 federal 
departments/agencies responding to this survey. The total number of 
responses for any one question may be less than 33 because all 
respondents did not answer all questions. 

Introduction: 

The U.S. Government Accountability Office, an agency of Congress, is 
exploring the implementation of programs that help federal employees 
balance both their personal and professional responsibilities. The 
Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, the 
Senate Select Committee on Aging, and the Senate Subcommittee on 
Governmental Management asked GAO to address the extent to which: (1) 
the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is providing agencies with 
assistance and guidance for establishing and enhancing work/life 
programs, and (2) OPM and federal agencies are tracking, evaluating 
and/or refining work/life programs. To meet these objectives, GAO 
designed this survey to solicit agencies' views on OPM's assistance 
and guidance for implementing work/life programs and to determine how 
agencies track and evaluate these programs. 

GAO is administering this survey to departmental Chief Human Capital 
Officers (CHCO) who are members of the CHCO Council and to a sample of 
work/life program managers at the agency level within these 
departments. In responding to the survey, please feel free to consult 
with colleagues as needed to answer the survey questions. We ask that 
the CHCO respondents frame their answers from a departmentwide 
perspective and that the work/life program managers frame their 
answers from their agency's perspective. 

To learn more about completing the questionnaire, printing your 
responses, and who to contact f you have questions, instructions.
Thank you in advance for your assistance in taking part in our survey. 

Survey Respondent: 

1. Please provide the following information for the person primarily 
responsible for completing this survey in case we need to contact you 
to clarify a response. 

Name: 
Position title: 
Department/Agency: 
Telephone:	
E-mail address:	 

Work/Life Program Inventory: 

2. We have classified several work/life programs available to federal 
employees (excluding teleworking/telecommuting and flexiplace) into 
seven categories. A number of these programs are required by law while 
some programs are authorized but not required. 

For each of the seven work/life categories listed below, based on your 
current knowledge, which statement(s) best represents the situation in 
your department/agency? 

Category 1 - Alternative work schedules (such as compressed schedule 
and flexible hours schedule) (Select all answers that apply.) 

9: We offer at least one program in this category because it is 
required by law. 

21: We offer at least one program in this category even though it is 
not required by law. - See below. 

4: We offer at least one program in this category but do not know 
whether required or not by law. - See below. 

0: We do not offer any programs in this category. 

If your department/agency offers any programs in category 1 that are 
not required by law or if you do not know if it is required by law, 
please provide examples of the specific program(s) you offer. 

Data intentionally not reported. 

Category 2 — Leave Programs (such as leave for family care) (Select 
all answers that apply.) 

28: We offer at least one program in this category because it is 
required by law. 

6: We offer at least one program in this category even though it is 
not required by law. - See below. 

6: We offer at least one program in this category but do not know 
whether required or not by law. - See below. 

0: We do not offer any programs in this category. 

If your department/agency offers any programs in category 2 that are 
not required by law or if you do not know if it is required by law, 
please provide examples of the specific program(s) you offer. 

Data intentionally not reported. 

Category 3 — Flexible Spending Accounts (such as dependent care and 
health care) (Select all answers that apply.) 

16: We offer at least one program in this category because it is 
required by law. 

10: We offer at least one program in this category even though it is 
not required by law. - See below. 

8: We offer at least one program in this category but do not know 
whether required or not by law. - See below. 

2: We do not offer any programs in this category. 

If your department/agency offers any programs in category 3 that are 
not required by law or if you do not know if it is required by law, 
please provide examples of the specific program(s) you offer. 

Data intentionally not reported: 

Category 4 — Care Giving Programs (such as child care, elder/dependent 
care, and support for care giving) (Select all answers that apply.) 

7: We offer at least one program in this category because it is 
required by law. 

21: We offer at least one program in this category even though it is 
not required by law. - See below. 

4: We offer at least one program in this category but do not know 
whether required or not by law. - See below. 

3: We do not offer any programs in this category. 

If your department/agency offers any programs in category 4 that are 
not required by law or if you do not know if it is required by law, 
please provide examples of the specific program(s) you offer. 

Data intentionally not reported. 

Category 5 — Employee Assistance Programs (such as stress management, 
smoking cessation, and counseling) (Select all answers that apply.) 

25: We offer at least one program in this category because it is 
required by law. 

20: We offer at least one program in this category even though it is 
not required by law. - See below. 

3: We offer at least one program in this category but do not know 
whether required or not by law. - See below. 

0: We do not offer any programs in this category. 

If your department/agency offers any programs in category 5 that are 
not required by law or if you do not know if it is required by law, 
please provide examples of the specific program(s) you offer. 

Data intentionally not reported. 

Category 6 — Volunteerism/Community Involvement Programs (such as blood
donation and tutoring) (Select all answers that apply.) 

3: We offer at least one program in this category because it is 
required by law. 

26: We offer at least one program in this category even though it is 
not required by law. - See below. 

4: We offer at least one program in this category but do not know 
whether required or not by law. - See below. 

2: We do not offer any programs in this category. 

If your department/agency offers any programs in category 6 that are 
not required by law or if you do not know if it is required by law, 
please provide examples of the specific program(s) you offer. 

Category 7 — Health and Wellness Programs (such as fitness programs and
health screening) (Select all answers that apply.) 

3: We offer at least one program in this category because it is 
required by law. 

25: We offer at least one program in this category even though it is 
not required by law. - See below. 

3: We offer at least one program in this category but do not know 
whether required or not by law. - See below. 

2: We do not offer any programs in this category. 

If your department/agency offers any programs in category 7 that are 
not required by law or if you do not know if it is required by law, 
please provide examples of the specific program(s) you offer. 

Data intentionally not reported. 

3. Based on your experience, to what extent, if at all, do your 
department's/agency's work/life programs improve the recruitment and 
retention of its employees? (Select one answer in each row in a, b, 
and c below.) 

a. Work/life programs offered that are required by law: 
							
Improves recruitment: 
Not applicable, programs not offered: 0; 
Very great extent: 6; 
Great extent: 11; 
Moderate extent: 10; 
Some extent: 3; 
Little or no extent: 1; 
Do not know: 2. 

Improves retention: 
Not applicable, programs not offered: 0; 
Very great extent: 6; 
Great extent: 12; 
Moderate extent: 9; 
Some extent: 2; 
Little or no extent: 0; 
Do not know: 2. 

b. Work/life programs offered that are not required by law but are 
authorized by your department/agency: 

Improves recruitment: 
Not applicable, programs not offered: 0; 
Very great extent: 6; 
Great extent: 10; 
Moderate extent: 13; 
Some extent: 1; 
Little or no extent: 0; 
Do not know: 3. 

Improves retention: 
Not applicable, programs not offered: 0; 
Very great extent: 7; 
Great extent: 9; 
Moderate extent: 9; 
Some extent: 3; 
Little or no extent: 0; 
Do not know: 3. 

c. Work/life programs offered that may or may not be required by law 
(i.e., you were not sure): 

Improves recruitment: 
Not applicable, programs not offered: 5; 
Very great extent: 2; 
Great extent: 5; 
Moderate extent: 7; 
Some extent: 2; 
Little or no extent: 0; 
Do not know: 9. 

Improves retention: 
Not applicable, programs not offered: 5; 
Very great extent: 2; 
Great extent: 7; 
Moderate extent: 4; 
Some extent: 2; 
Little or no extent: 1; 
Do not know: 8. 

Implementing Department/Agency Work/Life Programs: 

Please note: All remaining questions in this questionnaire refer to 
ALL work/life programs (excluding teleworking/telecommuting and 
flexiplace), both those required by law and those not required but 
authorized. 

4. Based on your experience, how has each of the following factors 
helped or hindered your department's/agency's ability to implement 
work/life programs? (Select one answer in each row.) 

a. OPM involvement (e.g., guidance, assistance, information sharing, 
etc.): 
Greatly	Helped: 12; 
Helped somewhat: 12; 
Helped in some, hindered in others: 6; 
Hindered somewhat: 1; 
Greatly	hindered: 0; 
Not applicable/Do not know: 2. 

b. Level of support from your department's/agency's top-level 
management: 
Greatly	Helped: 21; 
Helped somewhat: 10; 
Helped in some, hindered in others: 2; 
Hindered somewhat: 0; 
Greatly	hindered: 0; 
Not applicable/Do not know: 0. 

c. Level of support from your department's/agency's mid-level 
management: 
Greatly	Helped: 16; 
Helped somewhat: 13; 
Helped in some, hindered in others: 3; 
Hindered somewhat: 0; 
Greatly	hindered: 1; 
Not applicable/Do not know: 0. 

d. Availability of funding necessary for implementation of work/life 
program(s): 
Greatly	Helped: 12; 
Helped somewhat: 8; 
Helped in some, hindered in others: 0; 
Hindered somewhat: 3; 
Greatly	hindered: 7; 
Not applicable/Do not know: 3. 

e. Level of employee demand (from too little to too much) for 
work/life program(s): 
Greatly	Helped: 7; 
Helped somewhat: 16; 
Helped in some, hindered in others: 4; 
Hindered somewhat: 0; 
Greatly	hindered: 1; 
Not applicable/Do not know: 4. 

						
f. Labor/management agreements: 
Greatly	Helped: 4; 
Helped somewhat: 8; 
Helped in some, hindered in others: 12; 
Hindered somewhat: 1; 
Greatly	hindered: 0; 
Not applicable/Do not know: 8. 

g. Other factors - Please specify below: 
Greatly	Helped: 0; 
Helped somewhat: 0; 
Helped in some, hindered in others: 0; 
Hindered somewhat: 1; 
Greatly	hindered: 2; 
Not applicable/Do not know: 11. 

Please specify other factors that helped or hindered implementation. 

Data intentionally not reported. 

5. Please describe how issues related to how jobs are structured or 
work is performed by your department's/agency's employees (e.g., 
requirement that employees must work on-site for security reasons) 
helps and/or hinders your department's/agency's ability to implement 
work/life programs. 

Data intentionally not reported. 

6. What was the most significant challenge that your department/agency 
encountered when trying to implement a work/life program? In your 
answer, please include the program being implemented, the challenge 
faced, and the end result of the challenge. 

Data intentionally not reported. 

Departments'/Agencies' Perception of OPM: 

In this section, we ask about how you perceive OPM's involvement in 
your department's/agency's selection, development, and implementation 
of work/life programs. By OPM's involvement, we are referring to any 
guidance, assistance, and information they shared with your 
department/agency. When answering these questions, please use the 
following OPM definitions: 

Guidance - includes formal guidance (regulations) and informal 
guidance (such as memoranda, e-mails, and OPM bulletins). 

Assistance - includes such things as accessible OPM points of contact, 
formal working groups, informal mentoring, and OPM sponsored training. 

Information sharing - includes such things as interactive listservs, 
newsletters, and access to reports. 

7. Thinking about the guidance that your department/agency has 
received from OPM during the past year, how satisfied or dissatisfied 
were you with how OPM met the following criteria? (Select one answer 
in each row.) 

a. Timeliness: 
Did not	seek guidance from OPM: 0; 
Sought but did not receive guidance from OPM: 0; 
Very satisfied: 10; 
Somewhat satisfied: 12; 
As satisfied as	dissatisfied: 3; 
Somewhat dissatisfied: 2; 
Very dissatisfied: 4; 
Do not know: 2. 

b. Quality: 
Did not	seek guidance from OPM: 0; 
Sought but did not receive guidance from OPM: 0; 
Very satisfied: 13; 
Somewhat satisfied: 11; 
As satisfied as	dissatisfied: 4; 
Somewhat dissatisfied: 2; 
Very dissatisfied: 1; 
Do not know: 2. 

c. Ease of obtaining: 
Did not	seek guidance from OPM: 0; 
Sought but did not receive guidance from OPM: 0; 
Very satisfied: 10; 
Somewhat satisfied: 12; 
As satisfied as	dissatisfied: 4; 
Somewhat dissatisfied: 3; 
Very dissatisfied: 2; 
Do not know: 2. 

d. Sufficiency (in terms of quality or detail): 
Did not	seek guidance from OPM: 0; 
Sought but did not receive guidance from OPM: 0; 
Very satisfied: 10; 
Somewhat satisfied: 12; 
As satisfied as	dissatisfied: 4; 
Somewhat dissatisfied: 2; 
Very dissatisfied: 3; 
Do not know: 2. 

8. Thinking about the assistance that your department/agency has 
received from OPM during the past year, how satisfied or dissatisfied 
were you with how OPM met the following criteria? (Select one answer 
in each row.) 

a. Timeliness: 
Did not	seek guidance from OPM: 3; 
Sought but did not receive guidance from OPM: 0; 
Very satisfied: 11; 
Somewhat satisfied: 11; 
As satisfied as	dissatisfied: 4; 
Somewhat dissatisfied: 1; 
Very dissatisfied: 0; 
Do not know: 3. 

b. Quality: 
Did not	seek guidance from OPM: 3; 
Sought but did not receive guidance from OPM: 0; 
Very satisfied: 16; 
Somewhat satisfied: 5; 
As satisfied as	dissatisfied: 5; 
Somewhat dissatisfied: 1; 
Very dissatisfied: 0; 
Do not know: 3. 

c. Ease of obtaining: 
Did not	seek guidance from OPM: 3; 
Sought but did not receive guidance from OPM: 0; 
Very satisfied: 10; 
Somewhat satisfied: 12; 
As satisfied as	dissatisfied: 4; 
Somewhat dissatisfied: 0; 
Very dissatisfied: 1; 
Do not know: 1. 

d. Sufficiency (in terms of quality or detail): 
Did not	seek guidance from OPM: 3; 
Sought but did not receive guidance from OPM: 0; 
Very satisfied: 13; 
Somewhat satisfied: 10; 
As satisfied as	dissatisfied: 3; 
Somewhat dissatisfied: 0; 
Very dissatisfied: 1; 
Do not know: 3. 

9. Thinking about the information that OPM has shared with your 
department/agency during the past year, how satisfied or dissatisfied 
were you with how OPM met the following criteria? (Select one answer 
in each row.) 

a. Timeliness: 
Did not	seek guidance from OPM: 0; 
Sought but did not receive guidance from OPM: 0; 
Very satisfied: 13; 
Somewhat satisfied: 9; 
As satisfied as	dissatisfied: 4; 
Somewhat dissatisfied: 3; 
Very dissatisfied: 1; 
Do not know: 3. 

b. Quality: 
Did not	seek guidance from OPM: 0; 
Sought but did not receive guidance from OPM: 0; 
Very satisfied: 14; 
Somewhat satisfied: 9; 
As satisfied as	dissatisfied: 5; 
Somewhat dissatisfied: 1; 
Very dissatisfied: 1; 
Do not know: 3. 

c. Ease of obtaining: 
Did not	seek guidance from OPM: 0; 
Sought but did not receive guidance from OPM: 0; 
Very satisfied: 9; 
Somewhat satisfied: 14; 
As satisfied as	dissatisfied: 3; 
Somewhat dissatisfied: 3; 
Very dissatisfied: 1; 
Do not know: 3. 

d. Sufficiency (in terms of quality or detail): 
Did not	seek guidance from OPM: 0; 
Sought but did not receive guidance from OPM: 0; 
Very satisfied: 12; 
Somewhat satisfied: 10; 
As satisfied as	dissatisfied: 5; 
Somewhat dissatisfied: 1; 
Very dissatisfied: 2; 
Do not know: 3. 

10. Overall, would you say that OPM's direct involvement with your 
department/agency during the past year has helped or hindered your 
department's/agency's selection, development, and implementation of 
work/life programs? (Select one answer in each row. If your 
department/agency had no interaction with OPM, please respond "No 
interaction with OPM." If OPM's involvement helped your 
department/agency in some work/life programs but hindered in others 
please respond "Helped in some, hindered in others.") 

a. Selection of work/life programs: 
No interaction with OPM: 9; 
Greatly	helped: 6; 
Helped somewhat: 11; 
Helped in some, hindered in others: 4; 
Hindered somewhat: 0; 
Greatly	hindered: 0; 
Do not know: 1. 

b. Development of work/life programs: 
No interaction with OPM: 8; 
Greatly	helped: 6; 
Helped somewhat: 12; 
Helped in some, hindered in others: 4; 
Hindered somewhat: 0; 
Greatly	hindered: 0; 
Do not know: 3. 

c. Implementation of work/life programs: 
No interaction with OPM: 8; 
Greatly	helped: 6; 
Helped somewhat: 12; 
Helped in some, hindered in others: 3; 
Hindered somewhat: 0; 
Greatly	hindered: 0; 
Do not know: 4. 

10a. If in any row of question 10 you answered that OPM's involvement 
helped your department/agency in some work/life programs but hindered 
in others, please describe what helped and/or hindered your 
department/agency. 

Data intentionally not reported. 

Tracking/Monitoring of Work/Life Programs: 

In this section our questions focus on how your department/agency 
currently tracks or monitors the work/life programs (excluding 
teleworking/telecommuting and flexiplace) offered to its employees. 
The next section will focus on how your department/agency evaluates 
the work/life programs offered to its employees. 

By tracking or monitoring we mean measuring the extent to which your 
employees use these programs. This may include checks of time and 
attendance records, automated deductions from employees' paychecks, 
sign-in sheets at meetings, employee surveys, etc. 

11. Does your department/agency currently track or monitor the extent 
to which the work/life programs it offers to its employees are 
actually used by the employees? 

5: Yes, all of the programs - Continue with question 12. 

24: Yes, some of the programs - Continue with question 12. 

2: No, none of the programs — Go to page: Evaluation of Work/Life 
Programs. 

2: Do not know — Go to page: Evaluation of Work/Life Programs. 

12. For each of the work/life programs that your department/agency 
currently tracks or monitors, in which of the following ways is this 
tracking or monitoring carried out? (Check all answers that apply in 
each row. If you track or monitor programs in a way not listed in the 
matrix heading, please identify in question 12a.) 

a. Alternative work schedules (such as compressed schedule and 
flexible hours schedule): 
We do not track or monitor this program: 9; 
By analyzing time and attendance records: 17; 
By monitoring automated deductions from employees' paychecks: 0; 
By keeping track of sign-in sheets at meetings: 1; 
By conducting employee surveys: 4; 
By keeping logs of "contact time" or direct-service delivery hours: 1. 

b. Leave Programs (such as leave for family care): 
We do not track or monitor this program: 11; 
By analyzing time and attendance records: 15; 
By monitoring automated deductions from employees' paychecks: 0; 
By keeping track of sign-in sheets at meetings: 1; 
By conducting employee surveys: 4; 
By keeping logs of "contact time" or direct-service delivery hours: 1. 

c. Flexible Spending Accounts (such as dependent care and health care): 
We do not track or monitor this program: 14; 
By analyzing time and attendance records: 2; 
By monitoring automated deductions from employees' paychecks: 11; 
By keeping track of sign-in sheets at meetings: 0; 
By conducting employee surveys: 2; 
By keeping logs of "contact time" or direct-service delivery hours: 1. 

d. Care Giving Programs (such as child care, elder/dependent care, and 
support for care giving): 
We do not track or monitor this program: 10; 
By analyzing time and attendance records: 1; 
By monitoring automated deductions from employees' paychecks: 1; 
By keeping track of sign-in sheets at meetings: 7; 
By conducting employee surveys: 5; 
By keeping logs of "contact time" or direct-service delivery hours: 9. 

e. Employee Assistance Programs (such as stress management, smoking 
cessation, and counseling): 
We do not track or monitor this program: 3; 
By analyzing time and attendance records: 0; 
By monitoring automated deductions from employees' paychecks: 0; 
By keeping track of sign-in sheets at meetings: 9; 
By conducting employee surveys: 8; 
By keeping logs of "contact time" or direct-service delivery hours: 21. 

f. Volunteerism/Community Involvement Programs (such as blood donation 
and tutoring): 
We do not track or monitor this program: 14; 
By analyzing time and attendance records: 1; 
By monitoring automated deductions from employees' paychecks: 0; 
By keeping track of sign-in sheets at meetings: 7; 
By conducting employee surveys: 2; 
By keeping logs of "contact time" or direct-service delivery hours: 8. 
				
g. Health and Wellness (such as fitness programs and health 
screenings): 
We do not track or monitor this program: 6; 
By analyzing time and attendance records: 1; 
By monitoring automated deductions from employees' paychecks: 2; 
By keeping track of sign-in sheets at meetings: 12; 
By conducting employee surveys: 8; 
By keeping logs of "contact time" or direct-service delivery hours: 12. 

12a. If you track or monitor the work/life programs listed above in 
any other way, please identify the program and how it is tracked or 
monitored. 

Data intentionally not reported. 

Evaluation of Work/Life Programs: 

In this section we ask about how your department/agency may evaluate 
the work/life programs (excluding teleworking/telecommuting and 
flexiplace) offered to its employees. 

By evaluating we mean measuring the extent to which the program is 
meeting its goals. The results of the evaluations of work/life 
programs may be used to assess the programs' impact on the recruitment 
and/or retention of employees. 

13. Does your department/agency currently evaluate the work/life 
programs it offers to its employees? 

3: Yes, all of the programs - Continue with question 14. 

18: Yes, some of the programs - Continue with question 14. 

8: No, none of the programs - Skip to question 19. 

4: Do not know - skip to question 19. 

14. Which work/life programs are you currently evaluating (or have you 
evaluated)? (Check all answers that apply.) 

10: Alternative work schedules (such as compressed schedule and 
flexible hours schedule). 

4: Leave Programs (such as leave for family care). 

6: Flexible Spending Accounts (such as dependent care and health care). 

13: Care Giving Programs (such as child care, elder/dependent care, 
and support for care giving). 

16: Employee Assistance Programs (such as stress management, smoking 
cessation, and counseling). 

7: Volunteerism/Community Involvement Programs (such as blood donation 
and tutoring). 

17: Health and Wellness Programs (such as fitness programs and health 
screenings). 

14a. Please provide examples of programs for each program category 
checked. 

Data intentionally not reported. 

15. Does your department/agency currently use (or has it used) the 
results of the evaluation of work/life programs in the following ways? 
(Select one answer in each row.) 

a. To modify existing work/life program structure based on the data: 
Yes: 19; 
No: 0; 
Do not know: 1. 

b. To implement new work/life programs based on the data: 
Yes: 15; 
No: 3; 
Do not know: 2. 

c. To eliminate work/life programs based on the data (If yes, please 
describe in the space below): 
Yes: 2; 
No: 16; 
Do not know: 2. 

d. For other purposes - Please specify below: 
Yes: 2; 
No: 4; 
Do not know: 5. 

Please describe the situation whereby a work/life program has been 
eliminated based on the data. (Item "c" above) 

Data intentionally not reported. 

Please specify other purposes for which evaluation results have been 
used here. (Item "d" above) 

Data intentionally not reported. 

16. To what extent, if at all, does your department/agency assess the 
possible effects your work/life programs (excluding 
teleworking/telecommuting and flexiplace) have on the recruitment and 
retention of its employees? (Select one answer in each row.) 

a. Recruitment: 
Very great extent: 3; 
Great extent: 6; 
Moderate extent: 5; 
Some extent: 2; 
Little or extent: 3; 
Do not know: 2. 

b. Retention: 
Very great extent: 3; 
Great extent: 6; 
Moderate extent: 4; 
Some extent: 4; 
Little or extent: 2; 
Do not know: 2. 

17. Overall, would you say that interaction with OPM has helped, had 
no effect on, or hindered your department's/agency's ability to 
evaluate each of the following categories of work/life programs? 
(Select one answer in each row.) 
			
a. Alternative work schedules (such as compressed schedule and 
flexible hours schedule): 
Not applicable, we had no interaction with OPM: 4; 
Greatly helped: 3; 
Helped somewhat: 7; 
Had no effect: 5; 
Hindered somewhat: 0; 
Greatly hindered: 0; 
Do not know: 2. 

b. Leave Programs (such as leave for family care): 
Not applicable, we had no interaction with OPM: 3; 
Greatly helped: 5; 
Helped somewhat: 7; 
Had no effect: 3; 
Hindered somewhat: 0; 
Greatly hindered: 0; 
Do not know: 3. 

c. Flexible Spending Accounts (such as dependent care and health care): 
Not applicable, we had no interaction with OPM: 7; 
Greatly helped: 1; 
Helped somewhat: 3; 
Had no effect: 6; 
Hindered somewhat: 0; 
Greatly hindered: 0; 
Do not know: 4. 

d. Care Giving Programs (such as child care, elder/dependent care, and 
support for care giving): 
Not applicable, we had no interaction with OPM: 4; 
Greatly helped: 5; 
Helped somewhat: 5; 
Had no effect: 2; 
Hindered somewhat: 1; 
Greatly hindered: 0; 
Do not know: 4. 
						
e. Employee Assistance Programs (such as stress management, smoking 
cessation, and counseling): 
Not applicable, we had no interaction with OPM: 6; 
Greatly helped: 2; 
Helped somewhat: 7; 
Had no effect: 4; 
Hindered somewhat: 0; 
Greatly hindered: 0; 
Do not know: 2. 

f. Volunteerism/Community Involvement: 
Programs (such as blood donation and tutoring): 
Not applicable, we had no interaction with OPM: 5; 
Greatly helped: 2; 
Helped somewhat: 3; 
Had no effect: 6; 
Hindered somewhat: 0; 
Greatly hindered: 0; 
Do not know: 5. 
		
g. Health and Wellness (such as fitness programs and health 
screenings): 
Not applicable, we had no interaction with OPM: 2; 
Greatly helped: 3; 
Helped somewhat: 11; 
Had no effect: 3; 
Hindered somewhat: 0; 
Greatly hindered: 0; 
Do not know: 2. 

18. Overall, how much of a challenge, if any, has been presented by 
each of the following to limit your department's/agency's ability to 
adequately track or evaluate it's work/life program(s)? (Select one 
answer in each row.) 
				
a. Lack of management support: 
Very great challenge: 0; 
Great challenge: 0; 
Moderate challenge: 3; 
Some challenge: 8; 
No challenge: 9; 
Do not know: 1. 

b. Limited technology: 
Very great challenge: 0; 
Great challenge: 4; 
Moderate challenge: 5; 
Some challenge: 8; 
No challenge: 4; 
Do not know: 0. 

c. Methodological constraints: 
Very great challenge: 1; 
Great challenge: 3; 
Moderate challenge: 3; 
Some challenge: 8; 
No challenge: 2; 
Do not know: 4. 

d. Time constraints: 
Very great challenge: 4; 
Great challenge: 6; 
Moderate challenge: 3; 
Some challenge: 5; 
No challenge: 3; 
Do not know: 0. 

e. Limited staff resources, skills, or expertise for tracking or 
evaluating programs: 
Very great challenge: 5; 
Great challenge: 6; 
Moderate challenge: 5; 
Some challenge: 3; 
No challenge: 2; 
Do not know: 0. 

f. Organizational cultural factors — Please specify below: 
Very great challenge: 0; 
Great challenge: 1; 
Moderate challenge: 5; 
Some challenge: 2; 
No challenge: 7; 
Do not know: 5. 

g. Other challenges — Please specify below: 
Very great challenge: 0; 
Great challenge: 1; 
Moderate challenge: 0; 
Some challenge: 1; 
No challenge: 4; 
Do not know: 5. 

Please specify any organizational cultural factors here. 

Data intentionally not reported. 

Please specify other challenges here. 

Data intentionally not reported. 

19. If you have any comments about any of the topics covered in this 
questionnaire or would like to elaborate on any of your responses, 
please use the space below. 

Data intentionally not reported. 

20. Are you ready to submit your final completed survey to GAO?
(This is equivalent to mailing a completed paper survey to us. It 
tells us that your answers are official and final.) 

33: Yes, my survey is complete. 

7: No, my survey is not yet complete. 

[End of section] 

Appendix III: Comments from the Office of Personnel Management: 

United States Office Of Personnel Management: 
Employee Services: 
Washington, DC 20415: 

Ms. Yvonne D. Jones: 
Director, Strategic Issues: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO): 
441 G Street NW, Room #2440C: 
Washington, DC 20548: 

Dear Ms. Jones: 

Thank you for providing the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) 
the opportunity to comment on the Government Accountability Office 
draft report, "Agencies Generally Satisfied with OPM Assistance, but 
More Tracking and Information Sharing Needed." We appreciate the 
opportunity to provide you with comments about this report. 

Response to Recommendation: 

Recommendation: We recommend that the Director of OPM, working with 
the CHCO Council, identify the resources, steps, and timetable 
necessary to complete the following three actions: 

1) track on a more systematic basis information already being 
collected by individual federal agencies on their work/life programs, 
such as program usage data and evaluations; 

2) evaluate the results of work/life program surveys conducted by 
leading private sector organizations that could help federal agencies 
compare their work/life programs with private sector leading practices 
as stated in OPM's 2010-2015 Strategic Plan; and; 

3) provide the information from both the public and private sectors to 
agency officials—through available avenues such as-the CHCO Council 
and federal executive boards—that could help them address work/life 
program issues and determine if the work/life programs are meeting 
their agencies' goals. 

Management Response: 

We concur. We appreciate the time and effort that GAO has put into 
this informative report. The Office of Personnel Management's 
Work/Life/Wellness staff would welcome the opportunity to work with 
the CHCO Council to identify resources, steps and timetable necessary 
to complete the identified actions. Broadly speaking, we agree with 
the three actions outlined with the caveat that we have the following 
concerns about the emphasis on the private sector: 

* We acknowledge the utility of examining leading private sector 
programs, policies and practices. However, motivation and culture 
differ enough between the two so that direct comparison does not 
provide a comprehensive set of ready to use solutions. We ask that GAO 
modify the recommendations in the report to include this observation. 

* We support careful collaboration with the private sector. Avoiding 
the appearance of selective endorsement is a concern and needs to be 
factored into the recommendations. 

* Comprehensive evaluations of public and private sector work/life 
programs have been produced in the academic research, by State 
entities, and other organizations such as the Sloan Foundation. We 
suggest that GAO's recommendations be expanded to include these. 

Technical comments to the draft report are enclosed. Unless otherwise 
noted, the suggested revisions are meant to provide technical accuracy 
and conform to terminology applicable to the Federal service. 

Please contact Ms. Janet Barnes, Deputy Director, Internal Oversight & 
Compliance on (202) 606-3270 should your office require additional 
information. 

Again, my thanks to your office for providing this opportunity to 
update and clarify information in the draft report. 

Sincerely, 

Signed by: 

Nancy H. Kichak: 
Associate Director Employee Services: 

Enclosure: 

[End of letter] 

Technical Comments on Draft GAO Report: 

On page 2, first bullet at bottom of page, "We designed and 
administered a survey to assess agency perceptions of OPM's 
performance during a one-year period..." The dates of the one-year 
period should be specified. 

On pages 4 and 5, under "Background", the period of evaluation (i.e., 
the dates) should be given. 

On page 6, Table 1, under the Category "health and wellness", 
subcategory "health promotion", "worklife programs", the words 
"Fitness Programs" should be replaced with "Wellness Programs." 
Fitness is a result of physical activity participation at certain 
levels as determined by scientific bodies of academics and others, and 
is not an accurate title for programs being developed by agencies 
under our guidance. Wellness encompasses many other components of 
healthy lifestyle, including nutrition, behavior management and more. 

Page 23, top of page: "OPM officials stated that they do not share 
this information across federal agencies because they lack the time 
and resources to maintain an inventory of these evaluations. OPM 
officials said that the recent addition of staff to the Office of 
Work/Life/Wellness will enable them to review reports in the future." 

Comment: We request rewording this statement to say: "OPM officials 
said that the recent addition of staff to the Office of 
Work/Life/Wellness will enable them to review reports they may receive 
in the future. At the time of this engagement, they were not staffed 
or resourced to track, review or maintain an inventory of these 
evaluations." 

Page 30, first paragraph, last two sentences: "OPM officials said that 
they do not track or maintain an inventory of these evaluations nor 
review these evaluations due to the lack of time and available 
resources. 

Comment: We request rewording this statement to say: OPM officials 
said that they do not currently track or maintain an inventory of 
these evaluations nor review these evaluations. 

[End of section] 

Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments: 

Contact: 

Yvonne D. Jones, (202) 512-2717, jonesy@gao.gov: 

Acknowledgments: 

In addition to the contact named above, Steven Lozano, Assistant 
Director; Steven J. Berke; Jeffrey Dawson; Karin Fangman; Stuart M. 
Kaufman; Melanie Papasian; Joseph L. Santiago; Megan Taylor; and 
Gregory H. Wilmoth made key contributions to this report. 

[End of section] 

Related GAO Products: 

Human Capital: Sustained Attention to Strategic Human Capital 
Management Needed. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-623T]. Washington, D.C.: April 22, 
2009. 

Older Workers: Enhanced Communication Among Federal Agencies Could 
Improve Strategies for Hiring and Retaining Experienced Workers. 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-206]. Washington, D.C.: 
February 24, 2009. 

Human Capital: Transforming Federal Recruiting and Hiring Efforts. 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-762T]. Washington, 
D.C.: May 8, 2008. 

Older Workers: Federal Agencies Have Challenges, but Have 
Opportunities to Hire and Retain Experienced Employees. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-630T]. Washington, D.C.: April 30, 
2008. 

An Assessment of Dependent Care Needs of Federal Workers Using the 
Office of Personnel Management's Survey. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-437R]. Washington, D.C.: March 30, 
2007. 

Highlights of a GAO Forum: Engaging and Retraining Older Workers. 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-438SP]. Washington, 
D.C.: February 28, 2007. 

Older Workers: Some Best Practices and Strategies for Engaging and 
Retaining Older Workers. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-433T]. Washington, D.C.: February 
28, 2007. 

Office of Personnel Management: Key Lessons Learned to Date for 
Strengthening Capacity to Lead and Implement Human Capital Reforms. 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-90]. Washington, D.C.: 
January 19, 2007. 

Human Capital: Agencies Need Leadership and the Supporting 
Infrastructure to Take Advantage of New Flexibilities. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-05-616T]. Washington, D.C.: April 21, 
2005. 

Human Capital: OPM Can Better Assist Agencies in Using Personnel 
Flexibilities. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-03-428]. 
Washington, D.C.: May 9, 2003. 

Major Management Challenges and Program Risks: Office of Personnel 
Management. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-03-115]. 
Washington, D.C.: January 2003. 

Human Capital: Effective Use of Flexibilities Can Assist Agencies in 
Managing Their Workforces. [hyperlink,
 http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-03-2]. Washington, D.C.: December 6, 
2002. 

[End of section] 

Footnotes: 

[1] Although telework is offered as a work/life program to the federal 
workforce, we have not included it in this report because GAO is 
conducting a separate review of the federal telework program. 

[2] We asked the survey recipients to focus their perceptions about 
OPM's assistance, guidance, and information sharing during the 1-year 
period beginning April 2009 and ending April 2010. This time period 
coincides with the first year tenure of the new Director of OPM and 
would reflect any changes in OPM's policies (or actions) resulting 
from the new OPM administration. 

[3] The CHCO Council consists of 25 members: the OPM Director, the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Deputy Director for Management 
and the CHCOs from the 15 executive departments and an additional 8 
federal agency CHCOs designated by the OPM Director. The Council 
advises and coordinates the human capital activities of its members' 
agencies. 

[4] We did not receive survey responses from work/life program 
managers at the Department of Commerce, Department of Defense, 
Department of Education, Department of Homeland Security, and National 
Aeronautics and Space Administration, or from the CHCOs for the 
Department of Homeland Security and Department of State (see table 3 
in appendix I). 

[5] WorldatWork, "Attraction and Retention: The Impact and Prevalence 
of Work-Life & Benefit Programs" (Scottsdale, Ariz.: WorldatWork, Oct. 
2007) [hyperlink, 
http://www.worldatwork.org/waw/adimLink?id=21945&nonav=yes] (accessed 
May 14, 2009). WorldatWork is a nonprofit organization that focuses on 
human resources issues including compensation and work/life programs. 

[6] OPM, A New Day for the Civil Service: Federal Employee Viewpoint 
Survey 2010-Results from the 2010 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey 
(Washington, D.C., 2010). 

[7] For example, Congress has authorized flexible and compressed work 
schedules (5 U.S.C. §§ 6120-6133), voluntary leave transfer and leave 
bank programs (5 U.S.C. §§ 6331-6340 and §§ 6361-6373), and use of 
appropriated funds to support child care centers (40 U.S.C. § 590) and 
to subsidize child care (40 U.S.C. § 590(g)). 

[8] OPM, Working for America: Strategic and Operational Plan 2006-2010 
(Washington, D.C., 2006). The FEBs were established by Presidential 
Directive in 1961. FEBs foster communication, coordination, and 
collaboration among federal field agencies and serve as a forum for 
the exchange of information between Washington and the field about 
programs, management strategies, and administrative challenges 
including human capital management. 

[9] OPM, OPM Fiscal Year 2008 Annual Performance Report. HCAAF offers 
guidance and integration so that all involved in transforming human 
capital management--such as OPM and the federal agencies--can 
understand how to manage human capital programs and how to gauge 
progress and results in managing their human capital programs. 

[10] GAO, Human Capital: Sustained Attention to Strategic Human 
Capital Management Needed, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-623T] (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 22, 
2009). 

[11] [hyperlink, 
http://www.opm.gov/employment_and_benefits/worklife/aboutus] 
(Washington, D.C., 2010) (accessed Nov. 2010). 

[12] GAO, An Assessment of Dependent Care Needs of Federal Workers 
Using the Office of Personnel Management's Survey, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-437R] (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 30, 
2007); Human Capital: Agencies Need Leadership and the Supporting 
Infrastructure to Take Advantage of New Flexibilities, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-05-616T] (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 21, 
2005); Human Capital: OPM Can Better Assist Agencies in Using 
Personnel Flexibilities, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-03-428] (Washington, D.C.: May 9, 
2003). 

[13] GAO, Older Workers: Enhanced Communication among Federal Agencies 
Could Improve Strategies for Hiring and Retaining Experienced Workers, 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-206] (Washington, D.C.: 
Feb. 24, 2009). 

[14] GAO, Human Capital: Effective Use of Flexibilities Can Assist 
Agencies in Managing Their Workforces, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-03-2] (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 6, 2002). 

[15] 2006-2010 OPM Strategic Plan. 

[16] 2010-2015 OPM Strategic Plan. 

[17] Agency officials were asked to respond using a five-point scale, 
whether OPM's involvement: (1) greatly helped, (2) helped somewhat, 
(3) helped in some, hindered in others, (4) hindered somewhat, or (5) 
greatly hindered. 

[18] In its memo to federal agencies on the 2011 budget submissions, 
OMB required agencies to submit action plans that address employee 
satisfaction with human capital programs including work/life programs. 

[19] GAO, Human Capital: Continued Opportunities Exist for FDA and OPM 
to Improve Oversight of Recruitment, Relocation, and Retention 
Incentives, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-226] 
(Washington, D.C.: Jan. 10, 2010). 

[20] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-206]. 

[21] OMB Memorandum to Agencies' Heads, Fiscal Year 2012 Budget 
Guidance, June 8, 2010. 

[22] 2010-2015 OPM Strategic Plan. 

[23] OPM, "Memorandum for Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies 
re: Federal Agency Health and Wellness Reporting Requirements" 
(Washington, D.C.: July 14, 2009). 

[24] See table 1 for the list of work/life programs subcategories 
which were the basis of the categories used in our survey. 

[25] The report provided information on: (1) some of the changes in 
the private sector workforce that have increased the need for 
flexibility in the workplace; (2) the current state of flexible work 
arrangements and how many employers have adapted to the changing 
realities in the private sector workforce and (3) the economic 
benefits of workplace flexibility arrangements. 

[26] Executive Office of the President, Council of Economic Advisers, 
Work-Life Balance and the Economics of Workplace Flexibility 
(Washington, D.C., Mar. 2010). The survey was conducted by Corporate 
Voices for Working Families--a nonprofit organization representing the 
private sector on corporate and public policy issues involving working 
families. 

[27] GAO, Human Capital: Selected Agencies' Experiences and Lessons 
Learned in Designing Training and Development Programs, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-04-291] (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 30, 
2004). 

[28] OPM 2010-2015 Strategic Plan. 

[29] OPM, Fact Sheet on Federal Employee Health and Wellness 
Initiative (2010). 

[30] According to a Deloitte official, "Deloitte" means Deloitte LLP 
and its subsidiaries. 

[31] The Sloan Foundation is a non-profit, philanthropic organization 
that among other projects has provided research grants to study work- 
family issues such as initiatives to expand workplace flexibility. 

[32] The CHCO Council consists of 25 members: the OPM Director, the 
Office of Management and Budget Deputy Director of Management, and the 
CHCOs from the 15 Executive departments and an additional 8 federal 
agency CHCOs designated by the OPM Director. 

[33] We asked the survey recipients to focus their perceptions about 
OPM's assistance, guidance, and information sharing during the one-
year period beginning with April 2009 and ending April 2010. This time 
period coincides with the first year of tenure of the new Director of 
OPM and would reflect any changes in OPM's policies (or actions) 
resulting from the new OPM administration. 

[34] We originally selected one company in the computer/technology 
services industry, but that company declined to be interviewed. 

[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 Web site [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each 
weekday, GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and 
correspondence on its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly 
posted products every afternoon, 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 Web site, 
[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. 

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

Contact: 

Web site: [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: 

Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, dawnr@gao.gov: 
(202) 512-4400: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7125: 
Washington, D.C. 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, D.C. 20548: