While OSC Was Far More Successful in Meeting Time Limits For Processing Prohibited Personnel Practices Cases than Whistleblower Disclosure Cases, Backlogs of Both Types of Cases Persisted

OSC met the 240-day case processing statutory limit for about 77 percent of  prohibited personnel practices cases from fiscal years 1997 through 2003  and met the 15-day statutory limit for whistleblower disclosure cases about  26 percent of the time. OSC’s average time to process a whistleblower disclosure case was  more than six months for each of the seven years we examined. Table 5 shows that over the seven-year period, whistleblower disclosure  cases in backlog averaged 96 percent. These data show that the merger of the  agency’s investigators and attorneys into three parallel investigative and  prosecutive units and the adoption of streamlined investigative procedures  increased productivity, while the adoption of a priority system for  processing prohibited personnel practices and whistleblower disclosure  cases allowed more important cases to be handled more expeditiously. OSC noted several mitigating factors,  including staff turnover and the need to train new staff, which limited its  ability to process more cases and reduce the backlog of cases. OSC has not  detailed in any of its documents created for Congress or the executive  branch a comprehensive strategy for processing more cases within  statutory time limits and reducing the backlog of cases. Claim that Budget for Staff Has Not Kept Pace with Caseload Does Not Fully Explain OSC’s Case Processing Record

OSC officials told us that the primary reason that the agency has not been  more successful in meeting the statutory time limit for its cases,  particularly those involving whistleblower disclosure, is lack of an  adequate number of staff. Meeting 15-day Limit for Whistleblower Disclosure Cases Is Difficult, But OSC Has Not Proposed an Alternative Time Limit

According to OSC, in 1978, during congressional consideration of the Civil  Service Reform Act of 1978, senators drafting the legislation envisioned  that 15 to 20 full-time staff would be needed to process whistleblower  disclosure cases within 15 days. Presenting a strategy to Congress  that demonstrates how additional staffing, organizational changes, or  legislative solutions would help reduce the backlog of prohibited personnel  practices and whistleblower disclosure cases would provide Congress with  information that it needs for oversight and resource allocation. Our review provided  information in the following areas  (1) OSC’s caseload by type and number  and changes to the caseload between fiscal years 1997 to 2003, (2) the  extent to which cases were processed within time frames set by Congress,   (3) actions taken by management to address workload issues, and (4) the  agency’s perspective on the adequacy of its resources.
Why GAO Did This Study

The U.S. Office of Special Counsel has not been consistently processing cases within statutory time limits, creating backlogs. Because the backlogs are of concern to the Congress, this report provides information on how many cases were processed within statutory time limits, the actions taken by OSC to address case processing delays and backlog, and the agency's perspective on the adequacy of its resources and our analysis of this perspective.

What GAO Found

The U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC) met the 240-day statutory time limit for processing prohibited personnel practice cases about 77 percent of the time from fiscal year 1997 through 2003 and met the 15-day limit for processing whistleblower disclosure cases about 26 percent of the time. OSC took an average of more than six months to process a whistleblower disclosure case. Over the seven-year period, 34 percent of the prohibited personnel practices cases were backlogged as were 96 percent of the whistleblower disclosure cases. In an attempt to address workload issues, in 2001 OSC streamlined processes and hired additional staff. OSC data indicate that the merger of the agency's investigators and attorneys into a single unit increased the average number of cases processed per individual from June 2001 to June 2002. A case priority processing system for prohibited personnel practices and whistleblower disclosure cases allowed OSC to process more important cases more expeditiously, according to OSC. OSC officials told us that the primary reason the agency has not been more successful in meeting the statutory time limits for its cases, particularly those involving whistleblower disclosure, is lack of an adequate number of staff. Our analysis of OSC data indicates, however, that even with increased staffing, the agency was not able to process a significantly larger number of cases within the time limits. OSC noted that staff turnover and the need to train new staff lowered its productivity. Officials also noted the difficulty in meeting the 15-day limit for processing whistleblower disclosure cases, but have not proposed an alternative time limit. In external documents to Congress, OSC has discussed its case processing and backlog difficulties, but has not developed a comprehensive strategy for dealing with them. Presenting such a strategy would provide Congress with information that it needs for oversight and resource allocation.