	Background

USMS mission areas include fugitive apprehension, witness protection,  and federal prisoner transportation, among others. U.S. Deputy U.S. USMS Has Aligned its Merit Promotion Policy with Federal Guidelines and Developed a Corresponding Process

		USMS Merit Promotion Policy Is Aligned with Federal Human Capital Guidelines

We determined that the USMS merit promotion policy aligns with relevant  provisions of title 5 of the United States Code, and title 5 of the Code of  Federal Regulations. Agencies must  design and administer merit promotion programs to ensure a systematic  means of selection for promotion based on merit. These programs must  conform to five requirements outlined in title 5 of the Code of Federal  Regulations. Table 1 describes the five requirements and how key  provisions in the USMS Merit Promotion Plan align with these  requirements. USMS Is Taking Steps to Improve Monitoring of Its Merit Promotion Process, but Lacks Documented Guidance to Ensure Consistent Compliance with Merit Promotion Policy

		Although USMS Does Not Monitor Key Aspects of Its Merit Promotion Process, It Is Taking Steps to Improve

USMS does not monitor the implementation of the scoring component of  its rating process or compliance with its temporary promotion policy, but is  taking steps to improve these aspects. We found that raters may directly  compete with candidates whose merit promotion packages they score. Some USMS employees in our  discussion groups expressed the view that the rating process is biased  due to this potential conflict of interest. USMS also does not monitor the implementation of the rating component  of its process to ensure that raters complied with a key merit promotion  process requirement. Specifically, USMS guidance states that raters are  expected to decline to score a candidate’s application if there is a conflict  of interest with the candidate, for example, a former employee or  supervisor relationship or a close personal relationship. The  planned change entails having a third-party contractor, rather than USMS  employees, determine candidates’ competency scores using a scenario- based competency assessment. Marshal. USMS Lacks Documented Guidance on Rater Scoring

USMS provides verbal guidance to instruct raters on how to score the  experience category of merit promotion packages, which may result in  inconsistent application of the guidance. Furthermore, 70 of 85 employees (82 percent) expressed the view that  inconsistent scoring of similarly qualified candidates creates the  perception that the rating process is unfairly subjective. By developing clear  and specific documented guidance on how raters should interpret and  apply the benchmark guidelines, USMS could minimize rater subjectivity  and scoring inconsistency for both the current rating process and the  forthcoming competency-based assessment. USMS Has Taken Limited Steps to Understand or Address Employee Concerns about the Merit Promotion Process

		USMS Employees Have Expressed Negative Views and Concerns about the USMS Merit Promotion Process

According to an OPM report summarizing 2016 Federal Employee  Viewpoint Survey (FEVS) data, about one-third of USMS employees who  answered the survey indicated they agree that promotions are based on  merit. Specifically, in response to the survey statement, promotions in my  work unit are based on merit, an estimated 41 percent of USMS  respondents strongly disagreed or disagreed with the statement, while 34  percent strongly agreed or agreed, and 25 percent neither agreed nor  disagreed. Providing specific and consistent information to employees  about key steps in the merit promotion process and internal management  decisions, and constructive feedback to employees on the results of the  promotion process, including employee readiness for promotion, would  improve transparency and help mitigate employee perceptions of  favoritism that have negatively impacted employee morale. By delegating responsibility for  developing action plans to individual districts and divisions, HRD does not  have consistent or adequate information to understand the nature and  causes of employee concerns across districts and divisions. In light of  the significant distrust in the merit promotion practices we heard from  employees, USMS management can also take further action to better  understand and appropriately address employee concerns, such as  providing employees specific feedback on the results of the promotion  process, including their readiness for promotion and developing an  agency-wide action plan to more fully understand and address areas  where employees express negative perceptions of the merit promotion  process. (Recommendation 2)
Develop and implement an agency-wide action plan to more fully  understand and address areas where employees express negative  perceptions of the merit promotion process.
Why GAO Did This Study

USMS mission areas include fugitive apprehension, witness protection, and federal prisoner transportation, among others. USMS whistleblowers recently alleged that USMS officials engaged in improper promotion practices—such as routinely preselecting favored candidates. Investigations have substantiated multiple whistleblower allegations which has raised questions about the integrity of USMS's merit promotion process. USMS announces about 260 law enforcement promotion opportunities annually.
GAO was asked to review USMS's promotion processes and policies and effects that USMS promotion practices have on employee morale. This report examines (1) the extent to which the USMS's merit promotion policies are aligned with federal guidelines; (2) the extent to which USMS monitors its merit promotion processes; and (3) the steps, if any, USMS has taken to understand and address employee concerns about its merit promotion policies and processes. GAO analyzed data and documents on USMS promotions from October 2015 through April 2017, and found these data to be sufficiently reliable for the purposes of GAO's study. GAO also analyzed USMS documentation, and interviewed USMS officials and non-generalizable groups of employees (85 in total) in four district locations.

What GAO Found

The U.S. Marshals Service's (USMS) merit promotion policy aligns with relevant provisions in title 5 of the United States Code and Code of Federal Regulations, which are the government-wide laws and related provisions agencies must follow to make federal appointments. Agencies must design and administer merit promotion programs to ensure a systematic means of selection for promotion based on merit and these programs must conform to five key requirements outlined in title 5. GAO found that the USMS merit promotion plan, as revised in November 2016, aligned with each of these five requirements. For example, the first requirement states that agencies must establish merit-based procedures for promoting employees that are available in writing to candidates. The USMS merit promotion plan, which is available to employees, outlines such procedures.
USMS is taking steps to improve how it monitors the implementation of the scoring component of its process to rate promotion applications, but lacks documented guidance to ensure consistent compliance with its merit promotion policy. GAO found that USMS does not adequately monitor the rating process, which allowed for conflicts of interest with raters who may compete with candidates whose applications they score. USMS also does not monitor the rating process to ensure that raters complied with a key requirement—that raters decline to score applications of candidates with whom there is a conflict of interest, such as a supervisor-employee relationship. USMS is implementing a process change that, if implemented effectively, can address these two deficiencies. The new process entails having a third-party contractor, rather than USMS employees, determine candidates' scores. Finally, GAO found that USMS lacks documented guidance on rater scoring. USMS only provides verbal guidance to instruct raters on how to score the experience category of merit promotion packages, creating inconsistent application of the guidelines. Employees GAO met with expressed the view that such discrepancies create the perception that the rating process is unfairly subjective. Developing clear and specific documented guidance on how raters should apply the benchmark guidelines could minimize scoring inconsistency and potential rater subjectivity for both the current rating process and the new competency-based assessment.
USMS has taken limited steps to understand and address employee concerns about the promotion process. An estimated 41 percent of USMS respondents to the 2016 Office of Personnel Management Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey strongly disagreed or disagreed that USMS promotions are merit-based, while 34 percent strongly agreed or agreed, and 25 percent neither agreed nor disagreed. During discussion groups GAO held at four USMS district locations across the U.S., employees frequently expressed negative views and many indicated low or no trust that the process is fair and merit-based. Although USMS has acknowledged employees' negative perceptions of the promotion process, it has not developed an agency-wide action plan in accordance with federal guidance to better understand the nature and causes of employee concerns across districts and divisions. Providing specific and consistent information to employees about key steps in the merit promotion process and internal management decisions could improve transparency and help mitigate employee perceptions of favoritism that have negatively impacted employee morale.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that USMS develop specific rater guidance and develop and implement an agency-wide action plan to better understand and address employee concerns, among other steps. USMS concurred with the recommendations.