FY 78 AND FY 79 REDUCTIONS - - IMPLEMENTATION PRODCEDURES

• Document Type: FOIA
• Collection: FOIA Collection
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 02163142
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: U
• Document Page Count: 4
• Document Creation Date: March 8, 2023
• Document Release Date: May 28, 2019
• Case Number: F-2019-00852
• Publication Date: October 7, 1977

Approved for Release: 2019/05/16 CO2163142
LIDO 77-8855
MEMORANDUM FOR : All DO Employees
FROM WiIiaici W. Wells
ritity- Director for Operations
SUBJECT
and FY 79 Reductions --
lementation Procedures
ry
OCT 1977
1. T1.15 inemorawidin outlines procedures approved by the
DCI in implementing personnel reductions in the Operations
Directorate in FY 78 and ..1:"k= 09.
- 2. The Director has ordered a reduction in the Directorate
position ceiling. It is to bike place during FY 78 and FY 79. As
we begin FY 78, we have more employees on board than our new
FY 78 and FY 79 ceilings permit, thus necessitating that we identify
employees for separation in both FY 78 and FY 79. The Director
has ordered that
a. We reduce personnel at all grade levels;
b. We prov,de neadroom for promotion at all grade
levels; and
c. We provide for the accession of new personnel.
3. We fully recogntze that there is no easy way to accomplish
this reduction of personnel. We intend to be as fair and considerate
as possible. We will consider all possible factors in identifying
those specific employees who are to be separated. Those initially
�
so identified will be notified by 1 November 1977 with none
separated prior to t iviarch 1978. En the event that the Director
of Personnel is not able to find a suitable assignment elsewhere
in the Agency, the IA.' intends that these separations become
Approved for Release: 2019/05/16 CO2163142
Approved for Release: 2019/05/16 CO2163142
effective as soon the
fea sible. Employ ees
writing no later than
cii 978 as is administratively
cpa rated in FY 79 will be notified in
,976 insofar as possible.
4. In identifying entdoyees to be separated, we must
consider current and .uft.f ru leeds and insure that we maintain our
capability to carry otiL. Ln,..)::,e missions assigned to us by higher
authority. Employee,,�. at each grade level will be looked at
carefully to determine Vs'liCt 4... an be expected to contribute most
capably and prof icier-IA.1y to Iir(.-ctorate current and future
needs.
5. In detez minn-q4 Lot: number of employees to be separated,
we have considered HIC ia& t that, in any given fiscal year, a,
certain number of cmpfoyt-c- s leave the Directorate under normal
circumstances -- re:yaiiun, retirement and other forms of
separation. We have, thtmefui e, factored into our planning a
safe" attrition tigut e ..,ed on past normal attrition statistics.
These statistics, nowever, do not allow us to specifically forecast
attrition at each grade i vei who will leave under normal circum-
stances. Past dc show a greater proportion of normal
attrition at lower g/ de lc', els. Based on the above, we have
determined that by 1 November 1977 approximately 200 employees
must be notified that their separation from the Directorate in
FY 78 will be recunueuicd. Each such notification by me will
be followed by ,ny i eicwing the case with the Director of
Personnel and hotib, fog nim of my action as required by
and (2). Thereafter vaeiL ease will be processed by the Director
of Personnel az, pf ki vidcd by that regulation.
6. As an aid h iriewifying employees to be recommended
for separation, 1 intenu to make maximum use of information
developed on indi�ioual employees by our yearly comparative
evaluations by grate to ali employees. The Career Management
2
Approved for Release: 2019/05/16 CO2163142
4.4z, 14 4. 4: tA�.141_,; 4%4 sa.111.4
Approved for Release: 2019/05/16 CO2163142
Staff (CMS) which administers these Evaluation Boards on my.
behalf has produced for each grade a ranking of employees to be
considered for separation. In developing this ranking, CMS has
carefully reviewed all available Evaluation Board rankings and
commentary from FY 70 to the present. CMS first identified
employees who at any time during this period were ranked in the
low 20% percentile by an Evaluation Board. On some employees
we have seven years of Board rankings to provide a balanced overall
view of individuals. As you know, each year's Boards are composed
of different officers, normally at a level two grades above those
being evaluated. Thus CMS holdings on individual employees reflect
the judgments of a number of evaluators. The span of the holdings
on some employees will necessarily vary depending on such obvious
things as an EOD date, .1...)0G and/or conversion to professional
status.
7. CMS developed a point value system as set forth below
to assist in producing the necessary grade ranking. In addition to
this point value system, CMS also factored into its rankings the
latest available descriptor given to an employee by each Board
when it established its comparative evaluation grouping.
Point Values
Low 5% in FY 76 +25
Low 5% in FY 77 +30
Low 5% any time between FY 70
through 1.`Y '15 +20
Low 20% any time between FY 70
and FY 77 +10
Low Middle + 5
Promotion in either FY 76 or
FY 77 -20
Comparative Evaluation Groupings
Substandard (SS) +20
Limited Potential (LP) +10
Valuable Contribution (VC) 0
May Develop Iligh
Pet ential (MD) - 5
'Tighe st Potential (HP) -10
3
Approved for Release: 2019/05/16 CO2163142
Approved for Release: 2019/05/16 CO2163142
8. Preliminary listings were made by category and grade
and, within these groups, a rank order was established according
to the point score. The list was then reviewed and some adjust-
ments made taking into consideration whether the employee's
record was improving or declining, who had a most recent low
rating and the consistency of the low rating(s). CMS also looked
for aberrant rankings resulting from factors other than performance.
Finally, CMS melded all categories at each grade level.
9. Employees with the most points will therefore be
the first to be considered for separation. We recognize that this
listing may include a number of individuals who have been identified
as making a valuable contribution.
10. In making my .final judgment of those to be recommended
for separation, 1 must also consider that some employees are.
performing certain unique and highly necessary tasks which must
continue. This may require retention of these individual employees
until such time as a qualified replacement can be selected and
trained to perform these unique tasks.
11. In approving our use of a normal attrition figure in our
planning for our _FY 78 and FY 79 reductions, the Director has
charged the Directorate with the need to closely monitor our normal
attrition rate in FY 78. If this attrition rate lags behind the
estimate we have factored into our planning either overall or for
specific grades, he has stated we then must notify additional
employees of our intent to separate them from the Operations
Directorate in FY 78. Such notification will necessarily have to
take place after 1 November 1977.
William W. Wells
Approved for Release: 2019/05/16 CO2163142