NAPA REPORT ON THE CIA PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 171
• Document Creation Date: December 14, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 15, 2003
• Sequence Number: 1
• Publication Date: November 2, 1979
• Content Type: MF

Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
MFIOR.ANDUM FOR: Director of Personnel
FROM : NAPA Project Group
SUBJECT : NAPA Report on the CIA Personnel Management System
1. The Project Group has completed its assigned task to assess
the NAPA Report and make implementing recommendations based on NAPA's
observations and conclusions. This memorandum forwards our Report which
is comprised of twenty-seven separate studies listed at Tab A. Additional
studies related to the NAPA Report but assigned to other groups for action
are listed at Tab B.
2. As a guide to the issues to be addressed, the Project Group
used a paper prepared by the Office of Personnel that consolidated responses
to the NAPA Report of all Agency components and Management Advisory Groups.
This paper divided the NAPA findings into four major personnel management
issue areas: a framework for the Agency personnel system; personnel.
selection and development; manpower planning, recruitment, and separation;
and personnel program evaluation. The Project Group coordinator assigned
individual topics to each Group member who then conducted appropriate
research and interviews and prepared a first draft. After in-depth dis-
cussion among Group members, a second draft reflecting the Group view was
presented to the Plans and Control Staff for review and comment. Sub-
sequently, each issue paper was submitted to the Director of Personnel who
conducted a review with all members of the Project Group. It was agreed
among all concerned that no action was to be taken until the Group had
completed all studies and had the opportunity to review the total package
to assure compatability- of all recommendations. This has now been done.
3. We considered suggesting some rank order as a priority guide
for consideration of our recommendations, but ultimately decided that
from our vantage point this would be of marginal value. Of the twenty-
seven issues addressed, however, there are several the Project Group
views to be of major significance because of the far-reaching impact the
proposed actions would have on the personnel. management system. These are:
?Flow-Through Policy
'Low Three Percent Out Concept
?Competitive Evaluation Panels
'Decision-Making Role of Panels
?Evaluation Panel Functions
?Personnel Management Evaluation Program
?Authorities of the Director of Pers____1
25
Approved For Release 2p0 /p8 2G :,clA-RDP86B002G9R001300090001-7
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
4. The Project Group has over the past four months examined the
Agency's personnel management system with an intensity and from a per-
spective not normally associated with our individual Directorate responsi-
bilities. Unanimity of views on the intent of some NAPA observations or
what recommendations should be made did not come easily at times. In
general, however, consensus melded smoothly as occasional parochialism
dwindled in favor of commonality of. Agency interest. Several of the
issues identified by NAPA seemed in our view to be related primarily to
the Operations Directorate, although NAPA presented them as Agency wide
issues. This caused some problems for the Project Group in its effort
to examine each issue in an Agency wide context. Consequently, there
were moments when we considered recommending the DO be recognized as an
"un.iquc" organization with a mission and personnel situation very much
different from the rest of the Agency, and that it should be allowed
to operate under its on set of personnel management guidelines. We
ultimately rejected this concept as not being in the best interest of all
employees, also concluding that it would work counter to a continued
nurturing of a "one-Agency." With this consideration put to rest, the
central theme for all the Group's recommendations became consistency
in approach. to personnel management but with provision for some flexi-
bility of application by line management.
5. There is one issue the Project Group would like to address here
that indirectly captured our attention in the early course of examining
the NAPA Report coverage and other documents on career development and
promotional opportunities, and continued to be a topic of conversation
throughout our assignment. Our concern is over what appears to be a
creeping tendency within the Agency to view promotions during one's
career as a process without end. There seems to be an attitude among some
employees that once a person reaches a certain level of achievement--be
it at the professional journeyman, senior secretary or top clerical level--
opportunity for future promotion should. continue to be provided, based on
longevity and a record of demonstrated hard, satisfactory work even if
there is no attendant increase of responsibility. We see reflections of this
attitude in recommendations from various quarters to up-grade certain
clerical positions, to establish elevated master journeyman grades as well
as senior analyst positions at the supergrade level, and even to mace pro-
motions that result in PRAs. This apparent attitude on promotion, more-
over, seems to be encouraged by management pronouncements that set annual
promotion targets, talk of seeking ways to increase headroom and promotional
opportunities and encourage all employees who meet promotion standards to
expect satisfactory career progress.
6. Management intentions are not in doubt on this matter; they a,-e
to encourage excellence and provide continuing opportunity for career
development (with promotion as one aspect). This is a worthy goal that
indeed should be pursued. We feel, however, that in the process a level
of expectation with regard to promotions is being generated that cannot be
met in most instances, especially at a time of shrinking manpower resources
and money restraints.
Approved For Release 2003/08/20.: CIA-RDP86B00269RO01300090001-7
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
7. We suggest that management, along with its deliberations on the
Project Group's report on the NAPA study, give attention to this matter.
We recommend consideration be given to providing--in appropriate Persornel
Management Regulations, Notices, Directorate Handbooks, EOD orientations,
etc.--information to employees on what constitutes reasonable career
aspirations and what obligation the Agency has to provide opportunity for
meeting these personal goals. The elements of competitiveness, excellence
and potential--not just headroom or longevity--should be stressed as key
factors for selection beyond the journeyman level to senior positions.
8. The Project Group wants to take this opportunity to express its
appreciation for the excellent support provided by officers in the Office
of Personnel. Requested computer runs and historical files were promptly
provided, and the review process at all levels was most constructive. This
has been a rare opportunity for non-personnel careerists to become involved
in a task the outcome of which will impact on every employee in the Agency.
Our hope is that the Project Group Report provides positive and practical
means of action (including maximum flexibility for line management) for
implementing the recommendations of the NAPA Study. We are pleased to
concur in the NAPA finding that "the CIA's basic personnel system is
sound--one which most Federal agencies would envy for its flexibility and
its potential for responsiveness to management needs" . . . and that "Indeed,.
the Agency components have been served well by the present system." We
would hope that contrary views among some employees--although they certainly
should be considered--be measured in this context.
25
Approved For Release 200~/Q812O-; AA-RDP86B00269 R001300090001-7
 .'T`AB A
Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
Issues in NAPA Report Addressed
TX the NAPA Project Group
A Framework for the Agency Personnel System:
Scope and Limitations of the DCI's Authorities
Criteria for Changes
Personnel Policy - Approval and Publication of
Regulations
Authorities of the Director of Personnel
Role of Personnel Officers
OP Focal Point for Component Personnelists
Office of Personnel Operational Activities
"E" Career Service
Personnel Selection and Development:
CT Selection and Placement
Vacancy Notice System
Movement Into Professional Ranks
Occupational Career Systems
Rotational. ~ssi meat Policy
Competitive Evaluation Panels
D cisi.on-leaking Role of Panels
Evaluation Panel Functions
Uniform Precepts for Panels
Labeling Positions as Professional and Clerical
Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
Manpower Planning, Recruitment and Separation:
Flow-Through Policy
Personnel Reductions
Low Three Percent Out Concept
Non-Competitive Transfers
Agency's Obligation to Employees
Personnel Program Evaluation:
Personnel Management Evaluation Program
Costs of Personnel Administration
Personal Rank Assignments
LWOP for Employee Spouses
Approved For Release 2003/08/20: :CI,A-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
Issues in NAPA Report Being Addressed by Other Groups
? Set Guidelines on Use of Classification Act Standards - OP/MCP
? Shorten Recruitment Process - IG Staff
? Establish System to Resurface Applicant Files - IG Staff
? Eliminate Overlap in Employee Orientation - OP, OTR, O'"_S
? Redesign APP - OP, ODP
? Redesign PDP - OP
? Develop Executive Program - OP - SIS Support Staff
? Determine Data Needs - OP
? Develop Uniform. Qualification Standards - Selection
Guidelines Task Force
Approved For Relea k~ 03Lt / 6: CIA-RDP86B00269 R001300090001-7
 Approved For Release 2003/0 RDP86B00269R001300090001-7.
THE NAPA PROJECT GROUP REPORT
Approved For Release 2003/ 0R?-k4-RDP86B00269R0013000900PS7
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
P
FOREWARD
Subsequent to component review of the report on The
CIA Personnel Management System prepared by the National Academy
of Public Administration, a NAPA Project Group was established
on 27 June 1979 under the Director of Personnel at the direction
of the DDCI. The task of this Group was to assess the findings,
observations and conclusions of the NAPA Study, and to make rec-
ommendations for implementation. Twenty-seven issues were ad-
dressed. The Project Group, comprised of one senior officer from
each of the Agency's four Directorates and a coordinator from the
Office of Training, completed its task on 2 November 1979. Mem-
bers of the Group did not coordinate this report with their respec-
tive Directorates. While fact finding and interviews were conducted
Agency wide, appropriate research, in-depth review and consultation
were accomplished within the Office of Personnel. The views and
recommendations in this Report, however, were independently developed
by the Project Group. The Group papers are presented under four
major personnel management issue areas developed by the Office of
Personnel:
? A Framework for the Agency Personnel System
? Personnel Selection and Development
? Manpower Planning, Recruitment and Separation
? Personnel Program Evaluation
 SECRET
Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
THE NAPA PROJECT GROUP REPORT
TABLE'OF CONTENTS
I
A
A Framework for the Agency Personnel System:
Scope and Limitations of the DCI's Authorities ............... A
Criteria for Changes ......................................... B
Personnel Policy - Approval and Publication of
Regulations :.............................. C
Authorities of the Director of Personnel ..................... D
Role of Personnel Officers ................................... E
OP Focal Point for Component Personnelists F
Office of Personnel Operational Activities ................... G
"F' Career Service .......................................... H
Personnel Selection and Development:
CT Selection and Placement ...................................
Vacancy Notice System ........................ ...........C
Occupational Career Systems .................................. L
Movement Into Professional Ranks .............................
Rotational Assignment Policy ..............................
Competitive Evaluation Panels ................................ N
Decision-Making Role of Panels ............................... 0
Evaluation Panel Functions ................................... P
Uniform Precepts for Panels .................................. Q
Labeling Positions as Professional and Clerical .............. R
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
Manpower Planning, Recruitment and Separation:
Flow-Through Policy ........................................... S
Personnel Reductions .......................................... T
Low Three Percent Out Concept ................................. U
Non-Competitive Transfers ..................................... V
Agency's Obligation to Employees .......... ..................... W
Personnel Program Evaluation:
Personnel Management Evaluation Program ....................... X
Costs of Personnel Administration ............................. Y
Personal Rank Assignments ..................................... Z
LWOP for Employee Spouses ..................................... AA
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
TAB A
SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF THE DCI'S AUTHORITY
I. NAPA Recommendation.
"Action should be taken to determine the scope and
limitations of statutory authority to provide a base for
future policy decisions." (NAPA, Conclusions, p. 89.)
II. NAPA Comments.
A. "General Counsel's decisions on CIA statutory
latitude in personnel matters appear rather conservative;
the extent of the Agency's authority or restrictions upon it
need to be firmly agreed upon." (NAPA, Executive Summary,
p. II.)
B. "The scope and limitations of statutory personnel
authority should be analyzed and clearly defined." (NAPA,
Executive Summary, p. XI.)
C. "The NAPA Team also perceived a 'strict construction'
approach on the part of the Office of the General Counsel
with regard to the latitude the present statutes provide.
The basic question is the extent of the Agency's authority
to set up its own personnel system." (NAPA, The Present
System, p. 5.)
D. "The extent of the Agency's authority or restrictions
upon it need to be firmly established." (NAPA, The Present
System, p. 6.)
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
III. Discussion.
A. "The scope and limitations" of the authority of
the DCI are neither contained in a single document, nor can
they be expressed in a simple statement. The delineation of
the DCI's statutory authority is found in several different
mechanisms:
?statutes which specifically deal with the CIA
(e.g., Central Intelligence Agency Act of 1949);
?statutes which have special applications to CIA,
either through inclusion (e.g., Atomic Energy Act
of 1954) or exclusion (e.g., Classification Act
of 1949) ;
?Executive Orders (e.g., E.O. 10450, Security
Requirements for Government Employees);
?judicial decisions (e.g., the Pittman Case);
?decisions of the Comptroller General of the
United States (e.g., B-90432); and
?legislative oversite charters.
B. In a two volume publication, Guide to Law of Central
Intelligence Agency, the Office of General Counsel has bound
these various statutes, Executive Orders, etc., together and
in so doing provided the reader with information from which
the scope and limit of the DCI's authority can be deduced.
This, then, does provide "a base for future policy decisions."
But there are drawbacks to this base, namely that it is
0
w
0
IF
^
^
5
U
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
^
V
0
Charge the General counsel to complete the Gui e
o Law of Central Intelligence A enc within three months,
incomplete and not up to date; and that which is deduced may
well be different for each reader.
IV. Conclusion.
Though there is a need for a definitive statement of
the Agency's legal boundaries, that statement will be
accurate only in the short term. It will change as a
result both of the Agency's initiatives and outside forces
such as Congress, Executive Orders, and court cases. Further,
the extent to which the authorities, once defined, are
utilized is a decision to be made by the DCI, with the legal
advice of the General Counsel.
V. Recommendations. d
and subsequently to keep it current.
disapproved.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( )
B. Require senior managers periodically to read the
Guide.
disa roved.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) pp
C. Charge the General Counsel with developing a
statement, in the style and detail associated with a law
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
review article, that cites the significant boundaries of the
DCI's authority with regard to personnel administration.
This statement should be completed by 1 January 1980. The
statement is not in lieu of the Guide; its purpose is to
provide a single, uniform interpretation of the boundaries
of the DCI's authority, avoiding the problem of differing
conclusions drawn by laymen readers.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence Date
 TAB B
Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R0013000ODU'I-7
CRITERIA FOR CHANGES
y
I. NAPA Recommendation.
"It is recommended that the Agency establish a framework for
its system, including a written set of considerations for use in determi-
ning whether or not to adopt changes which stem from systems in other
agencies." (NAPA, Conclusions, p. 89.)
II, NAPA Comments.
A. "The Agency has been able to pick and choose parts of other
personnel systems; however, decisions to accept or reject various aspects
of the prevailing Federal system have not been based on clearly.stated
criteria nor fully explained to Agency employees." (NAPA, Executive
Summary, p. II.)
B. "Within its broad authority, the Agency has been able to pick
and choose parts of systems. While this has the advantage of enabling
the Agency to learn from others . . . it has consequences . . .". (NAPA,
The Present System, p. 2.)
C. " . . . the Agency is more or less obliged to monitor carefully
new or proposed legislation to determine in advance, how it might affect
CIA's personnel management system." (NAPA, The Present System, p. 2.)
D. "More importantly, the diverse legislative origins of its
present system has (sic) led to some problems in interpretation of what
constraints there are on administrative discretion." (NAPA, The Present
System, p. 2.)
E. "Each modification of a law or regulation affecting a part of a
personnel system which CIA has adopted should be carefully reviewed to
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
see if the change is appropriate for CIA personnel. The NAPA Team was
unable to locate any written set of considerations which are a plied in
making this review." (NAPA, The Present System, pp. 4-5.)
III. Project Group Findings.
A. In the NAPA Team view, expressed verbally to Project Group
representatives, the record of changes to the Agency's personnel manage-
ment system, and the criteria used in accepting those changes and rejecting
others, was incomplete. The Project Group also concluded that the record
of changes is incomplete, due in part to the various levels at which
personnel management decisions are made, i.e., by the DCI, DDCI, Executive
Committee, or Director of Personnel level. This decision process pre-
cludes normal analysis from being undertaken.
B. The Project Group believes that decisions with regard to a
personnel management program, like decisions in production management, or
fiscal management etc., need to be based on a disciplined analysis of the
issues associated with the change. The documentation of that analysis
will get at the problem surfaced by the NAPA Team, rather than their
proposal of a "written set of considerations."
C. The Project Group believes that the Agency should maintain its
freedom to select those parts of the system which would allow us the
greatest flexibility in improving our personnel management system.
Implementation of the NAPA proposal would restrict that option.
IV. Recommendations.
A. Do not accept the NAPA proposal for a written set of considerations
0
M
^
10
w
^
^
11
0
19
SECRET
16
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
for use in determining whether or not to adopt changes which stem from
systems in other agencies.
roved.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved disapproved.
) B. The DDCI task the Director of Personnel with the responsibility
analysis of proposed personnel policy changes, with the
for an impact ificance
degree and extent of that analysis being appropriate to the sign
of the issue.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
C. The DDCI utilize the report from that analysis as the basis of
a record of the decision made and the rationale for it; utilize the
analysis as a source of information for employees in those situations
where it is deemed appropriate.
roved.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapP
Deputy Director 01 Central Intelligence
n
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
PERSONNEL POLICY: APPROVAL AND PUBLICATION OF REGULATIONS
Summary, pp. II $ III.)
III. Discussion.
A. Identifying policy in regulations.
I. NAPA Recommendation.
he regulations be annotated in such a fashion that all
policy issues are clearly identified as such and subject to
the DCI.
change (or the addition of new policies) only by
Implementing procedures would be the responsibility of the
DDA or the Director of Personnel." (NAPA, Conclusions, p. 107..)
II. NAPA Comment.
"The system for issuance of regulations governing
Agency personnel management does not provide proper mechanisms
for policy decision-making by the DCI/DDCI." (NAPA,. Executive
1. Headquarters Regulations
series address personnel matters. This series is
presently divided into I eparate and specific sub-
series covering such subject matters as categories of
personnel, separation, promotions, pay, detailed personnel
etc. Within each of these sub-series, policy, procedures,
responsibilities, and where appropriate, authorities
that govern that specific subject are generally delineated
25X1
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
in sections. All sub-series do not follow the same
format as to labeling the sections nor do they all
address the same sections.
determine if all policy issues contained in that sub-
series were clearly identified, or included but not
clearly identified, or included but within implementing
text, or not stated at all. From this examination, it
was determined that policy was stated in 90% of the
regulations. In over 41% of the sub-series the policy
issue was clearly identified and labeled as such. In
45% of the sub-series the policy issue was either
included but not clearly identified or was included
within implementing text. In 4% of the sub-series,
part of the policy issue was clearly identified but the
remaining parts of the policy issues were either not
clearly labeled or stated within implementing text. A
policy issue or statement was neither identified nor
included in about 9% of the sub-series.
3. Having a regulation that clearly delineates
the authority, policy, practices and responsibilities
eliminates confusion and aids in enforcing and following
the approved policy.
(Reference A), Management
of Specially Qualified Scientific Personnel, appears to
be a correctly formatted regulation. The authority,
^
^
1*
w
w
^
w
a
C -2
SECRET
 X1
X
Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
policy, procedures to be followed and responsibilities
of individuals or positions involved are clearly stated.
Promotion, is an
In contrast, (Reference B),
example of a confusing regulation. Although the authority
labeled. The
to promote is stated, it is not clearly
Agency policy is identified, but the policy statement
also includes implementing procedures and responsibilities
of certain positions. In another example,
(Reference C), Categories of Personnel, is one of four
regulations where policy is not stated nor needed as
the subject matters covered are either informational or
definitional in nature.
B. Polic ap roval and implementation procedures.
As NAPA observed in their report, "The history
of the Agency makes it clear that policy is developed
and implemented only with senior line management involvement
and top management interest and support." (NAPA, The
Present System, p. 7.) Revisions since 1976 to the
series with relation to policy have had the
approval of senior management. This approval took one
of several forms. In some instances, DCI approval was
direct; in others, the DDCI used his delegated authority
in most instances, the
to approve policy changes;
Executive Committee (or its predecessor units) were
involved in the decision-making process.
215X1
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
2. Recommended policy changes usually take the
form of staff papers prepared by either the Office of
Personnel or one of the various management advisory
groups created within the Agency. Frequently, the
policy change is requested by Agency senior management
which explains why options may not be included in the
staff papers.
3, In reviewing the revisions of the
series, it was confirmed that the coordination process
is frequently a lengthy procedure. But, under the
concept of decentralized personnel management, im-
plementing procedures, although developed by the
specialist concerned, to be effective, require the
concurrence of operating officials who are charged with
managing personnel. The review indicated no instances
where basic policy was changed; the difficulty revolved
It,
r
^
E
^
a
25X1
if
^
^
^
w
around implementation procedures. The NAPA comment
(NAPA, The Present System, p. 8.) that coordination
91
often results in the regulation being reduced to the
^
lowest common denominator may, in some instances, be
correct. However, the fact remains that procedures
must be acceptable to those charged with managing the
Agency's human resources and when these procedures are
to be applied in diverse situations, they may have be
general rather than specific in content.
 25X1
10
^
Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
4. The procedures for coordinating regulations
Reference D), offer certain
as detailed in
time limits for responses and agreement among coordinators.
Every effort is made to resolve differences at the
coordinator level but if this is not possible, the DDCI
is charged with resolving the differences. Once co-
ordination has been effected, the DDA is normally the
final issuing authority on Headquarters regulations
unless statute requires DCI and DDCI approval. As
stated by NAPA: "This is in accordance with an 0GC
opinion dated 9 December 1960." (NAPA, The Present
System, p. 8.)
IV. Conclusions.
A. Identifying policy in regulations.
1. The NAPA finding that policy and procedure
are often combined in Headquarters Personnel Regulations
is valid.
2. . Confusion in interpretation would be reduced
if regulations clearly emphasized the basic policy
issue contained in that sub-series.
3. Some sub-series are informational or definitional
and may not need to include a clearly identifiable
policy statement.
B. Policy approval and implementation procedures.
1. The DCI, or designee, has approved all changes
to, or new, personnel policies.
C-5
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
25X1
2. Staff papers or Executive Committee deliberation,
not regulations, are the vehicle for obtaining personnel
policy approval. Regulations reflect policy decisions
by establishing responsibilities and operating procedures.
As such, they are developed by specialists in that
field but subject to coordination with those who are
charged with the applications and functioning of the
Agency's personnel program.
V. Recommendations.
A. Have the Director of Personnel review the
series and where necessary revise
them in format to clearly
indicate the basic Agency policy on the subject contained in
that sub-series. This revision is to be completed within
six months. As this is a format change only, coordination
is not necessary. The revised regulation is to note "revised
for format only," with the last date of content change also
indicated. Only those sub-series reflecting policy
issues need be revised. Those sub-series programmed for
content change within six months after the completion of the
format revision can be revised for format when revised for
content.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
r
^
M
^
N
^
IN
w
M
t
in
IN
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
B. The DCI or the DDCI continue to approve all new
personnel policies or any changes in existing policies; the
Director of'Personnel continue developing personnel regulations:;
and, the DDA, following coordination with appropriate senior
Agency managers, issue all Headquarters Personnel Regulations
unless statute requires DCI or DDCI approval.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence Date
 25X1 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
Next 9 Page(s) In Document Exempt
Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
A
TAB D
AUTHORITIES OF THE DIRECTOR OF PERSONNEL
I. NAPA Recommendation.
"The DCI/DDCI give emphasis to the control and enforcement
conveniently grouped into one of four categories. These are:
?developing and recommending Agency policies,
standards and procedures for personnel and
personnel and position management;
?monitoring and enforcing the application of
approved Agency policy;
functions it expects the Office of Personnel to carry out
and to assure that a system for raising issues and resolving;
disputes up the chain of command to the DCI/DDCI level
exists and is used." (NAPA, Conclusions, p. 115.)
II. NAPA Comment.
"The Office of Personnel has a weak enforcement posture
in all of its activities." (NAPA, Executive Summary, p. III
"The DCI/DDCI should give greater support to the Office of
Personnel in the enforcement of the Office of Personnel
control functions." (NAPA, Executive Summary, p. XVI.)
III. Discussion.
A. The Director of Personnel has an impressive array
of duties, responsibilities and authorities. Most can be
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
?operating a recruitment program nation-wide; and,
?providing benefits and services of common concern.
The area of concern to NAPA is the second one, enforcing the
application of approved Agency policy.
B. The enforcement responsibilities of the Director
of Personnel revolve around four areas: position management,
promotion, assignment and personnel management evaluation.
In the area of position management, the DDCI recently
strengthened the enforcement posture of the Director of
Personnel. In the area of promotion,
Director of Personnel with responsibility for (a) ensuring
compliance with this regulation (on promotion) by continuous
review of the Agency's comparative evaluation and promotion
program; and (b) reviewing all promotion requests and approving
promotion actions that conform to the provisions of Agency
regulations. In the assignment area, the Director of
Personnel's authorities are more limited but in the case of
personal rank assignment,
he approves the
assignment of employees to positions of a grade lower than
their grade and any extensions of the assignment. As to
personnel management evaluation,
indicates that the Director of Personnel will evaluate the
the personnel and career management programs and activities
of the Career Services and periodically submit reports of
the evaluations to the DDCI.
5X1
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
C. Thus, the Director of Personnel does.have the
regulatory authority to enforce the application of approved
Agency policy. Granted, the authority in the areas of
position management and personnel management evaluation are
recent and have yet to be tried. The other authorities have
existed for some time. Yet, NAPA charges--and the Project
Group concurs--that the Director of Personnel is in a weak
position to perform control and enforcement functions. The
results of this situation are: lack of assurance to the
DCI/DDCI that the system is being applied in a fair and
equitable manner to all employees; and, lack of assurance to
senior management that any deviation from regulations and
policies is being or has been corrected.
D. The reason the Director of Personnel is in a weak
control and enforcement position appears to be rooted in the
manner in which the Agency personnel system developed.
Under a decentralized personnel system, the Director of
Personnel is predominately an advisor on personnel matters.
The actual management of the system is left to the line
manager. The line manager has a very strong influence over
how the system is applied at the component level. Also,
organizationally the Director of Personnel is at a dis-
advantage, being subordinate to one of four equal Deputy
Directors for most functions. Consequently, in certain
matters of control and enforcement of policy, the Director
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
of Personnel is expected to direct those senior in the
organization. Granted, regulatory authority allows the
Director of Personnel to act in the name of the DCI. But,
action in this role is not often accepted due to the strong
influence of senior line managers, the historic independence
of the Directorates within the Agency's organizational
system, and, in some past instances, the Director of Personnel's
own reluctance to accept this role. This reluctance may
stem in part from the perceived philosophy in the Administration
Directorate that its role is one primarily of support rather
than control and enforcement.
IV. Project Group Observations.
A. The Director of Personnel has the necessary
regulatory authorities, to perform control and enforcement
functions.
B. The Director of Personnel is in a weak position to
exercise authority over control and enforcement functions.
C. Stronger control and enforcement authority will
assure the DCI and DDCI that all regulations and policies
are being met and that the system is being applied in a fair
and equitable manner to all employees.
D. The viability of enhanced control and enforcement
authority depends on the spirit of support provided at the
DCI/DDCI level.
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
A
V. Options.
There are two methods to strengthen control and
enforcement over personnel policies. One is to specifically
identify those areas where the Director of Personnel acts as
the singular control and enforcement arm of the DCI/DDCI and
reports on these areas directly to the DDCI. The second
method is to organizationally transfer those control and
enforcement units of the Office of Personnel to an organiza-
tional level where they will report directly to the DCI/DDCI.
A. Specifically identify. Although authorized in
regulations, control and enforcement functions in certain
areas have not always been discharged in a strong manner for
the reasons cited in the discussion section of this paper.
These areas are:
?position management;
?promotion;
?assignment; and,
?personnel management evaluation.
A recently approved paper on "Agency Position Classification
Policy" strengthened the Director of Personnel's authorities
regarding position management. For the varied reasons
discussed earlier, there still exists a reluctance on the
part of Agency management to accept the Director of Personnel's
other control and enforcement authorities. One way to have
these authorities accepted is for the DDCI to confirm the
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
Director of Personnel's control and enforcement authorities.
Following the precedent of the position management paper, a
similar memorandum could be issued delineating those specifics
within the other three areas (promotion, assignment and
evaluation) where the Director of Personnel is the key
officer in controlling and enforcing approved personnel
policies and procedures. Reporting requirements and pro-
cedures for resolving disputes could also be covered.
1. The advantages of Option A are:
a. it will reaffirm the Director of Personnel's
general control and enforcement authorities;
b. it will strengthen the Director of
Personnel's authority by specifically delineating
items of special interest to the DDCI that are to
be controlled and the enforcement role desired;
c. it will give more assurance that all
regulations and policies are being met and that
the system is being applied in a fair and equitable
manner to all employees.
2. The disadvantages of Option A are:
a. it would require a reissuance of the
memorandum whenever the DCI, DDCI or Director of
Personnel changes or whenever the areas of concern
to be controlled/enforced change; and
on,
0
w
0
w
Q
w
w
96.
 it
Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
pa
b. it would require dual reporting by the
Director of Personnel: directly to the DDCI on
control functions; and, to the Deputy Director for
Administration on other functions.
B. Organizationally transfer. Conceptually, a unit
at the DCI level to monitor personnel management within the
Agency would be concerned with four basic tasks. These are:
?human resource analysis to determine that
Directorate and Agency-wide personnel projections
are on-target and that manpower planning is being
performed effectively by the Career Services;
?position management to assure that there is
"equal pay for substantially equal work" and to
control grade escalation;
?personnel planning to concentrate on personnel
policy development; and,
?personnel management evaluation to assure that
practice by the Career Services is in accordance
with established policies, procedures and guide-
lines and handled in a fair and equitable manner.
These tasks are presently being performed by organizational
units within the Office of Personnel They could be trans-
ferred to the DCI Area where under the leadership of one
individual that unit could function directly for the DDCI.
The remainder of the present Office of Personnel could
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
remain within the Administration Directorate and be responsible
for personnel services and the day-to-day control over
promotion and assignment policy. The DCI unit could be
supported by the present Office of Personnel for files,
records, computerized data and reports, and people. The
unit could be staffed predominately by personnel careerists
on rotational assignment but augmented where appropriate, by
officers from other components of the Agency who could also
be on rotational assignment.
1. The advantages of Option B are:
a. it provides direct DDCI involvement in
overseeing the control and enforcement functions
of personnel;
b. it provides, by organizational place-
ment and reporting channel, a strong posture for
control and enforcement of personnel policy;
c. it provides full assurance to the DDCI
that all regulations and policies are being met
and that the system is being applied in a fair and
equitable manner to all employees; and,
d. it ensures that areas of specific
interest to the DCI/DDCI are being addressed.
2. The disadvantages of Option B are:
a. there could possibly be some confusion
over who is responsible for providing guidance
w
w
14
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
on personnel procedures and practices; i.e., the
DCI or the DDA unit;
b. there could also be confusion over the
working relationships between the DCI and the DDA
units;
c. there would be two individuals within
the Agency primarily responsible for personnel
administration;
d. physical separation from the day-to-day
working problems of the personnel system may lead
to the isolation of the DCI unit and might result
in an "Ivory Tower" approach to personnel manage-
ment; and,
e. this option does not strengthen the
Director of Personnel's posture but actually
removes certain major responsibilities and
authorities from that position.
V. Conclusion.
The NAPA Project Group is of the opinion that two
disadvantages to Option B--the potential for an "Ivory
Tower" approach to personnel management and diluting the
position of the Director of Personnel--make Option A more
practicable.
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
VII. Recommendation.
The DDCI issue a memorandum to senior Agency management
in which the control and enforcement functions to be per-
formed by the Director of Personnel are delineated. This
memorandum should also outline reporting requirements and
procedures for resolving disputes.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence Date
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
ROLE OF PERSONNEL OFFICERS
I. NAPA Recommendation.
"The role of personnel officers in the components be
defined, including their relationships with career management
staffs and line officers." (NAPA, Conclusions, p. 115.)
II. NAPA Comment.
"The role of personnel staffs assigned to Directorates
and Career Management staffs has not been clearly defined."
(NAPA, Executive Summary, p. III.)
III. Discussion.
A. "Personnel management is an integral part of overall
management and a primary responsibility of all individuals
who plan, direct, or supervise the work of Agency employees."
As defined, personnel management in CIA is a
line management function and its operation depends upon the
expectations and demands of management. The roles of those
involved in the day-to-day business of the Agency personnel
management system are directly related to the management
style of those who operate the Agency and its components.
This is.in contrast to roles being established by published
guidelines. Thus, the degree of involvement of anyone
charged with personnel management tasks is at the discretion
of both senior management and component managers.
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
B. Since line managers are primarily responsible for
personnel management, it follows that they are also primarily
responsible for the systems that administer personnel manage-
ment. In most instances, line managers are not professionally
trained or experienced in the technical aspects of personnel
administration. Normally, line managers will call upon the
specialist in personnel administration for advice, counsel
and guidance in the formulation and administration of personnel
policy and procedures. This use of specialists is both
general in an Agency-wide context and specific as to the
component's personnel administration system.
C. The role of the Personnel Officer, like the role
of others involved in personnel management, varies at the
operating level. Component managers differ in the amount of
responsibility delegated in personnel matters. Accordingly,
the role of the Personnel Officer depends to a large degree
upon the amount of responsibility and resources given by the
component manager to the Personnel Officer to do his or her
job. The varying nature of the Personnel Officers' role
among components can cause confusion unless it is understood
that their role depends upon the style, desires and needs of
the component manager and not solely upon published guidelines.
For much the same reasons, the roles of Career Management or
Development Officers vary. These line officers who normally
counsel and advise on promotion, assignment and development
also depend upon component managers for role definition..
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
D. The component manager usually views personnel
management as two separate functions. One is the managing
of human resources which includes evaluating, promoting,
developing, assigning and counseling the resource. The
second function is managing the technical aspects of per-
sonnel administration. In normal practice, managing the.
human resource is in the purview of the component manager's
line officers while the Personnel Officer is charged with
managing the technical aspects of personnel administration.
In some components these functions overlap. In other com-
ponents, the Personnel Officer performs most if not all of
both functions, particularly in administering secretarial/
clerical employees. However, in most components, the
distinction is made.
E. In addition to the role of the Personnel Officer
as delineated by the component manager, there is the role
expected by the Director of Personnel. The Director of
Personnel manages a line function when operating the Agency
recruitment program and when providing benefits and services
of common concern. The Director of Personnel is also charged
with certain control functions. Finally, the Director of
Personnel is a staff officer for personnel policy development
and implementation procedures. The Director of Personnel
expects to be represented regarding these matters in the
operating component by the Personnel Officer. In each
E-3
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
Directorate, there is a Senior Personnel Officer who coordinates
the personnel program of that Directorate and, organizationally,
falls between the Director of Personnel and the component
Personnel Officer. In any case, the Personnel Officer is
expected to advise component management on both the inter-
pretation and implementation of Agency personnel regulations,
policies and procedures and to exercise initial control
functions.
IV. Conclusions.
A. As the responsibility for personnel management
within this Agency rests with the managers of the Agency,
the role of a component Personnel Officer varies due to the
desires, needs and management style of the manager for that
component. Line management is responsible for evaluating
employees, developing employees (with attendant functions of
assignment and training), and career counseling. So long as
it is consistent with Agency overall policy, the mechanism
utilized by the component chief to discharge these respon-
sibilities is discretionary. The NAPA Project Group agrees
with this approach.
B. There are, however, certain functions common to
all personnel specialists that can be applied Agency wide to
Personnel Officers. These are:
?Advising component management on the inter-
pretation and implementation of Agency personnel
regulations, policies and procedures;
SECRET
w
^
f
M
M
0
M
r
W__
M
1
1
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
?exercising initial control functions;
?managing the technical aspects of personnel
administration; and
?serving as key advisor or member of personnel
management committees, promotion, assignment
and career panels, etc., but, the degree of
involvement in these functions is at the dis-
cretion of component management.
V. Recommendations.
A. Have the component manager clearly define in the
Advance Work Plan, the role expected from the Component
Personnel Officer giving particular emphasis both to the
working relationship desired between the Personnel Officer,
the Career Management Officer and the line supervisor and to
the four functions common to personnel specialists identified
in the conclusions section of this paper.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
B. Have the Director of Personnel clearly define in
supplemental guidance through the component manager, the
general role expected from Personnel Officers. If appropriate,
this guidance can be issued on a Directorate-wide basis.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
Deputy Director o Central Intelligence Date
E-5
SECRET
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
TAB F
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL FOCAL POINT
OM ONENT ERSONNELI T
I. NAPA Recommendation.
"The Office of Personnel is both a staff and operating
organization. There is no focal point for operations below
the Deputy Director level. In addition, personnel officers
in the components should be able to look at a focal point
for guidance. Therefore, we recommend that: a focal point
for operations be created in the Office of Personnel below
the Deputy Director level." (NAPA, Conclusions, p. 115.)
II. Discussion.
A. Due to the multitude of subjects and the technical
nature of most, it would be impractical to expect one officer
within the Office of Personnel to be sufficiently conversant
with all subjects to be a single focal point. A single
focal point between the component Personnel Officer and the
main Office of Personnel would have to act more as a clearing-
house and would funnel requests to technical referents for
responses. In this role, the single focal point would
become more of an administrative bottle-neck than expeditor
especially when there are already established multi-focal
points within the Office of Personnel to advise, counsel and
guide component Personnel Officers on the operation of the
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
Agency personnel system. In fact, the Office of Personnel
publishes a functional directory listing alphabetically
subjects within the personnel area, the Office of Personnel
unit responsible for this subject, and the unit's physical
location and telephone number. The directory is distributed
to all Personnel Officers. The directory should be updated
more frequently; it was last published in 1977.
B. Also, during monthly Personnel Officer meetings
and during periodic meetings with Personnel Officers from
each Directorate, the Director of Personnel and other OP
personnel provide guidance on.procedures and practices,
identify areas of concern, acknowledge items in the planning
stage and cite certain individuals responsible for personnel
functions. The Career Management Officer for the Office of
Personnel has the responsibility for providing career counsel-
ing and guidance to component Personnel Officers and serves
as their focal point for career matters.
C. In addition, each Directorate has a Senior Personnel
Officer who coordinates the personnel program of that
Directorate. Thus, there is organizationally a focal point
for Directorate personnel programs. Also, the Senior
Personnel Officer, by virtue of background and experience,
is able to guide and counsel the component Personnel Officer
on Agency personnel operations.
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
III. Conclusion.
As the Director of Personnel has designated focal
points within the Office of Personnel for personnel operations,
there is no need for a single focal point for operations to
guide component Personnel Officers.
IV. Recommendation.
A focal point for operations in the Office of Personnel
not be created.
The above recommendation is ( ') approved ( ) disapproved.
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence Date
ca
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
TAB G
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL
OPERATIONAL ACTIVITIES
I. NAPA Recommendation.
"Consideration be given to further delegations of
operational activities, now carried out in the Office of
Personnel, to personnel officers in the Directorates."
(NAPA, Conclusions, p. 115.)
II. Discussion.
A. NAPA, unfortunately, did not identify what OP
"operational activities" they were referring to. From
examining the NAPA Report, the Project Group could find no
discussion of "operational activities." In most other
instances, NAPA did discuss the pertinent subject matter
prior to making a firm recommendation. The only possible
lead to a meaning for "operational activities" can be found
in Part I. The Present System, of the NAPA Report under the
sub - topic of Staffing for Personnel Management in CIA. Here
(p. 19) they identify staff and service functions performed
by the Office of Personnel:
?Recruitment and placement
*Benefits and service, including CIARDS
?Contract personnel
?Personnel records and reports
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
?Position management, compensation, and manpower
utilization
?Personnel planning
?Personnel management evaluation
B. From examining each of these functions as stated
in the NAPA Report, the Project Group found NAPA statements
or recommendations which would contradict further decentrali-
zation of these functions. These are:
1. Recruitment and placement.
a. "Make sure that recruiters know the
position and the environment in which it operates;
encourage the recruiter to talk directly to com-
ponents having vacancies, to get better acquainted
with components and officials in them, and to be
involved in following an applicant he or she
referred through either entrance on duty or
rejection." (Conclusions, p. 103.) The Project
Group concludes that this does not support de-
centralization of the recruitment effort.
b. "Keep track of referrals against specific
vacancies and component actions to enable better
evaluation of the entire hiring process." (Con-
clusions, p. 104.) This centralized control, in
the Project Group's view, does not support further
decentralization of the placement process.
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
2. Benefits and service, including CIARDS, and
Contract Personnel.
No specific comment by NAPA, but the Team
states that "The costs of the present system
should be reviewed and cost containment should be
given a high, but not overriding, priority."
(Conclusions, p. 85.) The Project Group does not
see how this would support decentralization of the
above two functions as decentralization of services
of common concern would increase personnel costs.
3. Personnel records and reports.
"Further, the Office of Personnel has an
excellent computerized data and reports system
which will be further improved in 1979. The NAPA
Team believes that inadequate use has been made of
existing data and reports." (The Present System,
pp. 17-18.) The Project Group concludes this
statement does not support decentralization of
personnel records and reports.
4. Position management, compensation, and manpower
utilization, and Personnel management evaluation.
"Activities such as classification of positions
and enforcement of personnel policies are functions
carried out for the DCI/DDCI. Therefore, we
recommend that the DCI/DDCI give emphasis to the
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
control and enforcement functions they expect the
Office of Personnel to carry out. . .". (Con-
clusions, pp. 114-115.) The Project Group views
this as not supporting decentralization of these
two functions.
5. Personnel planning.
"The EAG and the DDCI should draw heavily on
the staff capabilities of the office (of Personnel)
in policy and decision-making." (Conclusions,
p. 114.) The Project Group concludes that this
does not support decentralization of the planning
function.
C. Possibly when.the NAPA Team addressed "operational
activity," they were identifying the exceptions granted by
the Director of Personnel to approved Agency policy. These
include such subjects as non-standard tours of duty abroad,
limits on the amount of home leave that can be used when
returning for assignment in the U.S., salary retention
rights, etc. Exceptions are allowed to certain Agency
policies to provide for flexibility, to meet exceptional
circumstances and to recognize differing needs at differing
times. The Director of Personnel authorizes these exceptions
in order to ensure consistency. There are certain standards
established allowing exceptions to be granted in a fair and
consistent manner. Delegating these authorities to Directorate
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
Personnel Officers would retain a degree of consistency
within Directorates but would not guarantee consistency
among Directorates.
III. Conclusions.
A. It would be difficult to determine exactly what
the NAPA Team wished to identify by the term "operational
activity."
B. If it is those items identified in the discussion
section of this paper, neither more standardization of
Agency personnel activity nor a less costly personnel system
would result from further decentralization.
IV. Recommendation.
Operational activities as defined in this paper and now
carried out in the Office of Personnel not be delegated to
Personnel Officers in the Directorates.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence Date
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
TAB H
"E" CAREER SERVICE
I. NAPA Recommendation.
"Reconsider the viability of the 'E' Career Service
and, if appropriate, dismember it and establish separate
'mini-career' services for the various staff entities which
now comprise the 'E' Career." (NAPA, Conclusions, p. 117.)
II. NAPA Comment.
"One finding that consistently came through was that
the 'E' Career Service is not a career service in any sense
of the word as compared to the other four." (NAPA, Con-
clusions p. 117.)
III. Discussion.
A. Rationale of the "E" Career Service.
The "E" Career Service was formed to provide.
uniformity in handling the career and performance evaluation
of individuals assigned to the Offices of the DCI Area in-
cluding the Agency staff of the Director and the Deputy
Director. In addition, it provides for conformity between
the "E" Career Service and the Career Service systems of the
four Directorates. The creation of the "E" Career Service
in 1973 stemmed from the existence of employees in the
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
Offices of the Director whose occupational specialities
defied inclusion in any of the other services.
B. Structure of the "E" Career Service.
1. The "E" Career Board is the umbrella unit. It
is composed of the Heads or their alternate of the
various offices reporting to the DCI. The secretary is
the Administrative Officer to the DCI. The Chairman of
the Board is designated annually by the DCI or the DDCI
from among the various Office Heads. The basic re-
sponsibilities of the Board, as found in the "E"
Career Service Handbook, are:
'to provide general overview of all
personnel, manpower and career manage-
ment matters affecting the DCI Area and
the members of the "E" Career Service;
*to provide advice to the DCI and the DDCI
and guidance to the "E" Career Service
Panels;
*to evaluate the career potential of each
member of the "E" Career Service at grades
GS-15 and above plus those below GS-15
assigned to the immediate office of the
DCI.
2. There are seven panels. One panel has been
established for each of the Offices of the DCI Area
(Comptroller, General Counsel, Inspector General,
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
Panel (GS-08 and above). The basic function of a panel
is to conduct annual evaluations of members of the "E"
Career Service, grades GS-08 through GS-14, who are
assigned to the office that the panel represents. They
also provide the Board with advice and comments on such
matters as training and assignments. The panel members
are normally line officers of the office concerned.
Clerical employees GS-07 and below are administered by
the office of assignment. Clerical employees GS-08 and
above are administered by the Senior Secretary/Clerical
Panel.
C. Membership of the "E" Career Service.
1. Selection into the "E" Career Service
is based on an objective finding that the best interests
of the Agency and the individual are served by a projected
long-term career relationship with one or more offices
of the DCI Area. Individuals on "rotational" assignments
(defined as three years or less) retain the career
service designation of their parent career service.
Public Affairs, Equal Employment Opportunity and
Legislative Counsel) and a Senior Secretary/Cleric
2. The FY 1979 ceiling calls for
positions
for the Offices of DCI Area (including the immediate
staffs of the DCI and the DDCI).
r' I
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
On-duty strength as of 31 May 1979 was
employees number
and clericals,
Thus,
percent of the work force is in the professional category;
the majority are concentrated at the GS-15 and above
level.
3. As of 31 May 1979, ^ of the professional
employees assigned to the Offices of the DCI Area
did not belong to the "E" Career Service. Rotational
personnel were concentrated in the Comptroller's Office
of the Inspector General (OIG)
and in the Office
on-duty). In the Office of the DCI only two special
assistants along with the professional officers of the
Administrative and Security Staffs were on rotational
assignment. The remaining professional employees
were "E" careerists. All clerical employees are members
of the "E" Career Service.
4. Of the "E" Career Service professional employees.,
approximately 51 percent have specialized skills.
These are the= lawyers in the General Counsel's
Office (OGC) and the F_1 auditors of the Audit Staff of
the OIG. Most of the remaining ^ professional "E"
careerists have talents that they either brought to the
job or were refined on the job. Aside from the General
Counsel and Audit Staffs, professional employees, with
 SECRET
Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
a few exceptions, do not enter at the journeyman
level and progress in a career pattern in the same
office; rather, professionals enter the "E" Career
Service at a relatively senior grade with considerable
Agency experience and careers behind them. Some individuals
are directly recruited from outside the Agency for a
specific assignment in the DCI Area. Normally, these
individuals are appointed in a reserve or contract
employment status for a specified period of time, and
the rationale for their direct recruitment is the need
for their unique skill or talent.
III. NAPA Project Group Observations.
A. There is a professional and secretarial/clerical
cadre permanently assigned to the Offices of the DCI Area
and their careers/employment need management.
B. Of the professional employees assigned to the
Offices of the DCI Area, 26 percent are on rotational assignment
and do not fall under the auspices of the "E" Career Service.
C. Secretarial/Clerical members of the "E" Career
Service are essentially similar to secretarial/clerical
employees assigned elsewhere in the Agency; thus, any
career management system found most successful for managing
secretarial/clerical employees Agency wide should be adopted
for those secretarial/clerical members of the "E" Career
Service.
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
D. As discussed earlier, professional employees who
are members of the "E" Career Service fall into two categories:
those who joined the "E" Career Service at a relatively
senior and experienced level (49%); and those dependent upon
the "E" Career Service for the full range of career management
needs (51%). Thus, the "E" Career Service differs from most
Career Services in that many of its members are not dependent
upon the "E" Career Service for career management in the
traditional sense. Rather the "E" Career Service primarily
administers to the personnel needs of these employees.
Accommodations, however, must be made for those members who
are dependent upon the "E" Career Service for career development
needs.
E. As it is Agency policy to follow the Career Service
concept for all employees, for the sake of fairness and
equity, those employees who are assigned on a permanent
basis to the Offices of the DCI Area should be members of
some form of a Career Service.
IV. Options.
A. Disestablish the Independent Offices.
Inherent in this alternative is submerging the
functions of the Independent Offices down in the Agency
organization and having the Heads report through various
Deputy Directors. Personnel assigned would then join the
career service of that Deputy Director. In most instances,
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
this would not be feasible as the concept of the Independent
Offices includes supporting the Director in his community as
well as Agency role. This would not be as efficient from a
lower position within the Agency. Also, some functions,
such as that of the Inspector General and the Comptroller
require Agency-wide duties and review roles that would be
difficult to discharge from a Directorate level.
B. Create a Series of "Mini-Services".
In this alternative, a series of Career Services
would be established following Office lines with the Head of
that Office as the Head of the Career Service. Each Office
would then be responsible for the career management and
progression of employees within that Office. This would.be
a system similar to the one which existed prior to 1973. An
initial difficulty would be duplicating the centralized
services provided by the "E" Career Service Board, its
secretary and the DCI Personnel Officer. This duplication
would be costly in terms of manpower and time. The lack of
career progression or growth in a small office would be of
concern as, in most instances, entry would be at a senior
level and it would be difficulty to establish a career
pattern within small specialty areas. Another difficulty
would be the career placement of those individuals reporting
directly to the DCI or DDCI. The panels within the "E"
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
Career Service now function closely to the concept of "mini-
services" with the advantage of centralized support and
equal and fair practices being developed by the Board.
C. Assign All Individuals on a Rotational Basis.
Without having a cadre of permanently assigned
individuals, there would be no need for an "E" Career Service
as individuals so assigned would remain affiliated with
their parent career service. The personal advantage to this
system would be the career growth and experience afforded an
individual by a rotational assignment in an Office of the
DCI Area. Additionally, rotation would bring more background
and expertise to many of the Offices. The overriding difficulty
would be filling those jobs in OGC and the Audit Staff where
certain skills are required that are only developed by
training and experience. A probable case can be made for
rotating Finance Officers into the Audit Staff where the
primary role is one of financial, budget and program evaluation;
most senior Finance Officers are similarly trained. However,
it may not be feasible to rotate individuals without law
degrees into the lawyer positions of OGC; finding sufficient
recently trained lawyers within the Agency would be difficult.
Also, the OGC skill of counsel and advice is developed
through experience and exposure. Additionally, some mechanism
will still be necessary to provide career service concepts to
Ni
A
M
P
0
A
a
10
1;
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
those permanently reporting to the DCI or DDCI. However,
staffing more professional positions in the Offices of the
DCI Area by individuals on rotational assignment has
merit. Position evaluations indicate that all but the most
senior positions and those in OGC and the Audit Staff can be
effectively staffed by individuals on a rotational assignment..
From examining the DCI Area Position Control Register, it
appears that this practice is usually followed only in the
Office of the Comptroller and with a few of the Inspectors
in OIG. This rotational policy is beginning in The Office
of Equal Opportunity where personnel generalist will spend a
tour doing EEO speciality duties. By following this practice.
in other Offices of the DCI Area, there would be fewer
professional members of the "E" Career Service; thus, the
difficulty of providing career progression to professional
members of the "E" Career Service would be reduced. Serious
consideration by the "E" Career Service Board and its Chairman
to this concept may be indicated.
D. Continue the "E" Career Service.
Conceptually, Career Services are simply organi-
zational elements responsible for the management of de-
signated individuals. Individuals are assigned to the
Offices of the DCI Area. Some have occupational specialities
that cannot be easily included in any other services.
Others elect to permanently join one of these Offices
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
due either to career goals or to special interests. The
Agency has elected to have career services the management
of which is at the highest practical organizational level
that can reasonably guide and handle a recognized group of
people. This has been applied in the "E" Career Service
with its Board and Panel system. Certain problems are
inherent in the "E" Career Service and the main one is the
lack of career progression in a planned and developed method.
This lack is due basically to the size of the service which
limits movements and restricts the gaining of varied ex-
perience. Lack of career progression will continue to be a
limiting factor in any system where the number of individuals
included in that specialty is small and the need for those
so trained is few. This constraint to the Career Service
concept is offset'by the advantage of offering a system that
provides equity and fairness to all employees in the DCI
Area and gives them a personnel management system similar to
that offered Agency employees assigned in other Directorates?
V. Conclusions.
A. The concept of the "E" Career Service is
viable for two basic reasons. First, the "E" Career Service
meets the Agency criteria that all employees belong to a
career service and that the service be managed from a senior
level to assure uniformity and consistency. Secondly, there
 I
m
A
A
4
A
4
4
4
0
0
Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
are "E" Career Service employees whose. occupational specialities
are such that there would be no tangible benefit in terms of
personnel management to include them in another Career
Service.
B. However, more professional positions in the Offices
of the DCI Area should be staffed by individuals on rotational
assignment. This could be accomplished by allowing fewer
officers to convert to the "E" Career Service when on assignment
to the DCI Area, nurturing rotational assignments in other
Directorates for "E" careerists, and more frequent replacement
of those "E" careerists who resign, retire, or transfer with
officers on rotational tours from outside the "E" Career
Service. Such a rotational policy would have to be gradual
and also would have to be compatible with career progression
of members of the "E" Career Service.
VI. Recommendation.
Retain the "E" Career Service but with more professional
"E" career positions being staffed by officers on rotational
assignment.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
Deputy Director of Cental Intelligence
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R0013000900 ' $ I
CT SELECTION AND PLACO-04T
or equivalent for those who are unable to complete the program but con-
present employees by providing 'retreat rights' to their former positions
I. NAPA Recommendations.
A. "Make entry into the Career Training Program more attractive to
B. "Explore the possibility of allowing entry into the Career
tinue to have value to the Agency elsewhere."
with special qualifications. Provide a modified CT Program for such persons
Trainee Program above GS-11 both from within and outside of CIA of persons
if necessary." (NAPA, Conclusions, pp. 104-105.)
criteria should be established for use of CTs in Directorates other than
Agency does not appear to have been pursued as effectively as it might and
A. "Recruitment of Career Trainees (CTs) from within and without the
II. NAPA Comments.
intelligence gathering or analytical experience." (NAPA, The Present
possible that a higher grade level could attract external candidates with
if entry into the Program above the GS-11 level were permitted. It is also
current employees (internals) if some of the restrictions were removed and.
B. "It appears that the Program could be made more attractive to
DDO. " (NAPA, Executive Summary, p. VII . )
making sufficiently broad use of the Program. The Team's recommendations,
qualified internal and external candidates as it might and is the Agency
focused on two legitimate concerns, i.e., is the CTP attracting as many
In commenting on the Career Training Program (CTP) the NAPA Team
System , p. 71.)
III. Discussion.
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
however, only addressed their perceived need for attracting internal and
external candidates. The question of broader use of the CTP by Director-
ates other than the DO was not translated into a specific recommendation.
Nevertheless, this issue deserves further study, as noted below.
A. Retreat Rights.
1. The NAPA Team defined "retreat rights" as a provisions to
allow internal CTs to return to "their former position or equivalent" if
they "are unable to complete the program but continue to have value to
the Agency." In their discussion of this issue the Team appears to have
been influenced by past Agency procedure which required "unsponsored"
internals (see below) to convert to contract status before being accepted
into the CTP. This procedure has been changed and now all internals who
have staff status retain their staff status thro'ighout the CTP. Although
the Team acknowledged that these current procedures are more attractive to
the internal applicant, they remained convinced that the Agency had not
"explored all possible avenues . . . to use existing Agency personnel
resources to fill the CT Program." (NAPA, The Present System, p. 61.)
Hence their recommendation for "retreat rights."
2. Current policy requires that before being accepted into the
CTP the internal applicant must have a permanent assignment to go to upon
completion of the Program. This means that either the internal's home
office supports, in effect "sponsors," the application with the understanding
that the CT will return to the home office upon graduating from the CTP
or the applicant obtains a commitment for a permanent assignment from a
new office. CTs are then slotted in the office of their new permanent
assignment before entering the Program or remain slotted in the office
sponsoring them.
 ^
4
Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
3. For the period 1975-1979 the CTP accepted a total of 46
internal candidates; 24 of these were "sponsored" and 22 were not. All
graduated with the exception of three of the "sponsored" internals who
resigned before completing the Program. These figures do not directly
address the subject of "retreat rights'' other than to show that only three
internals in the past five years did not complete the CTP and they were all
"sponsored," meaning that presumably they had some degree of "retreat rights."
What the reason was for the resignation of the three and whether or not
these CTs believed that they had any viable option except to complete the
Program and return to their home office is not available from CTP records.
How many other internals were interested in the CTP but did not apply
because of a perceived need for better "retreat rights" is also not re-
trievable from CTP records.
4. In the opinion of the NAPA Project Group, the Agency provides
"retreat rights" through the present requirements of "permanent assignment"
for CTs prior to acceptance into the Program. Nonetheless, the Project
Group concedes that certain internals may be discouraged or inhibited from
applying to the CTP. This is probably more a reflection of the content and
purpose of the CTP at this time than Agency procedures for internal applicants.
Specifically, the heavy commitment of the CTP to service DO requirements
has for the immediate future closed out the Program to all but very ex-
ceptional internals or those interested in pursuing a career with the DO.
This may be the major issue vis a vis internal applicants, not retreat rights.
B. Entry level GS-11 and above.
In making this second recommendation the NAPA Team implied
that a higher entry level grade for the CTP would result in more internal
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
candidates and better qualified external candidates. Mile this may be a
logical assumption it presupposes that: (1) there are qualified internal
candidates for the CTP who are discouraged or disinterested in applying
to the Program because of its low grade and (2) the CTP is not attracting
a sufficient number of high quality external applicants.
1. Internal Candidates.
a. In addressing the first point several facts are re-
levant. The CTP course is currentlLjonths for DO bound officers and
^months for others. The Program consists of 3 weeks of introduction to
the Agency and Intelligence Community, plus 4 weeks in a basic operations
course which is designed to give the CT a general exposure to operational
activity. This is now followed by two interim assignments: one
in the office to which the CT is to be permanently assigned and a second
interim in an office which complements the CT's office of permanent assign-
ment. The DO Crs then return to go through Part II of the Operations
Course where they are taught operations tradecraft.
b. What internal will be interested in the above
curriculum? In most cases an employee who is either; (1) interested in
making a career with the DO or (2) interested in the orientation aspects
of the Program offered through the training and the interim assignments to
two different offices and/or (3) interested in seeking a new assignment out-
side of his/her home base component.
c. In the first instance, a DO bound Cr will find upon
joining the D Career Service that to reach the journeyman level as an
operations officer (GS 11-12) he or she must have at least one tour as an
operations officer abroad. Because the DDO recognizes that a CT at the
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
GS-11 level is relatively non-competitive for the first few years the
Directorate has exempted CTs at this level from receiving the automatic
one grade increase which other DO bound CTs now receive upon completion
of the program. Thus, only CTs hired at the GS-10 or below grade receive
a grade increase at the end of the CTP. In view of these facts the Project
Group can see no justification for raising the entry level grade above
GS-11 for DO bound CTs.
d. Internals who are not interested in a career with the
DO and see the CTP as a broadening experience and/or a chance to seek a
new career track could be inhibited by the preference of the Program for
junior officers (i.e., below GS-11). Nonetheless, there are options other
than the CTP open to employees with such interests: for example, rotational
assignments to another career service, or various personnel services to
assist in seeking employment in other offices within the Agency. The
Project Group does not see the CTP as an especially appropriate vehicle
to service the above requirements of a mid-level employee.
2. External. Candidates.
Another reason for raising the entry level grade of
the CTP, as noted by NAPA, is to attract additional external candidates.
According to the DCI's Notes of 17 August 1979, the latest CT class is of
the same high caliber
as in earlier nays.
the size of the total number of CTs going through the Program.
would indicate that
is attracting a sufficient number of qualified external candidates to
meet its requirements. The question of whether a higher entry grade would
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
25X1
25X1
however, the option presently available to hire above the GS-11 level if
the qualifications of the candidate and the needs of the organization
dictate.
C. Broader Agency Use of the CTP.
1. The NAPA Team recognized that the CTP is currently committed
to servicing the heavy requirements of the DO resulting from a shortfall
of junior and mid-level operations officers in that Directorate. NAPA
also understood that the CTP has since its inception been made up of 50%
or more DO-bound trainees. The above notwithstanding, the Team questioned
"the criteria for use of CTs in Directorates other than DDO", noting that
"there is no indication in L__fs to the positions in the Agency that
should be filled through the CT Program." (NAPA, The Present System, p. 71.)
2. The NAPA Project Group found the following facts to be
relevant in assessing this issue:
a. Interest and requirements for a junior officer training
program vary between career services and subgroups outside of the DO.
b. The CTP is one of several junior officer training
programs in the Agency. (E.g., within the DA, the Offices of Personnel,
Logistics, and Security have each developed their own junior officer
trainee programs which they have tailored to their particular needs.)
c. In NFAC only OSR and OPA currently utilize the CTP to
any great extent. Other NFAC offices prefer to hire directly and give their
new analysts whatever training and orientation is needed after they are on
the job in NFAC.
w
14,
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
A
11
14
19
IR
4-
11
11
d. DDS&T has historically had limited requirements for
the CTP and generally prefers to hire new professionals directly.
3. Based on the above, the NAPA Project Group concluded that
there is a more basic issue facing Agency management than simply identi-
fying the criteria for use of CTs throughout the Agency. Namely, the
totality of the CTP--its objectives and goals--needs to be reviewed in
light of current Agency organization and personnel needs.
IV. Conclusions.
A. A CT internal currently has "retreat rights" by virtue of a
commitment for a permanent assignment before entering the CTP and re-
tention of staff status. These procedures appear adequate to provide
secruity for employees who "are unable to complete the program but con-
tinue to have value to the Agency . . ."
B. An entry level grade of GS-11 or above is not a viable option
for the average DO bound CT because in most circumstances it will put
the CT in a non-competitive status for several years. There is no
restriction, however, prohibiting the CTP from offering a GS-11 entry
grade or higher if the qualifications and projected assignment of the CT
justify such a grade. This applies to CTs scheduled for assignment to
all Directorates.
C. The question of broader Agency use of the CTP touches upon a
more basic issue which deserves study, namely the role and objectives
of the CTP including whether it should be a program to be used solely
for recruitment and development of operations officers.
V. Recommendations.
A. Retain present procedures requiring permanent assignments and
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
retention of staff status, when appropriate, for internal CT candidates.
The above recommendations is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
B. Have the Director of Training reaffirm in writing to Directorates
that the entry level grade of the CTP is flexible and pegged to the quali-
fications of candidates and in cases of exceptional qualifications and
corresponding need of Agency management a CT may be hired above the
GS-11 grade.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
C. Have the Director of Training publish annually an Agency Notice
outlining current requirements for the CTP and providing instruction for
internals interested in applying to the Program.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
D. Establish an inter-directorate task force to make an indepth
review of the role and objectives of the CTP.*
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
*The Project Group understands that a rather similar recommendation has
been made in the study "Recruitment for CIA's Career Training Program"
recently prepared in the Office of Training.
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
E. After the above review, have the DDA
the Agency's updated concept of junior officer programs in general and
the CTP in particular.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence Date
25X1
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
TAB J
VACANCY NOTICE SYSTEM
11
4
IN
11
I. NAPA Recommendation.
"Make better use of vacancy notices through defining
purposes and results expected from their use and then using
the notices accordingly." (NAPA, Conclusions, p. 97.)
II. NAPA Comments.
A. "The Agency 'Vacancy Notice' program is uncoordinated
and ill-defined. It is operated differently by the various
Directorates and has some mechanical problems in the actual
distribution of notices." (NAPA, Executive Summary, p. VII.)
B. "There is confusion as to the purpose of using a
vacancy notice."
C. "While the Vacancy Notice System is referred to as
Agency wide, past practice indicates that it operates on an
inconsistent basis at three levels--Agency, Career Service,
or Career Service Subgroup."
D. "There is a problem on distribution (of vacancy
notices) . .
E. "This is an area where there can be great differences
between employee expectations and reality. These differences
need to be narrowed as much as possible if the system is to
benefit both the Agency and its employees."
(Latter four statements from NAPA, The Present System, pp. 66-67.)
J-1
SECRET
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
II. Background.
A. Agency Vacancy Notice Policy.
1. is the
only official recognition of the Agency vacancy notice
program, albeit the Personnel Handbooks of the Directorates
include coverage on the subject. The official regulation
states:
"The Director of Personnel publishes vacancy
notices to advertise the qualification require-
ments of positions for which the Heads of
Career Services wish to solicit candidates.
Interested employees with the requisite
qualifications are encouraged to submit
applications for vacancies through appropriate
component channels."
The Project Group notes that this regulation does not
include a policy statement on what the vacancy notice
program is or what it is intended to accomplish.
Moreover, it does not clarify that, at the discretion
of the Career Service Heads, vacancy notices can be
distributed within three tiers--Career Service Subgroup,
Career Service, or Agency wide; and inattentive employees
can incorrectly presume that only the Director of
Personnel publishes notices and Agency-wide distribution
is normal practice.
a
a
25X1
0
0
0
1
1
I
SECRET
LM
 25X1
Approved For Release 2003/08/20 - CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
announced
2.
VaL;Ullcy notice
the "implementation of an Agency-wide
system." This HN says announcement of existing or
anticipated vacancies throughout the Agency is intended
ant p
to promote optimum use of existing manpower resources
and to make information about assignment opportunities
ailable to as many employees as possible. It further
av from
can be filled .
says "many positions
other offices and directorates as well as from the
,In such cases, vacant
component with the vacancy.
notices will be issued to stimulate a lications from
A third
which the best selection can be made" statement that
is the ssignificant element of this HN
wide
iven Agency-
vacancy notices will normall be g
but unique positions involving
distribution
exceptional qualification or
special training, offices
sensitivity may be restricted to specified
or directorates.
3. The Project Group notes that although the HN
touches on policy and recognizes the practice of dis-
tributing vacancy notices within components, it does
not identify the three-tiered system, it creates the
notices are
inaccurate impression that most vacancy Policy
distributed Agency wide, and a straight-forward po
statement is lacking.
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
4. In short, printed material on the vacancy
notice system intended for reading by all employees
Agency wide does not state policy clearly and has been
misread by some employees. Moreover, the paucity of
such material has led to poor employee understanding--
especially by those relatively new to CIA--of the
vacancy notice system.
B. Directorates' Vacancy Notice Policy.
1. The Personnel Handbooks of the Directorates
all include coverage on vacancy notices, when they may
be used, and what the level of distribution may be.
Although these Handbooks indicate that.notices may be
distributed to other Directorates, none except NFAC
talks of Agency-wide distribution per se. Moreover,
except for NFAC, the general guideline is that a vacancy
notice may be issued when a component has a vacancy
that cannot be filled within. In other words, little
encouragement is given by management to soliciting
candidates outside a Career Service or Career Subgroup.
The DDA Handbook (April 1975), for example, states:
"If a position cannot be filled by a qualified
candidate within a subgroup (each Career
Subgroup is encouraged to utilize internal
vacancy notices), a vacancy notice will be
distributed to the other Directorate Career
Subgroups or to the other Directorates."
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
m
For the DDS&T, the Handbook (July 1976) notes:
"The vacancy notice system is one means to
fill positions by personnel from other offices
and directorates, as well as from the com-
ponent with the vacancy."
"Vacancy notices will be issued when a
component has a vacancy for which it has no
highly qualified and obvious candidate."
The Handbook for the DCI Area (November 1977) does not
use the term "vacancy notice," as indicated in the
following:
required (i.e., NFAC-wide distribution or option for
out by grade and circumstances when such notices are
vacancy notices is also the most complete. It spells
current of the Directorates' Handbooks, and regarding
on vacancy notices dated July 1979) represents the most
The NFAC Handbook (November 1978, with a revised insert.
service."
on a rotation basis from another career
as, for example, the need to fill a position
in writing throughout the DCI Area unless
circumstances justify a different approach,
"The fact of the existence of a position
vacancy or staffing requirement in any office
or staff of the DCI Area will be disseminated
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
Agency-wide). A definition of what constitutes a
vacancy is also provided that includes instances of
resignation, retirement, reassignment, and rotations of
personnel at the same grade level within an Office.
The DDO Handbook (October 1977) indicates that the
vacancy notice system "is a means to fill open jobs in
the issuing component . . .
A vacancy notice is
submitted to the Career Management Staff which circulates
the notice, giving it intra-Directorate circulation or
submits it to the Office of Personnel for Agency-wide
circulation, as appropriate.
2. In sum, the majority of Agency line managers
are given discretion in determining what constitutes a
vacancy and how to go about filling that vacancy.
The prevailing philosophy among managers is that the
vacancy notice system is (some say "should be") a
management tool designed to supplement other established
assignment mechanisms.
C. Perceptions of Employees.
1. The best documented Agency-wide view of
employees on the subject of. vacancy notices is the
Employee Survey of July 1976, taken three years after
the "Agency-wide system" was implemented. In answering
the question "Do you believe the Agency vacancy notice
system works satisfactorily?"--200 of the respondents
said yes, 31% had no opinion, and 48% said no, with the
M
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
DO respondents recording the lowest "yes" percentage---
2. This view by Agency employees appears to have
changed little since 1976 according to conversations
between the Director and groups of employees. Most
complaints seem to center on distribution of notices
and pre-selections; i.e., application to a vacancy
notice is a hollow exercise in most instances because
the candidate already has been chosen.
3. It is clear that some employees are confused
over the purpose of vacancy notices, thus leading to
complaints about distribution. Little has been published
on this subject by the Agency for employee information.
The most useful current information is published by the
Directorates which concentrate on their policy--namely,
the line manager has the discretion when to issue a
notice and at what level of distribution. In contrast:,
discussed above, implies that most vacancy
notices are issued Agency wide by saying they will
normally be given Agency-wide distribution. This is
not actual practice, thus creating employee confusion
and consequent complaint about notice distribution.
4. The current procedure for reproducing and
distributing Agency-wide vacancy notices--which begins;
in Staff Personnel Division (SPD)--also has drawbacks
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
that create potential situations where employees may
rightfully complain that they do not see vacancy notices
and when they do, the application deadline may be past.
Upon receipt of a notice to be advertised Agency wide
and after normal administrative processing, SPD xeroxes
112 copies for clerical notices and 218 copies for
professional/technical notices for initial distribution
to about 65 offices of the Directorates where discretion
is exercised regarding further distribution and how
many additional copies will be xeroxed. Timely cooperation
obviously is required of the Directorates to make such
a distribution arrangement work, but such an uncontrolled
scheme can occasionally breakdown.
5. A more effective system existed prior to
SPD's move from Headquarters
.n August 1976.
SPD would receive overnight printing service from the
Printing and Photography Division of the Office of
Logistics. After SPD's move, however, such timely
service became infrequent and the norm for printing
increased from overnight service to seven/ten days.
Unable to change the situation and receiving employee
complaints on late notices, SPD undertook the time-
consuming and costly task of xeroxing and distributing
the Agency-wide notices.
ON
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
6. If there is a concern over the distribution
system, an employee still can remain informed by utilizing
alternative sources of information. For Agency-wide
vacancy notices, a summary list of vacancies is posted
monthly on the official bulletin boards in
Agency 25X
buildings. Locations of the formal files are normally
noted on the monthly summary. The actual notices, in
addition to normal distribution among components, are
available for employee review in the Headquarters
Library and in Ames Building. The Career Services have
similar master file arrangements for Directorate-level
notices and Agency-wide notices as well.
7. The view of some employees that candidates
are pre-selected for advertised vacancies cannot be
substantiated by the Project Group, but statistics that
follow suggest this is an overdrawn perception.
D. Statistics on Vacancy Notices.
1. In 1978 there were applicants for 0 P M1
vacancies- =professional/technical and clerical-- 25X1
advertised Agency wide (no one applied for ll of these 25X1
vacancies). Of the vacancies filled, 80% of the successful
candidates came from outside the advertising component.
For the period 1973-77 a total of Agency-wide 25X1
notices were published, applicants numbered and 25X1
-]positions were filled. Of these, 66% were filled
with applicants from outside the advertising component.
J-9
SECRET
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
Comparison of these two time frames clearly shows a
sharp increase in use of Agency-wide vacancy notices by
the Directorates and healthy participation by employees
in the system which suggests it is working reasonably
well. In total, the figures are impressive-
-
1 applicants, and the majority
advertised positions, F
of the positions were filled with employees from outside
the advertising component.
2. Not reflected in the above is the number of
vacancy notices continually being distributed below the
Agency-wide level. These "internal" systems which were
in being long before the Agency-wide one implemented in
1973, include notices distributed at the Office/Division
level or Directorate wide. No data are filed centrally
on how many of these vacancies are advertised annually,
but their combined number is estimated to exceed that
for Agency-wide notices by a significant margin, thus
indicating that overall a very large number of vacancies
are in fact advertised and that there is an even greater
number of vacancy notice applicants.
IV. Discussion and Findings.
A. Vacancy notices provide employees the most visible,
ongoing opportunity and direct means available for possible
career change and/or progression within their Directorate or
elsewhere in the Agency. Consequently, there is interest--
04
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
but in varying degrees--at most grade levels in the vacancy
notice system, and because of this interest it is important
that employees have a clear understanding of its purpose and
how it operates. As noted in the NAPA Report (p. 64),
however, this is not the case. Moreover, there is a wide
range of employee opinions on the use of the vacancy notice--
from a desire to have all vacancies filled through use of a
notice to a feeling that the system is a sham because someone
has been pre-selected before the notice was issued.
B. Managers also have indicated a whole range of
opinions on the use of the vacancy notices--from great
enthusiasm to downright antipathy (NAPA Report, p. 64).
A major concern of managers appears to be retention of line
authority to determine what constitutes a vacancy and how
a vacancy should be filled. Most managers feel the current
system provides them the flexibility they need in the selection
process for a vacancy; i.e., direct hire, internal lateral
transfers, intra-office, intra-directorate, or Agency-wide
call.
C. Another concern of managers is that inflexible
application of vacancy notices (e.g., mandatory advertising
of all vacancies) would create problems in meeting personnel
management responsibilities they have for employees in their
immediate Career Service or Subgroup, especially those
groups that are highly specialized. These responsibilities
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
include planning promotion targets, implementing Upward
Mobility Programs, expanding minority placements, planning
executive development and formulating succession planning
(the PDP), as well as career development planning (including
inter- and intra-Directorate rotations) and career counseling.
-The Project Group considers these concerns of managers to be
valid.
D. Employees dissatisfied with the vacancy notice
system do not seem to understand that it is intended to
complement the career development programs within each
Career Service, and that maintenance of a meaningful Career
Service requires priority consideration be given to qualified
employees in that Service in filling a vacancy. Elimination
of this policy may satisfy concerns of some employees who
are dead-ended and see vacancy notices as a possible means
for movement elsewhere, but it would create dissatisfaction
for others.
E. Employee dissatisfaction with the system also
derives in part from inadequate and infrequent Agency ex-
planation of its purpose and how it works. Directorates
also provide inadequate information. Periodic publication
of such information for employees would, in the view of the
Project Group, help dispel perceptions of a vacancy notice
program that has poor distribution of notices and pre-
selection of candidates for a position even before a notice
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
is issued. Dissemination of data for 1978, for example,
would clearly show the success of the program-
appli- 25~
vacancies advertised Agency wide, with 80% of
the successful candidates coming from outside the advertising
component. And these statistics do not include the full
magnitude of the program; i.e., vacancy notice programs
within each Directorate.
F. Although some employees complain of not seeing all
vacancy notices, the Project Group does-not see this as a
matter that per se requires major adjustment to the distribution
system. There are several reasons: first, not all vacancy
notices are distributed Agency wide. Second, once a notice
is initially distributed, there is no effective and efficient
way to guarantee timely distribution down to all levels of
the organization even if deadline dates were extended.
Third, it is impractical to expect the Office of Personnel
to assure that all notices will be seen by all employees.
No supervisor, however, should reserve the right to judge
whether a notice be circulated in his or her component.
Additionally, it would seem, in the eyes of the Project
Group, that some employees expect the organization to spoon
feed them with little effort on their part to personally
seek readily available information on vacancies.
G. In recognizing the inherent problem of distribution,
the Office of Personnel, for Agency-wide notices, posts
cants for
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
relevant, timely information at II key locations and
master files of Agency-wide notices are maintained for
employee review at two easy-access centers; each Directorate
also has master files for employee review of Agency-wide and
Directorate notices. In short, vacancy notice information
is always available to the employee who seeks it. Nonethe-
less, effort should be made to improve distribution and con-
comitantly reduce reproduction costs of vacancy notices.
This could be accomplished by requiring the Printing and
Photography Division to provide rapid timely service on all
SPD printing request for Agency-wide vacancy notices, and in
a sufficient number of copies to eliminate the need for
additional reproduction within the Directorates. Distribution
time thus would be quicker and more efficient, and reproduction
costs reduced.
H. Although the Project Group considers the current
vacancy notice system to be basically sound, we agree with
the NAPA Team that the system should provide a means to
strengthen opportunity for movement across Directorate lines
for qualified, interested employees. This can be accomplished
by a dual system that preserves present practice (i.e.,
three possible levels of vacancy notice distribution--
Agency, Career Service, or Career Service Subgroup for those
positions where there are no internal candidates in the
opinion of the line manager), but also requires annual
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
mandatory reporting to the Director of Personnel of all
anticipated vacancies during the upcoming fiscal year where
qualified candidates from within the advertising component
will be considered and no vacancy notice distributed.
These latter vacancies along with essential qualifications
and a closing date for applications could be filed for a
specific time period in central locations available for
employee review. Employees interested in specific jobs
could be referred by these centers to the personnel officer
of the issuing component for further information and appli-
cation procedures. In short, vacancy notices could be used
for positions where candidates are actively being sought,
and a means could be provided for employees to obtain in-
formation and to pursue on their own those anticipated
vacant positions for which there are fully qualified in-
ternal candidates. Such a mandatory reporting system would
strengthen opportunity for cross-Directorate movement and,
importantly, provide sufficient lead time for Career Service
or Subgroups to fill those positions in a timely, orderly
fashion. Such lead time would be especially critical in
those Subgroups comprised of specialists where one occurring
vacancy results in a chain of several subsequent vacancies.
I. There are several factors, however, that may be
viewed as drawbacks to the mandatory reporting scheme:
costs for timely and efficient maintenance of the central
0 1300090001-7
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
locations may be high in comparison to the frequency of
employee use; it may be difficult for some components to
provide 12-month projections; and not least, security--i.e.,
access of all employees to a vacancy listing that could
include sensitive positions. These aspects would have to be
examined. The Project Group notes, however, that decision
on cost/benefit could be delayed until completion of a set
trial period, most vacancies involving planned rotations
(e.g., Personnel, Security, Operations) can be anticipated,
and that security concerns might be met by the component
providing information in only the most general way or by
exempting sensitive vacancies from mandatory reporting.
Another factor not to be overlooked is employee perceptions
of a mandatory reporting scheme on anticipated vacancies for
which the components have qualified candidates. It could be
viewed as a sham.
J. The Project Group examined the feasibility of a
mandatory Agency-wide vacancy notice system and has concluded
that such a system would be an expensive, time-consuming
administrative burden that would create an enormous flow of
paper to all employees announcing vacant positions that
generally apply to a relatively small portion of the Agency
population. Historically, 60% of Agency-wide vacancy notices
have been for clerical positions, with about 45% of these
for positions GS-06 and below. Thus, most of the positions
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
have been of interest to about 15% to 25% of the Agency, not
including the factor of job qualifications. Under a mandatory
system, which would include advertising of highly specialized
jobs, this percentage probably would be even lower. Moreover,
a mandatory system would work at cross-purposes with the
Career Services and their responsibility for employee develop-
ment. The potential magnitude of a mandatory system is
reflected in data for FY 1978 which shows there were about
personnel movements in that 12-month period.
K. The Project Group also concludes that employee
understanding of the vacancy notice system could be improved
if each Directorate developed for use in its Career Service
or Subgroup a set of specific guidelines as to what con-
stitutes a vacancy, when notices should be circulated, and
at what level of distribution. Such guidelines should
initially be published as a notice and subsequently in the
Directorates' Personnel Handbooks which should be updated
with more frequency than has been practiced.
V. Recommendations.
A. Retain the present vacancy notice concept and
method for distribution for positions where line management
has elected or is directed to solicit candidates from outside
the advertising component.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
B. Make mandatory for all components the annual
reporting to the Director of Personnel of all anticipated
vacancies GS-15 and below in the upcoming fiscal year for
which fully qualified internal candidates will be considered
and no vacancy notice is to be issued, and have the Director
of Personnel establish for employee use at least two in-
formation repositories (e.g., Ames Building and Headquarters
Library) for these vacancies and pertinent related information
including a closing date for applications. Information on
each reported vacancy would be purged from the file on the
closing date.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
C. Have the Director of Personnel review the success
and cost/benefit of Recommendation B after one year and
recommend to the DDCI if such mandatory reporting should be
continued.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
D. Have the Director of Personnel distribute annually
a notice to employees explaining the vacancy notice system
and the role of Staff Personnel Division, and providing data
on the previous year's vacancy notice results; e.g., number
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
of vacancies advertised through notices, number of applicants,
percentage of such positions filled from outside the adver-
tising component.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
E. Have the Director of Personnel rewrite for DDCI
approval as a basic policy
statement on the vacancy notice system reflecting its purpose,
optional levels of notice distribution (i.e., Agency-wide or
within Directorates), and authority of Career Service Heads
to determine when to advertise a vacancy. Purpose of the
system should note that it complements the individual Career
Service personnel development systems, and that vacancy
notices provide opportunity for competitive,selection based
on qualifications, ability and potential. The regulation
also should include basic criteria developed by the Director
of Personnel for use by Career Service Heads in defining a
vacancy. Such criteria could include:
'No qualified candidate in the component;
'No candidate that the Career Service wants to
rotate into the position;
'The position is not related to an Upward Mobility
Program;
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
?The component is not seeking an employee from
a specific Directorate (e.g., a DO officer to
serve on the IG Staff or an NFAC analyst to
25X1
serve
?There is no need to fill the position by external
recruitment; and
?The position is not to be filled by directed
assignment because of an employee placement
problem or disciplinary action.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
F. Have each Deputy Director publish specific information
on vacancy notices using NFAC's July 1979 issuance on the
subject (attached) as a model framework, including policy,
definition of a vacancy, requirements for notice distribution
and procedures.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
G. Have each Deputy Director revise their Personnel
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
H. Have the Director of Personnel approve all
Directorate issuances on the vacancy notice system in-
cluding that which is in Personnel Handbooks.
disapproved.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( )
I. Charge the Directors of Personnel and Logistics to
arrange for priority printing of Agency-wide vacancy notices
and subsequent distribution. Sufficient numbers of notices
should be printed to eliminate the need for further reproduction
by the Directorates, thus reducing xeroxing costs and speeding
dissemination.
)
The above recommendation is ( ) approved disapproved.
Date
Deputy Director o Central Intelligence
 25X1 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
Next 1 Page(s) In Document Exempt
Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
MOVEMENT INTO PROFESSIONAL RANKS
I. NAPA Comment.
"The EEO Advisory Group opposes. . .the requirement of
a college degree for all 'professional' positions." (Executive
Summary, p. VIII.)
. a college degree appears to be a requirement for
movement into 'professional' positions--particularly in the
CT Program and in the DDA." (NAPA, The Present System,
p. 76.)
II. Discussion.
A. The connection of a college degree with entry into
professional ranks is an issue more related to qualification
standards than the subject of EEO or "labeling," under which
the above NAPA comment was presented. In any event, there
is no identifiable Agency policy that says or implies a
college degree is required for movement into professional
positions. In fact, approximately 27% of professional
employees do not have a degree. In most instances, however,
it is true that Agency components, including the DDA and the
CT Program, require a college degree for their professional
positions. The definition of "professional" in the Agency
Handbook of Position Title and Occupational Codes is germane
to this "requirement":
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269RO01300090001-7
"This category includes staff, contract, and
military positions involving performance of
work considered Managerial, Administrative
Management, Scientific, Intelligence, Engineering,
Legal, Investigative, or Educative--which
requires the analysis and solution of problems,
and the determination of action involving the
exercise of judgment and initiative. Normally
a baccalaureate degree or equivalent training
is required but demonstrated ability, experience,
and potential may be substituted."
B. The percentage of Agency professionals without a
degree indicates that flexible application of the above is
practiced. Nonetheless, in the eyes of some employees there
continues to be too few instances where capable, non-degreed
individuals have moved to professional positions based on
demonstrated ability, etc. This is a perception difficult
to deal with. Its existence also raises a question as to
whether there is sufficient distinction between the tasks of
some professional and clerical positions. Without this
distinction between work in a professional field and work
that is closely allied with it, but not itself professional,
it is easy to see why employees may have difficulty in
understanding why more non-degreed people do not move into
professional positions. Such lack of distinction may also
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
explain why employees at times view a college degree
"requirement" with some suspicion.
C. Staff Personnel Division (SPD)--in recognizing
that there are instances when a component will advertise.a
professional vacancy requiring a degree when such may not be
essential--monitors the education requirement for all vacancy
' notices to be distributed Agency wide. If the need for a
degree is not apparent, SPD consults with the originating
component, and in some instances this requirement is removed,
the wording altered to parallel more closely with the duties,
or a specific degree is identified. SPD, however, does not
monitor Directorate or Office-wide vacancy notices.
D. Employee concerns over conversions from clerical.
to professional status and whether some professional positions
do or do not require a college education appear to be mani-
festations of frustration in dealing with the fact that once
a certain clerical grade level is achieved there is minimal
opportunity for promotions without becoming a professional.
(The average clerical grade is GS-06, and only one in fifty
is GS-10 or higher.) This is a reality in any government
organization, however, where salaries are determined by the
complexity of the job. The important thing in CIA is that
opportunity be provided for clericals to move to professional
jobs--and it is for those with ability, experience and
potential.
b "269R001300090001-7
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
III. Conclusions.
A. There is no Agency requirement that employees must
have a college degree to move into any professional position.
B. The requirement for a degree is not always clearly
apparent for a professional position.
C. Components at times require a college degree for a
professional vacancy when it is not essential to performance
of the task.
VI. Recommendations.
A. Position Management and Compensation Division and
the operating heads insure that job descriptions and standards
accurately reflect the educational criteria for professional
positions.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
B. Each Deputy Director task the issuing officer for
a vacancy notice with the responsibility to verify the
subject component's vacancy notice requirement for a college
degree and to assure that the need for this requirement is
adequately conveyed in the notice.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence Date
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
TAB L
OCCUPATIONAL CAREER SYSTEMS
I. NAPA Recommendation.
"Establish some Agency-wide occupational systems across
career services or subgroup lines where several components
employ significant numbers in the same occupational family.,"*
(NAPA, Conclusions, p. 97.)
II. NAPA Comment.
"The Team is persuaded that the present system-aligning
careers to main Agency functions and decentralizing personnel
management-- is well designed to meet the Agency's needs in
most respects. However, measures are needed to strengthen
mobility across Directorate lines in several areas where it
appears to us that the Agency's and employee's interest
require it." (NAPA Conclusions, pp. 96-97.)
III. Discussion.
A. Problem Identification.
1. The NAPA Team's concern was that for certain
occupational families the Agency's decentralized career
career service system could "blunt" employee development
The NAPA Group wishes to emphasize that its reading of the NAPA
Team's recommendations is that these involved literally occupational
career systems, not occupational career services as interpreted by
the majority of Directorates in their ccmr&ents on this aspect of the
NAPA Report.
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
and prevent management from making full utilization
of employee's skills. The Team singled out Clerical
and Secretarial, Data Processing, and Intelligence
Processing and Production as those occupational families
employed in significant numbers by several career
services or subgroups. (There are others not mentioned
by NAPA which have been studied inconclusively in the
past, e.g., Graphics Arts employees.) The Team concluded
that "a board of representatives from D, I, R, and M
Career Services could assure developmental and promotional
.opportunities for data processing personnel across
Career Service lines. A similar board could be created
or the DDA given responsibility for senior secretarial
and clerical personnel." (NAPA, Conclusions, p. 97.)
2. The NAPA Project Group agrees that there may
be certain employees whose occupations are commonly
used by several Career Services who may be denied
greater job selectivity and possiblities for advance-
ment by being compelled to compete in but one service,
their own, rather than in several services. At the
same time jobs may not always be filled by the best
talent available because employees are not available
for assignment on an Agency-wide basis.
0-
^
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
B. Inter-Directorate Boards.
1. Theoretically, inter-directorate boards
could open up advancement opportunities for, and
produce wider utilization of, employees in these
occupational families by allowing them to compete and
be assigned Agency- wide. An effective inter-directorate
board, however, would need high-level authority to rank
competively (for assignment and promotion purposes)
employees from several Career Services.
2. The Agency's experience, to date, with
implementing effective systems for the purpose of
facilitating career development and job assignments
across Career Service lines has not been successful.
There are several reasons for this including:
a. Career Service managers have preferred
to retain assignment and promotion
authority for all of their employees
as a device to retain their stronger
employees, and to oversee their
occupational employment.
b. The general belief that in the case
of certain occupations, (e.g., Data
Processing and Intelligence Processing
and Production) employees need a close
familiarity with their parent component,
along with their occupational speciality
to be effective.
0269R00130009000'.1-7
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
c. Senior management has resisted
giving inter-directorate boards or
groups the responsibility and authority
needed to follow through on their
recommendations.
d. Impersonal personnel management
inherent in an inter-directorate system
is considered by many to be less satisfying
to both line management and employees.
3. The above notwithstanding, both management
and employee groups (notably various MAGs) have in the
past studied the idea of establishing systems to facilitate
cross-directorate mobility for various reasons including
those of concern to NAPA. The Personnel Approaches
Study Group (PASG), for example, was, in 1973, concerned
with the need to make better use of manpower within the
Agency. They made a number of recommendations touching
on the subject of mobility including vacancy notices,
and the identification of the Staff Personnel Division/OP
to serve as a central reference point for employee use.
PASG also was apparently the impetus for a paper on
mobility which was reviewed but not accepted by the
Management Committee in August 1973. This paper had
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
proposed, inter alia, establishment of an "Agency
Reassignment Committee" to facilitate mobility across
directorate lines.
4. The Careers Committee, established by OP
in 1975, exemplifies some of the problems that could
confront an inter-directorate board. The Project Group
recognizes that this committee was not a true inter-
directorate board because its membership was mostly
composed of OP careerists on assignment to the various
directorates rather than members of the various Career
Services. Nevertheless, the Project Group views the
Committee's inability to impact significantly on inter-
directorate mobility to be the direct result of the
Committee's lack of high-level endorsement and authority
along with the absence of inter-directorate representation.
The Committee eventually was abolished in 1978.
C. Career Services.
1. A different method for increasing advancement
opportunities and increasing Agency-wide utilization
for certain occupational families would call for the
establishment of new career services or subgroups along
occupational lines. There is, in fact, precedent for
the concept. Within the Directorate of Administration,
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
offices are organized by career affiliation and
occupational function. The Office of Personnel is an
example. The Office has line responsibility for managing
the Agency's personnel program. It also supports
operating components by assigning OP careerists to
components to assist line managers in administering
component personnel programs. In those instances where
OP careerists are rotated to an operating component
career affiliation remains with OP but in day-to-day
personnel administration matters they are under the
direction of component management. The system has
worked not only with personnel officers, but also with
logistics, finance and general support officers.
2. Whether or not the concept of a Career
Service subgroup is feasible for occupational families
other than those involved in administration is open to
question. Data Processing is certainly a logical
candidate for an occupational career subgroup (perhaps
through expansion of the existing ODP subgroup). This
possibility has.been studied several times by Agency
management. Yet all such studies, including the most
recent one completed in December 1978, were unable to
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
satisfy the vested interests of various career
services whose chiefs argued against diminished manage-
ment control of the Data Processing personnel assigned
to their components.
3. Further review of the concept of a Data
Processing sub-career group has in the NAPA Project
Group's mind now been overshadowed by senior manage-
ment's recent decision to launch a year-long Information
Handling Study. This latter study, which began on
7 May 1979, has stated in its action plan that ".
if warranted, the plan will be accompanied. by recommenda-
ations for changes in management systems and organiza-
tional structure." (Emphasis added.) It is possible
that these recommendations could include bringing
together all information handling occupational groups
such as data processing along with records management
and others into a single career service. In any case,
the conclusions of this study will likely have impact
on the management of personnel involved in information
handling.
4. In addition to Data Processing, the second
occupational family specifically identified by NAPA
as having significant representation in more than
one career service is Intelligence Processing and
Production. The requirements for an employee in this
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
occupational family are not, in the Project Group's
view, generally interchangeable between most career
services; e.g., a reports officer in the D Service with
an analyst in the I Service or an editor in the R
Service with either of the foregoing. There may be,
however, a need for a system to facilitate more ro-
tational tours for employees in this occupation who
would benefit and desire such tours, and this subject
is addressed in a separate paper.
5. Secretaries and Clericals comprise the
third occupational family identified by NAPA as
being widely dispersed throughout the Agency and
thereby, by implication, having their careers "blunted"
by inability to compete for all senior secretarial
vacancies. The perceptions of secretaries and clericals
themselves is certainly that there would be greater
opportunities for advancement if competition for senior
jobs was on an Agency-wide basis either through a
special career service or mandatory vacancy notice
system opening.up all secretarial/clerical jobs GS-08
and above. This perception is borne out to a degree by
the following chart which gives total numbers of
secretarial positions (GS-08 and above) by grade and
career service. By comparing these figures, it is
 evident that the D Career Service has the largest
number of GS-08 and GS-09 secretarial positions
while the E Career Service has the largest number of
GS-10 and above positions. While some senior secretaries
are known to be occupying positions of lower rank than
their present grade, the chart, nevertheless, gives a
reasonably accurate. picture of the spread of senior
secretarial jobs across the Agency. However, without
also knowing the frequency of turnovers in senior jobs
it is impossible to tell to what degree an individual
secretary's advancement opportunities would actually
increase with Agency-wide competition for senior jobs.
25X1
Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
13000'900b1 7
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
6. The option implied by NAPA of establishing
a career subgroup for secretaries and clericals has
also been raised periodically by both management
and employees with no concrete solution. The concept
of centralized administration has so far not been
implemented for a variety of reasons tied to the
realities of the supervisor/secretary/component
relationship, plus the major problem of managing
under one umbrella a relatively large group of
employees spread throughout the Agency with no
assurance of positive gain to either management
and/or employees. The Project Group concluded
that if a career subgroup were to be established,
the most logical place to put administration
of the subgroup would be in the DA. In our view,
this would be unwise for two major reasons. First,
a larger staff at the DDA level to administer the
career needs (assignment, evaluation, counseling,
etc.) of this group would be required. Secondly,
the size of the DA overall would increase if
senior secretaries and clericals (GS-08 and above)
occupied positions under the control of that
Directorate and this larger staffing complement
could require continuing justification to OMB.
ON
14
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
IV. Conclusions.
A. The Agency career service system has been
viewed by both management and employees as not providing
the fullest advancement opportunity for, and full Agency
utilization of, employees in certain occupational families,
especially data processing personnel and senior secretaries
and clericals.
B. To be effective, an inter-directorate personnel
management system, such as a board, must have authority for
(one or both) assignment and promotion.
C. Past proposals for inter-directorate systems to
facilitate cross-directorate career development have
floundered because they run counter to the Agency tenet
of decentralized personnel management.
D. Establishment of new career services or subgroups
is not a feasible option at this time for:
*Data processors because such a decision
should consider findings of the Information
Handling Study which will not be available
for several months;
?Senior secretaries and clericals because of
the major administrative resource cost of
grouping all together in the DA (the only
logical directorate) with no assurance of
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
net gain for these employees. There are
also problems arising from breaking up
the normal affinity between secretary,
supervisor, and component; and,
*Intelligence processors and production
analysts because of the general dis-
similarity between functions in career
services.
V. Recommendations.
A. Withhold decision regarding personnel management
of Data Processing occupational family until completion in
mid-1980 of the Information Handling Study.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved disapproved.
) B. Do not establish an Agency-wide senior secretarial/
clerical subgroup or board, but continue the present system
of Senior Secretarial Panels in each Career Service.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
C. Direct the Career Services and Subgroups to advertise
Agency wide all senior secretary/clerical vacancies GS-08 and
above, with the caveat-that a career service may not declare
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
a secretarial/clerical job (GS-08 or above) vacant when
it has an unassigned qualified employee of equivalent grade.
Applicants will be reviewed and ranked by the Senior
Secretary Panel of the Career Service with the vacancy.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence Date
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
ROTATIONAL ASSIGNMENT POLICY
of rotational assignment is clear . . . (but) Directorate
I. NAPA Comments.
A. "The attitude of top management toward the value
publications do not stress rotation." (NAPA, Executive
Summary, p. IX.)
B. "While breadth of experience is deemed important
C. "There has been a great deal of activity in terms
in their publications." (NAPA, The Present System, p. 80.)
by the DCI/DDCI, all career services have not reflected this
mobility, rewards for breadth of experience, etc., but
development, general career development, vacancy notices,
and recommendations for improvement on managerial
focus on this topic in any one place. There are comments
regarding rotational assignments, nor does its report
(NAPA, The Present System,
1. The NAPA Team makes no specific recommendations
A. Problem Identification.
of rotational assignments . .
p. 83.)
II. Discussion.
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
the NAPA Project Group is uncertain if the Team
was attempting to focus on development of potential
candidates for management positions, enhancement of
overall skills of employees in general and thus greater
chance for promotion, or increased flexibility for
assignment of the work force.
2. The Project Group has concluded that NAPA,
in addressing rotational assignments in a variety of
ways, was inferring that the Agency should clarify
rotational assignment policy.
B. Types and Purpose of Rotations.
1. In addressing NAPA's concern, the Project
Group has identified skill development and supervisory/
managerial development as the two primary purposes for
rotational assignments.*
2. Skill Development involves assignment to
another component for an agreed period of time upon the
conclusion of which the employee--who in most instances
would be at the journeyman level--usually returns to
the parent component. It may also involve rotation of
*A third purpose for rotational tours is executive development.
The Project Group has excluded this category because it is being
considered by the Senior Intelligence Service Support Staff. We
note that this Staff also will consider the feeder group to the SIS.
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
several employees within a component or bilateral
exchanges between components. The purpose of such
assignments usually is to enhance development of
specialized skills, broaden employee perspectives of
other activities related to these skills, or utilization
of certain skills to meet immediate needs of the organi-
zation. The Project Group especially emphasizes skill
development because current personnel practices, as
noted in a June 1979 DCI MAG study, "appear to encourage
individuals to seek management careers rather than
strive for excellence within their career specialities.
This trend may eventually undermine one of the major
strengths of the Agency: the high degree of functional
expertise within our cadre of journeymen employees."
Skill development assignments can come about by planning
at the Office/Division level, Career Service Panel
action, negotiation between components, special requests
by a component, vacancy notices or individual initiative.
3. Supervisory/Managerial Development involves
the sequential assignment of officers with perceived
management potential initially to provide supervisory/
managerial experience (and testing) within the com-
ponent and subsequently elsewhere in the office, Directorate,
and in a few instances cross-Directorate to obtain
130090001-7
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
breadth of experience and increasing managerial
responsibility. Such assignments generally are de-
veloped by the component chief with inputs in some
instances by the PDP mechanism and Career Service
Panels.
C. Historical Perspective.
1. Top management over the past seven years
has been encouraging greater use of rotational as-
signments to obtain more breadth of experience and as a
result such movement within Directorates and across
Directorate lines has been increasing. Implementation
of the PDP, APP, wider use of vacancy notices for
rotational tours, increased attention by component
managers, MAG recommendations, and greater personal
initiative by employees all have contributed to this
increase. In the professional ranks for FY 1978, for
example, over
employees were on rotation to.a
position outside their Career Service. On intra-
Directorate movement, there were over employees on
rotation.
2. The foregoing, however, does not shed light
on how much rotation is necessary or desirable, but it
does reflect that such movement is taking place within
the Agency. The volume of rotational assignments may
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
be adequate, but it has been argued that too much
of it may occur on an ad hoc basis for a variety of
administrative and personal reasons other than de-
velopmental. As has been noted in earlier personnel
studies, there is developmental dividend in such move-
ment in that employees are gaining wider experience,
but perhaps until recently, it has tended in some
instances to be a by-product of the process rather than
the result of long-range planning.
3. If there has been insufficient planning or
action to bring about programmed assignments and in-
creased breadth of employee experience, this can be
partially attributable to the policy guidance pro-
vided in Headquarters Regulations and the Directorates'
Personnel Handbooks.
for example,
merely says Heads of Career Services will "Establish
policy to facilitate inter-Career Service transfers and
rotational tours." The Personnel Objectives portion of
this Regulation makes no statement regarding rotational
assignment or its encouragement as a goal to meet
employee and/or organizational needs.
notes that promotion is bas__.. as-
sessment that the employee is qualified to undertake
8001300090001-7
25X1
25X1
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
higher level responsibility. Under elements to be
considered in making this assessment, however, no
specific mention is made of rotational tours or breadth
of experience as value factors.
4. The Directorates' Personnel Handbooks, except
for the DCI Area, all provide policy statements that
recognize the value of rotational assignments and
transfers. They are essentially passive, non-goal
oriented statements, however, that do not identify
rotations and breadth of experience--especially cross-
Directorate--as valuable objectives for both employees
and managment.
5. Although policy guidlines do not stress
the importance of rotational assignments, there is--as
recognized by NAPA--a significant degree of rotational
assignments in the Agency today. A controlling factor
on the number of such assignments, however, is the
need for each component to maintain its continuity of
substantive expertise. The demonstrated professional
competence of each component depends in large measure
on the depth of experience and specialized knowledge it
has in each substantive area. Excessive turnover would
tend to weaken this asset.
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
III. Conclusions.
A. There is no clear Agency policy statement defining
the purpose and goals of rotational assignments and the
value of breadth of experience to the Agency and its employees.
B. Directorates' policy statements in their Personnel
Handbooks encourage but do not stress rotations. They also
do not provide specific policy statements on Agency or
Directorate objectives for rotational assignments or the
value of breadth of experience.
C. The primary purposes of rotational assignments are
development of functional skills and supervisors/ managers.
A related purpose is to reduce barriers between Career
Services and foster teamwork.
D. Rotational tours have been increasing in recent
years, but maintenance of an office's continuity of sub-
stantive expertise and the availability of genuinely mean-
ingful tours are controlling factors on the number of
rotational assignments.
IV. Recommendations.
A. Have the Director of Personnel rewrite Head-
quarters
to provide a basic policy statement
that stresses the importance of rotational assignments in
meeting an Agency objective of obtaining maximum development
2:69R001300090001-7
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
of employee substantive and managerial skills and breadth
of related experience.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
B. Have the Deputy Directors revise Career Service
Handbooks to stress the Agency objective of Recommendation A
and include a policy statement on the value of rotational
assignments as they relate to the Directorate, the Agency,
and the individual. Also to be included, however, is a
statement that the necessity for continuity of substantive
expertise is a controlling factor on rotational assignments.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence Date
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20: CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-
COMPETITIVE EVALUATION PANELS
I. NAPA Recommendation.
. . . IL is recommenaea tnat the costs of administering the
. . . simplify the present system of evaluating employees
who are trainees below the journeyman level through greater dependence
upon supervisory evaluations and minimum dependence upon panel rankings."
(NAPA, Conclusions, p. 102.)
II. NAPA Comments..
personnel system be examined; specifically . . . the man years devoted to
panels . . ." (NAPA, Conclusions, p. 118.)
A. "Three hundred and ten (310) boards and panels are in operation
in the Agency today." (NAPA, The Present System, p. 40.)
man' level." (NAPA, The Present System, p. 43.)
up to the 'journeyman' level and promotion to positions above the 'journey-
B. "An important consideration which is not treated in any of the
regulations on the subject is the difference between promotion of a trainee
(NAPA, Executive Summary, pp. III and IV.)
part, from . . . and the number of man years devoted to panel operations.
C. The staff costs of administering personnel managment in the
CIA are high compared to other Federal agencies. The costs arise, in
III. Project Group Findings.
managers." (NAPA, Executive Summary, pp. V and VI.)
D. "The recent directive requiring supervisory compliance with
panel recommendations for promotion has caused concern among many line
A. Under the "journeyman" concept, a specific grade is designated
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
as representing the full performance level expected of the non-supervisory
employees, be they professionals, technicals or clericals.* Associated
with the concept is the establishment of job standards, and the acceptance
that the decision to promote is to be based on the performance of the
individual against those standards, not on competitive evaluation of
performance and potential factors; the responsibility for that judgment
of performance against standards will rest with the line managers.
Adoption of this concept:
1. permits the return to line management of the authority
and responsibility for promotion to journeyman, thus recognizing a basic
personnel management principle noted by NAPA - "line officers must be held
accountable for the management and performance of their people;"
2. reduces promotion panel costs significantly, by elimi-
nating those grades which cover a majority of the Agency population; and,
3. enhances the policy of competitive promotion by applying
it at the supervisory and senior non-supervisory levels--the situation
which demands competition due to the large number of candidates for a
limited number of positions.
B. Competitive evaluation panels should continue for those who have
reached the journeyman level (since the first line supervisors will come
from this group) and for supervisory and non-supervisory senior personnel.;
panels for those below the journeyman level should be discontinued.
*This varies according to components. For example in the Office of Com-
munications the professional journeyman level is at Grade 9; in most NFAC
offices it is at the GS-13 level.
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
IV. Conclusions.
A. The competitive evaluation program (and panels) should be limited
to recommending promotions to supervisory and senior non-supervisory positions;
such recommendations should be based on competitive evaluations of per-
formance and potential measurements.
B. Promotions to other positions (up to and including the journey-
man level) sho}ild be based on performance against job standards as evaluated
by the line managers. Components must also "live with" their Career Service
Grade Authorization (CSGA).
V. Recommendations.
A. Approve the concept of a journeyman level grade and establish
job standards related to it.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
B. Provide line managers the authority to promote individuals to
the level of journeyman, based on performance against job standards. The
level of this approval and the type of review authority (particularly the
impact upon the Career Service Grade Authorization) for these promotions
are to be established in each Directorate.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
C. Eliminate competitive evaluation/promotion panels for those
grades below journeyman level.*
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
D. Reaffirm competitive evaluation as a policy for supervisory and
senior non-supervisory positions; retain competitive evaluation/promotion
panels to recommend promotions at these levels based on assessment of
performance and potential.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence Date
*The Project Group estimates that this recommendation would reduce the
total number of panels by 45 or about 15% of the current total. In
addition, there are at least 30 other panels that consider employees in
grades 7 through 14; these panels would sit less frequently thereby re-
ducing substantially the number of manhours devoted to panel operations.
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269RO01300090001-7 TAB 0
DECISION-MAKING ROLE OF P_AATLS
I. NAPA Recommendations.
? Limit the decision-making role of panels.
? The level of approval for exceptions to promotion panel
recommendations be at the Directorate or independent office level through
GS-15 and at the DDCI level for SPS or GS-16 and above.
? For every exception made, the official responsible for
recommending the exception should record the reasons for the exception with
the Office of Personnel to enable an evaluation of all exceptions by
organization, grade, etc. An annual report on those data should be made
to theD CI/DDCI." (NAPA, Conclusions, p. 102.)
II. NAPA Comments.
A. "The personnel system should be based upon a common policy frame-
work, flexible enough to permit decentralized personnel management and to
meet the diverse needs of the components." (NAPA, Conclusions, p. 86.)
B. "Ease the current restrictions on supervisory modification of
promotion panel judgments. Monitor the incidence of such actions." (NAPA,
Executive Summary, p. XIV.)
C. "On 18 May 1978, the DDCI issued an instruction which stated that:
selected officials must 'follow rankings and recommendations for promotion
made by an evaluation panel; exceptions can only be made by the Director.'
This action has caused concern among many line managers." (NAPA, The
Present System, p. 4S.)
D. "There should be maximum line management involvement in personnel.
management." (NAPA, Conclusions, p. 86.)
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
III. Discussion.
A. Prior to 1978, Career Service and Subgroup panels were required to
perform annually a comparative evaluation of all professional employees.
This evaluation was to be advisory in nature. Although not required, it
was the practice in many Subgroups and in the DO as a whole to extend panel
responsibility to promotion review and recommendations, and some panels
also evaluated clerical and secretarial employees. In 1978, a policy
decision was reached to require all Career Services to use the panel system
to determine promotion rankings at each grade level. In addition, panel
promotion recommendations could only be changed by the DCI, thus changing
the panel role from advisory to decision-making. Also Career Services were
required to determine and meet annual promotion goals at each grade level.
In the same time frame the panel evaluation system in all Career Services
was expanded to include secretarial/clerical employees.
B. The :NAPA Team found fault with the extent of decision-making
responsibility given to panels, and the Project Group agrees with the NAPA
recommendation to limit this role. The Team's reasons are very germane.
They are quoted below:
1. "This action (i.e., decision-making authority) makes the panel
the selection official; not the line manager. This action weakens the role
of the line manager."
2. "The panel is not responsible for the employee's performance.
The manager is. There is no way to hold a panel accountable for its actions."
3. "Some panels do a good job; others do not."
4. "Panels may not have information or the perspective on employees
that a manager has. It is, at time, difficult to relate that information
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
which may be of a personal or confidential nature, and perspective to the
panel."
IR
M
M
W
5. "T`anagers might choose to accept the panel's recommendations
even when they have grave reservations rather than take the case to the
Director and ask for an exception." (NAPA, The Present System, p. 4S.)
C. The concept of using panels to determine promotions is defensible
as the panel system provides, particularly at the supervisory and above
level, for broader comparative evaluations and helps to reduce employee
perceived bias. The Project Group feels, however, that it cannot defend
the panel system in other than an advisory role. The manager is ultimately
responsible for all the resources that contribute to meeting the goal of
the organization. This officer should, therefore, have the authority to
make final decisions regarding these resources. Promotion is one of the
decisions that should be reserved to a manager.
D. While accepting that managers should have the final decision-
making authority, the Project Group does feel that when managers do not
accept the advice of panels, they should make the reasons for their non-
acceptance of matter of record.* By requiring non-acceptance to be a
matter of record, panel members will know the reasons why their recom-
mendation was not accepted, the possibility of rumor will be put to bed,
and whimsical choice will be avoided.
IV. Conclusions.
A. The role of Career Service and Subgroup panels should be advisory.
*The SIS Support Staff is reviewing the SIS promotion recommendation process.
0-3
SECRET
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
B. Exceptions to panel recommendations should be a matter of record.
V. Recommendations.
A. Establish the role of panels as advisory to the Heads of Career
Service and Subgroups.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
B. Require exceptions to panel promotion recommendations' through
GS-15 be fully documented as to the reasons, approved at the Directorate
or Independent Office level, reported to the panel concerned, and sub-
mitted to the Director of Personnel. The Director of Personnel is to
annually submit an analysis of these exceptions to the DCI/DDCI.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence Date
^
A
A
w
IP
10,
LU
 EVALUATION PANEL FUNCTIONS
I. NAPA Recommendations.
potential and indicate how each of these evaluation will be used."
(NAPA, Conclusions, p. 100.)
Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7TH ]'
A. "Clearly differentiate between evaluation for performance and
B. "Reduce the detail in ranking by categories to only that necessary
for decision-making." (NAPA., Conclusions, p. 102.)
II. NAPA Comments.
meet the diverse needs of the components." (.NAPA, Conclusions, p. 86.)
A. "The personnel system should be based upon a common policy frame-
work, flexible enough to permit decentralized personnel management and to
Valuable Contribution,' etc." (NAPA, Executive Summary, p. V.)
B. "There is confusion between 'performance' and 'potential' in the
use of the CIA descriptors - High Potential, May Develop High Potential,
C. "Some comparative evaluations of employees are excessively
definitive in that they purport to rank every employee in specific relation-
ship to every other employee. (That is, every individual in a group of .100
is assigned a position between 1 and 100)." (NAPA Executive Summary, pp. V $ VI.)
III. Discussion.
mance is a factor in the deliberations. Thus, performance and potential
levels of responsibility. In assessing potential, the evaluation of perfor-
defined as the assessment of the individual's readiness to assume higher
A. Normally within the Agency, performance is defined as the attainment
level reached in discharging assigned responsibilities while potential is
are interrelated.
ROOl flO090001-7
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
25X1
B. In reviewing functions performed by Agency evaluation panels, it
was found that panels review all employees for value to the service and
for promotion eligibility. Some panels have expanded this review to in-
clude a review for training, rotational assignments, and special recognition
rewards (i.e., QSI's, monetary awards, etc.). These additional reviews
are, however, outgrowths of the two regulatory requirements
D
5X1
determine promotion rankings by grade.
C. To assist in the comparative evaluation of employees, a Task Force
composed of representatives from each of the Career Services was formed in
1975 to develop a series of descriptors (Attachment). These are categories
(hi _est potential, may develop high potential, valuable contribution,
limited potential and substandard) into which employees are grouped for
identification by the evaluation process. From the beginning, however,
there was difficulty with the substantive content of the descriptors
(e.g., they confuse potential and performance), the significant degree
of overlapping between the categories and the connotations in the category
headings which have been upsetting to some employees and panel members.
In addition, the descriptors have been inconsistently applied among
career services.
D. What is the need for the descriptors? Do they aid in evaluating
performance? Do they aid in assessing potential? Panels are concerned
with two functions: one, recommending within established goals, which
employees should be promoted; and two, identifying those employees with
high potential for career growth into positions of increasingly greater
responsibility. The new Performance Appraisal Report System (PAR) provides
to perform comparative evaluations and to evaluate to
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
the basic performance evaluation documentation. In evaluating for
potential, panels have available for comparative review, each employee's
personal history (including experience and education), work performance
record and the supervisor's assessment of potential. The present de-
scriptors do not appear to aid in completing either of these functions.
C. Additionally, if panels are to evaluate for promotion eligibility
(,and, accordingly, make recommendations on who should be promoted) and
assess employees to identify those with highest potential, it does not
seem necessary to rank numerically every employee in specific relationship to
every other employee as is done in some career services. Promotion goals
are provided panels. The panel would be recommending those within the
career grouping who, in the panel's judgment, are most deserving of
promotion. The panel would also only be identifying one group of
employees, those with highest potential. The remainder would be those
without highest potential; further subcategorization appears superfluous.
The P.U. and the supervisor's assessment are available to identify sub-
standard performers.
D. A NAPA Project Group paper recommends providing line managers the
authority to promote individuals to the level of journeyman based on per-
formance evaluation. If approved, this recommendation will modify the
present need for panels below the journeyman level as promotion to the
journeyman level will be based upon the employee meeting established job
standards. In addition, another NAPA Project Group paper recommends that
panels be advisory to line managers.
IV. Conclusions.
A. Evaluation of performance contributes to assessing potential.
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
Performance can be more definitively measured as it is the attainment
level reached in discharging assigned responsibilities. Potential is,
however, a judgmental assessment of the individual's readiness to assume
higher levels of responsibility.
B. Panels have two functions. One is recommending, within established
goals, which employees within a career grouping should be promoted. The
second is to identify those employees with high potential for career
growth into positions of increasingly greater responsibility.
C. Descriptors presently in use do not aid in completing either
of a panels basic functions.
D. Ranking every employee in specific relationship to every other
employee also does not aid a panel in performing its basic tasks.
V. Recommendations.
A. Instruct the Heads of Career Services to revise Career Service
Handbooks and guidance to Career Service and Subgroup panels to distinguish,
if not already done, between evaluation for performance--that is the
attainment level reached in discharging assigned responsibilities--and for
potential--assessing the individual's readiness to assume higher levels
of responsibility--while recognizing that performance must be evaluated
while assessing potential.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
B. Approve the two basic functions of all Career Service and Subgroup
panels as :
-evaluating employees to recorrmrend, within established goals,
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
which employees within a career grouping should be promoted; and,
-identifying those employees with high potential for career growth
into positions of increasingly greater responsibility.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
C. No longer require Career Service and Subgroup panels to use
descriptors.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
D. Have Heads of Career Services and Subgroups whose panels
numerically rank all employees in specific relationship to all other
employees review the need to perform this function.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence Date
0001-7
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20: CIA-RDP86B002 P
Descriptors for Comparative Evaluation Groupings
Comparative evaluation rankings will be based specifically on
performance, potential, and value to the functioning of the
particular Career Service or Career Sub-Group involved. The com-
parative evaluation of employees will be considered in determining
appropriate work assignments and career actions such as promotion,
training, rotational assignments, counseling, and, if required,
adverse actions such as downgrading or separation.
Evaluation systems serve multiple purposes which cannot be
accomplished by competitive ranking alone but in which such
rankings play an important role. Thus, the determination of
employees to be promoted stems from consideration of comparative
ranking, performance, the response made to letters of instruction,
and the demonstration of capabilities to handle responsibilities to
be undertaken.
The Agency has affirmed its adherence to a merit system for
personnel actions; therefore, the underlying principle for com-
parative evaluation must be the relative merit or value of an
employee on the basis of performance and manifestation of potential.
HIGHEST POTENTIAL (HP)
Employees whose experience, qualifications and excellent per-
formance in assignments and training indicate that they have the
highest potential for advancement. Career actions should utilize
and further develop this potential.
MAY DEVELOP HIGH POTENTIAL (MD)
Employees whose qualifications and performance clearly are
above average and who give indication that they later may demonstrate
high potentialTr greater responsibility. Career actions (assignment,
training, experience on the job) should enhance their skills and
develop this potential.
VALUABLE CONTRIBUTION (VC)
Employees whose performance is good and who generally are realizing
their potential. This category will include some employees who may
be capable of performing at a higher level of responsibility and some
who may not. Among those who may not are employees who are making a
vital contribution to the functioning of their office (above average
or satisfactory performance) and would continue to do so either in
their present or a rotational assignment. Career management for
employees in this grouping should provide sufficient opportunities
for work satisfaction, improvement of skills, and personal growth
at current levels of responsibility so that those who may have future
potential have an opportunity to demonstrate it.
20 October 1975
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
LIMITED POTENTIAL (LP)
Employees whose overall performance is adequate but who have
some characteristic affecting knowledge or performance such that
their potential is judged to be limited. Their career planning and
counseling should consider whether there are measures which reasonably
can be taken to assist them in overcoming such deficiencies, whether
their talents can be utilized better in some other function. or office,
or whether they should be encouraged to seek career opportunities
elsewhere.
SUBSTANDARD (SS)
Employees whose performance and potential are substandard in com-
parison with others of the same grade and occupational category.
Requisite administrative actions may include, dependent on the pro-
cedures of the Career Service, notification, counseling, training
and/or reassignment. Employees in this grouping are subject to down/
grading or separation under the procedures specified by Agency reg-
ulations and the Career Service. In a:surplus situation, employees
so evaluated would have low priority for retention.
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20: CIA-RDP86B00269R00130009QM1 EF
I
UNIFORM PP.ECEPTS FOR PANELS
a
a
a
t
a
a
t
I
I. NAPA Recommendation.
"Provide uniform precepts for promotion panels." (NAPA, Conclusions,
p. 101.)
II. NAPA Comments.
A. "The personnel system should be based upon a common policy frame-
work, flexible enough to permit decentralized personnel management and
to meet the diverse needs of the components." (NAPA, Conclusions, p. 86.)
B. "There are a variety of differences in panel composition and
methods. of operation." (NAPA, The Present System. p. 43.)
C. "Adopt a number of specific suggestions for improving and
standardizing the functions of promotion panels." (NAPA, Executive Summary,
p. XIV.)
III. Discussion.
A. As all components within the Agency are not homogeneous in their
structure or functional roles, it follows that Career Service and Subgroup
panels which normally follow component organizational lines are also not
homogeneous in structure. As an example, panel coverage normally depends
on the size of the component and the distribution and mix of personnel
within that component. Also, some panels are responsible for personnel by
grade, some are organized by functional specialities, and some have com-
bination coverages. And, membership in the panels varies either by incum-
bents of designated positions or by individual appointment of employees
selected for their particular contributions. In addition, panels within
Q-1
/20 ' : CIA-R ;; 269R001300090001-7
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
the DO, the Senior Secretarial/Clerical Panels and the Career Service
Boards function on a Career Service basis while in the rest of the Agency,
panels function on a Subgroup basis.
B. As the structure of panels is not homogeneous Agency wide, it
is difficult to have uniform Agency wide guidance governing the structure
and operating methods of panels. However, NAPA properly identified a
need for some common guidance, various MAG's have addressed this subject.
and senior management has identified it as an item of concern. The Project
Group confirmed NAPA's observation that panels within Career Services and
Subgroups vary in operation and procedure. Examples are the variation
in the number of members, types of material given for use, duration of
membership, identification and definition of rating factors, etc. Granted,
there may be appropriate reasons for this variety; it appears, however,
that some guidance can be developed for uniform application within a
particular Career Service.
C. The most complete treatise on uniform guidelines for panels was
prepared by the DCI MAG. The NAPA Team generally supports the conclusions
and recommendations of this paper and summarized the major elements of it
in their report (attached).
IV. Conclusions.
A. Although .Career Service and Subgroup panels are not--for just
reason--homogeneous, there are a number of precepts that can be developed
for uniform-application to those panels which consider employees in like
work either at the Career Service or Subgroup level.
B. The attached provides some valid elements for Head of Career
Q-2
 r
r
^
Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
Services and Subgroups to use in developing uniform guidance to and
precepts for their panels.
V. Recommendation.
Have the Heads of Career Services develop, using the attachment
as a guide for their Career Service, uniform guidance to and precepts
for panel operations. This guidance is to be published in Career Service
Handbooks.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence
 e
r
Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
Extract from "1fi e CIA Personnel Management System", prepared by
The National Academy of Public Administration, March 15, 1979.
(a) Firsthand knowledge of those being evaluated must be
adequately represented in a panel.
(b) For accountability sake, line management representation on
2
the panel must be achieved.
(c) Types of data acceptable for panel consideration must be
identified and "benchmarked."
specified.
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
Cut-off dates for exclusion of data must be defined.
Duration of membership on a panel must be specified.
Size of panel required for optimum reliability must be
Factors included in the ratings must be identified and
defined in unambiguous terms.
and procedures should be instituted.
(1) A tutorial program in the fundamentals of panel purposes
the system, e.g., the EAG with support from the Office of Personnel.
(k). A staff component with Agency-wide scope should monitor
to a panel.
(j) Limits must be specified for the amount of "work" assigned
be defined.
(i) Specific steps to be followed in panel operations must
requirements.
by line management responsible for the position according to position
(h) Weights to be assigned the factors must be identified
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
LABELING POSITIONS AS PROFESSIONAL AND CLERICAL
^
^
^
0
I. NAPA Comment.
"There is a stigma attached to such labeling" (Ed.,
professional, clerical, or technical) "and agencies such as
Labor and Census are avoiding this categorization in all
their data gathering and reporting activities. The EEO
Advisory Group believes the Agency should follow a similar
course of action." (NAPA, the Present System pp. 75-76.)
II. Discussion.
A. The NAPA Report holds the view that a stigma is
attached to the designation or "labeling" of each position
in the Agency as professional, clerical or technical, the
implication being that clerical and technical tasks are
viewed as "non-professional." Preliminary to addressing
this matter, however, one item of accuracy must be noted
about the NAPA Report. Neither the Labor Department nor
Census Bureau has abandoned the use of labeling and both
continue the use of standard Civil Service job breakdown for
statistical reporting purposes. Rather, in communication
other than statistical reporting, a concerted effort is made
to substitute the word "support" for clerical wherever this
substitution will not confuse the issue at hand.
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
B. This notation aside, the division of jobs into
basic position categories such as professional, technical
and clerical has a variety of applications, as spelled out
in a memorandum on this subject prepared by D/OEEO at the
direction of the DDCI. These are:
?Labels facilitate CIA communication with and
reporting to other government agencies and
OMB about personnel related matters and are
useful for compensatory monitoring under the
Fair Labor Standards Act.
?Labels serve as an aid to Agency recruiters in
terms of clarifying Agency jobs and desired
qualifications to potential applicants who are
generally familiar with the Civil Service job
classification system.
?Labels facilitate the development, implementation,
monitoring and evaluation of the Annual Personnel
Plan, Personnel Development Plan, Equal Employment
Opportunity Plan and other personnel related
tools employed by management.
?Labels are used as a means of defining the
goal of Upward Mobility, i.e., movement from
dead-ended clerical or technical positions to
open opportunity professional positions. The
"non-professional" labels identify those eligible
to participate in Upward Mobility programs.
R-2
SECRET
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
III. Conclusions.
A. Division of jobs into basic position categories is
necessary for statistical and other reporting purposes.
B. Basic job titles could be changed in order to
eliminate the word "clerical" but this would be purely
cosmetic as long as we retain the "professional" designator.
C. No substitute for "professional" is apparent that
would not overly complicate and confuse present applications
of the three categories..
D. The terms professional, technical and clerical
have specific meanings as defined in the Agency Handbook of
Position Title and Occupational Codes that relate to the
complexity of the job, not to the professional manner in
which employees perform.
E. The problem as presented by the NAPA Report is an
attitudinal one and action should. be taken to promote a
better understanding of the use of labels for employees.
IV. Recommendations.
A. Maintain the basic position categories of clerical,
technical and professional.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
B. Charge the Director of Training to include a
segment in appropriate OTR courses (such as orientation and
:1A-RDP86B0 w 6 800130009000 `-7
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
management courses) that addresses the three basic job
categories into which all employees are placed, why this is
done, and what it means. The presentation should stress no
implication of lesser status for "non-professional," and
that clericals do perform in a professional manner, etc.
The message to be stressed is that Agency managers should
not recognize category distinctions in the treatment of
their employees and where possible should discourage the use
of such category labels in referring to individuals.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved,
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence Date
11
^
P
Am"
SUA
10
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
I. NAPA Recommendation.
"Clarify the intent and implications of a "flow-through"
policy by:
?identifying the group or groups to be covered;
*determining through modeling, the impact of
various concepts of 'flow-through' on the groups
involved; . . .". (NAPA, Conclusions, pp. 99-100.)
II. NAPA Comments.
A. "Other than for the obvious purpose of dismissing
individual employees who do not meet performance or suitability
standards, the separation authority has served as a tool to
reduce levels of employment in the Agency or components there
of and to maintain a young and vigorous work force. The latter
objective has been referred to as 'flow-through' " (emphasis
added) (NAPA, The Present System, p. 48.)
B. "Flow-through is not a workable concept for many Agency
managers. These managers argue that a 'young and vigorous' work
force is not a necessity in many parts of the Agency and that,
even in those components where it is highly desirable, there are
circumstances which require exceptions." (NAPA Executive Summary,
p. VI.)
101 `300090001-7
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7,
III. Discussion.
A. What would be the intent of an Agency flow-through
policy? Generally, when flow-through* is mentioned, the implied
intent is to maintain a "young and vigorous" work force. Not
only does this implied intent have litigious overtones, but as
observed in the NAPA Report, it has little acceptance among the
managers of the Agency. Its. most serious fault, however, is that
it defies the definition necessary to practical use. What is the
age distribution, by grade level, by job category which would
constitute a "young and vigorous" work force? Today? Tomorrow?
B. Would the intent be to rid the Agency of marginal or
substandard performers? The establishment of a flow-through
policy to achieve this objective appears redundant, since there
is a system already in existence under the Performance Appraisal
Report program.
C. Would the intent be to provide more promotional
opportunities than normally occur as a result of "headroom" and
attrition (deaths, resignation, and retirements)? A flow-through
policy could well serve this intent, and dependent upon the design
of its program, provide promotional opportunities in specific
numbers, grade levels, and job categories.
*In conversations and documents, the Project Group has found confusion with
regard to the terms and concepts of flow-through. A common perception is
that a flow-through policy means that the organization is committed to
.firing a number of employees each year. Flow-through is most often used in
the context of the absence/presence of promotional headroom.
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
D. There are, however, options to the flow-through policy
which can be applied--discontinued service, mandatory retirement
at 50 years of age for CIARDS participants, recruitment controls,
promotion targets, and when necessary, reductions-in-force.
IV. Conclusion.
Judged in the context of a broader objective, namely to
recruit and maintain a productive work force, the Project Group
concludes that the Agency does not need' and therefore should not
institute a flow-through policy. It further concludes that, if
line management performs the analysis of its work force, of the
present and for the future, necessary for the intelligent and
timely exercise of the options noted, the career development and
promotional opportunities needed for a productive work force can
be made available.
IV. Recommendations.
A. The DDCI issue a policy statement which expresses the
Agency's objective in regard to staffing, to include the follow-
ing thoughts:
1. The Agency's objective with regard to staffing
is to maintain a productive work force while ensuring
career development opportunities at all grade levels;
this objective does not include a "flow-through" policy.
N
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
2. In support of maintaining a productive work force
while ensuring career development, each Career Service Head
is responsible for establishing the hiring, staffing and
promotion patterns that will ensure a work force of the
proper background, experience, and grade necessary to
execute the responsibilities of that career service.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
B. Have each Directorate establish the data requirements
necessary for determining the nature of its present work force,.
(e.g., grade distribution, age-by-grade, time-in-grade, time-
with-Agency, etc.).
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
C. Have Career Service Heads analyze their personnel
structure by age and grade in a five-year context and develop a
program for hiring, promotion, rotation, and reduction of
personnel if necessary to achieve a balanced work force with
developmental opportunities for each grade. The DDCI is to
approve program goals annually and monitor achievements. The
APP is to provide the vehicle for reporting the goals.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
S-4
SECRET
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
D. Have the Director of Personnel develop data reduction
and analysis techniques for use by the Directorates, as required
to support their analyses.
The above recommendation is
( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
Deputy Director o Central Intelligence Date
 JCLKtI
Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
TAB T
PERSONNEL REDUCTIONS
I. NAPA Recommendation.
"A system be established for dealing with personnel reductions
(NAPA, Conclusions, pp. 99-100.)
II. NAPA Comments.
"The 1977 personnel reductions illustrated at least three problems
with the present system. The first is that the reduction was undertaken
without a clear picture of what the organization looked like before the
reduction and what it should look like after the reduction. The second
is that there is no system for separating people due to reductions in
personnel ceilings and the DDO had to develop an ad hoc system on the
spot to effect the reduction. The third is that the Office of Personnel
was not involved initially, but did yeoman work to place people through-
out the Agency. It did so primarily on the basis of its persuasive
ability rather than on the basis of policy and procedures." (NAPA, The
Present System, p. 50)
III. Discussion.
A. Under present Agency regulations
an employee can
be found "excess to Agency needs", and separated, if:
? The component is overstrength overall or in a grade or
functional elements;
? There is no longer a requirement for the particular skills
or qualifications possessed by the employee; or
? There is a reduction or elimination of the functions of
the component, thereby requiring a reduction in staff.
X1
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
B. There is no Agency regulation, however, that describes the
criteria or the process by which the reduction will be accomplished.
Though the Career Services address the subject in their respective
Handbooks, the statements speak to generalities, and the words suggest
different criteria; two examples:
? "Office Head or Staff Head will review experience record,
qualifications, and relative rankings of each employee in the lowest
categories of the competitive rankings." (Underscoring supplied)
personnel reductions will be made to the extent
possible from among persons competitively ranked in the lowest three
percent in performance (underscoring supplied) and with due consideration
to the functions being reduced."
C. The absence of an Agency policy with regard to criteria and
its application, coupled with the lack of consistency in the statements
in the Career Service Handbooks, creates uncertainty and criticism
beyond that normally associated with a reduction exercise. The NAPA
Team reached this judgment and the Project Group agrees with it.
D. In the Project Group's opinion there should be basic ground
rules for reduction exercises. On the other hand, in order to preserve
for management some latitude for adjusting to the conditions of time?
management should not attempt to identify in advance the specific
criteria to be used for reductions and the relative weight to be applied
to each.
IV. Recommendations.
A. Issue a statement with regard to the Agency's personnel reductions
policy, to include the following:
 s
S
4
I
4
Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
In the event of a reduction in the Agency's personnel ceiling,
major shifts in programs or responsibilities which result in excess
personnel, or imbalance in skills or grade levels, the Heads of the
Career Services and the Director of Personnel, are jointly responsible
for developing a program for separating excess personnel. The program
will utilize certain basic criteria, and will be approved by the DCI.
These criteria, in unranked order are:
1. Performance
2. Unique and necessary skills
3. Value to service
The specific weights of the individual elements, or the addition of
other elements, will be recommended by the Heads of Career Services, and
the Director of Personnel, and approved by the DCI. In the instance of
a personnel reduction all employees will be provided, in a published
notice, an explanation of the situation, the specific criteria to be used
and their relative weights, the decision mechanism (i.e., Career Service
Board, special selection panels), the details of appeal, and information
on placement opportunities, both internal and external.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence Date
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20: CIA-RDP86B00269 R001300090001-7rp-B 'T
I. TEA Statement.
"The 'low three percent out' concept has not resulted directly
in eliminating the least desirable personnel and is inadequate for use as
a reduction-in-force mechanism." (NAPA, Executive Summary, p. VI.)
II. NAPA Comments.
A. "The three percent concept derives from the military services
and is based upon assumption that on a service-wide comparison, the bottom
three percent should be dispensed with if their relative rank does not
improve over a two-year period. One of the difficulties with the 'three
percent' concept is that it simply has not been used in CIA . . . Partial
support of the fact that the three percent concept is not in use is the
fact that records of the 1977 cut appear to indicate that some people were
separated who should have been separated during or after initial training."
(NAPA, The Present System, pp. 49-SO.)
B. "The Agency should not depend upon the low 3 percent or 5 percent
system to solve problems related to reductions in personnel ceilings."
(NAPA, Conclusions, p. 103.)
III. Discussion.
A. The annual identification of the low three percent, when viewed as
the mechanism for the selection of employees to be released in the event:
of a reduction in personnel ceiling, was judged inadequate by the NAPA Team.
The Project Group shares that opinion because it believes that the selection
of individuals for reduction should be based upon the conditions causing
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
25X1
in procedures for its implementation. The intent of
the reduction and what the organization (the Agency in total, or the
smallest unit affected) decides it should be after the reduction. The
comparative evaluation of individuals alone does not meet this goal.
Moreover, a low ranking does not necessarily coincide with poor perfor-
mance. Recognition of this latter point has led many Career Service panels
to develop low three lists from those ranked in the low percent who also
are placed in Limited Potential or Substandard Comparative Evaluation
Groupings. The Project Group believes that identification of problem
cases (i.e., poor performers) and the pursuit of solutions is the super-
visor's responsibility and there are existing Agency mechanisms to handle
these situations.
B. Further to above, the Project Group found ambiguities and lack
of uniformity both in interpretation of the low three percent concept and
(specifically those ranked in the bottom three percent) for counseling
purposes first, and then if the performance is not improved after two
years on consideration for "administrative action" (i.e., downgrading or
separation).
C. The five Career Services have various means of developing a low
ranking as is evident from their handbooks. Generally, the Career Services
place emphasis in the first instance on counseling the substandard and
if that fails, then on separation. Two Career Services (the DO and NFAC)
identify the ranking as a low three percent, another (the DDS$T) defines
it as a low ten percent and the other two Directorates (DA and E) do not
specify the percent.
is to focus attention on relatively poor performers
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
10
IN
IN
P
14
IN
0
D. However,.in contrast to the counseling aspect, the DDCI in a
memorandum for all employees dated 7 April 1978 implies that the three
percent ranking may be used to obtain promotion headroom. Specifically,
in the context of a uniform promotion system, this memorandum states:
"These promotion rates will be sustained for the most part
through normal attrition, but additionally it will be necessary to apply
aggressively the current regulation) Ifor the identification of
the bottom three percent evaluated annually. The bottom three percent
is not simply determined by ranking, but also by an absolute determination
of the employee's value and potential as assessed by the evaluation panels
and Career Service boards . . .
IV. Conclusions.
A. The low three percent out concept is ineffective as a separation
mechanism.
B. There are ambiguities and lack of uniformity in the interpretation
of the low three percent concept and its implementation throughout the
Agency. This is especially relevant in regard to the use of the concept
as a flow-through mechanism. If Agency management believes there is a need
to sustain promotion rates through identification and separation of
employees ranking in the lowest three percent then
revised to clarify its purpose and to define the procedures for administering
a low three percent out concept.
C. The competitive evaluation program (and panels) should not be used
to identify employees ranked at the lower end of a competitive ranking.
Identification of poor performers and individuals with serious problems
affecting performance should be part of the PAR.
X1
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
V. Recommendations.
A. Eliminate the requirement to develop a low three percent
ranking.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
B. Publish Agency Notice explaining actions in Recommendation A.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence Date
 25X1 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
Next 2 Page(s) In Document Exempt
Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R00130009003-7W
AGENCY'S OBLIGATION TO R1PLOYEES
I. NAPA Recommendation.
NAPA, in addressing both the need for a system to deal with
personnel reductions and in assessing the validity of the "flow-through"
concept, recommended "reviewing the Agency's obligation to employees in
terms of retention until eligible for retirement and/or retention in
positions outside of the groups affected." (NAPA, Conclusions, p. 100.)
II. Discussion.
A. Present Agency regulations on the separation of excess personnel
"if an employee is excess to the needs of a component
and requests assistance for reassignment, an effort will be made first by
the Career Service and then by the Office of Personnel to find suitable
employment elsewhere in the Agency." In addition,
Director of Personnel will "provide a program to assist prospective
retirees in preparing for and obtaining post-retirement employment and to
furnish prospective resignees with possible sources of new employment."
Resignees have also included employees declared excess to needs, and the
out-placement program has been extended to them.
B. A NAPA Project Group paper recommends that, in the event of a
need for personnel reductions, the program be developed around certain
basic criteria. In addition, the recommendation states that information
on placement opportunities, both internal and external be provided em-
ployees subject to a reduction program.
C. However, there is not a defined and recorded policy statement on
the Agency's obligation to employees. The policy can in part be gleaned
2511
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
from existing regulations and recommendations for new policy.
III. Conclusions.
A. A policy statement on the Agency's obligations to employees is
needed, particularly on how this obligation relates when personnel reduction
programs are necessary.
B. The policy statement should acknowledge the dynamic nature of the
Agency's mission and functions, the ever-present possibility of an imposed
reduction in the Agency's personnel ceiling and, the need for a balanced and
productive work force.
IV. Recommendations.
A. Approve a policy that offers the opportunity for career employment
to employees so long as the employee's performance is acceptable, the employee
continues to contribute to Agency needs and there is a position available
within the Agency where the employee's skills, talents, and experience can
be utilized.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
B. If the above policy is approved, have the Director of Personnel
prepare it for publication in Agency-regulations.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
Deputy Director of-Central Intelligence bate
 TAB X
Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001 30009000 1-7
PERSONNEL NANAGENTNT EVALUATION PROGRAM
I. NAPA Recommendation.
"The system which we recommend below for the exercise of the DCI's
personnel management responsibilities leaves much of the action in the hands
of subordinates to whom he has delegated authority. There remains with the
DCI, the need for periodic assessment of the total operation. We recommend
that action be taken to:
? Involve line managers more deeply in the evaluation of the
personnel management system and the manner with which it is being implemented
in the organization(s) for which they are responsible through:
-providing managers with evaluation guides so that they can
measure the performance of their organization in personnel management;
-having each level in the organization, starting with Divisions/
Offices and ending with the DDCI, conduct an annual review of personnel
management activities for the past year and goals for the coming year
with heads of each of their subordinate organizations.
? Coordinate these evaluation efforts -- this should be done by
the DCI/DDCI with the assistance of the EAG and should also take into account
evaluations conducted by the Office of Personnel, the Office of Training,
the Inspector General, and the proposed management staff."
(NAPA, Conclusions, pp. 110-111.)
II. NAPA Comments.
"There does not appear to be a comprehensive system for evaluating
personnel operations, tracking performance or enforcing compliance with
policy." (NAPA, Executive Summary, p. III.) "From all of the above, it is
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
apparent that there is no comprehensive coordinated evaluation system at
present and no system for tracking and enforcement." (NAPA, The Present
System, p. 18.)
III. Discussion.
A. Executive Order 9830, dated 9 October 1969, requires the head of
each Federal Agency to review the Federal Agency's personnel programs and
specify the minimum requirement for each Federal Agency's personnel manage-
ment evaluation system. The rationale is that Federal Agency managers
cannot fulfill their personnel management responsibilities unless they
know how well personnel management activities are contributing to mission
accomplishment, productivity, and overall organization effectiveness; and
whether they are being carried out in compliance with law, regulatior
and other public policies.
B. A personnel management evaluation (PATE) program is the means to
accomplish this periodic assessment of personnel management effectiveness.
The goal of the program is to review the programs, systems, procedures
and techniques by which managers accomplish objectives through the use of
people. It is not a review of personnel administration but rather a review
of personnel management.
C. NAPA identifies two areas of concern with the Agency's PALE program.
One is that if line managers, under a decentralized personnel system, are
responsible for personnel management, they should be given proper tools to
perform that function; also included would be the means to perform an
appropriate evaluation. The other concern is to coordinate evaluation
efforts done by various components within the organizational structure.
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
The NAPA Project Group agrees that these are legitimate concerns needing
resolution.
D. As indicated in the NAPA Report, personnel management evaluation
tools presently provided for line managers are the Annual Personnel Plan
(APP) and the Personnel Development Program (PDP). NAPA also notes that
personnel management evaluation activities are found in more than one
organizational component of the Agency. They identify the Office of the
Inspector General, the Office of Training and the Office of Personnel as
performing PME efforts.
E. As tools for component use in PNB, the APP and PDP must have
meaning for managers, meet their needs and not require an inordinate
amount of time to complete. Unfortunately, as noted in the NAPA Report,
line managers cited the above as problems with the APP and PDP. The APP
should permit line managers to review personnel management plans in their
respective areas of responsibility, monitor patterns of progress toward
their accomplishment, and evaluate the effectiveness of implementation.
The basic concept is to have needs determined at the lowest line level
possible, have these needs reviewed by Directorate and Senior Managers
with goal setting agreements and then to provide for a review of accomplish-
ment. The APP, however, is now burdened with additional information and
data to be tracked mostly of an EEO nature. As a result, its usefulness
as a basic element in personnel management becomes marginal. With re-
direction, the APP can be a proper mechanism for goal setting and effective-
ness monitoring. The PDP, which is executive development related, will be
reviewed in conjunction with the executive development aspects of the
SIS system.
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
F. Outside of the Office of Personnel, the other major organizational
element evaluating personnel management is the Office of the Inspector
General. In component and audit surveys, the Inspector General primarily
does mission performance evaluations. These surveys normally include
comments and, in some instances, specific recommendations relating to
personnel management. In addition, the Inspector General, in handling
employee grievances, can assess in a limited way, some aspects of personnel
management. Due to the nature of the Inspection and Audit reports and the
confidential nature of the material they contain, distribution is normally
limited. Findings and conclusions on personnel management are provided
line managers but not to the Office of Personnel.
G. The Office of Training on an ad hoc basis compiles information
from students on their perceptions of component's personnel management
effectiveness. Usually these perceptions are gained in the management
Seminar, Advanced Intelligence Seminar, Mid-Career Course, Senior Seminar,
etc. These compilations have been provided, either as a direct report.
or as an extract from a course report, to such senior managers as the DCI,
DDCI, DDA, etc;=however, a report has not been compiled in over a year. As
these are not evaluation mechanisms but are reports of perceptions without
explanation or evaluation, they appear to be of marginal value. These
perceptions have not been provided to either the line manager or the Office
of Personnel.
H. In contrast to the Inspector General who performs mission per-
formance evaluation, the office of Personnel as directed
will evaluate specific personnel management programs. The PIT Staff of OP
will, when fully operational, use surveys and audits of Career Service and
E
2511
SECRET
 SECRET
Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
component personnel operations to evaluate personnel management implementation,
adherence to applicable law, Executive Orders and Agency regulations and
policy. In addition, this staff will provide guidance, advice and
assistance to line managers in improving the effectiveness of personnel
management. The OP evaluation effort is augmented by the PMCD surveys
of organizational components which, while heavily oriented to a review
of position classification, include coverage of position management, man-
power utilization and internal communications. In addition, OP analyzes data
from component APPs and PDPs for DCI/DDCI use in assessing personnel manage-
ment effectiveness. These evaluation efforts are provided to component
managers.
IV. Conclusions.
A. A comprehensive personnel management evaluation program is
needed to assess the effectiveness of the Agency's personnel management
program.
B. As line managers are primarily responsible for personnel manage-
ment, they should assess the effectiveness of their personnel management
programs.
C. A personnel management evaluation program, to be complete, must
include all findings regarding personnel management, be they results from
mission performance evaluations, specific program evaluations, or the
results of employee perceptions. Thus, personnel management evaluations
done by various organizational components must be available to the line
manager.
D. The Annual Personnel Plan, by redirection can provide component
managers with a basic evaluation guide that will permit both personnel
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
management goal setting and an annual review of accomplishment. However,
other tools may be necessary.
V. Recommendations.
A. Have the Director of Personnel, in consultation with line managers,
develop evaluation tools for use by line managers in assessing the effective-
ness of their personnel management programs.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
B. Require line managers to annually report on the effectiveness of
their personnel management programs. This report will take into considera-
tion findings on the effectiveness of their personnel management programs
done by other components of the Agency, and the line managers review of
personnel goals and accomplishments.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence Date
a
I
Q
w
1
a
r
I
w
 SECRET
Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
TAB Y
COSTS OF PERSONNEL AIMINISTRATION
I. NAPA Recommendation.
"It is recommended that the cost of administering the personnel
system be examined; specifically
- The roles and numbers of personnel careerists
assigned to components.
- The man years devoted to panels.
- The roles and numbers of non-careerists performing
personnel functions in the components."
(NAPA, Conclusions, p. 118.)
II. NAPA Comments.
A. "The costs of the present system should be reviewed and cost
containment should be given a high, but not overriding priority."
(NAPA, Conclusions, p. 85.)
120 CIA-
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
25X1
regard to the ratioing, and our own efforts in a discussion with two of the
NAPA Team members*, and other agencies, to define what was being compared.**
C. In the NAPA Team's review of Agency personnel costs it recommends
certain areas be examined to determine if:
1. the service being provided is worth the cost; and,
2. if the service can be provided in a less costly fashion.
stance, are incorrect; we know this from the NAPA Teams own warning with
draw us to a comparison of ratio figures (employees administering the
system relative to total employment) as the means for determining whether
costs are high or not. Inherent in that simplicity of approach, however,
is an assumption that like things are being compared; inherent in the
number is an assumption of quality. Assumptions, in this particular in-
I
ose costs, nor any compara ive e y
di use m as
B. The simplicity of the approach and the "preciseness" of numbers
costs are high compared to other agencies does not lend itself to critical
examination since their study does not provide the elements which constitute
ure of effectiveness of the stems
III. Project Group Findings.
A. The observation by the NAPA Team that CIA's personnel administration
*In a meeting with me ers of the Project Group, recalled that.
he had advised his colleagues against the use of the com-
parison, fearing that attention and action would be focused on arguments
about the number and away from the message the Team wished to deliver
about costs.
**A subsequent memorandum from the DDA, dated 19 October 1979, (attached) pro-
vides further evidence of the inherent problems in trying to fix a specific
ratio.
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
6
V
w
The Project Group addressed one of these areas (Panels, Tab N), and has
proposed changes which would result in a sizable reduction in costs.
Additional review of this area may afford other cost savings.
D. The other two recommended areas--personnel careerists assigned
to components, and non-careerists performing personnel functions--need
to be examined, with emphasis on the Directorate of Operations because of
the number involved there. Particularly important is the need to define
the roles of such personnel in order to sort out the true costs for
personnel administration.
E. We believe the appropriate level of attention for this matter,
which involves primarily value judgments on services needed and on effect-
iveness, should be the DDCI and the Directorate heads. And, as the NAPA
Team advised--"cost containment should be given a high, but not overriding
priori . "
IV. Recommendation.
Task each Directorate, with the guidance of the Director of
Personnel, to assess personnel costs in the areas noted by the NAPA Team
and report findings, with recommendations, to the DDCI.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence Date
 25X1 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
Next 1 Page(s) In Document Exempt
Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
PERSONAL RANK ASSIGNMENTS (PRA)
I. NAPA Observations on PRA.*
A. In examining the concept of Personal Rank Assignments,
practiced primarily in the Operations Directorate, the NAPA Team
raised the question: "Should the Agency (in view of the drive
to standardize practices) consider abandoning PRA for all but
the DDO, or for all but DDO and those portions of other Director-
ates which have significant overseas billets or continue the
present system?" (NAPA, The Present System, p. 35.) The Team
rejected a two system approach primarily because they felt the
flexibility provided by PRAs should be available to all Agency
components, not just to those oriented overseas. The NAPA Report
specifically noted: "The Agency currently has the best of both
worlds and if flexibility to adjust the system to the needs of
diverse parts creates some untidiness or ambiguity, this can be
dealt with as problems arise and is preferable to systemic
symmetry for its own sake." (NAPA, Conclusions, p. 88.) The
Project Group endorses this conclusion.
In its Report the NAPA Team grouped together as Personal Rank Assignments
both employees in positions higher than their grade and employees in positions
lower than their grade. The latter category is what the Agency defines as PRA.
This NAPA misconception caused problems for the Project Group in relating the
Team's comments with the Agency definition of the term.
':3'/08/20 : CIA-R
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
25X1
25X1
B. In the course of its favorable comments on PRA, how-
ever, the NAPA Team noted that "discussion with current and
former leaders as well as managers and employees revealed some
confusion about policy and practices." (NAPA, The Present
System, p. 4) This paper addresses that observation.
II. Discussion.
A. NAPA did not elaborate on what constituted the
"confusion" over PRA. The Project Group reviewed the relevant
Headquarters Regulation
and concluded it is an
easily understood policy statement reflecting the basic concept
that PRAs are temporary in nature. It clearly presents limita-
tion (initially two years), allowances for necessary flexibility
in unusual circumstances, written justification by the Operating
Official, concurrence of the Head of the Career Service and
approval authority of the Director of Personnel. Additionally,
each of the Directorate Personnel Handbooks adequately addresses
PRAs, although those for NFAC and DDA do not speak to Personal
Rank Assignments per se. If there is confusion over "practices,"
the Project Group presumes it probably involves rationalization
of the concept that PRAs are temporary with those PRAs of un-
usually long duration--i.e., those approximating five years or
longer. One can argue that any PRA exceeding two years is of
unusually long duration and is contrary to the intent of
0
The Project Group disagrees, noting that the Regulation
makes special emphasis on the five-year period.
Z-2
SECRET
 SECRET
Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
B. Statistics on current Personal Rank Assignments.
were examined to determine the magnitude of PRAs of 5-years and
more. They number only 14: 9 of about five years, 2 of six
years, and 3 of seven years. Of this 14, DDO has 8; DDSETT, 4;
DDA, 1; and NFAC, 1. Although there may be a question as to why
such PRAs have been continued, their insignificant number would
suggest they involve "unusual circumstances." Moreover, these
and all other PRAs are monitored on a continuing basis by the
Director of Personnel. Monthly reports are sent to the Director-
ates listing the "Not to Exceed" dates for each PRAed employee.
Thus, there is a constant reminder to component management that
discourages inattention regarding follow-up action on such
cases.
III. Conclusions.
A. Personal Rank Assignments generally are being utilized
in accordance wit and a mechanism independent of the
Career Services is provided to monitor such practice and to
approve/disapprove all extensions.
B. The total number of PRAs is small relative to the
Agency population, and the number of PRAs of long duration is
insignificant.
IV. Recommendations.
A. Retain the present concept of Personal Rank Assign-
ments with monitoring by the Director of Personnel.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
Z-3
SECRET
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
B. Have the Director, NFAC, and the Director of Admini-
stration clearly label coverage of Personal Rank Assignments in
their Career Service Handbooks so as to provide Agency-wide
consistency among handbooks and for easy identification by
employees.
The above recommendation is ( ) approved ( ) disapproved.
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence Date
M
M
t
 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
 25X1 Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
Next 5 Page(s) In Document Exempt
Approved For Release 2003/08/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R001300090001-7
 Approved For Release ?PP,k9W 0 : CIA-RDP86B00269RO01300090001-7
Approved For Releask &,U/20 : CIA-RDP86B00269R00130009000.1-7