SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

The Social Security Administration’s Hiring Under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009

August 2010

A-12-10-11050

QUICK RESPONSE EVALUATION

August 2010

Mission

By conducting independent and objective audits, evaluations and investigations, we inspire public confidence in the integrity and security of SSA’s programs and operations and protect them against fraud, waste and abuse. We provide timely, useful and reliable information and advice to Administration officials, Congress and the public.

Authority

The Inspector General Act created independent audit and investigative units, called the Office of Inspector General (OIG). The mission of the OIG, as spelled out in the Act, is to:

 Conduct and supervise independent and objective audits and investigations relating to agency programs and operations.
 Promote economy, effectiveness, and efficiency within the agency.
 Prevent and detect fraud, waste, and abuse in agency programs and operations.
 Review and make recommendations regarding existing and proposed legislation and regulations relating to agency programs and operations.
 Keep the agency head and the Congress fully and currently informed of problems in agency programs and operations.

To ensure objectivity, the IG Act empowers the IG with:

 Independence to determine what reviews to perform.
 Access to all information necessary for the reviews.
 Authority to publish findings and recommendations based on the reviews.

Vision

We strive for continual improvement in SSA’s programs, operations and management by proactively seeking new ways to prevent and deter fraud, waste and abuse. We commit to integrity and excellence by supporting an environment that provides a valuable public service while encouraging employee development and retention and fostering diversity and innovation.

Background
OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to determine whether the Social Security Administration (SSA) reported American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) new hire data to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) timely and accurately. We also provided information on the status and characteristics of these new hires.

BACKGROUND

ARRA was signed into law on February 17, 2009. One goal of ARRA funding was to preserve and create jobs. ARRA provided SSA with $500 million to process the increasing disability and retirement workloads caused in part by the economic downturn and the leading edge of the baby boomer retirements. In its plan to use these ARRA funds, SSA reported to OMB that the Agency planned to hire an additional 2,415 staff to process disability and retirement workloads in Fiscal Year (FY) 2009. This staff would be hired in the Offices of Operations (Operations) and Disability Adjudication and Review (ODAR), as well as the disability determination services (DDS), as shown in Figure 1.
 
Figure 1: Number of Staff Hired Under ARRA

OMB issued guidance on spending and accounting for ARRA funds. The OMB guidance specified that Federal agencies are required to provide spending and performance data to the Recovery.gov Website; the official Government-run Website detailing ARRA spending by Federal agencies and non-Government recipients. Recovery.gov provides the public with a user-friendly tool to track how and where ARRA funds are spent.

SSA has also made its ARRA efforts available to the public on its Agency-run ARRA Website. Moreover, SSA’s FY 2009 Performance and Accountability Report refers readers to SSA’s ARRA Webpage that highlights ARRA performance measures.

Results of Review
SSA timely reported aggregate FY 2009 staffing information to OMB and Recovery.gov relating to the number of ARRA employees hired in Operations, ODAR, and the DDSs. In addition, we reviewed a sample of new hire records and found the number of FY 2009 ARRA employees hired at Operations and ODAR to be accurate. At the time of our audit, about 8 percent of the Agency’s new hires had separated from SSA because either they resigned or SSA terminated them. Because of the Agency’s process for tracking employment at the DDS level, we were unable to verify the accuracy of the 300 DDS employees hired using ARRA funding. However, we were able to determine that FY 2009 hiring at DDS locations was consistent with the ARRA positions allocated by the Agency.

SSA used multiple hiring authorities to hire the 2,115 employees in Operations and ODAR. In terms of the most used hiring authority by component, approximately 74 percent of Operations’ employees was hired using the Federal Career Internship Program (FCIP) authority, and 48 percent of the ODAR employees was hired using the traditional Competitive Service authority. About 6 percent of the total new employees at these components was appointed under the Veterans’ Recruitment Appointment (VRA) authority. In our review of the sample cases, we identified two cases where military service information for new employees needed updating in SSA’s system. In addition, we found that approximately 8 percent of the Agency’s hires in our sample had previous Federal employment experience, including SSA interns who were converted to full-time employees.

REPORTED ARRA NEW HIRES

SSA timely reported on the aggregate number of FY 2009 ARRA employees hired at Operations, ODAR, and the DDSs to OMB. However, while we were able to verify the accuracy of the ARRA-funded SSA new hires, we could not perform this test on the ARRA-funded DDS new hires because of the Agency’s process for tracking employment at the DDSs. At the time of our audit, about 8 percent of the Agency’s new hires reviewed had separated from SSA because they resigned or the Agency terminated them.

Timely Reporting of FY 2009 ARRA Hiring

SSA timely reported the aggregate number of FY 2009 ARRA hires at Operations, ODAR, and the DDSs to OMB. SSA then posted this information on Recovery.Gov. For example, the May 29, 2009 posting on Recovery.Gov, under the Financial and Activity Report, showed that the Agency had hired 1,514 employees in Operations, 299 employees in ODAR, and 267 employees at the DDSs. Under the September 25, 2009, Financial and Activity Report, SSA stated it had attained its ARRA goal of 2,415 new hires in the 3 components.

While the aggregate ARRA hires in the Financial and Activity Report were correct, the detailed counts by region were not accurate. For instance, we found that the Operations’ new hire numbers reported on September 25, 2009, were off by 223 employees—New York Region new hires were not reported and the Dallas Region reported 29 new hires rather than 146 new hires. We also found other minor discrepancies between the year-end regional figures reported on Recovery.Gov and the final regional figures reported to us by Agency staff as part of this review.

ARRA Hires in Operations

SSA provided us with details on the 1,530 employees hired in Operations in FY 2009 using ARRA funds. These new hires were expected to process disability and retirement workloads in SSA field offices, program service centers, and teleservice centers. Table1 provides the reported location where the Operations employees were placed.

Table 1: New Hires in Operations Using FY 2009 ARRA Funds
Location Number of New Hires
Region1: Boston 23
Region 2: New York 106
Region 3: Philadelphia 140
Region 4: Atlanta 446
Region 5: Chicago 191
Region 6: Dallas 146
Region 7: Kansas City 54
Region 8: Denver 29
Region 9: San Francisco 192
Region 10: Seattle 50
Operations (Headquarters) 153
Totals 1,530

We reviewed 50 randomly selected Operations employees hired using ARRA funding and found that all 50 employees were hired after SSA received the FY 2009 ARRA appropriation and before the end of FY 2009. We also verified that SSA issued a Standard Form 50—Notification of Personnel Action (SF-50) for the 50 employees, with a special citation indicating that they were ARRA-funded positions. Furthermore, we checked the SSA email accounts for the 50 employees and found that 7 did not have SSA email accounts. We spoke to SSA staff and learned that these seven employees (14 percent of our sample) either resigned or had been terminated by the Agency and removed from SSA’s email system.

ARRA Hires in ODAR

SSA provided us with details on the 585 employees hired in ODAR in FY 2009 using ARRA funds. These new hires included administrative law judges and support staff who were assigned to process disability and retirement workloads in SSA hearing offices. Table 2 provides the reported location where the new ODAR employees were placed.

Table 2: New Hires in ODAR Using FY 2009 ARRA Funds
Location Number of New Hires
Region 1: Boston 31
Region 2: New York 32
Region 3: Philadelphia 69
Region 4: Atlanta 141
Region 5: Chicago 66
Region 6: Dallas 87
Region 7: Kansas City 16
Region 8: Denver 6
Region 9: San Francisco 114
Region 10: Seattle 23
Totals 585

We reviewed 50 randomly selected ODAR employees hired using ARRA funding and found that all 50 employees were hired after SSA received the FY 2009 ARRA appropriation and before the end of FY 2009. We also verified that SSA issued an SF 50 for the 50 employees, with the correct code indicating they were ARRA-funded positions. We found that SSA accurately tracked all 50 employees by issuing a special citation on the SF-50 for each employee hired with ARRA funds. Furthermore, we checked the SSA email account for the 50 ODAR employees and found that 1 employee in our sample was no longer listed in SSA’s email system because she resigned.

ARRA Hires in the DDS Offices

SSA provided us with the location of the 300 DDS employees hired in FY 2009 using ARRA funds (see Table 3), but was unable to provide details on the specific individuals hired by the DDSs. SSA staff stated neither the Agency nor the DDS tracked specific individual employees hired using the FY 2009 ARRA funds. SSA only tracked the aggregate number of ARRA employees until the maximum of 300 employees had been hired. SSA staff said this approach was consistent with SSA’s general procedures related to DDS personnel practices. Moreover, the DDSs were not required to track the ARRA-funded employees hired in their personnel records. As a result, we were not able to associate specific DDS employees to ARRA-created positions, as we did with the Agency’s new hires in Operations and ODAR.

Table 3: New Hires at DDSs Using FY 2009 ARRA Funds
Location Number of New Hires
Region 1: Boston 12
Region 2: New York 29
Region 3: Philadelphia 31
Region 4: Atlanta 118
Region 5: Chicago 41
Region 6: Dallas 17
Region 7: Kansas City 5
Region 8: Denver 2
Region 9: San Francisco 28
Region 10: Seattle 17
Totals 300

SSA staff informed us that the Agency had allocated ARRA money to the 10 regional offices with instructions that the first employees hired should be allocated to the ARRA-funded positions and later hires allocated to the FY 2009 annual appropriation. We examined SSA’s Staffing and Workload Analysis Report (FD-15) through the end of FY 2009 to determine whether the 29 States identified by the regions hired ARRA-funded employees at or above the ARRA allocation. In every case, we found the number of new hires exceeded the ARRA staff allocation. The DDSs also received funds for new employees from the FY 2009 Agency appropriation, so the fact that a DDS may have hired above the ARRA allocation was not deemed an issue. While this process did not allow us to perform the same level of review for DDS new hires as we did with SSA’s internal hires, we were able to confirm that DDS locations were meeting the hiring ARRA requirements under the Agency’s criteria.

Turnover of ARRA New Hires

After reviewing all of the ARRA new hire data for FY 2009, at the time of our audit we determined about 8 percent of the Agency’s new hires had separated from SSA because they resigned or SSA terminated them. Of the 1,530 FY 2009 ARRA Operations employees hired, 134 (8.8 percent) had left SSA’s employment. In the case of ODAR, 27 (4.6 percent) of the 585 new hires were no longer working at SSA. We reviewed 20 ARRA employees who were no longer working at the Agency—10 from Operations and 10 from ODAR—and found the following:

• 9 resigned for personal reasons;
• 4 were terminated;
• 4 found other jobs; and
• 3 left but did not provide a reason.

Operations backfilled 6 of the 10 vacant positions with new hires, though only 3 of these 6 new employees were annotated as ARRA-funded positions. ODAR staff could not confirm whether these 10 positions were backfilled with new hires because it did not have a reporting mechanism to obtain this information.

CHARACTERISTICS OF ARRA HIRES

In our review of the 2,115 Agency hires in Operations and ODAR, we found that SSA used multiple hiring authorities for the ARRA employees hired in FY 2009. Approximately 74 percent of the Operations employees was hired using the FCIP hiring

authority, and about 48 percent of the ODAR employees was hired under the Competitive Service hiring authority. About 6 percent of the total new employees at these components was appointed under VRA authority. See Table 4 for the hiring authority used and a basic definition of the hiring authority. In addition, about 8 percent of the Agency’s new hires had previous Federal employment experience.

Table 4: Hiring Authorities SSA Used for ARRA Employees
Authority Definition
Attorneys - Direct Hire1 Under the Direct Hire authority, agencies are responsible for establishing their own qualification requirements for attorney positions.
FCIP1 FCIP is an alternative external hiring procedure for filling entry-level career ladder positions through the GS-9 level. After successfully completing a 2-year training program, selectees are eligible for conversion to career/career-conditional appointments without further competition.
VRA VRA authority may be used with veterans who have recently separated from active duty or to disabled veterans, as well as to veterans who have served in a campaign for which a badge was authorized. These appointments lead to conversion to career/career-conditional appointments without further competition after successful completion of 2 years of employment.
Competitive Service Most Federal civilian jobs use this hiring authority based on competitive procedures and are open to the public.
Reinstatement This relates to the appointment of an individual to a Federal job who previously held career (unlimited eligibility from date of separation) or career-conditional (eligibility only for 3 years from the date of separation) status.
Reassignment
This relates to the movement of a Federal employee to a different position or location. For example, the movement of an administrative law judge from one hearing office to another.
Transfer This relates to an employee transferring from one Federal agency to another.
Note 1: See Appendix E for a description of Excepted Service positions and provisions for Direct Hiring authorities for attorneys and FCIP appointments.

Hiring Authorities

We reviewed the Governmentwide authorities to appoint 1,530 Operations ARRA-funded employees (see Figure 2). Approximately 74 percent of the Operations employees was hired using FCIP hiring authority. The FCIP is an excepted authority, and is used by agencies to hire promising external candidates identified through normal recruitment efforts. About 14 percent of Operations’ employees was hired using Competitive Service hiring authority, the traditional method for making appointments to Federal positions. About 8 percent of the Operations employees was hired using the VRA authority, and the remaining 4 percent was hired using “Other” authorities (reinstatement, reassignment, and transfer).

Figure 2: Hiring Authorities Used in Operations
for 1,530 ARRA-Funded New Hires

We also reviewed the ODAR authorities used to hire the 585 ARRA-funded employees (see Figure 3). About 48 percent of the ODAR employees was hired using the Competitive Service hiring authority. Another 33 percent was hired using a Schedule A exception, which allowed the direct hiring of attorneys. About 16 percent was hired using the FCIP authority. The remaining 3 percent was hired using “Other” authorities (VRA, reinstatement, and disability appointments).

Figure 3: Hiring Authorities Used in ODAR
for 585 ARRA-Funded New Hires

Citizenship Test of ARRA Hires

Our review of the 100 sample ARRA hires (50 from Operations and 50 from ODAR) revealed that all of the employees are U.S. citizens. While only U.S. citizens may be appointed in the competitive civil service, Federal agencies may employ certain non-citizens who meet specific employability requirements in the excepted service or the Senior Executive Service.

By reviewing SSA’s Numident file, we found that 6 of the 100 new ARRA hires in our sample had a code indicating that SSA needed to verify their U.S citizenship status. We contacted SSA’s Human Resources staff to verify that all of these employees had both an Employment Eligibility Verification (Form I-9) and the appropriate E Verify checks. We reviewed the documents furnished by SSA’s Human Resource personnel and found that all six new hires were U.S. citizens based on completed E-Verify checks and Forms I-9.

VRA and Creditable Military Experience

About 6 percent of the total new employees in Operations and ODAR was appointed under VRA. We found that 3 of the 100 employees in our sample were hired under VRA authority. One of the three had a miscoded SF-50 indicating they had no creditable military service though the employee had claimed this service in his Declaration of Federal Employment. All honorable active duty military service is potentially creditable under the Government’s retirement systems and would be relevant to the designation of VRA status. We notified SSA’s Human Resources staff about the discrepancy.

In our review of the sample cases, we identified 10 employees who had claimed creditable military service though they were not hired under VRA authority. Among this group, we found another case where the SF 50 for one of the employees stated “no creditable military service.” As with the first case, we shared this information with SSA’s Human Resources staff.

Previous Federal Hires

Eight of the 100 ARRA hires in our sample had previous Federal employment experience (see Table 5). Five of the eight had transferred from other Federal agencies before being employed at SSA. The remaining three employees were already working at SSA—two were summer interns hired under ARRA as full-time employees, and one was a rehired annuitant.

Table 5: FY 2009 ARRA New Hires with Previous Government Service
Component Details Previous Agency
Operations Summer Intern – hired full-time SSA
Operations Summer Intern – hired full-time SSA
Operations Rehired Annuitant SSA
Operations Continuous Federal Service Department of the Treasury
Operations Continuous Federal Service Legislative Branch
ODAR Continuous Federal Service Department of the Treasury
ODAR Continuous Federal Service Department of Health and Human Services
ODAR Continuous Federal Service Department of Veterans Affairs

Matters for Consideration
SSA timely reported aggregate FY 2009 staffing information to OMB and Recovery.gov related to the number of ARRA employees hired in Operations, ODAR, and the DDSs. While we found some of the supporting details reported by the Agency were inaccurate or incomplete, SSA timely reported the aggregate amount of new hires. SSA may want to review the supporting details in its FY 2009 submission and update it accordingly.

In terms of accuracy, we were able to verify the accuracy of the 2,115 new hires in Operations and ODAR. Moreover, at the time of our review, we found that about 8 percent of all the ARRA hires had already left the Agency. Because of the Agency’s process for tracking employment at the DDS level, we were not able to associate specific DDS employees to ARRA-created positions. Nonetheless, we were able to confirm that DDS locations were meeting the hiring requirements under the Agency’s criteria.

In general, we found that FCIP was an important component in the Agency’s hiring strategy because of its ability to increase the pace of hiring and allow a longer period of employee evaluation. FCIP new hires represented about 58 percent of the total hires in Operations and ODAR when combined. We also found that about 8 percent of the ARRA hires in our sample had former Federal service, including SSA service. In the case of the employees we identified with missing creditable military service, we believe SSA should review these records and correct any discrepancies.

Appendices
APPENDIX A – Acronyms
APPENDIX B – Selected Office of the Inspector General Reports on the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
APPENDIX C – Scope and Methodology
APPENDIX D – Fiscal Year 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Hiring and Placement
APPENDIX E – Hiring Authorities Used by the Social Security Administration for
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Fiscal Year 2009 Hires
APPENDIX F – OIG Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments

Appendix A
Acronyms

ARRA American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
DDS Disability Determination Services
FCIP Federal Career Internship Program
FY Fiscal Year
ODAR Office of Disability Adjudication and Review
OIG Office of the Inspector General
OMB Office of Management and Budget
Operations Office of Operations
OPM Office of Personnel Management
Pub. L. No. Public Law Number
SSA Social Security Administration
SSN Social Security Number
VRA Veterans’ Recruitment Appointment
Forms
I-9 Employee Eligibility Verification
SF-50 Notification of Personnel Action

Appendix B
Selected Office of the Inspector General Reports on the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
The following three evaluations on the Social Security Administration’s (SSA) planned hiring and use of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) funding were conducted by SSA’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG).

The Office of Operations’ Staffing Plans Under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (A-09-09-29157), November 2009

The Office of Operations (Operations) developed an appropriate plan for its $251 million in ARRA funds to process disability and retirement workloads. At the time of our review, Operations had hired 1,531 employees in front-line positions who were to be trained to process disability and retirement workloads. In addition, Operations planned to use approximately $53 million of its ARRA funds for employees to work overtime to process disability and retirement workloads. However, we identified the following matters for attention to ensure ARRA funds are properly accounted for and efficiently used and their benefits are fully disclosed.

• SSA used a cost allocation methodology that charged ARRA funds based on the average work-year cost to process disability and retirement workloads. The charges based on this methodology are approximately $195 million. However, the actual costs of the 1,531 new employees’ salaries and benefits will only be approximately $101 million.
• SSA did not disclose the cost of training time. The OIG reported that SSA’s workload plan should separately disclose the estimated $18 million in training costs since it is time spent in training rather than processing disability and retirement workloads.
• The performance measures did not identify all the anticipated benefits of the ARRA funds.

The Office of Disability Adjudication and Review’s Staffing Plans Under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (A-12-09-29140), December 2009

SSA allocated $30 million to Office of Disability Adjudication and Review (ODAR) in Fiscal Year (FY) 2009 and another $93 million in FY 2010 to hire administrative law judges and support staff. However, at the time of the review, we estimated the actual cost of the new hires would be less than ODAR planned for FY 2009. As part of a related review of staffing plans in Operations, the Agency issued an updated plan disclosing SSA’s cost allocation methodology, as well as the impact of charging the average salary and benefits of all ODAR employees compared to the actual costs of the new hires.

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) accepted SSA’s plan for how it would spend ARRA resources to process additional hearing workloads. Nonetheless, we found the final staffing plan submitted to OMB did not provide information on a number of areas that would be useful to those relying on the staffing plan, including

• a clear breakout of ODAR’s allocation in FY 2010 and anticipated use of overtime;
• the goals used to allocate new hires by location and skills; and
• the key productivity measures for the hearings workload, as well as factors that may affect productivity while new hires are coming on board and being trained.

The Disability Determination Services’ Staffing Plans Under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (A-07-09-29156), December 2009

SSA developed an appropriate plan for the $87 million received in ARRA funds to process disability workloads. At the time of our review, the disability determination services (DDS) had hired all 300 of the ARRA-funded employees who would be trained to process disability workloads. In addition, SSA planned to use $23 million of the ARRA funds for DDS employees to work overtime processing disability workloads and $10 million for DDS indirect costs.

We identified the following matters for consideration to ensure ARRA funds are properly accounted for, and efficiently used, and their benefits are fully disclosed.

• SSA used a cost allocation methodology that charged ARRA funds based on the average workyear cost to process disability and retirement workloads instead of the actual cost. In our November 2009 report on ARRA funds allocated to Operations, we recommended SSA disclose its cost allocation methodology, the cost of new hires, and any overtime for processing disability and retirement workloads funded from the ARRA appropriations. In response to our recommendation, SSA revised its retirement and disability workload plan to make the recommended disclosures.
• The one performance measure for DDSs in the Disability and Retirement Workload Plan does not disclose all the anticipated benefits of the ARRA funds.

Appendix C
Scope and Methodology
To accomplish our objective, we:

• Reviewed the provisions related to the Social Security Administration (SSA) in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) as well as Office of Management and Budget memorandums providing guidance to agencies implementing provisions under ARRA.

• Reviewed SSA’s Agency Wide ARRA Staffing Plan, a program-specific Disability and Retirement Workload Plan, and SSA’s Fiscal Year 2009 Performance and Accountability Report.

• Reviewed information posted to the Recovery.gov Website and the Agency’s Financial Activity and Management Report.

• Spoke with regional human resource directors and interviewed management staff from SSA’s Offices of Operations (Operations); Disability Adjudication and Review (ODAR); and Human Resources in Headquarters.

• Reviewed a random sample of 100 records for ARRA hires (50 ARRA hires at Operations and 50 ARRA hires at ODAR) and verified the information against the Standard Federal Notification of Personnel Actions Form (SF-50), SSA email accounts, Numident records, and other SSA records.

• Examined SSA’s Staffing and Workload Analysis Report (FD-15) for the disability determination services’ hiring through the end of Fiscal Year 2009.

With the exceptions stated in the findings of this report, we found the ARRA-funded new hire data in the personnel records for SSA hires to be reliable. The entities reviewed were Operations and the Office of Disability Determinations under the Deputy Commissioner for Operations and ODAR under the Deputy Commissioner for Disability Adjudication and Review. We performed our review from February through June 2010 in Falls Church, Virginia. We conducted our review in accordance with the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency’s Quality Standards for Inspections.

Appendix D
Fiscal Year 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Hiring and Placement
We examined the Fiscal Year (FY) 2009 ARRA-funded hiring for staff at the Social Security Administration’s Offices of Operations (Operations) and Disability Adjudication and Review (ODAR), as well as the disability determination services (DDS). We found that the most ARRA-funded hires were in California (285), Florida (217), and Maryland (171), as shown in Table D-1. Wyoming and Vermont did not have any ARRA hires.

Table D-1: FY 2009 ARRA Hires
Location Operations ODAR DDS Total
Alabama 107 22 1 130
Alaska 4 0 3 7
Arizona 24 9 6 39
Arkansas 21 14 0 35
California 158 105 22 285
Colorado 20 4 1 25
Connecticut 2 12 1 15
Delaware 6 1 0 7
District of Columbia 5 4 10 19
Florida 142 33 42 217
Georgia 73 16 2 91
Hawaii 5 0 0 5
Idaho 7 0 0 7
Illinois 63 15 2 80
Indiana 12 8 2 22
Iowa 4 4 0 8
Kansas 2 2 5 9
Kentucky 40 17 0 57
Louisiana 34 21 0 55
Maine 2 5 1 8
Maryland 158 13 0 171
Massachusetts 11 5 6 22
Michigan 40 16 1 57
Minnesota 9 4 8 21
Mississippi 6 9 0 15
Missouri 43 9 0 52
Montana 1 0 0 1
Nebraska 5 1 0 6
Nevada 6 0 0 6
New Hampshire 7 8 0 15
New Jersey 12 7 25 44
New Mexico 18 6 0 24
New York 85 16 4 105
North Carolina 31 7 36 74
North Dakota 2 2 0 4
Ohio 51 15 28 94
Oklahoma 5 5 0 10
Oregon 10 11 13 34
Pennsylvania 71 23 0 94
Puerto Rico 9 9 0 18
Rhode Island 1 1 4 6
South Carolina 9 11 17 37
South Dakota 1 0 0 1
Tennessee 37 26 20 83
Texas 68 41 17 126
Utah 5 0 1 6
Vermont 0 0 0 0
Virginia 42 17 19 78
Washington 29 12 1 42
West Virginia 11 11 2 24
Wisconsin 16 8 0 24
Wyoming 0 0 0 0
Total 1,530 585 300 2,415

Appendix E
Hiring Authorities Used by the Social Security Administration for American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Fiscal Year 2009 Hires
The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) provides Excepted Service hiring authorities, which permits hiring outside of the Competitive Service to fill special jobs or to fill any job in unusual or special circumstances. These Excepted Service authorities enable agencies to hire individuals when it is not feasible or practical to use traditional competitive hiring procedures. Direct-hire authority streamlines hiring, allowing agencies to appoint candidates directly to positions. A description of two of these Excepted Service appointments follows.

Schedule A Hiring Authority

Agencies must use Schedule A hiring authority for attorneys because, by law, OPM cannot develop qualification standards or examinations for attorney jobs. Agencies can use exceptions for other special jobs, including chaplain, law clerk trainee, medical doctor, dentist, certain interpreters, experts for consultation purposes, and some others.

Schedule B Hiring Authority

Agencies may use Schedule B hiring authority to fill Federal Career Internship Program positions, an alternative external hiring procedure for filling entry-level career ladder positions through the GS-9 level. After the successful completion of a 2-year training program, selectees are eligible for conversion to career/career-conditional appointments without further competition. Agencies may also use Schedule B hiring authority for the Student Temporary Employment Program and the Student Career Experience Program.

Appendix F
OIG Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments

OIG Contacts

Walter Bayer, Director, Chicago Audit Division

Nicholas Milanek, Audit Manager, Falls Church Office

Acknowledgments

In addition to those named above:

Mary Ann Braycich, Senior Program Analyst

Asad Isfahani, Auditor

Parham Price, Auditor

For additional copies of this report, please visit our Website at www.socialsecurity.gov/oig or contact the Office of the Inspector General’s Public Affairs Staff Assistant at (410) 965-4518. Refer to Common Identification Number
A-12-10-11050.

DISTRIBUTION SCHEDULE

Commissioner of Social Security
Chairman and Ranking Member, Committee on Ways and Means
Chief of Staff, Committee on Ways and Means
Chairman and Ranking Minority Member, Subcommittee on Social Security
Majority and Minority Staff Director, Subcommittee on Social Security
Chairman and Ranking Minority Member, Committee on the Budget, House of Representatives
Chairman and Ranking Minority Member, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
Chairman and Ranking Minority Member, Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives
Chairman and Ranking Minority, Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies, Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives
Chairman and Ranking Minority Member, Committee on Appropriations, U.S. Senate
Chairman and Ranking Minority Member, Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies, Committee on Appropriations, U.S. Senate
Chairman and Ranking Minority Member, Committee on Finance
Chairman and Ranking Minority Member, Subcommittee on Social Security Pensions and Family Policy
Chairman and Ranking Minority Member, Senate Special Committee on Aging
Social Security Advisory Board

Overview of the Office of the Inspector General
The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) is comprised of an Office of Audit (OA), Office of Investigations (OI), Office of the Counsel to the Inspector General (OCIG), Office of External Relations (OER), and Office of Technology and Resource Management (OTRM). To ensure compliance with policies and procedures, internal controls, and professional standards, the OIG also has a comprehensive Professional Responsibility and Quality Assurance program.
Office of Audit
OA conducts financial and performance audits of the Social Security Administration’s (SSA) programs and operations and makes recommendations to ensure program objectives are achieved effectively and efficiently. Financial audits assess whether SSA’s financial statements fairly present SSA’s financial position, results of operations, and cash flow. Performance audits review the economy, efficiency, and effectiveness of SSA’s programs and operations. OA also conducts short-term management reviews and program evaluations on issues of concern to SSA, Congress, and the general public.
Office of Investigations
OI conducts investigations related to fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement in SSA programs and operations. This includes wrongdoing by applicants, beneficiaries, contractors, third parties, or SSA employees performing their official duties. This office serves as liaison to the Department of Justice on all matters relating to the investigation of SSA programs and personnel. OI also conducts joint investigations with other Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies.
Office of the Counsel to the Inspector General
OCIG provides independent legal advice and counsel to the IG on various matters, including statutes, regulations, legislation, and policy directives. OCIG also advises the IG on investigative procedures and techniques, as well as on legal implications and conclusions to be drawn from audit and investigative material. Also, OCIG administers the Civil Monetary Penalty program.
Office of External Relations
OER manages OIG’s external and public affairs programs, and serves as the principal advisor on news releases and in providing information to the various news reporting services. OER develops OIG’s media and public information policies, directs OIG’s external and public affairs programs, and serves as the primary contact for those seeking information about OIG. OER prepares OIG publications, speeches, and presentations to internal and external organizations, and responds to Congressional correspondence.
Office of Technology and Resource Management
OTRM supports OIG by providing information management and systems security. OTRM also coordinates OIG’s budget, procurement, telecommunications, facilities, and human resources. In addition, OTRM is the focal point for OIG’s strategic planning function, and the development and monitoring of performance measures. In addition, OTRM receives and assigns for action allegations of criminal and administrative violations of Social Security laws, identifies fugitives receiving benefit payments from SSA, and provides technological assistance to investigations.