Office of Congressional Workplace Rights: Using Key Management Practices Would Help to Fully Implement Statutory Requirements

OCWR is an independent, non-partisan office that administers and enforces various provisions related to fair employment and occupational safety and health within the legislative branch. Responding to concerns about sexual harassment in the workplace, Congress passed the Reform Act in 2018, which expanded worker protections and overhauled the process for resolving workplace claims, including claims relating to discrimination and harassment. The act also required OCWR to create a secure, electronic claims system and appoint a confidential advisor to assist claimants, among other requirements.

The Reform Act includes a provision for GAO to review OCWR's management practices. This report examines (1) the status of OCWR's efforts to address new requirements in the Reform Act; (2) how OCWR is incorporating key management practices to implement the new requirements; and (3) the extent to which OCWR implemented recommendations from a related 2004 GAO report.

GAO reviewed documentation on OCWR's processes, interviewed officials from OCWR and selected legislative branch offices, and assessed how OCWR's actions aligned with key organizational change management practices that GAO identified and key project management practices from the Project Management Institute.

The Office of Congressional Workplace Rights' (OCWR) mission is to effectively implement and enforce the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (CAA), as amended in 2018 by the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 Reform Act (Reform Act). OCWR has implemented three of the four Reform Act requirements that generally became effective June 19, 2019, as shown below. Three other Reform Act requirements—track and report data and assessments, conduct a workplace climate survey, and educate and assist legislative branch offices—are in progress.

OCWR has incorporated some key management practices when implementing requirements, such as managing risks associated with appointing a confidential advisor. However, opportunities exist to further incorporate key management practices in OCWR's work. For example:

Addressing risks . OCWR has not yet developed policies and procedures to address the risks associated with permanently retaining sensitive records, such as ensuring they remain confidential when stored in multiple locations.

Measuring performance . OCWR has not established measurable performance targets and milestones or related performance measures. Doing so would allow OCWR to determine if it is making progress toward its long-term goals and better communicate with congressional and other stakeholders about its progress.

Monitoring effectiveness . OCWR routinely conducts educational activities, such as holding brown bag events and online training, and performs a variety of outreach activities. OCWR has new opportunities every 2 years to collect data through the workplace climate survey on the extent to which legislative branch employees are aware of OCWR's services and their rights under the CAA.

GAO found that OCWR implemented most recommendations from a 2004 GAO report examining OCWR's management controls. GAO also found that OCWR later stopped implementing a recommendation related to information technology (IT) planning, including ensuring that it obtained necessary IT skills. Without IT strategic planning, including recruiting and retaining staff with mission-critical IT skills, OCWR may be less able to carry out its strategic initiatives.

GAO is making six recommendations to OCWR to better incorporate key management practices as it implements requirements, and to improve its strategic planning. OCWR agreed with GAO's recommendations.

The Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (CAA) established the  Office of Congressional Workplace Rights (OCWR), formerly named the  Office of Compliance, to administer and enforce various provisions  related to fair employment and occupational safety and health within the  legislative branch. OCWR is an independent, non-partisan office with 28  full-time equivalent employees. Although a small office, its work covers  more than 30,000 legislative branch employees in the Washington, D.C.,  area, as well as elected officials’ district and state offices.

In response to increased awareness and concern about sexual  harassment in the workplace, Congress passed the Congressional  Accountability Act of 1995 Reform Act (Reform Act), which was signed  into law on December 21, 2018. The Reform Act: amended the procedures for initiating, reviewing, and resolving claims  related to violations of employee rights and protections, including  sexual harassment; extended protections to unpaid staff; and  required covered offices to develop and implement a program to train  and educate employees on the rights and protections under the CAA.

The effective date for implementing most new requirements of the Reform  Act, including the amended claims process, was June 19, 2019.

The Reform Act included a provision for us to review OCWR’s  management practices. This report examines (1) the status of OCWR’s  efforts to address the new requirements as defined in the Reform Act; (2)  how OCWR is incorporating key management practices in its  implementation of the Reform Act’s new requirements; and (3) the extent  to which OCWR implemented the recommendations from our 2004 report,  Office of Compliance: Status of Management Control Efforts to Improve  Effectiveness (GAO-04-400).

To determine the status of OCWR’s efforts to address new requirements  in the Reform Act and how OCWR is incorporating key management  practices, we reviewed applicable laws and identified the new  requirements. We also collected and reviewed documentation on  OCWR’s implementation process and management practices, such as  OCWR’s list of tasks and task teams, task team meeting notes, progress  reports, agreements with outside vendors, and email communications.

To assess how OCWR is incorporating key management practices to  implement the Reform Act’s new requirements, we analyzed OCWR’s  implementation of new requirements against key practices for change  management we identified in our 2003 report, Results-Oriented Cultures:  Implementation Steps to Assist Mergers and Organizational  Transformations (GAO-03-669), and key practices for project  management from the Project Management Institute Inc.’s A Guide to the  Project Management Body of Knowledge, PMBOK® Guide. We  determined which key practices and related implementation steps were  applicable to OCWR based on the following factors: (1) if the practices  aligned with the scope and nature of OCWR’s work and (2) if the  practices applied to OCWR’s implementation timeline given Reform Act  deadlines.

To determine the extent to which OCWR implemented recommendations  from our 2004 report, we reviewed OCWR’s plans and documentation of  its activities and information systems. We then assessed OCWR’s plans  and activities against our original recommendations and the  recommendations’ implementation status.

For all three objectives, we interviewed OCWR officials and conducted  semi-structured interviews with a nonprobability sample of key  stakeholders and officials from offices covered by the Reform Act. We  selected our sample based on various factors, such as how many  employees work in the office or agency, whether we interviewed the office  or agency for our 2004 report, and whether the selection would provide a  balance of perspectives (e.g., both chambers of Congress). For additional  details on our scope and methodology, see appendix I.

We conducted this performance audit from January 2019 to December  2019 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing  standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to  obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for  our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe  that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings  and conclusions based on our audit objectives.

OCWR allocates functions among its Board of Directors, Executive  Director, and General Counsel (see fig. 1). This organizational structure is  largely due to statutory requirements in the CAA.

As of February 2019, OCWR had 28 full-time equivalent positions, which  includes five part-time board members (counted as one full-time  equivalent) appointed by congressional leadership. This represents an  increase of five full-time equivalents since April 2018.

OCWR manages an Administrative Dispute Resolution (ADR) process to  resolve alleged violations of workplace rights and protections, such as  discrimination. The Reform Act overhauled the ADR process, including  removing mandatory counseling and mediation periods and a waiting  period prior to filing a claim (see fig. 2).

OCWR Implemented Some Reform Act Requirements; Other Requirements Are in Progress

OCWR Implemented Three of Four Reform Act Requirements Effective June 2019

To advance worker protections, the Reform Act mandated that OCWR  implement various new requirements. OCWR has implemented three of  the four requirements that generally became effective on June 19, 2019  (see table 1).

As of October 2019, OCWR had completed three requirements.

Managing changes to the ADR process. OCWR officials stated that  because they had initiated a multi-year process to revise procedural  rules in 2016, they were more familiar with the steps and timeline  needed to implement this requirement in 2019.

Appointing a confidential advisor. Similarly, an OCWR official  stated that the confidential advisor role was similar to OCWR’s  counselor role prior to the Reform Act, which made implementing this  requirement more manageable.

Creating a secure electronic system to file claims. The online  system, SOCRATES, was operational starting June 26, 2019, 7 days  after the requirement’s effective date of June 19, 2019. Between June  19 and June 26, 2019, OCWR implemented a fillable PDF form so  that claims could be submitted electronically (email or fax). OCWR  officials reported that no claims were filed during the 7-day delay, and  therefore, they believe that the delay did not negatively affect  employees’ ability to file claims.

According to OCWR, testing the system the week prior to June 19,  2019, revealed numerous problems with SOCRATES. For example, if  a user did not submit his or her claim within a certain amount of time,  the system refreshed the page without saving the user’s data, forcing  the user to restart the claim. Also, during a June 17, 2019, meeting  between OCWR and congressional staff, OCWR received requests to  further revise forms associated with SOCRATES. OCWR was unable  to implement these changes before the June 19, 2019, deadline. As a  result, OCWR delayed the launch of SOCRATES until June 26, 2019,  to allow time to resolve these issues and fully test the system.  However, OCWR did not communicate the decision to delay the full  launch of SOCRATES to congressional stakeholders who had  expected that the system would be delivered on time.

As of October 2019, OCWR had not completed one requirement that was  due by June 19, 2019.

Establishing a program to permanently retain records. The  Reform Act required OCWR to establish and maintain a permanent  records retention program, which includes records of preliminary  reviews, mediations, hearings, and other proceedings. Since  November 2017, OCWR has operated under an interim records  retention policy that requires it to permanently keep all records.  According to OCWR, it is not destroying or deleting any records.

OCWR’s interim permanent records retention policy states that  OCWR will establish standards and procedures for records integrity,  privacy, and confidentiality. However, as of October 2019, about 4  months after this requirement became effective, OCWR had not  developed these standards or established other policies or  procedures for maintaining a permanent records retention program  other than the interim policy. According to OCWR, it scanned paper  records to create electronic files and hired a separate contractor in  September 2019 to help further develop its records retention program.

OCWR Is Implementing Three Reform Act Requirements with Time Frames beyond June 2019

As of October 2019, OCWR was implementing the other three  requirements which have varying deadlines, time frames, and effective  dates extending beyond June 19, 2019 (see table 2).

Tracking and reporting data and assessments. The Reform Act  created new reporting requirements for OCWR. For example, it  required OCWR to issue annual, itemized reports on awards and  settlements. The Reform Act also required OCWR to issue a one- time report on awards and settlements previously paid, which OCWR  published on January 20, 2019. OCWR plans to issue the report on  2019 awards and settlements by January 31, 2020, and subsequent  reports annually. The Reform Act also required OCWR to use  SOCRATES data to assess the effectiveness of ADR procedures in  resolving claims in a timely manner and to publish these assessments  in semi-annual reports to Congress. OCWR plans to issue the first  semi-annual report by January 31, 2020.

Conducting a workplace climate survey. The Reform Act required  OCWR to conduct a secure survey of legislative branch offices  covered by the act by December 20, 2019 (within one year of  enactment), and every 2 years thereafter. The survey would assess  the workplace environment, including attitudes toward sexual  harassment.

As of October 2019, OCWR officials reported that they were waiting  for additional input from congressional staff before proceeding with  certain aspects of the survey. According to OCWR officials, OCWR’s  House and Senate oversight committees had different views of what  the survey should include. Therefore, OCWR plans to conduct  separate surveys for House offices, Senate offices, and other  legislative branch offices.

According to OCWR officials, they may be able to launch the House  survey by the December 20, 2019, deadline, with the other surveys  following. However, the timeline for conducting these surveys is  uncertain until OCWR can confirm the surveys’ content with  congressional staff and conduct various tests, such as separately pilot  testing each of the three surveys.

Additional work remaining includes:  reviewing changes to the survey questions, obtaining input from legislative branch stakeholders,  conducting internal testing of the survey, pilot testing the survey with legislative offices, and  finalizing the survey and communications to survey recipients.

Educating and assisting legislative branch agencies. OCWR  updated various education and training materials, such as:  creating a new workplace rights brochure;  redesigning a poster notifying employees of rights, protections,  and procedures under the CAA; and establishing audio and visual teleconferencing access for out-of- area employees (i.e., legislative branch employees in elected  officials’ district and state offices).

An OCWR official reported that, in October 2019, OCWR developed a  training video on new procedures under the Reform Act. A link to the  training video was included in the September 2019 quarterly e- newsletter sent to all legislative branch employees covered under the  CAA. According to the official, OCWR also plans to launch another  training video in November 2019 and develop three new training  classes.

OCWR Could Better Incorporate Key Management Practices to Improve the Ongoing Implementation of Requirements

We found that OCWR incorporated some key management practices  when implementing Reform Act requirements (see appendix II for a list of  management practices we used to assess OCWR). However, we also  found that OCWR did not consistently incorporate key management  practices for some requirements and that opportunities exist to improve  the remaining implementation and administration of Reform Act  requirements.

OCWR Incorporated Some Key Management Practices to Implement Requirements

We found that OCWR incorporated some key change management or  project management practices applicable to implementing Reform Act  requirements. For example:

OCWR defined the Reform Act requirements and created 21 task  teams for implementing them.

OCWR dedicated an implementation team to manage the  transformation process. OCWR designated a manager to track the  implementation status for all task teams. The task team leaders also  met weekly.

OCWR established an overall project schedule with interim milestones  and time frames for revising procedural rules, part of the requirement  to manage changes to the ADR process.

OCWR also established an overall project schedule for conducting the  workplace climate survey. OCWR officials reported that having this  schedule has enabled them to track progress, determine that the  survey is behind schedule (as of October 2019), and communicate  revised expectations to stakeholders.

In addition, OCWR officials stated they identified and addressed risks  associated with the requirement to appoint a confidential advisor.  These risks included the perception of a potential conflict of interest  that could arise if an attorney contracted from a private law firm  served as the confidential advisor. To mitigate this perception, OCWR  hired the confidential advisor as an employee to ensure that the  confidential advisor cannot refer claimants to his or her own law firm  for legal representation.

OCWR Did Not Use Project Schedules to Manage SOCRATES and Other Requirements

Project schedules provide a detailed plan for delivering products,  services, and results in a timely manner, as well as serve as a  communication tool for managing stakeholder expectations.

OCWR used project schedules to revise the procedural rules and develop  the workplace climate survey but did not use schedules to manage the  implementation of other requirements. In particular, for SOCRATES,  OCWR officials reported that they proposed a draft schedule but did not  finalize this draft or otherwise document changes to the schedule.

According to these officials, they did not update the schedule because  their implementation plans had changed significantly, and the  compressed timeframe resulted in making changes “on the fly.” For  example, they revised the system architecture as late as 3 weeks before  the mandated deadline, which required signing an interagency agreement  for hosting the system with the Library of Congress the day before the  mandated deadline. In addition, OCWR encountered last-minute issues  when testing the system, as we previously discussed. As a result, OCWR  delayed the full launch of SOCRATES but did not communicate this  decision to congressional stakeholders who had expected that the system  would be delivered on time. Although not a long delay, a project schedule  could have helped manage stakeholder expectations.

Without a schedule for SOCRATES, OCWR missed opportunities to take  corrective actions earlier, communicate with congressional stakeholders,  and better manage expectations. OCWR has ongoing cybersecurity  activities and planned upgrades to other information technology (IT)  systems, but has not yet established project schedules for them. Moving  forward, it will be important for OCWR to establish project schedules to  manage IT projects and allow key stakeholders to monitor OCWR’s  progress.

OCWR Has Not Addressed Risks for Its Records Retention Program

OCWR has taken interim steps to establish a permanent records  retention program. These steps include changing its records retention  policy in November 2017 to make all records permanent, hiring a  contractor in May 2019 to scan paper records and store them  electronically, and hiring another contractor in September 2019 to help  develop its records retention program.

Key management practices call for organizations to identify and assess  risks that could affect their ability to achieve their goals and objectives  and to monitor and manage these risks as the projects progress. OCWR  identified the largest potential risk to establishing and maintaining a  permanent records retention program as the loss of control over  confidential files. For example, an OCWR official confirmed that OCWR  maintains a physical file for every electronic file, which results in multiple  storage locations and duplicate records. Although this ensures the  availability of records, multiple storage locations can make ensuring the  confidentiality and security of these records more difficult.

However, as of October 2019, OCWR has not yet fully addressed this risk  by developing a policy to manage it or identified other risks. OCWR  officials stated that the contractor will help with these tasks. They also  reported that they plan to develop policies for the records retention  program, particularly for maintaining the privacy and security of records,  based on records management requirements for executive branch  agencies.

According to OCWR officials, addressing risks for its records retention  program is not a high priority, and demand for records is low.  Nevertheless, if OCWR does not address the potential risks, and any  emerging risks, associated with permanently retaining sensitive records,  OCWR may be less able to manage its records and ensure their  confidentiality, integrity, and availability.

OCWR Lacks Results- Oriented Performance Goals, Related Measures, and Reports Assessing Progress

We have previously reported that a critical element in an organization’s  efforts to manage for results is its ability to set meaningful goals for  performance and to measure progress toward these goals. Strategic  goals are intended to be the starting point for an organization’s  performance measurement efforts. To provide a connection between  the long-term strategic goals and the day-to-day activities, organizations  should also establish near-term performance goals and measures.  Finally, an organization needs to report on its performance to provide  information to its stakeholders on the extent to which it has met its  performance goals and what it accomplished with its resources. Leading  organizations then apply this performance information to continuously  improve organizational processes, identify performance gaps, and set  improvement goals.

OCWR’s 2019-2023 strategic plan includes several broad, long-term,  outcome-related goals that address Reform Act requirements. These  goals are supported by objectives, called initiatives. For example, OCWR  has a long-term strategic goal to “provide an efficient and effective ADR  program.” A supporting initiative is to “ensure that ADR processes meet  statutory and regulatory mandates, including mandates for maintaining  confidentiality.” However, this initiative does not state what is to be  achieved and by when, and none of the supporting initiatives reflect near- term performance goals that allow for an objective assessment of  progress. Performance goals, which are used to assess progress toward  long-term goals, should be stated in objective, measureable, and  quantifiable terms.

OCWR identifies performance measures in its strategic plan, but the  measures lack target levels of performance which would help assess  progress toward goals. For example, one of OCWR’s initiatives is to  “empower stakeholders to effectively resolve their workplace disputes  without having to engage in protracted dispute resolution proceedings.” A  supporting performance measure is to “track the rate of cases resolved by  negotiated settlements.” This measure provides a starting point for  collecting performance information but does not specify how it can be  used to assess progress on the initiative. We have previously reported  that successful performance measures commonly demonstrate results,  are limited to the vital few, respond to multiple priorities, and link to  responsible programs.

OCWR does not report on progress toward goals in its annual report,  partly because of the lack of performance goals and measures assessing  progress. OCWR’s annual reports summarize statistical data about the  number of employees using OCWR’s services and reasons for ADR  claims from each fiscal year, which is information required to be published  under the CAA. However, these statistics do not compare actual  performance against measurable performance goals. Further, OCWR  does not report how it used the data to improve its programs. For  example, in its fiscal year 2018 annual report, OCWR reported the  number and types of workplace issues that employees inquired about in  general information requests and raised during formal counseling  requests. However, OCWR did not report how it used this information to  identify trends and develop training programs to target the indicated  issues.

According to OCWR officials, OCWR does not set more specific or  measurable goals and measures beyond what is included in its strategic  plan. In addition, they stated that OCWR’s current performance goals and  measures reflected their concern that changes from the Reform Act could  affect their workload, such as the number of cases filed and how they  would be settled. They plan to reassess their performance starting in  June 2020, about 1 year after many Reform Act requirements became  effective, and establish new performance measures and targets based on  updated baseline performance levels.

Clearly defining performance goals, such as establishing measureable  performance targets and milestones, and related performance measures  would provide OCWR information to determine if it is making progress  toward its long-term goals and better communicate with congressional  and other key stakeholders about its progress. Moreover, such  performance data would allow OCWR to make more informed decisions  to improve performance, such as determining what activities are working  as intended and achieving results, and which are not and could be  improved. Finally, sharing this information in publically available annual  reports could make it more useful and transparent for stakeholders, as  well as strengthen OCWR’s accountability for making progress toward its  goals.

OCWR Conducts Various Education and Outreach Activities and Has Opportunities to Better Evaluate the Effectiveness of Its Efforts

OCWR has a broad mandate to provide education and information to  Members of Congress and covered legislative branch offices and  employees about their rights, protections, and responsibilities under the  CAA. OCWR routinely conducts educational activities, such as holding brown bag events,  creating online training, and posting resources on its website and social media channels.

OCWR also performs outreach by meeting with congressional committees regularly,  communicating with stakeholders (e.g., House and Senate  Employment Counsel), meeting with heads of legislative branch employing offices at least  sending an annual notice of rights to all legislative employees.

However, we found that OCWR’s assessment of these activities is limited,  such as collecting feedback forms from attendees of its brown bag  events. While important, these efforts do not enable OCWR to assess the  effectiveness of its education and outreach activities and the extent to  which they are reaching all covered legislative branch populations. Key  management practices call for continuous monitoring to identify areas that  require additional attention.

In 2004, we recommended that OCWR use various approaches, such as  feedback surveys, to increase its understanding of the actual level of  awareness of its activities among target populations. In response to the  recommendation, from 2008 to 2009, OCWR surveyed legislative branch  employees but had a low response rate, which rendered the survey data  of limited value. OCWR officials attributed the low response rate to not  having all respondent email addresses, as well as the lack of statutory  authority to conduct surveys.

Through the Reform Act’s requirement to conduct a workplace climate  survey every 2 years, OCWR has new opportunities to collect data on the  extent to which legislative branch employees are aware of OCWR’s  services and their rights under the CAA. Because the Reform Act states  that OCWR must consult with congressional committees on how to carry  out the survey, OCWR has sought guidance from its oversight  committees on what information to collect for the survey and the use of  the results.

In addition to developing the climate survey, an OCWR official stated that,  in March 2019, OCWR also hired a training and education project  manager who is responsible for developing an education and outreach  strategy. This effort is intended to include assessing awareness levels of  OCWR’s activities among legislative branch populations and improving  awareness where needed. However, as of October 2019, OCWR did not  provide documentation of the strategy and a timeline for its completion.

A mechanism for collecting feedback more widely from all covered  legislative branch employees could improve OCWR’s understanding of  the reach and effectiveness of its education and outreach efforts. For  example, it could help OCWR determine if it may be missing certain  subsets of legislative branch populations, such as maintenance workers  who may have limited computer access. Further, such information could  help inform management and resource allocation decisions, such as  where to focus education and outreach efforts and how to increase their  effectiveness.

OCWR Could Better Support IT Initiatives with Strategic Planning and Human Capital Management

In 2004, we reviewed OCWR’s management practices and made 20  recommendations to help OCWR:  strengthen strategic planning and develop results-oriented  performance measures; ensure an effective, results-oriented program structure; build effective communication emphasizing outreach and coordination  with congressional and legislative branch stakeholders; and  create and sustain an enhanced management control environment,  particularly for managing human capital and performance.

Between 2004 and 2013, we determined that OCWR had implemented 18  of the 20 recommendations. In this review, we found that, of these 18  recommendations, OCWR subsequently stopped implementing an  information technology (IT) planning recommendation that could have  strengthened its ability to better manage and implement the requirements  in the Reform Act.

We had recommended that OCWR ensure that IT planning and  implementation be an integral component of the strategic planning  process. This recommendation focused on positioning OCWR to  effectively leverage technology in achieving strategic mission goals and  outcomes. To do this, OCWR needed to establish certain basic IT  management capabilities, such as: developing a picture or description, based on OCWR’s strategic plan,  of what it wanted its future IT environment to look like; establishing and following a defined and disciplined process for  allocating limited resources across competing IT needs; using a rigorous IT system acquisition management process; and ensuring that needed IT skills have been identified and obtained.

OCWR took steps in 2003 and 2005 to create an IT task force and issue  a multi-year IT plan, respectively. However, these efforts were not  sustained. An OCWR official explained that OCWR had not conducted IT  planning, including developing an IT strategic plan, in recent years  because of limited resources and difficulties attracting a candidate for the  IT manager position. These challenges resulted in the position remaining  vacant for approximately 18 months from 2016 to 2018.

In past work, we have reported that IT strategic planning can help an  organization align its IT goals and investments with its strategic goals. A  key element of IT strategic planning is developing an IT strategic plan that  can serve as an organization’s vision or road map to guide its efforts and  investments.

OCWR officials reported that they will be developing an IT strategic plan.  However, as of October 2019, they were unable to provide additional  documentation or a timeline for completion.

Without IT strategic planning, OCWR may be less able to set forth a long- term vision of OCWR’s IT environment and measure progress in carrying  out its strategic initiatives. For example, OCWR envisioned developing an  electronic claims filing system as one of its strategic initiatives as early as  fiscal years 2013 to 2015. However, that system was not implemented  until 2019, in part because OCWR did not have an IT strategic plan and  related IT expertise to support the initiative.

With increased funding for implementing Reform Act requirements,  OCWR has recently re-focused on human capital management. In  September 2018, it hired an IT manager whose responsibilities include IT  planning and cybersecurity. In September 2019, OCWR hired a  contractor to help update its human capital plan, which had not been  updated since 2009.

We have previously reported that effective human capital management is  critical to sustaining an IT workforce with the necessary skills to execute a  range of management functions that support the agency’s mission and  goals. Given OCWR’s strategic and ongoing IT initiatives, it will be  important for OCWR to consider leading practices in human capital  management to ensure that it has the appropriate skills and capacity to  meet its current and future responsibilities. These leading practices  include  consulting with key stakeholders when developing human capital  strategies, having a system in place to continually assess and improve human  capital planning and investment, determining critical skills and competencies its workforce needs to  achieve current and future agency goals,  linking the strategic workforce plan with the organization’s strategic  plan, developing customized strategies to recruit highly specialized and having an ongoing succession planning process for identifying and  developing a diverse talent pool.

If OCWR does not continue to strategically assess and manage its human  capital needs, it could again find itself with IT or other skills gaps that  could negatively affect its ability to meet its mission. Incorporating these  leading practices in human capital management could help OCWR  develop a workforce plan that better aligns with its mission and goals, as  well as develop long-term strategies for recruiting and retaining staff to  achieve those goals.

Although small in size, OCWR has important responsibilities—to advance  the safety, health, and workplace rights of employees and employers in  the legislative branch. The Reform Act updated how OCWR carries out  these responsibilities, such as requiring OCWR to offer an electronic  option for filing Administrative Dispute Resolution (ADR) claims and to  conduct a workplace climate survey of legislative branch employees.

To meet these new requirements, OCWR developed new procedures,  trained and hired staff, and balanced new responsibilities with existing  ones. As a result, OCWR completed three requirements—managing  changes to the ADR process, appointing a confidential advisor, and  creating a secure electronic claims reporting system. However, as of  October 2019, OCWR had not fully completed the requirement to  establish and maintain a program for permanent records retention. To  meet this requirement, OCWR needs to develop and implement policies  and procedures to administer and manage the program, as well as  identify and address potential risks related to the privacy and security of  records, among other actions.

To help OCWR meet requirements with ongoing work and build upon  completed work, it will be important for OCWR to incorporate key  practices for project management, such as consistently developing and  using project schedules and assessing risk. These practices could help  OCWR better manage expectations and prioritize high-risk work. Further,  establishing results-oriented performance goals and measures and  collecting and using performance information could help OCWR evaluate  and better focus its education and outreach efforts, as well as assess  progress toward its strategic goals.

Finally, OCWR should use its strategic planning process to clearly  articulate how its IT initiatives support its organizational goals, such as  how the electronic claims reporting system supports a more efficient and  effective ADR program. Establishing performance measures and  monitoring actual-versus-expected performance of those measures can  help determine whether IT is making a difference in improving  performance, and in turn whether OCWR is better serving the legislative  community. Additionally, OCWR needs to evaluate its human capital  management strategies to ensure that it can recruit and retain staff with  the appropriate skills to plan and manage IT projects, as part of a larger  effort to conduct IT planning.

We are making the following six recommendations to OCWR:  The Executive Director of OCWR, in collaboration with relevant  managers, should establish a policy that requires a schedule of tasks to  be developed, documented, and updated throughout the lifetime of IT  system projects. (Recommendation 1)

The Executive Director of OCWR should identify and assess risks in  establishing and maintaining a permanent records retention program, and  develop policies and procedures to ensure that risks are properly  addressed. (Recommendation 2)

The Executive Director of OCWR should identify desired performance  results, develop performance measures that demonstrate the degree to  which the desired results were achieved, and report progress toward  those results in OCWR’s annual reports. (Recommendation 3)

The Executive Director of OCWR should collect relevant data through a  survey or other mechanisms, and use the information to evaluate the  effectiveness of education and outreach efforts and the extent to which  they are reaching all covered legislative branch populations.  (Recommendation 4)

The Executive Director of OCWR should integrate IT planning and  implementation into the agency’s strategic planning process.  (Recommendation 5)

The Executive Director of OCWR should incorporate key strategic human  capital management practices, such as developing strategies to recruit  and retain staff with mission-critical skills, into the strategic planning  process. (Recommendation 6)

We provided a draft of the report to OCWR for review and comment. In its  comments—reproduced in appendix III—OCWR agreed with our findings  and concurred with our six recommendations. To address the  recommendations, OCWR noted that it has already taken some actions,  such as hiring a contractor to assess risks related to permanent records  retention. It intends to implement additional changes, such as developing  a policy for IT project planning. Going forward, OCWR agreed to update  us on its progress implementing the recommendations.

We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate congressional  committees, the Executive Director of OCWR, and other interested  parties. In addition, the report is available at no charge on the GAO  website at http://www.gao.gov.

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact  me at (202) 512-6806 or jonesy@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices  of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last  page of this report. GAO staff who made key contributions to this report  are listed in appendix IV.

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

Our first objective was to determine the status of Office of Congressional  Workplace Rights’ (OCWR) efforts to address new requirements from the  Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 Reform Act (Reform Act). To  meet this objective, we reviewed applicable laws and identified the new  requirements. We reviewed the Reform Act and grouped Reform Act  requirements into seven categories of activities based on similar  characteristics, such as requirements related to amending the claims  process, and how these requirements aligned with OCWR’s task teams  working on these requirements. We also collected and reviewed  documentation on OCWR’s implementation process and management  practices, such as OCWR’s list of tasks and task teams, task team  meeting notes, progress reports, agreements with outside vendors, and  email communications.

Our second objective was to assess how OCWR is incorporating key  management practices to implement the Reform Act’s new requirements.  To meet this objective, we analyzed OCWR’s implementation of new  requirements against key practices for organizational change  management we identified in our 2003 report, Results-Oriented Cultures:  Implementation Steps to Assist Mergers and Organizational  Transformations (GAO-03-669) and key practices for project  management from the Project Management Institute Inc.’s A Guide to the  Project Management Body of Knowledge, PMBOK Guide®. We  determined which key practices and related implementation steps were  applicable to OCWR based on the following factors: (1) if the practices  aligned with the scope and nature of OCWR’s work, and (2) if the  practices applied to OCWR’s implementation timeline given Reform Act  deadlines. We shared these key management practices with OCWR.

Our third objective was to determine the extent to which OCWR  implemented recommendations from our 2004 report, Office of  Compliance: Status of Management Control Efforts to Improve  Effectiveness (GAO-04-400). To meet this objective, we reviewed  OCWR’s plans and documentation of its activities, such as strategic plans  and annual reports, to address the recommendations. We then assessed  OCWR’s plans and activities against our original recommendations and  the recommendations’ implementation status to determine the extent to  which OCWR implemented the recommendations in the past and has  continued to take similar actions.

For all three objectives, we interviewed OCWR officials and conducted  semi-structured interviews with a nonprobability sample of key  stakeholders and officials from offices covered by the Reform Act.  Although results from these interviews are not generalizable to all  stakeholders or offices covered by the act, they provided views and  illustrative examples about OCWR’s efforts to address new Reform Act  requirements, OCWR’s efforts to incorporate key management practices  to implement those new requirements, and the extent to which OCWR  implemented some of our previous recommendations. These  stakeholders and offices include the Architect of the Capitol, Senate Chief  Counsel for Employment, and Office of House Employment Counsel. To  obtain perspectives from a range of stakeholders and offices, we  considered the following factors in our selection:  size of the office or agency by number of employees; extent to which offices/agencies are involved in outreach by number  of Administrative Dispute Resolution cases and Occupational Health  and Safety Inspections/Americans with Disabilities Act inspections; past interviews with offices/agencies discussing OCWR outreach for balance of perspective (e.g., both chambers of Congress).

We also interviewed the House Office of Employee Advocacy and the  House Office of the Chief Administrative Officer safety team to obtain  additional views on their interactions with OCWR.

We determined that the following key organizational change management  practices and key project management practices, as well as related  implementation steps, were relevant for assessing the Office of  Congressional Workplace Rights’ (OCWR) management practices.

Appendix III: Comments from the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights

Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments

In addition to the contact name above, Steven Lozano (Assistant  Director), Elizabeth Fan (Analyst in Charge), David Blanding, Giny  Cheong, Patrick Dibattista, Karin Fangman, Ben Licht, Patricia Powell,  and Edith Yuh made key contributions to this report. Karen Brindle,  Hannah Brookhart, Kisa Bushyeager, Terrell Dorn, Robert Gebhart, Lisa  Hardman, Ted Hu, Susan Irving, Sonya Johnson, Amalia Konstas, Kaelin  Kuhn, Patricia McClure, Zina Merritt, Edda Emmanuelli Perez, Robert  Robinson, Sukhjoot Singh, Jon Ticehurst, Alicia White, and Rebecca  Woiwode also provided valuable assistance.

The Office of Congressional Workplace Rights enforces fair employment and occupational safety and health rules for over 30,000 employees in the legislative branch. Due to heightened awareness of workplace sexual harassment, Congress passed a 2018 law requiring the office to revise the process for resolving discrimination and harassment claims.

creating an online option for filing claims

educating employees on their workplace rights

Our 6 recommendations are to help the office better implement these and other requirements of the law.