field for bargain hunting. there is going to be such a relief amongst reach investors and foreign investors and we have excellent human capital and potentially growth industries that we can do the one thing we have not managed to do and that is create a developmental model that would be borrowed by this initial enthusiasm and to which we will fuel by a never ending sequence of great reforms.

the secretary of dhs just came by and had a meeting with mr. connolly and i and

has laid out a number a number of steps on where he is wanting to address this particular concern for employee morale. i think all of the witnesses for being here today and i look forward to a working relationship where we can work together to make sure that we have improved numbers but more importantly improved improve satisfaction among our federal workforce. with that i would recognize member connolly from virginia. >> and i your commitment is quite sincere. you want to collaborate to make things better. that's an important.to be emphasized. you and i most certainly will collaborate and try to accomplish that. it is easy to complain or highlight problems. it is a lot more difficult to try to address them. them. as you said mr. chairman

the secretary of homeland security cares enough about this topic to come and see you and me prior to this hearing, and hearing, and i would ask unanimous consent that the letter addressed to you and me written by the sec. be entered into the record. >> that objection. >> i think my friend. according to the annual survey and the partnership of public public service employee morale and job satisfaction and the federal government have declined rather dramatically over the last several years. the partnerships best places to work 2014 analysis concluded that the federal employee morale fell to its lowest.ever since the organization for started measuring it in 2003. the result of 2014 continued in a troubling pattern of decreasing employee satisfaction scores for the 4th consecutive year dropping from a high of 65 out of 100 and 2010 to 57 today.

the federal government the federal government is clearly going in the wrong direction with respect to supporting its people particularly when contrasted with private sector worker satisfaction. private private sector workers increased their job satisfaction in the same timeframe from 70.6 70.6 in 2010 to 72 in 2014 in fact now the gap between the two, federal and private sector has nearly tripled. looking at the data and the dates of certain events have likely contributed to the decline after the great recession. private sector job satisfaction started to bounce back in 2010. conversely since 2010 federal employees have endured a a three-year pay freeze, hundred and $40 billion of pay cuts sequestration, budget cuts hiring freezes reductions

in performance awards and training budgets and the 16 day government shutdown with the threat of perhaps shutting down the department of homeland security averted at the 11th hour last month. it is not surprising that these events along with political attacks disparaging the federal workforce by some elected officials including this body have actually had a toll on federal morale. the the problem is not just within federal agency management part of the problem is the poetical management problem right here in the halls of congress. we have to take responsibility for the impact we are having on your workforce. what is even more worrisome is that majorities in both the house and senate recently passed budgets for fiscal year 2016 that would further/agency spending below sequestration levels by $760 billion over ten

years. these call for additional federal workforce more than 280 billion over ten years in the house puzzle of. i am worried the negative impact of satisfaction and productivity agency mission, retention and recruitment of the next generation. we especially need to be mindful of the long-term negative effects on the service of that the federal government provides of the american people. that is what we will be focused on the last march i joined with ranking member cummings and lynch and requesting that jk of conduct a study of federal engagement trends as well as potential root causes. improving workforce morale. i know jl is completing the study and this year to testify but preliminary findings and welcome them to

the table. i understand the national archives and record administration the department of homeland security have ranked poorly among the use surveys. wwor despites the decline in of work

satisfaction, 2014 federal employment viewpoint survey data demonstrates the federal employees nonetheless have persevered through a lot of adversity and remained dedicated and overwhelmingly positive about their service to the country, which the champ eluded to. 90% of our federal employees believe the work they do is important. 96% of our federal employees are willing to put in the extra effort to get the job done. 90% are constantly looking for ways to do a better job. that renews my faith in who are these public sir vans. they're dedicated fellow americans who whatnot to make this a better country and i really appreciate that sentiment being expressed by the chairman who recognizes that in his open interactions with our public sir vans. so, thank you mr. chairman, for holding this hearing. i look forward to hearing the testimony and having a chance to have a dialogue with our

witnesses. >> thank you mr. connally, for those insightful remarks. i'll hold open the record for five legislative days for nip who would like to make written statement. i'm pleased to welcome the archivist at the national archives and records administration, the honorable manual ehrlich, board member of the u.s. chemical safety board, miss katherine anderson, with the department of homeland security, and the director of strategic issues for the u.s. government accountability office. welcome to you all. pursuant to commitee rules all witnessed by we sworn in before the testify so please rise and rate raise your right hand. >> do you solemnly swear or

affirm that your testimony that you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? let the record reflect all witnesses answered in the affirmative. thank you, and please be ceased. order to allow some time for discussion and dialogue, i would ask that you would limit your oral testimony to five minutes but your entire written statement will be made part of the record, and somer -- you're now recognized. >> thank you distinguished members of the committee, thank you for inviting me here today to discuss the national archives and reference administration and the rankings in our partnership for 2014 best places to work in federal government. my written testimony contains details of the many actions underway to address employee engagement and morale issues at the national archives. what i would like to convey now to you and more importantly to

any staff member who may be watching this hering i take the results of the annual employee viewpoints very seriously and personally. most of the work that goes on behind the scenes at the archives is hard physical work and windowless facilities that lack amenities found in most federal office settings. believe me i know. i began my career pulling and reshelving books and journals for long hours in the bowels of the libraries another m.i.t. i've flashflood our facilities over the past few years and met with employee, but what is most distressing is many staff feel they have felt undervalued and overworked for years. they're also rightfully frustrated by the simple fact that over the past three decades our holdings have more than tripled. customer expectations have changed, and electronic records requiring new resources while at the same time our work force numbers have declined.

we far behind finding efficiencies to do more with less. the very nature of or work has changed to the point where employees of 30 years ago would not even recognize it. our staff work hard every day to provide excellent stops customers and preand manage holdings but the pressure affects morale. i inherited nars' low scores when i took the job five years ago. much has been done to address the results of the survey, but because you invited me here today you know that positive change has been slowing in coming. we have adopted some of the newest practices for engaging the federal work force, including the strategies in the owe mb memo on strengthening employee engagement and organizational performance and the six best practice strategies recommend by the partnership for public service. these practices include holding executives accountable for executing engagement improfit plans developed with staff

partnering with labor unions and being transparent about our evs results. more importantly, we listen to staff and are following through with actions they identify as important to improving their satisfaction, including developing a cadre of motivated-well-trained supervisors, administering a fair and effective performance management system, providing meaningful career pacts and making the workplace safety a priority. providing easy access to tools employees need do their jobs. we started to see the results of these efforts in our annual scores. in 2014 the majority of our employees responded positively to questions focused on the relationship with their supervisors, including trust respect, and support. we have seen improvement in questions related to performance management and diversity and inclusion. our employees have consistently demonstrated their commit, to our mission and work and this is

reflected in the evs survival also responded positively to questions that measure their perceptions of teamwork and quality of work. these are strengths that nara must nurture and grow in order to build greater trust in agency leadership pride in being part of our agency as a whole. they deserve an agency that they can honestly call one of the best places in work in the federal government. i firmly believe that we're on the right path and that the future is bright for the national archives. millions of people visit our facilities and walk away full of pride, having been inspired by the nation of our -- history of our nation. from those driving fork lifts to those helping to respond to more than one million annual requests to help veterans claim benefits 0, toes those cargo for the declaration of independence, they all work for the common good of the national archives archives and citizens oft our country and

we all be proud and inspired by their service. >> thank you so much for your testimony, and i've been informed that it is streaming back to some of your employees and so i know they take to heart your comments, but i would be remiss if i don't say personally a real thank you to many of them for the hospitality they showed me when i was visiting there, and for the way that they treated me with not only such genuine hospitality but frankness and support and i look forward to working with you. thank you. mr. ehrlich, you're recognized for five minutes. >> mr. chairman, ranking members and members of the subcommittee. thank you. thank you for the opportunity to appear here today representing the u.s. chemical safety board of the usb. we welcome your visitation to the agency. so you have it with your colleagues so you have a better understand what we do and how we do it. the chp is recently without a

chair person. the agency for now is being run with three presidential appoint board members of whom i am one. although we are working together, my views today are my own. i came to the cfb with training and experience in human resource issues. i spent over 50 years in the chemical industry and in a variety of positions, much of my career spent with bisf corporation, the largest chemical company in the world. at bsf i work as a chemical plant manager and many other roles. i completed graduate studies in chemical inning mering and i of have masters degrees from columbia and counseling psychology for business and industry itch understand the issues related to some of these human behavior topics. in the five months i have served on the u.s. chemical safety board what has impressed me most is the dedication professionalism of the staff. i have been to industrial

chemical accident sites with investigation teams and have seen first-hand how diligently they perform potentially hard hazardous work put in long hours and spend months away from home. they have a steadfast commitment to making industrial chemical facilities safer places for workers, companies and communes. i'm privileged to work alongside of them and the rest of the staff. the federal viewpoint survey shows staff morale is low in some areas. the board is taking steps to improve morale, and i also believe there are critical steps congress can take to help. put the survey does not tell the whole story. since i became a board member i personally met with virtually every staff member face-to-face. i've listen to their concerns,

sought their input to. i've found commitment strong and morale in many areas is high. the staff derives a great deal of job satisfaction finalizing reports, presenting them to public meetings and news conferences and seeing safety recommendations implemented. they tell me they get considerable job satisfaction in saving lives. that is the csp biggs, and we take it personally -- csp mission and we take it personally. to address morale issues we have an active workplace improvement commitee. members of which were suggest upped by the staff itself, which has been meeting regularly to suggest specific improvements. it has spoken to all staff members. since last summer, the committee has created action items on improving employee on boarding, creating a database of csb best practices and clarifying employment policies as they're

now working to implement action items. i emphasize again the core work is being accomplished. the csb has been highly productive, particularly in the past year since the survey was last conducted. the number of cases is now down to seven from 22. the case backlog five years ago. we closed two more cases in a recent public meeting and a total of eight reports over a nine-month period. despite the agency's challenges we're in a period or very high productivity. i will draw to a close by suggesting that morale could be improved, even more if two things could happen. first, we need a chair person confirmed. we need the ability to hire more investigators. right now we have only 20 to cover the entire country based on our current budget. as a result we frequently must pull investigators off of one investigation and put them on new ones, oned a at ad hoc

basis, this has cause it morale problems and delays in investigations, leading to criticism. we do not let the quality of investigations falter so additional resources are needed to perform the csb's mission. in summary i would like to reiterate the following. good work is being done at the csb. we are productive. all of us whom the president appointed to the bored are committed to working collegially to further improve morale. we look forward to working with you and other congressional committees to continue to serve the public. thank you. >> thank you mr. ehrlich. are you streaming this back to your employees today? this hearing? >> i'm sorry but i don't know, sir. >> okay. miss emerson. >> chairman meadows ranking member colleen members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to address the department of homeland securiti' efforts

enhancing employee engagement. i'm catherine emerson the department's first career chief human capital officer. i'm responsible for the department's human capital policy, which covers recruiting, diversity inclusion, learning and development, and work force planning and support of dhs mission. my office supports employee engagement efforts led by secretary johnson and deputy majorca. the agency stands on the frontlines day in and day tout protect citizens from threats at home and abroad0. -under employees do difficult work under challenging circumstances, from protecting the border at the rio grandees valley to guiding maritime traffic on the mississippi river to managing shipments at the port of seattle and welcoming visitors at the jfk international airport. therefore, as the deputy secretary has stated we must

create the department our employee deserve. we recognize we must start with leadership improve employee morale. employee engagement is not a human resources program. we see employee engagement as a leadership responsibility for the entire department with human capital support. demonstrating this leadership responsibility, the secretary and the deputy secretary launched the employee focus building the department you deserve initiative. led by the deputy secretary and coordinated through an operationalie focused engagement steering committee, three items this initiative have focused on, the secretary honoring over 300 employees at a recent awards ceremony. this was the first one that was held in over six years. the secretary as directed

component leadership to host appropriate ceremonies and events to honor the contributions of their employees' and dhs partiers and we are doing this to acknowledge and recognize the fine work of our employees ample employees asked for greater transparency in the department's hiring process. we have posted personnel information on our internal web site provided helpful tips for manager that highlight how to lead a transparent hiring process, and we have made concerted effort to more prominently post job opportunities. additionally dhs is continuing to build a common leadership experience that begins out our on-boarding and continues through our leader's careers. we will continue to emphasize our key executive programs including the dhs senior executive service candidate development program, and the department's own executive

capstone program for new members of the senior executive service. moreover, the secretary and the deputy secretary are committed to personally hearing from our employees. both of our senior leaders hold regular meetings with rank-and-file employees as well as with supervisors managers and executives when visiting field offices or in video conferences. in these meetings they're listening to the concerns and suggestions of our employees cross the country. furthermore the deputy secretary regularly engages with our union parters, hearing they're feedback and concerns. building the department our employees deserve is also about finding better ways to do business and building opportunities for them to succeed. we thank congress and this committee particularly chairman, for last year's passage of the border patrol agent pay reform

act. this legislation is an excellent example of finding a better way to do business, as it replaces the administratively uncontrollable overtime model with the new and sound process for ensuring that our border patrol personnel are properly paid for their work. we are leaning forward to implement actions we believe will make a lasting and valuable difference to our employees. the words of secretary johnson we must inject a new energy into dhs, and we're working diligently to do just that. through our effort wes hope tone hans the work experience and honor the contributions of our hard-working and dedicated work force. thank you again for supporting our employees who are protecting all of us, each and every day. i look forward to your questions. >> miss emerson, thank you for your testimony and i will say thank you for the energy that i

witnessed just in the meeting prior to this and i look forward to work with you in the months and years to come. ... simply put, engagement is not about happy employees. it's about high-quality and responsive government. however, as was noted here today

government wide levels of employee engagement have declined four percentage points from 67% and 2011 to 63% in 2014 as measured by opm federal employees viewpoint survey and a score of opm director of the survey called the employee engagement index for aei. recognizing the connection between engagement levels and organizational performance the administration has called on agencies to strengthen the employee's engagement. for example agency leaders are to be held accountable for making employee engagement and integral part their performance management systems. in addition, as part of their annual performance plan and appraisals each member of the senior executive service will be responsible for improving employee engagement within their organization and for creating inclusive work environment. as requested my remarks today will focus first on government wide trends in employee engagement from 2006 to 2014.

second various practices that can strengthen engagement and third certain limitations of the eei that will be important for agency managers and leaders to consider as they use this measure to assess and improve and engage with their own organizations. our work indicates that improving employee engaged meant especially during challenging fiscal times as a difficult but doable task. the key is to understand and act on engagement both governmentwide and agency specific and leave those practices to the everyday fabric of the culture. with government wide engagement trends is important to note the majority of federal agencies actually defied the recent government wide downward trend in engagement levels as sustained or increased their scores.

as one example from 2013 to 2014 three of 47 agencies on increasing their engagement scores. 31 held steady and 13 declined. the decrease in government wide engagement as is a result of several large agencies such as dhs and dod ringing down the overall average. employee perceptions of leadership are also pulling down the government wide average. at the three components that comprise the engagement index employees perceptions of agency leaders their perceptions of supervisors and employees in transit work experience is agency leadership has consistently received the lowest score and at times was 20 percentage points lower than the other two components. our analysis of employee viewpoint survey identified six key practices that were consistent throughout the entire engagement levels mainly having constructive performance conversations providing opportunities for career development and training

supporting a good worklife balance, creating an inclusive work environment and employee involvement and work to related decisions and good communication for management. these practices were associated with higher engaged in scores government wide by agency and selected employee characteristics and therefore could be starting points for agency efforts to improve engagement. although opm provides a range of tools and guidance to help agencies analyze their engagement scores the eei data itself has limitations that agencies need to be aware of. for example opm does not report whether changes to an agency's engagement scores are statistically significant which could lead agencies to him is interpret results. over the way in which opm calculates the engagement index does not enable agencies to analyze the drivers of engagement for their organization. given these and other limitations agencies want to supplement their engagement scores with other information

such as workforce analytics and facilitated discussions with employees. in conclusion to improve performance agencies must make strengthening and sustaining employee engagement and integral part of their organizational culture and not simply an isolated set of practices. put another way if talented workforce is the engine of productivity and mission accomplishment and a workplace that fosters high levels of employee engagement is the fuel that powers that engine. this concludes my prepared remarks and i'd be happy to answer any questions that you may have. >> thank you all. thank you for your testimony and mr. goldenkoff i want to go to you first because obviously your agency they are doing things right because you get better scores. some of the things that you just highlighted their certainly are things that need to be implemented. and the analysis that you did did you find a resistance

perhaps on the part of senior level executives or mid-level managers or the like or even to implement some of those additional recommendations or observations that you have made. >> no we definitely did not find a resistance. it seems like at the top-level agency seemed to be getting it as you have heard here today. secretaries and heads of agencies at the senior level they seem to be getting it. to the extent that they're any breakdowns it seems to be more in the implementation either insufficient data analysis for example doing root cause analyses looking for the drivers of engagement both at the enterprise level and by component level. in some cases their issues with communication so it's not the case that if you look at it as a maturity model agencies are

definitely recognizing the need to take action but it's more now in terms of where the focus should neon better implementation of key steps. >> let me ask one other question before i go on to some of the other witnesses. how much of this is a legislative fix that is needed with regards to either the civil service performance metrics or whatever? how much of vacuum effects and how much of that is where we have to put emphasis that the agencies can fix in your opinion? >> what is so important is i think you need to be a partnership and we have heard a lot about today. it's very encouraging. clearly congress gets the message as well and just being supportive of the federal workforce but also holding them accountable for results is so important. in terms of legislative fixes most of what needs to be done starts with agencies and agency leadership creating that culture

of engagement and then cascading that downing creating almost like microlevels of engagement so it can be done at the top-level at the c suite and filters down to the cubicle. and then focusing on these key ingredients in these key drivers of engagement. so in terms of legislative fix, i don't think anything stands out. there are certainly things like the shutdown, things that may not have been helpful but at the same time. >> my ranking member was just about to go crazy that softball was not hit out of the park to go ahead. >> gao has not been attentive and one thing that's important to know this is what we bring out in our testimony and in a written statement but also in the full report coming out in a couple of months. during those difficult times what's interesting was the number of agencies that improved

their scores and went up. >> so let me ask you on the one to improve their scores, what kind of affirmation did they get to continue that? because we all are in the either reward or risk-averse society where punishment we hate rewards we like but did any of that happen to any of those that improve scores other than they got a good score on a report that some would say most don't look at? >> there is that put a lot of people do read that and of course it's in the "washington post" and we have hearings on it so if these things do get a lot of publicity. i think that you know really what drives so much of this is one, better agency performance. we are all public servants and we really focus on agency missions of the extent that better engagement, higher morale leads to better accomplishments

at the agency level and at the subcomponent that's a big driver driver. and then also holding individual leaders from the executives all the way down to the front-line supervisors everybody is responsible for improving engagement. >> thank you so much. mr. ferriero i want to come to you. yesterday he shared with me how you worked in a very hot area picking books and you understand some of the issues that some of the workforce gets to engage in on a regular basis so i would ask you with the scores being as low as they are and the action plan that you have outlined, what are the major impediments to getting the scores up that more importantly the scores would represent a change in attitude among many the people you have.

what is the major impediment you might have? >> i think it's clear that a tripling in the size of the record collection and a decrease in the number of total staff over a period of years has a tremendous impact on the staff's ability to keep up with the work that needs to be done. what i was sharing with you yesterday was my own experience about how routine the jobs get to be and no opportunities for advancement or enhancement of job skills so we have an initiative underway that is addressing career paths so that our folks have an opportunity to join the national archives and see a career path that gives them a certain set of skills and opportunities for dance men. as i said it's personal to me because it's a situation i had when i first started my job in this profession. >> can we get from each one of

you that are on this list, kind of a benchmark of where you would like to be six months from now and a year from now? are each one of you willing to at least give me a call that you are looking to get in terms of increasing the numbers and i will start with you. >> well we have laid out -- i'm encouraged because the staff at large has taken this seriously and have taken ownership of the issue. so we have employee engagement teams working across the national archives to identify in the local area what are the most important issues that are and they are basing this on the scores. what can we do locally to address these issues? a national level team works with those individual teams to look at patterns across the agency. >> i guess what i'm asking for is in order for me to properly

evaluated for the ranking member, properly evaluated we at least need a goal that the three of you are looking at and that may be a modest goal in saying we are looking at increasing the score and looking at it here and here it is that something you are willing to get with the senior staff and provide to the committee in terms of some clear objectives and where you want to be? then we have a matrix to at least measure again so we are not here next year saying well we didn't make its progress on all of you are saying the ocoee did make progress. i need something quantifiable i guess is what i'm saying. >> i would like to be able to come back to you and brag about the fact that it improve scores in three different areas, the staff has identified as problem areas. >> let me put it different different way for a preview. here's what i'm asking you to provide to this committee.

a score, a quantitative number in terms of where we are today and where you would like to be a year from now and you have already outlined some of the action plans you are doing. obviously you need to get there but i want to make sure we can measure it and say gosh these things worked. these guys did movie league -- than he let all so scrap it and go on to something else. >> i could provide that with you. >> i have gone way over my time want to recognize the ranking member mr. connolly. >> thank you mr. chairman. mr. ferriero how many employees do you have? >> just under 3000. >> would it be fair to say you are focused on the organizing principle of a coalition. employees understand what their mission is. >> and they love it. >> ms. emerson how many employees have you got? >> dhs is the third-largest

federal agency with over 225,000 employees at dhs. >> how many agencies and sub agencies were mao committed to create the department of homeland security? >> approximately 22 agencies. >> would be fair to say unlike mr. ferriero although you have an overarching mission at the department of homeland security went to or below that you have lots of different missions. >> we have lots of different missions under that. we have been main mission of protecting the homeland. >> wake. >> we have. >> wake up. >> we have got that the gloomy look at secret service it has a specific focus on the coast guard has a different focus. border patrol you know and would it be fair to say it's a little misleading to even give a grade to the department of homeland security as a whole because actually when you look at your constituent parts there's an enormous variety in

the scores of morale and employee satisfaction. >> that is correct. >> four example the coast guard has a very high scorer. >> that's correct. >> perhaps secret service at the moment is a fairly low scores. >> they have been dropping. >> e they been dropping so i think it's important to case of the archives we have to focus on agency a clear core mission and the employees love that mission and it's a fairly focused set of activities. we have to concentrate on it because the numbers are manageable and small and all that relative to you. the department of homeland security is you know huge enterprise and it's really misleading in some ways to give you one score because implicitly it suggests a homogeneity that in fact is not correct.

mr. goldenkoff i sms gao is looking at this process is taking cognizance of that difference. >> yes, i mean with dhs in particular. they have merged all these agencies emerging these very different cultures, different missions and it just takes time and dhs is still working through that process. >> and i don't want to overstate it the chairman was kind enough to note that i was a little agitated as you were answering this question because i do think congress has to take responsibility for some of this. we are not bystanders or observers and sometimes listening to ourselves we might as well put up a sign that blogging will continue until morale improves. we are in part responsible for that. i gave a litany of actions we have taken that it's certainly not contributed to the morale. and i would hope that i'd know the chairman absolutely is

committed to trying to do what he can to turn that around. we need to be speaking in respectful tones about her workforce. langeby incentivizing them and me to be there. we need to avoid the demagogic or pandering even though the temptation politically may be great because back home beating up on nameless bureaucrats can help you. defending the federal employee is of low political yield in many districts. not mine but in many end avoiding that i think is really important. i really respect the chairman for the fact that he is committed to that too and he's in a different kind of district in mind. i really appreciate that commitment. mr. ehrlich let's take a look at the ranking of the chemical safety board. the partnership ranks your board tenth out of 10 the lowest of

the low. a small agency with a score of 33.7. now that's almost half the average and well below the high of 76 and well below the private sector. and that represents a 2.9. fall from just the year before and a huge decline from what it was just two years ago when it was 54.2 so you have seen it precipitous drop in morale in the chemical safety board. is that correct? >> yes sir i have seen the numbers and i understand them. i have been there for five months. i can tell you it's getting better and we are going to continue to make it better. i think we understand why some of those issues have occurred and i think we are doing something to turn them around.

the product has not faltered. >> you said we think we understand why. perhaps you could elaborate, why? >> well for one thing many years ago a guy by the name of tom wrote a book that was called managing by walking around. i haven't seen that until recently. we have people we are dealing with. they are not robots. they are not automatons. they are human beings that want to know they are valued and just going out and asking them how are you doing, how is your family you are on an incident with four people that got killed. we have two teams deployed right now, one in texas where four people died in la porte texas in a massive explosion in california. those people need to know that we care about them and once you start to let people know that you care about them and you are willing to invest your time and your effort which is why really what we all get paid for and be part of the solution set a part of the problem morale gets better.

>> the csb of which you are board member hired a consultant committee called advantage human resources and in september of last year that found 80% of staff expressed quote much frustration with top leadership unquote and further felt quote conflict of a mung board members as having negative impact" and 47% said the perception of a climate where senior leaders discourage dissenting opinions. you are part of that leadership and maybe not a long-term or preview are part of that ward. your observations about the findings of your own consulting firm that you retain the board has retained, to look at these issues. >> there are some issues with that study in terms of how it was handled and how it was managed and as well i'm sure you know because of our concerns

about that the whole process has been turned over to the ig for examination. we are awaiting the outcome of that examination now. i think that the data was clearly taken. i don't have a whole lot of confidence in it right now. i have not reviewed it in absolute detail because i want to go down and talk to the people myself and i want to find out what's really on their minds and i think that's much better derived by face-to-face intervention and interaction than by having somebody fill out a piece of paper and talk to somebody else. >> of the chair will indulge one follow-up question. it is surprise you mr. ehrlich or your colleagues that the actions were statements or both of the board actually had an impact a fairly dramatic impact in the morale of the workforce itself?

>> no it really didn't surprise me because in talking to the staff members they want something from their board members. they want to know we are part of the team. they want to know we are there to support them not to achieve our own agendas and objectives whatever they may be. one of my pet peeves about a new board member is i don't have a job description. we are working on a job description. i want to know what people hold me accountable for. i hold myself accountable for very high standards. and i think and i believe sincerely that once that message gets out to the state that you are going to see a dramatic change. >> thank you mr. chairman. >> and mr. ehrlich let me follow-up. i'm confused. you have been there five months. you have been here before this committee on another issue just a few weeks ago and there was disagreement among the board members during that hearing.

>> that's correct. >> so what the ranking member just brought up in his questioning doesn't seem like he fixed that are are you saying shazam it's been fixed? >> i didn't say that at all mr. chairman. those things take times. >> here's my concern. you have one of the smallest agencies. >> that is correct. >> so knowing what they are thinking is certainly a whole lot easier than what ms. emerson has to deal with. how many employees do you have? >> 40. >> at the time of the survey you had dirty for employees and 32 of them responded which is an incredible response. i've never seen that ever and get that incredible response rate gave you an f, failing f, feeling great and you are sitting here saying there was a problem with the study that the ranking member highlighted?

how could that be? what cases do you say there was a problem with? do you base that on the fact that mr. ehrlich is still working with you punish the point of contact are doing the survey? do you based on that? >> senator i'm not sure except that terminology. >> you did punish the point of contact data. is that your testimony that he did not? >> there were mitigating circumstances to have that information was handled to dr. horowitz is a very valuable asset to the agency. >> why would dr. dr. horowitz not be today? we asked him to testify because he probably knows better than you since you've only been there five months. why would he i've come today? >> first of all he is not in a policymaking position and general counsel advised the person that represents the agency should be in a policymaking position or a pass.

first of all. >> did he punish him or not? >> not in my opinion, no sir. >> how about the other borders borders -- members who aren't here? i have reliable information that suggested he did. let me tell you why you are here today because the employees that work for you have given you an f consistently and the other thing is what we are not going to put up with is a whole lot of it isn't as bad as it seems on your particular agency is troubling and we get the best analysis. i think the ranking member said it was 80% of the people that didn't have confidence in the leadership. 80% of 40 people or 34 depending on which you want to look at is a significant number and that's very troubling to me because it should be very easy to address their concerns. wouldn't you agree with that?

>> i would. >> how are you specifically other than walking around and which i used to be consultant i talk on that particular book but other than just walking around, specifically how are you addressing these concerns? >> we have a work improvement committee in place where we have detailed six major topics that we are working on. we are going to put metrics in place relative to them. they are not totally unlike what other witnesses here of talked about in terms of on boarding statistics and the like are those things take time and they are getting better. >> okay you just talked about matrix and i'm going to come to the delegate from d.c. the cng has been gracious to not complain. under what matrix are you saying that they have gotten better because i don't see any? i meanies talked about matrix with the gal and you are going to implement some of those. and what matrix are they getting better the?

>> the fact that we are continually finishing the boards and we have our backlog in. >> backlog and reports is not employee satisfaction. >> i'm sorry sir but i believe when people take pride in turning out reports, turning out videos as they do. >> but that's not matrix mr. ehrlich. i was in the private sector for a long time and i did consulting. i did this kind of work on employee satisfaction. i have run into managers like you. they said everything is fine. the matrix you have can't be accurate. i've run into a number of times and let me just tell you i am asking you specifically what matrix are you referring to that they have gotten better? not stories, not anecdotal references. are there any, yes or no? are there any matrix is? yes or no. >> yes.

>> what are they? >> i just told you what they are. >> that is live matrix so what matrix is? >> i believe when you go out and ask people questions about how they feel about the workplace how they feel about senior management. what is it that they want? that to me can be resolved and reduced in writing and put into some kind of writing. >> will of the second round of questions and come back an address that. i appreciate the patience of the gentlewoman from the district of columbia and i will recognize her for a round of questions. mrs. norton. >> thank you mr. chairman. you can always count on me to be patient. mr. chairman actually i really appreciate this hearing and to just to put it in context my appreciation for the hearing, no matter how you look at it employees of the federal

government have fallen under special criticism particularly from the congress. in fact yesterday some of us were on the floor and by the way there were some good bills on the floor during tax day and then there were some bills that were very to moralizing. i went to the floor to speak on one on tax filings with the federal government workers have the best tax filings in the country and should. their being paid by the federal government. they took a lashing even though they are in place, absolutely in place very good and effective ways to deal with those tiny numbers who have not fully paid their federal taxes to be lashed when you've are the best. i don't know what you have to do do. we are seeing a generation which

may be the older generation of federal employees, these employees who came in after jfk these people who were the best and brightest who decided to give it all to the federal government. there are annual prizes and these people have invented things that if they admitted them into the private sector they would be millionaires by now. it's quite amazing. i go to the ceremony every year. i am particularly interested in the department of homeland security ms. emerson because the last agency in the country perhaps we need to have the last, really last, is this high security agency which in this very room we created.

now some of the reasons are quite obvious. we just finished having a late budget fight when everybody else in the federal government was funded except your security agency. imagine how that would make you feel if you worked for one of those agencies and had to give up and they and so way to such a fight. i don't even want to go into this sequestration and to continue with cuts in pay. so i think everybody will understand that there is a wonder that anything approaching good morale. but when you look at the department of homeland security which ranks near the bottom it's so important to every american how would you explain it's low

ranking? >> thank you and thank you for mentioning those challenges that dhs employees have had as well as the rest of the federal employee workforce. sequestration, budget cuts, freezes and furloughs they'll have an effect on employee morale and as you mentioned just recently dhs went through potential lapse in budget again so that does have an effect. but what i would like to bring forward is that we have top leadership support there are sick it terry and deputy secretary paid it back before we started this hearing secretary johnson was here giving his support in showing how important employee morale is to him. >> i appreciate that an i'm sorry. i could not go to this meeting to explain what he's doing but i was concerned that the senior leadership of all places has

seen so much turnover and in homeland security. why is that? >> our attrition rate is better than the rest of the government in terms of senior leadership and in the rest of the federal workforce and that has been confirmed by opm as well as our own internal folks. >> secretary johnson has characterized it as they leadership vacuum of alarming proportions. >> he has been very busy filling senior leadership vacancies. in fact is filled 16 of them. we have three more left but he has done a very good job. >> we do have some acting officials and a fair number of top jobs. is that because of difficulty getting people to come to the agency because of the difficulties it has gotten ours are some of the recent? >> secretary johnson has worked

very hard to get those positions filled. from day one he came in promising he was going to fill those top leadership positions. we do have three acting positions now. he is working hard everyday to get those positions filled on anything you all can do to help them out on that we would appreciate. i think when you have someone in enacting position and a higher leadership role that does tend to tell. >> i can't help but notice that the one agency within within the department of homeland within the department of homeland security that stands out as the united states coast guard. it is one agency that art has its new headquarters. you are building a new headquarters in the district of columbia. the congress has slowed you up and as a result has cost the taxpayers billions more because the only agency to be completely built is the homeland security is the united states coast guard and yet it has strong scores

among the best places. do you think that has something to do with the least they have a decent place to work? >> i think it very well could and would secretary johnson was here this morning he was talking about the headquarters building the nebraska avenue complex and i invite all of you to come and see that. >> i'm talking about the coast guard. >> the coast guard building is very nice. that could have an effect on the morale. they are together and it is a state-of-the-art building and we appreciate that building. >> thank you so much. the chair recognizes the gentleman from colorado mr. buck. >> thank you mr. chairman. mr. ferriero can you tell me what is the mission statement for your agency? >> we collect protect and encourage the use of the records of the u.s. government.

>> worcester ehrlich? >> our mission is to respond to making chemical incidents and supply that information to the american public to make the chemical industry safer place to work. >> and if i looked it up that would be the mission state you have on your web site? >> little more involved than that. i think everyone works towards that mission, yes. >> ms. emerson? >> at the department of homeland security we have an important mission and that's to protect the homeland. >> that's the mission statement? >> yes sir. >> is one of those areas and immigration? >> yes sir. >> you think immigration policies has encouraged hundreds of thousands of people to cross the border illegally does that have an effect on morale at your agency? >> i nor secretary and deputy

secretary met with employees and a union representative to discuss that issue. >> is that a yes or no? >> i'm not sure. when you look at the fed scores of hard to tell what affects the scores and oftentimes you have to do a deeper dive so that would be hard for me to speculate on. but i know it's something that our secretary and deputy secretary worked with union partners and employees on. >> i just want to make sure understand. it's hard for you to speculate about the fact that the immigration service is trying to regulate immigration in this country and it has gotten to the point where it's completely unregulated and it's hard for you to speculate whether that has caused a morale issue? >> i'm not sure and i'm not an expert on immigration but i do know that it is an issue that our secretary and deputy secretary work with employees on. >> do you think we have an immigration problem this country

with a number of illegal immigrants that come into this country? >> i'm not an immigration expert and i don't feel i should give an opinion on that. >> do you use than -- read the newspapers and watch tv? >> there are a lot of sporting events on at my house with two teenage boys. >> that's a good thing. so in your daily experience have you noticed whether we have a immigration challenge in this country? >> i know the department of homeland security is abiding by the regulations and are federal employees do that as well. >> and the fact that -- i've worked with a number of immigration agents and they feel they are a racehorse. they never get out of the gate to be able to run. that is the morale issue that i hear from the people on the ground in my prior life and law enforcement.

i think if people have a mission in the mission statement and they are frustrated, they are attracted to the agency because they wanted to work on that mission and they are frustrated. in that sense it seems that would be part of the morale problem. >> is certainly could be. as federal employees we have different policies and laws that we have to follow and sometimes they come with different administrations but that's her job is to follows the laws and rules and regulations. >> and in some cases not follow the law. not your breaking the law but not enforcing the law because the president has issued executive orders in other directions and use the terms prosecutorial misconduct or has decided in other ways that he's going to frustrate the mission statement of an agency. no further questions. >> i thank the gentleman. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york

ms. mulvaney for five minutes. >> first of all i want to thank the chairman and the ranking member for holding this hearing. i think it's very important because we have the finest workforce in the world. our federal government is superb and morale is low is very very troubling to be from the reports that the chairman was able to view personally on it. i have worked on the city and state level in new york and the bureaucracy and everyone i worked with were very dedicated, very hard-working as are our federal employees. i was amazed when i came to the federal government to see how very professional this government is in their work. there is always room for improvement but it's extremely professional.

i believe some of the problem is that people attacked federal employees all the time and it seems like every time we need to find the sum money we take it out of federal employees and instead of waiting the country with work and family balance which the president has spoken about how much one of your purports showed from gao that work and family balance is a very important part, you are dragging behind the private sector tremendously and i will give you two examples, they think chairman meadows these are things we can work on together that don't cost money. i know that's the first thing with the republican party. we can't spend the time that we can make things work better. i will give you to build that the president actually and i was very thrilled that he mentioned it in his state of the union address. one is paid leave for the birth of a child. i have had this bill in for a

number of years. it passed the house once. it never passed the senate. the president has endorsed it. gao did a report as did omb that it would not cost any money. in a report that i did and actually wrote about it in the book and the progress has been greatly exaggerated, we are the only country in the world safe to but does not provide paid leave for the birth of a child. the two that did not provided is papua new guinea and was so flat. in the report they said the birth of a child for two weeks paid leave would be the work we picked up by fellow employees helping out and granted it would be more work for them but you're not going to hire another person for it and is something we can work together and make happen in a positive way. i will tell you i have had federal employees call is this bill passing? i want to time the birth of my child around the passage of it is in our family i cannot afford

to lose workweeks and pay for the birth of a child. i think that's a concrete step that we can take to show federal employees we value their work. all fortune five hundreds, most companies have been that the federal government does not. another and i want trey gowdy from a conservative state and i'm from a liberal one and if we ever teamed up with might go to get some of these things done. that bill should pass. let's take a look at it and see if we can pass that bill. secondly is the work family balance and as a mother who has raised two children i can't tell you how distressing it is if you have a doctors appointment or your child is home sick and you have to be at the office. now what the work family balance bill does which was supported by labor and authored by myself and former senator kennedy and based on policies that were put in

place in england, it merely allows an employee to go to their h.r. advisor, human resources advisor, and ask about work family balance items. and with the guarantee that you will not be fired for asking about it. many people are very terrified of being fired. they need their jobs. i have been the same position in my own life and i can tell you when i had a child i went to my age aren't asked about family leave and they said there is no leave policy. women just lead. when you leaving? i that i have no intention of leaving. i'm coming back and i was terrified that i would be fired because i was going to become a mother. as a country that talks about family values is the most important thing in our country if you look at our policies they are really not there. to get past paid leave easily and to get past work family

balance very easily. it does not cost any money. you work it out with your h.r. adviser and it works within the timeframe and you can get the word done then it can work out. if you have a highly motivated worker which i think a federal employee is, they make the choice to serve this great country. what an honor to serve in the archives of this greatest democracy, this great country to preserve them. we in new york have digitized our main libraries so that everyone in the country can access our books. everyone in the country should be accessing what we have in our great archives, to see the original declaration of independence, the original things that are part of our country and i read that hasn't happened. you should go back to your office and work with your team make it happen and report back to this committee every month on

how fast you were working to digitize the system so that every american -- but believe me your workforce will be so motivated over the great goal of having this trove of information to protect the greatest defender of democracy of human rights in the world. what a privilege to work with the homeland security department. what a privilege and if you have clear guidelines you should make them go to the 9/11 museum and hear the stories of the devastation, hear the stories from the seals that risk their lives they thank god they -- they thought they were going to die when they went to kill osama bin laden bet we are going to forget we are going to get them. what a story to tell. i'm telling you you take a day, take them down to that museum. have them study it. they will come back so motivated

on the goal that they have to protect americans in this great country. we have such an opportunity. now my time has expired unfortunately. i'm just warming up. >> you may be running for president. we are ready. i have some more ideas that i will wait for my turn. i think there are things we can do that will not cost money. i know my marching orders. it will not cost a dime that we can do to help this workforce and help them catch up to the private sector. most people look to the federal government for best practices. we should be implementing all the best practices that mr. mr. goldenkoff put out in his report -- report. work family balance i have lifted that we should implement those recommendations that the gao gave. >> i will endeavor to work with the gentleman from new york so we look at that.

i recognize that ollman from south carolina for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman and i want to thank you for your hard work on this issue in so many other issues on the oversight committee. i do want to say that i am not only have great personal affection for the gentlelady from new york also have great respect for her and i would welcome every opportunity to work with her on whatever issue she is working on. ms. emerson i want to follow up on what representative talk brought up in terms of your place of employment. do you want to hazard a guess why women and men go into law enforcement? >> to serve their country. >> yes, more specifically what would you say? what draws women and men to law enforcement? >> at dhs? >> law enforcement general. >> my thought is to protect the homeland. to enforce the law.

>> respect for the rule of law because the law is the greatest unifying force that we have in our culture, the greatest equalizing force that we have in our culture and it really is what separates us from lots of other societies. it provides order. it provides structure. it provides predictability and i realize that your job may or may not afford you the opportunity to go out into the field and talk to women and men who work. i don't want to judge your job. i don't pretend to know how many opportunities you have but i can tell you attorney buck worked in one person every day and so did i. i have a lot of friends that are still in federal law enforcement and it breaks my heart to see any law enforcement entity ranks itself 314 out of 315 in terms of places to work. i would just ask you to encourage or i would encourage you to ask yourself whether

asking men and women who went into a job to enforce the law not to enforce the law, might possibly be responsible for that low rating because i can tell you every time i go home and i talk to the women and men who are still in law enforcement nothing would diminish their morale quite like being asked to do the opposite of what they signed up to do. mr. archivist as you know i'm biased toward towards youth summit ends or lack thereof will reflect that i is. i've worked with you in the past past. you were gracious enough to come to my district where you were warmly received and wildly popular and want you to come back and they want me to leave. they actually do. so i will say this. i am confident that you are going to identify whatever

issues exist and i'm confident that you are going to work on those issues. i know you will and i would also encourage you because there is not a more fair-minded conscientious hard-working member of congress than mark meadows are chairman and to the extent that you could privately meet with him, he was wildly successful and a former life in his wildly successful in this life. i know that you want that ranking to improve and i know he wants that ranking to improve and to the extent you can work together to remedy that situation i think it would be an oligarchy as interest. with be an oligarch s. interest. with that i will yield whatever remaining time i have to my friend from north carolina mr. meadows. >> i think the gentleman for his kind words and i would debate one particular point in that. the tenacious spirit of the gentleman from south carolina and the diligence of which he performs his actions are unmatched and unrivaled so i

thank him. and i would confer to the archivist. you have been near and dear place in many of our hearts and part of that is because of what is seen. at the place that most of us aren't but it's just as important on the places that very few people visit. that backbone of what is imperative is key so i thank you for being willing to work on that. mr. ehrlich let me come to you and i have a couple of questions. mr. horowitz as he currently listed as the managing director at csp on their web site? >> yes sir. >> city is the managing director? >> yes sir. >> why was his title changed from managing director to lead investigator of deepwater horizon just before our last

hearing and now it's been change back. i don't understand that. >> i don't think was changed for before the last meeting. it was my understanding that he was given that title relative to a functional responsibility in that specific project. his title at managing director hasn't changed since 2010. >> so you changing it, so it never changed managing director to that particular title and a back? is that your testimony here today? >> i believe one is a functional title and the other one is organizational. >> city carries both of those titles? >> i'm not sure how much longer he is going to carry the title relative to deep water because that project is nearing a close. >> okay, so was that the reason he was moved from ses two gs-15? why was he moved? why would his status changed? >> he was a temporary at ses as i understand it and when the chair step down he went back to

a gs-15. >> why? >> i think that was his wishes. i'm not totally sure. >> where letting him decide what he gets to do? what about the other 40 employees? do you we let them do that to matt? >> with the ses issue is a very special issue. >> you are telling me and ses can say i want to be a gs-15 tomorrow and the borges says that's fine? >> i think what happened was and i don't know all the government issues related to the ses's and when the chair step down i don't believe that apply to him anymore. >> all right so what is the status of the search for a new managing director? >> dr. horowitz is the managing director. >> so he is going to be it from here on out. >> to the best in my knowledge. >> so is the managing director would he not have understanding

of the employee morale issues? >> i think he does have an understanding. >> why would he not be here today if he is understanding? wouldn't he be in a better position than you mr. ehrlich that you been a board member for five months am i wouldn't he know better than you would no? >> we have talked about the issues and i think i can express the issues. as i've indicated i'm in a policymaking position. >> what policies do you believe are necessary to improve performance? >> we have looked at this work improvement thing and we have six particular items that we are putting policies and procedures in place for her. >> wanted to start working on those policies and procedures? >> we are going to develop metrics again found -- against them to satisfy your initial request to an hour ago. >> you said you've been working on that. way to start? >> i've been working on it with the committee and they have been working on for a year now as i understand it.

>> so who specifically has been working on a? >> one of our desk is of. >> who had set up? what is their name? >> cara had set up. >> did we swear -- should we swear her in for testimony? >> is fine with me. >> it is fine with you? will good, we may come back there. i will go to the gentleman from the virgin islands miss plaskett for five minutes. >> i'm interested in the impact of these reports have and show or rather what they show about the low morale among employees and specifically low morale to me as an outcome of leadership and an outcome of mechanisms that have been put in place for employees to feel that the

workplace is a great place to work. mr. ehrlich i wanted to ask you about employees repeatedly expressing concern that the leaders aren't responsible stewards of their positions and that they don't listen to employees concerns. that's something that has been in the report. how do you think employees can expect to best fulfill their work requirements when they don't feel their leaders are not steering them in the right direction? how do they understand the jobs they have? >> the attitude has to change and it is changing. we have made it known that we are going to change issues and those attitudes have to be changed and they will change over time but they are not going to change overnight. >> says do you think that just putting another individual in place does that or what mechanisms and what programs

that you don't? >> it's not a matter of putting one more person in place. it's a matter of changing the culture. >> what specifically have begun to do that? >> first of all we recognize and let our folks know that we appreciate, we value and understand the risks to which they put themselves every time they go out on an incident. we care about them and we care about their families. we care about their family values. that is very important. >> i'm sure you express that in prior years as well. i can't imagine you wouldn't have done that so how are you doing it incrementally differently now than previously? ..

quietly shut my door. i have no argument with that you are one of the largest agencies. in my mind it started off in a difficult position because you had different components from different places being put together. i actually was in part of the leadership team that was put together and i understand how

the agency is doing the most critical work right now. one of the things we talk about homeland security my colleague talk to immigration and the policies that may be with administration, and i don't think it's the policies that drive people to like or not like their jobs. they want to be able to pass a bill that will allow people we had the director a couple weeks ago talking about priorities.

they identify and apprehend criminals supervise alternative it's a large job they're working on. the virgin islands are considered the third border. having enough individuals to do the job? thank you,. >> our employees have difficult jobs as you are describing and those are very challenging

positions. actually, we do a very good job recruiting high-quality, diverse workforce at dhs. our attrition rates are low and our employees are extremely dedicated to their job. they do what it takes to get the job done. in terms of re-creating, hiring, retaining, dhs does a good job dhs does a good job there. do we have more work to do in employee engagement? you bet. our secretary was here today and the deputy secretary and they have made it a number one priority, starting with themselves. increasing communication holding all communication, holding all employee meetings, meeting with senior address executive service. they've done on two occasions. >> do you believe you have a last from a real agency? >> yes. i was out department of justice during that time when we were putting together homeland

security and it was a very big event. but it is coming together. we have employees who are extremely dedicated to their job. together they have the first award ceremony for our dhs employees. over 300 of our employees were recognized. i think that goes a long way and in addition to that they have required leadership to recognize and say thank you to those employees for those difficult jobs they do. >> the chair recognizes the jacket gentleman from wisconsin. >> i have a couple questions. how many employees do you have

at the national archives? >> just under 3000 in 46 facilities across the country. >> do you ever keep track, compared to other agencies how many leave prematurely? >> eyewear attrition rate. >> eyewear attrition rate is comparable to other federal agencies except in the area of student employees. student rates turnover faster than regular employees. >> out of every 100 employees, how many leave every year? >> between seven and 8%? >> do you ever do follow up to find out why they are leaving? >> we do exit interviews. most of the time it's better opportunities. we have a tremendous placements in other federal jobs so we do a lot of training. people take those skills and go to be record managers and other

agencies. >> how many employees you have? >> about 3000 with a dozen installations across the country. >> what is your turnover of non- retirement. >> i don't know offhand. i do know it's very leave low. they usually leave for personal reasons rather than dissatisfaction. their spouse got a different job and are changing location or have a career change. >> so if your employees aren't happy it's not that they're so unhappy that they're leaving? >> that's leaving? >> that's right. we go to great lengths to keep our employees happy and motivated. we also track it very closely and do exit interviews. we also talk about engagement. it really is part of our

culture, as a matter of fact, to try to bring in all employees no matter what level and make them feel part of the team. there was an intern who felt so motivated that helped out with this report and decided to come back for the hearing. there she is she has a smile on her face. >> thank you. i want to come back to you on one issue because of the volume of employees you have. would it be possible, or are you willing to look at exploring and looking at taking a smaller snapshot within the umbrella of dhs to look at performance on

perhaps two or three agencies together. your testimony was you had 22 different areas of responsibility. is that correct. >> that's correct. >> would you be willing to bundle those together where we can start to see the worst under the dhs umbrella and the dao can help you on that. is that correct? >> we have been working very closely together. i would like to help and thank gao for helping us. in fact our leadership have been over to gao to meet with their leadership so we are working very closely. >> in terms of that benchmark i asked before, perhaps let's break that down so we can look at and give you credit for the good stuff you're doing and maybe focus more emphasis on those other areas because over

200,000 employees, it gets very difficult. it's like turning a ship. it would be much more difficult than what they have to do with 40 40 employees. i'd like to go to the gentleman from missouri, but first who decided you should be the one to testify here today? you were not the one we requested. who decided that western mark. >> general counsel decided there should be a pass from the organization and i volunteered to be here sir. >> was that in consultation with the other board members? >> i let them know i was doing it and they were welcome to come. >> so they were willing to calm and declined to come?

so what you were saying is you drew the short straw? >> know i volunteered and they chose not to come. >> so we called them, they will say they were given the opportunity to calm and declined. >> they were given the opportunity to decline. >> is that your testimony? i'll recognize the gentleman from missouri. >> thank you and thanks to all the witnesses were being here today. agency youth leaders can and must use the resources at their disposal to build inclusive, motor fading, and productive work environments. however, we must recognize that congress has repeatedly asked these agencies to do more with less. less. this is a problem within itself and no doubt prevents agencies from operating at their full potential. according to a recent staffing report holdings have grown from

14.4 million cubic feet of records in 1985 to 29.5 cubic feet in 2013. despite 2013. despite a doubling in the workload, you have about half the employees you had in 1985. have you received significant funding to keep pace with the rapidly significant volume? >> the ability of us to do more with less is at its limit. we cannot do more with less. we cannot have the appropriate level of staffing to do the job we need to do. >> how has that affected employee morale? >> it has affected us. we have a

staff that ranks their passion for the job at 98% and they feel they are doing important work. the fact that they can't do the quality of work they've done enough in the past really hurts. >> mr. chairman, this raises a raises a valid point when we think about the ratings of these agencies. if we as legislators don't give the proper resources to adequately pay employees, to adequately fund these agencies who happened to be for the most part domestic agencies, even dhs, then we are doing a disservice to the agencies also. i want to bring that up, not to debate up, not to debate that issue here, that's not the place, but it also raises a real issue.