This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-07-1152T 
entitled 'United Nations Organizations: Enhanced Efforts Needed to 
Increase U.S. Employment at UN Agencies' which was released on August 
2, 2007. 

This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part 
of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every 
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of 
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text 
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the 
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided 
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed 
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic 
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail 
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this 
document to Webmaster@gao.gov. 

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright 
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed 
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work 
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the 
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this 
material separately. 

Testimony: 

Before the Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the 
Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia, Committee on Homeland 
Security and Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate: 

United States Government Accountability Office: 

GAO: 

For Release on Delivery Expected at 2:30 p.m. EDT: 

Wednesday, August 1, 2007: 

United Nations Organizations: 

Enhanced Efforts Needed to Increase U.S. Employment at UN Agencies: 

Statement of Thomas Melito, Director: 
International Affairs and Trade: 

GAO-07-1152T: 

GAO Highlights: 

Highlights of GAO-07-1152T, a testimony before the Subcommittee on 
Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the 
District of Columbia, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 
Affairs, U.S. Senate 

Why GAO Did This Study: 

The U.S. Congress continues to be concerned about the 
underrepresentation of U.S. professionals in some UN organizations and 
that insufficient progress has been made to improve U.S. 
representation. This testimony is based on GAO’s September 2006 report 
that reviewed (1) U.S. representation status and employment trends at 
five UN organizations, (2) factors affecting these organizations’ 
ability to meet U.S. representation targets, and (3) the U.S. 
Department of State’s (State) efforts to improve U.S. representation 
and additional steps that can be taken. GAO reviewed five UN 
organizations that together comprised about 50 percent of UN 
organizations’ total professional staff. 

What GAO Found: 

The United States was underrepresented in three of the five UN agencies 
we reviewed, and increased hiring of U.S. citizens is needed to meet 
employment targets. The three agencies where the United States was 
underrepresented were the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA); 
the UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO); and 
the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). U.S. 
citizens were equitably represented at the UN Secretariat, though close 
to the lower end of its target range. The UN Development Program had 
not established a target for U.S. representation, although U.S. 
citizens filled about 11 percent of its professional positions. Given 
projected staff levels, retirements, and separations, IAEA, UNESCO, and 
UNHCR would need to increase hiring of U.S. citizens to meet their 
minimum targets for U.S. representation in 2010. While the five UN 
agencies faced some common barriers to recruiting and retaining 
professional staff, including Americans, they also faced distinct 
challenges. Most of these barriers and challenges were outside of the 
U.S. government’s control. The common barriers included nontransparent 
human resource practices; limited external hiring; lengthy hiring 
processes; comparatively low or unclear compensation; required 
mobility; and limited U.S. government support. UN agencies also faced 
distinct challenges. For example, at the Secretariat, candidates 
serving in professional UN positions funded by their governments were 
more likely to be hired than those who took the entry-level exam; 
however, the United States had not funded such positions at the 
Secretariat. Also, IAEA had difficulty recruiting U.S. employees 
because the number of U.S. nuclear specialists was decreasing. Since 
2001, State has increased its efforts to achieve equitable U.S. 
representation at UN agencies, and additional options exist. State 
targeted efforts to recruit U.S. candidates for senior and policymaking 
UN positions, and although it was difficult to link State’s efforts to 
UN hiring decisions, U.S. representation in these positions improved or 
displayed no trend in the five UN agencies. U.S. representation in 
entry-level positions, however, declined or did not show a trend in 
four of the five UN agencies despite State’s increased efforts. 
Additional options include maintaining a roster of qualified U.S. 
candidates, expanding marketing and outreach, increasing UN employment 
information on U.S. agency Web sites; and assessing the costs and 
benefits of sponsoring entry-level employees at UN agencies. 

Table: Estimated Number of U.S. Citizens to be Hired to Meet Geographic 
targets: 

UN agency: IAEA; 
Average number of total staff hired into geographic positions each 
year, 2001-2005: 77; 
Average number of U.S. citizens hired into geographic positions each 
year, 2001-2005: 6; 
Minimum average number of U.S. citizens to be hired each year to reach 
geographic target in 2010: 16. 

UN agency: UNESCO; 
Average number of total staff hired into geographic positions each 
year, 2001-2005: 55; 
Average number of U.S. citizens hired into geographic positions each 
year, 2001-2005: 4.5; 
Minimum average number of U.S. citizens to be hired each year to reach 
geographic target in 2010: 6. 

UN agency: UNHCR; 
Average number of total staff hired into geographic positions each 
year, 2001-2005: 148; 
Average number of U.S. citizens hired into geographic positions each 
year, 2001-2005: 10; 
Minimum average number of U.S. citizens to be hired each year to reach 
geographic target in 2010: 25. 

Source: GAO analysis of IAEA, UNESCO, and UNHCR hiring data. 

[End of table] 

What GAO Recommends: 

GAO recommended that the Secretary of State provide more UN employment 
information on State Web sites; expand recruiting to reach qualified 
Americans; and evaluate the costs and benefits of maintaining a roster 
of qualified U.S. candidates for high priority positions, and of 
funding entry-level professional staff where Americans are 
underrepresented. In commenting on a draft of GAO’s 2006 report, State 
concurred with GAO’s recommendations. In July 2007, State officials 
updated GAO on the actions they have taken in response to these 
recommendations. 

[Hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-1152T]. 

To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on 
the link above. For more information, contact Thomas Melito at (202) 
512-6571 or melitot@gao.gov. 

[End of section] 

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: 

I am pleased to appear today to discuss ways to improve the 
representation of American professionals at United Nations (UN) 
organizations. The U.S. Congress continues to be concerned about the 
underrepresentation of American professionals employed by some UN 
organizations and that insufficient progress has been made to improve 
U.S. representation. The equitable representation of Americans at UN 
organizations is a priority to Congress in part because the United 
States is the largest financial contributor to most of these 
organizations. Moreover, according to the U.S. Department of State 
(State), Americans bring desirable skills, values, and experience that 
can have a significant impact on UN organizations' operational 
effectiveness. 

My testimony is based on a report that we issued on September 6, 
2006.[Footnote 1] Today I will discuss (1) U.S. representation status 
and employment trends at five UN organizations, (2) factors affecting 
these organizations' ability to meet U.S. representation targets, and 
(3) State's efforts to improve U.S. representation and additional 
efforts that can be taken. 

In preparing this testimony, we relied on our completed review of U.S. 
government efforts to increase U.S. employment at UN agencies. To 
address our objectives, we analyzed employment data for 2001 through 
2005 that we obtained from five UN agencies; reviewed UN agency and 
State documents; and interviewed UN human resources officials, over 100 
Americans employed at the five UN agencies, and U.S. officials. We 
reviewed the following five UN agencies: the International Atomic 
Energy Agency[Footnote 2] (IAEA); the UN Secretariat; the UN 
Development Program (UNDP); the UN Educational, Scientific, and 
Cultural Organization (UNESCO); and the Office of the UN High 
Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). We selected these agencies because 
they represented a range of UN agencies with different funding 
mechanisms and methods for calculating geographic representation. These 
five agencies together comprised approximately 50 percent of UN 
organizations' total professional staff. In July 2007, State officials 
updated us on the actions they have taken in response to our September 
2006 recommendations. We conducted our work for the September 2006 
report from July 2005 through July 2006 in accordance with generally 
accepted government auditing standards. 

Summary: 

The United States was underrepresented in three of the five UN agencies 
we reviewed, and increased hiring of U.S. citizens is needed to meet 
agreed-upon employment targets. Based on UN agencies' formal or 
informal targets for equitable geographic representation, U.S. citizens 
were underrepresented at IAEA, UNESCO, and UNHCR, and equitably 
represented at the UN Secretariat, though close to the lower end of its 
target range. UNDP had not established a target for U.S. 
representation, although U.S. citizens filled about 11 percent of the 
agency's professional positions. Given projected staff levels, 
retirements, and separations for 2006 to 2010, the Secretariat, IAEA, 
UNESCO, and UNHCR would need to hire more Americans than they have 
hired in recent years to meet their minimum targets for equitable U.S. 
representation in 2010. 

While the UN agencies we reviewed faced some common barriers to 
recruiting and retaining professional staff, including Americans, they 
also faced distinct challenges. Most of these barriers and challenges 
were outside of the U.S. government's control. Six barriers common to 
UN agencies we reviewed included nontransparent human resource 
practices; a limited number of positions open to external candidates; 
lengthy hiring processes; comparatively low or unclear compensation; 
required staff mobility and rotation policies; and limited U.S. 
government support during Americans' efforts to obtain, or be promoted 
at, a UN job. These barriers combined with distinct agency-specific 
factors to impede recruitment and retention. For example, candidates 
serving in professional positions funded by their member governments 
were more likely to be hired by the Secretariat than those who took the 
Secretariat's entry-level exam; however, the United States had not 
funded such positions at the Secretariat. In addition, IAEA had 
difficulty attracting U.S. employees because the number of U.S. nuclear 
specialists was decreasing. 

State has increased its efforts to support the goal of achieving 
equitable U.S. representation at UN organizations, and additional 
options exist to target professional positions. State has targeted 
efforts to recruit U.S. candidates for senior and policymaking UN 
positions, and, although it was difficult to directly link State's 
efforts to UN hiring decisions, U.S. representation in senior and 
policymaking positions either improved or did not reflect a trend in 
each of the five UN agencies we reviewed. State also has undertaken 
several efforts to improve overall U.S. representation, including 
adding staff to its UN employment office and increasing coordination 
with other U.S. agencies that work with UN organizations. For positions 
below the senior level, State focused on "getting the word out" by, for 
example, disseminating information on UN vacancies through its Web 
site, attending career fairs and conferences, and other means. Despite 
these efforts, U.S. representation in entry-level positions declined or 
did not display a trend in four of the five UN agencies we reviewed. 
Additional options to target potential pools of candidates for 
professional positions include: maintaining a roster of qualified 
American candidates; expanding marketing and outreach activities; 
increasing UN employment information on U.S. agency Web sites; and 
conducting an assessment of the costs and benefits of sponsoring Junior 
Professional Officers (JPO), who are entry-level employees that are 
financially supported by their home government. 

To improve U.S. efforts to increase the employment of Americans at UN 
agencies, our report made several recommendations. We recommended that 
the Secretary of State (1) provide more consistent and comprehensive 
information about UN employment on the State and U.S. mission Web sites 
and work with U.S. agencies to expand the UN employment information on 
their Web sites; (2) expand targeted recruiting and outreach to more 
strategically reach populations of Americans that may be qualified for 
and interested in entry-and mid-level UN positions; and (3) conduct an 
evaluation of the costs, benefits, and trade-offs of maintaining a 
roster of qualified candidates for professional and senior positions 
determined to be a high priority for U.S. interests and an evaluation 
of funding JPOs, or other gratis personnel, where Americans are 
underrepresented or could become underrepresented. In commenting on a 
draft of this report, State concurred with and agreed to implement all 
of our recommendations. In July 2007, State officials said they had 
begun to take some actions to implement our recommendations, such as 
outreaching to new groups of Americans and completing a preliminary 
analysis of the cost of maintaining a roster. 

Background: 

The United Nations comprises six principal bodies, including the 
General Assembly and the Secretariat, as well as funds and programs, 
such as UNDP, and specialized agencies, such as UNESCO. These funds, 
programs, and specialized agencies have their own governing bodies and 
budgets, but follow the guidelines of the UN Charter. Article 101 of 
the UN Charter calls for staff to be recruited on the basis of "the 
highest standards of efficiency, competence, and integrity" as well as 
from "as wide a geographical basis as possible." Each UN agency has 
developed its own human resource policies and practices, and staff 
rules. 

Of the five agencies we reviewed, three--the Secretariat, IAEA, and 
UNESCO--had quantitative formulas that establish targets for equitable 
geographical representation in designated professional positions. UNHCR 
had not established a quantitative formula or positions subject to 
geographic representation, but had agreed to an informal target for 
equitable U.S. representation. UNDP generally followed the principle of 
equitable geographic representation, but had not adopted formal or 
informal targets. Agencies with formal quantitative targets for 
equitable representation do not apply these targets to all professional 
positions. Instead, these organizations set aside positions that are 
subject to geographic representation from among the professional and 
senior positions performing core agency functions, funded from regular 
budget resources. Positions that are exempt from being counted 
geographically include linguist and peacekeeping positions, positions 
funded by extra-budgetary resources, and short-term positions. In 
addition, these organizations utilize various nonstaff positions, such 
as contractors and consultants. 

The Department of State is the U.S. agency primarily responsible for 
leading U.S. efforts toward achieving equitable U.S. employment 
representation in UN organizations. While State is responsible for 
promoting and seeking to increase U.S. representation in the UN, the UN 
entities themselves are ultimately responsible for hiring their 
employees and achieving equitable representation. 

U.S. Was Underrepresented in Three of Five UN Agencies and Increased 
Hiring of Americans Is Necessary to Meet Employment Targets: 

U.S. citizens were underrepresented at three of the five UN agencies we 
reviewed: IAEA, UNESCO, and UNHCR. Given projected staff levels, 
retirements and separations for 2006-2010, these agencies need to hire 
more Americans than they have in recent years to meet their minimum 
targets for equitable U.S. representation in 2010. 

U.S. Citizens Were Underrepresented Relative to Targets at Three UN 
Agencies: 

Relative to UN agencies' formal or informal targets for equitable 
geographic representation, U.S. citizens were underrepresented at three 
of the five agencies we reviewed-IAEA, UNESCO, and UNHCR. U.S. citizens 
were equitably represented at the UN Secretariat, though at the lower 
end of its target range, while the fifth agency-UNDP-had not 
established a target for U.S. representation. U.S. citizens filled 
about 11 percent of UNDP's professional positions. Table 1 provides 
information on U.S. representation at the five UN agencies as of 2005. 

Table 1: U.S. Representation at Five UN Agencies, 2005: 

UN agency: Secretariat; 
Percentage of total geographic positions targeted for U.S. citizens[A]: 
11.5%-15.6%; 
Percentage of geographic positions filled by U.S. citizens[A]: 12.1%; 
Percentage of non- geographic positions filled by U.S. citizens[B]: 
9.5%. 

UN agency: IAEA; 
Percentage of total geographic positions targeted for U.S. citizens[A]: 
12.9%; 
Percentage of geographic positions filled by U.S. citizens[A]: 11.5%; 
Percentage of non- geographic positions filled by U.S. citizens[B]: 
17.1%. 

UN agency: UNESCO; 
Percentage of total geographic positions targeted for U.S. citizens[A]: 
6.2%-10.2%; 
Percentage of geographic positions filled by U.S. citizens[A]: 4.1%; 
Percentage of non- geographic positions filled by U.S. citizens[B]: 
1.9%. 

UN agency: UNHCR; 
Percentage of total geographic positions targeted for U.S. citizens[A]: 
13%; 
Percentage of geographic positions filled by U.S. citizens[A]: 8.0%; 
Percentage of non-geographic positions filled by U.S. citizens[B]: 
11.1%. 

UN agency: UNDP; 
Percentage of total geographic positions targeted for U.S. citizens[A]: 
Not applicable; 
Percentage of geographic positions filled by U.S. citizens[A]: 
10.8%; 
Percentage of non- geographic positions filled by U.S. citizens[B]: 
12.6%. 

Source: GAO analysis of Secretariat, IAEA, UNESCO, UNHCR, and UNDP 
data. 

Note: Geographic targets were an average of 2004 and 2005 data. All 
other percentages were based on 2005 data. 

[A] UNHCR and UNDP did not have geographic positions; however, UNHCR 
had agreed to an informal 13 percent target with the U.S. government. 
For these agencies, we calculated the percentage of regular 
professional positions filled by U.S. citizens, which included staff 
under contracts of longer fixed term (100-series contracts in UNHCR and 
100-and 200-series contracts in UNDP). 

[B] For the Secretariat, IAEA, and UNESCO, nongeographic positions 
included regular professional positions not subject to geographic 
distribution, temporary positions, JPOs, and consultants and 
contractors. UNESCO was unable to provide nationality data for its 572 
consultants and contractors, which comprised nearly two thirds of 
UNESCO's nongeographic staff; hence the U.S. percentage of 
nongeographic positions did not reflect U.S. citizen employment in this 
category. For UNHCR and UNDP, nongeographic positions were all other, 
nonregular professional staff, which included temporary staff (limited 
fixed term at UNHCR and assignments of limited duration at UNDP), JPOs, 
and consultants and contractors. Agency-provided data did not 
differentiate between support and professional level positions for 
consultants and contractors. 

[End of table] 

Table 1 also shows that the percentage of U.S. citizens employed in 
nongeographic positions (or nonregular positions in the case of UNHCR 
and UNDP) was higher at IAEA, UNHCR, and UNDP and lower at the 
Secretariat and UNESCO compared to the percentage of geographic (or 
regular) positions held by U.S. citizens. 

As shown in table 2, U.S. citizen representation in geographic 
positions in "all grades" between 2001 and 2005 had been declining at 
UNHCR and displayed no clear trend at the other four UN agencies. 

Table 2: Trends in U.S. Representation at Five UN Agencies (covering 
geographic positions at the Secretariat, IAEA, and UNESCO and regular 
positions at UNHCR and UNDP): 

UN agency: Secretariat; 
Trend from 2001-2005: U.S. equitably represented based on agreed-upon 
targets[A]: Yes; 
Trend from 2001-2005: U.S. citizens in all professional grade levels: 
No trend; 
Trend from 2001-2005: U.S. citizens in policy-making and senior-level 
positions[B]: No trend; 
Trend from 2001-2005: U.S. citizens in entry- level positions[C]: No 
trend; 
Trend from 2001-2005: U.S. citizens in mid-level positions[D]: No 
trend. 

UN agency: IAEA; 
Trend from 2001-2005: U.S. equitably represented based on agreed-upon 
targets[A]: No; 
Trend from 2001-2005: U.S. citizens in all professional grade levels: 
No trend; 
Trend from 2001-2005: U.S. citizens in policy-making and senior-level 
positions[B]: Increasing; 
Trend from 2001-2005: U.S. citizens in entry-level positions[C]: 
Decreasing; 
Trend from 2001-2005: U.S. citizens in mid-level positions[D]: No 
trend. 

UN agency: UNESCO; 
Trend from 2001-2005: U.S. equitably represented based on agreed-upon 
targets[A]: No; 
Trend from 2001-2005: U.S. citizens in all professional grade levels: 
No trend; 
Trend from 2001- 2005: U.S. citizens in policy-making and senior-level 
positions[B]: No trend; 
Trend from 2001-2005: U.S. citizens in entry-level positions[C]: 
Increasing; 
Trend from 2001-2005: U.S. citizens in mid-level positions[D]: No 
trend. 

UN agency: UNHCR; 
Trend from 2001-2005: U.S. equitably represented based on agreed-upon 
targets[A]: No; 
Trend from 2001-2005: U.S. citizens in all professional grade levels: 
Decreasing; 
Trend from 2001- 2005: U.S. citizens in policy-making and senior-level 
positions[B]: No trend; 
Trend from 2001-2005: U.S. citizens in entry-level positions[C]: 
Decreasing; 
Trend from 2001-2005: U.S. citizens in mid-level positions[D]: 
Decreasing. 

UN agency: UNDP; 
Trend from 2001-2005: U.S. equitably represented based on agreed-upon 
targets[A]: Not applicable; 
Trend from 2001-2005: U.S. citizens in all professional grade levels: 
No trend; 
Trend from 2001- 2005: U.S. citizens in policy-making and senior-level 
positions[B]: Increasing; 
Trend from 2001-2005: U.S. citizens in entry-level positions[C]: 
Decreasing; 
Trend from 2001-2005: U.S. citizens in mid- level positions[D]: No 
trend. 

Source: GAO analysis of Secretariat, IAEA, UNESCO, UNHCR, and UNDP 
data. 

Notes: 

Trends in U.S. citizen representation refer to the number of U.S. 
citizens employed as a percentage of agency employment, in the 
respective grade, over the period 2001 to 2005. Increases or decreases 
were determined by positive or negative average changes over the 
period. For more information on our methodology, see GAO-06-988, 
appendix I. 

For the Secretariat, IAEA, and UNESCO, the trend analysis was for U.S. 
citizens in geographic positions from 2001 to 2005. For UNHCR and UNDP, 
the trend analysis, also for 2001 to 2005, was for U.S. citizens in 
regular professional positions since these agencies did not have 
geographic positions. Regular professional positions for UNHCR and UNDP 
included staff under contracts of longer fixed term (100-series 
contracts for UNHCR and 100-and 200-series contracts for UNDP). 

[A] The three agencies with geographic targets were the Secretariat, 
IAEA, and UNESCO. UNHCR did not have geographic positions, although it 
had agreed to an informal target. 

[B] Senior-level positions represent UN position levels D1 and D2, 
roughly equivalent to U.S. government Senior Executive Service. Policy- 
making positions represent UN position levels of Deputy or Assistant 
Director General at IAEA and UNESCO and Under or Assistant Secretary 
General at the Secretariat, UNHCR, and UNDP. 

[C] Represents UN position levels P1 to P3, roughly equivalent to U.S. 
government grade levels 9 to 12/13. 

[D] Represents UN position levels P4 to P5, roughly equivalent to U.S. 
government grade levels 13 to 15. 

[End of table] 

U.S. representation in policy-making and senior-level positions 
increased at two agencies --IAEA and UNDP--and displayed no overall 
trend at the Secretariat, UNESCO, and UNHCR over the full five years. 
At the Secretariat, although no trend was indicated, U.S. 
representation had been decreasing in policy-making and senior-level 
positions since 2002. At UNESCO, the data for 2001 to 2004 did not 
reflect a trend, but the overall percentage of Americans increased in 
2005, reflecting increased recruiting efforts after the United States 
rejoined UNESCO in 2003. At UNHCR, the representation of U.S. citizens 
in these positions grew steadily from 2001 to 2004, but declined in 
2005. 

Increased Hiring of Americans Needed to Meet Several UN Agencies' 
Minimum Targets: 

We estimated that each of the four agencies with geographic targets-the 
Secretariat, IAEA, UNESCO, and UNHCR-would need to hire U.S. citizens 
in greater numbers than they had in recent years to achieve their 
minimum targets by 2010, given projected staff levels, retirements, and 
separations; otherwise, with the exception of UNESCO, U.S. geographic 
representation will decline further. As shown in table 3, IAEA and 
UNHCR would need to more than double their current average hiring rate 
to achieve targets for U.S. representation. The Secretariat could 
continue to meet its minimum geographic target for U.S. citizens if it 
increased its annual hiring of U.S. citizens from 20 to 23. UNESCO 
could achieve its minimum geographic target by increasing its current 
hiring average of 4.5 Americans to 6 Americans. Although the fifth 
agency, UNDP, did not have a target, it would have to increase its 
annual hiring average of U.S. citizens from 17.5 to 26 in order to 
maintain its current ratio of U.S. regular professional staff to total 
agency regular professional staff. 

Table 3: Estimated Numbers of U.S. Citizens to be Hired to Meet 
Geographic and Other Targets for 2006 to 2010: 

UN agency: Secretariat; 
Average annual number of total staff hired into geographic positions 
each year, 2001-2005[A]: 170; 
Average number of U.S. citizens hired into geographic positions each 
year, 2001-2005[A]: 20; 
Percentage of total geographic positions targeted for U.S. citizens[B]: 
11.5%-15.6%; 
Minimum average number of U.S. citizens to be hired each year, 2006-
2010, to reach geographic target in 2010: 23; 
Resulting geographic representation in 2010 if agency follows 2001-2005 
hiring average for U.S. citizens: 10.9%. 

UN agency: IAEA; 
Average annual number of total staff hired into geographic positions 
each year, 2001-2005[A]: 77; 
Average number of U.S. citizens hired into geographic positions each 
year, 2001-2005[A]: 6; 
Percentage of total geographic positions targeted for U.S. citizens[B]: 
12.9%; 
Minimum average number of U.S. citizens to be hired each year, 2006-
2010, to reach geographic target in 2010: 16; 
Resulting geographic representation in 2010 if agency follows 2001-2005 
hiring average for U.S. citizens: 7.1%. 

UN agency: UNESCO; 
Average annual number of total staff hired into geographic positions 
each year, 2001-2005[A]: 55; 
Average number of U.S. citizens hired into geographic positions each 
year, 2001-2005[A]: 4.5; 
Percentage of total geographic positions targeted for U.S. citizens[B]: 
6.2%-10.2%; 
Minimum average number of U.S. citizens to be hired each year, 2006-
2010, to reach geographic target in 2010: 6; 
Resulting geographic representation in 2010 if agency follows 2001-2005 
hiring average for U.S. citizens: 5.1%. 

UN agency: UNHCR[C]; 
Average annual number of total staff hired into geographic positions 
each year, 2001-2005[A]: 148; 
Average number of U.S. citizens hired into geographic positions each 
year, 2001-2005[A]: 10; 
Percentage of total geographic positions targeted for U.S. citizens[B]: 
13%; 
Minimum average number of U.S. citizens to be hired each year, 2006-
2010, to reach geographic target in 2010: 25; 
Resulting geographic representation in 2010 if agency follows 2001-2005 
hiring average for U.S. citizens: 7.9%. 

UN agency: UNDP; 
Average annual number of total staff hired into geographic positions 
each year, 2001-2005[A]: 153; 
Average number of U.S. citizens hired into geographic positions each 
year, 2001-2005[A]: 17.5; 
Percentage of total geographic positions targeted for U.S. citizens[B]: 
Not applicable; 
Minimum average number of U.S. citizens to be hired each year, 2006-
2010, to reach geographic target in 2010: 26; 
Resulting geographic representation in 2010 if agency follows 2001-2005 
hiring average for U.S. citizens: 8.6%. 

Source: GAO analysis of Secretariat, IAEA, UNESCO, UNHCR, and UNDP 
data. 

[A] For UNHCR and UNDP, which did not have geographic positions, we 
calculated the average number of regular professional U.S. staff hired 
each year (2001 to 2005), including separations and retirements. 
Regular professional included staff under contracts of longer fixed 
term (100-series contracts in UNHCR and 100-and 200-series contracts in 
UNDP). 

[B] For UNHCR, we used the informal target of 13 percent for U.S. 
citizens, agreed upon by UNHCR and the U.S. government. For UNDP, we 
used the target of 11.1 percent, the average U.S. employment from 2001 
to 2005. 

[C] The minimum average number of U.S. citizens to be hired each year, 
25, was based on a zero percent rate of growth of staff, which UNHCR 
officials indicated was appropriate for 2006 to 2010. From 2001 to 
2005, UNHCR's staff grew at an average annual rate of 6 percent. Under 
this assumption, the minimum number of U.S. citizens to be hired 
annually would increase to 40. 

[End of table] 

If current hiring levels are maintained through 2010, two of the five 
agencies-IAEA and UNHCR-would fall substantially below their minimum 
targets. In only one agency-UNESCO-would the percentage of geographic 
positions filled by U.S. citizens increase under current hiring levels, 
due in part to the recent increased hiring of U.S. citizens. 

While Common Barriers to Increasing U.S. Representation Existed, UN 
Agencies Also Faced Distinct Employment Challenges: 

A combination of barriers, including some common factors as well as 
agency-specific factors, adversely affected recruitment and retention 
of professional staff, including Americans, at each of the five UN 
agencies. These barriers combined with distinct agency-specific factors 
to impede recruitment and retention. 

Common Barriers Adversely Affected U.S. Representation at Several UN 
Agencies: 

We identified the following six barriers that affected U.S. 
representation in the UN agencies we reviewed, though often to 
differing degrees: 

* Nontransparent human resource practices. A key barrier to American 
representation across the five UN agencies was the lack of transparent 
human resource management practices, according to Americans employed at 
UN organizations. For example, some UN managers circumvented the 
competitive hiring process by employing individuals on short-term 
contracts--positions that were not vetted through the regular, 
competitive process--for long-term needs. 

* Limited external opportunities. Recruiting U.S. candidates was 
difficult because agencies offered a limited number of posts to 
external candidates. Each of the organizations we reviewed, except 
IAEA, advertised professional vacancies to current employees before 
advertising them externally in order to provide career paths and 
motivation for their staff. We found that three of the five agencies-- 
UNESCO, UNHCR, and UNDP--filled 50 percent or more of new appointments 
through promotions or with other internal candidates rather than by 
hiring external candidates. IAEA filled a large percentage of its 
positions with external candidates because, in addition to not giving 
internal candidates hiring preference, the agency employed the majority 
of its staff members for 7 years or less. Although the data indicated 
that the Secretariat hired a significant percentage of external 
candidates, the Secretariat's definition of "external candidates" 
included staff on temporary contracts and individuals who had previous 
experience working at the agency. 

* Lengthy hiring process. The agencies' lengthy hiring processes can 
deter candidates from accepting UN employment. For example, a report 
from the Secretary General[Footnote 3] stated that the average hiring 
process was too slow, taking 174 days from the time a vacancy 
announcement was issued to the time a candidate was selected, causing 
some qualified applicants to accept jobs elsewhere. Many Americans that 
we interviewed concurred with the report, saying that it was difficult 
to plan a job move when there was a long delay between submitting an 
application and receiving an offer. In March 2006, the Secretary 
General proposed cutting the average recruitment time in half. 

* Low or unclear compensation. Comparatively low salaries and benefits 
that were not clearly explained were among the most frequently 
mentioned deterrents to UN employment for Americans. American employees 
we interviewed noted that UN salaries, particularly for senior and 
technical posts, were not comparable with U.S. government and private 
sector salaries. When candidates consider UN salaries in tandem with UN 
employee benefits, such as possible reimbursement for U.S. taxes and 
school tuition allowances through college, UN compensation may be more 
attractive. However, U.S. citizens employed at IAEA and UNESCO said 
that their agency did not clearly explain the benefits, or explained 
them only after a candidate had accepted a position. Incomplete or late 
information hampered a candidate's ability to decide in a timely manner 
whether a UN position was in his or her best interests. In addition, 
difficulty securing spousal employment can decrease family income and 
may also affect American recruitment since many U.S. families have two 
wage earners. At many overseas UN duty stations, work permits can be 
difficult to obtain, the local economy may offer few employment 
opportunities, and knowledge of the local language may be required. 

* Required mobility or rotation. UNHCR and UNDP required their staff to 
change posts at least every 3 to 6 years with the expectation that 
staff serve the larger portion of their career in the field; the UN 
Secretariat and UNESCO were implementing similar policies. While IAEA 
did not require its employees to change posts, it generally only hired 
employees for 7 years or less. Such policies dissuaded some Americans 
from accepting or staying in a UN position because of the disruptions 
to personal or family life such frequent moves can cause. 

* Limited U.S. government support. At four of the five agencies we 
reviewed--all except IAEA--a number of American employees said that 
they did not receive U.S. government support during their efforts to 
obtain a UN job or to be promoted at the job they held. The U.S. 
government supported candidates applying for director-level, or higher, 
posts, and put less emphasis on supporting candidates seeking lower- 
level professional posts. Although UN employees are international civil 
servants directly hired by UN agencies, some countries facilitate the 
recruitment of their nationals by referring qualified candidates, 
conducting recruitment missions, and sponsoring JPOs or Associate 
Experts.[Footnote 4] 

Agency-specific Factors Adversely Affected U.S. Representation at 
Several UN Agencies: 

Distinct agency-specific factors also impeded recruitment and 
retention. For example, 

* Candidates serving in professional positions funded by their member 
governments were more likely to be hired by the Secretariat than those 
who took the Secretariat's entry-level exam; however, the United States 
had not funded such positions at the Secretariat. At the entry level, 
hiring for professional positions was limited to an average of 2 
percent of individuals invited to take the Secretariat's National 
Competitive Recruitment Exam. In contrast, the Secretariat hired an 
average of 65 percent of Associate Experts sponsored by their national 
government. 

* Continuing U.S. underrepresentation at the IAEA was described by U.S. 
government officials as a "supply-side issue," with the pool of 
American candidates with the necessary education and experience 
decreasing, as nuclear specialists are aging and few young people are 
entering the nuclear field. 

* The United States' 19-year withdrawal from UNESCO contributed to its 
underrepresentation. When the United States left UNESCO in 1984, 
Americans comprised 9.6 percent of the organization's geographic 
professional staff. When it rejoined in 2003, Americans comprised only 
2.9 percent. By 2005 that number had increased to 4.1 percent--the 
third largest group of nationals UNESCO employed, although still below 
the minimum geographic target. 

* The difficult conditions that accompany much of UNHCR's work, coupled 
with the requirement to change duty stations every 4 years, contributed 
to attrition at the mid-career levels. UNHCR's requirement that 
employees change duty stations every 4 years was one of the most 
frequently cited barriers to retaining staff among the American 
employees we interviewed. UNHCR's mission to safeguard the rights and 
well-being of refugees necessitates work in hardship and high-risk 
locations. As such, UNHCR has twice as many hardship duty stations as 
any other UN agency. 

* Several barriers to increasing U.S. representation were the leading 
factors at UNDP and were also present at other UN agencies, according 
to American employees and other officials. In addition, UNDP's 
Executive Board had traditionally managed the organization with the 
understanding that its staff be equally represented from northern 
(mostly developed) and southern (mostly developing) countries, and had 
recently focused on improving the north-south balance of staff at 
management levels by increasing the hiring of candidates from southern 
countries. 

State Increased Efforts to Promote U.S. Representation, but Additional 
Options Exist to Target Professional Positions: 

State targeted its recruitment efforts for senior and policy-making UN 
positions, and, although it was difficult to directly link State's 
efforts to UN hiring decisions, U.S. representation in these positions 
either improved or displayed no trend in the five UN agencies we 
reviewed. State also increased its efforts to improve overall U.S. 
representation; however, despite these efforts, U.S. representation in 
entry-level positions declined or did not reflect a trend in four of 
the five UN agencies. Additional options exist to target potential 
pools of candidates for these positions. 

State Recruiting Efforts Focused on Senior Positions, and U.S. 
Representation in These Positions Improved or Showed No Trend: 

State focused its recruiting efforts for U.S. citizen employment at UN 
agencies on senior-level and policy-making positions because of the 
influence that these positions have within the organization. Although 
it is difficult to directly link State's efforts to UN hiring 
decisions, the percentage of U.S. representation in senior and 
policymaking positions either increased or did not display a trend at 
each of the five UN agencies we reviewed between 2001 and 2005. The 
U.S. share of senior and policymaking positions increased at IAEA and 
UNDP, whereas the U.S. share of these positions at the other three UN 
agencies displayed no trend over that period. 

State Increased Activities to Support Greater U.S. Representation, but 
the Employment of Americans in Entry-level Positions Declined or 
Displayed No Trend in Four Agencies: 

Since 2001, State has devoted additional resources and undertaken 
several new initiatives in its role as the lead U.S. agency for 
supporting and promoting the employment of Americans in UN 
organizations. First, State increased resources for disseminating UN 
vacancy information. State increased the number of staff positions from 
two to five, and added a sixth person who worked part-time on UN 
employment issues. One of the new staff focused on recruiting Americans 
for senior-level positions at UN organizations.[Footnote 5] According 
to State, the other staff have been recruiting candidates for 
professional positions at career fairs and other venues; however, a 
large portion of their work has been focused on providing information 
to potential applicants and disseminating information on UN vacancies 
and opportunities. In addition, State has increased outreach for the 
Secretariat's annual National Competitive Recruitment Exam for entry- 
level candidates by advertising it in selected newspapers. The number 
of Americans invited to take the exam increased from 40 in 2001 to 277 
in 2004. State reported that 178 Americans in 2007 were invited to take 
the exam. Second, U.S. missions have shared U.S. representation reports 
and discussed openings with UN officials. State prepares annual reports 
to Congress that provide data on U.S. employment at UN agencies as well 
as State's assessment of U.S. representation at selected UN 
organizations and these organizations' efforts to hire more Americans. 
State is providing these reports to UN agencies, as we recommended in 
2001. U.S. mission officials told us that they periodically meet with 
UN officials to discuss U.S. representation and upcoming vacancies. 

Finally, State has increased coordination with U.S. agencies. In 2003, 
State established an interagency task force to address the low 
representation of Americans in international organizations. Since then, 
task members have met annually to discuss U.S. employment issues. Task 
force participants told us that at these meetings, State officials 
reported on their outreach activities and encouraged agencies to 
promote the employment of Americans at UN organizations. One of the 
topics discussed by task force members was how to increase support for 
details and transfers of U.S. agency employees to UN organizations. In 
May 2006, the Secretary of State sent letters to the heads of 23 
federal agencies urging that they review their policies for 
transferring and detailing employees to international organizations to 
ensure that these mechanisms are positively and actively 
promoted.[Footnote 6] While the Secretary's letters may help to spur 
U.S. agencies to clarify their support for these initiatives, agency 
officials told us that their offices lacked the resources for staff 
details, which involve paying the salary of the detailed staff as well 
as "backfilling" that person's position by adding a 
replacement.[Footnote 7] State also has been periodically meeting one- 
on-one with U.S. agencies to discuss the employment situation and 
recruiting efforts at specific UN organizations. A State official told 
us that State's UN employment office meets with a few U.S. agencies per 
year to discuss UN agency staffing issues. 

Despite the new and continuing activities undertaken by State, U.S. 
representation in entry-level positions declined or displayed no trend 
in four of the five agencies we reviewed. U.S. representation in these 
positions declined at IAEA, UNHCR, and UNDP. The representation of 
Americans in entry-level positions at the Secretariat displayed no 
trend during the time period. At UNESCO, U.S. representation increased 
from 1.3 percent in 2003 to 2.7 percent in 2004, reflecting the time 
period when the United States rejoined the organization. 

Additional Options to Target Professional Positions Exist: 

We identified several options to target U.S. representation in 
professional positions, including the following: 

* Maintaining a roster of qualified candidates. Prior to 2001, State 
had maintained a roster of qualified American candidates for 
professional and technical positions, but discontinued it. State 
officials told us that they have not maintained a professional roster, 
or the prescreening of candidates, despite the recent increase in staff 
resources, because maintaining such a roster had been resource 
intensive and because the office does not actively recruit for UN 
professional positions at the entry-and mid-levels. However, State 
acknowledged that utilizing new technologies, such as developing a Web- 
based roster, may reduce the time and cost of updating a roster. Other 
U.S. government and UN officials told us that some other countries 
maintained rosters of prescreened, qualified candidates for UN 
positions and that this practice was an effective strategy for 
promoting their nationals. In July 2007, State officials said that they 
began researching Internet-based options for compiling a roster of 
potential U.S. candidates. State estimated the cost to set up such a 
roster at about $100,000, but had not received funding for the roster. 

* Expanding marketing and outreach activities. State had not taken 
steps that could further expand the audience for its outreach efforts. 
For example, while State had increased its coordination with other U.S. 
agencies on UN employment issues and distributed the biweekly vacancy 
announcements to agency contacts, U.S. agency officials that received 
these vacancy announcements told us that they lacked the authority to 
distribute the vacancies beyond their particular office or division. 
One official commented that State had not established the appropriate 
contacts to facilitate agency-wide distribution of UN vacancies, and 
that the limited dissemination had neutralized the impact of this 
effort. Several inter-agency task force participants also stated that 
no specific follow-up activities were discussed or planned between the 
annual meetings, and they could not point to any tangible results or 
outcomes resulting from the meetings. State also had not taken 
advantage of opportunities to expand the audience for its outreach 
activities. For example, State did not work with the Association of 
Professional Schools of International Affairs to reach potential 
candidates or advertise in some outlets that reach Peace Corps 
volunteers. In July 2007, State officials said they continue to 
outreach to new groups and attend new career fairs but have faced 
difficulty in identifying pools of candidates with the required skills 
and experience. 

* Increasing and improving UN employment information on U.S. agency Web 
sites. State's UN vacancy list and its UN employment Web site had 
limitations. For example, the list of vacancies was not organized by 
occupation, or even organization, and readers had to search the entire 
list for openings in their areas of interest. Further, State's UN 
employment Web site had limited information on other UN employment 
programs and did not link to U.S. agencies that provide more specific 
information, such as the Department of Energy's Brookhaven National 
Laboratory Web site. In addition, the Web site provided limited 
information or tools to clarify common questions, such as those 
pertaining to compensation and benefits. For example, the Web site did 
not provide a means for applicants to obtain more specific information 
on their expected total compensation, including benefits and U.S. 
income tax. Since we issued our report, State has added a UN pamphlet 
on benefits and compensation to its Web site. In July 2007, State 
officials told us they are exploring ways to improve the information 
available on UN compensation and benefits. For our 2006 report, we 
reviewed 22 additional U.S. mission and U.S. agency Web sites, and they 
revealed varying, and in many cases limited, information on UN 
employment opportunities. Overall, 9 of the 22 U.S. mission and agency 
Web sites did not have links to UN employment opportunities. Nearly 60 
percent of the missions and agencies provided some information or links 
to information on salaries and benefits. We updated our analysis in 
July 2007 and found the situation had worsened somewhat. Eleven of the 
22 U.S. mission and agency Web sites did not have links to UN 
employment opportunities[Footnote 8] and only about 50 percent of these 
Web sites provided some information or links to information on salaries 
and benefits. 

* Analyzing the costs and benefits of sponsoring JPOs. The U.S. 
government sponsored JPOs at two of the five UN agencies that we 
reviewed, but had not assessed the overall costs and benefits of 
supporting JPOs as a mechanism for increasing U.S. representation 
across UN agencies. Among the five agencies, State had funded a long- 
standing JPO program only at UNHCR, sponsoring an average of 15 JPOs 
per year between 2001 and 2005. The Department of Energy's Brookhaven 
National Laboratory also had supported two JPOs at IAEA since 
2004.[Footnote 9] For four of the five agencies we reviewed,[Footnote 
10] the percentage of individuals that were hired for regular positions 
upon completion of the JPO program ranged from 34 to 65 percent. In 
some cases, former JPOs were offered regular positions and did not 
accept them, or took positions in other UN organizations. The estimated 
annual cost for these positions to the sponsoring government ranged 
from $100,000 to $140,000 at the five UN agencies. State officials told 
us in July 2007 that they had not assessed the overall costs and 
benefits of supporting JPOs. 

Conclusions: 

Achieving equitable U.S. representation will be an increasingly 
difficult hurdle to overcome at UN organizations. Four of the five UN 
organizations we reviewed, all except UNESCO, will have to hire 
Americans in increasing numbers merely to maintain the current levels 
of U.S. representation. Failure to increase such hiring will lead the 
four UN organizations with geographic targets to fall below or stay 
below the minimum thresholds set for U.S. employment. 

As the lead department in charge of U.S. government efforts to promote 
equitable American representation at the UN, State will continue to 
face a number of barriers to increasing the employment of Americans at 
these organizations, most of which are outside the U.S. government's 
control. For example, lengthy hiring processes and mandatory rotation 
policies can deter qualified Americans from applying for or remaining 
in UN positions. 

Nonetheless, if increasing the number of U.S. citizens employed at UN 
organizations remains a high priority for State, it is important that 
the department facilitate a continuing supply of qualified applicants 
for UN professional positions at all levels. State focuses much of its 
recruiting efforts on senior and policy-making positions, and U.S. 
citizens hold over 10 percent of these positions at four of the five 
agencies we reviewed. While State has increased its resources and 
activities in recent years to support increased U.S. representation 
overall, additional actions to facilitate the employment of Americans 
in entry-and mid-level professional positions are needed to overcome 
declining U.S. employment in these positions and meet employment 
targets. 

Because equitable representation of Americans employed at UN 
organizations has been a high priority for U.S. interests, we 
recommended that the Secretary of State take the following actions: 

* provide more consistent and comprehensive information about UN 
employment on the State and U.S. mission Web sites and work with U.S. 
agencies to expand the UN employment information on their Web sites. 
This could include identifying options for developing a benefits 
calculator that would enable applicants to better estimate their 
potential total compensation based on their individual circumstances; 

* expand targeted recruiting and outreach to more strategically reach 
populations of Americans that may be qualified for and interested in 
entry-and mid-level UN positions; and: 

* conduct an evaluation of the costs, benefits, and trade-offs of: 

* maintaining a roster of qualified candidates for professional and 
senior positions determined to be a high priority for U.S. interests; 

* funding Junior Professional Officers, or other gratis personnel, 
where Americans are underrepresented or in danger of becoming 
underrepresented. 

In commenting on a draft of our 2006 report, State concurred with and 
agreed to implement all of our recommendations. In July 2007, State 
officials updated us on the actions they have taken in response to our 
2006 report recommendations. 

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, this concludes my 
prepared statement. I would be pleased to answer any questions that you 
may have. 

GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments: 

Should you have any questions about this testimony, please contact 
Thomas Melito, Director, at (202) 512-9601 or MelitoT@gao.gov. Other 
major contributors to this testimony were Cheryl Goodman, Assistant 
Director; Jeremy Latimer; Miriam Carroll; R.G. Steinman; Barbara 
Shields; Lyric Clark; Sarah Chankin-Gould; Joe Carney; and Debbie 
Chung. Martin De Alteriis, Bruce Kutnick, Anna Maria Ortiz, Mary 
Moutsos, Mark Speight, and George Taylor provided technical assistance. 

FOOTNOTES 

[1] GAO, United Nations: Additional Efforts Needed to Increase U.S. 
Employment at UN Agencies, GAO-06-988 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 6, 
2006). 

[2] Technically, the IAEA is an independent international organization 
that has a relationship agreement with the UN. For the purposes of this 
report, we refer to the IAEA as a UN agency or organization. 

[3] UN General Assembly, 60th Session. Investing in the United Nations 
for a Stronger Organization Worldwide: Report of the Secretary-General 
(A/60/692). 7 March 2006. 

[4] JPO or Associate Expert positions are funded by member states for 
periods of 2 or 3 years and provide opportunities for young 
professionals to gain experience in UN organizations. While, upon 
completion of the programs, these young professionals are not 
guaranteed employment at the agency and must apply for positions 
through the regular process, UN officials stated that the JPO 
experience provides applicants an advantage over their competitors. 

[5] State officials said this staff member left the department in June 
2007. 

[6] Executive Order 11552, issued in 1970, mandates that federal 
agencies shall assist and encourage details and transfers of their 
employees to international organizations and that State shall lead and 
coordinate these efforts. The order also specifies that vacancies in 
international organizations should be brought to the attention of well- 
qualified federal employees and that upon the return of an employee to 
his agency, the agency shall give due consideration to the experience 
the employee may have gained during the detail or transfer. 

[7] Transferred employees are paid by the UN organization, while 
detailed employees would remain on the U.S. agency's payroll. 

[8] Four of the six U.S. missions have Web sites. All four Web sites 
have links to State's employment page. 

[9] According to officials, Brookhaven and State's Bureau for 
International Security and Non-Proliferation also fund Cost-Free 
Experts at IAEA. These are technical specialists who work on short-term 
projects at IAEA for periods of 1 to 3 years. 

[10] IAEA did not provide JPO retention rate data. 

GAO's Mission: 

The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting 
its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance 
and accountability of the federal government for the American people. 
GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and 
policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance 
to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding 
decisions. GAO's commitment to good government is reflected in its core 
values of accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony: 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 
cost is through GAO's Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts 
newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. 
To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, 
go to www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to Updates." 

Order by Mail or Phone: 

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent 
of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 
more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. 
Orders should be sent to: 

U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM 
Washington, D.C. 20548: 

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 TDD: (202) 512-2537 Fax: (202) 
512-6061: 

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs: 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov 
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470: 

Congressional Relations: 

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400 U.S. 
Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 
Washington, D.C. 20548: 

Public Affairs: 

Paul Anderson, Managing Director, AndersonP1@gao.gov (202) 512-4800 
U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 
Washington, D.C. 20548: