PERSONNEL - OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP80B01086A000900100001-2
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 9
• Document Creation Date: December 12, 2016
• Document Release Date: November 5, 2001
• Sequence Number: 1
• Publication Date: July 13, 1973
• Content Type: MF

Approved For Rel-e se:200111'1/22-?: eIA-RDR80E30I0a6A000900100001-2
PT
MEMORANDUM FOR: Director of Personnel
Attention: Position Management and
Compensation Division
THROUGH : Deputy Director for Management and Services
SUBJECT" : Personnel - Office of the Inspector General
REFERENCE : Memorandum of Inspector General Designate
of 19 June 1973 -
1. Referent memorandum proposed certain minimum strengths
for the Office of the Inspector General. This memorandum submits
for final approval the following organization of the Office: .
25X1A
TT C-hange
Approved For Release, 2001/1-'4.2.2 :CIA=RDP80B01086A00090O10DMD1-2
 Approved ForReleaseY'2?01/11/22 CIA-RDP80B01086A0009001000bi-2
2. The above organization makes no change in'ihe Audit Staff,
which is being realigned within its existing -)ersonnel allowances.
It makes the following changes in the existing Table of Organization
of the Office of the Inspector General and the Inspection Staff:
a. It reduces the grade of the secretary to the
Inspector General from GS-11 to GS-10.
b. It eliminates nine GS-15 positions.
c. It eliminates two GS-07 secretary/steno positions.
d. It raises one GS-15 position to GS-16. In connection
with this change it is requested that authorization be given to
GS-16's assigned to the position to classify documents SECRET.
Donald F. Chamberlain
Inspector General
/s/ W. E. Colby
W. E. Colby
OIG (13 July 1973)
Distribution:
Orig. & 1 - Addressee
- ExecReg
1 IG Chrono
1 - IG Subject
1 - SDB Chrono
JUL X91;
25X1A
Approved For F2elease 2001/11/22 , CIA-RDP80BO1086A060900100001-2
 Approved Fot Re*e 2001/11/22: CIA-RDP80B01086A00100001-2
L. r1 !C above organization l =-'.:-les no change in K,he Audit Sta ff,
which is being realigned. within its existing personnel a lo'.vances.
It n-hakes the following changes in the existing Table of Organization
of the Office of the Inspector General and the Inspection Staff:
a. It reduces the grade of the secretary to the
Inspector General from GS-11 to GS-10.
c. It elimin
d. It raises
with- this change
GS-16's assigned
, ?, ~,. A
C C ~ti` Gam` ~a ~L z 9-
APPROVED:
W E. Colby Date
Approved For Release 2001/11/22 :. CIA-RDP80BO1086A000900100001-2
 Approved For elease 2001/11/22: CIA-RDP80
MEMORANDUM FOR: Nir._ Lusby
Bill:
The : Office of. -.Personnel positio
een t ri }_I esentati'!es A a e ldiscusssed- the a tac- ed
~
g
: We have concluded: that. the scope of
rith the IG
.
responsibility. .inherent.in.-the newly. constituted.0/IG
requested. The> ade_ levels for-,secretaries are con-
.
' I ;concur in < the' - IG:: request and recommend
Therefore
,
r approval of the T/Q as present
c':REPL-ACES. FORM' _j0,-4 'V
Approved For Release 2001/11/22 : CIA--RDP80B01086A000900100001-2
 Approved For~Rel4ase 20"M/22: CGA-RDP80
ME, ORANDUM FUR: l ) l J
Approved For Release 2001/11/22 : CIA=RDP80B01086A000900100001-2
 Approved For F elease 2001/11/22 CIA-RDP80B01086A40090010 ~--?
$ayia
1.5 March 1973
MEMORANDUM FOR: Executive Secretary,. CIA MM;ianagement Committee
SUBJECT
Personnel -- Office of Inspector General
1. In line with the approved proposal to reduce the function of the
Office of the Inspector General, I recommend a staff of five officers and
two secretaries. It should be noted that current work and possible appeals
in connection with planned personnel reduction should keep the full staff
busy through 30 June at least. The continuing complement should consist
of the Inspector General, two inspectors, the Equal Employment Opportu-
nity Officer, and the Federal Women's Program Coordinator (a new assign-
ment). Of the remaining personnel, one officer was due to return to his
parent component, four officers will`retire, five will return to their parent
organization, and three secretaries will have to be reassigned. In addition,
Miss Ruth Gillard, although age 60 in ,May 1973, will not have twenty years'
Government service until December 1973, so I recommend she be allowed
to remain in place for her last six months rather than return to the Cry Staff.
2. Due to the heavy personnel thrust of the contemplated IG funct' r, 1A
I believe is ideally suited by background and temper-5X1A
meet to assume the post as Inspector General. Mr. is
a permanent member of the IG Staff and should be retained. Mr.
is an E careerist and a highly experienced Inspector, so it manes
good sense to retain him. Mr. as the EEO Of."icer, and25X1A
as Federal Women's Program Coordinator,
o o R comp ete the o cer roster. I recom=mend that, at the end of Calen-
'dar Year 1973, the personnel situation be reviewed to see if the work loL1A
Iiw fl allow to be returned to the DDO and assume25 1A
his duties, thus reducing the staff by one...
3. senior secretary, is a GS-11. I do not
believe the reduced 1G office justifies a grade higher than a GS-9. The SX1A
yore, I recommend steps be taken to locate an appropriate assignment for
The second secretary position will be filled by Mrs. _
~_/
William V. Broe
Inspector General
ApprDiec61F rj:l lea 2001/11/2j);CI7a P80.B0-1086A000900100001-2
 Approved For Release 2001/11/22 CIA-RDP80BO1086A000900100001-2
v~"s:'% FOR: t',:iecutlve SeCreta rj', anage oent; CC: itte
_'~ Revised Role for the Agency's inspection Staff
1. You asked for my-thoughts on revising and substantially
reducing the role of the Agency's Inspection Staff. - I believe
this to be an area in which manpower savings can be. made without
significantly impairing the other functions of the Agency.
2. Our work falls into four major categories: component surveys,
grievances and complaints, special studies and investigations,
and returnee interviews. Assuming a full complement of 13
inspectors, the time that'is devoted to each of these categories
is approximately as follows:
Component Surveys
70
9.1
Grievances & Complaints
13
1.7
Special Studies & Investigations
11
1.4
Returnee Interviews.
6
.8
3. I have felt for some time that the results of our component
surveys are not worth the effort that is put into them. This may
not have been true.in_the earlier years, but it certainly is today.
We seldom find anything seriously amiss in the components we su_Y-vey;
and our reports are usually bland and uninteresting. I can think
of only four truly significant exceptions within the past decade : 25X1 A
NPIC in 1965, Project nd the Office of Finance in 1967,
and ORD in 197?. In each of those instances all we really
accomplished was to call to the attention of senior managers
problems of which they were already aware--or should have been if
they were doing their jobs properly. Given the amount of time
that is spent on component surveys and the limited results that
are achieved by them, I believe the compoaent survey program
could be abandoned without appreciable loss.
4. I also doubt that we are getting our money's worth out of
the so-called special studies that we do. These are, in effect,
surveys of functions or activities that cut across organizational
lines. Over the years, the special studies we have been assigned
to do--with an occasional rare exception--have tended to break dorn
into two general categories : those that turn out to i v 1~_i ub j Cts
Approved For Release 2001/11/2 lA'RDP80B01086A000900100001-2
 Approved For Release 2001/11/22: CIA-RDP80BO1086A000900100001-2
;__a-
(ti1L`S that you simply cannot come to grips
are so broad as to be beyond our ca-abilities. The 9963 st-udy
fil c.
r:,, -ora.le in e Cl l'-+and?s-'i're ?erz;i cerr is an example 01 :' the fo.:rme
O i __L.. S
~~-(:L saon. ~encrrr is an'
the ha 1 study Infcrmati?o~_ n i s _ager~e~_., nt in the __g
example of the la t~.. ter. I have the impression that the special
,.
studies wre have done in the past have yielded even less benefit
than have the component surveys. Abandoning them would be no
appreciable loss.
5. This leaves grievances and complaints, investigations
of misdoings_or of things that have gone sour, and returnee interviews.
I believe that we- need to retain a capability for handling each of
these..,
a. It is imper~.tive that we have a forum somewhere
in the Agency where employees may lodge their grievances in
the expectation that they will receive fair -and objective
treatment. Also, there is a need for a mechanism to review
on behalf of the Director those appeals from adverse actions
that are addressed to him.
b. I also think we will need to retain an investigative
capability for looking into flaps and for assembling the
facts relating to.those occasional misdeeds of our employees.
The Deputy Directors prefer to wash their dirty linen in
private, but we often are called upon when a significant
commitment of investigative manpower is required. We have
had it available; others have not.
c. Returnee interviews seldom yield anything of
consequence, but I favor continuing them if only as a morale
booster. They would also provide a way of filling likely
slack periods in this reduced program..
6. A reduced program such as that outlined above could
easily be handled by two or three people. I would start with a
chief and one assistant with the understanding that a second.
assistant could be added if experience demonstrated that he was
needed. The Director of EEO and the Federal 1domen`s Program
Coordinator would be included on the staff. Since neither of these
assignents is a full-time job, both would share in the handling of
regular grievances and complaints. Two secretaries should be able
to take care of the clerical needs of these four or five officers.
Thus, the staff would be reduced from the present 20 to a total
of six or perhaps seven.
Approved For Release 2001/11/22 : CIA-RDP80BO1086A000900100001-2
 Approved Fqr Release 2001/11/x.-1C IARIDP80B01086A00
Inspector- General
Approved For Release 2001/11/22 Clio-RQP8OB01086A000900100001-2
7-here have been times, although they have been rare, when we did
not have a single active grievance case under revie:r. other
times we would have been s?;amped if we had had a staff of only
two or three inspectors. Our current practice is to keep all
inspectors assigned at all times to component surreys or special
studies, pulling them off of their regular work as grievances
cases are -received. The effect of this has been to delay
completion of some surveys and studies, but it has enabled us to
keep all of our people fully occupied. If the reduced staff
were to handle only grievances, investigations, and returnee
7. lero is one potentially t_ l- rOLl'0~'_sOTu..f,=utur.~e of rEdLiCed
.,
program. The grievance and complaint workload is markedly -uneven.
interviews; I would anticipate that those assigned would not have
enough work to keep them busy during slack periods. There might
be other things that they could do, but I have no suggestions as
to what.
25X1A
25X1A