COMMENTS ON IG REPORT - R&P AREA

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP82-00357R000300020040-7
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 3
• Document Creation Date: December 12, 2016
• Document Release Date: May 20, 2002
• Sequence Number: 40
• Publication Date: May 18, 1976
• Content Type: REPORT

Approved For Release 2002/06/14: CIA-RDP82-00357R00Q30020040-7
18 May 1976
COMMENTS ON IG REPORT - R&P AREA
The IG report does not contain any specific recommenda-
tions requiring action by either Recruitment Division or
Staff Personnel Division. R&P is quite pleased with the
report and generally agrees with the substance. However, we
feel several comments should be made. They follow.
1. Page 3, Chart. The box "Field Recruitment Branch"
should bear the name STAT
2. Page 18, Paragraph 33. The phrase "principal cause"
may be a bit overstated. We would rather have seen the
phrase "contributing cause."
3. Tab A, Paragraphs 11--14. Based on the review by the
IG, the DDO has agreed hat applicant files need no longer
be sent to ISG. SPD is working with ISG to purge records
not conforming with the two-year retention schedule under
System 30. (Files and records over two years old will be
destroyed as soon as the moratorium is lifted.) As of now,
applicant files on candidates not accepted for employment are
being retained in CARB for two months and sent directly to
the Records Center for two years. At the end of two years,
the files and all records pertaining to them will be de-
stroyed.
4. Tab A, Paragraphs 15-20. We began to have an in-
crease in the number o employees reviewing their files in
July 1973, more than two years before was published. STAT
From the number of questions and complaints we receive from
employees reviewing their OPF's, it is obvious that OPF's are
not in perfect condition. There are some relatively simple
steps which can be made more emphatic during the file review
by the employee. We can provide "misfiled" slips which the
employee can use to identify material which should not be in
his file. When an employee finishes his file review, we can
specifically ask him whether he found any items of a question-
able nature or if he believes there are documents not in his
file that should be. In addition, and rather than taking a
sampling of files, we could review from an accuracy standpoint
those files we look at thoroughly. This would include all
counseling cases and some of the QSI's, and would amount to
about 200 files a year.
Approved For Release 2002/06/14: CIA-RDP82-00357R000300020040-7
 Approved For Release 2002/06/14: CIA-RDP82-00357R000300020040-7
*AW
5. Tab C, Paragraphs 9 & 11. We appreciate the IG's
recognition that t erfi- a are limits on how much SPD can do in
the reassignment of personnel, but we, like Avis, want to try
harder. We think preparation of the new careers occupational
handbook under the aegis of the Careers Committee, will facil-
itate our work. We have also drafted a new "Employees Avail-
able for Reassignment" publication. This is the opposite of
the Vacancy Notice in that it will advertise the qualifications
of those interested in a new assignment. Distributed to all
offices, this publication will insure that the person's quali-
fications are not overlooked.
6. Tab E, Paragranh 2_ We aa-rpe with the comment that
Agency experience than some of our current recruiters nowcdo.
It has been our plan for some time that new recruiters come
from the inside unless peculiar circumstances dictate to the
contrary. Certainly an externally picked up recruiter should
be the exception, not the rule. As a matter of policy, new
recruiters are now being accepted for rotational assignments
of about five years duration. They will come from and go back
to non-recruitment jobs within the Agency.
7. Tab E Paragraph 2. The suggestion that some re-
cruiters be brought into headquarters during their "slack
season" and assigned to components for which they recruit does
give us something of a problem. The idea sounds good. When
we use the. time/money/effectiveness criteria, we are not so
sure. Under our present operating procedures there is no
particular "slack season." Although the academic recruiting
schedule is reduced during the summer, we have placed new
emphasis on developing and utilizing non-academic sources,
especially during the summer months. Also, field recruiters
work against requirements for all elements of the Agency.
Training/work assignments in this regard might well devolve
into a familiarization experience rather than an in-depth
learning one.
8. Tab E, Paragraphs 5-8. While we appreciate the IG's
statement that S-D "is doing everything at Headquarters to get
applicant cases into the hands of the customers as quickly as
possible," we will continue to exert efforts to make the
system work better. Many offices are doing a better job of
making their recruitment guides more specific, but we need to
get all offices to do this. Recruiters need to get tougher
and reject applicants who are not exactly on target so that
we don't have offices spending so much time reviewing files.
(Having spent four years recruiting, C/SPD knows how difficult
it is to turn down outstanding candidates. There is always
the hope that someone will "buy" the applicant.) Preliminary
statistics show that we are moving towards reducing the
Approved For Release 2002/06/14 :ZCIA-RDP82-00357R000300020040-7
 Approved For Release 2002/06/14: CIA-RDP82-00357R000300020040-7
decision-making time from 60 to 50 days. However, we will not
meet this MBO objective unless we can somehow get the CT
Program to review files faster. We would hope that the IG
will assist this effort when they review OTR. We have recently
established a new system for the review of Hispanic-American
applicants. If successful, we might be able to adapt the
system to the review of files of Black applicants -- the other
area besides CTP which takes far too long. Our list of de-
linquent files remains too long. We have decided to be more
aggressive in retrieving these files and will do so at higher
levels. Delinquent files mean delinquent correspondence. In
addition to retrieving files, we are tightening up on our
procedures to see that applicants receive correspondence about
every 30 days. We were delighted to see the IG comments con-
cerning PATB Part I. As you know, we advocate the abolition
of the Part I testing in the field. PATB Part I and II could
better be taken in Headquarters by those applicants in whom
operating components had a sincere interest. Since the IG
report, the DDO has informed the Director of Personnel that
PATB Part I will not be administered in the field for CT
candidates. Finally, we have recommended that where an office
is interested enough to put an applicant in process, that the
PATB results be used as a final "go, no-go" decision, similar
to the results obtained from the medical and security evalua-
tions. Coming at the last of the processing, this would
certainly speed up the processing.
9. Tab E, Paragraph 10. The history of the Agency shows
that we never seem to have the proper number of clericals in
process. We studied this for several months and believe that
we now have fine-tuned our requirements. Recruiters now
understand that clerical applicant input must be maintained on
a steady, year-round basis and that we cannot rely on June
high school graduates to meet our requirements on a year-round
basis. In order to keep our clerical requirements filled, it
may be necessary in the summer months to exceed our clerical
ceiling, using the difference between our professional on-duty
strength and ceiling to absorb clerical overages.
10. Tab E, Paragraph 9. We were also most interested in
the IG comments concerning recruitment for the Career Training
Program. We would be most interested in the conclusions drawn
by the IG Inspection Team which is scheduled to do an OTR
survey in the near future. In the meantime, we will continue
to provide as precise guidelines as we can to our field re-
cruiters on the profile of a prospective CT applicant. The
closer we can get to the mark, the fewer applicant cases need
be submitted.
Approved For Release 2002/06/14 :-QJA-RDP82-00357R000300020040-7