United States General Accounting Office Washington, D.C. 20548 Resources, Community, and Economic Development Division B-276769 May 6, 1997 The Honorable Joe McDade Chairman The Honorable Vie Fazio Ranking Minority Member Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development Committee on Appropriations House of Representatives Subject: Denartment of Energv: Training Cost Data for Fiscal Years 1995 Through 1997 As requested, we are providing you with information on the training that the Department of Energy (DOE) provides to its employees and contractors. The Department provides a wide variety of training to its employees and contractors to improve or enhance, among other things, managerial expertise, job knowledge, working relationships, and professional development. As agreed with your office, the enclosures to this letter address (1) DOE’s training costs’ for fiscal years 1995 through 1997 (see encl. I), (2) examples of classes offered by the Department (see encl. II), (3) the size of the training organizations for selected DOE offices and selected contractors (see encl. III), (4) the extent to which selected DOE headquarters offices have completed annual training plans and their employees have completed individual development plans (see encl. IV), and (5) DOE’s investment in training compared with that of private industry (see encl. V). ‘Training costs include the cost of providing training, whether in-house or contracted for, and the value of time for the personnel being trained. GAOIRCED-97-140R DOE’s Data on Training Costs B-276769 SUMMARY According to DOE’s data, in fiscal years 1995 and 1996,the Department spent about $554 million and $476 million, respectively, on training for its own and contractor employees. In fiscal year 1997, DOE projects that it will spend about $438 million for training. With these funds, DOE offers a wide range of training, from technical courses on nuclear physics and chemistry to nontechnical courses on back care and defensive driving. DOE’s training structure is very decentralized, headquarters offices, field-offices, and contractors all have their own training programs with dedicated staff. The size of the training staffs for selected DOE offices ranged from 1 or 2 individuals to more than 20. The extent to which DOE staff and these offices met DOE-wide training requirements varied from office to office. These requirements state, in part, that each employee must complete an individual development plan2 In fiscal year 1996, the percentage of staff completing an individual development plan varied, from 25 to 30 percent in some DOE headquarters offices to 70 to 90 percent in others. Finally, for 1995, the average number of training days per year per employee (about 8.0) and the average training investment per year per employee (ranging from $1,966 to $3,415) were higher for DOE than for private industry, according to statistics reported by DOE and by the American Society for Training and Development’s Benchmarking Forum.3 AGENCY COMMENTS We provided copies of a draft of our report to DOE for its review and comment. DOE agreed with the information presented. However, DOE said that we did not adequately characterize the improvements the Department has made to employee training. DOE noted, for instance, that the Department has developed a training improvement plan that, upon implementation, should result in the proper sizing of training staffs and budgets within the Department. In addition, DOE stated that it is consolidating its management 2Such a plan establishes an employee’s needs for training, development, and qualification on the basis of the (1) Department’s and organization’s goals, objectives, and mission; (2) technical qualification standards for the employee’s position (if applicable); and (3) employee’s personal and professional development goals. these are the latest data available for comparing DOE’s investment with private industry’s. 2 GAO/WED-97-140R DOE’s Data on Training Costs B-276769 and scheduling of training. Overall, DOE expects its improvements will reduce duplication and waste in its training program (see encl. VI). It is important to note that the purpose of this report was to provide information and statistics on DOE’s training. It was not within the scope of our work to characterize, evaluate, and/or validate DOE’s efforts to improve training within the Department. Accordingly, while DOE’s comments indicate that a number of efforts are under way to reduce duplication and waste, we cannot comment on the extent to which these efforts are working. SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY We conducted our work at DOE headquarters in Washington, D.C. We obtained data on DOE’s training costs for fiscal years 1995 through 1997 from DOE’s Office of Training and Human Resource Development. We did not verify the accuracy of these data. We obtained information on the training classes offered by DOE by contacting DOE headquarters officials from the Offices of Human Resources and Administratiom Defense Programs; Environmental Management; Environment, Safety, and Health; and G&i&y Management. We determined the size of the training organizations for selected DOE offices and selected DOE contractors by contacting DOE officials within those organizations or DOE officials with oversight responsibility for those contractors. We determined, for selected DOE headquarters offices for fiscal year 1996, what percentage of employees had completed individual development plans and whether those offices had completed an annual training plan by interviewing the training coordinators for those offices. Finally, we obtained data on private industry’s training costs by contacting the American Society for Training and Development’s Benchmarking Forum. The Forum is a cooperative venture among 54 national and international companies with strong commitments to employee training. Member companies include American Telephone and Telegraph; Ford Motor Company; General Motors; and International Business Machines. We performed this work from February through April 1997 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. As arranged with your offices, unless you publicly announce its contents earlier, we plan no further distribution of this report for 30 days. At that time, we will provide copies to appropriate congressional committees, the Secretary of Energy, and other interested parties. We will also make copies available to others upon request. 3 GAOIRCED-97-140R DOE’s Data on Training Costs B-276769 Please call me at (202) 512-3841 if you or your staff have any questions. Major contributors to this report include Robert Baney, William Seay, and William Enclosures GAO/RCED-97-140R DOE’s Data on Trdning Costs ENCLOSURE I ENCLOSURE I DOE’S TRAINING COSTS, F’ISCAL YEARS 1995-97 Table 1.1: Summary of DOE’s Trainino Costs. Fiscal Years 199597 Fiscal year 1995 1996 1997 Eiement (actual) (actual) (projected) DOE headquarters offices Cost of providing $43,212,861’ $30,838,983’ $28518,206 traininga Value of time for 11,866,458 8,626,425 8,705,156 personnel being trainedb DOE field offices Cost of providing 18,576,771 d 18,011,362’ 17,351,900 traininga Value of time for 19,752,276’ 36,023,994 36542,200 personnel being trainedb DOE contractors Cost of providing 229,977,41 Of 209,667,772’ 200,393,942 traininga Value of time for 231 ,018,839 172,669,63ge 146,795,190 personnel being trainedb Total $554,404,615 $475,838,175 W&306,594 aThis is the cost of in-house training organizations and the cost associated with contracting for training. bThis is the cost associated with employees’ attendance at training. It includes salary/fringe benefit costs, which are calculated by multiplying the duty hours both in training and traveling to and from training by a DOE-calculated average 1995 hourly cost rate. The hourly rate used was $31.25 for DOE federal employees and $29.41 for DOE contractor employees. Travel costs are included except where noted. DOE calculated the value of time for personnel being trained for fiscal years 1996 and 1997 using 1995 salary/fringe benefit hourly cost rates. According to a DOE official, DOE’s training cost data were compiled for congressional staff and calculations 5 GAO/WED-97-140R DOE’s Data on Training Costs ENCLOSURE I ENCLOSURE I using updated hourly cost rates for fiscal years 1996 and 1997 could not be completed within the deadlines established by that staff. For that reason, the value of time for personnel being trained in fiscal years 1996 and 1997 is understated. ‘See table 1.2 for a more detailed breakdown of the cost of training for DOE headquarters offices. dSee table I.3 for a more detailed breakdown of the cost of training for DOE field offices. eTravel costs are not included. ‘See table 1.4 for a more detailed breakdown of the cost of training for DOE contractors. Source: DOE. 6 GAO/RCED-97-140R DOE’s Data on Training Costs ENCLOSURE I ENCLOSURE I Table 1.2: Cost of Providina Trainino for DOE Headouarters Offices. Fiscal Years 199596 Average annual cost Average annual Annual cost of providing of training per training days per training” employee 1 employee Headquarters office t FY 1995 FY 1996 FY 1995 FY 1996 FY 1995 FY 1996 Chief Financial $160,100 $152,000 $582 $606 7 3 Officer Civilian Radioactive 737,000 283,500 3,232 1,313 4 8 Waste Management Congressional, 3,781 1,905 33 18 5 1 Public, and Intergovernmental Affairs Defense Programs 1,311,100 1,275,OOO 3,582 3,622 9 7 Economic Impact 12,599 9,075 242 182 4 4 and Diversity Energy Efficiency 1,606,990 336,420 2,472 646 7 5 and Renewable Energy Energy Information 283,646 301,615 601 685 8 4 Administration Energy Research 194,478 185,824 604 594 5 5 Environmental 7,490,200 3,836,400 1O,OOob 5,795 10 10 Management Environment, 8,361,OOO 6,020,OOO 18,498’ 14,755c 7 2 Safety, and Health Field Management 0 0 0 0 4 4 Fissile Materials 4,839 5,000 255 250 3 1 Disposition Fossil Energy 1,658,147 1,220,300 1,640 1,304 9 7 General Counsel 42,190 9,500 199 49 2 2 Hearings and 97,147 0 1,429 0 6 1 Appeals 7 GAO/RCED-97-140R DOE’s Data on Training Costs ENCLOSURE I ENCLOSUFtE I Average annual cost Average annual Annual cost of providing of training per _ training days per training” employee employee Headquartersoffice FY 1995 FY 1996 FY 1995 FY 1996 FY 1995 FY 1996 Human Resources 7,224,206 5,040,900 6,708d 5,41 5d 4 3 and Administration Inspector General 348,000 182,000 1,074 580 12 4 Nonproliferation and 11,348,649 10,585,OOO 33,877” 30,41 7e 7 9 National Security Nuclear Energy, 133,115 179,450 887 1,246 6 5 Science, and Technology Policy 160,342 75,000 794 421 5 6 Quality 2,035,332 1 ,140,094 185,030’ 103,645’ 18 6 Management Total/overall average $43,212,861 $30,838,983 $6,024 $4,733 7 5 “This is the cost of in-house training organizations and the cost associated with contracting for training. bAccording to DOE/Environmental Management staff, the average shown reflects three training initiatives. One was to train 800 to 1,600 new employees departmentwide. Another was to provide all Environmental Management staff departmentwide with three week-long courses on project planning, baselining, and cost-estimating skills. A third was to design learning activities for employees with responsibility for waste management, environmental restoration, and environmental compliance. “According to DOE/Environment, Safety, and Health staff, the averages shown include external fellowships and grants (amounting to about $2.4 million in each of fiscal years 1995 and 1996), contractor training initiatives, and the creation of an automated Environment, Safety, and Health training infrastructure. dThese averages represent the cost to train employees in the respective DOE element and employees from other DOE headquarters and field office elements. eAccording to DOE/Nonproliferation and National Security staff, the averages shown include the cost of training federal employees and contractor employees departmentwide, as well as employees from other agencies and students from other nations. Source: DOE. 8 GAO/RCED-97-140R DOE’s Data on Training Costs ENCLOSURE I ENCLOSURE I Table 1.3: Cost of Providina Trainina for DOE Field Offices, Fiscal Years 1995-96 Annual cost of providing Average annual cost of Average annual training training* training per employee days per employee Field office FY 1995 FY 1996 FY 1995 FY 1996 FY 1995 FY 1996 Alaska Power $46,000 $46,936 $1,643 $2,347 11 15 Administration Albuquerque 2,782,OOO I,81 2,000 1,789 1,239 7 8 Operations Office Bonneville Power 2,087,122 3,178,OOO 637 1,007 7 5 Administration Chicago 915,000 794,800 1,637 1,574 10 10 Operations Office Golden Field 2,500 0 58 0 8 12 Off ice Idaho Operations 681,100 482,100 1,524 1,162 13 9 Off ice Nevada 878,769 642,000 2,247 1,754 12 15 Operations Office Oak Ridge 779,000 907,000 1,064 1,348 6 6 Operations Office Oakland 476,000 472,000 1,112 1,183 3 3 Operations Office Ohio Field Office 202,000 502,000 927 2,183 9 10 Pittsburgh Naval 19,000 27,000 241 370 3 3 Reactors Office Richland 2,740,OOO 2,840,OOO 4,858 5,420 12 15 Operations Office Rocky Flats Field 1,520,051 1 ,123,OOO 5,050 3,820 13 23 Office Savannah River 3,501,OOO 3,324,400 5,884 5,812 15 10 Operations Office Schenectady 38,900 36,200 598 548 5 4 Naval Reactors Off ice 9 GAOIRCED-97-14OR DOE’s Data on Training Costs ENCLOSURE I ENCLOSURE I Annual cost of providing Average annual cost of Average annual training training” training per employee days per employee Field office FY 1995 FY 1996 FY 1995 FY 1996 FY 1995 FY 1996 Southeastern 16,592 34,926 448 832 6 7 Power Administration Southwestern 285,000 281,000 1,477 1,536 9 7 Power Administration Western Area 1,606,737 1,508,OOO 1,141 1,168 8 7 Power Administration Total/overall average $18,576,771 $18,011,362 $1,702 $1,744 8 8 aThis is the cost of in-house training organizations and the cost associated with contracting for training. Source: DOE. .. 10 GAO/RCED-97-140R DOE’s Data on Training Costs ENCLOSURE I ENCLOSURE I Table 1.4: Cost of Providina Trainina for DOE Contractors, Fiscal Years 1995-96 Average annual Average annual cost of training days per Annual cost of providing training* training per employee employee Contractors at FY 1995 I M 1996 FY 1995 I M 1996 FY 1995 FY 1996 Albuquerque Operations $37,391,000 $43,571,000 $1,599 $1,923 5 6 Office Chicago Operations 8,061,400 7,674,OOO 1,072 1,069 6 6 Office Civilian Radioactive 3,928,086 1,134,077 2,888 2,388 6 6 Waste Management I I I I ! ! Fossil Energy 1,980,084 2;309,800 943 1,167 4 4 Golden Field Office 638,000 224,000 727 356 2 1 Idaho Operations Office 18,035,700 14,501,000 2,964 2,527 17 15 Nevada Operations 3,553,800 3,192,995 785 1,155 5 5 Off ice Nonproliferation and 561,000 341,000 7,480 4,608 0 7 National Security Oak Ridge Operations 46,049,OOO. 37,260,OOO 2,647 2,356 5 5 Office I I I I I I Oakland Operations 14,366,OOO 13,451,500 1,495 1,476 6 6 Off ice Ohio Field Office 10,350,000 7,196,OOO 2,417 1,926 7 3 Pittsburgh Naval 867,000 953,000 272 315 3 3 Reactors Off ice Richland Operations 21,588,200 18,125,OOO 1,637 1,498 5 15 Office Rocky Flats Field Office 20,833,OOO 11,373,ooo 4,666 3,218 13 6 Savannah River 41,291,ooo 47,585,600 s43 3,309 21 9 Operations Office Schenectady Naval 484,140 775,800 163 280 2 2 Reactors Office Total/overall average $229,977,410 $209,667,772 $1,966 $1,978 8 7 aThis is the cost of in-house training organizations and the cost associated with contracting for training. Source: DOE. 11 GAO/WED-97-140R DOE’s Data on Training Costs ENCLOSURE II ENCLOSURE II SCOPE OF TRAINING CLASSES OFFERED BY DOE iponsoring element Examples of classes offered” Defense Programs (Headquarters) Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Overview Basis and Methods for Hazard Analysis DOE’s Interactions with DOD Operational Readiness Review Overview Unreviewed Safety Questions Environment, Safety, and Health Accident Investigation Workshop Headquarters) Criticality, Safety, and Plutonium Accidents Environmental Compliance Fundamentals of Nuclear Operations Weapons Complex Overview Environmental Management (Headquarters) Developing Your Employees and Yourself Environmental Chemistry Fundamentals of Waste Management Project Planning for DOE Managers Site RemediationKleanup iuman Resources and Administration Basic Procurement IHeadquarters) Contract Law Effective Presentation Skills Managing Personal Growth Project Management Overview nteragency (Headquarters) Effective Listening and Memory Development Fiber Optics Leadership for a Democratic Society Mid-Career Retirement Planning Pre-Retirement Planning Quality Management (Headquarters) Customer Service Training Quality Concepts and Practices Self-Assessment Workshop Seven Habits of Highly Effective People Team Effectiveness Vendor (Headquarters) Artificial Intelligence: The Hype and the Reality Communicating Compensation and Benefits Evelyn Wood Reading Dynamics for Busines Professionals Hazardous Waste Management Stress Management 12 GAO/RCED-97-140R DOE’s Data on Training Costs ENCLOSURE II ENCLOSURE II Sponsoring element Examplesof classes offered” Argonne National Laboratory Biohazard Research ahd Development Chemical Waste Generator Training Electrical Safety Review Fissile Material Safety Training Intercultural Views of Animals EG&G Energy Measurements Back Care Defensive Driving Desert Tortoise Conservation Environmental Awareness Laser Safety Training Hanford Site Basic Motor Fundamentals Chemistry Fundamentals Driver Energy Conservation Facility Waste Sampling and Analysis Nuclear Physics Idaho National Engineering and Asbestos New Regulation Awareness Environmental Laboratory Criticality Safety Refresher Export Control Fall Protection At-Risk Worker Hearing Conservation Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Cost Estimating Workshop Elements of Metallurgy Hazardous Waste Handling Practices Money Management Noise Lockheed-Martin Energy Systems Carcinogen Control Worker Training Defensive Driving on Nonpaved Surfaces Handling Classified Documents Respirator Training Technical Writing Los Alamos National Laboratory Blood-Borne Pathogens Chemical Hazard Awareness English Refresher Hearing Conservation Nuclear Material Measurements Mound Laboratory Basic Tritium Training Explosive Safety Guidance Training Laser Hazard Awareness Root Cause Analysis Workshop Trash Awareness 13 GAO/RCED-97-140R DOE’s Data on Training Costs ENCLOSURE II ENCLOSURE II sponsoring element Examplesof classes offereda \levada Test Site Basic Health Physics - Fundamentals of Engineering Review Interviewing Skills Radiation Worker Training Smoking Cessation 3ak Ridge Institute for Science and Coping With Adolescents Education Forklift Training Gamma Spectroscopy Occupational Internal Dosimetry Radiological Worker Pantex Plant Calibrate Environmental Chambers Defensive Driving Course Explosives Safety Refresher Facility Security Fire Protection Sandia National Laboratories Body Language in Technical Meetings Chemical Carcinogens DOE Plutonium and Tritium Technology Overview Effective Presentation Skills Laboratory Spill Cleanup Savannah River Site Basic Criticality Training Computer Security Strategies to Cope With Burnout Unarmed Self-Defense/Rape Prevention Understanding Body Language in the Interview/Interrogation Process “According to a 1996 DOE training course database catalog, the Department had more than 12,000 different classes available for training its employees. For brevity, this enclosure shows only examples of those classes. Source: DOE. 14 GAO/RCED-97-140R DOE’s Data on Training Costs ENCLOSURE III ENCLOSURE III SIZE OF DOE TRAINING ORGANIZATIONS. END OF FISCAL YEAR 1996 Table 111.1: Size of Trainina Oraanizations for Selected DOE Offices. End of Fiscal Year 1996 Size of training staff (in Number of employees in Ratio of training staff Office full-time equivalentsr off ice to employees Headquarters Defense Programs 6 352 I:59 Environment, Safety, 13 408 1:31 and Health Energy Information 2 440 I:220 Administration Environmental 20 662 1:33 Management Energy Research 1 313 I:313 Fossil Energy I 198 I:198 Human Resources 2 775 I:388 and Administration Field Albuquerque 23 1,462 -I:64 Operations Office Chicago Operations 5 505 1:lOl Office Idaho Operations 5 415 I:83 Off ice Nevada Operations 11 446 1:41 Off ice Oak Ridge 15 673 1:45 Operations Office Oakland Operations 4 399 1:lOO Off ice Richland Operations 20 524 1:26 Off ice 15 GAOIRCED-97-140R DOE’s Data on Training Costs ENCLOSURE III ENCLOSURE III Size of training staff (in Number of employees in Ratio of training staff Office full-time equivalents)’ office- to employees Savannah River 572 I:29 Operations Office “The size of the training staff includes support contractor personnel who are providing assistance. Source: DOE. 16 GAO/RCED-97-140R DOE’s Data on Training Costs ENCLOSURE III ENCLOSURE III Table 111.2:Size of Trainina Oraanizations for Selected DOE Contractors, End of Fiscal Year 1996 Size of training staff (in Ratio of training staff Contractors supporting full-time equivalents) Number of employees to employees Hanford Site Bechtel-Hanford, Inc. 3 975 1:325 Pacific Northwest 9 3,557 1:395 National Laboratory Westinghouse 187 8,691 I:46 Hanford Company Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Lockheed-Martin 85 5,645 I:66 Idaho Technologies Company Oak Ridge Operations Office Lockheed-Martin 191 9,945 1:52 Energy Systems Lockheed-Martin 30 4,373 I:146 Energy Research Oak Ridge Institute 1 479 1:479 for Science and Education Oakland Operations Office University of 4 2,423 I:606 California, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory University of 90 6,688 I:74 California, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Savannah River Site Wackenhut Services, 42 735 I:18 Inc. 17 GAOIRCED-97-140R DOE’s Data on Training Costs ENCLOSURE LII ENCLOSURE III Size of training staff (in Ratio of training staff Contractors supporting full-time equivalents) Number of employees_ to employees Westinghouse 519 t3,641 1:26 Savannah River Company Source: DOE. 18 GAOIRCED-97-140R DOE’s Data on Training Costs ENCLOSURE l-V ENCLOSURE IV EXTENT TO WHICH TRAINING PLANS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED FOR FISCAL YEAR 1996 Table IV.l: Percentaae of Emoloyees in Selected DOE Headauarters Offices Who Have Comoleted an Individual Development Plan for Fiscal Year 1996 Percentage of employees who have completed an Headquarters office individual development plan Defense Programs 30 Environment, Safety, and Health 90 Energy Information Administration 25 Environmental Management 30 Energy Research 70 Fossil Energy 20-30 Source: DOE. Table IV.2: Whether an Annual Training Plan Has Been Completed bv Selected DOE Headauarters Offices for Fiscal Year 1996 Headquarters off ice Annual training plan completed Defense Programs No Environment, Safety, and Health Yes Energy Information Administration No Environmental Management No Energy Research No Fossil Energy No Source: DOE. 19 GAO/RCED-97-140R DOE’s Data on Training Costs ENCLOSURE V ENCLOSURE V COMPARISON OF DOE’S AND INDUSTRY’S INVESTMENT IN TRAINING, 1995 Federal Contractor Industry Key indicator (DOE) (DOE) average” Average number of training days 7.8 8.0 4.0 per year per employee Average investment in training $3,415 $1,966 $1,352 per year per employee Annual investment in training as 4.9% 3.2% 2.19% a percent of payroll d Note: Data for DOE (federal and contractor employees) are for fiscal year 1995. Data for private industry are for calendar year 1995. These data are the latest available for comparison. aThe source for the industry average is the American Society for Training and Development’s Benchmarking Forum. The Forum is a cooperative venture among 54 national and international companies with strong commitments to employee training. Member companies include American Telephone and Telegraph, Ford Motor Company, General Motors, and International Business Machines. Source: DOE except as noted. 20 GAOAWED-97-140R DOE’s Data on Training Costs ENCLOSURE VI ENCLOSURE VI COMMENTS FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Department of Energy Washwtgton. DC 20585 May 1, 1997 Victor S. Rezendes. Director Energy. Resources, and Science Issues U.S. General Accounting Ofice Washington. DC 20548 Dear Mr. Rezendes: Thank you for the opportunity to work with your statt’and to comment on the General Accounting Office draft report entitled “Department of Energy: Training Cost Data for Fiscal Years 1995 Through 1997.” We are in general agreement with the information provided in your report however, we feel that it does not adequately characterize the improvements the Department has made in employee training and development and reducing costs during a time of major change. The following information provides some specific examples. During the period covered by this audit. the Department has transitioned its primary mission from nuclear weapons production to environmental restoration. In conjunction with this transition. the Department has made a concentrated effort to reengineer the training process to allow for a decrease in staff and costs while providing the people of the United States with a more efficient, safer, and streamlined operation. In May, 1995 a plan was developed to establish a corporate approach to improve the formulation and execution of training within the Department. Actions in the plan are aimed at improving coordination of training development and delivery. consolidation of training management, integration of training scheduling. and reduction in training program costs and staflhtg requirements. It is believed that continued implementation of this plan will result in the rightsizing of training stat% and budgets, a more unified approach to training employees, a reduction of duplication and overlap, and improved management of training and development activities across the Department. We are starting to see results from this streamlining process. In Fiscal Year 1994 the Department spent 861,789,632 on Federal employee training; by the end of Fiscal Year 1996. the expenditure was decreased to 848.850.345. This is a reduction of $12.939.287 or 20.9%. By the end of Fiscal Year 1997 we project decreasing cost by an additional $2,980,239 or 4.9%. As more of these goals reach ftdl implementation we expect even greater savings. Notwithstanding the overall reduction in training costs, the Department has been compelled to expend significant fbnds to upgrade the qualification of our technical employees. For example, we have had difficulty in the past in hiring, training, and retaining qualified people for our nuclear facility sites. A Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) study in 1993 outlined recommendations for improving the qualifications of our employees at nuclear sites and throughout the Department. In response to this recommendation we initiated a host of activities 21 GAO/RCED-97-140R DOE’s Data on Training Costs ENCLOSURE VI ENCLOSURE V-I that are designed to improve the qualifications and capabilities ofour Federal and contract employees. These activities did not come without a cost. Fiscal Year 1994 through Fiscal Year 1996 total Federal cmployce training and development costs directly linked to DNFSB activities was $18.747.477 of the $186.935.950 expended (or 10% of the total training and development costs for Federal employees). The cost for our contractor counterparts for the same period was $306.043.840 ofthe $691.838.03 1 expended (44%). I believe that with continued vig,ilance we will not only continue to decrease our training and development costs, but we will also increase the qualifications of our highly technical staff. Once again, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to participate in this audit and to comment on this draft report. Working with your staff has provided us with the opportunity to validate our training cost baseline which will be extremely use&l in determining how well we are meeting our cost saving goals. If 1 can be of further assistance. please do not hesitate to call. Archer L. Durham Assistant Secretary for Human Resources and Administration 2 (141041) GAO/WED-97-140B DOE’s Data on Training Costs 22 Ordering Information The first copy of each GAO report and testimony is free. Additional copies are $2 each. Orders should be sent to the following address, accompanied by a check or money order made out to the Superintendent of Documents, when necessary. VISA and Mastercard credit cards are accepted, also. Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders by mail: U.S. General Accounting Office P.O. Box 6015 Gaithersburg, MD 20884-6015 or visit: Room 1100 700 4th St. NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW) U.S. General Accounting Office Washington, DC Orders may also be placed by calling (202) 512-6000 or by using fax number (301) 2534066, or TDD (301) 413-0006. Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and testimony. To receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any list from the past 30 days, please call (202) 512-6000 using a touchtone phone. A recorded menu will provide information on how to obtain these lists. For information on how to access GAO reports on the INTERNET, send an e-mail message with “iufo” in the body to: email@example.com or visit GAO’s World Wide Web Home Page at: httpVYwww.gao.gov United States General Accounting Office Washington, D.C. 20548-0001 Official Business Penalty for Private Use $300 Address Correction Reauested
Department of Energy: Training Cost Data for Fiscal Years 1995 Through 1997
Published by the Government Accountability Office on 1997-05-06.
Below is a raw (and likely hideous) rendition of the original report. (PDF)