Restoring Accountability for Career Senior Executives

January 20, 2025

Presidential Actions

View Original

Action Summary

Objective: Restore accountability for Career Senior Executive Service (SES) officials to ensure alignment with national policies and effective government management.
Constitutional Basis: Emphasizes the President’s authority under Article II to remove subordinates, reinforcing the need for SES officials to serve at the President’s pleasure.
Duties and Accountability: SES officials must properly execute laws and implement policy priorities; failure to do so—including unauthorized disclosures or inefficient performance—warrants corrective action.
Administrative Directives:
- Performance Plans: The Director of OPM, in coordination with OMB, must issue SES Performance Plans within 30 days for adoption by agencies.
- Management Reinvention: Agency heads are directed to reinvigorate the SES system using all available authorities to enhance accountability and align SES members to mission priorities.
- Reassignment and Reorganization: Agency heads should reassign SES officials based on skills and mission needs, terminate existing Executive Resources Boards (ERB), and establish new or interim boards with a majority of senior noncareer officials.
- Performance Review Reconstitution: Agencies must reconstitute their Performance Review Boards with individuals committed to enforcing rigorous SES evaluations.
- Immediate Action on Underperformance: Agency heads must promptly remove any SES official whose performance or position is inconsistent with the objectives of this memorandum, with support from OPM and OMB.
Overall Goal: Ensure a government workforce that is accountable, efficient, and fully committed to faithfully executing the laws and advancing the President’s agenda.

Risks & Considerations

The memorandum emphasizes accountability and performance within the Senior Executive Service (SES), which could lead to increased scrutiny and potential restructuring within federal agencies. This may result in a more dynamic and possibly unstable federal workforce environment.
There is a risk that the focus on accountability could lead to increased turnover among SES officials, which might disrupt ongoing projects and collaborations that Vanderbilt University has with federal agencies.
The directive to reassign SES members to align with the President’s agenda could lead to shifts in policy priorities, affecting federally funded research and initiatives that Vanderbilt is involved in.
Vanderbilt University may need to consider how changes in federal agency leadership and priorities could impact its strategic partnerships and funding opportunities, particularly in areas related to public policy and administration.

Impacted Programs

Vanderbilt’s Public Policy Studies Program may need to adapt its curriculum to reflect changes in federal executive management practices and accountability measures.
The Office of Federal Relations at Vanderbilt might need to increase its engagement with federal agencies to navigate potential changes in leadership and policy direction.
Research centers at Vanderbilt that rely on federal funding may need to reassess their project alignments to ensure continued support under the new accountability framework.
The Peabody College of Education and Human Development could see increased demand for expertise in organizational change and leadership within the public sector.

Financial Impact

Changes in SES leadership and priorities could affect the allocation of federal research grants, potentially impacting Vanderbilt’s funding landscape.
Vanderbilt University might experience shifts in funding opportunities, particularly if new SES performance plans prioritize different areas of research and development.
There may be increased opportunities for Vanderbilt to secure funding for research on government accountability and performance management, particularly through collaborations with federal agencies.
As federal agencies undergo restructuring, there could be a temporary slowdown in the processing of grants and contracts, affecting cash flow and project timelines for Vanderbilt.

Relevance Score: 3 (The memorandum presents moderate risks involving compliance and potential shifts in federal funding priorities.)

Key Actions

Vanderbilt’s Office of Federal Relations should monitor the implementation of SES Performance Plans and any changes in federal agency leadership structures. Understanding these changes can help the university anticipate shifts in federal priorities and align its strategic initiatives accordingly.
Vanderbilt’s Human Resources Department could benefit from reviewing the accountability measures and performance evaluation strategies outlined for SES officials. Adopting similar practices may enhance internal accountability and performance management within the university.
Vanderbilt’s Political Science Department should consider conducting research on the impact of increased accountability measures on federal governance. This research could provide valuable insights into the effectiveness of such policies and contribute to academic discourse on government accountability.

Opportunities

The emphasis on accountability and performance in federal agencies presents an opportunity for Vanderbilt’s Leadership Development Programs to offer training and workshops on effective leadership and accountability practices. This could position Vanderbilt as a leader in executive education and attract federal employees seeking to enhance their skills.
By engaging with federal agencies undergoing these changes, Vanderbilt can explore partnerships and collaborative research opportunities that align with new federal priorities, potentially increasing funding and support for university projects.

Relevance Score: 3 (The memorandum suggests some adjustments to processes or procedures at Vanderbilt to align with federal accountability measures.)

Average Relevance Score: 4

Timeline for Implementation

Within 30 days of the signing of the memorandum, the Director of OPM, in coordination with the Director of OMB, shall issue SES Performance Plans.
Immediately upon any agency head becoming aware of an SES official whose performance is inconsistent with the directives, all appropriate actions, including removal, should be taken.

Relevance Score: 5

Impacted Government Organizations

Office of Personnel Management (OPM): Tasked with issuing SES Performance Plans within 30 days in coordination with OMB and ensuring that career senior executives are held accountable for advancing presidential priorities.
Office of Management and Budget (OMB): Working with OPM to support agency heads in managing the SES system and enforcing performance evaluations, thus ensuring alignment with the Administration’s agenda.
Executive Departments and Agencies: All heads of executive departments and agencies are directed to review, reassign, and, if necessary, remove SES officials, overhaul internal Executive Resources Boards and Performance Review Boards, and generally reinforce accountability across the executive branch.

Relevance Score: 5 (The directive impacts a broad range of executive agencies and applies comprehensively across the government’s executive branch.)

Responsible Officials

Director of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) – Responsible for issuing SES Performance Plans in coordination with OMB.
Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) – Collaborates with OPM to issue the required SES Performance Plans.
Agency Heads – Accountable for managing and reforming the Career Senior Executive Service by implementing performance evaluations, reassignments, and removals as necessary.

Relevance Score: 4 (Directives affect agency heads and other senior officials critical to the execution of high-level policy reforms.)