2019 AGENCY ETHICS PROGRAM QUESTIONNAIRE

Status >>>
Submitted and Locked
<<< Status

PART 1. INTRODUCTION

Executive branch agencies are required to submit an annual report to the United States Office of Government Ethics (OGE) concerning certain aspects of their ethics programs (Section 402(e)(1) of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978, as amended). Your response to OGE’s Annual Ethics Program Questionnaire (questionnaire) serves as your annual report.

OGE uses the data collected through the questionnaire in many ways, including sharing information about the entire executive branch ethics program with the public, Congress, and the ethics community. OGE also uses the information to carry out its oversight role, to gain knowledge about individual programs as well as the overall ethics program, and to make informed decisions about resource allocations and priorities. OGE posts a summary of questionnaire responses and each agency’s unedited responses on OGE’s website. Therefore, please ensure your responses are suitable for publication.

OGE encourages each agency to use the annual exercise of completing the questionnaire as an opportunity to evaluate your ethics program.

DUE DATE: By regulation, the questionnaire is due to OGE by February 1, 2020. (5 C.F.R. 2638.207(a)). However, because February 1 falls on a Saturday, responses will be due February 3, 2020.

PART 2. INSTRUCTIONS

Your response to this questionnaire should reflect the 2019 calendar year (i.e., 1/1/2019 through 12/31/2019), except where specified. The answers provided should reflect the aggregate data for your agency. OGE will only accept one submission per agency.

Throughout the questionnaire you will be offered an opportunity to provide comments or explanations for your responses. Please use these comment sections to explain any discrepancies between levels of required activity and actual activity. These comment sections should also be used to explain significant changes from your 2018 report. After OGE has reviewed your questionnaire submission, you may be contacted for follow-up.

FAQ's:

Which Internet browser should I use?

How do I save a draft of my response?

How do I access my saved draft and edit the questionnaire?

Why is the field highlighted yellow?

After I have submitted the questionnaire, how do I save a copy for my records?

Can I edit my response if I made an error?

Can I increase the font size?

Can more than one person work on the questionnaire response?

I accidentally created more than one agency response. Which one should I use?

If you have any further questions, please contact Wendy Pond at wgpond@oge.gov.

PART 3. DEFINITIONS

Agency Head: For purposes of this questionnaire, in the case of an agency headed by more than one person, the chair or comparable member of such agency.

D.C Metro Area: For purposes of this questionnaire, D.C. Metro Area means the District of Columbia, DC; Calvert County, MD; Charles County, MD; Prince George's County, MD; Arlington County, VA; Clarke County, VA; Culpeper County, VA; Fairfax County, VA; Fauquier County, VA; Loudoun County, VA; Prince William County, VA; Rappahannock County, VA; Spotsylvania County, VA; Stafford County, VA; Warren County, VA; Alexandria city, VA; Fairfax city, VA; Falls Church city, VA; Fredericksburg city, VA; Manassas city, VA; Manassas Park city, VA; Jefferson County, WV; and, Silver Spring-Frederick-Rockville, MD Metropolitan Division Frederick County, and Montgomery County.

Full-time Agency Employees: For purposes of this questionnaire, the term “full-time agency employees” includes employees detailed to another agency. It also includes officers, but not enlisted members, of the uniformed services.

Special Government Employee (SGE): For purposes of this questionnaire, the term “special Government employee” (SGE) means an officer or employee who is retained, designated, appointed, or employed, to perform temporary duties either on a full-time or intermittent basis, with or without compensation, for not more than 130 days during any period of 365 consecutive days. The term “SGE” does not include enlisted members, of the Armed Forces. It does, however, include these categories of officers or employees:
  • Part-time United States commissioners;
  • Reserve officers of the Armed Forces and officers of the National Guard of the United States (unless otherwise officers or employees of the United States) while on active duty solely for training or serving involuntarily.

PART 4. ORGANIZATION/RESOURCES

1. Agency

  • Department of Defense - Department of the Air Force

2. Employees

  • Number of full-time agency employees as of December 31, 2019
474044

3. Information about the Designated Agency Ethics Official (DAEO):

a. Vacant (as of December 31, 2019)?
No

b. Time in current DAEO position
1 - 4 years

c. Total years performing ethics duties
10 or more years

d. Percent of time spent on ethics
0-25%

e. Is the DAEO a career employee or a political appointee?
Political employee

f. Number of reporting levels between the DAEO and the agency head.
1

4. Information about the Alternate Designated Agency Ethics Official (ADAEO):

a. Vacant (as of December 31, 2019)?
No

b. Time in current ADAEO position
1 - 4 years

c. Total years performing ethics duties
10 or more years

d. Percent of time spent on ethics
0-25%

e. Is the ADAEO a career employee or a political appointee?
Career employee

5. Number of employees, including the DAEO and ADAEO, who performed ethics program duties in 2019 (e.g., financial disclosure, education and training, advice and counseling, and program administration).

Number of employees by hours worked each week
Duty Station
Less than 1 hour per week
(up to .025 FTE*)
1-10 hours per week
(up to .25 FTE*)
11-20 hours per week
(up to .5 FTE*)
21-30 hours per week
(up to .75 FTE*)
31-40 hours per week
(up to 1 FTE*)
TOTAL
a. D.C. Metro area
21
10
7
0
5
43
b. Outside the D.C. Metro area
279
415
86
32
28
840
TOTAL
300
425
93
32
33
883

* FTE = Full Time Equivalent

Example: The table below provides an example of an agency with 13 employees that performed ethics
program duties in 2019.

EXAMPLE
Number of employees by hours worked each week
Duty Station
Less than 1 hour per week
(up to .025 FTE*)
1-10 hours per week
(up to .25 FTE*)
11-20 hours per week
(up to .5 FTE*)
21-30 hours per week
(up to .75 FTE*)
31-40 hours per week
(up to 1 FTE*)
TOTAL
D.C. Metro area
1
0
2
2
1
6
Outside the D.C. Metro area
1
3
3
0
0
7
TOTAL
2
3
5
2
1
13

6. In what areas did contractors support the ethics program? Select all that apply.

  • Check all that apply


Administrative support (e.g., tracking filing or training requirements, sending reminders, data entry, etc.)
Substantive ethics support (e.g., providing training, initial review of financial disclosures, drafting advice for further review, etc.)

  • Please describe IT support (optional)
    NA

  • Please describe administrative support (optional)

  • Please describe substantive support (optional)

  • Specify Other
    NA

7. Did your agency receive ethics services or support from another federal agency or federal entity? (Do not include contractors, OGE support, or OMB support of MAX.gov.)

  • Select Yes or No
No

  • Please provide the name of the federal agency or entity:

  • Describe the services or support received:

8. Did your agency provide ethics program services or support for any board, commission, or agency that is independant of your agency?

  • Select Yes or No
No

  • Please provide the name of the board, commission, or agency:

9. Does your agency's ethics program need additional resources? Check all that apply.

  • Select type of resources

    Budgetary, Human Capital, Technology

  • Specify Other
    NA

10. Did the agency head meet with the ethics staff to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the ethics program in 2019?

  • Select Yes, No, or Not Applicable
Yes

  • If Not applicable above, specify why
    NA

11. Did your agency (e.g., ethics office, Inspector General, General Counsel, etc.) evaluate any aspect of the ethics program in 2019 (5 C.F.R. 2638.104(c)(16))?

  • Select Yes or No
Yes

12. To whom were the results reported? Select all that apply.

    Agency Head, DAEO

  • Specify Other
    NA

13. What kind of changes resulted from the assessment?

    Programmatic changes (please describe)

  • Please Describe: (Please describe programmatic or policy changes; Specify why no changes resulted; Specify why not applicable)
    Renewed focus on timely certification of financial disclosure, and more tailored SGE and PGE training.

14. Of the following required written procedures, which did you have in place?
Check all that apply.

Financial disclosure program, including for the filing, review, and when applicable, public availability of public financial disclosure reports (5 C.F.R. 2638.104(c)(8)(i)), Issuance of notice of ethical obligations in written offers of employment (5 C.F.R. 2638.303), Provision of initial ethics training (5 C.F.R. 2638.304), Issuance of ethics notice to new supervisors (5 C.F.R. 2638.306)

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FOR PART 4. Please indicate the question number to which the comment corresponds.

  • Additional Comments

PART 5. EDUCATION AND TRAINING

15. Did the office(s) responsible for issuing ethics notices to prospective employees, pursuant to 5 C.F.R. 2638.303, provide the DAEO with the written confirmation required pursuant to 5 C.F.R. 2638.310?

    Some of the offices provided written confirmation to the DAEO (explain why not all offices then skip to #17)

  • Please Explain why not all offices:
    The Air Force Personnel Center (AFPC) controls, generates, and issues the offers of employment to prospective employees, and while some AFPC offices reported the issuance of the notice, not all did, because not all AFPC offices issued the notice as required. This deficiency is being addressed, and a closer communication process is being established between AFPC and the legal offices throughout the DAF.

16. Did written offers of employment for positions covered by the Standards of Conduct include the information required by 5 C.F.R. 2638.303?

  • Please Explain why not all offers:

  • Please Explain:

17. How many new agency leaders, as defined in 5 C.F.R. 2638.305(a), were required to receive ethics briefings by December 31, 2019?

Total Number
1
    • a. How many of those leaders received their briefing within 15 days of their appointment?
1
    • b. How many of those leaders received their briefing beyond the 15-day requirement?
0
    • c. How many of those leaders have yet to receive their briefing as of today?
0

    • If applicable, please explain why some of the leaders received their briefing beyond the 15-day requirement or have yet to receive their briefing.

18. How many employees, including SGEs, were required to receive Initial Ethics Training (IET) by December 31, 2019 (5 C.F.R. 2638.304)? Include employees who were excluded, under 5 C.F.R. 2638.304(a)(2), from the requirement to receive the interactive portion of the IET.

Number required
17761
  • a. How many of those employees received IET within the 3-month requirement?
17128
  • b. How many of those employees received IET beyond the 3-month requirement?
425
  • c. How many of those employee have not received IET as of today?
208

Example: If an employee started at the agency on December 15, 2019, and the employee completed IET prior to the end of the calendar year, include the employee in your required and received numbers. If, on January 1, 2020, the employee has not completed IET, do not count that employee in your required numbers. Instead, include the employee in your 2020 questionnaire response to be filed in 2021.

  • If applicable, please explain why some employees received IET beyond the 3-month requirement or have yet to receive IET.
    See comments at the end of this Part.

19. Did the office(s) delegated the responsibility for providing initial ethics training (IET) provide the required written confirmation to the DAEO, pursuant to 5 C.F.R. 2638.310?

    Written confirmation not required because all IET was provided by an office under the DAEO's supervision

  • Please Explain why not all offices:

20. Did the head of the agency complete either initial ethics training and/or annual ethics training in 2019?

  • Select One
Yes

  • Please specify why if "No" or "Not Applicable"

21. Required Annual Ethics Training

Type of covered employees (Include SGE filers)
# Required
# Received (of those required)

    a. Executive Schedule Level I or Level II public filers (OGE Form 278e)
1
1

    b. All other public filers (OGE Form 278e)
520
516

    c. Confidential filers (OGE Form 450 and OGE-approved alternative confidential financial disclosure forms)
24383
13195

    d. Other employees required by 5 C.F.R. 2638.307(a) (employees appointed by the President; employees of the Executive Office of the President; contracting officers; or, other employees designated by the head of the agency.)
142
141

TOTAL
25046
13853

  • If applicable, please explain discrepancies between the number of employees who were required to receive training and the number of employees who received training:
    See comments at the end of this Part.

22. If your agency assessed risk to help inform the content, format, and/or timing of ethics education and communications, select all that apply (see PA-19-05 for reference):


Reviewed advice logs for common issues, Discussed upcoming work and agency priorities with senior staff, Talked to program managers about risks inherent in their work, Conducted surveys to identify common and emerging ethics risks, Talked to employees about the ethics concerns they encounter in the workplace.

  • Please explain other:

23. If your agency evaluated the effectiveness of your ethics education and/or communication, select all that apply (see PA-19-05 for reference):


Conducted self-assessments to ensure that required employees are receiving training, Administered post-training evaluations to assess participants' perceptions of the training, Reviewed advice logs for increased activity after training presentations and communications, Held discussions with agency leaders and employees to evaluate whether the training and communications they received have supported them in managing ethics risks.

  • Please explain other:

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FOR PART 5. Please indicate the question number to which the comment corresponds.

  • Additional Comments
    Q18: Major Commands (MAJCOM) responsible for providing IET to their employees, but that failed to do so within the requisite 3-months, provided the following explanations:
    • Some individuals were deployed shortly after inprocessing, and were unable to complete the training within the 3 month period • A breakdown in the process utilized by the Civilian Personnel Office (CPO), wherein the notice was posted on the sharedrive, but the sharedrive was down for several months, resulted in a lapse of the three month window (all new employees have since been emailed regarding the requirement) • Some employees have not received IET because they have not attended one of the bi-weekly briefings offered to all employees who need IET. While communicating reminders (via email or phone) to attend a briefing is one means of ensuring compliance, some new employees do not have email accounts or phone numbers when they are in-processing. Moving forward, impacted legal offices will work with CPO to provide the training in conjunction with employees’ initial bi-weekly CPO in-processing to ensure all employees requiring IET receive the training in a timely manner.
    • The training was not included on the in-processing checklist in these instances, the checklist has been updated and now captures the requirement.
    • Some bases were not tracking this metric due to turnover in staff.
    • A transition in Ethics Counselors resulted in missing employees who had failed to train within three months of on-boarding.
    • Issues with availability or responsiveness of employees as a result of official travel, illness, or failure to properly monitor and respond to correspondence. The base experiencing these complications intends to explore additional ways to leverage civilian personnel officials and supervisors to ensure the proper emphasis is placed on this training. Some bases have struggled with high volumes of personnel that have departed their positions prior to training within three months, as well as a steep increase in new hires, which has made it difficult to track employees. The base experiencing these complications has instituted a weekly email to supervisors listing employees that require training. Additionally, engagement is necessary with civilian personnel to improve processes to provide and track the training.
    • The National Guard Bureau has had difficulty tracking all new entrants, and their IET status, largely due to a serious lack of staffing needed to manage the substantial workload across the Army National Guard and Air National Guard.
    • Some OCONUS bases have foreign national civilians under their supervision, and it has proven difficult to compel those individuals to comply with training requirements.
    Q21: MAJCOMs provided the following explanations:
    • Many individuals departed the covered position prior to conducting the annual training several individuals deployed and were unable to conduct the training from their deployed locations several individuals did not complete the training by December 31, 2019 despite numerous attempts to contact them by email and phone.
    • The training system, ADLS, and the filing system, FDM, where the training is recorded, are not connected. However, filers do not understand that, and erroneously believe that their completion in ADLS will automatically transfer to FDM, so they do not report their completion to a supervisor or ethics counselor.
    • Some filers were on extended medical leave that did not terminate before the end of 2019.
    • Some filers had scheduling conflicts and pressing assignments that prevented them from completing the training before the end of 2019, but have completed it since.
    • Massive reorganization of one MAJCOM changed supervisors, 450 certifiers, and ethics attorneys. This reorganization led to communication difficulties, assignment of less experienced attorneys (who were unaware of all training requirements) to ethics duties, and difficulty tracking completions.
    • Some employees were removed from the positions requiring filing before the end of the calendar year.
    • The National Guard Bureau has had difficulty tracking annual training as well, due to a serious lack of staffing, and the intense workload that must be managed between the Army National Guard and Air National Guard.

PART 6. ADVICE, COUNSELING, AND REMEDIES

24. From the list below, select the three topics that your employees most frequently sought guidance on in 2019. Please rate them in order, such that the first topic on which employees sought guidance the most frequently.

  • Conflicting financial interests
  • Gift acceptance
  • Financial disclosure reporting
  • Impartiality in performance of official duties
  • Misuse of position, government resources, and information
  • Outside employment/activities
  • Post-employment restrictions
  • Travel, subsistence, and related expenses from non-federal sources
  • Other (specify)

  • Selection 1
Financial Disclosure Reporting
  • Selection 2
Gift acceptance
  • Selection 3
Post-employment restrictions

  • Explain Other 1
NA
  • Explain Other 2
NA
  • Explain Other 3
NA

25. Number of notification statements of negotiation or recusal under section 17(a) of the STOCK Act submitted to the ethics office in 2019 (see 5 C.F.R. 2635.602(a)):

  • Enter total
30

26. Number of 18 U.S.C. 208 waivers granted in 2019:

Number Granted in 2019
Number Sent to OGE
    a. 208(b)(1) waivers
0
0
    b. 208(b)(3) waivers
0
0

  • If applicable, please explain discrepancies between the number of waivers granted and the number provided to OGE.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FOR PART 6. Please indicate the question number to which the comment corresponds.

  • Additional Comments

PART 7. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT AND ELECTRONIC FILING SYSTEMS

27. How often, within the 15-day deadline, did the human resources office(s) notify the DAEO of appointments to public and confidential financial disclosure filing positions (5 C.F.R. 2638.105(a)(1))?

    a. Public Filers
In Most Cases

    • If not applicable, specify why.
      NA

    • If "never" or "in some cases", please explain further:
      NA

    b. Confidential Filers
In Most Cases

    • If not applicable, specify why.
      NA

    • If "never" or "in some cases", please explain further:
      NA

28. How often, within the 15-day deadline, did the human resources office(s) notify the DAEO of terminations from public financial disclosure filing positions (5 C.F.R. 2638.105(a)(2))?

Public FilersIn Some Cases (specify why, below)

    • If not applicable, specify why.
      NA

    • If "never" or "in some cases", please explain further:
      Q28: MAJCOMs provided the following explanations:
      • For public filers, the MAJCOM provides monthly notices of inbound senior officials, but late notices of senior civilian assignments precluded timely notices to the DAEO. For confidential filers, the supervisors of the individuals in covered positions identify those required to file, and notify the POC(s) of the relevant organizations when they have a new filer. The POC(s) then notify the Ethics Counselors.
      • Some personnel offices assert they are not required to notify the legal offices/DAEO, for example, if the requirement is not specified in the position description, and have either refused to do so or provided incomplete or inaccurate information. Some legal offices have insisted on placing the legal office on the in-processing checklist to avoid having to rely on personnel offices. Other legal offices have had to devise their own methods and work-arounds to track appointments, with varying success.
      • Some MAJCOM legal offices with a lower volume of filers track the in and out-processing of the filing positions themselves.
      • Some MAJCOMs have personnel that are scattered throughout the country, and are serviced by different personnel offices, making communication about filer status even more challenging.
      • Some MAJCOMs report that because the filer and ethics counselors are known to each other by the time a filer terminates, the ethics counselors are typically already made aware of the termination by the filers themselves.

29. Did your agency use an electronic financial disclosure filing system (e-filing system) in calendar year 2019? Note: This includes Integrity.

  • Select Yes or No
Yes

30. Which system did your agency use?

  • Select one
Integrity and Other (specify)

  • Specify Other
    The Army Financial Management Disclosure System

31. Indicate for which forms your agency used the other e-filing system.

  • Check all that apply
Public Financial Disclosure (OGE Form 278e), Confidential Financial Disclosure (OGE Form 450 or OGE-approved alternative form)

32. Indicate your fiscal year 2019 actual costs for using the e-filing system. Note: Because OGE does not charge fees to use Integrity,there are no reportable costs associated with the use of Integrity.

Public (do not include Integrity)Confidential
a. Amount paid to a non-federal vendor in FY 2019Don’t know/don’t track
Don’t know/don’t track

b. Amount paid to a federal agency in FY 2019Don’t know/don’t track
Don’t know/don’t track

c. Amount for all internal costs associated with operating an e-filing system (e.g., FTE, overhead, etc.) in FY 2019Don’t know/don’t track
Don’t know/don’t track

  • Please explain "Don’t know/don’t track" answer above
    The Air Force Ethics and legal Offices do not have any input or oversight as to how the DAF's use of FDM is funded.

33. Indicate the number of filers who filed electronically in fiscal year 2019.

    a. public financial disclosure filers (exclude filers in Integrity)
733

    b. confidential financial disclosure filers
27097

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FOR PART 7. Please indicate the question number to which the comment corresponds.

  • Additional Comments

PART 8. PUBLIC FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE

34. Report the number of public financial disclosure reports (OGE Form 278e) required to be filed by December 31, 2019, excluding SGEs, and the number of reports actually filed (i.e., received) by December 31, 2019.

OGE Form 278e Reports
PAS2
Non-Career SES3
Career SES3
Schedule C
Other4
TOTAL
a. Nominee/New EntrantRequired
0
4
41
3
86
134
Filed
0
4
40
3
86
133
b. AnnualRequired
6
2
201
15
376
600
Filed
6
2
201
15
375
599
c. TerminationRequired
0
0
23
3
66
92
Filed
0
0
23
3
65
91
d. Combination1Required
1
2
3
2
9
17
Filed
1
2
3
2
9
17
    Total
Required
7
8
268
23
537
843
Filed
7
8
267
23
535
840

1 Includes reports filed to satisfy both annual and termination requirements, as well as new entrant and termination requirements.
2 Presidential appointees confirmed by the Senate.
3 Senior Executive Service, Senior Foreign Service, Senior Cryptologic Service, Defense Intelligence Senior Executive Service, etc.
4 Includes members of the Uniformed Services, Administrative Law Judges, Senior Level employees (SES Equivalent), administratively-determined positions, officials in the Executive Office of the President who do not otherwise meet the criteria of another category in the chart, etc.


Example for new entrant and termination reports: If an employee joined/departed the agency on December 15, 2019, and the employee filed a new entrant/termination report prior to the end of the calendar year, include the report in your required and filed numbers. If, on January 1, 2020, the employee has not filed a new entrant/termination report, do not count that report in your required numbers. Instead, include the employee in your 2020 questionnaire response to be filed in 2021.

  • If applicable, please explain discrepancies between the number of reports required to be filed and the actual number of reports filed.
    MAJCOMs provided the following explanation:
    • Filers failed to comply with the requirement.
    • Filer filed within 30 day grace period, but that resulted in a 2020 filing.

35. Note the number of public financial disclosure reports certified or otherwise closed during the calendar year. Exclude reports of SGEs. Of those reports, indicate how many were initially reviewed within 60 days and how many were certified within 60 days. “Initially reviewed within 60 days” means having completed a full technical review and conflicts analysis. See 5 C.F.R. 2634.605.

OGE Form 278e Reports
PAS2
Non-Career SES3
Career SES3
Schedule C
Other4
TOTAL
a. Nominee/New Entranti. How many reports were certified or closed in 2019?
0
4
28
4
72
108
ii. Of those certified/closed in 2019, how many were initially reviewed within 60 days?
0
4
28
4
63
99
iii. Of those certified/closed in 2019, how many were certified or closed within 60 days?
0
3
27
4
40
74
b. Annual
PAS2
Non-Career SES3
Career SES3
Schedule C
Other4
TOTAL
i. How many reports were certified or closed in 2019?
6
2
98
15
368
489
ii. Of those certified/closed in 2019, how many were initially reviewed within 60 days?
6
2
95
15
340
458
iii. Of those certified/closed in 2019, how many were certified or closed within 60 days?
3
2
90
15
184
294
c. Termination
PAS2
Non-Career SES3
Career SES3
Schedule C
Other4
TOTAL
i. How many reports were certified or closed in 2019?
0
0
11
3
65
79
ii. Of those certified/closed in 2019, how many were initially reviewed within 60 days?
0
0
11
3
44
58
iii. Of those certified/closed in 2019, how many were certified or closed within 60 days?
0
0
11
3
32
46
d. Combination
PAS2
Non-Career SES3
Career SES3
Schedule C
Other4
TOTAL
i. How many reports were certified or closed in 2019?
1
0
1
2
5
9
ii. Of those certified/closed in 2019, how many were initially reviewed within 60 days?
1
0
1
2
5
9
iii. Of those certified/closed in 2019, how many were certified or closed within 60 days?
0
0
1
2
5
8
    Total
i. How many reports were certified or closed in 2019?
7
6
138
24
510
685
ii. Of those certified/closed in 2019, how many were initially reviewed within 60 days?
7
6
135
24
452
624
iii. Of those certified/closed in 2019, how many were certified or closed within 60 days?
3
5
129
24
261
422

1 Includes reports filed to satisfy both annual and termination requirements, as well as new entrant and termination requirements.
2 Presidential appointees confirmed by the Senate.
3 Senior Executive Service, Senior Foreign Service, Senior Cryptologic Service, Defense Intelligence Senior Executive Service, etc.
4 Includes members of the Uniformed Services, Administrative Law Judges, Senior Level employees (SES Equivalent), administratively-determined positions, officials in the Executive Office of the President who do not otherwise meet the criteria of another category in the chart, etc.

  • If applicable, please explain why some reports were reviewed more than 60 days after submission.
    Q35(a): MAJCOMs have provided the following explanations:
    • Personnel shortages persisted during filing season, particularly with significant gaps in staffing of Ethics Counselor positions.
    • Simple oversight.
    • Turnover in legal offices, and an accompanying lag in access being gained for FDM and Integrity.
    • Amended reports required review that may have fallen outside of the original 60 days.
    • Migration to Integrity resulted in lapses of the 60 days.
    • Software reliability issues.
    • Overlapping absences between certifying officials.
    • Lack of sufficient manpower and resources, especially within NGB.
    • Administrative errors on the part of ethics officials who were new to the systems.

  • If applicable, please explain why some reports were certified/closed more than 60 days after submission. Check all that apply.
    additional information was being sought
    other (specify)

  • Specify Other
    Q35(b): MAJCOMs explained:
    • Simple oversight.
    • Promotions delayed after initial filing.
    • Software reliability issues.
    • Overlapping absences between certifying officials.
    • Lack of sufficient manpower and resources, especially within NGB.
    • In some cases, OGE was the certifying official, and did not provide reasons as to why PAS filers’ reports were not certified within 60 days.
    • Supervisors failed to complete the supervisory review needed to certify the report within 60 days.
    • Some reports were highly complex and required additional time to conduct an adequate review.
    • Conflicts identified that had to be resolved before certification.

36. Number of periodic transaction reports filed, excluding those filed by SGEs

    • Periodic Transaction Reports Filed
432
Note: Count the total number of periodic transaction reports filed. Example 1: If two employees each file 5 periodic transaction reports during the calendar year, report “10” in the table above. Example 2: If an employee files one report each month, each report is counted separately. Report “12” in the table.

37. Extension and late fees for new entrant, annual, termination, and combination public financial disclosure reports, and periodic transaction reports, excluding those for reports filed by SGEs.

Granted filing extension
Granted waiver of late filing fee
Paid late filing fee
    a. Number of OGE Form 278e Reports
110
19
3
    b. Number of OGE Form 278-T Reports
6
5
0

38. Number of public financial disclosure filers reported in calendar year 2019 to the Attorney General for failure to file.

  • Enter total
0

39. How many requests for public financial disclosure reports did you receive in 2019? Count each OGE Form 201 as one request, even if it contains a request for documents for multiple individuals.

  • Enter total
5

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FOR PART 8. Please indicate the question number to which the comment corresponds.

  • Additional Comments

PART 9. CONFIDENTIAL FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE

40. Report the number of confidential financial disclosure reports required to be filed by December 31, 2019, excluding SGEs, and the number of reports actually filed by December 31, 2019.

a. Required
b. Filed
27118
450
27097
OGE-approved alternate form
2
Total
27118
27099

    Example for new entrant reports: If an employee started at the agency on December 15, 2019, and filed a new entrant report prior to the end of the calendar year, include the report in your required and filed numbers. If, on January 1, 2020 the employee has not filed a new entrant report, do not count that report in your required numbers. Instead, include the employee in your 2020 questionnaire response to be filed in 2021.

    If applicable, please explain discrepancies between the number of reports required to be filed and the actual number of reports filed.
  • Explain, if applicable
    See comments at the end of this Part

41. Note the number of confidential financial disclosure reports certified or otherwise closed during the calendar year. Exclude reports of SGEs. Of those reports, indicate how many were initially reviewed within 60 days and how many were certified within 60 days. "Initially Reviewed within 60 days" means having completed a full technical review and conflicts analysis. See 5 C.F.R. 2634.605.

a. How many reports were certified or closed in 2019?
b. Of those certified/closed in 2019, how many were initially reviewed within 60 days?
c. Of those certified/closed within 2019, how many were certified/closed within 60 days?
450 and OGE-approved alternative
26330
24908
23659

  • If applicable, please explain why some reports were reviewed more than 60 days after submission.
    Q41(a): MAJCOMs provided the following explanations:
    • Simple oversight.
    • Reports were not appearing consistently in the multiple administrative reports available in FDM, leading to oversight.
    • Some organizations experienced substantial personnel shortages and turnover, and were unable to conduct the reviews within 60 days.
    • Some certifiers waited until the supervisor had reviewed to do the initial review. However, when those supervisors failed to review within the 60 days, so too did the certifier.
    • FDM software issues caused substantial and prolonged access difficulties.
    • Many reports were submitted less than 30 days before the end of the year, so review has taken place in 2020.

  • If applicable, please explain why some reports were certified/closed more than 60 days after submission. Check all that apply.
    additional information was being sought, remedial action was being taken
    other (specify)

  • Specify Other
    Q41(b): MAJCOMs explained:
    • Supervisors failed to review and sign within 60 days, preventing certifier from certifying.
    • Supervisors changed during the 60 day window, and the new supervisor did not have an adequate opportunity to review before the expiration.
    • Certifier completed review, but neglected to ensure that the report was actually signed before moving on.
    • Some organziations experienced substantial personnel shortages and turnover, and were unable to conduct the reviews within 60 days.
    • Delays in filers amending reports.
    • FDM software issues caused substantial and prolonged access difficulties.

42. Number of OGE 450 or OGE-approved alternative forms granted filing extensions in 2019.

  • Enter number
122

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FOR PART 9. Please indicate the question number to which the comment corresponds.

  • Additional Comments
    Q40: MAJCOMs provided the following explanations:
    • Some filers were granted filing extensions that pushed their due dates into 2020.
    • Some filers simply failed to comply.
    • Some filers that should have been scrubbed before the start of the year, because they had already departed, were autoassigned reports.
    • Some filers departed or were removed from the positions that required filing after the reports were assigned, but before submitting their reports.
    • Some reports were erroneously assigned as annual, and actually required new entrant reports (or vice versa), and after the error was corrected, the erroneously assigned report was not deleted, leaving the appearance of an unfiled required report.
    • Gaps in ethics counselor staffing resulted in losses of oversight needed to prevent failures to file.
    • Filers received different email addresses, specific to educational or laboratory facilities, that were not updated in FDM, and did not receive FDM-issued notifications to complete their reports.
    • A large number of annual reports that should have been autoassigned in January 2020, were prematurely assigned by the organization’s Point of Contacts (POC) in FDM, as they were unaware of the autoassignment feature in FDM. Therefore, the number of required reports was artificially inflated. We are working to better train POCs to eliminate these sorts of redundancies and errors.

PART 10. ENFORCEMENT OF STANDARDS OF CONDUCT AND CRIMINAL AND CIVIL STATUTES

43. Number of disciplinary actions taken in 2019 based wholly or in part upon violations of the Standards of Conduct provisions (5 C.F.R. part 2635) or your agency's supplemental Standards (if applicable). For purposes of this question, disciplinary actions include removals, demotions, suspensions, and written reprimands or their equivalents.

  • Enter number
53

    Of those, how many were disciplinary actions were taken wholly or in part upon violations of:

    Subpart A (General Provisions)
4

    Subpart B (Gifts from Outside Sources)
0

    Subpart C (Gifts between Employees)
0

    Subpart D (Conflicting Financial Interests)
1

    Subpart E (Impartiality in Performing Official Duties)
3

    Subpart F (Seeking Other Employment)
0

    Subpart G (Misuse of Position)
20

    Subpart H (Outside Activities)
4

    Agency's supplemental Standards of Conduct
24

44. Number of disciplinary actions taken in 2019 based wholly or in part upon violations of the criminal conflict of interest statutes (18 U.S.C. sections 203, 205, 208, and 209), failure to file or filing false public financial disclosures (5 U.S.C. app. section 104 or 18 U.S.C. section 1001), a civil matter involving outside earned income (5 U.S.C. app. section 501), or outside activities (5 U.S.C. app. section 502). For purposes of this question, disciplinary actions include removals, demotions, suspensions, and written reprimands or their equivalents:

  • Enter number
2

    Of those, how many were disciplinary actions taken based wholly or in part upon violations of:

    18 U.S.C. section 203 (Compensation in Matters Affecting the Government)
1

    18 U.S.C. section 205 (Claims Against and Matters Affecting the Government)
1

    18 U.S.C. section 208 (Acts Affecting a Personal Financial Interest)
2

    18 U.S.C. section 209 (Supplementation of Salary)
0

    5 U.S.C. app. section 104 or 18 U.S.C. section 1001 (Failure to file or filing false public financial disclosures)
0

    5 U.S.C. app. section 501 (outside earned income)
1

    5 U.S.C. app. section 502 (outside activities)
2

45. Number of referrals made to the Department of Justice of potential violations in 2019 of the conflict of interest statutes (18 U.S.C. sections 203,205, 207, 208, 209), failure to file or filing false public financial disclosures (5 U.S.C. app. section 104 or 18 U.S.C. section 1001), a civil matter involving outside earned income (5 U.S.C. app. section 501), or outside activities (5 U.S.C. app. section 502).

  • Enter number
2

DOJ Referrals

    a. How many of those referrals were accepted for prosecution?
0

    b. How many of those referrals were declined for prosecution?
2

    c. How many of those referrals were pending DOJ’s decision as of December 31, 2019?
0

Disciplinary Action

    a. How many of those referrals resulted in disciplinary or corrective action?
1

    b. How many of those referrals resulted in a determination not to take disciplinary or corrective action?
1

    c. How many of those referrals are pending a determination as to whether disciplinary or corrective action will be taken?
0

    d. How many of those referrals involved employees who left the agency before the agency determined whether or not to take disciplinary action
0

46. Did your agency submit all referral(s) and disposition(s) of the referral(s) to OGE via OGE Form 202 (as required by 5 C.F.R. 2638.206(a))?

  • Select answer
Yes

  • Please Specify Why

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FOR PART 10. Please indicate the question number to which the comment corresponds.

  • Additional Comments

PART 11. ETHICS PLEDGE ASSESSMENT

47. Were any full-time non-career appointees (e.g., Presidentially Appointed Senate Confirmed (PAS), Presidentially Appointed (PA), non-career Senior Executive Service (SES), Schedule C, etc.) appointed to or by your agency from January 1 through December 31, 2019? NOTE: For guidance on what constitutes a full-time non-career appointee for purposes of the Ethics Pledge, see LA-17-03 available at www.oge.gov.

  • Select answer
Yes

48. For each category of appointee, provide the number of full-time non-career appointees appointed between January 1 and December 31, 2019, and indicate the number who did and did not sign the Ethics Pledge. NOTE: Please include all appointees who did not sign, regardless of whether or not they were required to sign. Additional explanatory information is requested in the next question.

Number of Full-Time Non-Career Appointees
Type of Full-Time Non-Career Appointees
by Category
PAS
PA
Non- career SES
Schedule C
Other
Total
a. Appointed 01/01/2019 - 12/31/2019
1
0
2
1
0
4
i. Signed the Ethics Pledge in 2019
1
0
1
1
0
3
ii. Required to sign the Pledge in 2019 but signed in 2020
0
0
0
0
0
0
iii. Did not sign the Ethics Pledge
0
0
1
0
0
1

  • If applicable, please explain discrepancies between the number appointed and the number who signed or did not take the Pledge.

49. For each appointee who did not sign the Ethics Pledge, find the appropriate rationale(s) and indicate the total number of appointees who fit into that category.

Rationale for Not Signing the Ethics Pledge
Number and Type of Full-Time Non-Career Appointees
Who Did Not Sign the Ethics Pledge
PAS
PA
Non- career SES
Schedule C
Other
Total
a. Occupy an exempt non-policymaking position (Schedule C or other comparable authority)
0
0
0
0
0
0
b. Appointed without break in service after serving in another position for which the Ethics Pledge was already signed
0
0
1
0
0
1
c. Other (explain below)
0
0
0
0
0
0

    If other, please explain.

50. How many appointees appointed between January 1 and December 31, 2019 and subject to the Ethics Pledge were registered lobbyists during the two years prior to their appointment?

  • Enter number
1

51. Section 3 of Executive Order 13770 provides a waiver mechanism for the restrictions contained in the Ethics Pledge. Indicate below how many waivers were granted to appointees in your agency in 2019, the names of these individuals granted waivers in 2019, and which of the Pledge paragraphs were implicated.

Number of Ethics Pledge Waivers Granted
By Pledge Paragraph
Name(s) of Individual(s) Granted Ethics Pledge Waivers
Paragraph 1
0
Paragraph 2
0
Paragraph 3
0
Paragraph 4
0
Paragraph 5
0
Paragraph 6
0
Paragraph 7
0
Paragraph 8
0
Paragraph 9
0
Other
(please explain)
0

  • If other, please explain

52. Were there any violations of the Ethics Pledge during 2019?

  • Select Yes or No
No (skip to Additional Comments for this Part)

53. Please provide information on enforcement actions taken as a result of violations of the Ethics Pledge.

  • Please type in the box below.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FOR PART 11. Please indicate the question number to which the comment corresponds.

  • Please type in the box below.

PART 12. SPECIAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES (SGEs)

54. How many Special Government Employees (SGEs) did your agency have, in total, during calendar year 2019? (If zero, skip to Additional Comments for this Part.)

  • Enter number
106

55. How many SGEs who were expected to serve for 60 days or less on a board, commission, or committee were required to receive Initial Ethics Training (IET) by December 31, 2019 (5 C.F.R. 2638.304(b)(2))?

  • Enter number
22

    a. How many of those SGEs received IET before or at the beginning of the first meeting?
22

    b. How many of those SGEs received IET after the first meeting?
0

    c. How many of those SGEs have not received IET as of today?
0

    • If applicable, please explain why some SGEs received IET after the first meeting or have yet to receive IET.

56. Report the number of SGE public and confidential financial disclosure reports required to be filed by December 31, 2019 and the number of reports actually filed by December 31, 2019.

Type of SGE
Confidential Reports
(OGE Form 450 or OGE- Approved Alternative Form)
Public Reports
(OGE Form 278e)
required
filed
required
filed
a. Advisory Committee Members (FACA)
86
86
0
0
b. Advisory Committee Members (non-FACA)
0
0
0
0
c. Experts/Consultants
6
6
11
10
d. Board Members
0
0
2
2
e. Commissioners
0
0
0
0
f. Other
0
0
1
1
TOTAL
92
92
14
13

    Example for new entrant and termination reports: If an employee joined/departed the agency on December 15, 2019, and filed a new entrant/termination report prior to the end of the calendar year, include the report in your required and filed numbers. If, on January 1, the employee has not filed a new entrant/termination report, do not count that report in your required numbers. Instead, include the employee in your 2020 questionnaire response to be filed in 2021.

  • If applicable, please explain discrepancies between the number of reports required to be filed and the actual number of reports filed.
    MAJCOM explained: One HQE-SM failed to file an annual OGE Form 278e, despite numerous attempts to contact him.

57. Note the number of SGE disclosure reports certified or otherwise closed during the calendar year. Of those reports, indicate how many were initially reviewed within 60 days and how many were certified within 60 days. “Initially reviewed within 60 days” means having completed a full technical review and conflicts analysis. See 5 C.F.R. 2634.605.

Confidential Reports
Public Reports
a. How many reports were certified or closed in 2019?
88
13
b. Of those certified/closed in 2019, how many were initially reviewed within 60 days?
73
10
c. Of those certified/closed within 2019, how many were certified/closed within 60 days?
73
7

  • If applicable, please explain why some reports were reviewed more than 60 days after submission.
    True answers to a,b,c: Confidential (a)=88, (b)=73, (c)=73. Public (a)=13, (b)=10, (c)=7 MAJCOMs provided the following explanations:
    • FACA Secretariat failed to deliver paper 450s with original signatures before the 60 day deadline lapsed.
    • Personnel shortages and turnover resulted in a lack of oversight.
    • Paper filers did not follow DOD protocol and have all original wet signatures on the paper form, resulting in a delay between submission and when the properly signed reports reach the certifier.

  • If applicable, please explain why some reports were certified/closed more than 60 days after submission. Check all that apply.
    additional information was being sought
    other (specify)

  • Specify Other
    MAJCOMs explained:
    • Filers failed to return a response to questions until the 60 day deadline had lapsed.
    • Supervisor failed to review and sign within the 60 day deadline.
    • Personnel shortages and turnover resulted in a lack of oversight.
    • Complex reports required additional time to review.
    • Paper filers did not follow DOD protocol and have all original wet signatures on the paper form, resulting in a delay between submission and when the properly signed reports reach the certifier.

58. Number of SGEs excluded from all or a portion of the confidential filing requirements per 5 CFR 2634.904(b).

  • Enter number
0

59. Extensions and late filing fees for SGE financial disclosure reports.

Granted filing extension
Granted waivers of late filing fee
Paid late filing fee
      a. Number of OGE Form 278e Reports
0
0
0

      b. Number of OGE Form 450 or OGE-Approved Alternative Forms
0

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FOR PART 12. Please indicate the question number to which the comment corresponds.

  • Additional Comments

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONNAIRE COMMENTS:

  • Additional Comments
    In the past, DAF compiled data through an online application that provided a scaled down questionnaire to all of the organizations in the DAF. Since submitting the 2018 report to OGE, both the then-Ethics Director, and the then-Ethics Counselor completing the annual agency report have departed the DAF. Upon the new Ethics Director and Ethics Counselor reviewing the online application, we realized that the questionnaire was static and outdated. Moreover, organizations throughout the DAF were inconsistently completing the reports at varying levels, sometimes resulting in double and triple counting of some reporting numbers, such as training, or, conversely, failing to report at all, because some organziations erroneously believed other organizations were reporting on their behalf. When the new Ethics Director and Ethics Counselor realized that any data received through that online application was unreliable,, we directed the field offices worldwide from utilizing the online application, and submitted OGE’s 2019 questionnaire to all of the MAJCOMs en toto. The MAJCOMs were then tasked with going down the chain of organizations within their command, and rolling that data up to the Air Force Ethics Office at Headquarters Air Force. We then consolidated the data for this report. With a massive agency like the Department of the Air Force, obtaining this detail of data remains challenging however, we believe the data provided in this report is as accurate and complete as possible. We understand that there are some marked differences between the data in the 2018 report and this report however, we attribute the differences to the flawed internal reporting system used in prior years. We will continue to refine the reporting process in future years to ensure consistently accurate and complete reporting in the future. We also have taken this opportunity to assess areas in our ethics program that require immediate attention, redress, and planning for long-term success. For instance, we will be working closely with the MAJCOMs to ensure that financial disclosure programs are meeting deadlines, personnel are being timely and properly trained, and new employees are being properly notified of their ethics obligations. As always, the DAF appreciates OGE’s assistance and guidance in running the most effective ethics program possible.

      OGE Form 450A
0
hidden element