Page:Professionalism within the Workforce.pdf/4

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

Executive Summary

The mission of the Secret Service contributes significantly to DHS's overarching goals of preventing terrorism and enhancing security, as well as safeguarding cyberspace and critical infrastructure. The protection of the President and Vice President, in particular, is central to the continuity of government and DHS's goal of reducing risk to the Nation's critical infrastructure, key leadership, and events.

To accomplish its mission, the Secret Service relies heavily on an exceptional workforce comprising special agents, Uniformed Division officers, and administrative, professional, and technical support staff. As with all organizations, the Secret Service is judged by the actions of our workforce. To that end, Secret Service employees are not only responsible for carrying out the mission of the organization, but also for carrying out that mission in a way that earns the trust and confidence of those we serve.

While professionalism is the responsibility of all employees, the Secret Service as an organization is responsible for providing the policies and mechanisms to reinforce it. Employee misconduct in Cartagena, Colombia, in April 2012, raised questions regarding whether the Secret Service was doing everything it could do to carry out its responsibility to support its employees and their professional development. To answer those questions, the Secret Service requested the assistance of the Professionalism Reinforcement Working Group (PRWG), which was established approximately 1 month following the incidents that occurred in Cartagena. This working group was co-chaired by former Director John Berry of the Office of Personnel Management and Director Connie Patrick of the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center. Over the course of 8 months, they, along with a number of subject matter experts, conducted a comprehensive and objective review of Secret Service human resource policies and procedures. At the conclusion of this review, the PRWG issued 17 recommendations, which the Secret Service accepted.

The two major recommendations made by the PRWG relating to discipline were (1) instituting a table of penalties that would instill greater transparency, consistency, and fairness to disciplinary processes; and (2) creating a standalone Office of Integrity (ITG). In November 2013, the Secret Service published the Table of Offense Codes and Penalty Guidelines (Table of Penalties)[1] and applied it to all future disciplinary proceedings. The Table of Penalties serves as a guide in determining appropriate corrective, disciplinary, or adverse actions for common offenses. The Secret Service established ITG[2] on December 1, 2013, which reports to the Deputy Director. ITG oversees adherence to the Secret Service's code of conduct by impartially adjudicating allegations of employee misconduct in a fair, consistent, and timely manner. The Chief Integrity Officer and the

  1. ↑ See Appendix A.
  2. ↑ See Appendix B.

iii

This article is issued from Wikisource. The text is available under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 unless otherwise noted. Additional terms may apply for the media files.