Nation, and we have usually an outside agency person-Department of Labor, Commerce, or Agriculture-who sits on those committees. So that I think an eminently fair reading of the individual's performance is given each year and the boards change each year.

As for your specific questions, I will be glad to respond to them in writing.

Mr. CROCKETT. What were the affirmative action goals for 1982, and to what extent has the Department reached them? And then I would like to know what the goals are for 1983.

Ms. CLARK. Thirty-six for junior officers, and 25 at the midlevel. Mr. CROCKETT. Is that for 1982?

Ms. CLARK. That is for 1982, the current fiscal year.

Mr. CROCKETT. And has that been achieved?

Ms. CLARK. We have not yet fully met the goals, but we anticipate doing so despite the fact that there has been a slowdown in employment. Nevertheless, the goals of affirmative action remain in effect. We anticipate we will get there.

Mr. CROCKETT. Is that slowdown attributable to budget reductions?

Ms. CLARK. The slowdown in the overall hiring is attributable to budget reductions, yes, sir.

Mr. CROCKETT. You do not have the goals available now for 1983? Ms. CLARK. Not yet, sir.

Mr. CROCKETT. Will you furnish those to me?

Ms. CLARK. We will furnish them to you as soon as we have them, sir.

Mr. CROCKETT. Can you also provide us with a little more breakdown on minority employment as it existed in October 1980 when the Foreign Service Act of 1980 became effective, and as it exists now?

Ms. CLARK. I will be glad to submit that to you, sir.

[The information referred to follows:]

Mr. CROCKETT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. FASCELL. Ms. Clark, how long have you been in the Service? Ms. CLARK. It will be 37 years on the 5th of July.

Mr. FASCELL. And what is the highest rank you have held?

Ms. CLARK. FSO-1 in the career Service and Ambassador abroad. Mr. FASCELL. Where were you Ambassador?

Ms. CLARK. To Malta.

Mr. FASCELL. How long did you serve there?

Ms. CLARK. Two years, sir.

Mr. FASCELL. How long have you been in your present position? Ms. CLARK. Since February 2, 1981. The groundhog and I emerged on the same day. [Laughter.]

Mr. FASCELL. I will not ask you whether you would rather be in the field or in Washington, we will skip that.

What about entrance today as far as the State Department is concerned under the new act? Do we still get in the same way we used to? I mean, what is the difference, if anything?

Ms. CLARK. Well, we think the test, the written examination, is a little broader.

Mr. FASCELL. It has been revised, has it, the entrance test?

Ms. CLARK. It has been revised. It tests general knowledge, English expression, and then usually the functional category in which the person may go. And there is an all-day assessment center which we find works out very well and better than the old oral boards.

Mr. FASCELL. What is an all-day assessment center? It sounds horrible. [Laughter.]

Ms. CLARK. Well, it has a group "in-basket" exercise and individual "in-basket" exercise; the writing of an essay, and there are four examiners, usually, in the room at the same time. Always in the case of minorities or a woman, there is a representative there. Mr. FASCELL. Doing what to whom? [Laughter.]

Ms. CLARK. Well, sometimes there are some interesting things. The candidates get together in the morning and they go over what it is they are going to be doing during the course of the exercise. Mr. FASCELL. Well, I passed my written exam and I walk into this big hall with a whole bunch of people?

Ms. CLARK. Yes.

Mr. FASCELL. And I have four inquisitors?

Ms. CLARK. You have four inquisitors; yes.

Mr. FASCELL. I see. And we start out over coffee, telling me what I am going to be doing during the day?

Ms. CLARK. Yes.

Mr. FASCELL. Which is what?

Ms. CLARK. You are going to be tested during the course of the day.

Mr. FASCELL. Yes, but I mean, how? In what manner, X's and O's, or how much coffee I can drink? [Laughter.]

Ms. CLARK. No, no X's and O's. You will be examined on general knowledge and you have established priorities out of an in-basket, for example, and then they watch for leadership ability in the group basket test.

I would like to invite you over there because you really have to see it in order to understand it.

Mr. FASCELL. I am asked a lot of questions, or I am not asked any questions? I do not understand, I am sorry.

Ms. CLARK. You are asked some questions, yes.

Mr. FASCELL. I am asked some questions.

Ms. CLARK. A general dialog.

Mr. FASCELL. Am I put through any kind of paces? I mean, is the determination made on how I stack my paper on my desk? What is it we are looking for? I do not understand. Does somebody want to take a shot at it?

Ms. CLARK. Mr. Steigman, my deputy.

Mr. FASCELL. All right.

STATEMENT OF ANDREW L. STEIGMAN, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR PERSONNEL, DEPARTMENT OF STATE

Mr. STEIGMAN. Mr. Chairman, the examining process has several aspects to it. You come in in the morning and one of the examiners explains to you what you are going to face.

Mr. FASCELL. I got that far. [Laughter.]

Mr. STEIGMAN. We will run you through a series of tests. One of them, as Ms. Clark mentioned, is an essay to make sure that you can organize your thoughts and put them down on paper. You are given a topic assigned to all the candidates on that day.

Mr. FASCELL. Everybody has the same topic?

Mr. STEIGMAN. Everybody has the same topic. They have a choice of two or three topics. They have to sit down. They have 45 minutes to write an essay.

Mr. FASCELL. Formulate something.

Mr. STEIGMAN. Formulate something on that subject.

Mr. FASCELL. There is no right or wrong.

Mr. STEIGMAN. No right or wrong.

Mr. FASCELL. Is grammar involved?

Mr. STEIGMAN. Yes, indeed.

Mr. FASCELL. Spelling?

Mr. STEIGMAN. Spelling, grammar.

Mr. FASCELL. Continuity, clarity. I mean, what are the guidelines on that essay?

Mr. STEIGMAN. How well you can put together your thoughts and express them in a decent English style.

Mr. FASCELL. In other words, if one of the interrogators can read it and understand it.

Mr. STEIGMAN. Then you may have done pretty well.

The second exercise starts out as an "in-basket." You are given a package of papers relating to a specific situation. Last year's situation was one in which you are told you have been hired as the new director of International House at a university, and you arrive for the first time. You have a couple of hours just to meet your staff and deal with pressing problems.

You are given a stack of papers which describes the problems confronting the new director. You have, I think, an hour and a half for that segment of the examination. You organize the material in there; draft answers to the most urgent letters; assign some of the problems to other members of the staff to take care of in the next

few days while you go and pack out of your old job. The conditions and the staffing pattern are defined for you.

How well can you organize priorities and deal with urgent work is tested.

The third part of it is a group negotiating exercise. Six candidates sit down in a room. Each one is given a sheet of paper, given some background on the country in which they are supposed to be assigned. This is an overseas set.

Each one has to present the case for funding a small AID project in that country. There are not enough funds to handle all six of the projects and you are told that at the start.

The question is, how well can these candidates work among themselves to decide on how they are going to allocate the available funds which cannot stretch to cover all the projects.

Each candidate is judged by the four examiners sitting in the corners of the room on effectiveness in initial presentation in defense of his or her project, and how well he or she interacts with the others in attempting to find a group solution to the problem. Then, the final element of the examination is the individual interview, which is a carryover from the old oral examination proc

ess.

Mr. FASCELL. One on one?

Mr. STEIGMAN. No. Either two or three examiners for the one candidate. The questions aked are not random questions, however, they are uniform questions asked of all candidates. I think they change questions each week. They have a list of, I think, 30 questions.

Mr. FASCELL. Designed primarily to elicit what?

Mr. STEIGMAN. To elicit a sense of how well the candidate can organize and present thoughts orally on a given subject.

Mr. FASCELL. How about personal characteristics, when are they determined?

Mr. STEIGMAN. They are judged in the course of the entire day's assessment. How well does the candidate carry himself or herself. How effectively do they interact with others.

Mr. FASCELL. How about sobriety, for example?

Mr. STEIGMAN. Anybody who came in falling on his or her face probably would not do too well in the exam.

Mr. FASCELL. I do not know. [Laughter.]

Mr. STEIGMAN. I did not say they had to come in necessarily cold sober, Mr. Chairman. Just if they fall down, they are probably out. [Laughter.]

Mr. FASCELL. Personal characteristics are determined simply by the observation in this group therapy, this 1-day session?

Mr. STEIGMAN. That, sir, plus of course the background investigation which is pursued of all passing candidates.

Mr. FASCELL. Background investigation-is that physical, psychological?

Mr. STEIGMAN. No, sir, this is essentially the security.

Mr. FASCELL. What does your neighbor think?

Mr. STEIGMAN. It is a security background investigation.

Mr. FASCELL. That is different?

Mr. STEIGMAN. That is separate, that is conducted on all candidates who pass the oral assessment.