State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

May 18, 2018 – July 7, 2021 R45203

State Department Personnel: Background and
July 7, 2021
Selected Issues for the 117th Congress
Cory R. Gill
Congress has played a significant role in the management of the Department of State’s
Analyst in Foreign Affairs
workforce since 1789, when it established the State Department pursuant to statute and

established salaries for the Secretary of State and other personnel. Beginning in the early
20th century, Congress passed a series of laws intended to address corruption and graft in
the State Department’s diplomatic and consular services by merging them into the
modern-day Foreign Service, a professional diplomatic corps. Today, the Foreign Service Act of 1980 (P.L. 96-
465) serves as the framework through which the Department of State organizes and administers the Foreign
Service. This law seeks to maintain and strengthen the Foreign Service’s status as a professional diplomatic corps,
providing for admission, appointment, promotion, and separation procedures that reflect merit principles and a
rank-in-person merit classification system. In addition, the Foreign Service Act includes a finding stating that “the
members of the Foreign Service should be representative of the American people,” and further provides that it
intends to foster “the development and vigorous implementation of policies and procedures, including affirmative
action programs” to encourage “entry into and advancement in the Foreign Service by persons from al segments
of American society.”
President Biden has stated his intention to leverage the State Department’s personnel to advance U.S. foreign
policy goals, saying that he wil work to empower department staff and incorporate their perspectives into the
policy development process. To date, much of the Biden Administration’s efforts in this area have focused on
improving the State Department’s diversity and inclusion programs and increasing the size of the Foreign Service
and Civil Service. However, in recent years several Members of Congress, former and current senior State
Department officials, academics and think-tank analysts, and other stakeholders have published reports
recommending that the State Department and Congress consider significant changes regarding the State
Department’s personnel practices, not only with respect to diversity and inclusion and personnel strength, but also
in several other areas including training and professional development opportunities for staff, Chief of Mission
authority, and persistent vacancies in senior State Department positions requiring the advice and consent of the
Senate, especial y ambassadorships. The proliferation of such proposals may reflect concerns among some that
the State Department needs to consider reforms to restore the foreign policymaking influence that some perceive
it to have lost to other government entities over the past several decades, including the National Security Council
and the Department of Defense.
In recent Congresses, Members have demonstrated interest in applying the legislative branch’s constitutional and
statutory authorities to shape policies pertaining to Department of State personnel. For example, in 2016 Congress
passed the Department of State Authorities Act, Fiscal Year 2017 (P.L. 114-323). This law provided new
authorities to the State Department on matters such as security training for personnel assigned to high-risk, high-
threat posts; compensation for local y employed staff; the expansion of opportunities for Civil Service personnel
to serve overseas; and means of lateral entry into the Foreign Service for mid-career professionals. The 117th
Congress is currently considering H.R. 1157, the Department of State Authorization Act of 2021 that, if enacted,
would weigh in on a wide variety of personnel matters, including diversity and inclusion, fil ing Foreign Service
vacancies, and workforce planning.

Congressional Research Service

State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

Introduction
The Biden Administration has indicated a commitment to “revitalizing the foreign policy
workforce” following what some view as a tumultuous period for the State Department’s
personnel.1 For example, the State Department Office of Inspector General’s (OIG) most recent
report identifying the department’s most significant management and performance chal enges
noted recent incidents that, according to the OIG, hindered some employees’ trust in the State
Department’s leadership. These included a case where the department “ended the detail of a
career employee [in the Office of the Secretary] after significant discussion concerning the
employee’s perceived political views, association with former administrations, and perceived
national origin.”2 The State Department’s Assistant Secretary of State for International
Organization Affairs and Chief of Protocol also resigned in November 2019 and June 2019,
respectively, following al egations involving the mistreatment of personnel and leadership and
management deficiencies.3 Additional y, in 2018 Congress directed the OIG to review the effects
of the State Department’s hiring freeze, which lasted from January 2017 through April 2018, on
the department’s operations.4 The OIG released its report in August 2019 and found, among other
conclusions, that implementation of the hiring freeze “was not guided by strategic goals,”
impacted the State Department’s capacity to address its most significant management chal enges,
and negatively affected workforce morale.5
Consistent with the Biden Administration’s broader commitment to strengthening the foreign
policy workforce, Secretary of State Antony Blinken has stated that he wil prioritize
“reinvorgat[ing] the [State] Department,” by “investing in its greatest asset: the Foreign Service
Officers, civil servants, and local y employed staff who animate American diplomacy around the
world.”6 Much of Secretary Blinken’s efforts to date have focused on addressing concerns
regarding the perceived lack of diversity in the State Department’s workforce, especial y with
regard to the Foreign Service, including through appointing Ambassador Gina Abercrombie-
Winstanley to serve as the State Department’s first Chief Diversity and Inclusion Officer (CDIO).
Additional y, as part of its FY2022 International Affairs budget request, the Biden Administration
is seeking funding for an additional 485 Foreign Service and Civil Service Officers to work in
areas such as countering Chinese, Russian, and Iranian malign influence; protecting U.S. critical
infrastructure; and advancing the Biden Administration’s science and technology priorities.7

1 U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification, Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs,
Fiscal Year 2022, at ht t ps://www.st at e.gov/wp-cont ent /uploads/2021/05/FY-2022-St ate_USAID-Congressional-Budget -
Justification.pdfm p. 17.
2 U.S. Department of State, Office of Inspector General Inspector General Statement on the Department of State’s Major Management
and Performance Challenges (FY 2020), OIG-EX-21-01, December 8, 2020, at ht t ps://www.st at eoig.gov/syst em/files/
fy_2020_ig_letter_on_department_management_challenges_final.pdf , pp. 15, 17.
3 Colum Lynch, “ Senior State Oficial Accused of Mismanagement to Step Down,” Foreign Policy, October 18, 2019, at
https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/10/18/pompeo-senior-diplomat-accused-of-mismanagement -to-step-down-
international-orgnizations/; Josh Lederman, “ Trump’s chief of protocol pulled off the job ahead of G-20,” NBC News, June 25,
2019, at ht t ps://www.nbcnews.com/polit ics/nat ional-securit y/t rump-s-chief-protocol-pulled-job-ahead-g-20-n1021781.
4 Joint Explanatory Statement Accompanying Division K of Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs
Appropriations Act, 2018 (Division K of P.L. 115-141 ), at https://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20180319/
DIV%20K%20SFROPSSOM%20FY18-OMNI.OCR.pdf, p. 9.
5 U.S. Department of State, Office of Inspector General, Review of the Effects of the Department of State Hiring Freeze, ISP-I-19-23,
August 2019, at ht t ps://www.st at eoig.gov/syst em/files/aud-mero-20-09.pdf, pp. 2-3.
6 Antony J. Blinken, “ Statement for the Record before the United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations,” January 19, 2021, at
https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/011921_Blinken_Testimony.pdf.
7 U.S. Department of State, “ FY2022 Budget Request: Department of State and USAID,” Slide Presentation, May 28, 2021, p. 14.
Congressional Research Service

1

State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

Members of the 117th Congress have demonstrated interest in leveraging their authorities to shape
policies pertaining to Department of State personnel. For example, Congress is currently
considering H.R. 1157, the Department of State Authorization Act of 2021 that, if enacted, would
weigh in on a wide variety of personnel matters, including diversity and inclusion, fil ing Foreign
Service vacancies, and workforce planning. Additional y, Members of Congress, former and
current senior State Department officials, academics and think-tank analysts, and other
stakeholders have published several reports with increased frequency over the past decade
recommending that the State Department and Congress consider significant changes regarding the
State Department’s personnel practices. Proposed changes address diversity and inclusion and
personnel strength, but also several other issues including training and professional development
opportunities for staff, Chief of Mission authority, and persistent vacancies in senior State
Department positions requiring the advice and consent of the Senate, especial y ambassadorships.
In some cases, these issues have persisted across many Administrations and may present
considerable chal enges should the Biden Administration and Congress seek remedies.
Background of the Department of State and the
Foreign Service
Congress established the Department of State in 1789 and prescribed an initial salary for the
Secretary of State, the department’s chief clerk, and other clerks employed by the department.
The department’s domestic staff was initial y extremely smal , consisting of only three clerks and
translators when Thomas Jefferson became Secretary of State in 1790 and expanding to 10 such
individuals by the conclusion of the 18th century.8 Similarly, U.S. diplomatic representation
abroad was fairly limited during this period—only two commissioned American diplomats were
present in Europe when President Washington was inaugurated in 1789. By 1797, the United
States maintained diplomatic relations with France, Great Britain, the Netherlands, Portugal, and
Spain, yet had only limited diplomatic ties with other countries, including Austria, Prussia,
Russia, and Sweden.9
The Emergence of a Professional Foreign Service and Key
Related Statutes10
For nearly 70 years subsequent to the founding of the Department of State in 1789, an individual
employee’s rank and salary were attached to a specific position. In practice, this meant that the
President appointed individuals to specific posts (frequently his political al ies) and, upon his own
determination, set the compensation that the individual would receive at that post. If a person was
sent to a subsequent overseas post, another appointment was required and a new compensation
level was established. Because of funding constraints, ministers at larger posts such as London
and Paris often had to spend their own funds to maintain their ability to provide representation,
limiting the scope of individuals capable of serving at such posts. Some observers refer to this
framework as the “spoils system” or a “patronage system.” When addressing the spoils system,
President Theodore Roosevelt reflected that

8 Elmer Plischke, U.S. Department of State: A Reference History (Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1999), p. 45.
9 Elmer Plischke, U.S. Department of State: A Reference History, pp. 46-47, 56.
10 This section draws on previous CRS analysis charting historical movement toward a merit -based diplomatic service. See CRS
Memo DL095495, The Foreign Service and the Senate’s advice and consent authority, by Kennon H. Nakamura.
Congressional Research Service

2

State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

[t]he spoils system of making appointments to and removals from office is so wholly and
unmixedly evil, is so emphatically un-American and undemocratic, and is so potent a force
for degradation in our public life, that it is difficult to believe that any intelligent man of
ordinary decency who has looked into the matter can be its advocate. As a matter of fact,
the arguments in favor of the merit system against the spoils system are not only
convincing; they are absolutely unanswerable.11
Congress codified compensation levels for individuals appointed to specific diplomatic and
consular positions beginning in 1855, in effect taking compensation determinations out of the
hands of the President. U.S. consuls were also provided, for the first time, with annual federal
salaries, the amount depending on where they were posted. However, the federal government
continued to staff its bureaucracy through the spoils system. Following the Civil War, difficulties
stemming from the spoils systems were becoming increasingly evident throughout the federal
government, including in the Department of State. It is reported that Secretary of State Hamilton
Fish (1869-1877) threatened President Ulysses Grant with his resignation if President Grant and
his political al ies did not stop interfering with the organization and operation of the department
and appointments of diplomats and consular officers.
Key Statutes Related to the Organization and Practices of the Modern Foreign
Service (in sequential order)
The Stone-Flood Act (P.L. 63-242). This law gave previous executive orders intended to address corruption
and graft and promote merit-based personnel practices within the diplomatic and consular services at the
Department of State the force of law. It gave “rank-in-person” personnel practices at the Department of State,
which stil persist today, the force of law for the first time.
The Rogers Act of 1924 (P.L. 68-135). This law merged the State Department’s diplomatic and consular
services into today’s modern Foreign Service and codified many personnel concepts that continue in some form
within the department. These include requirements that Foreign Service Officers be appointed fol owing their
passage of an examination and subsequent probationary employment period. This law also authorized the
President to establish a Foreign Service retirement and disability system to be administered by the Secretary of
State and provided for a mandatory retirement age.
The Foreign Service Act of 1946 (P.L. 79-724). According to the Office of the Historian of the Department
of State, this law “provided for improvements in assignments policy, promotion procedures, al owances and
benefits, home leave, and the retirement system.” It also sought to improve the administration of the Foreign
Service through creation of a new Director General of the Foreign Service and a Foreign Service Board. It further
authorized a new Board of Examiners tasked with maintaining the principle of competitive entrance into the
Foreign Service.
The Foreign Service Act of 1980 (P.L. 96-465). The Foreign Service Act of 1980 serves as the modern-day
framework through which the Department of State organizes and administers the Foreign Service. It seeks to
maintain and strengthen the Foreign Service’s status as a professional diplomatic corps, providing for admission,
appointment, promotion, and separation procedures that reflect merit principles and a rank-in-person merit
classification system. In addition, the law states that “the members of the Foreign Service should be representative
of the American people” and mandates that the Foreign Service carry out intensive recruitment efforts to facilitate
and encourage the entry into the Foreign Service of individuals who meet the rigorous requirements of the service
while ensuring that the Foreign Service reflects the cultural and ethnic diversity of the United States.
During this period, graft was found to be especial y rampant in the consular service. On
September 20, 1885, President Grover Cleveland issued an executive order placing the lower
grades of the consular service under a merit system with emphasis on “character, responsibility
and capacity” as criteria for appointment. President Theodore Roosevelt made efforts to
professionalize the diplomatic service, placing diplomatic officers under previous laws intended
to reform the Civil Service and creating a Board of Examiners tasked with developing an entrance

11 American Foreign Service Association, “ In the Beginning: The Rogers Act of 1924,” at http://www.afsa.org/beginning-rogers-
act-1924.
Congressional Research Service

3

State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

examination system testing knowledge of international law, diplomatic usage, and modern
language skills. It also was tasked with developing and overseeing a merit promotion system for
all diplomatic and consular positions except those of minister and ambassador. The Stone-Flood
Act (P.L 63-242, also known as “An Act for the Improvement of the Foreign Service”) was later
enacted in 1915, giving previous executive orders in this area the force of law. This law also
divided personnel into their own classes or grades for the first time, assigned salary levels to
classes or grades, and stated that appointments to a class “shal be by commission to the offices of
the secretary of embassy or legation, consul general, or consul, and not by commission to any
particular post.” This marked the first time that the “rank-in-person” concept was incorporated
into law for diplomatic personnel.
In addition to combining the U.S.
Rank-In-Person Merit Classification
diplomatic and consular services for
Rank-in-person is an approach to merit classification in the federal
the first time and establishing the
government under which an employee is ranked based on his or
modern Foreign Service, the Rogers
her education, skil s, and qualifications; experience; and professional
Act of 1924 (P.L. 68-135) included
accomplishments. It is in contrast to a rank-in-position merit
several provisions to further
classification system, which focuses on the duties and
professionalize the Foreign Service.
responsibilities of a position.
It defined a Foreign Service Officer
Source: See Harold H. Leich, “Rank in Man or Job? Both!,” Public
Administration Review, vol. 20, no. 2, Spring 1960, pp. 92-99, for a
as a “permanent officer in the
brief discussion of the history of both merit classification systems.
Foreign Service below the grade of
minister, al of whom are subject to
promotion on merit, and who may be assigned to duty in either the diplomatic or the consular
branch of the Foreign Service at the discretion of the President.” Furthermore, this law
 established grades and classes of Foreign Service Officers and established
salaries for those grades and classes;
 stated that appointments to the position of Foreign Service Officer shal be made
after examination and a suitable period of probation in an unclassified grade, or
after five years of continuous service in the Department of State by transfer to the
Foreign Service upon meeting the rules and regulations established by the
President;
 established that al appointments to the Foreign Service shal be by commission
to a class and not by commission to any particular post, and that a Foreign
Service Officer shal be assigned to a post and may be transferred by the
President from post to post depending upon the interests of the service;
 stated that Foreign Service Officers may be appointed as secretaries in the
diplomatic service or as consular officers or both and that any such appointment
shal be made by and with the advice and consent of the Senate; and
 authorized the President to establish a Foreign Service retirement and disability
system to be administered by the Secretary of State, and provided for a
mandatory retirement age of 65 with 15 years of service.
Congress worked to consolidate and revise laws pertaining to the administration of the Foreign
Service when it passed the Foreign Service Act of 1946 (P.L. 79-724). This law created a new
Director General of the Foreign Service and a Foreign Service Board with the intent of improving
the department’s administration of the Foreign Service, while a new Board of Examiners was
authorized and tasked with maintaining the principle of competitive entrance into the Foreign
Service. According to the Department of State, “the law also provided for improvements in
assignments policy, promotion procedures, al owances and benefits, home leave, and the
Congressional Research Service

4

State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

retirement system.”12 Congress did not pass significant new legislation to govern the Foreign
Service for several decades, until the Foreign Service Act of 1980 (P.L. 96-465) was enacted.
Among other measures, this law created a new Senior Foreign Service and reformed overseas
al owances and spousal rights.13 Selected aspects of this legislation are discussed in detail below.
Selected Professional Attributes of the Foreign Service Provided for
in the Foreign Service Act of 1980
Like the Foreign Service Act of 1946, the Foreign Service Act of 1980 sought to maintain and
strengthen the Foreign Service’s status as a professional diplomatic corps. The law provides for
admission, appointment, promotion, and separation procedures that reflect merit principles and a
rank-in-person merit classification system. Section 101 of the law reaffirms that “a career foreign
service, characterized by excel ence and professionalism, is essential in the national interest to
assist the President and the Secretary of State in conducting the foreign affairs of the United
States.” Section 105 provides that “al personnel actions with respect to career members and
career candidates in the service (including applicants for career candidate appointments) shal be
made in accordance with merit principles.”14
With specific regard to admission procedures, Section 301 requires the Secretary of State to
“prescribe, as appropriate, written, oral, physical, foreign language, and other examinations for
appointment to the service (other than as a chief of mission or ambassador at large).” In addition,
Section 211 requires the President to establish a Board of Examiners for the Foreign Service to
develop and supervise the administration of these examinations to candidates for appointment.
The President is required to appoint the Board’s 15 members, at least five of whom must “be
appointed from among individuals who are not Government employees and who shal be
qualified for service on the Board by virtue of their knowledge, experience, or training in the
fields of testing or equal employment opportunity.” The Board must be chaired by a member of
the Foreign Service. Individuals who pass the examinations and are admitted into the Foreign
Service are required to serve for a trial period that general y does not exceed five years under a
limited appointment prior to receiving a career appointment in the Foreign Service. Section 306
of the law requires that any decision by the Secretary of State to recommend that the President
give a career appointment to such an individual shal be informed “based upon the
recommendations of boards, established by the Secretary and composed entirely or primarily of
career members of the service, which shal evaluate the fitness and aptitude of career candidates
for the work of the service.”15
As with admission requirements and procedures, the Foreign Service Act of 1980 intends to
ensure that appointments processes preserve and bolster the Foreign Service’s status as a
professional organization. Section 302 provides the President the authority to, “by and with the
advice and consent of the Senate, appoint an individual as a chief of mission, as an ambassador at
large, as an ambassador, as a minister, as a career member of the Senior Foreign Service, or as a

12 U.S. Department of State, Ofice of the Historian, “ A Short History of the Department of State: A Changing Role for the Secretary,”
at ht t ps://hist ory.st ate.gov/depart menthistory/short-hist ory/secretary.
13 U.S. Department of State, Ofice of the Historian, “ A Short History of the Department of State: Landmark Departmental Reform, ”
at ht t ps://hist ory.st ate.gov/depart menthistory/short-hist ory/reforms/
14 According to Section 105(a)(2) of the Foreign Service Act, “ personnel action” means “ any appointment, promotion, assignment
(including assignment to any position or salary class), award of performance pay or special differential, within-class salary increase,
separation, or performance evaluation,” and any decision, recommendation, examination, or ranking provided for under this act which
relates to any such action previously referred to in subparagraph (A) of the section.
15 See Section 306 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980, as amended.
Congressional Research Service

5

link to page 9 link to page 17

State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

Foreign Service officer.” Section 301 clarifies that “an appointment as a Foreign Service officer is
a career appointment,” while Section 303 indicates that the Secretary of State’s appointment
authorities do not extend to the personnel categories specified for presidential appointments in
Section 302. Thus, al Foreign Service Officers (with the exception of some Senior Foreign
Service Officers) are career members of the Foreign Service, appointed by the President by and
with the advice and consent of the Senate, and typical y serve over the course of several
presidential administrations. Section 305 provides for authorized limited, noncareer appointments
to the Senior Foreign Service under certain circumstances.16
Sections 305 and 404 further stipulate that Foreign Service Officers and other personnel, and both
career and noncareer members of the Senior Foreign Service, shal be appointed to salary
classes—rather than to individual positions—that the Secretary of State is authorized to
establish.17 These provisions undergird the Foreign Service personnel system as a rank-in-person,
rather than rank-in-position, approach. Figure 1 il ustrates one recent pay schedule providing the
salary classes to which Foreign Service Officers are appointed and promoted.
Figure 1. Department of State 2020 Foreign Service Pay Schedule (Base Schedule)

Source: U.S. Department of State, 2020 Foreign Service Salary Schedule, Base Schedule, at https://www.state.gov/
wp-content/uploads/2019/12/2020-FS-Pay-Schedules-by-Locality.pdf. While the State Department has released
the 2021 Foreign Service Pay Schedule, CRS could not locate a single, comprehensive source outlining salaries
for both the Foreign Service and the Senior Foreign Service. To review the 2021 pay schedule, see U.S.
Department of State, Bureau of Global Talent Management, “FS Pay Schedules,” at https://www.state.gov/
resources-bureau-of-global-talent-management/.
This rank-in-person orientation of Foreign Service personnel practices is widely perceived as a
merit-based system. Inherent to the rank-in-person system are the “up or out rules,” which are

16 See the “ Senior Foreign Service” subsection for more detail regarding limited, noncareer appointments to the Senior Foreign
Service.
17 See Sections 305 and 404 of Foreign Service Act of 1980, as amended.
Congressional Research Service

6

State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

mandated in Section 607 the Foreign Service Act of 1980 (where they are known as “time-in-
class limitations”). These rules require that both career members of the Senior Foreign Service
and the Foreign Service are either promoted within a specified time period denoted for each
salary class (or a combination of salary classes) or are otherwise retired from the service if not
performing at an adequate level.18 The process the law prescribes for considering the promotion
of members of the Senior Foreign Service and the Foreign Service is also intended to promote
merit-based practices. Section 602 mandates the establishment of selection boards tasked with
evaluating the performance of these personnel through ranking the members of a salary class on
the basis of relative performance and making recommendations for personnel actions, including
promotion. The membership of selection boards is required to include public members and “a
substantial number of women and members of minority groups.”19 The law also requires that the
selection boards’ recommendations and rankings reflect “records of the character, ability, conduct,
quality of work, industry, experience, dependability, usefulness, and general performance of
members of the service.”20 Section 605 further provides that the Secretary of State shal make
promotions (and, with respect to career appointments into or within the Senior Foreign Service,
recommendations to the President for promotions) “in accordance with the rankings of the
selection boards.” It also provides the Secretary the authority to delay the promotion of an
individual designated for promotion on a selection board list or remove that individual from a list
in “special circumstances” provided for by department regulations.21
Final y, provisions of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 governing the separation of members from
the service for cause seek to further preserve the Foreign Service’s professional character and
ensure that individuals are not separated without due process. Section 610 provides that the
Secretary of State may “decide to separate any member from the service for such cause as wil
promote the efficiency of the service.” However, in most cases any member of the Foreign
Service serving under a career appointment or a limited appointment may not be separated on the
basis of misconduct until the member in question receives a hearing before the Foreign Service
Grievance Board and the Board decides that cause for separation has been established.22 The
Foreign Service Grievance Board is itself authorized in Section 1105 of the Foreign Service Act
of 1980. The law requires that its membership comprise individuals approved by the exclusive
representative (labor organization) representing Foreign Service employees and the department
itself; to further help ensure impartiality, five of board members are required by law not to be
department employees. It also authorizes the Foreign Service Grievance Board to intervene in
cases where it determines that the department is considering the involuntary separation of a
grievant for reasons other than cause. If the Foreign Service Grievance Board finds that a
grievant’s claim is valid, it is authorized to direct the Department of State to retain the member in
the service.23

18 See Section 607 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980, as amended.
19 See Section 602 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980, as amended.
20 See Section 603 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980, as amended.
21 See Section 605 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980, as amended.
22 As the law notes, the right to a hearing does not apply in cases where an individual “ has been convicted of a crime for which a
sentence of imprisonment of more than one year may be imposed.” The right to a hearing also does not apply to United States citizens
employed under Section 311 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980, as amended, who is not a family member of a government employee
assigned abroad.
23 See Sections 1105, 1106, and 1107 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980, as amended.
Congressional Research Service

7

link to page 12 State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

Department of State Personnel by Category
Department of State personnel can broadly be characterized as being employed in the Foreign
Service or the Civil Service; however, many categories therein are governed by various legal
authorities passed by Congress. With respect to the Foreign Service, such categories encompass
Chiefs of Mission, al U.S. diplomats serving at State Department posts abroad and in the United
States, the local y employed staff with management responsibilities important to the functioning
of overseas posts, and al other Foreign Service personnel. Therefore, should Congress seek to
weigh in on executive branch practices—including the admission, appointment, or promotion of
an official of the Department of State; the responsibilities or compensation afforded to a
department official; or the separation of an official from the Department of State—the means
through which it would do so depend on the employment category of the official in question and
its associated legal authorities.
Foreign Service Personnel
Both Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution and The Foreign Service Act of 1980 provide
Congress with substantial authorities with respect to the appointment, governance, and
administration of Foreign Service personnel. Article II, Section 2, al ows the President to appoint
Ambassadors by and with the advice and consent of the Senate in most circumstances;
additional y, Congress has invoked its constitutional authority to provide advice and consent for
“other public Ministers and Consuls” by explicitly requiring advice and consent for senior
Department of State officials, including positions typical y held by career Senior Foreign Service
and Foreign Service Officers.24
Furthermore, Congress authorized and defined the Foreign Service and its employees pursuant to
the Foreign Service Act of 1980.25 The Foreign Service Act of 1980 also placed within the
purview of Congress the admission, appointment, promotion, and separation procedures of the
Foreign Service. It authorized the Senior Foreign Service and the appointment of Foreign Service
Nationals, Eligible Family Members, and Consular Agents, and required that the Foreign Service
operate in a fashion consistent with merit principles. Table 1 makes note of categories of Foreign
Service personnel described in the FAM.
In other areas, the Foreign Service Act of 1980 gives more discretion to the executive branch. It
does not prescribe the five “cones” within which Foreign Service Officers work, nor does it
explicitly prescribe the titles for the Senior Foreign Service salary classes. In stil other cases, the
law provides for arrangements where responsibilities are shared by the legislative and executive
branch. For example, although the Foreign Service Act of 1980 requires candidates for the career
Foreign Service Officer to serve a trial period prior to their appointment, the department is
afforded flexibility to determine the duration and nature of the trial period.

24 For example, Section 208 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980, as amended, provides in part that “ the President shall appoint, by and
with the advice and consent of the Senate, a Director General of the Foreign Service, who shall be a current or former career member
of the Foreign Service.”
25 For example, see Sections 103 and 104 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980, as amended.
Congressional Research Service

8

State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

Table 1. Categories of Foreign Service Personnel
The Foreign Af airs Manual notes that there are several categories of Foreign Service Personnel.
A brief description of each of these personnel categories fol ows.
Category
Description
Ambassadors and
Ambassadors and ambassadors-at-large are appointed by the President, by and
Ambassadors-at-Large
with the advice and consent of the Senate (see Section 302(a)(1) of the Foreign
Service Act of 1980).
Career Ambassadors
In recognition of especial y distinguished service over a sustained period, the
President may, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, confer the
personal rank of career ambassador on a career member of the Senior Foreign
Service (see Section 302(a)(2)(A) of the Foreign Service Act of 1980).
Chiefs of Mission
Chiefs of Mission are principal officers appointed by the President, by and with the
advice and consent of the Senate, to be in charge of a diplomatic mission of the
United States or of a U.S. office abroad that is designated by the Secretary of State
as diplomatic in nature. Congress prescribes the key authorities of Chiefs of
Mission in Section 207 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 (22 U.S.C. 3927) Career
members of the service assigned by the President to serve as chargé d’affaires or
otherwise as the head of a mission or a U.S. office abroad that is designated by the
Secretary as diplomatic in nature for such periods as the public interest may
require are also considered to be Chiefs of Mission.
Consular Agents
Consular Agents provide consular and related services as authorized by the
Secretary of State at specified locations abroad. The Secretary under Section 303
of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 (22 U.S.C. 3943) general y appoints consular
agents. They may or may not be U.S. citizens, and they usual y serve in a part of
the host country that has no U.S. embassy or consulate representation. While they
help facilitate the adjudication of U.S. passport and visa applications, they lack the
authority of Consular Fel ows or entry level Foreign Service Officers to adjudicate
these applications independently.
Consular Fellows
Consular Fel ows are U.S. citizens hired under limited noncareer status (see
Section 309(a) of the Foreign Service Act of 1980) within the Foreign Service.
Their appointments do not exceed five years. They are assigned abroad primarily
as consular adjudicators for U.S. passport or visa applications, and may serve in
multiple locations, especial y where specific language skil s are required (currently
Arabic, Mandarin Chinese, Portuguese, Russian, or Spanish). Consular Fel ows
perform functions similar to those of an entry-level Foreign Service Officer in a
consular section overseas.
Foreign Service Officers
Foreign Service Officers are U.S. citizens who hold career appointments and have
general responsibility for carrying out the functions of the service. Foreign Service
Officers are appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the
Senate (see Section 302(a)(1) of the Foreign Service Act of 1980) after having
served under a limited appointment as a career candidate (see Section 306 of the
Foreign Service Act of 1980).
Foreign Service
Foreign Service Specialists are U.S. citizens appointed by the Secretary under
Specialists
Section 303 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980. They provide special skil s and
services required for effective performance by the service.
Locally Employed Staff
Local y Employed Staff (LE Staff) are foreign nationals and legal y resident U.S.
citizens employed at a Foreign Service post abroad by a U.S. government agency
that is under Chief of Mission authority. See 3 FAM 7210 for further guidance on
employment of LE staff.
Congressional Research Service

9

State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

Category
Description
Senior Foreign Service
Members of the Senior Foreign Service (FE) are the corps of senior leaders and
experts for the management of the service and the performance of its functions.
Senior career members are appointed by the President, with the advice and
consent of the Senate, usual y through the promotion of career members of the
Foreign Service (see Section 302(a)(1) of the Foreign Service Act of 1980).
Noncareer and career candidate appointments are made by the Secretary and are
limited duration (see Sections 303 and 309 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980).
Source: U.S. Department of State, Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM), “Categories of Foreign Service Personnel,” 3
FAM 2230, at https://fam.state.gov/; U.S. Department of State, Consular Fel ows Program, “What We Do,” at
https://careers.state.gov/work/foreign-service/consular-fellows/what-we-do/.
Ambassadors, Chiefs of Mission, and Ambassadors-at-Large
The Department of State’s Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM) prescribes several categories of
Foreign Service personnel. Among the most senior Foreign Service personnel identified in the
FAM are Ambassadors and Ambassadors-at-Large. Section 302(a) of the Foreign Service Act of
1980 requires that the President appoint Ambassadors and Ambassadors-at-Large by and with the
advice and consent of the Senate in nearly al circumstances; the President can circumvent the
Senate only with respect to conferring the personal rank of ambassador on an individual in
connection with a special, temporary mission for the President not exceeding six months in
duration and, separately, through the use of recess appointments.26
U.S. ambassadors who lead U.S. embassies abroad and ambassadors who head other official U.S.
missions are usual y appointed by the President as the “Chief of Mission” (COM), which is the
title conferred on the principal officer in charge of each U.S. diplomatic mission to a foreign
country, foreign territory, or international organization. Each COM thus serves as the President’s
personal representative, leading diplomatic efforts for a particular mission or in the country of
assignment under the general supervision of the Secretary of State and with the support of the
regional assistant secretary of state. While Congress has vested several authorities in COMs
pursuant to Section 207 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 and other laws, COM authority is also
shaped through executive branch directives and regulations, including Presidential Letters of
Instruction, Executive Orders, and State Department regulations.27 The Section 207 authorities
entail:
 exercising full responsibility for the direction, coordination, and supervision of al
Government executive branch employees in that country (except for Voice of America
correspondents on official assignment and employees under the command of a United
States area military commander);
 keeping fully and currently informed with respect to al activities and operations
of the Government within that country, and insuring that al Government
executive branch employees in that country (except for Voice of America
correspondents on official assignment and employees under the command of a
United States area military commander) comply fully with al applicable
directives of the chief of mission;

26 The President’s authority to make recess appointments is derived from Article II, Section 2, clause 3 of the U.S. Constitutio n.
27 For more information on COM authority, see CRS Report R43422, U.S. Diplomatic Missions: Background and Issues on
Chief of Mission (COM) Authority, by Matthew C. Weed and Nina M. Serafino . Others laws, as codified, through which
Congress has vested authorities in Chiefs of Mission include 8 U.S.C. §1157 and 22 U.S.C §2656i.
Congressional Research Service

10

link to page 14 State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

 promoting United States goods and services for export to such country; and
 promoting United States economic and commercial interests in such country.28
While Section 304 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 provides that “positions as chief of mission
should normal y be accorded to career members of the [Foreign] Service,” the President is not
required to appoint exclusively career Foreign Service Officers as COMs. In most recent
Administrations, approximately 70% of appointees to U.S. ambassadorships have been career
Foreign Service Officers, while the remainder have been non-career (political) appointees.29
President Trump chose to appoint a greater proportion of political appointees, which comprised
around 44% of his ambassador appointments.30 Section 401 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980
authorizes the President to compensate COMs at one of the annual rates payable for levels II
through V of the Executive Schedule, with some conditions.
Ambassadors-at-Large, on the other hand, are “appointed by the President and serve anywhere in
the world to help with emergent problems, to conduct special or intensive negotiations, or serve
in other capacities, as requested by the Secretary or the President.”31 Al individuals currently
serving at the rank of Ambassador-at-Large are based in Washington DC (see Table 2), and none
are therefore currently employed as COMs abroad. Ambassadors-at-Large general y rank
immediately below assistant secretaries of state in terms of protocol. They are perceived within
the department as managers of crucial yet narrow issues, while assistant secretaries have much
broader responsibilities.32
Table 2. Positions at the Rank of Ambassador-at-Large in the
Department of State
(as of May 2021)
Position Title
Authorization Source
Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women’s
Presidential Memo of Jan. 30, 2013 (78 F.R. 7989).
Issues
Ambassador-at-Large for International
22 U.S.C. §6411; International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 (P.L.
Religious Freedom
105-292), as amended.
Ambassador-at-Large to Monitor and
22 U.S.C. §7103(e); Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection
Combat Trafficking in Persons
Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-386), as amended.
Ambassador-at-Large for Global Criminal
Department of State general authorities; statutory responsibilities
Justice
later prescribed in 22 U.S.C. §8213(a); Implementing
Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (P.L. 110-
53), as amended.
Coordinator for Counterterrorism
22 U.S.C. §2651a(e); State Department Basic Authorities Act of
1956 (P.L. 84-885), as amended.
U.S. Global AIDS Coordinator and Special
22 U.S.C. §2651a(f); State Department Basic Authorities Act of
Representative for Global Health
1956 (P.L. 84-885), as amended.
Diplomacy
Source: U.S. Department of State, Organizational Chart, May 2021, at https://www.state.gov/wp-content/
uploads/2021/06/DOS-Org-Chart-May-2021.pdf.

28 See Section 207 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980, as amended.
29 Dave Seminara, “ In U.S., Selling Ambassadorships to Highest Bidder Has Long History,” Washington Diplomat,
February 28, 2013, at https://washdiplomat.com/in-us-selling-ambassadorships-to-highest -bidder-has-long-history/.
30 American Foreign Service Association, “ Appointments - Donald J. Trump,” at https://afsa.org/appointments-donald-j-trump.
31 U.S. Department of State, Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM), “ Generic Responsibilities,” 1 FAM 014.4, at https://fam.state.gov/.
32 Conversation between CRS staff and Department of State officials.
Congressional Research Service

11

link to page 16 State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

Foreign Service Officers
Foreign Service Officers are U.S. diplomats who serve in one of five career tracks, or “cones,”
within the Foreign Service: consular, economic, management, political, and public diplomacy.33
These cones, which are not provided for in statute, are described in more detail in Table 3.
Foreign Service Officers are also referred to by the Department of State as “Foreign Service
Generalists,” a term that does not appear in the Foreign Service Act of 1980.34 The term
“generalist” derives from the view that Foreign Service Officers should be sufficiently flexible to
accept a variety of assignments and effectively transfer their skil s successfully across different
jobs.35 According to the Department of State’s website, “the mission of a U.S. diplomat in the
Foreign Service is to promote peace, support prosperity, and protect American citizens while
advancing the interests of the U.S. abroad.”36
As previously noted, Section 302 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 authorizes the President to
appoint individuals as Foreign Service Officers, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate,
after such individuals serve under a limited appointment as a career candidate for a trial period of
service prescribed by the Secretary of State.37 The trial period of service for Foreign Service
Generalist Career Candidates general y does not exceed five years.38 The Foreign Service Act of
1980 also authorizes the Secretary of State to establish a Foreign Service Schedule consisting of
nine salary classes, which is used to compensate Foreign Service Officers. The Foreign Service
Act of 1980 also (1) serves as the basis through which Foreign Service Officers are promoted (in
other words, they are promoted from one salary class to the next rather than from one single
position to another; see Sections 404 and 601 of the law); (2) codifies the process through which
Foreign Service Officers are promoted in a way that seeks to ensure conformity with merit
principles and the overal needs of the Foreign Service; and (3) governs the process to which the
Secretary of State and other department officials must adhere when seeking to separate a Foreign
Service Officer from the Foreign Service for cause.39

33 U.S. Department of State, “ Foreign Service Oficer: Career,” at https://careers.state.gov/work/foreign-service/officer/.
34 Some oppose the use of the term “ Foreign Service Generalist.” For example, the American Academy of Diplomacy, in its 2015
report titled American Diplomacy at Risk, made the following argument: “ For many years, officials in management and HR have been
un-naming the Foreign Service and in effect decommissioning Foreign Service Officers by the use and non-use of language. Foreign
Service Oficers have been renamed ‘Foreign Service Generalists’ or just ‘Generalists’ in official Department literature and parlance.
The phrases ‘Foreign Service Oficer and ‘FSO’ are being removed from the State lexicon and replaced with the more general ‘S tate
Department Oficial’ for public use and the technical personnel term ‘Generalist’ in internal documentation. The term ‘Foreign
Service’ as a professional cadre is now rarely mentioned.” The Department of State refuted the characterization. See American
Academy of Diplomacy, American Diplomacy at Risk, April 2015, p. 24. For the State Department’s refutation, see Joe Davidson,
“ Foreign Service officers fear State Dept. wants to define them away,” Washington Post, April 2, 2015.
35 William I. Bacchus, Staffing for Foreign Affairs: Personnel Systems for the 1980’s and 1990’s, (New Jersey: Princeton University
Press, 1983), p. 132.
36 U.S. Department of State, “ Foreign Service Oficer,” at https://careers.state.gov/work/foreign-service/officer/.
37 See Sections 302(a) and 306 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 (P.L. 96-465), as amended.
38 Section 309 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 provides that limited appointments cannot exceed five years except in limited
circumstances. The Foreign Service Officer Career Candidate Program is addressed by 3 FAM 2242.3, which notes that “ career
candidates are on a five-year limited appointment that generally cannot be extended.”
39 Compensation matters are addressed throughout the Foreign Service Act of 1980 (P.L. 96-465), as amended, including in Sections
403, 404, 406, 412, and 414. For the promotion of Foreign Service Officer, see Chapter 6 of the Foreign Service Act, including
Sections 601, 602, 603, and 605. Separation for cause issues are addressed in Section 610, while separation for other reasons is
addressed in Section 1106.
Congressional Research Service

12

State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

Table 3. Foreign Service Officer Cones
Cone Title
Description
Consular Officer
The responsibilities of Consular Officers include combatting fraud, facilitating
adoptions, and helping evacuate Americans from disasters abroad.
Economic Officer
Economic Officers work with foreign governments and other U.S. government agencies
on technology, science, economic, trade, energy, and environmental issues both
domestical y and overseas.
Management
Management Officers are responsible for al embassy operations, which range from real
Officer
estate property management to embassy budgetary issues.
Political Officer
Political Officers analyze host country political events and engage with foreign
government officials at al levels.
Public Diplomacy
Public Diplomacy Officers engage, inform, and influence opinion leaders, local
Officer
nongovernmental groups, academics, think tanks, government officials, and the ful
range of civil society in order to promote mutual understanding and support for U.S.
goals.
Source: U.S. Department of State, “Career Tracks for Foreign Service Officers,” at https://careers.state.gov/
work/foreign-service/officer/career-tracks/.
Foreign Service Specialists
Foreign Service Specialists “provide important technical, management, healthcare or
administrative services” at both Department of State posts in the United States and those
overseas.40 Unlike Foreign Service Officers, Foreign Service Specialists are not presidential
appointees. Instead, the Secretary of State appoints Foreign Service Specialists pursuant to the
authorities conferred by Section 303 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980.41 There are 19 different
specialist jobs grouped into the following categories: administration, construction engineering,
facility management, information technology, international information and English language
programs, law enforcement and security, medical and health, and office management.42 The
Department of State created these job categories; they are not provided for in law.
The Department of State administers a career candidate program for Foreign Service Specialists
separate from the aforementioned career candidate program for Foreign Service Officers. The
trial period for such appointees general y does not exceed four years.43 As Foreign Service
Specialists are assigned to positions on the Foreign Service Schedule, they are compensated
through the same means as Foreign Service Officers. Foreign Service Specialists serve under
career or limited appointments and are entitled to the same statutory protections as Foreign
Service Officers should the Secretary of State seek to separate a Foreign Service Specialist for
cause from the Foreign Service.44

40 U.S. Department of State, “ Foreign Service Specialist,” at https://careers.state.gov/work/foreign-service/specialist/.
41 The status of Foreign Service Specialists as career members of the Foreign Service appointed under Section 303 of the Foreign
Service Act is noted in 3 FAM 2234.1(b).
42 U.S. Department of State, “ Foreign Service Specialist,” at https://careers.state.gov/work/foreign-service/specialist/career-
tracks.
43 See Section 309 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 (P.L. 96-465), as amended; U.S. Department of State, Foreign Affairs Manual
(FAM), “ General Provisions,” 3 FAM 2251.3, at ht t ps://fam.st at e.gov/.
44 The status of Foreign Service Specialists as career members of the Foreign Service is noted in 3 FAM 2234.1(b). Section
610(a)(2)(A) of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 (P.L. 96-465), as amended, which governs the separation for cause process, indicates
that it applies to individuals serving under a career or limited appointment.
Congressional Research Service

13

State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

Senior Foreign Service
The Foreign Service Act of 1980 established a Senior Foreign Service (SFS), which serves as “the
corps of senior leaders and experts for the management of the service and the performance of its
functions.”45 The SFS was created to address what at the time was viewed by some as a glut of
senior officers in the Department of State, which exceeded the number of senior positions
available. Congress intended for entrance standards into the SFS to be higher than those
previously applied for promotion into the senior ranks. More stringent entrance standards and
time-in-class limitations were intended to ensure that the ranks of the Senior Foreign Service did
not become bloated and corresponded more closely to the number of available senior-level posts.
Moreover, the time-in-class limitations curtailed the amount of time that Foreign Service Officers
had to secure promotion to the SFS, as wel as the amount of time that career Senior Foreign
Service Officers had to be promoted to the next available grade within the SFS. (If an officer
exceeds these time-in-class limitations, he or she is required to be retired from the Foreign
Service.)46
The President is authorized to appoint career members of the SFS, by and with the advice and
consent of the Senate, by Section 302 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980. Section 302 also
authorizes the President to confer the personal rank of career ambassador upon a career member
of the SFS, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, “in recognition of especial y
distinguished service over a sustained period.” The Secretary of State is authorized to make
limited, noncareer appointments to the SFS pursuant to Section 303 of the Foreign Service Act of
1980, but Section 305 prohibits the Secretary from making a limited appointment if it would
“cause the number of members of the Senior Foreign Service serving under limited appointments
to exceed 5 percent of the total number of members of the Senior Foreign Service,” with some
exceptions.47
Section 402 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 requires the President to prescribe salary classes
for the SFS and appropriate titles and ranges of basic salary rates for each class. The three salary
classes and titles so prescribed are, in ascending order, those of Counselor, Minister-Counselor,
and Career Minister. As with the Foreign Service, promotion within the Senior Foreign Service
comprises one’s placement from one salary class to the next; promotion is not based on
movement from one single position to the next.
Locally Employed Staff
As of December 31, 2020, the Department of State employed 50,451 individuals classified as
Local y Employed Staff (LES), who comprise approximately 66% of total State Department
personnel.48 LESs include several subcategories of employees, including Foreign Service
Nationals (FSNs), Appointment Eligible Family Members (or AEFMs, categorized as local y-

45 U.S. Department of State, Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM), “ Senior Foreign Service,” 3 FAM 2233, at https://fam.state.gov/.
46 See Section 607 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980, as amended; also see U.S. Department of State, Ofice of the Historian, “ A
Short History of the Department of State: Landmark Departmental Reform,” at ht t ps://hist ory.state.gov/department hist ory/short-
history/reforms/.
47 See Section 305 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980, as amended
48 U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Global T alent Management, “ HR Fact Sheet: Facts About Our Most Valuable
Asset – Our People,” fact sheet, December 31, 2020, at https://www.afsa.org/sites/default/files/
1220_state_dept_hr_factsheet.pdf.
Congressional Research Service

14

State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

employed staff for some but not al purposes), local y resident U.S. citizens, and third-country
nationals.49 FSNs and AEFMs are discussed in more detail below.
Foreign Service Nationals (FSNs)
The Department of State’s website notes that LES, including FSNs, provide an important source
of continuity to each overseas post as American citizen employees rotate in and out, and that the
department “depend[s] heavily on [them], frequently delegating to them significant management
roles and program functions.”50 The Foreign Service Act of 1980 authorizes the Secretary of State
to appoint foreign national employees and states that foreign nationals who provide “clerical,
administrative, technical, fiscal, and other support at Foreign Service posts abroad” shal be
considered members of the Foreign Service.”51 FSNs are appointed by individual overseas
posts.52 They are hired under local compensation plans established by the Secretary of State and
based on prevailing wage rates and compensation practices for corresponding types of positions
in the locality of employment, as provided by Section 408 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980.
The department’s Office of Overseas Employment, located in the Bureau of Global Talent
Management, is responsible for developing and implementing human resources policies
pertaining to FSNs at overseas posts, including matters regarding recruitment, position
evaluation, and compensation.53
Appointment Eligible Family Members (AEFMs)
Section 311(a) of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 authorizes the Secretary of State to appoint
“United States citizens, who are family members of government employees assigned abroad or
are hired for service at their post of residence, for employment in positions customarily fil ed by
Foreign Service officers, Foreign Service personnel, and foreign national employees.” It further
provides that family members appointed under this provision shal be compensated in ac cordance
with the Foreign Service Schedule or at lower rates that the Secretary of State is authorized to
establish pursuant to Section 407 of the law.54
The Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM) clarifies that in order to be considered an AEFM, one must be
a U.S. citizen, the spouse or domestic partner of a sponsoring employee, listed on the travel
orders or approved Foreign Service Residence and Dependency Report of a sponsoring employee,
and residing at the sponsoring employee’s post of assignment abroad.55 The Department of State
can employ AEFMs through family member appointments, which are limited, non-career
appointments that exceed one year but are no longer than five years and can be extended or
renewed pursuant to Section 309 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980. AEFMs can also be
employed through temporary appointments that Section 309 provides shal last for one year or
less.56

49 According to 6 FAH 5 H-352.2, AEFMs are counted as locally employed staff for some, but not all, purposes.
50 U.S. Department of State, “ Local Employment in U.S. Embassies and Consulates,” at https://careers.state.gov/work/foreign-
service/local-employment/.
51 See Section 103 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980, as amended.
52 U.S. Department of State, Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM), “ Appointment,” 3 FAM 7240, at https://fam.state.gov/.
53 U.S. Department of State, “ Local Employment in U.S. Embassies and Consulates,” at https://careers.state.gov/work/foreign-
service/local-employment/.
54 See Section 408 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980, as amended.
55 U.S. Department of State, Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM), “ Definitions,” 3 FAM 7121, at https://fam.state.gov/
56 Ibid; also see Section 309 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980, as amended.
Congressional Research Service

15

link to page 19 State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

Civil Service Personnel
The Department of State employed 10,639 Civil Service (CS) employees as of December 31,
2020.57 These employees are among the 2.09 mil ion civilian non-postal employees that the
federal government employs.58 According to the Department of State, the “Civil Service corps,
most of whom are headquartered in Washington, D.C., is involved in virtual y every policy and
management area – from democracy and human rights, to narcotics control, trade, and
environmental issues. Civil Service employees also serve as the domestic counterpart to Foreign
Service consular officers who issue passports and assist U.S. citizens overseas.”59 Table 4 shows
the 11 Civil Service job categories within the department and describes each category.
Table 4. Department of State Civil Service Job Categories
Job Category
Description
Budget Administration
Perform, advise on, or supervise work in any of the phases of budget
administration when such work requires knowledge and skil in applying budget-
related laws, regulations, policies, precedents, methods, and techniques
Contract Procurement
Manage, supervise, perform, or develop policies and procedures for professional
work involving the procurement of supplies, services, construction, or research
and development using formal advertising or negotiation procedures; the
evaluation of contract price proposals; and the administration or termination and
close out of contracts
Foreign Affairs
Advise on, administer, supervise, or perform research or other professional and
scientific work in the formulation and direction of foreign affairs or in the study
and disposition of information impacting international relations
Foreign Language and
Apply expertise in second language acquisition, applied linguistics, and foreign
Professional Training
language and adult education in the training of U.S. diplomats
General Accounting and
Perform, supervise, or manage administrative work of a fiscal, financial
Administration
management, accounting, or budgetary nature, as wel as advise on or administer,
supervise, or perform professional accounting work
Human Resources
Manage, supervise, administer, advise on, or deliver human resources management
products or services, including special areas of focus such as Information Systems,
Classification, Compensation, Recruitment and/or Placement, Employee Benefits,
Human Resource Development, Performance Management, Labor Relations, and
Employee Relations
Information Technology
Manage, supervise, lead, administer, develop, deliver, and support information
Management
technology systems and services
Legal Counsel
Prepare cases for trial and/or trial of cases before a court or an administrative
body or persons having quasi-judicial power; render legal advice and services with
respect to questions, regulations, practices, or other matters fal ing within the
department’s purview

57 U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Global T alent Management, “ HR Fact Sheet: Facts About Our Most Valuable
Asset – Our People,” fact sheet, December 31, 2020, at https://www.afsa.org/sites/default/files/
1220_state_dept_hr_factsheet.pdf.
58 Ofice of Personnel Management, “ Profile of Federal Civilian Non-Postal Employees,” at https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-
oversight/data-analysis-documentation/federal-employment-reports/reports-publications/profile-of-federal-civilian-non-
postal-employees/, accessed June 28, 2021.
59 U.S. Department of State, Fiscal Year 2020 Agency Financial Report, at https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/
FY-2020-Agency-Financial-Report.pdf, p. 8.
Congressional Research Service

16

State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

Job Category
Description
Management Analysis
Evaluate the effectiveness of department programs and operations or the
productivity and efficiency of the management of the U.S. Department of State
Passport Visa Services
Manage, supervise, or perform administrative work concerned with adjudicating
applications for United States passports or visas, including related work involving
determining citizenship or fitness of noncitizens for admission to the United States
Public Affairs
Administer, supervise, or perform work involved in establishing and maintaining
mutual communication between the department and the general public or various
other pertinent publics including internal or external, foreign or domestic
audiences
Source: U.S. Department of State, “Civil Service Job Categories,” at https://careers.state.gov/work/civil-service/
job-categories/.
Selected Issues for Congress
Members of Congress, former and current senior State Department officials, academics and think-
tank analysts, and other stakeholders have long maintained an interest in personnel matters at the
Department of State. Issues concerning State Department personnel, including but not limited to
those discussed below, are frequently highlighted in reports and analyses concerning broader
potential efforts to reorganize or reform the department. Several such reports have been released
over the past year, including those published by the Council on Foreign Relations, the Harvard
Kennedy School, and the Truman Center.60 In general, these and other reports maintain that
efforts to strengthen the capacity of the State Department’s personnel to advance U.S. foreign
policy and national security goals must be holistic in scope and recognize the interrelated nature
of existing management chal enges. For example, some analysts who have expressed concern
regarding the absence of mid-level entry programs in the Foreign Service recommend that the
State Department leverage such programs to simultaneously target mid-career professionals from
racial and ethnic groups that are currently underrepresented in the department’s workforce, and
those with requisite expertise to fil previously unanticipated mid-level skil gaps in areas such as
science and technology. Similarly, analysts note persistent overseas Foreign Service vacancies
may contribute to difficulties that the State Department’s Chiefs of Mission currently face in
exercising their statutory authorities. Thus, efforts to expand the size of the Foreign Service
workforce or fil these vacancies through other means, such as Civil Service overseas rotation
programs, might also enhance the ability of COMs to direct and coordinate U.S. government
activities abroad.
To date, the 117th Congress’s engagement on State Department personnel matters has focused in
large part on diversity and inclusion issues. For example, in May 2021 the House of
Representatives passed H.R. 1157, the Department of State Authorization Act of 2021, which
includes several provisions regarding diversity and inclusion matters, including measures
affecting the State Department’s recruiting, training, and promotion practices. Members have also
introduced several additional bil s focused on this topic.61 The 117th Congress is also considering

60 Uzra S. Zeya, and John Finer, Revitalizing the State Department and American Diplomacy, Council on Foreign Relations,
November 2020, at ht t ps://www.cfr.org/report /revit alizing-st at e-department-and-american-diplomacy; Amb. Nicolas Burns,
Amb. Marc Grossman, and Amb. Marcie Ries, A U.S. Diplomatic Service for the 21st Century, Harvard Kennedy School: Belfer
Center for Science and International Affairs, November 2020, at ht t ps://www.hks.harvard.edu/publicat ions/us-diplomat ic-
service-21st -century; Truman Center, Transforming State: Pathways to a More Just, Equitable, and Innovative Institution, March
2021, at ht t p://t rumancenter.org/ideas/t ask-force-report-t ransforming-the-state-department/.
61 For example, see S. 599 and H.R. 1096.
Congressional Research Service

17

link to page 22 link to page 22 State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

the Biden Administration’s FY2022 International Affairs budget request, which includes a cal for
funding to support the hiring of an additional 485 Foreign Service and Civil Service Officers at
the State Department. The below sections examine the state of play regarding these and other
issues, including recent congressional activity and potential policy options.
Diversity and Inclusion
Successive Secretaries of State and other senior State Department officials, regardless of
Administration or political affiliation, have stated the importance of a diverse State Department
workforce. In 2002, Colin Powel , the first Black Secretary of State, remarked that “[t]o advance
America’s values and interests today, we must draw on the talents and the knowledge and
experience of the widest possible range of Americans. The diversity of our diplomats can help us
make the case al around the globe that the keys to a better future are ... societies where citizens
are equal under the law, and in which their contributions are valued.”62 Similarly, Secretary of
State Antony Blinken has asserted that “[b]ecause we’re operating in a diverse world, and
America’s diversity is a source of strength that few countries can match, when we fail to build a
team that reflects America, it’s like we’re engaging the world with one arm tied behind our
back.”63 The Foreign Service Act also includes multiple provisions addressing diversity. For
example, Section 101 includes a finding stating that “the members of the Foreign Service should
be representative of the American people,” and further provides that the law intends to foster “the
development and vigorous implementation of policies and procedures, including affirmative
action programs” to encourage “entry into and advancement in the Foreign Service by persons
from al segments of American society.”
Many stakeholders, including Secretary Blinken and some Members of Congress, argue that the
State Department has long failed to make necessary progress on workforce diversity and
inclusion efforts. For example, Secretary Blinken observed that a January 2020 Government
Accountability Office (GAO) report on diversity in the State Department’s workforce revealed
lower rates of promotion for racial and ethnic minorities and commented on what he perceived to
be “the alarming lack of diversity at the highest levels of the State Department” (see Figure 2 and
Figure 3).64 However, programs to promote diversity and inclusion sometimes face opposition.
Broadly, critics have argued that categorizing Americans by race, ethnicity, and other means of
differentiation, although sometimes required by equal opportunity laws, fosters “identity politics”
that encourage people to focus on individual differences rather than common national and agency
interests.65 Additional y, some experts have argued that diversity training within organizations
creates an “us versus them” response in many people that may actual y increase discrimination.66

62 Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, “ Remarks with Distinguished Guests at Ceremony Announcing Grant to Howard
Universit y,” May 17, 2002, at https://2001-2009.state.gov/secretary/former/powell/remarks/2002/10287.htm.
63 U.S. Department of State, Ofice of the Spokesperson, “ At the Announcement of Ambassador Gina Abercrombie-Winstanley as
Chief Diversity and Inclusion Oficer,” April 12, 2021, at https://www.state.gov/secretary-antony-j-blinken-at-the-
announcement -of-ambassador-gina-abercrombie-winstanley-as-chief-diversity-and-inclusion-officer/.
64 Ibid.
65 For examples, see Mike Gonzales, “ It Is T ime to Debate—and End—Identity Politics” T he Heritage Foundation,
October 9, 2018, https://www.herit age.org/civil-society/commentary/it-time-debate-and-end-identity-politics; and
Francis Fukuyama, Identity: The Dem and for Dignity and the Politics of Resentm ent, Farrar, Straus, and Giroux; 1st
Edition (Sept ember 11, 2018).
66 David Rock, “ Is Your Company’s Diversity T raining Making You More Biased?” Psychology Today, June 7, 2017,
at https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/your-brain-work/201706/is-your-company-s-diversity-training-making-
you-more-biased.
Congressional Research Service

18

State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

Figure 2. Department of State Minority Figure 3. Department of State Female
Workforce by Rank, 2018
Workforce by Rank, 2018

Source: CRS, adapted from data from GAO, State Department: Additional Steps Are Needed to Identify
Potential Barriers to Diversity, GAO-20-237, January 27, 2020.
Notes: Percentages calculated in-grade as the share of that grade comprised of minority and female
employees.
Both the White House and the State Department have announced new initiatives intended to
promote diversity and inclusion. On June 25, 2021, President Biden signed an executive order
requiring, among other priorities, that al federal agencies review whether employees from
underserved groups face barriers to employment, promotion, or professional development and,
separately, establish Chief Diversity Officers within their organizations.67 The State Department
has already fulfil ed the latter requirement, as Secretary Blinken appointed Ambassador Gina
Abercrombie-Winstanley to serve as the State Department’s first Chief Diversity and Inclusion
Officer (CDIO) in April 2021. Secretary Blinken noted that the CDIO wil report directly to him
and be tasked with aligning and advancing diversity and inclusion efforts across the State
Department and finalizing and implementing the State Department’s forthcoming Diversity and
Inclusion Strategic Plan.68
Following the death of George Floyd and ensuing protests in 2020, calls for the State Department
to improve and expand its diversity and inclusion efforts intensified.69 Many observers argue that
to improve diversity and inclusion, the State Department must implement reforms throughout its
personnel management cycle, including with respect to recruitment, training, assignment
procedures, promotion, retention, and other areas.70 For example, some have recommended that
the State Department conduct more targeted recruiting efforts to engage with high school and
college students throughout the United States, including those at historical y Black colleges and

67 T he White House, “ FACT SHEET : President Biden Signs Executive Order Advancing Diversity, Equity, Inclusion,
and Accessibility in the Federal Government,” June 25, 2021, at https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/
statements-releases/2021/06/25/fact-sheet-president-biden-signs-executive-order-advancing-diversity-equity-inclusion-
and-accessibility-in-the-federal-government/.
68 U.S. Department of State, Ofice of the Spokesperson, “ At the Announcement of Ambassador Gina Abercrombie-Winstanley as
Chief Diversity and Inclusion Oficer,” April 12, 2021, at ht t ps://www.st at e.gov/secret ary-ant ony-j-blinken-at-the-
announcement -of-ambassador-gina-abercrombie-winstanley-as-chief-diversity-and-inclusion-officer/.
69 Conor Finnegan, “ State Department expands diversity fellowships amid pressure to better support diplomats of
color,” ABC News, September 3, 2020, at https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/state-department-expands-diversity-
fellowships-amid-pressure-support/story?id=72754381.
70 For example, see “ Diversity and Inclusion in the U.S. Foreign Service: Recommendations for Action,” Foreign Service Journal,
January/February 2021.
Congressional Research Service

19

State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

universities.71 Additional y, both Members of Congress and former State Department officials
have cal ed for a significant expansion of paid internship opportunities, including at U.S.
embassies and consulates abroad.72 Others have advocated for Congress to create a program
similar to the U.S. military’s Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (ROTC) that would provide a new
avenue for students, including those from underrepresented backgrounds, to pursue a career in
either the Foreign or Civil Service.73
Many analysts have also emphasized that the State Department should place particular emphasis
on measures to retain and promote existing staff from underrepresented backgrounds, as the
previously mentioned 2020 GAO report found that the proportion of racial and ethnic minorities
and women were general y smal er in the State Department’s higher ranks, while promotion rates
for such groups were sometimes lower than those for Whites.74 Suggested actions include
revising promotion criteria to ensure that advancing diversity and inclusion is a factor for
promotion to supervisory positions and expanding the use of oral exit interviews to obtain
feedback from departing employees regarding the State Department’s diversity and inclusion
efforts.75 Others have cal ed on the State Department to appoint an independent academic expert
to conduct a “diversity review” of its personnel practices, including promotion and retention.76 At
the most senior levels, some cal ed on the State Department to more strongly prioritize diversity
and gender parity for appointments to such positions.77 Secretary Blinken’s decision to include
Ambassador Abercrombie-Winstanley in the State Department’s “D Committee,” which is
responsible for reviewing candidates to serve in senior positions including Chiefs of Mission,
may lead to change in this area.78
Congressional Responses and Options
 On May 18, 2021, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 1157, the
Department of State Authorization Act of 2021. This bil has been received in the
Senate and was referred to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. It includes
several provisions regarding diversity and inclusion. If enacted, this bil would
require the State Department to publicly disclose more detailed demographic data
and other information regarding the diversity of the State Department’s
workforce, expand its recruiting efforts to better target individuals from
underrepresented groups, increase training for staff on anti-harassment and anti-
discrimination, and implement performance and advancement requirements that
reward and recognize the efforts of individuals in senior positions to foster an
inclusive environment.

71 Amb. Nicolas Burns, Amb. Marc Grossman, and Amb. Marcie Ries, A U.S. Diplomatic Service for the 21st Century, November
2020, p. 27.
72 Ibid; See also Truman Center, Transforming State: Pathways to a More Just, Equitable, and Innovative Institution, p. 31.
73 Anne-Marie Slaughter, “ Reinventing the State Department,” Democracy Journal, September 15, 2020, at
https://democracyjournal.org/magazine/reinventing-the-state-department/.
74 William J. Burns and Linda Thomas-Greenfield, “ The Transformation of Diplomacy: How to Save the State Department,” Foreign
Affairs, September 23, 2020.
75 Amb. Nicolas Burns, Amb. Marc Grossman, and Amb. Marcie Ries, A U.S. Diplomatic Service for the 21st Century, November
2020, p. 27; Uzra S. Zeya, and John Finer, Revitalizing the State Department and American Diplomacy, November 2020, p. 15.
76 Truman Center, Transforming State: Pathways to a More Just, Equitable, and Innovative Institution, March 2021, p. 31.
77 Uzra S. Zeya, and John Finer, Revitalizing the State Department and American Diplomacy, November 2020, p. 15.
78 Jory Heckman, “ Elevated State Dept. chief diversity officer looks to move needle on decades-long challenges,” Federal News
Network, May 3, 2021, at ht t ps://federalnewsnet work.com/hiring-ret ention/2021/05/elevated-st ate-dept-chief-diversit y-
officer-looks-to-move-needle-on-decades-long-challenges/.
Congressional Research Service

20

State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

 During the 117th Congress, Members of Congress have introduced several
additional bil s seeking to advance diversity and inclusion programs at the State
Department. S. 599, the Department of State Student Internship Program Act, for
example, would expand the availability of paid internship programs and require
the State Department to transition al of its unpaid internship programs to
programs offering compensation. Separately, the Represent America Abroad Act
of 2021 (H.R. 1096), if enacted, would require the State Department to establish
a new mid-level entry program enabling the Foreign Service to recruit mid-career
professionals from minority groups (for more information regarding mid-level
entry programs, see the “Training and Professionalism” subsection).
 Some analysts have recommended that the Senate establish a confidential
channel through which the State Department’s personnel could share information
with Senate leadership regarding actions by nominees to senior positions
requiring Senate advice and consent that amount to bullying, discrimination, or
harassment.79 The Senate Foreign Relations Committee may wish to explore
whether such a channel would prove necessary or beneficial.
Personnel Staffing Levels
The Biden Administration has indicated a commitment to “revitalizing the foreign policy
workforce.”80 As part of its FY2022 International Affairs budget request, it is seeking funding for
an additional 255 Foreign Service Officers and 230 Civil Service personnel. The request includes
Foreign Service positions in Asia, Africa, Latin America, and elsewhere that the Biden
Administration maintains are critical to advancing U.S. prosperity and countering Chinese,
Russian, and Iranian malign influence. It also includes Civil Service positions to protect U.S.
critical infrastructure, expand the State Department’s cybersecurity and risk management
programs, and advance the Biden Administration’s science and technology priorities.81 These
requested positions broadly align with staffing priorities Secretary Blinken articulated at his
nomination hearing in January 2021. At the hearing, Secretary Blinken asserted that the State
Department needed additional personnel with expertise in critical areas such as global health,
climate change, and technology.82
Some analysts have termed the size of the State Department’s workforce a “foundational issue,”
arguing that it is currently too smal to most effectively shape and execute U.S. foreign policy
priorities.83 Yet many others caution that increasing the size of the Foreign Service workforce is
not a panacea. One former State Department official noted, for example, that while the size of the
diplomatic corps increased by around 50% from 2003 through 2012, the State Department stil
faced numerous chal enges delivering on its mission.84 Another observer has similarly asserted
that management chal enges are not attributable to the State Department’s personnel strength, but

79 Truman Center, Transforming State: Pathways to a More Just, Equitable, and Innovative Institution, March 2021, p. 16.
80 U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification, Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs,
Fiscal Year 2022, p. 17.
81 U.S. Department of State, “ FY2022 Budget Request: Department of State and USAID,” Slide Presentation, May 28, 2021, p. 14.
82 Testimony of Secretary of State-designate Antony Blinken, Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, Nomination Hearing, 117th
Cong., 1st sess., January 19, 2021.
83 Amb. Nicolas Burns, Amb. Marc Grossman, and Amb. Marcie Ries, A U.S. Diplomatic Service for the 21st Century, November
2020, p. 36.
84 Kori Schake, “ State of Disrepair,” Foreign Policy, April 11, 2012, at https://foreignpolicy.com/2012/04/11/state-of-disrepair/
.
Congressional Research Service

21

link to page 25

State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

rather the al ocation of resources and personnel to several tertiary priorities outside the State
Department’s traditional remit.85 The number of Foreign Service and Civil Service personnel
declined during the Trump Administration, which instituted a hiring freeze from January 2017 to
April 2018. However, these declines did not approach the lower numbers of Foreign and Civil
Service personnel in place near the end of the George W. Bush Administration (see Figure 4).
Figure 4. Department of State Foreign Service and Civil Service Personnel Levels

Source: Chart created by CRS with data from U.S Department of State, Bureau of Human Resources, “HR Fact
Sheet: Facts About Our Most Valuable Asset – Our People,” fact sheet, June 30, 2008; U.S Department of State,
Bureau of Human Resources (later known as the Bureau of Global Talent Management), “HR Fact Sheet: Facts
About Our Most Valuable Asset – Our People,” fact sheet, December 31, 2016-December 31, 2020.
While many analysts and other observers believe the size of the Foreign Service (or the State
Department workforce more broadly) should increase, there are many competing proposals
regarding precisely how the State Department should supplement existing personnel levels. Some
observers have cal ed on the State Department to gradual y hire as many as 3,800 additional
career Foreign Service personnel through traditional hiring mechanisms to both provide for an
adequate training float (see “Training and Professionalism” below) and address projected future
vacancies.86 Other proposals include cal s for Congress to establish a Diplomatic Reserve Corps
that would provide the State Department with a diplomatic surge capacity that could be deployed
to respond to crises or emergencies abroad; address, on a short-term basis, human capital deficits
in emerging areas such as quantum computing and cybersecurity; and fil critical vacancies at
overseas posts.87 Additional y, some have espoused the idea of a more robust Foreign Service

85 Brett D. Schaefer, How to Make the State Department More Effective at Implementing U.S. Foreign Policy , Heritage
Foundation, Backgrounder no. 3115, April 20, 2016, at https://www.heritage.org/political-process/report/how-make-
the-state-department-more-effective-implementing-us-foreign.
86 Amb. Nicolas Burns, Amb. Marc Grossman, and Amb. Marcie Ries, A U.S. Diplomatic Service for the 21st Century, November
2020, p. 37; Joaquin Castro, “ How to Bring American Diplomacy Back from the Brink,” Foreign Affairs, October 28, 2020, at
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2020-10-28/how-bring-american-diplomacy-back-brink.
87 Amb. Nicolas Burns, Amb. Marc Grossman, and Amb. Marcie Ries, A U.S. Diplomatic Service for the 21st Century,
November 2020, p. 44-45; Uzra S. Zeya, and John Finer, Revitalizing the State Departm ent and Am erican Diplom acy,
November 2020, p. 30; William J. Burns and Linda T homas-Greenfield, “ T he T ransformation of Diplomacy: How to
Save the State Department,” Foreign Affairs, September 23, 2020; American Academy of Diplomacy, Strengthening
the Departm ent of State, May 2019, at https://www.academyofdiplomacy.org/publication/strengthening-the-
Congressional Research Service

22

State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

mid-level entry program, or alternatively, new hiring authorities, to al ow the Foreign Servic e to
bring in personnel from the private sector or other government agencies to meet unanticipated
mid-level skil gaps in priority disciplines, while also improving diversity.88
Congressional Responses and Options
 Congress exercises the power of the purse, which includes authority to set the
amount of funding that agencies receive, as wel as determining how specific to
make such appropriations. In recent years, Congress has inserted directives in
appropriations laws requiring the State Department to obligate funds to support
the department’s workforce at specified levels. For example, Section 7073 of the
Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations
Act, 2019 (Division F of P.L. 116-6) provided that the State Department could
not use appropriated funds to expand or reduce the size of the State Department
Civil Service, Foreign Service, eligible family member, and local y employed
staff workforce from the on-board levels as of December 31, 2017, without
consultation with Congress. Congress has also included reporting requirements
obligating the State Department to submit regular reports detailing on-board
personnel levels, hiring, and attrition of the Civil Service, Foreign Service,
eligible family members, and local y employed staff workforce.89 Congress could
continue to include such measures in annual appropriations laws to provide
guidance and oversight with respect to the State Department’s personnel levels.
 Congress could choose to establish a Diplomatic Reserve Corps or a mid-level
hiring program through amending the Foreign Service Act or another legislative
vehicle. There is precedent for both actions–for example, in 2008, Congress
authorized both a Response Readiness Corps and a Civilian Reserve Corps to
support reconstruction and stabilization assistance in contingency
environments.90 With regard to mid-level entry programs, Congress in 2016
authorized a three-year pilot program pursuant to the Department of State
Authorities Act, Fiscal Year 2017 (P.L. 114-323), intended to facilitate mid-career
entry into the Foreign Service for qualified individuals from the Civil Service and
the private sector.91 Subsequent chal enges in standing up these programs may
indicate a need for Congress to provide consistent funding, expanded authorities,
and robust oversight over a period of many years to ensure that the State
Department has the tools at its disposal to fulfil ambitious statutory mandates.92
 H.R. 1157, the Department of State Authorization Act of 2021, which passed the
House of Representatives in May 2021, includes some provisions related to

department -of-state/, p. 23.
88 Amb. Nicolas Burns, Amb. Marc Grossman, and Amb. Marcie Ries, A U.S. Diplomatic Service for the 21st Century, November
2020, p. 41; Uzra S. Zeya, and John Finer, Revitalizing the State Department and American Diplomacy, November 2020, pp. 4, 6, 9,
17, 24; Truman Center, Transforming State: Pathways to a More Just, Equitable, and Innovative Institution, March 2021, p. 22.
89 For example, see Joint Explanatory Statement Accompanying Division K of Department of State, Foreign
Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2021 (Division K of P.L. 116-260), at https://docs.house.gov/
billsthisweek/20201221/BILLS-116RCP68-JES-DIVISION-K.pdf, p. 93.
90 See 22 U.S.C. §2734.
91 See Section 404 of the Department of State Authorities Act, Fiscal Year 2017 (P.L. 114-323).
92 For example, see archived CRS Report RL32862, Peacekeeping/Stabilization and Conflict Transitions: Background and
Congressional Action on the Civilian Response/Reserve Corps and other Civilian Stabilization and Reconstruction Capabilities , by
Nina M. Serafino (available to congressional clients upon request).
Congressional Research Service

23

State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

personnel strength and vacancies. If enacted, this bil would authorize the State
Department to temporarily fil Foreign Service designated positions that have
been vacant for over a year with non-Foreign Service personnel. Additional y, it
would require the State Department to submit a comprehensive five-year
strategic staffing plan to Congress that aligns with and furthers the objectives of
the National Security Strategy.
Training and Professionalism
Many former State Department officials and other observers have expressed concern that State
Department personnel are not sufficiently equipped with “the knowledge, skil s, abilities, and
outlooks needed to equip career diplomats to conduct 21st-century diplomacy.”93 Others similarly
note persistent tension between the need for education, training, and professional development
throughout al stages of an employee’s career on the one hand, and the State Department’s
immediate operational needs both overseas and domestical y on the other.94 This situation may
have fomented what some have described as a cultural aversion to training within the State
Department. Training assignments are often viewed, from this perspective, as potential y
damaging to one’s career prospects because they do not improve chances for promotion.95 While
some express concern that the State Department’s perceived lack of emphasis on training and
professional development could put its personnel at a disadvantage relative to those of other
executive agencies and foreign diplomatic corps, others may argue that it constitutes a sound
approach and may better ensure the advancement of the most talented and effective personnel to
the senior ranks.
Those in favor of expanding the State Department’s training and professional development
opportunities argue that improved programming must be available immediately when one enters
the State Department and continue through promotion to senior positions. Recommendations
include increasing the length of training for incoming Foreign Service Officers from 6 weeks to at
least 6 months, and expanding the curricula to include additional focus on U.S. diplomatic history
and practice; the respective roles of the Foreign Service, Civil Service, Local y Employed Staff,
and other personnel; leadership and management skil s; and how to best utilize on-the-job
training.96 Others have cal ed for the State Department to adopt more collaborative entry-level
training modules in which Foreign Service Officers, Foreign Service Specialists, and Civil
Service personnel participate together in order to promote a more unified State Department and
reduce stove-piping between the Foreign Service and Civil Service personnel systems.97
As personnel move through the State Department’s ranks, some argue that the department should
afford them more opportunities to go on temporary details to other executive agencies, think
tanks, state and local governments, congressional offices, and private sector firms. Supporters of
this policy argue that it wil enable both Foreign Service and Civil Service personnel to

93 Atlantic Council, State Department Reform Report, August 2017, pp. 15-16.
94 American Academy of Diplomacy, Strengthening the Department of State, p. 44.
95 William J. Burns and Linda Thomas-Greenfield, “ The Transformation of Diplomacy: How to Save the State Department,”,
September 23, 2020; Uzra S. Zeya, and John Finer, Revitalizing the State Department and American Diplomacy, November 2020, p.
26.
96 Amb. Nicolas Burns, Amb. Marc Grossman, and Amb. Marcie Ries, A U.S. Diplomatic Service for the 21st Century, November
2020, p. 33; Atlantic Council, State Department Reform Report, August 2017, p. 18; American Academy of Diplomacy, Strengthening
the Department of State, May 2019, p. 46.
97 Amb. Nicolas Burns, Amb. Marc Grossman, and Amb. Marcie Ries, A U.S. Diplomatic Service for the 21st Century, Harvard
Kennedy School: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, November 2020, p. 33; American Academy of Diplomacy,
Strengthening the Department of State, May 2019, p. 47.
Congressional Research Service

24

State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

strengthen their skil s in core areas of increasing importance to 21st century statecraft, including
business and commercial advocacy, cybersecurity, and information and communications
technology, while also (in the case of additional details to Capitol Hil ) improving relations with
Congress.98 Stakeholders have similarly cal ed on the State Department to provide more
opportunities for staff to study at outside academic institutions, noting that personnel accepted to
prestigious universities to earn advanced degrees relevant to their work are currently offered leave
without pay only under limited circumstances.99 Others note the importance of increasing in-
house training programs for mid-level personnel in areas such as the federal budget, the roles and
missions of other federal agencies involved with national security policy, and inter-agency
policymaking and implementation processes.100
For the State Department’s senior leadership, analysts note that recent Secretaries of State
successfully demanded that the Foreign Service Institute establish a school for leadership and
management training in large part to provide these personnel more access to professional
development programs in such disciplines. Some argue that the State Department must strengthen
and expand requirements that Foreign Service and Civil Service personnel seeking promotion into
the senior ranks complete training modules in these areas.101 Others have suggested that senior
leaders should receive as much as six months of training upon promotion, including in areas such
as current and emerging policy issues, strategic foresight, and diplomatic skil s and tradecraft.102
Al of the aforementioned proposals are general y predicated on the notion that the State
Department should advance the further professionalization of its workforce. However, this idea
does not enjoy universal adherence, as some have argued that changes to the international
political environment since the end of the Cold War demand that the State Department
“deprofessionalize” its workforce.103 This point of view reflects an assumption that in the post-
Cold War era, the most acute geopolitical chal enges facing the United States have transcended
traditional bilateral relations and now involve complex multidisciplinary issues such as climate
change, disinformation, global health security, mass migration, and natural resource shortages. To
address these chal enges effectively, national governments must, this argument follows, partner
with broad coalitions including stakeholders within the business community, academia, the
philanthropy sector, local governments, and faith groups.104 Supporters of this view argue that the
State Department can most effectively leverage these coalitions by deprofessionalizing its
workforce and creating a new “Global Service” comprised of personnel with backgrounds
working on global issues in a wide range of capacities serving on non-career, renewable five-year
appointments. Given the diverse backgrounds of such personnel, proponents of this approach
predict that they wil offer new perspectives to addressing national security and foreign policy

98 Joaquin Castro, “ How to Bring American Diplomacy Back from the Brink,” October 28, 2020,.; Uzra S. Zeya, and John Finer,
Revitalizing the State Department and American Diplomacy, November 2020, pp. 8, 10; Atlantic Council, State Department Reform
Report, August 2017, p. 17; Truman Center, Transforming State: Pathways to a More Just, Equitable, and Innovative Institution,
March 2021, pp. 23, 35; American Academy of Diplomacy, Strengthening the Department of State, May 2019, p. 51.
99 Amb. Nicolas Burns, Amb. Marc Grossman, and Amb. Marcie Ries, A U.S. Diplomatic Service for the 21st Century, November
2020, p. 31; Joaquin Castro, “ How to Bring American Diplomacy Back from the Brink,” October 28, 2020.
100 Atlantic Council, State Department Reform Report, August 2017, p. 18.
101 Amb. Nicolas Burns, Amb. Marc Grossman, and Amb. Marcie Ries, A U.S. Diplomatic Service for the 21st Century, November
2020, pp. 30-31; Uzra S. Zeya, and John Finer, Revitalizing the State Department and American Diplomacy, November 2020, p. 27;
American Academy of Diplomacy, Strengthening the Department of State, pp. 31, 40.
102 Amb. Nicolas Burns, Amb. Marc Grossman, and Amb. Marcie Ries, A U.S. Diplomatic Service for the 21st Century, November
2020, pp. 32-33.
103 Anne-Marie Slaughter, “ Reinventing the State Department,” Democracy Journal, September 15, 2020, at
https://democracyjournal.org/magazine/reinventing-the-state-department/.
104 Ibid.
Congressional Research Service

25

State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

chal enges. They would also be expected to “cross civic, corporate, and government boundaries
with ease” and reach out to their professional networks to mobilize the coalitions and resources
necessary to address contemporary national security threats.105
Congressional Responses and Options
 Those who have cal ed on the State Department to develop and offer a more
comprehensive suite of training, education, and professional development
opportunities often acknowledge that their proposals are not feasible unless the
State Department hires at least 2,000 additional Foreign Service Officers.106 This
would enable the State Department to create a “training float” of 15% above the
level required to staff al authorized positions to al ow Foreign Service personnel
to participate in long-term training programs without posts and bureaus having to
endure widespread vacancies.107 Such an effort would require congressional
action. Most State Department positions are funded through congressional
appropriations, and Congress has inserted directives in recent appropriations laws
requiring the State Department to obligate funds to support the State
Department’s workforce at certain levels (see the “Personnel Staffing Levels”
subsection).
 Congress has frequently passed laws instituting training requirements for State
Department personnel and could elect to do so again should it identify any areas
where training and professional development opportunities are currently lacking.
For example, in 2019 Congress amended Section 708 of the Foreign Service Act
to provide additional training on economic and commercial diplomacy to Foreign
Service personnel, including Chiefs of Mission. Specifical y, such training is
focused on “market access and other elements of an enabling framework for
United States businesses, commercial advocacy, and United States foreign
economic policy, in addition to awareness about the support of the United States
Government available to United States businesses.”108 In legislating such training
requirements, Congress would need to provide concomitant funding to the State
Department if it wanted to ensure that their implementation did not amount to an
unfunded mandate.
Chief of Mission Authority
As previously discussed, “Chief of Mission” is the title conferred on the principal officer in
charge of each U.S. diplomatic mission to a foreign country, foreign territory, or international
organization. In their capacity as the President’s personal representatives, COMs are responsible
for exercising the authorities vested in them by both law and executive branch directives and
regulations (for additional detail, see the “Ambassadors, Chiefs of Mission, and Ambassadors-at-
Large” subsection of this report).

105 Ibid.
106 Amb. Nicolas Burns, Amb. Marc Grossman, and Amb. Marcie Ries, A U.S. Diplomatic Service for the 21st Century, November
2020, p. 6.
107 Ambassador Charles Ray, “ America Needs a Professional Foreign Service: Speaking Out,” Foreign Service Journal, July/August
2015, at ht t ps://www.afsa.org/america-needs-professional-foreign-service.
108 See Section 708(d) of the Foreign Service Act of 1980, as amended.
Congressional Research Service

26

State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

Former senior State Department officials and other analysts have recently expressed concern that
many COMs have proven unable to effectively exercise their authorities. They often fear that
deficiencies in this area not only contribute to perceptions among the State Department’s inter-
agency partners that it is ineffective in developing, coordinating, and implementing policy, but
also foment confusion and a lack of cohesiveness among personnel at U.S. overseas posts.109
Similar concerns regarding the need for the executive branch to strengthen the capacity of COMs
to leverage their authorities have been expressed for many decades. In 1949, for example, the
Hoover Commission on Organization of the Executive Branch (created by Congress in 1947 and
tasked with recommending changes to promote economy and efficiency within the executive
branch) recommended that in light of the State Department’s own limited resources and
personnel, it should focus on coordinating the overseas work of other agencies endowed with the
capacity and budgets needed to implement significant programs.110 Yet subsequent reports issued
in 1975, 1998, and 2010 similarly identified the need for effective coordination of inter-agency
activities abroad, with some judging the State Department incapable of fostering improvements in
this area.111
Many analysts attribute the current state of affairs to an unwil ingness of both other agencies and
Washington-based State Department personnel to al ow the COM to manage interagency
activities within his or her jurisdiction; an absence of explicit authorities to empower COMs to
better unify the efforts of interagency groups that include the heads of non-State government
agencies represented at overseas posts (also known as country teams); the limited authorities
provided to COMs to manage budget and personnel issues; and, in some cases, the inability of
COMs to apply basic leadership and management practices required to exercise their statutory
authorities.112 In recent years, the State Department has worked to improve the training afforded
to COMs and provide more guidance on the details of COM authority.113 However, some believe
the State Department must take far more action to bolster the standing of each individual COM
and, by extension, the ability of the State Department to act as the lead U.S. foreign affairs
agency abroad. For example, three retired U.S. Ambassadors recently cal ed on the President to
exercise leadership in this area by clearly designating the State Department as the lead agency in
executing American foreign policy and ensuring that each COM’s role is “clear, paramount,
safeguarded, and unassailable.”114 Others have advocated for the State Department to adopt a
more agile policy coordination framework that ensures overseas posts are able to make significant
contributions to policy development processes that are often centered in Washington, develop
means to more promptly and efficiently transmit instructions to posts in the field to implement
policy, and afford overseas personnel under the COM’s supervision more autonomy.115 COMs
could be further empowered, these analysts maintain, if the State Department committed to

109 Amb. Nicolas Burns, Amb. Marc Grossman, and Amb. Marcie Ries, A U.S. Diplomatic Service for the 21st Century, , November
2020, p. 12; Uzra S. Zeya and John Finer, Revitalizing the State Department and American Diplomacy, p. 19.
110 Hoover and Acheson, p. 144, 155-158. See also Harry Kopp, “ Blue-Ribbon Blues: Why So Many Great Reports and Good Ideas
Go Nowhere,” Foreign Service Journal, September 2018, at ht t ps://www.afsa.org/blue-ribbon-blues-why-so-many-great -
reports-and-good-ideas-go-nowhere.
111 Ibid. The reports referred to are Ambassador Robert D. Murphy’s 1975 Commission on the Organization of the U.S. Government
for the Conduct of Foreign Policy, a 1998 Stimson Center report titled “ Equipped for the Future,” and the State Department’s 2010
Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review.
112 Ibid. See also CRS Report R43422, U.S. Diplomatic Missions: Background and Issues on Chief of Mission (COM)
Authority; Uzra S. Zeya and John Finer, Revitalizing the State Department and American Diplomacy, November 2020, p. 20.
113 U.S. Diplomatic Missions: Background and Issues on Chief of Mission (COM) Authority, p. 14.
114 Amb. Nicolas Burns, Amb. Marc Grossman, and Amb. Marcie Ries, A U.S. Diplomatic Service for the 21st Century, November
2020, p. 12.
115 Uzra S. Zeya and John Finer, Revitalizing the State Department and American Diplomacy, November 2020, p. 19.
Congressional Research Service

27

State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

al ocating more Foreign Service positions overseas, where persistent vacancies encumber both
COMs themselves and personnel under their jurisdiction.116
Congressional Responses and Options
 Congress passed the Foreign Service Act with the intention of codifying previous
executive orders providing COMs responsibility for coordinating and supervising
nearly al civilian U.S. government employees abroad and ensuring these
employees comply with COM directives. If Congress decided to take action to
further empower COMs, it could do so by providing them with additional, more
prescriptive statutory authorities. Ample precedent for such action exists—for
example, Congress amended the Foreign Service Act in 2019 to require the COM
to play a role in promoting U.S. economic and commercial interests abroad.117
Furthermore, separate laws provide specific statutory roles for the COM in
several areas including the adjudication of certain visa applications and
counterdrug and anticrime activities.118
 Many analysts note that the inability of some COMs to exercise their
responsibilities owes not only to an absence of statutory authorities, but also a
lack of experience among some COMs who are political appointees rather than
career Foreign Service Officers.119 While disputes persist regarding whether and
to what extent Congress can impose legal conditions affecting the President’s
constitutional authority to appoint ambassadors, the Foreign Service Act notes
that any individual appointed to serve as a COM “should possess clearly
demonstrated competence to perform the duties of a [COM],” states that COM
positions “should normal y be accorded” to career Foreign Service Officers, and
requires the President to submit a report on the demonstrated competence of that
nominee to serve as a COM. Legislation introduced in the 116th Congress, S.
4849, would have required the President to provide more details in these reports
regarding each nominee’s qualifications. Among other provisions, the bil also
would have required the Department of State’s Office of Inspector General to
ensure that at least 25% of its annual inspections take place at overseas posts
where the chief of mission was a non-career member of the Foreign Service as of
July 1 of the most recently concluded fiscal year.
Ambassador Vacancies
Under the Constitution, the President and the Senate share the power to appoint the top officers of
the United States.120 Within the Department of State, there are 255 so-cal ed PAS positions
(Presidential appointments with Senate confirmation). This figure constitutes the most of any
single federal agency and includes the approximately 189 ambassadors representing the United

116 American Academy of Diplomacy, Strengthening the Department of State, May 2019, p. 18.
117 See Title VII, Sec. 704 of P.L. 116-94.
118 See 8 U.S.C. §1157 and 22 U.S.C §2656i, respectively.
119 Brett D. Schaefer, How to Make the State Department More Effective at Implementing U.S. Foreign Policy, April 20, 2016, p. 9.
120 Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution provides that “ [the President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the
Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and
Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all ot her
Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be establ ished by Law.”
Congressional Research Service

28

State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

States in other countries or at international organizations.121 The appointment process for these
positions consists of three stages: selection and vetting by the President and other Administration
officials, Senate consideration, and appointment by the President.
Some Members of Congress and other observers have expressed concern about President Biden’s
pace of selecting nominees for PAS positions, especial y ambassadorships. AFSA data indicate
that as of June 23, 2021, there were approximately 85 ambassador positions (or 45% of al such
positions), which were vacant and for which President Biden had not transmitted a nominee to the
Senate.122 Senator James E. Risch, the Ranking Member of the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee, has stated that, “the Senate Foreign Relations Committee has helped expedite a
number of important nominees, but we can’t do our job if the president doesn’t send us names
and files ... at this rate, it’s hard to imagine we wil have ambassadors at key posts until much
later [in 2021].”123 Analysts cite numerous potential contributing factors to what some
characterize as President Biden’s slow pace. They include lengthy White House vetting
processes; efforts to identify a more diverse, representative cadre of nominees to serve in key
roles than has previously existed; and a predilection among senior officials already in place to
prioritize addressing immediate foreign policy chal enges rather than personnel matters.124
However, others argue that variables outside the Biden Administration’s control are the primary
cause of persistent ambassadorial vacancies. Among such factors are what some view as the slow
pace of the 2020-2021 presidential transition, which they state provided President Biden less time
than his predecessors to begin selecting key nominees.125 Additional y, they add that President
Trump demonstrated a predilection to select a greater share of political appointees to ambassador
positions, leaving President Biden with comparatively more positions to fil .126 Others blame
“senatorial inertia” and have criticized the Senate for failing, in their view, to expeditiously
schedule hearings for President Biden’s nominees across the government.127
Debate persists not only with regard to which parties are most to blame for continued
ambassadorial vacancies, but also such vacancies’ impact. Some have suggested that President
Biden’s significant reliance, in their view, on personal engagement with foreign leaders mitigates
the impact of such vacancies.128 Yet others argue that the absence of ambassadors at overseas
posts undermines the United States’ ability to project influence and advance its foreign policy

121 Other PAS positions include the Secretary of State, the Deputy Secretary of State, the State Department’s Under Secretaries o f
State, and most of the State Department’s Assistant Secretaries of State. See U.S. Congress, House Committee on Oversight and
Reform, United States Government Policy and Supporting Positions, S. Prt, 114-26, 116th Cong., 2nd sess. (Washington: GPO, 2020),
pp. 209-212.
122 AFSA, “ Tracker: Current U.S. Ambassadors,” accessed June 25, 2021, at https://afsa.org/list-ambassadorial-appointments.
123 Robbie Gramer and Jack Detsch, “ Biden to Announce Nominees for Key Diplomatic Posts,” Foreign Policy, April 15, 2021, at
https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/04/15/biden-state-department-white-house-picks-diplomats/.
124 “ America says it’s back. But where are its ambassadors?,” The Economist, June 20, 2021, at https://www.economist.com/
united-states/2021/06/20/america-says-its-back-but-where-are-its-ambassadors.; Tyler Parger, “ Biden to nominate Tom
Nides as ambassador to Israel; Ken Salazar, ‘Sully’ Sullenberger also get posts,” Washington Post, June 15, 2021, at
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/06/15/biden-ambassadors/.
125 Anita Kumar and Nahal Toosi, “ Biden under pressure to tap fewer political ambassadors than Trump, Obama,” Politico, March 15,
2021, at ht t ps://www.polit ico.com/news/2021/03/15/biden-polit ical-ambassadors-476050.
126 Nahal Toosi, “ Biden names 9 ambassador nominees, including for Israel, NATO,” Politico, June 15, 2021, at
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/06/15/biden-ambassadors-494645.
127 “ America says it’s back. But where are its ambassadors?,” The Economist, June 20, 2021.
128 Brett Samuels, “ Biden meets with foreign leaders as ambassadorships sit vacant,” The Hill, June 13, 2021, at
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/558080-biden-meets-with-foreign-leaders-as-ambassadorships-sit-vacant?
rl=1.
Congressional Research Service

29

State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

priorities.129 They have asserted, for example, that the absence of a U.S. ambassador to Israel
during the outbreak of violence between Israel and Hamas in May 2021 hindered U.S. diplomatic
efforts to reduce tensions.130 Many adherents of this view acknowledge that chargés d’affaires
assigned to serve as ambassadors on a temporary basis are often appropriately qualified and
experienced to serve in senior roles. Yet they add that these officials lack “the standing as a
personal emissary of the President” that ambassadors enjoy, in effect limiting their capacity to
advance U.S foreign policy goals.131
Congressional Responses and Options
 The Senate has the authority, pursuant to Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution,
to provide advice and consent for presidential appointments of ambassadors and
other public ministers and consuls. Congress has leveraged this authority with
respect to the Department of State, as the 255 positions within the department
that are required by law to be subject to advice and consent exceeds the number
of positions designated as such in any other federal agency. As described below,
Congress has taken, or may consider taking, some actions to al eviate concerns
that State Department ambassador slots or other PAS positions are not being
fil ed quickly. Some may caution Congress against taking such steps, arguing that
the Senate should closely guard its current prerogatives with respect to providing
advice and consent.
 Congress could expand on action in recent years to reduce the number of
positions for which advice and consent is required to expedite the process for
considering nominees. Enacted in 2012, the Presidential Appointment Efficiency
and Streamlining Act (P.L. 112-166) eliminated the requirement for advice and
consent for 163 positions, including selected positions within the Department of
State.132 In doing so, the legislation amended each section of the U.S. Code that
established the 163 positions across the federal government general y by striking
the phrase “by and with advice and consent of the Senate,” thus al owing
Presidents to fil these positions on their own. Although eliminating the advice
and consent requirement for ambassadors may not pass constitutional muster due
to the Constitution’s express delegation of this responsibility to the Senate,
eliminating this requirement for other positions could provide the Senate
additional time and flexibility to consider ambassadorial nominees. Separately, in
2011, the Senate passed S.Res. 116, which created a new process for Senate
consideration of nominations to 272 positions, wherein the nominations would
bypass formal committee consideration unless any single Senator objected (while
some foreign relations positions were subject to this new process, none were
ambassador positions).133 Congress could take similar actions to further reduce

129 Ibid.
130 Ibid; See also America says it’s back. But where are its ambassadors?,” The Economist, June 20, 2021.
131 Robbie Gramer, Dan De Luce, and Colum Lynch, “ How the Trump Administration Broke the State Department.” Foreign Policy,
July 31, 2017, at ht t p://foreignpolicy.com/2017/07/31/how-t he-trump-administ ration-broke-t he-state-department/.
132 Those positions within the Department of State for which the advice and consent requirement was eliminated were the Assistant
Secretary of State for Administration and the Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs. The law also eliminated the advice and
consent requirement for the Assistant Administrator for Management of the U.S. Agency for International Development.
133 These positions were included in Cabinet agencies, certain oversight boards and advisory councils, and independent agencies.
Many of these positions must remain advice and consent positions because of the responsibilities of the boards and councils u nder the
Appointments Clause of the Constitution. Foreign relations-related positions subject to the expedited process are the Assistant
Secretary of State for Legislative Affairs, the Department of State Chief Financial Officer, the Chairman and, separately, th e members
Congressional Research Service

30

State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

the number of Department of State positions for which advice and consent is
required or streamline the Senate’s process for considering certain nominees.134
 The Senate could also change its procedural rules with the intent of increasing
the likelihood that it wil provide advice and consent for the President’s nominees
or expediting the pace at which the President’s nominees are considered.135 On
November 21, 2013, the Senate reinterpreted the “cloture rule” (Senate Rule
XXII) to lower the threshold for invoking cloture, in effect al owing a simple
majority of Senators voting (as opposed to three-fifths of the full Senate pursuant
to the previous interpretation of the rule) to restrict the time for considering a
nomination or other items of business. As a result, a nominee requires the support
of only a simple majority of Senators voting for his or her nomination to receive
a subsequent up or down vote. (A simple majority is required for the Senate to
provide advice and consent, provided that a quorum is present.)136 Other
proposals for changing the cloture process include reductions in the time costs
associated with certain cloture-related actions or new or additional restrictions on
debate in certain circumstances. Some Members of Congress and other observers
have argued against such proposals, maintaining that the ability of any Senator to
speak at length about virtual y any topic at any time is a unique characteristic of
the Senate that al ows the chamber to play a vital role in the legislative process. If
this deliberative function is removed, they believe the Senate would become a
shadow of the larger House of Representatives, and would specifical y surrender
its unique role as a check on the executive branch through its role in executive
business—that is, nominations and treaties.137
Outlook
As noted above, several legislative vehicles and options are available to Congress, including but
not limited to foreign relations authorization measures and annual appropriations bil s that would
enable it to enact new laws or amend existing laws pertaining to Department of State personnel.
Such measures could address aforementioned matters pertaining to implementation of the
diversity and inclusion efforts, personnel staffing levels, and provision of advice and consent by
the Senate for nominees for selected State Department senior positions. Congress could also
address other personnel issues through legislation. For example, the Department of State
Authorities Act, Fiscal Year 2017 (P.L. 114-323), provided new authorities on matters such as
security training for personnel assigned to high-risk, high-threat posts, compensation for local y
employed staff, the expansion of Civil Service opportunities, and means of lateral entry into the
Foreign Service for mid-career professionals. The 117th Congress is currently considering

(8) of the Advisory Board for Cuba Broadcasting, the members (7) of the Africa Development Foundation Board of Directors, the
members (9) of the Inter-American Foundation Board of Directors, the members (15) of the National Peace Corps Advisory Council,
the members (8) of the Overseas Private Investment Corporation Board of Directors, the Assistant Secretary for Legislative and Public
Affairs of the U.S. Agency for International Development, and the members (4) of the Board of Directors of the Millennium
Challenge Corporation.
134 For more information see CRS Report R41872, Presidential Appointments, the Senate’s Confirmation Process, and
Changes Made in the 112th Congress, by Maeve P. Carey.
135 For more information on the procedural mechanisms by which the Senate might carry out rule changes, see CRS Report R42929,
Procedures for Considering Changes in Senate Rules, by Richard S. Beth.
136 For more information on reinterpretations of Senate Rule XXII, see CRS Report R44819, Senate Proceedings Establishing
Majority Cloture for Supreme Court Nominations: In Brief, by Valerie Heitshusen.
137 For more information regarding potential changes to Senate Rule XXII, see CRS Report R41342, Proposals to Change the
Operation of Cloture in the Senate, by Christopher M. Davis and Valerie Heitshusen.
Congressional Research Service

31

State Department Personnel: Background and Selected Issues for the 117th Congress

H.R. 1157, the Department of State Authorization Act of 2021 that, if enacted, would similarly
weigh in on a wide variety of personnel matters.

Author Information

Cory R. Gill

Analyst in Foreign Affairs

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should n ot be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

Congressional Research Service
R45203 · VERSION 5 · UPDATED
32

Download PDF

Download EPUB

Revision History

Jul. 7, 2021

HTML · PDF

53% changed

May. 18, 2018

HTML · PDF

Metadata

Topic areas

Foreign Affairs

Report Type: CRS Report

Source: CRSReports.Congress.gov, EveryCRSReport.com

Raw Metadata: JSON