Review of Allegations of Politicized and Other Improper Personnel Practices in the Bureau of International Organization Affairs

What OIG Reviewed
In response to a referral from the Department of State and congressional inquiries, the Office of Inspector General (OIG) reviewed allegations of politicized and other improper personnel practices by political appointees in the Bureau of International Organization Affairs. The Bureau, which reports to the Under Secretary for Political Affairs, is the U.S. Government’s primary interlocutor with the United Nations and a host of international agencies and organizations.

What OIG Recommends
OIG made two recommendations to the Under Secretary for Political Affairs: to develop a corrective action plan to address the leadership and management deficiencies within the Bureau of International Organization Affairs and to consider other appropriate action, including disciplinary action. The Department concurred with both recommendations.

What OIG Found OIG found evidence of leadership and management deficiencies and mistreatment of career employees in the Bureau of International Organization Affairs (IO). These inappropriate practices included disrespectful and hostile treatment of employees, accusations against and harassment of career employees premised on claims that they were “disloyal” based on their perceived political views, and retaliation associated with conflicts of interest. OIG also found that numerous employees raised concerns about the IO leadership to Department management officials outside of IO and that Department officials counseled IO leadership; however, the Assistant Secretary for IO, Kevin Moley, did not take significant action to respond to such concerns.

During the course of this review, OIG received allegations that two personnel actions were undertaken by IO leadership for improper motives: the removal of the IO Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary (PDAS), a career senior foreign service officer, and the cancellation of the selection process for a career position in the IO Office of Human Rights and Humanitarian Affairs. OIG found evidence that both actions by IO leadership were likely based on non-merit factors and thus violated Department policy.