tinuation of the efficiency-rating work in various offices, the investigation of the Bureau of Pensions, and the installation of an accounting system for the Indian Service. That will take a great deal of work in the field. Then, there is the completion of this inquiry concerning the cost of retiring superannuated clerks under the Senate resolution and the development of this inquiry that we are making in regard to duplication of statistical and other work. Those are the principal investigations that we have in hand at this time that will run into next year.

ESTIMATE FOR 1918.

Mr. BYRNS. On page 63 you are asking to eliminate the language formerly carried under the head of the Bureau of Efficiency, and provide specifically for salaries and contingent expenses, including not to exceed $50 for street car fare, and not to exceed $3,000 for traveling expenses. There is an increase of the appropriation from $40,000 to $60,000.

Mr. BROWN. The increase from $40,000 to $60,000 would enable us to expedite our work by increasing our force somewhat. The sooner we get these jobs completed, the more profitable our work will be to the Government. We believe that during the next year we will be able to use the additional $20,000 to great advantage.

Mr. BYRNS. I notice in the statement which is submitted along with the estimate that you have set forth the number of those who would be employed under this appropriation.

Mr. BROWN. Yes, sir.

Mr. BYRNS. Does that contemplate any increase in salaries?

Mr. BROWN. No, sir; it does not contemplate any increase of salaries, but I suppose that if any of the men should earn more than they are getting, it would be desirable to compensate them properly. In that connection, I would like to say that we have tried to be very cautions in increasing salaries, and have discussed promotions with the members of this committee and the Senate Committee on Appropriations before taking action.

Mr. BYRNS. As I figure it, you contemplate with this increased appropriation to employ nine additional investigators, clerks, and messengers?

Mr. BROWN. It is very difficult to say just how many people may be employed. It depends somewhat on the salaries we have to pay. We have found from our experience so far that cheap men are almost useless to us, and the kind of men we really need are hard to find.

TRAVELING EXPENSES.

Mr. BYRNS. What do you propose to do with this $3,000 for traveling expenses?

Mr. Brown. We are planning to use as much as is necessary in installing the system of accounts for the Indian Service. We should like to get the system approved by the Secretary of the Interior and then send our own agents into the field to install the system at the Indian agencies.

Mr. BYRNS. I believe you had such a provision in the general deficiency bill for this year?

Mr. BROWN. Yes, sir. This would be a continuation of an existing provision of law. Another reason, Mr. Chairman, for asking for funds for traveling expenses is to enable the representatives of the bureau to visit large commercial plants in order to learn how great corporations handle business similar to that of the Government. As I stated a few moments ago, our men have been in New York this last week to learn how the big insurance companies are doing a job very similar to one in the Internal Revenue Bureau. The information we get in that way frequently saves us a large amount of expensive experimental work.

Mr. Goon. You find no difficulty in using your appropriation for contingent expenses?

Mr. BROWN. No, sir.

DUPLICATION OF WORK.

Mr. GOOD. The act creating your bureau provided that you should investigate duplication of statistical and other work. Has anything been done along the line of duplication?

Mr. BROWN. That is an important investigation which has not progressed as rapidly as we hoped it would; but, as I stated in the memorandum which I read, we plan to develop an index that will bring together automatically all similar projects wherever they may be carried on in the Government service so that you gentlemen can tell where a particular kind of investigation is being made. Then I should think you would be better able to decide whether there should be a change. Mr. Wood has been handling this investigation and he can tell you more about the details of it.

Mr. WOOD. That work has not progressed very far, but we have prepared and submitted to several bureau chiefs a draft of a schedule on which they will be requested to report on every separate investigation or other project that they are working on. We have also developed a plan for indexing the reports so as to bring together projects that are similar in any way.

Mr. GOOD. I have noticed that the Department of Labor published last year Bulletin No. 162, Vocational Education Survey of Richmond, Va. The Bureau of Education is publishing a similar work of that kind. Have you investigated duplication of that kind?

Mr. WOOD. We have examined the publications of the departments for the past year and found many places where, if there was no real duplication there was at least an overlapping of functions. For example, the Bureau of Education and Health Bureau are both pursuing studies of school hygiene, though not in the same districts. Each is doing work that might be done by the other. Similarly, the Children's Bureau and the Health Bureau both published bulletins on the care of babies.

Mr. GOOD. That necessitates the keeping in two or more separate bureaus the same character of employees that ought to do the work in one bureau?

Mr. WOOD. The trouble seems to be that the authorizations given to the different bureaus cross or overlap. For example, the Children's Bureau is authorized to investigate anything pertaining to children. That includes children's health and education and various other matters. The Health Bureau is authorized to investigate

health, whether of children or adults. The Bureau of Education is authorized to investigate questions pertaining to education. Again, the Labor Bureau has always concerned itself with health insurance among laboring men. The Bureau of Public Health has recently taken up health insurance as a health measure. Both have issued publications on that subject.

Mr. GOOD. You have not gone into that?

Mr. WOOD. We have made a partial list of cases in which different bureaus seem to cover the same field, but we came to the conclusion that it would be better to get every bureau to report to us every job it is working on, to index those jobs so that all relating to health would fall in one place, all relating to children in another, etc., and then to go carefully through the index, make note of cases in which there is duplication or overlapping, and bring them, first, to the attention of the various bureaus, in order to get their statements of the case, and then to the attention of Congress. We hope to do that by the next Congress.

STANDARDIZATION OF POSITIONS.

Mr. GOOD. What work have you done, if any, in standardizing the 'work of positions in the various bureaus? Take the chief clerks: there is quite a difference in the salaries paid to the chief clerks of the various bureaus, and if one gets an increase all the others ask that their salary be made to correspond with the one who is receiving the largest salary. What have you done in the way of standardizing this work to aid Congress in fixing the amount that ought to be appropriated for each position?

Mr. BROWN. One of the fundamental features of the efficiency rating system that we have recommended and that has been adopted by the Post Office and other departments is a classification of employments. I have here [indicating] a classification of Post Office Department employments. Under this classification all of the different kinds of work that we have thought were worth $900 are thrown together, and all the different kinds of work that seemed to be worth $1,200 are thrown together, and so on. I think that answers your question. As fast as the efficiency ratings are established we will make a classification of the different employments in all the depart

ments.

Mr. GOOD. You are doing that in the departments in which you have gone?

Mr. BROWN. We have done that in all of the offices in which we have established efficiency ratings, but it is a very difficult job. The question of fixing standards is very perplexing. The Postmaster General gave us instructions to the effect that he wanted the standard salaries in the Post Office Department to be liberal, and that he desired us to investigate as best we could to ascertain what were the commercial rates of pay for the various kinds of work and then to fix the standards for similar work in the Post Office Department at from 15 per cent to 30 per cent above the commercial rates. In the limited amount of time that we have had to devote to the work we have tried to live up to those instructions. Another thing that we wish to do with our appropriation for travel is to ascertain what salaries commercial concerns pay for different kinds of work; not. for instance, for bookkeeping generally, but for a particular kind of

bookkeeping similar to bookkeeping done in the Government service, so we will be able to tell you gentlemen how the Government salaries compare with those in outside employment.

Mr. STAFFORD. In the Post Office Department have you standardized the employments above those of the clerical service?

Mr. BROWN. No, sir. We have not undertaken to standardize the supervisory grades.

Mr. BYRNS. I want to call your attention to this fact: You propose to eliminate the language which has heretofore been carried in this appropriation?

Mr. BROWN. Yes, sir.

Mr. BYRNS. The law, as I understand it, under which you have been acting the permanent law-simply provides for you to in effect establish and maintain a system of efficiency ratings?

Mr. BROWN. Yes, sir.

ACCESS TO GOVERNMENT RECORDS AND DOCUMENTS.

Mr. BYRNS. The legislative bill for the past year or two has gone further and authorized an investigation as to the administrative needs of the service relating to personnel in the several executive departments and independent establishments and to investigate duplication of statistical and other work and methods of business in the various branches of the Government service. I want to ask you whether you have taken into consideration the fact that if that language is eliminated you might be up against the proposition of some head of bureau or department raising the question of your authority to go further than merely establish and maintain a system of efficiency ratings?

Mr. BROWN. That question has been raised by several bureaus. They have raised the question of our authority to make recommendations as to business methods. They have said that the law was merely permissive, and that if the head of any office did not wish to let us come in we had no right to come.

Mr. BYRNS. The greater portion of it not being permanent law and simply being carried in the appropriation bill from year to year, if you eliminate it from the bill for 1918 would you not be up against the proposition suggested?

Mr. BROWN. I think we might, and therefore we want to offer a suggestion in regard to how such difficulties might be avoided. I have here a suggestion for an amendment:

Provided, That hereafter the Bureau of Efficiency shall investigate duplication of work and methods of business in the various branches of the Government service, and officers and employees of the executive departments and other establishments shall furnish authorized representatives of the Bureau of Efficiency with all information that the bureau may require for the performance of the duties imposed on it by law and shall give such representatives access to all records and papers that may be needed for that purpose.

Mr. BYRNS. Please prepare such language as you think should be included in the bill and submit it to the committee.

Mr. BROWN. Yes, sir.

I can also give you the sum total of the results of our work from the beginning to date. During the last year we have spent $34,452 and the actual savings accomplished this year have amounted to $77,300. The recommendations that we have made this year, which ought to be put into effect (and we believe most of them will be),

amount to $215,000, so that the $34,000 expended has resulted or will result in an aggregate saving of about $290,000.

Mr. BUCHANAN. In one year?

Mr. BROWN. Yes, sir. The savings by years are as follows: For the fiscal year 1914, $100,000; 1915, $88,000; 1916, $103,000; 1917, $102,000; and for the next fiscal year $40,000 so far. The total savings have been $434,000 and our total expenses since we began have amounted to $102,000 for salaries and a little over $11,000 for contingent expenses. The accumulated totals of the savings that have been repeated year after year are as follows: For the fiscal year 1914, $100,000; for the fiscal year 1915, $188,000; for the fiscal year 1916, $279,000; for the fiscal year 1917, $393,000; and for the ensuing year, $421,000, making a total of $1,381,000.

There is one other thing; you will probably want the personnel of the bureau and the salaries paid.

Mr. GOOD. Please put that in the record.

Mr. BROWN. Yes, sir.

The statement referred to by Mr. Brown follows:

List of employees of the Bureau of Efficiency Nov. 1, 1916.

STATEMENT OF MR. CHARLES A. KRAM, AUDITOR.

AUDITOR'S OFFICE.

Mr. BYRNS. In your office you eliminate 10 clerks of class 1. That seems to be the only change in the office of the Auditor for the Post Office Department.