## Notes from 05 April 2026 [[2026-04-04|← Previous note]] ┃ [[2026-04-06|Next note →]] I found this report, titled the _State Human Resources and Benchmarking Study_, published in February 2026. It was produced by the [[National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA)]] for the [[Niskanen Center]]. The study was commissioned by the Niskanen Center under the supervision of [[Gabe Menchaca]] , with support from the [[Recoding America Fund (RAF)]]. It aims to fill a research gap by providing a descriptive inventory of how 44 participating U.S. states manage their civil service systems, hiring, and compensation. The report shows that states operate along a spectrum of **centralization**. Some, like Utah and Vermont, use a highly centralized model where individual agencies have no internal HR offices. Others, such as Texas, are fully decentralized, allowing agencies to establish their own rules and processes. A key insight is the rise of [[Opportunity@Work|skills-based hiring]]; more than half of the interviewed states have issued executive orders or legislation to reduce or eliminate degree requirements to broaden candidate pools. To combat slow hiring speeds, states are testing approaches like "pool hiring," which allows multiple agencies to hire from a single vetted list of candidates. Regarding performance, 31 states have established **[[Performance management and appraisal|pay-for-performance]]** programs, though there is a lack of data proving their effectiveness. Managers often cluster ratings at the high end, particularly in states without cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs), using these raises to prevent real wage erosion. The report also highlights a shift toward [[Civil Service Tenure and Employment Stability|at-will employment]] in states like West Virginia and Oklahoma. However, "at-will" in government differs from the private sector, as most systems still maintain internal safeguards, documentation requirements, and review processes. Ultimately, the study suggests these varied practices and "workarounds" should serve as diagnostic signals for leaders to identify and fix underlying procedural bottlenecks.