The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

U.S. Department of Education (ED)

Permanent Workforce: 4,144 Temporary Workforce: 440 Total Workforce: 4,584

Workforce Composition

Employee Pool Total # Men Women Hispanics Whites Blacks Asian Americans / Pacific Islanders American Indians / Alaskan Natives
Permanent Workforce 4,144 47.91% 52.09% 4.38% 54.99% 35.82% 3.64% 1.15%
Major Occupations                
Management & Program Analysis 1,011 31.26% 68.74% 2.77% 55.09% 40.06% 1.78% 0.3%
Education Program 341 32.84% 67.16% 5.57% 54.84% 34.6% 2.93% 2.05%
Equal Opportunity Compliance 302 41.39% 58.61% 8.94% 46.36% 41.06% 3.31% 0.33%
GS-14 and GS-15* 1,392 28.45% 71.55% 3.02% 71.55% 21.62% 2.87% 0.93%
Senior Pay Level* 162 59.26% 40.74% 1.85% 82.09% 12.34% 3.08% 1.23%
First-Level Officials/Managers 1 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0%
Mid-Level Officials/Managers 485 45.15% 54.85% 3.92% 63.51% 29.07% 2.68% 0.82%
Senior Level Officials/Managers 594 54.55% 45.45% 2.69% 77.27% 17% 2.02% 1.01%

*Does not include pay-banded employees

Targeted Disabilities

Employees with targeted disabilities represented 0.99% of the total government workforce in FY 2004, and of agencies with a permanent workforce of 500 or more, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, at 2.23%, had the highest percentage of employees with targeted disabilities. At ED, employees with targeted disabilities represented 1.59% of the total workforce.

EEO Complaint Processing

  1. Counseling

    There were 53 instances of pre-complaint counseling (performed by EEO counselors and/or ADR intake officers). ED timely processed 28.3% of the total number of counselings. Following counseling, 38 formal complaints of discrimination were filed.

  2. Alternative Dispute Resolution

    Of ED's 53 instances of counseling, ADR was offered 100% of the time; the parties elected to participate in 3.8% of the completed counselings; and 100% of the the ADR closures were resolved through settlements or withdrawals.

    At the formal complaint phase, ED offered ADR 5.1% of the time; the parties elected to participate in 5.1% of the complaint workload; and 33.3% of the ADR closures were resolved through settlements or withdrawals.

  3. Processing Times

    ED completed 94% of its investigations within the regulatory time frames, with an average processing time of 194 days for all investigations. In most instances, the

    regulations require completion of investigations within 180 days. Of the agencies completing 25 or more investigations, the Tennessee Valley Authority was the only agency to complete 100% of their investigations within the regulatory time frames, with an average processing time of 117 days.

    ED's average processing time for all complaint closures decreased from 706 days in FY 2003 to 542 days in FY 2004. The government-wide average was 469 days.

  4. Pending Inventory

    ED had a total of 49 complaints pending at the end of FY 2004, with 24 pending investigation for an average of 146 days; and 9 pending the issuance of final decisions for an average of 764 days.

  5. Costs

    ED made no monetary awards for the 2 counseling settlements with benefits achieved.

    ED agreed to pay a total of $15,000 for 3 complaint closures through settlement agreement, final agency decision, and final agency orders fully implementing AJ decisions. For complaint closures with benefits, the average award (including back/front pay, compensatory damages, attorney's fees, and lump sum payments) was $5,000.

    ED expended a total of $75,503 for 18 complaint investigations, for an average expenditure of $4,195.

Outcome of Counselings Completed in FY 2004

Counseling Outcomes Completed by EEO Counselor Completed Using ADR All Completed Counselings
# % # % # %
Total Instances of Counseling: 51   2   53  
Settlements 0 0.00% 2 100.00% 2 3.77%
Withdrawal/no Complaint Filed 27 52.9% 0 0% 27 50.94%
Complaints Filed*         24 45.28%
Decision to File Complaint Pending at End of Fiscal Year         0 0.00%

*Includes only complaints filed in FY 2004 where counseling was also completed during FY 2004.

Agency Use of ADR for EEO Dispute Resolution

Counselings / Complaints ADR Offers ADR Participation
# # % # %
FY 2003 Pre-Complaint Counselings 45 0 0.00% 0 0.00%
FY 2004 Pre-Complaint Counselings 53 53 100.00% 2 3.77%
Percentage Change FY 2003 to FY 2004 17.77% 0%   0%  
FY 2003 Complaints* 78 0 0.00% 0 0.00%
FY 2004 Complaints* 79 4 5.06% 4 5.06%
Percentage Change FY 2003 to FY 2004 1.28% 0%   0%  

*Includes all complaints filed in the fiscal year, including those where the counseling was completed in the prior fiscal year.

Timeliness

Total # # Timely % Timely FY 2003 APD* FY 2004 APD % Change
All Counselings (minus remands) 53 15 28.30%      
All Investigations 18 17 94.44% 197 194 -1.52%
Merit Decisions (no AJ) 5 1 20.00% 283 537 89.75%
Dismissal Decisions 2     350 244 -30.28%

*APD = Average Processing Days

Outcomes of Complaints Closed in FY 2004

Complaint Outcomes Complaint Closures Final Agency Decision (no AJ decision) Final Order (AJ Decision Fully Implemented) Final Order (AJ Decision Not Fully Implemented)
Total Closures (30) # % # % # % # %
Settlements 3 10.00%            
Withdrawals 8 26.66%            
Dismissals 2 6.66%            
Merit Decisions 17 56.66%            
Finding Discrimination 1 5.88% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%
Finding No Discrimination 16 94.11% 5 31.25% 11 68.75% 0 0.00%


This page was last modified on May 3, 2005.

Return to Home Page