Fiscal Year 2008 Performance and Accountability Report

Strategic Objective: Justice, Opportunity and Inclusive Workplaces

The agency has nine performance measures under its Strategic Objective. These measures are used to drive results and accountability throughout the agency. EEOC achieved or exceeded the targets for eight of these measures. The target for one measure was not met this year. The Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2007-2012 was initially implemented on October 1, 2006 (FY 2007). Throughout fiscal years 2007 and 2008, the agency modified it to address new methodologies that were required to collect data that did not already exist and to make other necessary adjustments. The modified Strategic Plan was approved by the Commission on July 28, 2008.

Our progress in meeting our nine measures is summarized below and discussed in detail in the Performance Results section of this report.

EEOC FY 2007 Performance

Measures	Targets Met or Exceeded	Targets Not Met
9	8	1

Our modified performance measurement structure identifies the results we achieved to benefit individuals in workplaces nationwide and to provide both timely and high quality service to our customers. Long Term/Annual Measure 1 was developed during OMB’s PART review in FY 2006. During discussions with OMB during FY 2007, we modified and focused this measure on our private and federal sector enforcement programs. The measure is designed to demonstrate the results the agency achieves for all individuals affected by changes in workplaces resulting from our enforcement activities. During the past fiscal year, we collected the data for our enforcement programs and established a baseline value. In early FY 2008, we established annual targets and a final goal. Since our new Efficiency Measure is directly linked to the data collected for Long Term/Annual Measure 1, we also established a base line and identified the targets and a goal for this measure. We explain our efforts to develop both measures in more detail in the Performance Section.

Enforcement

Private Sector Enforcement Program: Providing quality services that are fair and prompt for both employees and employers in our administrative processing system is vital to our mission. In FY 2008, we received 95,402 private sector charges of discrimination, a 15.2% increase from FY 2007. We also received 2,666 charges through net transfers from state and local Fair Employment Practices Agencies (FEPAs). We achieved 81,081 resolutions, with a merit factor resolution rate of 21.4%. (Merit factor resolutions include mediation and other settlements and cause findings, which, if not successfully conciliated, are considered for litigation.) In comparison, the merit factor resolution rate for FY 2007 was 22.9%. Through our administrative enforcement activities, we also secured more than $274.4 million in monetary benefits, which is lower than the $290.6 million obtained in FY 2007. Overall, we secured both monetary and non-monetary benefits for more than 18,304 people through our charge processing. The increased receipts compared with FY 2007 left us with a pending inventory of 73,951 charges at the end of the fiscal year, compared with the FY 2007 figure of 54,970.

Timeliness is a key measure of our success in processing private sector charges. Measure 2.1 tracks our progress in resolving charges in 180 days or fewer. For several important reasons, explained in the Performance Section, the annual targets and final goal for this measure were modified. Based upon the modified target for FY 2008, we resolved 48.5% of the charges within the time frame; moderately exceeding the new target of 48%.

Our other key measure for success in processing private sector charges assesses the quality of our charge files. Under Measure 2.4, we exceededour FY 2008 target of 90% of investigative charge files meeting the standard of quality, with 97.0% meeting the quality standard.

Federal Sector Enforcement Program: In our federal sector enforcement role, the EEOC is responsible for providing hearings and appeals after the initial processing of the complaints by each individual federal agency. Unlike our responsibilities in the private sector, we do not process complaints of discrimination for federal employees. In the federal sector, individuals file complaints with their own federal agencies and those agencies conduct a full and appropriate investigation of the claims raised in the complaints. Complainants can then request a hearing before an EEOC administrative judge. In FY 2008, we received a total of 8,036 requests for hearings, which is slightly more than the 7,869 received in FY 2007. Additionally, we resolved a total of 7,138 complaints and secured more than $104.7 million in relief for parties in these complaints. Our Strategic Plan for FY 2008 set a target for Measure 2.2 to resolve 50% of federal sector hearings in 180 days or fewer. We did not meet our goal, resolving 38.6% of hearings cases in 180 days or fewer; this is below the target for FY 2008. This is due in large part to the agency’s focus on enhancing the quality of federal hearings and the loss of a significant number of administrative judges during the year.

The EEOC also adjudicates appeals of federal agency actions on discrimination complaints and ensures agency compliance with decisions issued on those appeals. During FY 2008, the EEOC received 5,082 requests for appeals of final agency actions in the federal sector. We made significant gains in processing our federal sector appellate inventory during FY 2008. Our goal for Measure 2.3 was to resolve 62% of appeals within 180 days or fewer. In FY 2008, we resolved 5,303 appeals, 63.3% of them within 180 days of their receipt. We were able to exceed our goal because of effective management of the appellate inventory and technological innovations. For FY 2009, we are increasing our target to 64% to continue to address our appeals workload in an ambitious manner.

Mediation

Private Sector Mediation Program: The EEOC’s mediation program has been very successful and has contributed to our ability, over the past few years, to better manage our growing inventory and resolve charges in 180 days or fewer. In FY 2008, the EEOC’s National Mediation Program secured 8,840 resolutions, which is 2% more than the 8,649 reported in FY 2007. We obtained more than $124.1 million in monetary benefits for complainants from mediation resolutions, which is equal to the $124 million in monetary benefits in FY 2007.

Performance Measure 2.5 highlights an important aspect of our private sector mediation program: the confidence that employers and charging parties have in the program. Participant confidence in our program remains high, with our FY 2008 figures reflecting that 96.5% of all participants would return to EEOC’s Mediation Program in the future. This exceeds our target for Performance Measure 2.5 of maintaining a 90% rate. We believe this high confidence level helps with our continuing efforts to convince parties to charges, particularly employer representatives, of the value of the mediation approach. In addition, we are increasing our target for FY 2009 to 92% as we strive toward a higher final goal of 95% by FY 2012 for our current Strategic Plan.

Although participants almost uniformly view our mediation program favorably, the percentage of employers agreeing to mediate is considerably lower than the percentage of charging parties agreeing to mediate. As part of our effort to increase the participation of employers in the mediation program, we have encouraged employers to enter into Universal Agreements to Mediate (UAMs). These agreements reflect the employer’s commitment to utilize the mediation process to resolve charges.

Many employers entered into these agreements in FY 2008, resulting in a cumulative multi-year total of 1,452 UAMs (177 National/Regional UAMS and 1,275 Local UAMs). This is a 14% increase from our FY 2007 level of 1,269 UAMs.

Federal Sector Mediation Program: Using Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) techniques to resolve workplace disputes throughout the federal government can have a powerful impact on agencies’ EEO complaint inventories and, in turn, the Commission’s hearings and appeals inventories. Resolving disputes as early as possible in the federal sector EEO process improves the work environment and reduces the number of formal complaints, allowing all agencies, including the EEOC, to redeploy resources that otherwise would be devoted to these activities. In addition, a growing number of agencies have incorporated dispute prevention techniques into their ADR programs, further increasing productivity and reducing the overall number of employment disputes.

Data submitted by federal agencies at the close of FY 2007, the most recent data available, indicate that there were 37,809 instances of pre-complaint EEO counseling across the federal government. Of that number, the parties participated in ADR in 18,262 cases, or 48.3% of the time.

The Commission’s efforts in promoting and expanding mediation/ADR at all stages of the federal EEO complaint process also appear to be having a positive effect on federal agencies’ EEO complaint inventories, as the number of formal complaints filed in FY 2007 declined by 2.2% over the previous year. As more agencies expand their efforts to offer ADR during the informal process, we expect to see continued decreases in the number of formal complaints filed, which will reduce costs for complainants and all federal agencies, and enable agencies to focus resources on their primary missions.

EEOC continues to actively pursue a variety of ways to assist federal agencies in improving alternative dispute resolution by identifying and sharing best practices, providing assistance in program development and improvements, providing training to federal employees and managers on the benefits of ADR, and maintaining a web page that serves as a clearinghouse for information related to federal sector ADR. We will continue to expand technical assistance efforts with agencies to encourage the development of effective ADR programs and promote ADR training among government managers and staff.

Litigation

The Commission’s litigation program provides relief for victims of discrimination, many of whom have no other recourse, and also encourages employers to resolve cases in the EEOC’s administrative process before litigation is contemplated. In FY 2008, EEOC field legal units filed 290 “merits” lawsuits and 36 subpoena enforcement and other actions. 179 of the new filings were individual suits and 111 were class suits. Six trials were held this fiscal year. Legal staff resolved 339 “merits” lawsuits for a total monetary recovery of $102,151,138 (“merits” lawsuits include direct suits and interventions alleging violations of the substantive provisions of the statutes enforced by the Commission and suits to enforce administrative settlements). Of these resolutions, 265 contained Title VII claims, 47 contained Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) claims, 41 contained Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA) claims, and 3 contained Equal Pay Act of 1964 (EPA) claims. The number of total merits lawsuits is less than the sum of suits based on each individual law as some suits are filed on multiple bases. We also resolved 27 subpoena enforcement and other actions during the fiscal year. In terms of dollars recovered in direct, indirect and intervention lawsuits by statute, EEOC recovered $65,611,235 in Title VII resolutions, $30,270,298 in ADEA resolutions, $3,549,033 in ADA resolutions, $971,961 in EPA resolutions and $1,748,610 in resolutions involving more than one statute. At the end of FY 2008, the number of cases on the EEOC’s active docket that involve multiple aggrieved parties or challenges to discriminatory employment policies was 238 or 45% of our total year-end caseload.

Refer to our website at www.eeoc.gov for a fuller depiction of litigation statistics and year-by-year data comparisons.

The Office of General Counsel has made implementation of the agency’s new systemic program a chief priority this year. The systemic initiative was launched in April 2006 with the Commission’s adoption of the recommendations of an internal task force, which prescribed comprehensive measures to improve all aspects of the agency’s systemic work. The Commission’s objective was to strengthen and modernize its nationwide approach to identifying, investigating, and litigating systemic cases, which the task force report defines as “pattern or practice, policy and/or class cases where the alleged discrimination has a broad impact on an industry, profession, company, or geographic location.” Since 2006, the Office of General Counsel has refocused its law enforcement activities to carry out the Commission’s mandate that “combating systemic discrimination should be a top priority at EEOC and an intrinsic, ongoing part of the agency's daily work.”[1]

This year, the Commission reviewed the progress of the systemic initiative at a public meeting and received a report from the Committee of Advisors for Systemic Enforcement (“CASE”), an advisory group of senior enforcement and litigation staff created by the task force to assess the agency’s overall effectiveness in combating systemic discrimination and serve as a resource on systemic matters.[2] As reported by CASE, the agency has made substantial progress towards a revitalized and dynamic systemic program. The number of systemic investigations has increased substantially. At the end of the fiscal year, 38 Commissioners’ charges were under investigation, compared to only 15 Commissioners’ charges in investigation as of March 31, 2006. Systemic investigations based on charges filed by the public have also increased significantly. Systemic lawsuits have been filed across the country under every statute enforced by the agency, involving a broad set of bases and issues and a wide variety of industries, and included cases that advance the agency’s E-RACE initiative.

Systemic cases are significantly more complex cases. They require greater resources, more highly trained investigators and attorneys, and sophisticated expert analysis by statisticians, industrial psychologists, and labor market economists. To address these needs, we are making more efficient use of our legal staff through partnerships among district offices and collaborative work on the larger cases. We are investing in the technology tools that are critical to a vigorous nationwide litigation practice. We are providing training to our staff and are working to better equip our lawyers and investigators to manage and analyze the very large amounts of case-related data in support of systemic investigations and litigation.

To accomplish the goals of the systemic initiative, the Office of General Counsel anticipates a shift in the composition of its litigation docket over time. We expect fewer small, individual cases and more cases on behalf of larger groups of individuals. While this is leading to a decline in the total number of lawsuits filed each year, compared to previous years, we expect that the overall impact of our litigation will be enhanced as larger cases are filed and resolved. Shifting the balance will enable us to use the agency’s limited resources in the most efficient and effective manner. Nonetheless, individual cases, particularly those under the Americans with Disabilities Act, will remain an important component of the agency’s docket and will continue to be strategically selected to have impact beyond their individual circumstances.

We highlight four noteworthy resolutions of systemic discrimination cases this year.[3] The largest by far was a suit against Sidley Austin, a large international law firm based in Chicago. The suit alleged that the firm implemented and maintained an age-based retirement policy and downgraded or expelled from its partnership certain partners age 40 and older because of their age. The case raised the important question of the circumstances under which members of a professional partnership can be considered employees under the ADEA, with important consequences for many professional partnerships under the employment discrimination laws generally. The consent decree provides that for purposes of resolving the matter, the law firm agrees that each person for whom EEOC sought relief was an employee under the ADEA. The decree provides for $27.5 million to be distributed to 32 eligible claimants. The decree prohibits defendant from: (1) terminating, expelling, retiring, or reducing the compensation of a partner because of age; (2) maintaining any formal or informal mandatory partner retirement policy or practice based on age; (3) pressuring a partner to change partnership status or to retire because of age; (4) requiring partners to cease their service on any firm committee (except the Executive or Management Committees), or as a practice group head, because of age; or (5) taking retaliatory action against any person for conduct related to the case or the claims in the case. EEOC v. Sidley Austin, LLP (N.D. Ill.) (resolved Oct. 4, 2007).

A systemic suit against a New York photographic and electronic equipment retailer alleged national origin discrimination against Hispanic warehouse employees with respect to wages, fringe benefits, and promotion. The consent decree, filed simultaneously with the complaint, provides that the company will equalize the wages of Hispanic employees to their non-Hispanic coworkers and will provide $4.3 million in monetary relief to individuals who were paid less, not promoted, or denied benefits because they are Hispanic. EEOC v. B & H Foto & Electronics, Inc. (S.D.N.Y.) (resolved Nov. 29, 2007).

A suit against one of New York’s most famous restaurants alleged that the restaurant engaged in severe and pervasive sexual, racial, and national origin harassment of female, black, and Hispanic employees, as well as retaliation. The consent decree provides for a claim fund of $2.2 million to be allocated to 75 victims of the harassment and/or retaliation. Additionally, the restaurant will establish a telephone hotline which employees may use to raise any discrimination complaints, distribute a revised policy against discrimination and retaliation, and provide training to all employees against discrimination and retaliation. EEOC v. Tavern on the Green (S.D.N.Y.) (resolved Jun. 3, 2008).

In a suit against an automobile manufacturer in the Midwest, the EEOC alleged that the company required apprenticeship applicants to pass a pen-and-paper test in order to be placed on an apprentice eligibility “wait list,” and that this test had a disparate impact based on race. The EEOC simultaneously filed a court complaint and a consent decree to resolve claims on behalf of a class of African American apprenticeship applicants who were denied opportunities as a result of the discriminatory test. The case was consolidated with a private class action. Under the consent decree, the settlement will provide $1.6 million to 666 claimants and $625,000 in attorneys’ fees, and will place 55 class members on the apprentice eligibility “wait list.” Pursuant to an earlier settlement of a related case, an industrial organizational psychologist selected by the parties will design and validate an apprenticeship selection instrument(s) consistent with the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures and professional standards within the field of industrial organizational psychology. EEOC v. Automotive Components Holdings, LLC, Visteon Corp., & Ford Motor Co. (S.D. Ohio) (resolved Dec. 20, 2007).

Outreach, Education and Technical Assistance

Our Strategic Objective also incorporates the concept that preventing discrimination is an important part of our mission. We briefly describe below some of the key outreach initiatives we conducted in FY 2008 and elaborate on them in the Performance Section of this report.

In FY 2008, we promoted voluntary compliance with the federal equal employment laws to prevent or reduce discriminatory barriers to employment opportunities, including the promotion of individual awareness and understanding of rights and responsibilities under those laws. We provide outreach and education to small businesses, especially those that lack the resources to maintain human resources staff, and to stakeholders in under served communities across the nation, including those with limited English proficiency, such as recently arrived immigrants.

In FY 2009, we will continueour outreach, education, and technical assistance programs to meet the needs of diverse audiences and will partner with the employer community and other stakeholders to foster strategies to recognize and prevent discrimination in the workplace. We remain prepared to respond to unanticipated issues that arise in the workplace due to current events, so that the EEOC stays on the forefront in informing both employees and employers alike of their rights and responsibilities in the ever-changing workplace environment.

Special Outreach Initiatives

The Commission is working cooperatively and collaboratively with the small business community to proactively prevent employment discrimination and to promote voluntary compliance through its Small Business Initiative. We recognize that many small businesses do not have separate human resource and legal staff to guide them through the regulatory process. Therefore, it is important to establish open lines of communication and provide the necessary training and tools to ensure that small employers comply with the law.

Youth@Work: We educate students and young workers about their workplace rights and responsibilities, including specific discussions on harassment and how to seek assistance to address or report incidents of discrimination and harassment that occur in the workplace. Through our Youth@Work Initiative, we reach out to schools and educators to share training materials and, as resources allow, develop and present training to teenagers about their workplace rights and responsibilities and assist these young workers as they enter and navigate through the workplace. Furthermore, we provide training and information to businesses that employ young workers to encourage them to proactively address discrimination issues confronting young workers.

E-RACE: In an effort to identify and implement new strategies that will strengthen its enforcement of Title VII and advance the statutory right to a workplace free of race and color discrimination, EEOC developed the E‑RACE (Eradicating Racism and Colorism in Employment) Initiative during FY 2007. In FY 2008, the EEOC continued to identify issues, criteria and barriers that contribute to race and color discrimination, explored strategies to improve the administrative processing and the litigation of race and color discrimination claims, and enhanced public awareness of race and color discrimination in employment.

LEAD: In the federal sector, the EEOC developed the LEAD (Leadership for the Employment of Americans with Disabilities) Initiative to address the declining number of employees with targeted disabilities in the federal workforce. This national outreach and education campaign includes seminars, educational events and focus group sessions to explore the issue of declining employment for individuals with severe disabilities and identify concrete solutions to address the problem.

The agency educates employers and other members of the public about systemic discrimination, including trends and issues that the agency has identified and cases the agency has handled through its Systemic Program. We recognize the educational and deterrent value of publicizing our court victories, particularly the cases resolving systemic discrimination, because of the ripple effect such decisions can have on promoting changes both across the impacted industry and in related industries. In addition, we issued 675 press releases on our enforcement activities to further raise public awareness and encourage compliance.

Federal Managers’ Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA)

The EEOC’s management controls and financial management systems were sound during FY 2008, with the exception of 20 findings of financial non-conformances. Seven financial non-conformances were carried over from FY 2007. The financial non-conformances were identified in several audit reports prepared by the Office of Inspector General.

In FY 2008, the agency corrected 16 of the 20 identified financial non-conformances—the seven non-conformances carried over from FY 2007 and nine non-conformances identified in FY 2008. The agency has implemented corrective action plans to resolve the remaining four non-conformances in FY 2009.

Based on the actions taken and taking the agency’s controls environment as a whole, the agency concludes that during FY 2008 its financial and management controls systems were in compliance with the Federal Managers’ Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA). Eighty percent of the identified non-conformances were resolved during the fiscal year, and it has plans in place to resolve the remaining financial non-conformances in FY 2009. The controls systems were effective; agency resources were used consistent with the agency’s mission; the resources were used in compliance with laws and regulations; and, there was minimal potential for waste, fraud, and mismanagement of the resources.

Financial Highlights

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular Number A-136 was used as guidance for the preparation of the accompanying financial statements. EEOC prepares four financial statements: the Consolidated Balance Sheets, Consolidated Statements of Net Cost, Consolidated Changes in Net Position, and the Combined Statements of Budgetary Resources. In FY 2007 the Consolidated Statements of Financing was moved to footnote 18 and renamed the Reconciliation of Net Cost of Operations to Budget as outline in OMB Circular A-136. Outlined in the following section are the purpose of each statement, an explanation of any significant amounts, and an explanation of significant fluctuations between FY 2008 and FY 2007.

Consolidated Balance Sheets

The Consolidated Balance Sheets present amounts that are owned or managed by EEOC (assets); amounts owed (liabilities); and the net position of the agency divided between the cumulative results of operations and unexpended appropriations.

The FY 2008 cumulative result of operations shows a negative balance. This is due to amounts accumulated over the years by EEOC from financing sources less expenses and losses and an amount representing EEOC’s liabilities for such things as accrued leave and actuarial liabilities not covered by available budgetary resources. EEOC’s FY 2008 future funded annual leave balances and actuarial FECA liability totaled $27 million.

Consolidated Statements of Net Cost

The Consolidated Statements of Net Cost presents the gross cost incurred by major programs less any revenue earned. Overall, in FY 2008, EEOC’s Consolidated Statements Net Cost increased by $14 million or 4%. The allocation of costs for FY 2008 shows that Private Sector resources used for Enforcement and Litigation increased $13 million while the Federal Sector Programs only increased $1 million over the past fiscal year.

Consolidated Statement of Changes in Net Position

The Consolidated Statement of Changes in Net Position represent the change in the net position for FY 2008 and FY 2007 from the cost of operations, appropriations received and used, net of rescissions, and the financing of some costs by other government agencies. The Consolidated Statement of Changes in Net Position decreased over last year by $2 million. EEOC’s total asset exceeded total liabilities (funded and unfunded) by $14 million.

Combined Statements of Budgetary Resources

The Combined Statements of Budgetary Resources shows how budgetary resources were made available and the status of those resources at the end of the fiscal year. In FY2008, EEOC received a $329 million appropriation, with no rescission. EEOC ended FY2008 with an increase in total budgetary resources of $2 million over last year. Resources not available for new obligations at the end of the year totaled $9 million and $8 million in FY 2008 and FY 2007, respectively. The unobligated balance not available represents expired budget authority from prior years that are no longer available for new obligations.

Use of Resources

The line chart below displays a 6-years historical view of EEOC’s use of resources. Compensation and benefits consumes the majority of the budget at 69%. The second and third items that have consumed a major portion, of which 8% of the budget were for payments to state and local FEPAs, and rent which also consumed 8% of the budget and are included in non-payroll costs.  

EEOC Total Budget FY 2004 - FY 2009

The pie chart displays EEOC’s FY 2008 use of resources by major object class. The major portions: Compensation & Benefits, State & Local, and Rent and Utilities. Resources used for Information Technology as well as general operating expenses were consumed at the rate of 13%. Other agency programs (Litigation, ADR contracts, INTAKE and Outreach) were consumed at the lowest rate of 2%. In comparison to last year, compensation and benefits increased 3% over last year’s percentage of 66%.

The dual axis chart that depicts EEOC’s compensation and benefits versus full-time equivalents (FTE) over the past six years shows an increase in both FY 2008 FTEs and compensation and benefits costs. EEOC’s full-time equivalents in FY 2008 increased in part by new-hires hired to replace retiring employees, EEOC’s Congressional Budget FTE ceiling increased to 2,556 in FY 2009. EEOC ended FY2008 with 2,166 employees on board. (The current average salary is approximately $106,252, an increase of $14,092 or 13% of the FY 2004 average salary). 

EEOC Compensation and Benefits vs. Full Time Equivalents

Performance Results

Integration of Elements in the Strategic Plan

EEOC implemented its Strategic Plan for FYs 2007 through 2012 at the beginning of FY 2007. The plan describes our overall strategic framework for six years. As noted in the previous section of this report, the agency has since modified the Strategic Plan by revising several areas of the performance structure (see the performance discussion below and the Addendum at the end of this section). These revisions were approved by the Commission on July 28, 2008. This section of the report summarizes the results achieved in FY 2008 for the nine performance measures described in our modified Strategic Plan.

The framework for the modified Strategic Plan in effect for FY 2008 represents an improvement in our overall strategic planning and measurement approach because it is designed to be more results oriented, customer centered, and performance driven. The plan melds our strategic objective, performance measures, and important program initiatives, all of which are integral to the accomplishment of our mission. The graphic presented on page 5 illustrates the integration of these elements, enabling us to achieve and evaluate our results for FY 2008.

Strategic Objective: Justice, Opportunity and Inclusive Workplaces

The EEOC is the nation’s primary enforcer of the civil rights employment laws, which prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, national origin, color, religion, sex, age, disability, and, as of November 21, 2009, genetic information. The agency was created in 1964 for the purposes of resolving charges of employment discrimination and securing relief for victims of discrimination. More than 40 years later, the public continues to rely on the Commission to carry out these fundamental responsibilities and bring justice and opportunity to the workplace. Our fight against discrimination goes beyond enforcing the law. The best way to combat workplace discrimination is to prevent it from happening in the first place. Educating employers and workers about their rights and responsibilities under the law is the first step toward promoting an inclusive workplace, where all workers are judged on their talents and abilities without regard to any protected characteristic.

EEOC’s major programs and activities are investigating and resolving charges of discrimination; litigating complaints of discrimination; conducting hearings, resolving appeals of discrimination complaints and promoting equal employment opportunity in the federal workplace; and educating the public about its rights and responsibilities. All of these programs and activities are done in the service of four shared goals:

• remedying and deterring unlawful employment discrimination;
• increasing public confidence in the fair and prompt resolution of employment discrimination disputes;
• increasing voluntary compliance with the federal equal employment laws; and
• increasing individual awareness and understanding of rights and responsibilities.

The modified Strategic Plan addresses many of the areas raised in the Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) review of the agency in 2006. The PART review resulted in a rating for the agency of Results Not Demonstrated, primarily because OMB determined that the agency’s approach, reflected in its former Strategic Plan, was insufficient to measure performance.

The new measurement structure and approach developed during our PART review is expected to enable us to enhance our program and the services we deliver to the public. The improvement plan developed with the PART focuses on three broad areas: 1) identifying and implementing challenging annual targets and final outcome goals for all agency performance measures; 2) developing in collaboration with its state and local partners methods for measuring performance that supports the agency’s goals; and 3) continuing to implement structural changes and other recommendations to improve efficiency and effectiveness of the program.

During fiscal years 2007 and 2008, we began to address all three elements in our PART improvement plan. The Strategic Plan we issued at the beginning of fiscal year 2007 addressed the first element of the improvement plan. We subsequently engaged in extensive agency reviews of the performance structure and performance measures that were initially included in the agency’s PART evaluation and our Strategic Plan. Our reviews resulted in several adjustments that modified the Strategic Plan. These modifications are included in the current performance measurement structure graphically displayed on page 5. (Also, see the Addendum at the end of this Performance Results section.) On July 28, 2008, the Commission approved the current configuration of the Plan, including adjustments to some performance measure baselines and annual targets, which are explained under the relevant measures in the following pages.

During this time, we also have been working extensively with the FEPAs to identify one or more forms of measurement that will reflect their contribution toward achieving EEOC’s strategic goal and its mission. To ensure collaboration in developing a measure, during fiscal year 2007 we established and tasked a joint EEOC/FEPA Work Group with identifying potential functions to measure. The Work Group was comprised of both EEOC staff and representatives from several FEPAs around the country. The Work Group, in developing its final recommendation, took into consideration information received from many of the FEPAs in response to the Work Group’s initial draft proposal as well as discussions and presentations during the annual FY 2008 EEOC/FEPA Conference. The Work Group’s final recommendation is pending review and approval at this time.

Our performance structure will enable us to strive toward meeting the goals and measures we have adopted, which include our two long-term performance measures, six annual performance measures, and one efficiency measure in our modified Strategic Plan for FYs 2007 through 2012.

Performance Measure Highlights

Long-Term/Annual Measure 1

We believe it is important to measure our success by looking beyond the monetary and equitable relief we secure through our enforcement actions. Our Long-Term/Annual measure focuses on tracking the improvements that are made in the workplace as a direct result of our enforcement programs. We selected this measure because, when we secure changes in employment policies, practices and procedures through our enforcement programs, we have a positive impact not only on the immediate victims of discrimination, but also on all individuals in the affected workplace. Through organization-wide changes, individuals benefit from a more inclusive workplace and have greater opportunities to compete on a level playing field. With the agency’s renewed emphasis on combating systemic discrimination, we expect to make significant increases over time in the number of individuals who benefit from our enforcement activities.

The Long-Term/Annual Measure was developed to focus on all enforcement services we provide to the public that result in workplace benefits. These results include benefits from administrative resolutions (including mediation), litigation resolutions, and federal sector hearings and appeals resolutions. Beginning in fiscal year 2005, we began collecting data on the number of individuals benefited through private sector administrative resolutions (including mediations) only. Based on that experience, we adapted the same data collection approach for all of our enforcement programs and established annual targets and our final goal for fiscal year 2012.

Enforcement resolutions from our administrative charge processing, litigation, and federal sector hearings and appeals programs benefited approximately 5.25 million individuals in FY 2008, or a 222.9% increase over our FY 2007 baseline number of 1.626 million individuals benefited. Our annual target for FY 2008 was a 2% increase over our baseline or approximately 1.658 million individuals. We greatly exceeded the target for several reasons.

This measure was developed during our OMB PART review and was included in the agency’s new Strategic Plan issued at the beginning of FY 2007. We subsequently established annual targets and a final goal based on our limited experience with the data we had already been collecting for several years for our administrative charge processing program. It was important to include all of our enforcement programs in the measure, but it was difficult to estimate their effect on the final results. In addition, there was the strong possibility that one or two large enforcement actions against a nationwide entity could affect the results in a significant way in any one year. For example, in FY 2008 two large resolutions—one in our administrative charge program and another in our federal sector hearings program—contributed extensively to this year’s results. Approximately 51% of the total number of individuals benefiting from our enforcement programs in FY 2008 was from these two resolutions. If the number of these individuals were removed from the total, we benefited approximately 2.547 million individuals, or about a 56.6% increase over our FY 2007 baseline. This is still a significant increase over the previous fiscal year and over our target for FY 2008.

Our FY 2009 annual target for this measure is to increase the number of individuals benefiting from improvements to organizations’ policies, practices and procedures by 10% over the FY 2007 baseline. Although our FY 2008 results were substantially above that level, we will retain the current target levels for now, so that we can use the results for at least one more year before reevaluating them.

Efficiency Measure

Enhancing the number of working people who benefit for each agency Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) position demonstrates our efficiency, because over 70% of the agency’s budget is dedicated to compensation and benefits. This entirely new area of measurement relies on the number of individuals benefited by our enforcement programs, which are collected for Long Term/Annual Measure 1. As noted in connection with that measure, during FYs 2007 and 2008, we also identified annual targets and established our final goal for fiscal year 2012.

The correlation to our FTE level is appropriate as it recognizes that our staff are the direct contributors to positive change in the workplace and because staff levels are susceptible to change. We believe that this measure will be a compelling indicator of the efficiency of our operations.

The agency had 2,176 Full-Time Equivalent positions at the end of FY 2008. Approximately 5.25 million individuals benefited through our enforcement programs (as reported for Long Term/Annual Measure 1), because of improvements to policies, practices or procedures. Therefore, approximately 2,412.7 individuals benefited for every FTE. This was an increase of 220.2% over the FY 2007 baseline, compared to our 1.8% target increase for FY 2008. Absent the two large case resolutions discussed in the previous measure, 1,170.5 individuals benefited for each FTE; or a 55.3% increase over the FY 2007 baseline. Our FY 2009 target is to achieve a 2.2% increase over the baseline. Although our increase for FY 2008 was substantially above this target, as we similarly noted under Long Term/Annual Measure 1, we will retain the current target levels and reevaluate them after another year of data.

Long-Term Measure 2

If the public is aware of our enforcement activities and believes that we have handled discrimination complaints effectively, they will be more likely to rely on us to investigate, mediate, litigate, adjudicate a federal complaint, and otherwise resolve allegations of discrimination. Additionally, if the agency’s reputation is one of a fair and responsible enforcer of the civil rights employment laws, then employers, attorneys and other members of the public will be more likely to defer to our assessment of discrimination complaints and commit to voluntary compliance through mediation, settlement or conciliation.

To measure the public’s confidence in the agency’s enforcement of the federal equal employment opportunity laws, the agency engaged a reputable private organization to conduct a survey in fiscal year 2007 of a representative sample of individuals nationwide. From that survey, we were able to establish a baseline value for fiscal year 2007, and a two-staged multi-year approach to reach a final goal by fiscal year 2012.

The agency previously identified a lower percentage value as its 2007 baseline from the survey results and initially established lower multi-year targets. During fiscal year 2008, the agency re-evaluated the responses from the survey participants and the methodology used to estimate the baseline value for this measure. As a result of this re-evaluation, the agency adjusted its baseline and its targets/final goal to indicate that more respondents to the survey reflected confidence in EEOC’s enforcement of the laws it enforces. The Commission approved the modified approach with its July 28, 2008, vote on the Strategic Plan. (A further explanation is provided in the Addendum at the end of this section.) Improvements in confidence will be measured in multi-year intervals to provide enough time to be able to measure reasonable changes in the nationwide results. In addition to the efforts to achieve the six Annual Measures, below, which are linked to improvements in the public’s confidence in EEOC’s enforcement efforts, we anticipate engaging in other initiatives that will influence this measure. We will conduct a survey during fiscal year 2010 to measure any change in the nationwide results for this measure. Consequently, the agency currently has met its target for this measure with the establishment of the baseline value. We will obtain new results when we conduct a follow-up survey in FY 2010.

Annual Measures 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3 focus on the resolution of private sector charges, federal sector hearings, and federal sector appeals. We have established final goals for fiscal year 2012 for all of these measures, as reflected in the modifications made to this Strategic Plan. In recognition of the maxim that justice delayed is justice denied, these measures ensure the timely resolution of complaints in each of our major complaint handling activities.

The goal of resolving private sector charges within 180 days is important to containing the overall average charge processing time. The Commission approved modifications to the agency’s Strategic Plan, which resulted in revisions to the annual targets and final goal for Annual Measure 2.1 based upon several compelling reasons; such as, dramatically increasing workload, declining staff and increased statutory responsibilities (see the Addendum at the end of this Performance Results section for additional information). The agency moderately exceeded its modified FY 2008 target at 48.5%. Our annual target for FY 2009 and FY 2010 will remain at 48%, as we increase our efforts to maintain this level of timely service and the quality of our investigations with fewer staffing resources to handle the growing inventory of charges (see our results for Annual Measure 2.4, below).

Annual Measure 2.2 addresses the resolution of federal sector hearings within 180 days. Although the targets and final goal reflects the agency’s commitment to continue the timely handling of federal sector hearings, our results compared to the annual targets have been difficult to maintain since FY 2006, when the target rose to 50%. The annual target remains 50% through FY 2009 and then rises from 52% for FY 2010 to 54% as a final goal for FY 2012. Our efforts to achieve this goal have become more difficult because of increasing workloads and decreasing staff, as well as greater attention being focused on enhancing the quality of hearings. For FY 2008 we resolved only 38.6% of the hearings within 180 days or fewer. We will renew efforts to achieve next year’s 50% target and prepare for the future increases in the targets for this measure.

Annual Measure 2.3 addresses the resolution of federal sector appeals within 180 days or fewer. The annual targets for this measure have consistently increased and the agency has been able to achieve them every year. FY 2008 was another successful effort where the agency resolved 63.3% of its appeals within 180 days or fewer, exceeding our target of 62%. The target for FY 2009 increases by 2 percentage points to 64%. We will continue to increase the proportion of appeals resolved within the time frame, as we move toward our 70% final goal in FY 2012.

Annual Measure 2.4 ensures that investigative files meet quality standards. As reflected in the modifications, we also established a final goal for this measure. Quality is determined by a large proportion of sampled investigative files reviewed meeting two critical quality criteria: 1) the appropriate charge categorization and file documentation supports the actions taken; and, 2) the resolution of the charge is supported. This measure is intended to ensure that we do not complete our work quickly at the expense of performing our work well. The annual targets for this measure have increased since the baseline was established in FY 2005 and we have exceeded these targets each year. FY 2008 is another year we exceeded the target. Although we are retaining the 90% target for FY 2009, we have increased the annual targets by 1 percentage point each year from FY 2010 to FY 2012.

Annual Measure 2.5 focuses on the EEOC’s mediation/ADR program. We recognize that the public’s confidence in our mediation program has a significant impact on its perception of the EEOC as a whole. We obtain results for this measure by surveying participants in EEOC’s mediation program and tabulating responses about their confidence in using the program. This measure has been used by the agency since 2004, so we have significant trend data upon which to base our targets. The confidence level in this program is consistently high. With the recent approval of the Strategic Plan, which significantly increased the final goal, the Commission recognized the need to enhance the results for this measure because a high level of confidence helps to convince participants, particularly company representatives, of the value of alternative dispute resolution. The Commission year-end results of 96.5% of the respondents and charging parties reporting confidence in EEOC’s ADR program exceeded the increased FY 2008 target of 91% for this measure.

Annual Measure 2.6 places a premium on maintaining the high level of successful resolutions in our litigation program. Successful resolutions include cases decided by favorable court order and those concluded through a consent decree or a settlement agreement in litigation. Achieving success on this measure will ensure that we continue to exercise our prosecutorial discretion responsibly, while allowing us to take on challenging issues and litigate complex cases, including cases of systemic discrimination. As our systemic litigation program continues to develop, this measure remains significant and ambitious because the achievement of success in systemic cases is challenging and resource-intensive. This year, we exceeded our goal with a 91.2% litigation success rate based on the results of a three-year weighted average (FYs 2006 to 2008). The success rate for FY 2008 alone was 92.0%. We are continuing this ambitious target in FY 2009.

Review of Litigation Results

For several years, the EEOC has attained the goal set forth in its Strategic Plan of maintaining at least a 90% success rate in lawsuit resolutions. Because the majority of lawsuits are resolved through settlement, this performance measure does not describe EEOC’s results in cases adjudicated by a judge or jury. As in this fiscal year, the Office of General Counsel conducted a review of the cases adjudicated to final decision by a judge or jury over the past five years, from FY 2003 through FY 2007. We also reviewed the results for private plaintiffs represented by counsel in employment discrimination cases adjudicated by a judge or jury in the federal courts, using data compiled by the Administrative Office of the United States Courts.

Our review focused on the results for two separate types of outcomes, both at the district court level: 1) non-trial adjudications (i.e., cases resolved by court orders such as summary judgment and dismissals); and 2) trial results.

Our review showed that:

• For private plaintiffs represented by counsel, 13.2% of all case resolutions were losses through non-trial adjudications; for EEOC, 5.9% of all case resolutions were losses through non-trial adjudications. (These figures treat voluntary dismissals with prejudice as settlements for private plaintiffs, because that is how most private settlements occur, but as non-trial adjudication losses for EEOC, because the agency never settles out of court.)
• In cases decided at trial, private plaintiffs who were represented by counsel won 38.3% of all trials; the EEOC won 50.8% of all trials.

The table below illustrates the results of our review in more detail.

This review is intended to provide context for the data on EEOC litigation results. It is not intended to represent that the differences in results are statistically significant, and it attempts no judgment on the reasons for the different outcomes.

In the future, we plan to perform a similar comparative review of data at the appellate court level, focusing on the reversal rate for plaintiff wins and the reversal rate for defendant wins. Our internal data shows that in EEOC cases where there was a decisive outcome on appeal in the period from FY 2003 to FY 2007:

• An appellate court reversed or remanded EEOC wins in two out of 12 cases.
• An appellate court reversed defendant wins in 19 out of 35 appeals in cases brought by EEOC.

Review of Content of EEOC Litigation Docket

As in last fiscal year, we reviewed the content of our litigation docket to determine whether our case filings were representative of the categories of claims we are charged with enforcing. To maintain a balanced litigation program, we seek to enforce the law actively with respect to each of the categories protected by the statutes under our charge. The figure below illustrates the number of cases filed in fiscal year 2007 containing allegations with respect to each of the protected categories for which we have litigation authority. (Note that the total number of allegations represented in this chart exceeds the total number of cases filed because many cases contain multiple allegations. Refer to www.eeoc.gov for additional statistics on suit filings and resolutions.)

Content of EEOC Litigation Docket FY 2007

*Of these 143 sex discrimination suits, 87 suits contained claims of sexual harassment.

**Of these 127 retaliation suits, 100 suits contained claims under additional bases.

Because of statutory prerequisites for our litigation, a further analysis is necessary to evaluate our case-selection decisions. Under Title VII, the ADA, and the ADEA, the EEOC must make efforts to resolve violations through informal conciliation before filing suit. For those statutes, only cases in which conciliation efforts have failed comprise the pool of potential litigation vehicles for the Commission. We looked at the number of conciliation failures in some typical categories of our litigation to determine whether our suit filings were reflective of the pool of available cases. We focused on five representative types of cases subject to a conciliation requirement: race/black, sexual harassment, national origin/ Hispanic, age and disability. We calculated the percentage of each type of case filed compared to the total number of suits filed and also calculated the percentage of conciliation failures under each of these case-types compared to all conciliation failures (using FY 2007 data). The figure below illustrates these comparisons:

This review reveals that our selection of race/black, national origin/Hispanic, and sexual harassment cases for litigation was comparable to their respective share of the cases available to consider for litigation after conciliation efforts failed. We also note that, to the extent that our selection of sexual harassment cases for litigation exceeded the percentage of these charges available for litigation, most of our sexual harassment cases achieve a high impact by seeking relief for multiple victims of discrimination. Our selection of age and disability cases for litigation was lower than the availability of these cases for litigation. This finding provides us with a useful tool to explore ways in which we can increase the representation of these types of cases on our docket. Overall, these results demonstrate that we are maintaining a docket that is reasonably representative of the categories of claims we are charged with enforcing.

Collaborative FEPA Measure Contributing to EEOC Goals

The Commission’s PART improvement plan includes an initiative for the agency to develop, in collaboration with its state and local partners, the Fair Employment Practices Agencies (FEPAs), methods for measuring FEPA performance that support the agency’s mission and goals. Throughout fiscal years 2007 and 2008, we have engaged in efforts with the FEPAs and have recommended measures, currently under review, that will focus on the contributions made by the many FEPAs nationwide to the achievement of EEOC’s goals. Once the recommended measurement approach is approved, data will be collected and analyzed in order to establish annual targets and a final goal. This cooperative effort with the FEPAs will enhance our relationships and our mutual interests in improving the enforcement of our respective employment discrimination laws.

Other Performance Initiatives

In the Management’s Discussion and Analysis Section of this report, we briefly described many other performance initiatives we initiated or continued in FY 2008. Each is described in more detail below.

Outreach: The Commission’s outreach programs reached 270,298 persons. EEOC offices participated in 5,360 educational, training, and outreach events. This is a decrease in the number of events over the same period in FY 2007, when there were 5,658 events.

Our offices distributed information materials on EEO laws and represented the Commission at 715 other public events that reached 49,202 people. These events included information booths at job fairs, conventions, cultural expositions, and conferences. Informational materials were distributed through participation in many community organization meetings to 49,783. We also made 617 media presentations, including newspaper, radio and TV interviews, talk shows, and press conferences that provided substantive EEO information to millions of stakeholders.

Our outreach, education and technical assistance efforts focus on increasing voluntary compliance with federal equal employment laws and on improving the individual awareness of a person’s rights and responsibilities.

Mediation Outreach: In FY 2008, EEOC offices conducted 262 outreach events directed toward the private sector employer community to promote our mediation program. Events included workshops, mock mediations, and panel discussions with employer representatives, as well as representatives from the plaintiff and defense bar.

Small Business Outreach: The Commission is working cooperatively and collaboratively with the small business community to proactively prevent employment discrimination and promote voluntary compliance. We recognize that many small businesses do not have separate human resources and legal staff to guide them through the regulatory process. Therefore, it is important to establish open lines of communication and provide the necessary training and tools to ensure that small employers comply with the law. EEOC offices conducted 724 outreach events directed toward small businesses in FY 2008, reaching 35,515 small business representatives. The most popular topics for small business audiences were an overview of the laws enforced by EEOC, charge processing procedures, sexual harassment, Title VII and the ADA.

Federal Sector Outreach: In FY 2008, OFO rolled out a new program designed to give analytical assessment/feedback of MD-715 model EEO program elements. This endeavor, the EEO Program Compliance Assessment (EPCA) is a type of scorecard in which OFO provided workforce analyses based on race, national origin, gender and targeted disabilities. These analyses show how the particular agency’s workforce is composed by major occupation and compare it to the civilian labor force, provide an odds ratio analysis on promotions in the senior grade levels, and show agencies how they compare to the federal government as a whole on various climate and other issues. Our intention is to provide new and useful ways for agencies to look at their data and to provide a benchmark upon which each agency can measure its progress toward becoming a model EEO workplace. In addition to EPCA, OFO intends to continue its practice of providing trend-analysis feedback on a rotating basis. In FY 2008, a key strategy in our efforts to be more responsive to our federal sector customers was the continued development of our relationship management pilot. This initiative was first piloted in FY 2004, and was modeled after the private sector’s approach to customer service. The pilot has evolved and expanded to bring Commission personnel together with EEO staff in eleven agencies in a consultative partnership to improve customer service and relationships, and to successfully implement the essential elements of MD-715’s model EEO program. In addition to these activities, OFO is conducting onsite reviews of five agencies with high under representation of racial minorities at the SES level and is conducting an onsite review of another agency to investigate a spike in retaliation complaints.

Education, Technical Assistance and Training:

• EEOC Training Institute: The EEOC Training Institute, formerly named “the Revolving Fund,” is a separate statutory authority that enables the EEOC to offer in-depth and specialized programs to supplement those general informational and outreach activities that are an ongoing aspect of the EEOC’s mission. The Training Institute offers diverse, high quality, reasonably priced EEO expertise and training products to private sector employers, state and local government personnel, and employees of federal agencies. In FY 2008, the Training Institute trained over 29,000 individuals from the private sector, local, state, and federal government at more than 900 events. In FY 2008, the Training Institute offered five product/service lines, which we expect to continue to provide in the future.
• Direct-Sale Training Products: The Training Institute also develops low-cost direct-sale training products and resource materials to foster the agency’s overall training and technical assistance statutory responsibilities. We will be expanding our product line during FY 2009 to include other training materials that address the changing needs of our customers, such as Webinars and hearings preparation training.
• Technical Assistance Program Seminars (TAPS): The one- and two-day TAP Seminars offered by the Training Institute are responsive to employers’ information and training needs and allow EEOC to educate substantially more employers and employees about how to identify, prevent and eliminate workplace discrimination. In FY 2008, 44 TAPS were conducted throughout the country with 6,693 participants. This number is slightly higher than the 6,666 people who participated in TAPS in FY 2007, even though one TAPS seminar had to be cancelled due to an evacuation of the host city for catastrophic weather.
• Training FEPAs: Training FEPAs nationwide was a major project continued by the Training Institute in FY 2008. FEPAs nationwide were offered two different courses targeted specifically for their investigative staff. A total of 23 separate training sessions were delivered which were conducted at three different locations nationwide with the offering of two full days of Race, Color and Religious Discrimination Training. Additionally, three sessions of new investigator training were conducted. Over 550 staff representing 70 FEPAs attended sessions for this training. FEPA training is planned for FY 2009.
• National Federal Sector Conference: An annual national federal sector conference, the Examining Conflicts in Employment Laws (EXCEL) Conference, has become a widely anticipated and highly acclaimed event for federal EEO managers, attorneys, union officials, EEO professionals and EEO staff. The FY 2008 conference held in Chicago, Illinois, last August marked the 11th anniversary of the popular event—attracting more than 1,000 attendees. There were several “firsts” at this year’s conference, including a Weblog (blog) that was updated from the conference floor; the first Hispanic Employment Managers’ Summit, which was presented as a partnership with the National Council of Hispanic Employment Program Managers; and, presentations that were made by leaders of the recently formed Asian American Pacific Islander (AAPI) and Hispanic Work Groups.
• Customer Specific Training: The Customer Specific Training Program trains employees, managers, supervisors and human resource professionals from large, mid-size and small employers on their EEO responsibilities and how to prevent and correct workplace discrimination. Standardized courses are available or we design customized courses that are delivered at employers’ worksites.

E-RACE (Eradicating Racism and Colorism from Employment): EEOC unveiled the E-RACE Initiative in February 2007. Race discrimination is the most frequent type of charge filing with the EEOC, a historical trend dating back to the agency’s opening in 1965. In FY 2008, 33,929 charges of race discrimination were filed with EEOC offices nationwide, accounting for 35.6% of the agency’s private sector receipts. The E-RACE Initiative is designed to improve EEOC’s efforts to ensure workplaces are free of race and color discrimination. Specifically, the EEOC will identify issues, criteria and barriers that contribute to race and color discrimination, explore strategies to improve the administrative processing and the litigation of race and color discrimination claims, and enhance public awareness of race and color discrimination in employment. As part of the E-RACE initiative, offices conducted 1,416 events reaching 58,183 individuals. More information about the E‑RACE Initiative is located on EEOC’s website at https://www.eeoc.gov/initiatives/e-race/e-race-initiativeeradicating-racism-and-colorism-employment.

Freedom to Compete Initiative: Launched in 2002, the EEOC’s Freedom to Compete Initiative is a national outreach, education and partnership campaign designed to recognize and reward specific practices that produce results and reflect a commitment to access and inclusion in the workplace.

Youth@Work: In FY 2008, the EEOC built on the success of its Youth@Work Initiative to educate young workers about their workplace rights and responsibilities. Over the past four years, EEOC offices nationwide have hosted or participated in more than 4,000 events to educate teenage employees and their employers about workplace discrimination and harassment. We have reached more than 250,000 high school students, parents, teachers, and employers—arming them with the information they need to create positive first work experiences for our young adults.

The Youth@Work website (www.youth.eeoc.gov) is dedicated to educating young workers about their equal employment opportunity rights and responsibilities. The website explains the different types of job discrimination that young workers may encounter and suggests strategies they can use to prevent and, if necessary, respond to such discrimination. The site includes an interactive tool called “Challenge Yourself!” that provides an opportunity for young workers to test their knowledge by analyzing sample job discrimination scenarios. The site, created with the assistance of EEOC student interns, also includes examples of recent cases involving workplace harassment of young workers. A Spanish-language version of the website debuted in June 2005 at www.youth.eeoc.gov/es.

In FY 2008, we conducted 1,248 events to educate teenage employees and their employers about workplace discrimination and harassment, reaching 62,797 high school students, parents, teachers, and employers. These events, which include information about the laws enforced by EEOC and the rights and responsibilities of employers and employees, are aimed at assisting young workers, as they enter and navigate the professional world, and encouraging employers to proactively address discrimination issues confronting young workers.

LEAD Initiative: The over-arching goal of the LEAD Initiative is to significantly increase the population of individuals with disabilities employed by the federal government—currently less than 1%. This national outreach and education campaign is designed to:

• Increase the awareness of federal hiring officials about the declining numbers of people with disabilities in federal employment;

FOIA Workload