FISCAL YEAR 2012 CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET JUSTIFICATION

The Chart below depicts the changes from EEOC's fiscal year 2011 Continuing Resolution to fiscal year 2012 Budget Request.

Image

D. Staffing and Funding Profile

Chart 1 below displays the EEOC's total agency staffing and funding profile by Strategic Objective and Program for fiscal years 2009 through 2012.

Image

The graph below shows the historical changes in the EEOC's FTE since 2005. As can be seen from the graph the EEOC is rebuilding its staffing levels to pre fiscal year 2005 in order to address the increase in charge receipts and to address the charge backlog. In fiscal year 2010, EEOC adjusted the agency's FTE ceiling to more closely reflect its expected FTE staffing level.

Image

E. Program Element

Table 1 outlines our budget information under our Strategic Objective for the agency's enforcement and outreach programs for fiscal years 2010 through 2012. Our performance measures, the agency's activities, and the requested budget are described in more detail in subsequent sections.

**May not add due to rounding

Image

Image

F. Object Class

Table 2 below outlines our budget information by Object Class.

*May not add due to rounding

III. PRIVATE SECTOR PROGRAMS

A. Private Sector Enforcement Programs

Charge Receipt and Inventory

In fiscal year 2010, the EEOC secured more than $319.3 million in monetary benefits through its private sector administrative enforcement activitiesthe highest level of monetary relief obtained through administrative enforcement in the Commission's history. Overall, the EEOC secured both monetary and non-monetary benefits for more than 18,898 people through charge processing. Through our strong enforcement activity, we achieved 104,999 resolutions, our second highest level ever, with a merit factor resolution rate of 19.2 percent. (Merit factor resolutions include mediation and other settlements and cause findings, which, if not successfully conciliated, are considered for litigation.) Our focus on achieving changes to workplace practices, procedures and policies through our private sector administrative enforcement activities yielded improved workplaces for more than 6.2 million individuals.

A Decrease in Frontline Staff and Increased Receipts Contributed to Growth in Inventory

While the agency has achieved some significant successes as outlined above, these successes are better understood in light of some of the challenges confronting the agency earlier in this decade. The EEOC's charge inventory has been growing since fiscal year 2002. Comparing the inventory in fiscal year 2002, when it was at its lowest point in the last decade and a half, to the inventory in fiscal year 2009, pending charges rose by 56,727, almost tripling the inventory. Additionally, as of third quarter 2010, the pending inventory reached 92,561, the highest level since fiscal year 1995. The growth in inventory has resulted from two primary causes: a nearly 30% frontline staff attrition from fiscal year 2000 fiscal year 2008 and a substantial increase in charge receipts. Recent increases in the agency's budget and a rededication to improving our internal processes and productivity have allowed EEOC to make significant progress in managing the inventory.

The most significant impact in addressing the backlog can be attributed to the ability to hire more front-line staff to perform critical enforcement activities. In fiscal year 2008, we had a net loss of 16 investigators and 5 mediators and our total enforcement resolutions were 81,081. By way of comparison, in fiscal year 2009, when we were authorized to hire 75 new investigators and 6 new mediators, we saw a jump in our total resolutions to 85,980. With these new staff becoming fully productive in fiscal year 2010, and with the additional authorization of 89 new investigators and 12 new mediators, we reduced the charge inventory to a level of 86,338--an increase of only 570 charges over last year's inventory. The additional resources the agency received and directed to the hiring of front line staff in just two years yielded over 19,000 charge resolutions. We were able to conduct quality investigations while at the same time keeping over 18,000 charges out of our overall pending inventory. Without this increased level of charge resolutions, our pending inventory currently 86,338 at the end of fiscal year 2010 would instead be at a level of more than 105,515 charges.

However, despite this recent infusion of resources, the EEOC must continue to rebuild frontline capacity. That is why this fiscal year 2012 budget justification requests 30 FTE new investigator positions to continue to restore staffing levels and better match our workload. At the same time, EEOC will examine new ways to address the backlog and increase productivity to make the best of a difficult fiscal environment.

An increase in charge receipts has also been a factor in the tremendous growth in the charge inventory. While fiscal year 2008 and fiscal year 2009 produced our two highest levels of receipts in over 20 years, fiscal year 2010 produced our highest level ever, with 99,922 charge filings. One reason that the charge inventory has increased is that the EEOC has become more accessible in the last five years, making charge filing easier and providing better, more responsive, customer service. Through our Intake Information Group EEOC expanded the agency's availability by phone and e-mail. Additionally, in the last four years, the EEOC has concentrated on revamping its charge intake services, expanding walk-in hours, and issuing a plain language brochure to assist potential charging parties in understanding their rights and the EEOC charge process. Individuals can now contact the agency by phone, by mail, by e-mail, by going to the EEOC website, or by visiting EEOC field offices.

Another reason for the increase in charge receipts is the expanded statutory authorities that EEOC has been given with the ADA Amendments Act (ADAAA) of 2008; the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) of 2008; and the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 (the Ledbetter Act).

These major legislative changes have enhanced the equal employment rights of individuals and we expect to see continued increases in our charge receipts through fiscal year 2012, as discussed in greater detail below.

With more than a year's experience of accepting charges under the ADAAA (which became effective in January 2009), we are continuing to see increasing numbers of ADA charge filings, with 17% more received in fiscal year 2010 than in fiscal year 2009. We project that a continued rise in ADA charge filings will occur as more individuals become aware of the broadened definition of "disability," with the adoption of new regulations interpreting the Act in December 2010 and with our expanded outreach and education activities to ensure that the public is knowledgeable about the changes.

The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) of 2008 became effective in November of 2009. The initial charge filings under GINA have been low, but we anticipate that as more individuals become aware of these expanded rights and protections, we will continue to see an increasing number of GINA charge filings.

Finally, in fiscal year 2009, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 became law. This legislation clarifies that discriminatory compensation decisions or other unlawful practices occur each time compensation is paid. Our current data suggests that there may be future increases in compensation based charge activity. Comparing fiscal year 2007 data (which includes the timeframe of the Court's decision) and the end of fiscal year 2009 (which reflects the period after the Act took effect in January 2009), we have seen a 17% increase in gender-based wage discrimination charges. Additionally, with the publicity surrounding the Ledbetter Act, we have also seen growth in our Equal Pay Act (EPA) charge filings, with 10.8% more in fiscal year 2010 than in fiscal year 2009.

We anticipate that in light of increased statutory authority discussed above as well as other factors discussed below, our receipts will increase above the fiscal year 2010 level of 99,922 (our highest level in the 45 years of the agency's history) by about 6% (5,995 more charges) in fiscal year 2011. We project that by fiscal year 2012, we will see a slowing growth rate of about 2% (2,119 additional charges). These projections recognize that other factors influence charge receipts, including various economic factors, such as unemployment rates, lay-offs, and company closures and restructuring all of which can have an effect on the level of charges filed by the public.

With these expanded legislative authorities and with the additional budgetary resources we have been provided, we have been able to train our staff to prepare them to process charges consistent with the new and expanded laws. This training has provided staff with a firm footing to handle the charges that come through our doors every day. It is our hope that with additional resources provided pursuant to the fiscal year 2012 request, we will be able to continue to provide staff with ongoing training to ensure that they are prepared to effectively meet the public demand for our services.

The Commission has made significant progress toward rebuilding the capacity needed to effectively enforce Federal employment discrimination laws. However, despite the success of our recent efforts as well as the strategic management of existing resources, without further investments in staff, training and technology, we may quickly find ourselves faced with a growing backlog of charges creating significant delays, costs, and negative consequences for employers, job seekers and employees.

We will continue to emphasize PCHP through intensified training, consultation with managers and staff throughout the agency to identify charge processing best practices, and to ensure that charges are processed fairly and efficiently. This includes the need to leverage increased use of technology to improve the efficiency of private sector charge processing.

Budget Request Details and Impact

The EEOC is requesting 30 FTE new investigator hires in fiscal year 2012. Although our ability to hire additional frontline staff began in fiscal year 2009 and continued in fiscal year 2010, the agency needs to continue rebuilding staff capacity.

The President's 2011 Budget Request for EEOC requested funding for additional investigators, however, based on projections from the current fiscal year 2011 Continuing Resolution, we anticipate the loss of investigator positions and mediator positions during the year. This sharp decline in front-line staff will impede our ability to address the growing inventory, particularly in light of the projected increase in receipts.

Under our projections, even with the additional 30 FTE frontline investigators provided in the 2012 Budget, the pending inventory is expected to reach nearly 100,834 charges at the end of fiscal year 2012 and rise to 144,217 charges at the end of fiscal year 2016. Our charge data projections also show that in 2012 our investigators will carry an average caseload of 128. This caseload will lead to an average resolution time far exceeding a 180 day average affecting all parties to the investigation.

Hiring Other Critical Staff

While hiring frontline investigators is crucial to bring the backlog down to an acceptable level, there are other critical positions in EEOC's field offices that should be filled along with investigators: supervisors, intake support assistants, and office automation assistants. These have also been included in the staffing projections in this fiscal year 2012 budget request.

Chart 2 below depicts the ending Private Sector charge inventory actuals for fiscal year 2008 through fiscal year 2010 and estimated through fiscal year 2014. These amounts represent the pending charges at the end of each fiscal year.

Chart 3: Private Sector Enforcement Program Workload Table Fiscal Year 2008 to Fiscal Year 2014

Image

Chart 3 above depicts the total receipts, resolutions and pending ending charge inventory for Private Sector enforcement actuals fiscal year 2008 through fiscal year 2010 and estimated through fiscal year 2014. As can be seen by Chart 3 receipts continue to rise through fiscal year 2012 while resolutions decline from the fiscal year 2010 level due to the loss of staff in fiscal year 2011 that is not restored to the same level in fiscal year 2012 and beyond.

Chart 4 below depicts the division of successful mediations between staff mediators and contracted mediators. As can be seen in Chart 4, staff mediators are responsible for a material portion of the successful mediations.

Chart 4:
Private Sector Enforcement Program Mediations Fiscal Year 2008 to Fiscal Year 2014

Image

Table 3 below depicts private sector charges received by Statute actual fiscal year 2008 through fiscal year 2010 and estimated through fiscal year 2014. As can be seen by Table 3 the largest portions of the charges are derived from Title VII.

*Totals for all charges do not equal the sum of all statutes because many charge filings allege issues/bases under more than one statute.

Systemic Enforcement Program

In recent years, the Commission has increased its focus on cases of systemic discrimination, since these cases maximize our ability to eradicate discriminatory policies and practices while obtaining relief for large numbers of individuals. Our systemic program has become ingrained in how we view our work and has shown some positive results, as reflected by the significant growth in systemic case development since fiscal year 2008.

In fiscal years 2009 and 2010, the Commission devoted significant resources to developing a strong systemic-oriented skill set. There are now 10 Lead Systemic Investigators dedicated exclusively to systemic work. Additionally, the Commission has hired additional experts to support field systemic investigations. Training efforts have focused on equipping our lawyers and investigators with the skills to identify systemic cases, as well as manage and analyze the very large amounts of data involved in systemic investigations and litigation. We have promoted multi-District partnerships among our field offices to marshal our resources on major systemic cases. Finally, the Commission continues to invest in technology to support systemic work, which is essential to manage the vast amounts of data involved in investigating systemic cases.

To highlight a few examples of active systemic litigation, we are currently litigating a nationwide Title VII case against a jewelry store chain, alleging that the company pays women in retail sales positions less than men because of their sex and promotes women less frequently and at slower rates than men because of their sex. As another example, we are currently litigating a nationwide Title VII case against a marketing firm, alleging that the company's policy of refusing to hire applicants based on credit and criminal history background checks has a disparate impact against African-Americans and Hispanics. Just recently, we filed a nationwide Title VII suit against a provider of postsecondary education alleging that its practice of rejecting applicants based on credit history has a disparate impact based on race and is neither job-related nor consistent with business necessity.

We highlight several noteworthy systemic case resolutions from fiscal year 2010. In a case in Colorado against a nationwide restaurant chain, the Commission alleged that the company engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination against women by failing to hire and promote them into management positions and by providing them inferior job assignments, fewer training opportunities, and less opportunity for advancement. A consent decree provides a $19 million settlement fund for approximately 3,000 class members. Among various forms of equitable relief, the restaurant is adopting objective promotion procedures to ensure that selections for the positions are gender-neutral.

In a case in Kentucky against a large nationwide retailer, the Commission alleged that the company failed to hire women for order-filler positions at one of its distribution centers for many years because of their sex. A consent decree provides for almost $12 million to be paid into a settlement fund. In the future, the company will use validated interview questions for the order- filler position, and the company will fill the first 50 available order-filler positions at the facility from a list of qualified females. In three related cases in Colorado, the Commission alleged that a national grocery store chain discriminated on the basis of race (black), color, national origin (Hispanic), and retaliation at one of its distribution centers. We alleged that racial graffiti was displayed throughout the distribution center's warehouse, and that the company assigned black and Hispanic employees more difficult or less desirable jobs. We also alleged that the company retaliated against individuals who complained about graffiti and discriminatory working conditions. A consent decree provides $8.9 million (including attorney's fees), to be distributed to 168 class members.

At this early point in fiscal year 2011, we have already resolved several noteworthy systemic cases. In an ADA case against a regional drug store chain, the Commission alleged that the company would not allow qualified employees with disabilities who were on authorized disability leave to return to work if they required an accommodation or had any restrictions. A consent decree provides $3.2 million to 110 aggrieved individuals. The store chain will hire consultants to recommend changes to its job descriptions and recommend possible accommodations to common work restrictions. Also, the company will revise its communications to assure employees that they need not be 100% healed to be considered for a return to work.

In a Title VII suit against a company that provides janitorial services at Chicago's O'Hare Airport, the Commission alleged that the company failed to hire black applicants based on race despite substantial numbers of such applicants. A consent decree provides $3 million to compensate around 550 aggrieved individuals. The company will offer jobs to certain aggrieved individuals, revise its hiring policy, increase recruitment efforts in the African-American community, and use its best efforts to reach certain hiring goals of African-Americans.

In a nationwide Title VII suit against a private security firm, the Commission alleged that the firm forced its pregnant guards to take leave and then discharged them based on pregnancy. A consent decree provides $1.6 million for 26 aggrieved individuals and requires a message from the firm's CEO to all employees along with a well-defined, comprehensive anti-discrimination policy.

As these cases illustrate, our Office of General Counsel's systemic case resolutions often result in large numbers of direct beneficiaries, large sums of monetary relief, and sweeping changes to employer policies and practices to prevent future discrimination. The funds requested in the fiscal year 2012 budget will allow us to continue our development of systemic cases.

Mediation Program

A key component of the Commission's enforcement strategy is the continued emphasis on the use of Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) as an effective tool to resolve appropriate charges of discrimination. We continue to pursue efforts to secure greater participation by employers, including the use of our Universal Agreements to Mediate (UAM), presenting informational materials and scheduling outreach events to highlight the benefits of mediation to employers.

The mediation program continues to enhance the Commission's efforts in providing the timely resolution of discrimination charges. In fiscal year 2010, the program resolved a record 9,362 employment disputes in an average time of 85 days and obtained over $141.9 million in benefits. The Commission projects that there will be a decline in the mediation resolutions beginning fiscal year 2011, due to less contract mediation funding and with the loss of mediator positions in fiscal year 2011. Mediation funding will allow the EEOC to continue its efforts in offering a fair, efficient and timely alternative to the traditional investigative process.

Additionally, based on the responses to a survey of participants in our mediation program, Charging Parties (employees, job applicants, and retirees) and Respondents continue to express their confidence in the level of service provided under this process. Based on results for fiscal year 2010, 96.1% of all participants indicated that they would utilize the mediation process in a future charge filed with EEOC. This is a direct measure of the public's confidence in our mediation program, which in turn, contributes to the projected results for the mediation program discussed above, such as less time to resolve a charge and the significant financial benefits secured for Charging Parties. Furthermore, successes in our mediation program results in fewer charges that remain in our backlog for investigation, thus alleviating the growth of the overall charge inventory.

Through our outreach to employer representatives and other related stakeholders, we will continue to emphasize the program's qualitative and quantitative achievements in order to highlight the value of alternative dispute resolution in appropriate charges of discrimination filed with the Commission. We believe the success of the mediation program helps build a persuasive case to convince employers to make an affirmative commitment to participate in our mediation program through signing UAM. Through fiscal year 2010, the agency has secured 214 National UAMs and had more than 1,570 Regional and Local UAMs.

Customer Service

As discussed in the Private Sector Enforcement section above, we have dedicated significant attention to enhancing the services provided by the Information Intake Group (IIG). The IIG is an in-house staff that serves as the first line of contact for many members of the public and is accessible via toll-free phone lines, e-mail and faxes. The IIG receives approximately 57,000 calls per month. An average of 39% of callers utilized an Interactive Voice Response system and needed no further assistance. Centralizing this first point of access to the public has a significant impact on our field offices. By having calls directed to this single entity, our field offices are freed from handling these calls, many of which are seeking general information about their rights, office locations and phone numbers and other types of information more efficiently provided through this centralized service. Our 64 Information Intake Representatives (IIRs), co-located in 15 of our field office sites, handles this significant volume of calls. We continue to strive for greater efficiency in our handling of these calls and in fiscal year 2010 approximately 70% of calls answered by the IIRs are fully resolved by the IIR without being referred to other staff in EEOC field offices.

B. State and Local

The agency's request for fiscal year 2012 includes $30,000,000 for State and Local activities. The fiscal year 2012 request will continue to fund our relationship with the Fair Employment Practices Agencies (FEPAs) and Tribal Employment Rights Organizations (TEROs). Both groups play a major role in EEOC's goal of achieving justice, opportunity and inclusive workplaces. The FEPAs help EEOC to resolve charges of employment discrimination and to prevent duplication of effort, resulting in a more efficient use of resources for both EEOC and the FEPAs. They also participate in the development and presentation of outreach and education events, frequently joining with EEOC field staff, to explain federal, state, and local laws regarding employment discrimination to various groups and other members of the public.

During fiscal year 2010, we continued efforts launched in fiscal year 2009, to reassess our relationship with the FEPAs and TEROs and to identify areas where we can achieve efficiencies for all parties involved in this relationship. Our primary focus continues to be on information sharing, training and enhanced communication between EEOC and the FEPAs and TEROs. In fiscal year 2011, the additional $4 million appropriated for State and Local Program activities during fiscal year 2010, will enable us to increase the per charge reimbursement rate from $550 to $600. This will represent the first increase in the reimbursement rate since fiscal year 2006. FEPAs have lost staff and other support because of economic challenges at the state and local level. An increase in the per charge reimbursement rate will help the FEPAs begin the rebuilding process, and offset more of the costs the FEPAs incur in resolving charges of employment discrimination. For fiscal year 2012, with the requested level of $30,000,000, we will be able to reimburse the FEPAs for an estimated 46,200 charge resolutions.

In fiscal year 2012, we will develop and implement a program to provide training for FEPA staff on a rotating basis. Every year, the goal will be to train staff in at least one-third of the 96 FEPAs that currently work with EEOC. We plan to structure the training in a manner that enables us to provide both basic and advanced training on an on-going basis. As staff leaves the FEPAs and replacements are hired, training becomes an important tool in ensuring that FEPAs have the skills necessary to address the enforcement demand of their workloads.

The chart below depicts actual State and Local receipts, total resolutions and ending State and Local inventory for fiscal years 2008 2010 and projections for fiscal years 2011 2014.

Chart 5:  Fiscal Year 2008 to Fiscal Year 2014

 

Image

* Prior period adjustment due to post year end audit and reconciliation

C. Litigation

Litigation

The Commission's litigation program is a vital part of the arsenal necessary to fulfill our mandate to enforce the federal civil rights employment laws. As one of the most visible of the agency's activities, the Commission's litigation program must be successful in remedying and preventing employment discrimination while maintaining the highest standards of ethics and fairness. Maintaining a visible and successful litigation program also provides employers with an incentive to comply voluntarily with the law and to resolve charges of discrimination during the Commission's administrative charge process, and serves as a deterrent to other employers who may otherwise act in disregard of the civil rights laws.

In recent years, the Commission has sought to maximize the impact of its litigation program by increasing its focus on cases of systemic discrimination, which typically involve broad-based employment practices affecting large numbers of individuals. The Commission also plans to continue litigation of smaller cases, but will focus its resources on those smaller cases that present cutting-edge issues or arise in geographical areas where the Commission has a limited presence. In addition to conducting litigation, Commission attorneys spend a significant portion of their time working closely with investigators to develop investigation plans, interview witnesses, analyze evidence and assist in charge resolutions.

For fiscal year 2012, the Commission expects to file 270 enforcement suits. Although this is only a modest increase from the previous two years, the Commission expects that at least 15 to 20 of these suits will challenge systemic discrimination. We believe that devoting a significant portion of our litigation resources to systemic discrimination suits is a wise investment, since these cases maximize our ability to eradicate discriminatory policies and practices while obtaining relief for large numbers of individuals. Systemic cases by their nature continue in active litigation over a multi-year period and last far longer than smaller-sized cases. Therefore, it is useful to examine the quantity of active systemic cases on the Commission's active litigation docket. Systemic cases can involve challenges to discriminatory policies or challenges to practices that affect anywhere from 20 to thousands of individuals. Our active docket of litigation changes from day to day, but as of the close of 2010 we were litigating more than 60 cases involving at least 20 victims of discrimination or approximately 14% of our total active litigation docket. Based on the large volume of systemic charges currently in investigation, we expect the quantity of systemic lawsuits -- and their representation on our total docket -- to steadily increase into 2012 and beyond.

As a greater proportion of our litigation docket is focused on systemic cases, the amount of resources needed to perform the work will rise. While the cost of litigating all types of cases has been increasing, the increase in the number of systemic discrimination cases on the docket is largely responsible for the large increase in litigation costs. Systemic cases typically require substantial resources in terms of professional staff time and litigation expenses, including expert witnesses, the costs of an extensive motion and discovery practice, and travel. Therefore, even a modest increase in systemic litigation activity has a major impact on the resources needed and will have an impact on the quantity of smaller sized cases the Commission is able to litigate. The Commission's litigation expenses have increased by almost 70% over the past five years. In addition, the Commission expects some increase in litigation costs associated with new statutory responsibilities, including the ADAAA, GINA and the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. Thus, we fully expect the trend in spending more dollars per case to continue into the foreseeable future.

Chart 6 The following chart depicts the estimated litigation inventory including the number of lawsuits filed, pending lawsuits and resolutions for actual fiscal years 2008 through 2010 and projections for fiscal years 2011 - 2014.

Chart 6:Litigation Inventory Fiscal Year 2008 to Fiscal Year 2014

Image

IV. FEDERAL SECTOR PROGRAMS

A. Federal Sector Enforcement Programs

In order to meet the increasingly complex needs of our nation, federal agencies must position themselves to attract, develop and retain a highly qualified workforce that can deliver results to the American people. Equal opportunity in the federal workplace is key to accomplishing this goal; agencies must fully utilize the talents of all, without regard to race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age, disability or genetic information.

To this end, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 require that all federal personnel decisions be made free of discrimination, and require federal agencies to establish affirmative programs of equal employment opportunity (EEO) for all federal employees and job applicants (42 U.S.C. §2000e-16 and 29 U.S.C. §791). Under these laws, and through subsequent statutes and amendments, Congress gave EEOC oversight responsibility over EEO programs in the federal government to ensure that equality of opportunity is provided to the over two million men and women across the country and around the world who have dedicated their lives to public service.

Additionally, Congress requires that the EEOC act as the enforcement authority for complaints of discrimination for applicants and employees in the federal sector. The Commission implements this authority through regulations that establish procedures for federal employees or job applicants to file complaints of employment discrimination. The agency charged with discrimination is responsible for informal counseling; and, if a complaint is filed and that complaint is accepted, for investigating the claims raised therein. At the conclusion of the investigation complainants may request a hearing before an EEOC administrative judge (AJ) or that the agency issues a final decision on the matter. The agency's final decision or final action after a hearing may be appealed to the Commission.

B. Federal Sector Improvements Hearings

The overarching goal of the federal sector program is enforcement of the nation's laws outlawing employment discrimination in the federal workplace. One way the Commission fulfills this mandate is through its vigorous federal sector hearings program. With 24 hearing units located throughout the United States the program provides federal sector complainants with a full, fair, and impartial adjudication of their EEO complaints.

Chart 7 below demonstrates the workload inventory of EEOC hearings on complaints of discrimination filed in federal agencies showing actual for fiscal years 2008, 2009 and 2010 and projected through fiscal years 2011 - 2014.

Chart 7:Federal Sector Hearings Workload Fiscal Year 2008 to Fiscal Year 2014

Image

* Pending beginning adjusted to reflect charge activity spanning fiscal years.

C. Appeals and Oversight of Federal EEO Programs

EEOC's regulations at 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 provide the Commission with the responsibility for acting as the neutral arbiter in the federal sector for appeals from agency decisions on EEO complaints, collective bargaining agreement grievances alleging discrimination against federal agencies, and reviewing decisions by the Merit Systems Protection Board containing allegations of discrimination in appealable actions. In this capacity, the Commission has developed and implemented innovative ways to control an appellate inventory that had grown to unacceptable levels in the 1990's. For example, EEOC has sought to leverage technology to more effectively manage the appellate inventory.

Building upon the success and foundation of this digital infrastructure, the Commission will soon be piloting its EEO File Exchange portal (EFX) for the federal sector appeals unit. In the first phase, EFX will serve as the vehicle for the two-way exchange of complaint-related documents between agencies and the Commission. In later phases, EFX will be the vehicle by which complainants can file appeals and submit supporting documentation. This will make the appellate process more streamlined, efficient and transparent, thereby improving customer service.

Concurrent with these efforts, the Commission has employed targeted management techniques and adopted strategic measures designed to increase the efficiency and fairness of the appellate decision-making process, and manage the appellate inventory. For example, the Commission measures its operational success by resolving aged appeals, increasing the percentage of appeals resolved within 180 days, and measuring the impact of the appellate decisions in the federal workplace.

Chart 8 demonstrates the workload inventory for appeals of complaints decided by the EEOC actuals for fiscal years 2008, 2009 and 2010 and projected through fiscal years 2011 - 2014.

Chart 8: Federal Sector Appeals Workload Fiscal Year 2008 to Fiscal Year 2014

Image

The data in the above table illustrate the Commission's success in inventory management, and project that the appellate inventory will remain at acceptable levels provided that the downward trend of federal sector appellate receipts continues. To facilitate this continued downward trend, the Commission will assist agencies in their efforts to remove barriers to equal employment opportunity and to develop and deploy effective early dispute resolution mechanisms. The Commission is confident that this integrated approach will result in reduced discrimination in the workplace, and fewer EEO complaints. In turn, this will enable the Commission to continue issuing timely, thorough and well reasoned appellate decisions.

Behind these numbers, these appellate decisions serve as a vehicle for the development and promulgation of the Commission's EEO policy in the federal sector. They address complex issues in areas of the law where EEO policy is less clear or evolving. Further, they serve to educate federal sector complainants and agencies about the law, guide agencies in their efforts to become model workplaces, and vindicate the public interest in eradicating discrimination in federal employment.

D. Federal Sector Strategies & Analysis of Workforces

Employment discrimination in the federal sector directly impacts agencies' abilities to perform their core missions. Victims of actual or perceived discrimination personally suffer extensive harm, and this, in turn, may impact the performance of their duties. Additionally, agencies must devote precious resources to investigate and defend against instances of alleged discrimination and to remedy those found to be meritorious.

To implement the federal government's policy prohibiting employment discrimination, agencies are required to maintain continuing affirmative programs to promote equal opportunity and to identify and eliminate barriers to participation by all federal employees. The Commission, serving in its oversight capacity for these effortsimplemented Management Directive 715 (MD-715), which details strategies for removing barriers to free and open workplace competition and incorporating EEO principles within agencies' missions. Should these efforts identify barriers to equal employment opportunity, the Commission works with agencies to develop creative strategies for their elimination. Further, the Commission works with agencies to promote model EEO Program policies and practices that foster an inclusive work culture and prevent employment discrimination by reviewing annual submission of MD-715 reports, providing in-person and telephonic technical assistance, and issuing written feedback.

In an effort to better assist agencies in the analyses of their workforces, improve transparency, and integrate the diverse data sets pertaining to EEO in the federal sector, the Commission recently partnered with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in the use of the OMB Max Information System (OMB Max). Specifically, the Commission will leverage OMB Max to collect, validate, analyze, collaborate, and report information relating to its government-wide oversight activities, and to develop EEO community forums designed to allow federal sector stakeholders to exchange valuable EEO-related information, such as best practices, relevant articles, etc. This will supplement the Commission's delivery of relevant and helpful information, training, and EEO solutions to federal agencies, and its dissemination of federal sector research materials through placement of Commission decisions and other helpful federal sector information on EEOC's web site.

V. SERVING THE AMERICAN PUBLIC

We will continue our outreach program 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.

Outreach

We have been able to reach out to individuals in all 50 states as well as the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands and the U.S. Possessions of American Samoa, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, and Wake Island. With additional funding, the agency will have the needed resources to expand its presence into currently underserved geographic areas.

Image

The EEOC will continue to enhance public awareness of discrimination in employment through partnerships with employee advocates, human resource professionals, employer groups, as well as State and Local human rights commissions or Fair Employment Practice Agencies (FEPAs). We will partner with the employer community and other stakeholders to foster strategies to recognize and prevent discrimination in the workplace.

We will educate 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. We recognize the value of publicizing our systemic discrimination court victories because of the ripple effect such decisions can have on promoting changes both across the impacted industry and in related industries.

We will continue to educate students and young workers about their workplace rights and responsibilities, including specific discussions on sexual harassment and how to seek assistance to address or report incidents of harassment that occur in the workplace. We will 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 will continue our efforts to provide training and information to businesses that employ young workers to encourage them to proactively address discrimination issues confronting young workers.

The Commission also will maintain its outreach to small businesses, especially those lacking the resources to maintain full-time professional human resources staff, and to stakeholders in under-served communities across the nation, including those with limited English proficiency, such as recently arrived immigrants.

Finally, we remain prepared to respond to unanticipated issues that arise in the workplace due to current events, so that EEOC stays on the forefront in informing both employees and employers alike of their rights and responsibilities in the ever-changing workplace environment.

VI. REVOLVING FUND EDUCATION, TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND TRAINING

The EEOC Training Institute (Revolving Fund) is a separate statutory authority that enables the EEOC to offer specialized fee-based programs to supplement the free outreach activities that are an on-going part of the EEOC's mission. The Training Institute offers diverse, high quality training products to three primary markets: private sector employers; State and Local government personnel; and federal agencies employees including federal supervisors, EEO counselors and investigators. See Table 4 for a Summary of Financing for the Revolving Fund.

Table 4:
Summary of Financing for the Revolving Fund
FY 2008 to FY 2012

*May not add due to rounding

VII. AGENCY INFRASTRUCTURE

A. Introduction

We are constantly seeking ways to achieve organizational excellence by improving our organizational capacity and infrastructure through sound management of our resourceshuman, financial and technological. Maximizing effective use of our resources is essential to achieve our enforcement and outreach goals and to carry out our mission.

B. File Disclosure Workload

As anticipated, the increased hiring of front line field office staff has increased EEOC's ability to close a greater number of charge files. As a result, EEOC experienced a 10% increase in the number of records disclosure requests. The majority of these requests, over 95%, seek access to charge files. Almost 69% of these requests are made pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

Although it is anticipated that a larger number of requests for charge files will be made pursuant to Section 83 of the EEOC Compliance Manual, Volume I, we continue to project a slight increase of 1% or less in the number of FOIA requests received by EEOC in fiscal years 2011 and 2012. We expect the number of FOIA requests received in fiscal years 2013 through 2014 to begin to decline, tapering off in the mid 15,000's.

The chart below depicts the actual FOIA workload from fiscal year 2008 through fiscal year 2010 and estimations for fiscal year 2011 through fiscal year 2014 including requests received, total workload, requests processed and pending ending inventory.

Chart 9: Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Fiscal Year 2008 to Fiscal Year 2014

Image

The data indicates that the number of charge file disclosure requests processed under Section 83 of the EEOC Compliance Manual will also increase, reaching an approximate high of 11,000 requests annually by fiscal year 2014.

The chart below depicts the Section 83 workload from fiscal year 2008 to fiscal year 2010 and estimations from fiscal year 2011 through fiscal year 2014 including requests received, total workload, requests processed and pending ending inventory.

Chart 10:Section 83 Disclosures Fiscal Year 2008 to Fiscal Year 2014

Image

C. Information Technology Funding

The EEOC Information Technology (IT) strategic vision provides the agency with a new direction for leveraging the power of technology to transform agency operations. This vision was created through multiple working sessions with EEOC staff representing all major program areas, ensuring a strong, direct alignment to EEOC's business needs, mission goals, and priorities. Achievement of this vision will require the use of innovative web technologies, modernization of our technology infrastructure, transformation and automation of our business processes, standardization in applying best practices, and measured risk taking.

Fiscal year 2012 funding will allow the agency to continue progress on existing technology initiatives, such as the EEO File Exchange Server and OMB MAX forums discussed under Section IV.D, Federal Sector Strategies, while exploring opportunities to implement the Chair's priority of increasing the efficiency of charge processing through expanded use of technology. We will also continue to support and maintain our current infrastructure and information systems, implementing cost containment strategies and program efficiencies as practical, while planning for future initiatives and funding in further support of our vision. This includes implementation of a "cloud-first" approach for IT investments, continuous monitoring of critical cyber activities and completion of Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6) Transition Plans.

D. Finance & Administration

The chart below displays the actual numbers of contracts awarded in fiscal year 2009 and 2010. As the chart shows we also are increasing the number of contracts awarded in subsequent fiscal years 2011 through 2012.

The chart below shows the fiscal year 2008, 2009 and 2010 actual vendors, Intra-governmental Payment And Collection (IPAC) and travel payments. Based on the actual figures, we estimate a consistent increase in payments through fiscal year 2012. The helpdesk statistics shows the agency users need for technical assistance continues to improve when accessing, updating and processing data within the EEOC financial system. We emphasize initial user training and conduct yearly refresher training for all users. The data below allows us to focus on the most needed areas in our annual refresher training.

In addition, the Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) is responsible for numerous support functions including: (1) handling 301,500 pieces of regular and expedited mail, (2) processing 8,500 facility related requests, (3) maintaining an agency vehicle fleet of 76, (4) managing tangible property inventories/excessed of 7,600 items, (5) processing 3,930 records assistance requests and (6) managing 30 real property leases requiring rightsizing (lease negotiations, termination, space reconfiguration, tenant improvements and/or expansion).

Office Expansions, Rehabilitations, and Relocations

The agency continues to be challenged to meet the office space requirements for its 53 field office locations due to increased hiring in fiscal year 2009 and 2010. The agency is expanding office space at many locations, while carrying excess capacity of office space at a few others. The agency continues to plan space requirements for all offices for both the short and long terms. In fiscal year 2012 nineteen EEOC offices are targeted for relocation or expansion, which totals about 330,000 rentable square feet, compared with ten offices which expanded or relocated in fiscal year 2011--including the agency's Washington Field Office which relocated from the headquarters building. The total office space under lease will be about 1.1 million rentable square feet at the end of fiscal year 2012.

The offices slated for expansion include: Atlanta, Greensboro, N.C., Kansas City, M.O., Minneapolis, New York, and Oakland. Offices under lease that will relocate due to lease renewals, forced moves by other agencies or inadequate expansion space to support our increased staffing requirements are Detroit, Greenville, S.C.; Indianapolis, Jackson, Miss.; Las Vegas, Little Rock, Los Angeles, Miami, New Orleans, Newark, N.J.; Raleigh, N.C.; and Richmond, V.A; and Seattle. We will continue to right-size offices required by staffing levels as leases expire, and rehabilitate office spaces as dictated by safety issues, the age of furniture and the office environment.

E. Human Resources Function

EEOC's Employee Satisfaction Action Plan Result for Fiscal Year 2010

Workforce planning provides managers with a strategic basis for making human resource decisions. It allows managers to anticipate change rather than be surprised by events. Workforce planning also provides strategic methods for addressing present and anticipated workforce issues. Although we have not completed a formal workforce plan, much of the underlying work has begun. For example, we have established a Workforce Planning Team that is responsible for creating a 3-year workforce planning strategy for determining the numbers, grades, and locations of the MCO positions, and for matching MCO staffing levels with workload (which is part of the Hiring Reform Action Plan).

Competency management is also a focus of workforce planning. We have made significant progress in identifying competencies for three mission-critical positions and we are in the process of identifying proficiency levels and any competency gaps for these positions. Training is one strategy we use to manage competencies. OHR created a comprehensive training program and issued guidance that will assist managers in better managing their training needs within the comprehensive agency training program. Further, all employees were asked to work with their supervisor to develop an Individual Development Plan. In addition, we started a trend analysis of data on applicants and selections in an effort to help the agency perform more targeted recruitment.

Communication technologies can enable almost every aspect of organizational management and effectiveness, including change management, knowledge management, participative management, innovation, and organizational partnerships and alliances. Consequently, we plan to expand and improve the delivery methods of providing information to employees on topics vital to the Agency's mission and of concern to employees, as well as the quality, frequency, and relevancy of the information. For example, we are redesigning our intranet to allow employees to find information more easily, as well as allow offices to post information more easily and in different layouts. We have conducted an internal review of how we provide information to the public as well as the type and format of the information provided. That review is also expected to produce recommendations on how to improve internal communications within the agency. We distributed new laptops with docking stations to all employees. This refresh of agency computers allows for easier teleworking as each laptop is equipped with the necessary security features and the software that allows for secure remote access to the EEOC's network. Finally, we launched a health coaching program and a pilot mentoring program.

EEOC Wellness Program

Planning for the health needs of employees is a wise investment. The EEOC has consistently demonstrated its commitment to employee wellness by promoting healthy practices and related workplace initiatives. We operate comprehensive health unit services in headquarters and most field offices through the Department of Health and Human Service's Federal Occupational Health. These units provide medical services while emphasizing preventive health measures in the belief that these programs are essential to an effective and productive organization. Many programs focus on educating employees about how they can impact their well being. The agency's internal web site is an important source of wellness and health benefits information. Yearly health fairs are held to assist employees in navigating among the myriad health options available to them. The most recent health fair offered healthy living information through blood pressure screening, body mass index assessment and healthy cooking demonstrations, all part of a one stop health educational market place.

The Commission is launching a new initiative in fiscal year 2011 that will offer health coaching to all its employees and has a well established and growing ergonomics program. Agency offices are also equipped with defibrillators and we have sponsored training in CPR in support of these devices.

Our headquarters location houses a fitness center with shower and locker rooms, secured bike room and outside bicycle rack, hand sanitizing stations and indoor/outdoor tobacco free areas among its health conscious amenities. We promote the availability of employee paid services such as yoga and massage therapy on site as well as a lactation room in the health unit.

We will continue to improve on our current efforts and direct our future resources more effectively through agency-wide wellness assessments.

See Appendix B for a description of the EEOC Wellness Program.

F. Equal Opportunity

EEOC remains firmly committed to promoting and maintaining a work environment that ensures equality and inclusion for all of our employees and applicants for employment. The Office of Equal Opportunity (OEO) is charged with ensuring that the Commission accomplishes these goals, through its Complaint Processing Program and the Affirmative Employment Program. Working collaboratively with the highly-dedicated employees, managers, and stakeholders of EEOCOEO is seizing the challenges and opportunities to create and sustain a diverse and inclusive workforce that best serves the public.

Creating a Diverse Workforce and an Inclusive Workplace

In an effort to create a diverse workforce and an inclusive workplace, EEOC continues to conduct rigorous barrier analysis of the workforce to identify barriers to full participation and to create innovative action plans to remove those barriers. We have removed several workplace barriers within the past year due, in part, to increased resources and a reinvigoration of the Affirmative Employment Program. In addition, OEO has revived the EEOC Speaker Series to encourage our employees to discuss matters of contemporary social justice by inviting commentary from a wide-range of speakers. We have further developed and strengthened our relationships with affinity groups/employee organizations to share information, develop strategies to promote an inclusive workplace, and establish partnership agreements to support relevant initiatives.

Enforcing EEO Laws, Regulations, and Policies within EEOC

The Complaint Processing Program continues to ensure compliance with EEO laws, regulations, and policies. We have improved the adherences to regulatory timeframes and the quality of counseling, investigations, and decisions by conducting a comprehensive review of existing processes and procedures, and by identifying new strategies (e.g., fact-finding conferences, electronic reporting, and the complaint processing plan) to provide improved services to our employees and applicants for employment. We have also increased training for OEO staff and agency employees. Because of these efforts, made possible by increased resources, OEO completed 95% of counseling, 100% of the backlog investigations, 100% of investigations received after the first quarter of fiscal year 2009, and 90% of final agency decisions within prescribed regulatory time frames.

G. Workplace Issues

Addressing workplace issues fairly and effectively helps foster amicable working relationships, enhances employee morale and productivity, and reduces the financial and other resources associated with workplace conflict. In 2003, the Commission launched RESOLVE, the EEOC's internal alternative dispute resolution program. In fiscal year 2010 the program resolved approximately 73 percent of the mediated disputes. On average, it has done so within 80 days of receiving a complaint. RESOLVE will continue outreach to all of the Commission's staff in Headquarters and the 53 field offices. It will also continue to conduct seminars to help employees develop conflict resolution skills.

To fulfill the Commission's vision for a fair and inclusive workplace, and as a key component of the EEOC's model workplace initiative, the Commission plans to expand its internal workplace dispute resolution program by creating an office of organizational (internal) Ombudsman. Through confidential employee engagement, Ombudsman promotes better communication, fosters constructive dialogue, increases collaboration, identifies systemic issues, facilitates equitable outcomes, and improves transparency of the organization.

VIII. STRATEGIC PLAN AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES

A. Introduction

The budget request for fiscal year 2012 is $385,520,000. The agency's first Strategic Plan was published on October 1, 2006. Over several years, the agency made interim modifications resulting in the current version of its Strategic Plan located on the agency's Web site at www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/plan/strategic_plan_07to12_mod.cfm. The agency's current Strategic Plan provides one Strategic Objective: Justice, Opportunity and Inclusive Workplaces. The plan contains nine performance measures under this Strategic Objective: two long-term, six annual, and one efficiency measure. These measures are used to drive results and accountability throughout the agency.

The agency's nine performance measures are directly related to its three front-line enforcement operationsprocessing private sector charges, litigating private sector cases, and conducting hearings and appeals of federal sector cases.

All of these activities are done in the service of the following shared goals:

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

Our requested funding will enable us to strive toward meeting the strategic goals and performance measures we have adopted to date. Each performance measure is more thoroughly discussed in Section VIII C.

B. Modified Strategic Plan and Budget Structure

The structure of the performance budget for fiscal year 2012 is based on our modified 2007 - 2012 Strategic Plan that was approved by the Commission on July 28, 2008. Correspondingly, this performance budget aligns with the agency's Strategic Objective of Justice, Opportunity and Inclusive Workplaces.

C. Performance Measures and Results

The current Strategic Plan covers fiscal years 2007 through 2012. It was initially issued on October 1, 2006, and established a new strategic framework and corresponding performance measures. In fiscal year 2008, the Strategic Plan was modified. These modifications are included in the current performance measurement structure graphically displayed on page 42. (Also, see Section VIII, F, Interim Adjustments to the Strategic Plan, on page 49 for a description of the specific modifications made to the Strategic Plan.) On July 28, 2008, the Commission approved the current configuration of the Plan, including adjustments to some performance measure baselines and annual targets.

The resources requested in this performance budget are focused on maintaining the reach of our enforcement and outreach programs, while promoting public confidence in our ability to resolve charges of discrimination in a timely, accurate, and consistent manner.

Long-Term/Annual Measure 1

Long-Term/Annual Measure 1 focuses on tracking the improvements that are made in the workplace as a direct result of our enforcement programs. 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. 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.

Long Term/Annual Measure 1 was developed to focus on all enforcement services we provide to the public that result in workplace benefits. Therefore, these results include benefits from administrative resolutions (including mediation), litigation resolutions, federal sector hearings and appeals resolutions. We subsequently established a baseline value for fiscal year 2007 and projected the annual targets and a final goal for the remaining years of the plan, based upon our previous experience with data collection for our administrative charge processing program. While it was important to include all of our enforcement programs in the measure, it was difficult to estimate their effect on the final results. In addition, there was also 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.

The fiscal year 2010 annual target for this measure was to increase the number of individuals benefiting from improvements to organizations' policies, practices, and procedures by 12.2 percent over the fiscal year 2007 baseline. Although our results for fiscal years 2008 (222.9%) and 2009 (234.3%) were substantially above the annual targets we established for those years, we retained the targets until we collected the data for an additional year to confirm the successful trend. The fiscal year 2010 result was 326.3 percent above the baseline value, or 6.9 million individuals benefiting from workplace improvements obtained through all of our enforcement programs--substantially surpassing the target level. Based on the consistently high performing results for this measure, we will reevaluate the utility of maintaining this measure and the associated targets as part of the agency's strategic planning review process.

Efficiency Measure

Approximately 70.1 percent of the agency's budget is dedicated to compensation and benefits. Linking the external impact of EEOC's enforcement programs to the Full Time Equivalent (FTE) number of positions is a valid indicator of the efficiency of our operations. 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.

In fiscal year 2010, the agency had 2,385 Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) positions for over 6.9 million individuals who benefited through our enforcement programs because of improvements to policies, practices, or procedures in their workplaces. Therefore, approximately 2,906.3 individuals benefited for every FTE. This was an increase of 285.7 percent over the fiscal year 2007 baseline, compared to the 4.3 percent target increase for fiscal year 2010. As is the case with Long Term/ Annual Measure 1, we are reevaluating this measure and its projected targets as part of our strategic planning review process.

Long-Term Measure 2

* A follow-up survey is pending the completion of the agency's overall strategic planning assessment

If members of the public are aware of EEOC's enforcement activities and believe that the agency has handled discrimination complaints effectively, they will be more likely to rely on the agency to investigate, mediate, litigate, adjudicate, and/or otherwise resolve allegations of discrimination. Additionally, if the agency has a reputation for fair and responsible enforcement of the federal employment discrimination laws, then employers, attorneys, and other members of the public will be more likely to defer to EEOC's assessment of discrimination complaints and commit to voluntary compliance through mediation, settlement, or conciliation.

To measure the public's confidence in EEOC's enforcement of federal equal employment opportunity laws, the agency engaged a private organization to conduct a survey in fiscal year 2007 of a representative sample of individuals nationwide. From that survey, EEOC was able to establish a baseline value for fiscal year 2007. A follow-up survey is pending the completion of the agency's overall strategic planning assessment.

As with the previous measures, EEOC will reevaluate the utility of maintaining Long-Term Measure 2 as part of its overall strategic planning process. The agency has also identified the following six, annual measures, under Long-Term Measure 2, that contribute to the public's confidence in EEOC.

Annual Measures 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3 focus on the resolution of private sector charges, federal sector hearings, and federal sector appeals, respectively.

Relationship Between Annual Program Performance Goals and the Strategic Goal Framework

Annual Measure 2.1: Timeliness of Private Sector Charges

In fiscal year 2010, we processed 38.3 percent of charges in 180 days or less, which was short of our intended target. The agency's inability to meet this target was due to a large pending inventory, and increasing number of charge receipts, and a shortage of front-line staff. For the long-term, however, we believe that the agency's multi-year approach to reducing the pending inventory will yield improved performance on processing charges in 180 days or less. We will continue our efforts to achieve target levels for timely service and to improve the quality of investigations while handling our charge inventory.

Annual Measure 2.2: Timeliness of Federal Sector Hearings

Annual Measure 2.2 addresses the resolution of federal sector hearings within 180 days. In fiscal year 2010, the agency had resolved 37.4 percent of federal sector hearings within 180 days. Although the targets and final goal reflect the agency's commitment to continue the timely handling of federal sector hearings, our reported results remain significantly below the projected targets that were increased to 52 percent for this year. Over time, our efforts to achieve this goal have become more difficult because of increasing workloads and a greater emphasis on enhancing the quality of hearings. In addition, the agency's efforts to achieve this goal have been compounded by the departure of a number of AJs who accepted Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) positions in other agencies, which prompted the reassignment of their complaints, creating larger caseloads and further delays in complaint processing. However, the Hearings Programs' launched technological enhancement, HotDocs, should streamline the decision writing phase of the hearings process for the long-term, and is expected to produce gains in the processing time for complaints. Therefore, we will continue to reinforce our efforts to achieve the projected annual targets.

Annual Measure 2.3: Timeliness of Federal Sector Appeals

Annual Measure 2.3 addresses the resolution of federal sector appeals within 180 days or less. The annual targets for this measure have consistently increased and the agency has successfully met its goals each year. In fiscal year 2010, the agency continued this successful effort by resolving 66.2 percent of its federal sector appeals within 180 days or less, exceeding the fiscal year 2010 target. We will continue to increase the proportion of appeals resolved within the time frame, as we move toward the final goal of 70 percent in fiscal year 2012.

Annual Measure 2.4: Quality of Private Sector Investigations

Annual Measure 2.4 ensures that investigative files meet quality standards. A large proportion of sampled investigative files are reviewed to determine whether they meet 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 too quickly at the expense of performing our work well. The annual targets for this measure have increased since the baseline was established in fiscal year 2005, and the agency has consistently exceeded these targets each year. In fiscal year 2010, 96 percent of investigative files met the requisite quality standards, exceeding the fiscal year 2010 target of 91 percent.

Annual Measure 2.5: Confidence in Private Sector Mediation Program

Annual Measure 2.5 focuses on 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 agency as a whole. Results for this measure were obtained by surveying participants in EEOC's mediation program and tabulating the responses related to the confidence level they reported in using the program. Based on this methodology, the confidence level in this program is rated consistently high. We believe a high level of confidence helps to convince participants, particularly company representatives, of the value of alternative dispute resolution. At the end of fiscal year 2010, 96.7 percent of all participants reported that they would return to EEOC's mediation program in the future.

Annual Measure 2.6: Success in Litigation

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 means we have exercised our prosecutorial discretion, responsibly. Based on the results of a three-year weighted average (i.e., fiscal years 2008 through 2010), EEOC's litigation success rate was 90.2 percent at the end of fiscal year 2010 slightly above the target.

Collaborative FEPA Measure Contributing to EEOC Goals

EEOC recognizes the importance of working with our partners the State and Local Fair Employment Practices Agencies (FEPAs). Therefore, we are considering a joint measure that would potentially assess FEPAs contribution to the agency's strategic goal and mission. The recommendation will be reviewed as part of the agency's overall strategic planning evaluation.

D. Verification and Validation of Data

Our private sector, federal sector, and litigation programs require accurate enforcement data, as well as reliable financial and human resources information, to assess EEOC operations and performance results and make good management decisions. We will continue efforts to ensure the accuracy of our program information and any analysis of the information.

We continually review the information we collect in our databases for accuracy by using software editing programs and program reviews of a sample of records during field office technical assistance visits. In addition, headquarters offices conduct analyses regularly to review the information collected in order to identify any anomalies that indicate erroneous entries requiring correction to collection procedures.

We have implemented approaches that enable the agency to collect information more rapidly and accurately by eliminating the need to enter information multiple times before it can be reviewed and analyzed. For example, we implemented a secure, web-based system that enables all federal agencies to electronically submit annual equal employment opportunity statistics (Form 462). This system continues to improve the quality and timeliness of the information we receive. Finally, we continue to improve the collection and validation of information for our Integrated Mission System (IMS), which consolidates our mission data on charge intake, investigation, mediation, litigation, and outreach functions into a single shared information system. The IMS includes many automated edit checks and rules to enhance data integrity. Since several of our new performance measures require us to use data to assess our achievements, it is significant that we can now obtain those data much more quickly and with greater data accuracy.

We also implemented information quality guidelines and adopted internal procedures, which strengthen our ability to verify and validate the quality of our data before it is released to the public. In addition, the agency's Office of Inspector General continues to review aspects of the status of the agency's data validity and verification procedures, information systems, and databases and offer recommendations for improvements in its reports. We use the information and recommendations to continually improve our systems and data.

E. Program Evaluations

Schedule of Future Program Evaluations

The following schedule of program evaluations will be reviewed during the agency's strategic planning assessment process.

F. Interim Adjustments To The Strategic Plan

The agency has made interim modifications to its Strategic Plan for fiscal years 2007 through 2012, which was initially issued on October 1, 2006. As the agency implemented the new performance structure and several new performance measures included in the Strategic Plan, it has made several modifications. As the modifications were adopted, they were included in the agency's Performance and Accountability Report (PAR) and its performance budget. On July 28, 2008, the Commission approved a Strategic Plan that contained previous modifications made to the initial Plan, and included several additional modifications to the performance structure. All of the modifications made to the Strategic Plan are described below:

• Revised Long-Term Measure 1

Initially, Long-Term Measure 1 included two Annual Measures. These integrated measures were designed to demonstrate the results of EEOC's efforts to provide benefits to individuals in the workplace because of its enforcement and outreach programs. During the agency's review and preliminary efforts to design an appropriate methodology for collecting data, the agency determined that the enforcement program was the substantial component of the Long-Term Measure, and that it was not currently feasible to develop a reliable method for collecting and analyzing outreach data. The measure was modified to measure the agency's enforcement programs only. The Annual Measure regarding outreach results was removed. Since the remaining Annual Measure for enforcement results was now redundant with the Long-Term Measure, it was also removed. Long-Term Measure 1 was modified to Long-Term/Annual Measure 1 and minor language changes were made.

• Removed the Management ObjectiveIncorporate Concepts into Means and Strategies

In reviewing the overall focus of the agency's Strategic Plan, it was determined that a separate Management Objective was not required, since the agency's efforts to improve its internal operations were designed to benefit its front-line enforcement and outreach programs. The agency incorporated the concepts of organizational improvement into the Means and Strategies section of the Strategic Plan; highlighting their important supportive role. Organizational changes and efforts to implement the new Administration's initiatives are part of the agency's strategies for doing all of its work more effectively and efficiently.

• Revised References to the Five- Point Plan

Also, the concepts described under the umbrella of the Five-Point Plan have always been critical aspects of its work. Although the Five-Point Plan itself provided an overall structure to express these important concepts, it added another organizational layer to the Strategic Plan that the agency now considers unnecessary and so it was removed. Even though the structure of the Five-Point Plan was removed, the essential concepts were merged into the current Strategic Plan's Means and Strategies section.

• Revised the Schedule of Program Evaluations

The agency also revised a number of the program evaluations it intends to conduct during the life of the Strategic Plan. The revised program evaluation schedule is included in the current Plan.

In addition, a completed program evaluation on the Private Sector Charge Process that informed one of our revisions of the program evaluation schedule was described.

• Revised Organizational Elements

The organization of the measures was revised to better explain their interrelationship. Since the Efficiency Measure was directly related to the results achieved with the revised Long-Term/Annual Measure 1, it was moved directly after Measure 1 to better describe that relationship.

• Revised Performance Structure and Established Final Goals for all Performance Measures

The performance measures in the Strategic Plan published on October 1, 2006, did not include final goals, because of the new performance structure that had been developed during the 2006 program assessment of the agency a few months earlier. Since that time, the agency has developed annual targets and final goals for those performance measures retained in the modified Strategic Plan (not all of the original measures were retainedsee the description of other modifications to the performance measurement structure, above). As targets/final goals were adopted for measures, they were incorporated into other agency reports; such as the agency's fiscal year 2007 PAR published in November 2007 and its fiscal year 2009 budget submission to Congress in February 2008.

Further modifications were included in the Strategic Plan approved by the Commission on July 28, 2008. For Long Term Measure 2public confidence in EEOC to enforce its lawsthe agency increased the previously published baseline value for fiscal year 2007; the multi-year targets; and the final goal for fiscal year 2012. The increased values resulted from a reassessment of the data collected from the survey taken of nationwide respondents who were asked a question about their confidence in EEOC. The original values were established using scores in the 8-10 range on a 10-point scale, with "10" as the highest score. Based on the reassessment, the range was expanded to the 7-10 range, which included additional respondents indicating their confidence in EEOC. The Commission determined that the modification was warranted because the revised range of scores more appropriately measured the public's confidence in the agency's enforcement of its laws.

The Commission's vote on the Strategic Plan in July also modified the annual targets and final goal for Annual Measure 2.1resolving private sector charges within 180-days or fewer. It reduced these values to adopt ambitious, but more realistic, goals for the agency, based on a series of factors--e.g., the existing number of charge receipts, the projected year-end inventory, and existing staff resources. Nevertheless, after the agency's earlier program assessment (which developed the new performance structure), it was determined that higher annual targets and a final goal would be established for this measure. Annual Measure 2.1 and its annual targets and final goal are under review as the agency prepares its new Strategic Plan strategy.

Another modification was to remove Annual Measure 2.7the number of individuals who demonstrate an awareness of their equal employment opportunity rights and responsibilities. Subsequent to the baseline and target information first reported for this measure, the agency has considered some alternative methodologies that could be used to measure the results for this performance measure, using data based upon responses to other questions from the nationwide survey. Since the agency is still considering the approach that should be used to measure results in this area, the Commission felt that it was appropriate to remove the measure from the agency's performance structure at this time, until we have had a full opportunity to carefully consider the best approach.

The agency also modified the program evaluation schedule to move the evaluation of the Systemic Enforcement initiative to fiscal year 2012. The Commission determined that it would be more advantageous to evaluate this initiative after the agency has had more time to implement it, so that it can measure results over a more appropriate time frame.

• Other Revisions

A placeholder was added for the development of a measure of the contribution of our FEPA partners toward achievement of the agency's goals.

In addition, the graphic presentation of the new performance structure was revised to accurately reflect the other revisions made to the plan.

APPENDIX A: EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION ACTION PLAN

Introduction

The EEOC values its employees' satisfaction in the workplace. We have increased funding for training and awards over recent years and have experimented with using a blog and email accounts that permit employees to make suggestions and comment directly to the EEOC Chair. The Commission, however, has faced significant challenges which are reflected in the most recent Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey. Principally among those challenges has been the lack of resources to address the substantial increase in the workload of the agency.

In examining the Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey results, employee concerns center on four major areas: resources, training and development, transparency and accountability and employee work life issues. In particular the survey indicates that the agency must, in addition to seeking adequate funding, ensure that employees understand the agency's actions in obtaining and allocating resources. Further, emphasis must be placed on the allocation of resources to provide training and development in the agency's mission critical positions. Next the agency must continue its efforts to improve and ensure communication of information from senior staff to front line employees; and lastly seek to improve the agency's survey results in areas relating to employee health, wellness, safety, employee assistance and other work/life issues.

Methodology

Prior to developing the EEOC Action Plan, the SWAT Team requested input from the EEOC SES Advisory Council and the National Council of EEOC Locals No. 216, AFGE, which represents a significant number of EEOC employees. In addition, three focus groups were conducted to gather additional input.

 

 

APPENDIX B: EEOC WELLNESS PROGRAM

Agency/Component: EEOC

Agency/Component: EEOC

Agency/Component: EEOC

Agency/Component: EEOC

APPENDIX C. GENERAL STATEMENT OF LAWS

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission was established by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 253, 42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq.) as amended, (Title VII) and became operational on July 2, 1965. The EEOC has five members, no more than three of whom shall be of the same political party. The members are appointed by the President, by and with the consent of the Senate for rotating five-year terms. The President designates one member to serve as Chair and one member to serve as Vice Chair. The General Counsel is appointed by the President by and with the advice and consent of the Senate for a term of four years.

The EEOC is charged with eliminating and preventing unlawful discrimination by investigation, conciliation, and mediation; education and technical assistance; and, judicial actions. We fulfill our mission through the implementation of a vigorous law enforcement program, complemented by an outreach program that provides information, guidance, and technical assistance to help prevent discrimination from occurring.

Title VII prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin by public and private employers with 15 or more employees, employment agencies, labor organizations with 15 or more members and joint labor-management committees controlling apprenticeship or other training or retraining, including on-the-job training programs. Members of the public file charges alleging employment discrimination with the agency field offices. EEOC staff members investigate the charges and issue determinations of "reasonable cause," or summary determinations when a legal violation is not substantiated. If the agency finds cause, it attempts to resolve the charge through conciliation. The EEOC also attempts to settle charges through mediation.

Title VII authorizes the agency to file suit in Federal District Court in order to achieve compliance if it is unable to achieve a remedy through conciliation. If the case involves a state or local government, the agency will refer it to the Attorney General, who may file suit in federal court.

Pursuant to its Title VII enforcement authority, the EEOC enforces the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, signed on January 29, 2009, by President Obama, which supersedes the Supreme Court's decision in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., Inc., 550 U.S. 618 (2007), and restores the longstanding position of the EEOC that each paycheck that delivers discriminatory compensation is a wrong actionable under the federal EEO statutes, regardless of when the discrimination began.

Under section 709(c) of Title VII, the agency requires covered public and private employers and labor organizations to file periodic reports providing data on the makeup of their workforces or membership by gender and racial/ethnic categories. The data are used by other federal, state, and local agencies charged with enforcement of equal employment opportunity laws, and in aggregate form by non-government organizations and researchers concerned with equal employment opportunity.

The EEOC also enforces the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) of 1967, and the Equal Pay Act (EPA). The ADEA protects workers age 40 and older from discrimination in hiring, discharge, pay, promotions, fringe benefits, and other aspects of employment having 20 or more employees, employment agencies, and labor organizations with 25 or more members, and the federal government. The Equal Pay Act prohibits gender-based discrimination in the payment of wages to men and women performing substantially equal work in the same establishment. The EEOC receives and investigates charges of discrimination in these areas and makes findings of "violation" or "no violation" and may file suit in Federal District Court if it is unable to achieve voluntary resolution of violations through conciliation.

The EEOC has enforced the Americans with Disabilities Act's (ADA) employment nondiscrimination provisions since they became effective in 1992. The ADA provides a clear and comprehensive national mandate for the elimination of discrimination against individuals with disabilities. Title I of the ADA prohibits employment discrimination against qualified individuals with disabilities by private sector, and state and local government, employers with 15 or more employees.

On September 25, 2008, the ADA Amendments Act of 2008 was enacted, becoming effective on January 1, 2009. The ADA Amendments Act makes several changes to the definition of the term "disability," overturning a number of Supreme Court decisions that Congress believed had construed the term too narrowly. The EEOC is responsible for ensuring compliance with Title I of the ADA as amended by the ADA Amendments Act, by receiving and investigating charges of disability discrimination. At the conclusion of EEOC's investigation, the agency issues a determination of reasonable cause or dismisses the charge (no cause). If the EEOC has found cause and is unable to achieve compliance through conciliation, EEOC may file a lawsuit. If the case involves a state or local government, the agency will refer it to the Attorney General, who may file suit in federal court.

Finally, the EEOC enforces Title II of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA), which became effective on November 21, 2009, and prohibits public and private employers with 15 or more employees, employment agencies, and labor organizations with fifteen or more members from using genetic information (including information from an individual's genetic tests and an individual's family medical history) in making employment decisions or decisions related to union membership; strictly limits access to genetic information; and requires that any genetic information that a covered employer, employment agency, or labor organization obtains be kept confidential. The procedures for enforcement and the remedies for violations of Title II of GINA are the same as those available under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Under the statutes EEOC enforces, the agency, through individual commissioners or by field directors, may initiate charges based on information suggesting that the law has been violated. If the agency decides after investigating that reasonable cause exists to believe that a violation has occurred, remedial relief is sought through the process of conciliation or litigation if conciliation efforts fail.

The federal government, as an employer, is subject to these antidiscrimination requirements through Section 717 of Title VII, Section 15 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and Title II of GINA. The laws provide the basis for Commision oversight responsibility for the procedures used by federal departments and agencies in processing internal complaints of discrimination. In addition, the agency has appellate jurisdiction to review final decisions of departments or agencies on discrimination complaints upon the request of the complainant. It is also responsible for ensuring that federal departments and agencies maintain programs of equal employment opportunity.

Under Executive Order 12067, the EEOC provides leadership and coordination to all federal department's and agencies' programs enforcing federal statutes, executive orders, regulations, and policies which require equal employment opportunity without regard to race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, or disability. Coordination is provided to eliminate conflict, competition, duplication, and inconsistency in these programs and to improve their effectiveness. All federal departments and agencies are required to cooperate with and assist the agency in performing these functions and are required to furnish the agency with such reports and information as it may require.