Improve the effectiveness of the private sector enforcement program, including the use of charge prioritization, mediation and, where necessary, litigation, by utilizing a comprehensive enforcement strategy that focuses on National Enforcement Plan priorities.
Strategic Goal 1 encompasses the agency's enforcement program in the private sector, including our partnership with State and local Fair Employment Practices Agencies (FEPA) and the Tribal Employment Rights Organizations (TERO), as well as in the federal sector. Over the past few years the agency has adopted policies and activities that have vastly improved our work in these vital areas.
In the private sector, we successfully adopted a National Enforcement Plan laying out the agency's overall policy priorities, Local Enforcement Plans describing how individual field offices would implement these overall priorities, and a Strategic Litigation Plan focusing on these overall priority issues. We implemented Priority Charge Handling Procedures (PCHP) to sort charges by merit, by designating them as "A" (highest merit) through "C" (lowest merit). Under Chairwoman Castro, a strategic framework for linking and implementing the policy priorities was developed-the Comprehensive Enforcement Program (CEP). CEP focuses on a collaborative approach between administrative enforcement and legal staff to improve the quality and timeliness of the entire enforcement process.
In the federal sector we made substantial inroads in processing hearings and appeals cases. New federal sector regulations (29 C.F.R. Part 1614) took effect in the first quarter of fiscal year 2000, which have greatly improved processes for addressing EEO complaints in federal agencies, as well as addressing hearings and appeals requests at the EEOC.
We also continued to strengthen partnerships with our FEPA and TERO partners. Under contracts nationwide, over 53,000 charges of employment discrimination filed simultaneously under both federal and State or local laws ("dual-filed" charges) to protect a charging party's rights were resolved in fiscal year 2000.
In fiscal year 2000, we exceeded or met all of our measures for the three Strategic Objectives under this Goal. Each Objective and the measures associated with it are discussed in this report.
Measures
| 1999 | 2000 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. | Measure | Target | Results | Target | Results |
| 1.1.1. | Percent of Category "A" charge resolutions involving multiple aggrieved parties (MAPs) or discriminatory policies.* | 4.7% | 12.1% | 12% | 19% |
| 1.1.2. | Average time to process private sector charges. | Reduce average processing time. | Reduced from 310 days to 265 days. | 220 days | 216 days |
| 1.1.3. | Offer mediation under the EEOC's ADR Program. | Double charges eligible for ADR. | More than doubled- 17,800 to 41,800. | Extend offers to at least 50% of appropriate charges. | Offers extended to 65% of appropriate charges. |
| 1.1.4. | Percent of resolved private sector charges benefitting victims of discrimination. | X | X | 20% | 21.3% |
| 1.1.5. | Percent of the cases filed in court involving multiple aggrieved parties (MAPs) or discriminatory policies. | 32% | 28.5% | 32% | 36% |
X=the stated measure is not applicable in the fiscal year.
These five measures reflect the agency's efforts through fiscal year 2000 to optimize quality and timeliness of service to private sector employers and employees with its Comprehensive Enforcement Program (CEP). The CEP focuses staff efforts on a step-by-step approach to carry out our work through collaborative approaches that enhance service to the public. The development and implementation of the results-based performance measures enhance the application of the private sector CEP at critical points in the resolution of allegations of discrimination. For example, the measures cover consolidating allegations against an employer to address them in a cost-efficient way in both the administrative and litigation stage, increasing the use of mediation to support reductions in the average time required to resolve charges, and increasing the proportion of resolutions with beneficial results, as a consequence of achieving the other measures.
We exceeded this measure.
This measure and litigation measure 1.1.5. focus on charges affecting larger numbers of individuals who are included in multiple charges against the same employer or covered in a charge alleging discrimination against a class of persons covered by EEO laws. In fiscal year 1999, the EEOC exceeded its first goal by a substantial margin, with the proportion of multiple aggrieved parties or discriminatory policy resolutions of Category "A" charges reaching 12.1% rather than the established target of 4.7%.
In fiscal year 2000, the EEOC modified the target value for this measure to maintain the high level reached in fiscal year 1999. However, at the end of fiscal year 2000 the agency had surpassed even this target, achieving 19% (4,403) of category "A" resolutions that involved multiple aggrieved parties.
We exceeded this measure.
We continued to reduce the average time it takes to process private sector charges. In fiscal year 2000 we reduced the time by almost 50 days to 216 days, on average. This is a significant accomplishment, helping both our charging party and respondent customers, who are interested in a quality review and a speedy conclusion on the issues before us.
Our Comprehensive Enforcement Program-where our investigators and attorneys improved collaborative charge processing efforts-and our charge categorization (PCHP) and mediation programs contributed over the past few years towards lowering the time to process charges.
We exceeded this measure.
EEOC's mediation program has been a major success. After its initial introduction in fiscal year 1998, the program was implemented nationwide. Fiscal year 2000 was the first full year of the program and, compared to the previous fiscal year, a larger percent of charges eligible for mediation were extended offers to mediate.
Also, resolutions from mediation increased over 150%-from 4,833 in fiscal year 1999 to 7,438 in fiscal year 2000.
The agency continues to emphasize the mediation program in its outreach efforts to encourage charging parties and employers to consider using it to address the charge allegations. As part of its outreach efforts, the agency released a new video to its field offices, "EEOC Mediation Program Overview." The video provides a brief overview of the mediation program and is designed to be used during intake of a charge and during outreach, education and technical assistance activities. In addition, EEOC field staff highlight the mediation program during their participation in various workshops or when they are speakers or panelists during the year.
The agency's mediation program has won the endorsement of our stakeholders, including business and labor advocates, civil rights groups, and representatives of the employer and plaintiff bars. An evaluation by the participants in the program- charging parties and respondents- was prepared for the Commission by a consortium of professors from Maryland colleges and universities. It showed that the overwhelming majority of employers (96%) and charging parties (91%) participating in the program said they would use it again.
Both parties were very satisfied with the amount and kind of information they received about the mediation process. They felt their mediation was timely scheduled -demonstrating EEOC's effective management of the program and increasing the chance for a timely resolution of the issues addressed. The parties were very satisfied that they had an ample opportunity to express their point of view during mediation. In addition, they were very satisfied with the role and conduct of the mediators and felt strongly that the mediators understood their needs, helped to clarify their needs, and assisted them to develop options for resolving the charge. They expressed strong satisfaction with the mediation process itself and considered it a highly effective dispute resolution mechanism. (The full report is available on EEOC's Web site at http://www.eeoc.gov/mediate/report .)
In fiscal year 2001, we intend to focus our outreach efforts on small employers to encourage greater use of the mediation process by this group, which stands to benefit most so they do not have to engage professional services they are not likely to have in-house.
We exceeded this measure.
This was a new measure for fiscal year 2000. As a result of stronger collaboration between investigators and attorneys, substantive issues raised in charges filed are addressed more efficiently and more effectively, resulting in more settlements of all kinds, withdrawals with benefits, mediations and conciliations and more cause findings.
The monetary benefits obtained through conciliations, mediation and negotiated settlements totaled $245.7 million, an increase of 17% over the prior year's amount. Over 14,000 individuals received monetary benefits in fiscal year 2000, with an average benefit of over $17,084 per individual.
We exceeded this measure.
We noted in our Fiscal Year 1999 Annual Performance Report that, although we did not achieve our target value of the percentage of cases filed involving multiple aggrieved parties or discriminatory policies, the total number of cases filed did increase. However, we were committed to achieve this measure. Results for fiscal year 2000 show that we exceeded the target value for this measure.
In fiscal year 2000 we filed 292 lawsuits and 105, or 36%, were cases involving multiple aggrieved persons or discriminatory policies.
EEOC obtained litigation victories and settlements in fiscal year 2000 in a wide variety of occupations addressing discrimination against vulnerable recent-immigrant communities, women in non-traditional jobs, people with disabilities, older workers, and minority individuals. The Commission also filed several high-profile lawsuits in geographic locations nationwide addressing discrimination in areas such as failure to hire blacks and women; failure to refer minority and female applicants; failure to pay women equal wages; disparities in benefits for older workers; and hostile work environments based on national origin, race and sex, including cases involving hangman's nooses used to intimidate and threaten minorities.
Major litigation settlements in FY 2000 include:
Enhance the effectiveness of the federal sector program by utilizing a comprehensive enforcement strategy.
EEOC's accomplishments in the federal sector in fiscal year 2000 demonstrate that the activities and reforms begun by EEOC in fiscal year 1999 are contributing to the federal government becoming a model employer.
EEOC's fiscal year 2000 accomplishments in the federal sector program include:
The Commission met or exceeded all of the measures for this Strategic Objective for fiscal year 2000 as discussed below:
Measures
| 1999 | 2000 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. | Measure | Target | Results | Target | Results |
| 1.2.1. | Percent of closed Hearings cases over 180 days old. | X | X | 5% reduction of cases over 180 days old at beginning of FY2000. | 6.8% reduction. |
| 1.2.2. | Percent of closed Appeals cases 500-days old or older. | X | X | 20% | 33% |
| 1.2.3. | Percent of Appeals cases resolved within 180 days. | X | X | 10% of cases received in FY2000. | 21.9% |
| 1.2.4. | Develop and implement measures to assess the effectiveness of revisions to the federal sector EEO process. | Develop measures | 8 measures developed. | Implement measures. | Measures implemented. |
| 1.2.5. | Number of agencies provided technical assistance to develop an ADR program. | X | X | at least 5 | 10 |
X=the stated measure is not applicable in the fiscal year.
The Agency announced in fiscal year 1999 that the federal sector program would embrace the Comprehensive Enforcement Program to provide the framework for successful implementation of the new federal sector regulations. We believe that implementing the CEP is transforming the federal sector EEO program. Several of these measures (1.2.1, 1.2.2. and 1.2.3.) commit the agency to reduce the time it takes to process hearings and appeals and the agency has exceeded the goals. Measures to assess the effectiveness of the new regulations have been implemented, and the agency exceeded its goal to assist agencies in developing an ADR program - the new federal sector regulations require that agencies offer alternative dispute resolution methods at any point after an employee has contacted their agency's EEO office.
We exceeded this measure.
This measure and the following two require workload management techniques to balance resolution of older cases with incoming work to reduce the overall age of the inventory. There were 7,119 hearings cases in the inventory over 180-days old at the beginning of fiscal year 2000. By the end of the fiscal year, there were only 6,638 hearings cases in the inventory over 180-days old, or 6.8% less than at the beginning of the year.
Part of this drop is due to consolidation of cases, required by the new regulations. The Commission also focused on this segment of its inventory to begin reducing the older cases. Hearings measures will continue to ensure that the age of the inventory does not grow.
In fiscal year 2001, District offices will implement special projects on an ad hoc basis to address workload imbalances and inventory management. Where necessary, these projects will involve collaboration of district office staff outside the hearings units, such as private sector enforcement legal unit staff, investigators or mediators to help achieve inventory management goals consistent with the results orientation of the Comprehensive Enforcement Program.
We exceeded this measure.
Our target was 20%, but we surpassed this goal with a reduction of 33%. This measure and measure 1.2.3. address the two ends of the spectrum of the appeals inventory and the timeliness of cases resolved. This measure addresses cases still in process after approximately 1 and 1/3 years. In fiscal year 2000, 33% of these appeals cases were closed, providing administrative resolution for those claimants and agencies awaiting EEOC's decision.
We exceeded this measure.
This measure addresses the newer appeals cases coming into the agency's workload. In an attempt to balance its resources and work to maintain a current, timely inventory the Commission established this measure to address a portion of the cases quickly. For fiscal year 2000 receipts, the Commission closed over twice (21.9%) the number of appeals cases than it had targeted.
We met this measure.
The Commission requested data from federal agencies regarding eight general measures designed to assess the effectiveness of the revised Part 1614 regulations. These measures are:
As of the end of the second quarter of fiscal year 2001, the Commission has received the requested data from all agencies except one. In addition, there have been ten agencies which have not reported accurate data relevant to ADR activities. The Commission will provide additional technical assistance to these 11 agencies and we are taking steps to ensure the integrity of data collected in the future. During fiscal year 2001, the Commission will analyze the data collected and prepare relevant assessments of the revised Part 1614 regulations.
The Commission annually collects federal EEO Complaint data from agencies. The EEOC has taken a number of steps to respond to the concerns raised by the General Accounting Office in its report entitled Equal Employment Opportunity: Data Shortcomings Hinder Assessment of Conflicts in the Federal Workplace, May 4,1999. This report highlights problems in the collection and reporting of data in Federal employment discrimination cases. EEOC has worked internally to address some of the issues raised in the GAO report by modifying its fiscal year 2000 data collection instrument, the Form 462. A significant change is the collection of data on the number of complainants and complaints filed alleging each of the bases and issues delineated in the report. This will respond to one of the major concerns of GAO relating to the need for an unduplicated number of complaints and individuals filing complaints, by bases and issues.
We exceeded this measure.
We expected to assist five federal agencies in developing and establishing their ADR programs; however, we were able to exceed that number and assisted 10 agencies.
Federal agencies are responsible for the prompt, fair, and impartial processing of complaints, as well as for maintaining a continuing affirmative program to eliminate discriminatory practices and policies. ADR is an effective tool for resolving disputes early in the EEO process. It is a key component of the Commission's federal sector CEP to help prevent discrimination, especially the new Part 1614 regulations requiring all agencies to establish or make available Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) programs by January 1, 2000.
We have also initiated other efforts to support and encourage the use of ADR techniques in federal agencies:
Strengthen partnerships with State and local Fair Employment Practices Agencies and Tribal Employment Rights Organizations to enhance effective implementation of laws addressing employment discrimination.
Over the past several years the Commission has enhanced its partnership with the Fair Employment Practices Agencies (FEPAs) throughout the country and the Tribal Employment Rights Organizations (TEROs) covering Native Americans to eradicate employment discrimination at the workplace.
Work-sharing agreements with State and local enforcement agencies that qualify under Section 706(c) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 allow the dual-filing of employment discrimination charges with both the EEOC and the FEPAs under State/local laws or federal laws when a charging party comes to either agency. Just over 58,000 charges were dual-filed with State and local FEPAs in fiscal year 2000. Our partnership with the FEPAs avoids duplication of effort by streamlining charge resolution efforts for all parties.
Training and technological support provided to the FEPAs and TEROs is critical to maintaining shared knowledge and skills on the investigation and litigation of charges and to maintain consistent records on charge activity nationwide. As shown below, EEOC met or exceeded its goals for all three measures under this strategic objective.
Measures
| 1999 | 2000 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. | Target | Results | Target | Results | |
| 1.3.1. | Train FEPAs and Tribal Employment Rights Organizations (TEROs). | Train 30 FEPAs. | 49 FEPAs trained. | Train FEPAs / TEROs. Provide training materials on at least 2 employment discrimination subjects. |
93 FEPAs & 61 TEROs trained. Materials on 2 subjects distributed. |
| 1.3.2. | The number of contracted dual-filed charges resolved by FEPAs. | X | X | approximately 53,000 | 53,683 |
X=the stated measure is not applicable in the fiscal year.
We met this measure.
The Commission continued its training commitment to FEPAs and TEROs in fiscal year 2000. All FEPAs received training and training materials at the national FEPA conference held in May 2000. The training provides up-to-date information about legal precedents to apply to charges in the dual-filed workload.
TEROs received training and materials at locally held training sessions conducted by the appropriate EEOC District Office. For example, in a joint effort two offices in the Southwest provided a day and a half training session to all TEROs in their office jurisdictions with EEOC contracts. In addition, three tribes without contracts also participated in the training. The training focused on investigative techniques, issues relating to a hostile work environment, and distinctions between "unfair" practices and discrimination.
We exceeded this measure.
The Commission estimated the number of charge resolutions that could be paid for with the available funds in fiscal year 2000. However, the charges resolved under the contracts with the FEPAs exceeded this amount by almost 700 charges.
* EEOC's workload is becoming increasingly more complex with "A" charges becoming a greater proportion of the charges because of the successes of the Priority Charge Handling Procedures (PCHP) and the private sector Comprehensive Enforcement Program (CEP). Of these "A" charges, charges and cases litigated involving multiple aggrieved parties or discriminatory policies continue to grow. These charges and legal cases they improve the agency's effectiveness by benefitting a greater number of victims of discrimination and impacting the workplace beyond an individual employer. These types of charges and legal cases often have a greater impact on eradicating discrimination from the workplace.
** The new regulations revised procedures throughout the federal complaint process, addressing the continuing perception of unfairness and inefficiency in the process. Agencies now must make alternative dispute resolution programs available. Other key areas included revisions to the counseling process, the bases for dismissing complaints, the procedures for requesting a hearing, the class complaint procedures, the appeals procedures and attorney's fees provisions. In addition, administrative judges now have the authority to dismiss complaints and issue decisions on complaints.
This page was last modified on May 3, 2001.
