The Agency is making limited changes to the text of six performance measures to ensure that their meaning is clearly understood, and it is altering its schedule of Program Evaluations. These changes in the measures and schedule are interim adjustments to the Agency's Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2004-2009. For the convenience of the reader, we have highlighted in bold several words in each measure to make it easier to identify the key changes made. The change in the schedule of evaluations is described in item E. This schedule change requires the agency to use an alternative method to evaluate the affected measure (see item F).
We are measuring a consistent time frame for the first three measures in our Strategic Plan. We are changing the phrasing of the text to ensure that it is clear that we are including the180th day of the period in the count. The change is not substantive.
| Measure 1.1.1 | The original performance measure read: By FY 2009, ensure
that at least 75% of private sector charges will be resolved
within 180 days.
The revised performance measure reads: By FY 2009, ensure that at least 75% of private sector charges will be resolved in 180 days or fewer. |
|---|---|
| Measure 1.1.2 | The original performance measure read: By FY 2009, ensure
that at least 50% of Federal sector hearings will be resolved
within 180 days.
The revised performance measure reads: By FY 2009, ensure that at least 50% of Federal sector hearings will be resolved in 180 days or fewer. |
| Measure 1.1.3 | The original performance measure read: By FY 2009, ensure
that at least 70% of Federal sector appeals will be resolved
within 180 days.
The revised performance measure reads: By FY 2009, ensure that at least 70% of will Federal sector appeals be resolved in 180 days or fewer. |
The private sector mediation program has been very successful;
however, our charge data and a research study verified that
employers do not agree to participate in the program to the same
extent charging parties do.
Measure 1.2.2. was developed to increase the number of
charges in which employers agree to participate. The
original language may incorrectly imply that we would count unique
employers in order to increase those agreeing to participate. It is
more appropriate, however, to try to increase the actual number of
charges that are mediated, which require the employer to agree to
mediate the charge. The text change is not substantive, but it
correctly states how the Agency will determine the results for this
measure.
| Measure 1.2.2 | The original performance measure read: By FY 2006,
increase by 20% the number of private sector
employers that agree to participate in mediation
from the FY 2003 baseline.
The revised performance measure reads: By FY 2006, increase by 20% the number of private sector charges in which employers agree to participate in mediation over the FY 2003 baseline. |
|---|
The Agency regularly uses the term "Federal sector program"when it describes EEOC's activities, policies, processes and procedures involving Federal agencies. One of the activities for EEOC is to evaluate the EEO programs of other Federal agencies. The use of the word "program" in this measure was intended to only indicate that the evaluation would be conducted by our own Federal sector program. It could be misunderstood, however, to require the type of rigor and independence expected from the Program Evaluations. The text of the measure has been changed to avoid any misunderstanding. It is not a substantive change to the measure.
| Measure 1.3.4 | The original performance measure read: EEOC's
Federal sector program evaluations and technical
assistance efforts result in Federal agencies improving employment
policies, practices and procedures.
The revised performance measure reads: EEOC's Federal sector evaluations and technical assistance efforts result in Federal agencies improving employment policies, practices and procedures. |
|---|
The electronic document management project will electronically convert key documents in a file, but it was not our intention to count individual documents in order to assess the results for this measure. The original text of the measure could be misunderstood. It has been revised to convey the proper interpretation that EEOC will count the number of case files once the electronic conversion of documents occurs. In addition, the original text did not explicitly include our Federal sector files in the document conversion program. The text was changed to clearly reflect that we are also converting key documents in the Federal files. The text changes are not substantive.
| Measure 3.1.8 | The original performance measure read: By FY 2009, EEOC
will maintain in electronic format 95% of the key
documents necessary in active charge/case-related
enforcement/litigation files.
The revised performance measure reads: By FY 2009, EEOC will convert the key documents contained in 95% of its private sector charge, Federal sector complaint, and litigation case files to electronic format. |
|---|
The Agency decided to change the order of the Program Evaluations outlined in the agency's Strategic Plan and conduct the Program Evaluation for the Private Sector Charge Process in FY 2005, rather than the Private Sector Mediation Program. The change in the table describing the revised schedule is not substantive.
The Strategic Plan indicates for Measure 1.2.1. that the agency would conduct a Program Evaluation in FY 2005 to assess the private sector mediation/ADR program. With the changed program evaluation schedule (item E. above), the agency will assess the program using an alternative method. It intends to develop a methodology to assess the program by using data collected from its investigative charge files and coded into the agency-wide charge database.
This page was last modified on November 18, 2004
