1. Home
  2. Federal Sector
  3. Federal Sector Reports
  4. Defense Office of the Inspector General (DOIG)

Defense Office of the Inspector General (DOIG)

Permanent Workforce: 1,533 Temporary Workforce: 45 Total Workforce: 1,578

Workforce Composition

Total # Men Women Hispanic or Latino White Black or African American Asian Native Hawaiian / Other Pacific Islander American Indian / Alaska Native Two or More Races Individuals with Targeted Disabilities
Permanent Workforce 1,533 56.69% 43.31% 6.39% 65.88% 20.94% 5.02% 0.20% 0.59% 0.98% 1.17%
Major Occupations:
AUDITING 734 53.68% 46.32% 6.81% 66.49% 20.98% 4.63% 0.00% 0.41% 0.68% 1.23%
CRIMINAL INVESTIGATING 372 78.49% 21.51% 8.06% 77.96% 6.99% 4.30% 0.81% 0.54% 1.34% 0.00%
GENERAL INSPECTION, INVESTIGATON, & COMPLIANCE 72 55.56% 44.44% 4.17% 69.44% 20.83% 0.00% 0.00% 2.78% 2.78% 2.78%
Senior Pay Level* 18 61.11% 38.89% 5.56% 77.78% 11.11% 5.56% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
SES 18 61.11% 38.89% 5.56% 77.78% 11.11% 5.56% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
Senior-Level Officials/ Mgrs 18 61.11% 38.89% 5.56% 77.78% 11.11% 5.56% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

*Does not include pay-banded employees

Targeted Disabilities

As of September 30, 2009, DOIG employed 18 (1.14%) Individuals with Targeted Disabilities (IWTD). In order to have met the federal 2% participation rate goal, 32 IWTD were needed. This represents an increase of one employee over FY 2008 and an increase of 5 employees since FY 2005. The participation rate for FY 2008 was 1.12% and for FY 2005 was 0.95%. Over the 5-year period DOIG had a net increase of 0.19% in employees with targeted disabilities.

EEO Complaint Processing

I. Counseling

DOIG timely processed 100% of the 4 pre-complaint counselings (without remands) completed in FY 2009.

II. Bases of Complaints Filed

The bases of alleged discrimination most often raised were: (1) Age; (2) Reprisal; and (3) Race (Black/African American). Of the 3 complaints filed at DOIG, 1 contained an allegation of race (Black/African American) discrimination, 1 contained an allegation of race (White) discrimination, 1 contained an allegation of color discrimination and 1 contained an allegation of disability discrimination.

III. Complaint Processing Times

Of the 2 completed investigations, 100% were timely. DOIG's average time for completing an investigation was 108 days. Of the agencies completing 25 or more investigations, the Tennessee Valley Authority had the lowest average of 100 days.

DOIG's average processing time for all complaint closures decreased from 408 days in FY 2008 to 264 days in FY 2009. The government-wide average was 344 days.

IV. Costs

DOIG reported paying no monetary benefits for the one pre-complaint settlement it reached in FY 2009. DOIG expended a total of $21,089 for 2 complaint investigations, for an average expenditure of $10,545.

DOIG reported paying no monetary benefits for its single complaint closure through settlement agreements, final agency decisions, and final agency orders fully implementing AJ decisions.

Outcome of Counselings Completed in FY 2009
Pre-Complaint Counseling Outcomes Completed by EEO Counselor Completed Using ADR All Completed Counselings
# % # % # %
Pre-Complaint Counselings: 3 1 4
Settlements 0 0% 1 100% 1 25%
Withdrawals or No Complaints Filed 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
Complaints Filed* 3 75%
Decision to File Complaint Pending at End of Fiscal Year 0 0%

*Includes only complaints filed in FY 2009 where counseling was also completed during FY 2009.

Agency Use of ADR for EEO Dispute Resolution in FY 2009
Counseling Complaint
Completed/Ended Counselings/Complaint Closures 4 4
Total Number Offered ADR 1 0
ADR Offer Rate* 25% 0%
ADR Participation Rate* 25% 0%
Total ADR Settlements 1 0
Total ADR Settlements Amount $0.00 $0.00

* EEOC revised the formula for calculating the ADR offer and participation rates in FY 2006.

Timeliness in FY 2009
Total # # Timely % Timely FY 2008 APD* FY 2009 APD % Change
All Pre-Complaint Counselings (minus remands) 4 4 100%
All Investigations 2 2 100% 151 108 -28.5%
All Complaint Closures 4 408 264 -35.3%
Merit Decisions (no AJ) 1 1 100% 266 225 -15.4%
Dismissal Decisions (no AJ) 1 0 29 NA%

*APD = Average Processing Days

Outcomes of Complaints in FY 2009
Complaint Closures Final Agency Decision (no AJ Decision) Final Order (AJ Decision Fully Implemented) Final Order (AJ Decision Not Fully Implemented)
# % # % # % # %
Total Complaints Filed 3
Total Closures 4
Settlements 1 25%
Withdrawals 0 0%
Total Final Agency Actions 3 75% 2 66.7% 1 33.3% 0 0%
Dismissals 1 33.3% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0%
Merit Decisions 2 66.7% 1 50% 1 50% 0 0%
Finding Discrimination 0 NA% 0 NA% 0 NA% 0 NA%
Finding No Discrimination 2 100% 1 50% 1 50% 0 0%