Skip to content

Print   Email  Share


TO : Diedre Flippen, Director
Office of Research, Information and Planning
Ronald Cooper, General Counsel
Office of General Counsel
Nicholas Inzeo, Director
Office of Field Programs
FROM : Aletha L. Brown
Inspector General
SUBJECT : Management Advisory on EEOC’s Performance Reporting
(OIG Evaluation No. 2005-02-AMR)

The Office of Inspector General (OIG) conducted Phase I of a review of key Agency performance measures to establish baseline information for future studies. Phase II will assess FY 2007 data. We plan on gathering much of the data in the 4th quarter of FY 2007, with the remainder in early FY 2008.

In Phase I, the objectives of the assessment are to provide EEOC managers, stakeholders, and the public with an independent judgment of whether key performance data can be verified in a reasonable manner and to assist EEOC in improving data reliability.

The scope of our review focused on the reliability of FY 2004 data for the following key Agency performance measures:

  • percentage of private sector cases resolved within 180 days
  • satisfaction with private sector mediation services
  • success rate of litigation

We tested the reliability of information in the databases where the performance data was compiled by verifying the information against information from the EEOC Field Offices where the work is performed. Due to the large number of private sector cases, we tested a random sample of 201 cases. We reviewed all mediation surveys EEOC received during its FY 2004 sampling period. We also reviewed the files of all 342 litigated cases resolved in FY 2004.


The table below contains our preliminary findings.

Timeliness of Case Closures Data Litigation Success Data Confidence in Mediation Data
1. Our review found 95 percent of files have adequate documentation supporting the accuracy of time taken to close cases. 1. Litigation success data is, overall, accurate, but discrepancies in data entry need to be significantly reduced.
2. The definition of success in litigation is not clear and meaningful, creating two major problems. First, even minor improvements in employer policy and procedure and insignificant financial settlements are equal to major improvements in employer policies and major financial settlements. Second, an unclear definition does not promote balanced decision making on the success of cases.
1. The mediation survey data is accurately reported. However, the data may not be reliable, due to quality control issues. The significant percentage of problematic surveys (though accurately recorded) detract from the reliability of the results. These problems include surveys with no case number, no responses to all or many questions, or other problems.

If you have any questions, please contact Larkin Jennings at or 202-663-4391.