../plan.css">The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
In the past few years the Commission has introduced initiatives in the private sector that have resulted in successfully managing large volumes of charges filed each year, while increasing beneficiaries of charge resolutions through a nationwide mediation program and investigator-attorney collaboration to focus resources on substantive issues. The building blocks of this success are the Priority Charge Handling Procedures, through which charges are prioritized based on potential merit; the National Enforcement Plan (NEP), which establishes agency-wide policy priorities; the translation of the NEP into Local Enforcement Plans to address specific needs within each office's geographic area; and the Comprehensive Enforcement Program.
The Comprehensive Enforcement program (CEP) is designed to ensure an integrated and strategic approach to the implementation of the equal employment opportunity laws enforced by the Commission. This is achieved through collaboration among staff to carry out outreach, investigative and legal functions and all phases of enforcement to achieve timely, fair, and efficient service to the public. The CEP addresses the new reality of the Commission's complex workload; over 90% of private sector charges now represent potentially meritorious claims, requiring more in-depth work and close collaboration between attorneys and enforcement staff.
Accordingly, our performance measures focus on timely and quality resolution of charges; they mark our efforts to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the private sector enforcement program through a strategic and coordinated approach.
Appendix B-3 shows a diagram illustrating the private sector Comprehensive Enforcement Program (CEP) concepts and Appendix B-1 displays a flow chart of the private sector enforcement process in brief. Our Regulations detailing this process are published in Title 29 of the Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.) under Part 1601. They are available on the U.S. Government Printing Office's web site and can be accessed through EEOC's web site. EEOC's web site is located at http://www.eeoc.gov/ and contains a wealth of information about the Commission, the laws we enforce and charge resolution processing procedures. A link on our web site to Part 1601 can be found at http://www.eeoc.gov/regs/index.html.
STRATEGIC GOAL 1
Enforce Federal Civil Rights Employment Laws Through a Comprehensive Enforcement Program.
Strategic Objective 1.1.
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.
|1.1.1.||Percent of resolved private sector charges benefitting victims of discrimination.||X||X||20%||21.3%||20%||22%|
|1.1.2.||Percent of newly filed, administratively processed private sector charges resolved within 180 calendar days.||X||X||X||X||60%||60%|
|1.1.3.||Percent of sampled district office charge files with information supporting the categorization of the charges as "A," "B," or "C" and any necessary attorney involvement.||X||X||X||X||90%||90%|
|1.1.4.||Percent of "A-1" charges received in the fiscal year with on-site investigations.||X||X||X||X||At least 70%||At least 70%|
|1.1.5.||Percent of "A" charges where attorneys are available to advise investigators.||X||X||X||X||100%||100%|
|1.1.6.||Percent of the cases filed in court involving multiple aggrieved parties (MAPs) or discriminatory policies.||32%||28.5%||32%||36%||36%||36%|
|1.1.7.||Percent of cases litigated during the fiscal year with investigators assigned.||X||X||X||X||no less than 5%||no less than 5%|
In fiscal year 2000, we exceeded two measures that are continued into fiscal year 2002 with higher target levels. For example, targets set for the percentage of charge resolutions benefitting victims of discrimination (measure 1.1.1.) and the percentage of cases filed in court involving multiple aggrieved parties or discriminatory practices (measure 1.1.6.) were exceeded, as shown above. For more information about our fiscal year 2000 achievements for these measures and other measures not continued into fiscal year 2002, see our Fiscal Year 2000 Annual Performance Report, included with this Budget Request in Appendix C-4.
In addition to the two measures we are continuing, we have added five others for fiscal years 2001 and 2002 to enhance our emphasis on several key areas of the Comprehensive Enforcement Program (CEP) in our private sector enforcement program.
With the successful implementation of the Priority Charge Handling Procedures (PCHP) and introduction of the CEP in fiscal year 1999, the Commission has made significant reductions in its inventory and is now closer to achieving a manageable workload. In fiscal year 2002, we will continue to focus on inventory reduction; anticipating a 6% lower inventory over fiscal year 2000 levels-a projected 31,438 charges by the end of fiscal year 2002, assuming that EEOC charge receipts and deferrals from Fair Employment Practices Agencies (FEPAs) are approximately 80,000 and 7,900, respectively, as projected. (See Table 1, Private Sector Enforcement Inventory Projections.
A key timeliness indicator is average charge processing time. As Figure 1 indicates, we have achieved a steady decline in our average processing time over the past few years.
For fiscal years 2001 and 2002, we are targeting our efforts on resolving a substantial number of incoming charges within 180 days to provide better service to employers and charging parties alike. To accomplish this, we have established a key measure of timeliness to resolve within 180 days 60% of the charges filed within the fiscal year (measure 1.1.2.). Our successful mediation program, which resolves charges in 96 days, on average, will be an important element for achieving this measure.
As implementation of the PCHP and the CEP has continued, charges that lack merit are quickly dismissed and the "B" inventory (potentially meritorious charges) continues to decline. This trend has allowed the agency to focus more resources on charges that fall into the "A" category, i.e. those charges with the greatest likelihood to have merit. Currently, "A" charges make up close to 40% of EEOC's workload, and we expect the number of "A" charges in the inventory to continue to increase. Since these charges are more complex and difficult to resolve, attorneys and investigators are working collaboratively in the investigation and litigation of "A" charges. Because more resources will be focused on the "A" charge inventory as it grows, we are likely to continue to see an increase in the percentage of charge resolutions benefitting victims of discrimination-projected at 22% for fiscal year 2002.
The increasing complexity of our workload requires timely collaboration under the CEP to maintain quality investigative and legal work. Four new measures for fiscal years 2001 and 2002 will help ensure that we achieve the maximum collaborative approach between our staff to properly and efficiently identify and develop evidence of discrimination for the "A" charges (measures 1.1.3.-5. and 1.1.7.). These four measures address both the involvement of attorneys in advising investigators and the involvement of investigators in litigation when settlement attempts fail.
Both investigators and attorneys benefit from collaboration. For example, litigation cases provide knowledge and experience to investigators, giving them a better understanding of the quantity and quality of evidence necessary to successfully litigate a case. Measure 1.1.7. is an important addition to our CEP; our staff working together in a common effort to improve our entire enforcement program.
An effective litigation program is not only a deterrent to employment discrimination-helping to support voluntary compliance with EEO laws- but also motivates successful resolutions through mediation and other settlement efforts in the administrative process. EEOC's litigation program continues to focus on cases that have not been settled, despite numerous attempts, and that meet one or more of several criteria, including the following:
With the need to balance resources among program requirements, the Commission projects a modest increase over the fiscal year 2001 levels in the number of new lawsuits filed during the year and the total active caseload, which comprises the new lawsuits and all active cases carried into the current fiscal year. The litigation caseload projected in fiscal years 2001 and 2002 is shown in Figure 3, Active Litigation Caseload. These estimates adjust those provided in last year's Budget Request, based on actual results for fiscal year 2000. For example, we filed fewer new cases and settled more lawsuits than we projected. As a result, we carried fewer cases into fiscal year 2001, and will have fewer cases in the total active caseload throughout the year.
We project that 400 lawsuits will be filed during fiscal year 2002, over 5% more than our estimate of 380 lawsuits during fiscal year 2001. In addition, we are projecting that our total active caseload for fiscal year 2002 will grow almost 6% to 892 cases from the projected 842 cases in our active caseload in fiscal year 2001. (See Figure 2, Types of Lawsuits Filed.) We expect to achieve our goal that 36% of the cases filed will involve multiple aggrieved parties or discriminatory policies, which is a cost-effective approach to resolving multiple charges and issues affecting numerous individuals. These cases consolidate allegations against the same employer, providing an expedited and coherent approach to their resolution.
Table 1, Private Sector Enforcement Inventory Projections, Figure 2, Types of Lawsuits Filed, and Figure 3, Active Litigation Caseload, summarize workload projections for fiscal years 2001-2002.
|WORKLOAD/WORKFLOW||FY 2000||FY 2001||FY 2002|
|Total Pending Charges/Complaints||40,184*||34,297||33,406|
|Net FEPA Transfers/Deferrals||7,889||7,889||7,889|
|Administrative Enforcement Resolutions||86,234||82,027||83,736|
|Charges/Complaints Carried Into Next Fiscal Year||34,297||33,406||31,438|
* The pending charges at the beginning of fiscal year 2000 was adjusted from the 40,234 charges stated as pending at the end of fiscal year 1999 to reflect refinements in charge process reports. Tables may not add due to rounding.
** Receipts for fiscal year 2000 were nearly 1,000 more than projected, and are expected to increase modestly in fiscal year 2001 and remain the same in fiscal year 2002.
|FY 2000 (actual)||FY 2001 (est.)||FY 2002 (est.)|
|TOTAL ACTIVE CASELOAD||866||842||892|
|Total Substantive Lawsuits Filed||292||380||400|
|Individual Substantive Lawsuits||187||243||256|
|Multiple Parties/Disc. Policies||105||137||144|
|FY 2000 (actual)||FY 2001 (est.)||FY 2002 (est.)|
|Cases Carried Into FY||574||462||492|
|New Cases Filed in FY||292||380||400|
|TOTAL ACTIVE CASELOAD||866||842||892|
|Cases Resolved in FY||404||350||400|
This page was last modified on May 3, 2001.
Return to Home Page