FY 2005 Performance Budget

Submitted to the
Congress of the United States

February 2004

Our Vision

A Strong and Prosperous Nation Secured Through a Fair and Inclusive Workplace

Our Mission

We Promote Equality of Opportunity in the Workplace and Enforce Federal Laws Prohibiting Employment Discrimination

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

C.State and Local Programs

The performance budget request for fiscal year 2005 includes $33 million for state and local programs. The Commission has developed strong partnerships with the many state and local FEPAs and the Native-American Tribal Employment Rights Organizations (TEROs). Our work-sharing agreements and other activities have benefitted the employer and employee communities by coordinating the investigation of charges dual-filed under state and local law and federal law where appropriate; by providing training on investigative and legal issues; and by conducting joint activities such as outreach. For example, in fiscal year 2003, we contracted with 92 FEPAs to resolve dual-filed charges. This arrangement prevents duplication of effort and streamlines the charge resolution process. We also contracted with 64 TEROs to promote equal employment opportunity on or near Indian reservations.

Our collaborative efforts have helped advance equal employment opportunity nationwide. We will continue contractual and technical assistance efforts with the FEPAs and the TEROs. Table 6 on page 29 summarizes the State and Local Programs' projected workload and results for fiscal years 2003 through 2005.

D.Federal Sector Enforcement

We have had success recently in the Federal Sector reform in controlling our hearings and appeals inventory, in promoting efforts to resolve conflicts more quickly including ADR efforts, and in promoting the prevention of discrimination. Our Federal Sector reforms will enable us to make further improvements as the initiative is implemented in the future.

1. Hearings

In the past few years, we have achieved significant progress in curbing the growth in the hearings inventory. We implemented revised regulations in early fiscal year 2000, which continue to positively impact on the EEOC's workload in the hearings process. These revisions made the hearings process more efficient and fair by reducing the number of hearings and avoiding the fragmentation of claims. Even though the revisions expanded the scope of the legal claims and evidence presented at each hearing and the responsibilities of EEOC's administrative judges, our own use of ADR in our own federal sector processes and our requirement that federal agencies offer ADR programs during their own complaint processing programs contributed to the resolution of 30.5 percent more hearings in fiscal year 2003. Resolutions are continuing to decrease, and the overall workload is decreasing in fiscal year 2004 and 2005.

Table 7 shows the estimated hearings workload for fiscal years2003 through 2005. We expect to continue making significant inroads into resolving our pending inventory of hearings cases and resolving more complaints at the hearings stage within 180 days, particularly as reforms take effect.

2. Appeals

Our federal sector program decides appeals from administrative decisions made by federal agencies on complaints of employment discrimination. We have achieved positive results the past few fiscal years in dramatically reducing the number, age, and processing time of pending appeals. In fiscal year 2002, we reduced by 77 percent the inventory of appeals more than 500 days old. We continued this trend in FY 2003, further reducing the inventory of appeals more than 500 days old by 76 percent. We also processed 44 percent of the appeals received in fiscal year 2003 within 180 days. As a result, our year-end inventory was comprised of more than 85 percent of appeals that had been filed that same fiscal year, keeping our inventory of appeals current.

We project in Table 8, however, that new appeals will steadily increase, while available appellate attorney staff will decrease, resulting in the appellate inventory increasing in fiscal year 2005 to the level slightly above where it was at the end of fiscal year 2002. We expect to manage this increase in several ways. We will deploy new technologies,including computerized decision templates, online research, computerized knowledge management software, and the use of more paperless complaint files. We will continue to deploy appellate inventory management pilots like our successful Federal Appellate Inventory Review (FAIR) project where appeals are prioritized and special issues identified early. Finally, we will continue to implement our federal sector reforms with existing resources.

E.Performance Measures for Strategic Objective 1 – Justice and Opportunity

Our new Strategic Plan for fiscal years 2004-2009 links our broad Strategic Objectives to the agency's Five Point Plan. Strategic objective 1, Justice and Opportunity relates to three of the elements of our Five-Point Plan–Proficient Resolution, Promote and Expand Mediation/ADR and Strategic Enforcement and Litigation. It also identifies our long-term goals to achieve results in each of these areas. The measures, target values for fiscal year 2005, and the results we expect to achieve with each measure are described below within each Five-Point Plan element.

[NOTE: The remaining measures in this Performance Budget are new as of fiscal year 2004.]

*[TBD]=[To Be Determined]

Timeliness, quality, public confidence – these are key measures of our success as an agency and are important elements of proficiently resolving our work. Our fiscal year 2005 measures address all of these areas.

Our goal to resolve 75 percent of the private sector charges within 180 days builds upon our steady success in recent years in reducing the average time to process charges. The current target value for fiscal year 2005 balances prompt service in our private sector processes with the need to devote resources to charges that take longer to process because of the type of meritorious or complex claims involved.

Similarly, in our federal sector program, we have established challenging goals to process hearings and appeals more timely. In fiscal year 2005, proactive resolution will be supported by a more streamlined federal complaint system to ensure more timely resolutions.

As of fiscal year 2003, 30.5 percent of federal sector hearings were resolved within 180 days. Our long-range goal is to increase this rate to 50 percent. Our intermediate target for fiscal year 2005 is to resolve 38 percent of our hearings cases within 180 days. Our coordinated initiatives will provide substantive and operational support and oversight towards the resolution of hearings cases to help prepare decisions more expeditiously. Our administrative judges who conduct hearings on discrimination complaints filed against federal agencies will be provided enhanced guidance and assistance. The hearings workload will be monitored by analyzing hearings' data and evaluating staffing needs and the quality of administrative judges' work. We will continue to expand the use of ADR to resolve complaints at the hearings stage. Federal sector appellate legal tools will be made available to assist administrative judges in processing hearings efficiently by making available fully researched and computerized legal language for inclusion in findings and decisions and fully-searchable past decisions on the agency's Intranet site.

We have a goal to resolve 70 percent of our federal sector appeals within 180 days by fiscal year 2009. As of fiscal year 2003, 44.8 percent were resolved within this time frame. Because we are projecting an increase in new appeals in FY 2004, while available appellate attorney staff will decrease, we have set a goal to resolve 45% of the new appeals received this fiscal year within 180 days, thereby maintaining the progress achieved on this measure. By fiscal year 2005, we will improve the rate of resolving appeals within 180 days to 50 percent; making steady gains towards our long-range target as many of the streamlining efforts and other federal sector reforms take hold. As the federal sector enforcement staff successfully resolve the older appellate inventory, resources will be deployed to resolve an increasing percentage of newly filed appeals within 180 days. We expect to achieve our goal in this area with staffing adjustments, appellate inventory management pilots, and new procedures developed from federal sector reforms.

Timeliness is an important measure itself, but it must go hand-in-hand with quality to make it truly efficient. Quality cannot be sacrificed for speed. Our quality review measures address this concern. Although the agency has always used quality review techniques, with our new measure we will use methodologies and develop more elaborate criteria to assess quality in our case work to assure that we simultaneously improve quality and timeliness in our work.

Our final indicator of success as an agency is the public's view of our effectiveness in enforcing employment discrimination statutes, regulations, and executive orders in our private sector and federal sector programs. In fiscal year 2005, as a key component of assessing Proficient Resolution in our work, we will survey members of the public to determine how familiar they are with our enforcement efforts and to what extent they believe that we have responsibly and effectively addressed workplace discrimination. Our assumption is that they will more than likely come to us for assistance and trust that we will capably handle their complaint if they know their rights and responsibilities and believe we will address workplace discrimination. If we are viewed as a fair and just enforcer of the civil rights employment laws, employers, attorneys and members of the general public will have confidence in our impartial role as a law enforcement agency.

Our four measures for Promote and Expand Mediation/ADR support this element of the Five-Point Plan in several ways. The measures assess the advantages of our mediation efforts in the workplace environment; measure the increase in participation in mediation/ADR in both the private and federal sectors; and, measure our ability to maintain a high level of confidence in EEOC's mediation program. We will assess the advantages of mediation in the workplace by documenting the benefits of mediation, for example, reductions in unnecessary costs and conflicts, fostering of amicable working relationships, and enhancing employee satisfaction and productivity.

A study of the EEOC's private sector mediation program has shown that participants have indicated a high level of satisfaction in the process, regardless of the outcome of their disputes. Through a program evaluation to assess our achievements under our measure, we will build upon past studies and document the many positive contributions that mediation brings to the workplace. We intend to increase participation of employers in private sector mediation by convincing more employers of the benefits of mediation. Our goal by fiscal year 2006 is to have 20 percent more employers agreeing to participate in mediation over a baseline of more than 13,000 employers who agreed in fiscal year 2003. This translates into over 2,600 additional employers who will participate in our program during the three year period of this measure. Although we will maintain the number of employer acceptances in fiscal year 2004, we will increase it by 8.5 percent in fiscal year 2005 on our way to our final goal. We want to maintain a high level of confidence in the EEOC's mediation program in order to bring about the types of positive changes to the workplace described above. In addition to contributing to a more positive and productive working environment, all of these measures will demonstrate that private sector mediation is a powerful tool for increasing the public's confidence in the fair and prompt resolution of employment discrimination disputes.

In the federal sector, we aim to increase the use of ADR techniques at the pre-complaint stage, the stage before a formal complaint of employment discrimination is filed with a federal agency. Using ADR can have a powerful impact on federal agencies' EEO complaint inventories and, in turn, EEOC's hearings and appeals inventories. Resolving disputes as early as possible in the federal sector EEO process will improve the work environment and reduce the number of formal complaints, allowing all agencies, including the EEOC, to redeploy resources otherwise devoted to these activities.

At the agency level, matters raised at the pre-complaint stage rose while formal complaints decreased between fiscal years 2001 and 2002. There were 47,658 EEO matters raised in fiscal year 2001, which grew to 55,441 in fiscal year 2002. The formal EEO complaints dropped from 23,301 filed in fiscal year 2001 to 21,945 in fiscal year 2002. As a percent of EEO matters, filed formal complaints dropped from 48.8 percent to 39.6 percent, respectively. Our efforts to increase the percentage of ADR efforts at other federal agencies at the pre-complaint stage should continue this trend.

The goal for our federal sector ADR measure is to increase ADR participation to 50 percent or higher at the pre-complaint stage. In fiscal year 2002, there were 55,441 EEO matters raised during the pre-complaint, informal process with an agency EEO Counselor or an ADR Intake Officer. In 12,800 of them, or 23 percent, individuals agreed to participate in the ADR process during the pre-complaint stage. By increasing the ADR participation rate, we expect to see a significant decrease in the number of formal complaints filed which will reduce costs for both complainants, the EEOC, and other federal agencies and provide faster resolutions of the issues raised.

We have established a target of 30 percent participation in ADR at the pre-complaint stage for fiscal year 2005, which is building towards our ultimate goal of 50 percent by fiscal year 2009. To enhance this participation, in fiscal year 2004 and 2005 we will increase our outreach and educational activities by including a user-friendly ADR web-page to showcase ADR policies and practices in the federal sector in conjunction with our proactive prevention activities. Over the next two fiscal years, we will partner with several federal agencies to identify ADR best practices to share throughout the federal community and develop an ADR assessment tool to assist agencies in initiating or improving their ADR programs. We will promote and expand the use of ADR by continuing our initiative to develop training modules to improve the quality and effectiveness of federal agencies' ADR programs. The modules include courses for managers and supervisors on the benefits of ADR as a management tool; for federal employees on the benefits of ADR and its availability to resolve workplace disputes as an alternative to other complaint processes; and for mediators of federal EEO cases on EEO law and procedures.

Once a request for a hearing has been filed with us, we will expand our efforts to use ADR at the hearings stage to resolve the complaint without the need for a formal hearing. Our administrative judges and other staff will use settlement, mediation, and other ADR techniques to reach early and mutually satisfactory resolutions for the parties. Our consistent and expanded use of ADR will contribute to and continue the trend in the reduction in our hearings inventory and the timeliness of hearings resolutions. See Hearings Workload, Table 7, on page 30.

*[TBD]=[To Be Determined]

The four measures for the Strategic Enforcement and Litigation element of the EEOC's Five-Point Plan focus on improving workplace policies, practices and procedures; improving working conditions in a broad array of workplaces; and maximizing the impact of our litigation program. Our success in three of these measures depends directly on our litigation program.

Charged with protecting the public interest and remedying employment discrimination, it is important that we ensure that our enforcement efforts result in victim-specific relief as well as improved employment policies, practices and procedures. We regularly track the amount of monetary benefits received through administrative and litigation resolutions. However, we have not comprehensively tracked prospective improvements in the workplace. While obtaining monetary benefits is crucial to the fulfillment of our public interest role, it is only part of the mosaic of positive changes that can be brought about by our enforcement and litigation programs.

We recognize the importance of non-monetary relief to remedy and deter employment discrimination and have established a new performance measure to place renewed emphasis on achieving this form of relief. In those private sector cases where we participate, we will increase the percentage of resolutions that result in improvements to employer policies, practices, and procedures. We cannot establish any targets for this measure at this time because our offices were not required to consistently enter this information into our data bases in the past. Although incomplete, preliminary data for fiscal years 1998 through 2002 indicate that improvements in policies, practices or procedures were obtained in 9.0 percent to 12.8 percent of our administrative resolutions over this period.

As a first step to implement this performance measure, we will modify our data tracking systems to capture information about changes to employment policies, practices, and procedures from our administrative and litigation resolutions. Once we obtain baseline data, we will establish annual target values through fiscal year 2009, including a target for fiscal year 2005. We will emphasize for our enforcement and legal staff the importance of securing non-monetary relief, where appropriate, while ensuring that monetary relief is not compromised.

Many of our litigated cases have an impact beyond the workplace environment of the parties to the dispute. We want to assess the ripple effect of our litigation on the workforce status of affected groups or on improvements to employment policies, practices, or procedures in workplaces within a geographic community, an industry, or even among the employer community generally. We will identify specific cases (filed or resolved) that have a potential to have a broader impact in the workplace because of their precedent-setting scope or the issues involved within particular geographical regions or industries or even within the employer community generally. Knowledge of our high-impact cases through our own publicity efforts or other methods serves the public interest by breaking down barriers to equal employment opportunity. This measure is primarily qualitative, rather than quantitative, and we will use a program evaluation approach instead of numerical targets to assess our progress. Beginning in fiscal year 2004, we will formulate criteria for identifying "high-impact" litigation; better define the characteristics of workforce status we expect to observe; and enhance our strategies for effectively publicizing our high impact litigation efforts. With the criteria and strategies in place, we will evaluate in fiscal year 2008 the extent to which our identified high impact cases have affected specific groups and improved workplace policies, practices, or procedures.

Another measure of our strategic enforcement and litigation area is to continue our success rate for resolving our lawsuits at 90 percent or higher. The target value established for this measure is a six-year nationwide rolling average ending in fiscal year 2009 at 90 percent or higher, an average for the entire six-year period. It is important to maintain this high level to aid our efforts to deter and remedy discrimination in the workplace. However, we are balancing our approach by using the averaging method over the long term to reduce influences that might deter the selection of more difficult or novel cases for litigation. Successful resolutions include cases decided by favorable court order and those concluded through a consent decree or a settlement agreement. A study of our litigation program for five fiscal years (1997 to 2001) showed the success rate averaging approximately 91 percent, which demonstrates our ability to achieve this level of success. The 90 percent target value ensures that we will continue to exercise our prosecutorial discretion responsibly while taking on emerging issues and trends.

One of the most important mechanisms in our federal sector program is our authority to conduct evaluations of federal agency EEO programs. Using an evaluation tool enables us to help federal agencies ascertain whether their EEO programs and practices are in compliance with the relevant statutes and regulations EEOC enforces and whether their EEO programs are achieving the purposes for which they were established. We will begin to use a more structured approach to conducting these evaluations and assisting agencies. In particular, we will utilize a new Program Evaluation Handbook when assessing agency EEO programs and provide agencies with an Agency Self-Assessment Guide that they can use to ensure that they are implementing efficient and effective EEO programs.

The results of our federal sector strategic enforcement measure will be assessed with a Program Evaluation study in fiscal year 2009. Using surveys and other assessment techniques we will collect and analyze information to determine how successfully the EEOC's evaluations of federal agencies positively impact on their EEO program activities. The results will be shared with federal agency EEO program leadership in a partnership effort to continue improvements in federal EEO programs and to enable us to tailor our future assistance to better serve our federal agency customers in developing workplaces free of employment discrimination.

F. Object Class Schedule – Strategic Objective 1: Justice and Opportunity

*may not add due to rounding

IV.STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 2 – INCLUSIVE WORKPLACE

A.Introduction

We believe that the best way to combat workplace discrimination is to prevent it from happening in the first place. Through outreach, education, and technical assistance, we seek to prevent unlawful exclusionary practices and to direct the nation toward sound workplace practices that foster a level playing field. Educating employers and workers about their rights and responsibilities under the law is the first step toward an inclusive work culture – where all workers are judged on their talents and abilities without regard to race, ethnicity, color, religion, sex, age, or disability.

The EEOC recognizes that many employers and employees today are committed to equal employment principles. Our prevention efforts seek to strengthen our shared responsibility for implementing these principles and to extend this commitment to the next generations of employees. This is increasingly important as our society becomes more diverse and new challenges to equal opportunity arise.

Our Inclusive Workplace objective encompasses all of the agency's outreach, education, and technical assistance activities. Fee-based programs are developed and provided under the EEOC Education,Technical Assistance, and Training Revolving Fund (Revolving Fund). Additionally, a wide variety of our staff provide outreach, education, and technical assistance to members of the public at no cost. We provide this information and assistance using EEOC employees from the private sector programs, including legal staff; from the federal sector programs; from our Revolving Fund program; and from our partnership with state and local program Fair Employment Practices Agencies (FEPAs).

Our budget request for fiscal year 2005 for Strategic Objective 2, Inclusive Workplace, is $47,663,000, which does not include EEOC's Revolving Fund. The proposed request will permit us to conduct more outreach, to get our message to large and small employers and to diverse communities throughout this country, to achieve increased awareness of and compliance with EEO laws, and reduce discrimination in the workplace. One of the proposed initiatives is new and other initiatives are an expansion of our current efforts funded with existing resources. Additional resources are needed to strengthen our prevention efforts and achieve intended results. Table 9 provides the funding estimates for Strategic Objective 2 for fiscal years 2003–2005.

*may not add due to rounding

B. Key Prevention Initiatives

The Five-Point Plan emphasizes Proactive Prevention – a belief that preventing discrimination is an important part of our mission. In fiscal year 2005, the agency will devote a greater portion of our resources to proactive prevention efforts. We will increase our outreach, education, and technical assistance efforts. On the following pages, we highlight specific initiatives that will enable the agency to be more proactive in our efforts to prevent or reduce barriers to employment discrimination.

1. The President's New Freedom Initiative

The goal of the President's New Freedom Initiative (NFI) is to fully integrate individuals with disabilities into all aspects of the nation's social and economic life. In fiscal year 2005, we are requesting $500,000 to implement a substantial program to remove discriminatory barriers and level the playing field in the employment setting for individuals with disabilities. More specifically, the funding will allow the EEOC to conduct a review of states' strategies for removing employment barriers faced by people with disabilities. EEOC will disseminate the results of this review, including posting them on our web site (www.eeoc.gov), to encourage widespread adoption of the "best practices".

Since states can serve as models, it is important to ensure that they promote employment opportunities for individuals with disabilities even in the face of economic difficulties and the limited ability of private legal actions to enforce the ADA against state employers. In partnership with governors, state government officials and their staffs, and disability commissions and boards, we will review state policies, employment practices, and data to identify and disseminate best practices related to the employment, retention, and advancement of qualified individuals with disabilities in state government. We will provide free and confidential technical assistance to states concerning identified barriers to employment.

2. The EEOC's Freedom to Compete Initiative

We have implemented the EEOC's Freedom to Compete Initiative in a multi-phased approach. This initiative complements the NFI by fostering a level playing field for all individuals to have equal employment opportunities. During the first phase of the initiative, we engaged a cross-section of stakeholders in a dialogue about EEOC and explored with them how we could broaden our presence and more proactively address 21^st century workplace issues. During fiscal year 2005, we will continue to partner, develop alliances, and use other collaborative efforts to engage stakeholders in efforts to influence the opinions of leaders in the business community and make changes in the workplace.

3. Federal Sector Programs

Our continued federal sector reforms will encourage federal agencies to enhance their own proactive efforts to prevent discrimination. We will use resources to continue federal sector reforms in fiscal year 2005. We will work with agencies to promote workplace policies and practices that foster an inclusive work culture and prevent employment discrimination. This effort includes working with federal agencies to adopt and successfully implement the elements of the EEOC's Model EEO Program. We will assist agencies to implement this program. For example, we will issue guidance on elements of a successful Model EEO Program. We will develop and use an assessment process to promote, monitor, and track compliance in the management of an agency's EEO program. In a collaborative effort, we will engage federal agencies' leadership to assist us in assessing their EEO programs and tailor strategies and solutions to correct identified problems. Finally, we will provide customer specific training to enhance EEO skills and competencies of an agency's workforce.

4. Education, Technical Assistance and Training Revolving Fund

In 1992, Congress passed the EEOC Education, Technical Assistance and Training Revolving Fund Act (P.L. 102-411). Under the Act, EEOC develops and delivers comprehensive and specialized external education, technical assistance, and training about the laws we enforce. The Revolving Fund permits us to charge a fee for the costs associated with the delivery of programs that augment agency activities provided to the public free of charge.

The EEOC Education, Technical Assistance and Training Revolving Fund was established as a Public Enterprise Fund with the following authorizing language:

There is hereby established in the Treasury of the United States a revolving fund to be known as the "EEOC Education, Technical Assistance and Training Revolving Fund" (hereinafter in this subsection referred to as the "Fund") to pay the cost (including administrative and personnel expenses) of providing education, technical assistance, and training relating to the laws administered by the Commission. Monies in the Fund shall be available without fiscal year limitation to the Commission for such purpose.

The Revolving Fund must maintain monies from the unobligated balance at the end of each fiscal year. These funds cover anticipated expenses for a portion of the next fiscal year until new revenues are received beginning in approximately May. This balance and subsequent revenues pay for conference sites, printing, other contractual obligations, and the Revolving Fund staff salaries and benefits. Also, funds are needed to develop new products and enhance existing products and services.

During fiscal year 2003, we conducted 405 fee-based training events under the auspices of the Revolving Fund. These events were attended by more than 20,000 people. Our Technical Assistance Program Seminars (TAPS) teach individuals and representatives about the principles of and the different responsibilities under EEO law. The TAPS are usually one day in length, held throughout the country, and attended by both private and federal sector employers. In fiscal year 2005, we will conduct 50 TAPS events and overall approximately 425 events sponsored by the Revolving Fund.

C. Performance Measures for Strategic Objective 2–Inclusive Workplace

*[TBD]=[To Be Determined]

Our measures, supporting the Proactive Prevention element of the EEOC's Five-Point Plan, focus on improving employment policies, practices, and procedures; increasing individual awareness of rights and responsibilities; and encouraging successful implementation of the Model EEO Program in federal agencies. Two of our measures focus on the real world impact of our prevention efforts and signal an enhanced emphasis on using strategies to prevent employment discrimination from occurring in the first place. We will rely mostly on survey results from individuals and employers to track the efficacy of our efforts. We cannot establish any targets for these measures at this time because they are a new way of measuring the results of our outreach and technical assistance programs. As a first step, we will design a survey tool and, during fiscal year 2004, establish baseline data. Once we obtain this baseline data, we will establish annual target values for fiscal year 2005 through fiscal year 2009 and implement strategies to achieve our fiscal year 2005 target.

The goal to successfully implement the attributes of the Model EEO Program in 50 percent of the federal agencies is a new initiative. The model provides a critical avenue for agencies to improve their workplaces and promote equal employment opportunity. We issued Management Directive 715 in August 2003. We will issue operational instructions for its implementation to assist agencies to achieve equality of opportunity in the federal workplace and to design and implement strategic programs that identify and eliminate barriers to equal employment opportunity. By adopting the attributes of the Model EEO Program, agencies will be able to attract, develop, and retain top-quality employees and prevent workplace conflicts from arising in the first instance. Where conflicts do arise, however, agencies with effective EEO and ADR programs will be able to resolve matters at an early stage, particularly at the pre-complaint informal stage, and reduce the number of formal EEO complaints requiring investigation and adjudication. As a result, agencies will be able to shift resources from costlier EEO complaint processing activities to proactive prevention. While the Commission strives to provide clear and effective guidance to agencies, as well as assist agencies in tailoring specific strategies to correct any EEO program deficiencies, it is the ultimate responsibility of each agency head to take all necessary measures to incorporate the principles of equal employment opportunity into the organization's structure and culture. As part of the model, we will develop an EEO program compliance assessment tool covering selected indicators that will help agencies measure their progress towards establishing a Model EEO Program.

D. Summary of Financing for the Revolving Fund

E. Object Class Schedule–Strategic Objective 2: Inclusive Workplace

*may not add due to rounding

F.Object Class Schedule–EEOC Education, Technical Assistance, and Training Revolving Fund

*may not add due to rounding

V. STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 3 – ORGANIZATIONAL EXCELLENCE

 

A.Introduction

Strategic Objective 3, Organizational Excellence, embodies the final element of the Five-Point Plan, EEOC as a Model Workplace. Under this objective, we seek to ensure that the principles and standards we promote to employers are readily apparent in our own operations. We will achieve this goal through professional and leadership development, performance management programs, enabling technologies, and establishing a flexible and adaptable work environment conducive to teamwork. To be a model workplace, we will build programs and practices worthy of emulation.

The President's Management Agenda (PMA) provides the roadmap for this strategic objective. The PMA addresses important enhancements to internal agency operations and the agency's interaction with the public.

B.Highlighted Resource Areas for Strategic Objective 3

The agency's resources are allocated between Strategic Objective1 and Strategic Objective 2 to identify the full cost of conducting our front-line programs, including all of the elements of our operations supporting those programs. There are specific areas important to highlight for some areas or programs that illuminate the agency's commitment in achieving organizational excellence and developing EEOC as a model workplace. Table 10, Highlighted Resource Areas in Organizational Excellence, summarizes specific areas that total almost $24 million of our fiscal year 2005 performance budget, which contribute to our two mission-related objectives: Justice and Opportunity and Inclusive Workplace.

* may not add due to rounding

Technology

Our technology request totals $18.8 million to improve the agency's efficiency and increase public access to our services and is allocated between Strategic Objectives 1 and 2.

Updated technology is critical to streamline our work processes, especially in light of organizational changes that will occur as we reposition ourselves to make more effective use of our resources. Our Five-Year Information Technology (IT) Strategic Plan outlines an ambitious agenda to continue to improve our business processes, program efficiencies, and customer service.

Our IT plans will give to our employees standardized, state-of-the-art desktop tools to increase their productivity; maintain a sound telecommunications infrastructure to facilitate electronic communication, information sharing and collaboration between our offices; leverage the Internet and information on the Internet to facilitate research and promote information exchange with our external customers; develop integrated information systems to manage our corporate information; implement electronic government initiatives (e-gov) to improve work efficiencies and customer service; and safeguard our agency's information resources to ensure the reliability, availability, and integrity of our data.

The additional technology funds requested for fiscal year 2005 will support the implementation and continuation of several vital agency technology initiatives. We need to expand our IT infrastructure to support the communication and storage requirements of our new document management system. The document management system is a core component of our e-government plans because it serves as the foundation for converting paper records into electronic files to process, store, secure, and retrieve on-line. In addition, the document management system will greatly improve the protection of our mission critical information. As our paper records are converted to an electronic format, critical information can be easily backed-up, stored off-site and recovered in the event of a disaster.

Additional funds will enable us to obtain the technology required to support our process-streamlining initiatives and infrastructure expansion, secure remote access to our internal data systems; and continue the migration to the Microsoft Office Suite.

These additional funds for technology programs build on the significant achievements we have made in the past few years. We have completed several major information technology e-government projects that automated internal processes, reduced paperwork burden, integrated data, and allowed us to work more efficiently within our existing resources. We deployed a secure, web-based application which enabled approximately 45,000 businesses to electronically submit their annual Employer Information Report (EEO-1) to the EEOC. We implemented another secure, web-based system which enabled all federal agencies to electronically submit annual federal equal employment opportunity statistics to EEOC. We implemented a new integrated information system which consolidated our charge intake, investigation, mediation, litigation, hearings, and outreach data into a single shared information system for real-time access; deployed new administrative systems to automate and integrate the functions and data associated with financial and human resources management; and implemented a new correspondence tracking system to electronically manage controlled correspondence and pilot document management technology.

In fiscal years 2004 and 2005, we will expand upon these e-government accomplishments by implementing a web-based tool to assist the public in determining if their employment discrimination complaint falls within EEOC's jurisdiction and to provide them with the option of securely transmitting their allegations and other information to the EEOC electronically. This expansion will complement our plans to upgrade our IT infrastructure to support electronic document management, automated workflow, and records management.

Workforce Repositioning

In February 2003, we received the National Academy of Public Administration's (NAPA) report containing an assessment of our structure and workforce issues. Concurrent with the NAPA study, the agency's Inspector General (IG) completed an assessment of field telecommuting options and the feasibility of substantially expanding the program to reduce overhead costs - predominantly rent. The recommendations from the NAPA and IG studies, input from EEOC employees and stakeholders, and an update to our 6-year Strategic Plan will help guide our repositioning initiative.

Our fiscal year 2004 Enacted level included funds for our repositioning initiatives; which includes the anticipated resources needed to implement management decisions resulting from the NAPA and IG studies and employee and stakeholder input. These resources will support staffing adjustments; office adjustments, especially as we expand our telecommuting workforce; and information technology improvements to support staffing and office space changes.

Throughout fiscal year 2003, the possibility of creating a National Contact Center was examined in order to solve concerns throughout the agency. The EEOC receives more than one million telephone contacts each year: 61 percent of which are requests for general information or potential charge inquiries. Various office management systems are used to handle these calls, as well as customer contacts made through walk-ins and mail. In many offices, calls from the public have been received and processed in the same way for more than 30 years using a variety of different types of systems. Moreover, there is no uniform approach to answering calls that guarantees promptness, accuracy, and courtesy.

An EEOC Work Group was convened in February 2003 to study the feasibility of implementing a cost-effective customer service contact center to provide optimum service and quality information to the public. The Work Group's recommendations were approved by the Commission and the acquisition process has been initiated.

The NAPA report and subsequent internal analyses have documented changing demographics and employment center shifts that require a re-examination of our office locations, staffing, skill mix, and office productivity. The preliminary results suggest imbalances between the agency's workload and the location and the mix of resources needed. We are exploring many options and will use the resources requested for fiscal year 2005 to implement the most prudent and efficient solutions.

In December 2002, the agency announced a freeze on long-term office lease rollovers. In January 2003, we announced a goal to save 35 percent of rental costs ($8 million) over a five-year period. We have achieved rent savings under the revised guidelines by closing a warehouse and relocating one office to new space. We are also relocating the Washington Field Office into the Headquarters building in late fiscal year 2004 to save additional rent costs.

Like other federal agencies, we are faced with a potential wave of retirements in the senior- and middle-level leadership and supervisory ranks beginning in fiscal year 2005. We need to identify, develop, train, and reward new managers. In addition, we must replace employees we lose through transfers and retirements with new hires. This cadre of new employees require intensive training to become good investigators, mediators, and trial attorneys. Resources are requested for these programs as well as rewards and promotions aimed at recognizing exemplary performance and reducing employee turnover.

C. Performance Measures for Strategic Objective 3 – Organizational Excellence

*[TBD]=[To Be Determined]

All of our measures are intended to carry out the PMA and further the agency's goals by assessing customer confidence in our services, achieving high standards in the management of our employees, demonstrating sound financial practices, and using technology to maintain important documents.

Customers must be confident that we can provide the services they expect. With our first measure, we will assess our staff professionalism, agency operations, and aspects of service delivery that impact on individuals and employers who use our services. With this type of new information, we will be able to identify ways to streamline and continuously improve our operations and our service delivery to achieve excellence in customer service.

Our success in providing quality service directly depends on our employees. Effective management of people is the key for achieving our other goals. The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has developed a scorecard to help agencies evaluate their status and make progress in implementing a successful approach for managing and developing human capital. For one of our measures, we will meet or exceed all elements of OPM's scorecard and demonstrate our success in human capital management. In fiscal year 2004, we will begin a comprehensive approach to improve in the areas of human capital management so that by the end of fiscal year 2005 we will have addressed any unacceptable indicators. In subsequent years, we will proceed to align our workforce and establish reward and accountability systems to achieve acceptable standards. Finally, we expect to achieve the fully successful standard when we implement all of our human capital components by fiscal years 2008 – 2009.

Another measure ties directly to OPM's survey of the government workforce. By 2009, we expect our employees to rate the agency above the government-wide ratings on the various components in the survey. Some of the areas of the employee survey include employee perceptions of the alignment of the agency's work with its mission, the quality of the agency's leadership, expectations about job performance and commitment to excellence, and how well the agency encourages employees to maintain and enhance professional and leadership skills. The last federal Human Capital Survey was administered by OPM to large agencies in fiscal year 2002. It indicated that more than 80 percent of federal employees believed that they do important work and are accountable for results; fewer than half believed that they received adequate recognition or that awards were tied to their performance, and fewer than half held their leaders in high regard.

OPM has concluded that where less than half of the workforce provides positive endorsement on these types of questions obstacles likely exist for an agency to be able to effectively serve customers, accomplish an agency's mission, or make full use of the agency's human capital. Our surveys will help us meet our measure by identifying any problems and pointing the way towards factors that will help us correct them.

Management of financial resources is another important component of the PMA. The agency is now required to produce an annual financial statement that is independently audited. When we receive an "unqualified" opinion from the auditor, we can be sure that we are meeting applicable accounting standards. In fiscal year 2003, we conducted the first-ever financial audit of the agency in preparation for implementing our measure in fiscal year 2004 to receive an "unqualified" audit opinion for each of the next six years. This is an important objective for our agency, because it is critical that we demonstrate that we are diligently managing our financial resources.

We have identified the key attributes of a Model EEO Program in the federal sector and, as described in measure 2.1.2. on page 49, we expect to have 50 percent of all federal agencies successfully implementing the model by the end of fiscal year 2009. Because EEOC is charged with enforcing the nation's civil rights laws to protect individuals from employment discrimination, EEOC as a model workplace means that our own internal workplace policies and practices serve as a prototype for other federal agencies. Consequently, we intend to reinforce that EEO is an integral part of our strategic mission; be proactive in assessing barriers to equal opportunity; and maintain an effective, efficient, fair, and impartial complaint resolution process. During fiscal year 2004, we will identify strategies and develop a plan of action to ensure that our EEO program meets or exceeds the standards established for a federal sector model EEO Program. We will also begin to implement the Model and successfully meet the identified benchmarks in at least 50 percent of the areas in FY 2004. For fiscal year 2005, we aim to meet all benchmarks.

Implementing the model will enhance our EEO program in many ways. One essential element of a model program is proficient resolution. Our private sector program and the other parts of our federal sector program have measures to assess the timeliness of their work. Similarly, it is critical to ensure that all internal complaints are resolved in an expeditious manner. Our measure requires us to take dramatic steps to decrease the overall amount of time we take to process internal EEO complaints by improving the management of our cases in the investigative phase. Using fiscal year 2003 as a benchmark, we will reduce the average time to process a formal complaint by at least 10 percent in fiscal year 2004 and 20 percent in fiscal year 2005.

As with our efforts to promote and expand mediation and other ADR approaches, it would be best if we could resolve any dispute raised at EEOC as early as possible and eliminate any prolonged conflict that can have a negative impact on our work environment. The EEOC recently implemented a dispute resolution program to improve the workplace and be a model employer in the federal sector. A model workplace seeks to improve the organizational efficiency of the agency and instill a climate of respect, service, and responsiveness. Our new RESOLVE Program is an internal alternative dispute resolution program that provides a forum to informally resolve a variety of workplace disputes, not just EEO concerns.

The program will use mediation to resolve most of the disputes, because it is a less adversarial approach than other processes. Mediation often leads to more creative solutions, and the parties are more satisfied with the process and the results. Mediation is quicker and less costly than other dispute resolution processes. We expect RESOLVE to help us achieve a more harmonious workplace where employees can focus their energy on the vital mission of the agency. The success of RESOLVE is so important that we want to measure the confidence employees have in participating in the program again. For fiscal year 2004, since it is a new endeavor, we have established a baseline that 30 percent of the employees using the RESOLVE program will be willing to use it again. We expect this percentage to grow each year and have set a target of 40 percent for fiscal year 2005. By fiscal year 2009, we want at least 80 percent of the employees who use the program to be willing to participate in it again.

The Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA) and the PMA e-gov initiative require the conversion of paper-based documents to an electronic format so that the management of the documents, such as their storage, retrieval, and archive can be achieved electronically on an enterprise basis. Electronic management and maintenance of our charge and case-related documents will improve our service to customers and enhance internal work efficiencies. Specifically, the conversion of paper documents to electronic files will enable on-line transactions with the public and employers; reduce paperwork processing and burden; improve internal information sharing and dissemination; streamline work processes; and provide disaster recovery for our vital mission records. Our measure focuses on building the technical infrastructure required to support enterprise-wide document management, such as expanding telecommunication bandwidth, acquiring storage devices and software licenses, and preparing for the phased-in, multi-year implementation of an electronic document system. We will convert key documents in our active cases through fiscal year 2009 when we expect to have 95 percent of the documents converted. During fiscal years 2004 and 2005, we will lay the groundwork for achieving these substantial gains towards implementing our final goal.

VI. VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF DATA

The EEOC continues to make significant progress in implementing its five-year technology plan, which is critical for ensuring the reliability and integrity of the agency's data. Data accuracy and reliability are necessary for effective planning and resource allocation. The agency's major front-line programs in the private and federal sector require accurate enforcement data and financial and human resources information to assess agency operations and performance results.

Over the past few years, we have designed and implemented several important, new technology-based systems to ensure more accurate and easily verifiable data. A desktop software program provides EEOC investigators and attorneys with a quick and easy way to view employers' EEO-1 reports, which are surveys of private sector companies' employment profiles by race, ethnicity, and sex. The desktop program enables our employees to compare this employer information to other employers in the same industry, to employers within a geographic area, or to profiles in the Census. In addition, a new, secure web-based system allows federal agencies to electronically submit annual EEO statistics to EEOC and improve the quality and timeliness of reporting.

We have implemented several new data systems that enhance our budget and performance integration efforts. A new personnel system was implemented in September 2001 to provide more accurate information on our employees and provide enhanced technological capabilities for utilizing this information. The Federal Personnel/Payroll System (FPPS) is maintained by the Department of Interior's National Business Center. We implemented our new Integrated Financial Management System (IFMS) in October 2001. The system is also operated and maintained by the Department of the Interior National Business Center. It has core accounting, budget execution, and project cost accounting modules. This system provides centralized access to a single, integrated, corporate-wide financial database and provides a mechanism for consolidated financial reporting. Two additional modules, procurement and fixed assets/property accounting, were implemented in fiscal year2002. A third module, travel management, was implemented in fiscal year 2003.

Additionally, in fiscal year 2003, we deployed the new Integrated Mission System (IMS) to headquarters and all field offices. The IMS consolidates information related to charge intake, investigation, mediation, litigation, hearings, and outreach into a single database for real-time access and operational reporting.

This data and process integration eliminated duplicate data entry and storage and streamlined functions to achieve data integrity.

Finally, during fiscal year 2002, we drafted our Guidelines for Ensuring and Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, Utility and Integrity of Information Disseminated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The guidelines became effective on October 1, 2002. They describe the EEOC's policy and procedures for reviewing and substantiating the quality of information and data before it is disseminated to the public. They provide an administrative mechanism for individuals to seek and obtain correction of the disseminated information.

Under the guidelines, we will be able to strengthen our verification and validation procedures to improve the quality of the agency's data. The guidelines require us to ensure that the information is protected from unauthorized access or revision. In addition, before releasing the information or data to the public, the guidelines require us to review the information and its usefulness to any intended users. The review will ensure that the public obtains the information they need; ensure that the information is displayed in a way that they can use; ensures that the substance of the information is accurate, reliable and unbiased; and, even where the information is accurate, ensure that it is also presented accurately, clearly, completely, in an unbiased way, and in context so that it can be interpreted properly.

During fiscal year 2003, we completed the directive which will guide the agency's internal process for ensuring that all information maintains quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity before being disseminated outside the agency. We will continue to build on the guidelines throughout fiscal years 2004 and 2005 to ensure the quality, usefulness, objectivity, and integrity of our information and our ability to verify and validate our information and data.

VII. PROGRAM EVALUATION

Program evaluation is an important component of an agency's effort to ensure that a program is operating as intended and is achieving results, and the policies, procedures, and processes are operating effectively and efficiently. A program evaluation is a thorough examination of the identified area using a rigorous methodology and statistical and analytical tools. It uses expertise within and outside the program under review to enhance the analytical perspectives and add credence to the evaluation and recommendations.

At this time, we have scheduled five program evaluations that focus on key aspects of our Strategic Objectives included in our Strategic Plan (see the schedule on page 70). During fiscal year 2004, we will establish procedures for conducting program evaluations and prepare for the assessment of our private sector mediation program. In subsequent years, we will evaluate the procedures we use to prioritize private sector charges and assess our federal sector mediation program.

These evaluations will enable us to make critical adjustments to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of these programs. Also, we will be able to review our measures and refine them, if necessary. We will review the need for other program evaluations, particularly for areas in which we are developing baseline information before identifying performance targets to achieve in the future.

VIII. GENERAL STATEMENT OF LAWS

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission was established by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 253, 42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq.) as amended, (Title VII) and became operational on July 2, 1965. The Commission has five members, no more than three of whom shall be of the same political party. The members are appointed by the President, by and with the consent of the Senate for rotating five-year terms. The President designates one member to serve as Chairman and one member to serve as Vice Chairman. The General Counsel is appointed by the President by and with the advice and consent of the Senate for a term of four years.

The Commission has been charged with promoting equal opportunity in employment by enforcing the federal civil rights employment laws through administrative and judicial actions, education, and technical assistance. We fulfill our mission through the implementation of a vigorous law enforcement program, complemented by proactive prevention through conducting an outreach program to provide information, guidance, and technical assistance to help prevent discrimination from occurring.

Title VII prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin by public and private employers with 15 or more employees, employment agencies, and labor organizations with 15 or more members. Members of the public file charges alleging employment discrimination with the Commission's 51 field offices. EEOC staff members investigate the charges and issue determinations of "reasonable cause" or "no reasonable cause" to believe the allegations of a charge. If the Commission finds cause, it attempts to resolve the charge through conciliation. EEOC also attempts to settle charges through mediation. Title VII authorizes the Commission to file suit in Federal District Court in order to achieve compliance if it is unable to achieve a remedy through conciliation. If the case involves a state or local government, the Commission will refer it to the Attorney General who may file suit in federal court.

Pursuant to Section 709(c) of Title VII, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission requires the filing of periodic reports by public and private employers and labor organizations providing data on the makeup of their workforces or membership by gender and racial/ethnic categories. The data are used by other federal, state, and local agencies charged with enforcement of equal employment opportunity laws, and in aggregate form by non-government organizations and researchers concerned with equal employment opportunity.

EEOC enforces the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) of 1967, and the Equal Pay Act (EPA). The ADEA protects workers age 40 and older from discrimination in hiring, discharge, pay, promotions, fringe benefits, and other aspects of employment by employers having 20 or more employees. The Equal Pay Act prohibits gender-based discrimination in the payment of wages to men and women performing substantially equal work in the same establishment. The Commission receives and investigates charges of discrimination in these areas and makes findings of "violation" or "no violation" and may file suit in Federal District Court if it is unable to achieve voluntary resolution of violations through conciliation.

Section 717 of Title VII, Section 15 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, bar discrimination by federal agencies on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, and disability. These sections provide the basis for Commission oversight responsibility for the procedures used by federal departments and agencies in processing internal complaints of discrimination. In addition, the Commission has appellate jurisdiction to review final decisions of departments or agencies on discrimination complaints upon the request of the complainant. It is also responsible for ensuring that federal department and agencies maintain programs of equal employment opportunity. Further, under Executive Order 12067, the Commission provides leadership and coordination to all federal department and agencies' programs enforcing federal statutes, executive orders, regulations, and policies which require equal employment opportunity without regard to race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, or disability. Coordination is provided to eliminate conflict, competition, duplication, and inconsistency in these programs and to improve their effectiveness. All federal departments and agencies are required to cooperate with and assist the Commission in performing these functions and are required to furnish the Commission with such reports and information as it may require.

On July 26, 1990, the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) became law. The ADA became effective on July 26, 1992, for employers with 25 or more employees and on July 26, 1994, for employers with 15 or more employees. This legislation provides a clear and comprehensive mandate for enforcing the laws prohibiting discrimination in employment opportunities for individuals with disabilities. EEOC is responsible for ensuring compliance with Title I of this statute by receiving and investigating charges of disability discrimination. At the conclusion of EEOC's investigation, the agency issues a determination of reasonable cause or dismisses the charge (no cause). If EEOC has found cause and is unable to achieve compliance through conciliation, EEOC may file a lawsuit. If the case involves a state or local government, the Commission will refer it to the Attorney General who may file suit in federal court.

Under the statutes EEOC enforces, the agency, through individual Commissioners or by field directors, may initiate charges based on information suggesting that the law has been violated. If the Commission decides after investigating that reasonable cause exists to believe that a violation has occurred, remedial relief is sought through the process of conciliation or litigation if conciliation efforts fail.

IX. ADDENDUM: INTERIM ADJUSTMENTS TO STRATEGIC PLAN

The agency is making two interim adjustments to its Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2004-2009.

A) Adjustment of the Goal Value for Performance Measure 1.1.1.

For Strategic Objective 1, Justice and Opportunity, we are changing performance measure 1.1.1. on page 16 of the agency's Strategic Plan. This measure supports the Proficient Resolution element of the agency's Five-Point Plan. The measure calls for us to resolve at least 70% of private sector charges within 180 days by FY 2009. This is a key measure of our success in providing timely service to our customers. We are increasing the target value for this measure from 70 percent to 75 percent by fiscal year 2009, a more challenging goal for the agency. The 75% target builds upon our steady success in recent years to reduce the time it takes to resolve charges. We recognize, however, that our goal to resolve 75% of private sector charges within 180 days must be balanced with other factors that contribute to the amount of time it takes to resolve these charges including the need to devote resources to charges that take longer to process because of the type of meritorious or complex claims involved.

The original performance measure read: By FY 2009, ensure that at least 70% 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 within 180 days.

B. Revised Language

In our Strategic Plan, we describe the means and strategies we will employ to address Strategic Objective #2, Inclusive Workplace, and the three long-term goals for the Five-Point Plan element, Proactive Prevention. We are removing references to the word "scorecard" from the text, because it did not appropriately convey our approach to develop an index to promote, monitor and track improvements in federal agency EEO programs. Our approach is not similar to scorecard mechanisms currently used to evaluate federal agency programs. Removing this word does not alter our initiative, but it will eliminate unnecessary confusion about how we will achieve our results to implement the attributes of the Model EEO Program throughout the federal government.

Text changes in the Strategic Plan

Original text on page 27, with language removed for revised text change: As part of the Model, we will develop a scorecard covering selected indicators that will help agencies measure their progress in establishing the Model EEO Program.

Original text on page 28, with language removed for revised text change: Also, develop a "scorecard" process to promote, monitor and track improvements in managing an agency's EEO program.

---

1. Includes fiscal year 2003 rescission of $2,007,343 (PL-108-7), and $15,000,000 supplemental (PL-108-11) and fiscal year 2004 rescission of $3,455,610 (PL-108-199).

2. Highlighted resources listed in Strategic Objective 3 are allocated between Strategic Objectives 1 & 2 and included in the Agency Total.

3. Obligations for State & Local were allocated to object class 41.0 for fiscal year 2003 and object class 25.0 for fiscal years 2004 and 2005.

4. Includes fiscal year 2003 rescission of $2,007,343 (PL-108-7), and $15,000,000 supplemental (PL-108-11) and fiscal year 2004 rescission of $3,455,610 (PL-108-199).

5. Includes $1,806,608 of the $2,007,343 fiscal year 2003 rescission (PL-108-7), and $13,200,000 of the $15,000,000 fiscal year 2003 supplemental (PL-108-11) and $2,937,269 of the $3,455,610 fiscal year 2004 rescission (PL-108-199).

6. Totals for all charges do not equal the sum of all statutes because many charge filings allege issues/bases under more than one statute.

7. "Hearing Requests Consolidated After Initial Processing" are cases initially processed by EEOC as individual hearings but subsequently consolidated with other hearings.

8. The target value was revised. For an explanation, see Section IX, page 77.

9. Obligations for State & Local were allocated to object class 41.0 for fiscal year 2003 and object class 25.0 for fiscal years 2004 and 2005.

10. Includes fiscal year 2003 rescission $1,806,608 of the $2,007,343 rescission (PL-108-7), and $13,200,000 of the $15,000,000 supplemental (PL-108-11) and fiscal year 2004 rescission $2,937,269 of the $3,455,610 rescission (PL-108-199)

11. Includes fiscal year 2003 rescission $200,734 of the $2,007,343 rescission (PL-108-7), and $1,800,000 of the $15,000,000 supplemental (PL-108-11) and fiscal year 2004 rescission $518,341 of the $3,456,000 rescission (PL-108-199).

---

This page was last modified on February 9, 2004

Return to Home Page