Report to Congressional Requesters

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO

October 2005 EQUAL 

EMPLOYMENT 

OPPORTUNITY 

COMMISSION 

Actions Taken, but 

Agency Restructuring 

Efforts Could Benefit 

from a More 

Systematic 

Consideration of 

Advisory Panel’s 

Recommendations 

GAO-06-10 
Page i GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

Letter 1

Summary of Findings 3 

Conclusions 5 

Recommendation for Executive Action 5 

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 5 

Appendix I Briefing Slides 8 

Appendix II Sixty-four Recommendations from the National 

Academy of Public Administration to EEOC 30 

Appendix III Comments from the U.S. Equal Employment 

Opportunity Commission 34 

GAO Comments 44 

Appendix IV GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 46 

Related GAO Products 47 

Contents 
Page ii GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

Abbreviations 

EEOC Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

NAPA National Academy of Public Administration 

OMB Office of Management and Budget 

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further 

permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or 

other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to 

reproduce this material separately. 
Page 1 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

October 28, 2005 

The Honorable Frank R. Wolf 

Chairman 

The Honorable Alan B. Mollohan 

Ranking Member 

Subcommittee on Science, the Departments of State, 

 Justice, and Commerce, and Related Agencies 

Committee on Appropriations 

House of Representatives 

The Honorable Jose E. Serrano 

House of Representatives 

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) promotes equal 

opportunity in the workplace and enforces federal laws that prohibit 

employment discrimination. EEOC investigates charges of discrimination 

from the public, litigates major discrimination cases, and reaches out to 

federal agencies and the public to educate and prevent discrimination. 

EEOC serves every industry, every segment of the population, and every 

part of the country. Since EEOC was established over 40 years ago, its 

core mission has not changed, but new issues continue to emerge. For 

example, the agency is experiencing an increase in charges of sexual 

harassment of teenagers in the workplace and discrimination against 

individuals who speak with accents. EEOC has also seen an increase in 

employer reprisals against employees who complain about discriminatory 

treatment, cooperate with EEOC investigations, or file formal charges. 

In May 2001, EEOC and other federal agencies were directed by the Office 

of Management and Budget (OMB) to prepare restructuring plans to make 

government more responsive to citizens’ needs.1

 By June 2001, agencies 

were to submit a workforce analysis to OMB that would include, for 

example, demographic information on the agency’s employees and would 

serve as the baseline for agency-specific restructuring plans. Agencies 

were to submit restructuring plans to OMB with fiscal year 2003 budget 

submissions and annual performance plans. These submissions were due 

to OMB September 2001. OMB’s directive required agencies with more 

 1

OMB Bulletin No. 01-07, “Workforce Planning and Restructuring,” May 8, 2001. 

United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548 
Page 2 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

than 100 full-time employees to develop restructuring plans with the goal 

of flattening the federal hierarchy. The OMB directive stated that plans 

should describe the specific activities and actions each agency planned to 

take, associated resources, expected outcomes, and tools to measure 

performance. 

In order to ascertain what progress EEOC has made in reorganizing its 

operations, we determined (1) whether EEOC implemented OMB’s 

directive to develop a restructuring plan and (2) what actions EEOC is 

taking to restructure and make its operations more efficient and effective. 

To determine whether EEOC implemented OMB’s directive to develop a 

restructuring plan, we obtained and reviewed OMB’s directive, the 

President’s Management Agenda, and other guidance. We interviewed key 

EEOC officials in headquarters to identify the steps that the agency took in 

order to implement OMB’s directive. We interviewed key OMB officials to 

determine the extent to which EEOC’s actions had met the OMB 

requirements. To determine what actions EEOC is taking to restructure 

and make its operations more efficient and effective, we interviewed key 

EEOC officials and reviewed documents pertaining to the agency’s 

restructuring efforts. To learn how these restructuring efforts would affect 

EEOC’s operations, we visited EEOC headquarters, the national contact 

center, and EEOC district offices in Chicago and San Antonio. In these 

district offices, we interviewed staff from all major functions and at 

different levels. To gain additional perspectives, we interviewed district 

directors from another five EEOC field locations (Atlanta, Detroit, 

Philadelphia, Phoenix, and San Francisco). We also interviewed 

representatives from an advisory panel of the National Academy of Public 

Administration (NAPA)2

 and the American Federation of Government 

Employees, EEOC Locals 216. We conducted our work between October 

2004 and September 2005 in accordance with generally accepted 

government auditing standards. 

On September 19, 2005, we briefed your staff and other staff of the 

Subcommittee on the results of our work based on the briefing slides we 

include in appendix I. The purpose of this letter is to formally publish the 

briefing slides and to officially transmit our recommendation to the Chair 

of EEOC. 

 2

NAPA is an independent organization chartered by Congress to improve governance. 
Page 3 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

Although EEOC did not develop or submit to OMB a restructuring plan as 

required, it has developed and submitted a workforce analysis to OMB, 

contracted with the National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA) 

for a study of its operations, and taken action to implement some of the 

study’s recommendations. OMB officials stated that they have found 

EEOC’s restructuring approach to be acceptable. EEOC chose to 

implement three major initiatives from the study of its operations but did 

not have an organized strategy to consider all of the study’s 

recommendations. These wide-ranging recommendations address multiple 

topics, including EEOC’s mission, needed technological improvements, 

and human capital management. 

In this report, we are making a recommendation to the Chair of EEOC to 

develop and implement an organized strategy to consider all of the NAPA 

recommendations. EEOC disagreed with this recommendation, indicating 

that they had already implemented such a strategy. We continue to believe 

that EEOC needs to more systematically evaluate each of the NAPA 

recommendations, which would include an examination of the 

implementation costs, contributions to Commission goals, as well as 

establishing a means for measuring the impact of those recommendations 

that are implemented. 

EEOC did not develop or submit a restructuring plan as the OMB directive 

required but took actions OMB officials have found to be acceptable. 

According to EEOC officials, EEOC did not meet the directive’s 

requirement because the agency was unsure of how to conduct a 

restructuring effort given the financial difficulties the agency was facing. 

Further, EEOC was experiencing management challenges at the time. 

According to EEOC officials, the agency was undergoing a major 

management transition to a new chair. 

To prepare for restructuring, EEOC commissioned a study of its 

operations by a NAPA advisory panel in June 2002. NAPA’s February 2003 

report emphasized three major initiatives and identified 64 wide-ranging 

recommendations that EEOC should implement.3

 The 64 

recommendations address multiple topics such as creating a balance 

 3

“A Report by the Panel of the National Academy of Public Administration for the U.S. 

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission: Organizing for the Future,” February 2003. 

Summary of Findings 

Status of EEOC’s 

Implementation of OMB’s 

Directive 

EEOC’s Actions to 

Restructure 
Page 4 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

among enforcement, outreach and prevention, and mediation activities; 

needed technological improvements; and human capital management. 

Appendix II contains a list of these recommendations. EEOC addressed 

some of these recommendations, however, it did not have an organized 

strategy for considering all of them.4

 Instead, EEOC considers addressing 

the three major initiatives as the completion of its primary restructuring 

efforts. To address the three initiatives, EEOC (1) established a pilot test 

of a national contact center to take calls from the public, (2) recently 

approved a plan to streamline its field structure, and (3) intends to 

reorganize its headquarters operations at an undetermined date once the 

structure of its field operation has been determined. 

EEOC’s national contact center, which is operated by a contractor, 

became operational in March 2005 and will continue as a pilot test for 18 

months. Contact center representatives provide callers with basic 

information but do not take charges of discrimination, contrary to NAPA’s 

recommendation. Instead, contact center representatives refer potential 

charges of discrimination to EEOC field locations for investigation. The 

contact center also processes postal mail and e-mail inquiries from the 

public. As a part of the pilot test, the EEOC Inspector General is 

conducting a review of the contact center. 

EEOC approved its field streamlining plan in July 2005 and plans to begin 

implementing it in October 2005. The plan would increase the total 

number of field locations nationwide, but it would change the size level of 

some offices. In an effort to better match workload with the size of its field 

locations, EEOC’s plan would reduce the number of district and area 

offices and increase the number of field and local offices. Further, it would 

change the menu of services available at select locations to correspond 

with their new size levels. According to EEOC officials, workload and 

geography were the primary criteria used to determine each field 

location’s level. EEOC will not lay off any employees or force them to 

relocate as a result of implementing the streamlining plan. Employees will 

leave these positions through attrition or through voluntary reassignment. 

EEOC officials estimate that implementing the field streamlining plan will 

free up $8.26 million through fiscal year 2013. However, EEOC will not 

 4

Although EEOC contracted with NAPA to conduct the study, the agency is under no 

obligation to implement the recommendations. 

National Contact Center 

Field Streamlining 
Page 5 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

begin to realize these financial benefits until fiscal year 2010 because of 

the immediate costs of opening two new local offices and the time needed 

for employees to leave their eliminated positions. 

EEOC intends to reorganize its headquarters operations, but it does not 

yet have a plan or specific time frame for doing so. According to EEOC 

officials, the agency will begin reorganizing its headquarters operations 

after its field streamlining is under way—at some time during fiscal year 

2006. As a part of the headquarters reorganization, the agency intends to 

shift 20 percent of resources—a combination of human resources and 

funding—from its headquarters to the field in order to better serve the 

public. 

In the last year, EEOC took major restructuring actions that could 

fundamentally change the way the agency serves the public. Given its role 

as the preeminent antidiscrimination enforcement agency, making such 

important changes in how the agency is structured and operates calls for 

carefully considering all available options. NAPA completed a major study 

of EEOC’s operations and created an extensive list of recommendations. 

However, EEOC has no organized approach to consider each of these 

recommendations. Without such an approach, EEOC lacks assurance that 

each recommendation has been fully considered. As a result, EEOC may 

miss an opportunity to fully benefit from NAPA’s work, become more 

efficient and effective, and further improve its ability to enforce the 

nation’s civil rights laws. 

In order to improve the Commission’s restructuring efforts, we 

recommend that the Chair of EEOC develop and implement an organized 

strategy to consider all of the NAPA recommendations. This strategy 

should include, among other things: (1) an examination of each 

recommendation from the perspective of its potential to aid in achieving 

the strategic goals and objectives of the agency, (2) an evaluation of the 

costs associated with their implementation, and (3) a means of measuring 

the impact of any recommendations that are implemented. 

We provided officials at EEOC an opportunity to comment on a draft of 

this report. In general, EEOC disagreed with our findings, conclusion, and 

recommendation regarding the agency’s lack of an organized approach to 

consider all of NAPA’s recommendations. EEOC’s assertion, that it has 

Headquarters 

Reorganization 

Conclusion 

Recommendation for 

Executive Action 

Agency Comments 

and Our Evaluation 
Page 6 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

developed an organized and comprehensive framework for considering 

and implementing NAPA’s recommendations, does not correspond with 

the results of our review. More specifically, over the course of our review, 

we sought documentation supporting the agency’s strategy for reviewing 

and implementing the NAPA recommendations; however, EEOC officials 

told us on several occasions that such documentation did not exist. Only 

after we completed our review and discussed our preliminary findings did 

EEOC provide us with an internal tracking document that discussed its 

implementation of many of NAPA’s recommendations. Only in response 

to a draft of this report did the Commission provide us with an additional 

document that listed the implementation status of each of the 

recommendations. Neither of these documents contained, nor could we 

obtain from the agency, evidence of the strategy EEOC said it developed 

to evaluate the NAPA recommendations, or evidence of the kind of 

strategic approach that we continue to recommend: (1) an examination of 

each recommendation from the perspective of its potential to aid in 

achieving the strategic goals and objectives of the agency, (2) an 

evaluation of the costs associated with their implementation, and (3) a 

means of measuring the impact of any recommendations that are 

implemented. EEOC’s comments and our response are reproduced in 

appendix III. 

We are sending copies of this report to the Chairman and Ranking 

Member, House Subcommittee on Science, the Departments of State, 

Justice, and Commerce, and Related Agencies, Committee on 

Appropriations; other interested parties; and will make copies available to 

others upon request. We are also sending copies to the Chair of the EEOC. 

In addition, the report will be available at no charge on GAO’s Web site at 

http://www.gao.gov. 
Page 7 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

If you have any questions about this report, please contact me at 

(202) 512-7215. Contact points for our Offices of Congressional Relations 

and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this report. GAO staff 

who made major contributions to this report are listed in appendix IV. 

Robert E. Robertson 

Director, Education, Workforce, 

 and Income Security Issues 
Appendix I: Briefing Slides 

Page 8 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

Appendix I: Briefing Slides 

1

EEOC: Status of Restructuring Efforts

Briefing to Subcommittee on Science, the Departments of State, 

Justice, and Commerce, and Related Agencies 

Committee on Appropriations

House of Representatives

September 19, 2005
Appendix I: Briefing Slides 

Page 9 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

2

Introduction: Mission

• The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) was 

established by title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. 

• The agency promotes equal opportunity in the workplace and 

enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination on the 

basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, and disability. 

• EEOC investigates charges of employment discrimination from the 

public, litigates major cases, and reaches out to the public to help 

educate it and prevent such discrimination.
Appendix I: Briefing Slides 

Page 10 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

3

Introduction: Restructuring Plan

• In May 2001, EEOC and other federal agencies were directed by 

the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to prepare 

restructuring plans to make government more responsive to 

citizens’ needs. 

• OMB’s directive required that EEOC submit a restructuring plan to 

OMB with its fiscal year 2003 budget submission and annual 

performance plan. These documents were due to OMB in 

September 2001.
Appendix I: Briefing Slides 

Page 11 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

4

Introduction: Restructuring Plan (cont.)

• OMB Bulletin 01-07 called for agencies to prepare restructuring 

plans based on a workforce analysis and submit them to OMB. The 

plans should include:

• organizational charts showing baseline program, staffing levels,

and work processes that would be accomplished;

• costs and savings that will result from implementing the 

restructuring plan;

• the human resources management tools and flexibilities 

needed to implement the plan;

• the specific actions to be taken, with a timetable; and

• the anticipated impact from implementing the plan along with 

the agency’s methods for measuring its progress.

Note: Workforce analyses were due to OMB in June 2001.
Appendix I: Briefing Slides 

Page 12 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

5

Objectives

• You asked us to provide an update on EEOC’s restructuring 

actions. To determine the status of EEOC’s actions we sought to 

assess

1. whether EEOC implemented OMB’s directive to develop a 

restructuring plan, and

2. what actions EEOC is taking to restructure and make its 

operations more efficient and effective.
Appendix I: Briefing Slides 

Page 13 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

6

Methodology

• We interviewed key EEOC officials and reviewed documents pertaining 

to the agency’s restructuring efforts.

• We visited EEOC headquarters, the national contact center, and EEOC 

district offices in Chicago and San Antonio to learn about EEOC’s 

operations.

• We interviewed directors from five other districts (Atlanta, Detroit, 

Philadelphia, Phoenix, and San Francisco) to learn more about EEOC 

field operations and gather perspectives on the restructuring.

• We interviewed representatives of the National Academy of Public

Administration (NAPA) and the American Federation of Government 

Employees, EEOC Locals 216, to obtain their views on EEOC’s 

restructuring.

• We interviewed OMB staff and reviewed the President’s Management 

Agenda and OMB guidelines on agency restructuring.
Appendix I: Briefing Slides 

Page 14 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

7

Summary of Findings

1. EEOC did not develop a restructuring plan as the OMB directive 

required, but did develop and submit a workforce analysis. OMB

found EEOC’s subsequent restructuring approach to be 

acceptable.

2. To assist its restructuring efforts, EEOC contracted for a study of 

its operations in June 2002. The study identified three major 

initiatives and 64 wide-ranging recommendations. EEOC chose to 

implement the three initiatives, beginning with the first in 

September 2004, but did not have an organized strategy to 

consider all of the recommendations.
Appendix I: Briefing Slides 

Page 15 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

8

Finding One: Status of EEOC’s 

Implementation of OMB’s Directive

• EEOC did not develop or submit a restructuring plan to OMB 

because, according to an EEOC official, the agency was 

experiencing a transition from the prior chairmanship to the current 

chairmanship. EEOC submitted a workforce analysis that would 

serve as the baseline for restructuring.

• OMB officials stated that they have worked with EEOC throughout 

its restructuring and have found EEOC’s subsequent approach to 

be acceptable. 
Appendix I: Briefing Slides 

Page 16 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

9

Finding Two: EEOC’s Actions to 

Restructure

• To assist its restructuring efforts, EEOC sought the assistance of 

the National Academy of Public Administration, an independent 

organization chartered by Congress to improve governance. 

• In its February 2003 report to EEOC, NAPA made 64 

recommendations to help EEOC restructure and improve its 

operations. The recommendations included suggestions such as 

improving technology and making the best use of the agency’s 

workforce.

Note: Although EEOC sought NAPA’s assistance, EEOC was not required to implement any of NAPA’s 

recommendations. In addition, GAO did not evaluate the recommendations.
Appendix I: Briefing Slides 

Page 17 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

10

Finding Two: EEOC’s Actions to 

Restructure (cont.)

• EEOC is addressing NAPA’s three major initiatives. EEOC

• established a national contact center to answer calls from the 

public, 

• approved a plan to streamline its field structure, and 

• intends to reorganize its headquarters operations at an 

undetermined date.

• EEOC did not have an organized strategy to consider all of NAPA’s 

64 recommendations for agency restructuring. For example, EEOC 

did not establish a group to oversee the implementation of the 

NAPA recommendations, as NAPA suggested. Instead, EEOC 

considers addressing the three major initiatives as the completion 

of its restructuring efforts.
Appendix I: Briefing Slides 

Page 18 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

11

National Contact Center Initiative

• EEOC began developing the national contact center in September 

2004.

• The center, operated by a contractor, began taking calls from the 

public in February 2005 and became fully operational in March 

2005.

• After an 18-month pilot ending in September 2006, EEOC will 

evaluate the center’s effectiveness. 

• Center representatives provide callers with basic information but do 

not take charges of discrimination, contrary to NAPA’s 

recommendation. Center representatives refer potential charges of 

discrimination to EEOC field locations for investigation. 

• In addition to taking calls, the national contact center also 

processes mail and e-mail inquiries from the public.
Appendix I: Briefing Slides 

Page 19 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

12

Streamlined Field Structure Initiative

• EEOC approved its field streamlining plan in July 2005 and plans to 

begin formally implementing it in October 2005.

• As a result of the streamlining, there will be fewer district and area 

offices and more field and local offices. Specifically, EEOC’s plan

• keeps all existing offices open and keeps the same number of 

full-service offices, contrary to NAPA’s recommendation;

• adds two new field locations (Mobile, Alabama, and Las Vegas, 

Nevada); and

• converts some offices from one level to another, in part to free

up management and administration resources for other 

purposes.
Appendix I: Briefing Slides 

Page 20 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

13

Field Streamlining Initiative: Criteria

• According to EEOC officials, workload and geography were the 

primary criteria used for determining each field location’s level: 

district, field, area, or local.

• According to EEOC officials, the agency also used other criteria

that an EEOC work group developed. These criteria included: 

• office size, • operation costs.

• visibility,

• office performance, • economies of scale, and

• accessibility, • employers,

• population, • operational efficiency,
Appendix I: Briefing Slides 

Page 21 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

14

Field Streamlining Initiative:

Office-Level Changes 

Source: EEOC.

Total 51 53

Local 8 14 9 9

Area 19 15 9 9 9 9

Field 1 9 9 9 9 9 9 9

District 23 15 9 9 9 9 9 9

Outreach/ 

prevention

Federal 

services

Legal 

functions Enforcement Mediation Charge receipt

Number of 

offices after 

streamlining

Number of 

offices prior to 

streamlining

Office 

level

Services provided

Note: EEOC considered both district and field offices to be full-service offices.
Appendix I: Briefing Slides 

Page 22 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

15

Field Streamlining Initiative:

District Offices Affected 

• Detroit,

• Denver, • Seattle.

• Cleveland, • San Antonio, and

• Baltimore, • New Orleans,

• EEOC converted seven district offices from the district level to the 

field level:

• Another EEOC district office was converted from the district level to 

the area level:

• Milwaukee.
Appendix I: Briefing Slides 

Page 23 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

16

Field Streamlining Initiative:

Employee Positions Affected 

• The field streamlining plan did not lay off any employees or force 

them to relocate.

• The plan eliminated the following employee positions:

• 8 district directors,

• 8 regional attorneys, and

• 19 administrative employees.

• Employees will leave these positions through attrition or staff 

reassignment.
Appendix I: Briefing Slides 

Page 24 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

17

Prior to Field Streamlining Initiative, 

EEOC Had 23 Districts
Appendix I: Briefing Slides 

Page 25 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

18

After Field Streamlining Initiative, 

EEOC Will Have 15 Districts
Appendix I: Briefing Slides 

Page 26 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

19

Field Streamlining Initiative:

Financial Benefits

• EEOC estimated that implementing its field streamlining plan will 

free up $8.26 million through fiscal year 2013. EEOC officials also 

stated that additional benefits will result from moving additional 

resources to frontline positions.

• EEOC will not begin to realize these financial benefits until fiscal 

year 2010, for the following reasons:

• immediate costs to open and operate two new local offices and

• delayed benefits to allow time for employees to leave their 

eliminated positions through retirement or voluntary 

reassignment.

Note: These benefits are based on EEOC’s estimates. Assumes that EEOC will begin implementing the field 

streamlining plan in fiscal year 2006 as the agency intended. 
Appendix I: Briefing Slides 

Page 27 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

20

Headquarters Initiative:

Reorganized Operations

• EEOC intends to reorganize its headquarters operations but does 

not have a plan or time frame for doing so. According to EEOC 

officials, the agency will begin reorganizing its headquarters 

operations after its field streamlining is under way in fiscal year 

2006.

• Because EEOC has not yet developed a plan, it is too early to 

determine whether EEOC will implement NAPA’s recommendation 

to establish a better balance among enforcement, 

outreach/prevention, and mediation activities.

• According to EEOC officials, the agency intends to shift 20 percent 

of headquarters resources—a combination of human resources and 

funding—from headquarters to the field.
Appendix I: Briefing Slides 

Page 28 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

21

EEOC Took Other Ad Hoc Actions to 

Streamline and Restructure the Agency

• EEOC consolidated some district offices under fewer managers as 

a temporary measure until its field streamlining is implemented.

• EEOC saved on annual rental costs through actions such as

• moving its Washington Field Office into its headquarters 

building, saving about $500,000 in rental costs, and

• renting out extra space in its Puerto Rico office, saving about 

$54,000 in rental costs.

• EEOC streamlined its litigation work in headquarters by transferring 

responsibility for internal litigation from its Office of Legal Counsel 

to its Office of General Counsel.
Appendix I: Briefing Slides 

Page 29 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

22

Timeline of EEOC’s Restructuring Efforts
Appendix II: Sixty-four Recommendations 

from the National Academy of Public 

Administration to EEOC 

Page 30 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

Aligning Mission and Functions 

Initiative 1: Establish a nationwide call center. 

1. Establish a toll-free national call center staffed by individuals who have been thoroughly trained in both responding 

to questions about EEOC’s mission and services, and in taking charges over the phone. 

Initiative 2: Realign field offices and administrative work.

2. Establish a network of lead offices in areas with high workload levels. EEOC should define workload to include 

private sector charge filings and other factors, such as local industry data, population demographics, and EEOC’s 

mediation and outreach efforts. Lead offices might have satellite offices under them, and perhaps a mobile unit that 

could travel to areas not close to EEOC offices. 

3. Create pilot projects for a combination of place-based, mobile, and remote services so that EEOC can develop and 

test service to customers, infrastructure support, management checks and balances, revised work processes, and 

supporting human resources systems for recruitment, training and performance assessment, and other 

components. 

4. Consolidate most administrative support functions; leaving in each major office one highly skilled, fully trained 

administrative staff member to provide those services that must be performed on site and coordinate those that are 

performed at another location. 

5. Locate at least some of its consolidated support functions (should EEOC choose to provide them directly) outside 

of Washington, D.C., in locations where real estate costs are lower and where it may be easier to recruit and retain 

staff. 

6. Develop the costs and benefits of two options: (1) establishing a full service agreement with the Department of 

Interior, instituting additional cross-servicing agreements with other federal organizations, or (2) contracting out 

administrative functions to the private sector. 

Initiative 3: Realign headquarters. 

7. Establish more distinct focuses of accountability at the headquarters level for prevention and technical assistance, 

enforcement, and mediation. These three areas should have appropriate priority in field offices, even though 

resource allocation cannot be equally divided. 

8. Put all operational legal work in the Office of General Counsel and ensure that the Office of Legal Counsel 

maintains a policy guidance and internal advice role. 

9. Ensure that staff who review federal agency affirmative action programs report directly to the Office of Federal 

Operations. 

Harnessing Technology to Achieve the Mission 

Design secure technology tools for electronic charge filing. 

10. Ensure that the secure technology tools for electronic filing be designed so that customer service is user-friendly, 

staff can routinely follow up on Internet-filed charges with phone or in-person interviews, and information can be 

promptly provided to those whose queries or submissions do not involve employment discrimination. 

Acquire software and use new technology to improve management information, better support program delivery, and save 

money over the long term. 

11. Enhance its analytical capabilities by acquiring software that will allow it to access and analyze data from its 

multiple systems to improve its strategic decision making. 

12. Invest in litigation management software and new primary office software platforms to better support program 

delivery. If funds are not available to purchase the entire primary office software, the agency should begin its 

investment with the presentation software to allow preparation of outreach and other presentations. 

13. Conduct business case analyses on some long-term possibilities for savings and more effective operations. These 

include reducing the square footage for district libraries by creating a good virtual library and using 

videoconferencing or Web cameras for mission activities such as mediation, conciliations, and internal organization 

meetings. 

Appendix II: Sixty-four Recommendations 

from the National Academy of Public 

Administration to EEOC 
Appendix II: Sixty-four Recommendations 

from the National Academy of Public 

Administration to EEOC 

Page 31 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

Institute pilot telework programs and develop the secure technology to support them. 

14. Develop the secure technology tools to support teleworkers and other staff who travel to the customers. This would 

include secure remote access to major EEOC systems, appropriate equipment, and methods to keep the 

workforce current on EEOC software and data systems. 

15. Protect data at the sensitive-but-unclassified level by such things as Protective Key Infrastructure for mobile staff. 

These protections include adequate firewalls, antivirus protection for clients and servers, intrusion detection 

systems, onetime password authentication identification systems, and encryption software for laptops. 

16. Implement the EEOC Office of Inspector General recommendation that EEOC institute pilot telework programs. 

Ensure that senior management candidates understand the value of technology. 

17. Make it a condition of advancing to a senior management position that an individual understand the value of 

technology in accomplishing EEOC’s mission and demonstrate an ability to lead others in applying this value. 

Making the Best Use of EEOC’s Workforce 

Realign staff through work with OPM and union. 

18. Assess agency position descriptions to determine such things as which are current, which need to be redesigned 

to reflect new work methods, whether existing career ladders are appropriate, and whether positions accurately 

distinguish supervision from production. 

19. Seek approval from the Office of Personnel Management for a targeted early-out retirement option for staff in those 

headquarters and field offices that will be downsized. 

20. Design and implement a cost-effective career transition center. 

21. Work in partnership with EEOC’s unions as the agency makes decisions to realign staff work locations. 

Enhance agency leadership through leadership programs and improved accountability. 

22. Build a model of leadership that integrates achieving results, leveraging resources, maintaining accountability, and 

improving the organizational culture. 

23. Create executive development activities for all senior executives and managers by partnering with other federal 

agencies for mobility assignments, developmental activities, and enhancement of leadership skills. 

24. Partner with whichever federal, academic, nonprofit, or for-profit entities can most effectively tailor leadership 

development training programs for EEOC staff at all levels. 

25. Hold all managers accountable for performance, reward those whose performance meets or exceeds expectations, 

and provide assistance or sanctions for those who fail to meet expectations. 

26. Design performance measures and metrics that support accountability and the full scope of management. 

27. Focus on inspiring, leading, motivating, and sustaining high-performing organizations and offices within EEOC as 

well as managing staff resources and workload. 

Create strategic human capital plan expeditiously and link it to the planning and budget processes. 

28. Expedite a workforce planning effort and link it to the planning and budget processes. 

29. Develop an inventory of the competencies required to perform mission-critical work such as investigation, litigation, 

mediation, analysis, outreach, and prevention. 

30. Determine which of those staff who are eligible to retire plan to do so, the gaps these retirements will create in 

individual offices, the size of the pool needed to replace those retiring from specific positions, and the level of 

training or outside hiring required to put people with the right skills in the areas most critical to mission fulfillment 

when they are needed. 

31. Prepare a comprehensive cost-estimate for skill development needs so that EEOC can present an integrated 

strategy with cost implications to the Office of Management and Budget. 

32. Prepare individual development plans for staff so that EEOC has better information on the skills that staff have and 

whether anticipated development efforts match staff aspirations and agency needs. 
Appendix II: Sixty-four Recommendations 

from the National Academy of Public 

Administration to EEOC 

Page 32 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

33. Revise individual performance appraisal elements to reflect changes in roles and the linkage to achieving 

organizational performance goals. 

34. Develop the metrics for the revised performance elements. 

Develop a multi-year training plan for supervisors, managers, SES candidates, and other mission-critical staff. 

35. Develop a multiyear training plan, anchored in the competencies required for mission-critical staff, that reflects an 

adequate and stable level of spending through a mix of on-site, e-training, and other methods; and use this plan as 

the basis for funding requests. 

36. Develop a strong first-line supervisor and midlevel manager training program so that individuals moving into these 

and more senior leadership positions have the competencies they need to succeed. 

37. Develop an expanded Senior Executive Service candidate development program that leverages EEOC resources 

with those of other federal organizations for such things as mobility assignments or developmental activities. 

Align support staff responsibilities with fully-trained support staff. 

38. Determine, by office and function, the extent to which higher-grade employees are spending time on support-like 

functions; and consider, within the availability resources and work priorities, whether investment in additional 

support staff would be justified by a measurable increase in productivity. 

39. Provide adequate training and career development for administrative and support staff. 

Revamp the agency awards and evaluation systems. 

40. Revamp the agency awards systems to ensure they meet the four key elements of effective reward design: 

(1) performance requirements (financial, operational, and customer satisfaction); (2) talent needs (skills, 

experience, behaviors, and employee preferences); (3) cost and funding (affordability); and (4) culture and 

branding (alignment with mission, vision, and values). 

41. Revise the process for evaluating, counseling, and (if necessary) terminating poor performers to ensure that 

EEOC’s cadre of staff includes those who not only are dedicated to its mission but demonstrate their dedication 

through effective performance. 

Performance-Based Management 

Delegate authorities to senior executives with accompanying budgets, management tools, and accountability. 

42. Delegate authorities to senior executives with accompanying budgets, management tools, and accountability. 

43. Include with the delegation for compensation funds such features as a requirement that the Office of Chief 

Financial Officer provide each year’s funding level and an estimate for the following year and a requirement that 

the funding for hiring, promotions, within-grade step increases, and the like must be within budget allocation for the 

current year and the estimate for the following year. 

44. Train senior executives and delegated staff to manage that portion of the EEOC budget for which they are 

accountable, and phase in additional delegations as appropriate. 

45. Review, periodically, program accomplishment against expenditures for which each senior executive is 

responsible. 

46. Assess, annually, the quality of budget and other resource deployment by each senior executive. Ensure that this 

assessment is a significant factor in performance appraisals, and withdraw or modify the delegation where 

circumstances indicate the need. 

47. Conduct a periodic review of spending by all offices to inform the reallocation of resources during the year, to 

adjust for unanticipated imbalances in workload, and to adjust for new needs. 

Ensure cases are closed with the most appropriate resolution at the most appropriate time. 

48. Require that the Office of Field Programs routinely examine a random sample of closed cases from each office, on 

a rotating basis, to ensure that the cases were adequately investigated, given the information the charging party 

and respondent provided. 
Appendix II: Sixty-four Recommendations 

from the National Academy of Public 

Administration to EEOC 

Page 33 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

49. Require that the Office of Field Programs circulate and discuss aggregate case-processing timeliness data from 

each field office and use it to determine whether variations are the result of especially good or poor work methods 

or management styles, share the best practices with other field offices, and work closely with offices that have 

problems to correct them. 

50. Stress that cases are to be closed with the most appropriate resolution at the most appropriate time. 

Expand capacity to analyze, validate, and disseminate best practices. 

51. Expand EEOC’s capacity to analyze, validate, and disseminate information on best practices and take this 

expansion one step further to correlate work methods or processes with results. If some methods are clearly better, 

then the results achieved through them should be used in designing new standards of performance. 

52. Reinforce that the Director of the Office of Field Programs is the individual who can determine which methods or 

operations appear most effective and require that all offices either use these methods or achieve similar results 

with the methods they use. 

53. Reward those offices or key staff within them when their work methods are selected as best practices that other 

offices can emulate, and ensure that those with poor practices are directed to improve and receive the support 

necessary to do so. 

Develop methods to demonstrate the impact EEOC work has on reducing employment discrimination in the workplace. 

54. Develop methods to demonstrate the impact EEOC’s work has on reducing employment discrimination in the 

workplace. 

55. Develop baseline discrimination metrics for certain industries, nationwide firms, or geographic areas. 

56. Plan specific EEOC activities to direct toward the industries, firms, or areas that are implementing the activities and 

recording the level of effort. 

57. Track discrimination levels in the selected industries, firms, or geographic areas. 

Implementation Strategy and Plan 

Develop an implementation strategy and detailed implementation plan. 

58. Develop an implementation strategy and detailed implementation plan for the changes the commission decides to 

make, and use the plan to manage the implementation process. 

59. Decide which of the panel’s recommended changes do not require extensive consultation and can be implemented 

immediately. 

60. Identify a small staff responsible for planning, execution, tracking, and implementation assessment efforts. 

61. Present funding estimates and justifications for the multiyear restructuring plan to OMB, seeking the first-year 

resources at minimum as a change to the pending fiscal year 2004 request now at OMB. Explore with OMB 

whether any additional resources for fiscal year 2003 might be provided as a small amendment to the fiscal year 

2003 appropriation. 

Develop a communication strategy and plan. 

62. Develop a communication strategy and plan that identifies all the internal and external stakeholders, the issues 

and communications methodologies to be used with each, the frequency of communications, and the mechanisms 

for stakeholder feedback. 

Develop resource estimates for implementation. 

63. Develop resource estimates: The Academy Panel stresses that substantive improvements require real increases in 

resources each year for several years. This would be over and above the flexibility that can be realized against 

internal realignment and reallocations. 

Develop appropriate training for staff on the new methods and policies. 

64. Develop appropriate training to ensure that staff members who use or are responsible for the new methods and 

policies have the knowledge to fulfill their new roles and responsibilities successfully. 

Source: National Academy of Public Administration. 
Appendix III: Comments from the U.S. Equal 

Employment Opportunity Commission 

Page 34 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

Appendix III: Comments from the U.S. Equal 

Employment Opportunity Commission 

See comment 1. 
Appendix III: Comments from the U.S. Equal 

Employment Opportunity Commission 

Page 35 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

See comment 2. 
Appendix III: Comments from the U.S. Equal 

Employment Opportunity Commission 

Page 36 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

See comment 6. 

See comment 5. 

See comment 4. 

See comment 3. 
Appendix III: Comments from the U.S. Equal 

Employment Opportunity Commission 

Page 37 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 
Appendix III: Comments from the U.S. Equal 

Employment Opportunity Commission 

Page 38 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 
Appendix III: Comments from the U.S. Equal 

Employment Opportunity Commission 

Page 39 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 
Appendix III: Comments from the U.S. Equal 

Employment Opportunity Commission 

Page 40 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 
Appendix III: Comments from the U.S. Equal 

Employment Opportunity Commission 

Page 41 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 
Appendix III: Comments from the U.S. Equal 

Employment Opportunity Commission 

Page 42 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 
Appendix III: Comments from the U.S. Equal 

Employment Opportunity Commission 

Page 43 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 
Appendix III: Comments from the U.S. Equal 

Employment Opportunity Commission 

Page 44 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

1. EEOC’s assertion, that it has developed an organized and 

comprehensive framework for considering and implementing NAPA’s 

recommendations, does not correspond with the results of our review. 

More specifically, over the course of our review, we sought 

documentation supporting the agency’s strategy for reviewing and 

implementing the NAPA recommendations; however, EEOC officials 

told us on several occasions that such documentation did not exist. 

Only after we completed our review and discussed our preliminary 

findings did EEOC provide us with an internal tracking document that 

discussed its implementation of many of NAPA’s recommendations. 

Only in response to a draft of this report did the agency provide us 

with an additional document that listed the implementation status of 

each of the recommendations. Neither of these documents contained, 

nor could we obtain from the agency, evidence of the strategy EEOC 

said it developed to evaluate the NAPA recommendations, or evidence 

of the kind of strategic approach that we continue to recommend. 

2. EEOC asserted that our report overlooks that EEOC is a multi-member 

Commission that decides whether to approve agency reorganizations 

by vote of all of its members. Our finding that EEOC did not have an 

organized strategy to consider all of NAPA’s recommendations is not 

based on EEOC’s organizational structure. We believe EEOC’s current 

organizational structure allows the agency to develop and implement 

such a strategy. 

3. EEOC asserted that NAPA, in a letter to the Commission, expressed 

confidence in EEOC’s implementation actions in response to its 2003 

report. We reviewed this letter and acknowledge that NAPA expresses 

confidence in EEOC’s field streamlining plan. However, NAPA’s letter 

does not address all of EEOC’s restructuring actions or the many other 

NAPA recommendations, and NAPA’s comments are qualified by the 

statement “Given that we have not had the opportunity to restudy the 

issues addressed in this report, our comments in this letter are based 

solely on current information supplied by EEOC.” 

4. EEOC claimed that our report reflects a fundamental 

misunderstanding of its strategy for addressing NAPA 

recommendations, and it has carefully evaluated all the NAPA 

recommendations and has documentation to support its decisions. See 

comment 1. 

5. EEOC stated that it provided us with an internal tracking document 

listing the implementation status of each recommendation and is 

disappointed that we did not use this information in our draft report. 

See comment 1. 

GAO Comments 
Appendix III: Comments from the U.S. Equal 

Employment Opportunity Commission 

Page 45 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

6. EEOC stated that we had not previously provided it with appendix II of 

our draft report. However, this appendix is merely a listing of the 

recommendations contained in the February 2003 NAPA report that 

should have been the Commission’s starting point for systematically 

evaluating each of the recommendations and their potential to improve 

EEOC’s operations. We have included EEOC’s chart as an attachment 

to its letter. However, we cannot verify many of the actions that EEOC 

claims it has taken because the agency did not provide the supporting 

documentation. 
Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments 

Page 46 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

Robert E. Robertson (202) 512-7215 or robertsonr@gao.gov

David Lehrer, Assistant Director; Margaret Armen; Neal Gottlieb; 

Paul Schearf; and Rosemary Torres Lerma made significant contributions 

to this report. 

Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments 

GAO Contact 

Acknowledgments 
Related GAO Products 

Page 47 GAO-06-10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

Equal Employment Opportunity: The Policy Framework in the Federal 

Workplace and the Roles of EEOC and OPM. GAO-05-195. Washington, 

D.C.: April 29, 2005. 

Diversity Management: Expert-Identified Leading Practices and Agency 

Examples. GAO-05-90. Washington, D.C.: Jan. 14, 2005. 

Equal Employment Opportunity: Discrimination Complaint Caseloads 

and Underlying Causes Require EEOC’s Sustained Attention. 

GAO/T-GGD-00-104. Washington, D.C.: Mar. 29, 2000. 

Equal Employment Opportunity: Complaint Caseloads Rising, with 

Effects of New Regulations on Future Trends Unclear. GAO/GGD-99-128. 

Washington, D.C.: Aug. 16, 1999. 

Equal Employment Opportunity: Data Shortcomings Hinder Assessment 

of Conflicts in the Federal Workplace. GAO/GGD-99-75. Washington, D.C.: 

May 4, 1999. 

Equal Employment Opportunity: Rising Trends in EEO Complaint 

Caseloads in the Federal Sector. GAO/GGD-98-157BR. Washington, D.C.: 

July 24, 1998. 

Equal Employment Opportunity: Administrative Judges’ Recommended 

Decisions and Agencies’ Actions. GAO/GGD-98-122R. Washington, D.C.: 

June 10, 1998. 

Alternative Dispute Resolution: Employers’ Experiences with ADR in the 

Workplace. GAO/GGD-97-157. Washington, D.C.: Aug. 12, 1997. 

EEOC: Burgeoning Workload Calls for New Approaches. GAO/T-HEHS-95-

170. Washington, D.C.: May 23, 1995. 

EEOC: An Overview. GAO/T-HRD-93-30. Washington, D.C.: July 27, 1993. 

Related GAO Products 

(130407) 
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; 

and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help 

Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s 

commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost 

is through GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts 

newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To 

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go 

to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to Updates.” 

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. 

A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of 

Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 

more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders 

should be sent to: 

U.S. Government Accountability Office 

441 G Street NW, Room LM 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm 

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470 

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Paul Anderson, Managing Director, AndersonP1@gao.gov (202) 512-4800 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

GAO’s Mission 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony 

Order by Mail or Phone 

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs 

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER