# Recent Reports

Reports News from the GAO

- Higher Education: Employment Discrimination Case Referrals Between Education and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Could Be Improved What GAO FoundThe proportions of Black or African American (Black) and Hispanic or Latino (Hispanic) college faculty increased from fiscal years 2003 through 2021. Yet, there were lower proportions of Black and Hispanic college faculty compared to Black and Hispanic workers with advanced degrees (e.g., master's and doctorate) and professional workers (e.g., lawyers and engineers), according to GAO's analysis of Department of Education and Census Bureau data. Black and Hispanic individuals were also less represented among college faculty than among students, according to GAO's analysis of Education data. For example, in fiscal year 2021, 8 percent of faculty were Black compared to 12 percent of students, and 7 percent of faculty were Hispanic compared to 19 percent of students.College Faculty and Students by Race and Ethnicity, Fiscal Year 2021Notes: Black refers to Black or African American. Hispanic refers to Hispanic or Latino. An individual who self-identifies as Hispanic only, or both Hispanic and any race category, would be classified as Hispanic. The Other category includes individuals such as those that identified as Native American, Pacific Islander, multiple races, or unknown race.GAO's literature search identified strategies used by colleges to recruit and retain a diverse faculty, given the potential benefits to their students. Colleges have enhanced their job search processes, developed mentoring programs, and improved campus climate to recruit and retain a diverse faculty.Education refers certain employment discrimination complaints against colleges to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) for investigation consideration but has been consistently late in doing so. In fiscal year 2022, Education processed and referred to EEOC 99 complaints alleging employment discrimination at colleges based on race, color, national origin, or sex. GAO found that Education referred the complaints in 71 days on average, although Education policy calls for doing so in 30 days. However, Education does not track the timing of these referrals. Without doing so, Education could miss an opportunity to learn from offices that are more timely than others and apply those lessons agency-wide to reduce delays. Individuals with delayed complaints may experience adverse effects, such as continued discrimination or less pay. In fiscal year 2021, EEOC processed 1,342 complaints alleging employment discrimination at colleges based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, or disability, some of which were referred by Education. However, EEOC does not have a protocol to consistently track and account for the complaint referrals. Recently, one such referral was not initially received by EEOC until the individual who filed the complaint followed up. Without a protocol to ensure that EEOC receives and processes all Education complaint referrals, some may be missed or resolution may be delayed.Why GAO Did This StudyWhile the U.S. population has become increasingly diverse, college faculty may not reflect those same levels of diversity. Little is known at the national level about the relationship between faculty diversity and student outcomes. Separately, faculty have reported experiencing discrimination at colleges.GAO was asked to review faculty diversity and employment discrimination at colleges. This report examines (1) selected aspects of diversity among faculty, (2) efforts by colleges to recruit and retain a diverse faculty, and (3) how Education and EEOC process employment discrimination complaints at colleges. GAO analyzed Education data on faculty and students from fiscal years 2003–2021, national workforce data from the Census Bureau and Bureau of Labor Statistics ranging from calendar years 2014–2021, Education complaint data from fiscal years 2011–2022, and EEOC complaint data from fiscal years 2011–2021 (each set was the most recent available). GAO also conducted literature reviews; reviewed relevant federal laws, regulations, and policies; and interviewed agency officials and selected higher education experts.
- Paid Parental Leave: OPM Should Take Steps to Further Raise Awareness of the Program What GAO FoundThe Federal Employee Paid Leave Act of 2019 (FEPLA) provided a new paid parental leave benefit to most federal civilian employees. FEPLA amended the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (FMLA), which provided a federal entitlement of up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave to most federal employees for a variety of caregiving and medical purposes. Eligible federal employees were able to substitute up to 12 weeks of qualifying FMLA unpaid leave with FEPLA paid parental leave.The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) collected and analyzed data on the government-wide use of paid parental leave from the 2021 Federal Employee Benefits Survey, 2022 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS), and other sources. FEVS 2022 data showed that 96 percent of federal employees who used paid parental leave used it for the birth of a child (see table). A total of 557,778 employees completed the 2022 FEVS.Responses to Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS) Question Related to Use of Paid Parental Leave by Qualifying Event, 2022			Question 100a: For what purpose did you use Paid Parental Leave?									Percent Response								Birth of a child									96								Adoption placement of a child									2								Foster care placement of a child									2					Source: GAO analysis of Office of Personnel Management 2022 FEVS data. | GAO-24-106654OPM and three selected agencies—Department of Justice (DOJ), Small Business Administration (SBA), and Social Security Administration (SSA)—found no significant obstacles to employees using paid parental leave. Selected agencies used multiple channels, such as hosting information sessions, to communicate paid parental leave to their employees. However, GAO found that selected agencies' public-facing webpages did not reflect current paid parental leave policies. During the course of GAO's review, DOJ, SBA and SSA agreed and updated the relevant webpages accordingly.OPM's Leave Administration webpage includes handbooks and fact sheets intended to provide information on leave administration for federal employees. GAO found the webpage directs users to outdated information about FMLA before FEPLA went into effect. Specifically, the webpage directs users to the 2015 Handbook on Leave and Workplace Flexibilities for Childbirth, Adoption, and Foster Care, which does not reflect the availability of paid parental leave provided under FEPLA. The webpage also does not include FEPLA fact sheets. OPM officials told us that they had not yet completed updating the Handbook and fact sheets on its webpage because they had competing priorities and limited staff available. OPM intends to update the relevant documents as staff resources and workload permit. Without current information on its public webpage, OPM is missing an opportunity to help raise awareness of paid parental leave and ensure that federal employees understand their eligibility.Why GAO Did This StudyBeginning October 1, 2020, eligible federal employees were able to use up to 12 weeks of paid parental leave for the arrival of a new child by birth, placement for adoption or foster care. Studies cited by OPM indicated that paid parental leave can help increase bonding time between parent and child, improve the desirability of federal employment, and increase employee retention.The Joint Explanatory Statement accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 directs GAO to review federal paid parental leave. This report (1) describes OPM data on paid parental leave and (2) assesses OPM and selected agencies' efforts to raise awareness of the program, among other objectives.GAO analyzed OPM data on the government-wide use of paid parental leave. GAO also selected three agencies for review based on workforce size and use of paid parental leave. GAO analyzed relevant documents and interviewed officials from OPM, the selected agencies, and employee unions at the selected agencies.
- Federal Real Property: Improved Data and Access Needed for Employees with Disabilities Using Secure Facilities What GAO FoundThe Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and selected agencies have taken some steps to address physical access barriers to sensitive compartmented information facilities (SCIF), such as adding automatic door openers. However, additional barriers remain, including:Inaccessible entry doors and interior workspaces	Challenges with electronic door locks and intrusion detection systems	Absence of tactile signageODNI has not issued guidance identifying minimum specifications for common accessibility concerns and addressing accessibility in inspections. Without such guidance, agencies could miss opportunities to strengthen the federal workforce by enhancing accessibility for employees with disabilities.Physical Barriers to Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities (SCIFs) at Selected Facilities That GAO VisitedODNI and selected agencies have enhanced access to assistive technologies and medical devices for people with disabilities working in SCIFs, such as expanding videophones and interpretation services. However, agencies still face challenges ensuring access to these technologies and devices. These challenges include:Variation in SCIFs	Reciprocity with other agencies	Evolving technologiesODNI has provided agencies with limited guidance to evaluate options to use assistive technologies and medical devices in SCIFs. Additional guidance would better ensure that people with disabilities can have access to the devices they need to fully and appropriately perform their jobs in SCIFs.Why GAO Did This StudySCIFs are the only facilities authorized for storing, using, discussing, and processing highly classified information. The Director of National Intelligence, whose organization sets policy for the design, construction, and management of SCIFs, stated that she expects agency leaders to remove barriers to equal opportunities for their workforces, including for people with disabilities.GAO was asked to review federal agencies' efforts to manage SCIFs and ensure accessibility. This report, among other things, assesses the extent that selected agencies provide physical access to SCIFs and assistive technologies or medical devices in SCIFs. GAO reviewed ODNI guidance, obtained data, visited nine facilities with SCIFs, and conducted interviews. This is a public version of a sensitive report that GAO issued in September 2023. Information ODNI deemed sensitive has been omitted.
- U.S. Postal Service: Opportunities Exist to Strengthen Workforce Diversity Efforts What GAO FoundThe diversity of the U.S. Postal Service's (USPS) workforce has increased in recent years, including among its executive leaders. However, GAO's analysis—which controlled for factors such as employee tenure—found that White, non-Hispanic or Latino, and male employees generally had more positive career outcomes in USPS management than other demographic groups. For example, Hispanic or Latino employees' likelihood of promotion to middle manager roles was 28 percent less than their non-Hispanic or Latino counterparts. For Black or African American and Asian employees, the likelihood of promotion to middle manager roles was about 40 to 50 percent less than their White counterparts. In contrast, Black or African American and Asian managers were almost twice as likely as their White counterparts to be promoted to executive positions. GAO's analysis of management pay, which also controlled for relevant factors, found that many historically disadvantaged racial or ethnic groups, as well as women and employees with disabilities, earned 1 to 7 percent less than their counterparts, who were White, non-Hispanic or Latino, men, and employees without disabilities, respectively.In each of its annual reports to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) from 2016 through 2022, USPS identified some triggers to achieving workforce diversity. However, lack of applicants' demographic information, which is voluntarily provided by job and promotion applicants, limited USPS's ability to identify actual barriers. USPS is developing a new data system but does not have a plan for how it will use the data.U.S. Postal Service's Diversity Practices Compared to Diversity Management Leading PracticesUSPS met or mostly met five of the nine leading practices GAO previously identified for diversity management in the workplace. For example, establishing an Executive Diversity Council was among USPS actions that demonstrated top leadership commitment. USPS partially met the remaining four leading practices. For example, while its 10-year strategic plan highlights USPS's commitment to diversity, the plan does not specify performance measures for achieving that end. Developing specific diversity-related performance measures could help USPS track its progress and identify areas where adjustments to its diversity program, practices, and policies may be warranted. In addition, USPS has developed advisory boards to facilitate USPS's workforce diversity efforts, but membership of those boards consists only of senior USPS leaders. Gathering employee feedback from all career levels and different affinity groups could help USPS better assess progress towards its goal of a diverse and inclusive workforce.Why GAO Did This StudyUSPS reports it employs one of the most diverse workforces in the nation. However, USPS has faced challenges ensuring its leadership reflects the diversity of its workforce and the U.S.GAO was asked to examine USPS's efforts to develop a diverse workforce. This report examines career outcomes for demographic groups in USPS management. It also addresses the extent to which USPS has identified barriers to achieving workforce diversity and met leading diversity management practices, among other objectives.GAO used USPS data from fiscal years 2016 through 2022 to analyze career outcomes (promotions, pay, and separations) in management by demographic groups. GAO's analyses do not completely explain the reasons for differences in career outcomes, which may result from various unobservable factors. Thus, GAO's analyses do not establish a causal relationship between demographic characteristics and career outcomes. GAO reviewed USPS reports submitted to the EEOC and assessed USPS's actions against diversity management leading practices. GAO interviewed EEOC and USPS officials.
- Farm Credit System: Policy Considerations for a Potential Grant Program for Socially Disadvantaged Farmers and Ranchers What GAO FoundEstablishing a grant program for socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers within the Farm Credit System (FCS) would involve considerations for policymakers, includinghow the program size and funding approach would affect FCS's mission,	whether the program would expose FCS to legal challenges, and	whether the program would duplicate existing federal programs.The Farm Credit Banks and other stakeholders also identified several potential challenges to establishing such a program. For example, the Bankslack experience with overseeing a grant program, and	do not have the appropriate infrastructure or staff.Banks could address these issues by following leading grant management practices—such as for staffing and training, oversight, and grant management—that have been developed by GAO and others.A grant program would involve costs for FCS and its Banks and borrowers, according to stakeholders. The Banks could fund the program by redirecting funds from net income, thereby reducing funds available for loans and patronage (i.e., funds Banks return to borrowers, who are also owners of the system). (See figure.) GAO analyzed FCS data for 2013–2022 and found that Banks would likely have raised effective borrowing costs in at least some years had they been required to fund a program. All four Banks said that a grant program would increase costs for borrowers, reduce FCS's capacity to lend, and diminish FCS's competitiveness with commercial banks as agricultural credit providers. Advocacy groups noted that a grant program could benefit FCS by helping grantees qualify for FCS loans—for example, by buying land to use as collateral.How Farm Credit Bank Net Income Could Fund a Potential Grant ProgramAlthough Farm Credit Banks' net income, which would potentially fund a grant program, has been relatively stable in recent years, it has been more volatile in the past. More specifically, FCS net income in 1984–1993 was more volatile than in 2013–2022. Further, Farm Credit Administration officials indicated that the most recent decade was unusually strong for the agricultural industry and thus for Farm Credit Bank net income. Farm Credit Banks may face greater income volatility than other financial institutions because of their specialization in agricultural credit. In addition, unique risks in the agricultural industry contribute to uncertainty for Farm Credit Banks' net income.Why GAO Did This StudyCongress created FCS, a government-sponsored enterprise with a network of banks and associations, to meet the needs of creditworthy agricultural producers. FCS consists of four Farm Credit Banks, which fund associations that make loans to farmers and ranchers. Socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers—defined by the U.S. Department of Agriculture as members of certain racial and ethnic minority groups and women—may face challenges in obtaining agricultural credit.GAO was asked to provide information on the implications of establishing an FCS-funded grant program for socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers. This report (1) describes considerations for policymakers and potential challenges such a program might face, (2) examines potential effects of a grant program on Farm Credit Banks, FCS, and borrowers, and (3) examines the stability of funding from net income for a potential FCS grant program.GAO analyzed FCS data for 2013–2022 to examine the potential effects of a grant program. GAO also compared FCS data that reflected more and less stressful periods for FCS (1984–1993 and 2013–2022, respectively). GAO interviewed officials from the Farm Credit Administration, Farm Credit Banks, Farm Credit Council, and socially disadvantaged farmer and rancher advocacy groups.In a letter representing the views of its bank members, the Farm Credit Council stated that the report is comprehensive but raised concerns about some of the analyses. GAO stands behind its analyses.For more information, contact William B. Shear at (202) 512-8678 or ShearW@gao.gov.
- Bureau of Indian Education: Information on Efforts to Count Students for an Educational Services Program What GAO FoundThe Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) has estimated that 578,070 students are potentially eligible for the Johnson O'Malley (JOM) Program. The program provides supplemental education services to meet the specialized and unique needs of American Indian and Alaska Native students. BIE published this estimate, as required by the Johnson-O'Malley Supplemental Indian Education Program Modernization Act (JOM Modernization Act or the act), in July 2023, more than 3 years after the deadline required by the act. BIE officials told GAO that disruptions from the COVID-19 pandemic and changes in the agency's understanding of requirements in the act contributed to delays in its publication.According to BIE officials, the purpose of this estimate about potential student demand for the JOM program is to assist Congress in determining future appropriations. BIE reviewed several data sources and ultimately decided to use data from Census's American Community Survey for its estimate of potentially eligible students. While evaluating data sources and determining the estimate, BIE consulted with and obtained feedback from a variety of tribal and other JOM program stakeholders, including existing contractors who provide educational services (e.g., tribal organizations or public school districts). BIE has delayed plans to determine the total number of students currently served by the JOM program until the end of fiscal year 2024. Contractors are required to count the students they serve in school year 2023–24 and submit their annual reports by September 2024.BIE plans to distribute funding to all contractors based on updated student counts starting in fiscal year 2025. For fiscal year 2024, BIE will continue to use the 1995 base student counts for determining funding allocations, except contractors that reported higher updated counts in fiscal year 2023 will receive a corresponding funding increase. BIE officials told GAO they will implement the act's requirement to withhold funds from any contractors for failure to report student counts starting in fiscal year 2025.Why GAO Did This StudyThe JOM program provides academic and cultural supports to meet the unique and specialized educational needs of eligible American Indian and Alaska Native students in public schools and select tribal schools. BIE contracts with Tribes, tribal organizations, states, public school districts and others who provide JOM services to eligible students. These services can include Native cultural and language enrichment, academic support, dropout prevention, and the purchase of school supplies. Since 1995, BIE has relied on the same count of eligible students to determine its budget allocation for the program. Congress passed the JOM Modernization Act in 2018 to update and modernize the program, including provisions for BIE to estimate the number of students potentially eligible for JOM services and annually count the number of students receiving services. In addition, the act includes a provision for GAO to conduct a review of BIE's process for updating the student count.This report includes information on the steps BIE took, or plans to take, to estimate the number of students potentially eligible for JOM services, count students currently receiving services, and distribute JOM funds to contractors based on the number of students they serve. GAO reviewed relevant federal laws, regulations, and BIE documents on the JOM program. GAO also examined prior public comments submitted by Tribes and interviewed agency officials and members of the National Johnson O'Malley Association. GAO also conferred with the Department of Education's National Center for Education Statistics, who provided comments on the data sources BIE considered for its estimate of potentially eligible students.For more information, contact Melissa Emrey-Arras at (617) 788-0534 or emreyarrasm@gao.gov.
- Disaster Loan Program: SBA Should Include Key Issues in Its Review of How the Program Affects Underserved Communities What GAO FoundThe Small Business Administration (SBA) has taken initial steps to improve access to the Disaster Loan Program for historically underserved communities (such as those with high poverty rates or high percentages of Black or African American, Asian, and Hispanic or Latino residents). In its 2022 Equity Action Plan, SBA identified its lending criteria, such as satisfactory credit score, as a barrier that underserved communities face in accessing the program. SBA plans to conduct a congressionally requested review to determine if any current practices provide unequal outcomes for certain underserved communities and, if so, develop recommendations to improve outcomes. However, SBA does not plan to assess its lending criteria as part of this review. Doing so would help it to better determine if changes to the criteria are needed to reduce unequal outcomes for historically underserved communities, consistent with Congress's direction.SBA declined about 40 percent of disaster loan applications for 13 hurricanes in fiscal years 2018–2022. Loan outcomes tended to be worse in communities with higher percentages of low-income and Black or African American individuals. Of the 312,916 applications SBA accepted in the first stage of its application review, SBA approved 42 percent and declined 38.6 percent. Applications were declined primarily due to insufficient credit score or lack of repayment ability. The average approval rate in communities with the lowest median household incomes was 23 percentage points lower than in communities with the highest median household incomes. The average approval rate in communities with the highest percentages of Black or African American residents was 22 percentage points lower than in communities with the lowest percentages of Black or African American residents. Results were similar for areas affected by four hurricanes in fiscal year 2017 and for Puerto Rico.Disaster Loan Approval Rates by Socioeconomic and Demographic Characteristic in Communities Affected by 13 Hurricanes, Fiscal Years 2018–2022Note: For each characteristic, GAO ordered the census tracts within the disaster areas from the lowest to the highest prevalence of that characteristic and divided the ordered distribution into four equal groups (quartiles). The tracts with the lowest prevalence of that characteristic fall into the lowest quartile (or &lt;=25th percentile), while those with the highest prevalence fall into the highest quartile (or &gt;75th percentile).Why GAO Did This StudyNatural disasters cause billions of dollars of damage each year. Underserved communities with low levels of community resilience may be disproportionately affected. SBA's Disaster Loan Program assists homeowners, businesses, and others affected by natural and other disasters.The Explanatory Statement to the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 includes a provision for GAO to report on delivery of SBA disaster recovery support and how the needs of certain communities are addressed. This report examines (1) steps SBA has taken to improve equitable access to the Disaster Loan Program and (2) loan outcomes in and characteristics of communities in which program applicants and recipients are located.GAO reviewed SBA policies and procedures and interviewed SBA officials. GAO also analyzed disaster loan application data for all 17 hurricanes in fiscal years 2017–2022 that caused at least $1 billion in damage. This included calculating loan outcomes and using census data to determine the demographic and socioeconomic characteristics of communities in which applicants were located. Because of the magnitude of the four fiscal year 2017 hurricanes and Puerto Rico's unique demographics, GAO analyzed those applications separately.
- Coast Guard: Issues and Policies Related to Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity of Service Members What GAO FoundThe U.S. Coast Guard, a branch of the armed forces located within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), collects limited information on the sexual orientation and gender identity of active-duty service members and does not know the number of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) individuals in its ranks. Military policies pertaining to the sexual orientation and gender identity of active-duty service members have fluctuated over time. Current policy is that LGBTQ+ service members are allowed to serve. Coast Guard officials stated they maintain parity with Department of Defense (DOD) guidance and requirements for collecting and maintaining military personnel information. Officials said they are awaiting further guidance from DOD before considering collecting additional information. Because of the limited availability of information, the Coast Guard has not assessed barriers for LGBTQ+ service members. However, the service has taken certain steps to support LGBTQ+ service members, including implementing a voluntary diversity and inclusion education program that includes discussions related to sexual orientation and gender identity and recognizing and supporting Pride Month celebrations.Further, the Coast Guard has implemented a gender transition request policy but has not always adhered to the policy's timeframes for review and approval. In June 2021, the Coast Guard modified its policies and standards to ensure transgender members are able to serve on active duty, in accordance with Executive Order 14004. Coast Guard policy states that service members requesting a gender transition should receive a response containing an approval or denial of their request within 90 days, which aligns with DOD policy. However, the Coast Guard has not always met the designated timeframes. GAO's review found that 7 of 16 approved gender transition requests submitted from September 2021 through June 2023 surpassed the 90-day timeframe. Collecting information on gender transition request timeframes and using the information collected to identify and address the causes of any delays would help ensure the Coast Guard is following its policy and better position it to efficiently respond to these requests.&nbsp;Why GAO Did This StudyThe Coast Guard is responsible for protecting and defending more than 100,000 miles of U.S. coastline and inland waterways. To accomplish its missions, the Coast Guard employs more than 40,000 active-duty service members. According to the Coast Guard, the service is committed to ensuring a supportive and inclusive environment free from discrimination and harassment, including on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.GAO was asked to examine issues related to sexual orientation and gender identity of Coast Guard active-duty service members. This report addresses the service's policies and actions related to sexual orientation and gender identity among its active-duty service members. GAO reviewed relevant laws and Coast Guard policies, analyzed Coast Guard data, and interviewed agency officials.
- Equal Employment Opportunity: Additional Actions Would Improve USDA's Collection and Reporting of Key Data What GAO FoundThe U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) submits to Congress annual reports that contain information regarding equal employment opportunity (EEO) discrimination complaints made by USDA employees. GAO examined the EEO discrimination complaint data included in two types of public reports that USDA submits to Congress: the Notification and Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act (No FEAR Act) reports and the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (Farm Bill) reports. GAO also examined data in the nonpublic Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) Form 462 reports that USDA files with EEOC.When examining the No FEAR Act reports and the EEOC Form 462 reports, GAO found inconsistencies in the data. For example, the reports differed on total number of complaints by basis of race (see figure). Representatives from USDA's EEO database vendor investigated and found that sometime before 2015, a database user had manually added “Hispanic/Latino” as an option for race for the No FEAR Act reports. However, “Hispanic/Latino” should be reported as national origin, according to EEOC guidance. By updating the database so that “Hispanic/Latino” only appears on the list of options for complaints by the basis of national origin, USDA will better ensure its No FEAR Act reports are accurate and in line with EEOC guidance. Furthermore, by disclosing this error on its website for past reports, USDA will better ensure the information it publishes is transparent.USDA's Average Number of Complaints by Race Basis per Year, Fiscal Years 2015-2022GAO also found errors, incomplete source information, and unexplained changes in sources regarding the EEO discrimination complaint data included in some of USDA's Farm Bill reports. For example, USDA's Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights (OASCR) changed a source for its analysis of per capita complaints but did not explain the change in the affected reports. Additionally, none of the Farm Bill reports GAO reviewed included an explanation of the methods OASCR used to conduct the analyses in these reports. OASCR also does not have a staff-level review process in which someone independent from the work itself verifies that key facts, figures, and findings in the reports align with the sources and are correct. By including a section in USDA's Farm Bill reports that explains the methods OASCR staff used to analyze EEO discrimination complaints and implementing a process to review the quality of information, as called for in USDA guidance, OASCR would better ensure the transparency, accuracy, clarity, and completeness of information in its reports.Why GAO Did This StudyThe annual reports on employment discrimination complaint data that USDA submits to Congress play an important role in congressional oversight of USDA's compliance with federal laws. For effective oversight, the data in these reports need to be accurate, clear, and complete.As part of a larger review in response to a provision in the Agricultural Improvement Act of 2018, GAO identified discrepancies in USDA's data and reporting on EEO discrimination complaints. This report is intended to bring these issues to the attention of USDA. In conducting its work, GAO compared data across the No FEAR Act, EEOC Form 462, and Farm Bill reports. GAO also reviewed USDA guidance and interviewed agency officials and representatives of the EEO database vendor.
- Special Education: Additional Data Could Help Early Intervention Programs Reach More Eligible Infants and Toddlers What GAO FoundStates and territories (states) use different definitions of “developmental delay” and different program eligibility criteria for their early intervention programs, which serve infants and toddlers with disabilities from birth through age 2. This reflects flexibilities provided to states under Part C of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which assists states in operating a statewide program of early intervention services. GAO surveyed 56 Part C programs, and 54 responded. When asked to name their top challenges serving eligible families, 48 states identified a lack of qualified service providers, and 23 cited staffing challenges at the state level.According to GAO's survey, 53 percent of children referred for Part C services ultimately enrolled (see figure). To better understand the characteristics of children moving through each stage of the process, GAO analyzed demographic data for the 16 states able to report this information on GAO's survey. GAO found notable variation at different points in the enrollment process. For example, the percentage of children referred who received an evaluation ranged from 59 percent of American Indian or Alaska Native children to 86 percent of Asian children (a 27 point spread); whereas, the percentage of children deemed eligible who enrolled ranged from 91 percent of American Indian or Alaska Native children to 95 percent of Asian and White children (a 4 point spread).Percentage of Children Reaching Each Stage of Part C Enrollment Process, Out of Children Referred, July 2021 to June 2022Note: GAO conducted a survey of Part C programs. Fifty-four states and territories responded to our survey overall, and 41 provided responses included in this figure. Our survey requested data for the 12-month period from July 1, 2021 through June 30, 2022, however, three respondents provided data for a different, recent, 12-month period, in accordance with our survey instructions.Education does not collect, or require states to collect, demographic data on children prior to enrollment in Part C. Officials said that IDEA does not provide them the authority to do so. If Education had statutory authority to collect such data throughout the enrollment process, it could focus its assistance on maximizing access to early intervention services for all infants and toddlers who need it—a key goal of IDEA. Many states, however, collect such data already, and some use it to identify ways to improve Part C access. Encouraging all states to improve their Child Find efforts by using the data they already collect would help them better identify and serve those infants and toddlers who need support.Why GAO Did This StudyIDEA Part C programs served more than 770,000 children in 2021. Early intervention services, such as speech or physical therapy, can improve a child's outcomes. Research suggests that access to services varies by characteristics such as race and income.GAO was asked to review barriers states may face in carrying out IDEA Part C requirements, and any inequities in access to early intervention services. This report examines (1) how states' Part C programs differ and challenges states face in serving eligible families; (2) available data on characteristics of children referred to, evaluated for, determined eligible for, and enrolled in Part C programs; and (3) how Education and states use available data to identify opportunities to increase children's access to services. To do so, GAO conducted a survey of 56 Part C programs: 50 states, five territories, and the District of Columbia. GAO also analyzed data from Education, and spoke with Education officials and stakeholders, and other experts.
- VA Equal Employment Opportunity: Increased Attention Needed to Improve Program Effectiveness What GAO FoundThe Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has a diverse workforce, but disparities exist in career outcomes. GAO found that VA had higher representation of certain historically underrepresented racial and ethnic groups from fiscal years 2017 to 2021 than the national civilian labor force from 2014 to 2018 (the most recent data available). However, within VA's workforce, GAO estimated that from 2000 to 2021, certain of these groups hired into similar occupations had lower pay and attained fewer promotions than White men, on average (see figure).Estimated Differences in Promotions of Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) workers Hired into Similar Jobs 10 years after Starting Employment, by Race, Ethnicity, and Gender, Fiscal Years 2000-2021 (Percent Difference Relative to White Men)VA tracks complaints of alleged racial discrimination and harassment, but has not fully analyzed other data to understand potential prevalence. While VA has a goal to develop a dashboard to assess data on workplace climate, it has not planned for or conducted this analysis. Until doing so, VA is not best positioned to identify and address trends in potential discrimination and harassment.The continued misalignment of its equal employment opportunity (EEO) program with a federal directive hinders VA's ability to prevent and address employment discrimination. In 2020, GAO recommended that VA address these misalignment issues by ensuring VA's EEO director is not responsible for personnel functions and completing VA's planned realignment of its EEO Program Managers. As of April 2023, VA has not taken action to fully implement these recommendations.While VA has several programs that can receive complaints from veterans who feel they have been discriminated against in VA programs, it does not have a comprehensive policy to ensure complaints are addressed. This created several issues, such as (1) inconsistent processing of complaints; (2) lack of communication with veterans; (3) lack of coordination across the offices receiving complaints; and (4) lack of data on complaints. As a result, VA may not have visibility into whether veterans' complaints have been fully addressed, or the potential extent of discrimination against veterans in VA programs.Why GAO Did This StudyFederal law prohibits employment discrimination against federal employees and discrimination in federal programs on the basis of race, among other things. GAO was asked to review VA's efforts to ensure equitable treatment of its employees and veterans receiving its services or participating in its programs.This report examines (1) what disparities, if any, exist between VA employees from different racial and ethnic groups; (2) how VA tracks potential racial discrimination against its employees; (3) the extent to which VA has practices to prevent and address employment discrimination; and (4) how VA assesses and addresses issues related to the treatment of veterans based on race in VA programs. GAO reviewed relevant federal laws, and VA policies and documents; analyzed employee personnel data, survey data, and data on EEO complaints; held discussion groups with VA employees; and interviewed VA officials, representatives from VA's unions, employee affinity groups, and veterans service organizations.
- Older Workers: Retirement Account Disparities Have Increased by Income and Persisted by Race Over Time What GAO FoundDisparities between low-income and high-income older workers' retirement accounts were greater in 2019 than in 2007, according to GAO's analysis of Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF) data on households 51 to 64. For example, about one in 10 low-income households had a retirement account balance in 2019 compared to about one in five in 2007, while about nine in 10 high-income households had a balance through the period. For those with a balance, the median balance was higher for high-income households over the period, while any change for the other income groups was not statistically significant. Racial disparities also persisted over the period. A higher share of White households had a balance than those of all other races. Also, White households had about double the median balance as households of all other races.Estimated Retirement Account Balances for Households Age 51-64 with a Balance, by IncomeNote: Brackets represent 95 percent confidence intervals. Overlapping brackets for the lowest and middle income quintiles indicate no statistically significant difference between 2007 and 2019.Income, job-related factors, and race were strongly related to disparities in older worker households' retirement account balances, according to GAO's analysis of 2018 Health and Retirement Study (HRS) data. High-income households contributed a larger percentage of their pay than low-income households (about 8 and 5 percent) and received larger employer contributions. Households with higher income, longer job tenure, and a college education tended to have larger balances. Households of all other races than White and households with children had about 28 and 20 percent smaller balances, respectively.  The effects of selected strategies meant to increase workplace retirement savings vary across workers of different income groups, according to illustrative scenarios using GAO's analysis of SCF and HRS data. For example, automatic enrollment can increase participation of low-income older workers with access up to about one-third. However, only about 23 percent of low-income workers have access to a workplace retirement account. Further, they may choose not to participate, for example, if they have limited disposable income or expect Social Security to provide most of their retirement income. In contrast, increasing contribution limits for workplace retirement accounts almost entirely benefits high-income workers, as about 23 percent of high-income compared with about 3 percent of middle-income older workers contribute the individual limit.Why GAO Did This StudyIn 2022, the tax incentives for workers to save in tax-preferred retirement accounts cost the federal government nearly $200 billion in forgone revenue, according to the Department of the Treasury. Members of Congress and others are concerned these incentives accrue primarily to high-income workers and not low-income workers. Knowing the distribution of retirement account balances can help illuminate the retirement security of households of different incomes.GAO was asked to examine disparities in the distribution of retirement account balances. This report describes, among other issues, (1) how the distribution of retirement account balances among older households by income changed over time; (2) factors associated with the distribution of retirement account balances   among older households by income; and (3) how selected strategies meant to increase retirement savings affect high-, middle-, and low-income workers.GAO examined retirement account balances for older workers' households (age 51 to 64) over time using 2007-2019 SCF data. GAO analyzed 2018 HRS data to identify factors associated with the balance distribution. Both datasets were the most recent data available at the time of GAO's review. GAO crafted illustrative scenarios to show the effects of four strategies meant to increase retirement savings using SCF, HRS, and 2018 Internal Revenue Service Statistics of Income data. GAO selected these strategies with input from agency officials, federal reports, and experts. GAO also reviewed relevant literature and interviewed retirement security experts.For more information, contact Tranchau (Kris) T. Nguyen at (202) 512-7215 or NguyenTT@gao.gov.
- VA Disability Benefits: Actions Needed to Further Examine Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Compensation What GAO FoundThe Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has taken steps to improve how it collects race and ethnicity data to understand the experiences of veterans who may apply for disability compensation through the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA). For example, VA created a working group that specifically focused on improving demographic data collection. VA's collection efforts could enhance the data available to VBA to assess racial and ethnic disparities in disability compensation. However, VA has not developed a documented plan for how it will improve the availability of data for certain racial and ethnic groups who may not be accessing VA services and benefits. Without a plan to identify and document concrete actions, VA will not have the data it needs to ensure veterans are treated equitably.GAO's analysis of fiscal year 2010 through 2020 compared initial claims approval rates for all racial and ethnic groups to Non-Hispanic White (White) veterans—the largest group with decisions. GAO found that Non-Hispanic Black or African American (Black) veterans had the lowest approval rate among all groups (see figure). Similarly, GAO's analysis of selected medical conditions most frequently decided by VA found that differences in approval rates were particularly prominent between Black male and White male veterans, with Black male veterans' rates being 3 to 22 percentage points lower. These differences were prevalent for nine of the 10 conditions GAO analyzed such as tinnitus and posttraumatic stress disorder. VBA has conducted studies on racial and ethnic disparities in disability compensation for some conditions and found disparities. However, it has not comprehensively studied the root causes of the disparities it has found or potential disparities in the provisions of compensation more broadly. As a result, VA lacks the information it needs to ensure equitable decisions.VA Disability Compensation Approval Rates for Initial Claims, by Race and Ethnicity (Fiscal Years 2010–2020)Note: GAO grouped individuals of Hispanic ethnicity under that designation regardless of race.Why GAO Did This StudyVeterans from historically disadvantaged racial and ethnic groups comprised almost 24 percent of the total veteran population in 2017, according to a VA report. By 2045, this group of veterans will make up over 36 percent of all living veterans, according to VA projections.Public Law 117-66 includes a provision for GAO to assess whether there are racial and ethnic disparities with respect to disability compensation, among other areas. This report examines the extent to which (1) VA has taken steps to collect and assess data about the racial and ethnic composition of veterans who may apply for disability compensation; and (2) racial and ethnic disparities exist in the provision of compensation, and what factors could contribute to disparate outcomes.GAO reviewed relevant federal laws, regulations, and VA policies; analyzed VA's claims data by race, ethnicity, and sex from fiscal year 2010 through 2020 (the most recent full year of data available); and interviewed VA officials and representatives from a VA advisory group and selected veterans service organizations.
- HUD Rental Assistance: Enhanced Data and Strategy Could Improve Oversight of Accessibility Requirements What GAO FoundFederal civil rights laws require housing providers to make reasonable accommodations to help ensure that households with disabilities have equal opportunities to use and enjoy their homes. These requirements apply to public housing agencies (PHA) and other housing providers that administer rental assistance programs from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).Examples of Reasonable AccommodationsHUD does not collect certain key data on households with disabilities that participate in its three largest rental assistance programs. Although HUD collects information on a household's disability status, the agency does not systematically collect data on requests for reasonable accommodations. Doing so would make HUD more aware of whether the needs of assisted households were met. Moreover, many PHAs already collect data that HUD could use. For example, GAO surveyed PHAs that administer HUD rental assistance and estimates that over 83 percent (plus or minus 9 percentage points at the 95 percent confidence interval) collect information on a household's accessibility needs during application and generally annually thereafter.HUD also does not have a comprehensive, documented strategy for its oversight of compliance with reasonable accommodation requirements. HUD prioritizes its oversight on investigating complaints, which it is legally required to do. Because of the high volume of complaints, HUD is able to conduct only a limited number of discretionary compliance reviews of HUD-assisted housing providers. To target these reviews, officials said they consider factors such as complaints, press articles, and various data sources to assess risk. But HUD does not have basic assisted-household data to help support identification of potential noncompliance. HUD also does not document the criteria it uses to assess risk. Developing a comprehensive strategy for prioritizing and planning reviews, including policies for using assisted-household data, would allow HUD to proactively address compliance issues rather than respond after complaints are filed. Doing so also might reduce the number of complaint investigations, potentially freeing up resources for other fair housing-related activities.Why GAO Did This StudyHUD is responsible for enforcing federal civil rights laws that require housing providers to make reasonable accommodations for households with disabilities. HUD serves many of these households through its rental assistance programs.GAO was asked to review HUD's rental assistance to low-income households with disabilities. This report examines (1) what data are available on reasonable accommodations provided to HUD-assisted households with disabilities and (2) how HUD oversees compliance with requirements for reasonable accommodations in its rental assistance programs.GAO analyzed HUD documentation, including reporting requirements; reviewed relevant laws and regulations; surveyed a generalizable sample of 756 PHAs operating in urban areas or entire states that administer HUD programs; and interviewed officials at HUD headquarters and all 10 regional offices.
- U.S. Access Board: Interagency Efforts to Promote Accessibility for People with Disabilities Generally Followed Leading Collaboration Practices What GAO FoundThe U.S. Access Board, which works to promote accessibility for people with disabilities, has collaborated with federal agencies to carry out the three key areas of its mission: developing accessibility guidelines, providing related technical assistance and training, and enforcing certain accessibility requirements applicable to federal facilities. For example, in updating accessibility guidelines, such as on medical equipment, it collaborated with federal agency members on its governing board to obtain input and approval. The Access Board also collaborated with relevant agencies when providing technical assistance, such as on designing accessible electric vehicle charging stations. Additionally, the Access Board uses a collaborative approach with federal agencies when investigating public complaints about inaccessibility at federal facilities.The Access Board and selected agencies generally followed leading collaboration practices for the three selected efforts that GAO reviewed. In the few instances where the agencies had not fully followed a leading practice, GAO found that the agencies either were taking action to more fully implement the practice (e.g., recruiting additional participants) or used other ways to communicate and agree on interagency plans (in lieu of written agreements). (See example below.)Examples of Actions Taken by the U.S. Access Board and the Department of Transportation on Developing Public Rights-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines, Organized by Leading Collaboration Practices			Practice 									Examples of Actions 								Outcomes and Accountability									Agencies shared goals of drafting guidelines that reflected the expertise of relevant agencies and of facilitating subsequent steps in the rulemaking process. Officials tracked and communicated progress at board meetings.								Bridging Organizational Cultures									Agencies relied on long-term working relationships and common terminology to bridge their distinct cultures and missions.								Leadership; Clarity of Roles, Responsibilities									As this collaborative effort focused on developing Access Board's guidelines, officials from both agencies were clear on roles and responsibilities, including Access Board's leadership role.								Participants									Relevant staff attended meetings regularly and brought their expertise and institutional knowledge to develop the guidelines.								Resources									Both agencies contributed staff time and expertise. The Access Board primarily funded necessary activities, such as a cost benefit analysis, given its leadership role.								Written Guidance and Agreements									The Access Board did not have formal documents outlining detailed plans for the collaborative effort with the Department of Transportation, but plans were communicated in frequent meetings and emails. Further, additional formal guidance or agreements were not needed, given that the collaborative effort ended in March 2023.					Source: GAO analysis of interviews with agency officials and related documents. | GAO-23-105948Why GAO Did This StudyThe U.S. Access Board is a small federal agency ($9.8 million operating budget in fiscal year 2022) that promotes accessibility for people with disabilities. Because the Access Board is structured as a coordinating body with a governing board that includes federal agency representatives, interagency collaboration is a key feature of its work. GAO was asked to examine the Access Board's interagency collaboration in achieving its mission and goals.This report examines (1) the ways the Access Board collaborates with federal agencies to accomplish its mission and goals and (2) the extent to which the Access Board's collaboration with federal agencies on selected efforts aligns with leading collaboration practices.GAO analyzed Access Board documents such as its performance and accountability reports from 2017 to 2022; conducted structured interviews with the Access Board and three other federal agencies (Department of Transportation, General Services Administration, and U.S. Postal Service), and reviewed related agency documents and information. The three selected collaborative efforts varied across the Access Board's key work areas, access mode (e.g., digital or physical), agencies involved, and the Access Board's role. GAO assessed the efforts against leading collaboration practices previously identified by GAO.For more information, contact Elizabeth Curda at (202) 512-7215 or curdae@gao.gov.
- DOD Civilian Workforce: Actions Needed to Analyze and Eliminate Barriers to Diversity What GAO FoundOver the 10 years of Department of Defense (DOD) data GAO analyzed, the representation of women and of employees from historically disadvantaged racial or ethnic groups (historically disadvantaged groups) in DOD's civilian workforce generally remained unchanged and below total federal civilian workforce levels. Overall, from fiscal year 2012 through fiscal year 2021, the proportion of women decreased slightly, from 33.0 to 32.1 percent, but increased slightly for historically disadvantaged groups, from 31.0 to 32.6 percent. GAO also analyzed the General Schedule (GS) workforce and found that women and historically disadvantaged groups remained less represented at upper GS grades and the executive level.Demographic Representation in the DOD Civilian Workforce: Changes from Fiscal Year (FY) 2012–2021 and in General Schedule (GS) Grades and Senior Executive Service in FY 2021Note: Data reflect percentage-point change in the military departments and other DOD components from FY 2012 to 2021 (left) and percentages in FY 2021 (right). Historically disadvantaged groups include Black or African American, Hispanic or Latino, Asian, American Indian or Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and two or more races.Promotion outcomes were generally lower for historically disadvantaged groups than for White employees, and varied for women relative to men, based on GAO analysis of DOD data. For example, when controlling for factors such as occupation and education level, historically disadvantaged groups—particularly Black or African American employees—were less likely to be promoted in nearly all grades at or above GS-7. This analysis does not completely explain reasons for different promotion outcomes or establish causal relationships but can provide agencies additional insight.DOD has developed policies and plans to manage department-wide diversity, and it has taken steps to identify potential barriers to diversity and equal employment opportunity (EEO) in the military departments and other DOD components. However, GAO found that little has changed in terms of demographic representation. DOD has developed mechanisms to improve department-wide data analysis, but does not have clear policies for collecting barrier-related data, which may limit their utility. Unclear oversight roles and measures for tracking DOD progress to eliminating barriers—a top DOD and federal priority—may also hinder meaningful progress overcoming disparities in representation and promotion outcomes. Without additional actions, DOD lacks reasonable assurance its many efforts will effectively contribute to achieving its goals.Why GAO Did This StudyDOD employs over 700,000 federal civilians—over one-third of the total federal civilian workforce—and recognizes the importance of a diverse workforce to achieve its critical missions. However, DOD has faced challenges ensuring its workforce reflects the diversity of the nation it serves.House Report 116-617, accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021, includes a provision for GAO to examine diversity in the DOD federal civilian workforce. This report analyzes (1) the demographic composition of the DOD civilian workforce by gender and racial or ethnic group; (2) promotion outcomes among these demographic groups; and (3) the extent to which DOD has developed policies and plans to identify any barriers and track progress eliminating them.GAO analyzed DOD data for appropriated-fund civilian employees in the three military departments and across the other DOD components from fiscal year 2012 through fiscal year 2021 and conducted a multivariate regression analysis of promotions by gender and racial or ethnic group. GAO also analyzed DOD diversity and EEO policies, strategic plans, and federal standards to analyze barriers and track progress.
- HUD Rental Assistance: Serving Households with Disabilities What GAO FoundThe Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) provided rental assistance to an estimated 1.8 million households with disabilities, according to the 2019 American Housing Survey (survey). HUD primarily served these households through the Housing Choice Voucher, public housing, and Project-Based Rental Assistance programs. Most HUD-assisted households with a member using a mobility device (such as a wheelchair) reported living in units with at least one accessibility feature (such as an entry-level bedroom). However, more than 300,000 assisted households with a member using a mobility device reported living in units without any accessibility features, according to the 2019 survey.Providers of HUD-assisted housing are required to provide reasonable accommodations—such as structural modifications—to allow households with disabilities an equal opportunity to participate in HUD rental assistance programs. Housing providers also must use strategies, such as waitlist priorities, to match households with disabilities with units that meet their needs.Why GAO Did This StudyGAO was asked to examine HUD assistance for households with disabilities. Low-income households with disabilities can face challenges in securing affordable, accessible housing. This report provides information on how HUD serves low-income households (those with incomes at or below 80 percent of their areas' median income) with disabilities through its rental assistance programs.For more information, contact Alicia Puente Cackley at (202) 512-8678 or CackleyA@gao.gov.
- Women in the Workforce: Underrepresentation in Management Positions Persists, and the Gender Pay Gap Varies by Industry and Demographics What GAO FoundIn recent years, women remained underrepresented in management positions in most industries, and female and male managers had different demographic characteristics, according to GAO's analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data. For example, GAO estimated that in 2021, across all industries combined, 42 percent of managers were women, which was less than the percentage of women in non-management positions (48 percent). However, women's representation in management positions increased slightly, by less than 2 percentage points, between 2018 and 2021. In addition, in 2021, female managers were more likely than male managers to be under age 40 and have at least a bachelor's degree. Female managers were also less likely than male managers to be White, married, or have at least one child in their household.GAO found that the gender pay gap varied widely across industries, and was greater for managers than non-managers, in recent years. In 2021, women working full time earned an estimated 76 cents for every dollar that men earned, on average, across all industries combined. Women's pay by industry ranged from an estimated 57 cents on the dollar in the Health Care and Social Assistance industry to 93 cents on the dollar in the Construction industry. Across all industries combined, the pay gap was greater for managers than for non-managers (an estimated 71 cents and 77 cents on the dollar, respectively).GAO also found that the gender pay gap was greater in recent years for women with certain demographic characteristics. Among full-time managers in 2021, the pay gap varied considerably across racial and ethnic groups. For example, for every dollar earned by White men, on average, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander women earned an estimated 49 cents, and Asian women earned an estimated 86 cents. In addition, the pay gap was greater for female managers who were age 40 and older, had at least a bachelor's degree, were married, and had at least one child in their household. These findings were similar for women who were not managers.Full-Time Female Managers' Estimated Average Pay for Every Dollar Earned by Full-Time, White Male Managers, by Race and Ethnicity, 2021Why GAO Did This StudyResearch has shown that women in the U.S. workforce earn less than men and face challenges in advancing their careers. For example, in 2022, GAO reported that women were underrepresented in management positions. GAO was asked to further assess disparities for women in the U.S. workforce, including women's representation and pay by industry.This report examines (1) women's representation in management positions, by industry, and the key characteristics of women and men in these positions; (2) differences in pay between women and men, by industry, for managers and non-managers; and (3) how pay differences between women and men vary based on key characteristics, for managers and non-managers.GAO analyzed the U.S. Census Bureau's record-level American Community Survey (ACS) data from 2018, 2019, and 2021 (the most recent data available at the time of GAO's review). GAO did not analyze ACS data from 2020 because they were not sufficiently reliable due to data collection challenges early in the COVID-19 pandemic. To analyze pay differences, GAO used average pay for full-time, year-round workers. Because the ACS is a sample survey, all results presented in this report are estimates. All differences in this report are statistically significant at the 95 percent confidence level, unless otherwise noted. GAO's analysis is descriptive, and neither confirms nor refutes the presence of discriminatory practices. GAO did not control for any variables, including those that would be expected to affect pay and representation, such as hours worked beyond full time.For more information, contact Thomas Costa at (202) 512-4769 or costat@gao.gov.
- Department of Education: Additional Data Collection Would Help Assess the Performance of a Program Supporting College Students with Disabilities What GAO FoundThe Department of Education does not report on students with disabilities who participate in its Student Support Services (SSS) program, one of eight TRIO grant programs that promote achievement in postsecondary education among disadvantaged students. While none of the TRIO programs focuses exclusively on students with disabilities, the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA), specifically states that part of the program design for the SSS program is to foster an institutional climate supportive of students with disabilities. Education collects information about whether SSS participants meet one of several possible eligibility criteria, but does not collect data on the disability status of each SSS participant. In addition, Education periodically reports on the performance of SSS, but does not include performance information for participants with disabilities. The HEA requires, and performance management best practices underpin the need for, reporting on SSS for participants with disabilities. GAO found that as a result of not collecting data on each SSS participant's disability status, Education cannot fully evaluate and report on the program's performance for this population.Why GAO Did This StudyThrough eight separate programs, Education gives grants to schools and organizations that provide disadvantaged students with services to help them attend college. These eight grant programs are collectively known as "TRIO," named for the original three programs. In recent years, Congress has provided over $1 billion annually for TRIO programs. The programs primarily serve low-income and first-generation college students, while some also target individuals with disabilities and veterans. Given that students with disabilities are less likely to complete a postsecondary education and that this disparity can have lifelong consequences, GAO was asked to examine questions related to students with disabilities and TRIO. This report examines the extent to which Education has collected and reported information on students with disabilities served through TRIO.To examine this topic, GAO reviewed Education documents such as the most recent annual report for each TRIO program, and interviewed officials from Education as well as an organization representing TRIO grantees. GAO examined Education's performance reporting under certain requirements in the HEA, and assessed them against effective performance management practices that GAO identified in prior work.
- Supplemental Material for GAO-23-105459: SEC Personnel Survey Results This supplement is a companion to GAO's report entitled Securities and Exchange Commission: Employee Views of Personnel Management Improved, but Action Needed on Measuring Diversity and Inclusion Goals, GAO-23-105459. The purpose of this supplement is to provide results from two GAO surveys of Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) employees. The purpose of these surveys was to obtain employees' views about SEC's personnel management, including questions on (1) recruitment, training, staff development, and resources; (2) communication between and within divisions and offices; (3) leadership and management; (4) performance management and promotions; (5) organizational culture and climate; and (6) diversity and inclusion. The web-based questionnaires included both multiple-choice and open-ended questions.For more information, contact Michael E. Clements at (202) 512-8678 or clementsm@gao.gov.
- Securities and Exchange Commission: Employee Views of Personnel Management Improved, but Action Needed on Measuring Diversity and Inclusion Goals What GAO FoundThe views of Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) employees on certain personnel management topics—such as staff morale—have improved since 2013 (see figure). In 2022, employees also expressed positive views on the support SEC provided to employees during pandemic-related telework and the agency's diversity and inclusion efforts, among other issues. However, many employees continue to have unfavorable views on some issues related to performance management. For example, more than half of employees disagreed that SEC's new two-tier rating system creates meaningful distinctions in performance among employees or incentivizes high performance.SEC Employee Views on Staff Morale Improved from 2013 through 2022Since GAO's most recent review in 2019, SEC has made two significant changes to personnel management:In February 2022, SEC and the SEC employee union agreed that SEC employees would not receive Performance Incentive Bonus program awards in 2022, 2023, or 2024. SEC officials stated that supervisors could use other types of monetary and nonmonetary awards to recognize employee accomplishments.	In 2022, SEC replaced a program designed to identify a cohort of high-potential leaders available to fill vacant senior officer positions. Whereas the previous program assessed employees to create and develop a pool of candidates, the new program assesses employees for each vacancy and opens leadership training to all employees.In 2020, SEC released its first diversity and inclusion strategic plan, covering fiscal years 2020–2022. Since then, SEC has initiated a number of new diversity and inclusion efforts, including a professional development program for minority leaders at the agency. SEC did not develop performance measures related to the goals in the plan, but SEC intends to develop such measures for its 2023–2026 plan, according to SEC officials. Performance measures that align with goals and are clear, measurable, objective, and reliable could help SEC better track its progress in achieving diversity and inclusion goals and objectives. Improved tracking, in turn, could help SEC to understand which efforts are effective and target resources toward goals needing more attention.Why GAO Did This StudyEffectively carrying out its regulatory responsibilities requires that SEC attract and retain a high-quality workforce. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act contains a provision for GAO to report triennially on SEC's personnel management. GAO's first three reports (GAO-13-621, GAO-17-65, and GAO-20-208) identified a number of challenges and included 10 recommendations, all of which SEC has addressed.This report examines (1) employees' views of SEC's personnel management, (2) personnel management practices SEC implemented since GAO's 2019 report, and (3) SEC's diversity and inclusion efforts. GAO surveyed a representative sample of nonexecutive SEC employees and all senior officers in key occupations in nine key divisions and offices. The results of the nonexecutive employee survey are generalizable to SEC's mission-critical employees. GAO also reviewed SEC documents, relevant academic literature, and a management consultant report; interviewed SEC employees and officials and the SEC employees' union; and analyzed SEC workforce data.
- Women in Special Operations: Improvements to Policy, Data, and Assessments Needed to Better Understand and Address Career Barriers What GAO FoundThe Department of Defense's (DOD) policies to prevent and respond to incidents of gender discrimination, sexual harassment, and sexual assault are applicable department-wide. But some of the implementing service policies related to the environments in which U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) operates are inconsistent with DOD policy. The military services, not SOCOM, are responsible for administering service-specific policies on these types of incidents; however, SOCOM service members conduct missions in a joint (i.e., multi-service) environment. Some of the services' policies related to incidents of gender discrimination and sexual harassment occurring in joint environments are not aligned with DOD policies. DOD policies state that, in joint environments, discrimination and harassment complaints are to be processed through the complainant's service. In contrast, Army, Marine Corps, and Air Force policies all assign this responsibility to the alleged offender's service. Without the military services revising their policies for joint environments to help ensure alignment with DOD policies, such cases may be processed inconsistently across DOD.SOCOM has limited access to timely, accurate, and complete data on its personnel, including incidents of gender discrimination, sexual harassment, and sexual assault. While SOCOM has taken some steps to address its data access limitations, the department has not established a collaborative process to ensure SOCOM has access to data maintained in various Office of the Secretary of Defense and military service databases. Without such a process to facilitate SOCOM's access to needed data, SOCOM leadership will not be positioned to identify trends or address urgent concerns.SOCOM has taken some steps to identify and address barriers, such as gender discrimination and pregnancy-related policies, that may affect women's careers in U.S. Special Operations Forces (SOF).SOCOM-Identified Barriers to Women Serving in U.S. Special Operations ForcesHowever, DOD has yet to complete a comprehensive evaluation of barriers to women or developed a plan of action for addressing identified barriers. In addition, per a 2016 DOD requirement, SOCOM and the military departments are to conduct annual assessments on the full integration of women into previously closed positions. DOD has not, however, communicated which office has oversight responsibility for the assessments and their intended use is unclear. Without taking action to address these issues, DOD and Congress may be limited in their efforts to understand and address barriers to women in SOF.Why GAO Did This StudyWomen have historically held critical roles in the military. However, women make up less than 10 percent of SOCOM service members, compared with about 19 percent DOD-wide. SOCOM leaders have acknowledged existing issues of gender discrimination, sexual harassment and assault, and career impediments, and the need to do more.GAO was asked to review the incidence of gender discrimination, sexual harassment, sexual assault, and DOD's efforts to assess potential barriers to women in SOF. This report examines, among other issues, the extent to which (1) DOD has developed policies to prevent and respond to such incidents involving SOCOM service members, (2) SOCOM has access to data on these incidents, and (3) DOD and SOCOM have identified and addressed barriers that may impact the careers of women in SOF. GAO reviewed policies; interviewed DOD, SOCOM, and service officials; interviewed officials at five SOF headquarters installations; and interviewed 51 women currently or formerly serving in SOF.
- Financial Services Industry: Overview of Representation of Minorities and Women and Practices to Promote Diversity What GAO FoundEqual Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) data that GAO analyzed on diversity in the financial services industry show slight increases in representation of minorities (racial/ethnic groups other than White) and women in management positions from 2007 to 2020. For instance, for senior management positions:EEOC data (for 2007–2015) showed that Asian representation increased from 4 to 5 percent. Black and Hispanic representation was about 3 percent. Female representation remained around 29 percent in that period.	EEOC data (for 2018–2020) showed representation for both minorities and women was relatively flat or marginally increased. Black and Hispanic representation remained at about 3 and 4 percent, respectively. Female representation increased from 31 to 32 percent in that period.Representatives of financial services firms and other stakeholders with whom GAO spoke for the November 2017 report (GAO-18-64) described challenges in recruiting and retaining members of minority groups and women. They also identified practices that could help address the challenges, including recruiting students from a broad group of schools and academic disciplines and establishing management-level accountability to achieve diversity goals.Gender and Race/Ethnicity Representation of Executive/Senior-Level Management in the Financial Services Industry, 2020 Note: The “Other” category includes Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, Native American or Alaska Native, and “two or more races.”GAO's more targeted work highlighted industry challenges in recruiting and retaining women and minorities and using the services of minority- and women-owned businesses. GAO examined diversity efforts of the Federal Home Loan Banks, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac. GAO also reviewed practices for selecting minority and women-owned asset managers and recruiting women with science, technology, engineering, and math degrees. Challenges included high levels of competition for diverse talent and bias in selecting service providers (preference for larger firms with brand recognition). Key practices to address these challenges included conducting targeted outreach and communicating diversity and inclusion priorities and goals within their organization.Why GAO Did This StudyThe financial services industry provides services that help families build wealth and is essential to the continued economic growth of the country. Research has found that a diverse workforce can help managers understand and address the needs of a demographically diverse customer base. Diversity also can be beneficial in solving complex problems and lead to better performance.This statement is based on five GAO reports (GAO-21-490, GAO-20-637, GAO-19-589, GAO-18-64, GAO-17-726) on diversity efforts in the financial services industry and recent EEOC data. It discusses our work on (1) trends in management-level diversity in the financial services industry and (2) diversity and inclusion efforts by private and public financial services entities.For this statement, GAO analyzed the most recent available EEOC data from 2018 through 2020 on workforce race, ethnicity, and gender in the financial services industry. For the prior work, GAO reviewed literature, documentation on diversity practices and policies, and EEOC data. GAO also interviewed representatives from federal agencies, financial services firms, and nonprofits.For more information, contact Daniel Garcia-Diaz at (202) 512-8678 or GarciaDiazD@gao.gov.
- Passengers with Disabilities: Barriers to Accessible Air Travel Remain What GAO FoundPast GAO work has highlighted a range of barriers to accessible air travel that passengers with disabilities face. For example, GAO found that large, complex airports can affect accessibility with long distances to travel (GAO-21-354). Additionally, Transportation Security Administration's (TSA) screening practices may more frequently subject passengers with disabilities to additional screening (GAO-23-105201). GAO also found that passengers with disabilities may encounter barriers that airlines are responsible for addressing, including difficulties obtaining wheelchair and customer assistance and accessing onboard lavatories. Airlines also do not always properly handle passengers' special accommodation requests or stow wheelchairs without damage.GAO reported in April 2021 that airports and airlines have taken some steps to reduce barriers and make air travel more accessible (GAO-21-354). As part of large capital projects to expand and renovate airports, airports have made improvements to ramps, elevators, and restrooms designed to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act, as amended. To further improve the passenger experience, some airports have implemented a range of technology solutions, some of which may go beyond legal requirements (see figure). In October 2022, U.S. airlines announced a commitment to make air travel more accessible, including creating a passenger's advisory group at each airline to improve policies and operations.Airport Accessibility Features to Help Passengers with Disabilities Based on GAO's review of regulations and information obtained from officials with the Department of Transportation (DOT) and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), GAO found that DOT has taken steps to implement the relevant accessibility-related provisions of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018. For example, DOT now requires the largest U.S. airlines to report the number of wheelchairs and scooters that were transported and damaged. DOT is addressing several other provisions in the initial rulemaking processes. DOT has also taken steps to address other longstanding accessibility issues not required under the 2018 Act, but important to passengers with disabilities. In March 2022, DOT issued a proposed rule to address accessible lavatories that would apply to aircraft deliveries, to begin in 20 years. Regarding disability-related enforcement actions, DOT has taken one since 2019. GAO recommended in October 2020 that DOT increase transparency over its enforcement-related activities (GAO-21-109). DOT officials said they intend to provide more transparency and clarity into the results of their broader enforcement activities by December 2022.Why GAO Did This StudyApproximately 27 million passengers with disabilities traveled by air in 2019, according to DOT. Without accommodations, such as appropriate assistance and communication, passengers with disabilities may face challenges when flying. In 2021, DOT received 1,394 disability-related complaints, a 54 percent increase from 2019. The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 included provisions intended to improve the accessibility of air travel.This statement discusses: (1) barriers to accessible air travel; (2) steps that airports and airlines have taken to reduce those barriers; and, (3) the status of actions taken by DOT to respond to accessibility-related provisions in the Act and enforce accessibility-related regulations.This statement is based on GAO's past work on a variety of aviation accessibility issues. For that work, GAO analyzed data and documents, interviewed relevant agency officials and representatives from selected disability advocacy groups, U.S airlines, and airports. For this statement, GAO reviewed DOT's recent rulemaking actions and other relevant documents related to DOT accessibility and air travel efforts and interviewed DOT and FAA officials.
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission: Oversight of the Length of the Charge Intake Process is Needed What GAO FoundFrom fiscal years 2011 to 2021, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) reduced its pending charge inventory—the number of open charges as of the end of the fiscal year. Specifically, the pending charge inventory decreased from 82,199 to 43,520 charges during this time. EEOC officials identified steps that contributed to the reduction. For example, in fiscal year 2018, EEOC implemented an online portal, which allows individuals to file an inquiry and helps them determine if they meet the criteria to proceed with filing a charge.EEOC monitors the quality of its investigations; however, GAO found that EEOC does not monitor the length of the intake process across field offices. For the purposes of this report, the intake process begins when an individual files an inquiry and ends when an EEOC official interviews the individual about the alleged incident. GAO's analysis of EEOC data from the online portal shows that the average length of the intake process varied among EEOC's 53 field offices (see figure). EEOC officials said they could monitor data on the length of the intake process, but do not routinely do so because they have focused on ensuring that individuals who file inquiries do not miss the statutory deadline for filing a charge. By not monitoring the length of the intake process across field offices, EEOC is missing information that could allow it to better identify and provide support to offices that take longer to complete the intake process.The Length of the Intake Process Varies Greatly among EEOC Field OfficesEEOC tracks certain measures related to its outreach efforts such as the number of events it hosts and attendees, and is taking steps to develop measures to assess the impact of its efforts. However, Outreach and Education Coordinators (OEC) GAO spoke with identified challenges with providing outreach such as a need for additional training and support. EEOC headquarters officials identified multiple steps they take to provide training and support to OECs. For example, in fiscal year 2021, EEOC held an OEC conference that provided training on multiple topics including how to market outreach events.This is a public version of a law enforcement sensitive report that GAO issued concurrently. Information that EEOC deemed law enforcement sensitive has been omitted from this report.Why GAO Did This StudyEEOC is the primary federal agency that enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination and investigates allegations of employment discrimination. It received over 60,000 discrimination charges in fiscal year 2021. EEOC also provides guidance to employers and employees to help ensure compliance with federal anti-discrimination laws. According to EEOC, its enforcement and outreach activities play a critical role in advancing equal opportunity in the workplace.GAO was asked to review EEOC's charge investigation and outreach processes. This report examines (1) the steps EEOC has taken since fiscal year 2011 to address its pending charge inventory, and what is known about the length and quality of its investigation process; and (2) how EEOC evaluates its outreach efforts, and the challenges officials said they face when providing outreach.GAO analyzed EEOC charge data for fiscal years 2011 through 2021 and reviewed EEOC documentation. GAO conducted 9 discussion groups with officials in EEOC field offices selected based on geography and workload, and interviewed EEOC headquarters and field officials.
- K-12 Education: Department of Education Should Provide Information on Equity and Safety in School Dress Codes What GAO FoundWhile school districts often cite safety as the reason for having a dress code, many dress codes include elements that may make the school environment less equitable and safe for students. For example, an estimated 60 percent of dress codes have rules involving measuring students' bodies and clothing—which may involve adults touching students. Consequently, students, particularly girls, may feel less safe at school, according to a range of stakeholders GAO interviewed. According to GAO's nationally generalizable review of public school dress codes, districts more frequently restrict items typically worn by girls—such as skirts, tank tops, and leggings—than those typically worn by boys—such as muscle shirts. Most dress codes also contain rules about students' hair, hair styles, and head coverings, which may disproportionately impact Black students and those of certain religions and cultures, according to researchers and district officials. Department of Education (Education) officials told GAO they are considering options to provide helpful resources to stakeholders and the public, but as of September 2022, Education had not provided information on dress codes. Providing such information would align with the agency's goal to enhance equity and safety in schools.Items Commonly Prohibited by School Dress CodesSchools that report enforcing strict dress codes predominantly enroll Black and Hispanic students and are more likely to remove students from class. GAO's analysis of national data found that more than four in five predominantly Black schools and nearly two-thirds of predominantly Hispanic schools enforce a strict dress code, compared to about one-third of predominantly White schools. In addition, schools that enforce strict dress codes are associated with statistically significant higher rates of discipline that removes students from the classroom (e.g., suspensions). Further, an estimated 44 percent of dress codes outlined “informal” removal policies, such as removing a student from class without documenting it as a suspension. Education has recently noted challenges related to informal removals in guidance documents but has no information on the prevalence or impact of this emerging issue. Without information on the full range of ways children are disciplined—including informal removals and non-exclusionary discipline—Education's efforts to provide resources on the equitable enforcement of discipline will have critical gaps.Why GAO Did This StudyIn recent years, researchers, advocates, parents, and students have raised concerns about equity in school dress codes. Concerns have included the detrimental effects of removing students from the classroom for dress code violations.A committee report accompanying H.R. 7614 included a provision for GAO to study dress code discipline. This report also addresses a request to study informal removals. This report examines (1) the characteristics of K-12 dress codes across school districts nationwide, and how Education supports the design of equitable and safe dress codes; (2) the enforcement of dress codes, and how Education supports equitable dress code enforcement.To examine characteristics of dress codes, GAO analyzed a nationally representative sample of public school district dress codes. To assess the enforcement of dress codes and how Education supports school districts, GAO analyzed Education data; reviewed relevant studies on dress code discipline; and interviewed academic researchers and officials from national organizations, school districts, and Education.
- FEMA Workforce: Additional Actions Needed to Help Prevent and Respond to Discrimination and Harassment What GAO FoundThe Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)—a component of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)—has taken action since fiscal year 2019 to prevent and respond to discrimination and harassment. FEMA created an office to investigate harassment allegations and developed response policies. FEMA also issued its Culture Improvement Action Plan, which includes anti-harassment and anti-discrimination training and communication campaigns.In April 2022, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) found that FEMA did not meet 13 requirements in its equal employment opportunity program. FEMA officials said they are taking steps to address these deficiencies and plan to provide EEOC a required compliance report outlining its efforts and progress to address these deficiencies in October 2022.Further, the EEOC has issued recommended practices for preventing harassment, and FEMA has met most of these practices. For example:Extent to Which the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Met Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC) Recommended Practices, July 2022Recommendation			Category			Anti-Harassment			policy			Training			Complaint			System			Leadership and			Accountability			Total		Met			12			13			9			6			40		Partially Met			1			7			4			2			14		Not Met			2			2			0			1			5		Source: GAO analysis of information from FEMA compared with EEOC’s Promising Practices for Preventing Harassment. | GAO-23-105243DHS established the anti-harassment policy and training that apply to FEMA, but these do not fully meet recommended practices. For example, DHS’s policy does not include a statement that DHS (or the relevant component agency, such as FEMA) will provide a prompt, impartial, and thorough investigation. Policy and training that is more consistent with EEOC recommended practices could more effectively communicate key information to employees.	FEMA’s harassment complaint system generally met recommended practices, but FEMA does not consistently notify employees who allege harassment whether the agency took or will take corrective action. FEMA policy requires managers to provide such notification, but GAO found that managers have not consistently done so. By implementing a control to ensure consistent notification from management, FEMA could better adhere to its policy and promote trust in its complaint processes.Although FEMA has taken actions to address workplace discrimination and harassment, it has not taken steps that would enable it to determine the effectiveness of its efforts. Specifically, FEMA has not designated an individual or entity responsible for oversight nor has it established goals and measures for its cultural improvement efforts. Taking these steps could help FEMA better monitor its efforts, demonstrate results to its employees, and make any needed adjustments for improvement.Why GAO Did This StudyIncidents of employee discrimination and harassment can detract from an agency’s mission and hamper its ability to maintain public trust if not effectively addressed. In 2020, the RAND Corporation—under a FEMA contract—estimated that 29 percent of FEMA employees experienced discrimination or harassment related to sex, or race/ethnicity, based on selfreported responses to a 2019 survey.GAO was asked to review FEMA’s efforts to improve workplace culture. This report examines (1) actions FEMA took since fiscal year 2019 to prevent and respond to discrimination and harassment; (2) the extent to which EEOC has found that FEMA has complied with requirements; (3) the extent to which FEMA's actions have met EEOC recommended practices for preventing harassment; and (4) the extent to which FEMA is overseeing and evaluating its efforts. GAO analyzed FEMA and DHS policies and documentation, compared them with EEOC recommendations, and interviewed FEMA and EEOC officials.
- Workforce Diversity: Hispanic Workers Are Underrepresented in the Media, and More Data Are Needed for Federal Enforcement Efforts Para la versión de esta página en español, ver a GAO-22-105886. También, la transcripción del episodio de podcast relacionado incluye versiones en inglés y español.What GAO FoundHispanic workers are underrepresented in the media industry compared to their representation in the rest of the U.S. workforce. Little change occurred from 2010 through 2019, according to GAO's analysis of the Census Bureau's American Community Survey data (see fig.). The extent of underrepresentation in the media varied by occupation and gender. Stakeholders GAO interviewed identified challenges Hispanics may face working in the industry, such as access to professional networks.Estimated Percentage of Workers in the Media and in Non-media Industries Who Are Hispanic, 2010 through 2019Note: Estimates in the figure have relative standard errors of less than 4 percent.Leadership commitment, recruitment efforts, and diversity training were among the steps that selected large media companies publicly reported taking to promote workforce diversity.Federal agencies use complaint investigations and audits to enforce equal employment opportunity (EEO) requirements in the media industry, but gaps in agencies' data sharing and union reporting may hinder enforcement. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) no longer have an agreement in place to enable EEOC to share enforcement data. FCC instead relies on companies to self-report discrimination complaints filed against the companies. EEOC's sharing of such data could help FCC determine company compliance with EEO rules. Additionally, according to some stakeholders we interviewed, unions play an important role in helping some media workers obtain employment, and EEOC requires certain unions to file a report on member demographics. However, EEOC officials do not know whether the list of filers is missing unions that should file, nor when the list was last comprehensively updated. Officials told GAO they were exploring options for updating the list. By improving its approach to identifying unions required to file the reports, EEOC will have more complete information to consider when investigating discrimination complaints.Why GAO Did This StudyThe media industry plays a key role in educating and entertaining the public, but some policymakers have raised questions about workforce diversity in the industry. EEOC, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP), and FCC generally oversee media companies' compliance with EEO requirements. GAO was asked to review the representation of Hispanics in the media industry and related federal oversight.This report examines (1) the representation of Hispanics in the media industry over the last decade, (2) steps selected media companies publicly reported taking to increase workforce diversity, and (3) how key federal agencies have enforced federal EEO requirements in the industry.GAO analyzed data from the Census Bureau's American Community Survey data for 2010-2019, the most recent data available when GAO did the analysis. GAO interviewed agency officials and stakeholders, including organizations representing media workers and employers. GAO also reviewed diversity reports published on the websites of 15 large media companies, selected in part based on the companies' market value. GAO also reviewed agency documents and enforcement data.
- Diversidad en la fuerza laboral: Los trabajadores hispanos están infrarrepresentados en los medios de comunicación y se necesitan más datos para aplicar la normativa federal This is the Spanish&nbsp;language highlights associated with GAO-22-104669. También, la transcripción del episodio de podcast relacionado incluye versiones en inglés y español.Conclusiones de la GAOLos trabajadores hispanos están infrarrepresentados en el sector de los medios de comunicación si se compara su representación con el resto de la fuerza laboral estadounidense. Poco ha cambiado entre 2010 y 2019, según un análisis de la GAO de datos provenientes de la Encuesta sobre la Comunidad Estadounidense de la Oficina del Censo de los Estados Unidos (ver el gráfico). El grado de la infrarrepresentación en los medios de comunicación dependía de la ocupación y del género. Las partes interesadas entrevistadas por la GAO identificaron los desafíos a los que los hispanos se pueden enfrentar cuando trabajan en ese sector, como el acceso a redes profesionales.Porcentaje estimado de trabajadores hispanos en los sectores de medios de comunicación y otros, de 2010 a 2019Nota: Las estimaciones del gráfico tienen errores estándar relativos inferiores al 4%.Entre las medidas que empresas de medios de comunicación seleccionadas escogieron e informaron públicamente haber utilizado para fomentar la diversidad entre la fuerza laboral se encuentran el compromiso de liderazgo, actividades de reclutamiento y capacitación en materia de diversidad.Agencias federales utilizan investigaciones de denuncias y auditorias para aplicar los requisitos de igualdad de oportunidades de empleo (EEO) en el sector de los medios de comunicación, pero las lagunas en el intercambio de datos de estas agencias y en los informes de los sindicatos pueden dificultar su cumplimiento. La Comisión Federal de Comunicaciones (FCC, por sus siglas en inglés) y la Comisión para la Igualdad de Oportunidades en el Empleo (EEOC, por sus siglas en inglés) ya no cuentan con un acuerdo vigente que permita a la EEOC compartir datos sobre el cumplimiento de los requisitos. La FCC confía en cambio en que las empresas auto declaren las denuncias de discriminación presentadas contra ellas. Compartir este tipo de datos de la EEOC podría ayudar a que la FCC determine si una empresa cumple con las normas EEO. Además, según algunas partes interesadas entrevistadas, los sindicatos juegan un importante papel para ayudar a algunos trabajadores de medios de comunicación a conseguir empleo, y la EEOC requiere que ciertos sindicatos presenten informes sobre datos demográficos de sus miembros. Sin embargo, los funcionarios de la EEOC no saben si la lista de sindicatos incluye a todos los sindicatos que deberían presentar informes y tampoco cuando fue la última vez que la lista fue actualizada a fondo. Los funcionarios informaron a la GAO que estaban explorando opciones para actualizar la lista. Al mejorar su enfoque para identificar a los sindicatos que deben presentar informes, la EEOC dispondrá de información más completa a la hora de investigar las denuncias de discriminación.Propósito de este estudioEl sector de los medios de comunicación juega un papel clave en la educación y el entretenimiento del público, pero algunos encargados de la formulación de políticas han cuestionado la diversidad de la fuerza laboral en el sector. La EEOC, la Oficina de Programas de Cumplimiento de Contratos Federales (OFCCP) y la FCC generalmente supervisan el cumplimiento de los requisitos de igualdad de oportunidades de empleo por las empresas de medios de comunicación. Se solicitó a la GAO que analizara la representación de personas hispanas en el sector de los medios de comunicación y la correspondiente supervisión federal.Este informe examina 1) la representación de personas hispanas en el sector de los medios de comunicación durante la última década, 2) medidas que empresas de medios de comunicación seleccionadas informaron haber adoptado para aumentar la diversidad de la fuerza laboral y 3) cómo agencias federales clave han aplicado la normativa federal de igualdad de oportunidades de empleo en el sector.La GAO analizó datos de la Encuesta sobre la Comunidad Estadounidense de la Oficina del Censo de los Estados Unidos para el período 2010-2019, los datos más recientes disponibles cuando GAO realizó el análisis. La GAO entrevistó a funcionarios públicos y a partes interesadas, entre estos, organizaciones que representan a trabajadores y empleadores en los medios de comunicación. La GAO también analizó informes sobre diversidad publicados en los sitios web de 15 grandes empresas de medios de comunicación que se seleccionaron, en parte, por su valor en el mercado. La GAO también examinó documentos de las agencias y datos sobre el cumplimiento de las normas.
- Military Service Academies: Actions Needed to Better Assess Organizational Climate What GAO FoundThe United States Military Academy, United States Naval Academy, and United States Air Force Academy collect information about their organizational climate using a variety of tools. However, the DOD climate survey—the academies' primary tool for collecting information—does not provide complete and reliable information. Specifically, the survey has methodological issues concerning security, response rates, and post-survey weighting that limit its usability. In addition, while the academies monitor the number and basis of equal opportunity complaints, they do not fully capture information on alleged incidents of discrimination and harassment that are not submitted through the complaint processing system. DOD is taking steps to address methodological issues with its survey, but without addressing alleged incidents that are not submitted through the complaint processing system, the academies will continue to have an incomplete picture of their organizational climate. This will limit the academies' ability to identify problems, implement actions, and measure outcomes.Steps for Identifying and Correcting Organizational Climate ProblemsThe service academies have taken actions to improve organizational climate by incorporating leading practices for managing workforce diversity. Specifically, the academies have taken action to demonstrate leadership commitment, employ strategic planning, improve student involvement, and enhance recruitment, among others. For example, between 2019 and 2021, all three academies developed diversity and inclusion strategic plans, and each academy has created or restructured student leadership positions related to diversity and inclusion.Each academy has plans to measure the effect of its actions aimed at improving climate. However, they are unable to assess their actions' effectiveness because they have not fully developed or implemented performance measures, such as measures to review disciplinary actions for bias. Without such measures, the academies cannot hold accountable those responsible for the actions.Students at the academies expressed a range of perceptions regarding the academies' organizational climate in 34 GAO-conducted focus groups. For example, while most groups organized by race and ethnicity agreed that the use of offensive terms or slurs is uncommon, these groups differed in their view of how well command officials work with individuals from diverse backgrounds. However, most focus groups agreed that they would recommend the academy to a friend or family member.Why GAO Did This StudyAccording to the Department of Defense, creating an inclusive environment free from harassment and discrimination is a priority. As the military service academies are a major source of officer commissions, accounting for approximately 18 percent of all officer commissions in fiscal year 2019, they play a key role developing officers who will be responsible for leading a diverse military.The William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 included a provision for GAO to report on equal opportunity claims, climate surveys, and programs to address climate issues at the military service academies. Specifically, this report addresses (1) the extent to which the academies collect information to develop a complete picture of the climate; (2) the extent to which the academies have taken actions to improve the climate; and (3) the perceptions of current students concerning the climate.GAO held 34 focus groups with current students across the three service academies, analyzed complaint data from fiscal years 2017 through 2021, reviewed documentation, and interviewed officials.