1
2

DEFENSE THREAT REDUCTION AGENCY

ANNUAL EQUAL EMPLOYMENT 

OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM STATUS REPORT

MANAGEMENT DIRECTIVE 715

FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2019

PREPARED BY

EQUAL OPPORTUNITY AND DIVERSITY PROGRAMS OFFICE
3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION I:

PARTS A thru D: Agency Information ..............................................................................................4

PART E: Executive Summary ..............................................................................................................9

PART F: Certification of Establishment of Continuing EEO Programs........................................25

PART G: Agency 2.0 Self-Assessment Checklist ...........................................................................26

PART H: Plans for Addressing Deficiencies ...................................................................................42

PART I: Plans for Trigger Identification and Barrier Elimination.............................................57

PART J: Employment Plan for Individuals with Targeted Disabilities .....................................68

Analysis of Workforce Profiles... ..............................................................................................88

SECTION II:

APPENDICES .............................................................................................................97

Appendix A: MD-715 Definitions and EEO Authorities .........................................................99

Appendix B: DTRA Organization Chart ................................................................................104

Appendix C: Policy Statements ..............................................................................................106

Appendix D: Federal EEO Statistical Report of Discrimination Complaints (Form 462) .....115

Appendix E: Program Trends Report.................................................................118

Appendix F: 2019 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey...........................................124

Appendix G: Disability Strategic Action Plan......................................................153

Appendix H: Applicant Flow Data...................................................................156
4

EEOC FORM

715-01

PART A-D

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

FEDERAL AGENCY ANNUAL

EEO PROGRAM STATUS REPORT

DEFENSE THREAT REDUCTION AGENCY (DTRA) FY2019

For period covering October 1, 2018 to September 30, 2019

Part A - Department or Agency Identifying Information

Agency

Second 

Level 

Component

Address City State Zip 

Code 

Agency 

Code

FIPS 

Code

DTRA Not 

Applicable

8725 John J. 

Kingman Road

Ft. 

Belvoir VA 22060 DD61

Part B - Total Employment

Total Employment Permanent Workforce Temporary 

Workforce Total Workforce

Number of Employees 1369 47 1416

Part C.1 - Head of Agency and Head of Agency Designee

Agency Leadership Name Title

Head of Agency Mr. Vayl S. Oxford Director

Head of Agency 

Designee Mr. Vayl S. Oxford Director

Part C.2 - Agency Official(s) Responsible for Oversight of EEO Program(s)

EEO Program 

Staff Name Title Series 

Pay Plan 

and 

Grade 

Phone 

Number Email Address

Principal EEO 

Director/Official Willisa Donald Director 0260 GS-15 571-616-4544

Willisa.m.Donald.

civ@mail.mil

Affirmative 

Employment 

Program 

Manager

Denise Lewis EEO 

Manager 0260 GS-14 571-616-6597

Denise.a.lewis12.

civ@mail.mil
5

Complaint 

Processing 

Program 

Manager

Phil Ellis

Informal 

Complaint 

Program 

Manager

0260 GS-13 571-616-

6251

Phillip.t.ellis.civ

@mail.mil

Diversity & 

Inclusion Officer Denise Lewis

D&I 

Program 

Manager

0260 GS-14 571-616-

6597

Denise.a.lewis12.

civ@mail.mil

Hispanic 

Program 

Manager 

(SEPM)

James Jones

EEO Special 

Program 

Manager

0260 GS-13 505-853-

0648

James.a.jones125.

civ@mail.mil

Women's 

Program 

Manager 

(SEPM)

Denise Lewis

EEO 

Program 

Manager

0260 GS-14 571-616-

6597

Denise.a.lewis12.

civ@mail.mil

Disability 

Program 

Manager 

(SEPM)

Cheryl B. 

Williams-Payton

SEPM 

Program 

Manager

GS-12 571-616-

6422

Cheryl.b.williams

-

payton.civ@mail.

mil

Special 

Placement 

Program 

Coordinator 

(Individuals with 

Disabilities)

Cheryl B. 

Williams-Payton

SEPM

Program 

Coordinator

GS-12 571-616-

6422

Cheryl.b.williams

-

payton.civ@mail.

mil

Reasonable 

Accommodation 

Program 

Manager

Mary 

Lewandowski

RA Program 

Manager 201 GS-12 571-616-4802

Mary.h.lewandow

ski.civ@mail.mil

Anti-Harassment 

Program 

Manager

Claudette Persaud

AntiHarassment 

Program 

Manager

260 GS-13 571-616-

5112

Claudette.p.persa

ud.civ@mail.mil

ADR Program 

Manager Phil Ellis

ADR 

Program 

Manager

260 GS-13 571-616-

6251

Phillip.t.ellis.civ

@mail.mil

Compliance 

Manager Richard Conyers

Formal 

Compliant 

Program 

Manager

260 GS-14 571-616-

5720

Richard. 

F.conyers2.civ@

mail.mil
6

Principal MD715 Preparer Denise Lewis

AEP 

Program 

Manager

260 GS-14 571-616-

6597

Denise.a.lewis12.

civ@mail.mil

Part D.1 – List of Subordinate Components Covered in this Report

Please identify the subordinate components within the agency (e.g., bureaus, regions, etc.).

 If the agency does not have any subordinate components, please check the box.

Subordinate Component City State

Country 

(Optiona

l)

Agency Code 

FIPS

Codes

Not Applicable

Part D.2 – Mandatory and Optional Documents for this Report

In the table below, the agency must submit these documents with its MD-715 report.

Did the agency submit the following mandatory documents? Please respond Yes 

or No Comments

Organizational Chart YES

EEO Policy Statement YES

Strategic Plan YES

Anti-Harassment Policy and Procedures YES

Reasonable Accommodation Procedures YES

Personal Assistance Services Procedures NO

Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedures YES

In the table below, the agency may decide whether to submit these documents with its MD-715 report.

Did the agency submit the following optional documents? Please respond

Yes or No Comments

Federal Equal Opportunity Recruitment Program (FEORP) 

Report YES

Disabled Veterans Affirmative Action Program (DVAAP) 

Report YES

Operational Plan for Increasing Employment of Individuals with 

Disabilities under Executive Order 13548 YES

Diversity and Inclusion Plan under Executive Order 13583 NO

Implementing the 

D&I Strategic 

Plan in FY2020
7

Diversity Policy Statement YES

Human Capital Strategic Plan NO

HR is working 

on the FY2021-

2024 Plan

EEO Strategic Plan YES

Results from most recent Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey 

or Annual Employee Survey YES
8
9

EEOC FORM

715-01

PART E

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

FEDERAL AGENCY ANNUAL

EEO PROGRAM STATUS REPORT

For the period covering October 1, 2018 to September 30, 2019

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Part E.1 - Executive Summary: Mission

AGENCY MISSION

The Defense Threat Reduction Agency enables the Department of Defense, the United States 

Government and International partners to counter and deter weapons of mass destruction and improvised 

threat networks. DTRA carries out its mission by providing subject matter expertise and material 

solutions to Combatant Commanders and military Services across a number of mission areas including 

the nuclear enterprise, building partnership capacity, treaties and on-site inspections, and countering 

threat networks.

DTRA is a Combat Support Agency and a Defense Agency with a three-pronged mission:

1. ensure the U.S. military maintains a safe, secure, effective and credible nuclear weapons 

deterrent;

2. counter the threats posed by the full spectrum of weapons of mass destruction (WMD), including 

chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear weapons capable of a high order of destruction or 

causing mass casualties;

3. enable the Combatant Commanders and other partners to counter and deter improvised threat 

networks through shared situational understanding, analytic and advisory support, and delivery of 

technical capabilities.

DTRA is organized into nine Directorates, Research and Development Directorate (RD), On-Site 

Inspection and Building Capacity Directorate (OB), Nuclear Enterprise Directorate (NE), Cooperative 

Threat Reduction Directorate (CT), Acquisition, Contracts, and Logistics Directorate (AL), Information 

Management and Technology Directorate (IT), Human Resources Directorate (HR), Operations and 

Integration Directorate (OI), Strategic Integration Directorate (SI) and its supporting Staff Offices. 

DTRA’s Headquarters is located at Fort Belvoir, Virginia. The Agency also has Regional Offices 

located throughout various geographical locations: Germany, Albuquerque (ABQ), Eglin, and Travis.
10

Part E.2 - Executive Summary: Essential Element A - F

EQUAL OPPORTUNITY & DIVERSITY PROGRAMS OFFICE 

Mission Statement – The EEO mission is to create and sustain an inclusive work environment that 

aligns with DTRA’s mission.

Values – Our team is:

Trustworthy – Do the right thing, the right way, for the right reason, regardless of the circumstances or 

consequences.

Empowered – Foster a capable workforce trusted to take personal initiative, enabled and supported by 

leadership.

Agile - Be risk-tolerant and operate at the speed of relevancy.

Mission-Focused – Understand and meet the operational needs of those we support.

Innovative – Boldly develop creative solutions to tough problems with license to fail, learn, and succeed 

along the way.

Selfless – Collaborate with and support our partners and each other, always putting the mission first.

EEO Office Structure - The Equal Opportunity and Diversity Programs Office (EEO) is comprised of 

the following: Affirmative Employment; Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR); Complaints and 

Compliance; Diversity and Inclusion (D&I); Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS), AntiHarassment Program (AHP), Special Emphasis Programs (SEP), EEO/EO Training; Sexual Assault 

Prevention and Response (SAPR) and conducting Climate Assessments. The current staff consists of an 

EEO Director, two EEO Managers, five EEO specialists and one EEO Assistant. 

SIX ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS ACCOMPLISHMENTS –

DTRA is seeking to fulfill the United States Secretary of Defense (SECDEF) Lines of Efforts:

1. Build a more lethal force

2. Strengthen alliances and attract new partners

3. Reform the Department

Essential Element A:

DEMONSTRATED COMMITMENT FROM AGENCY LEADERSHIP

Agency Realignment: In FY2019, the Agency aligned with the National Defense Strategy (NDS), 

focusing on the three key tenets (listed in the Agency’s mission) and amplifying our relationships with 

the warfighter. We have also realigned our organization to posture for the changing strategic 

environment and increased demand from the Combatant Commands (CCMDs) for our support. The 

overarching goal was to integrate our operations and strategic functions and create cross-functional 

country teams that focus on the NDS-identified threat actors. We accomplished this by expanding our 
11

operational analysis functions across the counter-WMD (CWMD) and counter improvised threats 

missions. This new approach ensures the agility to address the emerging needs of the warfighter, while 

maintaining a steadfast and globally integrated focus on supporting the overarching objectives of the 

NDS."

Mentoring Program: DTRA’s Mentoring Program grows internal talent and increases the overall 

communication and collaboration across the Agency as a premier model program for DoD. The FY2019

program consisted of 111 civilian employees. Among our mentors were 13 Senior Executive members. 

DTRA Senior Leaders played an active part in the program by hosting brown bags and participating in 

key program activities. Senior leaders met with mentees on a regular basis in a relaxed environment to 

discuss key points centered around the program's featured book, "Becoming a Person of Influence," by 

John C. Maxwell. The program hosted a workshop that focused on "Increasing your Circle of 

Influence", where the speaker helped mentoring participants become stronger leaders through ownership, 

focus, and commitment. The participants also participated in a "Communicating with Style" session 

where they explored strategies for building and enhancing productive relationships. A new feature in 

FY2019 was our Mentoring Cafés, which allowed mentees to share ideas and best practices with their 

fellow mentees. We offered a similar session for mentors. The DTRA Director showed his support by 

meeting with the participants to share mission updates and provided an opportunity for them to ask 

questions in a casual setting.

Leadership Development Program (LDP): In FY2019, DTRA allocated funding to each Directorate, 

in proportion to its size, to execute individual training plans and provide opportunities to attend core 

leadership development courses. Participation in competitive programs increased from FY2018 by 

approximately 75%. Applicants were subject to a thorough screening process, which included vetting 

and selection by the Agency’s Leadership Development Council (LDC), after obtaining supervisory 

approval. The LDC is comprised of representatives from each directorate in addition to an advisor from 

the EEO Office. The LDC reviews, rates, and ranks applications based on a standardized application 

criteria. A panel of senior leaders then interviews the top candidates. Non-selects are afforded the 

opportunity to gain feedback on their submission and results to learn from the experience and ensure 

transparency in the process. Opportunities for participation in programs are provided for all levels of 

employees from Junior to Senior Executive. 

Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS): EEO administered the FY2019 FEVS and briefed the 

DTRA Senior Leaders and Directorates to communicate the Agency’s employee engagement results. 

Some of the highlights showcased how the Agency employees loved the mission, 96% expressed that 

they are willing to put in the extra effort to get the job done. Employees (95%) also indicated that they 

are always looking for better ways to do their jobs and 88% of DTRA employees felt that the 

organization is prepared for potential security threats. The most notable change was the positive trend 

concerning “poor performers”. Employees (41%) indicated steps are taken to deal with poor performers, 

an increase of +5% from 2018; employees (56%) felt that they are recognized for doing a good job, an 

increase of +5% from 2018. Employees (45%) also felt that differences in performance are recognized 

in a meaningful way, also a +5% increase from 2018. Additionally, there was a +4% increase from 2018 

for the following questions; employees (71%) indicated that prohibited practices are not tolerated; and 

67% of the employees understood what was needed to be rated at different performance levels. 

Climate Assessment: As a result of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), Federal Employee 

Viewpoint Survey (FEVS), the Agency Director instructed the EEO Office to aggressively address the 

FEVS workplace issues and identify Agency-wide trends. During FY2019, the Proactive Prevention 

Team utilized the DTRA High Negative and Trailing scores to develop and administer an Agency-wide 
12

Climate Assessment for 10 Agency Directorates to identify blind-spots and trends. Additionally, EEO 

solicited inputs and recommendations from each Directorate to address the issue of poor performers and 

develop best practices for employee engagement.

Essential Element B: 

INTEGRATION OF EEO INTO THE AGENCY’S STRATEGIC MISSION

Minority Serving Institutions: The Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) and DTRA are 

collaborating to create opportunities for diversity students in STEM, Foreign Affairs, and Political 

Science fields. The Diversity Internship for DTRA (DID) welcomes students currently attending a 

minority-serving institution (MSI) who are excited about tackling hard problems in national security and 

applying cutting-edge research to make our nation safer and stronger. Internships are for 8-12 weeks 

during the summer and are available in Richland, WA. Travel and housing assistance for the interns is 

also provided. For FY2019, DTRA sponsored five DID interns and plans to increase that number in the 

future. As part of our agreement with PNNL, the program manager engaged with MSIs and HBCUs 

across the country to attract the best possible candidates for the program and for potential future 

employment with DTRA. 

EEO Director Involvement: The EEO Director continued to build relationships with Senior Leaders on 

strategies which promote an environment free from personal, social, or institutional barriers that prevent 

employees from rising to their highest potential. The EEO Director attended bi-weekly Director’s staff 

meetings and continued to participate in various forums throughout the Agency, e.g., the Director’s 

Intelligence Brief (DIB) creating a more engaged working relationship with senior leaders. The EEO 

Director and the Affirmative Employment Program Manager presented the annual State of the Agency 

briefing to the Director and Senior Officials. The presentation covered an overall assessment of the 

Agency’s performance in each of the six essential elements as well as EEO FY2020 initiatives to gain 

Leadership buy-in and support. 

EEO Office provided several briefings at various Directorates All-hands and conducted training (i.e., 

Sexual Harassment, Generations in the Workplace, Sexual Assault, Bullying and FEVS). The Agency 

continued to secure funding, to ensure compliance on EEO programs such as, Special Emphasis, 

Diversity and Inclusion, Sign Language Interpreters (SLI), staff training, and contracts for Investigations 

and Court Reporting services. 

Albuquerque (ABQ) C.U.L.T.U.R.E Initiative: In FY2019, DTRA ABQ implemented its 

C.U.L.T.U.R.E. initiative. 

• Care – Care about what you do every day. Care about each other.

• U – You are the most valuable Agency’s asset.

• Learning – Learn from what we do wrong and what we do right.

• Teamwork – Teamwork is the individual commitment to the group effort.

• Us – We are in this together.

• Results – We are a results oriented Agency.

• Excellence - We strive for this in everything we do.

The acronym is a quick focal point and a reminder of the importance of building and enhancing an 

inclusive culture. Throughout the year, ABQ promoted its C.U.L.T.U.R.E. Conversations through 

monthly emails as well as hosted various presentations and trainings such as: True Colors Assessment, 

Generations in the Workplace Panel Discussion and Implicit Bias training to promote and enhance 
13

employee engagement. In addition, ABQ conducted three EEO for Newcomers and three Civil 

Treatment Training sessions for the workforce. 

Historically Black Colleges & Universities/Minority Serving Institutions (HBCUs/MSIs): The 

Research and Development Directorate conducted the following initiatives with Historically Black 

Colleges and Universities/Minority Serving Institutions (HBCU/MI):

• Chemical and Biological Technologies Department (RD-CB) Engaged Towson University to 

discuss Science and Technology opportunities and DTRA partnership with Principal Investigators,

researchers and students to promote employment opportunities and the use of the USA Jobs website. 

CB also funded and facilitated placement of four student interns and three faculty researchers from 

HBCU/MI's. Interns and faculty researchers engaged in Counter Weapons of Mass Destruction 

(CWMD) research and experiments over the period of a University Semester.

• Counter WMD Technologies Department (RD-CX) conducted sensing sessions for female and 

minority employees at the Department and the Division level and designated specific opportunities 

for female and minority employees, recognizing a need to focus attention and help to ensure 

discussions can occur in an environment of non-attribution. Also, CX was committed to integrating 

EEO by utilizing diverse hiring panels (male/female representation) as well as redacted all 

applicants’ names from their resumes so all resumes read as gender neutral which promoted an

objective evaluations on candidate skills and qualifications ensuring fair hiring practices. 

• Enabling Capabilities Department (RD-EC) leaders along with ABQ EEO presented DTRAABQ technical capabilities at the Kirtland Air Force Base Hispanic Heritage Event. This event was 

held jointly with Sandia National Laboratories on Kirtland Air Force Base. DTRA presented its 

capabilities in seismic/acoustic monitoring and unmanned aerial vehicles.

Agile. Be risk-tolerant and operate 

Essential Element C: 

MANAGEMENT AND PROGRAM ACCOUNTABILITY 

Disabled Veterans Affirmative Action Program (DVAAP): The report was submitted on October 29, 

2019, to the Defense Civilian Personnel Advisory Service. The following accomplishments were 

highlighted in the report:

• Workforce Recruitment Program (WRP): WRP continues to be a success in FY2019. The 

Engineering and Logistics Department (AL-EL) Department hired three WRP students/ employees 

and five Pathway student interns; seven Veterans and one WRP student into permanent positions 

through various hiring authorities. This inclusive effort brought new ideas and perspectives, diverse 

thinking that allow AL-EL to overcome challenges while providing innovation.

• Veterans Recruitment: DTRA continues to recruit Veterans, especially those who are 30 percent or 

more disabled. At the end of FY2019, DTRA employed 1,413 of which 781 (55%) are Veterans. Of 

the 781 Veterans, 56 (7%) are identified as disabled Veterans, and 117 (15%) are identified as 30% 

or more disabled Veterans. In FY2019, there were a total of 189 new hires, 101 (53%) of the new 

hires were Veterans and 18 (10%) were identified as 30% or more disabled Veterans.

• Reasonable Accommodation (RA) and Section 508 Compliance: The Agency processed 33 RA

requests, which included a combination of assistive technologies, sit/stand workstations, chairs, 

keyboards, flexible work schedules, and medical telework. The HR worked closely with the 

Information Technology Directorate and Building Manager to provide the approved accommodations 

for individuals, such as 15 sit/stand workstations, one heater and 11 ergonomic chairs.
14

Federal Equal Opportunity Recruitment Program (FEORP): The EEO Office and the HR 

Directorate collaborated on the FEORP submission in November 2019. The report included the 

Agency’s promising practices, strategies, and activities related to Hiring Authorities, Hispanic 

Employment, Mentoring, Training, Career Development, and Recruitment of Individuals with 

Disabilities. The following accomplishments were highlighted.

• Develop Strategic Partnership with Academic Institutions and Associations: To further 

programmatic success, DTRA is bolstering existing well-established outreach relationships while 

building new relationships and partnerships for recruitment opportunities. The Agency already 

works with hundreds of identified schools/universities, specifically targeting career services,

faculty members, student organizations, and clubs, etc. to facilitate targeted recruiting and outreach 

efforts. Additionally, providing opportunities for students, Career Services staff, and faculty

members to visit DTRA work sites to observe firsthand the exciting mission tasks being 

accomplished by the Agency. 

• Collect and Analyze External Applicant Flow Data: The Agency will continue to collect and 

analyze applicant flow data to determine areas of low participation rates in its applicant pool data and 

determine areas of improvement in the Agency’s recruitment efforts. This information will be 

analyzed to determine the racial demographics of applicants and conduct outreach to ensure DTRA 

current recruiting practices include a diverse pool of qualified jobseekers.

Special Emphasis Program Observances: The EEO Offices within the McNamara Complex including 

DTRA, Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA), and the Defense 

Technical Information Center (DTIC) co-sponsored 11 Observances to educate and inform the 

workforce. DTRA sponsored the following three events:

• Women’s History Month: The guest speaker for this observance was Ms. Kim Parker from PEW 

Research Center, she discussed “Women’s Trends, Experiences and Attitudes in the Workplace.” She 

presented statistical data about Women in Leadership, Gender Pay Gap, Me Too Movement, and 

STEM. The presentation was well received and approximately 90 employees were in attendance. 

• LGBT Month: The theme for the event was “Looking Back, Moving Forward.” The 50th

anniversary of the Stonewall uprisings in New York, and the birth of the modern Pride movement. 

Our guest speaker, Ms. Mary Ann Murdoch, a 24-year Veteran, returned from the Army with a secret 

that could have cost her everything. Ms. Murdoch discussed her transition from a male to a female,

four years after her retirement from the Army, and some of the challenges she experienced during the 

transition. Approximately 108 employees were in attendance.

• National Disability Employment Awareness Month (NDEAM): The Agency hosted the

Disability Awareness Employment Month Observance with the theme, “The Right Talent, Right 

Now.” There were a series of events during the month of October. The kick-off event was led by 

Lieutenant General Rogers, the Agency’s Deputy Director. The second week, two representatives 

from the Computer/Electronic Accommodations Program (CAP) conducted training to educate the 

workforce on the benefits of utilizing CAP to support the Agency’s Reasonable Accommodation

(RA) needs. The Agency also co-hosted the NDEAM Program with the Defense Logistics Agency –

and our guest speaker was Colonel (Ret.) Gregory Gadson. We concluded the month with a

Disability Etiquette Training course to educate the workforce on the proper ways to interact with 

IwDs and IwTDs. 
15

Essential Element D: 

PROACTIVE PREVENTION OF UNLAWFUL DISCRIMINATION

Anti-Harassment Program (AHP): The EEO Office continues to build and strengthen its AHP, by 

established a tracking system to ensure all cases are promptly initiated within 10-days. In FY2019, the 

AHP tracked 20 cases and ensured two successful mediations were conducted to resolve workplace 

disputes at the lowest level. In addition, the team continues to develop tools and resources to engage 

Managers, Supervisors and Employees on the AHP. 

Issuance, Policies and Procedures: In FY2019, EEO examined, concurred and/or provided comments 

on Defense of Defense (DOD) Instructions and Human Resources Issuances regarding 

management/personnel policies, procedures and practices through the DTRA Enterprise Information 

System (EIS). EEO reviewed and provided feedback for the following policies and procedures:

Instructions/Directives:

• DTRA Instruction 1025.3 - Fellowship Program

• DTRA Instruction 1400.27 - Merit Promotion Plan Change 

• DTRA Instruction 1430.2 - Student Loan Repayment Program

• DTRA Instruction 1200.1 - Military Reserve Program

• DTRA Instruction 3001.1 - Detail of Civilian Personnel

• DTRA Instruction 1400.27 - Merit Promotion Plan

• Department of Defense Directive 5105.62 - Defense Threat Reduction Agency

• DTRA Directive 1310.2 - Senior Service Advisors

• DTRA Instruction 1400.28 - Performance Management Program Civilian Personnel

• DTRA Instruction 1438.1 - Federal Employee’s Injury Compensation Program

• DTRA Instruction 1400.25-610 - Civilian Hours of Duty

• DTRA Instruction 1400.25-630 - Leave of Civilian Personnel (Surge)

• DTRA Directive 1100.01 - Human Resources Policy Board

• DTRA Instruction 7230.1 - Professional Liability Insurance (PIL)

• DTRA Directive 3005.2 - Deployment of Service Members and Civilian Employees in Support of 

Military Service Operational Requirements and/or Reserve Activations

• DTRA Instruction 1100.2 - Telework Program

• Formal Coordination of DoDI 1350.02 - DoD Military Equal Opportunity (MEO) Program

DoD Instructions:

• FY2018 - DoD Civilian Employee Workplace and Gender Relations Report

• Formal Coordination of DoDI 1020.EM - DOD Employee Anti-Harassment Program

• Formal Coordination of DoDI 1020.EM - DOD Employee Anti-Harassment and Response for

DoD Civilian Employees

• Formal Coordination DoDD 1401.03 - DoD NAF Employee Whistleblower Protection 

• Formal Coordination of DoD Instruction 1402.05 - Background Check on Individuals Providing 

Care and Services to Children in DoD Programs

• Congressional Report: FY2018 DoD Civilian Employee Workplace and Gender Relations Report

Women’s Pay Study: 
16

The study was conducted to determine triggers in regards to Women in the DTRA workforce. We 

examined pay grades from GS-3 to SES and the study revealed that 96% of DTRA personnel are 

between the GS-11 to GS-15 grade levels. On average, women are comparative with men in pay but

make 7.3% ($9K) less than men overall. The gap is explained by the fact that 33% of women at DTRA 

are in GS-14 and above positions compared to 48% of men. Additional data mining will be conducted in 

FY2020. 

EEO Training: In FY2019, the EEO Office proactively sought to enhance training efforts. The 

breakdown as follows:

Mandatory EEO Training FY2018

Participation

FY2019

Participation

EEO Newcomers for Employees 316 335

Civil Treatment/Supervisors Training 46 102

Additional EEO Training 

EO Onboarding 147 127

Diversity Training 0 25

Mandatory Online EEO Training

No FEAR 

Prevention of Sexual Harassment (POSH)

ABQ Classroom Training

EEO for Newcomers 35 39

SAPH 0 39

Implicit Bias 0 12

Civil Treatment for Leaders 17 59

Civil Treatment for Employees 0 17

Total 561 755

In FY2018, the EEO Office hired someone to enhance training coordination efforts and in FY2019, EEO 

increased the number of courses being offered. EEO provided training to all the remote locations 
17

(Germany, Eglin and Travis). EEO and Diversity Training was also provided to Directorates and/or 

Divisions by request. 

 

Inspector General (IG) Office: In FY2019, IG assisted employees with allegations of possible climate, 

diversity, or discrimination concerns and held discussions with EEO to address related cases. IG 

received 111 contacts, of which approximately 30 were Whistleblowers and 19 involved EEO and 

climate concerns. The IG also ensured the two hiring actions it conducted this FY were racially diverse 

and in one case the hiring panel was both gender and racially diverse. Additionally, the IG rapidly 

implemented processes to meet the Director's charge to improve climate challenges across the Agency, 

by creating a synergistic interface and partnership with the EEO. The IG was able to implement 

individual directorate reviews, offering senior leaders early indicators that headed-off potential problems. 

In addition, IG continued its monthly “Blotter” updates for the Director and respective Directorate 

leaders where IG-related activities were addressed to include matters involving climate, diversity, and/or 

discrimination. IG also conducted monthly meetings with the EEO, General Counsel (GC), Security and 

Counterintelligence Department, and HR to review personnel concerns that potentially contained an EEO 

nexus and met to ensure there was a process to elevate internal investigations to DTRA Leadership. 

Finally, IG personnel attended multiple EEO and Diversity Office functions and afterwards discussed 

topics within the office and potential impacts and proper responses.

Essential Element E: 

EFFICIENCY

Complaints & Compliance: In FY2019, the EEO Office handled 20 Informal complaints, nine 

individuals either withdrew or did not file a complaint and 11 individuals filed Formal complaints of 

discrimination. Two of the 11 complaints were closed by issuance of a Final Agency Decision (FAD). 

There were four Agency Settlement Agreements and two Final Agency Orders. In FY2019 the Agency 

had one finding of discrimination based on Retaliation. 

In reviewing the complaint trends, the Agency continues to process an average 23 complaints annually 

and out of the 23 complaints approximately 11 individuals have filed a Formal complaint. However, the

data also reveals that the Informal/Pre-Complaints are being proactively resolved at the lowest level. 

The data is slightly skewed based on a significant increase in complaints in FY2018. In FY2018, the 

Agency Director sent an email to all employees articulating that he would not tolerate Harassment or 

Retaliation and encouraged employees to address the behavior(s) with the EEO or IG Office. See Figure 

1. 

Figure 1: Informal and Formal Complaints

9 21 11

9 12 9

0%

50%

100%

FY17 FY18 FY19

COMPLAINTS

FILED FORMAL WITHDRAWN
18 

Reprisal continues to be one of the leading basis for filing a discrimination complaint in FY2018-2019. 

In addition, Harassment (Non-Sexual) and Race complaints were the second basis for allegations of 

discrimination. In FY2017-2019, trends indicated most of the Agency complaints were filed based on 

Reprisal (22), Harassment (20), Race (16), Sex (16) and Age (12). See Figure 2. 

Figure 2: Basis of Discrimination FY2017 – FY2019

In FY2018 - 2019, the Agency began closing more cases. In FY2017 - 2019, The Agency 

implemented 14 (52%) Final Agency Orders; issued eight (30%) Final Agency Decisions and 

coordinated five (18%) Settlement Agreements. 

Figure 3: Settlements and Closures

Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR): Meditation was offered to all aggrieved employees during the 

EEO Informal complaint process by the EEO Counselor during the initial counseling phase. The EEO 

counselor informed all aggrieved employees of the benefits of mediation and emphasized how the 

mediation process is confidential, voluntary and allows disputes/issues to be handled swiftly to get 

matters resolved. Several employees sought mediation but the Responsible Management Official (RMO) 

declined the request. Zero EEO Meditations were conducted in FY2019. 

Mediation was offered eight times out of the 14 Anti-Harassment cases initiated in FY2019. Mediation 

was conducted twice and both matters were successfully resolved at the lowest level. The EEO Office 

provided an informative mediation brochure during the Equal Opportunity Newcomers Training, OnBoarding for New Employees, and during EEO Training for Supervisors. We also ensured the same 

brochure is in our EEO Counseling Packets as well as on our DTRA1 EEO website, readily available to 

the workforce. The mediation process is a vital part of the training curriculum that we offer. 
19 

Complaint Funding: During FY2019 there were 16 investigations conducted. There were two 

successful Anti-Harassment mediations and the EEO Office provided Court Reporting services for two 

cases. The following table below reflects the fiscal year expenditures.

COMPAINT PROCESSING EXPENDITURES

INVESTIGATIONS MEDIATIONS COURT REPORTING

$74,650.00 $3,880.00 $3,910.57

TOTAL EXPENSE $82,440.57

Essential Element F:

RESPONSIVENESS AND LEGAL COMPLIANCE 

EEO fully complied with all laws, including EEOC regulations, Orders, Decisions and Settlement 

Agreements. The EEO Director and Complaints Team regularly interacted with the Agency’s Office of 

General Counsel (OGC) on EEO Complaint matters and in particular legal sufficiency reviews. The 

Agency submitted all mandatory EEO annual reports in a timely manner. 

Date Submitted Report Title

March 2020 Alternative Dispute Resolution Report

October 29, 2019 Annual Federal Equal Employment Opportunity Statistical 

Report of Discrimination Complaints (462 Report)

November 4, 2019 Civil Rights Reports Age Discrimination Act Report and 

Executive Order 13160 Report

January 2020 NO FEAR Report

EEO ensured compliance with EEOC Administrative Judges and/or the Office of Federal Operations 

(OFO) Decisions. The Agency’s Settlement Agreement process ensured timely compliance with all 

terms and conditions to include an appropriate clause regarding breaches. In FY2019, $107,867.20 was 

attributed to Attorney fees. Settlement Agreements also increased significantly in FY2019 because 

more Hearings were conducted.

Settlement Claims FY2017 FY2018 FY2019 

Totals $52,583.35 $42,514.84 $353,867.20
20 

WORKFORCE DATA HIGHLIGHTS: DTRA’s workforce analysis provides information regarding 

the current composition and trends impacting the workforce. The U.S. Census Bureau 2010 Civilian 

Labor Force (CLF) census data was used as a benchmark.

At the end of FY2019, the total workforce (permanent and temporary) was comprised of 1,416 civilians 

spanning 14 locations worldwide. The total population increased from 1,365 to 1416 representing a 

positive net change of 51 (3.74%). The overall workforce consists of 930 (65.68%) Males and 486 

(34.32%) Females. The 2010 Civilian Labor Force (CLF), the percentage of Males is 51.86% and 

Females is 48.14%. 

DTRA Permanent Workforce Compared to CLF:

Race/Ethnicity Males

Total % CLF %Males

Females

Total % CLF% Females

Total

Hispanic 56 3.95 5.17 29 2.05 4.79 85

White 694 49.01 38.33 284 20.06 34.03 978

Black 122 8.62 5.49 132 9.32 6.53 254

Asian 44 3.11 1.97 32 2.26 1.93 76

Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific 

Islander 2 0.14 0.07 3 0.21 0.07 5 

American Indian/Native American 6 0.42 0.55 2 0.14 0.53 8

Two or More Races 6 0.42 0.26 3 .21 0.28 9

Total 930 65.49 51.84 486 34.51 48.16 1416

Male Hispanic, American Indian/Native American and Female Hispanic, White, American 

Indian/Native American and Two or More Races categories had a low participation rate when 

compared to the CLF. 

SUMMARY OF AGENCY ACCOMPLISHMENTS ARE AS FOLLOWS:

PART H Summary: Based on the Part G - Self-Assessment review, the Agency corrected the following 

deficiencies. 

Closed/Resolved Deficiencies

Element A: Demonstrated Commitment from Agency Leadership

A.2.b

Does the agency prominently post the following 

information throughout the workplace and on its 

public website: 

The EEO Office developed and launched its new 

EEO External Website with contact information for 

the EEO Director and a description of the 

following areas: Complaints, Anti-Harassment, 

Special Emphasis, Diversity, Disability and Federal 

Employee Viewpoint Survey. All of EEO Annual 

Reports, Policy Statements and the Affirmative

Action Plan was posted to the external website.

A.2.b.1

The business contact information for its EEO 

Counselors, EEO Officers, Special Emphasis Program 

Managers, and Director? [see 29 C.F.R § 

1614.102(b)(7)]

A.2.b.2

Written materials concerning the EEO program, laws, 

policy statements, and the operation of the EEO 

complaint process? [see 29 C.F.R § 1614.102(b)(5)]

Element B: Integration of EEO Into The Agency’s Strategic Mission

B.1.c

During this reporting period, did the EEO Director 

present to the head of the agency, and other senior 

management officials, the "State of the agency" 

briefing covering the six essential elements of the 

model EEO program and the status of the barrier 

analysis process? [see MD-715 Instructions, Sec. I)] If 

In FY2019, EEO presented the State of the Agency 

Brief to our Senior Leaders.
21 

“yes”, please provide the date of the briefing in the 

comments column. 

B.3.b

Does the agency’s current strategic plan reference EEO 

/ diversity and inclusion principles? [see MD-715, 

II(B)] If “yes”, please identify the EEO principles in 

the strategic plan in the comments column.

The EEO Office revised the Agency FY2018 -

2022 Strategic Plan to include the following EEO 

and Diversity Language - Value Empowered: 

Sustain Dignity and Respect by fostering an 

inclusive, engaged and capable workforce, trusted 

to take personal initiative, enabled and supported 

by leadership. 

Element C: Management and Program Accountability

C.2.a.5

Does the agency conduct a prompt inquiry (beginning 

within 10 days of notification) of all harassment 

allegations, including those initially raised in the EEO 

complaint process?

In FY2019, the Agency has conducted all 

harassment allegations promptly within the 10-day 

timeframe.

C.4.e.2 Does EO collaborate with HR to develop and/or 

conduct outreach and recruiting initiatives?

In FY2019, EEO and HR worked closely to 

develop and execute recruitment and outreach 

strategies and events. 

Element D: Proactive Prevention

D.4.a

Does the agency post its affirmative action plan on its 

public website? [see 29 CFR 1614.203(d)(4)] Please 

provide the internet address in the comments.

The EEO Office has ensured that the Affirmative 

Action Plan for IwDs was posted on the external 

website. The internet address is: 

https://www.dtra.mil/DTRA-Mission/ReferenceDocuments/DTRA-No-Fear-Act/. 

Element E: Efficiency

E.1.h

When the complainant does not request a hearing, does 

the agency timely issue the final agency decision, 

pursuant to 29 CFR §1614.110(b)?

In FY2019, EEO timely issued all Final Agency 

Decisions.

E.2.d

Does the agency ensure that its agency representative 

does not intrude upon EEO counseling, investigations, 

and final agency decisions? [see MD-110, Ch. 

1(IV)(D)]

EEO and the Office of General Counsel agreed to 

have a different attorney review Final Agency 

Decisions. 

E.4.a.4

External and internal applicant flow data concerning 

the applicants’ race, national origin, sex, and disability 

status? [see MD-715, II(E)]

In FY2019, EEO received direct access to the 

Applicant Flow Data from Office of Personnel 

Management’s USA Staffing Managers system 

to begin examining Race and Gender 

information and to identify barriers.

The following are the Agency current Deficiencies.

Current Deficiencies

# Element 

# Deficiencies

1 B.3.a

Are EEO program officials present during agency deliberations prior to decisions regarding 

recruitment strategies, vacancy projections, succession planning, selections for training/career 

development opportunities, and other workforce changes?

2 

C.2.e.6 Does the agency’s training material on its anti-harassment (AH) policy include examples of 

disability-based harassment?

E.4.a.6 Does the agency have an accurate data collection systems in place to evaluate the processing of 

complaints for anti-harassment program?

3 D.1c

Does the agency conduct exit interviews or survey that include questions on how the agency could 

improve the recruitment, hiring, inclusion, retention and advancement of individuals with 

disabilities? 

4 

D.2.a Does the agency have a process for analyze and identify barriers that may exclude EEO groups?

D.2.d Does the agency regularly review the following sources of information to find barriers: 

complaint/grievance data, exit surveys, employee climate surveys, focus groups, affinity groups, 
22 

union, program evaluations, anti-harassment program, special emphasis programs, reasonable 

accommodation program; anti-harassment program; and/or external special interest groups?

5 E.4.a.3 Does the agency have systems in place to accurately collect, monitor, and analyze Recruitment 

activities to evaluate EEO efforts? 

6 

E.5.a Does the agency monitor trends in its EEO program to determine whether the agency is meeting its 

obligations under the statutes EEOC enforces.

E.5.b Does the agency review other agencies’ best practices and adopt them, where appropriate, to 

improve the effectiveness of its EEO program?

E.5.c Does the agency compare its performance in the EEO process to other federal agencies of similar 

size?

PART I Summary: The Agency has the following workforce deficiencies according to the Civilian 

Labor Force data; Women, Hispanics and Individuals with Disabilities have low participation rates.

This year the EEO Office achieved the following: 

• Initiated a Women Pay Equity Study to identify gender pay gaps

• Conducted Culture Conversation in ABQ with the Hispanic Working Group

• The Disability Program Coordinator created a Disability Strategic Action Plan

In FY2020, EEO will finalize the ERG charter and establish its Agency-wide Employee Resource 

Groups (ERGs) to assist in engaging employees and carrying out the Agency’s strategic goals and 

priorities. The ERGs will: 

• Improve the corporate culture

• Assist with Special Emphasis events and support D&I goals

• Contribute to the success of the Agency through diverse ideas

• Aid in the Agency recruitment efforts of diversify applicant pool

• Create a climate to enhance employee engagement and retention

• Foster employee connectivity and professional development through support of Mentoring,

networking and workshops

EEO will continue to engage SESs to serve as ERG champions for the following groups: Hispanics, 

Women, African American, Native American, Asian, American/Pacific Islander, Individuals with 

Disabilities and Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Questioning, Intersex and Advocate. 

PART J Summary: The overall IWDs percentage was 11.37% (161), which is below the 12% 

benchmark. In FY2019, 50 individuals retired and 11 were IWDs (.22%) and 158 separated and 21 were 

IWDs (13.29%). 

The overall IWTDs percentage was 1.55% (22), which is below the 2% benchmark. In FY2018 the 

PWTDs percentage was 1.25% (17) and it increased in FY2019 to 1.55% (22).

During FY2019 the Agency and the EEO Office was able to accomplish the following:

• Five PWTDs were hired in FY2019 as well; two Workforce Recruitment Program students were

converted to full time employees using the Schedule A Hiring Authority in FY2019.

• The Agency hosted the Disability Awareness Employment Month Observance with the theme,

“The Right Talent, Right Now.” There were a series of weekly events during the month of

October.
23 

• Conducted a Disability Etiquette Training course for Supervisors and Managers to educate the

workforce on the proper ways to interact with IWDs and IWTDs.

• Acquired three Ubi Duos for employees who are hearing impaired to ensure they are able to

communicate with their co-workers and customers.

• Created a Schedule A “Fact Sheet for Supervisors, Hiring Managers, and Employees”.

The Disability Strategic Plan was developed in FY2019 and will be implemented in FY2020. In 

collaboration with HR, EEO is making concerted efforts to increase the number and percentages of 

employees hired with severe/targeted disabilities and ensure reasonable accommodations are provided.

CONCLUSION: 

The Agency continues to strive toward achieving a Model EEO Program and has made 

significant contributions to include the following: 

• Enhanced collaboration between EEO and the HR Directorate on recruitment and outreach

strategies. As a result, we were able to close the outreach and recruiting deficiency.

• Engaged the DTRA workforce through administering Climate Assessment for each Directorate,

focusing on Senior Leadership, First Line Supervisor, Mission, Communication and Teamwork,

Accountability, Promotion and Career Development, Recognition and Awards, and Morale. The

results aided in providing the Directorate’s with recommendations of how to improve their climate

and organizational effectiveness.

• The DTRA Value “Empowered” in the Agency FY 2018-2022 Strategic Plan was revised to reflect

the following EEO language: Sustain Dignity and Respect by fostering an inclusive, engaged and

capable workforce, trusted to take personal initiative, enabled and supported by leadership.

• Conducted a Women’s Pay Study to determine triggers and corrective actions regarding Women in

the DTRA workforce. The study revealed that 96% of DTRA personnel were between the GS-11 to

GS-15 grade levels and on average, Women’s annual salary was commensurate with Men’s. 

In FY2020, EEO will embark on establishing its Diversity and Inclusion (D&I) program to build a

strategic framework to foster a workforce that sustains employee engagement and inclusiveness. We 

will develop our D&I Strategic Plan which will include actions designed integrate D&I into the 

Agency’s mission and enhance recruitment and outreach initiatives. 

DTRA Leadership is committed to working together to ensure the workforce is empowered, and 

equipped, to reach our full potential. The values and goals attained through our continuous efforts will 

create a diverse and innovative workforce which is paramount to accomplishing the DTRA mission and 

our future success. 
24
1, Willisa M. Donald, am the Director, Equal Opportunity and Diversity Programs Office

Principal EEO Director/Official For Defense Threat Reduction Agency

The Agency has conducted an annual self-assessment of Section 717 and Section 501 programs against the

essential elements as prescribed by EEO MD-715. lfan essential element was not fully compliant with the standards of

EEO MD-715, a further evaluation was conducted and, as appropriate, EEO Plans for Attaining the EssentialElements of a Model EEO Program, are included with this Federal Agency Annual EEO Program StatusReport.

The Agency has also analyzed its workforce profiles and conducted barrier analyses aimed at detecting

whether any management or personnel policy, procedure or practice is operating to disadvantage any groupbased on race, national origin, gender or disability. EEO Plans to Eliminate Identified Barriers, as appropriate,are included with this Federal Agency Annual EEO Program Status Report.

I certify that proper documentation of this assessment is in place and is being maintained for EEOC reviewupon request.

. DONALD.WILLISA.MARIE.1 240241125 Dgft&lygnedbyDONAW.RhJ5A.MARIE.124O241125 August 3, 2020

Director, Equal Oppopvnity and Diversity Programs Office Date

/PsA,/

Director, fe hreat Reduc%’Agency Date

25
26
27

MD-715 - PART G

Agency Self-Assessment Checklist

Essential Element A: DEMONSTRATED COMMITMENT FROM AGENCY LEADERSHIP

This element requires the agency head to communicate a commitment to equal employment opportunity 

and a discrimination-free workplace.

Compliance 

Indicator 

Measures

A.1 – The agency issues an effective, up-to-date EEO policy 

statement.

Measure 

Met?

YES

During EEO

Newcomer’s monthly 

training and EEO for 

Supervisors quarterly 

training

A.1.a

Does the agency annually issue a signed and dated EEO policy 

statement on agency letterhead that clearly communicates the 

agency’s commitment to EEO for all employees and applicants? If 

“yes”, please provide the annual issuance date in the comments 

column. [see MD-715, II(A)]

YES

A.1.b

New

Does the EEO policy statement address all protected bases (age, 

color, disability, sex (including pregnancy, sexual orientation and 

gender identity), genetic information, national origin, race, religion, 

and reprisal) contained in the laws EEOC enforces? [see 29 CFR § 

1614.101(a)] 

YES

Compliance 

Indicator 

Measures

A.2 – The agency has communicated EEO policies and 

procedures to all employees.

Measure 

Met?

YES

During EEO Training; 

All EEO policies and 

procedures are on the 

DTRA1 portal

A.2.a Does the agency disseminate the following policies and 

procedures to all employees:

A.2.a.1

New Anti-harassment policy? [see MD 715, II(A)] YES

A.2.a.2

New

Reasonable accommodation procedures? [see 29 C.F.R § 

1614.203(d)(3)] YES

A.2.b Does the agency prominently post the following information 

throughout the workplace and on its public website: 

A.2.b.1

New

The business contact information for its EEO Counselors, EEO 

Officers, Special Emphasis Program Managers, and EEO Director? 

[see 29 C.F.R § 1614.102(b)(7)]

YES

A.2.b.2

Written materials concerning the EEO program, laws, policy 

statements, and the operation of the EEO complaint process? [see 29 

C.F.R § 1614.102(b)(5)]

YES

A.2.b.3

Reasonable accommodation procedures? [see 29 C.F.R. § 

1614.203(d)(3)(i)] If so, please provide the internet address in the 

comments column.

YES

http://www.dtra.mil/Car

eers/Onboarding/Sponso

r-Program/ReasonableAccomodation/

A.2.c Does the agency inform its employees about the following topics: 

A.2.c.1 EEO complaint process? [see 29 CFR §§ 1614.102(a)(12) and 

1614.102(b)(5)] If “yes”, please provide how often. YES

A.2.c.2

New

ADR process? [see MD-110, Ch. 3(II)(C)] If “yes”, please provide 

how often. YES During the informal and formal process.

A.2.c.3 Reasonable accommodation program? [see 29 CFR § 

1614.203(d)(7)(ii)(C)] If “yes”, please provide how often. YES Posted on internal DTRA1 portal
28

A.2.c.4

New

Anti-harassment program? [see EEOC Enforcement Guidance on 

Vicarious Employer Liability for Unlawful Harassment by 

Supervisors (1999), § V.C.1] If “yes”, please provide how often.

YES During monthly EEO 

Training

A.2.c.5

Behaviors that are inappropriate in the workplace and could result in 

disciplinary action? [5 CFR § 2635.101(b)] If “yes”, please provide 

how often.

YES Addressed in Agencywide Ethics Training

Compliance 

Indicator 

Measures

A.3 – The agency assesses and ensures EEO principles are part 

of its culture.

Measure 

Met?

YES

Assessments are done 

via Federal Viewpoint 

Survey (FEVS) and 

Climate Assessments

A.3.a

New

Does the agency provide recognition to employees, supervisors, 

managers, and units demonstrating superior accomplishment in 

equal employment opportunity? [see 29 CFR § 1614.102(a) (9)] If 

“yes”, provide one or two examples in the comments section.

NO

EEO will work with HR 

to create an EEO annual 

recognition program

A.3.b

New

Does the agency utilize the Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey or 

other climate assessment tools to monitor the perception of EEO 

principles within the workforce? [see 5 CFR Part 250]

YES

Essential Element B: INTEGRATION OF EEO INTO THE AGENCY’S STRATEGIC MISSION

This element requires that the agency’s EEO programs are structured to maintain a workplace that is free from 

discrimination and support the agency’s strategic mission.

Compliance 

Indicator 

Measures

B.1 - The reporting structure for the EEO program provides the 

principal EEO official with appropriate authority and resources 

to effectively carry out a successful EEO program.

Measure 

Met?

YES

EEO Director reports 

directly to the Agency 

Head

B.1.a

Is the agency head the immediate supervisor of the person (“EEO 

Director”) who has day-to-day control over the EEO office? [see 29 

CFR §1614.102(b)(4)]

YES

B.1.a.1

New

If the EEO Director does not report to the agency head, does the 

EEO Director report to the same agency head designee as the 

mission-related programmatic offices? If “yes,” please provide the 

title of the agency head designee in the comments.

YES

B.1.a.2 Does the agency’s organizational chart clearly define the reporting 

structure for the EEO office? [see 29 CFR §1614.102(b)(4)] YES

B.1.b

Does the EEO Director have a regular and effective means of 

advising the agency head and other senior management officials of 

the effectiveness, efficiency and legal compliance of the agency’s 

EEO program? [see 29 CFR §1614.102(c)(1); MD-715 Instructions, 

Sec. I] 

YES

B.1.c

During this reporting period, did the EEO Director present to the 

head of the agency, and other senior management officials, the 

"State of the agency" briefing covering the six essential elements of 

the model EEO program and the status of the barrier analysis 

process? [see MD-715 Instructions, Sec. I)] If “yes”, please provide 

the date of the briefing in the comments column. 

YES

B.1.d

New

Does the EEO Director regularly participate in senior-level staff 

meetings concerning personnel, budget, technology, and other 

workforce issues? [see MD-715, II(B)]

YES
29

Compliance 

Indicator

Measures

B.2 – The EEO Director controls all aspects of the EEO 

program.

Measure 

Met?

YES

Complaints, Alternate 

Dispute Resolution, 

Affirmative 

Employment, Diversity 

and Anti-Harassment

B.2.a

Is the EEO Director responsible for the implementation of a 

continuing affirmative employment program to promote EEO and to 

identify and eliminate discriminatory policies, procedures, and 

practices? [see MD-110, Ch. 1(III)(A); 29 CFR §1614.102(c)] 

YES

B.2.b

New

Is the EEO Director responsible for overseeing the completion of 

EEO counseling [see 29 CFR §1614.102(c)(4)] YES

B.2.c

New

Is the EEO Director responsible for overseeing the fair and thorough 

investigation of EEO complaints? [see 29 CFR §1614.102(c)(5)] 

[This question may not be applicable for certain subordinate level 

components.]

YES

B.2.d

New

Is the EEO Director responsible for overseeing the timely issuance 

of final agency decisions? [see 29 CFR §1614.102(c)(5)] [This 

question may not be applicable for certain subordinate level 

components.]

YES

B.2.e Is the EEO Director responsible for ensuring compliance with EEOC 

orders? [see 29 CFR §§ 1614.102(e); 1614.502] YES

B.2.f

New

Is the EEO Director responsible for periodically evaluating the entire 

EEO program and providing recommendations for improvement to 

the agency head? [see 29 CFR §1614.102(c)(2)]

YES

B.2.g

New

If the agency has subordinate level components, does the EEO 

Director provide effective guidance and coordination for the 

components? [see 29 CFR §§ 1614.102(c)(2) and (c)(3)]

YES

Compliance 

Indicator

Measures

B.3 - The EEO Director and other EEO professional staff are 

involved in, and consulted on, management/personnel actions.

Measure 

Met? Part H initiated 

B.3.a

Do EEO program officials participate in agency meetings regarding 

workforce changes that might impact EEO issues, including strategic 

planning, recruitment strategies, vacancy projections, succession 

planning, and selections for training/career development 

opportunities? [see MD-715, II(B)]

NO Part H

B.3.b

New

Does the agency’s current strategic plan reference EEO / diversity 

and inclusion principles? [see MD-715, II(B)] If “yes”, please 

identify the EEO principles in the strategic plan in the comments 

column.

YES

Compliance 

Indicator

Measures

B.4 - The agency has sufficient budget and staffing to support 

the success of its EEO program.

Measure 

Met?

YES

B.4.a

Pursuant to 29 CFR §1614.102(a)(1), has the agency allocated 

sufficient funding and qualified staffing to successfully 

implement the EEO program, for the following areas: 

B.4.a.1 to conduct a self-assessment of the agency for possible program 

deficiencies? [see MD-715, II(D)] YES
30

B.4.a.2 to enable the agency to conduct a thorough barrier analysis of its 

workforce? [see MD-715, II(B)] YES

B.4.a.3

to timely, thoroughly, and fairly process EEO complaints, including 

EEO counseling, investigations, final agency decisions, and legal 

sufficiency reviews? [see 29 CFR § 1614.102(c)(5) & 1614.105(b) – (f); MD-110, Ch. 1(IV)(D) & 5(IV); MD-715, II(E)]

YES

B.4.a.4

to provide all supervisors and employees with training on the EEO 

program, including but not limited to retaliation, harassment, 

religious accommodations, disability accommodations, the EEO 

complaint process, and ADR? [see MD-715, II(B) and III(C)] If not, 

please identify the type(s) of training with insufficient funding in the comments column. 

YES

B.4.a.5

to conduct thorough, accurate, and effective field audits of the EEO 

programs in components and the field offices, if applicable? [see 29 

CFR §1614.102(c)(2)]

YES

B.4.a.6

to publish and distribute EEO materials (e.g. harassment policies, 

EEO posters, reasonable accommodations procedures)? [see MD-

715, II(B)]

YES

B.4.a.7

New

to maintain accurate data collection and tracking systems for the 

following types of data: complaint tracking, workforce 

demographics, and applicant flow data? [see MD-715, II(E)]. If not, 

please identify the systems with insufficient funding in the 

comments section.

YES

B.4.a.8

to effectively administer its special emphasis programs (such as, 

Federal Women’s Program, Hispanic Employment Program, and 

People with Disabilities Program Manager)? [5 USC § 7201; 38 

USC § 4214; 5 CFR § 720.204; 5 CFR § 213.3102(t) and (u); 5 CFR 

§ 315.709]

YES

B.4.a.9

New

to effectively manage its anti-harassment program? [see MD-715 

Instructions, Sec. I); EEOC Enforcement Guidance on Vicarious 

Employer Liability for Unlawful Harassment by Supervisors (1999), 

§ V.C.1]

YES

B.4.a.10 to effectively manage its reasonable accommodation program? [see 

29 CFR § 1614.203(d)(4)(ii)] YES

B.4.a.11

New

to ensure timely and complete compliance with EEOC orders? [see 

MD-715, II(E)] YES

B.4.b

New

Does the EEO office have a budget that is separate from other 

offices within the agency? [see 29 CFR § 1614.102(a)(1)] YES

B.4.c Are the duties and responsibilities of EEO officials clearly defined? 

[see MD-110, Ch. 1(III)(A), 2(III), & 6(III)] YES

B.4.d

Does the agency ensure that all new counselors and investigators, 

including contractors and collateral duty employees, receive the 

required 32 hours of training, pursuant to Ch. 2(II)(A) of MD-110?

YES

B.4.e

Does the agency ensure that all experienced counselors and 

investigators, including contractors and collateral duty employees, 

receive the required 8 hours of annual refresher training, pursuant to 

Ch. 2(II)(C) of MD-110?

YES

Compliance 

Indicator 

Measures

B.5 – The agency recruits, hires, develops, and retains 

supervisors and managers who have effective managerial, 

communications, and interpersonal skills.

Measure 

Met?

YES
31

B.5.a

Pursuant to 29 CFR § 1614.102(a)(5), have all managers and 

supervisors received training on their responsibilities under the 

following areas under the agency EEO program:

NO

Not all supervisors were 

trained but training was 

provided

B.5.a.1

New EEO Complaint Process? [see MD-715(II)(B)] YES

B.5.a.2 Reasonable Accommodation Procedures? [see 29 C.F.R. § 

1614.102(d)(3)] YES

B.5.a.3

New Anti-Harassment Policy? [see MD-715(II)(B)] YES

B.5.a.4

New

Supervisory, managerial, communication, and interpersonal skills in 

order to supervise most effectively in a workplace with diverse 

employees and avoid disputes arising from ineffective 

communications? [see MD-715, II(B)]

YES

B.5.a.5

ADR, with emphasis on the federal government’s interest in 

encouraging mutual resolution of disputes and the benefits 

associated with utilizing ADR? [see MD-715(II)(E)]

YES

Compliance 

Indicator 

Measures

B.6 – The agency involves managers in the implementation of its 

EEO program.

Measure 

Met?

YES

B.6.a

New

Are senior managers involved in the implementation of Special 

Emphasis Programs? [see MD-715 Instructions, Sec. I] YES

B.6.b Do senior managers participate in the barrier analysis process? [see 

MD-715 Instructions, Sec. I] YES

B.6.c

When barriers are identified, do senior managers assist in 

developing agency EEO action plans (Part I, Part J, or the Executive 

Summary)? [see MD-715 Instructions, Sec. I]

YES

B.6.d

Do senior managers successfully implement EEO Action Plans and 

incorporate the EEO Action Plan Objectives into agency strategic 

plans? [29 CFR § 1614.102(a)(5)]

YES

Essential Element C: MANAGEMENT AND PROGRAM ACCOUNTABILITY

This element requires the agency head to hold all managers, supervisors, and EEO officials responsible for 

the effective implementation of the agency’s EEO Program and Plan.

Compliance 

Indicator 

Measures

C.1 – The agency conducts regular internal audits of its 

component and field offices.

Measure 

Met?

YES

C.1.a

New

Does the agency regularly assess its component and field offices for 

possible EEO program deficiencies? [see 29 CFR §1614.102(c)(2)]

If ”yes”, please provide the schedule for conducting audits in the 

comments section.

YES

ABQ - 02/19; 

Travis - 09/19;

Germany - 01/19

C.1.b

New

Does the agency regularly assess its component and field offices on 

their efforts to remove barriers from the workplace? [see 29 CFR 

§1614.102(c)(2)] If ”yes”, please provide the schedule for 

conducting audits in the comments section.

YES

New EEO specialist in 

ABQ will conduct 

analysis
32

C.1.c

New

Do the component and field offices make reasonable efforts to 

comply with the recommendations of the field audit? [see MD-715, 

II(C)] 

YES

Compliance 

Indicator 

Measures

C.2 – The agency has established procedures to prevent all 

forms of EEO discrimination.

Measure 

Met?

YES

C.2.a

New

Has the agency established comprehensive anti-harassment policy 

and procedures that comply with EEOC’s enforcement guidance?

[see MD-715, II(C); Enforcement Guidance on Vicarious Employer 

Liability for Unlawful Harassment by Supervisors (Enforcement 

Guidance), EEOC No. 915.002, § V.C.1 (June 18, 1999)]

NO

The Instruction is being 

revised and a toolkit for 

Supervisors was 

developed 

C.2.a.1

New

Does the anti-harassment policy require corrective action to prevent 

or eliminate conduct before it rises to the level of unlawful 

harassment? [see EEOC Enforcement Guidance on Vicarious 

Employer Liability for Unlawful Harassment by Supervisors (1999), 

§ V.C.1]

YES

C.2.a.2

New

Has the agency established a firewall between the Anti-Harassment 

Coordinator and the EEO Director? [see EEOC Report, Model EEO 

Program Must Have an Effective Anti-Harassment Program (2006]

YES

C.2.a.3

New

Does the agency have a separate procedure (outside the EEO 

complaint process) to address harassment allegations? [see 

Enforcement Guidance on Vicarious Employer Liability for 

Unlawful Harassment by Supervisors (Enforcement Guidance), 

EEOC No. 915.002, § V.C.1 (June 18, 1999)]

YES

C.2.a.4

New

Does the agency ensure that the EEO office informs the antiharassment program of all EEO counseling activity alleging 

harassment? [see Enforcement Guidance, V.C.]

YES

C.2.a.5

New

Does the agency conduct a prompt inquiry (beginning within 10 

days of notification) of all harassment allegations, including those 

initially raised in the EEO complaint process? [see Complainant v. 

Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal No. 0120123232 (May 21, 

2015); Complainant v. Dep’t of Defense (Defense Commissary 

Agency), EEOC Appeal No. 0120130331 (May 29, 2015)] If “no”, 

please provide the percentage of timely-processed inquiries in the 

comments column.

NO PART H

C.2.a.6

New

Do the agency’s training materials on its anti-harassment policy 

include examples of disability-based harassment? [see 29 CFR 

1614.203(d)(2)]

NO PART H

C.2.b

New

Has the agency established disability reasonable accommodation 

procedures that comply with EEOC’s regulations and guidance? [see 

29 CFR 1614.203(d)(3)]

YES

C.2.b.1

Is there a designated agency official or other mechanism in place to 

coordinate or assist with processing requests for disability 

accommodations throughout the agency? [see 29 CFR 

1614.203(d)(3)(D)]

YES

C.2.b.2

New

Has the agency established a firewall between the Reasonable 

Accommodation Program Manager and the EEO Director? [see MD110, Ch. 1(IV)(A)]

YES
33

C.2.b.3

New

Does the agency ensure that job applicants can request and receive 

reasonable accommodations during the application and placement 

processes? [see 29 CFR 1614.203(d)(1)(ii)(B)]

YES

C.2.b.4

New

Do the reasonable accommodation procedures clearly state that the 

agency should process the request within a maximum amount of 

time (e.g., 20 business days), as established by the agency in its 

affirmative action plan? [see 29 CFR 1614.203(d)(3)(i)(M)]

YES

C.2.b.5

Does the agency process all accommodation requests within the time 

frame set forth in its reasonable accommodation procedures? [see 

MD-715, II(C)] If “no”, please provide the percentage of timelyprocessed requests in the comments column.

YES

C.2.c

New

Has the agency established procedures for processing requests for 

personal assistance services that comply with EEOC’s regulations, 

enforcement guidance, and other applicable executive orders, 

guidance, and standards? [see 29 CFR 1614.203(d)(6)]

YES

C.2.c.1

New

Does the agency post its procedures for processing requests for 

Personal Assistance Services on its public website? [see 29 CFR § 

1614.203(d)(5)(v)] If “yes”, please provide the internet address in 

the comments column.

YES

http://www.dtra.mil/Car

eers/Onboarding/Sponso

r-Program/ReasonableAccommodation/

Compliance 

Indicator 

Measures

C.3 - The agency evaluates managers and supervisors on their 

efforts to ensure equal employment opportunity.

Measure 

Met?

YES

C.3.a

New

Pursuant to 29 CFR §1614.102(a)(5), do all managers and 

supervisors have an element in their performance appraisal that 

evaluates their commitment to agency EEO policies and principles 

and their participation in the EEO program?

YEYES

C.3.b

Does the agency require rating officials to evaluate the 

performance of managers and supervisors based on the 

following activities:

C.3.b.1 Resolve EEO problems/disagreements/conflicts, including the 

participation in ADR proceedings? [see MD-110, Ch. 3.I] YES

C.3.b.2

Ensure full cooperation of employees under his/her supervision with 

EEO officials, such as counselors and investigators? [see 29 CFR 

§1614.102(b)(6)]

YES

C.3.b.3 Ensure a workplace that is free from all forms of discrimination, 

including harassment and retaliation? [see MD-715, II(C)] YES

C.3.b.4

Ensure that subordinate supervisors have effective managerial, 

communication, and interpersonal skills to supervise in a workplace 

with diverse employees? [see MD-715 Instructions, Sec. I]

YES

C.3.b.5 Provide religious accommodations when such accommodations do 

not cause an undue hardship? [see 29 CFR §1614.102(a)(7)] YES

C.3.b.6 Provide disability accommodations when such accommodations do 

not cause an undue hardship? [ see 29 CFR §1614.102(a)(8)] YES

C.3.b.7

New

Support the EEO program in identifying and removing barriers to 

equal opportunity. [see MD-715, II(C)] YES

C.3.b.8 Support the anti-harassment program in investigating and correcting 

harassing conduct. [see Enforcement Guidance, V.C.2] YES

C.3.b.9

New

Comply with settlement agreements and orders issued by the 

agency, EEOC, and EEO-related cases from the Merit Systems YES
34

Protection Board, labor arbitrators, and the Federal Labor Relations 

Authority? [see MD-715, II(C)]

C.3.c

New

Does the EEO Director recommend to the agency head 

improvements or corrections, including remedial or disciplinary 

actions, for managers and supervisors who have failed in their EEO 

responsibilities? [see 29 CFR §1614.102(c)(2)]

YES

C.3.d

New

When the EEO Director recommends remedial or disciplinary 

actions, are the recommendations regularly implemented by the 

agency? [see 29 CFR §1614.102(c)(2)]

YES

Compliance 

Indicator 

Measures

C.4 – The agency ensures effective coordination between its 

EEO programs and Human Resources (HR) program.

Measure 

Met?

NO

PART H was established 

to address effectiveness

C.4.a

New

Do the HR Director and the EEO Director meet regularly to assess 

whether personnel programs, policies, and procedures conform to 

EEOC laws, instructions, and management directives? [see 29 CFR 

§1614.102(a)(2)]

YES

C.4.b

Has the agency established timetables/schedules to review at regular 

intervals its merit promotion program, employee recognition awards 

program, employee development/training programs, and 

management/personnel policies, procedures, and practices for 

systemic barriers that may be impeding full participation in the 

program by all EEO groups? [see MD-715 Instructions, Sec. I]

YES

C.4.c

New

Does the EEO office have timely access to accurate and complete 

data (e.g., demographic data for workforce, applicants, training 

programs, etc.) required to prepare the MD-715 workforce data 

tables? [see 29 CFR §1614.601(a)]

YES

C.4.d

New

Does the HR office timely provide the EEO office with access to 

other data (e.g., exit interview data, climate assessment surveys, and 

grievance data), upon request? [see MD-715, II(C)]

YES

C.4.e

New

Pursuant to Section II(C) of MD-715, does the EEO office 

collaborate with the HR office to:

C.4.e.1

New

Implement the Affirmative Action Plan for Individuals with 

Disabilities? [see 29 CFR §1614.203(d); MD-715, II(C)] YES

C.4.e.2

New

Develop and/or conduct outreach and recruiting initiatives? [see 

MD-715, II(C)] NO PART H

C.4.e.3

New

Develop and/or provide training for managers and employees? [see 

MD-715, II(C)] YES

C.4.e.4

New

Identify and remove barriers to equal opportunity in the workplace? 

[see MD-715, II(C)] YES

C.4.e.5

New

Assist in preparing the MD-715 report? [see MD-715, II(C)] YES

Compliance 

Indicator 

Measures

C.5 – Following a finding of discrimination, the agency explores 

whether it should take a disciplinary action.

Measure 

Met?

YES
35

C.5.a

Does the agency have a disciplinary policy and/or table of penalties 

that covers discriminatory conduct? [see 29 CFR § 1614.102(a)(6); 

see also Douglas v. Veterans Administration, 5 MSPR 280 (1981)]

YES

C.5.b

When appropriate, does the agency discipline or sanction managers 

and employees for discriminatory conduct? [see 29 CFR 

§1614.102(a)(6)] If “yes”, please state the number of 

disciplined/sanctioned individuals during this reporting period in the 

comments.

YES

C.5.c

New

If the agency has a finding of discrimination (or settles cases in 

which a finding was likely), does the agency inform managers and 

supervisors about the discriminatory conduct? [see MD+-715, II(C)]

YES

Compliance 

Indicator 

Measures

C.6 – The EEO office advises managers/supervisors on EEO 

matters.

Measure 

Met?

YES

C.6.a

Does the EEO office provide management/supervisory officials with 

regular EEO updates on at least an annual basis, including EEO 

complaints, workforce demographics and data summaries, legal 

updates, barrier analysis plans, and special emphasis updates? [see 

MD-715 Instructions, Sec. I] If “yes”, please identify the frequency 

of the EEO updates in the comments column.

YES

During the Director’s 

biweekly Staff Meetings

C.6.b

New

Are EEO officials readily available to answer managers’ and 

supervisors’ questions or concerns? [see MD-715 Instructions, Sec. 

I]

YES

Essential Element D: PROACTIVE PREVENTION

This element requires that the agency head make early efforts to prevent discrimination and to identify 

and eliminate barriers to equal employment opportunity.

Compliance 

Indicator 

Measures

D.1 – The agency conducts a reasonable assessment to monitor 

progress towards achieving equal employment opportunity 

throughout the year.

Measure 

Met?

YES

The EEO office 

conducts an offsite to 

plan every year

D.1.a

New

Does the agency have a process for identifying triggers in the 

workplace? [see MD-715 Instructions, Sec. I] YES

D.1.b

New

Does the agency regularly use the following sources of 

information for trigger identification: workforce data; 

complaint/grievance data; exit surveys; employee climate 

surveys; focus groups; affinity groups; union; program 

evaluations; special emphasis programs; reasonable 

accommodation program; anti-harassment program; and/or 

external special interest groups? [see MD-715 Instructions, 

Sec. I]

NO

EEO prepares an end 

of the year report to 

review trend analysis 

and action plans are 

prepared to establish 

an EEO annual work 

plan. This information 

will be assessed to 

eliminate triggers and 

counter climate 

concerns.

D.1.c

New

Does the agency conduct exit interviews or surveys that 

include questions on how the agency could improve the 

recruitment, hiring, inclusion, retention and advancement of 

NO PART H
36

individuals with disabilities? [see 29 CFR 

1614.203(d)(1)(iii)(C)]

Compliance 

Indicator 

Measures

D.2 – The agency identifies areas where barriers may exclude 

EEO groups (reasonable basis to act.)

Measure 

Met?

NO

EEO is working on 

establishing ERGs.

D.2.a

New

Does the agency have a process for analyzing the identified triggers 

to find possible barriers? [see MD-715, (II)(B)] NO PART H

D.2.b

Does the agency regularly examine the impact of 

management/personnel policies, procedures, and practices by race, 

national origin, sex, and disability? [see 29 CFR §1614.102(a)(3)]

YES

D.2.c

Does the agency consider whether any group of employees or 

applicants might be negatively impacted prior to making human 

resource decisions, such as re-organizations and realignments? [see 

29 CFR §1614.102(a)(3)]

YES EEO coordinates on all

reorganizations.

D.2.d

New

Does the agency regularly review the following sources of 

information to find barriers: complaint/grievance data, exit surveys, 

employee climate surveys, focus groups, affinity groups, union, 

program evaluations, anti-harassment program, special emphasis 

programs, reasonable accommodation program; anti-harassment 

program; and/or external special interest groups? [see MD-715 

Instructions, Sec. I] If “yes”, please identify the data sources in the 

comments column.

NO PART H

Compliance 

Indicator 

Measures

D.3 – The agency establishes appropriate action plans to remove 

identified barriers.

Measure 

Met?

YES

Action plans and 

working groups were 

established

D.3.a.

New

Does the agency effectively tailor action plans to address the 

identified barriers, in particular policies, procedures, or practices?

[see 29 CFR §1614.102(a)(3)]

YES

D.3.b

New

If the agency identified one or more barriers during the reporting 

period, did the agency implement a plan in Part I, including meeting 

the target dates for the planned activities? [see MD-715, II(D)] 

YES

D.3.c

New

Does the agency periodically review the effectiveness of the plans? 

[see MD-715, II(D)] YES

Compliance 

Indicator 

Measures

D.4 – The agency has an affirmative action plan for people with 

disabilities, including those with targeted disabilities.

Measure 

Met?

YES

D.4.a

New

Does the agency post its affirmative action plan on its public 

website? [see 29 CFR 1614.203(d)(4)] Please provide the internet 

address in the comments.

YES The action plan was

published in FY2019

D.4.b

New

Does the agency take specific steps to ensure qualified people with 

disabilities are aware of and encouraged to apply for job vacancies? 

[see 29 CFR 1614.203(d)(1)(i)]

YES

D.4.c

New

Does the agency ensure that disability-related questions from 

members of the public are answered promptly and correctly? [see 29 

CFR 1614.203(d)(1)(ii)(A)]

YES
37

D.4.d

New

Has the agency taken specific steps that are reasonably designed to 

increase the number of persons with disabilities or targeted 

disabilities employed at the agency until it meets the goals? [see 29 

CFR 1614.203(d)(7)(ii)]

YES

Essential Element E: EFFICIENCY

This element requires the agency head to ensure that there are effective systems for evaluating the impact and 

effectiveness of the agency’s EEO programs and an efficient and fair dispute resolution process.

Compliance 

Indicator 

Measures

E.1 - The agency maintains an efficient, fair, and impartial 

complaint resolution process.

Measure 

Met?

YES

E.1.a Does the agency timely provide EEO counseling, pursuant to 29 

CFR §1614.105? YES

E.1.b

Does the agency provide written notification of rights and 

responsibilities in the EEO process during the initial counseling 

session, pursuant to 29 CFR §1614.105(b)(1)?

YES

E.1.c

New

Does the agency issue acknowledgment letters immediately upon 

receipt of a formal complaint, pursuant to MD-110, Ch. 5(I)? YES

E.1.d

New

Does the agency issue acceptance letters/dismissal decisions within 

a reasonable time (e.g., 60 days) after receipt of the written EEO 

Counselor report, pursuant to MD-110, Ch. 5(I)? If so, please 

provide the average processing time in the comments.

YES 45 days of less

E.1.e

New

Does the agency ensure all employees fully cooperate with EEO 

counselors and EEO personnel in the EEO process, including 

granting routine access to personnel records related to an 

investigation, pursuant to 29 CFR §1614.102(b)(6)? 

YES

E.1.f Does the agency timely complete investigations, pursuant to 29 CFR 

§1614.108? YES

E.1.g

New

If the agency does not timely complete investigations, does the 

agency notify complainants of the date by which the investigation 

will be completed and of their right to request a hearing or file a 

lawsuit, pursuant to 29 CFR §1614.108(g)?

YES

E.1.h

When the complainant does not request a hearing, does the agency 

timely issue the final agency decision, pursuant to 29 CFR 

§1614.110(b)?

YES

E.1.i

Does the agency timely issue final actions following receipt of the 

hearing file and the administrative judge’s decision, pursuant to 29 

CFR §1614.110(a)?

YES

E.1.j

If the agency uses contractors to implement any stage of the EEO 

complaint process, does the agency hold them accountable for poor 

work product and/or delays? [See MD-110, Ch. 5(V)(A)] If “yes”, 

please describe how in the comments column.

N/A

E.1.k

New

If the agency uses employees to implement any stage of the EEO 

complaint process, does the agency hold them accountable for poor 

work product and/or delays during performance review? [See MD110, Ch. 5(V)(A)]

YES

E.1.l

New

Does the agency submit complaint files and other documents in the 

proper format to EEOC through the Federal Sector EEO Portal 

(FedSEP)? [See 29 CFR § 1614.403(g)]

YES
38

Compliance 

Indicator 

Measures

E.2 – The agency has a neutral EEO process.

Measure 

Met?

YES

E.2.a

New

Has the agency established a clear separation between its EEO 

complaint program and its defensive function? [see MD-110, Ch. 

1(IV)(D)] 

YES

E.2.b

When seeking legal sufficiency reviews, does the EEO office have 

access to sufficient legal resources separate from the agency 

representative? [see MD-110, Ch. 1(IV)(D)] If “yes”, please 

identify the source/location of the attorney who conducts the legal 

sufficiency review in the comments column. 

YES

E.2.c

New

If the EEO office relies on the agency’s defensive function to 

conduct the legal sufficiency review, is there a firewall between the 

reviewing attorney and the agency representative? [see MD-110, Ch. 

1(IV)(D)]

YES

E.2.d

Does the agency ensure that its agency representative does not 

intrude upon EEO counseling, investigations, and final agency 

decisions? [see MD-110, Ch. 1(IV)(D)]

YES

OGC and EEO agreed to 

have a different attorney 

review Final Agency 

Decisions beginning 

April 2019

E.2.e

If applicable, are processing time frames incorporated for the legal 

counsel’s sufficiency review for timely processing of complaints? 

[see EEOC Report, Attaining a Model Agency Program: Efficiency

(Dec. 1, 2004)]

YES

Compliance 

Indicator 

Measures

E.3 - The agency has established and encouraged the widespread 

use of a fair alternative dispute resolution (ADR) program.

Measure 

Met?

YES

ADR was aggressively 

encouraged in FY2019

E.3.a

Has the agency established an ADR program for use during both the 

pre-complaint and formal complaint stages of the EEO process? [see 

29 CFR §1614.102(b)(2)]

YES

E.3.b Does the agency require managers and supervisors to participate in 

ADR once it has been offered? [see MD-715, II(A)(1)] YES

E.3.c Does the agency encourage all employees to use ADR, where ADR 

is appropriate? [see MD-110, Ch. 3(IV)(C)] YES

E.3.d

New

Does the agency ensure a management official with settlement 

authority is accessible during the dispute resolution process? [see 

MD-110, Ch. 3(III)(A)(9)]

YES

E.3.e

Does the agency prohibit the responsible management official 

named in the dispute from having settlement authority? [see MD110, Ch. 3(I)]

YES

E.3.f

New

Does the agency annually evaluate the effectiveness of its ADR 

program? [see MD-110, Ch. 3(II)(D)] YES
39

Compliance 

Indicator 

Measures

E.4 – The agency has effective and accurate data collection 

systems in place to evaluate its EEO program.

Measure 

Met?

NO

E.4.a Does the agency have systems in place to accurately collect, 

monitor, and analyze the following data:

E.4.a.1

Complaint activity, including the issues and bases of the complaints, 

the aggrieved individuals/complainants, and the involved 

management official? [see MD-715, II(E)]

YES

iComplaints purchased

and information is being 

uploaded in the system

E.4.a.2 The race, national origin, sex, and disability status of agency 

employees? [see 29 CFR §1614.601(a)] YES

E.4.a.3 Recruitment activities? [see MD-715, II(E)] NO PART H

E.4.a.4

New

External and internal applicant flow data concerning the applicants’ 

race, national origin, sex, and disability status? [see MD-715, II(E)] YES

E.4.a.5

New

The processing of requests for reasonable accommodation? [29 CFR 

§ 1614.203(d)(4)] YES

E.4.a.6

New

The processing of complaints for the anti-harassment program? [see 

EEOC Enforcement Guidance on Vicarious Employer Liability for 

Unlawful Harassment by Supervisors (1999), § V.C.2]

NO PART H

E.4.b

New

Does the agency have a system in place to re-survey the workforce 

on a regular basis? [MD-715 Instructions, Sec. I] YES

Compliance 

Indicator 

Measures

E.5 – The agency identifies and disseminates significant trends 

and best practices in its EEO program.

Measure 

Met?

NO

E.5.a

Does the agency monitor trends in its EEO program to determine 

whether the agency is meeting its obligations under the statutes 

EEOC enforces? [see MD-715, II(E)] If “yes”, provide an example 

in the comments.

NO Part H

E.5.b

Does the agency review other agencies’ best practices and adopt 

them, where appropriate, to improve the effectiveness of its EEO 

program? [see MD-715, II(E)] If “yes”, provide an example in the 

comments.

NO Part H

E.5.c Does the agency compare its performance in the EEO process to 

other federal agencies of similar size? [see MD-715, II(E)] NO Part H

Essential Element F: RESPONSIVENESS AND LEGAL COMPLIANCE

This element requires federal agencies to comply with EEO statutes and EEOC regulations, policy 

guidance, and other written instructions.

Compliance 

Indicator 

Measures

F.1 – The agency has processes in place to ensure timely and full 

compliance with EEOC Orders and settlement agreements.

Measure 

Met?

YES

Formal Complaints 

Manager monitor and 

assess

F.1.a

Does the agency have a system of management controls to ensure 

that its officials timely comply with EEOC orders/directives and 

final agency actions? [see 29 CFR §1614.102(e); MD-715, II(F)]

YES
40

F.1.b

Does the agency have a system of management controls to ensure 

the timely, accurate, and complete compliance with 

resolutions/settlement agreements? [see MD-715, II(F)]

YES

F.1.c Are there procedures in place to ensure the timely and predictable 

processing of ordered monetary relief? [see MD-715, II(F)] YES

F.1.d Are procedures in place to process other forms of ordered relief 

promptly? [see MD-715, II(F)] YES

F.1.e

When EEOC issues an order requiring compliance by the agency, 

does the agency hold its compliance officer(s) accountable for poor 

work product and/or delays during performance review? [see MD110, Ch. 9(IX)(H)]

YES

Compliance 

Indicator 

Measures

F.2 – The agency complies with the law, including EEOC 

regulations, management directives, orders, and other written 

instructions.

Measure 

Met?

YES

Formal Complaints 

Manager monitor and 

assess

F.2.a Does the agency timely respond and fully comply with EEOC 

orders? [see 29 CFR §1614.502; MD-715, II(E)] YES

F.2.a.1

When a complainant requests a hearing, does the agency timely 

forward the investigative file to the appropriate EEOC hearing 

office? [see 29 CFR §1614.108(g)]

YES

F.2.a.2

When there is a finding of discrimination that is not the subject of an 

appeal by the agency, does the agency ensure timely compliance 

with the orders of relief? [see 29 CFR §1614.501]

YES

F.2.a.3

New

When a complainant files an appeal, does the agency timely forward 

the investigative file to EEOC’s Office of Federal Operations? [see 

29 CFR §1614.403(e)]

YES

F.2.a.4 Pursuant to 29 CFR §1614.502, does the agency promptly provide 

EEOC with the required documentation for completing compliance? YES

 Compliance 

Indicator

 Measures

F.3 - The agency reports to EEOC its program efforts and 

accomplishments.

Measure 

Met?

YES

No Fear, 462 Report, 

DVAAP, and FEORP 

are timely submitted

F.3.a

New

Does the agency timely submit to EEOC an accurate and complete 

No FEAR Act report? [Public Law 107-174 (May 15, 2002), 

§203(a)]

YES

F.3.b

New

Does the agency timely post on its public webpage its quarterly No 

FEAR Act data? [see 29 CFR §1614.703(d)] YES
41
42

MD-715 – Part H - 1

Agency EEO Plan to Attain the Essential Elements of a Model EEO Program

Defense Threat Reduction Agency 

Please describe the status of each plan that the agency has implemented to correct deficiencies in the EEO program.

 If the agency did not address any deficiencies during the reporting period, please check the box.

Statement of Model Program Essential Element Deficiency -

Type of Program 

Deficiency Brief Description of Program Deficiency

B.3.a

Are EEO program officials present during agency deliberations prior to decisions 

regarding recruitment strategies, vacancy projections, succession planning, 

selections for training/career development opportunities, and other workforce 

changes?

Objective(s) and Dates for EEO Plan

Date 

Initiated Objective Target Date 

Modified 

Date 

Date 

Completed 

October 

2017

EEO will collaborate with HR regarding Strategic 

Workforce Planning groups; Vacancy Planning, 

Recruitment/Outreach Planning and 

Training/Career Development Planning and other 

workforce changes.

12/2020 1/2019

Responsible Official(s)

Title Name

Performance Standards 

Address the Plan?

(Yes or No)

Director, Equal Opportunity and 

Diversity Programs Office Willisa Donald NO

Director, Human Resource Directorate Christine Enriquez, Colonel NO

Planned Activities Toward Completion of Objective

Target 

Date Planned Activities

Sufficient 

Funding & 

Staffing? 

(Yes or No)

Modified 

Date 

Completion 

Date 

01/2018

HR will ensure EEO is invited to participate as an 

Advisor on the Leadership Development 

Programs (LDP). 

YES 02/2018
43

Target 

Date Planned Activities

Sufficient 

Funding & 

Staffing? 

(Yes or No)

Modified 

Date 

Completion 

Date 

05/2019

HR will provide EEO with the annual outreach 

schedule to solicit participation schools and 

organizations (HBCUs, TCUs, and MSIs). 

YES

07/2019

EEO and HR Directors will meet monthly to 

discuss Agency Recruitment/Hiring, Career 

Development, Retention (Exit Survey) and review 

action items.

YES

10/2018

HR and EEO will track and analyze recruitment

efforts to identify potential barriers for the 

employment of Women, Hispanics and Individual 

with Disabilities.

YES

04/2020 EEO will participate on HR’s Workforce 

Development Council (WDC) as an advisor. YES

04/2020 EEO will participate on the Human Resources 

Policy Board (HRPB) as an advisor. YES

Report of Accomplishments

Fiscal 

Year Accomplishments

FY2019

During FY2019, the HR and EEO Directors scheduled monthly recurring meetings to 

discuss collaborative efforts. The EEO Director served as a member of the Agency’s 

Leadership Development Council (LDC), which serves as the selecting body for 

training/career development opportunities. Furthermore, the EEO Office was invited to 

attend all applicant interviews for the aforementioned programs. The DTRA Leadership 

Development Program (LDP) offers four Tracks:

• Track 1 – A non-competitive learning and development curriculum for all 

employees.

• Track 2 – Professional developmental opportunities and training activities for all 

employees.

• Track 3 – An 18 month Senior Leadership Development Program for GS 14/15.

• Track 4 – Provides Executive Professional Development opportunities to existing 

Senior Executive Service (SES) members.

DTRA also offers the Competitive Academic Program, which provides opportunities for 

civilian employees to pursue an undergraduate or graduate degree with financial 

assistance from the Agency. 

DTRA encourages all employees to apply for and participate in our wide array of 

professional/career development tracks. In FY2019, DTRA had 16 employees participate 

in the competitive Career Development Program. The Agency also executed a successful 

Career Broadening Program (CBP) that enabled and promoted individual employee 
44

Target 

Date Planned Activities

Sufficient 

Funding & 

Staffing? 

(Yes or No)

Modified 

Date 

Completion 

Date 

development and experiential learning through rotational assignments. Twenty-five 

employees participated in the program during FY2019.

DTRA offers open participation in the mentoring program (no competitive selection). In 

2019, there were over 130 participants including mentors and mentees from across the 

Agency, ranging from entry-level employees to Senior Executive Service (SES) 

members. 

In FY2020, HR and EEO will work with the Directorates across the Agency to 

incorporate EEO considerations into vacancy/succession planning as we evolve our 

NexGen outreach and recruitment initiatives.
45

MD-715 – Part H - 2

Agency EEO Plan to Attain the Essential Elements of a Model EEO Program

Defense Threat Reduction Agency 

Please describe the status of each plan that the agency has implemented to correct deficiencies in the EEO program.

 If the agency did not address any deficiencies during the reporting period, please check the box.

Statement of Model Program Essential Elements Deficiency

Type of Program 

Deficiency Brief Description of Program Deficiency

C.2.a.5

Does the agency conduct a prompt inquiry (beginning within 10 days of 

notification) of all harassment allegations, including those initially raised in the 

EEO complaint process? [see Complainant v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, EEOC 

Appeal No. 0120123232 (May 21, 2015); Complainant v. Dep’t of Defense 

(Defense Commissary Agency), EEOC Appeal No. 0120130331 (May 29, 2015)] 

If “no”, please provide the percentage of timely-processed inquiries in the 

comments column. CLOSED

C.2.a.6 Do the agency’s training materials on its anti-harassment policy include examples 

of disability-based harassment? [see 29 CFR 1614.203(d)(2)]

E.4.a.6

The processing of complaints for the Anti-harassment program? [see EEOC 

Enforcement Guidance on Vicarious Employer Liability for Unlawful Harassment 

by Supervisors (1999), V.C.2]

Objective(s) and Dates for EEO Plan

Date 

Initiated Objective Target Date 

Modified 

Date 

Date 

Completed 

09/01/2018

Create an effective Anti-Harassment Program in 

compliance with EEOC guidance and 

communicate the Anti-Harassment Policy to 

prevent and eliminate all types of harassment.

10/18/2020

Responsible Official(s)

Title Name

Performance Standards 

Address the Plan?

(Yes or No)

Anti-Harassment Manager Claudette Persaud Yes

Director, Equal Opportunity and 

Diversity Programs Office Willisa Donald Yes
46

Responsible Official(s)

Title Name

Performance Standards 

Address the Plan?

(Yes or No)

Planned Activities Toward Completion of Objective

Target 

Date Planned Activities

Sufficient 

Funding & 

Staffing? 

(Yes or No)

Modified 

Date 

Completion 

Date 

01/03/2019

Ensure all inquiries of harassment allegations are 

addressed within 10 days of notification and track

by the Anti-Harassment (AH) Program Manager.

YES

02/28/2019 Develop a Supervisor’s Toolkit to assist mangers 

with processing AH cases. YES

03/31/2019

Revise the DTRA Anti-Harassment Instruction to 

include the timeframes and clearly explain the 

process.

YES

04/30/2020 Create AH training material, which include 

examples of disability based harassment.

06/15/2019 Provide Anti-Harassment training to managers, 

supervisors and DTRA employees. YES

06/31/2020 Establish an effective Harassment Instruction for 

the Armed Forces. YES

Report of Accomplishments 

Fiscal Year Accomplishments

2019

EEO established its Anti-Harassment Program (AHP) in October 2018. Currently, the 

Anti-Harassment Directive 1020.03 is being revised. Since October 2018, the AH 

Program Manager conducted approximately 20 Anti-Harassment intakes and met with 

Management Officials. 

The AH Program Manager proactively complied with the EEOC guidance by promptly 

working with supervisor’s to address and resolve workplace issues within the 10-day 

timeframe. The distinction between EEO and the AH Program was taught during the 

Civil Treatment for Supervisors to include elements of ADR and Retaliation.
47

MD-715 – Part H - 3

Agency EEO Plan to Attain the Essential Elements of a Model EEO Program

Defense Threat Reduction Agency 

Please describe the status of each plan that the agency has implemented to correct deficiencies in the EEO program.

 If the agency did not address any deficiencies during the reporting period, please check the box.

Statement of Model Program Essential Element Deficiency

Type of Program 

Deficiency Brief Description of Program Deficiency

C.4.e.2

Does the Agency EEO Office collaborate with the HR Directorate to develop and/or 

conduct outreach and recruitment initiatives in accordance with MD-715 standards?

CLOSED

E.4.a.3 Does the Agency have systems in place to accurately collect, monitor, and analyze the 

following data: Recruitment activities? [see MD-715, II(E)]

Objective(s) and Dates for EEO Plan

Date 

Initiated Objective Target Date 

Modified 

Date 

Date 

Completed 

10/30/2017

Establish a Recruitment Strategy/Plan to address 

low participation rates for Minorities, Women, 

and IwDs within the Agency.

12/2019 12/2018

Responsible Official(s)

Title Name

Performance Standards 

Address the Plan?

(Yes or No)

Director, Equal Opportunity and 

Diversity Programs Office Willisa Donald YES

Director, Human Resource 

Directorate Christine Enriquez, Colonel YES

Planned Activities Toward Completion of Objective

Target 

Date Planned Activities

Sufficient 

Funding & 

Staffing? 

(Yes or No)

Modified 

Date 

Completion 

Date 

01/30/2020

EEO will provide a list of colleges and 

universities for recruitment and outreach 

initiatives for Hispanics, Women and IwDs.

YES 01/2020
48

02/15/2019

HR will invite EEO to participate in the 

development of annual recruitment and outreach

events/meetings.

YES

06/30/2020

EEO and HR will meet quarterly to review and 

analyze recruitment activities (USA Staffing/

Applicant Flow Data reports).

YES

07/30/2020 EEO and HR will collaborate on the Diversity 

Internship for DTRA. YES

09/30/2020 EEO in collaboration with HR, will analyze 

recruitment efforts to identify potential barriers. YES

Report of Accomplishments

Fiscal 

Year Accomplishments

2019

In FY2019, HR rolled out its plan for the next generation of outreach and talent 

acquisition programs. As part of this effort, DTRA continues to work hand-in-hand with 

the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) on outreach efforts centered around 

Minor Serving Institutions (MSIs) as part of its Diversity Internship for DTRA (DID) 

program. Some of the institutions visited included Howard University, Morgan State, 

Tennessee State, Xavier University, University of the Incarnate Word, and University of

Puerto Rico among others. For FY2020, we will continue to work with our interagency 

partners to expand our outreach efforts and site visits. Furthermore, the HR outreach and 

talent acquisition team began working collaboratively and will continue to collaborate 

with the EEO Office to identify program improvements and develop systems to 

accurately collect, monitor, and analyze recruitment activities.

DTRA’s recruiting and outreach program Lead began hosting regular planning meetings,

where representatives from across the Agency were invited to discuss priorities and 

scheduling for talent acquisition-related events and strategies. EEO representatives have 

attended these meetings, which included the review of outreach schedules and proposed 

events. HR representatives continue to collaborate with EEO to solicit recommendations 

for improved diversity and inclusion outreach events.

In FY2020, HR will seek to work closely with EEO to develop specific recruitment and 

outreach activities designed to meet the workforce needs in identifying critical skillsets 

to diversify the workplace.
49

MD-715 – Part H - 4

Agency EEO Plan to Attain the Essential Elements of a Model EEO Program

Defense Threat Reduction Agency

Please describe the status of each plan that the agency has implemented to correct deficiencies in the EEO program.

 If the agency did not address any deficiencies during the reporting period, please check the box.

Statement of Model Program Essential Element Deficiency

Type of Program 

Deficiency Brief Description of Program Deficiency

D.1.c

Does the agency conduct exit interviews or survey that include questions on how the 

agency could improve the recruitment, hiring, inclusion, retention and advancement of 

individuals with disabilities? [see 29 CFR 1614.203(d)(1)(iii)(C)

Objective(s) and Dates for EEO Plan

Date 

Initiated Objective Target Date Modified Date Date Completed 

01/15/19

Ensure exit interviews and survey includes 

questions to improve recruitment, hiring, 

inclusion, retention and advancement with 

IwDs.

12/30/2020

Responsible Official(s)

Title Name

Performance Standards 

Address the Plan?

(Yes or No)

Director, Equal Opportunity and 

Diversity Programs Office Willisa Donald NO

Director, Human Resource 

Directorate Christine Enriquez, Colonel NO

Planned Activities Toward Completion of Objective

Target 

Date Planned Activities

Sufficient 

Funding & 

Staffing? 

(Yes or No)

Modified 

Date 

Completion 

Date 

04/30/2020 EEO will collaborate with HR to develop exit 

interview and survey questions. YES

05/30/2020

Update exit survey questions to include targeting

recruitment, hiring, inclusion, retention and 

advancement with IwDs.

YES
50

Target 

Date Planned Activities

Sufficient 

Funding & 

Staffing? 

(Yes or No)

Modified 

Date 

Completion 

Date 

07/30/2020 Quarterly track and monitor the specific questions 

to determine issues and concerns. YES

08/30/2020

EEO and HR will meet biannually to discuss the 

results and actions to enhance recruitment, hiring, 

inclusion, retention and the advancement of IwDs.

YES

09/30/2020

Develop a collaborative Senior Leader’s brief and 

communicate exit survey resolutions at the HRPB 

or DSM.

YES

Report of Accomplishments

Fiscal 

Year Accomplishments

2019

DTRA employees who are leaving the Agency are afforded the opportunity to complete 

and submit an exit survey. Questions address the following: 

• primary reasons for departure,

• contributing factors to the decision to depart, 

• satisfaction with supervisors, 

• retention factors, and 

• demographic data.

Employees are also given the opportunity to provide any additional feedback. HR is 

currently working to revise and release the exit survey during FY2020. HR in 

collaboration with the EEO Office has incorporated additional questions related to 

recruitment, hiring, inclusion, retention and advancement for individuals with disabilities. 
51

MD-715 – Part H - 5

Agency EEO Plan to Attain the Essential Elements of a Model EEO Program

Defense Threat Reduction Agency 

Please describe the status of each plan that the agency has implemented to correct deficiencies in the EEO program.

 If the agency did not address any deficiencies during the reporting period, please check the box.

Statement of Model Program Essential Element Deficiency

Type of Program 

Deficiency Brief Description of Program Deficiency

D.2.a Does the agency have a process for analyzing the identified triggers to find possible 

barriers? [see MD-715, (II)(B)]

D.2.d

Does the agency regularly review the following sources of information to find barriers: 

complaint/grievance data, exit surveys, employee climate surveys, focus groups, affinity 

groups, union, program evaluations, anti-harassment program, special emphasis 

programs, reasonable accommodation program; anti-harassment program; and/or external 

special interest groups? [see MD-715 Instructions, Sec. I] If “yes”, please identify the 

data sources in the comments column.

Objective(s) and Dates for EEO Plan

Date 

Initiated Objective Target Date

Modified 

Date 

Date 

Completed

10/30/2017

Develop a process to collect data and conduct a 

trend analysis for management/personnel 

policies and practices by race, national origin, 

sex and disability.

12/30/2020 12/30/2019

Responsible Official(s)

Title Name

Performance 

Standards 

Address the Plan?

(Yes or No)

Director, Equal Opportunity and 

Diversity Programs Office Willisa Donald NO

Affirmative Program Manager Denise Lewis YES

Planned Activities Toward Completion of Objective
52

Target 

Date Planned Activities

Sufficient 

Funding & 

Staffing? 

(Yes or No)

Modified 

Date 

Completion 

Date 

10/30/2019

EEO will review management policies, practices 

and procedures for any hidden impediments to 

equal opportunity.

YES

06/30/2020

Collect information from the Federal Employee 

Viewpoint Survey to identify and address 

opportunities for improvement.

YES

02/28/2020 Conduct Complaint and AH trends analysis. YES

04/30/2020 Finalize the ERG Charter to include an effective 

process for managing results. YES

04/30/2020 Review the Agency-wide training evaluations to 

access needs and overarching EEO concerns. YES

05/30/2020

Identify Special Emphasis Program trends utilizing 

various data (i.e. Observances, WRP, Schedule A 

and Outreach/Recruitment). 

YES

10/15/2020 Update EEO dashboard and examine data trends. YES

11/30/20/20 Develop a quarterly EEO Diagnostic Report YES

Report of Accomplishments

Fiscal 

Year Accomplishments

2019

In FY2019, EEO Office developed several processes to analyze and identify barriers.

o Program Trend Analysis – A three-year trends report was developed to communicate 

our program areas successes and measures. The report conveyed trends for EEO 

programs such as: complaints (informal and formal), FEVS, Anti-Harassment, EEO 

budget, contract expenditures and execution, EEO Mandatory Training, WRP and 

Special Observances data. (Appendix E)

oWomen’s Pay Equity Study – The study was conducted to determine triggers in 

regards to Women in the DTRA workforce. We examined pay grades from GS-3 to 

SES and the study revealed that 96% of DTRA personnel are between the GS-11 to 

GS-15 grade levels. On average, women compare with men in pay. However, there are 

more men in grades 11-15 which decreased the pay of women by 7.3% ($9K) less than 

men overall. 

o FY2019 FEVS Report – The FEVS results highlights that the Agency employees 

loved the mission, 96% expressed that they are willing to put in the extra effort to get 

the job done. Employees (95%) indicated that they are always looking for better ways 
53

to do their jobs and 88% of DTRA employees felt that the organization is prepared for 

potential security threats. The most notable change was the positive trend concerning 

“poor performers”. Employees (41%) indicated steps are taken to deal with poor 

performers, an increase of +5% from 2018; employees (56%) felt that they are 

recognized for doing a good job, an increase of +5% from 2018. Employees (45%) 

also felt that differences in performance are recognized in a meaningful way, also a 

+5% increase from 2018. (Appendix F)
54

MD-715 – Part H - 6

Agency EEO Plan to Attain the Essential Elements of a Model EEO Program

Defense Threat Reduction Agency 

Please describe the status of each plan that the agency has implemented to correct deficiencies in the EEO program.

 If the agency did not address any deficiencies during the reporting period, please check the box.

Statement of Model Program Essential Element Deficiency

Type of Program 

Deficiency Brief Description of Program Deficiency

E.5.a Does the agency monitor trends in its EEO program to determine whether the agency is 

meeting its obligations under the statutes EEOC enforces?

E.5.b Does the agency review other agencies’ best practices and adopt them, where appropriate, 

to improve the effectiveness of its EEO program?

E.5.c Does the agency compare its performance in the EEO process to other federal agencies of 

similar size?

Objective(s) and Dates for EEO Plan

Date 

Initiated Objective Target Date

Modified 

Date 

Date 

Completed

01/30/2019

Monitor the EEO program trends to ensure 

Agency obligations; review other agencies best 

practices to improve effectiveness and compare 

Agency’s performance to similar federal 

agencies.

02/15/2020

Responsible Official(s)

Title Name

Performance 

Standards 

Address the Plan?

(Yes or No)

Director, Equal Opportunity and 

Diversity Programs Office Willisa Donald YES

Affirmative Program Manager Denise Lewis YES

Planned Activities Toward Completion of Objective
55

Target 

Date Planned Activities

Sufficient 

Funding & 

Staffing? 

(Yes or No)

Modified 

Date 

Completion 

Date 

03/20/2020

Conduct specific tend analysis of EEO programs 

annually to identify triggers and improve any 

deficiencies to ensure alignment with EEOC

(Employee Engagement/New IQ, Complaints, 

ADR, Anti-Harassment, Disability Employment 

Programs (Schedule A and WRP)

YES

06/30/2019

Conduct online research to identify Federal 

agencies, best practices to incorporate and 

implement new strategies and ideas. 

YES

07/30/2019

Visit and partner with various Federal agencies on 

specific program areas to enhance EEO program 

effectiveness.

YES

9/15/2020

Conduct comparative analysis within DoD with 

other 4th Estate Agencies (review DoD Annual 

Reports) and/or conduct face to face meetings.

YES

10/20/2020

Review and conduct specific studies to analyze 

and determine if disparity exists based on race, 

sex, and/or disability.

YES

Report of Accomplishments

Fiscal 

Year Accomplishments

2019

In FY2019, EEO identified benchmarking opportunities with several Federal agencies 

of similar size to compare their Diversity and Inclusion, Disability, ERGs efforts.

The Affirmative Employment Team attended the Human Health Services, ERG Forum 

and gained insight on establishing ERGs. The Affirmative Program Manager also 

visited Department of Labor, and discussed Diversity and Inclusion strategies and their 

experiences establishing their programs, lesson learned and pitfalls.

The EEO Office in an effort to garner "best practices" for Employee Engagement, met 

with the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) Workforce Engagement Office 

(WEO). EEO gained insight on how to analyze Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey 

(FEVS) information utilizing the existing tools of EVS Art and the OPM Employee 

Engagement Toolkit in order to develop a solid understanding of DTRA's FEVS 

results.
56
57

MD-715 – Part I

Agency EEO Plan to Eliminate Identified Barrier

DTRA FEMALE WORKFORCE

Please describe the status of each plan that the agency implemented to identify possible barriers in policie 

procedures, or practices for employees and applicants by race, ethnicity, and gender. 

 If the agency did not conduct barrier analysis during the reporting period, please check the box.

Statement of Condition That Was a Trigger for a Potential Barrier:

Source of the 

Trigger

Specific 

Workforce 

Data Table 

Narrative Description of Trigger

DTRA 

Female 

Workforce

Table A1

Overall, the Agency total workforce for FY2019 participation rate for 

Females was 486 (34.32%). This is below the 2010 CLF of 48.16%.

New Hires: The Agency hired 210 new employees of which 82

(39.05%) were Females. 

Separation: 158 employees separated the Agency. Sixty Seven 

(42.41%) Females separated, while they represent only 34.32% of the 

overall DTRA population.

Workforce 

GS-14 thru 

SES

Table A4

GS-13 Female population was 203 (39.19%) in FY2019 vs. 207

(39.06%) in FY2018

GS-14 Female population was 112 (29.17%) in FY2019 vs. 107

(29.72%) in FY2018.

GS-15 Female population was 46 (22.77%) in FY2019 vs. 44

(21.36%) in FY2018.

SES Female population was 3 (18.75%) in FY2019 and FY2018. 

EEO Group(s) Affected by Trigger

All Women

Barrier Analysis Process

Sources of Data

Source 

Reviewed?

(Yes or No)

Identify Information Collected

Workforce Data Tables YES Analyzed the overall, new hires and separation data.

Complaint Data (Trends) YES Six of 11 formal complaints were filed by women and 

4 of the complainants claimed harassment.

Grievance Data (Trends) NO
58

Findings from Decisions 

(e.g., EEO, Grievance, 

MSPB, Anti-Harassment 

Processes) 

YES

Reviewed EEO and Anti-Harassment data, in FY2019, 

53% of the Female workforce filed an Anti-Harassment 

case.

Climate Assessment 

Survey (e.g., FEVS) YES

In FY2019, the Agency administered the FEVS and 

Climate Assessment for all of the Agency’s 

Directorates. For the 2019 FEVS, 35% of the DTRA 

Female workforce participated.

Exit Interview Data NO

Focus Groups NO

Interviews NO

Reports (e.g., Congress, 

EEOC, MSPB, GAO, 

OPM)

NO

Other (Please Describe)

Status of Barrier Analysis Process

Barrier Analysis Process Completed?

(Yes or No)

Barrier(s) Identified?

(Yes or No)

NO YES

Statement of Identified Barrier(s)

Description of Policy, Procedure, or Practice

DTRA’s Policies and procedures are reviewed regularly by the EEO Office to ensure that the content 

provides equitable opportunity. DTRA must sustain efforts to recruit highly–qualified women. 

Women low representation and advancement in DTRA have been identified as a trigger. 

Develop and implement strategies for the recruitment and selection of highly qualified women for 

positions at the highest levels.

Objective(s) and Dates for EEO Plan
59

Objective Date 

Initiated 

Target 

Date 

Sufficient 

Funding 

& 

Staffing?

(Yes or No)

Modified 

Date 

Date 

Completed 

Identify the cause(s) of 

potential barriers for recruiting

women.

04/14/2019 09/30/2020 YES

Responsible Official(s)

Title Name

Performance 

Standards Address the 

Plan? 

(Yes or No)

Director, Equal Opportunity and 

Diversity Programs Office Willisa Donald YES

Director, Human Resource 

Directorate Christine Enriquez, Colonel YES

Planned Activities Toward Completion of Objective

Target Date Planned Activities Modified Date Completion Date 

Barrier Analysis

02/15/2019

Finalize ERG Charter and guidance to 

establish new working groups to examine 

perceived barriers

03/05/2020

Establish the Women’s ERG (W/ERG) to 

address the low participation of Women in 

the Agency.

04/30/2020 Select a SES sponsor (Champion) to play an 

active role within the W/ERG.

06/08/2020

Hold W/ERG monthly meetings to 

collaborate on targeted outreach strategies

and diversity-related matters.

08/29/2020

Develop and provide workshops, brown 

bags and seminars to promote cultural 

awareness for Women.

09/01/2020 Develop partnerships with colleges, and 

universities that have a high percentage of 
60

Target Date Planned Activities Modified Date Completion Date 

women in the DTRA mission critical 

skillsets.

10/15/2020

Target recruitment efforts toward women 

from diverse backgrounds (including 

veterans) through networking/partnerships 

with women and veteran organizations.

10/30/2020

Adopt and tailor OPM Recruitment, 

Engagement, Diversity and Inclusion 

Program (REDI) roadmap for ideas.

11/01/2020

Examine the Applicant Flow Data to 

determine if Women are applying and/or 

being selected.

11/15/2020

Review the Career Development workforce 

data to determine if there are any barriers in 

women applying and being selected for 

opportunities.

12/30/2020

Conduct an analysis to determine retention 

issues within the Agency (i.e., exit survey, 

OPM Employee Viewpoint Survey). 

Report of Accomplishments

Fiscal Year Accomplishments

FY2019

Women’s Pay Equity Study – the study was conducted to determine triggers in 

regards to Women in the DTRA workforce. We examined pay grades from GS-3 to 

SES and the study revealed that 96% of DTRA personnel are between the GS-11 to 

GS-15 grade levels. On average, women compare with men in pay. 

In FY2019, HR continued partnerships and alliances with diverse professional 

organizations and educational institutions. The EEO Office collaborated with HR to 

increase the number of minority and female candidates applying for positions 

suitable for recruitment by:

• Assessing DTRA- wide recruitment activities

• Coordinating EEO Office participation in recruitment events

• Facilitate transition for female veterans into the civilian workforce

• Continue to offer a formal detail/rotation process and current opportunity to

promote career advancement

• Develop a comprehensive recruitment strategy and best practices for Hispanics, 

Women, Veterans, STEM, Individual with Disability and Mission Critical 

Occupation

• Increase retention of Women in the Agency 
61
62

MD-715 – Part I

Agency EEO Plan to Eliminate Identified Barrier

DTRA HISPANIC WORKFORCE

Please describe the status of each plan that the agency implemented to identify possible barriers in 

policies, procedures, or practices for employees and applicants by race, ethnicity, and gender. 

 If the agency did not conduct barrier analysis during the reporting period, please check the box.

Statement of Condition That Was a Trigger for a Potential Barrier:

Source of 

the 

Trigger

Specific 

Workforce 

Data Table 

Narrative Description of Trigger

DTRA 

Hispanic 

Workforce

Table A-1

Overall, the Agency Hispanic participation rate in FY2019 for Males

were 56 (3.95%) which is below the CLF of 5.17% and Females were

29 (2.05%) which is below the CLF of 4.79%. 

New Hires: The Agency hired 16 (7.62%) Hispanic Males out of a total 

of 114 Males and two (0.95%) Hispanic Females were hired out of 62 

Females.

Separation: A total of 16 Hispanics separated DTRA during FY2019. 

Seven (4.43%) Hispanic Males separated out of 91 Males and 9 (5.70%) 

Females separated out of 67 Females.

Senior 

Executive 

Service

Table A-4 The participation rate of Hispanic Males and Females in the total 

workforce at the Senior Executive Service (SES) level is 0%. 

EEO Group(s) Affected by Trigger

Hispanic Workforce

Hispanic or Latino Males Hispanic or Latino Females

Barrier Analysis Process

Sources of Data

Source 

Reviewed?

(Yes or No)

Identify Information Collected

Workforce Data Tables YES Analyzed the overall, new hires and separation data.

Complaint Data (Trends) YES

One of 11 formal complaints were filed by a Hispanic

Male and the complainant claimed non-selection for 

promotion.

Grievance Data (Trends) NO
63

Sources of Data

Source 

Reviewed?

(Yes or No)

Identify Information Collected

Findings from Decisions 

(e.g., EEO, Grievance, 

MSPB, Anti-Harassment 

Processes) 

NO

Climate Assessment Survey 

(e.g., FEVS) YES

Six hundred and thirty five (635) civilians took the 

FY2019 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey and 8% 

identified themselves as Hispanics, Latino or Spanish.

Exit Interview Data NO

Focus Groups YES ABQ EEO Office reestablished the Hispanic Working 

Group (HWG) to identifying and addressing barriers. 

Interviews NO

Reports (e.g., Congress, 

EEOC, MSPB, GAO, OPM) NO

Other (Please Describe)

Status of Barrier Analysis Process

Barrier Analysis Process Completed?

(Yes or No)

Barrier(s) Identified?

(Yes or No)

YES YES

Statement of Identified Barrier(s)

Description of Policy, Procedure, or Practice

The Agency continued to work on the low participation rates of Hispanics. In FY2019, the EEO

Office with the support of HR was committed to identify and minimize potential barriers to improve 

the representation of Hispanics at DTRA. 

Objective(s) and Dates for EEO Plan
64

Objective

Date 

Initiated Target 

Date 

Sufficient 

Funding 

& 

Staffing?

(Yes or No)

Modified 

Date 

Date 

Completed 

Identify and address all 

potential barriers for Hispanic, 

Latino within DTRA’s 

workforce.

12/04/2018 12/15/2020 YES

Responsible Official(s)

Title Name

Performance 

Standards Address the 

Plan? 

(Yes or No)

Director, Equal Opportunity and 

Diversity Programs Office Willisa Donald YES

Director, Human Resource 

Directorate Christine Enriquez, Colonel YES

Planned Activities Toward Completion of Objective

Target Date Planned Activities Modified Date Completion 

Date 

Barrier Analysis

03/05/2019 Establish a Hispanic ERG (H/ERG). June 19, 2019

03/31/2020 Conduct a Climate Survey of the DTRA 

Albuquerque facility.

04/29/2020

Develop and provide workshops, brown bags 

and seminar to promote cultural awareness 

in working with Hispanics.

08/05/2020

Finalize the ERG Charter and guidance to 

establish new working group to examine 

perceived barriers.

08/10/2020 Select a SES sponsor (Champion) who will 

play an active role within the H/ERG.

08/15/2020

Hold H/ERG monthly meetings to 

collaborate on targeted outreach strategies 

and diversity-related matters.

Ongoing
65

Target Date Planned Activities Modified Date Completion 

Date 

07/30/2020

Conduct in-depth barrier analysis in 

collaboration with H/ERG to identify 

policies and practices that may prevent 

advancement in the representation of 

Hispanics at DTRA.

07/30/2020

EEO will establish and provide a list of 

Universities and Institutions for specific 

mission skillsets.

7/30/2020 Select a list of Summer Programs for 

Hispanics and provide to HR.

08/30/2020

Conduct Federal Agency research of Best 

Practices for Hispanic recruitment, 

retention, and fostering professional 

development opportunities targeting the 

Hispanic workforce and develop a report 

regarding findings.

9/30/2020

Provide the selecting officials with low 

participation (RNO) to share with hiring 

panel members prior to initiating the hiring 

process.

10/15/2020

Review hiring, promotion, and career 

development programs from other Federal 

Agencies and private sector companies to 

benchmark best practices.

11/15/2020

Review the Career Development workforce 

data to determine if there are any barriers in 

Hispanic applying and being selected for 

opportunities.

01/15/2021

Conduct Awareness Sessions for Agency 

employees and discuss ways to enhance 

opportunities for Hispanics. 

Report of Accomplishments

Fiscal Year Accomplishments

FY2019

Hispanic Working Group (HWG): In FY2019, the DTRA Albuquerque (ABQ)

EEO Office reestablished the Hispanic Working Group (HWG) to assist with 

identifying and addressing barriers causing the low participation rate. There were 
66

nine individuals who volunteered to support this effort, including an HR 

Representative, the ABQ Site Chief and two Active Duty personnel. The group 

began discussion on topics such as recruitment, retention and advancement of 

Hispanics within DTRA. The initial effort consisted of reviewing the 2014 

Hispanic Barrier Analysis Final Report, specifically, the HWG Recommendation 

Matrix to identify completed items as well as actions to be resolved. The intent of 

the HWG is to engage its employees while examining and addressing employmentrelated issues. 

Recruitment and Outreach: EEO and HR attended numerous recruitment and 

outreach efforts with a potentially high Hispanic participation rates including the 

Kirtland AFB Air Show (May 2019) and the Transition Assistance Program 

(TAPS) Job Information Fair (May 2019). The Oak Ridge Institute for Science and 

Education (ORISE), conducted an in-residence Joint Science and Technology 

Institute (JSTI) Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) camp 

with the Agency’s participation. Also in FY2019, the Agency reached out to the 

University of New Mexico, New Mexico State University, Hispanic Association of 

Colleges and Universities (HACU), to provide information briefing sessions. We 

also partnered with other government agencies such as the National Nuclear 

Security Agency (NNSA), Kirtland Air Force Base (KAFB) and Raymond G. 

Murphy VA Medical Center (New Mexico, VAMC) for outreach, resource sharing 

and best practices.

Establishing Partnerships: DTRA continues to attend quarterly Albuquerque 

Hispano Chamber of Commerce meetings, comprised of National, State and 

Federal stakeholders, to identify ways to attract and retain local Hispanic talents. 

The Agency established partnerships with other government agencies such as 

NNSA, KAFB and New Mexico VAMC as well as professional Hispanic affinity 

organizations such as the League of United Latin American Citizens Conference 

(LULAC) to market DTRA as an employer of choice. Also, in FY2019, the 

Agency systemically provided reminders to the workforce to examine their 

personnel records and correct any self-identification discrepancies in the MyBiz + 

/HR Application.
67
68

MD-715 – Part J

Special Program Plan for the Recruitment, Hiring, Advancement, and 

Retention of Persons with Disabilities 

To capture agencies’ affirmative action plan for persons with disabilities (PWD) and persons with 

targeted disabilities (PWTD), EEOC regulations (29 C.F.R. § 1614.203(e)) and MD-715 require agencies 

to describe how their plan will improve the recruitment, hiring, advancement, and retention of applicants 

and employees with disabilities. All agencies, regardless of size, must complete this Part of the MD-715 

report.

Section I: Efforts to Reach Regulatory Goals

EEOC regulations (29 C.F.R. § 1614.203(d) (7)) require agencies to establish specific numerical goals 

for increasing the participation of persons with reportable and targeted disabilities in the federal 

government. 

Using the goal of 12% as the benchmark, does your agency have a trigger involving PWD by grade level 

cluster in the permanent workforce? If “yes”, describe the trigger(s) in the text box.

a. Cluster GS-1 to GS-10 (PWD) Yes 0 No X

b. Cluster GS-11 to SES (PWD) Yes X No 0

The percentage of PWDs in the GS-1 to GS-10 cluster was 26.67% in FY2019 which is above 

the goal of 12%.

The percentage of PWDs in the GS-11 to SES cluster was 11.08% in FY2019, which falls below 

the goal of 12.0%. Reference Table B4

In FY2019, 50 individuals retired and 11 were PWDs (.22%)

In FY2019, 158 separated and 21 were PWDs (13.29%)

The overall PWDs percentage was 11.37% (161), which is below the 12% benchmark. 

Using the goal of 2% as the benchmark, does your agency have a trigger involving PWTD by grade level 

cluster in the permanent workforce? If “yes”, describe the trigger(s) in the text box.

a. Cluster GS-1 to GS-10 (PWTD) Yes No X

b. Cluster GS-11 to SES (PWTD) Yes X No 0

The percentage of PWTDs in the GS-1 to GS-10 cluster was 13.33% in FY2019 which is above 

the goal of 2%.

The percentage of PWTDs in the GS-11 to SES cluster was 1.26% in FY2019, which falls below 

the goal of 2.0%. Reference: Table B-4

The overall PWTDs percentage was 1.55% (22), which is below the 2% benchmark.

In FY2018 the PWTDs percentage was 1.25% (17) and it increased in FY2019 to 1.55% (22). 

Describe how the agency has communicated the numerical goals to the hiring managers and/or recruiters.
69

The Agency’s HR personnel communicated the numerical goals in various forums, including 

briefings for managers and supervisors; individual meetings with hiring managers. EEO

provided the State of Agency brief to leadership. 

Five PWTDs were hired in FY2018 and Five PWTDs were hired in FY2019 as well; two 

Workforce Recruitment Program students were converted to full time employees using the 

Schedule A Hiring Authority in FY2019. Two PWTDs separated in FY2019.

Section II: Model Disability Program

Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. §1614.203(d)(1), agencies must ensure sufficient staff, training and resources to 

recruit and hire persons with disabilities and persons with targeted disabilities, administer the reasonable 

accommodation program and special emphasis program, and oversee any other disability hiring and 

advancement program the agency has in place. 

PLAN TO PROVIDE SUFFICIENT & COMPETENT STAFFING FOR THE DISABILITY 

PROGRAM

Has the agency designated sufficient qualified personnel to implement its disability program during the 

reporting period? If “no”, describe the agency’s plan to improve the staffing for the upcoming year.

Yes X No 0

Identify all staff responsible for implementing the agency’s disability employment program by the office, 

staff employment status, and responsible official.

Disability Program Task

# of FTE Staff by 

Employment Status Responsible Official

Full (Name, Title, Office, Email)

Time

Part 

Time

Collateral 

Duty

Processing applications from 

PWD and PWTD 1 0 0

Preliou-Holland, Jacqueline

Human Resource Specialist,

jacqueline.s.preliouholland.civ@mail.mil

Answering questions from the 

public about hiring authorities 

that take disability into 

account

1 0 0

Cheryl Williams-Payton

Disability Program Coordinator, 

Equal Opportunity and Diversity 

Programs Office,

Cheryl.b.williamspayton.civ@mail.mil

Processing reasonable 

accommodation requests from 

applicants and employees

1 0 0

Mary Lewandowski

Reasonable Accommodation 

Coordinator,

Human Resources, 

Mary.h.lewandowski.civ@mail.mil
70

Section 508 Compliance 1 0 0

Robert Bleck, DTRA 508 Program 

Coordinator, Information 

Technology Department

Robert.r.bleck.civ@mail.mil

Architectural Barriers Act 

Compliance 1 0 0

Patrick Bass, Facilities Plans and 

Space Management, AL-ELF 

Patrick.r.bass.civ@mail.mil

Special Emphasis Program for 

PWD and PWTD 1 0 0

Cheryl Williams-Payton

Disability Program Coordinator, 

Equal Opportunity and Diversity 

Programs Office,

Cheryl.b.williamspayton.civ@mail.mil

Has the agency provided disability program staff with sufficient training to carry out their responsibilities 

during the reporting period? If “yes”, describe the training that disability program staff have received. If 

“no”, describe the training planned for the upcoming year.

Yes X No 0

The Agency’s Disability Program Coordinator participated in federal training and workshops to 

obtain best practices. She also attended the EEOC Disability Program Manager Course. The 

Chief, Management and Employee Relations and Work Life (HR) attended the Examining 

Conflicts in Employment Law (EXCEL) conference. 

PLAN TO ENSURE SUFFICIENT FUNDING FOR THE DISABILITY PROGRAM

Has the agency provided sufficient funding and other resources to successfully implement the disability 

program during the reporting period? If “no”, describe the agency’s plan to ensure all aspects of the 

disability program have sufficient funding and other resources.

Yes X No 0

Section III: Plan to Recruit and Hire Individuals with Disabilities

Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.203(d)(1)(i) and (ii), agencies must establish a plan to increase the 

recruitment and hiring of individuals with disabilities. The questions below are designed to identify 

outcomes of the agency’s recruitment program plan for PWD and PWTD. 
71

PLAN TO IDENTIFY JOB APPLICANTS WITH DISABILITIES

Describe the programs and resources the agency uses to identify job applicants with disabilities, 

including individuals with targeted disabilities. 

The Agency continued to utilize the recruitment strategies described below to increase the 

number of qualified PWDs and PWTDs. 

• In FY2019, four Workforce Recruitment Program (WRP) students were selected for the 

summer. Two of the WRP students were transitioned into a permanent position in the 

Agency utilizing the Schedule A Hiring Authority.

• Numerous students were brought onboard as summer hires through the Pathways Summer 

Internship Program.

• The EEO Office conducted Disability Etiquette training to ensure co-workers, managers and 

leaders were educated on dignity, respect and inclusive practices in the workplace.

• During FY2019, there were a total of 189 new hires, 101 or 53% of the new hires were 

Veterans and 18 or 10% were identified as 30% or more disabled Veterans 

Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.203(a)(3), describe the agency’s use of hiring authorities that take disability 

into account (e.g., Schedule A) to recruit PWD and PWTD for positions in the permanent workforce. 

In FY2019, DTRA hired (3) permanent employees under the Schedule A Authority. There was a 

decline in hiring due to lack of billets and funding.

When individuals apply for a position under a hiring authority that takes disability into account (e.g., 

Schedule A), explain how the agency (1) determines if the individual is eligible for appointment under

such authority and (2) forwards the individual's application to the relevant hiring officials with an 

explanation of how and when the individual may be appointed. 

Our correspondents at DLA will review the applicant’s resume against the Position 

Description/Job announcement to determine if the person is qualified for the position and will 

ensure a Schedule A letter from a Licensed Doctor/Physician is included in the application. 

DLA will recommend review by the supervisor who will make the ultimate determination on the 

applicant’s qualifications. 

Has the agency provided training to all hiring managers on the use of hiring authorities that take 

disability into account (e.g., Schedule A)? If “yes”, describe the type(s) of training and frequency. If 

“no”, describe the agency’s plan to provide this training.

Yes X No 0 N/A 0

DTRA Human Resources provided training to hiring managers on the use of hiring authorities 

that is inclusive of PWDs and PWTDs. Mandatory training – “Roadmap to Success: Hiring 

People with Disability” is provided as a one hour online course.
72

PLAN TO ESTABLISH CONTACTS WITH DISABILITY EMPLOYMENT ORGANIZATIONS

Describe the agency’s efforts to establish and maintain contacts with organizations that assist PWD, 

including PWTD, in securing and maintaining employment. 

The Agency established a HR POC for the Wounded Warrior Program which is now the 

Operational Warfighter. In FY20, the Agency is scheduled to visit Fort Belvoir Wounded 

Warrior Office, and Vocational Rehabilitation Centers to establish and build collaborative 

relationships and to promote programs for PWDs and PWTDs. 

PROGRESSION TOWARDS GOALS (RECRUITMENT AND HIRING)

Using the goals of 12% for PWD and 2% for PWTD as the benchmarks, do triggers exist for PWD 

and/or PWTD among the new hires in the permanent workforce? If “yes”, please describe the triggers 

below.

a. New Hires for Permanent Workforce (PWD) Yes X No 0

b. New Hires for Permanent Workforce (PWTD) Yes 0 No X

DTRA does not meet the goals for PWD, but is above the goals for PWTD. Of the 176 new 

hires, 14 (7.95%) have a disability and 4 (2.27%) have a targeted disability. 

Using the qualified applicant pool as the benchmark, do triggers exist for PWD and/or PWTD among the 

new hires for any of the mission-critical occupations (MCO)? If “yes”, please describe the triggers 

below.

a. New Hires for MCO (PWD) Yes X No 0

b. New Hires for MCO (PWTD) Yes X No 0

Table B6

MCOs /Series

PWD % in 

Qualified 

Applicant 

Pool

PWTD % in 

Qualified 

Applicant 

Pool

Total # 

New Hires

PWD

Total # 

New Hires

PWTD

Trigger

PWD

(Y/N)

Trigger

PWTD

(Y/N)

0080 

Security 

Administration

4.61% 2.14% 28 13 Y N

0301

Miscellaneous 

Administration and 

Program Series

4.87% 2.18% 67 30 Y N

0343

Management and 

Program Analyst

3.42% 0.85% 4 1 Y Y

0801

General 

Engineering

1.61% 1.34% 6 5 Y Y

1102

Contracting 8.44% 6.49% 13 10 Y Y

1301

General Physical 

Science

2.27% 1.32% 12 7 Y Y
73

2210

Information 

Technology 

Management 

3.87% 2.24% 31 18 Y N

Using the relevant applicant pool as the benchmark, do triggers exist for PWD and/or PWTD among the 

qualified internal applicants for any of the mission-critical occupations (MCO)? If “yes”, please describe 

the triggers below.

a. Qualified Applicants for MCO (PWD) Yes 0 No 0 N/A X

b. Qualified Applicants for MCO (PWTD) Yes 0 No 0 N/A X

Currently, we do not have relevant applicant pool data to conduct benchmarks.

Using the qualified applicant pool as the benchmark, do triggers exist for PWD and/or PWTD among 

employees promoted to any of the mission-critical occupations (MCO)? If “yes”, please describe the 

triggers below.

a. Promotions for MCO (PWD) Yes X No 0

b. Promotions for MCO (PWTD) Yes 0 No X

Table B-6: Selections for Internal Competitive Promotions for Major Occupations by Disability

MCOs /Series

PWD % in 

Qualified 

Internal 

Applicants

PWTD % in 

Qualified 

Internal 

Applicants

Total #

PWD

Total #

PWTD

Trigger

PWD

(Y/N)

Trigger

PWTD

(Y/N)

0080 

Security 

Administration

9.03% 6.07% 58 39 Y N

0301

Miscellaneous 

Administration 

and Program 

Series

7.57% 4.54% 65 39 Y N

0343

Management and 

Program Analyst

11.27% 11.27% 8 8 Y N

0801

General 

Engineering

0.00% 0.00% 0 0 N/A N/A

1102

Contracting 0.00% 0.00% 0 39 N/A N/A

1301

General Physical 

Science

0.00% 0.00% 0 0 N/A N/A

2210 5.72% 2.93% 39 20 Y N
74

Information 

Technology 

Management 

Section IV: Plan to Ensure Advancement Opportunities for Employees 

with Disabilities 

Pursuant to 29 C.F.R §1614.203(d)(1)(iii), agencies are required to provide sufficient advancement 

opportunities for employees with disabilities. Such activities might include specialized training and 

mentoring programs, career development opportunities, awards programs, promotions, and similar 

programs that address advancement. In this section, agencies should identify, and provide data on 

programs designed to ensure advancement opportunities for employees with disabilities.

ADVANCEMENT PROGRAM PLAN

Describe the agency’s plan to ensure PWD, including PWTD, have sufficient opportunities for 

advancement.

DTRA is committed to providing opportunities for advancement among all employees including 

PWDs and PWTDs. We currently offer a wide range of career development and training 

opportunities through Learning Management System and Instructor Led classroom courses. Such 

opportunities help position all DTRA employees for advancement within their current positions 

and beyond.

Also, we offer three targeted programs that offer clear opportunities for advancement among our 

staff, the Leadership Development Program (LDP), Competitive Academic Program (CAP), and 

Graduate Fellowship Program (GFP). PWDs and PWTDs have been accepted into and 

completed these programs. 

CAREER DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES

Please describe the career development opportunities that the agency provides to its employees. 

DTRA offers a variety of training and leadership development opportunities to all employees 

through multiple channels within the organization.

The training opportunities provided include; technical information on administrative systems 

(e.g. travel, time and attendance, budget and acquisitions management); sessions focusing on 

professional development (e.g. Project Management, Managing Up, and Change Movement); 

and soft skill training (e.g. Teamwork Skills, Crucial Conversations). In addition, DTRA offers 

formal competitive leadership development and Academic Programs.

In the table below, please provide the data for career development opportunities that require competition 

and/or supervisory recommendation/approval to participate. [Collection begins with the FY2018 MD715 report, which is due on February 28, 2019.]

Career Development 

Opportunities Total Participants PWD PWTD
75

Applicants 

(#)

Selectees 

(#)

Applicants 

(%)

Selectees 

(%)

Applicants 

(%)

Selectees 

(%)

Internship Programs N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Fellowship Programs 8 5 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Mentoring Programs 106 106 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Coaching Programs N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Training Programs 11 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Detail Programs N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Other Career 

Development Programs 18 12 0 0 2 2

Do triggers exist for PWD among the applicants and/or selectees for any of the career development 

programs? (The appropriate benchmarks are the relevant applicant pool for the applicants and the 

applicant pool for selectees.) If “yes”, describe the trigger(s) in the text box.

a. Applicants (PWD) Yes 0 No 0 N/A X

b. Selections (PWD) Yes 0 No 0 N/A X

Currently this information is not being captured. EEO and HR will jointly work on as an action 

item.

Do triggers exist for PWTD among the applicants and/or selectees for any of the career development 

programs identified? (The appropriate benchmarks are the relevant applicant pool for applicants and the 

applicant pool for selectees.) If “yes”, describe the trigger(s) in the text box.

a. Applicants (PWTD) Yes 0 No N/A X

b. Selections (PWTD) Yes 0 No N/A X

Currently this information is not being captured. EEO and HR will jointly work on as an action 

item.

AWARDS

Using the inclusion rate as the benchmark, does your agency have a trigger involving PWD and/or 

PWTD for any level of the time-off awards, bonuses, or other incentives? If “yes”, please describe the 

trigger(s) in the text box.

a. Awards, Bonuses, & Incentives (PWD) Yes X No 0

b. Awards, Bonuses, & Incentives (PWTD) Yes X No 0

The inclusion rate for time off awards, bonuses, or other incentives was 82.2% for the workforce 

without disabilities, which was greater than the inclusion rate of 10.7% for PWDs and 1.65% for 

PWTDs.
76

Using the inclusion rate as the benchmark, does your agency have a trigger involving PWD and/or 

PWTD for quality step increases or performance-based pay increases? If “yes”, please describe the 

trigger(s) in the text box.

a. Pay Increases (PWD) Yes 0 No X

b. Pay Increases (PWTD) Yes X No 0

The inclusion rate for pay increases, indicated as Quality Step Increases (QSIs) for PWDs was 

ten (14.93%), The inclusion rate for pay increases, indicated as Quality Step Increases (QSIs) for 

PWTDs was one (1.49%). 

If the agency has other types of employee recognition programs, are PWD and/or PWTD recognized 

disproportionately less than employees without disabilities? (The appropriate benchmark is the inclusion 

rate.) If “yes”, describe the employee recognition program and relevant data in the text box.

a. Other Types of Recognition (PWD) Yes 0 No 0 N/A X

b. Other Types of Recognition (PWTD) Yes 0 No 0 N/A X

PROMOTIONS

Does your agency have a trigger involving PWD among the qualified internal applicants and/or selectees 

for promotions to the senior grade levels? (The appropriate benchmarks are the relevant applicant pool 

for qualified internal applicants and the qualified applicant pool for selectees.) For non-GS pay plans, 

please use the approximate senior grade levels. If “yes”, describe the trigger(s) in the text box.

SES

Qualified Internal Applicants (PWD) Yes 0 No X

Internal Selections (PWD) Yes 0 No X

Grade GS-15

Qualified Internal Applicants (PWD) Yes 0 No X

Internal Selections (PWD) Yes 0 No X

Grade GS-14 

Qualified Internal Applicants (PWD) Yes 0 No X

Internal Selections (PWD) Yes 0 No X

Grade GS-13 

Qualified Internal Applicants (PWD) Yes 0 No X

Internal Selections (PWD) Yes 0 No X

At this time the data is not available
77

Does your agency have a trigger involving PWTD among the qualified internal applicants and/or 

selectees for promotions to the senior grade levels? (The appropriate benchmarks are the relevant 

applicant pool for qualified internal applicants and the qualified applicant pool for selectees.) For nonGS pay plans, please use the approximate senior grade levels. If “yes”, describe the trigger(s) in the text 

box.

SES

Qualified Internal Applicants (PWTD) Yes 0 No X

Internal Selections (PWTD) Yes 0 No X

Grade GS-15

Qualified Internal Applicants (PWTD) Yes 0 No X

Internal Selections (PWTD) Yes 0 No X

Grade GS-14 

Qualified Internal Applicants (PWTD) Yes 0 No X

Internal Selections (PWTD) Yes 0 No X

Grade GS-13 

Qualified Internal Applicants (PWTD) Yes 0 No X

Internal Selections (PWTD) Yes 0 No X

At this time the data is not available.

Using the qualified applicant pool as the benchmark, does your agency have a trigger involving PWD

among the new hires to the senior grade levels? For non-GS pay plans, please use the approximate senior 

grade levels. If “yes”, describe the trigger(s) in the text box.

New Hires to SES (PWD) Yes 0 No X

New Hires to GS-15 (PWD) Yes 0 No X

New Hires to GS-14 (PWD) Yes 0 No X

New Hires to GS-13 (PWD) Yes 0 No X

At this time the data is not available.

Using the qualified applicant pool as the benchmark, does your agency have a trigger involving PWTD

among the new hires to the senior grade levels? For non-GS pay plans, please use the approximate senior 

grade levels. If “yes”, describe the trigger(s) in the text box.

New Hires to SES (PWTD) Yes 0 No X

New Hires to GS-15 (PWTD) Yes 0 No X

New Hires to GS-14 (PWTD) Yes 0 No X
78

New Hires to GS-13 (PWTD) Yes 0 No X

At this time the data is not available.

Does your agency have a trigger involving PWD among the qualified internal applicants and/or selectees 

for promotions to supervisory positions? (The appropriate benchmarks are the relevant applicant pool for 

qualified internal applicants and the qualified applicant pool for selectees.) If “yes”, describe the 

trigger(s) in the text box.

Executives

Qualified Internal Applicants (PWD) Yes 0 No X

Internal Selections (PWD) Yes 0 No X

Managers

Qualified Internal Applicants (PWD) Yes 0 No X

Internal Selections (PWD) Yes 0 No X

Supervisors 

Qualified Internal Applicants (PWD) Yes 0 No X

Internal Selections (PWD) Yes 0 No X

At this time the data is not available.

Does your agency have a trigger involving PWTD among the qualified internal applicants and/or 

selectees for promotions to supervisory positions? (The appropriate benchmarks are the relevant 

applicant pool for qualified internal applicants and the qualified applicant pool for selectees.) If “yes”, 

describe the trigger(s) in the text box.

Executives

Qualified Internal Applicants (PWTD) Yes 0 No X

Internal Selections (PWTD) Yes 0 No X

Managers

Qualified Internal Applicants (PWTD) Yes 0 No X

Internal Selections (PWTD) Yes 0 No X

Supervisors 

Qualified Internal Applicants (PWTD) Yes 0 No X

Internal Selections (PWTD) Yes 0 No X
79

At this time the data is not available.

Using the qualified applicant pool as the benchmark, does your agency have a trigger involving PWD

among the selectees for new hires to supervisory positions? If “yes”, describe the trigger(s) in the text 

box.

New Hires for Executives (PWD) Yes 0 No X

New Hires for Managers (PWD) Yes 0 No X

New Hires for Supervisors (PWD) Yes 0 No X

At this time the data is not available.

Using the qualified applicant pool as the benchmark, does your agency have a trigger involving PWTD

among the selectees for new hires to supervisory positions? If “yes”, describe the trigger(s) in the text 

box.

New Hires for Executives (PWTD) Yes 0 No X

New Hires for Managers (PWTD) Yes 0 No X

New Hires for Supervisors (PWTD) Yes 0 No X

At this time the data is not available.

Section V: Plan to Improve Retention of Persons with Disabilities

To be a model employer for persons with disabilities, agencies must have policies and programs in place 

to retain employees with disabilities. In this section, agencies should: (1) analyze workforce separation 

data to identify barriers retaining employees with disabilities; (2) describe efforts to ensure accessibility 

of technology and facilities; and (3) provide information on the reasonable accommodation program and 

workplace personal assistance services.

VOLUNTARY AND INVOLUNTARY SEPARATIONS

In this reporting period, did the agency convert all eligible Schedule A employees with a disability into 

the competitive service after two years of satisfactory service (5 C.F.R. § 213.3102(u)(6)(i))? If “no”, 

please explain why the agency did not convert all eligible Schedule A employees.

Yes 0 No X N/A 0

The Agency was unable to convert all eligible Schedule A employees because of funding and lack of 

billets. 

DTRA will track all Schedule A appointments to determine when and if they are converted into the 

competitive service, and, for those not converted, reasons why.
80

Using the inclusion rate as the benchmark, did the percentage of PWD among voluntary and involuntary 

separations exceed that of persons without disabilities? If “yes”, describe the trigger below.

Voluntary Separations (PWD) Yes 0 No X

Involuntary Separations (PWD) Yes X No 0

Overall, the number of separations were 158, the voluntary separations were 103 and involuntary 

were 55. The PWDs voluntary was 15 (14.56%) of the workforce and involuntary was 6 

(10.91%). 

Using the inclusion rate as the benchmark, did the percentage of PWTD among voluntary and 

involuntary separations exceed that of persons without targeted disabilities? If “yes”, describe the trigger 

below.

Voluntary Separations (PWTD) Yes X No 0

Involuntary Separations (PWTD) Yes X No 0

There were triggers amongst voluntary and involuntary separations for PWTDs. The PWTDs 

voluntary was 1 (.97%) and involuntary was 1 (1.82%). 

If a trigger exists involving the separation rate of PWD and/or PWTD, please explain why they left the 

agency using exit interview results and other data sources.

Based on triggers identified above involving separations of PWDs and PWTDs at DTRA, EEO

will collaborate with HR to revise the exit survey questions to ensure the questions include 

recruitment, inclusion, retention and the advancement of individuals with disabilities.

ACCESSIBILITY OF TECHNOLOGY AND FACILITIES

Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.203(d)(4), federal agencies are required to inform applicants and 

employees of their rights under Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. § 794(b), 

concerning the accessibility of agency technology, and the Architectural Barriers Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 

§ 4151-4157), concerning the accessibility of agency facilities. In addition, agencies are required to 

inform individuals where to file complaints if other agencies are responsible for a violation. 

Please provide the internet address on the agency’s public website for its notice explaining employees’ 

and applicants’ rights under Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act, including a description of how to file 

a complaint. 

The Agency website is: https://www.dtra.mil/Mission/Equal-Opportunity-and-DiversityPrograms/EEO-Disability-Employment/

Please provide the internet address on the agency’s public website for its notice explaining employees’ 

and applicants’ rights under the Architectural Barriers Act, including a description of how to file a 

complaint.
81

The Agency website is: https://www.dtra.mil/Mission/Equal-Opportunity-and-DiversityPrograms/EEO-Disability-Employment/

Describe any programs, policies, or practices that the agency has undertaken, or plans on undertaking 

over the next fiscal year, designed to improve accessibility of agency facilities and/or technology.

The contracts are reviewed for compliance and web documents are periodically reviewed. We 

have a Section 508 site on our internet with links to external training materials, FAQs, tips, 

etc. This serves as a resource for the Agency. https://dtra1/j6/508/default.aspx

REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION PROGRAM

Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.203(d)(3), agencies must adopt, post on their public website, and make 

available to all job applicants and employees, reasonable accommodation procedures.

Please provide the average time frame for processing initial requests for reasonable accommodations 

during the reporting period. (Please do not include previously approved requests with repetitive 

accommodations, such as interpreting services.)

The average number of days it takes to process RA requests (from initial receipt of the request to 

provision of the accommodation was 30 calendar days. 

Describe the effectiveness of the policies, procedures, or practices to implement the agency’s reasonable 

accommodation program. Some examples of an effective program include timely processing requests, 

timely providing approved accommodations, conducting training for managers and supervisors, and

monitoring accommodation requests for trends.

Some examples of the effectiveness of DTRA’s RA program are: (1) Managers and supervisors 

have been trained on their roles/responsibilities in the RA arena; (2) RA awareness briefing 

across the agency are routinely provided to new supervisors on a quarterly basis. (3) For record 

keeping purposes only, relevant accommodation-related materials are compiled and tracked. (4) 

RA coordinator process RA requests and provide technical assistance to employees, interns, 

managers, and supervisors.

PERSONAL ASSISTANCE SERVICES ALLOWING EMPLOYEES TO PARTICIPATE IN THE 

WORKPLACE

Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.203(d)(5), federal agencies, as an aspect of affirmative action, are required 

to provide personal assistance services (PAS) to employees who need them because of a targeted 

disability, unless doing so would impose an undue hardship on the agency. 

Describe the effectiveness of the policies, procedures, or practices to implement the PAS requirement. 

Some examples of an effective program include timely processing requests for PAS, timely providing 

approved services, conducting training for managers and supervisors, and monitoring PAS requests for 

trends.
82

DTRA RA Policy and Procedures requires that PAS for PWTDs be requested and processed in 

the same manner as any other request for accommodation. In addition, requests for workplace 

personal assistance as an accommodation to perform certain work-related tasks will be 

processed. Therefore, DTRA does not currently have any effective program practices to report.

Section VI: EEO Complaint and Findings Data

EEO COMPLAINT DATA INVOLVING HARASSMENT

1. During the last fiscal year, did a higher percentage of PWD file a formal EEO complaint alleging 

harassment, as compared to the government-wide average? 

Yes 0 No X N/A 

2. During the last fiscal year, did any complaints alleging harassment based on disability status 

result in a finding of discrimination or a settlement agreement?

Yes 0 No X N/A 

3. If the agency had one or more findings of discrimination alleging harassment based on disability 

status during the last fiscal year, please describe the corrective measures taken by the agency.

There were no discrimination harassment findings based on disability status during the last fiscal 

year.

EEO COMPLAINT DATA INVOLVING REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION

1. During the last fiscal year, did a higher percentage of PWD file a formal EEO complaint alleging 

failure to provide a reasonable accommodation, as compared to the government-wide average? 

Yes 0 No X N/A 0

2. During the last fiscal year, did any complaints alleging failure to provide reasonable 

accommodation result in a finding of discrimination or a settlement agreement?

Yes 0 No X N/A 0

3. If the agency had one or more findings of discrimination involving the failure to provide a 

reasonable accommodation during the last fiscal year, please describe the corrective measures 

taken by the agency.

There were no findings of discrimination based on a failure to accommodate.

Section VII: Identification and Removal of Barriers

Element D of MD-715 requires agencies to conduct a barrier analysis when a trigger suggests that a 

policy, procedure, or practice may be impeding the employment opportunities of a protected EEO group.

1. Has the agency identified any barriers (policies, procedures, and/or practices) that affect 

employment opportunities for PWD and/or PWTD? 

Yes 0 No X
83

2. Has the agency established a plan to correct the barrier(s) involving PWD and/or PWTD? 

Yes 0 No X N/A 0

3. Identify each trigger and plan to remove the barrier(s), including the identified barrier(s), 

objective(s), responsible official(s), planned activities, and, where applicable, accomplishments.

Trigger 1

DTRA did not exceed the 12% representation goals for PWDs 11.37% (161) 

and the 2% goal 1.55% (22) for PWTDs. 

Of the 210 new hires, 8.57% (18) were PWDs and 2.38% (5) were PWTDs. 

There were a trigger amongst voluntary and involuntary separations for 

PWTDs. The PWTDs voluntary were 1 (.97%) and involuntary with 1 (1.82%). 

Barrier(s) The permanent workforce participation rate is 1.53% (21) for PWTDs was 

lower than 2% (Table B1).

Objective(s) Increase the participation, advancement and retention rate of PWTDs within the 

Agency to meet or exceed the DoD 2% by 2021. 

Responsible Official(s)

Performance Standards Address the 

Plan?

(Yes or No)

Director, Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Office No

Director, Human Resource Directorate No

Barrier Analysis Process Completed?

(Yes or No)

Barrier(s) Identified?

(Yes or No)

No No

Sources of Data

Sources 

Reviewed?

(Yes or No)

Identify Information Collected

Workforce Data Tables Yes Table B- Disability

Complaint Data (Trends) Yes Agency-wide Complaints Data

Grievance Data (Trends) No

Findings from Decisions (e.g., EEO, 

Grievance, MSPB, Anti-Harassment 

Processes) 

No

Climate Assessment Survey (e.g., 

FEVS) Yes Annual FEVS Report

Exit Interview Data No

Focus Groups N/A

Interviews N/A

Reports (e.g., Congress, EEOC, 

MSPB, GAO, OPM) No

Other (Please Describe)

Target Date

(mm/dd/yyyy) Planned Activities

Sufficient 

Staffing & 

Funding

Modified 

Date

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Completion 

Date

(mm/dd/yyyy)
84

(Yes or No)

5/10/2020

EEO will create a Recruitment and 

Outreach plan for PWDs and 

PWTDs and share with HR

Yes

5/30/2020

Coordinate a discussion with HR 

regarding the Career Development 

program and the need to track PWDs 

and PWTD

Yes

6/01/2020

Update the EEO external website to 

include 504/508 complaint 

information in the Disability 

Outreach section.

Yes

6/15/2020

EEO and HR will track all Schedule 

A appointments to determine when 

and if they are converted into the 

competitive service, and, for those 

not converted, reasons why.

Yes

6/30/2020

Utilize the OPM Feds Hire Vets 

website for ideas on how to reach 

Veterans and disabled Veterans

Yes

7/10/2020

Conduct Trend Analysis to identify 

triggers for MCO new hires and 

qualified internal applicants for 

PWDs and PWTDs

Yes

7/15/2020

Will collaborate w/HR to identify if 

triggers exist with the Career 

Development Program for PWDs 

and PWTDs

Yes

8/25/2020

Examine the Awards Program to 

identify triggers for PWDs and 

PWTDs

Yes

9/10/2020

Based on triggers identified 

involving separations of PWDs and 

PWTDs at DTRA, EEO will 

collaborate with HR to revise the 

exit survey questions to ensure the 

questions include recruitment, 

inclusion, retention and the 

advancement of individuals with 

disabilities.

Yes

11/18/2020

Partner with HR to conduct at least 

two Disability Brown Bag sessions 

to inform supervisors of the program 

and how to hire a student/PWDs

Yes

Fiscal Year Accomplishments

FY2019

The Agency hosted the Disability Awareness Employment Month Observance 

with the theme, “The Right Talent, Right Now.” There were a series of weekly 

events during the month of October. The kick-off event was led by Lieutenant 
85

General Rogers, the Agency’s Deputy Director. Twenty individuals were in 

attendance. The second week, two representatives from the 

Computer/Electronic Accommodations Program (CAP) conducted training to 

educate the workforce on the benefits of utilizing CAP to support the Agency’s 

Reasonable Accommodation (RA) needs. 

The Agency also co-hosted the National Disability Employment Awareness 

Month Program with the Defense Logistics Agency – Energy and our guest 

speaker was Colonel (COL) (Retired) Gregory Gadson. COL (R) Gadson lost 

both legs (above the knees) and the normal use of his right arm in the military. 

Despite his injuries, COL (R) Gadson remained on active duty in the Army and 

continued to inspire many with his message of courage, perseverance, 

determination and teamwork. We concluded the month with a Disability 

Etiquette Training course to educate the workforce on the proper ways to 

interact with IwDs. 

Conducted a Disability Etiquette Training course for Supervisors and Managers 

to educate the workforce on the proper ways to interact with PWDs and 

PWTDs. Approximately eight individuals attended.

Finalized the Disability Strategic Plan and developed the FY20 Disability 

Implementation Plan. (Appendix G)

Five PWTDs were hired in FY2019 as well; two Workforce Recruitment 

Program students were converted to full time employees using the Schedule A 

Hiring Authority in FY2019. 

Acquired three Ubi Duos for employees who are hearing impaired to ensure 

they are able to communicate with their co-workers and customers.

Created a Schedule A “Fact Sheet for Supervisors, Hiring Managers, and 

employees.

Hosted a WRP 2019 Information Session to educate and provide awareness to 

managers on the Disability hiring process.

4. Please explain the factor(s) that prevented the agency from timely completing any of the planned 

activities.

We were not able to complete all of the deficiencies in FY2019, however, EEO and HR focused on 

WRP, Schedule A and offered a Disability Etiquette Training. planned activities but there some 

emphasis 

5. For the planned activities that were completed, please describe the actual impact of those activities 

toward eliminating the barrier(s).

DTRA hired 5 PWTDs and two WRP students were converted to full-time employees using the 

Schedule A Hiring Authority for DTRA and another WRP student was converted to full-time 
86

employment with another agency. EEO hosted a Disability Etiquette training, one supervisor used the 

material to share with his employees and other organizations he is affiliated with outside of DTRA. 

Another supervisor took the training material and shared with his team. The Special Placement 

Program Coordinator provided information and guidance to individuals seeking employment. 

Documents were submitted to HR Hiring Managers for consideration.

6. If the planned activities did not correct the trigger(s) and/or barrier(s), please describe how the 

agency intends to improve the plan for the next fiscal year. 

For FY2020, the Agency has identified new planned activities to address the deficiencies in their 

Affirmative Action Plan and also in the Disability Strategic Plan which includes FEORP, DVAAP and 

IWDs deficiencies.
87
88

AGENCY TOTAL WORKFORCE

In FY2019, the DTRA civilian workforce was 1,416, an increase of 51 from FY18. Of the total 

workforce, 1,369 were permanent employees and 47 were temporary. The permanent workforce 

increased by 22 and the temporary workforce increased by 29. The Agency hired 210 new permanent 

employees and there were 158 voluntary separations.

The participation rate for White employees slightly decreased from 69.38% to 69.07%. Black employee 

participation rates increased from 16.92% to 17.94 %. Hispanic employee participation rates also 

increased from 2.64% to 6.00%. Asian employee participation rates slightly increased from 4.46% to 

5.37%. Two or more races participation rate significantly declined from 6.01% to 0.63%. There was no 

increase in the representation of Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander.

FY2018 FY2019 2010 

CLF

# % # % %

MALES 894 65.49 930 65.68 51.84

FEMALES 471 34.51 486 34.32 48.16

HM 19 1.39 56 3.95. 5.17

HF 17 1.25 29 2.05 4.79

WM 669 49.01 694 49.01 38.33

WF 273 20.37 284 20.06 34.03

BM 118 8.64 122 8.62 5.49

BF 113 8.28 132 9.32 6.53

AM 35 2.56 44 3.11 1.97

AF 26 1.90 32 2.26 1.93

NH/PI M 1 0.07 2 0.14 0.07

NH/PI F 3 0.22 3 0.21 0.07

AI/AN M 3 0.22 6 0.42 0.55

AI/AN F 1 0.07 2 0.14 0.53

TWO OR MORE RACES MALES 49 3.59 6 0.42 0.26

TWO OR MORE RACES FEMALES 33 2.42 3 0.21 0.28

HM=Hispanic Males; HF=Hispanic Females; WM=White Males; WF=White Females; BM=Black Males; BD=Black Females

AM=Asian Males; AF=Asian Females; NHOPIM= Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander Males; NHOPIF= Native Hawaiian or Other 

Pacific Islander Females; AIANM=American Indian or Alaska Native Males; AIANF=American Indian or Alaska Native Females

The CLF participation rate for Females was 48.14%. DTRA’s overall Females FY2019 participation rate 

was (34.32%) below the CLF. Hispanic participation rate (6.00%) were well below the CLF (9.96%), 

White Females (20.06%) are still below of the CLF (34.03%), Native Hawaiian Males are at the CLF 

(0.14%) and American Indian/Native Males and Females (0.56%) were below their respective CLF 

(1.08%). DTRA’s Male participation rate increased slightly from 65.49% in FY18 to 65.68% in FY2019

and remained above the CLF (51.84%). 

The chart below identifies the Agency’s Females:

FY2016 FY2017 FY2018 FY2019

2010 

CLF

# % # % # % # % %

FEMALES 414 36.41 448 33.43 471 34.51 486 34.32 48.16

Hispanic participation rates increased from 2.64% in FY18 to 6.00% in FY2019, well below the CLF of 

9.96%. 
89

The chart below identifies the trend of low participation for Hispanics:

FY2016 FY2017 FY2018 FY2019 2010 

CLF

# % # % # % # % %

HISPANIC 

MALES

18 1.58 20 1.49 19 1.39 56 3.95 5.17

HISPANIC 

FEMALES 18 1.58 19 1.42 17 1.25 29 2.05 4.79

DTRA DIRECTORATES

DIR– Office of the Director

The Office of the Director, which includes the Command Group, the Chief of Staff, and the Staff 

Offices, makes up 4.51 % of the Agency’s civilian workforce; 48.44% were Male and 51.65% 

were Female. Race/National Origins were represented in DIR with the exception of Native 

Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander (0.00%). There is a low participation rate of Hispanic 3.13%, 

and there were no Asian, and American Indian or Native American in DIR. There were seven 

Individuals with Disabilities (IWD) and one PWTD in DIR.

HR - Human Resources Directorate

• The HR Directorate makes up 4.52% of the Agency’s civilian workforce; 29.23% were Male 

and 70.77% were Female. 

• Hispanics had a low participation rate of 6.15%. There were no Native Hawaiians and 

American Indian or Native in the HR Directorate all at 0.00%. 

• There were seven IWDs and one IWTD with a 1.54% participant rate in the HR Directorate.

NE-Nuclear Enterprise Support Directorate

• The NE Directorate makes up 8.54% of the Agency’s civilian workforce; 85.95% were Male 

and 14.05% were Female. 

• Hispanics had a low participation rate of 9.09%. There were no Native Hawaiians and one 

American Indian or Native American in NE Directorate. Asian low participation rate was at 

2.48 %. 

• There were 17 IWDs and three IWTDs with a 2.48% participant rate in the NE Directorate.

PP – Plans and Programs Directorate

• The PP Directorate makes up 20.06% of the Agency’s civilian workforce; 49.65% were Male 

and 50.35% were Female. 

• The following categories have low participation rates: Hispanics at 7.39%, White Females at 

26.76%, and Blacks at 21.13%, Asians at 8.80%, and Native Hawaiians or Other Pacific 

Islanders at 0.70%. There were one American Indians or Alaska Native. 

• There were 30 IWDs and four IWTDs with a 1.41% participation rate in the PP Directorate. 

AL - Acquisition, Finance & Logistics Directorate 

• The AL Directorate makes up 10.38% of the Agency’s civilian workforce, 53.74% were Male 

and 46.26% were Female.
90

• Hispanic participation rate was low at 4.79%. There is no Male Native Hawaiians or Other 

Pacific Islanders and one American Indian or Native Americans Female in this Directorate. 

• There were 21 IWDs and three IWTDs within the AL Directorate. 

IT- Information Integration & Technology Services Directorate 

• The IT Directorate makes up 5.29% of the Agency’s civilian workforce, 66.67% were Male 

and 33.33% were Female. 

• Hispanic had a low participation rate of 8.00%. There were no Native Hawaiians or Other 

Pacific Islanders or American Indian or Native American in this Directorate. 

• There were ten IWDs and one IWTDs within the IT Directorate. 

RD - Research and Development Directorate

• The RD Directorate makes up 20.55% of the Agency’s civilian workforce, 73.20% were Male 

and 26.80% were Female. 

• Hispanics had a low participation rate of 3.78%. Black or African American had a low 

participation rate of 8.24%. Native Hawaiians or Other Pacific Islanders has a low 

participation rate of 1.03%.

• There was 23 IWDs with a 7.90% and three IWTDs with a 1.03%, in the RD Directorate

JD-Joint Improvised-Threat Defeat Directorate

• The JD Directorate makes up 9.18% of the Agency’s civilian workforce, 83.08% were Male 

and 16.92% were Female.

• Hispanics participation rate was low at 7.69%. Asians had a low participation rate of 3.08% 

• There were 17 IWDs and three IWTDs with a 2.31% participant rate, in the JD Directorate

CT-Cooperative Threat Reduction Directorate

• The CT Directorate makes up 4.87% of the Agency’s civilian workforce, 73.91% were Male 

and 26.09% were Female.

• Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, American Indian or Alaska Native and Two or 

more races participation rate was low at 0.00%. Asians had a low participation rate of 2.90% 

for both Male and Female

• There were eight IWDs and zero IWTDs with a 0.00% participant rate, in the CT Directorate

CZ-Combat Support Directorate

• The CZ Directorate makes up 2.89% of the Agency’s civilian workforce, 85.37% were Male 

and 14.63% were Female.

• Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander and American Indian or Alaska Native 

participation rate was low at 0.00%. Asians had a low participation rate of 2.44% 

• There were eight IWDs and one IWTDs with a 2.44% participant rate, in the CZ Directorate.

OB-On-Site Inspection and Building Capacity Directorate 

• The OB Directorate makes up 8.54% of the Agency’s civilian workforce, 85.17% were Male 

and 19.83% were Female.

• Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, American Indian or Alaska Native and Hispanics 

Female participation rate was low at 0.00%. Hispanics Male and Asians participation rate 

was low at 6.61% and 4.13%. 

• There were 13 IWDs and one IWTDs with a 0.83% participant rate, in the OB Directorate.
91

The following table identifies DTRA’s Civilian Workforce by Race/National Origin:

DIR HR NE PP OB

# % # % # % # % # %

HM 0 0.00 0 0.00 9 7.44 2 0.73 11 3.87

HF 2 3.13 4 6.15 2 1.65 4 1.46 10 3.52

WM 21 32.81 13 20.00 77 63.64 104 37.96 98 34.51

WF 16 25.00 17 26.15 13 10.74 75 27.37 76 26.76

BM 9 14.06 5 7.69 15 12.40 14 5.11 17 5.99

BF 14 21.88 22 33.85 1 0.83 37 13.50 43 15.14

AM 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 1.65 5 1.82 14 4.93

AF 0 0.00 2 3.08 1 0.83 11 4.01 11 3.87

NH/PI M 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00

NH/PI F 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0.73 2 0.72

AI/AN M 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.83 0 0.00 1 0.35

AI/AN F 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00

TWO OR 

MORE RACES 

MALES

1 1.56 1 1.54 0 0.00 9 3.28 0 0.00

TWO OR

MORE RACES 

FEMALES

1 1.56 1 1.54 0 0.00 11 4.01 1 0.35

TOTAL 72 100 45 100 111 100 274 100 117 100

PWTDs 1 1.49 1 2.27 3 2.70 2 0.74 1 0.85
92

The following table identifies DTRA’s Civilian Workforce by Race/National Origin (Cont’d):

MAJOR OCCUPATIONS

The Agency monitored seven major occupations based on their relationship to the DTRA missions and 

population size – Security, Miscellaneous Administration, Management Program Analyst, Contracting, 

Physical Science, Engineering, and Information Technology Management. The following are snapshots 

of these major occupations and identified potential trigger points for barrier analysis and action planning.

Security 

• The participation rate for Females in this major occupation was 32.31% compared to the 

Occupational Civilian Labor Force (OCLF) of 77.20%.

• Black Females had low participation rates at 13.85% compared to their OCLF of 27.20%. 

• There were eight (12.31%) IWDs and two (3.08%) IWTDs in this major occupation. 

Misc. Administration 

• The participation rate for Females in this major occupation was 21.50% compared to the OCLF 

of 24.50 %. The participation rate for Males in this occupation is 78.50%, above the OCLF of 

74.50%.

• Hispanic Females fall below their respective OCLF with a participation rate of 0.93% for 

Hispanic Females compared to the OCLF of 7.40% and Asian Females with a low participation 

rate of 1.24% compared to the OCLF of 1.25%. 

CT CZ AL IT RD JD

# % # % # % # % # % # %

HM 1 1.45 4 9.76 5 3.40 3 4.00 8 2.75 7 5.38

HF 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 1.36 3 4.00 3 1.03 3 2.31

WM 42 60.87 26 63.41 47 31.97 39 52.00 171 60.25 86 66.15

WF 16 23.19 4 9.76 40 27.21 13 17.33 57 17.21 14 10.77

BM 7 10.14 4 9.76 22 14.97 6 8.00 12 4.12 10 7.69

BF 1 1.45 2 4.88 19 12.93 6 8.00 12 4.12 4 3.08

AM 1 1.45 1 2.44 5 3.40 2 2.67 14 4.81 3 2.37

AF 1 1.45 0 0.00 6 4.08 3 4.00 4 1.37 1 0.34

NH/PI M 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0.69 0 0.00

NH/PI F 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.34 0 0.00

AI/AN M 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 3 1.03 1 0.57

AI/AN F 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.67 0 0.00 1 0.34 0 0.00

TWO OR 

MORE 

RACES 

MALES

0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 3 1.03 1 0.57

TWO OR

MORE 

RACES 

FEMALES

0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00

TOTAL 73 100 26 100 150 100 77 100 244 100 176 100

PWTDs 0 0.00 1 3.85 0 0.00 0 0 2 0.84 5 2.86
93

• There were 41 IWDs (12.77%) and seven (1.54%) IWTDs in this major occupation. 

Management/Program Analyst 

• The participation rate for Males in this occupation was 56.60% compared to the OCLF of 

58.40%. The Female participation rate was 43.40%, above the OCLF of 41.60%

• Hispanic and Asian Males fall below their OCLF with a participation rate of 1.89% for Hispanic 

Males compared to their OCLF of 2.60% and 1.89% for Asian Males compared to 1.10%. 

• There were nine (16.98%) IWDs one (1.54%) IWTD in this major occupation. 

Physical Science 

• The participation rate for Females in this major occupation was 17.53% compared to the OCLF 

of 41.60%. The Agency participation rate for Males within this major occupation was 82.47%, 

above their respective OCLF of 60.90%.

• White Females fall below their OCLF with a participation rate of 12.37% for White Females 

compared to their OCLF of 32.60%.

• There were 11(11.34%) IWTDs in this major occupation. 

Contracting 

• The participation rate for Females in this major occupation was 60.00% compared to the OCLF 

of 48.16%. The Agency participation rate for Males in this same major occupation was 40.00%, 

below their respective OCLF of 85.50%.

• Hispanic and Black Females was above their OCLF with a participation rate of 2.33% for 

Hispanic Females compared to their OCLF of 2.35% and 12.94% for Black Females.

• There were eight (9.41%) IWDs and two (2.54%) IWTDs in this major occupation. 

Engineering 

• The participation rate for Females in this major occupation was 20.51% compared to the OCLF +

• Specifically, Black Females fall below their respective OCLF with a participation rate of 0.00% 

compared to 6.53%, Asian Females at 0.00% compared to 1.93%. 

• There were 5 (12.82%) IWDs one (1.33%) IWTD in this major occupation.

Information Technology Management 

• The participation rate for Females in this major occupation was 28.21% compared to the OCLF 

of 48.16%. The participation rate for Males in this same major occupation was 71.79%, above 

their respective OCLF of 51.84%.

• Specifically, Hispanic Males was above their respective OCLF with a participation rate of 8.97% 

compared to 5.49%, Black Males at 5.13% compared to 5.19%. 

• There were 12 (15.38%) IWDs and one (1.33%) IWTD in this major occupation. 

PARTICIPATION FOR GENERAL SCHEDULE GRADES

• The majority of employees were in Grades 11 through 15. 

• Males have a higher participation rate in Grades, 11 through 15, with a participation rate of 

66.03% as compared to Females in the same grades with a participation rate of 33.97%, with the 

most significant participation rate in Grade 15 with Males at 77.23% and Females at 22.77%

• Whites have a higher participation rate in Grades 11 through 15, with a participation rate of 

69.19.%, Hispanics at 2.67%, Blacks at 17.07%, Asians at 4.53%, Native Hawaiians or Other 

Pacific Islanders at 0.29% and American Indians or Alaska Natives at 0.29%.
94

• There were 45.21% IWDs and 5.05% IWTDs in Grades 11 through 15. 

Applicant Flow Data 

• In FY2019, EEO continues to use the USA Staffing data to assess the demographics of applicants 

through the application process (e.g. applied, qualified, referred and selected). The Agency 

resolved the issue of applicant flow discrepancies by working with OPM and DLA to obtain the 

applicant data directly from the Cognos system. (Appendix H)

New Hires (From Table A-1)

• 210 new civilian employees joined the Agency during FY2019 either by external hiring, transfer, 

or reinstatement actions. Overall, Females accounted for a lower number than males (39.05% for 

Females compared to 60.95% for Males). 128 Males and 82 Females were added to DTRA’s 

permanent workforce; and 14 Males and 20 Females were added to the temporary numbers. 

White males were hired at a rate of 45.71%. 19 Black females were hired a rate of 9.05%. There 

was 18 (8.57%) IWDs and five (2.38%) IWTDs hired in FY2019. 

THE CHART BELOW IDENTIFIES HIRES IN FY2019

FY2019

Permanent 2010 CLF Temporary

# % %

MALES 128 60.95 14 41.18 51.84

FEMALES 82 39.05 20 58.82 48.16

HM 16 7.62 2 5.88 5.17

HF 2 0.95 1 2.94 4.79

WM 96 45.71 11 32.35 38.33

WF 54 25.71. 10 29.41 34.03

BM 9 4.29 0 0.00 5.49

BF 19 9.05 7 20.59 6.53

AM 5 2.38 1 2.94 1.97

AF 5 2.38 1 2.94 1.93

NH/PI M 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.07

NH/PI F 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.07

AI/AN M 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.55

AI/AN F 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.53

TWO OR MORE RACES 

MALES 2 0.95 0 0.00 0.26

TWO OR MORE RACES 

FEMALES 2 0.95 1 2.94 0.26
95

EMPLOYEE RECOGNITION AND AWARDS 

• During FY2019, 72 employees received Time-Off Awards of 1 to 9 hours; 45.83% were Male 

and 54.17% were Female (which is above their population rate). There was no Female or Male 

Native Hawaiians/Other Pacific Islanders nor American Indian or Alaskan Native Male or 

Female given awards in this category. There were 6 (8.33%) IWDs and three (4.17%) IWTDs

who received awards in this category.

• 206 employees received Time-Off Awards of 9+ hours; 67.48 % were Male and 32.56 were 

Female. Awards in this category were given across the board to all groups.

• 582 incentive cash awards in amounts ranging from $100 to $500 were given to employees. Of 

those, 57.90% were Male and 42.10% were Female. Whites received the majority of the 

awards in this category with a percentage of 72.85%. Awards in this category were given 

across the board to all groups. There were 61 (10.48%) IWDs and seven (1.20%) IWTDs who 

received awards in this category. 

• 242 incentive cash awards in the amounts of $501+ were given to employees. Of those, Males 

received a higher percentage of the awards at a rate of 61.16% compared to their population of 

65.49%. Females received this award at a rate of 38.84% compared to their population of 

34.51%. Hispanic received awards in this category at a lower rate of 6.20% compared to their 

population of 9.96% and Asian received awards in this category at a rate of 5.78% compared to 

their population of 3.90%, and Blacks received awards at a rate of 13.63% compared to their 

population of 12.02%. There were 26 (10.74%) IWDs and four (1.65%) IWTDs who received 

awards in this category. 

• There were 67 Quality Step Increases (QSIs) given in FY2019 based on the FY2018

performance cycle. Of those, 67.16% were Males and 32.84% were Females. There were no 

Native Hawaiians/Other Pacific Islanders, American Indians or Alaska Native, or Two or more 

races given awards in this category. There were 10 (14.93%) IWDs and one (1.49%) IWTDs

who received awards in this category.

SEPARATIONS

• 158 employees separated from the Agency during FY2019. Women separated at a rate of 

42.41%, while they represented only 34.51% of the overall DTRA population. Of the 158 total 

separations, five were removal, 36 resignation, 50 retirement and 67 other separations. Of the 

five removal, three were White Males, one White Female and one Black Male. There were 21

IWDs and two IWTDs who separated from the Agency.
96
97

SECTION II - APPENDICES

Appendix A: MD 715 Definitions and EEO Authorities

Appendix B: DTRA Organization Chart

Appendix C: Policy Statements

Appendix D: Federal EEO Statistical Report of Discrimination Complaints (EEOC Form 462)

Appendix E: Program Trends Report

Appendix F: Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey

Appendix G: Disability Strategic Plan

Appendix H: Applicant Flow Data
98
99

MD-715 DEFINITIONS AND EEO AUTHORITIES

The following definitions apply to MD 715: 

• Applicant: A person who applies for employment. 

• Applicant Flow Data: Information reflecting characteristics of the pool of individuals applying for 

an employment opportunity. 

• Barrier: An agency policy, principle, practice or condition that limits or tends to limit employment 

opportunities for members of a particular gender, race or ethnic background or for an individual (or 

individuals) based on disability status. 

• Disability: For the purpose of statistics, recruitment, and targeted goals, the number of employees in 

the workforce who have indicated having a disability on an Office of Personnel Management 

Standard Form (SF) 256. For all other purposes, the definition contained in 29 C.F.R. § 1630.2 

applies. 

• Civilian Labor Force: Persons 16 years of age and over, except those in the armed forces, who are 

employed or are unemployed and seeking work. 

• EEO Groups: Members of groups protected under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and other 

Federal guidelines. Includes: White Men, White Women, Black Men, Black Women, Hispanic Men, 

Hispanic Women, Asian Men, Asian Women, Native American Men, Native American Women, and 

Persons with Disabilities. 

• Employees: Members of the agency's permanent or temporary work force, whether full or part-time 

and whether in competitive or excepted service positions. 

• Employment Decision: Any decision affecting the terms and conditions of an individual's 

employment, including but not limited to hiring, promotion, demotion, disciplinary action and 

termination. 

• Feeder Group or Pool: Occupational group(s) from which selections to a particular job are 

typically made. 

• Federal Categories (Fed9): EEOC is requiring agencies to report their workforce data by 

aggregating it into nine employment categories. These categories are more consistent with those 

EEOC uses in private sector enforcement and will permit better analysis of trends in the federal 

workplace than previous categories used. The Commission has created a Census/OPM Occupation 

Cross-Classification Table by OPM Occupational Code (crosswalk) which assists agencies in 

determining the category in which to place a position through use of the position's OPM or SOC 

codes or the OPM or Census Occupation Title. The crosswalk may be accessed at the Commission's 

website: http://www.eeoc.gov/federal/715instruct/00-09opmcode.html. This crosswalk is intended as 

general guidance in cross-classifying OPM occupational codes to the EEO nine categories. Agencies 

are encouraged to contact EEOC with specific questions about what category might be appropriate 

for their particular occupations.
100

THE NINE JOB CATEGORY TITLES ARE: 

• Officials and Manager - Occupations requiring administrative and managerial personnel who set 

broad policies, exercise overall responsibility for execution of these policies, and direct individual 

offices, programs, divisions or other units or special phases of an agency's operations. In the federal 

sector, this category is further broken out into four sub-categories: (1) Executive/Senior-Level, (2) 

Mid-Level, (3) First-Level and (4) Other. When an employee is classified as a supervisor or 

manager, that employee should be placed in the Officials and Managers category rather than in the 

category in the crosswalk that they would otherwise be placed in based on their OPM occupational 

code. Those employees classified as supervisors or managers who are at the GS-12 level or below 

should be placed in the First-Level sub-category of Officials and Managers, those at the GS-13 or 14 

should be in the Mid-Level sub-category and those at GS-15 or in the SES should be in the 

Executive/Senior-Level sub-category. An agency may also choose to place employees who have 

significant policy-making responsibilities, but do not supervise other employees, in these three subcategories. The fourth sub-category, called "Other” contains employees in a number of different 

occupations which are primarily business, financial and administrative in nature, and do not have 

supervisory or significant policy responsibilities. For example, Administrative Officers (OPM Code 

0341) are appropriately placed in the "Other” sub-category. 

• Professionals - Occupations requiring either college graduation or experience of such kind and 

amount as to provide a comparable background. Includes: accountants and auditors, airplane pilots 

and navigators, architects, artists, chemists, designers, dietitians, editors, engineers, lawyers, 

librarians, mathematicians, natural scientists, registered professional nurses, personnel and labor 

relations specialists, physical scientists, physicians, social scientists, teachers, surveyors, and kindred 

workers.

• Technicians - Occupations requiring a combination of basic scientific knowledge and manual skill 

which can be obtained through two years of post-high school education, such as is offered in many 

technical institutes and junior colleges, or through equivalent on-the-job training. Includes: computer 

programmers, drafters, engineering aides, junior engineers, mathematical aides, licensed, practical or 

vocational nurses, photographers, radio operators, scientific assistants, technical illustrators, 

technicians (medical, dental, electronic, physical science), and kindred workers. 

• Sales - Occupations engaging wholly or primarily in direct selling. Includes: advertising agents and 

sales workers, insurance agents and brokers, real estate agents and brokers, stock and bond sales

workers, demonstrators, sales workers and sales clerks, grocery clerks, and cashiers/checkers, and 

kindred workers.

• Administrative Support Workers - Includes all clerical-type work regardless of level of difficulty, 

where the activities are predominantly non-manual though some manual work not directly involved 

with altering or transporting the products is included. Includes: bookkeepers, collectors (bills and 

accounts), messengers and office helpers, office machine operators (including computer), shipping

and receiving clerks, stenographers, typists and secretaries, telegraph and telephone operators, legal 

assistants, and kindred workers. 

• Craft Workers (skilled) - Manual workers of relatively high skill level having a thorough and 

comprehensive knowledge of the processes involved in their work. Exercise considerable 

independent judgment and usually receive an extensive period of training. Includes: the building 
101

trades, hourly paid supervisors and lead operators who are not members of management, mechanics 

and repairers, skilled machining occupations, compositors and typesetters, electricians, engravers, 

painters (construction and maintenance), motion picture projectionists, pattern and model makers, 

stationary engineers, tailors, arts occupations, hand painters, coaters, bakers, decorating occupations, 

and kindred workers. 

• Operatives (semi-skilled) - Workers who operate machine or processing equipment or perform other 

factory-type duties of intermediate skill level which can be mastered in a few weeks and require only 

limited training. Includes: apprentices (auto mechanics, plumbers, bricklayers, carpenters, 

electricians, machinists, mechanics, building trades, metalworking trades, printing trades, etc.), 

operatives, attendants (auto service and parking), blasters, chauffeurs, delivery workers, sewers and 

stitchers, dryers, furnace workers, heaters, laundry and dry cleaning operatives, milliners, mine 

operatives and laborers, motor operators, oilers and greasers (except auto), painters (manufactured 

articles), photographic process workers, truck and tractor drivers, knitting, looping, taping and 

weaving machine operators, welders and flame cutters, electrical and electronic equipment 

assemblers, butchers and meat cutters, inspectors, testers and graders, hand packers and packagers, 

and kindred workers. 

• Laborers (unskilled) - Workers in manual occupations which generally require no special training 

who perform elementary duties that may be learned in a few days and require the application of little 

or no independent judgment. Includes: garage laborers, car washers and greasers, grounds keepers 

and gardeners, farm workers, stevedores, wood choppers, laborers performing lifting, digging, 

mixing, loading and pulling operations, and kindred workers. 

• Service workers - Workers in both protective and non-protective service occupations. Includes: 

attendants (hospital and other institutions, professional and personal service, including nurse’s aides, 

and orderlies), barbers, char workers and cleaners, cooks, counter and fountain workers, elevator 

operators, firefighters and fire protection, guards, door-keepers, stewards, janitors, police officers and 

detectives, porters, waiters and waitresses, amusement and recreation facilities attendants, guides, 

ushers, public transportation attendants, and kindred workers.

Fiscal Year: The period from October 1 of one year to September 30 of the following year.

Goal: Under the Rehabilitation Act, an identifiable objective set by an agency to address or eliminate 

barriers to equal employment opportunity or to address the lingering effects of past discrimination. 

Major Occupations: Agency occupations that are mission related and heavily populated, relative to 

other occupations within the agency. 

Onsite Program Review: Visit by EEOC representatives to an agency to evaluate the agency's 

compliance with the terms of this Directive and/or to provide technical assistance.

Reasonable Accommodation (RA): Generally, any modification or adjustment to the work 

environment, or to the manner or circumstances under which work is customarily performed, that enables 

an individual with a disability to perform the essential functions of a position or enjoy equal benefits and 

privileges of employment as are enjoyed by similarly situated individuals without a disability. For a 

more complete definition, see 29 C.F.R. § 1630.2(o). See also, EEOC's Enforcement Guidance on 

Reasonable Accommodation and Undue Hardship under the Americans with Disabilities Act, No. 
102

915.002 (October 17, 2002). 

Relevant Labor Force: The source from which an agency draws or recruits applicants for employment 

or an internal selection such as a promotion. 

Section 501 Program: The affirmative program plan that each agency is required to maintain under 

Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act to provide individuals with disabilities adequate hiring, placement, 

and advancement opportunities. 

Section 717 Program: The affirmative program of equal employment opportunity that each agency is 

required to maintain for all employees and applicants for employment under Section 717 of Title VII. 

Selection Procedure: Any employment policy or practice that is used as a basis for an employment 

decision. 

Special Recruitment Program: A program designed to monitor recruitment of, and track applications 

from, persons with targeted disabilities. 

Targeted Disabilities: Disabilities that the Federal Government, as a matter of policy, has identified for 

special emphasis in affirmative action programs. They are: 1) deafness; 2) blindness; 3) missing 

extremities; 4) partial paralysis; 5) complete paralysis; 6) convulsive disorders; 7) mental retardation; 8) 

mental illness; and 9) distortion of limb and/or spine. 

Technical Assistance: Training, assistance or guidance provided by the EEOC in writing, over the 

telephone or in person. 

Under representation: Result of conditions in which the representation of EEO groups is lower than 

expected. 
103
104

DTRA Organizational Chart
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117

 
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163