2 

DEFENSE THREAT REDUCTION AGENCY

 ANNUAL EQUAL EMPLOYMENT 

OPPORTUNITY

PROGRAM STATUS REPORT

MANAGEMENT DIRECTIVE 715

FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2021 

PREPARED BY THE: 

EQUITY, DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION OFFICE
3 

Table of Contents 

PARTS A-D: AGENCY INFORMATION.......................................................................4 

PART E: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...........................................................................10 

PART F: CERTIFICATION OF ESTABLISHMENT OF CONTINUOUS EEO PROGRAMS ......40 

PART G: AGENCY SELF-ASSESSMENT CHECKLIST..................................................42 

PART H: ESSENTIAL ELEMENT DEFICIENCIES AND PLANNED ACTIVITIES.................66 

PART I: BARRIER ANALYSIS AND PLANNED ACTIVITIES.........................................95 

PART J: EMPLOYMENT PLAN FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES.............................132 

AGENCY WORKFORCE ANALYSIS.......................................................................163 

APPENDIX A: ACRONYMS..................................................................................171 
4 

 
5 

EEOC

FORM 

 715-01

 PART AD

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

FEDERAL AGENCY ANNUAL

EEO PROGRAM STATUS REPORT

 For period covering October 1, 2020 to September 30, 2021

 Part A - Department or Agency Identifying Information 

Agency Second

Level

Component 

Address City State Zip

Code 

Agency

Code 

 FIPS 

 Code 

Defense 

Threat 

Reduction 

Agency 

(DTRA) 

Not 

Applicable 

8725 John J. 

Kingman 

Road 

Fort 

Belvoir VA 22060 DD61 

Part B - Total Employment 

Total Employment Permanent 

Workforce 

Temporary 

Workforce 

Total Workforce 

Number of 

Employees 

1454 26 1480

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

Agency Leadership Name Title 

Head of Agency Rebecca K.C. Hersman Director

Head of Agency 

Designee Rebecca K.C. Hersman Director

Part C.2 - Agency Official(s) Responsible for Oversight of EEO Program(s) 
6 

EEO 

Program

Staff

Name Title

Series / Pay 

Plan 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 

Complaint 

Processing 

Program 

Manager 

Phillip Ellis 

Informal 

Complaint 

Program 

Manager 

0260/GS-13 571-616-6251 phillip.t.ellis.civ@ma

il.mil 

Diversity & 

Inclusion 

Officer James Jones

Diversity & 

Inclusion 

(D&I) 

Program 

Manager 

0260 GS-13 505-853-0648 james.a.jones125.civ

@mail.mil

Hispanic 

Program 

Manager

(SEPM)

James Jones EEO 

Specialist 0260/GS-13 505-853-0648 james.a.jones125.civ@mail.mil

Women’s 

Program 

Manager 

(SEPM)

Yorshia 

Houseal

EEO 

Specialist 0260/GS-13 571-616-6917 yorshia.e.houseal.civ@mail.mil

Disability 

Program 

Manager 

(SEPM)

Cheryl B. 

WilliamsPayton

SEPM 

Program 

Manager

0260/GS-13 571-616-6422 cheryl.b.williamspayton.civ@mail.mil

Special 

Placement 

Program 

Coordinator 

(PWD/IWD)

Cheryl B. 

WilliamsPayton

SEPM 

Program 

Manager

0260 GS-13 571-616-6422 cheryl.b.williamspayton.civ@mail.mil
7 

Subordinate Component City State Country 

(Optional)

Agency 

Code 

(xxxx)

FIPS

Codes

(xxxxx)

Reasonable 

Accommodat

ion Program 

Manager

Mary 

Lewandowski

RA Program 

Manager 020/GS-12 571-616-4802 mary.h.lewandowski.civ@mail.mil

Reasonable 

Accommodat

ion Program 

Manager

Sherry 

Parker

RA Program 

Manager 0201/GS-14 571-616-4342 sherry.d.parker6.civ@mail.mil

AntiHarassment 

Program 

Manager

Yorshia 

Houseal

AntiHarassment 

Program 

Manager

0260/GS-13 571-616-6917 yorshia.e.houseal.civ

@mail.mil

ADR 

Program 

Manager

Richard 

Conyers

ADR Program 

Manager 0260/GS-14 571-616-5720 richard.f.conyers2.civ@mail.mil

Compliance 

Manger Richard 

Conyers

Formal 

Compliant 

Program 

Manager

0260/GS-14 571-616-5720 richard.f.conyers2.civ

@mail.mil

Principal 

MD-715 

Preparer

Mary Lynn 

Dickson

EEO 

Manager 0260/GS-14 571-616-2567 mary.l.dickson7.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.).

Part D.2 – Mandatory and Optional Documents for this Report 
8 

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 YES

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 

Diversity Policy Statement YES 

Human Capital Strategic Plan NO 

EEO Strategic Plan YES 

Results from most recent Federal Employee

Viewpoint Survey or Annual Employee Survey YES 
9 

 
10 

 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, 2020 September 30, 2021

PART E: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

The Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) enables the Department of Defense (DoD), U.S. 

Government, and International Partners to counter and deter Weapons of Mass Destruction 

(WMD) and emerging threats. Working within this mission, and under National and DoD 

guidance, the Agency reduces the risks posed by WMD and emerging threats, delivering 

innovative material and non-material solutions that ensure a strong, protected, and prepared Joint 

Force.

The DTRA Strategy included the following Strategic Goals, Core Functions and Directors 

Priorities for the FY21. 

The Agency’s 2022-2027 Strategy includes the following Strategic Goals: 

1. Ensure a Safe, Secure, Reliable, and Effective Nuclear Deterrent; 

2. Counter Weapons of Mass Destruction and Emerging Threats; 

3. Enable the Joint Force and Allies/Partners to Compete and win Against Adversaries; and

4. Build an adaptive and resilient Agency. 

 

The Agency’s Strategic Goals are enabled by the following Core Functions: 

 1. DTRA Enable Strategic Deterrence; 

 2. DTRA Supports U.S. Treaty Implementation and Verification; 

 3. DTRA Partners to Reduce Global WMD Threats; 

 4. DTRA Identifies Vulnerabilities and Mitigation Strategies; and 

 5. DTRA Develops and Delivers Rapid Capabilities. 

The Director’s Priorities:

 1. CWMD/Emerging Threats Mission Excellence;

 2. Align Resources to Strategy; and 

 3. Drive the Agenda with a Sense of Urgency. 

During FY22 the DTRA Strategy was rescinded and replaced by the Director’s Strategic Intent 

2022-2027. The FY22 report will include the Agency’s revised Strategic Priorities, Core 

Functions, Essential Approaches, and the Director’s Initiatives. 
11 

DTRA is both a Defense Agency (executing strategic, Defense policy oriented programs on 

behalf of offices within OSD); and a Combat Support Agency (responsive to counter-WMD

requirements out of the Joint Staff, Combatant Commands, and the Services). Our unique, 

specialized staff works collaboratively to find, coordinate, and produce solutions that align 

resources to strategy, and drive an actionable, forward-thinking CWMD/emerging threats 

agenda on behalf of National Defense and National Security goals.

 

In addition to the Office of the Director (DIR) and its associated staff functions, the DTRA 

workforce comprises nine Directorates: Acquisition, Contracts, and Logistics (AL);

Cooperative Threat Reduction (CT); Human Resources (HR); Information Management and 

Technology (IT); Nuclear Enterprise (NE); On-Site Inspection and Building Capacity (OB); 

Operations and Integration (OI); Research and Development (RD); and Strategic Integration 

(SI). 

 

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

presence at a number of other locations worldwide, including New Mexico, Florida, California, 

Germany, the United Kingdom, and deploys members worldwide as necessary. 

EQUITY, DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION OFFICE 

MISSION STATEMENT – The Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Office (EI) mission is to create 

and sustain an inclusive work environment that aligns with DTRA’s mission. 

EI Office Structure - The EI is comprised of the following:

• Affirmative Employment Program (AEP),

• Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR),

• Pre-Complaints, MEO and Formal Complaints, 

• Diversity and Inclusion (D&I), 

• Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS), 

• Climate Assessments,

SO1: Integrate EEO into the workforce.

SO2: Improve program execution and customer service. 

SO3: Establish new relationships, to include nontraditional partners. 

SO4: Enhance effectiveness of internal relationships. 

SO5: Become a catalyst for change.

SO6: Encourage leaders to support innovation and 

creativity. 

SO7: Create a shared understanding of how EEO 

contributes to the DTRA mission. 

SO8: Provide tailored consultative support services. 

Goal 1: Improve focus beyond 

compliance.

Goal 2: Leverage and expand our 

collaboration with internal and 

external partners.

Goal 3: Facilitate innovation.

EI Strategic Goals and Objectives 

Goal 4: Educate and advise DTRA 

Leadership and Staff. 
12 

• Anti-Harassment Program (AHP),

• Special Emphasis Programs (SEP), 

• Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR), 

• Equal Employment Opportunity/Equal Opportunity (EO) Training. 

The current staff consists of an EI Director, two EEO Managers and five EEO Specialists. 

SIX ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS ACCOMPLISHMENTS

1. ESSENTIAL ELEMENT A: 

2. DEMONSTRATED COMMITMENT FROM AGENCY 

LEADERSHIP 

EEO Policies and Procedures Communicated to the Workforce: The Agency disseminated 

its EEO Policy Statements (Anti-Harassment, Civilian, Military, Sexual Harassment/Sexual 

Assault, Harassment, Diversity and Inclusion) and other EEO program information during the 

EEO Training for Supervisors and Employees. The reasonable accommodation (RA) procedures 

are provided in the Supervisory Role in HR Management Training. During training Supervisors 

and Employees were informed of their rights and responsibilities pursuant to the EEO process, 

AHP, ADR process, RA program, and behaviors that could result in discipline. These policies 

are also annotated on the Agency’s internal and external website. 

The policy statements reinforce that Employees are protected against discrimination based on 

race, color, national origin, religion, sex (including pregnancy, sexual orientation, and gender 

identity), age, genetic information, disability, and retaliation. The policy statements highlighted 

that harassment, sexual harassment and sexual assault is not and will not be tolerated. They 

stated that DTRA is committed to sustaining an environment where all members of our team has 

the opportunity to reach their maximum potential, where Diversity of thought is both respected 

and promoted, and inclusiveness is consistently practiced. The policy statements also annotated 

who to contact, the EI Office, to report any allegations of discrimination or harassment. 

The EI Office contact information was posted on the internal and external websites to include 

the EI Director, Complaints Manager/Specialist, SEP Managers and other staff members. 

FEVS and Climate Assessment Surveys: The Agency utilizes the FEVS and Climate 

Assessment surveys to monitor the Agency or Directorate climate within the workforce. The 

FEVS examined Employee Engagement, New Inclusion Quotient, Global Satisfaction, Effective 

Communication and Human Resource Management. A 4-Year Trend Analysis was conducted 

which identified continued improvement in the Employee Engagement Index and the Employee

Engagement Drivers. Additionally, it is vital to note that DTRA’s workforce participation in the 

FEVS continued to increase. DTRA’s response rate increased in FY20 to 59% an increase of 

7% in comparison with 52% in FY19. 
13 

The Climate Assessments focus areas were: Senior Leadership, First Line Supervisors, Mission, 

Communication and Teamwork, Promotion and Career Development, Recognition and Awards, 

and Morale. The EI Office created and administered five Climate Assessments during FY20, 

with a total of 498 responses. Climate Assessments involve gathering information from 

Employees who have different perspectives, insights and experiences. The information gathered 

assists DTRA in addressing known and unknown workforce issues. Additionally, the Agency 

effectively utilized the Climate Assessments to be more proactive in its Employee engagement 

efforts. 

Diversity and Inclusion (D&I) Council: In FY21, the DTRA Director affirmed his 

commitment to EEO Principles and Diversity by establishing a contract to support Diversity

initiatives within DTRA and a D&I Council with the goal of building an inclusive workforce. 

The D&I Council conducted preliminary D&I planning/strategic sessions with KUSI in 

October. The Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (EI) Office provided the Council with DoD 

Performance Management and Appraisal Program (DPMAP) Critical Elements EEO 

Supervisory Element. The first and second issues of the CHARGE Quarterly Newsletter were 

released, which provided an overview of D&I initiatives across the Agency. The D&I Council 

& ERGs participated in the first D&I workshop which focused on recruitment and barrier 

analysis; foundational in developing ways to make the workplace more diverse and inclusive. 

The second D&I workshop, Driving Change, was provided by KUSI and gave insight on how 

ERG members can be change agents within DTRA. The Council crafted a hiring policy report 

that offers recommendations and standardizes hiring practices across the Agency to ensure that 

they are equitable and inclusive, which was provided to DTRA Leadership. The D&I Council 

Charter was revised to incorporate lessons learned over the past year and guidance from the 

White House EEOC. The Council and EI reviewed all ERG Action Plans and they were 

updated. 

FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20

Response Rate Government Wide 46% 41% 43% 44%

30% 30% 33% 35%

37% 34% 36% 42%

51% 46% 52% 59%

Employee Engagement Index Overall 65% 69% 70% 76%

50% 59% 60% 69%

76% 76% 69% 81%

72% 72% 69% 73%

Employee Engagement Drivers Overall 64% 67% 68% 76%

57% 61% 63% 69%

54% 60% 62% 73%

63% 64% 66% 75%

70% 71% 70% 79%

75% 76% 74% N/A

37% 42% 46% 59%

66% 70% 71% 79%

72% 76% 77% 86%

64% 68% 68% 80%

79% 81% 79% 84%

Teamwork

Training and Development

Work/Life Balance and Support

Job Resources

Merit System Principles

Performance Feedback

Performance Rating

Performance Recognition and Reward

Results Driven

Leaders Lead

Supervisors

Intrinsic Work Experience

Collaborative Management/

Empowerment/Communication

Department of Defense 

OSD, Joint Staff, Defense Agencies, 

and Field Activities

Defense Threat Reduction Agency
14 

In FY20, the Agency established its D&I Council, which is comprised of two co-chairs, one 

general/flag officer and one SES, and voting members of various Directorates. The Council 

established monthly meetings for the third Thursday of the month. Also, the EI Office developed 

an ERG charter and established six Agency-wide ERGs. Each ERG appointed a lead and co-lead 

to provide Leadership and oversight support for all functions of the ERGs. The ERGs are 

initiating activities such as: Data and Barrier Analysis; Employee/Workforce Engagement; 

Recruitment and Outreach; and Training and Cultural Awareness to resolve systemic workplace 

issues. 

Diversity in the Hiring Process: During FY21 the EI Office, in collaboration with the Human 

Resources Directorate (HR) participated in DTRA Strategic Recruitment Discussions (SRDs).

The SRDs enhanced DTRA's efforts to diversify the workforce through providing education for 

DTRA's Hiring Managers. In FY21 the EI Office participated in 95 SRDs. Topics discussed 

during a SRD include the following: 

• Document review to ensure DTRA cast the widest possible recruitment net (i.e. Veterans, 

Individuals with Disabilities, HBCUs, and HSIs); 

• Schedule A and Workforce Recruitment Program (WRP); and

• Best practices for interview panels and question development. 

Additionally, the EI Office also reviewed interview questions to identify any potentially 

discriminatory wording. 

Disciplinary Actions for Discrimination: Following a finding of discrimination, the Agency 

explores whether it should take a disciplinary action. The Agency has a disciplinary policy 

and/or table of penalties that covers discrimination conduct. Where appropriate, the Agency

disciplines Employees for discriminatory conduct. When there is a finding of discrimination, the 

Agency informs Managers/Supervisors about the discrimination conduct (methods of informing 

can include training, webinars, brochures, emails, or types of written communication). 

ESSENTIAL ELEMENT B:

INTEGRATION OF EEO INTO THE AGENCY’S STRATEGIC MISSION

EI Director Involvement: The EI 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 EI Director met and reported

directly to the Agency Director and regularly informed the Agency Director of the EI office top 

priorities, compliance issues, EEO, and Diversity and Inclusion efforts. The EI Director attended

weekly Agency Director staff meetings and participated in various forums throughout the 

Agency, (e.g., the Director’s Intelligence Brief), creating a more engaged working relationship 

with senior leaders.
15 

State of the Agency Brief: The EI Director presented the annual State of the Agency briefing to 

the DIR and senior officials. The presentation covered the assessment of the Agency’s 

performance from each of the six elements, results from the Gender Pay and Generational Study, 

and EEO FY21 initiatives. 

Program Funding: The Agency continued to allocate and execute appropriate 

funding to ensure compliance on EEO programs such as EEO, the Affirmative 

Employment Program, Special Emphasis, Diversity and inclusion, staff training, 

and contracts for Investigations and Court Reporting services.

FY21 EEO PROGRAM EXPENDITURES

DIVERSITY CONTRACT $52,533.00

INVESTIGATION CONTRACT $1,358.00

COURT REPORTING SERVICES $10,177.90

TOTAL EXPENSE $64,068.90

Regular Internal of Remote Sites: The major Geographically Separated Units (GSUs) or 

Remote Sites, Eglin AFB, Kirtland AFB, Travis AFB and DTRA Europe (Stuttgart) had been 

visited face-to-face by the EI Office Director on a yearly rotation. These visits were suspended 

due to the COVID-19 pandemic; however, these visits will be restarted pending pandemic status 

during FY22 or FY23. The EI Office has not been proactively visiting the smaller GSU offices, 

we was largely been dependent on Directorate Leadership to alert us of needs and issues during 

FY21. To assist in meeting the needs and conduct visits with the smaller GSU offices we utilized

bi-monthly GSU meetings with the various Leadership teams. 

Leadership Development Programs: The Agency continued to create and maintain a model 

EEO program by ensuring professional and career development opportunities were available for 

participants at all levels from the most junior Employee or military Service member to Senior 

Executives and General/Flag Officers. The Agency provided professional and career 

development opportunities through its four Leadership Development Program (LDP) tracks. 

Track 1 provided non-competitive learning and development opportunities for all Employees. A 

competitive track, LDP Track 2 provided Employees the opportunity to participate in 

developmental programs for their professional and career enhancement. This track included the 

ability for civilians to pursue an undergraduate and/or graduate degrees on their time; and in 

some cases, the ability to also pursue a Masters or a Doctorate degree as a full-time student, for 

one academic year. LDP Track 3 is a competitive track designed to train, develop, and prepare 

participants for obtaining higher level Leadership positions; formal training & Leadership

development opportunities are program foundations. Lastly, LDP Track 4 focused on Senior 

Executive Service/General Officer executive development. 
16 

In FY21, DTRA allocated funding to each Directorate, in proportion to its military and civilian 

personnel populations, to execute individual training plans and provide opportunities to attend 

core Leadership development courses. During FY21, the Agency had 5 Employees whom were 

selected during the FY20 solicitation to participate in the competitive academic degree (CAP)

program. Additionally, 34 Employees participated in Career Broadening or Competitive 

Leadership programs. All Agency applicants were subjected to a comprehensive 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 of the Agency’s Directorates and an additional advisor from one of the Agency’s Staff 

Offices. The LDC reviewed, rated, and ranked applications based on a standardized application 

criterion. Finally, a panel of senior leaders conducted an interview with each of the top 

candidates and made final LDC recommendations to the HR Director. Personnel who were not 

selected were afforded the opportunity to receive feedback on their submission and results to 

learn from the experience and ensure transparency in the process.

Mentoring Program: DTRA’s Mentoring Program continued to promote equal opportunity for 

all Employees during the second year of the pandemic and maximum telework environment. The 

DTRA Mentoring Program is designed to improve the Leadership skills and increase 

organizational awareness for civilian and military Employees. The program goals are: 1) 

Facilitate transfer of technical and professional knowledge, skills and competencies; 2) Gain an 

understanding of organizational values, relationships and unwritten rules; 3) Strengthen 

communication and collaboration across DTRA; 4) Increase exposure at different organizational 

levels; and 5) Create a greater sense of community. This program was conducted in a virtual 

format, ensuring successful communication and collaboration across the Agency during a time of 

maximum telework for many federal Employees. The Main Mentoring Program ran over a nine 

month period and can accommodate up to 150+ participants (about 75+ mentor/mentee 

partnerships). The first iteration of the Mentoring Component for Supervisors (six months 

designed to help new Supervisors transition from technical positions to Leadership positions) 

started in FY20 and concluded in FY21. The overall FY21 program consisted of 148 civilian 

Employees (about 74 mentor/mentee partnerships). Mentors included ten Senior Executive 

members. DTRA senior leaders played an active part in the program by hosting virtual brown 

bags and participating in key program activities. Senior leaders met with mentees on a regular 

basis in a virtual environment and discussed key points from the program's featured book, The 

Power of Positive Leadership, by Jon Gordon. The members participated in a first ever 

"Presenting with Peers" session which was a stretch assignment for those that desired to practice 

their PowerPoint presentation skills in front of other participants and receive feedback. They also 

participated in a new “Knowledge Sharing Panel” which is a panel of Supervisors, primarily 

Senior Executives, who shared their professional knowledge, the panel was open for questions, 

comments, and dialogue. The DTRA Director also showed his support by meeting with the 

participants to share mission updates and provided an opportunity for them to ask questions in a 

casual virtual setting. 
17 

Number of 

Participants 

in Grades 

7-9 

Number of 

Participants 

in Grades 

11-12 

Number of 

Participants 

in Grades

13-15 

Number of 

SES

Participants 

Mentees 3 5 54 0

Mentors 0 0 43 10

Outreach and Talent Acquisition Plan: In FY21, the HR Directorate continued to expand the 

DTRA network and established relationships with community partners and organizations, 

including disability and veteran organizations, to attract diverse talent in Mission Critical 

Occupations. DTRA worked with Supervisors and hiring Managers on the Schedule A process, 

Workforce Recruitment Program (WRP), and the 30% Disabled Veterans Program. There were 2 

WRP participants in FY21, extended to FY22. During FY21 the Agency hired 6 Employees 

utilizing the Schedule A hiring authority. Additionally, DTRA new hires included 59 (47%) 

Veterans, of which 34 (27%) had a disability rating of 30% or more. During FY21, the EI office 

and HR’s Talent Acquisition Program representatives participated in four targeted outreach 

events for PWDs that included Operation Warfighter, Baltimore and Veteran Eastern Regional 

Career Fairs and Education and Employment Initiatives. 

Employee Resource Groups (ERG): The ERG’s developed and submitted Action Plans for 

review by the D&I Council Chairs and the EI Director. The ERGs assisted the EI office by 

conducting a review and providing feedback on the EI Diversity Hiring Guidance. The ERG’s 

received quarterly training via HR’s Talent Acquisition Program (TAP) & Outreach Team to 

expand recruitment and Outreach. The D&I Council and the ERGs participated in DTRA’s first 

D&I workshop focusing on recruitment, barrier analysis and developing strategies for achieving 

a more diverse and inclusive workplace. The ERG’s also planned observance month or special 

observances in coordination with the Special Emphasis Program Manager and the Employee

Engagement & Morale Council (EEMC). Additionally, the EI office provided monthly training 

for the ERGs.

• African American (AA); The EI Director met with the ERG to advise and assist with their 

initiatives. 

 Participated in TAP & Outreach events with Howard University, the D&I Career 

Fair, Virginia Commonwealth University, Federally Employed Women (FEW) 

Leadership Summit, FEW STEM Panel, Mental Health Symposium, and the Eco 

D&I Career Fair. 

The AA ERG selected a theme for each month of FY21. 

 MLK Jr. Observance blog and PowerPoint were shared regarding unknown 

African Royalty. 

 Black History Month shared informational presentations highlighting Black 

achievements and DMV Black History. 

 Women’s History month focused on African American Women who made U.S. 

Military History, Black Women and Healthcare, Black Women Hair and Fashion, 
18 

Dove Brand– The Crown Research Study and Stereotypes and the Black Woman. 

They also organized a “No labels, no limits” discussion to bring awareness to 

various labels and share perspectives on various terms and their meanings. 

 Juneteenth they created an informational PowerPoint regarding the history and 

significance of the date. The presentation was posted to their SharePoint page and 

also emailed to everyone in OI-MSC Security and Counterintelligence 

Directorate. 

 “Journey to Leadership” panel for Juneteenth provided mentoring and lesson’s 

learned from senior African American professionals. 

 Collaborated with the LGBTQIA+ ERG during Pride Month to create a blog post 

and PowerPoint presentation regarding African American LGBTQIA+ Pioneers. 

 Wellness Month, in August, the ERG shared information on their SharePoint page 

regarding Traveling While Black and Food Deserts, which are places with no 

ready access to fresh and nutritious food options. 

 Monthly spotlights focused on DTRA AA individuals or ERG members on their 

SharePoint page to highlight excellent work done within DTRA. 

 Championed a clothing drive for Afghan refugees at DTRA HQ. 

Additionally, the ERG also created a video presentation, which included collaborating 

with all ERGs, to celebrate the D&I Council and ERG First Anniversary, highlighting 

events during the D&I inaugural year and contained interviews from the Agency

Director, D&I Council and EI Director. 

• Asian American Pacific Islander (AAPI); 

 Reviewed Agency data to establish a base line for workforce demographics. 

 Participated in the TAP & Outreach events with Stanford University Job Fair, 

West Point, and Women in Tech Symposium. 

 AAPI ERG Lead joined the Pan Pacific American Leaders & Mentors (PPALM); 

and provided insight into DTRA's mission, shared accomplishments of the DTRA 

D&I Council and ERGs as best practices to cadets from the United States Military 

Academy at West Point; US Naval Academy, and US Air Force Academy. 

 AAPI Heritage month celebrations included; a Senior Leader Round table, 

cultural display, virtual cooking demonstrations, published a cookbook, a 

Combatting Anti-Asian Violence talk, and an AAPI Heroes and Award 

Ceremony.

• Hispanic, The EI Director met with the Hispanic ERG providing advice and assistance 

regarding their initiatives. 

 Participated in the TAP & Outreach events for the West New Mexico University 

Career Fair;

 Hosted a lecture series;

 The Mayaguez Incident – 12 to 15 May 1975 

 Morinqueneers – 65th Infantry Regiment, 1899 to Presentation of Congressional 

Gold Medal 
19 

 Hosted lunchtime brown bag – Music/Culture series to create cultural awareness;

Salsa, Merengue, Mambo, and Bomba-Plena, Ranchera, Mariachi, Cumbia, and 

Tango

 Collaborated with the Women’s ERG for information sharing on several Women 

Firsts, within DoD (First female to Lead a Service, First Female Coast Guard 

Commandant); 

 Participated in Inter-Government mentoring, with other agencies as they stood up 

their Hispanic ERG;

 Hosted a Cinco De Mayo educational display; and 

 Commemorated Hispanic Heritage Month through a series of displays. 

• Individuals with Disabilities (PWDs); The EI Director met with the PWD ERG 

providing advice and assistance regarding their initiatives. 

 Analyzed the Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS) to collect relevant 

information. 

 Investigated the use of assistive Bluetooth devices in DTRA facilities. 

 Participated in the TAP & Outreach events with the Career and disabled Career 

Fair and Bender’s Career Fair. 

 Coordinated with HR, Supervisors, and each Directorate to champion the 

Workforce Recruitment Program (WRP). 

 Hosted a panel highlighting benefits of hiring WRP candidates, and recruited 

members from each Directorate to increase PWD connection with the Agency. 

 Provided education for users/implementers and streamlined the process for 

interpreters entering DTRA facilities, including approval of a badging process for 

interpreters. 

 The ERG also initiated cross-sharing and collaborating with Wounded Warrior 

Project.

• Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Questioning/Queer, Intersex, Asexual/Ally 

(LGBTQIA+);

 “Ask me Anything” panel and ice-cream social celebrated Pride month. 

 “Ask me Anything” panel and ice-cream social celebrated Women’s month. 

 Members supported and attended the DAF Women’s Air and Space Power 

Symposium, a professional development series. 

 Participated in TAP and Outreach events with the Internship and Employment 

Fair and Federally Employed Women (FEW) Leadership Summit. 

• The Women’s ERG established DTRA’s LeanIN Circle to connect individuals that are 

interested in empowering women at work and created outreach and fellowship. 

 Women’s History events highlighted significant events and contributions that 

women have made in DTRA and the nation. 

 Hosted a DTRA talk for Women’s History month. 
20 

 Attended The Conference Board Organization’s Diversity, Equity and Inclusion 

(DEI) Virtual Global Event. 

 Performed a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT) analysis 

to review the past year and prepare for the year to come. 

 Hosted an art exhibit at DTRA HQs to celebrate National Women’s Appreciation 

day.

D & I Contract: KUSI developed and facilitated a Change and Management Leadership

Training for the ERGs. KUSI also created a Change Management and Leadership ERG 

Participant Workbook for DTRA distribution. The workbook serves as an additional resource to 

guide ERGs with their efforts as leaders of change. C.H.A.R.G.E. (Culture. Humility. Agility. 

Respect. Global Execution.) Brand was developed by KUSI, who also drafted the first issue of 

the C.H.A.R.G.E. newsletter. A D&I Council Best Practices Guide was developed and presented 

to the Council, as well as the ERGs. KUSI analyzed the 2019 FEV Scores and other government 

agencies’ strategic plan goals to provide guidance for the development of DTRA’s D&I Strategic 

Plan goals. Furthermore, KUSI briefed the Acting Director on D&I efforts accomplished by 

DTRA and provided next steps for moving forward. During the briefing they covered the 

following topics; the Strategic Plan Goals, Strategic Communication Plan Goals, D&I Best 

Practices Guide, C.H.A.R.G.E and the DTRA Culture Change System (DCCS). 

ESSENTIAL ELEMENT C:

MANAGEMENT AND PROGRAM ACCOUNTABILITY

Anti-Harassment Program (AHP): The Anti-Harassment (AH) Program is coordinated by the 

Agency’s designated AH Program Manager. The Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Office (EI) 

revised the AH Policy to ensure the following information is included: 

• Information as to what constitutes prohibited conduct and the appropriate steps for 

reporting harassing conduct; 

• The venues for receiving and responding to allegations; 

• Inform Employee’s that the Agency AHP is a separate from the EEO process to address 

unlawful discriminatory conduct; 

• Provide assurance that Supervisors will take immediate and appropriate corrective 

actions when harassment occurs; and that to the extent possible, the Agency will protect 

the confidentiality of the individuals submitting claims of harassment;

• Retaliation against Employees, to include witnesses, who report harassment or 

participate in harassment investigations is prohibited. 

Agency Supervisors are responsible for conducting inquiries of harassment allegations and 

ensuring they are conducted promptly within 10 days. After the inquiry, if additional information 

is required an investigation or mediation will be sought to resolve the harassment matter. The 

Deputy Director will appoint an investigator to complete the fact finding within 60 days. The 

Office of General Counsel (OGC) and Human Resources (HR) are consulted for corrective 
21 

action measures. Based on this process there is a firewall between the AHP, and the EEO 

Complaints Process. 

Reasonable Accommodations (RA) and Personal Assistance Services (PAS): In April 2021, 

HR revised its Reasonable Accommodation Handbook in accordance with guidance from the 

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The revised procedures are posted on 

DTRA’s external website, https://www.DTRA.mil/Work-With-Us/Pay-and-Benefits/. 

The Agency processed 20 RA requests, which included a combination of assistive technologies, 

sit/stand workstations, ergonomic chairs, extra laptop and dragon software. The RA coordinator 

worked closely with the IT Directorate and Building Manager to provide approved 

accommodations for individuals, such as four sit/stand workstations, three ergonomic chairs; 

extra laptop, dragon software and coordinated with the Environmental, Safety and Occupational 

Health Office (ES) to ensure ergonomic assessments were conducted upon request. The Agency 

provided Sign Language Interpreter (SLI) services for workplace meetings, conferences, 

training, and special events and maintained an SLI log which tracked expenditures for all events 

and requirements, facilitating participation in over 441 events. The Agency processed three 

Computer Accommodation Program (CAP) requests at no cost to DTRA as CAP is a free service 

provided by DoD.

Supervisory EEO Performance Element: The EI Office revised the Supervisory EEO 

performance element to include a requirement to promote an inclusive workplace where 

Diversity and individual differences are valued while ensuring a work environment free from 

discrimination. This element was approved by the Human Resource Policy Board (HRPB) and 

will be added to the Supervisors and Managers, Department of Defense Performance 

Management and Appraisal Program (DPMAP). The revised Supervisory EEO element will be 

implemented for the April 2022 DPMAP performance period. 

EI and HR Monthly Collaboration: The EI Director and HR Director continued their monthly 

collaboration on personnel programs, policies, and procedures in accordance with EEOC laws, 

instructions, and management directives. In FY21, EI and HR collaborated on several initiatives 

such as the Diversity Hiring Guidance, Recruitment and Outreach strategies, the Affirmative 

Action Plan for PWDs and activities and the establishment of a D&I contract to assist in 

developing and executing D&I strategies throughout the Agency. 

Affirmative Action Plan: EI and HR partnered to implement the Affirmative Action Plan for 

PWDs. The following accomplishments were highlighted in FY21: 

• The EI Office created a disability roster and sent out e-mail communication to the 

disability community regarding internal and external opportunities such as career 

development, mentoring, and specialized training and events training for Managers and 

Employees. 

• The EI Office coordinated a Veterans Day Working Group and provided a successful 

Veterans Day Celebration to honor Veterans within the Agency for their service. The 
22 

theme was, “Honoring Those Who Served.” The Agency’s guest speaker was Sergeant 

Major (Retired) Gary Smith, United States Marine Corps. Sergeant Major Smith shared 

his experience and success stories with the workforce. Graphics created a video that 

captured a group of World War II Veterans at the Washington DC memorial during a flag 

presentation and a few of the DTRA Veterans introduced themselves and shared why 

they chose to serve in the military. 

• The Agency hosted a virtual Disability Hiring Authorities for Individuals with 

Disabilities Training for the Supervisors on October 28, 2021. Guest presenters were Ms. 

Frances Vhay and Miranda Lange from the Department of Labor. 

• The EI Office created toolkits and quick guides for Supervisors and Managers to assist in 

gaining an understanding and benefits for hiring and working with Individuals with 

Disabilities that brings valuable asset, skills, and experience to the workplace. 

• The EI Office provided Schedule A applicants information regarding the Schedule A 

hiring process and provided them with a Schedule A Fact Sheet, Federal Resume Tips 

and additional information regarding programs available to assist Individuals with 

Disabilities. The SEP Manager reviewed USAJobs for available positions for the Agency 

and surrounding agencies that the applicant may be qualified for and provided the link to 

the applicant. 

• DTRA continued to recruit 30% or more disabled Veterans. Of the 752 Veterans, 366 

(49%) were identified as disabled Veterans, and 318 (48%) were identified as 30% or 

more disabled Veterans. During FY21, DTRA brought onboard 126 new hires, of whom 

59 (47%) were Veterans and 29 (23%) were identified as 30% or more disabled Veterans. 

• Created Disability Employment Training for Supervisors and Managers to educate and 

provide information on how to work with individuals with disabilities. 

• Collaborated with HR and CAP and Wounded Warrior Program and provided a virtual 

Information Session to the workforce. 

EI Office Advises Senior Leaders and Supervisors on EEO Matters: The EI Office provided 

management and Supervisory officials with regular EEO updates, including complaints and 

workforce data summaries, through the State of the Agency Brief, monthly briefing and EEO 

Training. Anti-Harassment, WRP, Veteran and Employee Engagement toolkits were developed 

to educate Managers and Supervisors on various processes. The EI Office readily addressed 

EEO questions or concerns raised by Managers and Supervisors. 

Directorate Partnerships to Promote an Inclusive Workplace 

 

The Office of the Inspector General (IG/OIG) Office promoted an inclusive workplace by 

conducting the following initiatives: 

• OIG assisted Employees with allegations of possible climate, Diversity, or discrimination 

concerns.

• They held discussions with EI when EI-related cases were being addressed. 

• OIG served as an advisory member on the monthly Diversity and Inclusion Working 

Group. 
23 

• OIG Served as an advisory member on the Human Resources Personnel Board, where 

senior Managers review personnel programs throughout the Agency. 

The Acquisition, Contracts, and Logistics (AL) Directorate promoted an inclusive 

workplace by conducting the following initiatives:

• Integrated Equal Employment Opportunities (EEO) programs or policies (i.e. Directorate 

created hiring guidance including internal and external panelist and male/female 

representation). 

• AL integrated EEO policies in hiring decisions. 

• AL Hiring Business Rules incorporated Diversity and fairness practices including: 

ensuring consistent scoring criteria and interview questions for all applicants; all hiring 

panels included at least one female and one individual from another directorate; and 

coordination with EI was required to ensure there are no objections to the questions being 

asked by the hiring panel or in regard to the makeup of the panel. 

Several leaders and personnel within AL demonstrated their commitment to Diversity by 

participating in various DTRA Employee Resource Groups (ERGs). The AL Leadership team 

was committed to continuing to foster an inclusive workplace where everyone was treated with 

respect and dignity, coming together for constructive dialogues and solving challenges. AL 

Supervisors and team leads completed Unconscious Bias training, a course offered by the 

Brookings Institution, in October 2020. The Directorate also utilized Unconscious Bias training 

as a team building activity towards creating an inclusive workforce. Employees, Supervisors and 

Managers were recognized for demonstrating superior accomplishments in EEO or Diversity. 

Ms. Willisa Donald, Director of the Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (EI) Office was invited to 

participate in ALs March All Hands to discuss and promote the Workplace Recruitment Program 

(WRP) that connects federal agencies with qualified candidates with disabilities for temporary or 

permanent positions. 

Recruitment, partnerships, internships with Tribal and Historically Black Colleges and 

Universities or Minority Institutions (HBCU/MIs) Office of Small Business Programs (AL-SB) 

presented two (2) DoD Office of Diversity Management and Equal Opportunity, “Talking to the 

People” events were hosted in conjunction with HBCUs. One was on 26 March 2021, which was 

cohosted by Howard University with 700 attendees. The other was on 8 April 2021, which was 

co-hosted by Hampton University with 1,500 attendees. DTRA educated attendees on how 

HBCUs/MIs can support DoD through Research and Development, through the Small Business 

Technology Transfer Program; through provision and development assistance to Protégé firms 

through the DoD Mentor Protégé Program; and through participation in full and open 

recruitment solicitations. 

The Cooperative Threat Reduction (CT/CTR) Directorate promoted an inclusive workplace 

by conducting the following initiatives: 
24 

• The CTR fully supported and enforced the Inclusion and Diversity policies of the 

Agency. 

• CTR integrated Inclusion and Diversity initiatives throughout the hiring process and 

duration of employment by enacting several internal policies and practices including 

blind resume reviews and diverse hiring panels, with the goal of providing Equal 

Employment Opportunities for new hires and reducing potential inherent biases. Blind 

resume reviews include removing any personal identifying information, such as names 

and contact information, college/university names, membership organization names, 

authorship on peer-reviewed publication, any mention of gender, and any references’ 

names and contact information. This allowed the hiring Manager to solely focus on the 

technical information on the resume and how they align to the requirements of the 

position. 

• In line with DTRA’s Diversity Guidance and cleared by the Equity, Diversity and 

Inclusion (EI) Office, interview panels were convened with the following make-up: at 

least one panelist who identified as a man, at least one panelist who identified as a 

woman, at least one panelist external to CTR, and at least one panelist representing an 

underrepresented minority group within DTRA. One panelist can address multiple 

desired attributes, with the intent to have an odd number panel, with at least three (3) 

panelist. 

• Inclusion and Diversity were addressed directly to the workforce throughout the year by 

the CTR Director in the form of virtual town halls, climate surveys, and Employee 

training. The CTR Director addressed proper reporting of incidences through chain of 

command, the CTR Front Office, and DTRA EI or IG, as appropriate. CTR Climate 

surveys were issued and used to improve the CTR Leadership climate in FY21. Several 

CTR departments offered Unconscious Bias, Arbinger and Brookings trainings that were 

well attended, during FY21. 

The Research and Development (RD) Directorate promoted an inclusive workplace by 

conducting the following initiatives: 

• Chemical and Biological Technologies Department (RD-CB): In FY21, DTRA 

engaged with 32 HBCU/MIs through two recorded webinars, Navigating USAjobs and 

the SMART Program Spotlight. Virtual events enabled direct engagement with students 

and faculty and recordings of these events were posted to the Defense Visual Information 

Distribution Service (DVIDS) for broader continuing access. 

• Enabling Capabilities (RD-EC) Department: The DTRA basic research program 

operates two University Research Alliances (URAs). Each URA was made up of 

approximately twenty (20) partner organizations, primarily universities. Multiple 

historically black colleges and universities/minority institutions (HBCU/MIs) were

important partners within these alliances, including Morgan State University, Fisk 

University, University of California Riverside, New Jersey Institute of Technology, 

University of Arizona, and Florida International University. Workforce development was

a key objective of these alliances, and both programs aimed at developing students from 
25 

HBCU/MIs, including internships. During FY21, the URAs trained seventeen (17) 

students in DTRA relevant STEM fields. 

• Nuclear Technologies (RD-NT) Department: Fisk University in Nashville, Tennessee 

was a subcontractor on a Phase I Small Business Technology Transfer (STRR) contract 

with Ne-Trek and will again be a subcontractor on the Phase II award now being 

processed through DTRA contracting. Fisk University is a member of the DTRA’s 

Interaction of Ionizing Radiation with Matter (IIRM) basic research alliance. Morgan 

State University is a member of the Materials Science in Extreme Environments (MSEE) 

basic research alliance. 

The On-Site Inspection and Building Capacity (OB) Directorate promoted an inclusive 

workplace by conducting the following initiatives: 

• Integrated Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) programs or policies (i.e. the 

Directorate created hiring guidance which included internal and external panelist and 

male/female representation). OB Standing Operating Procedure (SOP) 5: Civilian Hiring 

required hiring Managers to coordinate all panel questions with the Director of the 

Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (EI) Office. Additionally, the SOP required one external 

directorate panel member for GS-13 or above hiring actions; and one external department 

panel member for GS-12 or below hiring actions. 

• Creating inclusive workforce engagement activities (i.e. Request Unconscious and 

Implicit Bias training as a team building activity). 

DTRA-Europe was involved in the Women’s ERG, DTRA’s Women Peace and Security 

program and was a founding member of the LeanIN group. They hosted Women’s History 

Month and Equality Day events. 

ESSENTIAL ELEMENT D:

PROACTIVE PREVENTION OF UNLAWFUL DISCRIMINATION

The Agency proactively reviewed, revised, and published (internal/external websites) EEO 

policies relating to harassment prevention, EEO complaints process, RA, and PAS. 

Anti-Harassment Program: In FY21, DTRA established and redistributed the Anti-Harassment 

Policy Statement on Harassment, dated 16 July 2021, it is designed to be easily understood by all 

Employees and addresses conduct/behavior for Employees and Supervisors in the workforce. In 

addition, Employees are encouraged to report harassment before it becomes severe or pervasive. 

In FY21, EEOC program deficiencies were resolved by completing several taskers that complied 

with the EEOC guidance. The AHPM revised DTRA’s civilian and military harassment 

instruction to ensure compliance and alignment with the Agency’s mission and goals. 

Additionally, the program Manager outlined the ADR procedures and process for Supervisors 

when offering the ADR mediation techniques to address harassment concerns. The Supervisory 

Workplace Harassment Prevention Toolkit was revised to contain a step by step process for 
26 

processing Anti-Harassment cases, including the creation of the DTRA’s harassment intake form 

for documenting relevant case information. In FY21 3rd Qtr. (August/September) the EI Office 

hosted two Prevention of Harassment Trainings conducted by the EEOC and created monthly 

Prevention of Harassment Training modules for Employees and Supervisors. The Prevention of 

Harassment Training is mandatory and embedded into the Agency’s training portal. The EI 

Office also enhanced the Prevention of Harassment Training modules by adding slides related to 

disability based harassment. Finally, the EI Office streamlined the Agency’s internal harassment 

excel tracking tracker.

Trends Report and Data Monitoring Tool: The EI Office completed the trigger tables to assist 

in the barrier analysis process to identify potential barriers. The trigger tables analyze data such 

as sex, race, occupational category, participation rates, awards, and directorate break down of the 

workforce compared to the Civilian Labor Force Census (CLF). The use of the trigger tables 

identified the following areas of concern, Women, Hispanics, White Females, American Indian 

Alaskan Native Females, Native Hawaiian Pacific Islander Males, and Two or More Races Male 

and Female. HR also reviewed exit surveys from departing Employees and provided relevant 

information. The Agency continually strives to improve its recruitment, hiring, inclusion, and 

advancement of people with disabilities. 

Exit Interviews Survey: There were 143 surveys completed beginning FY21, of which 86% of 

respondents were civilian Employees. Of the Civilian Employees whom completed the exit 

survey, 82% responded they would recommend working at DTRA to others. Additionally, a 

high percentage of civilian Employees provided positive feedback with their response on 

recommending the Agency to others as a place of employment. 

Affirmative Action Plan: EI and HR promoted the recruitment, hiring, and advancement of 

qualified PWDs and Individuals with Targeted Disabilities (PWTDs) to apply for vacancies via 

Schedule A and WRP hiring authorities. They also ensured all disability-related questions and 

concerns were addressed promptly and correctly by the Disability Program Manager. EI initiated 

collaboration with HR to develop a comprehensive plan for specialized training; mentoring and 

career development opportunities are in place for PWDs and PWTDs.

Issuance, Policies and Procedures Review: In FY21, the EI Office reviewed DoD issuances 

and DTRA issuances about management and personnel policies, procedures and practices (merit 

promotion program, Employee recognition awards program, and the Employee development/ 

training program) through the DTRA Enterprise Information System (EIS). 

EI Identified policies and procedures which will be reviewed to identify potential systemic 

barriers. The feedback provided by the reviews will be utilized to address any potential systemic 

barriers. 

• DTRA Instruction 1100.2 – Telework Program, Change 1 

• DTRA Instruction 1200.1 – Military Reserve Program
27 

• DTRA Instruction 1300.1 – Military Assignments

• DTRA Instruction 1348.4 – Military Decorations Program

• DTRA Instruction 1400.25-V400 – Merit Promotion Plan, Change 1 

• DTRA Instruction 1400.25-V2009 – Defense Civilian Intelligence

• Personnel System: Disciplinary and Adverse Actions Procedures 

• DTRA Instruction 1402.1 – Five-Year Limitation on Foreign Employment, Change 1 

EEO Training for Supervisors and Employees: The Agency provided EEO Training for all 

Supervisors, Managers, and Employees. The training included the Complaints Process, AH 

Process, ADR, and EEO laws and guidance. Additionally, EEO Training was also provided for 

DTRA Employees. 

The EI Office proactively sought to enhance training efforts during FY21, by increasing the 

number of Diversity courses. The provision of additional Diversity courses resulted in a 167% 

increase in attendance. These virtual trainings were available to all remote locations (Germany, 

ABQ, Eglin, and Travis). EEO and Diversity Training were also provided to Directorates and 

Divisions upon request. 

Mandatory EEO 

Training 

FY18 

Participation 

FY19 

Participation 

FY20 

Participation 

FY21 

Participation 

EEO Newcomers for 

Employees 

407 347 314 347 

Civil 

Treatment/Supervisors 

Training 

86 102 142 92

Military EO Training 

Sexual Assault 

Prevention and 

Response (SAPR) 

105 372 

 

Prevention of 

Harassment 

Training 

 

Employee 40 

Supervisor 34

ABQ Classroom 

Training 

EEO for Newcomers 35 39 11 

SAPR 0 39 

Implicit Bias 0 12 
28 

Civil Treatment for 

Leaders 

17 59 6 

Civil Treatment for 

Employees 

0 17 

Briefing and 

Workshops 

Onboarding (Brief) 147 165 141 135 

Diversity Training 0 25 231 617

Race Relation (not 

mandatory) 

1141 

ADR Webinar 96 16 

Disability Training 69 45 

Veterans Day 

Observance 

80 103 

Culture Conversation 31 

Total 797 1177 2262 1429

Office Inspector General (OIG): In FY21, the OIG office received ninety (90) contacts, four 

(4) of which involved an EEO-type of concern, which is a significant decrease in comparison 

with FY16 (111 contacts, 19 EEO-type of concern) and FY20 (86 contacts, 10 EEO-type of 

concern). One (1) in four (4) cases led to an investigation of a sexual harassment complaint. In 

three (3) of four (4) cases, OIG assisted the Employee for resolution to address the concern. 

No cases required a referral to management for resolution. One (1) separate contact involved 

an allegation of abuse of authority. Three (3) separate contacts involved an allegation of 

reprisal. Fourteen (14) contacts involved allegations of MSPB hiring fairness concerns. 

OIG sustained monthly “Blotter” updates with the Director, where IG-related activities were

addressed, which at times included matters involving climate, Diversity, or discrimination. 

OIG provided similar “Blotter” updates to respective Directorate leaders. OIG conducted 

monthly Personnel Action Meetings with EI, GC, SC, and HR to review personnel concerns 

that potentially contained an EI nexus; the Deputy Director could also chair some meetings. 

The Personnel Actions Meetings were to ensure there was a process to elevate internal 

investigations to DTRA Leadership. 

ESSENTIAL ELEMENT E: 

EFFICIENCY 

In FY21, the EI Office continued to enhance its systems to accurately collect, monitor, and 

analyze data related to the EEO program. To comply with Part 1614 of Title 29, Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) and MD-715 requirements, the EI Office remains neutral and impartial. This 
29 

helps to prevent institutional conflicts of interest that otherwise could arise and instill confidence 

in the integrity of the EEOC’s EEO complaint program. 

Neutral EEO Process: To comply with Part 1614 of Title 29, Code of Federal Regulations 

(CFR) and MD-715 requirements, the EI Office remains neutral and impartial. This helps to 

prevent institutional conflicts of interest that otherwise could arise and to instill confidence in the 

integrity of the EEOC’s EEO complaint program. The EI Office ensures the Agency

representative is not the attorney providing legal sufficiency reviews or involved in counseling, 

investigations, or final Agency decision stages of the EEO process. 

Efficient, Fair and Impartial Complaint Resolution Process: DTRA’s EEO complaint 

program is timely in conducting EEO counseling, including written notification of rights and 

responsibilities, investigations, acceptance/dismissal decisions, final Agency decisions, and final 

actions. The EI Office routinely utilizes the Federal Sector EEO Portal (FedSEP) to submit 

complaint files and other documents in the proper format to EEOC. 

Data Collection Systems: In FY21, the AH Program Manager created two tracking systems. 

Contacts were tracked for type of issue, Directorate, Manager, and Alleged Harasser. Harassment 

allegations are tracked for type of issue, Directorate, Manager, Alleged Harasser and completion 

of inquiry. Utilizing the information generated in the tracking systems allowed identification of 

trends, identification of uptake in complaints based on the number received, and/or issues within 

a specific Directorate or individuals. 

In FY21, the EI Office continued to enhance its systems to accurately collect, monitor, and 

analyze data related to the EEO program. The EI Office maintained a contract for annual support 

and licensing for iComplaints to track and monitor EEO complaints. The system also produced 

the annual 462 Report for the Agency and well as the quarterly and annual No Fear Reports. 

EI coordinated with the DTRA Human Resources Directorate to request and receive additional 

reporting data in support of the MD 715, FEORP, DVAAP Reports, as well as ad hoc requests. 

EEO Complaints: The EI Office tracked its EEO complaint trends in the past year, to include 

entering complaints in the iComplaints data management tool. EI also utilized the iComplaints 

data management tool to produce the FY21 Annual Federal Equal Employment Opportunity 

Statistical Report of Discrimination Complaints (462). 

EEO Pre-Complaints & Formal: In FY21, EI received 14 pre-complaints which was an 

increase of six over FY20. EI continued to be fully compliant with meeting the timelines for 

processing pre-complaints (30 days, or up to 90 days with extensions) in accordance with 

Section 1614.105 (d) and (e) of Title 29, CFR. Of the 14 pre-complaints filed, three were 

processed beyond 30 days, though they remained timely as the Aggrieved granted extensions. 
30 

NOTE: While 14 pre-complaints were counseled in FY21, one was still pending at the end of the fiscal year. 

Though still timely at that time, timeliness of this counseling will be counted in next year’s report as it was 

completed in FY22. Figure 1: Pre-Complaints FY17 – FY21 

In FY21, nine of the 14 aggrieved Employees filed formal EEO complaints; one pre-complaint 

remained pending at the end of FY21. One of nine formal complaints resulted in a settlement 

agreement, while two others were procedurally dismissed. The remaining six complaints were 

pending investigation at the end of FY21. Additionally, 17 other formal complaints from prior 

fiscal years were pending a hearing or appeal, of which two were filed in FY16, five in FY17, 

four in FY18, four in FY19, and two in FY20.

*All investigations initiated in FY21 were pending at the end of the fiscal year. Though still timely at that 

time, timeliness of these investigations will be counted in next year’s report as they were completed in FY22. 

Figure 2: Formal Complaint Investigations FY17 – FY21 
31 

Formal Complaints 

FY Total 

Filed 

Pending Closed by 

Dismissal 

Closed 

(Settlement/ 

FAD/FAO/ 

OFO) 

Investigated 

in 180 Days* 

Investigated 

w/ Extension 

Untimely 

Investigation 

Findings** 

17 10 7 0 3 2 0 8 0 

18 20 5 3 12 12 1 3 2 

19 11 6 0 5 11 0 0 0 

 20 6 3 3 0 3 0 0 0 

 21 9 6 2 1 Pending 0 0 0 

*180 days of formal filed or last amendment filed without exceeding 360 days from formal filing. 

**Count could change in future reports based on outcome of complaints still pending. 

DTRA’s most frequently claimed bases were reprisal and sex in FY21. Reprisal increased from 

three (3) to five (5) from FY20 to FY21. Sex increased from four (4) to five (5) from FY20 to 

FY21. National Origin experienced the largest increase between FY20 and FY21, increasing 

from zero (0) to two (2). Race also increased in FY21, from three (3) in FY20 to four (4) in 

FY21. 
32 

Figure 4: Bases of Discrimination FY2017 – FY2021 

Alternative Dispute Resolution: In FY21, the DTRA EI Office initiated an overhaul of the 

ADR Program, to include continuing to route its Agency instruction, revamping the program’s 

marketing, and developing a series of ADR workshops to educate the work. The EI Office 

developed a training module to demonstrate the core principles of ADR, which was delivered in 

semi-annual ADR briefings offered to the workforce on a voluntary attendance basis, and was 

also incorporated into the Prevention of Harassment for Employees/Supervisors, EEO Training 

for Employees/Supervisors, Onboarding Briefings and the Virtual Agency Overview Briefings, 

which are Agency-wide mandatory trainings. 

The ADR program was available during the pre-complaint and formal complaint processes. ADR 

was offered to all aggrieved Employees during the EEO pre-complaint process by the EEO 

Counselor. The EEO Counselor informed all aggrieved Employees of the benefits of ADR and 

emphasized how the ADR process was voluntary and allowed disputes/issues to be handled 

swiftly to get matters resolved. In FY21, DTRA processed 14 informal and 10 formal EEO 

complaints. Mediation was offered each time, and one aggrieved Employee elected to 

participate. However, the mediation could not be arranged in a timely manner due to nonresponsiveness. 

The Agency did not currently require Managers and Supervisors to participate in ADR when 

offered during the EEO complaint process, during FY21. However, the draft ADR Instruction 

includes language that would make this a requirement, and if accepted in the final Instruction, 

will be enforceable. 

 

DTRA submitted an annual ADR Report to DoD detailing the Agency’s ADR Program to 

include types of ADR conducted, number of resolutions, marketing conducted in the prior year 

and enhancements projected for the next year. DTRA submitted its FY21 ADR Report to DoD 

on March 21, 2022. 

Complaint Funding: During FY21, EI contracted services for five EEO investigations (one 

being from another Agency EI worked as a conflict of interest case) and one Anti-Harassment 

case mediation. Additionally, EI renewed its contract for technical support and subscription 
33 

upgrade for its complaints tracking and reports software, iComplaints. The table below reflects 

the FY expenditures. 

FY21 COMPAINT PROCESSING EXPENDITURES 

INVESTIGATIONS 

CONTRACT

$23,105.00

MEDIATIONS $1,358.00 

 COURT REPORTER $0.00 

 COMPLAINT SOFTWARE $11,747.22 

TOTAL EXPENSE $36,210.22 

ESSENTIAL ELEMENT F:

RESPONSIVENESS AND LEGAL COMPLIANCE

Compliance: The EI Office ensured full and prompt compliance with orders from 

Administrative Judges (AJ) and implementing terms of settlement agreements that were reached 

in FY21. This fiscal year, DTRA continued to process a consolidated complaint that consisted of 

two individual complaints filed by one Complainant, one in FY13 and one in FY15. The 

consolidated complaint had previously been decided but was appealed by the Complainant 

requesting additional attorney’s fees. A decision was issued on the appeal requiring DTRA to 

pay additional fees, which were promptly paid and documented with a compliance reported 

submitted to the AJ. DTRA reached settlements with three complaints: one each raised in FY21, 

FY20 and FY16. The terms of the FY16 and FY20 agreements included lump sum and attorney’s 

fees payments, while the FY20 agreement also included a non-monetary exchange between the 

Complainant and Agency as did the FY21 agreement. 

Date Submitted Report Title 

January 2020 FY20 No FEAR Act Report 

March 13, 2020 FY19 Alternative Dispute Resolution Report

November 2, 2020 FY20 Annual Federal Equal Employment Opportunity Statistical 

Report of Discrimination Complaints (462 Report) 

November 4, 2020 FY20 Civil Rights Reports Age Discrimination Act Report and 

Executive Order 13160 Report 

No FEAR Act Report: The EI Office timely and accurately submitted its quarterly and annual 

No FEAR Report to the EEOC. These reports were also posted on the Agency’s external website 

in a timely manner. 
34 

Figure 5: Monetary Settlements FY17 – FY21 

Compliance with Settlement Agreements: The EI Office ensured full and prompt compliance 

with terms of settlement agreements that were reached in FY21. DTRA reached settlements with 

three complains: one each raised in FY21, FY20 and FY16. The terms of the FY16 and FY20 

agreements included lump sum and attorney’s fees payments, while the FY20 agreement also 

included a non-monetary exchange between the Complainant and Agency as did the FY21 

agreement. There was one finding of discrimination issued in FY21, which is currently under 

appeal by the Agency. 

Anti-Harassment Trends: In FY21, DTRA noted an increase in claims for all bases except 

Religion and GINA, which both remained at “0”, and Disability (3) and Color (1), which each 

decreased by one. The most frequently claimed bases were Sex (5), Reprisal (5) and Race (4). 

National Origin (2) and Reprisal each were claimed two additional times than in the prior year. 

The other bases that saw an increase in FY21 only increased by one additional claim. 

During FY21, DTRA experienced an increase, by one, in the number of complaints 

of harassment received. 

FY No. of 

Cases 

Total 

Inquiries/Investigations Closed Mediations 

20 7 6 6 5 

21 8 8 8 1

The following chart depicts the various types of allegations submitted by DTRA Employees 

during FY20 and FY21. 

FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21

TOTALS $52,583.35 $42,514.84 $353,867.20 $238,291.45 $290,497.94

$0.00

$50,000.00

$100,000.00

$150,000.00

$200,000.00

$250,000.00

$300,000.00

$350,000.00

$400,000.00

Monetary Fees and Settlements Paid Out by FY
35 

DTRA processed 14 Anti-Harassment cases and mediation was requested in three. However only 

one mediation was able to be conducted before the end of the fiscal year, which was successfully 

resolved. 

SUMMARY OF AGENCY ACCOMPLISHMENTS ARE AS FOLLOWS:

DTRA’s Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (EI) Office compared its current EEO program status to 

the Model EEO Program Self-Assessment measures (Part G). Of the 156 measures, the EI Office 

identified 15 deficiencies within its EEO program reflecting a compliance rate of 90.38%. 

Utilizing the results of the self-assessment, the Agency developed plans to address program 

deficiencies (Part H) and workforce data triggers regarding participation rates for certain groups 

in the workforce (Parts I and J). 

DTRA’s Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (EI) Office compared its current EEO program status to 

the Model EEO Program Self-Assessment measures (Part G). Of the 156 measures, the EI Office 

identified 15 deficiencies within its EEO program reflecting a compliance rate of 90.38%. 

Utilizing the results of the self-assessment, the Agency developed plans to address program 

deficiencies (Part H) and workforce data triggers regarding participation rates for certain groups 

in the workforce (Parts I and J). 

PART H Summary: DTRA continues to work diligently to resolve the identified program 

deficiencies. Numerous steps were taken to address each deficiency during FY21. 

Accomplishments during FY21 include the resolution of the following program deficiencies: 

C.3.a 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?
36 

C.3.b.4 Ensure that subordinate Supervisors have effective Managerial, communication, 

and interpersonal skills to supervise in a workplace with diverse Employees? [see MD715 Instructions, Sec. I].

C.3.b.5 Provide religious accommodations when such accommodations do not cause an 

undue hardship? [see 29 CFR §1614.102(a)(7)]. 

C.3.b.6 Provide disability accommodations when such accommodations do not cause an 

undue hardship? [see 29 CFR §1614.102(a)(8)]. 

C.3.b.7 Support the EEO program in identifying and removing barriers to equal 

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

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

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

C.3.b.9 Comply with settlement agreements and orders issued by the Agency, EEOC, 

and EEO-related cases from the Merit Systems Protection Board, labor arbitrators, and 

the Federal Labor Relations Authority? [see MD-715, II(C)].

E.4 – The Agency has effective and accurate data collection systems in place to evaluate 

its EEO program. 

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)].

Program Accountability 

PART I Summary: DTRA’s analysis provided information regarding the current composition 

and trends impacting the workforce. The U.S. Census Bureau 2014-2018 Civilian Labor Force 

(CLF) census data was used as a benchmark. 

DTRA identified the following areas of low participation:

• Female total workforce participation rate was 35.20%.

• Hispanic Male workforce participation rate was 4.80%.

• Hispanic Females workforce participation rate 2.36%.

• White Females workforce participation rate of 20.41%. 

• Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander Males participation rate of 0.07% 

• American Indian Alaska Native Females workforce participation rate of 0.14%.

• Two or More Races Female workforce participation rate of 0.20%. 

• Two or More Races Male workforce participation rate of 0.41%

 Ethnicity Males 

Total % CLF % 

Males 

Females 

Total % CLF% 

Females 

Total 
37 

Hispanic 71 4.80 6.82 35 2.36 6.16 106

White 698 47.16 35.65 302 20.41 31.82 1000

Black/African American 124 8.38 5.70 137 9.26 6.61 261

Asian 53 3.58 2.19 38 2.57 2.18 91

Native Hawaiian/Other 

Pacific Islander 1 0.07 0.08 4 0.27 0.08 5 

American Indian/Native 

American 

6 0.41 0.31 2 0.14 0.31 8

Two or More Races 6 0.41 1.05 3 0.20 1.05 9

Total 959 64.80 51.79 521 35.20 48.21 1480

*Red indicates percentages that are below the CLF. 

At the end of FY21, the total workforce was comprised of 1,480 civilians spanning 14 locations 

worldwide. The total workforce population increased by 195 permanent Employees. The overall 

workforce consists of 972 (64.79%) Males a decrease of 0.11% in comparison with FY20, and 

512 (35.21%) Females an increase of 0.11% in comparison with FY20. The 2014-2018 CLF 

benchmark for Males is 51.79% and Females is 48.21%. 

During FY21, the EI Office worked to establish an Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Action Award. 

It would provide recognition to DTRA civilian and/or military Employees demonstrating superior 

accomplishments in equal opportunity, and Diversity and inclusion in the workplace and 

community. 

PART J SUMMARY: The representation of PWDs in FY21 was 210 (14.19%) an increase of 

32 (0.34%) in comparison with 178 (13.85%) in FY20. Additionally, the representation of 

PWTDs in FY21 was 51 (3.45%), an increase of 27 (1.58%) in comparison with 24 (1.87%) in 

FY20. The representation of PWDs (14.19%) exceeded the 12% benchmark. The representation 

of PWTDs (3.45%) is also exceeded the 2% benchmark. 

In FY21, a total of 64 individuals separated from the Agency. The breakdown of those whom 

retired included: 

1200

1300

1400

1500

2017.5 2018 2018.5 2019 2019.5 2020 2020.5 2021 2021.5

DTRA Total Workforce From 2018 -

2021 

1285 1309

1365

1480
38 

• Resignation 1 PWD, 0 PWTD; 

• Retirement 5 PWD, 1 PWTD; and 

• Other Separations 1 PWD, 1 PWTD. 

Although PWDs comprised 10.94%, and PWTDs comprised 3.13% of the total number of 

separations, analysis utilizing the inclusion rate as the bench mark indicated that there is no 

trigger related to separations for PWD or PWTD

During FY21 the Agency with the support of Managers and Supervisors hosted the following 

events: 

• Veterans Day Celebration for DTRA Veterans. 

• Participation in a virtual Disability Hiring Authority for Individuals training. 

• The utilization of toolkits and quick guides provided by the EI Office regarding hiring 

Individuals with Disabilities and the valuable assets, skills, and experience they bring to 

the workforce. 

• Participated in Disability Employment Training.

• Participated in the CAP and Wounded Warrior Program virtual information session. 

• Supported the participation of Employees as leaders and members of Employee Resource 

Groups. 

CONCLUSION:

The Agency made the following significant contributions to achieving a Model EEO Program: 

• Maintained a D&I Council comprised of two co-chairs, one general officer/flag officer 

and one SES, and voting and advisory members, to assist in building an inclusive 

workforce. 

• Maintained six ERGs (African American, AAPI, Hispanic, PWDs, LGBTQIA, and 

Women) that supported the D&I Council in creating a culture that encourages 

collaboration and flexibility, support and bringing Employees together, providing 

recommendations and solutions for identified barriers in the workplace. These ERGs 

created a multitude of events, presentations, and information sharing to promote 

Diversity, equity, and inclusion. 

• EI provided an EEO and Diversity SES performance element for FY21 plans, to ensure 

senior leaders are accountable for fostering an inclusive work environment. 

Hosted a series of five Race Relations sessions with the goal of furthering a safe and 

supportive environment for DTRA Employees to candidly voice their concerns and share 

their experiences regarding race relations in our workplace and communities. 

• Enhanced collaboration between the EI office and the HR Directorate on recruitment and 

outreach strategies resulted in 95 Strategic Recruitment Discussions (SRDs). These 

discussion continue DTRA’s efforts to diversify the workforce through providing 
39 

education to Hiring Officials. As a result of the enhanced collaboration and the SRDs, we 

were able to close the outreach and recruiting deficiency. 

• Participated in the Agency’s Leadership Development Council panel, responsible for 

viewing, vetting and recommending top candidates for selection for competitive 

Leadership/professional development opportunities. 

• Exceeded the benchmarks in the representation of PWDs and PWTDs. 
40 
41 
42 

 
43 

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 

A.1 – The Agency issues an effective, upto-date EEO policy statement. 

Measure 

Met? 

Measures 

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 MD715, II(A)] 

YES July 16, 2021

A.1.b 

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 

A.2 – The Agency has communicated 

EEO policies and procedures to all 

Employees. 

Measure 

Met? 

Measures 

A.2.a Does the Agency disseminate the following 

policies and procedures to all Employees: 

A.2.a.1 Anti-harassment policy? [see MD 715, 

II(A)] YES 

A.2.a.2 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: 
44 

A.2.b.1 

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 

RA-HandbookUpdates_15-July2021.pdf 

(DTRA.mil)

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 During the informal 

and formal process 

as well as during 

training.

A.2.c.2 ADR process? [see MD-110, Ch. 

3(II)(C)] If “yes”, please provide how 

often. YES 

During the informal 

and formal process as 

well as during 

training.

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.

 A.2.c.4 

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 

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 the 

Agency-wide Ethnics 

Training

Compliance 

Indicator 

Measures 

A.3 – The Agency assesses and ensures 

EEO principles are part of its culture. 

Measure 

Met? 

A.3.a 

Does the Agency provide recognition to 

Employees, Supervisors, Managers, and 

units demonstrating superior 

accomplishment in equal employment 

NO Part H 1 
45 

opportunity? [see 29 CFR § 1614.102(a) 

(9)] If “yes”, provide one or two 

examples in the comments section. 

 A.3.b 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? 

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 

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 

YES 
46 

§1614.102(c)(1); MD-715 Instructions, 

Sec. I] 

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 

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 

Compliance Indicator 

Measures 

B.2 – The EEO Director controls all 

aspects of the EEO program. 

Measure 

Met? 

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 

Is the EEO Director responsible for 

overseeing the completion of EEO 

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

YES 

B.2.c 

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 

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 

YES 
47 

be applicable for certain subordinate level 

components.] 

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 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 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? 

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 2 

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. 

NO Part H 3 

Compliance Indicator 

Measures 

B.4 - The Agency has sufficient budget 

and staffing to support the success of its 

EEO program. 

Measure 

Met? 

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: 
48 

B.4.a.1 

to conduct a self-assessment of the Agency

for possible program deficiencies? [see 

MD-715, II(D)] 

YES 

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 

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 
49 

B.4.a.9 

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 to ensure timely and complete compliance 

with EEOC orders? [see MD-715, II(E)] YES 

B.4.b 

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? 

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: 

B.5.a.1 EEO Complaint Process? [see MD715(II)(B)] YES 

B.5.a.2 Reasonable Accommodation Procedures? 

[see 29 C.F.R. § 1614.102(d)(3)] YES 

B.5.a.3 Anti-Harassment Policy? [see MD715(II)(B)] YES 
50 

B.5.a.4 

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? 

B.6.a 

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? 
51 

C.1.a 

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 

Larger Remote Sites 

were visited annually 

prior to the COVID19 pandemic. The 

visits will restart 

during FY22 or 

FY23 pending 

pandemic status. 

Smaller Remote 

Offices participate in 

bi-monthly meetings 

with the EI Office. 

C.1.b 

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 

C.1.c 

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? 

C.2.a 

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)] 

YES

C.2.a.1 

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), 

YES 
52 

§ V.C.1] 

C.2.a.2 

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 

There is a firewall 

within the AntiHarassment program 

and the EI Director. 

Management 

officials make all the 

final decisions and 

corrective actions. 

C.2.a.3 

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 

The AntiHarassment 

Program is separate 

from the Complaint 

Process. 

C.2.a.4 

Does the Agency ensure that the EEO 

office informs the anti- harassment 

program of all EEO counseling activity 

alleging harassment? [see Enforcement 

Guidance, V.C.] 

YES 

The Complaint 

Manager refers 

Employees alleging 

harassment to the AntiHarassment program, 

and notifies the AntiHarassment program 

Manager of all 

counseling related to 

claims of harassment.

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 timelyprocessed inquiries in the comments 

column. 

YES 

C.2.a.6

Do the Agency’s training materials on its 

anti-harassment policy include examples YES
53 

of disability-based harassment? [see 29 

CFR 1614.203(d)(2)] 

C.2.b 

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 614.203(d)(3)(D)] 

YES 

C.2.b.2 

Has the Agency established a firewall 

between the Reasonable Accommodation 

Program Manager and the EEO Director? 

[see MD- 110, Ch. 1(IV)(A)] 

YES 

C.2.b.3 

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 

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 timely- processed requests in 

the comments column. 

YES 

C.2.c 

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 
54 

C.2.c.1 

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 

RA-HandbookUpdates_15-July2021.pdf 

(DTRA.mil)

Compliance Indicator 

Measures 

C.3 - The Agency evaluates Managers 

and Supervisors on their efforts to ensure 

equal employment opportunity. 

Measure 

Met? 

C.3.a 

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? 

YES 

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 YES
55 

undue hardship? [ see 29 CFR 

§1614.102(a)(8)] 

C.3.b.7 

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 

Comply with settlement agreements and 

orders issued by the Agency, EEOC, and 

EEO-related cases from the Merit Systems 

Protection Board, labor arbitrators, and the 

Federal Labor Relations Authority? [see 

MD-715, II(C)] 

YES

C.3.c 

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 

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? 

C.4.a 

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 

YES 
56 

participation in the program by all EEO 

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

C.4.c 

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 

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 

Pursuant to Section II(C) of MD-715, 

does the EEO office collaborate with the 

HR office to: 

C.4.e.1 

Implement the Affirmative Action Plan for 

Individuals with Disabilities? [see 29 CFR 

§1614.203(d); MD-715, II(C)] 

YES 

C.4.e.2 Develop and/or conduct outreach and 

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

C.4.e.3 

Develop and/or provide training for 

Managers and Employees? [see MD-715, 

II(C)] 

YES 

C.4.e.4 

Identify and remove barriers to equal 

opportunity in the workplace? [see MD715, II(C)] 

YES 

C.4.e.5 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? 

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 
57 

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 

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? 

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 Agency

Director Staff 

Meeting. 

C.6.b 

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? 

D.1.a 

Does the Agency have a process for 

identifying triggers in the workplace? 

[see MD-715 Instructions, Sec. I] 

YES 
58 

D.1.b 

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 Part H 7

D.1.c 

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 individuals with disabilities? [see 29 

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

YES 

Compliance Indicator 

Measures 

D.2 – The Agency identifies areas where 

barriers may exclude EEO groups 

(reasonable basis to act.) 

Measure 

Met? 

D.2.a 

Does the Agency have a process for 

analyzing the identified triggers to find 

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

NO Part H 7

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)] 

NO Part H 6

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 reorganizations and realignments? [see 29 

CFR 1614.102(a)(3)] 

YES 

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 

NO Part H 7
59 

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. 

Compliance Indicator 

Measures 

D.3 – The Agency establishes 

appropriate action plans to remove 

identified barriers.

Measure 

Met? 

D.3.a. 

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)] 

NO Part H 8

D.3.b 

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)] 

NO Part H 8

D.3.c Does the Agency periodically review the 

effectiveness of the plans? [see MD-715, 

II(D)] 

NO Part H 8

Compliance Indicator 

Measures 

D.4 – The Agency has an affirmative 

action plan for people with disabilities, 

including those with targeted disabilities.

Measure 

Met? 

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. 

YES https://www.DTRA.mil/

Mission/EI-AnnualReports/ 

D.4.b 

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 

Does the Agency ensure that disabilityrelated questions from members of the 

public are answered promptly and 

correctly? [see 29 CFR 

614.203(d)(1)(ii)(A)] 

YES 

D.4.d 

Has the Agency taken specific steps that 

are reasonably designed to increase the 

number of persons with disabilities or 

targeted disabilities employed at the 

YES 
60 

Agency until it meets the goals? [see 29 

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

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 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? 

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 

Does the Agency issue acknowledgment 

letters immediately upon receipt of a 

formal complaint, pursuant to MD-110, 

Ch. 5(I)? 

YES 

E.1.d 

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 Sixty days or less. 

E.1.e 

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 
61 

E.1.g 

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 

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 MD- 110, Ch. 5(V)(A)] 

YES 

E.1.l 

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 

Compliance Indicator 

Measures 

E.2 – The Agency has a neutral EEO 

process.

Measure 

Met? 

E.2.a 

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 

YES 
62 

source/location of the attorney who 

conducts the legal sufficiency review in 

the comments column. 

E.2.c 

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

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? 

E.3.a 

Has the Agency established an ADR 

program for use during both the precomplaint 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)] 

NO Part H 9

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 

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 

MD- 110, Ch. 3(I)] 

YES 
63 

E.3.f 

Does the Agency annually evaluate the 

effectiveness of its ADR program? [see 

MD-110, Ch. 3(II)(D)] 

YES 

Compliance

Indicator 

Measures 

E.4 – The Agency has effective and 

accurate data collection systems in place 

to evaluate its EEO program.

Measure 

Met? 

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 

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)] YES 

E.4.a.4 External and internal applicant flow data 

concerning the applicants’ race, national 

origin, sex, and disability status? [see MD715, II(E)] 

NO Part H 10

E.4.a.5 The processing of requests for reasonable 

accommodation? [29 CFR § 

1614.203(d)(4)] 

YES 

E.4.a.6 

The processing of complaints for the antiharassment program? [see EEOC 

Enforcement Guidance on Vicarious 

Employer Liability for Unlawful 

Harassment by Supervisors (1999), § 

V.C.2] 

YES 

E.4.b 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? 
64 

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 11 

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 11 

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 11 

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? 

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 

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) YES 
65 

accountable for poor work product and/or 

delays during performance review? [see 

MD- 110, Ch. 9(IX)(H)] 

Compliance Indicator 

Measures 

F.2 – The Agency complies with the law, 

including EEOC regulations, 

management directives, orders, and other 

written instructions.

Measure 

Met? 

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 

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? 

F.3.a 

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 

Does the Agency timely post on its public 

webpage its quarterly No FEAR Act data? 

[see 29 CFR §1614.703(d)] 

YES 
66 

 

 
67 

MD-715 – Part H - 1 

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

Defense Threat Reduction Agency 

Statement of Model Program Essential Element Deficiency - 

Type of Program 

Deficiency Brief Description of Program Deficiency

A.3.a 

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)] 

Objective(s) and Dates for EEO Plan 

Date 

Initiated 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Objective Target Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Modified 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Date 

Completed 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

01/04/2021 

EI will develop a recognition award for 

Employees, Supervisors and Managers 

demonstrating superior 

accomplishment in equal employment 

opportunity and Diversity.

12/31/2021 06/30/2022 

Responsible Official(s) 

Title Name

Performance 

Standards Address 

the Plan?

(Yes or No)

Director, Equity, Diversity and 

Inclusion Office (EI)

Willisa Donald NO

Planned Activities Toward Completion of Objective 

Target 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Planned Activities

Sufficient 

Funding 

& 

Staffing? 

(Yes or No)

Modified Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Completion 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

12/01/2020 EI will research other federal EEO 

Awards for best practices. YES 01/30/2021 
68 

Target 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Planned Activities

Sufficient 

Funding 

& 

Staffing? 

(Yes or No)

Modified Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Completion 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

01/31/2021 

EI will develop the criteria for the 

equal employment opportunity and 

Diversity award.

YES 07/30/2021 07/30/2021 

03/15/2021 

EI will coordinate the award criteria 

with HR and GC (via EIS Tasker) for 

review and approval. YES

07/30/2022

03/2021 

12/2021 

08/2021

04/01/2021 

EI will establish a selection board to 

review submissions. The selection 

board will determine the award 

recipient.

YES 12/31/2022 

05/01/2021 

This will be an annual process initiated 

in October and award recipient(s) will 

be acknowledged in January.

YES 12/31/2022 

03/2022 

Report of Accomplishments 

Fiscal Year Accomplishments

2020 

EI began to explore best practices and developing the award criteria for 

an annual Martin Luther King Distinguished Award for Employees, 

Supervisors and Managers. The criteria is being drafted, once finalized, 

the criteria will be submitted and coordinated with HR and GC. 

2021 

The award criteria has been drafted and is currently under review by 

Human Resources and General Counsel for the Equity Diversity and 

Inclusion Action Award. Once all procedures are completed for 

establishing the award EI will establish a selection board to evaluate all 

submissions and determine the award recipient. 

MD-715 – Part H - 2 

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

Defense Threat Reduction Agency 
69 

Statement of Model Program Essential Element Deficiency - 

Type of Program 

Deficiency Brief Description of Program Deficiency

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)]

Objective(s) and Dates for EEO Plan 

Date 

Initiated 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Objective Target Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Modified 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Date 

Completed 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

10/01/2017 

HR will collaborate with EI regarding

Strategic Workforce Planning groups; 

Recruitment/Outreach Planning and 

Training/Career Development Planning 

and other workforce changes. 

12/31/2020 12/31/2022 

12/2020 

Responsible Official(s) 

Title Name

Performance 

Standards Address 

the Plan?

(Yes or No)

Director, Equity, Diversity and 

Inclusion Office (EI)

Willisa Donald NO

Director, Human Resource 

Directorate

Christine Enriquez, Colonel, 

United States Army NO

Planned Activities Toward Completion of Objective 

Target Date

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Planned Activities

Sufficient 

Funding 

& 

Staffing? 

(Yes or No)

Modified Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Completion Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

05/15/2019

HR will provide EI with the 

annual outreach schedule to 

solicit participation schools YES 09/30/2020
70 

and organizations (HBCUs, 

TCUs, and MSIs).

7/31/2019 

EI and HR Directors will meet 

monthly to discuss programs 

and processes that intertwine 

in both offices and track 

collaborative action items to 

completion

YES 09/30/2020 

09/20/2020 

HR will ensure EI is invited to 

participate as an Advisor on 

the Leadership Development 

Programs (LDP). 

YES 06/2021 

09/30/2020 

HR will collaborate with EI 

regarding Recruitment and 

Outreach Planning events and 

activities for regular 

participation.

YES 09/30/2021 

04/05/2021 

EI will participate on the 

Human Resources Policy 

Board (HRPB) as an advisor. 

YES 09/30/2022 

04/15/2021 

HR will invite EI as an 

advisor during Strategic 

Workforce Planning (SWP) 

discussions to ensure regular 

attendance and participation. 

YES 12/31/2022 

08/2021 

06/12/2021 

EI will participate in HR’s 

Workforce Development 

Council (WDC) as an advisor 

to ensure regular attendance 

and participation. 

YES 09/30/2022 

12/2021 

09/15/2021 

HR will collaborate with EI 

regarding Training and Career 

Development Planning and 

execution on a reoccurring 

basis. 

YES 12/31/2022 

09/15/2021 HR will invite EI as an 

advisor during Vacancy 

Planning for the Agency 

and/or Directorates for regular 

attendance and participation. 

YES 12/31/2022 

08/2021 

Report of Accomplishments 

Fiscal Year Accomplishments
71 

2020 

During FY2020, the Human Resources (HR) and Equity Diversity and 

Inclusion (EI) Directors scheduled monthly recurring meetings to 

discuss collaborative efforts. The offices were able to coordinate and 

accomplish the following: 

• FEORP and DVAAP Reports 

• EEOC Technical Assistance Response for the Reasonable 

Accommodation Procedures 

• EEOC Technical Assistance Response for DTRA’s Model EEO 

Program and Model Disability Program 

• Transitioned Diversity & Inclusion training funds to HR 

HR and EI staff held bi-weekly meetings to discuss upcoming events 

and job fairs. HR hosted a university engagement webinar titled, 

"Student Workforce Opportunities." During the hour and a half session, 

DTRA RD-CB, HR Talent Acquisition Program and Science, 

Mathematics, and Research for Transformation (SMART) Program 

subject matter experts discussed internships, scholarships, fellowships, 

postdoctoral and employment opportunities available by the DoD and 

Federal government. Students and staff members from 53 Institutions 

were in attendance, to include 25 Research Doctorial Universities and 

14 MSIs (HBCUs, HISs, Asian American and Native American Pacific 

Islander Serving Institutions (AANAPISIs), and Alaska Native-Serving 

and Native Hawaiian (AANH). 

2021 

The EI Office, in collaboration with HR participated in 95 Strategic 

Recruitment Discussions (SRDs). SRDs continue DTRA's efforts to 

diversify the workforce through providing education to Hiring 

Officials. Topics covered included: document review to ensure DTRA 

cast a recruitment net, including Veterans, Persons with Disabilities, 

graduates of Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and 

Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs). Schedule A and Workforce 

Recruitment Program (WRP) opportunities are discussed, best practice 

interview panel and question development. The EI Office also provides 

interview question reviews to look for any discriminatory wording. 

MD-715 – Part H - 3 

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

Defense Threat Reduction Agency 

Statement of Model Program Essential Element Deficiency - 
72 

Type of Program 

Deficiency Brief Description of Program Deficiency

B.3.b Does the Agency’s current strategic plan reference EEO / Diversity and 

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

Objective(s) and Dates for EEO Plan 

Date 

Initiated 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Objective Target Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Modified 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Date 

Completed 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

01/01/2021 

Ensure that Diversity and Inclusion 

principles and EEO concerns are 

integrated into the Agency’s strategic 

mission.

12/31/2021 12/31/2022 

Responsible Official(s) 

Title Name

Performance 

Standards Address 

the Plan?

(Yes or No)

Affirmative Employment Manager Denise Lewis YES

Director, Equity, Diversity and 

Inclusion Office

Willisa Donald YES

Planned Activities Toward Completion of Objective 

Target Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy) Planned Activities

Sufficient 

Funding 

& 

Staffing? 

(Yes or No)

Modified Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Completion 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

04/01/2021 EI will craft language to include into 

the Agency Strategic Initiative/Plan

YES 05/31/2021 

05/01/2021 

EI will review the Agency Strategic 

Initiative/Plan to determine where to 

include the EEO/D&I language. 

YES 06/30/2021 
73 

Target Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy) Planned Activities

Sufficient 

Funding 

& 

Staffing? 

(Yes or No)

Modified Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Completion 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

06/01/2021 

EI will meet with the Strategic Team to 

ensure that the EEO/D&I principles are 

included in the Agency’s Strategic 

Initiative/Plan.

YES 12/31/2022 

09/2021 

Report of Accomplishments 

Fiscal Year Accomplishments

2020 

In FY20, in accordance with EEOC guidance, EI drafted the 

following language, which will be updated in the next Agency

Strategic/Initiative:

DTRA is committed to supporting and promoting the intent of equity, 

Diversity, and inclusion, which mirrors our culture, values, and goals. 

DTRA’s strength lies in our Diversity and serves as the driving force 

behind our organization’s excellence and mission success. 

Discrimination, workplace harassment and retaliatory actions are 

contrary to our team being successful. Therefore, all Managers and 

Supervisors have an obligation to handle issues swiftly and foster a 

work environment that achieves an opportunity for each Employee to 

experience a fair and level playing field in the workplace.

2021 

The EI office provided verbiage in FY20 for inclusion in the DTRA

Strategy that addressed EEO Principles and Elements of Diversity. 

The DTRA Strategy 2022-2027, did not include EEO Principles, but 

does contain Elements of Diversity. 

The following was included in the DTRA Strategy: What was put in 

the Agency Strategic Plan: The Agency will reflect the changes in the 

broader American landscape. It will be a workforce that is more 

diverse, inclusive, and representative of the changing demographics 

in our country. Further, we will have collaborative suites of 

information technology tools that enable conceptualization, 

understanding, and collaboration within the workforce. By 

combining a workforce with a diverse set of expertise, skills, and 

backgrounds with innovative technical solutions, DTRA will enable 

DoD to respond to crises and develop solutions to detect, deter, and 

defeat current and emerging WMD threats. To this end, the Agency 

will: Increase the relative percentage of entry level and early career 

professionals; Shift the makeup of the workforce to better align with 

the nation’s demographics; and Realize a workspace that facilitates 

greater and more meaningful collaboration, to include in-person, 

virtual, and mixed.
74 

MD-715 – Part H - 4 

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

Defense Threat Reduction Agency 

Statement of Model Program Essential Element Deficiency - 

Type of Program 

Deficiency Brief Description of Program Deficiency

C.2.a 

Has the Agency established comprehensive anti-harassment policy and 

procedures that comply with EEOC’s enforcement guidance? [see MD715, 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)] 

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 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Objective Target Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Modified 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Date 

Completed 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

09/01/2018 

Create an effective Anti-Harassment 

Program in compliance with EEOC 

guidance and communicate the AntiHarassment Policy to prevent and 

eliminate all types of harassment.

12/31/2021 06/30/2022

Responsible Official(s) 

Title Name

Performance 

Standards Address 

the Plan?

(Yes or No)

Anti-Harassment Manager Yorshia Houseal YES
75 

Title Name

Performance 

Standards Address 

the Plan?

(Yes or No)

Director, Equity, Diversity and 

Inclusion Office

Willisa Donald YES

Planned Activities Toward Completion of Objective 

Target 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Planned Activities

Sufficient 

Funding & 

Staffing? 

(Yes or No)

Modified 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Completion 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

02/28/2019 

Develop a Supervisor’s Toolkit and 

Employee Question and Answer Fact 

Sheet to assist Managers with processing 

AH cases (C.2.a.6).

YES 08/2021 12/21/2020 

02/28/2019 

Develop Employee Question and Answer 

Fact Sheet to assist Managers with 

processing AH cases (C.2.a.6)

YES 12/31/2020 

04/30/2020 

Create AH training material, which 

includes examples of disability based 

harassment (C.2.a.6).

YES 11/2021 11/30/2021 

04/30/2021 

EI will revise the Anti-Harassment Policy 

to ensure compliance with EEOC’s 

guidance (C.2.a).

YES 07/30/2021 

06/15/2021 

Provide Anti-Harassment training to 

Managers, Supervisors and Employees 

(C.2.a.6).

YES 08/30/2021 08/30/2021 

05/03/2021 

EI will revise the language in the 

Instruction for Supervisors to ensure all 

inquiries of harassment allegations are 

addressed within 10 days of notification 

and track by the Anti-Harassment (AH) 

Program Manager (C.2.a; E.4.a.6).

YES 6/30/2022 

11/2021 

10/2021 

05/03/2021 

EI will revise the DTRA Anti-Harassment 

Instruction to include the 60 day 

timeframes for all investigations (C.2.a; 

E.4.a.6).

YES

6/30/2022 

11/2021 

10/2021 
76 

Target 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Planned Activities

Sufficient 

Funding & 

Staffing? 

(Yes or No)

Modified 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Completion 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

06/15/2021 EI will revise the process to ensure it 

clearly explain the process (C.2.a.6).

YES 6/30/2022

12/2021

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.

2020 

The Anti-Harassment Instruction 1020.03 was updated to include 

elements a –e in accordance with EEOC Guidance. The instruction 

is pending revision and coordination. 

A Supervisory Toolkit and an Employee Question and Answer 

Fact Sheet were developed to inform the workforce of the Antiharassment process. 

EI included disability-based harassment in the Anti-Harassment 

and the Disability Training modules. The update includes slides 

and a video on disability-based harassment. In addition, these 

slides were also included in the mandatory EEO for Supervisors 

and Employees training. 
77 

2021 

The EEOC provided training for DTRA Employees and 

Supervisors during August and September of 2021. DTRA

implemented mandatory Prevention of Harassment training for 

Employees and Supervisors in October 2021 (FY22). Additionally, 

EI coordinated with Human Resources to ensure the Prevention of 

Harassment training has been added to the Agency’s mandatory 

training requirements. The training is offered monthly for 

Employees and Supervisors. 

The Agency’s Anti-Harassment Civilian and Military Instruction 

1020.03/04 has been revised and pending review. 

 

The EI Office created slides focused on disability for the Prevention 

of Harassment training. The slides includes examples of disability 

based harassment. 

DTRA established a Policy Statement on Harassment in the 

Workplace dated July 2021, in accordance with EEOC’s enforcement 

guidance. In addition, the Agency established an easy to understand 

Anti-Harassment toolkit for Supervisors. 

MD-715 – Part H - 5 

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

Defense Threat Reduction Agency 

Statement of Model Program Essential Element Deficiency - 

Type of Program 

Deficiency Brief Description of Program Deficiency

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] CLOSED

C.3.b.5 Provide religious accommodations when such accommodations do not 

cause an undue hardship? [see 29 CFR §1614.102(a)(7)] CLOSED

C.3.b.6 Provide disability accommodations when such accommodations do not 

cause an undue hardship? [ see 29 CFR §1614.102(a)(8)] CLOSED

C.3.b.7 Support the EEO program in identifying and removing barriers to equal 

opportunity. [see MD-715, II(C)] CLOSED
78 

Type of Program 

Deficiency Brief Description of Program Deficiency

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

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

C.3.b.9 

Comply with settlement agreements and orders issued by the Agency, 

EEOC, and EEO-related cases from the Merit Systems Protection 

Board, labor arbitrators, and the Federal Labor Relations Authority? 

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

Objective(s) and Dates for EEO Plan 

Date 

Initiated 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Objective Target Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Modified 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Date 

Completed 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

01/04/2021 

Develop a Supervisors and Managers 

performance element to include 

language for religious and disability 

accommodations, identifying and 

removing barrier to equal opportunity, 

anti- harassment program in 

investigating and correcting harassing 

conduct and comply with settlement 

agreements and orders issued by the 

Agency. 

12/31/2021 04/30/2021 

Responsible Official(s) 

Title Name

Performance 

Standards Address 

the Plan?

(Yes or No)

Director, Equity, Diversity and 

Inclusion Office

Willisa Donald NO

Director, Human Resource 

Directorate

Christine Enriquez, Colonel, 

United States Army NO

Planned Activities Toward Completion of Objective 
79 

Target 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Planned Activities

Sufficient 

Funding & 

Staffing? 

(Yes or No)

Modified 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Completion 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

01/31/2021 

EI will develop proposed language for the 

Supervisors and Managers performance 

element.

YES 03/30/2021 

04/15/2021 HR and GC will review and provide 

feedback on proposed language.

YES 08/2021 04/30/2021 

05/15/2021 

EI will collaborate with HR to incorporate 

the language into the Managers and 

Supervisors DoD Performance 

Management and Appraisal Program 

(DPMAP) performance rating cycle.

YES 10/2021 04/30/2021 

Report of Accomplishments 

Fiscal Year Accomplishments

2021

EI revised the DPMAP Supervisory Workplace EEO Performance 

Element in FY21, to evaluate Managers’ and Supervisors’ Equal 

Employment Opportunity efforts in accordance with the MD-715 new 

requirement. The performance language was reviewed, approved by 

the HRPB and will be implemented for the April 2022 performance 

period, which began on April 1, 2021. 

MD-715 – Part H - 6 

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

Defense Threat Reduction Agency 

Statement of Model Program Essential Element Deficiency - 

Type of Program 

Deficiency Brief Description of Program Deficiency

D.2.b 

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)]
80 

Objective(s) and Dates for EEO Plan 

Date 

Initiated 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Objective Target Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Modified 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Date 

Completed 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

01/04/2021 

Examine the impact of 

management/personnel policies, 

procedures, and practices by race,

national origin, sex and disability.

12/31/2021 06/30/2023 

Responsible Official(s) 

Title Name

Performance 

Standards Address 

the Plan?

(Yes or No)

Director, Equity, Diversity and 

Inclusion Office

Willisa Donald NO

Director, Human Resource 

Directorate

Christine Enriquez, Colonel, 

United States Army NO

Planned Activities Toward Completion of Objective 

Target Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy) Planned Activities

Sufficient 

Funding 

& 

Staffing? 

(Yes or No)

Modified Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Completion 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

06/30/2021 

EI will identify a system and a process 

to obtain a viable plan to regularly 

examine management/personnel 

policies related to merit promotion, 

Employee recognition, Employee

development/training programs.

YES

12/31/2022 

09/2021 

08/31/2021 

EI will formulate a timeline and 

schedule with milestones to the review 

of all management/personnel policies.

YES 12/31/2022 

12/31/2021 

EI will examine the impact of the 

management/personnel policies, 

procedures and practices on race, 

national origin, sex and disability.

YES 06/30/2023 
81 

Report of Accomplishments 

Fiscal Year Accomplishments

2021 

EI identified the following management and personnel policies 

and will develop a timeline to review these policies for systemic 

barriers: 

Instructions/Directives: 

• DTRA Instruction 1100.2 – Telework Program, Change 1 

• DTRA Instruction 1200.1 – Military Reserve Program 

• DTRA Instruction 1300.01 – Military Assignments 

• DTRA Instruction 1348.4 – Military Decorations Program 

• DTRA Instruction 1400.25-V400 – Merit Promotion Plan, Change 

1 

• DTRA Instruction 1400.25-V2009 – Defense 

• Civilian Intelligence Personnel System: Disciplinary and Adverse 

Actions Procedures 

• DTRA Instruction 1402.1 – Five-Year Limitation on Foreign 

Employment, Change 1 

• DTRA Instruction 7230.01, Professional Liability Insurance, 

Change 1

MD-715 – Part H - 7 

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

Defense Threat Reduction Agency 

Statement of Model Program Essential Element Deficiency - 

Type of Program 

Deficiency Brief Description of Program Deficiency

D.1.b 

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] 

D.2.a Does the Agency have a process for analyzing the identified triggers to 

find possible barriers? [see MD-715, (II)(B)] 
82 

Type of Program 

Deficiency Brief Description of Program Deficiency

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] 

Objective(s) and Dates for EEO Plan 

Date 

Initiated 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Objective Target Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Modified 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Date 

Completed 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

10/30/2019 

Establish a regular review of 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.

12/31/2022 03/31/2023 

Responsible Official(s) 

Title Name

Performance 

Standards Address 

the Plan?

(Yes or No)

Director, Equity, Diversity and 

Inclusion Office

Willisa Donald NO

Affirmative Program Manager Denise Lewis YES

Planned Activities Toward Completion of Objective 
83 

Target 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Planned Activities

Sufficient 

Funding & 

Staffing? 

(Yes or No)

Modified 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Completion 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

10/30/2019 

EI will review management policies, 

practices and procedures for any hidden 

impediments to equal opportunity (D.1.b; 

D.2.d).

YES

12/31/2020 

02/28/2020 

Conduct complaint and grievance trend 

analysis by gender and RNO (D.1.b; 

D.2.d).

YES

12/31/2020 

04/30/2020 Finalize the ERG Guidance to include an 

effective process for managing results.

YES 12/31/2020 

04/30/2020 

Review the Agency-wide training 

evaluations to access needs and 

overarching EEO concerns (D.1.b; D.2.d).

YES

12/31/2020 

05/30/2020 

Identify Special Emphasis Program trends 

utilizing various data (i.e. Observances, 

WRP, Schedule A and 

Outreach/Recruitment) (D.1.b; D.2.d).

YES

12/31/2020 

03/15/2021 Update EEO dashboard and examine data 

trends (D.2.a).

YES 3/31/2023

01/2022

06/30/2021 

Collect information from the Federal 

Employee Viewpoint Survey to identify 

and address opportunities for 

improvement (D.1.b; D.2.d).

YES 12/31/2022 

12/31/2021 

07/30/2021 Develop an annual EEO Diagnostic 

Report (D.2.a)

YES 12/31/2022

12/2021

Report of Accomplishments 

Fiscal Year Accomplishments

2019 

In FY19, 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 
84 

budget, contract expenditures and execution, EEO Mandatory 

Training, WRP and Special Observances data. (Appendix E)

o 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. However, there 

are more men in grades 11-15 which decreased the pay of women by 

7.3% ($9K) less than men overall. 

oFY19 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 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.

2020 

In September 2020, DTRA established a Diversity and Inclusion 

Council, which includes five Employee Resource Groups: African 

American; Asian Pacific Islander; Hispanic; Individuals with 

Disabilities; Women and LGBTQIA. 

In January 2021, EI created a Barrier Analysis Toolkit and conducted a 

briefing session with the ERGs to assist with their efforts in conducting 

barrier analysis. 

Conclusions concerning the existence of workplace barriers cannot be 

drawn from solely numerical analysis. The EI Office began exploring 

and analyzing other sources of data, the EI Office created a 3 Year 

Trends Report. The report conveys a comparison of EEO Complaint 

(Informal and Formal), Anti-Harassment, Special Emphasis Program 

Observance, Training, and the Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey. The 

EI Office developed a trigger table to analyze workforce data and 

identify the need for barrier analysis.

2021 

The EI Office reached out to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA) to receive training on their EEO Diagnostic 

Tool. This monitoring tool will provide source information for trigger 

identification and barrier analysis. The EI Office is also working with the 

Employee Resource Groups (ERGs) for them to identify and analyze 

barrier analysis data and provide feedback.
85 

MD-715 – Part H - 8 

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

Defense Threat Reduction Agency 

Statement of Model Program Essential Element Deficiency - 

Type of Program 

Deficiency Brief Description of Program Deficiency

D.3.a 

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)]

D.3.b 

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)]

D.3.c Does the Agency periodically review the effectiveness of the plans? [see 

MD-715, II(D)]

Objective(s) and Dates for EEO Plan 

Date 

Initiated 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Objective Target Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Modified 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyy

y)

Date Completed 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

03/03/2021 

Tailor action plans to address the 

identified barriers, in policies, 

procedures, practices, Part I or Part J.

12/31/2023

Responsible Official(s) 

Title Name

Performance 

Standards Address the 

Plan?

(Yes or No)

Director, Equity, Diversity and 

Inclusion Office

Willisa Donald YES

Affirmative Employment Manager Denise Lewis YES

Planned Activities Toward Completion of Objective 
86 

Target 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Planned Activities

Sufficient 

Funding & 

Staffing? 

(Yes or No)

Modified 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Completion 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

06/01/2021 

After examination of the policies, 

practices and procedures an action plan 

will be developed to address and eradiate 

barriers (D.3.a; D.3.b).

YES

12/31/2022 

09/30/2021 

06/01/2021 

EI will utilize the EEOC guidance on 

barrier identification to address and 

eradiate barriers (D.3.b).

YES

12/31/2021 

08/01/2021 

Incorporate assistance from the ERGs to 

see if their action plans align or connect 

with the identified barriers (D.3.c).

YES

02/28/2022 

09/30/2021 Create timelines within the action plan to 

correct the deficiencies with HR (D.3.a).

YES 04/30/2022 

10/01/2021 

Format the action plans to address the 

identified barriers in Part I including 

meeting the target dates for the planned 

activities (D.3.a; D.3.b).

YES 08/31/2022 

10/30/2021 

EI will create a trigger table to identify 

red flags within the workforce data 

(D.3.b).

YES

07/30/2021 

03/01/2022 

Establish a procedure to annually review 

the effectiveness of the Parts I and J plans 

(D.3.c).

YES

10/31/2022 

Report of Accomplishments 

Fiscal Year Accomplishments

2020 

In FY20, EI developed action plans for Part I and Part J, timelines were 

created to correct identified deficiencies. A trigger table was developed 

to identify red flags within the workforce. 

2021 

EI collaborated with the Agency ERGs to address barriers, and develop 

action plans to address identified deficiencies. Additionally, a trigger 

table was developed and utilized to assist in data analysis. 
87 

MD-715 – Part H - 9 

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

Defense Threat Reduction Agency 

Statement of Model Program Essential Element Deficiency - 

Type of Program 

Deficiency Brief Description of Program Deficiency

E.3.b The Agency does not currently require Managers and Supervisors to 

participate in ADR once it has been offered IAW MD-715, II (A)(1).

Objective(s) and Dates for EEO Plan 

Date 

Initiated 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Objective Target Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Modified 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Date 

Completed 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

01/05/2021 

The Agency’s ADR Instruction has 

been drafted to include requirement for 

Managers and Supervisors to 

participate in ADR for EEO complaints 

when offered. Is approved, the 

requirement will be effective upon 

publication. If not approved, the 

Agency will keep the stance that ADR 

is voluntary for all workplace disputes.

01/31/2023 

Responsible Official(s) 

Title Name

Performance 

Standards Address the 

Plan?

(Yes or No)

Director, Equity, Diversity and 

Inclusion Office

Willisa Donald YES

Alternative Dispute Resolution 

Program Manager

Richard Conyers YES

Planned Activities Toward Completion of Objective 
88 

Target 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Planned Activities

Sufficient 

Funding & 

Staffing? 

(Yes or No)

Modified 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Completion 

Date (mm/dd/yyyy)

01/31/2022 Work out edits to ADR Instruction with 

Tech Writers.

YES

10/31/2022 

Route ADR Instruction through 

Directorates for feedback and implement 

feedback accordingly. 

YES

12/31/2022 

Route ADR Instruction through CoS and 

DIR for feedback and implement 

feedback accordingly.

YES

01/31/2023 Publish ADR Instruction YES

Report of Accomplishments 

Fiscal Year Accomplishments

2021 

During FY21, the Complaints and Resolutions team continued to 

coordinate the draft ADR Instruction with Tech Writers for review 

ensuring accurate and clear guidance is conveyed and properly 

formatted.

MD-715 – Part H - 10

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

Defense Threat Reduction Agency 

Statement of Model Program Essential Element Deficiency - 

Type of Program 

Deficiency Brief Description of Program Deficiency

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)]

Objective(s) and Dates for EEO Plan 
89 

Date 

Initiated 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Objective Target Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Modified 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Date Completed 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

01/04/2021 

Maintain accurate data collection for 

workforce demographics and applicant 

flow.

12/30/2021 

Responsible Official(s) 

Title Name

Performance 

Standards Address the 

Plan?

(Yes or No)

Director, Equity, Diversity and 

Inclusion Office

Willisa Donald YES

Affirmative Program Manager Denise Lewis YES

Planned Activities Toward Completion of Objective 

Target 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Planned Activities

Sufficient 

Funding & 

Staffing? 

(Yes or No)

Modified 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Completion 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

12/31/2020 EI will Obtain applicant flow data from 

USA Staffing for Table A/B 7.

YES 01/31/2021 

02/28/2021 

EI will conduct analysis to determine 

what occupational series and grades 

candidates are applying.

YES

04/30/2021 

03/31/2021 

EI will develop trigger tables (A&B) to 

collect applicant flow data by series, 

RNO, Grade, Gender and Disabilities.

YES

07/30/2021 

06/30/2021 

EI will analyze the AFD for any 

disparities within the RNO, Grade, 

Gender and Disabilities.

YES 5/31/2022 

12/2021 

Report of Accomplishments 

Fiscal Year Accomplishments

2020 

In FY20, EI Office collected the applicant flow data for permanent 

mission critical occupations (MCO). The tables reflect the FY20 new 

hires and internal promotion candidate’s applications that were submitted 
90 

for employment vacancies announced through USAJOBs. The data 

revealed applicants who self-identified and were (1) qualified; (2) 

referred; and (3) selection for vacancies posted on USAJOBs. 

The following analysis was conducted for Internal Competitive 

Promotion and New Hires by Mission Critical Occupations (MCOs). 

Internal Competitive Promotion: The Agency received 607 

applications through USAJOBS and made 4 selections for Security 

(0080) Administration positions. Of the 4 selected 3 (75.00%) were 

Males (1 Hispanic and 2 White) and 1 (25.00%) Asian Female. 

Misc. Administration (0301) MCO, the Agency received 1840 

applications and made 29 selections of which 15 (51.72%) were Males (1 

Hispanic, 10 White, 1 black, and 3 Asian) 9 (31.03%) were Females (7 

Whites, 1 Black and 1 Two or more races) 4 Omitted. 

Information Technology Management (2210%) MCO, the Agency 

received 500 applications and made 6 selections of which 5 (83.33%) 

were Males (3 White, 1 Black and 1 Asian) and 1 (16.67%) Female 

(Two or more races). 

New Hires: The Agency received 764 applications through USAJOBS 

and made 3 selections for Security (0080) Administration positions. Of 

the 3 selected, there were 1 (33.33%) Black Male, 1 (33.33%) White 

Female and 1 (33.33%) Omitted. 

Misc. Administration (0301) MCO, the Agency received 1593 

applications and made 8 selections of which 3 (37.50%) were White 

Males, 3 (37.50%) were Females (2 White and 1 Black) and 2 (25.00%) 

were Omitted. 

The Budget Analysis (560) MCO, the Agency received 565 applications 

and made 9 selections of which 2 (22.22%) were Males (1 White and 1 

Asian), 5 (55.56%) Females (3 White and 2 Black) and 2 (22.22%) were 

Omitted.

General Physical Science (1301) MCO, the Agency received 1127 

applications and made 16 selections of which 5 (31.25%) were White 

Males, 5 (31.25%) were Females (3 White, 1 Black and 1 Asian) and 6 

(37.50%) were Omitted. 

 
91 

Information Technology Management (2210) MCO, the Agency

received 567 applications and made 3 selections of which 3 (100.00%) 

were Omitted.

2021 

In FY21, EI Office obtained applicant flow data via USAStaffing. The A 

& B tables include applicant flow data for new hires and internal 

promotions. The A Tables include applicant flow data for the following 

categories: (1) Total number of applicants; (2) Total number of qualified 

applicants; (3) Total number referred; and (4) Total number of 

selections. The data is categorized by Race, Ethnicity and Sex. The B 

Tables include applicant flow data for the following categories: (1) Total 

number of applicants; (2) Total number of qualified applicants; (3) Total 

number referred; and (4) Total number of selections. The data is 

categorized by Disability. 

An analysis was conducted for Mission Critical Occupations, and will be 

expanded in FY22 to include an analysis of all available Applicant Flow 

Data. 

MD-715 – Part H - 11

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

Defense Threat Reduction Agency 

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? 

[see MD-715, II(E)]

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)]

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)]

Objective(s) and Dates for EEO Plan 
92 

Date 

Initiated 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Objective Target Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Modified 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Date 

Completed 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

01/30/2020 

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.

12/15/2021 12/31/2022 

Responsible Official(s) 

Title Name

Performance 

Standards Address the 

Plan?

(Yes or No)

Director, Equity, Diversity and 

Inclusion Office

Willisa Donald YES

Affirmative Program Manager Denise Lewis YES

Planned Activities Toward Completion of Objective 

Target Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy) Planned Activities

Sufficient 

Funding 

& 

Staffing? 

(Yes or No)

Modified 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Completion 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

06/30/2021 

Conduct online research to identify 

Federal agencies, best practices to 

incorporate and implement new 

strategies and ideas.

YES

12/31/2022 

09/30/2021 

07/30/2021 

Visit and partner with various Federal 

agencies on specific program areas to 

enhance EEO program effectiveness.

YES

12/31/2021 

05/20/2021 

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 12/31/2022 
93 

Target Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy) Planned Activities

Sufficient 

Funding 

& 

Staffing? 

(Yes or No)

Modified 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Completion 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

09/15/2021 

Conduct comparative analysis within 

DoD with other 4th Estate agencies 

(review DoD Annual Reports) and/or 

conduct face to face meetings.

YES

12/31/2022 

Report of Accomplishments 

Fiscal Year Accomplishments

2019 

In FY19, 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.

2020 

In FY20, EEO identified benchmarking opportunities with several 

Federal agencies of similar size to compare their Diversity and 

Inclusion, Disability, ERGs efforts. 

The Diversity, Engagement and Outreach Team reached out to Federal 

Maritime Commission Agency to gain insight on their Employee

Engagement successes, strategies and their experiences establishing 

their programs, lesson learned and pitfalls. 

The Agency Disability Coordinator partnered with Department of the 

Blind and Vision Impairment (DBVI) and the Department for Aging and 

Rehabilitation Services (DARS) to educate the workforce on how to 

interact with disability community. Also, EI partnered with the 

Wounded Warriors Regiment of Quantico, VA to obtain a speaker for 

the virtual disability program. 
94 

The EI Office collaborated with the newly established ERGs to promote 

Special Emphasis Programs, activities and events in the workforce. 

2021 

DoD/Armed Forces Harassment Ms. Shirley Raguindin, from the 

Associate Director, Defense Advisory Committee on Diversity and 

Inclusion Diversity Management Operations Center. She provided HQ 

level information regarding the operations. Additionally, she shared a 

brief she conducted at DEOMI during the Leadership Training 

Awareness Seminar on the MEO program initiatives. Information 

regarding initiatives in the MEO sphere is vital to ensure DTRA’s 

programs and initiatives are aligned accordingly. 

NASA/DOL/DHA - Discussed with Mr. James Gilliam, Defense Health 

Agency, best practices in their Agency’s Disability Programs, i.e. the 

Selective Placement Program procedures and the importance of 

providing candidates with information to assist applicants in seeking 

employment with the federal government. Additionally, we also 

discussed the various reports that the Disability Program Manager

prepares for their programs. Mr. Gilliam provided an introduction to 

Rosemary Salak, Department of the Army Disability Program Manager. 

 

EI Office collaborated with Ms. Vhay, Department of Labor, to provide 

a virtual training regarding the Workforce Recruitment program and 

hiring affiliated hiring authorities. The goal of the training was to 

provide hiring Managers and Supervisors information regarding the 

benefits of the WRP program and hiring individuals with disabilities. 

She provided information regarding utilization of the Schedule A hiring 

authority for a position vs hiring a non-Schedule A person. 

 

Coordinated with DTRA Individuals with Disabilities ERG Chair and 

Co-Chair to meet with NASA Disability Program Manager, Special 

Emphasis Program Managers and their Disability ERG Chair to discuss 

their best practices with individual’s disabilities in their Agency.
95 
96 

MD-715 – Part I 

Agency EEO Plan to Eliminate Identified Barrier 

DTRA FEMALE WORKFORCE 

Source of 

the Trigger

Specific 

Workforce 

Data Table 

Narrative Description of Trigger

Female 

Workforce

Table A1, A3, 

A9

DTRA’s Total workforce for FY21 consisted of 1,480 

individuals. Of those, 521 (35.20%) were Females which was 

significantly lower than the 48.21% Civilian Labor Force (CLF). 

Permanent workforce for FY21 consisted of 1,454 individuals. 

Of those, 512 (35.21%) were Females which was significantly 

lower than the 48.21% Civilian Labor Force (CLF). 

The Permanent workforce Female participation rate (35.20%) is 

broken down as follows: Executives (23.88%), Managers (24%), 

Supervisors (0.00%), Professionals (32.26%) and Administrative 

Workers (63.64%). 

 

Senior-grade level Female participation rates were; 208 GS-13s 

(43.15%), 123 GS-14s (30.83%), 51 GS-15 (26.42%), and 1 

SES (7.14%) experienced an increase, except for SES, when 

compared with FY20. 

The participation rate of Female New Hires in the Total 

workforce was 41.84% for FY21. However, even though the 

New Hire participation rates are as follows, Hispanic (3.57%), 

White (26.02%) Black/African American (8.67%), American 

Indian or Alaska Native (0.51%), and Two or More Races 

(0.20%) Females remain significantly underrepresented in the 

DTRA workforce. 

 

The Separation rate for Females in the Total workforce was 22 

(34.38%) for FY21. Female separations were represented as 

follows: Hispanic (6.25%), White (20.31%), Black/African 

American (6.25%), and Asian (1.56%). 

Analysis of the Time-Off Award data revealed that Females 

received Time Off awards in all categories except as noted. 
97 

• No Hispanic Females received a Time-Off Award of 1-10 

hours. 

• No Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander Females 

received Time-Off Awards in the 1-10 hours, or 11-20 

hours categories. 

• No American Indian or Alaska Native Females received 

Time-Off Awards in the 1-10 hours, 11-20 hours or 21-30 

hours categories. 

• No Two or More Races Females received Time-Off 

Awards in the 1-10 hours, 11-20 hours or 21-30 hours 

categories. However, they did receive Time Off awards in 

the 31-40 hours category. 

Analysis of the Cash Award data revealed that Females received 

Cash Awards in all categories except as noted. 

• No Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander Females 

received Cash Awards in the $501-$999, $1000-$1999, 

$2000-$2999, $3000-$3999, or $5000 or more categories. 

• No American Indian or Alaska Native Females received 

Cash Awards in the $500 and under, $501-$999, $2000-

$2999, $3000-$3999, or $5000 or more categories. 

• No Two or More Races received Cash Awards in the 

$501-$999, $2000-$2999, $3000-$3999, $4000-$4999, or 

$5000 or more categories. 

Analysis of the Quality Step Increases data indicates that the 

participation rate for Females was 41.89%; however, no Native 

Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islanders, and American Indian or 

Alaska Native Females were among those receiving a QSI. 

NOTE: The analysis was conducted based on the data provided 

by ADVANA.

Female

Workforce 

GS-14 thru 

SES

Table A4

The Female participation rate within the Permanent workforce

was 35.21%. The following are areas of concern: 

 

The GS-14 Female participation rate was 123 (30.83%). 

 Hispanic Females, five (1.25%) compared to the 

permanent workforce of 34 (2.34%). 

 White Females, 75 (18.80%) compared to the permanent 

workforce of 296 (20.36%). 

 Black/African American Females, 28 (7.02%) compared 

to the permanent workforce of 136 (9.35%). 
98 

 Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander Females, zero 

(0.00%) compared to the permanent workforce of four 

(0.28%). 

 American Indian or Alaska Native Females, zero

(0.00%) compared to the permanent workforce of three 

(0.14%). 

The GS-15 Females participation rate was 51 (26.42%). 

 White Females, 36 (18.65%) compared to the permanent 

workforce of 296 (20.36%). 

 Black/African American Females, 7 (3.63%) compared 

to the permanent workforce of 136 (9.35%). 

 Asian Females, two (1.04%) compared to the permanent 

workforce of 37 (2.54%). 

 Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander Females, zero

(0.00%) compared to the permanent workforce of four 

(0.28%). 

 Two or More Races Female, zero (0.00%) compared to 

the permanent workforce of three (0.21%). 

In FY21, the SES Female population was one (7.14%) compared 

to the permanent workforce of 512 (35.21). 

NOTE: The analysis was conducted based on the data provided 

by ADVANA.

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 Analysis of Female workforce utilizing ADVANA Data. 

Complaint Data 

(Trends) NO

Grievance Data 

(Trends) NO
99 

Sources of Data

Source 

Reviewed?

(Yes or No)

Identify Information Collected

Findings from 

Decisions (e.g., EEO, 

Grievance, MSPB, 

Anti-Harassment 

Processes) 

YES

Climate Assessment 

Survey (e.g., FEVS) NO

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 will need to determine the following: 

• Why do Females have a low participation rate in DTRA’s total workforce 

• Why are Females separating from the Agency at 36.54% 

• Are Females being hired at a comparative rate to Males 

• Are Females being paid comparable to Males
100 

Description of Policy, Procedure, or Practice

Address and implement strategies for the recruitment and selection of highly qualified 

Females for positions at the highest levels.

Objective(s) and Dates for EEO Plan 

Objective

Date 

Initiated 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Target 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Sufficient

Funding 

and 

Staffing?

Modified 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Date 

Completed 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Collaborate with HR 

on Recruitment 

Events and Outreach 

for Females.

04/14/2019 09/30/2020 YES 12/31/2022 

Participate in HR’s 

Strategic Recruitment 

Discussions to 

provide guidance in 

hiring process.

09/01/2020 09/30/2020 YES 09/30/2020 

Review applicant 

flow data to identify 

the number of 

Females applying for 

positions

01/01/2021 12/31/2021 YES 09/30/2022 

Responsible Official(s) 

Title Name

Performance Standards 

Address the Plan? 

(Yes or No)

Anti-Harassment Program Manager Yorshia Housel NO 

Director, Equity, Diversity and 

Inclusion Office Willisa Donald NO 

Director, Human Resource 

Directorate Christine Enriquez, Colonel NO

Planned Activities Toward Completion of Objective 
101 

Target Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy) Planned Activities Modified Date (mm/dd/yyyy)

Completion Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

02/15/2020 

Conduct a Gender Pay Study to 

examine pay gap between Males 

and Females within the Agency

03/30/2020 

03/20/2020 

Collaborate with HR’s 

Recruitment and Outreach Team 

on events and efforts for Females

09/30/2020 

04/30/2020 

Develop a Recruitment and 

Outreach Plan identifying 

undergraduate, graduate schools 

and universities, summer 

internships, and associations for 

Women

08/30/2020 

07/01/2020 

Participate in HR’s Strategic 

Recruitment Discussions and 

provide hiring guidance to hiring 

Managers

09/30/2020 

07/30/2020 

Examine exit survey data to 

determine why Females are 

leaving the Agency

09/30/2022 

08/05/2020 

Establish the Women’s ERG 

(W/ERG) to address the low 

participation of Women in the 

Agency. Select a Lead and Colead to play an active role within 

the W/ERG.

09/30/2020 

10/01/2020 Develop an Action Plan and a 

way forward with the W/ERG 01/29/2021 

10/31/2020 

Hold W/ERG monthly meetings 

to collaborate on targeted 

outreach strategies and Diversityrelated matters.

12/31/2021 

05/01/2021 Develop and provide workshops, 

brown bags and seminars to 

12/31/2021

08/2021
102 

Target Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy) Planned Activities Modified Date (mm/dd/yyyy)

Completion Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

promote cultural awareness for 

Women.

06/01/2021 

Develop partnerships with 

colleges, and universities that 

have a high percentage of 

women in the DTRA mission 

critical skillsets

03/30/2022 

09/2021 

07/15/2021 

Target recruitment efforts toward 

women from diverse backgrounds 

(including veterans) through 

networking/partnerships with 

women and veteran 

organizations.

03/30/2022 

09/2021 

09/30/2021 

Adopt and tailor OPM 

Recruitment, Engagement, 

Diversity and Inclusion Program 

(REDI) roadmap for ideas. 

02/28/2022 

10/01/2021 

Examine the Applicant Flow Data 

to determine whether Women are 

applying and/or being selected. 

03/30/2023 

09/30/2021 

12/15/2021 

Review the Career Development 

workforce data to determine if 

there are any barriers in women 

applying and being selected for 

opportunities. 

03/30/2022 

12/30/2021 

Conduct an analysis to determine 

retention issues within the 

Agency (i.e., exit survey, OPM 

Employee Viewpoint Survey).

06/30/2022 

Report of Accomplishments 

Fiscal Year Accomplishments

2020 Recruitment and Outreach Plan: EI continued to engage with HR on recruitment 

and outreach efforts: EI developed a Recruitment and Outreach Plan to address the 
103 

deficiencies from the MD-715, Federal Equal Opportunity Recruitment Plan 

(FEORP) and Disadvantaged Veterans Affirmative Action Plan (DVAAP) Report 

and to support recruitment efforts for women including schools and universities 

(undergraduate and graduate), summer internships, institutions and associations. 

Strategic Recruitment Discussion: The EI Office began participating in strategic 

conversations with HR and hiring Managers to educate and provide awareness on 

achieving Diversity in recruitment, hiring and the interviewing process. These 

conversations assist in increasing hiring Manager’s awareness of various special 

hiring authorities, Diversity recruitment strategies and establishing a diverse hiring 

panel, beyond demographics. 

Agency Established a Women’s ERG: In FY20, DTRA established an Agencywide Diversity and Inclusion Council, to include six ERGs (African American, 

AAPI, Hispanic, PWD, LGBTQIA and Women). The newly established Women’s 

ERG included 20 volunteers from across the Agency. The group immediately 

developed its Action Plan and focused efforts on: 

• Analysis and Reporting 

• Policy and Oversight 

• Force and Talent Management

• Strategic Communications and Events

While individual initiatives are still under development, the formation of this ERG 

represents deliberate commitment to issues of Diversity and inclusion with the 

Agency. 

Women’s Pay Equity Study – In FY20, a pay study was conducted to determine 

triggers in regards to Women in the DTRA workforce. We examined pay grades for 

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. A 

member of the ORSA team briefed the D&I Council and ERGs and will collaborate 

with the ERGs to conduct further analysis. 

The Agency Women’s ERG hosted a Women’s History Month Panel event. There 

were 3 Female panelists: Dr. Ada Bacetty, Navy CPO Diana Angstadt, and Dr. 

Jennifer Sparks. Ms. Amanda Andersen moderated the event. The theme of the 

event centered on Leadership, followership, and championship in work and life 

endeavors. The discussion topics included mentorship, barriers in the workplace, 

work/life balance, and overcoming adversity. The three panelists answered 

questions and offered different perspectives based on career fields, personal and 

professional experience, and individual drivers. The event helped to share 

perspectives on overcoming barriers to ensure women at DTRA have the support 

they need to grow and succeed in the DTRA workforce. There were over 150 

attendees. 
104 

2021 

EI continued to engage with HR on recruitment and outreach efforts; EI developed 

a Recruitment and Outreach Plan to address the deficiencies. 

 

A Women’s ERG member attended The Conference Board Organization’s Diversity, 

Equity and Inclusion (DEI) Virtual Global Event which was a platform of global 

Senior Leadership speakers/panel participants with discussions of the current DEI 

challenges of incorporating DEI in the workforce from the top down; Shared with 

the Council and ERGs. 

 

Women ERG performed a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats 

(SWOT) analysis that reviewed the past year and preparing for the year to come. 

The Women’s ERG displayed an art exhibit at DTRA HQs to celebrate National 

Women’s Appreciation day. 

 

A Women’s ERG member attended The Conference Board Organization’s 

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI). 

 

The Women’s ERG participated in TAP & Outreach events such supporting Women 

ERG members and attending the DAF Women’s Air and Space Power Symposium, 

a professional development series. 

 

The Women’s ERG requested DTRA HR to include D&I Council/ERG 

SharePoint link on the Agency In-processing checklist. 

 

The ERG hosted a Women’s Equality Day Canvas project, Brown Bags, guest 

lectures, internal women’s panels. 

They collaborated with the other ERGs to conduct a Recruitment Job Fair in the 

Headquarters Lobby January 2022 TBD. 

 

The ERG solicited for new members’ by sharing information on the DTRA 1 

Carousel. 

 

They reviewed the MD-715 to identify retention issues for Women. 

 

Develop partnerships and collaborative relationships with professional 

organizations to promote DTRA’s mission and hiring needs. 

 Explore the opportunity to start a Federal Employed Women (FEW) 

chapter at DTRA (stretch goal) 

 Explore the option of DTRA becoming a sponsor during FEW conferences. 

Team with existing Chapters 

 Win an Award (stretch goal) 
105 

Collaborate with the HR Talent Acquisition Program (TAP) team to assess how to 

find, engage, and target Women candidates. 

 Explore outreach to women’s colleges such as: Spelman, Bennett, Barnard, 

Wellesley, Smith, etc. 

 Teaming with AAERG as two are HBCUs 

The ERG plans to meet in person to provide LeanIn/Group fellowship support 

groups.

MD-715 – Part I 

Agency EEO Plan to Eliminate Identified Barrier 

DTRA HISPANIC WORKFORCE

Source of the 

Trigger 

Specific 

Workforce 

Data Table 

Narrative Description of Trigger 

Hispanic 

Workforce 

Table A1, 

A8 and A16 

DTRA’s Total workforce for FY21 consisted of 1,480 individuals. Of 

those, 71 (4.80%) were Hispanic Males and 35 (2.36%) were Hispanic 

Females. The representation of Hispanic Males and Females is 

significantly lower than the Hispanic Male CLF of 6.82% and Hispanic 

Female CLF of 6.16%.

Permanent workforce for FY21 consisted of 1,454 individuals. Of 

those, 71 (4.88%) were Hispanic Males and 34 (2.34%) were Hispanic

Females. The representation of Hispanic Males and Females is 

significantly lower than the Hispanic Male CLF of 6.82% and Hispanic 

Female CLF of 6.16%.

The Permanent workforce Hispanic Males participation rate 71 

(4.88%) is broken down as follows: Executives three (2.24%), 

Managers four (5.33%), Supervisors one (100%), Professionals 25 

(5.76%), Technicians five (15.63%) and Administrative Workers one 

(9.09%).

The Permanent workforce Hispanic Women’s participation rate 34 

(2.34%) is broken down as follows: Executives four (2.99%), Managers 

two (2.67%), and Professionals 10 (2.30%). 

Senior-grade level Hispanic participation rates were as follows: Male 

GS-13s 22 (4.56%), 15 GS-14s (3.76%), three GS-15 (1.55%), and 1 
106 

SES (7.14%). Female GS-13s 13 (3.32%), five (1.25%) GS-14s, and 

five (2.59%) GS-15s. 

The participation rate of Hispanic Male New Hires in the Total 

workforce was 13 (6.63%) for FY21, they remain underrepresented in 

the DTRA workforce. 

The participation rate of Hispanic Females New Hires in the Total 

workforce was seven (3.57%) for FY21, they remain significantly 

underrepresented in the DTRA workforce. 

The Separation rate for Hispanic Males in the Total workforce was 

three (4.69%) for FY21.

The Separation rate for Hispanic Females in the Total workforce was 

four (6.25%) for FY21. 

Analysis of the Time-Off Award data revealed that Hispanic Males 

received Time-Off Awards in all categories except as noted. 

• No Hispanic Males received a Time-Off award of 11-20 hours. 

Analysis of the Time-Off Award data revealed that Hispanic Females 

received Time-Off Awards in all categories except as noted. 

• No Hispanic Females received a Time-Off Award of 1-10 hours. 

Analysis of the Cash Award data revealed that Hispanic Males and 

Females received Cash Awards in all categories. 

Analysis of the Quality Step Increases data indicates Hispanic Males and 

Females were recipients of Quality Step Increases in FY21. 

NOTE: The analysis was conducted based on the data provided by 

ADVANA.

Senior 

Executive 

Service 

Table A-4 

The Agency has 14 individuals in SES positions. The Hispanic Male 

SES population was one (7.14%) compared to the permanent workforce 

of 71 (4.88%). There was no Hispanic Female representation among 

the SES. 

Analysis of the Hispanic Male workforce reveals there is no Hispanic 

Male representation in GS-01 to GS-06, nor GS-8-GS-10. Analysis of 

the Hispanic Female workforce reveals there is no Hispanic Female 

representation in GS-01 to GS-08, nor GS-10 to GS-GS-11. 
107 

The majority of Hispanic Males 40 (56.33%) of the 71permanent 

Hispanic Males were in the GS-13 to GS-15 pay grades, placing them in 

the SES pipeline.

The majority of Hispanic Females 26 (76.47%) of the 34 permanent 

Hispanic Females were in the GS13 to GS-15 pay grades, placing them 

in the SES pipeline. 

NOTE: The analysis was conducted based on the data provided by 

ADVANA.

EEO Group(s) Affected by Trigger 

Hispanic Workforce

Barrier Analysis 

Process

Sources of Data Source 

Reviewed? 

(Yes or No) 

Identify Information Collected 

Workforce Data Tables YES Analysis of Hispanic workforce utilizing 

ADVANA Data.

Complaint Data (Trends) 

NO 

Grievance Data (Trends) NO 

Findings from Decisions 

(e.g., EEO, Grievance, 

MSPB, Anti-Harassment 

Processes) 

NO 

Climate Assessment Survey 

(e.g., FEVS) NO 

Exit Interview Data NO

Focus Groups NO 

Interviews NO 
108 

Reports (e.g., Congress, 

EEOC, MSPB, GAO, OPM) NO 

Other (Please Describe) NO 

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 

The Agency continued to work on the low participation rates of Hispanics. In FY21, the EI Office with 

the support of HR continued their work to identify and minimize potential barriers to improve the 

representation of Hispanics at DTRA. 

Objective(s) and Dates for EEO Plan 

Objective 

Date 

Initiated Target 

Date 

 Sufficient

Funding

&

Staffing?

Modified 

Date 

Date 

Completed 

Identify and 

address potential 

barriers within 

DTRA’s Hispanic 

workforce. 

12/04/2018 12/15/2021 YES 6/30/2022

Enhance Hispanic 

cultural awareness 

through engaging 

the Hispanic ERG.

01/01/2020 Ongoing YES 10/31/2021

Develop an outreach 

and recruitment plan 

that identifies R/O 

strategies and 

highlights Hispanic 

06/01/2020 10/31/2020 YES 10/31/2021 
109 

Serving Institutions 

(HSIs). 

Responsible Official(s) 

Title Name 

Performance 

Standards Address the 

Plan? 

(Yes or No) 

Director, Equity, Diversity

and 

Inclusion 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 

03/05/2019 Re-establish a Hispanic Working Group 06/30/2019 

03/31/2020 Conduct a Climate Survey of the DTRA

Albuquerque facility. 04/30/2020 

04/29/2020

Develop and provide workshops, brown 

bags and seminars to promote cultural 

awareness in working with Hispanics.

12/31/2022

09/2021 

04/30/2020 

Develop a Recruitment and Outreach 

Plan for Hispanics. Provide a list of 

Universities and Institutions for specific 

mission skillsets. 

08/15/2020 

07/30/2020 Select a list of Summer Programs for 

Hispanics and proved to HR.

08/15/2020

08/05/2020 

Finalize the ERG Charter and guidance 

to establish new working group to 

examine perceived barriers.

09/30/2020
110 

08/15/2020 Select a Lead and Co-Lead who will play 

an active role within the Hispanic ERG. 

09/30/2020

08/15/2020 

Hold Hispanic ERG meetings monthly to 

collaborate on targeted outreach 

strategies and Diversity related matters.

08/31/2020

01/15/2021 

Conduct Awareness Sessions for Agency 

Employees and discuss ways to enhance 

opportunities for Hispanics.

09/30/2022 

07/30/2021 

Conduct in-depth barrier analysis in 

collaboration with Hispanic ERG to 

identify policies and practices that may 

prevent advancement in the 

representation of Hispanics at DTRA. 

03/30/2022

10/2021 

08/30/2021 

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. 

06/30/2022

10/15/2021 

Reviewing hiring, promotion, and career 

development programs from other 

Federal Agencies and private sector 

companies to benchmark best practices. 

06/30/2022

11/15/2021 

Review the Career Development 

workforce data to determine if there are 

any barriers in Hispanics apply and being 

selected for opportunities. 

09/30/2022

Report of Accomplishments 

Fiscal Year Accomplishments 

2020 

Hispanic Recruitment and Outreach: DTRA continues to focus, review and 

modify recruitment strategies to ensure these efforts result in a diverse applicant 

pool that includes Hispanics. Ongoing recruiting efforts include outreach at virtual 

and community events and informational briefs at local schools and colleges/ 

universities with large Hispanic populations such as the University of New 

Mexico, New Mexico State University, Central New Mexico Community College 

and the Society of Hispanic Professional Engineers (SHPE) Regional Leadership

Development Conference Region 3, the nation’s largest association dedicated to 

fostering Hispanic Leadership in the STEM field. In addition, the recruitment team 
111 

was established for engineering and scientist positions specifically targeted to 

Hispanic/Latino Americans seeking employment, as well as increased 

collaboration with professional Hispanic affinity organizations. DTRA attended 

one outreach event that engaged over 150 prospective candidates. The Agency had 

two additional Hispanic focused events cancelled due to COVID-19. 

Hispanic Working Group and Climate Assessment: The Hispanic Working 

Group engaged Hispanic Employees and discussed the Agency's efforts such as 

the Hispanic Working Group action plan report and next steps for outreach into 

the community. The Working Group conducted a climate assessment for the ABQ 

workforce. Fifty-two percent (52%) of the ABQ workforce took the assessment. 

The results indicated there is a need for improvement in Employee recognition 

and promotion, career development and Senior Leadership. There were positive 

outcomes for ABQ’s first line Supervisor, mission and accountability. 

Hispanic Employee Resource Group (H/ERG): In FY20, the Agency established 

the H/ERG with 18 volunteers to assist with identifying and addressing barriers 

causing a low participation rate. The group developed a draft action plan and 

selected team leads to support the following teams: 

• Data and Barrier Analysis 

• Recruitment and Outreach 

• Employee/Workforce Engagement 

• Training and Cultural Awareness

2021 

• Hispanic, The EI Director met with the Hispanic ERG providing advice and 

assistance regarding their initiatives. 

 Participated in the TAP & Outreach events for the West New 

Mexico University Career Fair;

 Hosted a lecture series;

 The Mayaguez Incident – 12 to 15 May 1975 

 Morinqueneers – 65th Infantry Regiment, 1899 to 

Presentation of Congressional 

 Gold Medal 

 Hosted lunchtime brown bag – Music/Culture series to create 

cultural awareness;

 Salsa, Merengue, Mambo, and Bomba-Plena

 Ranchera, Mariachi, Cumbia, and Tango

 Collaborated with the Women’s ERG for information sharing on 

several Women Firsts, within DoD (First female to Lead a 

Service, First Female Coast Guard Commandant);

 Participated in Inter-Government mentoring, with other agencies 

as they stood up their Hispanic ERG; 

 Hosted a Cinco De Mayo educational display; and
112 

 Commemorated Hispanic Heritage Month through a series of 

displays. 

MD-715 – Part I 

Agency EEO Plan to Eliminate Identified Barrier 

White Females

Source of 

the 

Trigger 

Specific 

Workforce 

Data Table 

Narrative Description of Trigger 

White 

Female

Workforce 

Table A1, 

A8 and A16 

DTRA’s Total workforce for FY21 consisted of 1,480 individuals. Of 

those, 302 (20.41%) were White Females which was significantly 

lower than the 31.82% Civilian Labor Force (CLF). 

Permanent workforce for FY21 consisted of 1,454 individuals. Of 

those, 296 (20.36%) were White Females which was significantly 

lower than the 31.82% Civilian Labor Force (CLF).

The Permanent workforce White Female participation rate 296 

(20.36%) is broken down as follows: Executives 22 (16.42%), 

Managers eight (10.67%), Professionals 91 (20.97%), and 

Administrative Workers six (54.55%).

Senior-grade level White Female participation rates were as follows: 

Male GS-13s 108 (22.41%), 75 GS-14s (18.80%), 36 GS-15 (18.65%), 

and one SES (7.14%). 

The participation rate of White Female New Hires in the Total 

workforce was 51 (26.02%) for FY21, they remain significantly 

underrepresented in the DTRA workforce. 

The Separation rate for White Females in the Total workforce was 13 

(20.31%) for FY21. 

Analysis of the Time-Off Award data revealed that White Females

received Time-Off Awards in all categories. 

Analysis of the Cash Award data revealed that White Females received 

Cash Awards in all categories.
113 

Analysis of the Quality Step Increases data indicates White Females 

were recipients of Quality Step Increases in FY21. 

NOTE: The analysis was conducted based on the data provided by 

ADVANA.

Senior 

Executive 

Service 

Table A-4 

The Agency has 14 individuals in SES positions. There was no White 

Female representation among the SES. 

 

Analysis of the White Female workforce reveals there is no White 

Female representation in GS-01 to GS-06. 

The majority of White Females 219 (74%) of the 296 permanent White 

Females were in the GS-13 and GS-15 pay grades, placing them in the 

SES pipeline. 

NOTE: The analysis was conducted based on the data provided by 

ADVANA.

EEO Group(s) Affected by Trigger 

White Females

Barrier Analysis Process 

Sources of Data Source 

Reviewed? 

(Yes or No) 

Identify Information Collected 

Workforce Data Tables YES Analysis of White Female workforce utilizing 

ADVANA Data.

 Complaint Data (Trends) NO

 Grievance Data (Trends) NO

 Exit Interview Data NO

 Focus Groups NO

 Other (Please Describe) NO

Status of Barrier Analysis Process 
114 

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 

In FY21 the Agency workforce analysis identified a lower than anticipated participation rate of 

White Females in the DTRA workforce. 

DTRA will need to determine the following:

 Why do White Females have a low participation rate in DTRA’s permanent workforce?

 Why is there no White Female representation in the SES workforce?

Objective(s) and Dates for EEO Plan 

Objective 

Date 

Initiated 

Target 

Date 

 Sufficient 

Funding 

& 

Staffing? 

Modified 

Date

Date 

Completed 

Identify and address 

potential barriers 

within DTRA’s 

White Female 

workforce. 

11/15/2020 06/30/2022

YES

Enhance 

contributions of the 

White Female 

workforce through 

an awareness

campaign.

12/15/2021 09/30/2022

YES

Develop an 

outreach and 

recruitment plan 

that identifies R/O 

Strategies and 

highlights Women’s 

Institutions.

1/05/2022 08/15/2022

YES
115 

YES

Responsible Official(s) 

Title Name 

Performance

Standards Address the 

Plan?

(Yes or No)

Director, Equity, Diversity

and Inclusion 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 

12/31/2021 

Select a list of Summer Programs for High 

School and College age Females and 

provide to HR. 

12/31/2022

04/30/2022 

Develop and provide workshops, brown 

bags and seminars to promote the 

accomplishments of White Women in 

History and in the DTRA Workforce. 

06/30/2022

Review hiring, promotion, and career 

development programs from other Federal 

Agencies and private sector companies to 

benchmark best practices. 

06/30/2022

Review the Career Development workforce 

data to determine if there are any barriers in 

White Women applying for and being 

selected for Career Development 

opportunities.

09/30/2022 

Conduct in-depth barrier analysis in 

collaboration with the Women’s ERG to 

identify policies and practices that may 
116 

prevent advancement in the representation 

of White Women at DTRA. 

09/30/2022 

Conduct Federal Agency research of Best 

Practices for White Women regarding 

recruitment, retention, and fostering 

professional development opportunities. 

Report of Accomplishments 

Fiscal Year Accomplishments 

2021 

The Women’s ERG performed a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats 

(SWOT) analysis that reviewed the past year and preparing for the year to come. 

The Women’s ERG displayed an art exhibit at DTRA HQs to celebrate National 

Women’s Appreciation day. 

A Women’s ERG member attended The Conference Board Organization’s 

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI). 

The Women’s ERG participated in TAP & Outreach events such supporting Women 

ERG members and attending the DAF Women’s Air and Space Power Symposium, 

a professional development series. 

The Women’s ERG requested DTRA HR to include D&I Council/ERG 

SharePoint link on the Agency In-processing checklist. 

The ERG hosted a Women’s Equality Day Canvas project, Brown Bags, guest 

lectures, internal women’s panels. 

They collaborated with the other ERGs to conduct a Recruitment Job Fair in the 

Headquarters Lobby January 2022 TBD. 

The ERG solicited for new members’ by sharing information on the DTRA 1 

Carousel. 

 

They reviewed the MD-715 to identify retention issues for Women. 

 

Develop partnerships and collaborative relationships with professional 

organizations to promote DTRA’s mission and hiring needs. 

 Explore the opportunity to start a Federal Employed Women (FEW) 

chapter at DTRA (stretch goal) 
117 

 Explore the option of DTRA becoming a sponsor during FEW conferences. 

Team with existing Chapters 

 Win an Award (stretch goal) 

 

Collaborate with the HR Talent Acquisition Program (TAP) team to assess how to 

find, engage, and target Women candidates. 

 Explore outreach to women’s colleges such as: Spelman, Bennett, Barnard, 

Wellesley, Smith, etc 

 Teaming with AAERG as two are HBCUs 

The ERG plans to meet in person to provide LeanIn/Group fellowship support 

groups.

MD-715 – Part I 

Agency EEO Plan to Eliminate Identified Barrier 

DTRA AMERICAN INDIAN ALASKAN NATIVE (AIAN) FEMALE WORKFORCE 

Source of 

the 

Trigger 

Specific 

Workforce 

Data Table 

Narrative Description of Trigger 

DTRA

AIAN

Female

Workforce 

Table A1, 

A8 and A16 

DTRA’s Total workforce for FY21 consisted of 1,480 individuals. Of 

those, two (0.14%) were AIAN Females. The representation of AIAN

Females is significantly lower than the CLF of 0.31%.

Permanent workforce for FY21 consisted of 1,454 individuals. Of 

those, two (0.14%) were AIAN Females which was significantly lower 

than the 0.31% CLF.

The Permanent workforce AIAN Female participation two (0.31%) is 

broken down as follows: Executives one (0.14%) among the 

Occupational Categories. 

Senior-grade level there is no AIAN Female representation within the 

GS-13 and GS-14. There is one (0.52%) AIAN Female in the GS-15. 

There is no AIAN Female representation among the SES. 

The participation rate of AIAN Female New Hires in the Total 

workforce was one (0.51%). 

No AIAN Females separated from the Agency in FY21. 
118 

Analysis of the Award data revealed that the two AIAN Females in the 

DTRA workforce Awards as follows: 

• One Time-Off Award of 31-40 Hours. 

• One Cash Award of $1000-$1999. 

• One Cash Award of $4000-$4999. 

NOTE: The analysis was conducted based on the data provided by 

ADVANA.

Senior 

Executive 

Service 

Table A-4 

The Agency has 14 individuals in SES positions. There is no AIAN 

Female representation among the SES. 

Analysis of the AIAN Female workforce reveals there is no AIAN 

Female representation in GS-01 to GS-09, nor GS-12 to GS-14. The 

two AIAN Females in the DTRA workforce are in the GS-10 and GS15 pay grades. Thus the AIAN pipeline to SES positions is limited. 

NOTE: The analysis was conducted based on the data provided by 

ADVANA.

Barrier Analysis Process 

Sources of Data Source 

Reviewed? 

(Yes or No) 

Identify Information Collected 

Workforce Data Tables YES Analysis of AIAN Female workforce utilizing 

ADVANA Data.

 Complaint Data (Trends) NO

 Grievance Data (Trends) NO

 Exit Interview Data NO

 Focus Groups NO

Other (Please Describe) NO

Status of Barrier Analysis Process 

Barrier Analysis Process Completed? 

(Yes or No) 

Barrier(s) Identified? 

(Yes or No) 

NO YES 
119 

Statement of Identified Barrier(s) 

Description of Policy, Procedure, or Practice 

In FY21 the Agency workforce analysis identified a lower than anticipated participation rate of 

AIAN Females in the DTRA workforce. 

DTRA will need to determine the following:

 Why do AIAN Females have a low participation rate in DTRA’s permanent workforce?

 Why is there no AIAN Female representation in the SES workforce?

Objective(s) and Dates for EEO Plan 

Objective 

Date 

Initiated 

Target 

Date 

Sufficient 

Funding & 

Staffing?

(Yes or No)

Modified Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Date 

Completed 

Identify and address 

potential barriers 

within DTRA’s 

AIAN Female 

workforce.

10/31/2021 04/30/2022

YES

Enhance AIAN 

Female cultural 

awareness through 

partnering with the 

Women’s ERG to 

showcase AIAN 

history, culture, and 

accomplishments.

10/31/2021 06/30/2022

YES

Partner with the 

Women’s ERG to 

conduct Barrier 

Analysis. 

11/15/2021 03/30/2022

Responsible Official(s) 

Title Name 

Performance

Standards Address the Plan?

(Yes or No) 
120 

Director, Equity, Diversity

and Inclusion 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 

12/31/2021 

Identify Institutions with AIAN Cultural 

groups for recruitment opportunities and 

provide to HR. 

01/31/2021

Develop and provide workshops, brown 

bags and seminars to promote cultural 

awareness in working with AIAN 

Females.

03/30/2021

Conduct in-depth barrier analysis in 

collaboration with the Women’s ERG to 

identify policies and practices that may 

prevent advancement in the 

representation of AIAN Females at

DTRA. 

05/31/2021

Conduct Federal Agency research of 

Best Practices for AIAN Female

recruitment, retention, and fostering 

professional development opportunities 

targeting the AIAN Female workforce 

and develop a report regarding findings. 

12/31/2021

Review hiring, promotion, and career 

development programs from other 

Federal Agencies and private sector 

companies to benchmark best practices. 

04/30/2022 

Develop a Recruitment and Outreach 

Plan for AIAN Females.

09/30/2022

Review the Career Development 

workforce data to determine if there are 

any barriers in AIAN Females applying 

and being selected for opportunities. 
121 

Report of Accomplishments 

Fiscal Year Accomplishments 

2021 Workforce Analysis was initiated and identified a gap in AIAN representation 

limiting opportunities for advancement.

MD-715 – Part I 

Agency EEO Plan to Eliminate Identified Barrier

DTRA NATIVE HAWAIIAN PACIFIC ISLANDER (NHPI) MALE WORKFORCE 

Source of 

the 

Trigger 

Specific 

Workforce 

Data Table 

Narrative Description of Trigger 

DTRA

NHPI Male

Workforce 

Table A1, 

A8 and A16 

DTRA’s Total workforce for FY21 consisted of 1,480 individuals. Of 

those, one (0.07%) were NHPI Males. The representation of NHPI

Males and slightly lower than the NHPI Male CLF (0.08%). 

Permanent workforce for FY21 consisted of 1,454 individuals. Of 

those, one (0.07%) were NHPI Males which was lower than the 0.08% 

Civilian Labor Force (CLF).

The Permanent workforce NHPI Male participation rate (0.07%) is 

broken down as follows: one GS-13 (0.21%). 

Senior-grade level NHPI Male participation rates were; one GS-13 

(0.21%). 

There were no NHPI Male New Hires in the Total workforce for FY21. 

There were no Separations of NHPI Males in the Total workforce for 

FY21. 

Analysis of the Time-Off Award data revealed that NHPI Males received 

Time-Off Awards as noted. 

• One NHPI Male received a Time-Off Award of 31-40 Hours. 

Analysis of the Cash Award data revealed that NHPI Males received Cash 

Awards as noted. 

• One NHPI Male received a Cash Award of $500 and Under. 
122 

Analysis of the Quality Step Increases data indicates that no NHPI Males 

received a QSI in FY21. 

NOTE: The analysis was conducted based on the data provided by 

ADVANA.

Senior 

Executive 

Service 

Table A-4 

The NHPI Male participation rate within the Permanent workforce

was one (0.07%) The following are areas of concern: 

The GS-13 NHPI Male participation rate was one (0.21%). However, 

there are no NHPI Males in grades GS-01-12, thus there is no pipeline 

of qualified candidates for GS-13 positions. 

The GS-14 NHPI Male participation rate was zero (0.00%). The 

pipeline of qualified candidates for GS-14 positions is severely limited 

due to the low number of GS-13 NHPI Males. 

The GS-15 NHPI Males was zero (0.00%). There is no pipeline of 

qualified candidates for GS-15 positions. 

In FY20, the SES NHPI Male participation rate was zero (0.00%). 

There is no pipeline of qualified candidates for SES positions. 

NOTE: The analysis was conducted based on the data provided by 

ADVANA.

Barrier Analysis Process 

Sources of Data Source 

Reviewed? 

(Yes or No) 

Identify Information Collected 

Workforce Data Tables YES Analysis of NHPI Male workforce utilizing 

ADVANA Data.

 Complaint Data (Trends) NO

 Grievance Data (Trends) NO

 Exit Interview Data NO

 Focus Groups NO

Other (Please Describe) NO

Status of Barrier Analysis Process 
123 

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 

In FY21 the Agency workforce analysis identified a lower than anticipated participation rate of 

NHPI Males in the DTRA workforce. 

DTRA will need to determine the following:

 Why do NHPI Males have a low participation rate in DTRA’s permanent workforce?

 Why is there no NHPI Male representation in the GS-01 to GS-12 grades? 

 Why is there no NHPI Male representation in the GS-14 to SES workforce?

Objective(s) and Dates for EEO Plan 

Objective 

Date 

Initiated 

Target 

Date 

Sufficient 

Funding & 

Staffing? 

(Yes or No)

Modified 

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Date

Completed 

 (mm/dd/yyyy)

Identify and address 

potential barriers 

within DTRA’s 

NHPI Male 

workforce. 

11/15/2021 04/30/2022

YES

Develop an 

outreach and 

recruitment plan 

that identifies R/O 

Strategies and 

highlights 

institutions 

reaching the NHPI 

community. 

12/01/2021 06/30/2022

YES

Enhance NHPI 

cultural awareness 

through engaging 

the AAPI ERG.

12/01/2021 06/30/2022
124 

Responsible Official(s) 

Title Name Performance 

Standards Address 

the Plan? 

(Yes or No) 

Director, Equity, Diversity

and Inclusion 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 

03/15/2022 Conduct in-depth barrier analysis in 

collaboration with the AAPI ERG to 

identify policies and practices that may 

prevent advancement in the 

representation of NHPIs at DTRA.

05/15/2022

Develop a list of Universities and 

Institutions for specific mission skillsets 

reaching the NHPI community.

06/30/2022

Develop a Recruitment and Outreach 

Plan for NHPI.

06/30/2022

Conduct Federal Agency research of 

Best Practices for NHPI recruitment, 

retention, and fostering professional 

development opportunities targeting the 

NHPI workforce and develop a report 

regarding findings. 

06/30/2022 

Review hiring, promotion, and career 

development programs from other 

Federal Agencies and private sector 

companies to benchmark best practices.

08/15/2022

Develop and provide workshops, brown 

bags and seminars to promote cultural 

awareness of NHPI cultures.
125 

Report of Accomplishments 

Fiscal Year Accomplishments 

FY2021 

Asian American and Pacific Islander Employee Resource Group (AAPI): In 

FY21, the group hosted events, distributed Agency wide information, and created 

awards. AAPI ERG celebrated Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage 

Month, Filipino American Heritage Month, and also posted a blog on the DTRA1 

site about Lunar New Year. The AAPI ERG came together and created a Heritage 

Cookbook, as well as, having a cooking demonstration for AAPI Heritage Month 

that had recipes from different Asian cultures that were AAPI staples or wellknown foods. 

 

Some of their May Heritage Month events included: 

 Senior Leader Round Table 

 Cultural display 

 Virtual cooking demonstrations 

 Published a cookbook 

 Combatting Anti-Asian Violence talk 

 Hosted the first ever AAPI Heroes and Award Ceremony 

 

The ERG instituted annual DTRA AAPI Recognition Awards with the Spirit of the 

442nd Infantry Regiment Award and the Senator Daniel K. Inouye Outstanding 

Civilian Award. The AAPI ERG reviewed Agency data to establish a base line for 

workforce demographics and participated in DTRA Talent Acquisition Program 

(TAP) & Outreach events at the Stanford University Job Fair, West Point, and 

Women in Tech Symposium. 

 

The former AAPI ERG lead joined the Pan Pacific American Leaders & Mentors 

(PPALM) - established in March 2006, as an outreach mentoring endeavor. 

Messaged DTRA's mission to junior officers and DoD Civilians worldwide. 

Provided insight into DTRA's mission, shared accomplishments of the DTRA D&I 

Council and ERGs as best practices to cadets from the United States Military 

Academy at West Point; US Naval Academy, and US Air Force Academy. During 

these mentoring sessions, provided advice to our next generation of diverse junior 

leaders, so they may positively impact the command climate in their organizations. 

MD-715 – Part I 

Agency EEO Plan to Eliminate Identified Barrier 

DTRA TWO OR MORE RACES WORKFORCE
126 

Source of the 

Trigger 

Specific 

Workforce 

Data Table 

Narrative Description of Trigger 

Two or 

More Races

Workforce 

Table A1, 

A8 and A16 

DTRA’s Total workforce for FY21 consisted of 1,480 individuals. Of 

those, six (0.41%) were Two or More Races Males and three (0.20%) 

were Two or More Races Females. The representation of Two or More 

Races Males and Females is significantly lower than the Two or More 

Races Male CLF of 1.05% and the Two or More Races Female CLF of

1.05%.

Permanent workforce for FY21 consisted of 1,454 individuals. Of 

those, five (0.34%) were Two or More Races Males and three (0.21%) 

were Two or More Races Females. The representation of Two or More 

Races Males and Females is significantly lower than the Two or More 

Races Male CLF of 1.05% and Two or More Races Female CLF of 

1.05%.

The Permanent workforce Two or More Races Males participation 

rate five (0.34%) is broken down as follows: Managers one (1.33%),

and Professionals two (0.46%). Two or More Races Female 

participation rate three (0.21%) is broken down as follows: Managers 

one (0.48%). 

Senior-grade level Two or More Races Male participation rates were as 

follows: GS-14s three (0.75%), and one GS-15 (0.52%). Two or More 

Races Female participation rates were as follows: GS-13s one (0.21%), 

and one (0.25%) GS-14. 

The participation rate of New Hires in the Total workforce for Two or 

More Races Male was one (0.51%) for FY21, they remain significantly 

underrepresented in the DTRA workforce. There were no New Hires in 

FY21 of Two or More Races Females, they also remain significantly 

underrepresented in the DTRA workforce.

The Separation rate for Two or More Races Males in the Total 

workforce was zero (0.00%) for FY21. The Separation rate for Two or 

More Races Female in the Total workforce was zero (0.00%) for FY21. 

Analysis of the Time-Off Award data revealed that Two or More Races 

Male received Time-Off Awards in all categories except as noted. 
127 

• No Two or More Races Males received a Time-Off award of 1-

10 hours. 

• No Two or More Races Males received a Time-Off award of 11-

20 hours. 

• No Two or More Races Males received a Time-Off award of 21-

30 hours. 

Analysis of the Time-Off Award data revealed that Two or More Races

Females received Time-Off Awards in all categories except as noted. 

• No Two or More Races Female received a Time-Off award of 

1-10 hours. 

• No Two or More Races Females received a Time-Off award 

of 11-20 hours. 

• No Two or More Races Females received a Time-Off award 

of 21-30 hours. 

Analysis of the Cash Award data revealed that Two or More Races Males 

received Cash Awards in all categories except as noted.

• No Two or More Races Males received Cash Awards $2000-

$2999. 

Analysis of the Cash Award data revealed that Two or More Races 

Females received Cash Awards in all categories except as noted.

• No Two or More Races Female received Cash Awards $501-

$999. 

• No Two or More Races Female received Cash Awards $2000-

$2999. 

• No Two or More Races Female received Cash Awards $3000-

$3999. 

• No Two or More Races Female received Cash Awards $4000-

$4999. 

• No Two or More Races Female received Cash Awards $5000-

$5999. 

Analysis of the Quality Step Increases data indicates that no Two or More 

Races Males were recipients of Quality Step Increases in FY21. Further 

analysis of the Quality Step Increases data indicates that one (1.35%) of 

Two or More Races Female were recipients of Quality Step Increases in 

FY21. 

NOTE: The analysis was conducted based on the data provided by 

ADVANA.
128 

Two or 

More Races

Senior 

Executive 

Service 

Table A-4 

The Agency has 14 individuals in SES positions. The Two or More 

Races Male SES representation was zero (0.00%) compared to the 

permanent workforce of five (0.34%). The Two or More Races Female 

SES representation was zero (0.00%) compared to the permanent 

workforce of three (0.21%). 

Analysis of the Two or More Races Male workforce reveals there is no 

Two or More Races Male representation in GS-01 to GS-08, nor GS-10 

to GS-13. Analysis of the Two or More Races Female workforce 

reveals there is no Two or More Races Female representation in GS-01 

to GS-11. 

The majority of Two or More Races Males four (80%) of the five 

permanent Two or More Races Males were in the GS-14 and GS-15 pay 

grades, placing them in the SES pipeline. However, there is no pipeline 

of qualified applicants for Two or More Races Male in the GS-10 to 

GS-13 grade levels. 

The majority of Two or More Races Females two (66.67%) of the three

permanent Two or More Races Females were in the GS13 and GS-14 

pay grades, placing them in the SES pipeline. However, there is no 

pipeline of qualified applicants for Two or More Races Female in the 

GS-01 to GS-11 grade levels. 

NOTE: The analysis was conducted based on the data provided by 

ADVANA.

EEO Group(s) Affected by Trigger 

DTRA TWO OR MORE RACES WORKFORCE

Barrier Analysis Process

Sources of Data Source 

Reviewed? 

(Yes or No) 

Identify Information Collected 

Workforce Data Tables YES Analysis of Two or More Races workforce 

utilizing ADVANA Data.

Complaint Data (Trends) 

NO 
129 

Grievance Data (Trends) NO 

Findings from Decisions 

(e.g., EEO, Grievance, 

MSPB, Anti-Harassment 

Processes) 

NO 

Climate Assessment 

Survey (e.g., FEVS) NO 

Exit Interview Data NO

Focus Groups NO 

Interviews NO 

Reports (e.g., Congress, 

EEOC, MSPB, GAO, 

OPM) 

NO 

Other (Please Describe) NO 

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 

In FY21 the Agency workforce analysis identified a lower than anticipated participation rate of 

Two or More Races Males and Females in the DTRA workforce. 

DTRA will need to determine the following:

 Why do Two or More Races Males and Females have a low participation rate in DTRA’s 

permanent workforce?

 Why is there no Two or More Races Male representation in the GS-01 to GS-08 and GS10 to GS-13 pay grades? 

 Why is there no Two or More Races Female representation in the GS-01 to GS-11 pay 

grades?
130 

 Is underrepresentation related to underreporting?

Objective(s) and Dates for EEO Plan 

Objective 

Date 

Initiated Target 

Date 

 Sufficient

Funding

&

Staffing?

Modified 

Date 

Date 

Completed 

Identify and 

address potential 

barriers within 

DTRA’s Two or 

More Races 

workforce. 

10/31/2021 05/31/2022 YES 

Enhance Two or 

More Races cultural 

awareness through 

Special Emphasis 

Events celebrating 

multiple cultures. 

11/15/2021 03/30/2022 YES 

Initiate a re-survey 

campaign 

encouraging the 

workforce to selfidentify. 

12/15/2021 06/30/2022 YES 

Responsible Official(s) 

Title Name 

Performance 

Standards Address the 

Plan? 

(Yes or No) 

Director, Equity, Diversity

and Inclusion Office Willisa Donald YES 

Director, Human Resource 

Directorate Christine Enriquez, Colonel YES 

Planned Activities Toward Completion of Objective 
131 

Target Date Planned Activities Modified Date Completion Date 

02/15/2022 Develop and provide workshops, brown 

bags and seminars to promote cultural 

awareness of Two or More Races in the 

workplace.

04/30/2022 Conduct Federal Agency research of 

Best Practices for Two or More Races 

recruitment, retention, and fostering 

professional development opportunities 

targeting the Two or More Races 

workforce and develop a report 

regarding findings.

05/30/2022 Develop a Recruitment and Outreach 

Plan for Two or More Races. 

06/30/2022 Conduct in-depth barrier analysis to 

identify policies and practices that may 

prevent advancement in the 

representation of Two or More Races at 

DTRA. 

06/30/2022 Review the Career Development 

workforce data to determine if there are 

any barriers in Two or More Races 

applying and being selected for 

opportunities. 

07/30/2022 Reviewing hiring, promotion, and career 

development programs from other 

Federal Agencies and private sector 

companies to benchmark best practices. 

Report of Accomplishments 

Fiscal Year Accomplishments 

2021 

Workforce Analysis was initiated and identified a gap in Two or More Races 

representation limiting opportunities for advancement. 
132 
133 

MD-715 – Part J

Special Program Plan for the Recruitment, Hiring, Advancement, 

and Retention of Persons with Disabilities

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. 

1. 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 X No 0

b. Cluster GS-11 to SES (PWD) Yes 0 No X

The DTRA Total Workforce consisted of 1480 individuals, of whom 210 (14.19%) were 

PWDs. 

In regard to the 12% benchmark for PWDs in the DTRA permanent workforce. The permanent 

workforce consisted of 1454 individuals of whom 206 (14.17%) were PWDs. Further analysis 

of the permanent workforce data indicates there are 8 (3.88%) PWDs in the GS-1 to GS-10 

cluster and 188 (91.26%) PWDs in the GS-11 to SES cluster. 

The analysis indicates there is a trigger related to Cluster GS-1 to GS-11 for PWD in the 

workforce. 

NOTE: The analysis was conducted based on the data provided by ADVANA. 

2. 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 0 No X

b. Cluster GS-11 to SES (PWTD) Yes 0 No X

3. Describe how the Agency has communicated the numerical goals to the hiring Managers 

and/or recruiters.

Information regarding the numerical goals is shared with hiring officials and Managers during 

the Strategic Recruitment Discussions (SRDs) to improve the incorporation of information 

regarding special hiring authorities for veterans, disabled veterans and 30% or more disabled 

veterans, PWDs and PWTDs. 
134 

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. 

A. Plan to Provide Sufficient & Competent Staffing for the Disability Program 

1. 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

2. 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

(Name, Title, Office, Email) Full 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

Special Emphasis Program 

Manager/DPM, Equity, Diversity

and Inclusion 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

Sherry Parker

Supervisory HR Specialist
135 

sherry.d.parker6.civ@mail.mil

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 Eric Reed, Facilities Plans and 

Space Management, AL-ELF 

Eric.c.reed8.civ@mail.mil

Special Emphasis 

Program for PWD 

and PWTD

1 0 0 Cheryl Williams-Payton

Special Emphasis Program 

Manager/DPM, Equity, Diversity

and Inclusion Office, 

cheryl.b.williamspayton.civ@mail.mil

3. 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

In FY21, the Disability Program Manager attended training designed to increase the 

knowledge and skills related to facilitating the Disability Program. The Disability Program 

Manager Course was presented by the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute 

(DEOMI).

B. 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. 
136 

A. Plan to Identify Job Applicants with Disabilities

1. Describe the programs and resources the Agency uses to identify job applicants with 

disabilities, including individuals with targeted disabilities. 

DTRA Talent Acquisition Program (TAP) and Outreach Team partnered with the Department 

of Defense’s Operation Warfighter (OWF) Program. In FY21, DTRA participated in four 

Employment and Education Initiatives (E2I) & Operation Warfighter (OWF) Programs, the 

inaugural virtual event, two additional virtual and one in-person event, with a total of 455 

OWF Internship candidates receiving positive DTRA brand-messaging and exposure of 

potential next generation workforce. At the career fairs, Persons with Disabilities (PWD) were 

able to provide their resumes and Schedule A letter to the Agency’s Disability Program 

Manager. TAP’s partnership with CareerEco and Recruit military secured 11 successful 

Diversity, disabled, veteran, and STEM outreach engagements, resulting with 7,585 

participants introduced to the DTRA, DoD and Federal employment, Diversity, inclusion, 

culture and opportunities. TAP collaboration with Handshake rendered 22 various nationwide collegiate events with 4,257 students, alumni and facilities whom attended DTRA

presentations of Agency Overview, Question & Answer sessions, navigation and exploration 

of www.USAJOBS.gov. Utilizing the Agency Strategic Plan along with the Equity, Diversity

and Inclusion Office Diversity Hiring Guidance, TAP ensured, facilitated and created opendialogue for DTRA leaders, key stakeholders, hiring Managers and Employee Resources 

Groups (ERGs) to reach academia, corporate industry, infinity groups, communities and 

under-represented groups through outreach efforts. 

The Selective Placement Program Coordinator (SPCC) coordinated with hiring Managers to 

consider hiring noncompetitive applicants before announcing the job on USAJobs.gov. 

DTRA TAP and Outreach Team and EI Offices met bi-weekly to discuss the various virtual 

outreach opportunities. 

FY21, two Workforce Recruitment Program (WRP) students were brought on as interns during 

COVID-19.

2. 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. 

During FY21 the Agency used the following authorities to hire persons with disabilities: 

1. Schedule A for PWD and PWTD

2. Pathways

3. Veterans with a 30% or greater disability rating

4. Workforce Recruitment Program 

5. Operation Warfighter
137 

6. Veterans’ Recruitment Appointment (VRA)

3. 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. 

The Agency USAJobs announcements included language informing applicants they can be 

considered under Schedule A. In the USAJobs announcements, we defined the position 

requirements and the required supporting documentation for Schedule A eligibility. Schedule 

A applicants must meet the specialized experience and best qualified category. 

To ensure eligibility, the applicant must provide a signed Schedule A letter or other 

documentation that indicates 30 percent or more disabled. The Special Emphasis Program 

Manager/DPM provided the Schedule A Applicant’s resume to the HR Staffing Team, which 

is forwarded to a Hiring Official. This process was done outside of the USAJobs competitive 

process, to ensure all interested Schedule A Applicants have an immediate opportunity to be 

hired. 

4. 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

The HR Staffing Team incorporated information regarding special hiring authorities to recruit 

PWD and PWTD into the strategic recruitment discussions with hiring Managers. Strategic 

recruitment discussions occurred at the beginning of each hiring request. The Disability 

Program Manager provided disability-related training for Supervisors and hiring Managers 

that covered the hiring goals and special hiring authorities.

B. 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. 

DTRA maintained partnerships with PWD/PWTD organizations (i.e., WRP, Operations 

Warfighter and other organizations that serve disabled Veterans). DTRA also utilized the 

Pathways program to recruit and fill positions within the Agency. 
138 

C. Progression Towards Goals (Recruitment and Hiring) 

1. 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 0 No X

b. New Hires for Permanent Workforce (PWTD) Yes 0 No X

 

2. 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

Using the qualified applicant pool as the benchmark triggers were identified among PWD and 

PWTD new hires for the following MCO series. 

• Security Series 0800 (0.00%) 

• Miscellaneous Administrative Support Series 0301 (0.00%) 

• Program Management Series 0340 (5.88%) 

• Management/Program Analyst Series 0343 – (0.00%) 

• Budget Analysis Series 0560 (0.00%) 

• Contracting Series 1102 (0.00%) 

• Physical Science Series1301 (0.00%) 

• Information Technology Management Series 2210 (0.00%) 

NOTE: The analysis was conducted based on the data provided by ADVANA.

3. 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 X No 0

b. Qualified Applicants for MCO (PWTD) Yes X No 0
139 

The Agency identified a potential trigger for PWD and PWTD qualified applicants as the 

available data does not contain the relevant applicant pool required with which to conduct the 

analysis. 

NOTE: The analysis was conducted based on the data provided by ADVANA. 

4. 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 X No 0

Using the qualified applicant pool as the benchmark triggers were identified among PWTD 

Employees promoted to the following MCO series. 

• Miscellaneous Administrative Support Series 0301 (7.99%) 

• Management/Program Analyst Series 0343 – (7.98%) 

• Budget Analysis Series 0560 (0.00%) 

• Contracting Series 1102 (10.18%) 

• Information Technology Management Series 2210 (6.43%) 

Using the qualified applicant pool as the benchmark triggers were identified among PWTD 

Employees promoted to the following MCO series. 

• Budget Analysis Series 0560 (0.00%) 

• Physical Science (0.00%)

NOTE: The analysis was conducted based on the data provided by ADVANA.

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.
140 

A. Advancement Program Plan

Describe the Agency’s plan to ensure PWD, including PWTD, have sufficient opportunities for 

advancement.

The Agency provided training for Managers and Supervisors with the goal of increasing their 

knowledge and equipping them with the tools and resources available for effectively managing 

PWD and PWTD Employees. Managers and Supervisors were encouraged to promote the 

career development of all Employees, including PWDs and PWTDs. The Disability Program 

Manager shared career development and advancement program information with PWD and 

PWTD Employees. The Disability Program Manager encouraged them to participate in the 

available career development and advancement programs. 

Employee Resource Group (ERG) for PWDs/PWTDs were established to identify and address 

barriers to advancement for Employees with disabilities and targeted disabilities. EI held briefing 

sessions with the ERG Lead and Co-Lead to discuss barriers to advancement for Employees with 

targeted disabilities.

B. Career Development Opportunities

1. Please describe the career development opportunities that the Agency provides to its 

Employees. 

DTRA offered training opportunities for Employees via the DTRA Learning Management 

System (LMS) online portal. DTRA ensured announcements for the Competitive Academic 

Program, Leadership Program and Professional/Career Development Program announcements 

are sent to all Employees to include PWDs and PWTDs.

DTRA had three PWDs and one PWTD whom participated in Career Development Programs. 

Additionally, seven PWDs and 2 PWTDs participated in DTRAs mentoring program. 

2. 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 FY 2018 MD-715 report, which is due on February 28, 2019.] 

Career 

Development 

Opportunities 

Total 

Participants PWD PWTD

Applicants 

(#)

Selectees 

(#)

Applicants 

(%)

Selectees 

(%)

Applicants 

(%)

Selectees

(%)

Internship Programs

Fellowship Programs
141 

Mentoring Programs 74 74 9.46% 9.46% 2.70% 2.70%

Coaching Programs

Training Programs

Detail Programs

Other Career 

Development Programs

Career Broadening 34 19 8.82% 10.53% 5.88% 5.26%

Competitive Leadership 42 15 6.67% 6.67% 0.00% 0.00%

Competitive Academic 17 5 11.76% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

3. 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 X No 0

b. Selections (PWD) Yes X No 0

Analysis of the available data indicated that there is a trigger in all career development 

programs for applicants and selections of PWDs. 

NOTE: Analysis was conducted based on data provided by the Office of Human Resources. 

4. 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 X No 0

b. Selections (PWTD) Yes X No 0

Analysis of the available data indicated that there is a trigger in all career development 

programs for applicants and selections of PWTDs. 

NOTE: Analysis was conducted based on data provide by the Office of Human Resources. 
142 

C. Awards

1. 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 Agency identified triggers involving the percentage of PWDs and PWTDs who received 

Time Off Awards hours using the inclusion rate as the benchmark, as follows: 

PWD whom received a Time Off Award of 31-40 hours 

PWTD whom received a Time Off Award of 31-40 hours 

The Agency identified triggers involving the percentage of PWD and PWTD who received Cash 

Awards using the inclusion rate as the benchmark, as follows: 

 PWD whom received a Cash Award $500 and under 

 PWD whom received a Cash Award $1,000-$1,999 

PWTD whom received a Cash Award $1,000-$1,999 

PWD whom received a Cash Award $3,000-$3,999 

PWTD whom received a Cash Award $4,000-$4,999 

PWD whom received a Cash Award $5,000-$5,999 

PWTD whom received a Cash Award $5,000-$5,999 

NOTE: The analysis was conducted based on the data provided by ADVANA.

2. 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 X No 0

b. Pay Increases (PWTD) Yes X No 0

A total of 74 Quality Step Increases were awarded. The Agency identified triggers exist regard 

PWD (9) and PWTD (2).

NOTE: Analysis was conducted based on data provided by the Office of Human Resources. 

3. 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
143 

D. Promotions

1. 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.

a. SES

i. Qualified Internal Applicants (PWD) Yes X No 0

ii. Internal Selections (PWD) Yes X No 0

b. Grade GS-15 

i. Qualified Internal Applicants (PWD) Yes X No 0

ii. Internal Selections (PWD) Yes X No 0

c. Grade GS-14 

i. Qualified Internal Applicants (PWD) Yes X No 0

ii. Internal Selections (PWD) Yes X No 0

d. Grade GS-13 

i. Qualified Internal Applicants (PWD) Yes X No 0

ii. Internal Selections (PWD) Yes X No 0

The Agency identified a potential trigger for PWD qualified applicants as the available data 

does not contain the relevant applicant pool required with which to conduct the analysis. 

NOTE: The analysis was conducted based on the data provided by ADVANA.
144 

2. 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 non-GS pay plans, please use the approximate senior grade levels. If “yes”, 

describe the trigger(s) in the text box. 

a. SES

iii. Qualified Internal Applicants (PWTD) Yes X No 0

iv. Internal Selections (PWTD) Yes X No 0

b. Grade GS-15 

v. Qualified Internal Applicants (PWTD) Yes X No 0

vi. Internal Selections (PWTD) Yes X No 0

c. Grade GS-14 

vii. Qualified Internal Applicants (PWTD) Yes X No 0

viii. Internal Selections (PWTD) Yes X No 0

d. Grade GS-13 

ix. Qualified Internal Applicants (PWTD) Yes X No 0

x. Internal Selections (PWTD) Yes X No 0

The Agency identified potential trigger for PWTD qualified applicants as the available data 

does not contain the relevant applicant pool required with which to conduct the analysis. 

NOTE: The analysis was conducted based on the data provided by ADVANA.

3. 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.

a. New Hires to SES (PWD) Yes X No 0

b. New Hires to GS-15 (PWD) Yes X No 0

c. New Hires to GS-14 (PWD) Yes X No 0

d. New Hires to GS-13 (PWD) Yes X No 0

The Agency identified a potential trigger for PWD qualified applicants as the available data 

does not contain the relevant applicant pool required with which to conduct the analysis. 

NOTE: The analysis was conducted based on the data provided by ADVANA. 
145 

4. 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. 

e. New Hires to SES (PWTD) Yes X No 0

f. New Hires to GS-15 (PWTD) Yes X No 0

g. New Hires to GS-14 (PWTD) Yes X No 0

h. New Hires to GS-13 (PWTD) Yes X No 0 

The Agency identified a potential trigger for PWTD qualified applicants as the available data 

does not contain the relevant applicant pool required with which to conduct the analysis. 

NOTE: The analysis was conducted based on the data provided by ADVANA. 

5. 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.

a. Executives

i. Qualified Internal Applicants (PWD) Yes X No 0

ii. Internal Selections (PWD) Yes X No 0

b. Managers 

i. Qualified Internal Applicants (PWD) Yes X No 0

ii. Internal Selections (PWD) Yes X No 0

c. Supervisors 

i. Qualified Internal Applicants (PWD) Yes X No 0

ii. Internal Selections (PWD) Yes X No 0

The Agency identified a potential trigger for PWD qualified applicants as the available data 

does not contain the relevant applicant pool required with which to conduct the analysis. 

NOTE: The analysis was conducted based on the data provided by ADVANA.
146 

6. 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. 

a. Executives

i. Qualified Internal Applicants (PWTD) Yes X No 0

ii. Internal Selections (PWTD) Yes X No 0

b. Managers 

i. Qualified Internal Applicants (PWTD) Yes X No 0

ii. Internal Selections (PWTD) Yes X No 0

c. Supervisors 

i. Qualified Internal Applicants (PWTD) Yes X No 0

ii. Internal Selections (PWTD) Yes X No 0

The Agency identified a potential trigger for PWTD qualified applicants as the available data 

does not contain the relevant applicant pool required with which to conduct the analysis. 

NOTE: The analysis was conducted based on the data provided by ADVANA.

7. 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. 

a. New Hires for Executives (PWD) Yes X No 0 

b. New Hires for Managers (PWD) Yes X No 0

c. New Hires for Supervisors (PWD) Yes 0 No X

Utilizing the qualified applicant pool as the benchmark, triggers were identified for PWD, 

Executives (1.33%) and Managers (6.27%). 

NOTE: The analysis was conducted based on the data provided by ADVANA. 

8. 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. 

a. New Hires for Executives (PWTD) Yes X No 0

b. New Hires for Managers (PWTD) Yes 0 No X

c. New Hires for Supervisors (PWTD) Yes 0 No X 
147 

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.

A. Voluntary and Involuntary Separations 

1. 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 X No 0 N/A 0

2. 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. 

a. Voluntary Separations (PWD) Yes 0 No X

b. Involuntary Separations (PWD) Yes 0 No X 

3. 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 0 No X

Involuntary Separations (PWTD) Yes 0 No X

Utilizing the qualified applicant pool as the benchmark, triggers were identified for PWTD 

Executives (1.33%) were identified. 

NOTE: The analysis was conducted based on the data provided by ADVANA. 
148 

4. 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. 

B. 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. 

1. 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. 

https://www.DTRA.mil/Mission/Equity-Diversity-and-Inclusion-Office/

2. 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.

https://www.DTRA.mil/Mission/Equity-Diversity-and-InclusionOffice/Accessibility/

3. 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 Executive Order 13583 established a coordinated, Government-wide initiative to promote 

Diversity and inclusion in the Federal workforce. In 2020, the Director established the 

Diversity and Inclusion (D&I) Council to build an inclusive workforce. One of the D&I 
149 

Council's objectives and scope of activities was to create initiatives to promote D&I through 

the development of Employee Resources Groups (ERGs). 

One of the six ERGs is the Individual with Disabilities (PWD) ERG. It is being led by Gordon 

Banks, and Flynn Rosko is the co-lead. This group established an action plan for the next two 

years to generally improve the culture and experience of PWDs at DTRA. During FY21, they 

worked to identify barriers and solutions. A topic of discussion was accessibility to Agency 

facilities as well as technology. The ERG will be undertaking initiatives to enhance and/or 

address accessibility concerns. 

C. 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. 

1. 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 time frame for processing initial requests for reasonable accommodations during 

the reporting period was 10 calendar days. 

2. 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. 

DTRA’s Reasonable Accommodation Program (RA) provided requestors an approval within 

10 calendar days. DTRA RA actively collaborated with the Computer/Electronic 

Accommodations Program to ensure assistive technologies were available to applicants and 

Employees with disabilities. During FY21, 16 RA requests were processed, ranging from IT 

assistive technologies, sit/stand workstations and ergonomic chairs. Sign Language Interpreter 

services are provided for workplace meetings, conferences, and special events, enabling 

participation for the deaf/hard of hearing community.

D. 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. 
150 

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. 

DTRA did not receive any requests for PAS during FY21. 

Section VI: EEO Complaint and Findings Data

A. 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 0

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 X No 0 N/A 0

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 was a finding of discrimination issued in August 2021, for a complaint filed in FY18. 

An appeal has been filed, and thus no corrective actions are required at this time.

B. 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. 
151 

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 X No 0

2. Has the Agency established a plan to correct the barrier(s) involving PWD and/or PWTD? 

Yes X No 0 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 2% benchmark in the Permanent Workforce, 

regarding PWTDs 24 (18.87%) in FY20. Trigger Resolved FY21 DTRA 

PWTD workforce was 51 (3.51%) in FY21.

Trigger 2

The percentage of PWDs separations was 21 (13.46%) and 1 (0.64%) PWTD, 

in FY20. Trigger Resolved FY21 Analysis of DTRA separations in FY21 

indicates there is no trigger for PWD (3.40%) and PWTD (3.92%).

Trigger 3 

The percentage of PWTD in the GS-11 to SES cluster is 19 (1.55%) which falls 

below the goal of 2%, in FY20. Trigger Resolved FY21 Analysis of DTRA 

GS-11 to SES Cluster in FY21 indicates there is no trigger for PWTD 45 

(3.09%).

Barrier(s)

The Agency needs to establish advancement opportunities such as specialized 

training, mentoring programs, career development opportunities, award 

programs, promotions for PWD and PWTD. 

Lack of awareness regarding the Schedule A Hiring Authority. 

Objective(s)

Increase the participation, advancement and retention rate of PWTDs within the 

Agency to meet or exceed the EEOC Final Rule on Affirmative Action 

Employment Goal of 2% by 2022. 

Responsible Official(s)

Performance Standards 

Address the Plan?

(Yes or No)

Willisa Donald

Director, Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Office (EI) No

Christine Enriquez, Colonel, United States Army

Director, Human Resource Directorate No

Barrier Analysis Process Completed?

(Yes or No)

Barrier(s) Identified?

(Yes or No)
152 

No No

Sources of Data

Sources 

Reviewed?

(Yes or No)

Identify Information 

Collected

Workforce Data Tables YES Analysis of the Disability workforce 

utilizing ADVANA Data.

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) NO

Exit Interview Data NO

Focus Groups YES

Interviews N/A

Reports (e.g., Congress, EEOC, 

MSPB, GAO, OPM) No

Other (Please Describe) No

Target Date

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Planned Activities Sufficient 

Staffing & 

Funding

(Yes or No)

Modified 

Date

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Completion 

Date

(mm/dd/yyyy)

05/2020 EEO will create a Recruitment and 

Outreach Plan for PWDs and 

PWTDs and share with HR.

Yes 08/03/2020

06/01/2020 Update the EEO external website to 

include 504/508 complaint 

information in the Disability 

Outreach section.

Yes 09/15/2020

06/15/2020 EEO and HR will track all Schedule 

A appointments to determine 

whether they are converted into the 

competitive service, and for those 

not converted, reasons why.

Yes 12/31/2020

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 11/30/2020

09/10/2020 Based on triggers identified 

involving separations of PWDs and 

Yes 09/30/2020
153 

PWTDs at DTRA, EI will 

collaborate with HR to revise the 

exit survey questions to ensure the 

questions include recruitment, 

inclusion, retention and the 

advancement of PWDs.

12/15/2020 Create list of colleges/universities 

with programs focusing on PWD 

and PWTDs

Yes 09/30/2022

05/15/2021 Coordinate a discussion with HR 

regarding the Career Development 

program and the need to track PWDs 

and PWTDs.

Yes 08/03/2021

06/30/2021 Utilize the OPM Feds Hire Vets 

website for ideas on how to reach 

Veterans and disabled Veterans.

Yes 09/30/2021 02/28/2021

07/10/2021 Conduct trend analysis to identify 

triggers for MCO new hires and 

qualified internal applicants for 

PWDs and PWTDs.

Yes 9/30/2022

12/2021 

07/15/2021 Collaborate w/HR to identify 

whether triggers exist within the 

Career Development Program for 

PWDs and PWTDs.

Yes 09/30/2022

12/2021 

08/25/2021 Examine the Awards Program to 

identify triggers for PWDs and 

PWTDs

Yes 09/30/2022

12/2021 

Fiscal Year Accomplishments

FY 2020 In FY20, the EI Office continued to manage the WRP. Three college students 

were hired for temporary summer employment and placed in various 

Directorates utilizing their skills to support the mission. Two WRP interns were 

permanently hired into government positions. 

The Agency partnered with the Department of the Blind and Vision Impairment 

(DBVI) and the Department for Aging and Rehabilitation Services (DARS) to 

host a virtual training for the workforce. 

The EI Office hosted a Disability Awareness and Etiquette Training to educate 

the workforce on the Disability laws that support PWDs from being 

discriminated against, different hiring authorities for PWDs, reasonable 

accommodations, and areas that are required by law, and the proper ways to 

interact with PWDs. 
154 

The EI Office hosted a Veterans Day Celebration to honor Veterans in the 

Agency for their service. The theme was, “Honoring Those Who Served.” 

SgtMaj Michael Mack, guest speaker, shared stories of his success and 

determination with thought provoking topics on Teamwork, Peace, Joy and 

Purpose. A video was created to celebrate the accomplishments of Veterans and 

to reflect on the services they provided. 

The EI Office created two toolkits (Veterans Employment and Workforce 

Recruitment Program (WRP)) for Supervisors and Managers to assist in 

understanding the special hiring authorities, bring awareness of the programs 

and the benefits to the interns in the Agency. The WRP toolkit was provided to 

PWD ERG to utilize when conversing with Managers and Supervisors. 

The EI Office developed a Recruitment and Outreach Plan. The plan includes 

information for PWDs to include schools, universities and institutions for 

partnership and recruitment of PWDs/PWTDs. 

The EI Office provided information to Schedule A applicants regarding the 

hiring process and provide them with a Schedule A fact sheet. Also, the Special 

Emphasis Program Manager held telephone conversations with Schedule A 

applicants to discuss the Schedule A hiring process. 

FY 2021 Created Disability Etiquette in the Workplace Toolkit 

Created Quick Guide for Assisting PWDs in an Emergency 

Finalized the Disability Strategic Plan and developed the FY2021 Disability 

Implementation Plan.

Developed a Disability Employment Program Training for Supervisors and 

Hiring Managers 

Facilitated the Department of Labor Hiring Authorities training 

Developed Veterans Toolkit for Supervisors and Hiring Managers 

Created a Special Emphasis Program Overview Guide 

Hired two Workforce Recruitment Program Interns during COVID. 

Conducted two Disability Brown Bag sessions to inform Supervisors of the 

program and how to hire a student/PWDs. 
155 

Utilized the OPM Feds Hire Vets website for ideas on how to reach Veterans 

and disabled Veterans. 

Analysis of Table B1 demonstrates that the Disability Workforce increased in 

representation from 24 PWTD (1.87%) in FY20 to PWTD 51 (3.45%) in FY21. 

Thus there was no trigger as it relates to the PWTD permanent workforce for 

FY21. 

Analysis of Table B1 Separation data utilizing the inclusion rate as the 

benchmark indicates that DTRA there was no trigger related to separations of 

PWD and PWTDs for FY21. 

All triggers were resolved during FY21 with the data analysis indicating that 

the Agency met the benchmarks affiliated with each previously identified 

trigger. Additionally the ERGs will continue to assist with trend analysis for 

MCO new hires and qualified internal applicants for PWDs and PWTDs. 

1. Please explain the factor(s) that prevented the Agency from timely completing any of 

the planned activities.

2. For the planned activities that were completed, please describe the actual impact of those 

activities toward eliminating the barrier(s).

DTRA hired two WRP students during COVID. Individuals with Disabilities seeking 

employment worked with the Disability Program Manager to obtain information and guidance 

on the special hiring authority (Schedule A). The Disability Program Manager submitted 

documents received from the individuals to the HR Staffing Team to provide to the Hiring 

Managers for consideration. 

The Agency met the benchmarks affiliated with each previously identified trigger. To ensure 

the Agency continues to meet the affiliated benchmarks the Agency will continue to utilize the 

OPM Feds Hire Vets website for ideas on how to reach Veterans and disabled Veterans.

3. 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. 
156 

Trigger 4 The lower than anticipated participation of PWD 8 (3.88%) in the GS-1 to GS10 Cluster.

Trigger 5 The lower than anticipated participation of PWD and PWTD in regard to new 

hires in Mission Critical Occupations (MCO). 

Trigger 6 The lower than anticipated participation of PWD and PWTD among promotions 

to all MCOs.

Trigger 7

There is a potential trigger regarding PWD and PWTD selectees for internal 

applicants/ selectees for promotions to the senior grade levels, as the data 

required for the analysis is unavailable.

Trigger 8 There is a potential trigger regarding new hires of PWD and PWTD to Senior 

grade levels, as the data required for the analysis is unavailable.

Trigger 9 There is a potential trigger regarding promotions of PWD and PWTD to 

Supervisory positions, as the data required for the analysis is unavailable.

Trigger 10 The lower than anticipated participation of PWDs as new hires to Supervisory 

positions, Executives (1.33%) and Managers (6.27%).

Trigger 11 The lower than anticipated participation of PWTDs as new hires to Supervisory 

positions, Executives (1.33%).

Barrier(s)

Required data is unavailable to conduct required analysis.

No barrier has been identified at this time in regard to the lower than anticipated 

representation. 

Objective(s)

Obtain the required data to conduct the analysis and identify specific triggers, 

barriers and resolutions. 

Conduct barrier analysis to identify barriers related to the lower than anticipated 

representation. 

Responsible Official(s)

Performance Standards Address the 

Plan?

(Yes or No)

Willisa Donald

Director, Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Office (EI) NO

Christine Enriquez, Colonel, United States Army

Director, Human Resource Directorate NO

Barrier Analysis Process Completed?

(Yes or No)

Barrier(s) Identified?

(Yes or No)

NO YES

Sources of Data

Sources 

Reviewed?

(Yes or No)

Identify Information Collected
157 

Workforce Data Tables YES Analysis of the Disability workforce 

utilizing ADVANA Data.

Complaint Data (Trends) NO

Grievance Data (Trends) NO

Findings from Decisions (e.g., EEO, 

Grievance, MSPB, Anti-Harassment 

Processes) 

NO

Climate Assessment Survey (e.g., 

FEVS) NO

Exit Interview Data NO

Focus Groups NO

Interviews NO

Reports (e.g., Congress, EEOC, 

MSPB, GAO, OPM) NO

Other (Please Describe) NO

Target Date

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Planned Activities Sufficient 

Staffing & 

Funding

(Yes or No)

Modified 

Date

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Completion 

Date

(mm/dd/yyyy)

03/30/2022 Meet with Human Resources to 

define specific data needs. 

YES

06/30/2022 Coordinate with Human Resources 

for development of specified data 

reports.

YES

09/30/2022 Spot check data reports by 

conducting MD-715 analysis to 

identify additional needs. 

YES

10/15/2022 Receive all required data to 

complete the MD-715 required 

analysis.

YES

Fiscal Year Accomplishments

1. Please explain the factor(s) that prevented the Agency from timely completing any of 

the planned activities.
158 

2. For the planned activities that were completed, please describe the actual impact of those 

activities toward eliminating the barrier(s).

3. 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. 

Trigger 12 Lower than anticipated participation of PWD and PWTD in Time-Off Awards 

of 31-40 Hours.

Trigger 13

Lower than anticipated participation in receipt of Cash Awards: PWD $500 and 

under; PWD & PWTD $1000-$1999; PWD $3000-$3999, PWTD $4000-

$4999; and PWD & PWTD $5000-$5999.

Trigger 14 Lower than anticipated participation of PWD and PWTD receiving Quality Step 

Increases.

Barrier(s) No barrier has been identified at this time.

Objective(s) Identify specific barriers and resolutions. 

Responsible Official(s)

Performance Standards Address the 

Plan?

(Yes or No)

Willisa Donald

Director, Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Office (EI) NO

Christine Enriquez, Colonel, United States Army

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 Analysis of the Disability workforce 

utilizing ADVANA Data.

Complaint Data (Trends)

Grievance Data (Trends)
159 

Findings from Decisions (e.g., EEO, 

Grievance, MSPB, Anti-Harassment 

Processes) 

Climate Assessment Survey (e.g., 

FEVS)

Exit Interview Data

Focus Groups

Interviews 

Reports (e.g., Congress, EEOC, 

MSPB, GAO, OPM)

Other (Please Describe)

Target Date

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Planned Activities Sufficient 

Staffing & 

Funding

(Yes or No)

Modified 

Date

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Completion 

Date

(mm/dd/yyyy)

03/30/2021 Conduct analysis of workforce data 

by Directorate to identify trends.

YES

04/30/2021 Engage with Human Resources to 

review Supervisor and Manager

Awards Training.

YES

05/30/2021 Engage with Disability Program 

Manager to ensure that Disability 

Training for Supervisors and 

Managers addresses the provision of 

Awards. 

YES

Fiscal Year Accomplishments

1. Please explain the factor(s) that prevented the Agency from timely completing any of 

the planned activities.

2. For the planned activities that were completed, please describe the actual impact of those 

activities toward eliminating the barrier(s).
160 

3. 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. 

Trigger 15 The lower than anticipated participation of PWD applicants and selectees in all 

Career Development Programs.

Trigger 16 The lower than anticipated participation of PWTD applicants and selectees in 

all Career Development Programs. 

Barrier(s) To date no barrier has been identified.

Objective(s) Identify barriers and resolutions for PWD and PWTD participation in Career 

Development Programs. 

Responsible Official(s)

Performance Standards Address the 

Plan?

(Yes or No)

Willisa Donald

Director, Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Office (EI) No

Christine Enriquez, Colonel, United States Army

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

Workforce Career Development data 

regarding provided by Office of Human 

Resources.

Complaint Data (Trends)

Grievance Data (Trends)

Findings from Decisions (e.g., EEO, 

Grievance, MSPB, Anti-Harassment 

Processes) 

Climate Assessment Survey (e.g., 

FEVS)

Exit Interview Data

Focus Groups 

Interviews
161 

Reports (e.g., Congress, EEOC, 

MSPB, GAO, OPM)

Other (Please Describe) 

Target Date

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Planned Activities Sufficient 

Staffing & 

Funding

(Yes or No)

Modified 

Date

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Completion 

Date

(mm/dd/yyyy)

12/31/2021 Facilitate a meeting with HR to 

ensure all career development 

announcements contain information 

for PWD/PWTDs in need of 

accommodations. 

Yes

03/30/2022 Conduct analysis of workforce data 

by Career Development Program to 

identify trends.

Yes

06/30/2022 Conduct analysis of workforce data 

by Directorate to identify trends.

Yes

07/30/2022 Engage with Disability Program 

Manager to ensure that Disability 

Training for Supervisors and 

Managers address the participation 

of PWD/PWTDs in Career 

Development Programs. 

Yes

09/30/2022 Conduct benchmarking with other 

Federal agencies regarding Career 

Development Programs specifically 

designed for PWD and PWTDs. 

Yes

Fiscal Year Accomplishments

1. Please explain the factor(s) that prevented the Agency from timely completing any of 

the planned activities.

2. For the planned activities that were completed, please describe the actual impact of those 

activities toward eliminating the barrier(s).
162 

3. 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. 
163 
164 

AGENCY TOTAL WORKFORCE ANALYSIS

In FY21, the DTRA civilian workforce was 1,480, an increase of 195 from FY20. Of the total 

workforce, 1,454 were permanent employees and 26 were temporary. The permanent workforce 

increased by 195; there was no change in the temporary workforce. During FY21, 89 employees 

separated from the Agency.

FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 2014-2018

CLF

# % # % # % # % %

Total Males 894 65.49 849 64.86 834 64.90 942 64.79 51.79

Total Females 471 34.51 460 35.14 451 35.10 512 35.21 48.21

Hispanic Males 19 1.39 50 3.82 56 4.36 71 4.88 6.82

Hispanic Females 17 1.25 27 2.06 29 2.26 34 2.34 6.16

White Males 669 49.01 628 47.98 608 47.32 686 47.18 35.65

White Females 273 20.37 263 20.09 255 19.84 296 20.36 31.82

Black or African American Males 118 8.64 121 9.24 118 9.18 122 8.39 5.70

Black or African American Females 113 8.28 131 10.01 128 9.96 136 9.35 6.61

Asian Males 35 2.56 37 2.84 41 3.19 51 3.51 2.19

Asian Females 26 1.90 31 2.37 30 2.33 37 2.54 2.18

Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific 

Islander Male

1 0.07 2 0.15 2 0.16 1 0.07 0.08

Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific 

Islander Female

3 0.22 3 0.23 3 0.23 4 0.28 0.08

American Indian or Alaska Native Male 3 0.22 5 0.38 5 0.39 6 0.41 0.31

American Indian or Alaska Native 

Female

1 0.07 2 0.15 2 0.16 2 0.14 0.31

Two Or More Races Males 49 3.59 6 0.46 4 0.31 5 0.34 1.05

Two Or More Races Females 33 2.42 3 0.23 4 0.31 3 0.21 1.05

The participation rate for White employees increased slightly from 67.56% to 67.57%. Black 

employee participation rate decreased from 17.74% to 17.64 %. Hispanic employee participation 

rate also decreased from 7.22% to 7.16%. Asian employee participation rate increased from 

6.05% to 6.15%. Participation rate for Two or More Races increased from 0.56% to 0.61%. 

Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander participation rate decreased slightly from 0.35% to 

0.34% and American Indian or Alaska Natives participation rate remained the same at 0.55%. 

The chart below identifies the trend of low participation for Females:

The CLF participation rate for Total Females was 48.21%. DTRA’s overall Female FY20 

participation rate was 35.20% significantly below the CLF. Hispanic Male participation rate 

4.80% was well below the CLF 6.82%, Hispanic Females participation rate 2.36% was

significantly below the CLF 6.16%, White Females participation rate of 20.41% remained below 

the CLF 31.82%, and American Indian/Native Females 0.14% remained below the CLF 0.31%, 

FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 2014-2018

 CLF

# % # % # % # % %

FEMALES 471 34.51 460 35.14 451 35.10 512 35.21 48.21
165 

Two or More Races Female participation rate 0.20% was also below the CLF 1.05%. 

The chart below identifies the trend of low participation for Hispanics: 

The CLF participation rate for Total Hispanics was 12.98%; Males 6.82% and Females 6.16%. 

DTRA’s overall Hispanic FY20 participation rate was 7.16%; Males 4.80% and Females 2.36%. 

The Agency remained significantly below the CLF for Hispanic Males and Females. 

MISSION CRITICAL OCCUPATIONS

The Agency monitored eight Mission Critical Occupations based on their relationship to the 

DTRA missions and population size – Security, Miscellaneous Administration, Program 

Manager, Management Program Analyst, Budget Analysis, Contracting, Engineering, and 

Information Technology Management. The following are snapshots of these major occupations 

and identified potential trigger points for barrier analysis and action planning. 

0080 - Security

• The participation rate for Females in this major occupation was 28.36% compared to the 

Occupational Civilian Labor Force (OCLF) of 54.30%.

• Hispanic Females participation rate was below their respective OCLF of 5.50% with a 

participation rate of 4.48%. White Females participation rate of 11.94% was below their 

respective OCLF of 36.40%. Asian Females participation rate of 1.49% was below their 

respective OCLF of 3.50%.

• Asian Males had low participation rate of 1.49% compared to the OCLF of .05%. 

• Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander had a low participation rate of 0.00% 

compared to the OCLF of 0.10%. American Indian or Alaska Native Males had a 

low participation rate of 0.00% compared to the OCLF of 0.20%. American Indian 

or Alaska Native Females had a low participation rate of 0.00% compared to the 

OCLF of 0.30%. Two or More Races Females has a low participation rate of 0.00% 

compared to the OCLF of 1.30%.

• There were seven (10.45%) IWDs and three (4.48%) IWTDs in this major occupation.

0301 - Miscellaneous Administration

• The participation rate for Females in this major occupation was 24.56% compared to the 

OCLF of 54.30%. 

• Hispanic Females participation rate was below their respective OCLF of 5.50% with a 

FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 2014-2018

CLF

# % # % # % # % %

HISPANIC 

MALES

19 1.39 50 3.82 56 4.36 71 4.88 6.82

HISPANIC 

FEMALES 17 1.25 27 2.06 29 2.26 34 2.34 6.16
166 

participation rate of 1.18%. White Females participation rate of 15.98% was below their 

respective OCLF of 36.40%. Black or African American Females participation rate was 

below their respective OCLF of 7.20% compared to the participation rate of 5.03%. Asian 

Females participation rate of 1.78% was below their respective OCLF of 3.50%.

• Asian Males participation rate was below their respective OCLF of 3.50% compared to their 

respective participation rate of 1.48%.

• Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander Male participation rate was below their 

respective OCLF of 0.10% compared to their respective participation rate of 0.00%. 

Two or More Races Males has a low participation rate of 0.00% compared to the 

OCLF of 0.90%. Two or More Races Females has a low participation rate of 0.00% 

compared to the OCLF of 1.30%.

• There were 54 (15.98%) IWDs and 12 (3.55%) IWTDs in this major occupation.

0340 - Program Manager

• The participation rate for Females in this occupation was 34.23% compared to the OCLF of 

35.10%. 

• Hispanic Females participation rate was below their respective OCLF of 3.1% with a 

participation rate of 2.70%. Hispanic Males participation rate was below their respective 

OCLF of 35.1% with a participation rate of 3.60%. White Females participation rate of 

25.23% was below their respective OCLF of 25.6%. Asian Females participation rate of 

1.80% was below their respective OCLF of 1.90%. 

• Asian Males participation rate of 0.90% was below their respective OCLF of 2.80%. 

• Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander Males participation rate of 0.00% was below 

their respective OCLF of 0.10%. American Indian or Alaska Native Males 

participation rate of 0.00% was below their respective OCLF of 0.30%. American 

Indian or Alaska Native Females participation rate of 0.00% was below their 

respective OCLF of 0.20%. Two or More Races Males has a low participation rate 

of 0.00% compared to the OCLF of 1.00%. Two or More Races Females has a low 

participation rate of 0.00% compared to the OCLF of 0.80%.

• There were 17 (15.32%) IWDs and four (3.60%) IWTDs in this major occupation.

0343 - Management/Program Analyst

• The participation rate for Males in this occupation was 30.77% compared to the OCLF of 

33.33%. 

• White Males participation rate was below their respective OCLF of 27.30% with a 

participation rate of 14.29%. 

• Hispanic Females participation rate was below their respective OCLF of 5.70% with a 

participation rate of 4.40%. Asian Females participation rate of 3.30% was below their 

respective OCLF of 5.30%.

• American Indian/Alaska Native Males fell below their OCLF with a participation rate of 

0.00% compared to the OCLF of 0.10%. American Indian or Alaska Native Females had a 

low participation rate of 0.00% compared to the OCLF of 0.30%.

• Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander Males had a low participation rate of 0.00% 

compared to the OCLF of 0.10%. Two or More Races Males had a low participation 
167 

rate of 0.00% compared to the OCLF of 0.80%. Two or More Races Females had a 

low participation rate of 1.10% compared to the OCLF of 1.50%.

• There were 13 (22.03%) IWDs and four (6.78%) IWTD in this major occupation.

0560 – Budget Analysis 

• The participation rate for Males in this major occupation was 30.77% compared to the OCLF 

of 38.30%. 

• White Males fell below the OCLF with a participation rate of 14.29% compared to the 

OCLF of 4.40%. Hispanic Females participation rate was below their respective OCLF of 

5.70% with a participation rate of 4.40%. Asian Females participation rate of 3.30% was 

below their respective OCLF of 5.30%.

• Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander Males had a low participation rate of 0.00% 

compared to the OCLF of 0.10%. American Indian or Alaska Native Males had a 

low participation rate of 0.00% compared to the OCLF of 0.10%. American Indian 

or Alaska Native had a low participation rate of 0.00% compared to the OCLF of 

0.30%. Two or More Races Males had a low participation rate of 0.00% compared to 

the OCLF of 0.80%. Two or More Races Females had a low participation rate of 

0.00% compared to the OCLF of 1.50%.

• There were nine (9.89%) IWDs and one (1.10%) IWTDs in this major occupation.

1102 - Contracting

• The participation rate for Males in this major occupation was 37.04% compared to the OCLF 

of 55.56%. 

• White Females participation rate of 37.57% was below their respective OCLF of 39.20%. 

• Hispanic Males had a low participate rate of 1.23% for compared to the OCLF of 4.30%. 

White Males participation rate of at 23.46% was below their respective OCLF of 37%.

• American Indian or Alaska Native Males had a low participation rate of 0.00% 

compared to the OCLF of 0.20%. American Indian or Alaska Native Females had a 

low participation rate of 0.00% compared to the OCLF of 0.30%. Two or More 

Races Males had a low participation rate of 0.00% compared to the OCLF of 0.60%. 

Two or More Races Females had a low participation rate of 0.00% compared to the 

OCLF of 1%.

• There were seven (8.64%) IWDs and one (1.23%) IWTDs in this major occupation.

1301 – Physical Science

• The participation rate for Females in this major occupation was 25.00% compared to the

OCLF of 43.30%. 

• Hispanic Females participation rate was below their respective OCLF of 2.80% with a 

participation rate of 0.93%. White Females participation rate of 16.67% was below their 

respective OCLF of 29.90%. Asian Females participation rate of 3.70% was below their 

respective OCLF of 7.30%.

• Asian Males had low participation rate of 5.56% compared to the OCLF of 8.7%. 

• Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander had a low participation rate of 0.00% 

compared to the OCLF of 0.10%. American Indian or Alaska Native had a low 
168 

participation rate of 0.00% compared to the OCLF of 0.10%. Two or More Races 

Females had a low participation rate of 0.00% compared to the OCLF of 0.70%.

• There were 12 (11.11%) IWDs and six (5.56%) IWTD in this major occupation.

2210 - Information Technology Management 

• The participation rate for Females in this major occupation was 25.30% compared to the

OCLF of 29.10%. The participation rate for Males in this same major occupation was 74.70%, 

above their respective OCLF of 70.90%.

• Hispanic Females participation rate was below their respective OCLF of 1.60% with a 

participation rate of 0.00%. White Females participation rate of 14.46% was below their 

respective OCLF of 20.90%. Asian Females participation rate of 2.41% was below their 

respective OCLF of 2.60%.

• Asian Males had low participation rate of 3.61% compared to the OCLF of 7%. White 

Males participation rate of at 51.81% was below their respective OCLF of 54.30%.

• Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander had a low participation rate of 0.00% 

compared to the OCLF of 0.10%. American Indian or Alaska Native had a low 

participation rate of 0.00% compared to the OCLF of 0.10%. Two or More Races 

Males had a low participation rate of 0.00% compared to the OCLF of 1.30%. Two 

or More Races Females had a low participation rate of 0.00% compared to the OCLF 

of 0.70%.

• There were 13 (15.66%) IWDs and four (4.82%) IWTD in this major occupation.

PARTICIPATION FOR GENERAL SCHEDULE GRADES

• The majority of employees were in Grades 11 through 15.

• There were a total of 942 Males in the Agency workforce with 840 (89.17%) of them within 

Grades 11 through 15. There were are a total of 512 Females in the Agency workforce with 

463 (90.43%) of them within Grades 11 through 15. 

• There were a total of 982 Whites (Males 686, Females 296) within the Agency workforce. 

The highest concentration was within Grades 11 through 15, with 605 Males (88.19%), and 

258 Females (87.16%). 

• There were a total of 105 Hispanics (Males 71, Females 34) within the Agency workforce. 

The highest concentration was within Grades 11 through 15, with 63 Males (88.73%), and 30 

Females (88.23%). 

• There were a total of 258 Black/African Americans (Males 122, Females 136) within the 

Agency workforce. The highest concentration was within Grades 11 through 15, with 119 

Males (97.54%), and 131 Females (96.32%).

• There were a total of 88 Asians (Males 51, Females 37) within the Agency workforce. The 

highest concentration was within Grades 11 through 15, with 43 Males (84.31%), and 36 

Females (97.3%). 

• There were a total of five Native Hawaiians or Other Pacific Islanders (1 Male, 4 Females) 

within the Agency workforce. The highest concentration was within Grades 11 through 15, 

with one male (100%), and four females (100%).
169 

• There were a total of eight American Indians or Alaska Natives (6 Males, 2 Females) within 

the Agency workforce. The highest concentration was within Grades 11 through 15, with five 

Males (83.33%), and one Female (50%).

• There were a total of 8 Two or More Races (5 Males, 3 Females) within the Agency 

workforce. The highest concentration was within Grades 11 through 15, with four Males 

(80%), and three Females (100%). 

• There were a total of 210 IWDs and 51 IWTDs within the agency. The highest 

concentration was also within Grades 11 through 15, with 187 IWDs (89.04%), 

and 45 IWTDs (88.24%).

Applicant Flow Data

In FY21, EI received applicant flow data provided by USAStaffing and analyzed data related to 

the Agency’s Mission Critical Occupations. The below shows the recruitment results by gender. 

Internal Competitive Promotion

Gender

Males Females

Series Applied Qualified Selected Applied Qualified Selected

0080 267

75.9%

154

76.23%

3

60%

85

24.14%

48

23.76%

2

40%

0301 1,566

75%

698

74.3%

24

87.5%

527

25%

242

25.7%

4

14.3%

0340 235

75%

151

77%

2

33.33%

78

25%

45

23%

4

66.66%

0343 50

61.7%

19

50%

1

100%

31

38.3%

19

50%

1

100%

0560 19

67.9%

14

74%

0

0.00%

9

32.1%

5

26.3%

0

0.00%

1102

1301 122

75.26%

55

84.6%

2

100%

38

23.75%

10

15.4%

0

0.00%

2210 376

81.7%

238

81.5%

9

90%

84

18.2%

60

20.5%

0

0.00%

New Hires

Gender

Males Females

Series Applied Qualified Selected Applied Qualified Selected

0080 374

71.51%

281

67.71%

3

100%

152

28.99%

132

32.04%

0

0.00%

0301 1,183 767 5 597 442 4
170 

67.03% 63.55% 55.55% 29.58% 36.62% 44.44%

0340 891

64.05%

544

63.85%

11

61.11%

506

36.38%

312

36.62%

7

38.89%

0343 222

60.00%

141

49.47%

2

66.67%

201

47.07%

144

50.52%

1

33.33%

0560 49

60.49%

21

52.50%

0

0.00%

34

41.98%

20

50.00%

1

100.00%

1102 272

48.75%

158

46.06%

11

61.11%

288

51.61%

185

53.94%

7

38.89%

1301 763

72.60%

435

74.11%

3

37.50%

292

27.78%

155

26.41%

5

62.50%

2210 337

83.42%

257

80.82%

1

50.00%

74

18.32%

63

19.81%

1

50.00%

New Hires 

• In FY21 the Agency hired 161 new civilian employees which is more than the 134 new 

hires in 2020. The Agency hired 67 Females (42%), which included 41 White, 4 Asian, 14 

Black/African American, 7 Hispanic, and 2 Two or More Races. The Agency hired 94 

Males (58.4%), which included 66 White, 1 Native Hawaiian Other Pacific Islander, 11 

Hispanic, 12 Black/African American, 2 Asian and 2 Two or More Races. 

EMPLOYEE RECOGNITION AND AWARDS

• In FY21, 24 employees received Time-Off Awards of 1 to 10 hours; 70383% were Males and 

29.17% were Female. There were 6 (25%) IWDs and 2 (8.33%) IWTDs who received 

awards in this category.

• Thirty six (36) employees received Time-Off Awards of 11 - 20 hours; 58.33 % were Males 

and 41.67% were Females. There were 6 (16.67%) IWDs and 2 (5.56%) IWTDs who 

received awards in this category.

• One hundred ninety-seven (197) received Time-Off Awards of 21-30 Hours; 65.99% were 

Males and 34.01 were Females. There were 39 (19.80%) IWDs and 12 (6.09%) IWTDs who 

received awards in this category.

• Seven hundred thirty-two (732) received Time-Off awards of 31-40 Hours; 61.61% were 

Males and 38.39% were Females. There were 100 (13.66%) IWDs and 21 (2.87%) IWTDs 

who received awards in this category.

• Cash Awards in amounts of $500 and under were given to 574 employees. Of those, 61.15% 

were Males, and 38.85% were Female. There were 83 (14.46%) IWDs and 20 (3.48%) 

IWTDs who received awards in this category.

• Cash Awards in the amount of $501 - $999 were given to 322 employees. Of those, 65.84% 

were Males, and 34.16% were Females. There were 46 (14.29%) IWDs and 14 (4.35%) 

IWTDs who received awards in this category.

• Cash Awards in the amount of $1000 - $1999 were given to 238 employees. Of those, 

67.65% were Males, and 32.35% were Females. There were 30 (12.61%) IWDs and six 

(2.52%) IWTDs who received awards in this category.
171 

• Cash Awards in the amount of $2000 - $2999 were given to 202 employees. Of those, 

67.33% were Males, and 32.67% were Females. There were 36 (17.82%) IWDs and eight 

(3.96%) IWTDs who received awards in this category.

• Cash Awards in the amount of $3000 - $3999 were given to 238 employees. Of those, 

63.45% were Males, and 36.55% were Females. There were 26 (10.92%) IWDs and two 

(0.84%) IWTDs who received awards in this category.

• Cash awards in the amount of $4000 -$4999 were given to 131 employees. Of those, 59.54% 

were Males, and 40.46% were Females. There were 20 (15.27%) IWDs and four (3.05%) 

IWTDs who received awards in this category.

• Cash awards in the amount of $5000 or more were given to 217 employees. Of those, 

69.59% were Males, and 30.41% were Females. There were 25 (12.90%) IWDs and five 

(2.30%) IWTDs who received awards in this category.

• There were 74 Quality Step Increases (QSIs) given in FY21 based on the FY2020 

performance cycle. Of those, Males received 43 (58.11%), Females received 31 (41.89%). 

There were nine (12.16%) IWDs and two (2.70%) IWTDs who received awards in this 

category.

SEPARATIONS

• Eighty nine (89) employees separated from the Agency in FY21. Women whom separated 

are represented by 1 Asian, 6 Black/African American, 4 Hispanic, 14 White, 1 Two or 

More Races. The men who separated are represented by 1 Asian, 1 American Indian or 

Alaskan Native, 11 Black/African American, 5 Hispanic, and 45 White. 
172 

APPENDIX A: ACRONYMS 

ABQ Albuquerque 

ADR Alternative Dispute Resolution 

AHP Anti-Harassment Program 

AHPM Anti-Harassment Program Manager

AL Acquisition, Contracts, and Logistics Directorate 

AL-EL Engineering and Logistics Department 

AL-SB Office of Small Business Programs 

CAP Computer Accommodation Program 

CLF Civilian Labor Force 

COVID-19 Coronavirus Disease 2019 

CT Cooperative Threat Reduction Directorate 

D&I Diversity and Inclusion 

DARS Department for Aging and Rehabilitation Services

DBVI Department of the Blind and Vision Impairment 

DID Diversity Internship for DTRA

DIR DTRA Director 

DoD Department of Defense 

DTRA Defense Threat Reduction Agency

EEO Equal Employment Opportunity 

EEOC Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

EI Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Office 

EIS Enterprise Information System 

EO Equal Opportunity 

ERG Employee Resource Group 

ES Environmental, Safety, and Occupational Health Office 

FedSEP Federal Sector EEO Portal 

FEVS Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey 

FY Fiscal Year 

GC General Counsel 

HBCU Historically Black College and University 

HR Human Resources Directorate 

IG Inspector General 

IT Information Management and Technology Directorate 
173 

LDC Leadership Development Council 

LGBTQIA Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer/Questioning, 

Intersex, Asexual/Ally 

MD Management Directive 

MSI Minority-Serving Institution 

NDEAM Month National Disability Employment Awareness 

NE Nuclear Enterprise Directorate 

No FEAR Notification & Federal Employee Antidiscrimination Retaliation Act 

of 2002 

OB On-Site Inspection and Building Capacity Directorate 

OB-BE Conventional Inspections Department 

OB-BP Building Partner Capacity Department 

OB-BPI INDOPACOM Operations Division 

OB-OS Open Skies Department 

OFO Office of Federal Operations 

OI Operations and Integration Directorate 

OI-MSC Security and Counterintelligence Division 

PAS Personal Assistance Services 

PNNL 

PWD

PWTD

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory 

Person with Disability

Person with Targeted Disability

RA Reasonable Accommodation 

RD Research and Development Directorate 

RD-CB Chemical and Biological Technologies 

RD-CXU Urgent Solutions Division 

RD-ECN Nevada Test Division 

SAPR Sexual Assault Prevention and Response 

SEP Special Emphasis Program 

SES Senior Executive Service 

SI Strategic Integration Directorate 

SLI Sign Language Interpreter 

STRI Strategic Trends Research Initiative 

UCP Unified Command Plan 

WMD Weapons of Mass Destruction 

WRP Workforce Recruitment Program
174