U.S. Department of Agriculture 

Notification and Federal Employee 

Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act 

(No FEAR Act) Report to Congress 

Fiscal Year 2020
United States Department of Agriculture

Office of the Secretary

Washington, D.C. 20250

May 22, 2020

USDA Civil Rights Policy Statement

The hallmark of my tenure as Secretary of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is to do right

and feed everyone and I don’t intend for that to be just a hollow creed. This pledge is at the heart of

our work, which includes our commitment to protecting the civil rights of all USDA employees and

customers.

Doing right means treating all people equally, regardless of an individual’s race, color, national origin,

religion, sex (including pregnancy, gender identity and sexual orientation), disability, age, genetic

information, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program,

political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity

conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). We are part of the same human

family, imbued with dignity and worthy of respect. I expect every USDA employee to foster a

workplace free from discrimination, harassment, and retaliation so everyone can reach his or her full

potential. Workplace harassment will not be tolerated, and managers and supervisors will correct the

harassing conduct before it becomes severe or pervasive. Our workplace will be a model for proper

enforcement of civil rights protections, not only because it’s the law, but also because it’s the right

thing to do.

Equal employment opportunity covers all personnel/employment programs, management practices,

and decisions, including, but not limited to, recruitment/hiring, merit promotion, transfer,

reassignments, training and career development, benefits, and separation.

Feeding everyone means it doesn’t matter what you look like or where you come from, USDA

programs are for you. Hunger knows no color or creed. Whether we are responding to disasters with

food aid, cultivating sustainable agriculture programs overseas, or improving school meals here at

home, at USDA we know food has the power to unite.

When you start with a simple expression of integrity and equality, upholding civil rights and all the

freedoms enshrined in our laws is not just compulsory, it becomes intrinsic. For that reason and

working together, we will continue to return to our touchstone: Do right ... by everyone ... and feed

everyone.

Sonny Perdue

Secretary

An Equal Opportunity Employer
Table of Contents

Annual Reporting Requirements i

Executive Summary iii

PART I: USDA Formal EEO Complaints for 1

 Fiscal Years 2019 - 2020

Section A – Number of Formal EEO Complaints and Number of Filers 2

Section B – Most Frequently Cited Bases in Formal EEO 3

Complaints at USDA

Section C – Most Frequently Cited Issues in Formal EEO 5

Complaints at USDA

Section D – EEO Processing Stages 7

(1) Average Number of Days for Completion of 

Selected EEO Stages

(2) Pending Complaints at Various Stages

(3) Pending Formal Complaints Exceeding the 180-Day

Investigation Requirement

Section E – Final Agency Actions with a Finding of Discrimination 11

Section F – Analysis, Experience, and Actions 12

(1) Causal Analysis

(2) Experience Gained by USDA in the Processing of

 Formal EEO Complaints

(3) Past and Future Actions by USDA Relating to EEO 

 Complaints Processing

PART II: USDA Reimbursement to Judgment Fund for 17

Fiscal Year 2020

PART III: USDA Disciplinary Actions and Reports for 19

Fiscal Years 2019 - 2020

PART IV: USDA Federal Court Litigation 21

Statistics for Fiscal Year 2020

Appendix Equal Employment Opportunity Data Posted A-1

 Pursuant to the No FEAR Act
ii

Annual Reporting Requirements

The Notification and Federal Employee Anti-discrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002 (No 

FEAR Act), Public Law No. 107-174, Section 203 mandates that Federal Agencies report certain 

information on actions taken to promote nondiscrimination in employment and process 

complaints of discrimination for each fiscal year (FY). This report contains the: 

• number of complaints filed with USDA alleging discrimination based on race, color, 

religion, national origin, sex, disability, genetics, age, reprisal, and violations of

whistleblower protection laws;

• amount of money USDA has reimbursed to the Judgment Fund in accordance with the 

No FEAR Act;

• aggregate amount USDA has reimbursed to the Judgment Fund that is attributable to the 

payment of attorney’s fees;

• USDA policies relating to disciplinary actions to be taken against employees who have 

violated anti-discrimination or whistleblower laws or engaged in prohibited personnel 

practices;

• number of employees USDA has disciplined for discrimination, retaliation, harassment, 

or prohibited personnel practices; 

• number of cases in Federal Court arising under the anti-discrimination and whistleblower 

protection laws; and

• statistical data USDA is required to post on its public website.

In addition, the No FEAR Act requires USDA to provide: (1) an examination of trends; (2) 

causal analysis; (3) practical knowledge gained through experience; (4) actions planned or taken 

to improve its complaint or civil rights programs and procedures and any ascertainable 

adjustments made in its budget as a result of its compliance with the reimbursement requirement.
iii

Executive Summary 

USDA’s FY 2020 No FEAR Act Annual Report is the sixteenth report submitted pursuant to the 

Notification and Federal Employee Anti-discrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002 (No FEAR 

Act), Public Law No. 107-174, Section 203. The No FEAR Act Annual Report demonstrates 

key accomplishments for USDA during FY 2020 to reduce anti-discrimination and retaliation, 

increase accountability, emphasize training for managers in the management of a diverse 

workforce, encourage dispute resolution and employee communication skills.

As demonstrated in the report, key accomplishments in line with the requirements of the No FEAR 

Act and the Secretary of Agriculture’s (Secretary) Civil Rights objectives, consist of the following:

• A decrease of 13 percent in equal employment opportunity (EEO) complaints filed in FY 

2020 as compared to FY 2019. 

• The number of filers decreased by eight percent in FY 2020 as compared to FY 2019.

• The number of findings of discrimination increased by seven in FY 2020 as compared to 

FY 2019. 

• Disciplinary actions taken against employees who violated Federal anti-discrimination 

laws and whistleblower protection statutes shows there were 14 in FY 2020.

1

 

• The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights (OASCR) conducted an in-depth 

audit of its open inventory of cases which resulted in the identification of approximately 

90 complaints inaccurately reflecting open status. Through our partnership with the Equal 

Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to obtain the necessary confirmation, 

OASCR closed 46 of those cases.

During FY 2020, USDA through OASCR, implemented the following initiatives to reduce the 

number and improve timeliness of EEO complaints: 

• Processed 360 formal complaints of discrimination. Complaints were processed at the 

intake stage with an average processing time of 24 days for acceptance or dismissal 

determinations. 

• Processed 395 investigations as compared to 393 investigations processed in FY 2019. 

• Worked to eliminate a backlog of untimely complaints under a 180-day Investigative 

Initiative. This Initiative resulted in no complaints over 180 days old and an average 

processing time reduced below the statutory requirement to 171 days. 

• Reduced the processing times for adjudicating final agency decision (Final Agency 

Decisions without a Hearing) from 41 days as compared to 56 days in FY2019.

1

(See Part III: Table 9 Disciplinary Actions) taken against employees, as compared to 17 in FY 2019)
iv

During FY 2020, USDA through OASCR, implemented the following initiatives to both achieve 

Employment Opportunity standards for a model EEO program and strengthen civil rights 

activities: 

• Revised and posted civil rights and anti-harassment (AH) policy statements in accordance 

with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC), Management Directive 

715 requirements.

• Developed and implemented USDA’s revised Reasonable Accommodation (RA) and 

Personal Assistant Services Departmental Regulation (DR), 29 C.F.R. § 16.14.203(d)(3).

This DR establishes the USDA policy for providing a RA to qualified employees and 

applicants with disabilities. This DR will help provide qualified people with disabilities 

an equal opportunity to obtain and successfully perform a job to the same extent as 

employees without disabilities and enjoy the benefits and privileges of employment. 

• Established a USDA wide task force to establish USDA’s Anti-harassment Program 

through the development of a USDA Anti-harassment DR due to be issued in fiscal year 

2021.

• Developed an on-line civil rights app to ensure all employees and customers have access 

to critical civil rights information and know their legal rights. This new phone 

application and quick reference guide will be uploaded on every USDA employee’s 

mobile device. This app will be updated regularly with current civil rights information.

• Strengthened USDA’s ability to analyze civil rights impacts by:

o Implementing a communication strategy to all USDA Mission Areas, agencies,

and staff offices requiring compliance with DR) 4300-004, Section 8(a) (6-9) and 

realigning existing civil rights impact analysis (CRIA) procedures to the DR;

o Developed and issued a comprehensive CRIA Guidebook to educate internal and 

external stakeholders on the CRIA process and procedures in accordance with DR 

4300-004, CRIA; and

o Developed and implemented a CRIA tracking system and dashboard.
1

PART I:

USDA Formal EEO Complaints

for

Fiscal Years 2019 – 2020
2

Section A— Number of Formal EEO Complaints and Filers at USDA

Introduction

This section contains comparative information regarding the number of formal EEO complaints 

filed and the number of filers for FYs 2019 and 2020. 

Summary of Data

Table 1 below indicates the number of formal EEO complaints filed and the number of filers

who filed complaints with USDA by fiscal year. It shows a decrease in the number of 

complaints filed and the number of filers over the prior year (See Graph 1). 

In FY 2020, 394 complaints were filed as compared to 436 in FY 2019. This represents a ten

percent decrease in complaints filed. Additionally, the number of filers was 381 as compared to

414 in FY 2019. This represents an eight percent decrease in the number of filers.

Table 1

Number of Formal EEO Complaints and Number of Filers at USDA

Fiscal Years Number of Complaints

Filed

Number of Filers

2019 436 414

2020 394 381

Graph 1

Formal EEO Complaints and Filers at USDA

350

360

370

380

390

400

410

420

430

440

450

2019 2020

Formal EEO Complaints and Filers

at USDA

Number of Complaints Filed Number of Filers
3

Section B—Most Frequently Cited Bases in Formal

EEO Complaints at USDA

Introduction

This section contains information on the most frequently cited bases in formal EEO complaints 

for FYs 2019 and 2020. The basis of the complaint is the protected characteristic the 

complainant alleges which formed the motivation for the discriminatory conduct. The bases 

protected by EEO statutes are race, color, religion, national origin, sex, disability, genetics, age 

and retaliation (for participating in the EEO complaint process or for opposing practices made 

illegal under the EEO laws). A complaint brought under the Equal Pay Act of 1963, as amended, 

is considered to be a complaint based on sex.

Summary of Data

Table 2 provides data on all bases alleged in formal EEO complaints filed with USDA. Of all 

bases, the four most frequently cited in formal EEO complaints filed in FY 2020 are: 

(1) retaliation; (2) race; (3) sex; and (4) age. In FY 2019, the four most frequently cited bases 

were: (1) retaliation; (2) race; (3) sex; and (4) disability. These four bases are illustrated in 

Graph 2. 

Complaints Alleging Retaliation

Retaliation was the most frequently alleged basis in formal EEO complaints at USDA for FYs 

2020 and 2019. In FY 2020, 57 percent of complaints cited retaliation as a basis, compared to 59

percent in FY 2019. 

Complaints Alleging Race Discrimination

Race was the second most frequently alleged basis in formal EEO complaints at USDA in 

FY 2020. In FY 2020, 43 percent of complaints cited race as a basis, compared to 55 percent in 

FY 2019. 

Complaints Alleging Sex Discrimination 

Sex was the third most frequently alleged basis in formal EEO complaints at USDA in 

FY 2020. In FY 2020, 42 percent of complaints cited sex as a basis, compared to 61 percent in 

FY 2019. 

Complaints Alleging Age Discrimination 

Age was the fourth most frequently alleged basis in formal EEO complaints at USDA for FY

2020. In FY 2020, 36 percent of complaints cited age as a basis.
4

Table 2

Most Frequently Cited EEO Bases in Formal EEO Complaints at USDA

Frequency of EEO Bases in Formal EEO Complaints

Year

Race

Color

Religion

Sex

National Origin

Disability

Age

Retaliation

2 Other

2019 195 93 35 171 58 170 157 258 37

2020 170 59 18 168 46 141 144 224 38

 

Graph 2

Most Frequently Cited Bases 

 

2 Other USDA protected bases include: Non-EEO. Additionally, the basis of sex includes gender identity and 

expression.

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

2019 2020

Most Frequently Cited EEO Bases

Race Sex Age Retaliation
5

Section C—Most Frequently Cited Issues in Formal EEO

Complaints at USDA

Introduction

This section contains information regarding the most frequently cited issues in formal EEO 

complaints for FYs 2019 and 2020. The No FEAR Act requires Federal Agencies to post data 

regarding the nature of the issues raised in EEO complaints. The issue of a complaint is the 

specific subject matter about which the individual is complaining or the alleged discriminatory 

incident for which the individual is seeking redress. Table 3 contains a list of issues most raised

in complaints. The “Other” category captures all issues not specifically listed. 

Summary of Data

Table 3 provides the most frequently cited issues in formal EEO complaints filed with USDA. 

The three EEO issues most frequently cited in FY 2020 were: (1) Harassment; (2) Disciplinary 

Action; and (3) Promotion/Non-Selection. In FY 2019, the three EEO issues most frequently 

cited were: Harassment; (2) Terms/Condition of Employment; and (3) Disciplinary Action.

Graph 3 shows the trends for these three issues over the two-year reporting period.

Harassment was the most frequently cited issue in formal EEO cases in FYs 2020 and 2019. In 

FY 2020, 54 percent (214 filings) of complaints cited harassment as an issue as compared to 44

percent (2453filings) in FY 2019, indicating a 13 percent decrease from FY 2019 to FY 2020. 

Disciplinary Action4 was the second most frequently cited issue in formal EEO cases in FY 

2020. Approximately 23 percent (89 filings) of complaints cited disciplinary actions as an issue 

in FY 2020 as compared to 75 percent (111 complaints) in FY 2019, a 19 percent decrease from 

FY 2019 to FY 2020.

Promotion/Non-selection was the third most frequently cited issue in formal EEO cases in FY 

2020. Approximately 21 percent (82 filings) of complaints cited Promotion/Non-selection as an 

issue in FY 2020, compared to 77 percent (100 filings) in FY 2019, an 18 percent increase. 

3 Data reconciliation is conducted on a regular basis; therefore, the number may change.

4 Disciplinary Action includes demotion, reprimand, suspension, removal and other.
6

Table 3

EEO Issues in Formal EEO Complaints

EEO Issues in Formal EEO Complaints

Year

Appointment/Hire

Assignment of Duties

Awards

Conversions to Full Time

Disciplinary Action

Duty Hours

Performance Evaluation/Appraisal

Examination/Test

Harassment

Medical Examination

Pay/Overtime

Promotion /Non-Selection

Reassignment

Reasonable Accommodation Disability

Reinstatement

Retirement

Termination

Terms and Conditions of Employment

Time and Attendance

Training

*Other

2019 17 72 8 0 111 15 91 1 245 3 13 100 57 75 3 11 27 137 69 30 21

2020 31 58 7 0 89 12 76 1 214 0 20 82 24 56 4 5 24 58 42 71 16

 *Other USDA protected issues include Religious Accommodation, Sex Stereotyping, Telework

. 

Graph 3

EEO Issues in Formal EEO Complaints

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

2019 2020

EEO Issues in Formal EEO Complaints

Displinary Actions Promotion/Nonselection Harassment
7

Section D—EEO Processing Stages

Introduction

This section contains data regarding selected stages and associated processing times for formal 

EEO complaints processed during FYs 2019 and 2020. The formal EEO complaint process has 

various stages. Not all formal complaints complete all processing stages. These stages are: 

(1) Investigation (which includes Letter of Acceptance); (2) Final Agency Action with EEOC 

Hearing; (3) Final Agency Action without EEOC Hearing; and (4) Dismissal. Formal EEO 

complaints may be withdrawn or settled at any stage and may be dismissed at various stages.

Summary of Data

The following is an analysis of data for the three EEO processing stages. This section contains data 

on: (1) the average number of days for completion of each stage; (2) pending complaints at various 

stages of the EEO process; and (3) pending formal complaints exceeding the 180-day investigation 

requirement.

(1) Average Number of Days for Completion of EEO Stages

Table 4 below provides the average number of days for processing a formal EEO complaint at 

each stage. The data revealed a downward trend (as shown in Graph 4) in the average number of 

days for dismissals and for all Final Agency Actions with and without an EEOC hearing. There 

was an upward trend in the average number of days for investigations.

Table 4

Average Number of Days for Completion of Each EEO Stage

Year Investigation Final Agency Action 

with EEOC Hearing

Final Agency 

Action without 

EEOC Hearing

Dismissals

(pending prior 

to dismissal)

2019 199 29 56 66

2020 207 26 41 40
8

Graph 4

The Number of Days for Completion of Each EEO Stage

(2) Pending Complaints at Various Stages

Table 5 below illustrates the number of pending EEO complaints in FYs 2019 and 2020 at each 

EEO stage.

At the conclusion of each fiscal year, the number of pending investigations remained the same. 

However, the number of EEOC hearings and USDA final agency actions decreased from the 

number filed in FY 2019. The number of appeals pending at the EEOC at the end of the FY 

increased.

Table 5

Pending EEO Formal Complaints by Stage

Year Investigation Hearing Final Agency Action Appeal

2019 17 410 36 274

2020 17 333 26 352

0

50

100

150

200

250

2019 2020

Days

Number of Days for 

Completion of Each EEO Stage

Investigation

Final Agency Action with EEOC

Hearing

Final Agency Action without

EEOC Hearing

Dismissals
9

Graph 5 shows a decrease in the number of pending complaints in the Hearing and Final Agency 

Action stages and no change in Investigation. In addition, Graph 5 shows an upward trend in 

pending complaints at the Appeal stage.

Graph 5

Pending EEO Formal Complaints by Stage

(3) Formal Complaints Exceeding the 180-Day Investigation Requirement

Table 6 and Graph 6 show no change in the number of complaints (16) in FY 2020 for formal 

complaints that exceeded the 180-day investigation requirement from FY 2019 to FY 2020.

Table 6

Formal EEO Complaints Exceeding the 180-Day Investigation Requirement

Complaints Exceeding the 180-day Investigation Requirement

2019 16

2020 16

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

2019 2020

Investigation Hearing Final Agency Action Appeal
10

Graph 6

Formal EEO Complaints Exceeding 180-Day Investigation Requirement

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

2019 2020

Formal EEO Complaints Exceeding 

180-Day Investigation Requirement

Pending Complaints

Exceeding the 180-day

Investigation Requirement
11

Section E—Final Agency Actions with a Finding of Discrimination

Introduction

Final Agency Actions involving a finding of discrimination may be issued on the record or 

following an EEOC Administrative Hearing. The final actions involving a finding of 

discrimination may include complaints with a variety of bases and issues. The No FEAR Act 

requires Federal Agencies to post the total number of final actions involving a finding of 

discrimination, along with the issues and bases for those complaints. 

Summary of Data

Table 7 and Graph 7 show that from FY 2019 to FY 2020, the number of findings of 

discrimination issued with an EEOC Administrative Hearing increased by five, and the number 

of findings without an EEOC Administrative Hearing increased by two during FY 2020.

Table 7

Final Agency Actions with a Finding of Discrimination

Year With an EEOC 

Administrative Hearing

Without an EEOC 

Administrative Hearing

2019 2 1

2020 7 3

Graph 7

Final Agency Actions with a Finding of Discrimination

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

2019 2020

Final Agency Actions with a Finding of 

Discrimination

With an EEOC Administrative

Hearing

Without an EEOC

Administrative Hearing
12

Section F—Analysis, Experience, and Actions

Introduction

The No FEAR Act requires: (1) an examination of trends; (2) a causal analysis; (3) practical 

knowledge gained through experience; and (4) any actions planned or taken to improve USDA’s 

complaint or civil rights programs. The prior sections (Sections A-E) provided an examination 

of trends. Described below are various observations related to the remaining three areas:

(1) Causal Analysis

USDA and its sub-component agencies identified and reported in FY 2020 the following factors 

impacted the filing of formal EEO complaints.

• The Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) reported no change in the number of 

complaints for FYs 2020 and 2019. Specifically, 22 complaints were filed in FYs 2020 

and 2019. AMS attributes the static number to the CR/EEO training sessions and the 

Civil Rights Program’s proactive approach in resolving complaints at the earliest stages. 

• The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) reported a six percent decrease

in the number of complaints filed in FY 2020. Specifically, 33 complaints were filed in 

FY 2020, compared to 35 in FY 2019. APHIS attributes the decrease to engagement by 

managers and supervisors in addressing workplace conflicts at the earliest stages.

• The Agricultural Research Service (ARS) reported a 13 percent decrease in the number 

of complaints filed in FY 2020. Specifically, 13 complaints were filed in FY 2020, 

compared to 15 in FY 2019. ARS attributes the decrease to timely and effective issuance 

of EEO policies and training.

• The Conflict Complaints Division (CCD), which processes conflict cases5, reported an 

increase of six percent in the number of complaints filed in FY 2020. Specifically, 56

complaints were filed in FY 2020, compared to 53 in FY 2019.Further analysis will be 

conducted to determine causation.

• The Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) reported a ten percent decrease in the number of 

complaints filed in FY 2020. Specifically, nine complaints were filed in FY 2020, 

compared to ten in FY 2019. FAS attributes the decrease in complaints to continued 

training and educating employees on EEO issues, as well as interaction with employees.

The Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) reported a 73 percent increase in complaints filed. 

Specifically, 19 complaints were filed in FY 2020, compared to 11 in FY 2019. FNS 

attributes the upsurge in complaints filed to the Coronavirus global outbreak, as well as 

the shift to a virtual setting. Managers and employees experienced challenges in adapting

to the virtual setting.

5 Conflict case(s) is an EEO complaint involving facts and/or allegations that are determined to pose an actual, 

perceived, and or potential conflict of interest between a Responsible Management Official or complainant’s 

position or personal interest, and USDA’s responsibility to administer a fair and impartial investigative process and 

resolution of complaints.
13

• The Farm Production and Conservation (FPAC) – Business Center (BC) reported a 25 

percent decrease in the number of complaints filed in FY 2020. Specifically, six 

complaints were filed in FY 2020, compared to eight in FY 2019. The BC attributes the 

decrease in the number of complaints to FPAC’s maximizing synergy in leadership as a 

result of their reorganization and streamlining case management within its Civil Rights 

and EEO Division (CREEOD).

• The FPAC – Farm Service Agency (FSA) reported a 37 percent decrease in the number 

of formal complaints in FY 2020. Specifically, 17 complaints were filed in FY 2020, 

compared to 27 in FY 2019. As mentioned above the decrease in complaint activity is 

attributed to maximizing synergy in leadership as a result of their reorganization and 

streamlining case management within its CREEOD.

• The FPAC – Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) reported a 35 percent 

decrease in the number of complaints filed in FY 2020. Specifically, 17 complaints were 

filed in FY 2020, compared to 26 in FY 2019. As mentioned above the decrease in 

complaint activity is attributed to maximizing synergy in leadership as a result of their 

reorganization and streamlining case management within its CREEOD.

• The FPAC – Risk Management Agency (RMA) reported no change in the number of 

complaints filed in FY 2020. Specifically, one complaint was filed in FY 2020, 

compared to one in FY 2019. RMA attributes no change inthe number of complaints to 

the CR and EEO supplemental training on conflict management, unconscious bias, 

diversity, and inclusion.

• The Forest Service (FS) reported a 30 percent decrease in the number of complaints filed 

in FY 2020. Specifically, 70 complaints were filed in FY 2020, compared to 100 

complaints file in FY 2019. FS attributes the decrease in the number of complaints to 

effectively improving the EEO pre-complaint process and addressing disparate impact 

and disparate treatment discrimination in the work environment.

• The Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) reported a five percent decrease in the 

number of formal complaints filed in FY 2020. Specifically, 55 complaints filed in FY

2020, compared to 58 filed in FY 2019. FSIS attributes the decrease in the complaints to 

the actions and or activities undertaken during FY 2020, i.e., CR/EEO training, 

conducting Title VII compliance reviews, continued marketing of alternative dispute 

resolution (ADR) for complaint resolution at the lowest level, and the FSIS 

reorganization. 

• The National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) reported a 50 percent decrease in the 

number of complaints filed in FY 2020. Specifically, one complaint was filed in FY 

2020, compared to two in FY 2019. NASS attributes the decrease to its continued efforts 

to foster a culture that works on resolving conflicts at the earliest stages of disagreements 

or disputes. 
14

• The National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) reported no complaints filed in 

FY 2020. Specifically, no complaints were filed in FY 2020, compared to three 

complaints filed in FY 2019. NIFA attributes the decrease in the number of complaints 

to continuous CR training, utilization of ADR, and early proactive prevention of 

discrimination in the workplace.

• The Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) reported a 23 percent decrease in the 

number of complaints filed in FY 2020. Specifically, 27 complaints were filed in FY 

2020, compared to 35 in FY 2019. OCFO attributes the decrease to expert EEO 

counseling and attempts to resolve matters at the lowest possible level within the

agency. 

• The Rural Development (RD) reported a 45 percent decrease in complaints filed in FY 

2020. Specifically, 16 complaints were filed in FY 2020, compared to 29 in FY 2019. 

RD attributes the decrease in the number of complaints filed to the EEO staff’s proactive 

approach in mitigating issues during or prior to an individual initiating the informal EEO 

process. 

(2) Experience Gained by USDA in the Processing of Formal Complaints

USDA, including all its Mission Areas and agencies, have learned the following lessons from its 

experience in processing and resolving formal EEO complaints by:

• allowing maximum participation of all employees for employees to telework, EEO 

complaint activity declined;

• providing training to employees and managers and partnering with Human Resource 

Division was effective in resolving complaint and workplace issues;

• EEO accountability addressing wrongdoing must continue to be a focus of improvement; 

• strengthening and better coordinating the pre-complaint process to accurately identify and 

process allegations in accordance with the EEO laws and resolve disputes is needed; 

• additional procedures and training around harassment issues in the workforce may help 

reduce the number of claims citing harassment; and

• maximizing ADR and conflict resolution programs before or during the pre-complaint 

process must be strengthened and fully maximized. 

(3) Past and Future Actions by USDA Relating to EEO Complaints Processing

USDA has taken several actions that have proven effective in improving its formal EEO 

complaint processing. These past actions include the following:

• published information on upcoming leadership plans for employees through 

intranet accessibility;
15

• increased communication to all employees in advance of policy and/or 

organizational changes to decrease perceived personal attacks or harassment; 

• addressed the increased inventory due to the 180-day initiative by maintaining 

progress towards timely adjudication and sustained quality.

• conducted an in-depth audit of open inventory cases which resulted in the identification 

of 90 inaccurate complaints pending open status. Partnering with the Equal Employment 

Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to obtain the necessary confirmation, 46 of those cases

were closed by the end of the fiscal year. 

• provided guidance and training to managers, supervisors and employees on

harassment in the workplace, complaint processing procedures, conflict resolution, 

ADR, and the difference between EEO and non-EEO related matters;

• disseminated the Secretary’s civil rights and anti-harassment policy statements to 

all supervisory personnel to ensure their understanding, cooperation, and 

compliance;

• hosted supplemental training sessions for managers and employees to include such 

topics as Using ADR Techniques, Understanding Harassment, Unconscious Bias, 

Reasonable Accommodation (RA), and Hostile Environment Claims;

• continued to work collaboratively with experts such as the Office of General 

Counsel, as well as external USDA trainers to provide supplemental training for

employees;

• created a new division which deals with “Customer and Employee Engagement” in order 

to listen, learn, and measure what matters to customers and employees;

USDA is also introducing new initiatives to reduce complaints in future years. USDA plans to 

take the following future actions: 

• encourage supervisors and managers to cooperate with EEO officials and investigators 

throughout the complaint process, to respond to requests for information and documents 

in a timely and accurate manner, to participate in mediation at any stage of the complaint 

process, and to participate in training, especially Title VII, and EEO training;

• focus civil rights training on topics aligned with our EEO top cited basis such as race, 

reprisal, and sex appear to help reduce complaint filings;

• continue to review the best practices in formal EEO complaint tracking and provide 

conflict micro-aggression, and unconscious bias courses to managers, supervisors, and 

employees which contributes to a better work environment;

• enhance its RA program to improve efficiency and to ensure compliance with the 

EEOC’s requirements; 
16

• enforce compliance review assessment tools to determine whether new measures are 

required to effectively assess the Agency’s EEO Program; 

• assure all Civil Rights/EEO counseling and investigative personnel receive the required 

32 hours of training and the annual 8-hour refresher training; and

• encourage individuals to engage in early resolution of complaints and to ensure EEO 

conflicts are resolved at the lowest level possible.
17

PART II:

USDA Reimbursement to 

Judgment Fund for 

Fiscal Year 2020
18

USDA Reimbursement to Judgment Fund for Fiscal Year 2020 

Introduction 

Table 8 below provides information on reimbursements by USDA to the U.S. Department of 

Treasury’s Judgment Fund for monies associated with FY 2020 judgments, awards, or 

settlements under the statutes addressed in the No FEAR Act. 

Table 8 

USDA Reimbursement to Judgment Fund for FY 2020 Settlements 

USDA Reimbursement to Judgment Fund for FY 2020 Settlements

Case Total Amount Attorneys’ Fees

1 $4,000.00 -

2 $933,417.50 $476,937.31

3 $100,000.00 -

4 $30,000.00 -

5 $200,000.00 -

6 $132,899.44 $70,424.80

Total $1,400,316.94 $547,362.11

 

Summary 

In FY 2020, USDA reimbursed the Judgment Fund $1,400,316.94, of which $547,362.11 were 

identified as payment of attorneys’ fees. 
19

PART III:

USDA Disciplinary Actions and Reports 

for Fiscal Years 2019 – 2020
20

USDA Disciplinary Actions and Reports for

Fiscal Years 2019–2020

Summary of Data

PART 1: Table 9 below contains the number of disciplinary actions taken against employees 

who were found to have committed prohibited acts of discrimination, retaliation, harassment, or 

prohibited personnel practices (including those acts discovered in conjunction with investigations

of whistleblower protection or civil rights complaints).

Table 9

ADMINISTRATIVE DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS6

TYPE OF 

ACTION

FY 2019 FY 2020

DISC. RET. HAR. PPP WBP TOTAL DISC. RET. HAR. PPP WBP TOTAL

REMOVAL 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0

15 DAY OR

MORE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

14 DAY OR 

LESS 0 0 5 0 0 5 1 2 5 0 1 9

REDUCTION

IN GRADE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

REDUCTION

IN PAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

LOR 0 0 9 1 0 10 1 0 4 0 0 5

TOTAL

DISCIPLINE 0 0 16 1 0 17 2 2 9 0 1 14

PART 2: Table 10 below contains the number of complaints referred to the Office of Special 

Counsel (OSC) Whistleblower cases. 

Table 10

OFFICE OF SPECIAL COUNSEL CASES*

CATEGORIES OF CASES FY 2019 FY 2020 TOTAL

OSC WHISTLEBLOWER CASE 0 18 18

OSC WHISTLEBLOWER CASE CLOSED 0 0 0

*Data Source: Office of Inspector General

6 Table Abbreviations: Disc. = Discrimination; Ret. = Retaliation; Har. = Harassment; PPP = Prohibited Personnel 

Practice; WBP = Whistleblower Protection Act; and LOR = Letter of Reprimand.
21

PART IV:

USDA Federal Court Litigation Statistics 

for FY 2020
22

Tables 11, 12, and 13 below provide composite data for cases in Federal Court pending or 

resolved in FY 2020 and arising under the anti-discrimination and whistleblower protection laws.

Table 11

Federal Cases Pending in FY 2020

Federal Cases Pending in FY 2020

Pending District Court Cases 38

Pending Appellate Court Cases 4

New Cases Filed in District Court 17

Note: Cases pending at any time during the year, including those filed during the year, 

and those disposed of during the year. 

Table 12

Pending Cases

Pending Cases

29 

U.S.C. 

§206(d)

29 U.S.C. 

§631

29 U.S.C. 

§633a

29 U.S.C. 

§791

42 

U.S.C. 

§2000e16

Disposed of During FY 

2020 0 10 10 8 19

Still Pending at End of FY 

2020 1 9 9 16 29

Table 13

Disposition of Cases

(Including Dismissals)

Disposition of Cases

(Including Dismissals)

29 

U.S.C. 

§206(d)

29 U.S.C. 

§631

29 U.S.C. 

§633a

29 U.S.C. 

§791

42 

U.S.C. 

§2000e16

Settlements 0 2 2 2 6

Withdrawals 0 2 2 1 2

Final Judgment for 

Complainant

0 0 0 0 0

Final Judgment for Agency 0 6 6 5 11

Total Cases disposed of in 

FY 2020

0 0 0 0 24
23

NOTES ON CASES WITH MULTIPLE BASES ALLEGED

1. Of the cases handled by OGC involving the Federal Antidiscrimination Laws covered by the 

No FEAR Act, approximately 82.3 percent of those cases involve claims of discrimination on 

multiple bases (e.g., Sex, Race) and/or under multiple statutes (e.g., Title VII, ADEA).

2. Of the cases handled by OGC involving the Federal Antidiscrimination Laws covered by the 

No FEAR Act, approximately 72.5 percent of those cases also included a claim of 

reprisal/retaliation.
A-1

Appendix A

Equal Employment Opportunity Data 

Posted Pursuant to the No FEAR Act
A-2

Equal Employment Opportunity Data Posted 

Pursuant to the No FEAR Act 

FY 2019 for period ending September 30, 2020 

Complaint Activity

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Number of Complaints Filed 531 561 522 436 394

Number of Complainants 508 531 497 414 381

Repeat Filers 19 24 21 18 11

Complaints by Basis

Note: Complaints can be filed alleging multiple

bases.The sum of the bases may not equal total

complaints filed.

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Race 222 243 216 195 170

Color 63 75 85 95 59

Religion 35 35 28 35 18

Reprisal 273 311 315 258 224

Sex 206 216 229 171 168

PDA 0 2 2 2 3

National Origin 47 67 68 58 46

Equal Pay Act 1 8 13 7 6

Age 185 207 155 157 144
A-3

Disability 157 185 195 170 141

Genetics 0 1 0 3 3

Non-EEO 39 55 40 37 38

Complaints by Issue

Note: Complaints can be filed alleging multiple

bases.The sum of the bases may not equal total

complaints filed.

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Appointment/Hire 28 40 24 17 31

Assignment of Duties 92 87 82 72 58

Awards 8 17 14 8 7

Conversion to Full Time/Permanent Status 0 3 1 0 0

Demotion 4 4 3 1 4

Reprimand 27 45 43 41 24

Suspension 26 36 37 34 27

Removal 6 17 21 32 29

Other 7 4 3 3 5

Duty Hours 20 18 8 15 12

Performance. Evaluation/Appraisal 92 96 98 91 76

Examination/Test 1 2 1 1 1

Non-Sexual 285 343 351 239 199

Sexual 18 13 24 6 15

Medical Examination 1 4 0 3 0

Pay including Overtime 22 30 11 13 20

Promotion/Non-Selection 149 124 71 100 82
A-4

Reassignment

Denied 14 17 21 17 8

Directed 18 20 26 39 16

Reasonable Accommodation Disability 68 84 94 75 56

Reinstatement 2 0 0 3 4

Religious Accommodation 3 4 1 1 2

Retirement 3 6 4 11 5

Sex-Stereotyping 1 1 1 0 0

Telework 29 25 31 20 14

Termination 27 36 35 27 24

Terms/Conditions of Employment 103 146 135 137 58

Time and Attendance 60 67 77 69 42

Training 54 40 45 30 17

User Defined - Other 1 5 2 0 1 2

User Defined - Other 2 0 1 0 0 0

User Defined - Other 3 0 0 0 0 0

User Defined - Other 4 0 0 0 0 0

Processing Time

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Average Number of Days in 

Investigation

209.13 161.02 173.22 199.49 207.27

Average Number of Days in Final 

Action

97.53 151.66 36.78 40.62 32.40

Average Number of Days in 

Investigation

213.18 165.95 172.58 208.32 216.45
A-5

Average Number of Days in Final 

Action

69.31 108.76 21.90 29.15 25.95

Average Number of Days in 

Investigation

202.08 153.61 173.78 189.03 190.26

Average Number of Days in Final 

Action

124.03 181.49 50.90 55.94 40.90

Complaints Dismissed by Agency

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Total Complaints Dismissed by 

Agency

54 83 84 51 46

Average Days Pending Prior to 

Dismissal

111 64 20 66 40

Total Complaints Withdrawn by 

Complainants 28 35 28 37 46

Total Final Agency Actions Finding 

Discrimination 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

# % # % # % # % # %

Total Number Findings 7 5 1 3 10

Without Hearing 6 86 3 60 0 1 1 33 3 30

With Hearing 1 4 2 40 1 10 2 67 7 70

Note: Complaints can be filed 

alleging multiple bases.The sum 

of the bases may not equal total

complaints and findings.

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

# % # % # % # % # %

Total Number Findings 7 4 1 3 10
A-6

Race 3 43 3 75 0 0 1 33 2 20

Color 1 14 0 0 0 0 1 33 1 10

Religion 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Reprisal 4 57 1 25 1 100 2 67 6 60

Sex 3 43 0 0 1 100 1 33 5 50

PDA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

National Origin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Equal Pay Act 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Age 0 0 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0

Disability 2 29 0 0 0 0 2 67 2 20

Genetics 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Non-EEO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 10

Findings After Hearing 1 2 1 2 7

Race 1 100 2 100 0 0 0 0 2 29

Color 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 14

Religion 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 0 0

Reprisal 1 100 0 0 1 100 1 0 6 71

Sex 1 100 0 0 1 100 0 0 5 71

PDA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

National Origin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Equal Pay Act 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Age 0 0 1 50 0 0 0 50 0 0

Disability 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0

Genetics 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Non-EEO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 14
A-7

Findings Without Hearing 6 2 0 1 3

Race 2 33 1 50 0 0 1 100 0 0

Color 1 17 0 0 0 0 1 100 0 0

Religion 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Reprisal 3 50 1 50 0 0 1 100 1 33

Sex 2 33 0 0 0 0 1 100 0 0

PDA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

National Origin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Equal Pay Act 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Age 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Disability 2 33 0 0 0 0 1 100 2 67

Genetics 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Non-EEO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Findings of Discrimination

Rendered by Issue

2016 2017 2018 FY 2019 FY 2020

Total Number Findings 7 4 1 3 10

Appointment/Hire 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Assignment of Duties 1 14 2 50 0 0 0 0 3 30

Awards 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Conversion to Full Time/

Permanent Status 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Demotion 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Reprimand 2 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 10

Suspension 1 14 0 0 0 0 1 33 0 0

Removal 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 33 0 0
A-8

Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Duty Hours 1 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 10

Performance Evaluation/ Appraisal 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 33 2 20

Examination/Test 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Non-Sexual 2 29 0 0 0 0 3 100 5 50

Sexual 0 0 0 0 1 100 0 0 0 0

Medical Examination 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Pay Including Overtime 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 33 1 10

Promotion/Non-Selection 2 29 3 75 0 0 0 0 1 10

Denied 0 0 0 0 1 100 0 0 0 0

Directed 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Reasonable Accommodation 

Disability 1 14 0 0 0 0 2 67 0 0

Reinstatement 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Religious Accommodation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Retirement 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Sex-Stereotyping 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Telework 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 10

Termination 0 0 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0

Terms/Conditions of Employment 2 29 1 25 0 0 0 0 3 30

Time and Attendance 0 0 0 0 1 100 0 0 0 0

Training 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 10

User Defined - Other 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

User Defined - Other 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

User Defined - Other 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

User Defined - Other 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
A-9

Findings After Hearing 1 2 1 2 7

Appointment/Hire 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Assignment of Duties 1 100 1 50 0 0 0 0 2 29

Awards 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Conversion to Full Time/Perm 

Status

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Demotion 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Reprimand 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 14

Suspension 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 50 0 0

Removal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Duty Hours 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 14

Performance Evaluation/ Appraisal 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 50 2 20

Examination/Test 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Non-Sexual 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 100 4 57

Sexual 0 0 0 0 1 100 0 0 0 0

Medical Examination 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Pay Including Overtime 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 50 0 0

Promotion/Non-Selection 0 0 1 50 0 0 0 0 1 14

Denied 0 0 0 0 1 100 0 0 0 0

Directed 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Reasonable Accommodation 

Disability

0 0 0 0 0 0 1 50 0 0

Reinstatement 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Religious Accommodation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Retirement 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
A-10

Sex-Stereotyping 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Telework 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 14

Termination 0 0 1 50 0 0 0 0 0 0

Terms/Conditions of Employment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 29

Time and Attendance 0 0 0 0 1 100 0 0 0 0

Training 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 14

User Defined - Other 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

User Defined - Other 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

User Defined - Other 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

User Defined - Other 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Findings Without Hearing 6 2 0 1 3

Appointment/Hire 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Assignment of Duties 0 0 1 50 0 0 0 0 1 33

Awards 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Conversion to Full Time/

Permanent Status 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Demotion 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Reprimand 2 33 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Suspension 1 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Removal 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 100 0 0

Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Duty Hours 1 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Performance Evaluation/ Appraisal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Examination/Test 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Non-Sexual 2 33 0 0 0 0 1 100 1 33

Sexual 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
A-11

Medical Examination 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Pay Including Overtime 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 33

Promotion/Non-Selection 2 33 2 100 0 0 0 0 0 0

Denied 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Directed 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Reasonable Accommodation 1 17 0 0 0 0 1 100 0 0 Disability 

Reinstatement 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Religious Accommodation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Retirement 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Sex-Stereotyping 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Telework 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Termination 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Terms/Conditions of Employment 2 33 1 50 0 0 0 0 1 33

Time and Attendance 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Training 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

User Defined - Other 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

User Defined - Other 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

User Defined - Other 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

User Defined - Other 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Pending Complaints Filed in 

Previous Fiscal Years by Status 

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 

Total Complaints from Previous 442 472 453 421 369 Fiscal Years 

Total Complainants 417 429 410 368 321 
A-12

Investigation 15 14 17 17 17

ROI Issued, Pending 

Complainant's Action 2 0 0 1 0

Hearing 375 434 426 410 333

Final Agency Action 59 27 24 36 26

Appeal with EEOC Office of 

Federal Operations 143 192 231 274 352

Complaint Investigations

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Pending Complaints Where 

Investigations Exceed Required 

Time Frames

10 8 21 16 16