Equal Employment Opportunity: DHS Has Opportunities to Better Identify and Address Barriers to EEO in Its Workforce
Published: 2009-08-31T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: Under MD-715, federal agencies are to identify and eliminate barriers that impede free and open competition in their workplaces. EEOC defines a barrier as an agency policy, principle, or practice that limits or tends to limit employment opportunities for members of a particular gender, race, ethnic background, or disability status. According to EEOC's instructions, many employment barriers are built into the organizational and operational structures of an agency and are embedded in the day-to-day procedures and practices of the agency. In its oversight role under MD-715, EEOC provides instructions to agencies on how to complete their barrier analyses and offers other informal assistance. Based on agency submissions of MD-715 reports, EEOC provides assessments of agency progress in its Annual Report on the Federal Workforce, feedback letters addressed to individual agencies, and the EEO Program Compliance Assessment (EPCA).
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: DHS has generally relied on workforce data and has not regularly included employee input from available sources to identify "triggers," the term EEOC uses for indicators of potential barriers. GAO's analysis of DHS's MD-715 reports showed that DHS generally relied on workforce data to identify 13 of 15 triggers, such as promotion and separation rates. According to EEOC, in addition to workforce data, agencies are to regularly consult a variety of sources, such as exit interviews, employee groups, and employee surveys, to identify triggers. Involving employees helps to incorporate insights about operations from a frontline perspective in determining where potential barriers exist. DHS does not consider employee input from such sources as employee groups, exit interviews, and employee surveys in conducting its MD-715 analysis. Data from the governmentwide employee survey and DHS's internal employee survey are available, but DHS does not use these data to identify triggers. By not considering employee input on DHS personnel policies and practices, DHS is missing opportunities to identify potential barriers. Once a trigger is revealed, agencies are to investigate and pinpoint actual barriers and their causes. In 2007, through its departmentwide barrier analysis, DHS identified four barriers: (1) overreliance on the Internet to recruit applicants, (2) overreliance on noncompetitive hiring authorities, (3) lack of recruitment initiatives that were directed at Hispanics in several components, and (4) nondiverse interview panels. GAO's analysis of DHS's 2007 and 2008 MD-715 reports showed that DHS has articulated planned activities to address identified barriers, has modified nearly all of its original target completion dates by a range of 12 to 21 months, and has not completed any planned activities; although officials reported completing other activities in fiscal year 2007 and 2008 associated with its EEO program. Nearly half of the planned activities involve collaboration between the civil rights and human capital offices. DHS said that it modified the dates because of staffing shortages. In order to ensure that agency programs are effectively and efficiently implemented, it is important for agencies to implement internal control activities, such as establishing and tracking implementation goals with timelines. This allows agencies to pinpoint performance shortfalls and gaps and suggest midcourse corrections. DHS has not developed project plans with milestones beyond what is included in its MD-715 report and its Human Capital Strategic Plan. These documents include only the anticipated outcomes and target completion dates, not the essential activities needed to achieve the outcome. Identifying the critical phases of each planned activity necessary to achieve the intended outcome with interim milestones could help DHS ensure that its efforts are moving forward and manage any needed midcourse corrections, while minimizing modification of target dates. DHS uses a variety of means to oversee and support components, including providing written feedback on draft reports to components that are required to prepare their own MD-715 reports, conducting program audits, and convening a council of EEO directors from each of the components.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: Since March 2003, when it was created from a disparate group of 22  agencies with multiple missions, values, and cultures, the Department of  Homeland Security (DHS) has faced enormous challenges related to  protecting the nation from terrorism while organizing its predecessor  agencies—several with existing program and management challenges— into a coherent and integrated department. Because these challenges  could have serious consequences for the security of our country, we  designated DHS’s implementation and transformation as a high-risk area in  2003. While progress has been made, DHS’s implementation and  transformation remains on the high-risk list today.
One key challenge DHS has faced is effectively and strategically managing  its large workforce (about 216,000 employees) to respond to current and  emerging 21st century issues. Strategic human capital management must  be the centerpiece of any serious change management strategy. The  federal government is faced with a workforce that is becoming  increasingly eligible for retirement. We have reported that it is important  for federal agencies, including DHS, to use available flexibilities to acquire,  develop, motivate, and retain talented individuals who reflect all segments  of society and our nation’s diversity. While DHS overall has a low  proportion—20 percent—of workers eligible to retire by 2012, attention to  strategic human capital management is still important as 50 percent or  more of its customs and border agents, who serve in a mission-critical  occupation, are eligible to retire by 2012. According to the Equal  Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), to attract, develop, and  retain a top-quality workforce, agencies must ensure that their workforces  are free of barriers to equal employment opportunity (EEO). Through  Management Directive (MD) 715, EEOC provides that as part of a model  EEO program, to prevent unlawful discrimination, federal agencies are to  identify barriers to EEO in the workplace, execute plans to eliminate  barriers, and report annually to EEOC.
As agreed, we present our findings on (1) the extent to which DHS has  taken steps, according to its MD-715 reports, to identify barriers to EEO in  the workplace; (2) the extent to which DHS has taken steps to address  identified barriers and what progress has been reported; and (3) how DHS  oversees and supports component agencies in identifying and addressing  barriers. We reviewed DHS's MD-715 reports for fiscal years 2004 through  2008, and analyzed DHS’s identified barriers and plans to address those  barriers obtained from its fiscal year 2007 and 2008 reports. Because it was  beyond the scope of this engagement, we did not evaluate the accuracy of  the data contained in the workforce data tables, the extent to which DHS  identified all potential barriers, or the extent to which plans to eliminate  barriers or activities would address identified barriers. In addition, we  reviewed DHS policies, guidance, directives, and diversity plans related to  identifying and addressing barriers; the 2008 Federal Human Capital  Survey (FHCS) results for DHS; and DHS’s 2007 internal employee survey  results. We interviewed DHS officials from its Office of Civil Rights and  Civil Liberties (CRCL) and the Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer  (OCHCO). We also reviewed MD-715 and EEOC instructions and guidance  on MD-715, and interviewed EEOC officials from its Office of Federal  Operations. We obtained information from the Office of Personnel  Management’s (OPM) Strategic Human Resource Policy Division on the  availability of FHCS data to federal agencies.
We conducted this performance audit from January 2009 to August 2009 in  accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. Those  standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient,  appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and  conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence  obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions  based on our audit objectives.
subsections: section_title: Background
paragraphs: Under MD-715, federal agencies are to identify and eliminate barriers that  impede free and open competition in their workplaces. EEOC defines a  barrier as an agency policy, principle, or practice that limits or tends to  limit employment opportunities for members of a particular gender, race,  ethnic background, or disability status. According to EEOC’s instructions,  many employment barriers are built into the organizational and  operational structures of an agency and are embedded in the day-to-day  procedures and practices of the agency. In its oversight role under MD- 715, EEOC provides instructions to agencies on how to complete their  barrier analyses and offers other informal assistance. Based on agency  submissions of MD-715 reports, EEOC provides assessments of agency  progress in its Annual Report on the Federal Workforce, feedback letters  addressed to individual agencies, and the EEO Program Compliance  Assessment (EPCA).
At DHS, the Officer for CRCL, through the Deputy Officer for EEO  Programs, is responsible for processing complaints of discrimination;  establishing and maintaining EEO programs; fulfilling reporting  requirements as required by law, regulation, or executive order; and  evaluating the effectiveness of EEO programs throughout DHS. Consistent  with these responsibilities, the Officer for CRCL, through the Deputy  Officer for EEO Programs, is responsible for preparing and submitting  DHS’s annual MD-715 report.
In addition, the Deputy Officer for EEO Programs and the Under Secretary  for Management (USM) are also responsible for diversity management at  DHS. Under the USM, the Chief Human Capital Officer is responsible for  diversity management and has assigned these duties to the Executive  Director of Human Resources Management and Services. According to  CRCL’s Deputy Officer for EEO Programs, CRCL and OCHCO collaborate  on a number of EEO and diversity activities through participation in work  groups, involvement in major projects, policy and report review, and  participation on the Diversity Council and its Diversity Policy and  Planning Subcouncil. Figure 1 shows the officials who are primarily  responsible for EEO and diversity management at DHS.
The DHS Diversity Council is composed of the members of the DHS  Management Council, which is chaired by the USM and includes  component representatives—generally a component’s equivalent of a chief  management officer or chief of staff. The Diversity Council charter gives  the DHS Management Council the responsibility of meeting as the  Diversity Council at least bimontly. CRCL’s Deputy Officer for EEO  Programs and OCHCO’s Executive Director of Human Resources  Management and Services chair the Diversity Council’s Policy and  Planning Subcouncil, which includes at least one member from each DHS  component represented on the Management Council.  The Diversity Policy  and Planning Subcouncil meets every 2 weeks and is to identify, research,  and analyze workforce diversity issues, challenges, and opportunities and  report and make recommendations to the Diversity Council on DHS  diversity strategies and priorities.
section_title: DHS Has Generally Relied on Workforce Data and Has Not Regularly Included Employee Input in Identifying Potential Barriers
paragraphs: According to EEOC’s MD-715 instructions, barrier identification is a two- part process. First, using a variety of sources, an agency is to identify  triggers. Second, the agency is to investigate and pinpoint actual barriers  and their causes. According to EEOC officials, this should be an ongoing  process. Figure 2 shows the barrier identification steps under MD-715.
Our review of DHS’s MD-715 reports for each of the fiscal years 2004  through 2007 showed that in 2004 DHS identified 14 triggers, which were  present in each subsequent year. According to DHS’s MD-715 reports, DHS  identified 13 of the 14 triggers based on its analysis of participation rates  contained in the workforce data tables. The remaining trigger— incomplete accessibility studies on all facilities—was identified based on  responses to the self-assessment checklist contained in the MD-715 form  and comments made at disability awareness training for managers. In  addition, in 2008, DHS identified one new trigger based on a joint  statement from EEOC, the Department of Justice, and the Department of  Labor related to heightened incidents of harassment, discrimination, and  violence in the workplace against individuals who are or are perceived to  be Arab, Muslim, Middle Eastern, South Asian, or Sikh. Table 1 shows a  summary of DHS-identified triggers and the sources of information from  which they were identified.
To identify triggers, agencies are to prepare and analyze workforce data  tables comparing participation rates to designated benchmarks (such as  representation in the civilian labor force (CLF) or the agency’s total  workforce) by gender, race, ethnicity, or disability status in various  subsets of their workforces (such as by grade level or major occupations  and among new hires, separations, promotions, and career development  programs). According to EEOC’s MD-715 instructions, participation rates  below a designated benchmark for a particular group are triggers. Along  with the workforce data tables, according to EEOC’s MD-715 instructions,  agencies are to regularly consult additional sources of information to  identify areas where barriers may operate to exclude certain groups. Other  sources of information include, but are not limited to    EEO complaints and EEO-related grievances filed;    findings of discrimination on EEO complaints;     surveys of employees on workplace environment issues;     exit interview results;     surveys of human resource program staff, managers, EEO program staff,  counselors, investigators, and selective placement coordinators;   input from agency employee and advocacy groups and union officials;     available government reports (i.e., those of EEOC, GAO, OPM, the Merit  Systems Protection Board, and the Department of Labor); and   local and national news reports.
EEOC officials said that these sources may reveal triggers that may not be  present in the workforce data tables. Several of the above-listed sources  provide direct employee input on employee perceptions of the effect of  agency policies and procedures. For example, according to EEOC  instructions, employee surveys may reveal information on experiences  with, perceptions of, or difficulties with a practice or policy within the  agency. Further, EEOC’s instructions state that reliance solely on  workforce profiles and statistics will not meet the mandate of MD-715.  When workforce data and other sources of information indicate that a  barrier may exist, agencies are to conduct further inquiry to identify and  examine the factors that caused the situation revealed by workforce data  or other sources of information.
To identify triggers, CRCL stated that it regularly reviews complaint data it  must submit annually to EEOC and data collected from reports CRCL is  required to submit under various statutes, executive orders, and initiatives,  including the Notification and Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and  Retaliation Act, Federal Equal Employment Opportunity Recruitment  Program, Executive Order 13171 on Hispanic employment in the federal  government, Disabled Veterans Affirmative Action Program, White House  Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities, and White House  Initiative on Tribal Colleges and Universities. According to CRCL officials,  in the past, CRCL has also relied upon the DHS online departmental  newsletter, periodicals, and news media to identify triggers.
We have previously reported that successful organizations empower and  involve their employees to gain insights about operations from a frontline  perspective, increase their understanding and acceptance of organizational  goals and objectives, and improve motivation and morale. Obtaining the  input of employees in identifying triggers would provide a frontline  perspective on where potential barriers exist. Employee input can come  from a number of sources including employee groups, exit interviews, and  employee surveys. CRCL said that it does not consider input from  employee groups in conducting its MD-715 analysis, but the Diversity  Council’s Diversity Policy and Planning Subcouncil has recently begun to  reach out to form partnerships with employee associations such as the  National Association of African-Americans in the Department of Homeland  Security. In addition, according to DHS’s 2008 MD-715 report, DHS does  not currently have a departmentwide exit survey, but according to a senior  OCHCO official, OCHCO plans to develop a prototype exit survey with the  eventual goal of proposing its use throughout DHS.
Although DHS does not have the structures in place to obtain employee  input departmentwide from employee groups and exit surveys, DHS could  use the FHCS and DHS’s internal employee survey to obtain employee  input in identifying potential barriers. OPM administers the FHCS  biennially in even-numbered years, and DHS administers its own internal  survey in off years. Both surveys collect data on employees’ perceptions  of workforce management, organizational accomplishments, agency goals,  leadership, and communication. We have previously reported that  disaggregating employee survey data in meaningful ways can help track  organizational priorities.According to information from officials in OPM’s  Division for Strategic Human Resources Policy, which administers and  analyzes the FHCS, results by gender, national origin, and race are  available at the agency level (i.e., DHS) on each agency’s secure site.  DHS’s internal survey also collects demographic data on race, gender, and  national origin of respondents. DHS could analyze responses from the  FHCS and its internal employee survey by race, gender, and national origin  to determine whether employees of these groups perceive a personnel  policy or practice as a possible barrier. For example, one question on the  2008 FHCS asked whether supervisors or team leaders in the employee’s  work unit support employee development. Fifty-eight percent of DHS  respondents agreed and 21 percent disagreed with the statement. The 2007  DHS internal survey asked whether employees receive timely information  about employee development programs. Thirty-nine percent of  respondents provided a positive response; 35 percent provided a negative  response. Although a CRCL staff member reviews the FHCS and DHS’s  internal survey data as part of an OCHCO employee engagement working  group, the staff member does not review DHS responses based on race,  gender, and national origin. Responses based on demographic group could  indicate whether a particular group perceives a lack of opportunity for  employee development and suggest a need to further examine these areas  to determine if barriers exist. Without employee input on DHS personnel  policies and practices, DHS is missing opportunities to identify potential  barriers. Regular employee input could help DHS to identify potential  barriers and enhance its efforts to acquire, develop, motivate, and retain  talent that reflects all segments of society and our nation’s diversity.
subsections: section_title: DHS Identified Workforce Barriers in 2007
paragraphs: In fiscal year 2007, DHS conducted its first departmentwide barrier  analysis. This effort involved further analysis of the triggers initially  identified in 2004 to determine if there were actual barriers and their  causes. According to DHS’s 2007 MD-715 report, DHS limited its barrier  analysis to an examination of policies and management practices and  procedures that were in place during fiscal year 2004. Therefore,  according to the report, policies, procedures, and practices that were  established or used after fiscal year 2004 were outside the scope of this  initial barrier analysis. Based on triggers DHS identified in 2004, DHS’s  departmentwide barrier analysis identified the following four barriers:   1.  Overreliance on the Internet to recruit applicants.  2.  Overreliance on noncompetitive hiring authorities.   3.  Adequacy of responses to Executive Order 13171, Hispanic  Employment in the Federal Government; specifically, in several  components that there was no evidence of specific recruitment  initiatives that were directed at Hispanics.     4.  Nondiverse interview panels; specifically, interview panels that did not  reflect the diversity of applicants.
section_title: DHS Has Identified Planned Activities to Address Barriers, but Has Modified Nearly All of Its Target Completion Dates
paragraphs: According to EEOC guidance, barrier elimination is vital to achieving the  common goal of making the federal government a model employer. Once  an agency identifies a likely factor (or combination of factors) adversely  affecting the employment opportunities of a particular group, it must  decide how to respond. Barrier elimination is the process by which an  agency removes barriers to equal participation at all levels of its  workforce. EEOC’s instructions provide that in MD-715 reports, agencies  are to articulate objectives accompanied by specific action plans and  planned activities that the agency will take to eliminate or modify barriers  to EEO. Each action item must set a completion date and identify the one  high-level agency official who is responsible for ensuring that the action  item is completed on time. In addition, according to EEOC’s instructions,  agencies are to continuously monitor and adjust their action plans to  ensure the effectiveness of the plans themselves, both in goal and  execution. This will serve to determine the effectiveness of the action plan  and objectives. Figure 3 shows the barrier elimination and assessment  steps under MD-715.
subsections: section_title: DHS Modified Nearly All Target Completion Dates on Planned Actions to Address Barriers
paragraphs: Our analysis of DHS’s MD-715 2007 and 2008 reports showed DHS  articulated 12 different planned activities to address the identified barriers,  including 1 new planned activity in 2008. Of the 12 planned activities, 2  relate to recruitment practices and strategies, specifically implementing a  departmentwide recruitment strategy and targeting recruitment where  there are low participation rates. Two other planned activities relate to the  development of additional guidance, specifically on composition of  interview panels and increasing educational opportunities. For each  barrier, DHS identifies at least one planned activity—eight in total— related to collecting and analyzing additional data. According to DHS’s  2007 and 2008 MD-715 reports, DHS’s primary objective is to capture and  analyze the additional data needed to link the barriers to the relevant  triggers.
In addition, of the 12 different planned activities, 5 involve collaboration  between CRCL and OCHCO. One planned activity to address overreliance  on the use of the Internet to recruit applicants calls for the development of  an applicant flow tool to gather data on applicants, which would enable  CRCL and OCHCO to analyze recruitment and hiring results. According to  CRCL, its staff collaborate with OCHCO by evaluating and providing  feedback on development of the tool. We have previously reported on the  benefits of coordination and collaboration between the EEO and the  human capital offices within agencies. During our previous work  reviewing coordination of federal workplace EEO, an EEOC official  commented that a review of barrier analyses in reports submitted under  MD-715 showed that the highest-quality analyses had come from agencies  where there was more coordination between staff of the human capital  and EEO offices.
Table 2 shows DHS’s planned activities, the identified barriers to which  they relate, and the target completion dates.
For the planned activities identified in its 2007 MD-715 report, DHS has  modified the target date for all but one of them. As reported in the 2008  MD-715 report, the original target completion dates have been delayed  anywhere from 12 to 21 months. In addition, since DHS filed its 2008 MD- 715 report, DHS modified one of the target dates it had previously  modified in its 2008 report. DHS has not completed any of the planned  activities articulated in its 2007 and 2008 MD-715 reports. According to  CRCL officials, although it has not completed any planned activities to  address identified barriers, DHS has completed some planned activities  identified in fiscal years 2007 and 2008 related to improving its EEO  program.
According to CRCL, DHS modified target dates primarily because of  staffing shortages in both CRCL and OCHCO, including the retirement in  2008 of three senior CRCL officials (including the Deputy Officer for EEO  Programs) and extended absences of the remaining two staff. In addition,  according to senior officials, during fiscal year 2008, OCHCO experienced  significant staff shortages and budgetary issues and lost its contract  support. According to the Deputy Officer for EEO Programs, fiscal year  2009 is a rebuilding year. CRCL is adding five new positions, in addition to  the existing three, to the CRCL unit responsible for preparing and  submitting DHS’s MD-715 reports and implementing MD-715 planned  activities. According to CRCL, once it is fully staffed, it will be able to  expand services and operations.
DHS has not established interim milestones for the completion of planned  activities to address barriers. According to DHS officials, its MD-715  reports and Human Capital Strategic Plan represent the extent of DHS  project plans and milestones for completing planned activities. These  documents include only the anticipated outcome, not the essential  activities needed to achieve the outcome. For example, in DHS’s 2007 and  2008 MD-715 reports, CRCL identifies an applicant flow tool to analyze  recruitment and hiring results as a planned activity to address the barrier  of overreliance on the use of the Internet to recruit applicants. DHS’s  Human Capital Strategic Plan also identifies an applicant flow tool to  analyze recruitment and hiring results as an action to achieve its  departmentwide diversity goal. DHS does not articulate interim steps, with  milestones, to achieve this outcome in either document.
In order to help ensure that agency programs are effectively and efficiently  implemented, it is important that agencies implement effective internal  control activities. These activities help ensure that management  directives are carried out. We have previously reported that it is essential  to establish and track implementation goals and establish a timeline to  pinpoint performance shortfalls and gaps and suggest midcourse  corrections. Further, it is helpful to focus on critical phases and the  essential activities that need to be completed by a given date. In addition,  we recommended in our 2005 report on DHS’s management integration  that DHS develop a management integration strategy. Such a strategy  would include, among other things, clearly identifying the critical links  that must occur among initiatives and setting implementation goals and a  timeline to monitor the progress of these initiatives and to ensure that the  necessary links occur. Identifying the critical phases of each planned  activity necessary to achieve the intended outcome with interim  milestones could help DHS ensure that its efforts are moving forward and  manage any needed midcourse corrections, while minimizing  modifications of target completion dates.
section_title: DHS Reports Progress on EEO and Diversity Initiatives
paragraphs: According to CRCL and OCHCO officials, DHS is making progress on  initiatives relating to (1) outreach and recruitment, (2) employee  engagement, and (3) accountability. DHS’s Executive Director of Human  Resources Management and Services told us that DHS is currently  implementing a targeted recruitment strategy based on representation  levels, which includes attending career fairs and entering into partnerships  with organizations such as the Black Executive Exchange Program. CRCL  officials also said that CRCL staff participate on the Corporate  Recruitment Council, which meets each month and includes recruiters  from each of the components. In addition, according to the Human  Capital Strategic Plan diversity goal, DHS plans to establish a diversity  advisory network of external stakeholders. According to CRCL, this effort  includes specific outreach and partnership activities with such groups as  the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Blacks  in Government, League of United Latin American Citizens, Organization of  Chinese Americans, Federal Asian Pacific American Council, Federally  Employed Women, National Organization of Black Law Enforcement  Executives, and Women in Federal Law Enforcement.
DHS has also reported progress on employee engagement efforts. The  Executive Director of Human Resources Management and Services also  told us that DHS is in the planning stages of forming a department-level  employee council comprising representatives from each diversity network  at each of DHS’s components. In addition, according to DHS’s Human  Capital Strategic Plan, DHS will incorporate questions into its internal  employee survey specifically addressing leadership and diversity. The  planned completion for this effort is the first quarter of fiscal year 2010.
To address accountability, the Executive Director of Human Resources  Management and Services said that DHS added a Diversity Advocate core  competency as part of DHS’s fiscal year 2008 rating cycle for Senior  Executive Service (SES) performance evaluations. Under DHS’s SES pay- for-performance appraisal system, ratings on this and other core  competencies affect SES bonuses and pay increases. According to DHS’s  Competency Illustrative Guidance, the standard provides for each senior  executive to promote workforce diversity, provide fair and equitable  recognition and equal opportunity, and promptly and appropriately  address allegations of harassment or discrimination. According to the  Executive Director of Human Resources Management and Services,  OCHCO is currently developing plans, with the participation of CRCL, to  implement a similar competency in 2010 for managers and supervisors,  although the specific details on implementation are not yet finalized.
section_title: DHS Reports Using a Variety of Means to Oversee and Support Components
paragraphs: According to MD-715 and its implementing guidance, a parent agency is to  ensure that its components implement the provisions of MD-715 and make  a good faith effort to identify and remove barriers to equality of  opportunity in the workplace. Among other requirements, the parent  agency is responsible for ensuring that its reporting components—those  that are required to submit their own MD-715 reports—complete those  reports. The parent agency is also responsible for integrating the  components’ MD-715 reports into a departmentwide MD-715 report.  According to officials from EEOC’s Office of Federal Operations, how a  department oversees and manages this process is at the discretion of the  department. In addition, to ensure management accountability, the agency,  according to MD-715, should conduct regular internal audits, at least  annually, to assess, among other issues, whether the agency has made a  good faith effort to identify and remove barriers to equality of opportunity  in the workplace.
At DHS, according to the DHS Acting Officer for CRCL and the Deputy  Officer for EEO Programs, component EEO directors do not report  directly to CRCL but to their respective component heads. While this EEO  organizational structure is similar to other cross-cutting lines of business  (LOB), other cross-cutting LOBs have indirect reporting relationships,  established through management directives, between the component LOB  head and the DHS LOB chief for both daily work and annual evaluation. In  contrast, the Deputy Officer for EEO Programs stated that he relies on a  collaborative relationship with the EEO directors of the components to  carry out his responsibilities. According to the Deputy Officer for EEO  Programs, component EEO programs have supported department-wide  initiatives when asked to join such efforts.
On February 4, 2008, the Secretary of Homeland Security delegated  authority to the Officer for CRCL to integrate and manage the DHS EEO  Program, and currently a management directive interpreting the scope of  this authority is awaiting approval. The Deputy Officer for EEO Programs  stated that until the management directive is approved and implemented,  the actual effect of the delegated authority is unclear. Lacking direct  authority, the Deputy Officer stated that he relies on a collaborative  relationship with the EEO directors of the components to carry out his  responsibilities. According to the Deputy Officer for EEO Programs, one  means of collaboration with the components is through the EEO Council,  which meets monthly and is chaired by the Deputy Officer for EEO  Programs and is composed of the EEO directors from each component.  The Deputy Officer for EEO Programs said that he uses the EEO Council  to share best practices, enhance cooperation, and enforce accountability.
To assist the components in their MD-715 analyses, according to CRCL  officials, CRCL prepares the workforce data tables for each of the  components required to submit its own MD-715 report. CRCL obtains the  data from OCHCO and sends them to a contractor to create the workforce  data tables. According to CRCL officials, DHS is pursuing an automated  information management system that will allow CRCL to conduct in-house  centralized workforce data analysis at the component level.
To ensure timely submissions of component MD-715 reports, DHS’s CRCL  sets internal deadlines by which reporting components are to submit their  final MD-715 reports. CRCL instructs the components to follow EEOC  guidance in completing their reports. CRCL also gives components the  option of submitting a draft report for CRCL to review and provide  technical guidance on before the final report is submitted. For those  components that have submitted draft reports, CRCL has provided written  comments that could be incorporated into the components’ final reports. A  CRCL official told us that for fiscal year 2009 draft submissions, CRCL will  continue this practice and encourage components to submit draft reports.
Since DHS was formed in 2003, CRCL has completed a full EEO program  evaluation of the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) in  fiscal year 2007, which focused on FLETC’s EEO Office’s operations and  activities. In fiscal year 2008, CRCL conducted the audit work on a full  program evaluation of the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s  Equal Rights Office’s operations and activities, but to date CRCL has not  issued the audit report. In fiscal year 2006, CRCL conducted a partial  evaluation of the Transportation Security Administration’s Office for Civil  Rights, which focused on EEO counseling, complaint tracking, and  alternative dispute resolution. In addition, in fiscal year 2009, a contractor  issued a report describing the findings of a program review of the U.S.  Coast Guard’s Office of Civil Rights. The Deputy Officer for EEO  Programs told us that CRCL intends to conduct program reviews of the  EEO programs at all operational components by 2010, although no  schedule for completing these audits has been established.
section_title: Conclusions
paragraphs: Input from employee groups reflects the perspective of the individuals  directly affected by employment policies and procedures and could  provide valuable insight into whether those policies and procedures may  be barriers to EEO. Because CRCL does not regularly include employee  input from available sources, such as the FHCS and DHS’s internal  employee survey, it is missing opportunities to identify potential barriers  to EEO. For barriers DHS has already identified, it is important for DHS to  ensure the completion of planned activities through effective internal  control activities, including the identification of critical schedules and  milestones that need to be completed by a given date. Effective internal  controls could help DHS ensure that its efforts are moving forward,  manage any needed midcourse corrections, and minimize modifications of  target completion dates. Additional staff, which DHS plans to add in 2009,  could help DHS implement effective internal control activities.
section_title: Recommendations for Executive Action
paragraphs: We recommend that the Secretary of Homeland Security take the  following two actions:    Direct the Officer for CRCL to develop a strategy to regularly include  employee input from such sources as the FHCS and DHS’s internal survey  in identifying potential barriers to EEO.
Direct the Officer for CRCL and the CHCO to identify essential activities  and establish interim milestones necessary for the completion of all  planned activities to address identified barriers to EEO.
section_title: Agency Comments
paragraphs: We provided a draft of this report to the Secretary of Homeland Security  for review and comment. In written comments, which are reprinted in  appendix I, the Director of DHS’s Departmental GAO/OIG Liaison Office  agreed with our recommendations. Regarding the first recommendation,  the Director agreed that DHS should develop a departmentwide strategy to  regularly include employee input from the FHCS and DHS internal  employee survey to identify barriers, but noted that DHS component EEO  programs already use employee survey data to develop annual action  plans to address identified management issues. Regarding the second  recommendation, the Director wrote that CRCL has already begun revising  its plans to identify specific steps and interim milestones to accomplish  the essential activities. DHS also provided technical comments, which we  incorporated as appropriate.
As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce the contents of  this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 30 days from the  report date. At that time, we will send copies to the Secretary of Homeland  Security and other interested parties. The report also will be available at  no charge on GAO’s Web site at http://www.gao.gov.
If you or your staff have any questions concerning this report, please  contact me at (202) 512-6806 or jonesy@gao.gov. Contact points for our  Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the  last page of this report. Staff who made major contributions to this report  are listed in appendix II.
section_title: Appendix I: Comments from the Department of Homeland Security
section_title: Appendix II: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
subsections: section_title: Acknowledgments
paragraphs: In addition to the contact named above, Belva Martin, Acting Director;  Amber Edwards; Karin Fangman; Melanie H. Papasian; Tamara F. Stenzel;  and Greg Wilmoth made key contributions to this report.