oversight

EEO at Justice: Progress Made but Underrepresentation Remains Widespread

Published by the Government Accountability Office on 1990-10-02.

Below is a raw (and likely hideous) rendition of the original report. (PDF)

           :                                                               ,_   ,...*.
                 United   States   General   Accounting   Office

GAO              Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee
                 on Government Information, Justice
                 and Agriculture, Committee on
                 Government Operations, House of
                 Representatives
October   1990
                 EEO AT JUSTICE
                 Progress Made But
                 Underrepresentation
                 Remains Widespread




                                                                   .   .
                   United States
GAO                General Accounting  Office
                   Washington, D.C. 20648

                   General   Government   Division

                   B-240676

                   October 2,199O

                   The Honorable Robert E. Wise, Jr.
                   Chairman, Subcommittee on Government
                     Information, Justice and Agriculture
                   Committee on Government Operations
                   House of Representatives

                   Dear Mr. Chairman:

                   This report responds to your request that we review the affirmative
                   action program at the Department of Justice. As agreed, we determined
                   whether Justice has the data necessary to evaluate the success of its
                   efforts to recruit, hire, and promote minorities and women. Where eval-
                   uation data existed, we determined the success of Justice’s efforts. In
                   measuring those efforts, we followed the guidance of the Equal Employ-
                   ment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)and compared, for various job cat-
                   egories, the level of minority and female representation at Justice to
                   their levels in the civilian labor force (CLF). Full representation occurs
                   when the two levels are the same. In accordance with your agreement
                   with another congressional committee, the Federal Bureau of Investiga-
                   tion (FBI)-an agency within Justice-was excluded from the review.


                   Justice has designated six key jobs as the focus of its equal employment
Results in Brief   opportunity recruiting, hiring, and promotion efforts-attorney,       border
                   patrol agent, correctional officer, criminal investigator, deputy U.S. mar-
                   shal, and immigration inspector. Recruiting efforts establish pools of
                   applicants for given jobs; hiring efforts refer to selecting and hiring indi-
                   viduals from those pools. Justice had data, such as work force profiles
                   by pay grade, for measuring the success of its efforts to hire and pro-
                   mote minorities and women. However, for five of its six key jobs, Justice
                   had no data on whether its recruiting efforts were providing applicant
                   pools with representative numbers of minorities and women.

                   Although Justice has acknowledged for several years the need for
                   recruitment data, it is waiting for the EEOCto issue guidance and a form
                   for collecting it. The EEOC,however, said in January 1988 that agencies
                   should develop their own means of collecting the data if they have a
                   need for it.

                   Justice’s work force data showed that representation of minorities and
                   females within its work force has increased over the years. Even so,
                   underrepresentation remains widespread, especially (1) for females


                   Page1                                GAO/GGD.QlB
                                                                  JusticeEE4lUndemp~ntatkm
           a-240676




           affirmative employment program instructions issued by EEOC,estab-
           lishing agency-wide objectives, submitting multiyear affirmative
           employment program plans, and ensuring that all SESmanagers are held
           accountable for achieving affirmative action objectives and
           requirements.

           Management Directive 7 14 requires agencies to comprehensively ana-
           lyze affirmative employment program elements for status of current
           conditions. The analyses are to address such elements as work force
           composition, recruitment, hiring, promotions, and separations. EEOC
           evaluates the effectiveness of an agency’s affirmative employment pro-
           gram efforts by reviewing changes in the agency’s work force. To do
           this, it requires that agencies submit work force profiles of EEXgroups
           by occupational category, key agency job series, and grade/pay level.

           These profiles are to cover 11 Em groups and 5 broad occupational cate-
           gories. The EEOgroups delineated by EEOCare black male and female,
           Hispanic male and female, Asian American/Pacific Islander male and
           female, American Indian/Alaskan Native male and female, white male
           and female, and total female. For brevity, we identify Asian Americans/
           Pacific Islanders as Asian and American Indian/Alaskan Native as
           American Indian. This report provides information about 10 rather than
           11 EEDgroups; it excludes the white male category. We did this for ease
           of presentation and in keeping with the Subcommittee’s emphasis on the
           hiring and advancement of minorities and women, The occupational cat-
           egories are professional, administrative, technical, clerical, and other
           (PATCO).Appendix III shows percentage indexes of EEOgroups in PATCO
           categories for all of Justice. Appendix IV gives the percentage indexes
           for specific bureaus within Justice. Appendix V shows representation of
           EEOgroups in Justice’s key jobs.

           Under Management Directive 714, agencies decide which jobs are key.
           Justice has named the following six jobs as key jobs: attorney, border
           patrol agent, correctional officer, criminal investigator, deputy U.S. mar-
           shal, and immigration inspector.


           We used Em standards and evaluation techniques to determine
Approach   whether underrepresentation existed for various Em groups. Under-
           representation exists, according to EEOCstandards, if the percentage rate
           at which an Em group is represented in an agency’s work force is less
           than the rate at which the group is represented in the CLF as identified
                       E-240676




                       spoken of “manifest imbalance” and “conspicuous absence.“’ According
                       to Management Directive 714, manifest imbalance refers to situations
                       where an EFXIgroup is “substantially below its representation in the
                       appropriate CL.F.”Conspicuous absence refers to situations where an EEO
                       group is “nearly or totally nonexistent from a particular occupation or
                       grade level in the work force.” Because numerical criteria for “substan-
                       tially” and “nearly or totally nonexistent” are not established, we used
                       the previous term (severe) and definition (50 percent or less).

                       Our work was done from April 1989 to August 1990, in accordance with
                       generally accepted government auditing standards. As requested, we did
                       not obtain official agency comments on this report. We did, however,
                       informally discuss the results of our review with officials of Justice and
                       the EEOC.Additional details about our scope and methodology are
                       presented in appendix I.


                       Justice had data on its efforts to hire and promote minorities and
Data Available on      females, but with the exception of its attorney honor program, the
Hiring and Promoting   agency did not have data on recruitment. Justice’s data show such infor-
But Not Recruiting     mation as race, ethnic origin, and gender of the individuals hired but not
                       of all individuals who apply for jobs. Although Justice recognized at
                       least as far back as 1983 that it needed recruitment data, it has not
                       aggressively tried to collect these data. For example, Justice said in Jan-
                       uary 1990 that it was waiting for guidance and a collection “tool” from
                       EEOC.However, in instructions issued in January 1988, the EEOCsaid
                       that until it develops and obtains clearance for a data collection form,
                       agencies, as they determine the need for such data, should devise and
                       implement their own means of collecting recruitment data. The EEOC
                       recently developed a draft data collection form. Before the form can be
                       given to agencies for their use, it must be approved within EEOCand then
                       by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). When these approvals
                       will be obtained is unknown.




                       ‘Accordingto the EEOC,the changewasmadebecause     Management   Directive714“se&ato build
                       upontheprogressmostagencies   madeduringtheprevkwssix years.Thepreviousperiodcowen-
                       tratedona rigid hiring approach.Themajorthrustfor [Management   Directive7141andthenext
                       logicalstepafterhiring membersof theprotectedclasses is eliminationof practices,pmwdw?s,and
                       policieswhichopera&to hamperinternalmovement    of theproW classes.      Thenewtermstrack
                       recentSupreme  Courtrulingsandprovideanuptodate approachto a rapidlychangingworkforce.”


                       Page6                                      GAO/GGDQl-8JusticeEEOUnderrepresentatIon
                        B240676




                        dropped between 1982 and 1988. There were nine fewer PATCOcatego-
                        ries (30 percent) showing underrepresentation in 1988. Using occupa-
                        tion-specific CLF data for attorneys and PATCOCLF data for the other key
                        jobs there were seven fewer key job categories showing
                        underrepresentation.

                        Even with the progress Justice made, widespread underrepresentation
                        remains, especially in key jobs and for females of all ethnic groups. As
                        of December 1988. underremesentation existed in 21 of the 50 PATCOcat-
                        egories and 33 of the 60 key job categories when using occupation-spe-
                        cific CLFdata for attorneys. For some categories, representation was in
                        the go-percent range and thus close to full. However, for 18 of the key
                        job categories and three of the PATCOcategories, underrepresentation
                        was severe. That is, the EEOgroup’s representation at Justice was no
                        greater than 50 percent of its representation in the CLF.Similar cornpar .i-
                         sons using the broader professional CLF data showed underrepresenta-
                        tion in 39 of the 60 key job categories. Underrepresentation was severe
                         for 24 of these 39.

                        All key jobs except attorney, using occupation-specific CLFdata for
                        attorneys, and immigration inspector had at least one category of severe
                        underrepresentation. Comparing Justice’s attorney work force with the
                        broader professional CLF data showed 6 of the 10 categories with severe
                        underrepresentation. Of the other five key jobs, those with the most cat-
                        egories of severe underrepresentation were border patrol agent (7 out of
                        10 EEOcategories) and criminal investigator (5 out of 10 EEOcategories).
                        The EEOgroups most frequently experiencing severe underrepresenta-
                        tion were Asian females (four out of six key jobs) and American Indian
                        females and black females (both three out of six key jobs).

                        Using occupation-specific CLF data for attorneys, we estimate that as of
                        December 1988 Justice would have needed at least an additional 28
                        Asian females, 12 American Indian females, and 198 black females in
                        the key jobs where they were severely underrepresented to enable those
                        groups to reach full representation overall. Using the broader profes-
                        sional CLFdata Justice would need at least an additional 74 Asian
                        females, 17 American Indian females, and 279 black females.


Low Representation at   For pay grades across all jobs at Justice, all EEOgroups except white and
Upper Grade Levels      American Indian females had achieved full representation as of
                        December 1988 at grades 1 through 12 combined. However, females
                        across all race and ethnic groups had not achieved full representation in
                     goals do not require or mandate selection of unqualified persons or pref-
                     erential treatment of EEOgroups but are another tool management can
                     use in working toward full representation of all segments of the CLF.

                     Specific accountability at Justice for EEOmatters appears to be lacking.
                     We reviewed the EEOsection from the work plans that Justice provided
                     of six of its SESmembers and found that the vague manner in which
                     they were all written blunted accountability. For example, one work
                     plan was no more definitive than saying the incumbent should demon-
                     strate “an awareness of and sensitivity to Em principles and concepts”
                     when recruiting, hiring, and promoting individuals. Management Direc-
                     tive 714 requires all managers under the SESto be held accountable for
                     achievement of their respective agency’s affirmative employment
                     objectives.

                     The EEOCrequires agencies, in their affirmative employment plans, to
                     list the specific actions needed to accomplish the plans’ objectives and
                     name the officials responsible for carrying out those actions. We believe
                     that Justice should add those actions to the performance work plans of
                     the responsible executives to increase their accountability. Such plans
                     contain the performance objectives and standards that executives will
                     be rated on for a given period of time. Appropriate executives, in our
                     view, would include (1) those who head Justice’s bureaus, offices, and
                     divisions and (2) other executives who are responsible for recruiting,
                     hiring, and promoting individuals.


                     When we analyzed data that covered several years, conditions some-
Justice Should       times became apparent that were not apparent when one year was com-
Systematically Use   pared to the next. For example, when using occupation-specific CLFdata
Long-Term Data and   for attorneys the level of representation for black male attorneys was
                     125 percent of the CLF in 1987 and 123 percent in 1988. But the level
Trend Analysis       was 221 percent in 1982. The downward trend of Justice’s black male
                     attorney work force remains when using the broader professional CLF
                     data as a base; however, the percentages become 99,97, and 175,
                     respective] y.

                     Our analysis of Justice’s attorney honor program during a S-year period
                     (1984-1988) showed that black applicants received offers from Justice
                     at a lower rate than white applicants (about 60 percent as often). These
                     circumstances do not prove that barriers exist in these areas, but do sug-
                     gest that additional analysis by Justice for barriers needs to be done.
                     Although Justice has prepared some long-term trend data for specific


                     page9                               GAO/GGDSlI Justice EEOUnderrepresentation
                           B240676




                           We recommend that the Attorney General strengthen management of
Recommendationsto          Justice’s affirmative action program by
the Attorney General
                       . expanding data collection and analysis efforts to include recruitment
                         data and the systematic use of long-term trend data and analysis;
                       l adding numerical goals to its affirmative employment plan where war-
                         ranted by the level of underrepresentation, such as severe under-
                         representation; and
                       + increasing the EF.Qaccountability of appropriate SE members by
                         including in their performance work plans the responsibility for setting
                         ambitious goals and taking the vigorous actions needed to achieve
                         affirmative employment plan goals-both numerical and narrative.


                           The Director of EEOC’SFederal Sector Programs agreed with our findings
Agency Views               and conclusions. He also agreed that Justice could strengthen the man-
                           agement of its affirmative action program by (1) collecting and ana-
                           lyzing recruitment data, (2) systematically using long-term trend data
                           and analysis, (3) using numerical goals in its affirmative employment
                           plan, and (4) assigning accountability to appropriate SESmembers for
                           taking the actions needed to achieve the goals.

                           Justice officials generally agreed with our findings and conclusions;
                           however, they differed from our views on several issues. Justice offi-
                           cials agreed that agency recruitment data were needed; however, they
                           placed full responsibility on EEOCfor developing a governmentwide form
                           for capturing these data. The EEOCdid not deny accountability, but until
                           its effort is fully approved and implemented, it has asked agencies to
                           develop and use their own means of collecting recruitment data.

                           Justice officials provided documentation to show that they sometimes
                           prepared long-term data and trend analyses to monitor and evaluate
                           their affirmative employment program. However, they agreed that the
                           long-term data and trend analyses were done on an ad hoc basis, and
                           that it would be helpful to make more comprehensive and systematic
                           use of these techniques.

                           When we discussed the results of our underrepresentation analysis with
                           Justice officials, they said they used American Bar Association data for
                           attorneys, rather than the broader professional civilian labor force data
                           used by EEOC.They said that comparing attorney-specific data shows a
                           much more favorable EEOpicture of their attorney work force. However,
                           Justice’s plans and reports submitted to EEOCcontained no such data.


                           Page11                             GAO/GGD91-!3
                                                                       JusticeEEOUnderrepresentation
E-249976




Appendix II contains detailed information on the results of our review.
Major contributors to this report are listed in appendix VI. If you have
any questions about this report, please call me at 275-5074.

Sincerely yours,




Bernard L. Ungar
Director, Federal Human Resource
  Management Issues




Page13                              GAO/GGB918Jwtice EEOUnderrepresentation
Appendix VI                                                                                  54
Major Contributors to
This Report
Tables                  Table 11.1:Representation of Justice’s Work Force by                 28
                            PATCO Occupational Categories (1982 and 1988)
                        Table 11.2:Justice’s Rank Among the 13 Cabinet Agencies              31
                            in the EEO Profile of Its Professional and
                            Administrative Work Force (as of December 1988)
                        Table 11.3:Representation of Justice’s Work Force by                 32
                            Justice’s Key Jobs
                        Table 11.4:Numbers of Minorities and Females Needed to               34
                             Reach Full Representation, by Pay Grade, in Justice
                             Key Jobs as of December 1988
                        Table 11.5:Number and Percentage of Justice’s 1988 New               36
                             Hires Who Were Minorities and Females Compared to
                             Their Percentages in the CLF (for Key Jobs)
                        Table IV. 1: Bureau of Prisons                                       46
                        Table IV.2: Drug Enforcement Administration                          46
                        Table IV.3: Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys                      48
                        Table IV.4: Federal Prison System                                    48
                        Table IV.5: Immigration and Naturalization Service                   50
                        Table IV.6: Offices, Boards, and Divisions                           50
                        Table IV.7: United States Marshal’s Service                          50

Figures                 Figure II. 1: Trend Line Showing Representation of Black             24
                             Males in Justice Attorney Occupations (1982-1988)
                        Figure 11.2:Representation of Females and Minorities at              39
                             Justice by Grade Level (as of December 1988)




                        Page15                             GAO/GGD918JosticeEEOUnderrepresentatIon
Page17   GAO/GGD918JusticeEEOUnderrepreeentstion
AppendixI
Objectives,Scope,andMethodology




We did not verify the accuracy of the data Justice provided. However,
we did obtain similar data from the EEOCthat corroborated Justice’s
data. We did not verify the accuracy of EEOC’Sdata. The source of the
EEOCdata was the Office of Personnel Management’s (OPM)Central Per-
sonnel Data File, which covers most federal employees.’

We used EEOC’sstandards and evaluation techniques to determine
whether minorities and females were fully represented at Justice. The
EEOCuses these standards and techniques to evaluate the EEOefforts of
all federal agencies. According to EEOCdirectives, a group is under-
represented if the percentage at which an EEOgroup is represented in an
agency’s work force is less than the rate at which the group is repre-
sented in the national CLF. The CLFrepresents persons 16 years of age or
over, excluding those in the armed forces, who are employed or seeking
employment.

To gauge representation, the EEOCgrouped (1) the federal government’s
420 white-collar jobs into the five PATCOcategories and (2) each CLF
occupation into the same PATCOcategory as its federal counterpart, with
some exceptions. EEOCuses the PATCO-groupedCLFdata as the base
against which it compares work force data that agencies align by PATCO
category and key job. It also instructs agencies to do the same; that is,
use the PA’rco-group CIS data as the base of comparison.

However, there can be alternatives to using this base. For example, if
the broader professional CLFdata category yields “a seriously-distorted
availability figure for a particular professional occupational series,” the
EEOC,according to the federal program manager, permits agencies to use,
where available, occupation-specific CLF data. CIP data must be used
unless approval for other data is obtained from EEOC.“Attorney” is one
of the occupations that goes into making up the broader professional
category, and CLFdata for attorneys are available. It is the only key job
at Justice that falls int,o the exception category.

In analyzing the EEOprofile of the attorney work force at Justice, we
used as our base of comparison both the occupation-specific CLF data for
attorneys and the broader professional CLFdata. For reporting purposes,
we show both sets of data.

‘TheCentralPersonnel   DataFileis basedonandupdatedmonthlywith personnelactioninformation
submitteddirectlyto OPMby federalagencyappointingoffices.Thefile includesinformationon
individualidentificationsuchasSocialSecuritynumberanddateof birth; employee characteristics
suchasgenderandminontystatus;andjob characteristics suchaspayplangrade,salary,occupa-
tionalseries,andsupervixxy status.


Page19                                     GAO/GGDI)l-!lJusticeEEOUnderrepresentation
Availability of Data and Status of Minority and
Female Representation at Justice

                       The EEOCrequires agencies to answer a series of questions about their
Data Available on      recruitment, hiring, and promotional efforts when preparing their
Hiring and Promoting   affirmative employment plans. In order to answer these questions accu-
but Not Recruiting     rately and completely, agencies must have pertinent data available. The
                       EEOCalso requires agencies to provide work force profiles of EEOgroups
                       by occupational category, key agency job series, and grade/pay level.

                       Justice was able to provide all but recruitment data to us. With the
                       exception of recruitment data for its attorney honor program, the
                       agency did not have detailed recruitment data to provide. In January
                       1990, Justice said it was waiting for a forthcoming directive from EEOC
                       to provide guidance and a form for collecting “applicant flow” data.
                       Applicant flow data include information on the numbers of applicants
                       who applied for given positions; their race, ethnic origin, and gender;
                       and the sources of those applicants (names of specific universities and
                       colleges, for example). Applicant data enable agencies to determine the
                       extent to which minorities and women are applying for jobs and, where
                       underrepresentation exists, whether their recruiting efforts are a cause
                       for the underrepresentation.

                       The lack of recruitment data is not a recent situation at Justice. In an
                       affirmative employment plan submitted to EEOCin 1983, Justice
                       acknowledged the need for collecting data that could identify to what
                       extent minorities and women applied for Justice jobs. Justice did not
                       follow up this acknowledgement with a system to collect data, even
                       though EEOCrequired all agencies at that time to collect data on race,
                       ethnic origin, and gender of job applicants.

                       From January 1981 to December 1983, both EEOCand OPMrequired agen-
                       cies to use an OPMform specifically designed to collect data on race,
                       ethnic origin, and gender of job applicants. In December 1983, however,
                       OPM’Sauthorization to use the form expired, and OPMdecided not to
                       request reauthorization from OMBbecause (1) no law or regulation
                       required OPMto collect the data, (2) the data collected were not statisti-
                       cally reliable, and (3) collecting and processing the data was expensive.
                       OPMhas not replaced the form.

                       Although the form was discontinued, the requirement to collect data
                       remained. The EEOCcontinued to require agencies to collect data on race,
                       ethnic origin, and gender of job applicants until December 1987. Man-
                       agement Directive 714 did not renew the requirement. However, in a
                       January 1988 supplement to Management Directive 714, the EEOCsaid
                       that until it is successful in obtaining clearance for a data collection


                       page21                              GAO/GGD918JusticeEEOUnderrepresentrtion
                     Appendix II
                     Availability of Data and Status of Minority
                     and Female Representation    at Justice




                     most other cabinet-level agencies,’ all of which have widespread opera-
                     tions and followed the same EEOCguidance as Justice, submitted their
                     plans to the EEOCsooner than Justice. All but one submitted their plans 3
                     to 16 months earlier than Justice; one cabinet agency submitted its plan
                     after Justice did.

                     In addition to being late, both plans were incomplete. The first plan did
                     not contain (1) the data analysis required by EEOCto identify areas of
                     underrepresentation or (2) the goal-setting required by Management
                     Directive 707 to address those areas of underrepresentation. The second
                     plan did not contain the EEOC-required comparison data Justice was to
                     have used to analyze the representation of minorities and females
                     within its six key jobs.

                     Justice was instructed to use the appropriate PATCOCLF data or more
                     specific occupational CLEdata to compare with each of its six key jobs.
                     Justice instead only showed each minority group as a percentage of the
                     total in each occupation without making CLFcomparisons


                     While not a specific requirement of Management Directive 714, long-
Justice Should       term trend data and analyses are recommended to agencies by the EEOC
Systematically Use   for monitoring and evaluating their EEOprograms. Justice officials pro-
Long-Term Trend      vided documentation to show that they sometimes use long-term trend
                     data and analyses for these purposes. For example, they have used
Analysis             these techniques to monitor the EEOprofiles of their attorney employee
                     population, as well as the EEOprofiles of the participants in Justice’s
                     attorney honor program, which is the primary source of Justice’s new
                     hires in the attorney occupational category. However, our analysis of
                     the documentation provided indicated that Justice prepared these kinds
                     of long-term trend data reports irregularly. Use of this monitoring and
                     evaluation technique on a more comprehensive and systematic basis
                     could assist Justice officials in forecasting and pinpointing potential
                     problem areas.

                     As part of our review, we found that conditions existed that, if
                     examined by current and past year comparisons, showed little or no
                     apparent cause for concern. But when examined over a multiple-year
                     period, trends were revealed that indicated problems needing attention.
                                                      -
                     ‘Therewere13cabinet-level agencies
                                                      in April 1988.In additionto Justice,theyweretheDepart-
                     mentsof Agriculture,Gxnmerw Defense,  Education,Energy,HealthandHumanServices,   Housing
                     andUrbanDevelopment,  Interior,Labor.State,Transportation,andTreasury.


                     Page 23                                       GAO/GGDS1-8   Justice   EEO Underrepresentation
Appendix II
AvailabLUty of Data and Stahw of Minority
and Female Representation   et Justice




The Attorney General’s Honor Program is Justice’s only recruitment
program targeting graduating law students and new attorneys. The
agency hires other attorneys through its Experienced Attorney Pro-
gram. Applicants for the honor program positions must be (1) third-year
law students, (2) graduate law students in the autumn of the last year of
graduate law study, or (3) judical law clerks. Selection considerations
include many factors, such as academic achievement, law courses taken,
law review contributions, extracurricular activities, and summer and
part-time employment. Because of the lengthy and extensive training
given to new legal employees, most of Justice’s organizations partici-
pating in the honor program require a 3-year commitment for selectees
to remain with the organization.

Justice officials gave us a long-term data report showing numbers and
relative percentages, by race, of its attorney honor program applicants,
job offer recipients, and hires, from fiscal year 1984 through fiscal year
 1988. The report did not have gender data.

Our analysis of the data provided for this 5-year period showed that 731
applications, or 7 percent of the total, were from blacks. Sixty-one (8
percent) of the black applicants received offers, and 39 (64 percent) of
those offered jobs accepted them. During the same period, 8,509 applica-
tions, or 82 percent of the total received, were from whites; 1,13 1 (13
percent) of the white applicants received job offers; and 600 (53 per-
cent) of the white applicants accepted the offers. Therefore, during this
B-year period, blacks who received offers accepted them at a higher rate
than whites, but black applicants received offers at a lower rate than
white applicants.

Analyzing these data suggests that a careful examination needs to be
made of Justice’s assessment process of its attorney honor program
applicants. In its current affirmative employment plan, Justice states
that it plans to track minority applicants through its honor program
recruitment process.

Justice officials agreed that although they have used long-term trend
data and analysis to monitor and evaluate their program, more compre-
hensive and systematic use of these techniques would be helpful and
would be considered




Page 26                                     GAO/GGB918   Justice   EEO Underrepresentation
Page 27   GAO/GGD-911   Justice   EEX3 Underrepresentation
                                        Appendix II
                                        AvailabilIty of Data and Stahls of Minority
                                        and Female Representation    at Justice




                                                         Female
     White               Black               Hispanic               Asian                    American   Indian      Total Female
 1982        1988    1982        1988      1982       1988      1982              1988        1982         1988     1982       1988
    0           0       0           0         0           0        0                 0            0            0        0         0
    0           0       X           X         X          X         0                 X            0            0        0         0
    X           X       X           X         X          X         0                 X            0            X        X         X
    0           0       X           X         X          X          0                X            0            X        X         X
    0            0      X           X         0           X         0                X            0            0        0         0

                                        NoteX Represents
                                                      fullor overrepresentat~on
                                                                            I” category
                                              0 Represents underrepresentatmn



Bureaus Within Justice                  EEOCManagement Directive 714 requires a separate analysis for each
                                        installation with 2,000 or more employees. We did such an analysis for
                                        seven of Justice’s nine operating bureaus2 We did not analyze the FBI
                                        and, because it had fewer than 2,000 employees, the Office of Justice
                                        Programs.

                                        EEOCguidance does not require underrepresentation determinations for
                                        occupational categories with fewer than 100 employees. There were 35
                                        possible PATCOcategories to analyze (5 PATCOcategories x 7 bureaus), and
                                        we dropped 7 from our analysis because each had fewer than 100
                                        employees. Those dropped were in four bureaus. In total, we analyzed
                                        280 of the 350 possible categories [(5 PATUI categories x 10 EEOgroups) x
                                        7 bureaus].

                                        Among the seven bureaus, representation of minorities and females in
                                        the PATCOcategories generally increased. For example, in comparison to
                                        1982, all had fewer categories with underrepresentation in 1988. Alto-
                                        gether, there were 31 fewer categories with underrepresentation, a
                                        decrease of about 18 percent. Even with this progress, however, under-
                                        representation was common. In three bureaus, underrepresentation
                                        existed in 42 to 48 percent of the categories in 1988. In four bureaus,
                                        underrepresentation existed in 53 to 65 percent of the categories. The
                                        Federal Prison System had the largest percentage of underrepresented
                                        categories-65 percent,


                                        “WeanalyzedtheBureauof Prisons,DrugEnforcement     Administration,ExecutiveOfficefor 1J.S.
                                        Attorneys,FederalPrisonSystem,bnmigrationandNaturalizationService,andtheIJ.S.Marshals
                                        Swnre.Justicecombines offices,boards, anddivisionsto maketheseventh“bureau.”ForEEO
                                        rqwrting purposes.
                                                         Justiceseparates theBureauof PrisonsfromtheFederalPrisonSystem.


                                        Page 29                                          GAO/GGDSl-8    JusticeEEOUnderrepresentation
                                            Appendix II
                                            Availability of Data and Status of Minority
                                            and Female Representation    at Justice




Table 11.2:Justice’s Rank Among the 13
Cabinet Agencies in the EEO Profile of      EEO group                                                          Professional          Administrative
Its Professional and Administrative Work    Total female                                                                       58                     12a
Force (As of December 1988)                                                                                                    2”                     12a
                                            White female
                                            Black male                                                                         Et                      5
                                            Black female                                                                       7=                     10
                                            Htspanic male                                                                      9”                      1
                                            Hlspanic female                                                                    7a                      2
                                            Asian male                                                                        13a                      3
                                            Asian female                                                                      13a                      6
                                            Amencan Indian male                                                               12”                      6
                                            American lndlan female                                                             9”                     12a
                                            aFor this category, representat!or, at JustIce was below the CLF



Key Jobs                                    EEOCrequires agencies to submit, for its evaluation, work force profiles
                                            for key jobs. As stated earlier, Justice has identified six key jobs.
                                            According to Justice’s affirmative employment plans, these six jobs
                                            account for approximately one-half of Justice’s labor force and are the
                                            focus of Justice’s EEOrecruiting, hiring, and promotion efforts. We ana-
                                            lyzed work force profiles to determine if minorities and women were
                                            fully represented in the key jobs and to estimate the numbers of minori-
                                            ties and females needed to reach full representation. We also reviewed
                                            Justice’s 1988 hiring efforts for the six jobs.

Extent of Underrepresentation          in   Underrepresentation was greater in key jobs in 1988 than in the broader
Key Positions                               PATCOcategories. That is not to say Justice made no progress in moving
                                            towards full representation. Of the 60 categories (10 EEOgroups x 6 key
                                            jobs), representation increased in 46, or about 77 percent, of the catego-
                                             ries. In comparison to 1982 and using occupation-specific CLF data for
                                             attorneys, the number of categories with underrepresentation decreased
                                             by 7, or 18 percent. However, as table II.3 shows, 33 categories (55 per-
                                             cent) still had less than full representation. While several of the 33 cate-
                                             gories had near full representation, 18 had representation that was 50
                                             percent or less of the corresponding CLFlevel. Put another way, about 30
                                             percent of the 60 categories were severely underrepresented.

                                             Using the broader professional CLF data, we found that there were eight
                                             fewer underrepresented key job categories in 1988 than in 1982, and a
                                             total of 39 categories (65 percent) with less than full representation.
                                             Underrepresentation was severe for 24 of these 39 categories.




                                             Page 31                                          GAO/XX%914          Justice   EEO Underrepresentation
                                            Appendtx n
                                            Availability of Data and Statas of Minority
                                            and Female Representation    at .Jw&e




                                                             Female
     White                   Black               Hispanic               Asian                       American   Indian         Total Fomrlr
 1982        1988        1982        1988      1982       1988      1982                  1988       1982         1988        1982         1988
    X           X           X           X         X          X         X                     X           X            0           X           X
    0           X           0           0         0           0         0                    0           0            0           0           0

    0            0          0           0          X             X            0              0           0             0           0         0

    0            0          X           X           0            X            0              0           0             0           0         0

    0            0           0          0           0            0            0              0           0             0           0         0

    0            X           0   ____   0           0            X            0              0           0             0           0          0

    0            0          X           X           X            X            0              X           0             0           0         X
                                            Note X Represents full or overrepreseniatm
                                                 0 Represents underrepresentation

                                            All key jobs except attorney, using occupation-specific CLF data for
                                            attorneys, and immigration inspector had at least one EEO category of
                                            severe underrepresentation. Comparing Justice’s attorney work force
                                            with the broader professional CLF data showed 6 of the 10 categories
                                            with severe underrepresentation. Of the other five key jobs, those with
                                            the most categories of severe underrepresentation were border patrol
                                             agent (seven out of the 10 EEOcategories) and criminal investigator (five
                                            out of 10 EEO categories). The EEOgroups most frequently experiencing
                                             severe underrepresentation were Asian females (four out of six key
                                            jobs) and American Indian females and black females (three out of six
                                            jobs each). (App V shows representation levels for the 60 categories in
                                             1982 and 1988.)

Numbers of Minorities and                   We used EEOC and OPM guidance to estimate the additional numbers of
Women Needed to Attain Full                 minorities and women Justice would need to attain across-the-board rep
Representation       in Key Positions       resentation in the key positions. In many instances, Justice would need
                                            only a few more individuals from an EEO group to achieve full represen-
                                            tation because that group’s representation in the CLF is small. In other
                                            instances, the numbers are larger because the group’s representation in
                                            the CLF is larger. Table II.4 shows, by grade and EEO group, the numbers
                                            needed to make up representation shortfalls.




                                             Page 33                                             GAO/GGWWJ     Just&   EEO Underrep-t&lam
                                 Appendix II
                                 Availability of Data and Status of Minority
                                 and Female Representation    at Justice




                                 number of black male attorneys actually employed. The differences,
                                 where there were shortfalls, appear in table 11.4.

                                 To ensure percentages in the categories analyzed were large enough to
                                 permit reasonable comparison with the CLFpercentages, we combined
                                 grades, where feasible, when there were fewer than 100 employees in a
                                 grade. OPMinstructions say, as a general rule, at least 100 employees
                                 should be in any grade or grouping of grades in order to determine if
                                 underrepresentation exists.

1988 Hiring Efforts Below 1988   Justice hired 4,493 people in calendar year 1988 for its six key jobs. We
CLF Percentages for Key          analyzed Justice’s hiring results for the EEOgroups that were under-
Positions                        represented at the start of 1988. For each key job, we determined which
                                 EEOgroups were underrepresented as of December 1987 and then com-
                                 pared the percentages of minorities and females hired in 1988 to the
                                 corresponding percentages of minorities and females in the CLF. We did
                                 so to see how representative Justice’s hiring results were. More often
                                 than not, Justice’s hiring results were less than the CLFpercentage. As of
                                 December 1987, using occupation-specific CLF data for attorneys, repre-
                                 sentation was less than full in 28 categories; 34 categories if using the
                                 broader professional CLF data to analyze Justice’s attorney work force.3
                                 As table II.5 shows, Justice hired at or above CLFpercentage for only 8
                                 of the underrepresented categories.




                                 ‘The total numberof categories
                                                              was54.The“total” femalecategoryfor eachjob wasexcluded.Of
                                 the54categories, usingoccupation-specific
                                                                         CLFdatafor attorneys,full representation
                                                                                                                existedin 26
                                 categories;underrepresentatmnexistedin 28.Usingthebroaderprofessional CLFdatashowedfull
                                 representationin 20categories
                                                             andunderrepresentationin theremaining34categories.


                                 Page 36                                       GAO/GGD-918   Justice   EEO Underrepresentation
                                                     Appendix II
                                                     AvaIlability of Data and Status of Minority
                                                     and Female Representation    at Justice




                                                                           Male
                    Asian                                                                                          American Indian
Hired                Justice                                   CLF                        Hired                          Justice                        CLF
     2                     0.7%                                0.54%     ----0             - ~-.____- -              ___-      0.0%                     0.15%
                                              __-
     2                     0.7                                  2.53                           0                               00                       0.21
     0                     0.5                _-      --- .-___ 0.73                           5
                                                                                          ~--___                               03                       0.76
    12                     0.8                                 0.73                           11                               00                            a
                                                                         __~            .                    __-.~   -__I_                         __-.
    19                     3.6                                       a                         1                               02                            a
                                              -       -___
    0                          0                                     B                         0I.________                    00                         0.76
   74                     67                                         B                          1                             on                                a




                                                                         Female
         Hispanic                                                         Asian                                              American Indian
Hlred      Justice                 CLF                   Hired             Justice    -~~ - -__CLF               Hired             Justice               CLF
    1            0.3%                     a                    1                 0.3%               a                0
                                                                                                                  .- ~___---             0.0%            004%
    1            0.3           1.14%                           1
                                                  --_-.__-.__-__..               0.3- -~~      112%                  0                   0.0             0.13
   31            19                       a                   2                  0.1          0.09                   0                   00              0.09
   18            1.2                      a                    0                 0.0           0 09                  2                   0.1             0.09
   10            1.9               1.30                        3                 0.6           0.51                  1                   0.2             0.17
    0            00                       a                    0                 00            0 09                  0                   0.0             0.09
   24            6.2                      a                  11                  2-e                a                0                   0.0             017
                                                      aEEO group representation was at or above full represent&on as of December 1987
                                                      Q3ng occupation-speck       CLf datd for attorneys
                                                      ‘Using broad professIona CLF !iata
                                                      Note Percentage represents the EEO group’s percent of JustIce’s total hires for that particular fob
                                                      series CLF represents the EEClgroup’s corresponding PATCO representation In the clvlllan labor force

                                                      Figures In bold lndlcate areas where JustIce htred at or above CLF levels for EEO groups which were
                                                      underreoresented as of December 1987

                                                      We do not know why hiring was less than fully representative for most
                                                      of the underrepresented categories. Justice’s affirmative employment
                                                      plan says the agency does not attract enough qualified women and
                                                      minorities for its key jobs However, as reported earlier, Justice gener-
                                                      ally does not collect the data necessary to know whether many minori-
                                                      ties and women are applying for its key jobs and what portion of the



                                                      Page 37                                              GAO/GGD918    Justice   EEO Underrepresentation
                                                    Appemlix II
                                                    Availability of Data and Status of Minority
                                                    and Fmnale Representation    at Justice




Figure 11.2:Representation        of Females   and Minorities   at Justice    by Grade Level (As of December 1988)
260   Percentage Representation
240
220

200
180
160
140

120

100
 80

 60
 40
 20

  0


      White            Black Males       Black            Hispanic           Hispanic      Asian Males      Asian               American        American
      Females                            Females          Males              Females                        Females             Indian Males    Indian
                                                                                                                                                Females
      EEO Group




                SES

                                                     Note Percentage representation ISthe rate at which the apphcable EEO group ISrepresented I” the
                                                          occupatvxx3 category as compared to that group’s representation I” the national ciwhan labor
                                                          force without regard to pay level



                                                     The EEOC has required two 5-year plans from agencies to date, and has
 Justice Should Employ                               issued guidance for agencies to follow in preparing them. EEOC’S instruc-
 Numerical Goals                                     tions issued in 1981 for preparing the first plan required agencies to (1)
                                                     analyze their work force profiles for underrepresentation and (2) estab-
                                                     lish numerical goals and timetables for underrepresented EEO groups.
                                                     The instructions for the second (current) plan, Management Directive
                                                     714, require agencies t,o compare their work force profiles with the CLF’
                                                     but do not require numerical goals and timetables. The directive says
                                                     agencies may develop reasonable numerical goals to address instances of
                                                     conspicuous absence or manifest imbalance. EEOC’S explanation for
                                                     changing the use of numerical goals from a requirement to an option is




                                                      Page 39                                        GAO/GGD-918      Justice    EEO Underrepresentation
                           Appendix II
                           AvaUablllty of Data and Status of Minority
                           and Female Representation   at Justice




Specific EEO               The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 specifies that the SIB shall be
                           administered so as to ensure that compensation, retention, and tenure
Accountability   Lacking   are contingent on executive success. Success, the act says, is measured
                           on the basis of individual and organizational performance, including
                           success in meeting EEOgoals. EEOC’SManagement Directive 714 assigns
                           agency heads the responsibility for ensuring that all managers under the
                           SESare held accountable for the achievement of affirmative employment
                           objectives and the fulfillment of EEo requirements and objectives estab-
                           lished by the agency.

                           At Justice, the level of accountability for EEOrequirements and objec-
                           tives is not as specific as it could be. For example, Justice’s current
                           affirmative employment plan contains narrative objectives such as “to
                           increase the numbers of women and minorities in the applicant pools for
                           law enforcement positions.” The objectives are followed by a list of
                           actions Justice will take to achieve the objectives. According to Manage-
                           ment Directive 714, an official responsible for carrying out each action
                           item must be listed in the plan. Justice generally named organizations
                           such as “EEOStaff” and “Justice Management Division.“6 Thus, the plan,
                           which covers Justice’s bureaus, generally does not identify the specific
                           persons or positions that are responsible for achieving the objectives.

                           We reviewed the performance work plans of six SESpositions at Justice,
                           with which Justice provided us as examples of work plans of officials
                           with EEOresponsibilities. We found that the plans lack the specificity
                           needed to truly gauge how successful the executives are in carrying out
                           their EEOresponsibilities. (Performance work plans contain the perfonn-
                           ante objectives and standards that an executive will be rated on for a
                           given period of time.)

                           One of the work plans given us was for the Assistant Attorney General
                           for Administration; this position has been designated by the Attorney
                           General as the Director of EF&who is responsible for enforcing and man-
                           aging Department EEOpolicy. As an element (objective) of this position,
                           the work plan says the incumbent “supports the Department’s equal
                           employment opportunity (EEO)/human resources programs.” The EEO
                           performance standard for “fully successful” in this plan requires the




                            “After reviewingtheplan,EEOCinformedJusticethat actionitemsshouldbeassigned   to responsible
                            officialsinsteadof offices,divisions,andbureaus.EEOCeventuallyapprovedthe plandespiteJus-
                            tic& namingmostlyorganizations    ratherthanresponsible
                                                                                 officials.


                            Page 41                                     GAO/GGDSlS    Justice   EEO Underrepresentation
Page43   GAO/GGB918JusticeEEOUnderrepresentation
                                         Appendix III
                                         Minority and Female Representation     at
                                         Justice by PATCO Occupation




                                                           Female
    White                Black                Hispanic                    Asian                  American   Indian          Total Female
1982        1999    1982         1980      1982        1908           1902           1988         1992         1998         1982       1988
   75          97      91           94        61          64            22              27          28            55           74         93
   57          70     141          185       129         197            54             160          43            46           68         08
  101         109    294          306        150        204             90             141          68           134          129        142
   91         a5     274          300    -   155        229             81             128          97           119          118        122
   55         71      139          175        a7        183              0             106          23            90           70         95

                                         Note Figures show Justrce white-collar work force as a percentage of the natronal CLF This type of
                                         percentage Index. called an underrepresentatron index by EEO and OPM, indicates the extent to whrch
                                         a partrcular EEO group ISrepresented rn a work force as compared to the group’s representatron rn the
                                         CLF The Index can range from 0 to lOO+, wrth 100 indicatrng full representation and lower numbers
                                         rndrcating underrepresentatron
                                         Numbers rn bold rndrcate areas of underrepresentatron




                                          Page 46                                            GAO/GGBBlB     Juetice EEO Underrepresentation
                                         Appendix IV
                                         Minority  and Female Representation  Within
                                         Justice Bureaus by PA’TCO Occupation




                                                            Female
    White              Black                   Hispanic                    Asian               American    Indian           Total Female
1962        1966   1962        1966          1982       1986           1962         1966        1982          1966          1962       1966
  62          96    147         238       -    92        122              9           22            0           189           66         109
  36          65      67         149           34          60            15           36          44             29           42          72
  76          60     100        143            67        134             27           94          96              6           90          92
 106         122     161        211            93         131            45           26          75            110          112         132
  66          71    200         233    --~____ 65          99             0           46          21             92           69          96
                                         Note Ffgures show Justrce work force as a percentage of the natronal CLF This type of percentage
                                         Index, called an underrepresentatron index by EEOC and OPM, Indicates to whrch extent that a partrc-
                                         ular EEO group ISrepresented In a work force as compared to the group’s representatron rn the CLF
                                         The Index can range from 0 to lOO+ wrth 100 rndrcating full representatron and lower numbers mdr-
                                         catrng underrepresentation
                                         Numbers rn bold mdrcate areas of underrepresentahon




                                                          Female
    White              Black                  Hispanic                     Asian               American     Indian           Total Female
1962        1966   1962       1966
                             ____..~~       1982       1966            1962         1966        1962           I 966         1962       1966
  31          67     56          44           46         36               0          110            0              0           33          72
  26          44     61         144           53         91              24           50            0             15           34          56
  69          95    571         497          119        185              40          129            0            151          139         155
 105          77    266         394          219        256              51           94            0            114          130         129


                                         Note Frgures show Juskce work force as a percentage of the nattonal CLF Numbers rn bold Indicate
                                         areas of underrepresentatron
                                         Qd not examme because category had less than 100 employees erther as of December 1982 or
                                         December 1988




                                         Page 47                                           GAO/GGD918     Justice   EEO Underrepresentation
                                        Appendix IV
                                        Mimdty   and Female Representation       Within
                                        Justice Bureau by PA’RQ Occn~tlon




                                                          Female
    White               Black                 Hispanic               Asian                         American   Indian            Total Female
19a2        19811   1962        i996       I 962       1966      1962               1969            I 962        iaaa           1962       i9aa
   76          96      60          36         53         64        14                 15               39             0            73         66
 231         242     200          246         57        157        72                228              434           171          219         239
 193          197    238          255        156        176       151                209                0           137           195        204
  125         122     182         182        122        133        66                 95               71           127           131        130


                                        Note: Frgures show Justice work force as a percentage of the national CLF. Numbars in bold indicate
                                        areas of underrepresentation.
                                        ‘Did not examrne because category has less than 100 employees either as of December 1962 or
                                        December 1988.




                                                          Female
    White               Black                Hispanic                     Asian                    American    lndlrn           Total Fernslo
1982        iaaa    1992        iaaa       1962
                                          _______-    I 966           1962          iaaa            I 962         1986          1962        19aa
                                                                       --
  27          59      ai         152           0           17               75            45            0               0          30         66
                                          -

  31          73      50          97           0             0               0             0            0               0          32         71
                                        Note. Frgures show Justice work force as a percentage of the national CLF. Numbers WIbold indicate
                                        areas of underrepresentatron
                                        ‘Drd not examine because category had less than 100 employees as of December 1982or December
                                         1988.




                                        page 49                                                GAO/GGD911     Justice   EEO Underrep-tation
                                         Appendix IV
                                         Mhxity   and Female F&presentation  Witbin
                                         Justice Bureaum by PATCO Occupation




    White                Black                     Hispanic                   Asian                American   Indian          Total Female
I 962        iaaa    1962        1966           1962        1966          1962         1966         I 962        1966         I 962      1968
   43           96     63          63            307         247            31            91            0            0           53        101
   51           57    116         185            244         385            75          317            45           66           66         69
   63           66    219         260            275         368           128           192            0          125           96        112
   65           64    296         266        .__ 247         343           117          231           129-         145          106        110
   19           32     15          53             110        307             0            72            0           72           23         5;
                                         Note Ftgures show Justice work force as a percentage of the national CLF. Numbers rn bold indrcate
                                         areas of underrepresentation




                                                               Female
    White                Black                     Hispanic                    Asian               American    Indian          Total Female
1962         1966    1962        1966           1962        1966          i 962        1996         1962          1966         1962       1966
  90          101      74          53   --         ia         17             31           14           39            60           64         91
 130          147     434         448              76        165            100          156            0            36         157         177
 125          114     577         610              50         60             50           60           56          187          180         179
  69           73     399         460              16        157             36           49          115           62           123        127
 140          139     786         970             113        399              0            0         703           496          245         288
                                             Note, Figures show Justice work force as a percentage of the national CLF Numbers rn bold rndrcate
                                             areas of underrepresentatron




                                                               Female
     White               Black                     Hispanic               Asian                    American    Indian          Total Female
I 962        iaaa    1962        1966           I 962       1966      1962             i 966        1962 -        iaaa         1962       1966


  96           36     250          46               0           27            0            0
                                                                                   ~-.____-__         512           34           110             36
 200          200     185         175             176          171          235           91          411          320           198            193


  60           234     56          96              56          175            0          311             0         311            56            210
                                             Note Frgures show Justrce work force as a percentage of the national CLF Numbers in bold indicate
                                             areas of underrepresentation
                                             aDrd not examrne because category had less than 100 employees erther as of December 1982 or
                                             December 1999




                                             Page 61                                           GAO/GGD918     Justice EEO Underrepresentation
                                      Appendix V
                                      Minority  and Female Represent&on      Within
                                      Juetiee’s Bureau Key Jobs




                                                           Female
   White               Black                   Hispanic                  Asian               American     Indian           Total Female
1982       1988    1982        1988         1982        1988         1982         1988        1982           1988          1982       1988
 174        217     251         141           146         145         142           114         123             98           177        200
  80         100      78         42            49          48          24            19          38             30            78         90
  18          24       8         10           111        263     ---    0
                                                                 .~~~~__.            28            0            28            19         38
  57          81    230         266            93         105    -.--   0            20          27             79            87         98
   9          22      20         32            19          78          14            38            0            19            10         25
  80         109      52         22            58         159    _...   0             0            0             0            57         98
  81          80     124        216           350        557           70          407           60             61            00        102

                                      Note Figures show Justice work force as a percentage of the national CLF. Thustype of percentage
                                      Index, called an underrepresentation Index by EEOC and OPM, indicates the extent to which a partic-
                                      ular EEO group ISrepresented in a work force as compared to the group’s representation in the CLF.
                                      The Index can range from 0 to lOO+, with lM3 indicating full representation and lower numbers indl-
                                      catmg underrepresentatlon Numbers In bold indicate areas of underrepresentation.
                                      Wslng occupation-specrfic CLF data for attorneys.
                                      bUslng broader professional CLF data




                                      Page 5.3                                         GAODXD91-I)      Justice   JZEO Underrepresentation
Ordering   Information

The first five copies of each GAO report are free. Additional copies
are $2 each. Orders should be sent to the following address, accom-
panied by a check or money order made out to the Superintendent
of Documents, when necessary. Orders for 100 or more copies to be
mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent.

U.S. General Accounting Office
P.O. Box 6015
Galthersburg, MD 20877
Appendix VI

Major Contributors to This Report


                        Steven J. Wozny, Assistant Director, Federal Human Resource Manage-
General Government        ment Issues
Division, Washington,   Steven G. Hunichen, Project Director
DC.                     Jeffery A. Bass, Evaluator-in-Charge
                        Clifton G. Douglas, Jr., Staff Evaluator
                        Loretta Evans, Secretary


                        Michael Volpe I, Assistant General Counsel
Office of the General   James M. Rebk,L.,. N,LULIL+ZY-~UYISVI-
                                           *cc^..-..-. A-3-.1---
Counsel, Washington,




(saess7)                Page 64                            GAO/GGD-910   Justice   EEO Underrepresentation
Appendix     V

Minority and Female Representation Within
Justice’s Bureau Key Jobs

                                                          Male
                             Black            Hispanic                 Asian                    American    Indian
Category
      - -               1982         1900   1982       1988        1982           i 980          1982          1908
Attorney’                221          123    102        104          73              a4            02             52
Attorneyb                 175          97     66         67          16              18            56             37
Border Patrol Agent        11          16    501        685          55              01            23             34
Correctional Officer     217          229    156        152          34              56            98            108
Criminal Investigator     172         210    369        380          67             121           205            236
Deputy US Marshal         178          34     98         66          53             147            77              0
Immigration Inspector      72          92    469        658          76             236            80             97




                        Page 52                               GAO/GGD918       Justice   JZEO Underrepreaen~tion
                                                    Appendix IV
                                                    Mhority  md Female Bepresentation   Within
                                                    Justice Bureaus by PA!K!Q Occup&ion




Table iV.5: immigration    and Naturalization      Service
                                                                                                 Male
                                                          Black                    Hispanic                   Asian                    American     Indian
Category                                              1982        1986          1982        1988         1982            1988           1982           1988
Professional                                            60         132            130        130            14              40              0              0
Administrative                                          86          99           361         548            73            190              64             85
Technical                                              230         165           667         592            86            136             116             78
ClerIcal                                               234         157           332         290           193             148             64            249
Other                                                   19          21           514         679            84            106              22             40




Table IV. 6: Offices.   Boards. and Divisions
                                                                                                Male
                                                          Black                   Hispanic                   Asian                     American     Indian
Category                                              1982        1988          1982       1968          1982             1988          1982           1988
Professional                                            129         83            35         54            14               20            48               37
AdmInIstrative                                         210         170            74         67            36               74            32               38
TechnIcal                                              239         268             6         14             0               29              0               a
Clerical                                                263        121             4          40             0               44              0              0
Other                                                   455        273     --     13          19           260              122             83             59




Table IV. 7: United States Marshal’s     Service
                                                                                                  Male
                                                          Black                   Hispanic                    Asian                     American    Indian
Category                                              1982        1988          1982       1988           1982            1986           1982          1988
ProfessIonala
Admlnlstratwe                                           263        266            63          175            0                  43            0            288
Technical                                                40         63            13           21          .29                  45            0              0
Clerical”
Other                                                   178         50            97          70            53              115             76               0




                                                     Page 60                                        GAO/GGDI)lS       Justice    EEO Underrepresentation
                                                      Appendix IV
                                                      Minority and Female Beprwentation     Wlthh
                                                      Justice Bureaus by PA!l-CO Occupation




Table iV.3: Executive     Office for U.S. Attornevs
                                                                                                 Male
                                                           Black                   Hispanic                   Asian                    American    Indian
Category                                               1982         1988         1982       1986          1982           1988           1982          1988
ProfessIonal                                            240          122           86         74            20             17             72             41
Administrative                                          122           48           27         32             0             40               0            45
TechnIcal                                                78           24            0         13            28              0               0             0
Clewal                                                   53           55           17         20            47             34               0             0
Other”




Table   IV. 4: Federal   Prison   Svstem


                                                           Black                   Hispanic                   Asian                    American     Indian
Cateaorv                                               1982         1988         1982       1986          1982           1988           1982           1988
Professional*
Administrative                                           147          169           83          132         106                 64         239            142
TechnIcala
Clericala
Other                                                     97          114          141          157          37                 64         177            103




                                                      Page 49                                         GAO/GM%918      Justice    EEO Underreprwentation
Appendix         IV

Minority and Female Representation Within
Justice Bureaus by PATCOOccupation


Table IV.1: Bureau of Prisons
                                                                                                 Male
                                                           Black
                                                           -.--._                Hispanic                      Asian                American    Indian
Category                                             1962           i9aa    7- 1982       1988          1982           19aa           1982          iQaQ
ProfessIonal                                          -_-
                                                      7RR            ---
                                                                     ml=,       .--
                                                                                155        IA1            Al                A0          Yao            ,oc.

Administrative                                        279            268        158        1317           27                 36         208            136
Technical                                             221            182        180        240            10                138         100            217
Clerical                                              123             48         72         21             0                 39         113              0
Other                                                 192            205        146        143            36                RR           RR            119




Table IV. 2: Drug Enforcement   Administration
                                                                                              Male
                                                         Black                  Hispanic                    Asian                   American Indian
Category                                             1962           1968      1962       1966           1982           1988          1982       1968
Professional                                          313            246       169         114           124            130              0          0
Administrative                                        206            209       297        274             75            105           265______- 241
Technical                                              184           182        81          95             0             47             145              0
Clerical                                                69           100        25          16             0              0               0_____-      171
Othera




                                                 Page 46                                         GAO/GGD91-8      Justice    EEO Underrepresentation
Appendix        III

Minority and Female Representation at Justice
by PATCOOccupation

                                                                Male
                              Black               Hispanic                 Asian               American    Indian
Category                 I 982        I 988    1962        1968        1982        1986         1982          1968
ProfessIonal               204          148       65          65         25          30           94             61
Administratwe              163          170     261         314          61         115          135            143
TechnIcal                  197           160    253         239          33          a3           70             73
Clerical                    170          111     141         123         a3          77           36            115
Other                       148          129     227         319         54          61            76            62




                      Page 44                                   GAO/GGD918     Justice   EEO Underrepresentation
Appendix II
AvailabilIty of Data and Stahu of Minority
and Female Representation    at Justice




incumbent to demonstrate “an awareness of and sensitivity to EEO prin-
ciples and concepts when recruiting, evaluating, and selecting individ-
uals for vacancies or promotions; affording employees opportunities for
training or other developmental assignments; and evaluating employees
performance or recognizing employee accomplishments.” In our view,
the EEO element of this work plan is vaguely written; the other five work
plans are written in a similar manner.

Thus, in our view, Justice executives are not held specifically account-
able in either the affirmative employment plan or their performance
plans for the Em program’s successes or failures. This, we believe, can
be changed in a practical way. As said earlier, we believe Justice’s
affirmative action plan should contain numerical goals for hiring and
promoting minorities and females. The plan should also define the
actions necessary to attain those goals and the names of officials or posi-
tions responsible for carrying out those actions. Those officials should
be part of the process that determines what action items go into the
affirmative employment plan.

In order to avoid treatment of goals as quotas, we would not include
numerical goals in executives’ performance work plans. We would, how-
ever, put into the work plans the action items needed to accomplish the
goals and hold the responsible executives accountable for carrying out
those actions. This accountability would be reflected in the executives’
performance ratings. We recognize that the action items could be satis-
factorily implemented without achieving the related goal. Failure to
reach the goal need not be a negative reflection on the executive’s per-
formance. However, it may suggest a need to reexamine the appropri-
ateness of the numerical goal and the related action items.




Page 42                                      GAO/GGB918   Justice   EEO Underrepresentation
                                    A~F-?&Lx II
                                    AvallabUlty of Data and Stahm of Mhmity
                                    and Female Representrtion   at Justice




                                    that the change provides agencies with more responsibility and flexi-
                                    bility in doing what they believe is necessary to meet their EEOneeds.


No Goals   in   Justice’s   Plans   Justice did not include numerical goals in either of its two 5-year affirm-
                                    ative employment plans. The EEOCnever approved the first plan because
                                    Justice refused to follow EEOC’srequirement to do underrepresentation
                                    analysis and set numerical goals for underrepresented groups. The EEOC
                                    has approved Justice’s current affirmative employment plan; it contains
                                    comparisons to the CLF.

                                    Justice has a policy that prohibits use of numerical goals for EEOactivi-
                                    ties because it believes numerical goals are tantamount to quotas. The
                                    EEOCdoes not view goals in this manner. Numerical goals, the EEOChas
                                    said, are intended to provide management with a flexible tool to
                                    improve efforts to increase representation of targeted EECIgroups,
                                    According to the EEOC,numerical goals do not require or mandate the
                                    selection of unqualified persons or preferential treatment based on race,
                                    national origin, or gender; and the goals must be reasonable. That is,
                                    they must have a reasonable relation to the extent of underrepresenta-
                                    tion, the availability of candidates, and the number of vacancies.

                                    Other federal agencies have employed numerical goals as an aid in
                                    moving towards full representation. For example, in response to a rec-
                                    ommendation we made in 1989 regarding underrepresentation in the
                                    Foreign Service,4 the Department of State said it agreed that greater
                                    specificity in goal-setting could aid in eliminating underrepresentation,
                                    and agreed to take steps to alter its f&year affirmative employment plan
                                    as needed. The US. Army Post at Fort Lee, Virginia, included numerical
                                    goals in its 1988 to 1992 affirmative employment plan although such
                                    goal-setting was not required by the EEOC.These goals included adding a
                                    certain number of minorities and white women to specific targeted
                                    civilian job series over the &year period and a numerical goal to address
                                    underrepresentation at higher civilian grades (grades 13 through 15).”




                                    %ate Department:
                                                  MinoritiesandWomenAre Underrepresented
                                                                                      in theForeignService(GAO/
                                    N’!?SAD-89-146,
                                                June26,1989).
                                    5WereportedonFort Lee’sEEOprogramfor civilianpersonnelin
                                    Representation
                                                of MinoritwsandWhik Womenat FortLeeArmy
                                    Jan.17,1990).


                                    Page 40                                   GAO/GGD.91-8   Justice   EEO Underrepresentation
                          Appendix II
                          Availability of Data and Status of Minority
                          and Female Representation    at Justice




                           applicants are qualified. Having such information, we believe, would
                           help Justice improve its efforts to bring full EEO representation to all key
                          jobs.


Representation at Upper   The General Schedule (GS) pay system is the primary pay system for
                          civilian employees of the federal government. It has levels or grades; the
Grade Levels              higher the grade, the greater the responsibility and pay. The Gs system
                          includes employees covered by the Performance Management and Rec-
                          ognition System. Employees in the Performance Management and Recog-
                          nition System are identified by the General Management (GM) pay plan
                          designation and occupy positions in grades 13 to 15. People in these
                          grades are often considered the government’s middle managers. The
                          government’s career senior executives (upper level managers) are paid
                          through the SESpay system.

                          As figure II.2 shows, females across all ethnic groups had not achieved
                          full representation in the SESand at grades 13 through 15. Although
                          most had achieved full representation at grades 1through 12 combined,
                          white and American Indian females had not. The results for minority
                          males were uneven. Black and Asian males were fully represented in the
                          SES;Hispanic and American Indian males were not. Hispanic and Amer-
                          ican Indian males were fully represented at grades 13-15; black and
                          Asian males were not. All male minority groups were fully represented
                          in grades 1 through 12 combined.




                           Page 38                                      GAO/GGD9143   Justice   EE4l Underrepresentation
.                                               Appendix II
                                                Availability of Data and Status of Minority
                                                and Female Representation    at .Justice




    Table 11.5:Number and Percentage of Justice’s   1988 New Hires Who Were Minorities                   and Females Compared            to Their
    Percentages in the CLF (for Key Jobs)

                                      Total                          Black                                                           Hispal nit
    Job series                        Hired           Hired          Justice                     CLF                  Hired            Jusi
                                                                                                                                       ---lice                  CLF
    Attorneyb                           298                5               1 7%                          a                 4                  1.3%                      a
    AttorneyC                           298                 5               17                    2 33                    4                 1.3                 2.16%
    Border Patrol Agent                1619                40               2.5                   8 34                  488                30.1                   -a
    Correctional Officer               1448               282              195                           a              110                 7.6                      a
    Crlmmal Investigator                528                51         ~~   g,                            a --~~~         35                 66                    -a
    Deputy U.S. Marshal                 211                 0              00                    8.34                     0                 0.0                 4.77
    Immigration Inspector               389                18              4.1                   3.84                    95                24 4                         a




                                                                                              Female
                                                       White                                                                         Black
    Job series                     Hired               Justice                    CLF                        Hired                   Justice                    CLF
    Attorneyb                          89                  29 9%                          a                       3                        1 .O%                        B
    AttorneyC                          89                  29.9%                 28.85%                          3                        IO                    2 79%
    Border Patrol Agent                40                    25                   7 71                           4                        0.2                   1.61
    Correctional Officer               95                    66                   7 71                          75                        57                        a
    Criminal lnvestlgator              47                    89                   26 57                          6                        1.1                   3.13
    Deputy U.S Marshal                 17                    81                           a                      0                        00                    1 Ii1
    lmmigratlon Inspector              43                   11 1                  26 57                          9                        2.3                           a




                                                Page 36                                                  GAO/GGDSlS        Justice    EEO Underrepresentation
                                                            Appendix Jl
                                                            Availability of Data and Status of Minchy
                                                            and Female Representation    at Justice




Table 11.4:Numbers   of Minorities     and Females            Needed to Reach Full Representation,            by Pay Grade, in Justice            Key Jobs as of
December 1988
                                                                                  Number Needed to Reach Full Representation
                                                                         Male                                          Female
                               Grade                                                    American                                                                American
Job Title’                  Grouping            Black          Hispanic         Asian      Indian   White      Black     Hispanic                   Asian          Indian
Attorneyb                       II-12       -           4                 0           0          0       0      -0                0                         0            0
                                13-15                   0                 1                                                                                 0
                            13-15L2                                                 :,           1                z          :                :             1            i
                                                        1                 :         1            0                3          0                1             l-l          0
                                  ADd                   0                 0         5            2                0          0                0             i            i
Attorneye                       11-12                   :                1;        3:            i                z         2;                3         3               0
                                13-15                                                                                                        12        11               1
                            13-15(GM)                   3                 3         9            1            28             2                0         5               1
                                      SES’                                                                                                    2
                                    AD                  i                1:        5:            i           i:             5:               13        2:               i
Crtminal                          5-7                   E                 i         E            :          6;;               6
lnvesttgator                     9-12                                                                                       2                 E         1:              i
                                13-14                                                                       245                               8                         2
                            13-15(GM)                   i                 E         A            z          279             29               12             z           1
Border Patrol                     5-7                                               0            8           90                                                         2
Agent                            9-12             1::                     E         4           12          145             E                 E             :            1
                            13-15(GM)              13               .-    0         1            1           12              8                1             n           n
immigration                      3-7                                                             0           108
Inspector                        9-12                                                            A           197
                            13-15(GM)                3                    0         1                          7             0                0             0            0
Deputy                            5-7               16                    i         i            ;             :             4
U S. Marshal                     9-12               13                                                                       2                i             z            t
Correcttonal                          5-8                                 E        13            6           134                                            3            0
Officer                              9-12                                           4            1            35             i                i             1            1
                                                            aJusttce’s total work force for each lob trtle as of December 1986 was: attorney-5.083; crtmrnal investr-
                                                            gator-6,211, border patrol agent-4,224, rmmtgratroninspector-WOO, deputy US marshal-561,
                                                            and correctronal officer-5.629
                                                            ‘Usrng occupation-specrftc CLF data for attorneys
                                                            ‘GM refers to parsons In the Performance Management and Recognthon pay system. Seep 36
                                                            dAD refers to attorneys whose salares are “admmlstratwely determined” by the Attorney General and
                                                            are not 1-1the GS and GM pay systems
                                                            ‘Using broad profewonal CLF data

                                                            For each job, Justice provided the number of minority and female
                                                            employees at each grade level as of December 1988. We then compared
                                                            these numbers to our estimates of the numbers needed for full represen-
                                                            tation. For example, since black males make up 1.8 percent of the
                                                            attorney category in CLF data, we applied that percentage to the total
                                                            number of attorneys employed at each grade level. The resulting number
                                                            was the estimated number of black male attorneys needed for full repre-
                                                            sentation. We then compared the fully representative number with the



                                                            Page 34                                           GAO/GGDSlS          Justice   EEO Underrepresentation
                                                    Appendix II
                                                    AvailabUity of Data and Status of Minority
                                                    and Female Representation   at Justice




Table 11.3:Representation     of Justice’s   Work Force by Justice’s       Key Jobs
                                                                                        Male
                                   Black                              Hispanic                           Asian                        American    Indian
Cateaorv
      - -                   1982             1900              1982              1988            1982            1988                1982             1908
Attorneya                      X                X                X                  X              0                0                  0                 0
Attorneyb                      X                0                0                  0              0                0                  0                 0
Border Patrol
Agent                          0                0                X                 X               0                  0                 0                 0
Correctional
Officer                       X                 X                X                 X               0                  0                 0                 X
Criminal
Investigator                  X                 X                X                 X               0                  X                 X                 X
Deputy U S
Marshal                                                                                                                                 0                 0
lmmlgratlon
Inspector                                                                                                                                                 0
                                                    Wslng occupation-specific CLF data for attorneys
                                                    %slng broader professional CLF data




                                                     Page 32                                           GAO/GGDSl-&?   Justice   EEO Underrepresentation
                           Appendix II
                           Availability of Data and Status of Minority
                           and Female Representation    at Justice




                           Where there was underrepresentation, it was often severe. All of the
                           bureaus had categories where representation was 50 percent or less.
                           Usually, this representation level existed in anywhere from about one-
                           half to three-fourths of the underrepresented categories in each bureau.
                           The Immigration and Naturalization Service was outside this one-half-
                           to-three-fourths range. Of categories with underrepresentation, about 29
                           percent of those in the Immigration Service had representation levels of
                           50 percent or less. (App. IV contains the PATCOtable for each bureau.)

                           Severe underrepresentation existed in 76, or about 27 percent, of the
                           280 EEO categories across all seven bureaus as of December 1988.
                           Overall, slightly more than one-half (51 percent) of the 280 categories
                           had some degree of underrepresentation.


Justice in Comparison to   We compared Justice’s EEO profile for two PATCOcategories-profes-
Other Agencies             sional and administrative-with    like profiles from the 12 other agencies
                           that had cabinet-level status in December 1988, the date of the data we
                           used. (The 12 are the same as those listed in footnote 1.) We made the
                           comparison to determine where Justice’s minority and female represen-
                           tation stands in comparison to the other cabinet agencies for the two
                           occupational categories. We used the professional and administrative
                           categories because, of all PATCOcategories, they experienced the most
                           significant growth over the 1982 to 1988 period in the number of
                           employees governmentwide. To make our comparison, we determined
                           representation levels at each agency in relation to the CLF and ranked
                           the agencies on the basis of those levels.

                           As table II.2 shows, Justice frequently compares favorably with the
                           other 12 agencies on representation levels in the administrative cate-
                           gory. However, it compares far less favorably on representation in the
                           professional category. Like Justice, all of the other 12 agencies had EEO
                           groups that were underrepresented in the professional and administra-
                           tive categories. On average, the 12 agencies had 5.4 groups in the profes-
                           sional category with underrepresentation and 3.3 groups in the
                           administrative category. In comparison, Justice had nine under-
                           represented EEO groups in the professional category and three in the
                           administrative category.




                           Page 30                                       GAO/GGD91-8   Justice   EEO Underrepresentation
                                                Appendix II
                                                Availability of Data and Status of Minority
                                                and Female Representation    at Justice




Table 11.1:Representation   of Justice’s   Work Force by PATCO Occupational         Categories (1982 and 1988)
                                                                                              Male
                                                         Black                   Hispanic                Asian                 American Indian
Category                                             1992         1988         1902       1908       1992          1980         1982       1998
ProfessIonal                                             X
                                                    ~.-__--           X~          0          0           0            0             0          0
AdminIstratIve                                           X            X           X          X           0            X             X          x
TechnIcal -    ~~ --                                       X          X           X          X           0               0          0          0
Clerical                                                   X          X           X          X           0               0           0 --      X
Other                                                      X          X           X          X           0               0           0         0




                                                 Page 28                                         GAO/GGB91-8   Justice   EEO Underrepresentation
                       Apmmlix     II
                       Avaihbillty    of D&I and Status of Mhwity
                       and Female Representrtion     at Justice




                       As a means of evaluating agencies’ progress in their affirmative employ-
Progress Made but      ment efforts, EEOCexamines work force data to see if there is positive
Widespread             change in the participation of Em groups. One set of data it examines
Underrepresentation    represents an agency’s work force in the PATCO white-collar occupational
                       categories; another represents an agency’s work force by its key jobs.
Remains                We made various comparisons using PATCO and key job data to determine
                       where minority and female representation stands at Justice. Between
                       the two approaches, PATCO provides a broader view. On the other hand,
                       key jobs, by their very classification as key, provide more precise
                       insight about representation at Justice.


PATCO Representation   Of Justice’s 50 PATCO categories (10 EEQ groups x 5 PATCO categories),
                       minority and female representation increased in 40 categories between
                       1982 and 1988. These increases pushed representation up enough that
                       the number of categories with underrepresentation dropped from 30 in
                       1982 to 21 in 1988, as table II.1 shows. Moreover, of this 21, representa-
                       tion was from 90 to 98 percent in 5 categories. However, even though
                       Justice has made progress, the 21 underrepresented categories means
                       that 42 percent of the PATCO categories at Justice still do not reflect the
                       relative minority and female makeup of the CLF. (App. III shows repre-
                       sentation levels for the 50 categories in 1982 and 1988.)




                        Page 26                                     GAO/GGD91-9   Justice   EJXI Underrepresentation
                                             Appendix U
                                             AvailabilIty of Data and Status of Minority
                                             and Female Representation    at Justice




                                             For example using occupation-specific CLF data for attorneys, the level
                                             of representation of black male attorneys at Justice declined slightly
                                             between 1987 and 1988, going from 125 percent of the CLF to 123 per-
                                             cent. But when analyzing their employment from 1982 through 1988, a
                                             different picture emerges As figure II. 1 shows, a steep decline occurred
                                             from 1982, when the number of black male attorneys represented about
                                             221 percent of the CLF, to 1987 and 1988, when they were just above
                                             half of their 1982 representation level. The downward trend of Justice’s
                                             black male attorney work force remains when using the broader profes-
                                             sional CLFdata as a base, however the percentages become 99,97, and
                                             175, respectively. Justice officials did not know why black male attor-
                                             neys were leaving the agency but acknowledged it was a problem they
                                             needed to address. This example, we believe, demonstrates that long-
                                             term trend analyses are needed to provide a more complete picture of
                                             program results.


Figure 11.1:Trend Line Showlng
Representation   of Black Males in Justice
                                             240       Percentage     Representation
Attorney Occupations (1982-l 988)
                                             220

                                             200

                                             190

                                             160

                                             140

                                             120                                                                                                     7
                                             1W                                                                                  -----llllm-

                                               90

                                               60

                                               40

                                               20

                                                0

                                                1962                  1963             1964      1966           1666             1967               1966
                                                Year

                                                       -            Using attorneyCLF data
                                                       - ---        Using professionalCLF data

                                              Percentage representation ISthe rate that black males are represented I” Justice’s attorney work force
                                              as compared to that group’s representation in the corresponding national CLF occupational category
                                              wthout regard to pay level




                                              Page 24                                            GAO/GGD91-8    Justice   EEO Underrepresentation
                      Appendix II
                      AvailabiUty of Data and Status of Minority
                      and Female Representation   at Justice




                      form, agencies are to develop and implement their own means of col-
                      lecting applicant data as they see the need for such data. Since issuing
                      the supplement, the EEOC has developed a draft form. According to an
                      EEOCofficial, the draft was submitted on August 1, 1990, to the EEOC
                      Commissioners for approval. The official was unable to predict when
                      the Commissioners would review the draft. If the Commissioners
                      approve the form, it must then be sent to OMB for approval. According to
                      the official, the form can be given to agencies for their use after OMB'S
                       approval is obtained.

                      We believe Justice should develop its own means of collecting applicant
                      data rather than waiting for the EEOC'S form. This is because (1) Justice
                      has an acknowledged need for the data, (2) there is no assurance that
                      EEOC'S form will enable Justice to capture all of the data it may need, (3)
                      the length of time it will take to obtain all approvals is unknown, and (4)
                      there is no guarantee that the form will be approved. Other agencies,
                      such as the Internal Revenue Service, have developed their own forms
                      for capturing applicant data. As a means of accelerating development,
                      Justice may wish to review these forms to determine if they can be
                      adapted to its needs.


                       The EEOC requires agencies to prepare affirmative employment plans
Late and Incomplete    and to submit those plans to it for approval. The plans cover 5-year
Submissions of         periods, and the EEOC requires agencies to submit annual updates and
Affirmative            accomplishment reports. The first 5-year plan required by the EEOC cov-
                       ered fiscal years 1982 through 1986, and as fiscal year 1987 drew near,
Employment Plans       the EEOC had agencies update and extend it to fiscal year 1987. The
                       second and current plan covers fiscal years 1988 through 1992.

                       Justice was late in submitting the first plan. It submitted the plan on
                       July 19, 1983, about 21 months after it was due. Justice was also late in
                       submitting the current plan. The EEOCissued guidance for developing
                       the current plan in October 1987 (Management Directive 714) and Jan-
                       uary 1988. The current plan was due to EEOCby April 15,1988. EEOC
                       received Justice’s plan on July 29, 1989, or about 15 months late.

                       According to Justice officials, the current plan was late because (1)
                       Management Directive 714, in comparison to the directive it replaced,
                       put greater emphasis on the identification of internal barriers to full
                       representation and the actions necessary to remove them, and (2) there
                       was inherent difficulty in collecting necessary data from the many
                       offices and bureaus that make up the Justice Department, However,


                       Page 22                                     GAO/GGD918   Justice   EEO Underrepresentation
Appendix I
Objectives, Scope, and Methodology




The most recent applicable CLF data was for 1980. We recognize that,
because of the age of the data, the 1980 CLF data may not reflect the
various EEO groups’ current overall representation in the labor force.




 Page 20                             GAO/GGDSl-(I   Justice   EEO UnderrepresentatIon
Appendix I

Objectives, Scope,and Methodology


               As agreed with the Subcommittee, the objectives of our review were to
               (1) determine whether Justice has the data necessary to evaluate the
               success of its efforts to recruit, hire, and promote minorities and women
               and (2) where evaluation data existed, determine the success of Jus-
               tice’s efforts.

               We reviewed relevant EEO statutes, regulations, and guidance issued by
               Justice and the EEOC. We also obtained and reviewed documents from
               Justice as well as EEOC reports and program evaluation guides. For
               example, we reviewed Justice’s past and current affirmative employ-
               ment plans, accomplishment reports, and updates that cover fiscal years
               1982 through 1992. We interviewed Justice’s EEO officials at the head-
               quarters and bureau level. We also interviewed Federal Sector Programs
               officials in the EEOC'S Office of Program Operations, which is responsible
               for reviewing and approving agencies’ affirmative employment plans.

               Because the information in Justice’s EEO monitoring reports was not
               presented in a way we could use, we requested an array of information
               from the agency’s computerized human resource management informa-
               tion system. This system is Justice’s source for all work force profile
               data. Justice officials attributed the more than 2 months’ delivery time
               for the data to such factors as (1) a physical relocation of Justice’s data
               center, (2) having only one analyst available to retrieve the data from
               the information system, and (3) verifying the data being provided.

               The data obtained covered the 6 years from December 1982 to December
               1988, and included profiles of Justice’s labor force by PATCO category,
               key job, and pay grade. We did not examine EEOprofile data on Justice’s
               blue-collar work force since (1) the blue-collar work force comprised less
               than 5 percent of Justice’s non-km work force, (2) Justice’s blue-collar
               work force does not contain any of the key occupations Justice has
               targeted for priority emphasis in its equal employment opportunity
               efforts, and (3) the blue-collar pay and grading systems are not compa-
               rable to the white-collar pay and grading systems. For ease in presenta-
               tion, in most cases this report shows data for only the beginning and
               ending dates-December 1982 and December 1988. Although we did not
               show them in the report, trend lines over the entire period were usually
               consistently upward or downward. That is, if a comparison between the
                1982 and 1988 dates showed an increase or a decrease, the trend line
               over the entire 6 years generally showed a constant increase or
               decrease.




               Page18
Contents




Abbreviations

CLF         Civilian Labor Force
EEO         Equal Employment Opportunity
EEOC        Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
FBI         Federal Bureau of Investigation
GM          General Management
GS          General Schedule
OMB         Office of Management and Budget
OPM         Office of Personnel Management
PATCO       professional, administrative, technical, clerical, and other
SE3         Senior Executive Service


Page 16                               GAO/GGDBM    JustIce EEO Underrepresentation
Contents


Letter                                                                                                       1

Appendix I                                                                                                  18
Objectives, Scope,and
Methodology
Appendix II                                                                                                 21
Availability of Data     Data Available on Hiring and Promoting but Not
                              Recruiting
                                                                                                            21
and Status of Minority   Late and Incomplete Submissions of Affirmative                                     22
and Female                    Employment Plans
Representation at        Justice Should Systematically Use Long-Term Trend                                  23
                              Analysis
Justice                  Progress Made but Widespread Underrepresentation                                   26
                              Remains
                         Justice Should Employ Numerical Goals                                              39

Appendix III                                                                                                44
Minority and Female
Representation at
Justice by PATCO
Occupation
Appendix IV                                                                                                 46
Minority and Female
Representation Within
Justice Bureaus by
PATCOOccupation
Appendix V                                                                                                  52
Minority and Female
Representation Within
Justice’s Key Jobs


                         Page 14                          GAO/GGD-918   Justice   EEO Underrepresentation
B-240676




Neither had Justice sought or received the required EEOCapproval to use
American Bar Association data or any other source of attorney-specific
data as a basis of comparison. Accordingly, we did not believe it appro-
priate for Justice to use American Bar Association data.

Conceptually, we agree that comparison of occupation-specific data
should provide a more precise measure than comparison to the broader
civilian labor force professional data. Given Justice’s comment, we
obtained attorney-specific CLFdata from EEOC and compared that data
with Justice’s attorney work force data. The comparison showed a more
favorable assessment of minority and female representation in Justice’s
attorney jobs. For example, using the occupation-specific CLF data for
attorneys, only 3 of 10 EEO groups were underrepresented as of
December 1988 compared to 9 of 10 when using the broader profes-
sional CLF data.

Justice officials agreed that the agency’s performance work plans for
SESpersonnel lacked specificity in the El30 area. However, they said that
the lack of specificity applied throughout the work plans and not just
the EEO area. Department officials maintain that the generalities within
the work plans flow from the agency’s overall policy against goals and
numerical objectives. As stated in our report, we believe the use of
numerical goals and increased EEO accountability can help improve Jus-
tice’s EEO profile.

                    -
As arranged with the Subcommittee, unless you publicly release its con-
tents earlier, we plan no further distribution of this report until 30 days
from the date of this letter. At that time, we will send copies to the
Attorney General; the Chairman, EEOC; and other interested parties.




 Page12
              B240676




              uses, Justice officials agreed that using long-term trend data and anal-
              yses on a more comprehensive and systematic basis could enable them
              to better identify or forecast these and other potential problem areas.


              Justice needs to strengthen the management of its Em program. Affirm-
Conclusions   ative employment plans have been submitted significantly late and per-
              formance work plans lack the specificity to hold appropriate SES
              members truly accountable for EEO matters. Although Justice had data
              on its efforts to hire and promote minorities and women, it has been
              slow in accumulating and analyzing information about its recruiting
              efforts. Justice has made occasional, but not systematic, use of long-
              term trend data. Justice refused to use numerical goals as a management
              tool for increasing minority and female representation when use of such
              goals was required by EEOC and has chosen not to use numerical goals
              now that their use is optional.

              All of this is not to say that Justice has failed to make progress in
              moving toward full representation. It has. But it still has a long way to
              go. After years of effort, underrepresentation existed in at least 33 of
              the 60 key job categories, with a minimum of 18 categories reflecting
              severe underrepresentation. These key jobs, according to Justice, were
              the focus of its Em recruiting, hiring and promotion efforts. This contin-
              uing condition clearly indicates a need for Justice to do more to enhance
              the prospects for improving its Em program. For Justice to meet these
              needs, we believe that it should do more in (1) collecting and analyzing
              recruiting and long-term trend data, (2) holding appropriate SESmem-
              bers more accountable for Em matters, and (3) employing numerical
              goals in affirmative employment plans as an aid to increasing
              representation.

              In order to avoid treatment of numerical goals as quotas, numerical
              goals could be excluded from executives’ performance work plans. How-
              ever, through the performance rating process, executives should be held
              accountable for carrying out the action items needed to accomplish both
              numerical and narrative goals. We recognize that the action items could
              be satisfactorily implemented without achieving the related goal.
              Failure to reach a goal need not be a negative reflection on the execu-
              tives’ performance; however, it may suggest a need to reexamine the
              appropriateness of the goal and the related action items.




              Page 10                             GAO/GGDSl-(I   Justice   EEO Undempresentation
                            B-240676




                            the SESor at grades 13 through 15. For minority males, the situation was
                            uneven. Of the four male groups, Hispanic and American Indian males
                            were at full representation at grades 13 through 15 but not at the SES
                            level; black and Asian males were fully represented in the SESbut not at
                            grades 13 through 15.


Justice Compared to Other   We compared the minority and female profiles of Justice’s professional
                            and administrative work forces with corresponding profiles from the 12
Agencies                    other agencies that had cabinet-level status as of December 1988. We
                            used the professional and administrative categories because out of all
                            PA'I'CO categories, they experienced the most significant growth over the
                            1982-1988 period in the number of employees governmentwide. To
                            make our comparison, we determined representation levels at each
                            agency in relation to the CLF.

                            Justice compared more favorably to the other cabinet agencies in the
                            administrative category than it did in the professional category. Justice
                            had 3 underrepresented EEO groups in the administrative category; the
                            12 other agencies had, on average, 3.3 groups with underrepresentation
                            in the administrative category. Justice had 9 underrepresented EECI
                            groups in the professional category; the other 12 agencies averaged 5.4
                            groups with underrepresentation.


                            To enhance its EEO program, we believe Justice should add numerical
Justice Should Use          goals to its affirmative employment plans and hold executives account-
Numerical Goals             able, through the performance rating process, for the actions necessary
                            to accomplish those goals. Justice should use such goals, we believe, to
                            seek full representation across pay grades as well as within jobs and
                            bureaus.

                            Justice has not used numerical goals in working toward a labor force
                            that is representative of the CLF. The EEOC no longer requires agencies to
                            use numerical goals but gives agencies the option of using them.
                            According to the EEOC, numerical goals reflect management’s commit-
                            ment to overcoming underrepresentation, while providing measurable
                            objectives for managers to aim toward when recruiting, hiring, and pro-
                            moting staff.

                            Justice chooses not to use goals because it views them as tantamount to
                            quotas. We do not share that view. Like the EEOC, we believe numerical



                            pages
                      B24lltm




                      Justice has been late in submitting its affirmative employment plans to
Late and Incomplete   EEOC for approval. EEOC has required agencies to submit 5-year affirma-
Submission of         tive employment plans since 1981, and Justice has been late in submit-
Affirmative           ting both of the required plans. It was about 21 months late in
                      submitting the first plan and 15 months late in submitting the second
Employment Plans      (current) plan. Justice officials said the current plan was late because
                      (1) there was a change in emphasis prescribed by Management Directive
                      714 and (2) there were inherent difficulties in collecting data from the
                      many offices and bureaus that make up the Justice Department. All but
                       1 of 12 other cabinet-level agencies submitted their current plans 3 to 16
                      months earlier than Justice; 1 submitted its plan after Justice.

                      In addition to being late, both plans were incomplete. The first plan did
                      not (1) contain the data analysis required by EEOC to identify areas of
                      underrepresentation, or (2) the goal setting required by Management
                      Directive 707, the predecessor to Management Directive 714, to address
                      those areas of underrepresentation. The second plan did not contain the
                      EEoc-required comparison data Justice was to have used to analyze the
                      representation of minorities and females within its six key jobs.


                      Notwithstanding the lack of recruitment data and untimely plan submis-
Progress Made But     sions, Justice has made progress in increasing minority and female rep-
Underrepresentation   resentation in its work force. We made various analyses using PATHI and
Remains Widespread    key job data to determine where minority and female representation
                      stands at Justice. The PATCO data cover all white-collar positions at Jus-
                      tice and thus provide a broad overview of minority and female represen-
                      tation throughout Justice. While Justice’s EFJJefforts cover all jobs,
                      those efforts focus on certain jobs. The key jobs data cover those six
                      jobs that Justice’s affirmative employment plans say are the focus of
                      the agency’s EEO recruiting, hiring, and promotion efforts. In our anal-
                      ysis, we looked at each of the 10 EEXIgroups within each of the PATCO
                      occupational categories and key jobs. In total, we examined 50 EEO
                       groups or categories using PATGOdivisions (10 EEO groups x 5 PATCOoccu-
                       pational categories) and 60 categories using key jobs (10 EEO groups x 6
                       key jobs).

                      For many of the PATCOand key job categories, representation grew
                      between 1982 and 1988. This was true for 40 of the 50 PATCO categories
                      and 46 of the 60 key job categories. In some instances, a category was at
                      full representation before the increase. But in most instances, the
                      increase moved the EEO group closer to full representation or achieved it.
                      In fact, the number of categories where underrepresentation existed
in the most recent census. The CLFrepresents, in general terms, all per-
sons who are employed or seeking employment. Since Justice recruits
nationally for its key occupations, we used national CLF data, in accor-
dance with EEOCstandards.

At our request, Justice provided profiles of its work force for calendar
years 1982 through 1988. The last year for which data were available at
the time we collected the data was 1988. We used this information, sepa-
rated into PATCQand key job categories, to determine if and where
underrepresentation existed.

To gauge representation, the Em grouped (1) the federal government’s
420 white collar jobs into the five PATCOcategories and (2) each CLFoccu-
pation into the same PATCXJcategory as its federal counterpart, with
some exceptions. EEOCuses the PATCo-grouped CLFdata as the base
against which it compares work force data that agencies align by PATCO
category and key job. It also instructs agencies to do the same; that is,
use the PA’rCC-groupCLFdata as the base of comparison.

However, there can be alternatives to using this base. For example, if
the broader professional CLFcategory yields “a seriously-distorted avall-
ablity figure for a particular professional occupational series,” the EEOC,
according to the federal program manager, permits agencies to use,
where available, occupation-specific CLFdata. CLF data must be used
unless approval for other data is obtained from EEOC. “Attorney” is one
of the occupations that goes into making up the professional category,
and CLF data for attorneys are available. It is the only such key job at
Justice. Thus, in analyzing the EEO profile of the attorney work force at
Justice, we used as our base of comparison both the occupation-specific
data and the broader professional data. For reporting purposes, we
show both sets of data.

In analyzing work force data for underrepresentation, we used a term
and definition that EEOC had formerly used: “severe underrepresenta-
tion,” which exists when representation is 50 percent or less of the CLF.
The EEOC applied this definition for several years through December
1987. During this period, the EEOCdirected agencies to double their
hiring goals for EEO groups suffering severe underrepresentation.

The EEOC, however, has not applied this term and definition since Jan-
uary 1988. Since then, the EEOC, through Management Directive 714, has




page4
             B-240676




             across Justice at pay levels above the grade 12 level and (2) within five
             of Justice’s six key jobs, especially border patrol agent and criminal
             investigator.

             We reviewed, for example, the December 1988 work force profile of 10
             minority and female groups in each key job, and the underrepresenta-
             tion level was severe-50 percent or less of the cm---for nearly one-
             third of the 60 categories (10 groups X 6 jobs). However, our use of
             occupation-specific data for attorneys significantly enhanced Justice’s
             representation profile over that derived from using the broader CLF
             data.

             In addition to collecting and analyzing recruiting data, Justice could
             enhance its prospects for improving its affirmative action program by
             (1) systematically analyzing data for periods of several years to estab-
             lish trend lines, (2) adding to its affirmative employment plan numerical
             goals for increasing minority and female representation, and (3) holding
             executives more accountable for carrying out actions needed to reach its
             goals.

             Justice continues to view numerical goals as quotas and does not use
             them for that reason. The EEOC gives agencies the option of using numer-
             ical goals. It views numerical goals as a flexible tool that management
             can use for increasing representation and, unlike quotas, not requiring
             preferential treatment of minorities and females without regard to qual-
             ifications. We share the EEOC’Sviews.


             The Justice Department, with over 50,000 non-FBI employees, is the
Background   nation’s principal law enforcement agency. Through various bureaus,
             offices, boards, and divisions, it undertakes such federal law enforce-
             ment activities as investigating and litigating civil and criminal cases,
             combating illegal drug trafficking, policing the nation’s borders, and
             housing convicted criminals.

             The Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by the Equal Employment
             Opportunity Act of 1972, requires federal agencies to develop and
             implement affirmative action programs to eliminate the historic under-
             representation of minorities and women in the work force. The EEOCis
             responsible for providing agencies with guidance on their affirmative
             action programs. EEOC’S Management Directive 714, issued in October
              1987, assigns agency heads responsibility for ensuring compliance with



             Page 2                              GAO/GGDSlS   Justice   EEO Underrepresentation