1F05 Review of Executive Order Itemized Listing Data for Acceptability

Contractors must submit data and information on the results of their immediately preceding AAP, as well as submit data and information on their current year AAP if they are six months or more into the current year by the time they receive their Scheduling Letter.39

COs request the AAP data and information using the Itemized Listing that accompanies the Scheduling Letter. Several items on the Itemized Listing specify that if the contractor is six months or more into its current AAP year when the listing is received the contractor will provide OFCCP with updated data for the current AAP year. For each of these items, the contractor should provide OFCCP with as much current AAP year data as it has. This means, for example, that if the contractor is six months into its current AAP year, it should provide six months of additional data; if the contractor is seven months into its current AAP, it should provide seven months of data; and if the contractor is 10 months into its current AAP, it should provide 10 months of data.

The Itemized Listing requests data and information indicating the numerical and other results of contractors’ affirmative action goals for each job group for the current and preceding AAP years, as well as employment activity data (i.e., applicants, hires, promotions and terminations) and employee-level compensation data. It also requests copies of the contractor’s EEO-1 reports for the last three years and a copy of the contractor’s collective bargaining agreement, if applicable, including documents that implement, explain or otherwise elaborate on the provisions of the collective bargaining agreement.

a. Data on Affirmative Action Goals. As noted above, the contractor must provide information indicating the numerical results of affirmative action goals set for each job group in their immediately preceding AAP and, where applicable, results on goals set for their current AAP. For each goal not attained, or not currently being attained, contractors must describe the good faith efforts they have undertaken to achieve the goal. Provided they make good faith efforts, contractors will not be held in violation for failure to achieve the goal. Contractors should always submit goal data for the immediately preceding AAP unless they were not federal contractors covered by 41 CFR Part 60-2 during the preceding AAP year.

• Information on Job Groups with Goals. COs, in order to measure the results of goals, must first know whether a contractor established goals for its job groups and what the goals are. The contractor’s current AAP submitted for desk audit will have this information for the current year. The contractor’s report on whether it attained the goals set in the immediately preceding AAP should specifically state the goals for that prior year; however, when it does not, the CO must request a copy of the goals section of the contractor’s immediately preceding AAP.
• Information on Placements into Job Groups with Goals. Since contractors establish annual goals in terms of a percentage placement rate, evaluation of progress toward the goals requires knowledge of the total number of placements into the job groups (hires, promotions and transfers) and the number of minority and female placements, as appropriate. If a contractor’s progress report does not include this information or if it includes incomplete information (e.g., the number of minorities and females but not total placements), the CO will determine if the missing information can be obtained from the contractor’s submission of personnel activity data. If the information cannot be obtained from the personnel activity data, the CO must ask the contractor to forward a copy of the report on the progress made toward its goals as prepared under its internal audit and reporting system.40 If the contractor employs 100 or more people, a copy of the underlying data it used for its adverse impact determinations on hires, promotions and any other placements into job titles within the job group should be requested.41
• Good Faith Efforts. When a contractor’s goals report does not describe its good faith efforts to achieve the goals that it failed to meet, or does not describe those efforts in sufficient detail for a CO to evaluate their adequacy, the CO must request additional information to review during the desk audit.42 The CO must also include this request for more information in the On-Site Plan for evaluation of good faith efforts. Even if the contractor corrects the goals report, the closure letter may identify the incorrect or incomplete report as a technical violation that was corrected during the review.43

b. Review of Employment Activity Data for Acceptability

• Data Format. To be acceptable for the desk audit, the contractor must present Itemized Listing data either by job group or by job title. For example, data by total workforce is not acceptable; nor is data by EEO-1 job category, unless a category legitimately constitutes a job group at the particular establishment or the contractor has fewer than 150 employees.
• Information Included. For each job group or job title, Itemized Listing data in each major personnel activity area (e.g., applicant flow, hires, promotions and terminations) must at least include the total number of actions, the total number of actions for women and the total number of actions for minorities. For example, applicant flow for a job group or job title must include at least the total applicants, total female applicants and total minority applicants; hires for a job group or job title must include at least the total hires, total female hires and total minority hires.
• Evaluation Period Covered. It is generally better to have the longest possible period because the data are more likely to reflect the contractor’s usual way of operating. At a minimum, however, the Itemized Listing data must cover the immediately preceding AAP year and, if the contractor is six months or more into its current AAP year when it receives the Scheduling Letter, the current AAP year. If there are indicators of a violation, the evaluation period will extend to cover the two years before the contractor’s receipt of the Scheduling Letter, as long as the contractor was covered by 41 CFR Part 60-2 during that period. To fully investigate and understand the scope of potential violations, the CO may need to examine information relating to periods after the date of the Scheduling Letter to determine, for example, if violations are continuing or have been remedied. If the CO believes it is necessary to request information for periods after the date of the Scheduling Letter, the CO must discuss the issue with his or her supervisor.
• Source of Applicant Data. COs must determine if a contractor used the internet to recruit for any job group(s). When the AAP does not readily specify the applicant pool for job groups in which individuals applied through the internet, the CO must contact the contractor to request the criteria used by the contractor in defining applicants for the job position(s) in question. The contractor’s submission should address the following four questions:
  • Did the individual express an interest in employment through the internet or related electronic data technologies?
  • Did the contractor consider the individual for employment in a particular position?
  • Did the individual’s expression of interest indicate that the individual possesses the basic qualifications for the position?
  • Did the individual at any point in the contractor’s selection process, before receiving an offer of employment from the contractor, remove him or herself from further consideration or otherwise indicate that he or she was no longer interested in the position?

To be acceptable, the contractor must identify the electronic data technologies used to collect expressions of interest, the specific job positions for which the contractor considered applications through the internet and the basic qualifications for these positions. COs will note unacceptable submissions in Part B.II of the SCER, and investigate during the on-site review.

c. Review of Employee-Level Compensation Data. The Itemized Listing requests data regarding the contractor’s compensation, including employee-level compensation information and policies related to compensation practices.

• Data Format. The contractor should electronically submit all of the compensation data requested, if the data is computerized. The data must also be contained within a single file.
• Information Included. The CO must review the data to ensure it includes compensation, gender, and race/ethnicity information, and hire date for each employee, as well as job title, EEO-1 category and job group. Compensation includes base salary and/or wage rate, and hours worked in a typical workweek. Other compensation or adjustments to salary such as bonuses, incentives, commissions, merit increases, locality pay or overtime should be identified separately for each employee. Data should be present for all employees, including full-time, part-time, contract, per diem or day labor, and temporary employees, as of the date of the workforce analysis in the contractor’s AAP.

Additional data that may be included are data on factors used to determine employee compensation such as education, experience, duty location, performance ratings, department or function, and salary level/band/range/grade. Documentation and policies related to compensation practices of the contractor should also be included in the submission, particularly those that explain the factors and reasoning used to determine compensation.

• Time Period of Data. The CO must verify that the “snapshot date” for employee-level compensation data is the same as the date for the organizational display or workforce analysis submitted by the contractor.

d. Action When Data Are Unacceptable. If employment activity or compensation data are submitted but not acceptable, COs must call the contractor and request that the appropriate changes are promptly made and the data resubmitted within the timeframe specified by the OFCCP field office. If, at the end of the allotted timeframe, the data are not received in an acceptable form, COs will recommend issuing an SCN specifying the regulatory sections the contractor violated.

Examples of unacceptable data submissions include, but are not limited to, instances where the data are in aggregations larger than job group or are not provided by sex, or by racial or ethnic category.