The challenge facing the Commission is how it can build on its recent successes by creating an enforcement program that has the maximum impact on workplace discrimination within the confines of its budget. Field offices have reduced the charge inventory by more than 40%, victims of discrimination are recovering more benefits as a result of Commission enforcement efforts, and the number of cases in the agency's docket that challenge the most serious violations is increasing. The Commission has made substantial progress in many areas since implementation of the Priority Charge Handling Procedures ( PCHP) in 1995 and the National Enforcement Plan ( NEP) in 1996. Report of the Priority Charge Handling and Litigation Task Forces Reports and Common Definitions Required for LEP Activity C. Techniques for Facilitating Case Development APPENDICES A.

Legal Unit Support to Area and Local Offices The Roles of District Directors and Regional AttorneysĪdministrative Obstacles to Field Office Efficiency

Legal/Investigative Interaction 52 Investigator/Attorney Collaboration Pre-Determination, Settlements, Conciliation and ADR The Identification and Investigation of A Charges Priority Charge Handling Implementation 41 IntroductionĬase Categorization and NEP/ LEP Intake Issues The Local Enforcement Plan 31 The Commission's LEP PolicyĬommissioner Charges and Directed Investigations Headquarters Support of NEP Case Development EEOC - A Strategic Law Enforcement Agency 13 Headquarters Support and Technical Assistance Determining the Success of the Commission's Enforcement Program The ChallengeĪ Tool for Improvement: The Local Enforcement Plan Chair, Priority Charge Handling Task ForceĬONTENTS Executive Summary I.

Pdi new life program dallas