For The Recruitment, Hiring, Advancement,

Agency decision

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

AFFIRMATIVE

ACTION PLAN

AND REPORT

For The Recruitment, Hiring, Advancement,

and Retention of Persons With Disabilities

FISCAL YEAR 2023

A F F I R M AT I V E A C T I O N P L A N

CONTENTS

SPECIAL PROGRAM PLAN FOR THE RECRUITMENT, HIRING, ADVANCEMENT,

AND RETENTION OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES (PART J). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Section I: Efforts to Reach Regulatory Goals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Section II: Model Disability Program. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Plan to Provide Sufficient & Competent Staffing for the Disability Program. . . . . . . . . . 4

Plan to Ensure Sufficient Funding for the Disability Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Section III: Plan to Recruit and Hire Individuals with Disabilities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Plan to Identify Job Applicants with Disabilities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Plan to Establish Contacts with Disability Employment Organizations. . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Progression towards Goals (Recruitment and Hiring). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Section IV: Plan to Ensure Advancement Opportunities for Employees with Disabilities . . . . 15

Advancement Program Plan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Career Development Opportunities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Awards. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Promotions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Section V: Plan to Improve Retention of Persons with Disabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

Voluntary and Involuntary Separations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

Accessibility of Technology and Facilities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Reasonable Accommodation Program. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Personal Assistance Services Allowing Employees to Participate in the Workplace . . . . . . 37

Section VI: EEO Complaint and Findings Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

EEO Complaint Data Involving Harassment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

EEO Complaint Data Involving Reasonable Accommodation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

Section VII: Identification and Removal of Barriers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

TABLE B1: TOTAL WORKFORCE—DISTRIBUTION BY DISABILITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

TABLE B1-2: TOTAL WORKFORCE—DISTRIBUTION BY DISABILITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

TABLE B2: TOTAL WORKFORCE BY REGIONAL OFFICES AND

HEADQUARTERS—DISTRIBUTION BY DISABILITY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

TABLE B3: OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORIES—DISTRIBUTION BY DISABILITY . . . . . . . . . 53

Prepared by

THE OFFICE OF EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY

FISCAL YEAR 2023

TABLE B4P: PARTICIPATION RATES WITHIN GRADES BY

DISABILITY–PERMANENT WORKFORCE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

TABLE B4T: PARTICIPATION RATES WITHIN GRADES BY

DISABILITY—TEMPORARY WORKFORCE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

TABLE B5P: PARTICIPATION RATES WITHIN SALARY RANGES BY

DISABILITY—PERMANENT WORKFORCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

TABLE B5T: PARTICIPATION RATES WITHIN SALARY RANGES BY

DISABILITY—TEMPORARY WORKFORCE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

TABLE B6P: PARTICIPATION IN MISSION CRITICAL OCCUPATIONS BY

DISABILITY—PERMANENT WORKFORCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

TABLE B6T: PARTICIPATION IN MISSION CRITICAL OCCUPATIONS BY

DISABILITY—TEMPORARY WORKFORCE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82

TABLE B7: PARTICIPATION RATES FOR SENIOR GRADE LEVELS BY

DISABILITY—PERMANENT WORKFORCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97

TABLE B8: PARTICIPATION RATES FOR MANAGEMENT POSITIONS BY

DISABILITY—PERMANENT WORKFORCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .107

TABLE B9-1: EMPLOYEE RECOGNITION AND AWARDS—PARTICIPATION

BY DISABILITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .116

TABLE B9-2: EMPLOYEE RECOGNITION AND AWARDS—INCLUSION WITHIN

THE PERMANENT WORKFORCE BY DISABILITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .120

A F F I R M AT I V E A C T I O N P L A N

SPECIAL PROGRAM PLAN FOR

THE RECRUITMENT, HIRING,

ADVANCEMENT, AND RETENTION OF

PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES (PART J)

To capture agencies’ affirmative action plan for persons with disabilities (PWD) and persons with

targeted disabilities (PWTD), EEOC regulations (29 C.F.R. § 1614.203(e)) and MD-715 require

agencies to describe how their plan will improve the recruitment, hiring, advancement, and retention

of applicants and employees with disabilities. All agencies, regardless of size, must complete this Part

of the MD-715 report.1

SECTION I: EFFORTS TO REACH REGULATORY GOALS

EEOC regulations (29 C.F.R. § 1614.203(d)(7)) require agencies to establish specific numerical

goals for increasing the participation of persons with reportable and targeted disabilities in the

federal government.

In FY 2022, OPM changed the format of Applicant Flow Data with respect to disability identification. A new “disability

omitted” category was added, which includes both applicants who did not submit a disability identification form and

applicants who selected they did not wish to answer questions on their disability on the disability identification form.

The SEC’s MD-715 workforce tables account for persons who did not submit a form in a new “No Form” column, and

persons who selected they did not wish to answer questions on their disability in the “Not Identified” column. Since the

agency has no information on the disability status of persons who did not submit a form, persons who did not submit a

form are not included in the totals.

FISCAL YEAR 2023

1. Using the goal of 12% as the benchmark, does your Agency have a trigger involving PWD by

grade level cluster in the permanent workforce? If “yes”, describe the trigger(s) in the text box.

a. Cluster GS-1 to GS-10 (PWD)

b. Cluster GS-11 to SES (PWD)

Yes 0

Yes X

No X

No 0

This report presents separate results for both persons with disabilities (PWD) and persons

with targeted disabilities (PWTD) employed, or seeking employment, with the U.S. Securities

and Exchange Commission (SEC). As required by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity

Commission (EEOC), the analysis and report reflect the participation of persons with

(targeted) disabilities in two different “clusters” – Cluster GS-1 to GS-10, and Cluster GS-11

to SES (senior officer-equivalent for the SEC). The clusters are calculated based on the

locality adjusted salary specified in the revised regulations implementing Section 501 of the

Rehabilitation Act of 1973. As a point of reference, in FY 2023 the locality adjusted salary

of a GS-11, step 1, in the Washington, DC, area was $78,592.

The EEOC has established numerical goals for the employment and utilization of PWD

(12%) and PWTD (2%) for each of the two clusters. The SEC’s goal is to meet and exceed

these relevant benchmarks for PWD and PWTD for each cluster.

The SEC included permanent and temporary employees hired under authorities that

take disability into account as PWD under the relevant hiring authority. Permanent and

temporary employees who did not self-identify on standard form 256 (SF-256) as having

a disability but whose personnel record indicates they received veterans’ preference (e.g.,

CPS – preference based on compensable service-connected disability of 30% or more) are

included in the total PWD workforce data tables. Similarly, permanent and temporary

employees not self-identified on SF-256 but whose personnel record documents that they

were hired or converted into the competitive service under Schedule A, part u (5 C.F.R. §

213.3102(u) Appointment of persons with intellectual disabilities, severe physical disabilities,

or psychiatric disabilities) are included in the total PWD workforce for purposes of

utilization analysis.

For employees with salaries below a GS-11, step 1, the agency achieved the numerical goal

for PWD participation; three or 46.15% of employees in this cluster were PWD compared to

the 12% benchmark. See Table B5.

For employees with locality adjusted salaries above a GS-11, step 1, the agency did not

achieve the required numerical goal: 9.69% of employees in this cluster were PWD

compared to the 12% benchmark. While the numerical goal was not achieved, the current

participation rate represents an increase of 3.12 percentage points since the end of FY 2015.

Between FY 2015 and FY 2023, the participation of PWD in the total workforce increased

from 6.57% to 9.69%.

A F F I R M AT I V E A C T I O N P L A N

2. Using the goal of 2% as the benchmark, does your Agency have a trigger involving PWTD by

grade level cluster in the permanent workforce? If “yes”, describe the trigger(s) in the text box.

a. Cluster GS-1 to GS-10 (PWTD)

b. Cluster GS-11 to SES (PWTD)

Yes 0

Yes X

No X

No 0

The SEC achieved the numerical goal established for PWTD in the lower salary cluster

during FY 2023. In the lower salary cluster, 1 of the 10 permanent employees is a PWTD

(7.69%). The SEC did not achieve the numerical goal for PWTD among higher-salaried

employees, as 1.81% of higher-salaried employees are PWTD.

3. Describe how the Agency has communicated the numerical goals to the hiring managers

and/or recruiters.

The SEC’s Office of Human Resources (OHR) continues to implement the 2022 – 2024

Recruitment Strategy (Recruitment Strategy) to “Increase workforce representation for people

with disabilities and people with targeted disabilities.” The Recruitment Strategy employs

two goals toward this objective: (1) build a talent pool of qualified Schedule A applicants;

and (2) improve veteran recruitment efforts. SEC senior leadership, OHR, the Office of Equal

Employment Opportunity (OEEO), and Office of Minority and Women Inclusion (OMWI)

are working together to communicate these goals throughout the agency. The plan has been

made available to all SEC employees on the SEC’s intranet, AskHR.

OHR continues to provide training and develop new resources to improve awareness and

communicate opportunities to utilize special hiring authorities, including Schedule A hiring

options. Through training and conversations with hiring managers, OHR continues to

reinforce how the agency may improve progress toward achieving numerical goals. A checklist

is used by OHR staffing specialists when vacant positions are identified to ensure hiring

managers understand all of their options for filling positions, including using Schedule A

and veterans’ hiring authorities for those applicants with a service-connected disability of

30% or more.

SEC division and office heads and employees have access to the agency’s Diversity Dashboard,

an interactive web-enabled data feed that aggregates workforce data. Multiple views of

gender, race, generation, veteran, and disability status provide a real-time status on the

progress the agency is making toward its goals.

Continued on the next page

FISCAL YEAR 2023

OHR also continues to share workforce data through the Human Capital Reporting &

Analytics (HCRA) Dashboard. The HCRA provides, among other key human capital

metrics, aggregate data on the disability status for self-identified PWD and PWTD. A

series of data filters enable leaders to understand employee gains and losses within their

particular division or office for specific occupations, grades, and duty stations. OHR uses

this information to support human capital strategic planning.

SECTION II: MODEL DISABILITY PROGRAM

Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. §1614.203(d)(1), agencies must ensure sufficient staff, training and resources

to recruit and hire persons with disabilities and persons with targeted disabilities, administer

the reasonable accommodation program and special emphasis program, and oversee any other

disability hiring and advancement program the Agency has in place.

Plan to Provide Sufficient & Competent Staffing for the Disability Program

1. Has the Agency designated sufficient qualified personnel to implement its disability program

during the reporting period? If “no”, describe the Agency’s plan to improve the staffing for the

upcoming year.

Yes X

No 0

The agency designated sufficient talent acquisition resources and full-time equivalents (FTE)

to Special Programs classification, recruitment, and staffing in support of the Disability

Program. In FY 2023, OHR designated a new full-time position for the Disability and

Veterans programs to serve as the primary point of contact for the disability community

and work on recruitment, staffing, policies, and procedures. In addition, the agency

approved hiring for another FTE and added three contractor personnel to the reasonable

accommodation (RA) component of the agency’s Disability Program.

A F F I R M AT I V E A C T I O N P L A N

2. Identify all staff responsible for implementing the Agency’s disability employment program by the

office, staff employment status, and responsible official.

Number of Full-Time Equivalent Staff

by Employment Status

Disability Program Task

Processing applications from PWD

and PWTD

Full Time

Part Time

Collateral

Duty

Responsible Official

(Name, Title, Office, Email)

Xiya Li, Branch Chief, Recruitment,

Outreach and Special Hiring Programs

Office of Human Resources

lixiy@sec.gov

Jacqueline Twiner, Branch Chief, Staffing

Office of Human Resources

twinerj@sec.gov

Answering questions from the

public about hiring authorities

that take disability into account

Xiya Li, Branch Chief, Recruitment,

Outreach and Special Hiring Programs

Office of Human Resources

lixiy@sec.gov

Jacqueline Twiner, Branch Chief, Staffing

Office of Human Resources

twinerj@sec.gov

Processing reasonable

accommodation requests from

applicants and employees

Shalisha Bazemore, Deputy Chief

Human Capital Officer / Acting Disability

Program Manager

Office of Human Resources

bazemores@sec.gov

Section 508 Compliance

Sharvon Jones, Section 508 Coordinator

Governance Branch

Office of Information Technology

jonessh@sec.gov

Architectural Barriers Act Compliance

Reema Gupta, Architect

Office of Support Operations (OSO)

Office of Building Operations (OBO)

guptare@sec.gov

Saji Alummuttil, Architect

OSO-OBO

alummuttils@sec.gov

Carla Hairston, NCIDQ, COEE, Space

Management Specialist

OSO-OBO

hairstonc@sec.gov

Special Emphasis Program for PWD

and PWTD

Rachael Tsuchitani,

Disability Program Advisor

Office of Human Resources

tsuchitanir@sec.gov

FISCAL YEAR 2023

3. Has the Agency provided disability program staff with sufficient training to carry out their

responsibilities during the reporting period? If “yes”, describe the training that disability program

staff have received. If “no”, describe the training planned for the upcoming year.

Yes X

No 0

RA Program staff, including the Disability Program Officer, receive on-the-job training and

periodically attend training programs. The office also reviews recent case law to stay current

with developments in this area. The RA Program Manager and coordinators completed

courses specific to accommodating disabilities, the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, the

Providing Urgent Maternal Protections for Nursing Mothers Act (PUMP Act), religious

accommodations, performance management, hiring, and retaining PWD and PWTD via

webinars sponsored by the EEOC, LRP Publications, and through the SEC’s on-demand

learning management system, LEAP.

More generally, all of the SEC’s HR specialists have completed training courses related

to staffing and placement offered by the USDA Graduate School or Office of Personnel

Management (OPM) and through various other platforms. The agency’s training and

development office, SEC University, also offers learning options that include processing

applications for PWD and PWTD. The agency will continue these practices in the future.

Plan to Ensure Sufficient Funding for the Disability Program

1. Has the Agency provided sufficient funding and other resources to successfully implement the

disability program during the reporting period? If “no”, describe the Agency’s plan to ensure all

aspects of the disability program have sufficient funding and other resources.

Yes X

No 0

The agency was resourced adequately during the reporting period to successfully implement

the Disability Program. In FY 2023, the agency also designated a new, full-time position to

serve as the primary point of contact for the veteran and disability community to work on

recruitment, staffing, policies, and procedures.

A F F I R M AT I V E A C T I O N P L A N

SECTION III: PLAN TO RECRUIT AND HIRE INDIVIDUALS

WITH DISABILITIES

Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.203(d)(1)(i) and (ii), agencies must establish a plan to increase the

recruitment and hiring of individuals with disabilities. The questions below are designed to identify

outcomes of the Agency’s recruitment program plan for PWD and PWTD.

Plan to Identify Job Applicants with Disabilities

1. Describe the programs and resources the Agency uses to identify job applicants with disabilities,

including individuals with targeted disabilities.

The SEC is committed to being a model employer for people with disabilities. The SEC uses a

streamlined approach to the general hiring process using the Schedule A hiring authority for

PWD. As such, external hiring requests are filtered through the Selective Placement Program

Coordinator (SPPC) for review. The SPPC refers eligible applicants to hiring managers prior to

or concurrently with the general staffing process.

OHR also continued to take steps toward improving the representation of PWD and PWTD

in applicant pools. Since implementation of the Recruitment Strategy, the SEC has realized

an increase in the overall representation of PWD through effective recruitment and outreach

efforts that identify the agency as an employer of choice. The SEC used OPM’s Agency

Talent Portal to search for resumes of individuals with disabilities. Invitations to complete

the web-form and/or apply to jobs posted on USAJOBS.gov are sent to individuals with

disabilities who demonstrated an interest in mission-critical occupations (MCO) at the SEC.

In FY 2023, OHR also piloted posting open continuous job announcements on USAJOBS for

the examiner and accountant MCOs, open only for veterans and PWD. The announcements

were used as an additional tool to increase the number of eligibles in the database that can

be non-competitively referred for future SEC vacancies. More than 1,300 applications were

received across the two announcements. Through the end of the fiscal year, eight lists of

eligibles were referred to hiring managers with a total of 332 applicants from the database.

In FY 2023, the agency maintained a strong recruitment presence and attended four virtual

career fairs and events to support other disability recruitment efforts in building talent pools

for future employment.

In FY 2023, OHR also hosted two career fairs specifically targeting individuals with

disabilities and veterans seeking employment opportunities in the SEC’s MCOs and will

continue seeking opportunities to engage with law and business students interested in

internships with the SEC. Further, OHR continues to retain and review applications from

PWD for future openings and conducts targeted outreach to connect with qualified candidates

by collaborating with community-based partners such as nonprofit organizations, national

and local disability organizations, and federally funded state and local employment programs.

Finally, OHR continues to leverage the Disability Interests Advisory Committee (DIAC), an

employee affinity group, for recruitment resources and assistance.

FISCAL YEAR 2023

2. Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.203(a)(3), describe the Agency’s use of hiring authorities that

take disability into account (e.g., Schedule A) to recruit PWD and PWTD for positions in the

permanent workforce.

The agency uses a variety of available resources that support hiring through Schedule A and

other hiring authorities that take disability into account.

The Disability Program Manager and/or SPPC receives notifications and newsletters from the

following groups and transmits information to OHR staff engaged in recruitment:

EARN—Employer Assistance Resource Network: askearn.org

JAN—Job Accommodation Network: askjan.org

ODEP—Office of Disability Employment Policy, Department of Labor:

dol.gov/agencies/odep

OWF—Operation Warfighter Program: warriorcare.dodlive.mil/carecoordination/

operation-warfighter/

3. When individuals apply for a position under a hiring authority that takes disability into account

(e.g., Schedule A), explain how the Agency (1) determines if the individual is eligible for

appointment under such authority and (2) forwards the individual’s application to the relevant

hiring officials with an explanation of how and when the individual may be appointed.

The following describes three procedures for processing applications under the Schedule

A hiring authority for persons with disabilities, one used in response to a specific

vacancy posting and the other two for Schedule A applications to be considered for future

SEC vacancies.

1. OHR processes Schedule A applications in response to a Job Opportunity

Announcement (JOA).

Applicants who wish to be considered for a specific vacancy under the Schedule A hiring

authority must submit the appropriate documentation when applying for a current open

JOA. The SEC defers to the OPM-identified appropriate documentation. Applications

are reviewed by HR specialists to determine if the applicant is minimally qualified as

identified in the JOA. If the applicant is minimally qualified, that individual is referred to

the hiring manager on a separate certificate of eligible candidates. HR specialists provide

written guidance to hiring managers via email that explains how Schedule A applicants

can be selected once the certificate has been issued.

Continued on the next page

A F F I R M AT I V E A C T I O N P L A N

2. OHR also processes unsolicited Schedule A applications.

Applicants who wish to be considered under the Schedule A hiring authority, outside

the process for a specific vacancy posting, must submit the appropriate documentation

as identified by OPM with their application. The SPPC will proactively contact the

prospective applicant if the individual did not submit the required documentation. The

application will not be processed until the appropriate documentation is received.

Resumes submitted directly to the SPPC are reviewed to determine eligibility. Building a

pool of qualified candidates is important to the SEC; as such, the agency has developed a

Schedule A Resume Database.

The SEC process for hiring starts with a Staffing Action Request Form (SARF) submitted

by the hiring manager. Upon request, when a SARF is received by OHR, the SPPC

compiles a certificate of eligible candidates from the database per the job series and grade

and refers candidates to hiring managers. The SPPC conducts a one-on-one consultation

with the hiring manager to discuss the certificate of eligible candidates, as appropriate.

The SEC’s administrative regulations on its Veterans Employment Program provides

instruction for hiring veterans with disabilities and was last updated in December 2021.

The agency’s administrative regulations are available upon request.

3. OHR processes Schedule A applications in a response to an Open Continuous

Announcement-Open to Persons with Disabilities and Veterans.

Applicants who wish to be considered under the Schedule A hiring authority for

future SEC vacancies through the posted announcement must submit the appropriate

documentation with their application, as identified by OPM. Resumes received through

the open continuous announcement will be reviewed by the SPPC to determine eligibility.

Upon receipt of a SARF, the SPPC compiles a certificate of eligibles and refers candidates

to hiring managers prior to a competitive vacancy announcement posted on USAJOBS.

Written guidance is then provided to hiring managers via email to explain how Schedule

A and veteran candidates can be selected and conducts one-on-one consultation with the

hiring manager, as needed.

FISCAL YEAR 2023

4. Has the Agency provided training to all hiring managers on the use of hiring authorities that take

disability into account (e.g., Schedule A)? If “yes”, describe the type(s) of training and frequency.

If “no”, describe the Agency’s plan to provide this training.

Yes X

No 0

N/A 0

In FY 2023, OHR Staffing specialists used a hiring checklist in the one-on-one conversation

with hiring managers. The checklist contains a section on Schedule A hiring of PWD, and the

specialist advises hiring managers on the Schedule A hiring process and offers it as a course of

action where applicable.

To increase awareness about the Schedule A hiring process and options available to hiring

managers, OHR also developed and launched online training. Additional resources and fact

sheets are available to hiring managers via the SEC’s intranet, AskHR.

In FY 2023, hiring managers were invited to take a survey to gauge awareness of PWD hiring

and appointment flexibilities. The results of the survey will determine additional FY 2024

training and outreach needs.

The SEC will continue to promote among hiring managers the successful use of Schedule

A hiring to support the SEC’s Recruitment Strategy and Affirmative Action Plan for the

Recruitment, Hiring, Advancement, and Retention of Persons with Disabilities.

A F F I R M AT I V E A C T I O N P L A N

Plan to Establish Contacts with Disability Employment Organizations

1. Describe the Agency’s efforts to establish and maintain contacts with organizations that assist

PWD, including PWTD, in securing and maintaining employment.

The SEC’s SPPC continued to maintain established partnerships with organizations that

assist PWD and PWTD in securing and maintaining employment. The SPPC updated

the SEC’s list of affinity organizations to maintain contact and foster relationships for

recruitment events and candidate sourcing.

The SPPC also maintains an ongoing relationship with the SEC’s DIAC and the Veterans

Committee members which help support the agency’s efforts to recruit PWD and PWTD.

In addition, the agency continued work to strengthen partnerships with stakeholders to

include SEC program offices, such as OMWI, the National Treasury Employees Union

(NTEU), DIAC, and employee affinity groups to identify sustainable actions to improve

the agency’s diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility initiatives for the PWD and

PWTD communities. These actions continue to promote greater inclusion of the PWD

and PWTD communities in the SEC workforce.

Progression towards Goals (Recruitment and Hiring)

1. Using the goals of 12% for PWD and 2% for PWTD as the benchmarks, do triggers exist for

PWD and/or PWTD among the new hires in the permanent workforce? If “yes”, please describe

the triggers below.

a. New Hires for Permanent Workforce (PWD) Yes 0

b. New Hires for Permanent Workforce (PWTD) Yes X

No X

No 0

In FY 2023, the agency hired 412 permanent employees, of which PWD and PWTD

represented 12.62% and 0.97%, respectively, of all new hires. As such, the agency achieved

the 12% goal for new hires of PWD for the first time in FY 2023 but did not achieve the

numerical goal of 2% participation of new hires for PWTD. See Table B1.

FISCAL YEAR 2023

2. Using the qualified applicant pool as the benchmark, do triggers exist for PWD and/or PWTD

among the new hires for any of the mission-critical occupations (MCO)? If “yes”, please describe

the triggers below.

a. New Hires for MCO (PWD)

b. New Hires for MCO (PWTD)

Yes X

No 0

In FY 2023, the SEC hired and onboarded a total of 412 permanent staff employees.

Among these newly hired staff members were 337 persons in MCO positions as follows:

235 attorneys; 26 accountants; 31 securities compliance examiners; 26 IT management

specialists; and 19 economists. Thirty-five of the 337 (9.74%) newly onboarded MCO

permanent staff were PWD.

As a preliminary matter, differences may be observed in comparing the demographic statistics

of the qualified applicant pool (QAP), selections, and new hires onboarded. Reasons for

these differences vary. Some newly hired staff applied for a vacancy posted in the prior fiscal

year or may have elected not to volunteer demographic information with their application.

In addition, in FY 2023, some divisions posted open continuous announcements for which

the applicant flow data do not fall into a specific fiscal year based on the close dates of the

postings. Triggers comparing the composition of PWD and PWTD in applicant flow versus

new hire data should be interpreted with these differences in mind.

Triggers were observed for PWD in the hiring of permanent economists, accountants,

securities compliance examiners, and attorneys as follows:

For economists, 10.53% of new hires were PWD, below their representation in the QAP

of 13.68%.

For attorneys, 8.09% of new hires were PWD, below their representation in the QAP

13.16%.

For accountants, 3.85% of new hires were PWD, below their representation in the QAP

of 8.27%.

For securities compliance examiners, 3.23% of new hires were PWD, below their

representation in the QAP of 8.74%

Continued on the next page

A F F I R M AT I V E A C T I O N P L A N

For IT management, 42.31.% of new hires were PWD, above their representation in the

QAP of 32.64%.

Triggers were also observed for PWTD in the attorney, IT management, economist, and

accountant occupations:

One-hundred seven PWTD were in the QAP (3.84%) for attorneys; no PWTD

were hired.

Forty-seven PWTD were in the QAP (5.75%) for IT management; no PWTD

were hired.

Thirty-three PWTD were in the QAP (6.64%) for economists; no PWTD were hired.

Five PWTD were in QAP (1.07%) for securities compliance examiners; no PWTD

were hired.

Twenty-one PWTD was in the QAP (3.22%) for accountants; no PWTD were hired.

See Table B6.

3. Using the relevant applicant pool as the benchmark, do triggers exist for PWD and/or PWTD

among the qualified internal applicants for any of the mission-critical occupations (MCO)? If

“yes”, please describe the triggers below.

a. Qualified Applicants for MCO (PWD)

b. Qualified Applicants for MCO (PWTD)

Yes 0

No X

In the FY 2023 data presented in Table B6, differences were identified in the participation

of PWD in the qualified internal applicants for competitive promotions as compared to the

relevant applicant pool (RAP) within the Attorney occupation.

The RAP was defined for each MCO based on the number of employees holding a

qualifying occupation series and in the SK-levels encumbered at the agency between

SK-11 and SK-16. Specifically, for attorneys, the RAP included all employees in the 0905

series. For accountants, the RAP included all employees in the 0510 series. For securities

compliance examiners, the RAP included all employees in the 1831 and the 0501, Financial

Administration and Program series. For the IT management occupation, the RAP included

all employees in the 2210 series, and for the economist occupation, the RAP included all

employees in the 0110 series.

Continued on the next page

FISCAL YEAR 2023

None of the MCOs had a trigger between the RAP and qualified internal applicants.

Accountants, securities compliance examiners, IT management specialists, and economists all

had qualified internal applicants that exceeded their RAP, both for PWD and PWTD. Within

the attorney occupation, the QAP among PWTD (1.04%) was within one percentage point

of the RAP (1.12%); thus no trigger was observed.

4. Using the qualified applicant pool as the benchmark, do triggers exist for PWD and/or PWTD

among employees promoted to any of the mission-critical occupations (MCO)? If “yes”, please

describe the triggers below.

a. Promotions for MCO (PWD)

b. Promotions for MCO (PWTD)

Yes X

No 0

The selection data indicate a difference for PWD in the attorney, accountant, securities

compliance examiner, economist, and IT management occupations.

For attorneys, the QAP for PWD was 6.22%, and PWD were 1.39% of selections.

For accountants, the QAP for PWD was 22.03%, and PWD were 0.00% of selections.

For securities compliance examiners, the QAP was 12.16%, and PWD were 0.00%

of selections.

For economists, the QAP for PWD was 11.54%, and PWD were 0.00% of selections.

For IT management, the QAP for PWD was 48.19%, and PWD were 28.57%

of selections.

The selection data also indicate there were differences between selections and the qualified

applicant pool for PWTD in the attorney, accountant, securities compliance examiner,

economist, and IT management occupations.

For attorneys, the QAP for PWTD was 1.04%, and PWTD were 0.00% of selections.

For accountants, the QAP for PWTD was 3.39%, and PWTD were 0.00% of selections.

For IT management, the QAP for PWTD was 9.84%, and PWTD were 0.00%

of selections.

For economists, the QAP for PWTD was 11.54%, and PWTD were 0.00% of selections.

For securities compliance examiners, the QAP for PWTD was 2.70%, and PWTD were

0.00% of selections.

A F F I R M AT I V E A C T I O N P L A N

SECTION IV: PLAN TO ENSURE ADVANCEMENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR

EMPLOYEES WITH DISABILITIES

Pursuant to 29 C.F.R §1614.203(d)(1)(iii), agencies are required to provide sufficient advancement

opportunities for employees with disabilities. Such activities might include specialized training and

mentoring programs, career development opportunities, awards programs, promotions, and similar

programs that address advancement. In this section, agencies should identify, and provide data on

programs designed to ensure advancement opportunities for employees with disabilities.

Advancement Program Plan

1. Describe the Agency’s plan to ensure PWD, including PWTD, have sufficient opportunities

for advancement.

To promote EEO, the agency takes a number of steps to ensure that opportunities for

advancement are open and available to all in the workforce, including PWD and PWTD.

The following describes efforts to promote opportunities for advancement.

Information about training, the agency’s Mentoring Program, and career development

opportunities is widely shared with the workforce via SEC Today, which is the SEC’s daily

newsletter published agency wide.

OHR maintains a user-friendly, interactive portal, AskHR, on the SEC’s intranet, which

provides employees with information about hiring, compensation and benefits, employee

development, performance management, and disability accommodations, among a number

of other topics.

The SEC Veterans Committee hosts a website that includes information concerning veterans’

benefits and a link to the Feds Hire Vets website that highlights special hiring authorities

for veterans.

DIAC regularly communicates with its membership, which includes PWD and PWTD,

about its own activities, other events, developmental opportunities, and job postings or

support available to the workforce. These more targeted communications help ensure

that PWD and PWTD are aware of the available options and any processes for requesting

participation or enrollment.

OHR reserved five (5) slots in the 2023 Mentoring Program cohort for employees with

disabilities and collaborated with DIAC to communicate this opportunity to its membership.

An additional 12 slots were delegated to the Division of Enforcement Diversity Council

to nominate individuals and a number of those slots went to people with disabilities. The

agency ultimately enrolled 17 mentees who are employees with disabilities.

Continued on the next page

FISCAL YEAR 2023

In addition, in FY 2021, the SEC launched a cross-office working group comprised of

senior officers who are champions of disability inclusion, subject matter experts in OHR,

OEEO, OMWI, and key members of the DIAC. This working group began meeting in

FY 2021 and, leveraging evidence-based data, made 17 recommendations to management

in FY 2022 related to the recruitment, hiring, career development, promotion, reasonable

accommodation, and retention of PWD and PWTD at the SEC (PWD Recommendations).

A new cross-office working group (comprised of OHR, OMWI, OEEO, OIT, and OCOO)

was launched in FY 2023 and charged with implementing the PWD Recommendations.

By the end of FY 2023, the SEC had implemented 12 of the 17 recommendations,

including: sharing the Schedule A PWD list with division/office hiring managers prior to the

publication of a job announcement provided there are qualified candidates in the resume

database to refer; generating a larger talent pool of Schedule A PWD candidates through

open continuous announcements and by marketing the web-form that is used to collect

information from prospective candidates who identify as PWD; hosting two career fairs for

PWD and veterans; creating more training resources for hiring managers; increasing outreach

and communication to colleges, universities, and professional organizations; and sharing

aggregate disability data with divisions/offices.

To ensure progress was made on the recommended actions, the implementation working

group met on a monthly basis and scheduled accountability meetings with agency leaders—

including the agency’s Operations Steering Committee (a standing committee that is

consulted on various matters, including those related to the agency’s human capital), the

Diversity Council, the Chief Operating Officer, and the two senior officer co-leads for the

working group that developed the recommendations. The accountability meetings not

only serve to hold the working group accountable but also serve as an opportunity to

request needed resources and/or support from other agency stakeholders in the

implementation phase.

The remaining PWD Recommendations accepted by the agency will be the focus of

intentional effort in FY 2024, along with implementing accountability measures to continue

to monitor the ongoing actions for the recommendations being implemented.

A F F I R M AT I V E A C T I O N P L A N

Career Development Opportunities

1. Please describe the career development opportunities that the Agency provides to its employees.

The SEC provides numerous opportunities for employees to acquire the skills and

certifications needed to succeed in their technical positions and to progress in their careers.

Classroom-style and e-Learning programs offer an extensive array of learning opportunities

in technical areas (e.g., courses on hedge funds, mutual funds, and credit derivatives), as well

as in leadership development, to SEC senior leaders and non-supervisory staff alike. Among

the variety of learning and development offerings, the SEC offers the career development

training programs highlighted below. Data on participation in these programs is captured

along with other training program data in the section below.

The EIG Fellows Program, coordinated by the Partnership for Public Service, strengthens

the leadership skills of experienced federal employees through a combination of

innovative coursework, best practices benchmarking, challenging action-learning

projects, executive coaching, and government wide networking. This program is offered

to SEC employees in the SK-14 to SK-17 (a mix of supervisory and non-supervisory)

levels. SEC’s EIG Fellows attend facilitated sessions to share what they are learning and

to explore how this information can be applied to improve organizational performance,

workplace relationships, and productivity.

The Aspiring Leaders Program is an interactive blended-learning program designed to

strengthen the leadership and management skills of SEC non-supervisory (SK-13 and

SK-14) employees. The program covers: critical leadership skills for effective supervision;

first-line management responsibilities; understanding government policy, process, and

regulations relevant to management; and increasing self-awareness through guided selfassessments and feedback.

C.O.R.E. is a transformative professional development experience, with a focus on the

unique perspectives of minority leaders at the SEC, and provides tools and techniques

to increase participants’ effectiveness, span of contributions and engagement within

their function, and support their personal well-being and growth. The series equips

participants, including minority leadership talent, with knowledge, skills, and strategies

to successfully manage unique challenges as they strive to reach senior-level positions at

the SEC while helping to drive the agency’s overall success and mission effectiveness. The

series has five two-hour webinars, in which participants learn strategies for authentic

and difficult conversations, managing conflict, and exploring the role that emotions play

in leadership outcomes.

Continued on the next page

FISCAL YEAR 2023

In addition to the career development programs referenced above, the agency encourages

employees, including PWD and PWTD, to pursue leadership development through a variety

of program offerings, including both individual coaching and an agency-wide mentoring

program. In FY 2023, 45 SEC managers engaged in coaching with an external coach. Due

to confidentiality considerations, the SEC does not track demographic information for the

employees engaged in coaching opportunities. Non-supervisory offerings developed for

leaders without formal authority included, for example, Unlocking Innovation Through

Diversity and Managing Your Personal Brand and Impact and Influence. (Courses are

designed to enhance individual development, relationship-building, support diversity and

inclusion values SEC-wide, and develop leadership behaviors for SEC leaders at all levels.)

In FY 2022, the SEC finalized and launched a Leadership Evaluation and Development

(LEAD) Program, which emphasizes the importance of certain leadership skills essential

for success at the SEC. In FY 2023, the SEC maintained the developmental components of

the LEAD Program while pilot testing the leadership assessments, using them as part of the

selection process for SO positions in OCOO and the Division of Investment Management.

The LEAD pilot for selecting senior officers included validated standardized leadership

assessments that screen candidates on essential leadership competencies in a fair and legally

compliant manner. Based on the pilot test, in FY 2024, OHR is planning to focus efforts

on formalizing a robust senior leadership developmental program, while also continuing

to provide a framework and website for employees to investigate and seek leadership

development resources and tools. The easy-to-navigate website will continue to be available

to all SEC employees to identify and access leadership development tools and tips to help

them advocate for relevant leadership development opportunities that are aligned to critical

SO leadership competencies.

The agency also promotes a robust Detail Program. Detail opportunities offer SEC

employees short-term rotational assignments to gain knowledge and experience within

another SEC division or office. Details are advertised internally via SEC Today and allow

employees to temporarily move laterally, without a change in grade or pay, to learn about

programs and subject matter areas throughout the agency.

A F F I R M AT I V E A C T I O N P L A N

Total Participants

PWD

Selectees

(#)

Internship Programs

3,395

406

6.82

9.38

2.39

2.60

Fellowship Programs

5.13

0.00

2.04

0.00

2.38

Career Development Opportunities

Applicants

(%)

PWTD

Applicants

(#)

Selectees

(%)

Applicants

(%)

Selectees

(%)

Mentoring Programs

23.81

2.38

Coaching Programs

Training Programs

54,079

9.48

1.74

Detail Programs

370

183

6.60

7.43

1.35

0.55

Other Career Development Programs

14.81

14.89

7.41

6.38

Notes to help the reader understand the data above:

The SEC’s Mentoring Program was open for registration to all employees. Mentees were selected

on a first-come, first-served basis.

Due to confidentiality considerations, the SEC does not track demographic information for

employees engaged in coaching programs.

Training Programs data show demographic data for all permanent employees’ registrations for

training in LEAP, Pluralsight, Becker, The Practising Law Institute, and Udemy, who completed

training opportunities during FY 2023. All eligible employees who register or apply are invited

or selected to complete the training course. Applicant and selectee participation records are thus

identical. These applicant registration and selectee records may include more than one training

opportunity per employee. Therefore, the total registration and participation data exceed the

total number of employees.

In FY 2023, the SEC expanded the type of information included in reporting on Detail Programs.

The FY 2023 MD-715 Report includes information both from detail opportunities that did

not include a change in grade as well as detail opportunities that did include a change in grade.

Current staff’s view is that both types of details represent opportunities for career development.

Previous years’ MD-715 reporting on detail programs only summarized information for

Temporary Promotions announced by the agency for competitive selection (which produces

Applicant Flow Data in USA Staffing©). They did not include lateral details or non-competitive

temporary promotions, which may be filled without posting to USAJOBS, and represent 94

percent of the agency’s detail opportunities. When this additional dataset of detail opportunities

was included, PWD represented a much smaller proportion of detail applicants and selectees than

computed under previous MD-715 Reports’ methods, and PWTD represented a slightly larger

proportion of applicants and selectees.

FISCAL YEAR 2023

In this report, the agency included FY 2023 selection data for its leadership development

programs, including the Excellence in Government Fellows Program, the Aspiring Leaders

Program, and C.O.R.E., as well as approved participation in Harvard University’s Strategic

Management of Regulatory Enforcement Agencies course. While completion of these programs

does not lead to placement at a specific grade (a criterion for inclusion in the MD-715 Workforce

Data Tables), they do contribute to the pool of employees who may potentially be considered for

leadership positions in the future. Data for these leadership programs have been consolidated into

the “Other Career Development Programs” category.

2. Do triggers exist for PWD among the applicants and/or selectees for any of the career

development programs? (The appropriate benchmarks are the relevant applicant pool for the

applicants and the applicant pool for selectees.) If “yes”, describe the trigger(s) in the text box.

a. Applicants (PWD)

b. Selections (PWD)

Yes X

No 0

From the Career Development Opportunities table as described above, data on the

participation of PWD and PWTD in applications and selections for various programs

were reviewed.

For the Internship Program, 6.82% of applicants were PWD and PWD were 9.38% of

selections. As selections had a higher percentage of PWD than the percentage of PWD

among applicants, there was no trigger for internships.

For the agency’s economist, accountant, and attorney Fellows programs, the agency noted a

difference in the participation of PWD among (external) applicants for these programs and

eventual selections for positions. While 5.13% of applicants were PWD, none of the Fellows

hired were PWD (0.00%).

Within the agency’s Mentoring Program (selections were on a first-come, first-served basis),

the agency found no evidence of a trigger. PWD represent 23.81% of those employees

who expressed interest in the Mentoring Program and 23.81% of those selected for

mentoring. This was an increase of about double the proportion of applicants who were

PWD in FY 2022 (12.90%).

In FY 2023, training data includes trainings approved on standard form 182 through the

agency’s learning management system, LEAP, and trainings from Pluralsight, Becker, the

Practising Law Institute, and Udemy. Aggregate PWD participation in training programs

matched their participation on rolls: 9.48% of trainings were completed by PWD,

compared to 9.82% of permanent employees who are PWD. No trigger was found for

applications or selections.

Continued on the next page

A F F I R M AT I V E A C T I O N P L A N

FY 2023 data include information about lateral details as well as temporary promotions.

PWD were a smaller percentage of applicants for detail opportunities than their representation in the workforce. PWD were 6.60% of applicants for detail opportunities compared

to 9.82% of the SEC workforce. However, PWD were a larger proportion of those selected

than their representation among applicants. PWD were 7.43% of selections compared to

6.60% of applicants.

Selection data for PWD on other career development programs indicated no evidence of

a trigger for PWD. PWD were 14.89% of selectees among the consolidated selectees of

the Excellence in Government, Aspiring Leaders, and C.O.R.E. programs, and 9.82% of

permanent SEC employees.

3. Do triggers exist for PWTD among the applicants and/or selectees for any of the career development programs identified? (The appropriate benchmarks are the relevant applicant pool for

applicants and the applicant pool for selectees.) If “yes”, describe the trigger(s) in the text box.

a. Applicants (PWTD)

b. Selections (PWTD)

Yes X

No 0

From the Career Development Opportunities table above, data on the participation of

PWTD in various programs were reviewed for equality of employment opportunity in the

applications and selections for these programs.

FY 2023 showed few triggers among PWTD applicants for career development programs.

However, several triggers remained among selections.

In the agency’s Economist, Accountant, and Attorney Fellows programs, the agency had a

trigger for selections among PWTD. PWTD were 2.04% of applicants, but no PWTD were

selected as Fellows in FY 2023.

For the Internship Program, 2.39% of applicants were PWTD, and PWTD were 2.60%

of selections.

Within the agency’s Mentoring Program, the participation rate for PWTD among applicants

(2.38%) approximated the percentage of PWTD among permanent staff (1.84%). Thus, no

trigger was found among applicants. The participation of PWTD among employees selected

for mentoring in FY 2023 was equal to the proportion of applicants, as all applicants were

selected on a first-come, first-served basis. Thus, no trigger was found among selections.

Continued on the next page

FISCAL YEAR 2023

No evidence of a trigger was found among applicants or selections in the training programs.

In the aggregate, training records show that PWTD participated in training programs about

equal to their participation on rolls; 1.74% of training opportunities requiring special

approval were completed by PWTD, compared to 1.84% of permanent employees.

Data about detailed employees show evidence of a difference for PWTD among those who

applied for detail opportunities (1.35%) compared to PWTD in the permanent workforce

(1.84%). The data also indicated a 0.8 percentage point difference between PWTD selections

and applicants. While 1.35% of applicants for detail opportunities were PWTD, PWTD

represent 0.55% of those selected.

Data on other career development programs indicated high representation of PWTD among

applicants for leadership programs, at 7.41 percent. However, selection data suggested a

one percentage point trigger at the selection phase. Of 54 selectees among the consolidated

selectees for the Excellence in Government, Aspiring Leaders, and C.O.R.E. programs,

6.38% of selections were PWTD, and 7.41% of applicants were PWTD.

Awards

1. Using the inclusion rate as the benchmark, does your Agency have a trigger involving PWD and/

or PWTD for any level of the time-off awards, bonuses, or other incentives? If “yes”, please

describe the trigger(s) in the text box.

a. Awards, Bonuses, & Incentives (PWD)

b. Awards, Bonuses, & Incentives (PWTD)

Yes X

No 0

Table B9-2 presents information on awards distributed to employees during the year as

part of the SEC’s Employee Recognition Program. The EEOC has suggested that agencies

consider awards distribution based on inclusion rates, the degree to which each employee

group is distributed across workforce indicators, e.g., awarded or separated. This analysis

requires aggregating data to the person level as presented in Table B9-2. Employees who

received at least one award in any particular award category are counted once in this table.

Aggregated data enables inclusion to be calculated as the proportion for all PWD and PWTD

who received each type or category of award. In contrast, Table B9-1 presents participation

rates among awards distributed. One employee can and often does receive more than one

award in a year. In Table B9-1, one employee is represented more than once if he or she

received more than one award in that category. Differences in calculation should be noted

when interpreting data from Tables B9-1 and B9-2.

Continued on the next page

A F F I R M AT I V E A C T I O N P L A N

The inclusion rate for PWD was calculated by comparing the number and percent of

employees with disabilities who received at least one award in each applicable program

element to the number and percent of employees without a disability (this category combines

persons with no disability and those who did not identify as having a disability) who received

at least one award in each applicable program element.

The inclusion rate for PWTD was calculated by comparing the number and percent of

employees with targeted disabilities who received at least one award in each applicable

program element to the number and percent of employees without a targeted disability

(this category combines persons with no disability, those who did not identify as having a

disability, and those with a disability that is not targeted) who received at least one award in

each applicable program element.

The agency found a trigger in the distribution of time-off awards of 11-40 hours for PWD.

The inclusion rate for PWD was 25.05%, while the inclusion rate for people without

disability was 26.69%. The inclusion rate for PWTD was 30.23%.

For cash awards, the agency found triggers for PWD and PWTD for cash awards of $1,000$1,999, $2,000 – $2,999, and $3000 or more.

For cash awards at the $1,000 – $1,999 level, the inclusion rate for PWD was 32.90%, and

the inclusion rate for persons without disability was 40.59%. The inclusion rate for PWTD

was 33.72%, and the inclusion rate for persons with no targeted disability was 40.59%.

For cash awards at the $2,000 – $2,999 level, the inclusion rate for PWD was 9.59%, and the

inclusion rate for persons without disability was 13.55%. The inclusion rate for PWTD was

8.14%, and the inclusion rate for persons with no targeted disability was 13.25%.

For cash awards at the $3,000 or more level, the inclusion rate for PWD was 3.27%, and the

inclusion rate for persons without disability was 1.99%. The inclusion rate for PWTD was

1.16%, and the inclusion rate for persons with no targeted disability was 2.14%.

OEEO researched the observed differences in the distribution of discretionary awards, made

recommendations, and is actively monitoring the implementation as part of our barrier

analysis program.

FISCAL YEAR 2023

2. Using the inclusion rate as the benchmark, does your Agency have a trigger involving PWD and/

or PWTD for quality step increases or performance-based pay increases? If “yes”, please describe

the trigger(s) in the text box.

a. Pay Increases (PWD)

b. Pay Increases (PWTD)

Yes 0

No X

The agency did not have a trigger for PWD or PWTD for performance-based pay increases.

3. If the Agency has other types of employee recognition programs, are PWD and/or PWTD

recognized disproportionately less than employees without disabilities? (The appropriate

benchmark is the inclusion rate.) If “yes”, describe the employee recognition program and

relevant data in the text box.

a. Other Types of Recognition (PWD)

b. Other Types of Recognition (PWTD)

Yes 0

No 0

N/A X

N/A

Promotions

1. Does your Agency have a trigger involving PWD among the qualified internal applicants and/or

selectees for promotions to the senior grade levels? (The appropriate benchmarks are the relevant

applicant pool for qualified internal applicants and the qualified applicant pool for selectees.) For

non-GS pay plans, please use the approximate senior grade levels. If “yes”, describe the trigger(s)

in the text box.

a. SES

Qualified Internal Applicants (PWD)

Internal Selections (PWD)

b. Grade GS-15

Qualified Internal Applicants (PWD)

Internal Selections (PWD)

c. Grade GS-14

Qualified Internal Applicants (PWD)

Internal Selections (PWD)

d. Grade GS-13

Qualified Internal Applicants (PWD)

Internal Selections (PWD)

A F F I R M AT I V E A C T I O N P L A N

Yes 0

Yes X

No X

No 0

Yes 0

Yes X

No X

No 0

Yes 0

Yes X

No X

No 0

Yes 0

Yes X

No X

No 0

The SEC crosswalks the agency’s SK alternative pay plan’s senior-grade levels to the General

Schedule according to the following equivalencies: SES = SO and EX; GS-15 = SK-16 and

SK-17; GS-14 = SK-14 and SK-15; GS-13 = SK-13. Note that the relevant applicant pools

for the SK-grade equivalencies of the GS-14 and GS-15 levels combine data across SK-grade

levels. This combination was made to conform analyses to the format provided, though the

actual RAPs for individual SK levels differ.

Table B7 presents the relevant FY 2023 data to assess whether triggers exist with regard to

promotions to senior-grade levels. Of 1,349 qualified internal applications for senior-grade

level positions, 414 (30.69%) were submitted by PWD.

No differences were observed among the qualified applicants compared to the RAP for PWD

at any senior-grade level.

Among internal selections, differences were observed at the SES, GS-15, GS-14, and GS-13

equivalent levels. Of the 128 selections for internal promotions to senior-grade levels in Table

B7, 6.25% were PWD, which was below their availability in the QAP at 30.69%.

At the SES equivalent level, PWD represented 54.43% of qualified applicants, while no

selections were PWD.

At the GS-15 equivalent level, PWD represented 16.11% of qualified applicants, while they

represented 3.90% of selections.

At the GS-14 equivalent level, PWD represented 39.39% of qualified applicants, while they

represented 10.20% of selections.

At the GS-13 equivalent level, PWD represented 44.44% of qualified applicants, while no

selections were PWD.

FISCAL YEAR 2023

2. Does your Agency have a trigger involving PWTD among the qualified internal applicants and/or

selectees for promotions to the senior grade levels? (The appropriate benchmarks are the relevant

applicant pool for qualified internal applicants and the qualified applicant pool for selectees.) For

non-GS pay plans, please use the approximate senior grade levels. If “yes”, describe the trigger(s)

in the text box.

a. SES

Qualified Internal Applicants (PWTD)

Internal Selections (PWTD)

b. Grade GS-15

Qualified Internal Applicants (PWTD)

Internal Selections (PWTD)

c. Grade GS-14

Qualified Internal Applicants (PWTD)

Internal Selections (PWTD)

d. Grade GS-13

Qualified Internal Applicants (PWTD)

Internal Selections (PWTD)

Yes 0

Yes X

No X

No 0

Yes 0

Yes X

No X

No 0

Yes 0

No X

Yes 0

Yes X

No X

No 0

Applying the same comparisons to PWTD as described above, the agency presents

information on trigger identification for PWTD in promotions to senior-grade levels. Of

1,349 qualified internal applications for senior-grade level positions, 84 (6.23%) were

submitted by PWTD, and 2 (1.56%) selected were PWTD.

No differences were observed among qualified applicants at any of the senior grades. Among

selections, triggers were observed at the SES, GS-15, and GS-13 equivalent levels.

At the SES equivalent level, PWTD represented 8.86% of the qualified applicants, and

represented no selections.

At the GS-15 equivalent level, PWTD represented 1.93% of qualified applicants, and

represented no selections.

At the GS-13 equivalent level, PWTD represented 9.72% of qualified applicants, and

represented no selections.

There was no trigger observed at the GS-14 level. PWTD represented 4.31% of qualified

applicants, and 4.08% of selections were PWTD.

A F F I R M AT I V E A C T I O N P L A N

3. Using the qualified applicant pool as the benchmark, does your Agency have a trigger involving

PWD among the new hires to the senior grade levels? For non-GS pay plans, please use the

approximate senior grade levels. If “yes”, describe the trigger(s) in the text box.

a. New Hires to SES (PWD)

b. New Hires to GS-15 (PWD)

c. New Hires to GS-14 (PWD)

d. New Hires to GS-13 (PWD)

Yes

The QAP from Table B7 summarizes data where the applicant self-identified with a disability

and qualified for the position. Data in this table describe vacancies for permanent positions

with the SEC that were posted in USAJOBS with a closing date during the fiscal year. In

contrast, Table B7 also presents data on new hires onboarded during the course of the

fiscal year; some of whom applied for a vacancy posted prior to the start of the fiscal year,

and some of whom were onboarded from open, continuous postings. Differences may be

observed in the demographic statistics of those selected versus those onboarded as new

hires. Triggers comparing the composition of PWD and PWTD (see Question 5 immediately

below) in applicant flow versus new hire data should be interpreted with these differences

in mind.

Applying the same grade equivalencies that were described in Section IV.D.1, the agency

presents information on trigger identification for PWD new hires to senior grade levels based

on reviewing Table B7. In FY 2023, 337 persons were hired into senior grade level positions

as follows: Eight into SES equivalent positions, 50 into GS-15 equivalent positions, 162 into

GS-14 equivalent positions, and 117 into GS-13 equivalent positions. Thirty-eight of those

337 (11.28%) hires identified as PWD. Triggers were observed among new hires to the

GS-15 equivalent, GS-14 equivalent, and GS-13 equivalent levels. The following evaluates

participation of PWD in each senior-grade equivalent level.

At the GS-15 equivalent level, the QAP was 13.50% PWD, and 4.00% of the 50 hires

identified as PWD.

At the GS-14 equivalent levels, the QAP was 15.74% PWD, and 11.11% of the 162 hires

identified as PWD.

There was no trigger among new hires at the GS-13 equivalent level. The QAP was 12.94%

PWD, while 13.68% of the 117 hires identified as PWD.

There was no trigger among new hires at the SES equivalent level. The QAP was 11.06%

PWD, and 25.00% (two hires) identified as PWD.

FISCAL YEAR 2023

4. Using the qualified applicant pool as the benchmark, does your Agency have a trigger involving

PWTD among the new hires to the senior grade levels? For non-GS pay plans, please use the

approximate senior grade levels. If “yes”, describe the trigger(s) in the text box.

a. New Hires to SES (PWTD)

b. New Hires to GS-15 (PWTD)

c. New Hires to GS-14 (PWTD)

d. New Hires to GS-13 (PWTD)

Yes

Applying the same grade equivalencies that were described above, the agency presents

information on trigger identification for PWTD new hires to senior-grade levels. The QAP

for PWTD was 4.32%.

The agency found triggers in participation of PWTD between qualified applicants and new

hires at the SES, GS-15, GS-14, and GS-13 equivalent levels.

More detail about each senior-grade level follows in descending order by level.

At the SES equivalent level, the QAP was 2.98% PWTD; no new hires were PWTD.

At the GS-15 equivalent level, the QAP was 4.20%; no new hires were PWTD.

At the GS-14 equivalent level, the QAP was 4.99% PWTD; 0.62% of the newly-hired

GS-14 equivalent staff were PWTD.

At the GS-13 equivalent level, the QAP was 3.05% PWTD; 1.71% of the newly hired staff

members were PWTD.

A F F I R M AT I V E A C T I O N P L A N

5. Does your Agency have a trigger involving PWD among the qualified internal applicants and/or

selectees for promotions to supervisory positions? (The appropriate benchmarks are the relevant

applicant pool for qualified internal applicants and the qualified applicant pool for selectees.) If

“yes”, describe the trigger(s) in the text box.

a. Executives

Qualified Internal Applicants (PWD)

Internal Selections (PWD)

b. Managers

Qualified Internal Applicants (PWD)

Internal Selections (PWD)

c. Supervisors

Qualified Internal Applicants (PWD)

Internal Selections (PWD)

Yes 0

Yes X

No X

No 0

Yes 0

Yes X

No X

No 0

Yes 0

Yes X

No X

No 0

The SEC cross-walked the agency’s alternative pay plan supervisory levels to the executive,

manager, and supervisor levels according to the following equivalencies: Executives

= SO; Managers = SK-17 and the supervisory Administrative Law Judges in pay plan

Administrative Law (AL); and Supervisors = employees or positions at SK-levels below

SK-17 who hold supervisory status. The agency notes that, similar to the senior-grade level

equivalencies, the relevant applicant pools for supervisory levels at the agency combine data

across multiple SK levels. This combination was made to conform analyses to the format

provided, though the actual RAPs for the specific leadership levels differ.

FY 2023 data underlying Table B8 are relevant for assessing whether triggers exist with

regard to promotions to supervisory or managerial positions. Among the promotions in

FY 2023 were 66 persons promoted to a leadership position at the supervisor, manager,

or executive level: 1 SO, 38 managers, and 27 supervisors. The following evaluates

participation of PWD in each leadership level.

For the executive, manager, and supervisor levels, there were no differences to the disadvantage of PWD in the QAP compared to the RAP. However, there were triggers at all three

levels with respect to selections. For executives, the QAP was 59.55% and no PWD were

selected. For managers, the QAP was 18.06%, and PWD were 2.63% of selections. For

supervisors, the QAP was 32.84%, and PWD were 3.70% of selections.

FISCAL YEAR 2023

6. Does your Agency have a trigger involving PWTD among the qualified internal applicants and/or

selectees for promotions to supervisory positions? (The appropriate benchmarks are the relevant

applicant pool for qualified internal applicants and the qualified applicant pool for selectees.) If

“yes”, describe the trigger(s) in the text box.

a. Executives

Qualified Internal Applicants (PWTD)

Internal Selections (PWTD)

b. Managers

Qualified Internal Applicants (PWTD)

Internal Selections (PWTD)

c. Supervisors

Qualified Internal Applicants (PWTD)

Internal Selections (PWTD)

Yes 0

Yes X

No X

No 0

Yes 0

Yes X

No X

No 0

Yes 0

Yes X

No X

No 0

Applying the same grade equivalencies that were described above, the agency presents

information on trigger identification for PWTD internal promotions to supervisory positions

from Table B8. For the executive, manager, and supervisor levels, there were no differences

to the disadvantage of PWD in the QAP compared to the Relevant Applicant Pool. However,

there were triggers at all three levels with respect to selections. Of 66 individuals selected for

promotion, none were PWTD.

At the executive level, the agency observed triggers with respect to selections for promotion.

The QAP was 8.99%, and there were no PWTD selections. However, there was only one

promotion selection made at the executive level in FY 2023.

At the manager level, the agency observed a trigger with respect to selections for promotions.

The QAP for PWTD was 2.26%, while no selections were PWTD.

At the supervisor level, the agency observed a trigger with respect to selections for

promotions. The QAP for PWTD was 7.35%, while no selections were PWTD.

A F F I R M AT I V E A C T I O N P L A N

7. Using the qualified applicant pool as the benchmark, does your Agency have a trigger involving

PWD among the selectees for new hires to supervisory positions? If “yes”, describe the trigger(s)

in the text box.

a. New Hires for Executives (PWD)

b. New Hires for Managers (PWD)

c. New Hires for Supervisors (PWD)

Yes 0

Yes X

No X

No 0

Applying the same grade equivalencies that were described above, the agency presents

information on trigger identification for PWD new hires into leadership positions. Table B8

is relevant for assessing whether differences exist with regard to applicants and new hires in

supervisory positions for PWD (this question) and PWTD (see the next question).

Differences were found in FY 2023 new hire data for PWD at the manager and supervisor levels.

Among the 412 newly hired staff members in FY 2023 were 19 persons hired into leadership

positions: eight SOs, six SK-17 managers, and five supervisors below SK-17. Two of those

19 (10.53 %) newly hired permanent staff in leadership positions identified as PWD. The

following evaluates participation of PWD in each leadership level.

For executives, the QAP was 11.06% PWD, and two of the eight (25.00%) newly hired

permanent executives identified as PWD.

For managers, the QAP was 20.59% PWD, and none of the six newly hired managers

identified as PWD.

For supervisors, the QAP was 14.04% PWD, and none of the five newly hired permanent

supervisors identified as PWD.

FISCAL YEAR 2023

8. Using the qualified applicant pool as the benchmark, does your Agency have a trigger involving

PWTD among the selectees for new hires to supervisory positions? If “yes”, describe the trigger(s)

in the text box.

a. New Hires for Executives (PWTD)

b. New Hires for Managers (PWTD)

c. New Hires for Supervisors (PWTD)

Yes X

No 0

Differences were found in the new hire data for PWTD at the executive, manager, and

supervisor levels.

For executives, the QAP was 2.98% PWTD, and no PWTD were hired for executive

positions in FY 2023.

For managers, the QAP was 5.88% PWTD, and no PWTD were hired for manager positions

in FY 2023.

For supervisors, the QAP was 3.86% PWTD, and no PWTD were hired for supervisor

positions in FY 2023.

A F F I R M AT I V E A C T I O N P L A N

SECTION V: PLAN TO IMPROVE RETENTION OF PERSONS

WITH DISABILITIES

To be a model employer for persons with disabilities, agencies must have policies and programs in

place to retain employees with disabilities. In this section, agencies should: (1) analyze workforce

separation data to identify barriers to retaining employees with disabilities; (2) describe efforts to

ensure accessibility of technology and facilities; and (3) provide information on the reasonable

accommodation program and workplace personal assistance services.

Voluntary and Involuntary Separations

1. In this reporting period, did the Agency convert all eligible Schedule A employees with a disability

into the competitive service after two years of satisfactory service (5 C.F.R. § 213.3102(u)(6)(i))?

If “no”, please explain why the Agency did not convert all eligible Schedule A employees.

Yes X

No 0

N/A 0

The SEC maintains discretion on conversions to a career or career-conditional appointment

among employees on Schedule A appointments. As a general practice, those Schedule A

employees who were not converted voluntarily accepted a new Schedule A appointment

within the agency. During FY 2023, four employees were converted to the competitive

service under the Schedule A hiring authority after two years of their most recent Schedule

A appointment. Thirteen employees are currently serving on their most recent Schedule A

appointment that was processed within the past two years. All 13 employees are serving on

an initial Schedule A appointment that has not reached the two-year threshold. Eleven staff

members were newly hired under Schedule A during FY 2023. A review of records for other

Schedule A employees who were hired or transferred to the SEC and remain on rolls at the

close of FY 2023 confirms that all were converted to the competitive service within two years

of their most recent Schedule A appointment.

FISCAL YEAR 2023

2. Using the inclusion rate as the benchmark, did the percentage of PWD among voluntary and involuntary separations exceed that of persons without disabilities? If “yes”, describe the trigger below.

a. Voluntary Separations (PWD)

b. Involuntary Separations (PWD)

Yes 0

No X

Data from Table B1-2 on voluntary and involuntary separations by disability were used to

calculate the inclusion rates. Inclusion rates were calculated as the number of PWD who

separated among all PWD in the workforce, compared to the same proportion among

persons with no disability (this category is combined with those who did not self-identify

as having a disability).

The agency did not identify a trigger for voluntary separations in FY 2023. The inclusion rate

on voluntary separations was 5.01% for PWD, and 4.03% for persons with no disability.

The inclusion rate on involuntary separations was 0.00% for PWD and 0.07% for persons

with no disability.

3. Using the inclusion rate as the benchmark, did the percentage of PWTD among voluntary and

involuntary separations exceed that of persons without targeted disabilities? If “yes”, describe the

trigger below.

a. Voluntary Separations (PWTD)

b. Involuntary Separations (PWTD)

Yes 0

No X

Using data from Table B1-2, the inclusion rates were calculated as the number of PWTD

who separated among all PWTD in the workforce, compared to that same proportion

among persons with no targeted disability (this group also includes those who did not selfidentify as having a disability and those with a disability that is not targeted).

The agency did not have a trigger for voluntary separations in FY 2023. For PWTD, the

inclusion rate on voluntary separations was 3.49%, and the inclusion rate for persons with

no targeted disability was 4.14%.

For PWTD, there were no involuntary separations in FY 2023, and among persons with no

targeted disability, the inclusion rate for involuntary separations was 0.07%.

A F F I R M AT I V E A C T I O N P L A N

4. If a trigger exists involving the separation rate of PWD and/or PWTD, please explain why they

left the Agency using exit interview results and other data sources.

Not applicable. There were no triggers involving separation rates in FY 2023.

Accessibility of Technology and Facilities

Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.203(d)(4), federal agencies are required to inform applicants and

employees of their rights under Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. § 794(b))

concerning the accessibility of Agency technology, and the Architectural Barriers Act of 1968 (42

U.S.C. § 4151-4157) concerning the accessibility of Agency facilities. In addition, agencies are required

to inform individuals where to file complaints if other agencies are responsible for a violation.

1. Please provide the internet address on the Agency’s public website for its notice explaining

employees’ and applicants’ rights under Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act, including a

description of how to file a complaint.

The agency’s public website provides information on the employee and applicant rights

under Section 508: https://www.sec.gov/disability/sec_access and directs complaints to

Section508Complaint@sec.gov.

2. Please provide the internet address on the Agency’s public website for its notice explaining

employees’ and applicants’ rights under the Architectural Barriers Act, including a description

of how to file a complaint.

Information is posted on SEC.gov: http://www.sec.gov/disability/sec_access.htm. This

page contains the required notice explaining employees’ and applicants’ rights under the

Architectural Barriers Act, including how to file a complaint alleging violations of the

Architectural Barriers Act.

FISCAL YEAR 2023

3. D

escribe any programs, policies, or practices that the Agency has undertaken, or plans on

undertaking over the next fiscal year, designed to improve accessibility of Agency facilities

and/or technology.

The SEC continues to improve upon current practices in place to ensure all ICT is accessible

to internal and external parties, as mandated by the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. The agency’s

testing and validation process includes dedicated resources, testing tools, documented test

processes, and a remediation process. The majority of ICT products and tools are tested

before they are deployed. Upon completion of testing, project teams are notified of the

defects and are instructed to submit for approval a Remediation Plan, indicating a definitive

timeline in which the vendor will make the respective product 508 compliant.

The Office of Public Affairs has been instrumental in educating SEC staff on the guidelines

and importance of Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act. Training courses have been

offered, as well as “how to” videos that inform staff of the process with making electronic

information technologies accessible to all parties.

The Office of Information Technology will be active in supporting the SEC Administrative

Regulation that defines roles and responsibilities of SEC staff to address formal Section 508

Complaint Procedures related to accessibility of IT programs and services.

Reasonable Accommodation Program

Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.203(d)(3), agencies must adopt, post on their public website, and

make available to all job applicants and employees, reasonable accommodation procedures.

1. Please provide the average time frame for processing initial requests for reasonable

accommodations during the reporting period. (Please do not include previously approved

requests with repetitive accommodations, such as interpreting services.)

In FY 2023, the SEC processed 97% of accommodation requests (which includes offering

interim accommodations) within 45 business days.

A F F I R M AT I V E A C T I O N P L A N

2. D

escribe the effectiveness of the policies, procedures, or practices to implement the Agency’s

reasonable accommodation program. Some examples of an effective program include timely

processing requests, timely providing approved accommodations, conducting training for

managers and supervisors, and monitoring accommodation requests for trends.

The SEC published in FY 2022 the revised RA policy and operating procedures to include

a revised timeframe to process requests for accommodation. During FY 2023, the agency

received 146 reasonable accommodation requests from employees and job applicants,

47% of which were received during Quarter 2, FY 2023. In FY 2023, the SEC processed

97% of accommodation requests (which includes offering interim accommodations) within

45 business days.

Personal Assistance Services Allowing Employees to Participate

in the Workplace

Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.203(d)(5), federal agencies, as an aspect of affirmative action, are

required to provide personal assistance services (PAS) to employees who need them because of a

targeted disability, unless doing so would impose an undue hardship on the Agency.

1. Describe the effectiveness of the policies, procedures, or practices to implement the PAS

requirement. Some examples of an effective program include timely processing requests for

PAS, timely providing approved services, conducting training for managers and supervisors,

and monitoring PAS requests for trends.

The agency’s Reasonable Accommodation (RA) Operating Procedures (SECOP 6-80)

includes information regarding the process for requesting PAS. Although distinguishable

from other types of reasonable accommodation, requests for PAS will be initiated,

processed, and otherwise addressed in the same manner described in the RA Operating

Procedures. Similarly, medical information, to include medical confidentiality and disclosure

provisions, and the responsibilities of the Disability Program officer, the employee, and

other relevant staff (e.g., supervisors, RA coordinators) during the interactive process, apply

to all requests for PAS. Program provisions for requesting and providing decisions on PAS

reasonable accommodation requests are the same as the process for requesting reasonable

accommodation described in the agency policy and related operating procedures and are

available on the agency public and internal websites. In FY 2023, the materials related to

PAS were updated to explain eligibility requirements, types of PAS, and how to request

services under the new RAIMS process. The agency will continue to provide PAS-related

resources and other materials on its intranet portal and offer related training to managers,

supervisors, and employees throughout FY 2024.

Continued on the next page

FISCAL YEAR 2023

SEC employees are asked to submit PAS requests through the RAIMS portal. Agency Form

2943, Request for Personal Assistance Services, remains available to capture the needs of

employees seeking personal assistance services. The agency has a contract in place to support

employees with targeted disabilities needing PAS, including reader and nurse services. In

FY 2023, the agency did not receive or process any new requests for PAS services.

During FY 2023, the agency conducted general training for managers and supervisors on the

Rehabilitation Act, their role and responsibilities in the reasonable accommodation process

to include the interactive process provision, and how to respond appropriately when an

individual places them on notice of the need for reasonable accommodation. New managers

and supervisors are required to attend scheduled training on the agency’s provisions for

reasonable accommodation. Additionally, program-specific information is disseminated

during the New Employee Orientation and through the College of Leadership & Team

Development (CLTD) Fundamentals of Human Resources Management course offered by

the agency’s learning office, SECU. The CLTD 307 training provides specific, scenario-based

illustrations for supervisors and managers to heighten awareness about the RA Program,

details general characteristics of available accommodations typically requested by employees

with disabilities (e.g., PAS) and clarifies assumptions about roles and responsibilities with

respect to the agency’s RA Program. Moreover, refresher training course offerings are readily

available for employees and managers through the agency’s learning platform. The training

provides an effective overview of the Rehabilitation Act, Americans with Disabilities Act, and

the federal and SEC RA process.

A F F I R M AT I V E A C T I O N P L A N

SECTION VI: EEO COMPLAINT AND FINDINGS DATA

EEO Complaint Data Involving Harassment

1. During the last fiscal year, did a higher percentage of PWD file a formal EEO complaint alleging

harassment, as compared to the government-wide average?

Yes 0

No X

N/A 0

2. During the last fiscal year, did any complaints alleging harassment based on disability status result

in a finding of discrimination or a settlement agreement?

Yes 0

No X

N/A 0

3. If the Agency had one or more findings of discrimination alleging harassment based on disability

status during the last fiscal year, please describe the corrective measures taken by the Agency.

During FY 2023, the agency did not have any findings of discrimination alleging harassment

based on disability status.

EEO Complaint Data Involving Reasonable Accommodation

1. During the last fiscal year, did a higher percentage of PWD file a formal EEO complaint alleging

failure to provide a reasonable accommodation, as compared to the government-wide average?

Yes 0

No X

N/A 0

2. During the last fiscal year, did any complaints alleging failure to provide reasonable

accommodation result in a finding of discrimination or a settlement agreement?

Yes X

No 0

N/A 0

3. If the Agency had one or more findings of discrimination involving the failure to provide a

reasonable accommodation during the last fiscal year, please describe the corrective measures

taken by the Agency.

During FY 2023, the agency did not have any findings of discrimination involving the failure

to provide reasonable accommodation.

FISCAL YEAR 2023

SECTION VII: IDENTIFICATION AND REMOVAL OF BARRIERS

Element D of MD-715 requires agencies to conduct a barrier analysis when a trigger suggests

that a policy, procedure, or practice may be impeding the employment opportunities of a

protected EEO group.

1. Has the Agency identified any barriers (policies, procedures, and/or practices) that affect

employment opportunities for PWD and/or PWTD?

Yes 0

No X

2. Has the Agency established a plan to correct the barrier(s) involving PWD and/or PWTD?

Yes 0

No 0

N/A X

3. Identify each trigger and plan to remove the barrier(s), including the identified barrier(s),

objective(s), responsible official(s), planned activities, and, where applicable, accomplishments.

Not applicable for the FY 2023 reporting period.

A F F I R M AT I V E A C T I O N P L A N

Significant

Disfigurement [93]

Dwarfism [92]

Significant Psychiatric

Disorder [91]

Intellectual Disability

[90]

Epilepsy or Other

Seizure Disorders

[82]

Partial or Complete

Paralysis [60]

Significant Mobility

Impairment [40]

Missing Extremities

[31]

Blind or Serious

Difficulty Seeing [20]

Deaf or Serious

Difficulty Hearing [19]

Traumatic Brain

Injury [03]

Developmental

Disability [02]

PWTD

Total PWD

Other PWD1

Disability

[02-03, 06-99]

Not Identified [01]

No Disability [05]

TOTAL

EMPLOYMENT

TENURE

TABLE B1: TOTAL WORKFORCE—DISTRIBUTION BY DISABILITY [OPM FORM 256 SELF-IDENTIFICATION CODES]

PAY PERIODS 202222 TO 202322

TOTAL WORKFORCE

Prior FY

Current FY

4,722

4,005

283

374

434

100%

84.82%

5.99%

7.92%

1.27%

9.19%

1.82%

0.02%

0.80%

0.15%

0.04%

0.06%

0.13%

0.08%

0.00%

0.42%

0.02%

0.06%

4,941

4,188

269

416

484

0.06%

100%

84.76%

5.44%

8.42%

1.38%

9.80%

1.82%

0.02%

0.06%

0.75%

0.16%

0.04%

0.02%

0.12%

0.08%

0.00%

0.49%

0.02%

Difference

219

183

-14

-1

-2

Ratio Change

0.00%

-0.06%

-0.55%

0.50%

0.11%

0.61%

0.00%

0.04%

-0.05%

0.01%

0.00%

-0.04%

-0.01%

0.00%

0.07%

0.00%

Net Change

4.64%

4.57%

-4.95%

11.23%

13.33%

11.52%

4.65%

0.00%

200.00%

-2.63%

14.29%

0.00% -66.67%

0.00%

20.00%

0.00%

EMPLOYEE GAINS

Total

New Hires

853

693

100%

81.24%

8.44%

7.85%

2.46%

10.32%

1.17%

0.12%

0.00%

0.12%

0.00%

0.59%

0.00%

EMPLOYEE LOSSES

Reduction in

Force

Removal

Resignation

Retirement

Other

Total

Separations

100%

0.00%

100%

0.00%

100%

84.44%

12.22%

3.33%

0.00%

3.33%

0.00%

100%

78.35%

5.15%

13.40%

3.09%

16.49%

2.06%

0.00%

1.03%

0.00%

1.03%

0.00%

410

312

100%

76.10%

15.37%

6.83%

1.71%

8.54%

1.46%

0.24%

0.00%

0.49%

0.00%

0.24%

0.00%

0.24%

0.00%

0.24%

0.00%

600

467

100%

77.83%

13.17%

7.33%

1.67%

9.00%

1.33%

0.17%

0.00%

0.50%

0.00%

0.33%

0.00%

0.17%

0.00%

0.17%

0.00%

“Other PWD” include employees who did not self-identify on SF-256 and who were coded on Veterans’ Preference for hiring as “CPS - preference based on a compensable service-connected disability of 30% or more” or

were hired or converted into the competitive service under Schedule A(u).

Note: Total calculations shown may not match that derived from detail data presented due to rounding.

Source: Datamart FPPS and EEO-AT 2.0 Analytic File for pay period 202322, downloaded on 11/16/2023

FISCAL YEAR 2023

Significant

Disfigurement [93]

Dwarfism [92]

Significant Psychiatric

Disorder [91]

Intellectual Disability

[90]

Epilepsy or Other

Seizure Disorders

[82]

Partial or Complete

Paralysis [60]

Significant Mobility

Impairment [40]

Missing Extremities

[31]

Blind or Serious

Difficulty Seeing [20]

Deaf or Serious

Difficulty Hearing [19]

Traumatic Brain

Injury [03]

Developmental

Disability [02]

PWTD

Total PWD

Other PWD1

Disability

[02-03, 06-99]

Not Identified [01]

No Disability [05]

TOTAL

EMPLOYMENT

TENURE

TABLE B1: TOTAL WORKFORCE—DISTRIBUTION BY DISABILITY [OPM FORM 256 SELF-IDENTIFICATION CODES]

PAY PERIODS 202222 TO 202322 continued

PERMANENT

Prior FY

Current FY

4,452

3,819

223

353

410

100%

85.78%

5.01%

7.93%

1.28%

9.21%

1.86%

0.02%

0.81%

0.16%

0.04%

0.07%

0.13%

0.07%

0.00%

0.45%

0.02%

0.07%

4,674

3,972

243

394

459

0.06%

100%

84.98%

5.20%

8.43%

1.39%

9.82%

1.84%

0.02%

0.06%

0.77%

0.17%

0.04%

0.02%

0.13%

0.06%

0.00%

0.47%

0.02%

Difference

222

153

-2

Ratio Change

0.00%

-0.80%

0.19%

0.50%

0.11%

0.61%

-0.02%

0.00%

0.04%

-0.04%

0.01%

0.00%

-0.05%

0.00%

-0.01%

0.00%

0.02%

0.00%

-0.01%

Federal Goal

12.00%

2.00%

EMPLOYEE GAINS

Permanent

New Hires

412

327

100%

79.37%

8.01%

9.71%

2.91%

12.62%

0.97%

0.00%

0.24%

0.00%

0.24%

0.00%

0.49%

0.00%

EMPLOYEE LOSSES

Reduction

in Force

Removal

Resignation

Retirement

100%

0.00%

100%

0.00%

100%

86.30%

9.59%

4.11%

0.00%

4.11%

0.00%

100%

78.35%

5.15%

13.40%

3.09%

16.49%

2.06%

0.00%

1.03%

0.00%

1.03%

0.00%

Other

Total

Separations

100%

69.57%

13.04%

17.39%

0.00%

17.39%

4.35%

0.00%

4.35%

0.00%

196

158

100%

80.61%

7.65%

10.20%

1.53%

11.73%

1.53%

0.00%

0.51%

0.00%

1.02%

0.00%

were hired or converted into the competitive service under Schedule A(u).

Note: Total calculations shown may not match that derived from detail data presented due to rounding.

Source: Datamart FPPS and EEO-AT 2.0 Analytic File for pay period 202322, downloaded on 11/16/2023

E E O P R O G R A M S TAT U S R E P O R T

Significant

Disfigurement [93]

Dwarfism [92]

Significant Psychiatric

Disorder [91]

Intellectual Disability

[90]

Epilepsy or Other

Seizure Disorders

[82]

Partial or Complete

Paralysis [60]

Significant Mobility

Impairment [40]

Missing Extremities

[31]

Blind or Serious

Difficulty Seeing [20]

Deaf or Serious

Difficulty Hearing [19]

Traumatic Brain

Injury [03]

Developmental

Disability [02]

PWTD

Total PWD

Other PWD1

Disability

[02-03, 06-99]

Not Identified [01]

No Disability [05]

TOTAL

EMPLOYMENT

TENURE

TABLE B1: TOTAL WORKFORCE—DISTRIBUTION BY DISABILITY [OPM FORM 256 SELF-IDENTIFICATION CODES]

PAY PERIODS 202222 TO 202322 continued

TEMPORARY

Prior FY

Current FY

270

186

100%

68.89%

22.22%

7.78%

1.11%

8.89%

1.11%

0.00%

0.74%

0.00%

0.37%

0.00%

267

216

100%

80.90%

9.74%

8.24%

1.12%

9.36%

1.50%

0.00%

0.37%

0.00%

0.37%

0.00%

0.75%

0.00%

Difference

-3

-34

-1

Ratio Change

0.00%

12.01% -12.48%

0.46%

0.01%

0.47%

0.39%

0.00%

-0.37%

0.00%

0.75%

0.00%

Net Change

-1.11%

16.13% -56.67%

4.76%

0.00%

4.17%

33.33%

0.00%

0.00% -50.00%

0.00%

EMPLOYEE GAINS

Temporary

New Hires

441

366

100%

82.99%

8.84%

6.12%

2.04%

8.16%

1.36%

0.23%

0.00%

0.23%

0.00%

0.23%

0.00%

0.68%

0.00%

EMPLOYEE LOSSES

Involuntary

Reduction

in Force

Removal

Voluntary

Resignation

Retirement

Other

Total

Separations

100%

0.00%

100%

0.00%

100%

0.00%

404

309

100%

76.49%

15.84%

5.94%

1.73%

7.67%

1.24%

0.25%

0.00%

0.50%

0.00%

0.25%

0.00%

0.25%

0.00%

100%

76.47%

23.53%

0.00%

100%

0.00%

387

296

100%

76.49%

15.50%

6.20%

1.81%

8.01%

1.29%

0.26%

0.00%

0.52%

0.00%

0.26%

0.00%

0.26%

0.00%

404

309

100%

76.49%

15.84%

5.94%

1.73%

7.67%

1.24%

0.25%

0.00%

0.50%

0.00%

0.25%

0.00%

0.25%

0.00%

were hired or converted into the competitive service under Schedule A(u).

Note: Total calculations shown may not match that derived from detail data presented due to rounding.

Source: Datamart FPPS and EEO-AT 2.0 Analytic File for pay period 202322, downloaded on 11/16/2023

FISCAL YEAR 2023

Significant

Disfigurement [93]

Dwarfism [92]

Significant Psychiatric

Disorder [91]

Intellectual Disability

[90]

Epilepsy or Other

Seizure Disorders [82]

Partial or Complete

Paralysis [60]

Significant Mobility

Impairment [40]

Missing Extremities

[31]

Blind or Serious

Difficulty Seeing [20]

Deaf or Serious

Difficulty Hearing [19]

Traumatic Brain

Injury [03]

Developmental

Disability [02]

PWTD

Total PWD

Other PWD1

Disability

[02-03, 06-99]

Not Identified [01]

No Disability [05]

TOTAL

EMPLOYMENT

TENURE

TABLE B1: TOTAL WORKFORCE—DISTRIBUTION BY DISABILITY [OPM FORM 256 SELF-IDENTIFICATION CODES]

PAY PERIODS 202222 TO 202322 continued

SCHEDULE A EMPLOYEES IN THE PERMANENT WORKFORCE2

100%

0.00%

100%

0.00%

100%

42.86%

0.00%

14.29%

0.00%

28.57%

0.00%

100%

0.00%

53.85%

46.15%

100%

7.69%

0.00%

7.69%

0.00%

Ratio Change %

0.00%

0.00% -46.15%

46.15%

0.00% -35.17%

0.00%

0.00% -14.29%

7.69%

0.00%

0.00% -28.57%

0.00%

Net Change

0.00%

Prior FY

Current FY

Difference

0.00%

EMPLOYEE GAINS

Total

New Hires

100%

0.00%

54.55%

45.45%

100%

9.09%

0.00%

9.09%

0.00%

EMPLOYEE LOSSES

Total

Separations %

100%

0.00%

were hired or converted into the competitive service under Schedule A(u).

Schedule A Employees in the Permanent Workforce are those currently serving under an appointment type covered by Schedule A(u). Employees previously converted to the permanent workforce are not counted.

Note: Total calculations shown may not match that derived from detail data presented due to rounding.

Source: Datamart FPPS and EEO-AT 2.0 Analytic File for pay period 202322, downloaded on 11/16/2023

E E O P R O G R A M S TAT U S R E P O R T

Significant

Disfigurement [93]

Dwarfism [92]

Significant Psychiatric

Disorder [91]

Intellectual Disability

[90]

Epilepsy or Other

Seizure Disorders [82]

Partial or Complete

Paralysis [60]

Significant Mobility

Impairment [40]

Missing Extremities

[31]

Blind or Serious

Difficulty Seeing [20]

Deaf or Serious

Difficulty Hearing [19]

Traumatic Brain

Injury [03]

Developmental

Disability [02]

PWTD

Total PWD

Other PWD2

Disability

[02-03, 06-99]

Not Identified [01]

No Disability [05]

Persons without

Disability1

TOTAL

EMPLOYMENT

TENURE

TABLE B1-2: TOTAL WORKFORCE—DISTRIBUTION BY DISABILITY [OPM FORM 256 SELF-IDENTIFICATION CODES]

PAY PERIODS 202222 TO 202322

TOTAL WORKFORCE

Prior FY

Current FY

4,722

4,005

283

374

434

100% 90.81% 84.82%

4,288

5.99%

7.92%

1.27%

9.19%

1.82%

0.02%

0.80%

0.15%

0.04%

0.06%

0.13%

0.08%

0.00%

0.42%

0.02%

0.06%

4,941

4,188

269

416

484

100% 90.20% 84.76%

5.44%

8.42%

1.38%

0.02%

0.06%

0.75%

0.16%

0.04%

0.02%

0.12%

0.08%

0.00%

0.49%

0.02%

0.06%

4,457

9.80%

1.82%

12.00%

2.00%

-1

-2

0.11%

0.61%

0.00%

0.04%

-0.05%

0.01%

0.00%

-0.04%

-0.01%

0.00%

0.07%

0.00%

11.23% 13.33%

11.52%

4.65%

0.00% 200.00%

0.00% -66.67%

0.00%

0.00% 20.00%

0.00%

501 Goal

Difference

219

169

183

-14

Ratio

Change

0.00%

-0.61%

-0.06%

-0.55%

0.50%

Net Change

4.64%

3.94%

4.57%

-4.95%

-2.63% 14.29%

EMPLOYEE GAINS (INCLUSION RATE)

Total

New Hires

853

765

693

% 17.26% 17.16% 16.55% 26.77%

16.11% 30.88% 18.18%

11.11%

100%

33.33%

2.70% 12.50%

0.00%

0.00% 25.00%

0.00% 20.83%

0.00%

ersons without Disability include the combination of those with No Disability (05) and those who are Not Identified (01).

“Other PWD” include employees who did not self-identify on SF-256 and who were coded on Veterans’ Preference for hiring as “CPS—preference based on a compensable service-connected disability of 30% or more” or

were hired or converted into the competitive service under Schedule A(u).

Note: Total calculations shown may not match that derived from detail data presented due to rounding.

Source: Datamart FPPS and EEO-AT 2.0 Analytic File for pay period 202322, downloaded on 11/16/2023

FISCAL YEAR 2023

Significant

Disfigurement [93]

Dwarfism [92]

Significant Psychiatric

Disorder [91]

Intellectual Disability

[90]

Epilepsy or Other

Seizure Disorders [82]

Partial or Complete

Paralysis [60]

Significant Mobility

Impairment [40]

Missing Extremities

[31]

Blind or Serious

Difficulty Seeing [20]

Deaf or Serious

Difficulty Hearing [19]

Traumatic Brain

Injury [03]

Developmental

Disability [02]

PWTD

Total PWD

Other PWD2

Disability

[02-03, 06-99]

Not Identified [01]

No Disability [05]

Persons without

Disability1

TOTAL

EMPLOYMENT

TENURE

TABLE B1-2: TOTAL WORKFORCE—DISTRIBUTION BY DISABILITY [OPM FORM 256 SELF-IDENTIFICATION CODES]

PAY PERIODS 202222 TO 202322 continued

EMPLOYEE LOSSES (INCLUSION RATE)

Involuntary

Reduction

in Force

Removal

Voluntary

Resignation

Retirement

Other

0.06%

0.07%

0.00%

0.06%

0.07%

0.00%

597

543

464

11.08% 29.37% 10.58% 14.71%

11.16%

8.89%

100%

0.00%

8.11%

0.00%

0.00% 25.00%

0.00%

4.17%

0.00%

% 12.08% 12.18%

0.00% 200.00%

1.82%

1.95%

1.81%

4.09%

0.72%

0.00%

0.62%

0.00%

1.96%

1.82%

1.81%

1.86%

3.13%

4.41%

3.31%

2.22%

0.00%

2.70%

0.00%

100%

0.00%

312

6.73% 10.29%

7.23%

6.67%

100%

0.00%

5.41%

0.00%

100%

0.00% 25.00%

0.00%

4.17%

0.00%

410

375

8.30%

8.41%

600

546

Total

Separations % 12.14% 12.25%

7.45% 23.42%

11.15% 29.37% 10.58% 14.71%

467

11.16%

8.89%

100%

0.00%

8.11%

0.00%

0.00% 200.00%

0.00% 25.00%

0.00%

4.17%

0.00%

ersons without Disability include the combination of those with No Disability (05) and those who are Not Identified (01).

were hired or converted into the competitive service under Schedule A(u).

Note: Total calculations shown may not match that derived from detail data presented due to rounding.

Source: Datamart FPPS and EEO-AT 2.0 Analytic File for pay period 202322, downloaded on 11/16/2023

E E O P R O G R A M S TAT U S R E P O R T

Significant

Disfigurement [93]

Dwarfism [92]

Significant Psychiatric

Disorder [91]

Intellectual Disability

[90]

Epilepsy or Other

Seizure Disorders [82]

Partial or Complete

Paralysis [60]

Significant Mobility

Impairment [40]

Missing Extremities

[31]

Blind or Serious

Difficulty Seeing [20]

Deaf or Serious

Difficulty Hearing [19]

Traumatic Brain

Injury [03]

Developmental

Disability [02]

PWTD

Total PWD

Other PWD2

Disability

[02-03, 06-99]

Not Identified [01]

No Disability [05]

Persons without

Disability1

TOTAL

EMPLOYMENT

TENURE

TABLE B1-2: TOTAL WORKFORCE—DISTRIBUTION BY DISABILITY [OPM FORM 256 SELF-IDENTIFICATION CODES]

PAY PERIODS 202222 TO 202322 continued

PERMANENT

Prior FY

Current FY

4,452

3,819

223

353

410

100% 90.79% 85.78%

4,042

5.01%

7.93%

1.28%

9.21%

1.86%

0.02%

0.81%

0.16%

0.04%

0.07%

0.13%

0.07%

0.00%

0.45%

4,674

3,972

243

394

459

100% 90.18% 84.98%

4,215

5.20%

8.43%

1.39%

9.82%

1.84%

0.02%

0.06%

0.77%

0.17%

0.04%

0.02%

0.13%

0.06%

0.00%

0.47%

0.02% 0.07%

0.02% 0.06%

501 Goal

12.00%

2.00%

Difference

222

173

153

-2

Ratio

Change

0.00%

-0.61%

-0.80%

0.19%

0.50%

0.11%

0.61%

-0.02%

0.00%

0.04%

-0.04%

0.01%

0.00%

-0.05%

0.00%

-0.01%

0.00%

0.02%

0.00% -0.01%

Net Change %

4.99%

4.28%

4.01%

8.97%

11.61% 14.04%

11.95%

3.61%

0.00% 200.00%

0.00% -66.67%

0.00%

0.00% 10.00%

0.00% 0.00%

0.00% 14.29%

EMPLOYEE GAINS (INCLUSION RATE)

Permanent

New Hires

412

360

8.81%

8.54%

8.23% 13.58% 10.15% 18.46%

327

11.33%

4.65%

0.00%

33.33%

0.00% 12.50%

0.00%

9.09%

0.00% 0.00%

ersons without Disability include the combination of those with No Disability (05) and those who are Not Identified (01).

were hired or converted into the competitive service under Schedule A(u).

Note: Total calculations shown may not match that derived from detail data presented due to rounding.

Source: Datamart FPPS and EEO-AT 2.0 Analytic File for pay period 202322, downloaded on 11/16/2023

FISCAL YEAR 2023

Significant

Disfigurement [93]

Dwarfism [92]

Significant Psychiatric

Disorder [91]

Intellectual Disability

[90]

Epilepsy or Other

Seizure Disorders [82]

Partial or Complete

Paralysis [60]

Significant Mobility

Impairment [40]

Missing Extremities

[31]

Blind or Serious

Difficulty Seeing [20]

Deaf or Serious

Difficulty Hearing [19]

Traumatic Brain

Injury [03]

Developmental

Disability [02]

PWTD

Total PWD

Other PWD2

Disability

[02-03, 06-99]

Not Identified [01]

No Disability [05]

Persons without

Disability1

TOTAL

EMPLOYMENT

TENURE

TABLE B1-2: TOTAL WORKFORCE—DISTRIBUTION BY DISABILITY [OPM FORM 256 SELF-IDENTIFICATION CODES]

PAY PERIODS 202222 TO 202322 continued

EMPLOYEE LOSSES (INCLUSION RATE)

PERMANENT

Involuntary

0.06%

0.07%

0.08%

0.00%

Inclusion Benchmark

Reduction

in Force

Removal

Voluntary

0.07%

0.00%

0.06%

0.07%

0.08%

0.00%

0.00% 200.00%

0.00%

193

170

155

4.13%

4.03%

3.90%

6.17%

5.08%

4.62%

5.01%

3.49%

0.00%

2.78%

0.00%

Inclusion Benchmark

Resignation

Retirement

4.14%

1.56%

1.66%

1.59%

2.88%

0.76%

0.00%

0.65%

0.00%

2.08%

1.92%

1.91%

2.06%

3.30%

4.62%

3.49%

2.33%

0.00%

2.78%

0.00%

100%

0.00%

0.49%

0.45%

0.40%

1.23%

1.02%

0.00%

0.87%

1.16%

0.00%

100%

0.00%

Total

Separations %

196

173

158

4.19%

4.10%

3.98%

6.17%

5.08%

4.62%

5.01%

3.49%

0.00%

2.78%

0.00%

0.00% 200.00%

0.00%

Other

ersons without Disability include the combination of those with No Disability (05) and those who are Not Identified (01).

were hired or converted into the competitive service under Schedule A(u).

Note: Total calculations shown may not match that derived from detail data presented due to rounding.

Source: Datamart FPPS and EEO-AT 2.0 Analytic File for pay period 202322, downloaded on 11/16/2023

E E O P R O G R A M S TAT U S R E P O R T

Significant

Disfigurement [93]

Dwarfism [92]

Significant Psychiatric

Disorder [91]

Intellectual Disability

[90]

Epilepsy or Other

Seizure Disorders [82]

Partial or Complete

Paralysis [60]

Significant Mobility

Impairment [40]

Missing Extremities

[31]

Blind or Serious

Difficulty Seeing [20]

Deaf or Serious

Difficulty Hearing [19]

Traumatic Brain

Injury [03]

Developmental

Disability [02]

PWTD

Total PWD

Other PWD2

Disability

[02-03, 06-99]

Not Identified [01]

No Disability [05]

Persons without

Disability1

TOTAL

EMPLOYMENT

TENURE

TABLE B1-2: TOTAL WORKFORCE–DISTRIBUTION BY DISABILITY [OPM FORM 256 SELF-IDENTIFICATION CODES]

PAY PERIODS 202222 TO 202322 continued

TEMPORARY

270

246

186

100%

91.11%

68.89%

22.22%

7.78%

1.11%

8.89%

1.11%

0.00%

0.74%

0.00%

0.37%

0.00%

267

242

216

100%

90.64%

80.90%

9.74%

8.24%

1.12%

9.36%

1.50%

0.00%

0.37%

0.00%

0.37%

0.00%

0.75%

0.00%

-3

-4

-34

-1

Ratio Change %

0.00%

-0.47%

12.01%

-12.48%

0.46%

0.01%

0.47%

0.39%

0.00%

-0.37%

0.00%

0.75%

0.00%

Net Change

-1.11%

-1.63%

16.13%

-56.67%

4.76%

0.00%

4.17%

33.33%

0.00%

0.00% -50.00%

0.00%

366

300.00% 144.00%

150.00%

0.00%

100%

0.00%

100%

0.00% 150.00%

0.00%

Prior FY

Current FY

Difference

EMPLOYEE GAINS (INCLUSION RATE)

Temporary

New Hires

441

% 165.17%

405

167.36% 169.44% 150.00% 122.73%

ersons without Disability include the combination of those with No Disability (05) and those who are Not Identified (01).

were hired or converted into the competitive service under Schedule A(u).

Note: Total calculations shown may not match that derived from detail data presented due to rounding.

Source: Datamart FPPS and EEO-AT 2.0 Analytic File for pay period 202322, downloaded on 11/16/2023

FISCAL YEAR 2023

Significant

Disfigurement [93]

Dwarfism [92]

Significant Psychiatric

Disorder [91]

Intellectual Disability

[90]

Epilepsy or Other

Seizure Disorders [82]

Partial or Complete

Paralysis [60]

Significant Mobility

Impairment [40]

Missing Extremities

[31]

Blind or Serious

Difficulty Seeing [20]

Deaf or Serious

Difficulty Hearing [19]

Traumatic Brain

Injury [03]

Developmental

Disability [02]

PWTD

Total PWD

Other PWD2

Disability

[02-03, 06-99]

Not Identified [01]

No Disability [05]

Persons without

Disability1

TOTAL

EMPLOYMENT

TENURE

TABLE B1-2: TOTAL WORKFORCE–DISTRIBUTION BY DISABILITY [OPM FORM 256 SELF-IDENTIFICATION CODES]

PAY PERIODS 202222 TO 202322 continued

EMPLOYEE LOSSES (INCLUSION RATE)

TEMPORARY

Involuntary

Reduction

in Force

Removal

Voluntary

Resignation

Retirement

Other

0.00%

404

373

309

154.13% 143.06% 246.15% 109.09% 233.33% 124.00% 125.00%

0.00%

0.00% 200.00%

0.00%

100%

0.00% 50.00%

0.00%

% 151.31%

6.37%

7.02%

6.02%

15.38%

0.00%

387

356

296

147.11% 137.04% 230.77% 109.09% 233.33% 124.00% 125.00%

0.00%

0.00% 200.00%

0.00% 50.00%

0.00%

% 144.94%

404

Total

Separations % 151.31%

373

309

154.13% 143.06% 246.15% 109.09% 233.33% 124.00% 125.00%

0.00%

100%

0.00% 200.00%

0.00%

100%

0.00% 50.00%

0.00%

ersons without Disability include the combination of those with No Disability (05) and those who are Not Identified (01).

were hired or converted into the competitive service under Schedule A(u).

Note: Total calculations shown may not match that derived from detail data presented due to rounding.

Source: Datamart FPPS and EEO-AT 2.0 Analytic File for pay period 202322, downloaded on 11/16/2023

E E O P R O G R A M S TAT U S R E P O R T

Significant

Disfigurement [93]

Dwarfism [92]

Significant Psychiatric

Disorder [91]

Intellectual Disability

[90]

Epilepsy or Other

Seizure Disorders [82]

Partial or Complete

Paralysis [60]

Significant Mobility

Impairment [40]

Missing Extremities

[31]

Blind or Serious

Difficulty Seeing [20]

Deaf or Serious

Difficulty Hearing [19]

Traumatic Brain

Injury [03]

Developmental

Disability [02]

PWTD

Total PWD

Other PWD2

Disability

[02-03, 06-99]

Not Identified [01]

No Disability [05]

Persons without

Disability1

TOTAL

EMPLOYMENT

TENURE

TABLE B1-2: TOTAL WORKFORCE–DISTRIBUTION BY DISABILITY [OPM FORM 256 SELF-IDENTIFICATION CODES]

PAY PERIODS 202222 TO 202322 continued

SCHEDULE A EMPLOYEES IN THE PERMANENT WORKFORCE3

100%

0.00%

60.00%

40.00%

100%

0.00%

100%

0.00%

53.85%

46.15%

100%

7.69%

0.00%

7.69%

0.00%

Ratio Change %

0.00%

-6.15%

6.15%

0.00%

7.69%

0.00%

7.69%

0.00%

160.00%

0.00%

0.00% 133.33%

200% 160.00%

0.00%

Prior FY

Current FY

Difference

Net Change

EMPLOYEE GAINS (INCLUSION RATE)

Total New

Hires

4.12%

0.00%

27.27%

166.67%

44.00% 25.00%

0.00%

EMPLOYEE LOSSES (INCLUSION RATE)

Total

Separations %

0.00%

ersons without Disability include the combination of those with No Disability (05) and those who are Not Identified (01).

were hired or converted into the competitive service under Schedule A(u).

Note: Total calculations shown may not match that derived from detail data presented due to rounding.

Source: Datamart FPPS and EEO-AT 2.0 Analytic File for pay period 202322, downloaded on 11/16/2023

FISCAL YEAR 2023

501 Goal

TOTAL

NYRO

CHRO

LARO

BRO

PLRO

FWRO

SFRO

ARO

MIRO

DRO

SLRO

12.00%

Significant Disfigurement

[93]

Dwarfism [92]

Significant Psychiatric

Disorder [91]

Intellectual Disability [90]

Epilepsy or Other Seizure

Disorders [82]

Partial or Complete

Paralysis [60]

Significant Mobility

Impairment [40]

Missing Extremities [31]

Deaf or Serious Difficulty

Hearing [19]

Traumatic Brain

Injury [03]

Developmental Disability

[02]

PWTD

Total PWD

Other PWD1

Disability

[02-03, 06-99]

Not Identified [01]

No Disability [05]

TOTAL

Permanent

Employees

TOTAL WORKFORCE

Blind or Serious Difficulty

Seeing [20]

TABLE B2: TOTAL WORKFORCE BY REGIONAL OFFICES AND HEADQUARTERS—DISTRIBUTION BY DISABILITY

[OPM FORM 256 SELF-IDENTIFICATION CODES]—PAY PERIOD 202322

2.00%

4,674

3,972

243

394

459

100%

84.98%

5.20%

8.43%

1.39%

9.82%

1.84%

0.02%

0.06%

0.77%

0.17%

0.04%

0.02%

0.13%

0.06%

0.00%

0.47%

0.02%

0.06%

3,071

2,565

175

282

331

100%

83.52%

5.70%

9.18%

1.60%

10.78%

1.95%

0.00%

0.07%

0.88%

0.26%

0.03%

0.07%

0.00%

0.49%

0.00%

0.07%

400

365

100%

91.25%

3.00%

5.50%

0.25%

5.75%

1.25%

0.00%

0.50%

0.00%

0.50%

0.25%

0.00%

221

199

100%

90.05%

3.62%

4.52%

1.81%

6.33%

0.00%

0.45%

0.00%

0.45%

0.00%

161

140

100%

86.96%

3.73%

8.07%

1.24%

9.32%

2.48%

0.00%

1.24%

0.00%

0.62%

0.00%

0.62%

0.00%

147

134

100%

91.16%

3.40%

2.04%

5.44%

0.00%

127

111

100%

87.40%

3.94%

7.87%

0.79%

8.66%

3.15%

0.00%

0.79%

0.00%

0.79%

0.00%

0.79%

0.00%

104

100%

78.85%

5.77%

14.42%

0.96%

15.38%

1.92%

0.96%

0.00%

0.96%

0.00%

123

103

100%

83.74%

11.38%

4.88%

0.00%

4.88%

1.63%

0.00%

0.81%

0.00%

0.81%

0.00%

100%

79.59%

3.06%

14.29%

3.06%

17.35%

4.08%

0.00%

2.04%

0.00%

1.02%

0.00%

1.02%

107

100%

85.05%

5.61%

9.35%

0.00%

9.35%

2.80%

0.00%

0.93%

0.00%

0.93%

0.00%

0.93%

0.00%

100%

92.78%

1.03%

5.15%

1.03%

6.19%

0.00%

100%

77.78%

11.11%

0.00%

11.11%

0.00%

“Other PWD” include employees, who did not self-identify on SF-256, and who were coded on Veterans’ Preference for hiring as “CPS—preference based on a compensable service-connected disability of 30% or more”

or were hired or converted into the competitive service under Schedule A(u).

Note: Total calculations shown may not match that derived from detail data presented due to rounding.

Source: Datamart FPPS and EEO-AT 2.0 Analytic File for pay period 202322, downloaded on 11/16/2023

E E O P R O G R A M S TAT U S R E P O R T

501 Goal

12.00%

Significant

Disfigurement [93]

Dwarfism [92]

Significant Psychiatric

Disorder [91]

Intellectual Disability

[90]

Epilepsy or Other

Seizure Disorders [82]

Partial or Complete

Paralysis [60]

Significant Mobility

Impairment [40]

Missing Extremities

[31]

Blind or Serious

Difficulty Seeing [20]

Deaf or Serious

Difficulty Hearing [19]

Traumatic Brain

Injury [03]

Developmental

Disability [02]

PWTD

Total PWD

Other PWD1

Disability

[02-03, 06-99]

Not Identified [01]

No Disability [05]

TOTAL

OCCUPATIONAL