Return to flip book view

2013-2014 Annual ReportChairman Gerald S. Robinson • Executive Director JoAnn L. Edwards

2Dear Governor Corbett and General Assembly,Throughout the past two years, our commissioners and sta have been engaged in a strategic planning process to guide the commission’s work in a time of rapid demographic, technological and cultural change. The resulting three-year strategic plan seeks to address current challenges and trends in civil rights, as well as agency human, nancial and technological resources. The process will provide a roadmap for moving the agency forward, while acknowledging and celebrating challenges met and progress made in the past. During the 2013-’14 scal year, the strategic planning process yielded a revised mission and a set of shared values for commission work and culture (see opposite page). This report touches on the many innovative processes and initiatives undertaken or continued over the past year, and illustrates the overwhelmingly positive results of cultural and organizational changes we have established in order to meet the challenges of today’s civil rights environment. Through our 2015-2017 Strategic Plan, we hope to build on this foundation of innovation and integrity.With a total budget of $11.472 million, a sta complement of 101, and the commitment and creativity of many invaluable partners, we believe we have made signicant progress toward establishing sustainable, eective enforcement and outreach practices that will help ensure equal opportunity for all in Pennsylvania in the decades to come.On behalf of all of our commissioners and sta, we want to thank you for your continued support of our mission and your partnership in making Pennsylvania a better, fairer place to live, work and learn!Sincerely,Gerald S. RobinsonChairmanJoAnn L. EdwardsExecutive Director

3PHRC Vision, Mission & ValuesVISIONAs Pennsylvania’s civil rights leader, it is our vision that all people in Pennsylvania will live, work and learn free from unlawful discrimination.MISSIONThe PA Human Relations Commission promotes equal opportunity for all and enforces Pennsylvania’s civil rights laws that protect people from unlawful discrimination. VALUES• Equality - We believe strongly in the equality and dignity of all individuals. We uphold the principles of justice and fairness through our work, conduct and communication.• Service - We subscribe to the highest standards of responsiveness, quality, timeliness and professionalism.• Integrity - We uphold the highest standards of honesty and transparency. We are candid, trustworthy, credible and unbiased.• Excellence - We strive to excel in our work. We endeavor to ensure a highly prepared, diverse, competent and committed workforce.• Teamwork - We build and sustain strong, constructive and collaborative relationships.

4PHRC Commissioners are appointed by the Governor and conrmed by the Senate to serve ve-year terms. Selected to further the interests of the commonwealth in ending and preventing discrimination, they represent diverse areas of the state, including Southeastern PA, the Pittsburgh area, the Lehigh Valley and Central Pennsylvania. They are racially and ethnically diverse and represent dierent religious traditions and political viewpoints. They come from a variety of profes-sional backgrounds, including education, nance, journal-ism, medicine, law, public administration, religious ministry and the military.Commissioners work to further the PHRC mission in part-nership with public and private organizations representing numerous ethnic, racial, gender, age-based, family, disability and religious advocacy organizations, as well as with other civil rights law enforcement or-ganizations on the state and federal level. They meet monthly to delib-erate over cases in which the sta’s investigation found probable cause to support the allegations and the case failed to settle. Commis-sioners preside over public hearings, guide decision-making and set policies and priorities to support the agency mission. CommissionersContentsIntroductory LetterCommissioners Investigation & EnforcementSettlement HighlightsInitiativesEducational OutreachEmployee RecognitionCase Statistics Above: Commissioners Jerry Mondesire (top) and Sylvia Waters (bottom) recount their memories of the 1960s and the Civil Rights Movement to staff and guests during a Black History Month event in Harrisburg.Above left: Commissioner Varsovia Fernandez chats with Urban League President Pat Coulter during a Meet the Commissioner event in Philadelphia in June 2014.Above: Chairman Gerry Robinson greets PHRC legal interns Tom Colvin and Juliana Stiles at Meet the Commissioner at the Urban League of Philadelphia in June 2014.pages 2-3pages 4-5pages 6-11pages 9-11pages 11-13pages 13-17pages 16 -17pages 18 - 23

5CommissionersVarsovia Fernandez Ardmore(conrmed Dec. 2013)S. Kweilin NassarPittsburgh(through Dec. 2013)Pamela McGahaBethlehemThe Honorable Terence FarrellWest ChesterMeron Yemane Harrisburg(conrmed Dec. 2013)J. Whyatt MondesirePhiladelphiaSylvia WatersOberlinRev. Dr. James Earl Garmon, Sr..SecretaryPittsburghM. Joel BolsteinWarringtonDr. Raquel O. YiengstVice ChairSinking SpringGerald S. RobinsonChairmanLancaster

6 Investigations Enforcement&Cases at a glance*Cases docketed during the year 1,835Discriminatory acts alleged (counts)** 3,093Bases of discrimination alleged** 2,467Cases pending at beginning of the year 3,146Cases reopened upon request*** 8Cases closed during the year 2,623 (53% of total caseload)Cases closed within one year 1,153 (44% of cases closed)Cases pending at year end 2,355Median age of pending cases 327 days (-17.2% from ‘12-13)Average age of pending cases 487 days ( - 4.7% from ‘12-13)Settlements 683 (26% of cases closed)Settlements prior to investigative nding 648 Probable Cause ndings 40Settlements after probable cause nding 35 (1% of cases closed)Closed after no probable cause nding 1,643 (63% of cases closed)Cases closed due to court lings 140 (- 25% from ‘12-13)Closed for other reasons**** 297 (11% of closings)Public Hearings 3Final orders after public hearing 3*Does not include complaints led dually with the EEOC or HUD in which PHRC is not conducting the investigation.**One complaint may include multiple bases and discriminatory acts alleged.***PHRC calls this “request for a preliminary hearing”.****Withdrawn, lack of jurisdiction, parties could not be located or failed to cooperate, etc.

7HousingDisability* 41%Race/color 25.4%Retaliation 12%Familial Status 6% National origin 4.2%Sex 5.1%Age 2.3%Ancestry 1.8%Religion 1.4%Multiple class** .5%Overall, retaliation was the most frequent allegation, making up 20.3 percent of the total. Disability-related complaints* followed at 19.6 percent. Race/color-based complaints were 18.9 percent, sex 15.5 percent and age 15.2 percent of the total.*Disability complaints include those led by users handlers or trainers of support animals. They also include those based on being related to some-one with a disability, being regarded as having a disability and having a record of a disability.**Multiple class complaints are based on both sex and race, when neither by itself applies. (i.e.. Black males were not discriminated against, but black females were or vice versa.)EmploymentRetaliation 21.6% Race/color 17.8% Age 17.2%Sex 17% Disability* 16.4%National origin 3.3%Ancestry 3.2% Multiple class** 1.8 %Religion 1.7%Public AccommodationsDisability* 38.6%Race/color 30.1% National origin 10.8%Retaliation 8.4%Sex 7.2%Ancestry 2.4 % Multiple class** 1.2%Religion 1.2%EducationDisability* 45%Race/color 20% Retaliation 25%Sex 10%Basis of Complaints by TypeThe protected class basis and type of discrimination for cases docketed (investigations begun) during 2013-14 are below. Percentages are rounded to the nearest tenth, and may total slightly under 100. Specic numbers and breakdowns of bases within each protected class category can be found on pages 16-21.Basis of ComplaintsTotal = 2,467CommercialPropertyDisability* 57%National Origin 29% Race/color 14% 0100200300400500600Series1

8Public Hearings When an investigation has found probable cause and the case has failed to settle, the commission holds a public hearing. In 2013-14, 29 cases were approved for a public hearing. Fourteen cases settled after being approved for a hearing.The commission held three public hearings over the year, and issued the following three nal legal orders. In all three cases, the company failed to answer the complaint, despite a court order, and the commission held them liable for discrimination.Disability DiscriminationA Harrisburg man alleged that the fast-food chain where he worked as a prep cook, red him because of non-job-related disabilities. The commission ordered the company to:• cease discriminating against employees because of their disabilities;• reinstate the worker into his former job or a comparable job; • pay front pay of $225 per week until he is reinstated or nds other work paying at least $225 per week; andpay $19,800, plus interest, for unpaid wages from the date of his ring until payment is paid. At the time of the order, interest brought the back-pay award to $21,879.Sexual Harassment & RetaliationA Montgomery County ambulance company employee alleged that her supervisor sexually harassed her, and the company retaliated against her for opposing harassment. The commission ordered the company to:• cease allowing employees to be sexually harassed;• cease retaliating against employees for opposing discrimination; and• pay the former employee $11,819, plus interest, for unpaid wages and complaint-related expenses. At the date of the order, interest brought the award to $13,117.Age DiscriminationA Franklin County woman alleged that a fast-food business refused to hire her because of her age. The commission ordered the franchise owner to cease discriminating based on age, and to pay the complainant $6,839.76 for lost wages and expenses, plus interest. At the date of the order, interest brought the amount to $7,591.Enforcement Highlights“With 56 percent of Pennsylvania’s workforce being over 40, and 42 percent of unemployed workers who have given up looking for work being over 40, age discrimination can clearly damage our economy.Employers who refuse to consider qualied applicants based on myths and stereotypes of older workers not only risk liability, they rob themselves of an available labor pool who could become loyal, hard-working employees.” PHRC Executive Director JoAnn EdwardsPHRC Hearing Examiner Carl Summerson, left, re-ceives a lifetime achievement award in June 2014 from U.S. Dept. of Justice Conciliation Specialist Knight Sor, with whom Summerson has trained law enforcement ofcers statewide.

9Enforcement Highlights: SettlementsSettlement OverviewPA law requires the commission to encourage settle-ments. PHRC’s settlement rate consistently exceeds that of our peer state agencies and the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Settlements in 2013-14 ben-eted approximately 7,133 Pennsylvanians, and included monetary benets of $4.9 million to 729 alleged victims of discrimination.Re-engineering our case-management to reect cur-rent human and budgetary resources is helping us meet the challenge of a smaller workforce and tighter bud-get. However, a current focus on closing older cases has temporarily reduced our settlement numbers, since older, more complex cases don’t typically settle. Despite an overall reduction in our settlement rate, we decreased our backlog of older cases by 40 percent, clos-ing 86 percent of the oldest pending cases. This eort will eventually help us achieve our goal of closing cases within one year and getting faster legal relief to discrimi-nation victims and employers facing false allegations.Following are some examples of cases that settled in 2013-’14. Settlements usually include a condentiality term, so details are not made public.Employment CasesIn an unequal pay complaint, a woman presented a petition signed by 40 co-workers, attesting to the unfair treatment of women and older workers. She was awarded back wages and attorney fees in a settlement after the investigation found probable cause.An African-American worker was suspended, then red for comments he made on social media. The case settled for $55,000 after the investigation uncovered a white co-worker who had posted similar comments and was not disciplined.An African-American man had complained to managers numerous times of racial harassment after being subject-ed to nooses, Nazi symbols and racist cartoons. He was red and led a retaliation complaint with PHRC. After a probable cause nding, he was awarded a settlement of $100,000.A woman who had been subjected to sexual comments in text messages, emails and personal encounters, which 0%5%10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14Case Settlement RateFiscal YearPA's Fair Employment Case Settlement Rate Exceeds the U.S. AverageSeries1Series2Series3*U.S. average is based on settlement rates of other state fair employment practice agencies.PA RateEEOCU.S. Avg.

10escalated to sexual advances and physical contact. She quit her job due to the hostile work environment. A second employee alleged similar treatment during the investigation. Investigations of both women’s allegations found prob-able cause and each woman was awarded $45,000.An African-American worker alleged that he was as-signed to loca-tions with poor working condi-tions, including no access to restrooms, no heat and paid parking, while white peers were given more favorable assignments and conditions. As a result of PHRC’s investigation, he was reinstated, given better assignments and awarded more than $10,400 in back wages.A Hispanic woman was denied promotions despite her qualications. She was disciplined, allegedly in retalia-tion for opposing a discriminatory policy that required Spanish-speaking employees to speak only English. A settlement before a nding was issued included $60,000, purged personnel le and a neutral reference letter.A complainant who is blind alleged that he was red in retaliation for complaining about co-workers placing obstacles in his path during the workday. The settlement included a charitable donation to The National Federation for the Blind.A male employee who had reported sexual harassment was forced to work with his harasser and told that if he wanted to avoid him, he must take time o without pay. The settlement, after a probable cause nding, included a $30,000 payment to the alleged victim, training for 200 company managers and a revision of the company sexual harassment policy.A woman returning to work after a medical procedure was required to prove that she had tested negative for an unrelated communicable dis-ease, despite being physically able to perform her job. She was red after ling a complaint. As a result of the investigation, parties agreed to settle for $20,000.Education SettlementsA professor complained about unfair treatment of African-American students, and alleged that she was removed from faculty responsibilities in retaliation for opposing discrimina-tion. She was awarded $15,000 in a settlement.Housing SettlementsA mobility-impaired woman who had requested a park-ing accommodation for her disability had parking nes forgiven. Building management also added accessible spaces and benches to aid mobility-impaired tenants.A public housing authority which refused to make rea-sonable accommodations for a tenant with disabilities underwent sta training as a result of a probable cause nding and settlement. The settlement also involved a revised disability policy, $10,000 to the complainant and $9,500 to the Fair Housing Rights Center of SE Pennsylva-nia.A family with foster children was charged fees for the chil-dren to swim in a pool which was free for other families and children. Because foster children are protected from discrimination based on familial status, the investigation found probable cause, and the family received a $2,000 reimbursement in a settlement.Enforcement Highlights: SettlementsConnued

11Housing Settlements (continued)A family received an eviction notice following the birth of a child, in violation of the familial status protections in the PA Human Relations Act. The family received $2,000 in a settlement after a probable cause nding.Public Accommodations SettlementsAfter requesting handicapped-acces-sible parking, an African-American woman was denied the opportunity to be a vendor at a farmers’ market where Enforcement Highlights: SettlementsConnued 2013-14PHRC Initiativesshe had operated for several years. She was the only African-American vendor, and was replaced by a white vendor after making her request. A settlement following a probable cause nding included $2,500 in lost revenue and reinstatement as a vendor. Mediation Program PilotWith funding from the Governor’s Innovation Ofce, PHRC estab-lished a mediation program to give parties in employment dis-crimination cases the opportunity to reach a voluntary settlement outside the investigation process. Forty mediated cases resulted in 22 settlements over the year ─ a 60 percent success rate. The average time to mediate a case successfully was 33 days. Cases which did not end in a settlement, but returned to the investigative process, closed in an average of 132 days, com-pared to the average case age for all PHRC cases of 487 days.In participant surveys, 93 per-cent of responding parties indi-cated they were satised with their decision to participate and 100 percent said they would participate again. The program also generated $110,000 in cost-savings.The program received a Gover-nor’s Innovation Award for its Initiatives launched or continued in 2013-14 signicantly improved agency operations. PHRC Mediaon Coordinator Katherine Petruczok, le, and Volunteer Mediator Jody King, right, of the Oce of General Counsel receiving a Governor’s Innovaon Award for the mediaon program.

12success and partnership between PHRC and the Ofce of General Counsel, which supplied volunteer mediators. Funding for the program was renewed for another year.Case-Management Re-engineering Case-Management Re-engi-neering, an initiative begun in late 2011, continued to make signicant improvements in the efciency, integrity and quality of investigative procedures over the year. Newly established procedures were fully implemented in October 2013.The ROOT process, an aspect of re-engineering which focuses the expertise and experience of a team on an investigator’s oldest, most com-plex cases, yielded incredibly positive results. The average investigator caseload of 120 cases contributed to high administrative costs, de-layed relief to potential victims of discrimina-tion and high legal costs for businesses facing charges. The innovative ROOT process aimed to reduce investigators’ caseloads and help achieve the goal of closing new cases within a year, speed-ing relief to all involved. Teams ─ each consisting of an investigator, supervisor, attorney and regional director ─ have brought diverse perspectives to cases and resulted in “roadmaps” to either close cases or bring them to a public hearing. ROOT has yielded dramatic results, including a 40 per-cent decrease in the agency’s case backlog, and $372,450 in federal funding for cases dually led with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportu-nity Commission.Fair Housing Hotline & PartnershipsThe PA Fair Housing Hotline, established just prior to the beginning of the 2013-14 year, re-ceived 121 calls from its inception in May 2013 through June of 2014. A staff hotline monitor refers callers to the appropriate PHRC housing investigator or to the appropriate agency when the call is not related to discrimination. The toll-free hotline has helped ensure faster pro-cessing of housing complaints and faster relief Settlement OerIssue SubpoenaInterview Witness PA Fair Housing Hotline Toll-free•855•866•5718ROOTIniaves connued

13to discrimination victims. PHRC partnered with HUD and private agencies in 2014 to fund projects to promote fair housing in PA. HUD-funded and PHRC-adminis-tered projects spanning two scal years engaged private agencies to examine patterns of discrimination and work with local governments and hous-ing providers to remove barriers that unfairly deny opportunities to Pennsylvania families, people of color and people with disabilities.PHRC awarded partnership grant funds totaling $227,000 to Southwestern Pennsylvania Legal Services, Poverty and Race Research Action Council and Fair Housing Center at Lancaster Housing Opportunity Partnership. Funded proj-ects will be completed in 2015.PHRC also joined Philadelphia-based non-prot Bike & Build to educate Pennsylvanians on how Connued on next pagel-r; Clerk Typist Debra Brice, Invesgator Christopher Young and Director of Educaon & Community Services Craig Dietz prepare to educate parcipants in YWCA of Central Pennsylvania’s Race Against Racism on Harrisburg’s City Island in May of 2014.unfair housing practices limit the availability of affordable housing. Bike & Build teams crossing PA in the summer to raise funds and awareness of the affordable housing crisis were armed with information on recognizing unfair practices and informing people of their fair housing rights and where to turn when they face discrimination.Educational Outreach:Proactive PartnershipsPHRC’s mission is to end and prevent discrimination not only by by enforcing the PA Human Relations Act and PA Fair Educational Opportunities Act, but by educating Pennsylvanians on their legal rights and responsibilities. PHRC outreach includes in-depth, formal training result-ing from settlements, including16 settlement-related training events statewide serving 426 people.Most formal PHRC training is in response to requests from employers, legal and human resources professionals, law enforcement agencies, school and community ocials, housing providers, realtors and others subject to non-discrimination laws. One goal of training is to help these groups proactively avoid liability through sound, consis-tently applied and clearly communicated policy. In 2013-’14, there were 47 such events, serving 1,708 people.Notable trainings included sessions on PHRC and chang-ing disability laws at The PA State Society of Human

14Then-Philadelphia Regional Director Juan Xu poses with friends at a celebraon of Asian-Pacic Islander Heritage Month in May of 2014 in Franklin Square in Philadelphia.Educational Outreach (continued)Resource Managers Council Legal and Legislative Confer-ence, disability in the workplace and employer legal responsibilities at the PA Disability Employment and Empowerment Summit, employers’ use of criminal re-cords for the PA Oce of General Counsel, an overview of the PA Human Relations Act for the PA State Borough Solicitors Conference, anti-bullying and harassment at the PA Safe Schools Conference, and training in drafting PHRC complaints for Duquesne University law students providing pro-bono services to low-income clients. Train-ing sessions for the PA Bar Institute in Mechanicsburg, Philadelphia and Pittsburgh introduced the PHRC Media-tion Program and covered other topics such as workplace retaliation.PHRC provides information and exhibits at community events, ethnic celebrations, festivals and legislators’ events including the City of Philadelphia Employer Information Expo, Chinese-American Chamber of Com-merce, Women in Business Committee, 500 Men Reading, Multi-culture Advisory Expo, Mon-Valley NAACP regional strategic planning sessions, YWCA of Greater Pittsburgh Racial Justice Awards and numerous others. PHRC speakers greeted audiences statewide through-out the year. Chairman Gerry Robinson made welcome remarks at the PA Safe Schools Conference, Chief Counsel Kathy Morrison addressed state employees at an Asian-Pacic Heritage Month event, Executive Director JoAnn Edwards spoke at the combined state agencies’ kicko event for Black History Month and Director of Education & Community Services Craig Dietz was keynote speaker at Penn-State Altoona’s Martin Luther King Day celebration. In 38 total outreach events, PHRC events directly served 1,805 people.In addition to educational outreach and formal technical training on how to comply with non-discrimination laws, the commission conducts legislative and media outreach and supplies publications through state and county oces where Pennsylvanians turn for help and informa-tion. PHRC developed new publications on fair housing rights and disability support animals in 2013-‘14. All PHRC publications are available online at www.phrc.state.pa.us or by request from phrc@pa.gov.

15PA Interagency TaskforceOne of the primary partnerships PHRC organizes is a network of state, federal and non-governmental agencies called the PA Interagency Taskforce on Com-munity Relations & Activities. PHRC, the Attorney General’s Oce, PA State Police, U.S. Dept. of Justice, the FBI and a number other entities participate in the taskforce.Formed decades ago to address civil unrest stemming from organized hate activity, the taskforce meets bi-monthly and tracks incidents that may lead to tension between racial, ethnic and other groups. Members refer inquiries to the appropriate entity to address the situa-tion, and taskforce partners work together to reduce the potential for tension in schools and communities state-wide. Local Human Relations Commissions & Advisory Councils In order to broaden educational outreach and be in bet-ter touch with communities across the state, PHRC has been working to revitalize and strengthen partnerships with local human relations commissions and PHRC advi-sory councils. PHRC is active in the Tri-State Human Rela-tions Coalition, along with the EEOC, U.S. Dept. of Justice, New Jersey and Delaware Human Relations Commissions, DE Dept. of Labor and 24 local commissions in the area.In 2014-15, the commission will be working to expand its existing six advisory councils into other areas of the state. Current councils serve Blair, Centre, Monroe-Pike, Mont-gomery and York counties and Johnstown.The commission also hopes to re-establish work-sharing agreements with local commissions to protect the rights Popular Presentation Topics*accessibility & accommodationsage discrimination bullying & harassmentcriminal records use by employersdisability support animals English -only rulesequal educational opportunity ethnic intimidation (hate crimes)fair housing rightsracial & cultural sensitivitylandlord responsibilitiesPHRC process overviewPHRC mediation processpregnancy discriminationretaliation in the workplacesexual harassment*Request training or event speakers at www.phrc.state.pa.us under Education & Trainingl. to r. – East Norriton Township Human Relaons Commissioner James Dougherty, PHRC Execuve Director JoAnn Edwards and Chairman Don Benn of E. Norriton Twp. Human Relaons Commission at a Feb. 2013 ceremony recognizing student parcipants in E. Norriton’s Creave Expressions Contest at the Capitol. The contest theme was Inclusion, Respect & Unity.of individuals under both local ordinances and state law. Local human relations commissions enforce local ordi-nances in approximately 32 municipali-ties around PA. Local commissions have widely varying stang and funding levels, powers and protections. Those in cities such as Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Erie and Reading have operated for decades. Many others have formed recently in eort to give protection from discrimination for LGBT individuals and others not protected under current state or federal law. The commission’s goal in strengthening these partnerships is to ensure that Penn-sylvanians’ rights are protected regardless of which entity they turn to for help.Equal Educational OpportunityPHRC works with partners — including the PA Center for Safe Schools, Mid-At-lantic Equity Center, NAACP – PA, and the Connued on next pageEducational Outreach (continued)

16Rered PHRC Execuve Director Homer C. Floyd addresses sta and commissioners in Harrisburg in June 2014 aer receiving the rst annual Homer C. Floyd Pinnacle Award. Dept. of Justice’s Community Relations Service —whose mutual goal is fostering equal educational opportunity in Pennsylvania schools. This group collaborated to make recommendations to Coatesville Area School District of-cials following the fall 2013 public disclosure of sexually and racially demeaning texts exchanged between former district personnel. The commission participated in NAACP public hearings to gather community feedback on the school climate shortly after the scandal broke, then held its regular monthly meeting in Coatesville in March 2014. The partners joined PHRC to give recommendations and a progress report to the district and community at a public listening session in March of 2014.The district has joined the collaborative eort and made positive steps toward improving the climate for teaching and learning in an ethnically diverse climate.Reading School DistrictThroughout 2013-14, PHRC continued to work with Read-ing School District, seeking the district’s compliance with the terms a ve-year conciliation agreement entered into in 2012 to address community, student and faculty con-cerns about barriers to equal educational opportunity for Reading’s 18,000 predominantly Hispanic students.In January 2014, PHRC supported a Berks County Inter-mediate Unit short-term solution of temporary district management, rather than continuing to allow students to suer the eects of dysfunctional leadership and lack of compliance with the agreement.Equal educational opportunity is crucial to the region’s economic prosperity. Without a solid educational founda-tion, Reading students will continue to underachieve and drop out in high numbers, feeding the cycle of unem-ployment and dependence on public benets, and the school-to-prison pipeline. Employers will continue be forced to look elsewhere for qualied workers.PHRC’s settlement agreement contains tangible solutions to the many equity challenges faced particularly by the district’s English language learners. Failure to implement steps in the agreement hurts all students.In 2014-15, PHRC has continued aggressive eorts to en-courage district leadership to turn challenges into oppor-tunities for Reading’s students and the region’s economy. Educational Outreach (continued)PHRC employees embody the values of equality , service, excellence & teamwork outlined on page three of this report and now established as a guiding principle of the agency’s three-year strategic plan. Prior to nalizing the strategic plan, the agency established an annual employee recognition program to commend those who were particularly shining examples of those values.The recognition program is one element of a strategic goal to fully develop the talented sta member, recognizing that they are the commission’s greatest asset.Six awards were established, and the rst honorees were named and recognized during the June 2014 public commission meeting in Harrisburg (see photo on next page). PHRC Sta – Excellence in ActionConnued on next page

172014 PHRC Employee Recognion Award Winners, le to right – Pisburgh Human Relaons Represen-tave Joe Retort - Team Leadership Star, Philadelphia Human Relaons Representave Joyce Jordan-Brown - Excellence in Invesgaon, Rered Execuve Director Homer C. Floyd - Homer C. Floyd Pinnacle Award, Harrisburg IT Generalist Rhonda SechristExcellence in Administraon, Harrisburg Assistant Chief Counsel Kelly Matos - Legal Star, Pisburgh Clerk Typist Rotana Jay - Clerical Star• Equality • Service • Excellence • Teamwork •Employees are routinely recognized by their respective professional organizations and for their involvement outside the workplace in their home communities and in ethnic, religious, civic, legal and social justice advocacy organizations.One notable example of professional recognition during the year was the U.S. Department of Justice Lifetime Achievement Award presented to Public Hearing Examiner Carl Summerson, Investigative Supervisor Martin Kearney and Executive Director JoAnn Edwards for their work with the PA Interagency Taskforce on Community Activities and Relations (see Summerson photo on page eight).PHRC Sta connued

18*Docketed cases include all those for which an investiga-tion was initiated. Cases found to be non-jurisdictional, led in error or withdrawn prior to an investigation are not included in this number.The county listed is the county in which the respondent is located. Out-of-state respondents are responsible parties located in other states, but who have employees, tenants or businesses located in Pennsylvania.E = EmploymentH = HousingPA = Public AccommodationsED = EducationCP = Commercial PropertyCase Statistics: Discrimination ProleCases Docketed by County & Type*County E H PA ED CP TotalOut of state 33 10 2 45ADAMS 12 1 1 14ALLEGHENY 146 12 5 163BEAVER 7 3 10BEDFORD 1 1 2BERKS 35 3 2 40BLAIR 7 2 9BRADFORD 4 4BUCKS 54 14 7 75BUTLER 5 1 6CAMBRIA 12 12CAMERON 1 1CARBON 1 1 2CENTRE 21 5 1 27CHESTER 52 7 1 60CLARION 2 1 3CLEARFIELD 5 2 7CLINTON 4 4COLUMBIA 8 1 9CRAWFORD 5 1 6CUMBERLAND 67 5 1 1 74DAUPHIN 164 11 8 3 1 187DELAWARE 63 12 7 82ELK 3 3ERIE 18 2 2 22FAYETTE 10 1 1 12FRANKLIN 15 1 16FULTON 3 2 5GREENE 3 1 4

19Case Statistics: Discrimination ProleCases Docketed by County and Type (cont.)County E H PA ED CP TotalHUNTINGDON 4 1 5INDIANA 4 4JEFFERSON 3 3JUNIATA 2 2LACKAWANNA 32 2 34LANCASTER 54 3 2 1 4 64LAWRENCE 8 1 9LEBANON 20 3 2 1 26LEHIGH 50 7 3 60LUZERNE 45 3 1 49LYCOMING 10 2 12MCKEAN 2 2MERCER 10 1 1 12MIFFLIN 1 1 2MONROE 16 1 1 18MONTGOMERY 118 26 7 2 153MONTOUR 3 3NORTHAMPTON 20 2 1 23NORTHUMBERLAND 7 3 1 1 12PERRY 3 1 4PHILADELPHIA 230 17 15 2 264PIKE 1 1POTTER 1 1SCHUYLKILL 16 1 17SNYDER 7 7SOMERSET 2 2 4TIOGA 3 3UNION 5 1 6VENANGO 1 1WARREN 2 1 3WASHINGTON 10 4 14WAYNE 2 2WESTMORELAND 28 4 1 33YORK 74 7 1 82Statewide Total 1,554 184 78 16 7 1,839

20Case Statistics: Discrimination ProleBasis of Discrimination: Protected ClassesE = EmploymentH = HousingPA = Public AccommodationsED = EducationCP = Commercial Property*Complainants self-identify age, race, sex, ancestry and national origin.Age* E H Total40 - 42 18 1 1943 - 45 27 2746 - 48 24 2449 - 51 35 1 3652 - 54 40 4055 - 57 74 7458 - 60 62 6261 - 63 51 1 5264 - 66 43 1 4467 - 69 22 2270 - 72 12 1273 - 75 13 1 1476 -78 9 979- 81 1 1 282 - 85 4 4Total 435 6 441Ancestry* E H PA TotalAfrican 3 3American 3 1 4Arab 1 1Asian 2 2Dominican 2 2Hispanic 61 1 2 64Jamaican 2 2Latino 3 1 4Portuguese 1 1Puerto Rican 10 10Syrian 3 3West Indian 2 2Total 92 4 2 98Disability E H ED PA CP TotalCognitive 39 11 1 51Hearing 16 1 1 18Immunological 71 5 3 4 83Mobility/Joints 104 13 4 121Multiple - Other 45 66 6 117Neurological 70 8 3 4 85Psychological 104 10 6 8 128Respiratory 28 2 1 31Visual 7 1 3 11Total 484 117 10 30 4 645 Disability Support Animals H PA TotalUse of Guide or Support Animal 8 3 11Total 8 3 11

21Case Statistics: Discrimination ProleBasis of Discrimination: Protected ClassesConnued **Only protected in housing.Familial Status** HParent designee or per-son with custody2Domiciled with 2Parent or other person with legal custody4Person under 18 living with parent or guardian6Total 14*Complainants self-identify age, race, sex, ancestry and national origin.Multiple Class E H PA TotalAfrican-American Female30 1 31African-American Male12 1 13Total 42 1 1 44Race* E H PA ED TotalAfrican-American 410 47 22 3 482American Indian 1 1 1 3Asian 7 1 8Bi-Racial 5 1 1 2 9Black 35 7 42Caucasian 26 3 1 30Complainant's race and known association with another person6 3 1 10Total 490 63 25 6 584Color* E CP PABlack 6 2 1Brown 5Total 11 2 1Sex E H PA EDFemale 330 11 5 4Female & Pregnant48Male 87 1 2Total 465 12 7 4E = EmploymentH = HousingPA = Public AccommodationsED = EducationCP = Commercial Property

22National Origin* E H PA CP TotalAfrica 1 1Armenia 1 1Bangladesh 1 1Belgium 1 1China 2 3 5Croatia 1 1Dominican Republic 7 1 8Egypt 1 4 4 9El Salvador 2 2Germany 1 1Guatemala 1 1Guyana 1 1Haiti 5 5Hong Kong 1 1India 5 1 6Iran - Islamic Republic 1 1Iraq 1 1Jamaica 6 6Jordan 1 1Korea - North 1 1Korea - South 2 2Laos 1 1Liberia 1 1Mali 1 1Mauretania 1 1Mexico 2 2 4Morocco 1 1Nepal 1 1Niger 5 1 6Nigeria 1 1Peru 1 1Puerto Rico 13 2 15Russian Federation 2 2Case Statistics: Discrimination ProleBasis of Discrimination: Protected ClassesConnued E = EmploymentH = HousingPA = Public AccommodationsED = EducationCP = Commercial Property*Complainants self-identify age, race, sex, ancestry and national origin.

23National Origin E H PA CP TotalSt. Vincent/Grenadines 1 1Syrian Arab Republic 7 7Trinidad and Tobago 1 1 2Turkey 1 1Ukraine 1 1United Kingdom 1 1United States 9 1 10Total 90 11 9 4 114Case Statistics: Discrimination ProleBasis of Discrimination: Protected ClassesConnued Religion E H PA7th-Day Adventist 2Agnosticism 1Baptist 3Christianity 8Hinduism 1Islam 14 1 1Israelite 1Jehovah's Witness 1Judaism 4 1Non-Catholic 1Non-Christian 2Non-Jewish 1Pentecostal 1Protestantism 1Rastafarian 1Roman Catholic 1Total 42 3 1Retaliation E H PA EDAssisted Investigation 32 1 1Filed PHRC Complaint 81 13 3Otherwise Opposed Unlawful Activity426 13 4 4Provided Information 8Testied 9Total 556 27 7 5E = EmploymentH = HousingPA = Public AccommodationsED = EducationCP = Commercial Property*Complainants self-identify age, race, sex, ancestry and national origin.