The EEOC charge priority policy and claimants with psychiatric disabilities

M. D. Ullman, M. C. Johnsen, K. Moss, S. Burris

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objective: In June 1995 the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) instituted a new charge priority policy. Under the new policy, charges are classified as one of three priority levels during or immediately after intake. Only charges assigned a high priority receive a full investigation. This paper examines the effect of the charge priority policy on individuals with psychiatric disabilities who filed Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) charges with the EEOC. Methods: Using data extracted from the EEOC's charge data system, the authors analyzed all 66,298 ADA claims prioritized and closed between June 1995 and March 1998. The z test for difference in proportions and the generalized estimating equations procedure were used. The primary outcome measure was the priority assignment received by ADA claimants. Results: Charges that received a high priority assignment were more likely to result in benefits for claimants. Charges filed by claimants with psychiatric disabilities were significantly less likely to be assigned a high priority than charges filed by other claimants. Claimants with psychiatric disabilities were also significantly less likely to benefit from their claims. Conclusions: The strong relationship between being assigned high priority and receiving benefits as a result of filing a charge demonstrates the importance of accurate priority categorization. The finding that people with psychiatric disabilities are less likely than others to benefit from their claims is cause for concern, particularly given the fact that the accuracy of the charge prioritization system has not been validated.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)644-649
Number of pages6
JournalPsychiatric Services
Volume52
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - 2001
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

charge
employment opportunity
Psychiatry
disability
Disabled Persons
act
Information Systems
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychiatry and Mental health
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Health(social science)
  • Health Professions(all)

Cite this

The EEOC charge priority policy and claimants with psychiatric disabilities. / Ullman, M. D.; Johnsen, M. C.; Moss, K.; Burris, S.

In: Psychiatric Services, Vol. 52, No. 5, 2001, p. 644-649.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Ullman, M. D. ; Johnsen, M. C. ; Moss, K. ; Burris, S. / The EEOC charge priority policy and claimants with psychiatric disabilities. In: Psychiatric Services. 2001 ; Vol. 52, No. 5. pp. 644-649.
@article{a56bef6a13374dc9adf727f04999a21f,
title = "The EEOC charge priority policy and claimants with psychiatric disabilities",
abstract = "Objective: In June 1995 the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) instituted a new charge priority policy. Under the new policy, charges are classified as one of three priority levels during or immediately after intake. Only charges assigned a high priority receive a full investigation. This paper examines the effect of the charge priority policy on individuals with psychiatric disabilities who filed Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) charges with the EEOC. Methods: Using data extracted from the EEOC's charge data system, the authors analyzed all 66,298 ADA claims prioritized and closed between June 1995 and March 1998. The z test for difference in proportions and the generalized estimating equations procedure were used. The primary outcome measure was the priority assignment received by ADA claimants. Results: Charges that received a high priority assignment were more likely to result in benefits for claimants. Charges filed by claimants with psychiatric disabilities were significantly less likely to be assigned a high priority than charges filed by other claimants. Claimants with psychiatric disabilities were also significantly less likely to benefit from their claims. Conclusions: The strong relationship between being assigned high priority and receiving benefits as a result of filing a charge demonstrates the importance of accurate priority categorization. The finding that people with psychiatric disabilities are less likely than others to benefit from their claims is cause for concern, particularly given the fact that the accuracy of the charge prioritization system has not been validated.",
author = "Ullman, {M. D.} and Johnsen, {M. C.} and K. Moss and S. Burris",
year = "2001",
doi = "10.1176/appi.ps.52.5.644",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "52",
pages = "644--649",
journal = "Psychiatric Services",
issn = "1075-2730",
publisher = "American Psychiatric Association",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The EEOC charge priority policy and claimants with psychiatric disabilities

AU - Ullman, M. D.

AU - Johnsen, M. C.

AU - Moss, K.

AU - Burris, S.

PY - 2001

Y1 - 2001

N2 - Objective: In June 1995 the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) instituted a new charge priority policy. Under the new policy, charges are classified as one of three priority levels during or immediately after intake. Only charges assigned a high priority receive a full investigation. This paper examines the effect of the charge priority policy on individuals with psychiatric disabilities who filed Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) charges with the EEOC. Methods: Using data extracted from the EEOC's charge data system, the authors analyzed all 66,298 ADA claims prioritized and closed between June 1995 and March 1998. The z test for difference in proportions and the generalized estimating equations procedure were used. The primary outcome measure was the priority assignment received by ADA claimants. Results: Charges that received a high priority assignment were more likely to result in benefits for claimants. Charges filed by claimants with psychiatric disabilities were significantly less likely to be assigned a high priority than charges filed by other claimants. Claimants with psychiatric disabilities were also significantly less likely to benefit from their claims. Conclusions: The strong relationship between being assigned high priority and receiving benefits as a result of filing a charge demonstrates the importance of accurate priority categorization. The finding that people with psychiatric disabilities are less likely than others to benefit from their claims is cause for concern, particularly given the fact that the accuracy of the charge prioritization system has not been validated.

AB - Objective: In June 1995 the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) instituted a new charge priority policy. Under the new policy, charges are classified as one of three priority levels during or immediately after intake. Only charges assigned a high priority receive a full investigation. This paper examines the effect of the charge priority policy on individuals with psychiatric disabilities who filed Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) charges with the EEOC. Methods: Using data extracted from the EEOC's charge data system, the authors analyzed all 66,298 ADA claims prioritized and closed between June 1995 and March 1998. The z test for difference in proportions and the generalized estimating equations procedure were used. The primary outcome measure was the priority assignment received by ADA claimants. Results: Charges that received a high priority assignment were more likely to result in benefits for claimants. Charges filed by claimants with psychiatric disabilities were significantly less likely to be assigned a high priority than charges filed by other claimants. Claimants with psychiatric disabilities were also significantly less likely to benefit from their claims. Conclusions: The strong relationship between being assigned high priority and receiving benefits as a result of filing a charge demonstrates the importance of accurate priority categorization. The finding that people with psychiatric disabilities are less likely than others to benefit from their claims is cause for concern, particularly given the fact that the accuracy of the charge prioritization system has not been validated.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0035024895&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0035024895&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1176/appi.ps.52.5.644

DO - 10.1176/appi.ps.52.5.644

M3 - Article

C2 - 11331799

AN - SCOPUS:0035024895

VL - 52

SP - 644

EP - 649

JO - Psychiatric Services

JF - Psychiatric Services

SN - 1075-2730

IS - 5

ER -