Accenture Federal Services to Pay $25M to Settle Claims It Used Race and Sex in Hiring, Promotions

Accenture Federal Services and affiliated entities have agreed to pay the United States $25 million to settle allegations that the company falsely certified compliance with federal anti-discrimination requirements while considering race and sex in employment decisions, the Justice Department said.

The settlement resolves False Claims Act allegations against Accenture Federal Services, Accenture plc, and Accenture LLP covering 2017 to the present. Federal contractors are generally required to certify that they will not discriminate against employees or applicants because of race or sex and that they will ensure workers are treated “without regard to” race or sex.

it was also alleged AFS falsely certified compliance with those conditions while engaging in discriminatory employment practices.

According to the allegations, AFS took race or sex into account in hiring to make progress toward non-public workforce composition goals. Business unit leaders received monthly summaries showing the percentage of each race and sex within their units, with figures highlighted green, yellow, or red to indicate whether representation met or exceeded company goals, was within 5 percent of the goal, or fell below it.

Those demographic goals were designed to, and did, drive changes in hiring practices based on race and sex, the government alleged. As an example, prosecutors said AFS conducted a round of entry-level hiring in late 2020 and early 2021 to advance its racial representation goals.

Court documents alleged AFS considered race or sex in promotion decisions. During managing director promotions, AFS held separate discussions about candidates who furthered its demographic goals to ensure they received extra visibility with leaders responsible for promotion decisions, according to the allegations. The company also highlighted those candidates’ names in color and developed a separate “pipeline” of potential promotion candidates who would advance its demographic goals, the government said.

Furthermore it was alleged AFS limited eligibility by race or sex for certain training, mentoring, leadership development, and educational opportunities. From August 2022 to February 2025, AFS ran the Amplify to Elevate training program, which reserved participation based on race and was designed to boost those employees’ career prospects through mentorship and networking, according to the government.

“Opportunity and promotion in the workplace must be earned through merit,” Associate Attorney General Stanley E. Woodward Jr. said. “Today’s resolution makes unmistakably clear that the Department will continue to aggressively pursue unconstitutional discriminatory employment practices.”

Assistant Attorney General Brett A. Shumate of the Justice Department’s Civil Division said federal contractors have a straightforward obligation to make employment decisions without regard to race or sex.

“A company cannot take taxpayer dollars, certify that it is following that simple principle, and then use race or sex as a factor in deciding who gets an opportunity,” Shumate said.

Deloitte to Pay $21.5M Over Alleged Race, Sex-Based Hiring and Promotion Practices in Federal Contracts

The Justice Department announced Thursday that five Deloitte entities have agreed to pay the United States $21.5 million to resolve allegations that the company violated the False Claims Act by failing to comply with anti-discrimination requirements in its federal contracts and discriminating against employees and applicants on the basis of race or sex.

The settlement is the latest resolution secured under the Civil Rights Fraud Initiative, which the department launched in May 2025. The entities — Deloitte LLP, Deloitte Consulting LLP, Deloitte & Touche LLP, Deloitte Financial Advisory Services LLP, and Deloitte Transactions and Business Analytics LLP — are referred to collectively as Deloitte.

Most federal contracts require contractors to provide equal opportunity to employees and applicants. As a condition of being a federal contractor, a company must certify it will not discriminate because of race or sex and must take steps to ensure applicants are employed, and employees are treated, “without regard to” race or sex.

The settlement resolves allegations that from 2017 to the present, Deloitte falsely certified compliance with those conditions while engaging in discriminatory race- and sex-based employment practices.

“Government contractors cannot reward or penalize employees based on race or sex — and labeling the practice DEI does not make it lawful,” Attorney General Todd Blanche said. “The Justice Department will aggressively pursue government contractors that have used taxpayer dollars to fund unlawful discrimination.”

“Merit drives opportunity and promotion. Not someone’s sex or race,” Associate Attorney General Stanley E. Woodward Jr. said. “Today’s settlement is yet another example of this Department’s commitment to eliminating woke, unconstitutional practices from American workplaces.”

Assistant Attorney General Brett A. Shumate of the Civil Division said contractors are bound by clear legal obligations.

“When a contractor misrepresents its compliance with federal anti-discrimination law to secure federal funds, it violates the conditions for receiving those funds and risks liability under the False Claims Act,” Shumate said. “Today’s resolution makes unmistakably clear that the Department will aggressively enforce these requirements, and companies who take taxpayer funds while engaging in illegal discrimination will be held accountable.”

U.S. Attorney Ryan Raybould for the Northern District of Texas said the False Claims Act is a powerful enforcement tool.

“As this settlement shows, the government is committed to ensuring that those who receive the benefits of federal contracts or funding must play by the rules,” Raybould said. “My office will not hesitate to use it to investigate and uncover any violations and to hold the responsible parties accountable.”

According to court documents, Deloitte took race or sex into account in hiring, promotion, and staffing decisions to make progress toward non-public race- and sex-based workforce composition goals. Business units received monthly summaries tracking demographic goals, with representation or advancement highlighted in green, yellow, or red depending on whether the goal was exceeded, met or slightly missed, or significantly below target. Deloitte’s Partners, Principals and Managing Directors were evaluated in part on their contributions to achieving workforce composition goals, and that for a two-year period the compensation of approximately 150 of Deloitte’s most senior PPMDs could be affected if their business units did not meet demographic goals set by the firm.

Those goals were also intended to affect promotion decisions, according to the government. Business units were assigned goals for the racial and sex makeup of their yearly PPMD classes. Where a class of PPMD candidates initially met Deloitte’s demographic goals, Deloitte identified candidates by race and sex in a spreadsheet when circulating the candidate list and suggested that those selecting PPMD candidates promote specific employees to “equitably maintain the current mix.”

Furthermore, it was alleged that Deloitte set goals for the demographics of employees staffed to federal contracts and sought to make statistically equal the percentages of Deloitte-identified Under Represented Minorities and non-URMs who were understaffed or “on the bench.” Deloitte identified available employees by race and sex, provided those names to staffing managers, and suggested managers consider staffing employees whose utilization would help achieve parity between the two groups, according to the allegations. Deloitte offered certain training, mentoring, leadership development, educational opportunities, or resources only to certain employees, with eligibility limited by race or sex. Deloitte ran the Springboard and Compass programs, where eligibility was limited on the basis of race and sex, and which were designed to boost participants’ career prospects through sponsorship and networking, according to the government.

The civil settlement includes the resolution of claims brought under the qui tam or whistleblower provisions of the False Claims Act by the American Alliance for Equal Rights. Under those provisions, a private party can file an action on behalf of the United States and receive a portion of any recovery. The case is captioned United States ex rel. American Alliance for Equal Rights v. Deloitte LLP, et al. (No. 4:25-cv-00458). The relator will receive $4,300,000 under the resolution.

The claims resolved by the United States in the settlement are allegations only, and there has been no determination of liability.

Federal Judge Approves Settlement for National Guard Medic Who Says Texas Memory Care Facility Demoted, Fired Her Over Military Service

AUSTIN, Texas — A federal judge in Austin has approved a settlement between the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, acting on behalf of Army National Guard Combat Medic Specialist Maria Opara, and Texas-based University Village Memory Care to resolve allegations that the facility violated the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994.

The lawsuit arose from UVMC’s demotion and ultimate termination of Opara after she went on leave to fulfill military orders, the Justice Department said.

The settlement resolves Opara’s claim that UVMC violated USERRA when it demoted or attempted to demote her from her position as a night shift supervisor to a lower-paying position because of her military service. It also resolves her claim that UVMC terminated her employment when she refused to accept the forced demotion.

Under the agreement, UVMC will pay $15,000 in monetary relief to Opara and must update its policies and procedures regarding employees’ USERRA rights, including training all UVMC employees on the updated policies and procedures.

“It is unlawful to demote a servicemember because of her service in the National Guard, and also unlawful to terminate a servicemember because she refused to accept such a demotion,” said Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division. “The Department is proud to vindicate servicemembers’ rights under USERRA and will continue to ensure that they can serve our country without fear of being demoted or losing their civilian jobs because of their service.”

U.S. Attorney Justin R. Simmons for the Western District of Texas said the region is home to many servicemembers and that the department will protect their rights.

“So many of our servicemembers call the Western District of Texas home, so we do all we can to protect their rights while they are out protecting our freedoms,” Simmons said. “Our servicemembers — the men and women who, along with their families, sacrifice so much to protect our nation and its citizens — can be confident the Justice Department will hold employers accountable for unlawful acts committed against our soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines.”