Accenture Federal Services (AFS), Accenture plc, and Accenture LLP (Accenture) have agreed to pay the United States $25 million to resolve alleged violations of the False Claims Act by the US Justice Department. The department accused the technology consulting company of failing to comply with anti-discrimination requirements in federal contracts and discriminating against employees and applicants for employment because of race or sex. The settlement resolves allegations that from 2017 to the present, AFS falsely certified compliance with these conditions, while engaging in discriminatory employment practices.In an official release, Associate Attorney General Stanley E. Woodward Jr. said “Opportunity and promotion in the workplace must be earned through merit,” adding “Today’s resolution makes unmistakably clear that the Department will continue to aggressively pursue unconstitutional discriminatory employment practices.”
What was Accenture accused of
Most federal contracts contain a provision that requires contractors to provide equal opportunity to employees and applicants for employment. As a condition to being a federal contractor, the company must certify that it will not discriminate against an employee or applicant for employment because of race or sex and must further certify that it will take steps to ensure that applicants are employed, and employees are treated during employment, “without regard to” race or sex.The United States alleged that AFS took race or sex into account when making hiring decisions to achieve progress toward non-public workforce composition goals. The justice department claimed that business unit leaders within AFS received monthly summaries of the specific percentage of each race and sex within the unit, with the figures highlighted green, yellow, or red to indicate whether representation was at or exceeded AFS’ goal, was within 5 percent of AFS’ goal, or was below 5 percent of AFS’ goal, respectively.“These demographic goals were designed to, and did, drive changes in hiring practices based on race and sex. For example, at the end of 2020 and beginning of 2021, AFS engaged in a round of entry level employee hiring to make further progress towards the company’s racial representation goals,” the department said.The United States further alleged that AFS took race or sex into account when making promotion decisions. For example, when considering managing director promotions, AFS conducted a separate discussion of candidates who furthered AFS’ race or sex demographic goals to ensure that these candidates received extra visibility with AFS leaders responsible for making promotion decisions. AFS also highlighted in color the names of candidates who furthered the company’s demographic goals to distinguish them from other candidates during the promotion review process and developed a separate “pipeline” of potential promotion candidates who would advance AFS’ demographic goals.Finally, the United States alleged that AFS offered certain training, mentoring, leadership development programs, and educational opportunities where eligibility for these resources was limited by race or sex. For example, from August 2022 to February 2025, AFS ran the Amplify to Elevate training program, which reserved participation for employees based on race and was designed to boost the career prospects of these employees over others through mentorship and networking.
Leave a Reply