On June 4, 2026, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) approved its new National Enforcement Plan (“NEP”) for Fiscal Years 2025–2029, replacing the agency’s prior Strategic Enforcement Plan. The NEP establishes the EEOC’s nationwide enforcement priorities and signals a significant shift in how the agency intends to investigate and litigate employment discrimination claims. Although the NEP applies to employers across industries, its implications may be particularly significant for health care organizations, many of which operate federally funded workforce programs or maintain longstanding diversity initiatives.
Most notably, the EEOC identifies remedying DEI-related race and sex discrimination as one of its enforcement priorities. The agency also states that it will prioritize intentional discrimination (disparate treatment) claims while limiting the use of disparate impact theories “to the maximum degree possible,” consistent with recent Executive Orders and the current Administration’s enforcement priorities. Although the NEP does not change Title VII or other federal anti-discrimination laws, it provides employers with an important roadmap for how the EEOC intends to focus its enforcement resources.
A More Centralized Enforcement Approach
The NEP adopts a nationwide enforcement model, replacing district-specific priorities with a single national framework. The EEOC may reassign investigations across districts based on workload or expertise and may initiate investigations through Commissioner Charges without first receiving an employee complaint. This centralized approach enhances the agency’s ability to identify and pursue priority matters nationwide.
DEI Programs Receive Increased Attention
The NEP identifies programs labeled or framed as “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (“DEI”) or similar initiatives as potential enforcement priorities where they involve race- or sex-based preferences. Examples include:
- hiring, promotion, and layoff decisions involving demographic quotas or preferences;
- leadership development, mentorship, internship, fellowship, and apprenticeship programs with race- or sex-based eligibility criteria;
- diverse slate or hiring panel requirements;
- diversity statements used in hiring decisions;
- demographic data shared with managers for employment decision-making; and
- executive compensation tied to demographic hiring or promotion goals.
The NEP does not prohibit lawful DEI initiatives. Rather, it signals increased scrutiny of employment decisions involving protected characteristics.
Why Health Care Employers Should Pay Particular Attention
The NEP presents unique compliance considerations for health care organizations, many of which participate in federally funded workforce development initiatives or maintain longstanding diversity recruitment programs. Organizations should review federally funded workforce programs – including Health Resources and Services Administration and National Institutes of Health grants, residency and fellowship programs, internships, scholarships, and pipeline initiatives that incorporate demographic selection criteria or hiring metrics—as well as targeted recruiting efforts, diversity hiring goals, leadership development and mentorship programs, executive compensation metrics tied to workforce demographics, and DEI training and communications. Many of these initiatives were developed under prior federal policy priorities.
Health care employers should ensure they remain consistent with current enforcement priorities, including the certification requirements of Executive Order 14173, while distinguishing lawful outreach and recruitment efforts from programs that provide preferences or limit opportunities based on protected characteristics.
Key Takeaways
The NEP does not change federal anti-discrimination law or prohibit lawful DEI initiatives. It does, however, signal increased EEOC scrutiny of employment practices involving protected characteristics, particularly for employers with federally funded workforce programs or longstanding DEI initiatives. In light of the NEP, employers should consider conducting a review of DEI-related policies and programs, hiring and promotion practices, public DEI statements, and grant obligations, including certifications under Executive Order 14173, to assess compliance with current enforcement priorities.
KMK’s Labor & Employment team is closely monitoring these developments and is available to assist employers with compliance reviews, risk assessments, and evaluating existing DEI initiatives.
KMK Law articles and blog posts are intended to bring attention to developments in the law and are not intended as legal advice for any particular client or any particular situation. The laws/regulations and interpretations thereof are evolving and subject to change. Although we will attempt to update articles/blog posts for material changes, the article/post may not reflect changes in laws/regulations or guidance issued after the date the article/post was published. Please consult with counsel of your choice regarding any specific questions you may have.
ADVERTISING MATERIAL.
© 2026 Keating Muething & Klekamp PLL. All Rights Reserved
- Partner
Chris Jones focuses his practice on litigating and advising clients regarding issues within the workplace. Chris strives to fully understand clients’ business concerns and counsels clients regarding hiring and firing issues ...
- Associate
Kelzé Riley is an associate in the firm's Labor & Employment Group. Her practice includes a wide range of labor and employment matters.
Kelzé earned her J.D. from the Donald P. Klekamp College of Law at the University of Cincinnati in ...
Topics/Tags
Select- EEOC
- Labor & Employment Law
- Diversity
- Immigration
- Employment Law
- National Enforcement Plan
- Labor Law
- Department of Labor
- Wage & Hour
- FMLA
- NLRB
- Arbitration
- National Labor Relations Board
- Americans with Disabilities Act
- FLSA
- Discrimination
- Reasonable Accommodation
- Sexual Harassment
- Coronavirus
- Social Media
- Sixth Circuit
- Title VII
- Employer Policies
- Holiday Policies
- Transgender Issues
- Employment Litigation
- Religion Discrimination
- Employer Rules
- Overtime Pay
- Workplace Violence
- Non-Compete Agreements
- Pregnancy Discrimination
- OSHA
- Artificial Intelligence
- Employee Benefits and Executive Compensation
- Privacy
- Independent Contractor
- Joint Employer
- Telework
- Department of Justice
- Paid Leave Laws
- NLRA
- Compliance
- Supreme Court
- Tax Credit
- Employee Tips
- One Big Beautiful Bill
- Workplace Accommodations
- Federal Trade Commission
- Litigation
- Worker Classification
- IRS
- Harassment
- Performance Improvement Plans
- Department of Homeland Security
- Immigration and Customs Enforcement
- Foreign Nationals
- Immigration and Nationality Act
- Disability Discrimination
- Medical Marijuana
- Retirement
- Inclusion
- LGBTQ+
- National Labor Relations Act
- Accommodation
- Sexual Orientation Discrimination
- Employer Handbook
- Race Discrimination
- ADAAA
- ERISA
- Unions
- ACA
- Affordable Car Act
- Technology
- Federal Arbitration Act
- Medical Cannabis Dispensaries
- Whistleblower
- Disability
- United States Supreme Court
- 401(k)
- Employment Settlement Agreements
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
- Fair Labor Standards Act
- Benefits
- Gender Identity Discrimination
- Posting Requirements
- Class Action Litigation
- Disability Law
- E-Discovery
- Evidence
- Paycheck Protection Program
- Environmental Law
- Family and Medical Leave Act
- Privacy Laws
- Securities Law
- Health Savings Account
- Preventive Care Benefits
- SECURE Act
- US Department of Labor Employee Benefits Security Administration
- Healthcare Reform
- Representative Election Regulations
- Older Workers' Benefit Protection Act (OWBPA)
- Affirmative Action
- Compensable Time
- Electronically Stored Information
- Equal Opportunity Clause
- Security Screening
- Telecommuting
- E-Discovery Case Law
- Electronic Data Discovery
- ESI
- Occupational Safety and Health Administration
- Unemployment Insurance Integrity Act
- American Medical Association
- Attendance Policy
- Classification
- Confidentiality
- Fair Minimum Wage
- Federal Minimum Wage
- Media Policy
- Misclassification
- Return to Work
- Seniority Rights
- State Minimum Wage
- Wage Increase
- Disability Leave
- Equal Pay
- Genetic Information Discrimination
- National Origin Discrimination
- Retaliation
- Social Media Content
- Antitrust
- Employment Incentives
- HIRE Act
- Social Security Tax
- Taxation
Recent Posts
- TPS Haiti Termination: How Employers Can Ensure I-9 Records Remain Compliant
- A New Enforcement Era: What Employers Should Know About the EEOC’s 2025–2029 National Enforcement Plan
- Beyond Paid Time Off: The Legal Side of Holiday Policies
- EEO-1 Reporting on the Chopping Block: What Employers Need to Know
- DOL Proposes New Joint Employer Rule: What Employers Need to Know
- Arbitration Agreements Take a Hit: What the Sixth Circuit's EFAA Decision Means for Your Workplace Agreements
- Bourbon, Ballots, and Bargaining Orders: Sixth Circuit Rejects NLRB’s Cemex Framework
- Independent Contractor and Joint Employer Rules: Looking to the Past for Future Compliance
- New Requirements for Employers in California
- Back to the Office: The EEOC Clarifies the Limits of Telework Under the ADA

