Abstract Bias and inflation in genomic evaluation with the single-step methods have been reported in several studies. Incompatibility between the base-populations of the pedigree-based and the genomic relationship matrix (G) could be a reason for these biases. Inappropriate ways of accounting for missing parents could be another reason for biases in genetic evaluations with or without genomic information. To handle these problems, we fitted and evaluated a fixed covariate (J) that contains ones for genotyped animals and zeros for unrelated non-genotyped animals, or pedigree-based regression coefficients for related non-genotyped animals. We also evaluated alternative ways of fitting the J covariate together with genetic groups on biases and stability of breeding value estimates, and of including it into G as a random effect. In a whole vs. partial data set comparison, four scenarios were investigated for the partial data: genotypes missing, phenotypes missing, both genotypes and phenotypes missing, and pedigree missing. Fitting J either as fixed or random reduced level-bias and inflation and increased stability of genomic predictions as compared to the basic model where neither J nor genetic groups were fitted. In most models, genomic predictions were largely biased for scenarios with missing genotype and phenotype information. The biases were reduced for models which combined group and J effects. Models with these corrected group covariates performed better than the recently published model where genetic groups were encapsulated and fitted as random via the Quaas and Pollak transformation. In our Norwegian Red cattle data, a model which combined group and J regression coefficients was preferred because it showed least bias and highest stability of genomic predictions across the scenarios.