Transcripts For CSPAN House Veterans Affairs Hearing On Whistleblowers 20240714

Unfortunately, we learned that the v. A. Is continuing to struggle with the culture of retaliation against whistleblowers. In too many instances leadership and supervisor turned a blind eye in those in v. A. Worker frs pointed out sowers problems or pointing out bad actors ace of using positions or breaking laws. Even worse the whistleblowers are targeted for active retaliation. One striking example dpram dr. Catherine mitchells testimony. In 2014 she was one of a group of people working at the Phoenix Medical Center to expose the secret waiting list of veterans in need of medical care. Instead of addressing the issue , the leadership actively worked to hide the exorbitant wait times. And it turned out such practices occurred at v. A. Facilities nationwide. The coverup was extensive and deliberate, and health and well the health and well being of veterans was put at risk. Congress responded to the allegations with hearings that confirmed the whistleblowers revelations of long and active difficult wait times for appointments. The v. A. Has a lot of work to do so ends veterans get access to health care in a timely and transparent manner. In fact, the committee on Veterans Affairs will hold a hearing on this topic tomorrow. The phoenix v. A. Employees , including dr. Mitchell, who blew the whistle in 2014, raised incredibly important concerns regarding Veterans Health care. Instead of being thanked for raising the issues theyve experienced retaliation. Their jobs were threatened and they faced a hostile work environment. Unfortunately, their experience is not uncommon. Our two other witnesses during the june hearing also testified about retaliation they were experiencing, all while continuing to work at the v. A. And they sought protection as whistleblowers. The june witnesses described many shortcomings within the v. A. For protecting the rights of whistleblowers. Each of the three individuals who testified described ongoing retaliation that they were experiencing despite current laws and institutions designed for their protection as they try to speak truth to power. For example, dr. Mitchell testified that retaliation is ongoing even after she secured a Settlement Agreement with the v. A. To continue to work serving veterans. Clearly, the v. A. Must do better. Mistake, this committee believes the importance of having people who are brave enough to stand up and blow the whistle on missteps and misdeeds within the department. These are people who are trying to do the best for the veterans and they should be we should be committed to their protection. The Ranking Member requested to testify them before the committee. The subcommittee will hold an additional hearing with government witnesses in september. It has been two years since congress and the v. A. Established the congress and accountability whistleblower rejection. Our september hearing. Whistleblower protection. Our september hearing will focus on the results of that particular office. Today is an opportunity to hear from the office of accountability on whistleblower protection. In addition will hear from the office of the Inspector General. Each represents a key Agency Charged with protecting whistleblowers. Two of theo invited whistleblower advocates who appeared on the june 25 panel to ensure a strong and important governmentth officials. As i said before, and it needs to be repeated again, m importanters are a source of information and should not be ignored. Their rights must be protected so that future whistle bloergs relief confidence the stories are heard and confidence the investigations without reprisal. I look forward to the testimony of the witnesses, and with that, i would like to recognize thank you member bergman. Rep. Bergman thank you, mr. Chairman. I appreciate your holding the hearing open to allow us to receive testimony from government witnesses who administer the whistleblower programs. Scheduling a hearing this quickly is difficult and i appreciate you following through on your commitment to hold this hearing as soon as possible. The first Witness Panel recounted case specific complaints but we had littles discussion about the whistleblower process. The discussion bounced back and forth between complaints with vas office of accountability and whistleblower protection or opinion the office of special counselor osc on the v. A. Inspector general. Witnesses raised concerns that the current lack of merit protection Board Members clouded its operations. It is critical that we understand the division loh the division of labor in the whistleblower protectionsome if we are going to diagnose the problems. Let me give you my analogy from my pilot background. There are four forcing afgting forcing an aircrafts ability to fly thrust, weight, drag and lift. When the problem arises that forcemust understand the acceleration, because the response differs depending on the nature. The whistleblower process is no different. The remedy for disclosure problem may be vastly different than a retaliation problem. I want to make sure that we have the right framework and identify the airport accountable parties to address whistleblower concerns. Behind me is a diagram of what i understand to be the whistleblower reporting process for v. A. Employees. When we discuss whistleblowers we must distinguish between disclosures and retaliation. Because what an employee is alleging and where they go for help depends on one of the are making a disclosure or a retaliation claim. A disclosure is the initial blowing of the whistle. It is when an employee brings the attention to the 600 hammer, secret waitlist, or potential criminal activity. Retaliation on the other hand is what happens after a Whistleblower Makes a disclosure and experiences an adverse impact on their work or career because of your disclosure. Their work, or their disclosure. Retaliation may occur when management proposes to remove the employee or move them to an isolated Office Without heat or airconditioning. It might manifest in the form of multiple investigations or a threat. A whistleblower can make a disclosure to their supervisor, oawp, the vaig or the osc. In fact, a whistleblower may make this team disclosure to all these offices, and is unclear what type of communication exists between the parallel roads of investigation. Similarly a whistleblower may raise a retaliation complaint to those organizations. They can raise their claims in forums andorm that could lead to multiple investigation. It was described the process of seeking whistleblower assistance as confounding. And the other witnesses echoed that sentiment. Keep it simple. But this runs afoul of the principle. This is another example of bureaucracy 101, a Government Program with multiple governing offices and diffuse responsibility, which together creates confusion and a lack of accountability. Our witnesses are undoubtedly the experts at what works and what needs to be improved in the whistleblower protection system. I would like each of you to explain your offices role as it relates to disclosure or retaliation. A common grievance is the lack of communication between the investigating officer and the whistleblower following disclosure or retaliation complaint. I would like the witnesses to explain what an employee should expect from the investigator in your office. What barriers exist to timely and sour communication, and what steps you are taking to improve this communication. Mr. Chairman, before i yield, i want to reiterate that whistleblowers provide an Invaluable Service to our country. They must belief gnat whistle blowing systems take their concerns seriously and investigates their complaints appropriately and efficiently. Most importantly, whistleblowers must feel safe to make a disclosure. It is evident that the witnesses on the first panel do not have faith in the system. But i was surprised to learn in the written testimony submitted vaig that in fy 2018, the received hotline complaints that 35,000 whistleblowers contacted oawp, 1965 times and that osc received roughly 2,100 v. A. Related disclosure and retaliation complaints. This data suggests that many employees are not afraid to raise concerns. But this is not cause to celebrate just yet. Because as the prior testimony made clear problems remain and , there is a lack of faith by many in the system. That with a multifaceted understanding of the process, we can identify the root causes of the problems and make a whistleblower system that works better for everyone. And again, mr. Chairman, i appreciate your reconvening the important hearing and i yield back. Rep. Pappas well, thank you Ranking Member bergman. I very much appreciate your recommendation to hold this session today. And appearing before us today are four witnesses selected by Ranking Member bergman to offer testimony. And id like to recognize them first starting with dr. Anto, she is the assistant secretary from the office of witness protection. You have five minutes for your testimony. Chairman priebus, Ranking Member bergman, and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today regarding whistleblower protection at the department of Veterans Affairs. Protecting whitley blowers from retaliation is a priority for the v. A. And the office of accountability. To protect whistleblowers, the oawp directly investigates all whistleblower retaliation allegations made by employees and applicants for employment by the v. A. Since my confirmation as the First Assistant secretary oawp , has engaged with other federal agencies including the office of special counsel, the department of defense, the department of justice, the department of ofor, and the differen departmt Homeland Security to obtain best practices to investigate disclosures and protect whistleblowers. Oawp also developed a process to regularly update whistleblowers who make a disclosure to oawp about the status of their investigation into the allegations. The secretary and i recognized the need for improvements to whistleblower protection within the v. A. Oawp is actively working to implement several initiative. And i appreciate the opportunity to address a few. We are working on standardized investigator training to ensure that all our investigators under understand the law, including whistleblower protection and is applied in investigations consistently. We are finalizing written policy and how oawp investigates the disclosures it receives. The policy undergoing concurrence in the v. A. And i anticipated will be issued before october 21st 2019. We are also engaged and collaborating with the office of topector general and the osc finalize training for all v. A. Employees as required by the accountability act. The training addresses methods for making a disclosure, prohibitions against taking action against an employee for making a lawful disclosure and penalties for whistleblower retaliation. The training should be available later in the fall. In addition to continuously improving whistleblower protection oawp is actively , working on complying with other requirements on our authorizing statute, including standing a division to fulfill our requirement to record, track and review, and confirm that the as implementation of recommendations from audits and investigations conducted by the Government Accountability office, the office of Inspector General, and the office of the special counsel. Since my appointment ive met with several internal and external stakeholders, including supervisors, a char staff, Veterans Service organizations, and nonprofit such as whistleblowers of america. I value the input i received and i look forward to kinning to discuss ways to improve whistleblower protection with all stakeholders. A registeredand nurse, former investigator on this subcommittee, and now assistant secretary for oawp, i understand that whistleblowers have a Critical Role in stopping misconduct within the organization. The secretary and i value all v. A employees and whistleblowers and their commitment to improving care and services for our veterans. I want the v. A. To be a place where an employee can trust that management will take allegations of retaliation or wrongdoing seriously, encourage staff to raise concerns and not retaliate against staff who raise concerns. Mr. Chairman, i look forward to working with this committee and our internal and external stake holders to identify opportunities to and best practices to protect whistleblowers. This concludes my testimony and i look forward to any questions you may have. Chairman pappas thank you very much, dr. Bonzanto. Id like to recognize the Inspector General at the department of Veterans Affairs, mr. Mike mistle. Ranking member bergen chairman pappas, members of the subcommittee. I appreciate the opportunity to discuss the importance of whistleblowers to the office of Inspector General. We treat all complainants as whistleblowers. That is, we provide the same protections, respond with respect, carefully evaluate their concerns, and safeguard confidentiality. The oig relies heavily on allegations investigations and complaints from v. A. Employees, veterans and their families, congress and the public when deciding where to focus our resources. There are countless examples of how whistleblowers and other complainants have driven change, not only for the matter under review but frequently at the systems level, through changes in policies, practices and personnel. An individuals decision to bring allegations forward should not have to be weighed against possible adverse actions. The whistleblower protection act prohibits reprisal against public employees, former employees, or applicants for employment for reporting a violation of law, rule or regulation. That prohibition extends to reports of gross mismanagement and waste of funds, abuse of authority, or a substantial and specific danger to Public Health or safety. The oig operates a hotline staffed by a dedicated team to receive whistleblower complaints and other information. Our hotline received over 35,000 18,tacts in fiscal year 15,000 contacts for the First Six Months of fiscal year 19. Every contact is reviewed and processed, and acknowledged by an analyst. We receive information via telephone, fax, web submission forms on the website. In addition, there are posters on in the v. A. Facilities how to contact the oig. As a result of our site visits and other engagements with stake holders, oig staff maybe contacted by individuals directly with information or allegations of wrong doing. The oig interacts with other oversight entities to ensure all available resources and protections are trabl to are available to complainants. There are many agencies that complainants can go to for redress. The oig website including frequently asked questions, relate theed to hotline inquiries, that outline the types of complaints addressed by the oig and other offices. It also provides Contact Information for those entities. This information is further provided to individuals who call or write the oig hotline. Although the oig advises individuals contacting our hotline how to reach many agencies with the authority to provide relief, we have formalized the exchange of information, particularly for allegations of retaliation. The oig directs those complainants to the v. A. Office of accountability appear and to the office of the special counsel. As part of our continuous efforts, i will be delivering the keynote address at the annual hotline worldwide outreach conference which honors nationalwers on whistleblower Appreciation Day this july 30th. This conference, sponsored by the department of defense oig analyzes best practices, discusses Lessons Learned and provides examples of challenges facing the hotline oversight community. In addition, we recognize that some v. A. Employees and contractors may be confused about when it is appropriate to contact the oig about fraud, waste and abuse in v. A. Programs and operations. To that end, we have requested that v. A share with all employees an email on National Whistleblower Appreciation Day that has information on how and when to contact the oig. We are also working with the v. A. To offer more formal training on the oig and the various avenues for redress available to those with complaints. The oig values whistleblowers and the information they provide , as we explore areas for potential oversight of the v. A. It is incumbent upon v. A. Stakeholders to protect whistleblowers from retaliation and foster an environment where no one fears the consequences of reporting problems for ideas for potential improvement. I encourage all whistleblowers to contact us with their concerns and we will treat them with respect, dignity, and in confidence to the greatest extent possible. Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. I would be happy to answer any questions that you or other members of the subcommittee may have. Chairman pappas thank you, mr. Mistle. I now recognize mr. Henry kerner. Mr. Kerner you are recognized are for five minutes. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Good evening, chairman pappas, Ranking Member bergman members of the committee. Osc is deeply committed to veterans and im honored to be here to discuss the way the osc can assist the v. A. In providing the best possible service to veterans. Whistleblowers are vital to ensuring problems within an organization are identified and fixed. Oscs contribution to the process is twofold. First osc provides a safe employees,r v. A. Applicants for employment, and former employees to make disclosures of wrongdoing. And osc has authority to demand a full investigation of any disclosures that warrant second, one. Works to ensure that whistleblowers do not face retaliation. We seek corrective and disciplinary action where we establish retaliation occurred, and we work with leaders to train employees on prohibited personnel practices. We are committed to helping the v. A. By ensuring the patriotic employees can do their jobs without fear of reprisal. Like you, i watch with significant concern as with whistleblowers came forward other hearing last month to describe their ordeals at the hands of management. I have submitted a longer satement out the osc procedures into details. I thought i would focus my remarks on chronicling some of the efforts i have undertaken in supporting that whistleblowers. Our commit i met with the leadership of the v. A. As soon as i became the head of the os, first with secretary shulkin in november of 2017, and later with secretary wilkie in august of 2018, a short time after his confirmation. Met mr. Mistl e. And all these meetings, i explained my fears commitment to supporting whistleblowers and reporting retaliation, and i found each of the leaders supportive. While its clear that more needs to be done to protect whistleblower to stem whistleblower reprisals of the v. A. , i take the leaders at their word and count on them to assist by improving the culture at their department. The cornerstone of my leadership at osc involves what i call old style Customer Service. That means providing whistleblowers Accurate Information as quickly as possible, even or perhaps especially if it turns out we are unable to assist them. I am keenly aware of the criticism that osc can take too long to process cases which is why one of my first managerial decisions was the creation of an efficiency and effectiveness working group. Following its recommendations, i undertook a major reorganization of osc by merging two units into one. As a result of the new internal processes, osc has been much ascendingient at cases to attorneys, and closing cases where osc may not have jurisdiction. Osc staff attorneys have forwarded me emails from complaintants grateful to have received introductory email within the first week of filing with us. We still face a nearly 2600case backlog and it will come as no surprise to learn we need more funding to be able to reduce the backlog and provide faster processing times to whistleblowers. But despite the backlog we strive to be as responsive as possible. Osc is part of a mosaic of whistleblower Resources Available to v. A. Employees, which includes the office of accountability and whistleblower p, the officehe oaw of the Inspector General, and mspb. As an independent agency osc delivers benefits that only can we provide. Part of that advantage lies in the world of disclosuring e wrongdoing. That is where the whistleblower is afforded the opportunity the to participate in the investigation of the allegations by providing comments to osc. And those comments and the report itself are then made public. This is a feature unique to osc , and whistleblower comments are crucial to my final evaluation of the sufficiency and reasonableness of the agency s investigation. On the retaliation side osc , offers unique Enforcement Authority with our ability to litigate corrective and disciplinary actions before the mspb taking the decision of whether to correct the retaliation out of the hands of agency management. Together, these oscspecific features allow osc to stand out in the field of whistleblower related entities. Thank you for holding the hearings. I look forward to answering your questions. Chairman pappas thank you, mr. Kerner. Next id like to recognize our fourth witness, mr. Tristan leavitt. The most senior official serving the board as acting chief executive and Administrative Officer. You are recognized for five minutes. Good evening, chairman pappas, Ranking Member bergman, and members of the subcommittee. Im the general counsel of merit systems protectioned about board. Because there are no Senate Confirmed members im the Administrative Officer of the agency as the chairman said. Thank you very much for this opportunity to testify. As requested, my testimony will focus broughtly on the process by which whistleblower cases are brought before the mspb and jude and adjudicated. This year marks the 40th pb opening its ms doors. Following the Civil Service reform act. It opened with a series of findings stating it is the policy of the United States that the merit system and principles should be expressly stated to furnish guidance to federal employees, and should be statutorily defined to enable federal employees to avoid conduct undermining the principles and the integrities of the merit system. The Civil Service reform act recognized the value of whistleblowers. Employees should be protected against reprisal for lawful disclosures. The mspb was established to fill decide the matters appealed based on the evidence submitted. As someone who previously received many allegation of retaliation when i worked on capitol hill, i recognized this mission established by congress was critical to establish which claims are metorious. Turned statute in order to receive corrective action, the appelant must demonstrate he or she made a disprotected disclosure. The agency threatened to take action against him or her and it was a contributing factor in the action. Even after a finding that it was a contributing factor in the action, corrective action is not required turned law if it would have taken the same personnel action in the absence turnover isclosure. Outside of cases brought by osc, they hear two types of whistle blower cases. The first type called an therwise appealable action, removal, reduction in grade or pay. Or suspension of more than 14 days. In such appeal both the appealable matter and the claim of reprisal for whistleblower will be reviewed by the mspb. The claim of whistleblower retaliation is termed aed firmt defense if the agency proves it met the evidence he had shear standard for taking the action the appellant may attempt to plof the agency nevertheless took the action in reprisal. The second type of whistleblower cases is the cases in which the individual filed a complaint but osc lass not sought corrective action on the individuals behalf. This is a individual right of action or ira appeal most surround axes not directly paeflable to the direct. For example a suspension under 14 days or reassignment with no reduction in pay or grade. In such circumstances the appellant to required to exhaust the administrative remedy of first filing a complaint. The administrative remedy. In an ira appeal the will goord are not decide the personalle action other than the connection with the claim of reprisal for whistle blowing. In both types of cases an administrative judge may grant the stay of action add issue. Is similarly osc may request any member, board order a stay. Near needless to say in authority has been complicated by the lack of any current sitting Board Members. That said, despite the lack of a board kwour up since january 2017, the 60 or so administrative judges at mspb process continue to hear cases of the 5447 cases administrative judges decided in fa 2018 approximately 1 5 were from employees. They have decided claims in the past three fickle years and the same number in fy 2019 in closing one general trend i do want to note not specific to the v. A. The increasing complexity of the complaints and the djudication. It is increasingly rare to see a case in which the paleant made a sim disclosure in retaliation for which the agency just took ne personnel action. As osc can attest, the typical case often involves multiple ails of alleged whistle bloerg and several retaliatory personnel actions because multipart test for jurisdiction and proof of the claims must be applied to each protected disclosure, whistleblower appeals are often difficult and time consuming to hear and decide. Nevertheless, i believe the mspb understanding that its counted on to be the front line for the issues. And wants to give full appear fair consideration to each appeal in replying the law. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you. Happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you. We have two additional witnesses on the panel today, mr. Tom devine, the legal direct director of the Government Accountability probabilities and miss jas lynn garrick the founders of whistleblowers of testimony they both offered testimony at our june 25th session on the earlier panel and brought them back to allow a more full discussion today. But since they already gave testimony at that time they wont give additional testimony today. With that i want to thank each witness for in re testimony well begin the questions portion of this hearing. And ill begin by recognizing myself for five minutes of questioning. Could start if i with you, i appreciate your comments here today. And i think it was made very clear to us by some of the witnesses we heard from earlier by folks who have reached out to my office that we have a culture problem at the v. A. And i believe you recognize this during the nomination process. After our hearing last month we heard from whistleblowers about retaliation thats ongoing and its clear to me that there still needs to be culture change underway at the v. A. So youre six months into your job. I wonder how you assess the transition you said needed to happen and will you address that moving forward. Sir, thank you so much for the uestion. I do have to say coming from the subcommittee as an investigator and now on the other side there is definitely a change in the culture where there is more support from leadership about engaging staff and having conversations regarding retaliation or regarding the importance of engaging staff in addressing concern. For the first six month ive been there ive seen secretary wilkie lead this in conversation with leadership, the importance of Customer Service, importance of engaging we engage our veterans and listen to veterans but also engaging the staff and listening to them and the internal Customer Service breaking the silos and conversations across the administration to improve the Staff Engagement. I think that is definitely a positive thing. I do have to say when i came onboard, too, the partnership for Public Services which assesses best places to work in federal government from 2017 to 2018 v. A. Moved from the bottom third best places to work in government to the top third. And i think thats a positive sign from 2017 to 2018. I think that is a good sign were heading in the right direction. There is room for improvement. And i admit to that. And i think the office of accountability is part of that changing as engaging with stakeholders to improve our processes. Thank you for that. Im wondering if i could ask the other government witnesses here the same question. How would you assess the culture at the v. A. In terms of ing hospitable to whistle blowers and what steps need to be taken by the v. A. To ensure that whistleblowers are listened to, that theyre protected . It obviously starts at the top. We need good leadership. When you have good leadership with people as i indicated i met with dr. Bonzanto, i also met with the gc and of course the secretary. And i have their commitment that they are they are committed to trying to make to improve the culture. O i take them at their word. We at osc have a very extensive relationship with the v. A. Has the most cases with us. We have a lot of communication with them. Starts at the head. But my team meets we have monthly meetings with them. We also have bi monthly meeting on the 714 process, involving discipline. But in addition to leadership you also have to have education. You have to have people know what the whistleblower laws are. Obviously once you have the commitment to then abide by the laws and then finally you need to have accountability. You have to have discipline and accountability. This is where osc comes in to try to assist with the culture change at the v. A. It certainly takes time to change culture. I think that culture was in place for a number of years. A little more than a year ago we were dealing with the office of accountability and whistleblower protection by fighting with them about access to documents. So certainly we have come a long way from that type. I think with dr. Bonzantos leadership they are headed in the right direction. Its going to take time. And with whistleblowers they have to prove to them that its a place they feel comfortable coming toward and there will not be adverse actions against hem. I would just add it does take time. There are a lot of layers in the v. A. My experience on the hill when you had a problem of culture at the place it took a long time, sustained effort, along with just commitment from individuals but to help people have the confidence that things can work out for the best. Well, thank you. And dr. Bonzanto, you need to you know, im specifically concerned about whistleblower protection. Hats a charge of your office. I understand that new policies are underway and you have alluded to those. I want to get a higher degree of confidence today that the steps are underway to improve the protections of the individuals so v. A. Luable to the process. Could you highlight the steps again for us to make sure that were going to have greater confidence coming out of the hearing that things are headed in the right direction. Of course, sir. I have to say one of the things i was listening through to hearings and also engaging with stake holders, some of the things that ive learned in our process appear meeting with other departments within the executive branch is to improve anonymity and communication was whistleblowers, right. So they understand where they are in the process. That Customer Service like mr. Kerner said its a soft still. Understand that there might be a fear of retaliation. And having given them confidence in the system and understanding they are putting their jobs on the line coming forward. Thats something that we are working on improving internal to oawp. The other thing is empathy. Empathizing with whistleblowers and understanding their perspective. Thats something those skills have to be developed with my staff. Im working on that. As im working on rolling out those policies, im also improving training my staff, to understand the importance of this. And engaging with leadership throughout the v. A. And taking in from the top, you know, working with the secretary to improve communications and the importance of Staff Engagementment is where we are at. You have my commitment to that. Thats something i will continue to have the conversations about, im sure. Thank you, i appreciate your response. Im not satisfied with where things stand today. But i look forward to continuing to work with you on this. And certainly others have questions as with well. With that id like to turn it over to the rank willing member general burger bergman for five minutes of questioning. Thank you, mr. Chairman. As we put up our chart on the front end it does violate the k. I. S. Principle a bit from the confusing the most important people i think to understand that how it works are the people who would be your whistleblowers. Whether they understand they may not understand on the front end how protected they are. But if they have confidence and they can see how the system is designed to work for them initially, that will build their confidence to come forward. So having said that, communications being key, now this is dr. Bonzanto and mr. Mistle and mr. Kerner, id like a Quick Response from each on the following. One of the major grievances we hear is that whistleblowers believe that organizations investigating their disclosures do not communicate nteroffice if you will, effectively. What level of communication should a whistleblower expect from your offices . And what barriers exist to meeting the whistleblowers expectations today with respect to that communication . Sir, i can tell you a barrier that exists in my office is that i cant disclose who the individuals are to the oig or the osc without their permission. If they choose not to that makes it difficult, is if they reported that they shared information with any of the entities that thats complicatesed. We might be investigating the same thing without knowing. Ok. When a complaintants contacts our office, their contact is acknowledged, if they do it through a web submission, fax, other than a phone call, we send out an acknowledgment that we got it. We also then and if the case is accepted we let them know the case has been accepted. At that point forward, until were done, due to confidentiality and other reasons its difficult to give an update on where we are. But when the case is closed, meaning either we dont have allegations or we have findings we will publish a report. And the complainant will then be able to see the results of their complaint. Ok. So when i talked about the Customer Service at osc what we are talking about is three pillars. One is we want to give Accurate Information in a timely manner in a polite way. Its really important that we provide that Customer Service to people. So when we get contacted we try to get to people as soon as possible. So we have undered the statute, for example, what youve described as the retags section we have 15 days to get back to people that file with us. We to do it under five days to make sure that we get back to them right away. We tell them we have their case. They have an assigned investigator or attorney who they can contact. To make sure that they are heard, that we get to their cases with some dispatch and that we handle the cases in a timely manner. When you ask about barriers, we have not insufficient staff for the cases we have. We have 6,000 new filings every year and a small office of over about 140 fulltime employees including some in field offices. The barrier is we try to get the cases as soon as possible. But sometimes we just have a lag and a backlog that takes a while to get to. Ok. Thank you. Dr. Bonzanto, oawp seems to perform functions that are similar to those of oig and osc. To what extent can oawp create a synergy among the organizations in order to best address the whistleblower cases that arise . Sir, one of the things thats different with the oawp is that we are within the department. I report directly to the secretary. Part of the law requires us to review review, receive, track and confirm implementation of recommendations from the investigative entities. Thats something thats unique. Its also within the department we have one area where we are receiving disclosures. Its getting the data where we can have the whistleblower disclosures, recommendations from the ia, osc, gao and office of skmeld inspector pulling the data together to identify opportunities for improvement within the department. And thats something thats very unique in what we are doing in oawp. And i think thats different than what the other entities do. They give their recommends but in v. A. We have the responsibility of ensuring the recommendation are implemented. Thank you. And mr. Chairman, i yield back. Thank you. I now would like to recognize miss rice for five minutes of questioning. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Dr. Bonzanto, although the v. A. Has procedures for investigating whistleblower complaints, these procedures have allowed the Program Office of facility where a whistleblower reported misconduct to conduct the investigation. So gao even found ininstances in which managers investigated themselves for misconduct. How do you plan on addressing this issue Going Forward to ensure independence in the report in the investigation and that things are done in an unbiased way . That for oawp we investigate all allegations related to retaliation. We also investigate allegations into Senior Leadership poor performance and management. We do have the authority similar to refer cases back to the administration. Part of the improving the processes internal is we are working on a questionnaire to basically triage the cases to ensure we are not referring cases back to the Program Office where a manager who is involved in the case is going to be part of that investigation. So its improving my internal training for my staff and also creating these templates where they can have a standard collect ch checklist of questions to improve anonymity and improve communications ensure people involved in the ails are not part of the investigations. I mean thats good because i know we heard before about a level of frustration on the part f whistleblowers that their its hard to have an unbiased approach when the person heading the investigation is involved. Right. So one of the other what we heard and it was really disturbingn the last hearing how actions taken by the v. A. Against whistleblowers follow them for the rest of their careers. And impact their future Employment Opportunities if they were to leave. But it doesnt seem to be the case for the more senior level employees who retaliate against them. So one issue that i would be interested to hear yours and anyone elses feedback on that i think speaks to addressing the cultural issue and Holding Senior level employees accountable is how relevant information or documentation on instances of whistleblower retaliation or substantiated isconduct is shared across the v. A. At the leadership and facility levels and if a senior had been loyee implicated in a whistleblower disclosure but no action taken against them for misconduct, is this type of information shared across the v. A. And if not, do you think it should be . Are you to clarify you are speaking about if an individual there is a claim against retaliation to substantiate if there is a recommendation regarding that we have to report back. If the recommendation coming out for disciplinary action regarding recommends retaliation is not followed we actually have to share that information back. I report directly to the secretary. So leadership is aware if that doesnt happen. I mean, it just seems that there is there are more negative there is a much more much greater negative impact n the whistleblowers obviously than the people retaliating against them. Right. It doesnt seem to be that much accountability at the higher levels in the v. A. For actions they may take against a whistleblower versus the sometimes careerending impact it has on the whistleblowers themselves. So how do you how can we make that a more consistent across the board i mean, the whole culture of the v. A. Starts at the top and if people in higher positions are not being held accountable when whistleblowers are actually having a much larger impact, professional and personal impact how do we address that consistency there . Inconsistency there . Part of our office when we talk about disciplinary action is to talk track those. Thats part of the Data Analysis we have to do. Well be able to identify the areas where a leader is refusing to take action against someone who is claiming who has substantiated allegation. So can you . Something you are just starting to try to get ofgs information on. Right. This is something ive been in the office six months. This is important and critical and the skmt also said we want to know where these data points are. How are you going about compiling that information . Its through recommendations for disciplinary action. When we give a action for disciplinary action if the actions are not taken thats something we track within the office. Youll obviously be sharing those results with us too. Yes, yes. Ok. Thank you very much. Thank you, mr. Chairman i yield back. Thank you. I would like to recognize mr. Bost for five minutes. Thank you. Dr. Bonzanto we had issues in my district. And the alleged whistleblower retaliation. One of the main concerns is the staff has heard about was individual v. A. Employees. When the ion, happens and a claim cannot be confirmed, does your office let the v. A. Employee who said disclosure or retaliation know so they know actions are being taken . That something we are working internally to improve. They are at five days for something, so thats the goal we strive to get to. I would say my expectation is that each employee has within seven working days that we give a response that we received your allegation. One of the things we are working on his understanding where in that journey from blowing the whistle to getting to the investigative phase and looking at those touch points. We have communicating to my taff and the importance of the whistleemployer being investigated and where they are in the process. One thing i want to recognize is that a lot of times employee want to know whether or not disciplinary action was taken. Employees have a right to privacy and thats something we informed them how to go about getting information regarding the case but as an entity we dont disclose to a whistleblower whether or not disciplinary action was taken against what they alleged. That is because they are both employees. Therefore they both ok. They both have the right to privacy and due process. For all the government witnesses, the next question i have, sometime during the rocess is obviously whenever they want anonymity, sometimes that doesnt happen. Sometimes who had the whistle blown on them finds out who it was that did that. How do you handle those situations . Each one of you . If it doesnt happen, tell me. We dont conduct investigations in the way that the other agencies do so the agency will know. We work hard to make sure it doesnt happen but sometimes if its an office that has a small number of people, it sometimes is fairly obvious. We always balance the individuals right to privacy when they do report it to us with a need to go further. We may talk to the individual as well who provided us the information and explain to that person that for us to go forward these are the steps we are going to have to take just to make sure the person is aware of it. But, we try very hard to protect he confidentiality of anyone that comes to us who asks to remain confidential and i believe we do accomplish that. We dont disclose the identities of the person making the claim unless they want us to. Obviously if theres a need for them, for example by getting a stay of personnel action against them, sometimes they will volunteer. For the most part we protect peoples identities. And we are also committed. We are also protecting whistleblowers. If you choose to remain anonymous its very difficult to ask questions regarding retaliation if you are choosing to remain anonymous. But, we do not expose employees information unless they choose to. One last question. Because we have less than a minute here. This is going to be for all three of you. Individual v. A. Employees understand the process of bringing retaliation a complaint, or do the employees think that every offices can handle them. Did they know the process . He was very clear about the process which is a nonofficer we understood very clearly. Do you think these employees under this process now understand how to truly file claims . Im not confident thats happening. With that being said, oawp is orking with the osc to develop training with regard to whistleblower cases like whistleblowing reporting when you want to make a disclosure. I dont think they do. Thats why i frequently ask v. A. Employees what do they know about the oig . Where would they go for a complaint . Its all levels. Some of the more senior people dont really understand the relationship between oawp, osc, oig. Thats why we feel strongly that the v. A. Ought to put out a training that weve prepared on when to come to the oig, went to come to some of the other avenues, and we hope that training gets implemented. We work very hard to get whistleblowers to know about us. We try to raise our pro file. We do press releases. We tried to me is raise the profile and do press releases. We also count on the v. A. To notify them. Let them know that this exists as a channel. We also do mandatory trainings for supervisors and others about personal practices. We are hoping that employees do know about osc and we have press releases and other ways to make ourselves known, we get a lot of cases from the v. A. So we think a lot of them know about us. I apologize for going over time. I yield back. You are recognized for five minutes. I want to follow up with what you are saying about these trainings. I feel like we can do this in a deliberative and quantitative manner. First of all, you mentioned there are trainings that you hope could be happening . Am i correct in saying that . Correct. Whats going on . Who is saying no to you . No one has said no. We are working to the process. Its a long process. Weve put together a training program. The v. A. Has a pretty expensive Extensive Training Program for a lot of different areas including maintaining confidentiality of documents, protected information, etc. No one is saying no . What is the timeline . We are hoping its sooner than later but its been months in the work and we keep saying another step needs to happen. Another step needs to happen. Do you feel that it could go faster . Absolutely. Who do we have to talk to make it go faster . Senior leadership at the v. A. Can you give us a name . Secretary wilkie . So we should talk and to urge training to go faster so people understand who to go to and when to go to them . Thats correct. You can count that we will do that. What about staffing . Whether its oig or any of the other offices you reesent, its the secondlargest department. Hundreds of thousands of employees. Do you feel that you are adequately staffed to both respond to whistleblowers as well as protect them thereafter . Currently, im adequately staffed. I dont think we are adequately staffed for whatever requirements, obligations, and responsibilities are. Has grown in tremendous size over the last 510 years, our office remained relatively flat. We appreciate the increases congress lee congress has recently given us, but i dont believe we are adequate. What do you think you do need in order to adequately fulfill the expectations that we all or youre with deal oig responsibilities . For the next year, the house has appropriated 222 million for us, which would be an increase from the previous year. In agiven we want to grow measured, controlled way, we think that would be adequate. We hope that would be just a series of increases Going Forward. Ok. Sir . Understaffed, as i alluded to. You are telling me it is relatively a sixmonth backlog . That sounds right. From an individual perspective, whistleblower comes forth, gets becomes a part of the backlog six months . Takes six know if it months because not all cases of the same. Aggregate, 6000 cases in the year, 3000 backlog, that is six months. What are some of the consequences we have seen of that backlog . The consequences are we just dont get to someones case. You might have a notorious case and by the time our examiner gets to that, weeks or months have gone by. Can you give us a specific example . Well you can pick out of the hat. What has happened where there has been a consequence . The consequence of the backlog would be that a whistleblower has a case sitting with us and we dont get to it for a while. A case took a couple of years to read why does the case take a couple of years . It takes a couple of years because of discovery. Sometimes, there are changes in staffing. What do you need to address the backlog . More staffing. How many more . We are at 28 million. That would be a big help. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Mitchell, the ig received 35,000 hotline contacts in fiscal year 2018. What percentage of hotline cases were closed without investigation . What percentage are investigated . Could you please explain how your office decides whether a complaint merits further investigation or should just simply be closed without action . Of the 35,000 contacts, as i testified, we analyze and evaluate each and every one of those. The number that turn into an oig investigation is a relatively small percentage. It is a resource issue. We take the matters that we believe are the most significant, most impactful, have the greatest risk to dollars, so we can only take a relatively small number. A number of the other cases or contacts that we get, we may refer over to v. A. And ask them. Or a number of the others, we may send to another agency, which is more capable of handling it if it is a since there ise more authority over the retaliation then we have. Of the approximately 2100 cases received last year, how many were disclosure cases and what percentage of disclosure close without investigation . How does os the determine whether a disclosure warrants further investigation . What happens is in terms of determination, we have to meet the Legal Standard. The Legal Standard is called likelihood. We have 45 days to make the likelihood determination. If it does rise in the opinion of the investigator or the lawyer to the standard, we referred to the agency. We dont actually do the investigation. If it does not reach that level, we close that case. I think in terms of the last see one second. So, we had approximately 2100 v. A. Cases. Were abouture cases 431. 39 . Is about i dont know the exact number we closed, but well must certainly dealt with all 431. They were closed without investigation . Yes, if they do not rise to the level of a substantial likelihood, those cases will be closed and almost all of them were addressed. Fiscal year 18, we had 642 disclosure cases. They would definitely be addressed certainly at this point within the statutory requirement. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I yield back the balance. Thank you very much. I would like to recognize mr. Cisneros. Thank you, chairman. Dr. , you said earlier that the v. A. Definitely needed a culture change and that needed to happen at the top and i wholeheartedly agree. This,aries dedicated to how are we getting that down to the v. A. Facilities . Making sureoffice that those individuals, the supervisors know that retaliation against whistleblowers is no longer going to be tolerated . Thank you so much for the question. This is something one least about internal Customer Service, we are having the secretary does have town halls with employees. He is promoting the importance of Staff Engagement through the organization, so something even internal, having the calls with my staff, those are things that we are doing internally to promote the importance of Staff Engagement and listening to employees. Is talking to your staff. Im giving you an example. Hes taking the leadership and im also doing that in my staff as an example of what we are doing. Is theer part of it training we are developing regarding whistleblower retaliation and why it should not be happening and what each one of our offices is doing to protect whistleblowers. Is this training for every employee . Every employee. What are we doing regarding supervisors to let them know that this treatment is no longer going to be tolerated . Is there anything being done specifically for them . Or is a getting the same training . All employees have the same training, but our Office Investigates retaliation, that is what we are charged to do and i get that, but how are we changing the culture . I get that you are putting it out to employees and letting them know it is ok to come out and report the whistleblowers, but how are we letting them know , how are we letting supervisors know that this is not going to be tolerated anymore, that retaliation is going to change . What is being done different to address supervisors that they need to change the way they are doing business, then business has been done in the past . That is through training and promoting the offices that we do have here. Traininge saying the is for everybody, so it is pretty much probably a general training that is given to all employees, but it is a specific training for supervisors . Just last week him i had to a training meant for members of congress and how i treat my staff. It was not an overall, all members, everybody employed by the house training. What are we doing specifically for supervisors to let them know that business is changing, the way they used to do things and tolerating, we are not going to tolerate the way we treated whistleblowers in the past . I can find out exactly and i ford take the Tech Training the supervisors regarding retaliation i know we have the all employee training, but specifically for supervisors i could take that to the record. You are chomping at the bit, sir. In 2017, Congress Passed the Chris Kirkpatrick law, which required retaliation of whistleblower training for all supervisors. Our office does that training for all supervisors. Has that been effective . I think it is very defective, it is a very good training program. I recently took it, so i can personally say i found a very helpful. If i could answer some of this . I was going to let you, mr. Devine, and the final witness i wanted to give you a chance. I know it has been like six months, but i would love to hear your thoughts and what you are hearing from those you represent. I think what you are really asking is about accountability. When we talk about training, we have talked about training for years and years and years. That is a paper tiger answer and it is so infuriating because there is no fair act training. There has been all kinds of whistleblower training. Mr. Devine does a lot of training. Show fromhat we can so many of the people who contact us that they never get responses to their emails, there policy that explains any of this. The v. A. Put out a 14 page report with a pneumonic we to care instead of a policy statement. That is so unprofessional, im at a loss forward. Havehe fact that we dont a good Bargaining Agreement with the union, we dont have a Mentor Program that we started that got disbanded, there is a lot of things that the v. A. Was doing, could be doing, we tried to get regular accountability meetings scheduled, quarterly meetings to go over some of the disclosure issues, but the fact that not a single scf or a single manager who has wasted government money has put veterans and their care at risk has not been held accountable . That should be something that this committee should be furious about. We certainly welcome the calls for improved culture and attitude and we welcomed the appointment and the Whistleblower Community pledges full support for her. Better attitudes at this top are not a substitute for results. Month,the hearing last one of the key witnesses was fired by the v. A. Area that is intended to send a message. Been working to try to resolve six whistleblower cases despite beyond the call of duty efforts, the v. A. Has not been willing to resolve any of those cases in a civilized manner. I think if there was any issue, that is a good weathervane for whether this talk is making it into reality, it is the secret waiting list issue. Five years ago, that scandal broke and it horrified the nation. Call three whistleblowers were exposed. Three out of the five clients i talked about in my testimony were on secret waiting list. The problem is not going away and it is not surprising light is not going away, the v. A. Had a very effective correct of Action Program that was doing outstanding work with handson efforts to correct the problem of secret waiting list. If you look at the transition it is impossible to be optimistic about the v. A. Weary little bit over with his time on questioning, but a couple of us are going to ask additional questions. With that, i would like to recognize mr. Peterson for five minutes. Maybe, we will pick up there, mr. Devine. Our government witnesses to gauge a little bit the culture, the change that needs to happen and the steps that they have outlined you are not satisfied with that. Would you like to consider destined did continue . It is the secret waiting list issue that is eating at us. The v. A. Had an effective unit working to clean up this mess. Was replaced in the congressionally chartered commission on care applauded their work, recommended giving them more resources and authority, so they could better pursue their mandate, and the v. A. Responded to that recommendation by canceling the work of the verc, merging it into another unit, which laid off all 127 career employees, who are seasoned professionals. They replaced them with an outside contractor under the itaziest of conditions area had access to inside budget information to customize their proposal. The reorganization that brought them into power without reauthorization. The outside contractor were benefiting from a study on how to replace federal employees with contractors. They were violating federal acquisitions regulators by supervising federal employees. What happened with this . Of having handson work at the hospital, it is a paperwork review, with a medical themselves that they have solved the problems. They canceled the site visits. They have stopped making to 150 million. We have replaced effective corrective action with a scam. That does not leave me feeling very encouraged about the progress. Wrongdoershave the investigating themselves. We have government money that does not get properly spent and g one of the reports i site all the time is this report that went to caliber, there was no resolve to that. The money does not get called back. None of the people responsible for the contract, there is no accountability. They recommended more training. Then we have caps on arbitration. Who is going to go through that process when that is the resolve . Employees experiencing cyber bullying. There is no one that will investigate threats. Threats of stocking and actual physical harm to employees who are whistleblowers. The oig does not do it, the v. A. Police does not do it there is no accountability for that kind of cyber stalking. Why do these things take years . I have filed an oig complaint on the waste, fraud, and abuse with Suicide Prevention money, something this committee has set as its number one priority, in that case has been open since 2016, well veterans are dying by suicide. Gio nt we asking the they said that 6 million was not spent what happened to unspent money . Who is being held accountable . I appreciate your perspective. It is valuable. I want to get one more question in and then i defer the general burden for a final western area i want to go question. Doctor, i want to go back to you. There is a section called on the horizon in a report you recently issued. Im very concerned and eager to learn more about what is just over the horizon for your agent see . There included some very fundamental steps, communicating with whistleblowers, developing standardized training, developing specialized investment investigatory teams not included are very specific timelines. I heard you mention a date earlier with respect to the changing training program, but im very interested in this is the fix of these things, the timelines so that we can follow the progress and look to hold your agency accountable in the future. Can you provide any of those for us today or followup with those details . Yes, sir. Policies rolling out by october 1, to have our directives involving direct investigations in what we do and how we do it. As for the rest of the requirements, by the end of the havedar year, i expect to these implemented and hopefully we can start measuring progress in developing the metrics to give you some idea of where we are. Ok, that is vital. Appreciate that. We will continue that conversation on those issues. I would like to turn it over to you for any final questions. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to set the record straight to make sure and was and. It was said that the focor doctor was fired the day after the hearing last time and it was advised that she was put on a hold. Can you confirm . Do have the ability to get confirmed confirm that . I will take that one for the. Ecord you oawp does have the ability to place actions on hold. Any chance you might know that . Yes, i believe we have a hold. All of this is reported and we want to make sure we did not mistake. I checked with the person who does this in our office and she reported that we do have a hold. Ok. What is the 2302c Certification Program . Has v. A. Completed that certification and what does that contain . Aig are in v. A. And the process of certifying. They have been previously certified, but we are re certifying them now. Hass a program where osc taken on the program does responsibility to voluntarily have an active role by teaching and educating supervisors and making sure that everybody complies with the retaliation and other legal requirements. So, specifically, we act as a certifying entity for agents these. Role, we ensure that they are meeting all the standards to educate and protect whistleblowers. For a lot of them, we dont but wey do the training, do provide the slides or other materials and we certify when they come back to us and comply with the training program. That is what we do with that. Thank you. I yield back. Well, thank you. Do any of the members have any additional comments before we close . Well, seeing none, i want to highlight a couple of points before we close the hearing. Subcommittee takes these issues very seriously and we are going to continue to track the disclosures and the needs of v. A. Whistleblowers. Lets be clear, whistleblowers are performing a public service, they are a critical resource, they need to be protected. The Inspector General will be issuing a report about v. A. s office of accountability and a september subcommittee meeting will focus on that review. We are also waiting further of information from the office of accountability whistleblower protection. As i asked for today, we are very much interested in further details, for the policies and procedures and timelines of how we can best track that process moving forward. Frankly, the testimony today left me wanting more. So if think further discussions and further hearings are warranted to ensure that things are moving in the right direction, but i remain concerned. Concerned after a hearing at the end of june, where we had three witnesses describe some pretty harrowing circumstances that unfolded over many years. Individuals who stepped forward just wanting to try to do the right thing. We have more work to do and we look forward to talking with you all in that process, so i want to express my appreciation who appeared before us today. We heard a lot of important thoughts from our government witnesses and from the whistleblower advocates. We thank you for being a part of this today. There was not always agreement certainly, but the dialogue is important, and it must continue. We are ultimately working for the same goal and that is that the v. A. Serves our veterans the best it can. There are ways that we understand that that process can be improved and whistleblowers are part of that process. I look forward to working with all of you. Doctor, clearly you have an important job ahead of you, and you all do as you move ahead. And make sure that things are headed in the right direction. And we stand ready to work with you every step of the way. It is pivotal we come together to improve the protections that exist for whistleblowers and improve services for our veterans. With that, i would like to turn it over to our Ranking Member for any closing comments. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Very briefly, to echo what the chairman said, we all have a responsibility to protect the whistleblowers, to create a culture in which everyone is held accountable and we will do our part, as the elected and weht part of this, are counting on all of you to do the same. Mr. Chairman, i really appreciate it. Members will have five legislative days to revise and extended remarks and include extraneous material. Without objection, the subcommittee stands adjourned. [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2019] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] watch our live coverage as the nations governors meet in salt lake city, we recognize americas space program, then at 11 30, a conversation about safer and martyr road. Then improving infrastructure with Maryland Governor larry hogan. Listen with the free cspan radio app. Here is a look at wednesdays live rogue ramming on the cspan networks. , formera. M. Eastern special Counsel Robert Mueller testifies before the House Judiciary Committee about the special counsel investigation into whether President Trump obstructed a probe into russian interference in the 2016 campaign. We will show you as much of that hearing as possible until the house gavels and for general speeches. At noon, the house is expected to consider several bills understood tension of the rules, including one authorizing Statement State Department programs. Others makes tax changes for samesex couples area of the senate then returns to take up the head of the federally aviation commission. You can watch that on cspan 2. On cspan 3, live coverage of special Counsel Robert Mueller committee Robert Mueller before the House Judiciary Committee in its entirety. At noon, the special counsel will testify before the house intelligence committee. President trump told a student conference that the democrats focus on the Mueller Report is making it harder for him to deal with russia. His comments came on the eve of former special Counsel Robert Muellers testimony on capitol hill. Turning point usa hosted the event. [applause]