comparemela.com

At any time. Today is the subcommittee entitled learning from va whistle blowers. On june 25th the subcommittee began this hearing to discuss the importance of va whistle blowers. We heard testimony from people inside the va who raised major questions and concerns about critical problems that affect the health and wellbeing of veterans. These witnesses were willing to blow the whistle even when it risked their live lee hood and careers. Unfortunately we learned that the va continues to struggle with the culture of retaliation against whistle blowers. In too many instances va leadership and supervisors have turned a blind eye to those in vas work force that have pointed out Serious Problems or attempted to support bad actors and even worse the whistle blowers are often the target of active retaliation. One striking example came from doctor catherine mitchells testimony. In 2014 she was one of a group of people working at the Phoenix Va Medical Center that exposed the existence of a secret waiting list of veterans in need of medical care. Instead of addressing this issue the phoenix va leadership exactively worked to hide the exorbitant wait times. And it turned out such practices were occurring at va facilities nationwide. The coverup was extensive and deliberate. Congress responded to the allegations with hearings that confirmed the whistle blowers revelations of long and difficult wait times for appointments. Of course the va still has a lot of work to do to ensure veterans get access to health care in a timely and transparent manner. In fact the committee will hold a hearing on this topic tomorrow. Including dr. Mitchell who blew the whistle in 2014 raised some important concerns regarding Veterans Health care. Instead of being thanked for raising these issues, however, theyve experienced retaliation. Their jobs were threaten asked they faced a hostile work environment. Unfortunately, their experiences are not uncommon. Our two other witnesses also testified about retaliation their experiencing all while continuing to workats the va and theyve sought protection as whistle blowers. The june witnesses, each of these 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 va to continue her work serving veterans. Clearly the va must do that. Make no mistake this committee believes the importance of having people who are brave enough to stand up and blow the whistle on misdeeds within the department. These are people trying to do the best they can for veterans, and we should be committed for their protection. At the beginning of the june 25th hearing the Ranking Member i agreed the Government Agency perspective is essential. In fact, the subkmcommittee wil hold an additional hearing in september. Its been two years since congress and va established the office of accountability and whistleblower protection. Our september hearing will focus on the results of an Inspector Generals investigation of this particular office. Todays panel is an early opportunity to hear from vas office of accountability and whistleblower protection. In addition the top officials from the office of Inspector General, the office of special counsel and the merit Systems Protection Board are present. Each represents a key Agency Charged with protections whistle blowers. Ive also invited twentytwo of the whistleblower advocates who appeared on the june 25th panel to ensure a strong and important dialogue with todays government officials. As ive said before and it needs to be repeated again whistle blowers are an important source of information and they should not be ignored. Their rights must be protected so that future whistle blowers will have confidence their stories will be heard and assurance their stories will be investigated without reprisal. I look forward to the testimony of todays witnesses. With that id like to recognize Ranking Member birdman for five minutes for opening remarks. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I appreciate your holding the hearing opening to testimony from government witnesses who administer the whistleblower programs. Scheduling a hearing this early is difficult and i appreciate your commitment to hold this hearing as soon as possible. The first Witness Panel recounted case specific complaints, but we had little discussion about the whistleblower process. The discussion bounced back and forth between complaints with vas office of accountability and whistleblower protection or oawp, the office of special counsel or ofc and the va Inspector General. Wnlss also raised concerns that the current lack of merit Systems Protection Board members clouded its operations. It is critical that we understand the division of labor in the whistleblower Protection System if we are going to diagnose the problems and craft appropriate solutions. Let me give you an analogy from my pilot background. There are four forces that affect a planes ability to fly. When a problem arises that pilot must understand which force is being affected because the response will differ depending on the nature of the problem. The whistleblower process is no different. The remedy for a disclosure problem may be vastly different than a retaliation problem. I want to make sure that we have the right framework and identify the appropriate accountable parties to address whistleblower concerns. Behind me is a diagram of what i understand to be the whistleblower reporting process for va employees. When we discuss whistle blowers we must distinguish between disclosures and retaliation because when an employee is alleging what an employee is alleging and where they go for help depends on whether they are making a disclosure or a retaliation claim. It disclosure is the initial blowing of the whistle. It is when an employee brings the attention to the 600 hammer, secret wait lists 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 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 the same disclosure to all of these offices, and it is unclear what type of communication exists between the parallel roots for investigation. Similarly, a whistleblower may raise a retaliation complaint to oawp, osc or the mspb. Again, a whistleblower can raise his or her claim in multiple forums and it could lead to multiple investigations. He described the process of seeking whistleblower systems as confounding. And the other witnesses echoed that sentiment. In the marines we employ the kiss, keep it simple. This is another example of bureaucracy 101, a Government Program with multiple government officess and a diffused responsibility which together creates confusion and a lack of accountability. Our witnesses are undoubtedly the experts on what works and what needs to be improved the whistleblower Protection System. I would like each of you to explain your offices role as it relates to disclosure or a retaliation claim. A common grievance is the lack of communication between the investigating officer and the whistleblower following the disclosure or retaliation complaint. I would like the witnesses to explain what an employee should expect from an investigator in your office, what barriers exist to timely and thorough communication and what steps you are taking to improve this communication. Mr. Chairman, before i yield i want to reiterate that whistle blowers provide an Invaluable Service to our country. They must believe that the whistle blowing systems take their concerns seriously and investigate their claims appropriately and efficiently. More importantly and most importantly whistle blowers 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 witness testimony submitted for today that in fy 2018 the vaig received 28,000 hot line complaints that whistle blowers contacted oawip 1,600 times and the va received roughly this disclosure suggests 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 theres a lack of faith by many in the system. I hope 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 this important hearing and i yield back. Well, thank you Ranking Member birdman, and i very much appreciate your recommendation to hold this session today. Appearing before us today are four witnesses selected by Ranking Member to offer testimony. And id like to recognize them first starting with the assistant secretary for the office of accountability and whistleblower protection. The subcommittee thanks you for appearing today, doctor, and you have five minutes for your testimony. Chairman, Ranking Member and members of the subcommittee thank you for the opportunities to testify today regarding whistleblower protection at the department of veteran affairs. Protecting whistle blowers from retaliation is a priority for the va and the office of accountability. To protect whistle blowers oawp directly investigates all whistleblower retaliatory investigations made by employees. This mitigates the possibility that whistle blowers may face retaliation for making a lawful disclosure. 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 labor, and the department of Homeland Security to obtain best practices to investigate disclosures and protect whistle blowers. Oawp has also developed a process to regularly update w s whistle blowers who make a disclosure about the status of the investigation into allegations. The secretaries and i recognize the need for improvements to whistleblower protection within the va. Oawp is actively working to implement several initiatives that will better protect whistle blowers, and i appreciate the opportunity today to address a few of them. We are currently working on standerdizing investigative training to ensure that all of our investigators understand the law including whistleblower protections and can apply it in the investigations consistently. We are finalizing written policy and how oawp investigates the disclosures it receives. The policies undergoing concurrence within the va. We are also engaged in collaborating with the office of the Inspector General and ofc to finalize training. The training investigates methods, provisions of taking an action against an employee for making a lawful disclosure and penalties for whistleblower retaliation. The penalty should be available later in the fall. In addition to continuously improving whistleblower protection, oawp is actively working on complying with other requirements of an authorerizing statute including standing up a division to fulfill a requirement to record, track, review and confirm these implementation of recommendations from audits and investigations conducted by the Government Accountability office, the office of Inspector General, vas office of medical inspector and the office of special counsel. Since my appointment ive met with several internal and external steak holders including vas hr staff, supervisors, va leaders, veteran organizations and nonprofits such as whistle blowers of america. I value the input i receive. As a veteran, a registered nurse, former investigator on this subcommittee and now the assistant secretary for oawp i understand whistle blowers have a Critical Role in stopping misconduct within the organization. The secretary and i value all va employees and whistle blowers and their commitment to improving care and services for our veterans. I want va to be a place where employees can trust his or her management can take allegations of retaliation seriously, encourage staff to raise concerns and not retaliate against staff who raise those concerns. Mr. Chairman, we look forward to working with this committee and our internal and external stakeholders to enhance vas ability to protect whistle blowers. This concludes my testimony and im proud to responds to any questions you have. Chairman, Ranking Member and members of the subcommittee, i appreciate the opportunity to discuss the importance of whistle blowers to the office of Inspector General. We treat all complaintants as whistle blowers. We carefully evaluate their concerns and safeguard confidentiality. The oig relies heavily on compliance and cooperation from va employees, families and the public on where to focus our resources. There are countless examples how whistle blowers and other contemplatants have driven not only for the matter under review but frequently at the systems level for policies of changes, 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 reprise against 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 substantial and specific danger to Public Health or safety. The oig operates a hot line that is staffed by a dedicated team to receive whistleblower complaints and other information. Our hot line received over 35,000 contacts in fiscal year 18 and over 15,000 contacts for the six months fiscal year 19. Every contact is reviewed, processed and acknowledged by an analyst upon receipt. We receive an analyst upon recement. We receive information via telephone, fax, regular mail, and through a web submission form on our website. In addition, there are also posters in va facilities on how to contact the oig. As a result of our site visits and other engagements with stakeholders, oig staff may also be contacted by individuals directly with information or allegations of wrong doing. The oig interacts with other oversight entities to ensure that all available resources and protections are available to complainants. There are many agencies complainants can go to for address. The oigs website includes frequently asked questions, related to hotline inquiries that outlines the complaints from the oig and other offices. It 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 complainants to the office of accountability and whistleblower protection and to the office of special counsel. As part of our continuous efforts to improve our responses and further our relationship with whistle blow eres, i will be delivering the keynote address at the hotline outreach conference which honors whistleblower this is july 30th this. Conference, sponsored by the department of defense oig, analyzes best practices, discusses lessons learned, and provides example os the challenges facing the hotline oversight community. In addition, we recognize that some va employees and contractors may be confused about when it is appropriate to contact the oig about fraud, waste, and abuse in vas programs and operations. To that end, we have requested that va 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 va to offer more formal training on the oig and the various avenues for address available to those with complaints. The oig values whistleblowers and the information they provide as we explore areas for ential oversight in the va. It is incumbent upon the va to foster an environment where no one fears the consequences of reporting problems or 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, and i would be happy to answer any question that is you or other members of the subcommittee may have. Thank you, mr. Missal. Ill recognize our third witness, mr. Henry kerner, hes the special counsel. And mr. Kerner, youre recognized for five minutes. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Good evening chairman pappas, esteemed members of the committee. Thank you for holding this important hearing. Oscs deeply committed to veterans and im honored to be here to assess the ways in which osc can assist. Whistleblowers are vital to ensuring that problems within an organization identified and fixed. Oscs contribution is twofold. First, osc provides a safe channel for va employees applicants for employment and former employees to make disclosures of wrong doing. And osc has the authority to demand a full investigation of any disclosures that warrant one. Second, osu works to ensure that va whistleblower dos not face retaliation. We seek corrective or disciplinary action. We work with va leadership to train Management Employees on prohibitive personnel practices. We are committed to helping the va by ensuring those patriotic employees who have devoted their professional lives to serving veterans, some being veterans themselves, can do their jobs without fear of reprisal. Like you, i watched with significant concern as brave whistleblowers came forward at your hearing last month to describe their ordeals at the hands of va management. I have submitted a longer statement laying out the processes and procedures in detail but thought i would focus my brief oral remarks on chronicling some of the efforts i have undertaken in support of veterans and whistleblowers. Our commitme whistleblowers is shown through external and internal enhancements. First with then secretary shulkin in november 2017 and later with secretary wilkey in 2018. Ive also had several constructive discussionings with the general counsel and mr. Jim bern, an osc alumnus. And with dr. Bonzanto. Ive also met mr. Missal. I explained my commitment to preventing retaliation. And i have found each and every one of these va leaders support it. While it is clear that more needs to be done to stem whistleblower reprisal, i take leaders at their word and count on them to assist us by improving the culture at their department. Interimly 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 very first managerial i undertook a major recommendation of osc by merging two units into one. As a result of these new internal processes, osc has been much more efficient at assigning cases to attorneys and closing case where is osc may not have jurisdiction. Osc staff attorneys have forwarded email from complainants grateful to have received an introductory email within the first week of filing with us. We still face a nearly 2,600 case back lorg. It will come as no surprise to learn we need more funding to be able to reduce this backlog and provide faster processing times to whistleblowers. But despite this backlog, we strive to be as responsive as possible. Osc is part of a mosaic of whistleblower Resources Available to va employees which includes the office of accountability, the va Inspector General, and the mspb. As an independent agency, osc offers a distinct advantage and delivers benefits only we can provide. Part of that is in the world of disclosing wrong doing where whistleblowers are afforded the opportunity to directly participate in oscs assessment of the agencys 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 efficiency and reasonableness of the agencys 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 a 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 these hearings, and i look forward to answering your questions. Thank you, mr. Kerner. Id like to recognize mr. Tristan leavitt. Hes the general counsel of the merit Systems Protection Board. Hes the most senior official currently serving the board as contacting chief executive and administrative officer. Mr. Leavitt, youre recognized for five minutes. My name is Tristan Leavitt and im the general counsel of the merit systems production board. Because there are no Senate Confirmed members of the board im the acting chief executive and mrtive officer of the agency. Thank you for this opportunity to testify. My testimony will focus on the process in which cases are brought and adjudicated. This is the 40th anniversary of the mspb opening its doors. This law was the first statute prohibiting retaliation from employees at the federal government. It opened with a series of findings stating it is a policy of the United States that merit system principles should be expressly stated to furnish guidance to agencies. It should enable federal employees to avoid conduct which undermines the merit system principles and the integrity of the merit system. The Civil Service reform act explicitly recognizes the value of whistleblowers. It states employees should be protected against reprisal for lawful disclosures. The mspb will establish the role that had been filled by the Civil Service commission. Its role in whistleblower cases is to provide a full and fair opportunity for both parties to as someone who previously received many allegations of executive branch whistleblower allegations when i worked on capitol hill. I recognized this mission as established by congress is critical in distinguishing which claims are meritorious. The practices related to retaliation prohibit reprisal based on protected activity. In order to receive corrective action in a claim taken or threatened to take a personnel action against him or her, and his or her protected disclosure was a contributing factor in the personnel action. Even after finding a protected disclosure was a contributing factor, corrective action is not granted under the law if the agency demonstrates by clear and convincing evidence it would have taken the same personnel action in the absence of the disclosure. The mspb is the forum before which osc investigates. Outside cases brought by osc, mspb hears two types of cases. The first type of case is called an otherwise appealable action. This involves an adverse personnel action appealable to the board. Such as a removal, reduction in grade or pay, or suspension of more than 14 days. In such an appeal, it will be review bid the mspb. Its termed an affirmative defense. If the agency proves its met the standard, the appellant could attempt to prove the agency took reprisal. The second case is a case in which an individual has filed with osc but osc has not an individual right of action or ira appeal. Most of those cases surround personnel actions not appealable to the board. For example, a suspension under 14 days. In such circumstances the appellant is required to exhaust the administrative remedy of filing with osc. In an ira appeal, the board will not decide anything other than its kwex the claim of reprisal. In both cases, an administrative judge may grant a stay of the personnel action at issue under appropriate circumstances. O sc may under appropriate circumstances request any member of the board order a stay. This has been complicated by the lack of any current sitting board members. That said, despite the lack of a board your rum since january 2017, the 60 or so administrative judges hear and adjudicate cases. Of the 5,447 cases administrative judges decide in fy 2018 one fifth were from va employees. An average of 180 ira claims each of the past three fiscal years. In closing, one general trend i do want to note that is not specific to the va is an increase in complexity of both whistleblower complaints and their adjudication. It is increasingly rare to see a case in which the appellant asserts he or she made a single disclosure for which the agency took onea. As osc can attest, it often involves several. Because of the multipart test of jurisdiction over and proof of the claims must be applied to each disclosure, whistleblower cases are often time consuming and difficult to decide. I know the mspb aspires to give full and fair attention to each appeal. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you. Thank you very much, mr. Leavitt. We have two additional witnesses on the panel. Mr. Tom devine. He is the legal director of the Government Accountability project. Also miss jaclyn gerrick, the founder of whistleblowers of america. They offered testimony at our june 5th session on the earlier panel and we brought them back here to allow a more full discussion today. Since they gave testimony at that time, they wont give additional testimony today. With that i want to thank each of our witnesses for their testimony. Well now begin the questioning portion of this hearing. And ill begin by recognizing myself for five minutes of questioning. Dr. Bonzanto, if i could start 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 va. And i believe you recognized 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 va. So youre six montes into your job. Im wondering how you can assess that transition you said needed to happen and how you will continue to address that as you move forward. Sir, thank you so much for your question. Boy have to say, coming from the subcommittee as an investigator, and now being in the va, theres been a change in culture where theres support from leadership about engaging staff and having conversations regarding retaliation, or the importance of engaging staff in addressing concerns. For the First Six Months ive been there, ive seen secretary wilkey lead this. The importance of Customer Service, the importance of engaging we engage our veterans, but also engaging our staff and listening to them. Internal Customer Service. Breaking the silos and having a conversation to improve Staff Engagement. I think thats a positive thing. I do have to say, when i came on board to the Partnership Republic services which assesses best places to work in federal government from 2017 to 2018 va 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. And i think thats a good sign were heading in the right direction. Now, there is room for improvement. And i admit to that. And i think the office of accountability is part of that. Change of culture is engaging with stakeholders to improve our processes. Thank you for that. Im wondering if i could ask the other government witnesses the same question. How would you assess the culture at the va in terms of being hospitable to whistleblower, and what steps need to be taken by the va to ensure that whistleblowers are listened to . That theyre protected . Sure, ill take a stab that the. I think its very important that its obviously starts at the top. So we need good leadership. I think when you have good leadership, i met with dr. Bonzanto. Ive also met with the gc and of course the secretary. And i have their commitment they are committed to trying to make to improve the culture. I take them at their word. We at osc have an extensive relationship with the va. The va has the most cases with us so we obviously have a lot of communication with them. Starts at the head, but my team has monthly meetings with them. We also have bimonthly meetings on the 714 process which involves 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 then abide by the laws and then finally you also need accountability. You have to have discipline. You have to have accountable. And this comes in as well to assist with the culture change at the va. 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 weve come a long way from that time. I think with dr. Bonzantos leadership theyre headed in the right direction. Its going to take time and with whistleblowers, they have to prove to them that its a place where they feel comfortable coming forward. And there would not be adverse actions against them. I would just add along with ig missal, it takes time. And in the same way that culture can be nebulous to define, right . Looking at an agency it can be difficult to change. And there are a lot of layers at the va, right . So my experience from on the hill was when you had a culture problem it took a very long time and sustained effort along with commitment from individuals but to help people have the confidence that thing cans work out for the best. Thank you. And dr. Bonzanto. You know, im specifically concerned about whistleblower connection. And that is a charge of your office. I understand the new policies are underway, and youve alluded to those. I want to get a higher degree of confidence today that the steps are underway for you to improve the protection of these individuals so valuable to the process. Could you highlight those steps again for us to make sure that were going have greater confidence coming out of this hearing that things are headed in the right direction. Of course, sir. I do have to say one of the things i was listening through to hearings and also engaging with stakeholders some of the things ive learned in our process and meeting with other departments within the executive bran temperature is to improve anonymity and communication. Like mr. Kerner said, its a soft skill. Understand that this is understand that there might be a fear of retaliation. And giving them confidence in the system and understand theyre putting their jobs on the line. Thats something were working on improving internally. The other thing is empathy, empathizing and understanding their perspective. Those skills have to be developed with my staff, and im working on that. As im working on rolling out policies, its improving training for my staff to understand the importance of this. And engaging with leadership throughout the va and taking this from the top and working with the secretary to improve communication and the importance of Staff Engagement i think is where were at. You have my commitment to that. And thats something that i will continue to have these conversations about it. 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 will have questions as well. Id like to turn it over to the Ranking Member, general bergman, for five minutes of questioning. Thank you, mr. Chairman. And as we put up our chart here on the front end, it does violate the kiss principle a little bit from the con fusing of the most confusing people i think to understand that how it works are the people who would be your whistleblowers. Whether understand they may not understand on the front end how protected they are. But they have confidence and they can see how the system is designed to work for them initially. Thatll build their confidence to come forward. So having said that, communications being key, you know, this is dr. Bonzanto and mr. Missal and mr. Kerner, id like a Quick Response on the following. One of the major grievances we hear is that whistleblowers believe that organizations investigating their disclosures do not communicate interoffice, 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. And if they choose not to, that makes it difficult. If they already reported that they shared information with one of these entities, that makes it complicated. We continue investigating, but we might be investigating the same thing without knowing. Okay. When a complainant contacts our office, their contact is acknowledged. If they do it through a web submission, a fax, other than a phone call we send out an acknowledgement that we got it. We also then while and if the case is accepted, we let them know that 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 an allegation or we have finding, we will publish a report and so the complainant will then be able to see the results of their complaint. Okay. So when i talked about the Customer Service at osc, what were basically talking about is three pillars. One is we want to give Accurate Information in a timely manner in a polite way. And 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 under the statute, for example, on what youve described as the retal section, we have 15 days to get back to meal that file with us. We try to do it under five days to make sure that we get back some right of way. We tell them we have their case, they have an assigned investigator or attorney 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 roughly every year. And we have a small office. About 140 fulltime employees, including some in field offices. So the barrier is we try to get to their cases as soon as possible, but sometimes we just have a lag and a backlog that take as while to get to. 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, receive track, and confirm implementation of recommendations. So thats something thats unique. Its also within the department we have one area where were receiving disclosures. So its getting the data where we can now have the whistleblower disclosures, recommendations from the oig, osc, and the office of the medical inspector. Were identifying opportunities for improvement in the department. Thats something thats very unique in what were doing in oawp. And i think thats different than what the other entities do. They give their recommendations, but within va we now have the responsibility of ensuring those recommendations are implemented. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, i yield back. Thank you, id like to recognize miss rice for five minutes of questioning. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Dr. Bonzanto, although the va has procedures for investigating whistleblower complaints, these procedures have allowed the Program Office of the whistleblower, reported misconduct to conduct the investigation. So gao even found instances 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 if things are on the you know, done in a nonbiassed way. That, um, for oawp we investigate all allegations related to retaliation. We also investigate allegations into Senior Leadership poor performance and management. We have the authority similar to osc to refer cases back to the administration. Part of improving processes internally is we develop a questionnaire to basically triage these cases to ensure were not referring cases back to an office where a manager who is involved in the case is going be part of that investigation. So its improving my internal training for my staff and also creating templates where they can have a checklist of standard questions to improve anonymity. I mean, thats good. I know weve heard before about a level of frustration on the part of whistleblowers that their its hard to have an unbiassed approach when the person heading the investigation is involved. Right. So one of the other what we heard, and it was really disturbing during the last hearing, how actions taken by the va against whistleblowers follow them for the rest of their careers. And impact their future Employment Opportunities if they would leave. But it doesnt seem to be the case for the more senior level employees who retaliate against them. So one issue that id 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 a substantiated misconduct is shared across the va at the leadership and facility levels. And if a senior level employee has been implicated in a disclosure, but no official action had been taken against them for misconduct, is this type of information shared across the va . And if not, do you think it should be . Are you to clarify, youre speaking about if an individual, theres a claim against retaliation, if there is a recommendation regarding that, we have to report back if the recommendation coming out for disciplinary action regarding retaliation is not followed, we 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 theres much more much greater negative impact on the whistleblowers, obviously, than the people who retaliate against them. There doesnt seem to be that much accountability at the higher levels in the va 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 va starts at the top. And if people in higher positions are not being held accountable when whistleblowers are actually having, you know a much larger impact, professional and personal impact, how do we address that inconsistency there . Part of our office, when were talking about disciplinary actions, is to track those. Well be able to identify those areas where a leader is refusing to take action against someone whos claiming who has a substantiated allegation. Is this something youre just starting to try to get information on . Right. This is something so ive been in the office for six months. This is something thats important and critical, and the committee has said that. 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 recommendation for disciplinary action, if those actions are not taken, thats something we track within our office. So youll obviously be sharing those. Yes, yes. Mr. Chairman, i yield back. Thank you, id like to recognize mr. Bos for five minutes. Thank you, chairman. Dr. Bonzanto, as you know we had issues in my district in marion va. And the alleged whistleblower retaliation. One of the main concerns that the staff has heard about can communicated several times is individual va employees. So its the communication between your afc and individual employees. In your opinion, whats a reasonable time from your office in disclosure and retaliation complaints. Obviously not everything reported is going to be have the evidence to back it up in the initial claim. But when this happens and a claim cannot be confirmed, does your office let the va employee who sent this closure or retaliation know so that they know the actions are being taken . Sir, thats something that were working internally to improve. As mr. Curtis said, theyre at five days, i think, for something. So thats a goal for us to strive to get to. I would say my expectation is that each employee has about within seven working day that is we give a response that we received your allegation. One of the things were working on is understanding where in that journey, you know, blowing the whistle to the investigative phase, looking at touch points, and we have communicating to my staff the importance of performing with the whistleblower, the person thats being investigated, of where they are in the process. One thing i do want to recognize here and say is that a lot of times employees want to know whether or not disciplinary action was taken. And employees do have a right to privacy. And thats something that we inform them how to go about getting information regarding the case, the person that were investigating, but i cant as an entity, we dont disclose to the whistleblower whether or not disciplinary action was taken against the person they ledged. Thats because theyre both employees right. They both have the right to privacy in the process. Right. Next question i have is actually for all the government witnesses. Sometime during these processes, obviously, whenever they want anonymity, sometimes that doesnt happen. Or sometimes you find that the person who has been ed that whistle blown on them, finds out who it was that did that. How do you handle those situations . Each one of you if i can . Or if it doesnt happen, tell me. So for ms pshgb, its just somewhat inapplicable because we dont conduct investigations. So its known. We work very hard to make sure it doesnt happen. Sometimes, though, if its an office which has a very small number of people, it sometimes is fairly obvious. But we always balance the individuals right to privacy when they do report it to us with the need to go further. We may talk to the individual as well who provided us the information and explain to that person for us to go forward these are the steps were going to have to take to make sure the person is aware of it. But we try very very hard to protect the confidentiality of anyone who comes to us who asks to be 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 their personnel action against them, et cetera, sometimes theyll volunteer. But we protect peoples identities as well. And oawp we are committed to we are also protecting whistleblowers. I have to say in retaliatory cases if you choose to remain anonymous its difficult to ask questions regarding retaliation if youre choosing to remain anonymous in disclosing that information, but employees we do not disclose employees information unless they choose to. So one last question because ive got less than a minute here. And this is going to be for all three of you. Individual va employees understand the process of bringing forward a disclosure and retaliation claim, complaint. Or do the employees think that all of your offices can handle a complaint. So do they know the process . General bergman is clear about the kiss process, which as a nonofficer, we understood very clearly. So do you think these employees under this process now understand how to file and truly file the claims . Um, not confident thats happening. With that being said, we are working, oawp is working with the oig and the osc to develop training regarding whistleblower cases. Like whistleblower reporting. When you want to make a disclosure. I dont think they do. Thats why i frequently ask va employees what do they know about the oig . Where would they go for a complaint . And its all levels at va. Its some of the more senior people dont really understand the relationship between oawp, osc, oig. And thats why we feel so strongly that va ought to put out a training that weve prepared on when to come to the oig, when to come to some of the other avenues. And we hope that training gets implemented. Yes, we work very hard to try to get whistleblowers to know about us. We try to raise our profile. We do press releases. We count on the agency, the va, to notify them. We have an agreement with the general counsels office at the va if there are personnel actions to let them know osc exists. We do mandatory trainings for supervisors and others about ppps. And so were hoping that employees do know about osc, and as weve as i said, as we have press releases and other ways to make ourselves known, i think we do. We get a lot of cases from the va, so we think a lot of them know about us. Mr. Chairman, i apologize for going over time. I yield back. Mr. Rose, five minutes. I want to follow up with what you all were saying about these trainings, because i feel like we can do this in a bit more of a deliberative and quantitative manner. First of all, mr. Missal, you mentioned there are trainings you hope to be happening . Is that am i correct to be saying that . Correct. Whats going on . Who said no to you . Were working through the process. Its a long process. Weve put together a training program. Va has a pretty Extensive Training Program for a lot of different areas, including maintaining a confidentiality of documents, protected information, et cetera. So no ones saying no. Whats the timeline for when this happens . We hope its sooner than later, but its been months in the works, and we keep telling another step needs to happen, another step needs to happen. Do you feel like it could go faster . Yes, absolutely. So who do we need to talk to . Senior leadership at va. Can you give us a name . Secretary wilke. So we should talk to secretary wilke to urge him for this training to go faster so people understand who to go to and when to go to them. Thats correct. So you can count that we will do that. What about staffing . Whether its oig or any of the other offices you all represent va is second largest department. Hundreds of thousands of employee, billions in budget. Do you feel like youre adequately staffed to both respond to whistleblowers as well as protect them thereafter . Well start with you dr. Ban san toe. Currently im adequately staffed for what im doing. I dont think were adequately staffed for what our requirements, obligations, and responsibilities are. As va has grown in tremendous size over the last five to ten year, our office for a long time remained relatively flat. We appreciate the increases congress has recently goich us, but i dont believe were adequate. Lets go into the details a little bit there. What do you think you do need in order to adequately fulfill your the expectations that we all associate with your the oig or its other respective responsibilities. For the next fiscal year the house has appropriated 222 million for us, which would be an increase from the previous year. Just given we want to grow in a measured, controlled way. We think that would be adequate. We hope that would be just a series of increases Going Forward. Okay. Sir . Thank you. Were also understaffed as i alluded to a couple times. Weve had a tremendous growth in cases. And because of that we have a significant backlog. About 2,600 cases in our backlog. A 2,600 case backlog. And how long is it going to take you to get through that . It depends on staffing. If its maintained. Every year we get 6,000 new cases and resolve about 6,000 new cases. So a backlog of 2,600 every year. So thats relatively a sixmonth backlog. Yes, that sounds right. So walk me through then, from an individuals perspective, right . Whistleblower, comes fovrment becomes a part of the backlog. Correct. Six months. Well, i dont know if it takes six months, because not all cases are the same. Some are more fact specific but 6,000 cases in the year, roughly 3,000 backlog. So thats six months. So what are some of the what are some of the consequences weve seen of that backlog . Well, so the consequences are we just dont get to someones case. Which means you might have a meritorious case of whistleblower retaliation, and unfortunately by the time the examiner gets to that weeks or months have gone by can you give us a specific example . I mean, theres just, i mean. You could pick out of the hat. Whats happened where theres been a consequence of that backlog . So the consequence of that backlog would be that a whistleblower had their case sitting with us and doesnt we dont get to it for a while. And the case, i thought you had testimony at the last hearing where one of the witnesses talked about how a case took a couple years. Now, why did this case take a couple years . It takes a couple years sometimes because of the discovery, youre waiting for documents. Sometimes theres changes this staffing or people dont get to so what do you need to address this backlog . More staffing. How many more . Well, we currently have, the house bill were at 28 million, a million and a half more than now. That would be a big help. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. All recognize miss rattlewagon for five minutes. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Missal, the ig received 35,000 hotline contacts in fiscal year 2018. What percentage of hotline cases are closed without investigation and what percentage are investigated . And could you please explain how your office decides with a complaint merits further investigation or should just simply be closed without action . Of the 35,000 contacts as i testified we analyzed and evaluate each and every one of those. The number that turned into an oig investigation is a relatively small percentage. Again, its a resource issue. We take the matters that we believe are the most significant, most impactful, have the greatest risk to veterans or tax dollars. And so we can only take a relatively small number. A number of the other case that is we or contacts we get, we may refer over to va and ask them to take a look at it and report back to us, or just refer it to them. Or a number of others we may send to another agency such as osc, which is more capable of handling it if its a retaliation case. Since mr. Kerners office has more authority over what our retaliation than we do. Mr. Kerner, of the approximately 2,100 va cases osc received last year, how many were disclosure cases . And what percentage of disclosure cases did osc close without investigation . And how does osc determine whether a disclosure warrants further investigation . Yes, so, what happens is we in terms of determination, we have to meet a Legal Standard. The Legal Standard is called substantial likelihood. When we get a case from someone who file as disclosure, we have 45 days by statute to make this substantial likely determination. If it does rise in the opinion of the investigator of the lawyer to the standard, then we referred to the agency that takes the agency then assigns a firm investigation. We dont do the investigation. If we dont, if it doesnt reach that level, then we close that case. I think in terms of the cases lets see, one second. So we have approximately 2,100 va cases. The disclosure cases at va were about 431 and i dont have the so its about 39 . I dont have the exact thumb ber of how many we closed. But we almost certainly dealt with all 431. And they were closed without investigation . Some of them yes, some of them if they do not rise to the level of a substantial likelihood, those would be close. And almost all were addressed. Sorry, for fiscal year 19 we have 431. For fiscal year 18, 642 va disclosure cases. And they would definitely be addressed certainly at this point within the 45 day statutory requirement. Thank you mr. Chairman. I yield back the balance of my time. Thank you very much. Id now like to recognize mr. Sis ner rose. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Dr. Bonzanto. You had said earlier that the va definitely needed a culture change and that needed to happen at the top. I wholeheartedly agree with that. But how is that change, you know, the secretarys dedicated to this. How are we getting that down to the va facility so that they know a culture change is happening. How is your Office Making sure those individuals, supervisors at the facilities know that retaliation against whistleblowers is no longer going to be tolerated . Sir, thanks so much nar question. When we speak about internal Customer Service, i can give you an example. Were having the secretary does have town halls with employees. So hes leading from the top. And then promoting that. The importance of Staff Engagement throughout the organization. So something even internal to oawp having division calls with my staff. Having all hands calls with my staff. Those are things as an example that were doing interimly to promote the importance of Staff Engagement, and listening to employees when they have said that. But hes talking to your staff im giving example. Hes taking a leadership, and im also doing that in my staff as an example of what were doing. The other part of it is also the training that were developing regarding the whistleblower retaliation and why it shouldnt be happening. And what each one of our offices is doing to protect whistleblowers. Is this training for supervisors or every employee . Every employee, sir. So what specifically are we doing regarding supervisors to let them know that this treatment, this is no longer going to be told . I mean, is there anything done specifically for them . All employees have the same training. But our Office Investigates retaliation. Well start those cases, theres i get that. But how are we changing the culture, right . I get that youre putting things out to employees and letting them know that its okay to come out and to report the whistleblowers, but how are we letting them know . How are we letting supervisors know that this isnt going to be tolerated anymore, that retaliation the way that it used to be done is going to change. What is being done different to address supervisors that they need to change the way theyre doing business . Or business has been done in the past . Thats through training and promoting the offices that we do have here. I know, but youre saying the training is for everybody. So pretty much its probably a general training given to all employees. Right. But is there a specific training thats dedicated to supervisors to let them know when youre a supervisor, you know, like, last week i had to go to a training meant for members of congress and how i treat my staff. It wasnt an overall all members, everybody whos employed by the house of representatives training. What are we doing specifically for supervisors to let them know that business is changing the way that things used to be done and tolerating, were not going to tolerate the way we treated whistleblowers in the past. I could find out exactly and take the exact training for the supervisors. I know we have all employee training for every employee, but specifically for supervisors, i can take that for the record. Youre chomping at the bit there. In 2017 Congress Passed the Chris Kirkpatrick law which requires retaliation whistleblower training for all supervisors. Our office does that training for all supervisors. We do that on an annual basis. Has it been effective . I think its very effective. Its a very good training program. I recently took it, and so i can personally say i found it very helpful. If i could answer some of this . I was just going to let you, mr. Devine, and miss gerrick. I wanted to give you a chance. I know its been, like, six months, but i would love to hear your thoughts what youre hearing from those you represent. The real issue here, what youre asking is about accountability. When we talk about training, weve talked about training for years and years and years. That is a paper tiger answer. And its so infuriating. Because there is no fear of training. Theres been whistleblower training. Mr. Devine does a lot of training. Its online. Theres lots of training. The fact that we can show from so many of the people who contact us that they never get responses to their emails. There is no policy in place that explains any of this. The va put out a report, a 14page report with a pneumonic we too care instead of a policy statement. That is just so unprofessional. Im at a loss for words. And the fact that we dont have 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 va was doing, could be doing. Weve tried to get regular accountability meetings scheduled quarterly meetings with the vsos to go over the 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. Congressman, we welcome the calls for culture and attitude. And we have support for dr. Bonzanto. But better attitudes at the top arent a substitute for results. And the results arent Getting Better in our experience, sir. Before the hearing last month a day before the hearing, one of the key witnesses was fired by the va. Thats intended to send a message. Trying to resolve six whistleblower cases. And despite the call of duty efforts by the office of special counsel, the va hasnt been willing to resolve any of those cases in a civilized manner. I think if there was any issue thats a good weather vein for whether or not this talk is making it into reality, its the secret waiting list issue. Five years ago that scandal broke. And it horrified the nation. And the va promised to do much much better. At last months hearing all three whistleblowers disclosing three out of the five get clients that i talked about in my testimony, were on secret waiting lists. The problem isnt going away. And its not surprising. The va has a very effective corrective Action Program that was doing outstanding work. With handson efforts in the medical centers to correct the problem of secret waiting lists. And that was cancelled and replaced with a pork barrel contractor kind of buddy system contractor scheme. And if you look at the transition, which hand within the last two year, its impossible to be optimistic whats happening at the va. Mr. Devine, i apologize. Were a little bit over on this, on his time for questioning. Yes, sir. But a couple of us will ask additional questions and we might allow you to expand upon that a bit. I appreciate your response. With that id like to recognize mr. Peterson for five minutes. Okay, maybe well pick up there, then, mr. Devine. You know, we were asking, you know, our government witnesses to gauge a little bit the culture change that needs to happen and the steps that theyve outlined. Youre not satisfied with that. Would you like to continue or offer more comments in that vein . Yes, sir, its the secret waiting list issue thats just eating at us. The va had an effective unit, verc, that was working with the hospitals and cleaning up this mess. However, it was replaced in the congressly chartered commission on care, applauded their work, recommended giving them more resources and authority so they could better pursue their mandate, and the va responded to that recommendation by canceling the work of the verc, merging it into another unit, which laid off all 127 career employees who were seasoned veteran professionals at solving these problems. And replaced them with an outside contractor under the sleaziest of conditions. The outside contractor had access to inside budget information in order to customize their proposal. The reorganization that brought them into power was instituted without prior congressional authorization as required by law. The outside contractors were benefiting from federal spending for a study on how to replace federal employees with contractors which is illegal. The outside contractors were violating federal acquisition regulations by supervising federal employees. And whats happened with this . Well, now instead of having handson work at the hospitals, its a paperwork review where the medical centers certify themselves on an honor system to the outside contractors that theyve solved the problems. Theyve canceled the site visits. Theyve stopped making progress. And the cost of this has increased from 45 million to 150. Weve replaced effective corrective action with a buddy system pork barrel scam, mr. Chair man. That doesnt leave me feeling encouraged about the progress of the administration. And when we have, we have the wrongdoers investigating themselves. We have government money that doesnt get properly spent. And the oig, one of the reports that i cite all the time, is this 11. 7 million that went to caliber while orourke was head of the oawp. There was no resolve to that. The money doesnt get called back. None of the vba people that were responsible for that contract there was no accountability for that. There was they recommended more training. So thats why i get so frustrated when and then we have caps on arbitration. Why are caps at 5,000 . Who is going to go through that process when thats the resolve . We have va employees experiencing cyberbullying. There is no one at the va that will investigate threats. Threats of stalking and actual physical harm to va employees who are whistleblowers. And the oig doesnt do it. The va police doesnt do it. So who does it . Theres no accountability for that kind of cyberstalking. And then why do these things take years . I have filed an oig complaint on the waste fraud and abuse with Suicide Prevention money at the va, something this committee has said is its number one priority. And that case has sat open since 2016 while veterans are diagnose by suicide. Why arent we asking the im sorry, 6 million wasnt spent. What happened to that money . I appreciate your perspective. Its valuable. I want to get one more question in before my times up here. Then i defer to general bergman for a final question. But dr. Bonzanto, i want to go back to you. Because in the report that your Office Issued most recently, theres a section called on the horizon. So im very concerned and eager to learn more about what is just over the horizon for your agency. Included there some fundamental steps issuing a policy on whistleblower disclosures and oawp investigations, developing specialized teams including those trained in whistleblower retaliation matters, not included are very specific timelines. And i heard you mention a date earlier with respect to the training program. Im very interested in understanding and learning more about the specifics of these things, the timelines for these, so that we can follow the progress and look to hold your agency accountable in the future k. You provide any of those for us today . Or follow up with us for those details . I can speak for the timeline as the policy is rolling out. We expect by october 1st to have our directives involving investigations and what we do, how we do it october 1st. So for the rest of the requirements in here by the end of the calendar year, i expect to have actually all of these implemented and hopefully we can measure progress and developing the metrics to give you some type of idea where we are and what our challenges are by the end of this calendar year. Okay. That is vital. I appreciate that. Yeah, and ill keep follow up on these issues. General bergman, any final questions . Thank you, mr. Chairman. Just i want to set the record straight here just to make sure i understand. Dr. Bonzanto, mr. Devine just said that dr. Agevli was fired the day before the last hearing. I sent a letter asking the aide to review under the 714 hold preers and was advised she was put on a hold. Can you confirm . Do you have the ability to confirm where we are on that . On this one . If you cant, take it for the record. Ill take that one for the record. I just want to make sure that we understand where we are in the process with her. Oawp does have the ability to place holds on actions taken under 714. And thats something we do have in a statute to protect whistleblowers. Okay, mr. Kerner, any chance you might know that . Yes, i believe we have a hold on it. Okay, okay. Lets just double check here because we didnt, again, this is all of this is recorded and we want to make sure we didnt misstate. I checked with the person that does this in our office and she informs me we do have a hold. We do have a hold. Okay. Anyway, my question is, again, mr. Kerner, what is when we talk about training, programs, and getting people up to speed on the same sheet of music, what is 2302c Certification Program has va completed the certification and what does the certification convey . Yes, so va and the va ig as well are in the process of recertifying. Theyve been previously certified, but were recertifying now. The 2302c program is a program where osc has taken on the 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 weve we act as a certifying entity for agencies. And as part of that role we work with them to ensure they are meeting all the standards outlined in 2302c to educate and protect whistleblowers and other federal employees. There are roughly 170 agencies, and we have fairly limited resources. Far lot of them we dont do the training. We provide a lot of slides or other materials for the training and that we certify when they come back to us and comply with the training program. So thats what we do with that. Mr. Chairman, i yield back. Well, thank you. Do any of the members have additional questions before we close . Well, i want to highlight a couple of points here before we close the hearing. First, the subcommittee takes these issues very seriously, and were going to continue to track the disclosures and needs of va whistleblowers. Lets be clear on one fact. Whistleblowers are performing a public service. They are a critical resource and they need to be protected. The Inspector General will be issuing a report about vas office of accountability and whistleblower protection in the september hearing of the subcommittee, we will focus on that review. Were also waiting further information from the office of accountability and whistleblower protection. Were interested in further details, further policies and procedures and timelines of how we can best track that progress moving forward. Frankly the testimony today left me wanting more. I think further discusses 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. So 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 for each of those who appeared here for us today for offering your testimony, your thoughts, your views. We heard a lot of important thoughts on from our government of witnesses and from the whistleblower advocates. We thank you for being a part of this again today. There wasnt always agreement, but the dialogue is important and it must continue. Ultimately were working towards the same goal ensuring the va serves our veterans as best it can. And there are certain ways we all understand that can be improved, and whistleblowers are part of that process. I look forward to working with all of you. Dr. Bonzanto, clearly you have an important job ahead of you. And you all do as you move ahead and make sure things are headed in the right direction. And we stand ready to work with you every step of the way. Its pivotal we come together to protect the whistleblowers and improve services for our veterans. Id like to turn it over to Ranking Member bergman for any closing comments he may have. Thank you, mrcht chairman. And 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 oversight part of this. And were counting on all of you to do the same. So thank you very much for holding the hearing mr. Kwharman, i appreciate it. Thank you, members. Well have five legislative days for remarks and extraneous material. The subcommittee stands adjourned. [inaudible conversations]

© 2024 Vimarsana

comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.