The Office of the Whistleblower Ombuds is an independent and nonpartisan support office established to advise House offices on best practices for working with whistleblowers from the public and private sectors – whether constituents or oversight sources.
Learn more about the Office's confidential services on its Congressional Audience page.
Learn more about the Office's establishment on its Purpose page.
In broad terms, a whistleblower is an individual who discloses evidence of wrongdoing, regardless of whether subsequent retaliation occurs.
The legal definition in civil service law for a whistleblower is an employee, applicant or former employee who discloses information that he or she reasonably believes evidences:
Contrary to popular belief, an individual who discloses suspected wrongdoing does not need to experience retaliation to meet the legal definition of a whistleblower. Moreover, some individuals may better identify with the term "truth-teller" or "watchdog" for instance. Most whistleblowers simply perceive themselves as committed employees performing their jobs.
Most often, whistleblowers perceive themselves as committed employees performing their jobs. Many feel an obligation to report misconduct out of a sense of loyalty to the organizational mission. In fact, the Standards of Ethical Conduct requires executive branch employees to "disclose waste, fraud, abuse, and corruption to appropriate authorities." Further, the Code of Ethics for Government Service requires all federal government employees to "[e]xpose corruption wherever discovered." Notwithstanding this expectation, whistleblowing can come at a significant professional and personal cost.
The experience for a whistleblower can be traumatic and life-changing. These courageous individuals may be dealing with threats and pressures they never anticipated and feel betrayed by the institutions they have been loyal to. Maybe they are going through professional isolation or experiencing gaslighting – a form of manipulation that can cause them to question their own reality and evidence. Commonly, whistleblowers are pushed out of their chosen career field – the retaliator may interfere with their ability to obtain future employment. All these factors can have psychological, emotional, and financial impacts.
In recognition of the mental health impacts of whistleblowing, The Chris Kirkpatrick Act of 2017 (Public Law No.: 115-73) requires federal agencies to report information about employee suicides that have a whistleblower nexus. This data can be difficult to track, however, and it requires the agency to first receive written permission from the family.
Individuals can view Whistleblower Survival Tips for key steps to consider before engaging in whistleblowing.
House offices can contact the Office of the Whistleblower Ombuds for guidance on how to safely work with whistleblowers.
The Office of the Whistleblower Ombuds is not authorized to receive disclosures from whistleblowers. Rather, the Office exists to advise House offices and their staff on best practices for working with whistleblowers. However, the Office has developed a menu of governmental and nongovernmental resources for whistleblowers on its Whistleblower Audience page.
Before risking retaliation or liability, anyone considering blowing the whistle should consult an attorney experienced in representing whistleblowers. Also review Best Practices for Working with Congress and Whistleblower Survival Tips.
The Office has developed a Committee Jurisdiction Tool to help individuals identify a menu of House committees that may have jurisdiction over a whistleblower matter. In addition, the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE) and the U.S. Office Special Counsel (OSC) have developed an interactive online tool to ensure that whistleblowers are informed of the avenues available to them to report wrongdoing, and also the correct venue to file a complaint to address any retaliation that may occur after reporting wrongdoing.
The coronavirus presents significant public health and safety threats, as well as the potential for misuse of taxpayer dollars designated for the coronavirus response. The options for engaging in protected whistleblowing will vary depending on the nature of the disclosure and the whistleblower's employer, among other factors.
Whistleblowers who wish to make a coronavirus-related disclosure can use the following interactive online tool to determine the avenues available to report wrongdoing and retaliation. They can also use GAO's FraudNet, contact the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis, or CIGIE's Pandemic Response Accountability Committee hotline. In addition, the Special Inspector General for Pandemic Recovery (SIGPR) accepts disclosures regarding "fraud, waste, abuse and mismanagement related to the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act funding, programs, and personnel."
There are significant gaps in whistleblower laws that leave certain sectors of the labor force uncovered. The Office maintains a series of sector and issue-specific whistleblower protection fact sheets, available on its Fact Sheets page.
Notably, legislative branch employees have limited anti-retaliation protections under the Congressional Accountability Act (CAA) and Clause 20 of Rule XXIII (Code of Official Conduct). In addition, most political appointees and judicial branch employees do not have whistleblower protections. Moreover, for those employees with coverage, the strength of their rights varies significantly.
There exists a patchwork of federal, state and local laws, as well as First Amendment rights, that comprise the legal whistleblower landscape. Each law has different remedies, procedural steps, and paths for enforcement. Anyone considering blowing the whistle should first consult an attorney experienced in representing whistleblowers.
See the Office of the Whistleblower Ombuds' Legislative Branch Whistleblowing Fact Sheet for a comprehensive overview.
Legislative branch employees have limited anti-retaliation protections under the Congressional Accountability Act (CAA). Additional information on those rights can be found at the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights. For matters that fall within the jurisdiction of the CAA, legislative branch employees can arrange a confidential meeting with the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights. House employees can also seek confidential advice and legal representation from the Office of Employee Advocacy.
Further, the House Code of Official Conduct (Clause 20 of Rule XXIII) prohibits a Member, Delegate, Resident, Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House from taking any actions to prevent an individual from, or to retaliate against an individual for, providing truthful information to the Committee on Ethics, the Office of Congressional Ethics, the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights, or any law enforcement official, provided that the disclosure of such information is not otherwise prohibited by law or House rules.
House employees who want to report suspected misconduct can also arrange a confidential consultation and submit an allegation with the House Committee on Ethics, or submit an allegation with the Office of Congressional Ethics or the House Office of Inspector General.
Congress plays a critical role in both learning from, and protecting, whistleblowers. Further, Congress' constitutionally mandated oversight work very often relies on vital disclosures from employees within the public and private sectors.
There are several primary statues that protect whistleblower communications with Congress, such as:
There are many additional statutes, including for the private sector, that protect whistleblower communications with Congress. The Office maintains a series of sector and issue-specific whistleblower protection fact sheets, available on its Fact Sheets page.
Further, Congress has established penalties for individuals who try to interfere with lawful whistleblower communications to Congress or engage in retaliation. See the Office's guidance document Holding Retaliators Accountable for additional information.
See the Office of the Whistleblower Ombuds' Intelligence Community Whistleblowing Fact Sheet for a comprehensive overview.
Whistleblower disclosures that involve classified information are permitted only if made through appropriate, lawful channels. Providing classified documents to unauthorized recipients could result in criminal prosecution.
Intelligence Community (IC) employees and contractors working in any of the IC elements must follow the processes established within the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act (ICWPA) for making a protected disclosure to the congressional intelligence committees.
Federal employees or applicants covered under the Whistleblower Protection Act also have the right to make classified disclosures to Congress, if the information was classified by the heads of non-IC elements and if the disclosure does not reveal sources and methods.
Anyone considering making a classified whistleblower disclosure should first consult an attorney experienced in representing national security whistleblowers.
There are several laws that require whistleblower confidentiality. For example:
Despite legal protections, a whistleblower's identity could still be revealed by their employer, colleagues or other individuals aware of their whistleblowing. Revealing a whistleblower's identify can have a significant chilling effect and deter future employees from reporting waste, fraud, abuse or other misconduct.
The Office of the Whistleblower Ombuds has developed a Template Whistleblower Confidentiality Policy, and it stands ready to assist House offices with compliance with Clause 21 and maintaining confidentiality.
| Is a whistleblower disclosure that is based on secondhand information credible and protected? |
|---|
| It is not uncommon for a whistleblower to make a disclosure based on secondhand information. There are numerous factors that can result in a whistleblower using secondhand information. For instance, secondhand information is often used to corroborate the "pioneer" whistleblower's allegations, and/or the whistleblower may serve as a conduit for additional whistleblowers. In response to widespread public confusion, the Office of the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community clarified that an individual does not need to possess firsthand information in order to make a protected disclosure. |
