BOV in Full Control of Investigation into Alleged UVA Med School Abuses
Many University of Virginia faculty members expressed skepticism during a meeting of the Faculty Senate last week that an investigation into alleged misdeeds by the UVA Health System and School of Medicine (SOM) will be independent and credible.
Their fears were inflamed by a letter that President Jim Ryan distributed to SOM faculty members last month critical of a letter alleging widespread abuses in the Health System and Medical School, signed by 128 employees of the UVA Physicians Group (with names withheld from the public). Ryan’s reaction was dismissive. He described the charges as vague and generalized, although he added, “Without specific details or names to follow up with, we will do our best to investigate.”
A few days later, the University announced that “the University Board of Visitors and President Ryan” had agreed to conduct an “independent review ” of the allegations, adding that “the Board and President Ryan will receive the findings of this review.” It was unclear from the statement who, exactly, would be in charge or how the investigation would be structured.
Those questions were answered at the Faculty Senate meeting Friday: The Board of Visitors’ Audit, Compliance, and Risk Committee is running the investigation, not the UVA administration.
Porter Wilkinson, vice chair of the University of Virginia Board of Visitors’ Audit Committee
Rachel W. Sheridan, chair of the University of Virginia Board of Visitors’ Audit Committee
Rachel W. Sheridan and Porter N. Wilkinson — chair and vice chair respectively of the Audit, Compliance, and Risk Committee — conveyed the details in a letter read to the Senate Faculty.
You have our commitment that the investigation will continue to be our priority and that we will protect the independence of the investigation as has been the case from the beginning.
The administration of the university and the health system are not involved and will not be involved in any aspect of deciding what evidence to obtain, reviewing evidence, or supervising the investigation. They have not been and will not be involved in directing our outside law firm.
Outside counsel, DC-based megafirm Williams & Connolly, has been conducting interviews for the past few weeks, but significant work remains to be done, Sheridan and Wilkinson continued.
We have measures in place to ensure that this investigation operates with the highest level of integrity as this process moves forward. We understand the importance of transparency and open lines of communication. We remain committed to sharing information about the status of the investigation as we are able, consistent with the need to preserve the integrity of the investigation.
Jeri K. Seidman, a McIntire School of Business professor and chair-elect of the Faculty Senate, elaborated on the letter based on Senate Executive Committee conversations with Sheridan and Wilkinson, whose professional obligations precluded them from attending the full faculty senate meeting.
“They view this as independent because the Audit Committee is separate and distinct from the BOV,” Seidman said. “This has been commissioned through the Audit Committee, not the BOV. It’s going through the audit committee, not the BOV. The Audit Committee is the client. They defined the initial scope.” she said, adding that the scope could evolve as the investigation advances.
Faculty Senate members expressed worries about allegations that physicians have been subjected to retaliation and wondered how they would be protected. Several asked if the University could pay for legal counsel in their appearances before the Williams & Connolly investigators.
The investigation has set up a mechanism for faculty members with “concerns about repercussions” to report to Carolyn D. Saint, UVA’s chief audit executive, Seidman said. “She is someone separate from the administration, separate from the investigation, separate from the BOV, and used to handling things that are sensitive. … She investigated issues of financial malfeasance at the Med School.”
During his forty-five minute remarks to the Faculty Senate, Ryan acknowledged that people were upset by his letter to the Med School faculty but stressed that he is playing no role in the investigation. “I’m staying out of it. … I’m not involved in the gathering of information or the analysis of the information.”
He also issued a quasi-apology for the letter.
For those who were upset about it, I apologize. The point of the letter was to make it clear that we were not going to summarily fire [Health System CEO Craig Kent] and [School of Medicine Dean Melina Kibbe] based on that letter, and that we at least needed to give them due process and investigate what the allegations were. Maybe I became too aggressive. Sometimes the lawyer in me comes out. And someone said, “I rarely see you angry but you seemed angry.” I will tell you, it’s much easier for me to deal with criticisms that are aimed at me than aimed at my colleagues. And, so, I do feel more protective of my colleagues than I do of myself. If you’re in a job like this, you’re used to criticism. It’s not like I love it but if… you develop thick skin. … I don’t have thick skin with respect to my colleagues. At the same time, if you’re the president of a university, your fiduciary duty is to the University, and the allegations that were made in that letter are serious and need to be investigated. I want to make sure it’s a full and fair investigation.
Attendees of the Senate Faculty meeting voted to present a resolution in support of the School of Medicine faculty members for an online vote to be held Monday, October 21, through Wednesday, October 23.
James A. Bacon is the founder of Bacon’s Rebellion and a contributing editor with The Jefferson Council.
