University administrators have hired litigation firm Williams & Connolly to conduct an independent review of accusations of workplace and financial misconduct by top U.Va. Health and School of Medicine administrators, according to University Spokesperson Brian Coy. In a statement to The Cavalier Daily, Coy said that the University has worked with Williams & Connolly in the past, but did not specify when or under what circumstances, noting that the University typically does not comment on legal matters.
The announcement follows a Sept. 5 letter from 128 University Physicians Group-employed faculty to the Board of Visitors. In the letter, signatories alleged that Craig Kent, chief executive officer of U.Va. Health and executive vice president for health affairs, and Melina Kibbe, dean of the School of Medicine, Medicine professor and chief health affairs officer, have fostered a negative environment detrimental to both patient safety and faculty well-being.
In particular, the letter accused Kent and Kibbe of hiring doctors despite concerns over their integrity and quality, as well as threatening faculty who have raised complaints about patient safety. The letter also alleges that the two administrators spent excessive amounts on executives, failed to address staffing shortages and regularly committed violations of the Board-approved code of ethics.
The identities of the letter’s 128 faculty signatories have not been publicly disclosed, which the letter says is to protect those faculty members out of fear of retaliation. The Cavalier Daily has been unable to independently verify any of the allegations made in the letter.
In the days following the letter of no confidence, University administrators released multiple statements regarding the allegations, including a Sept. 6 statement co-authored by University President Jim Ryan and Board of Visitors Rector Robert Hardie. In the message, Ryan and Hardie wrote that the Board and the University administration took the allegations seriously and were in the process of determining next steps.
“We all share the goal of offering every member of our community the best possible place to live, learn, and work,” the statement read. “We are grateful for the dedication of all U.Va. Health team members in making our health system one of the best in the nation.”
The following day, Ryan released a longer individual statement in which he criticized the letter of no confidence signatories’ approach to addressing their concerns. In the statement, he reiterated the University’s commitment to investigating the allegations, but stated that the letter presented many vague claims of wrongdoing while providing few details to use to investigate the allegations.
Ryan also said that he was disappointed in the signatories’ approach to handling the situation, stating that himself and Ian Baucom, executive vice president and provost, had already been meeting with small groups of faculty prior to the letter of no confidence. According to Ryan, the University had already addressed some of the concerns faculty raised in these meetings and it was working on addressing others.
“They have besmirched the reputations of not just Melina and Craig,” Ryan said. “Instead, through some of their allegations, they have unfairly — and I trust unwittingly — cast a shadow over the great work of the entire health system and medical school.”
Following Ryan’s statement, a group of faculty who helped author the original letter of no confidence sent a follow-up letter to the Board of Visitors Sept. 12 criticizing University administrators for their response to the allegations. The statement said that recent University statements — particularly Ryan’s individual statement — suggest a lack of respect for their concerns around Kent and Kibbe’s behavior.
“The multiple communications from various University leaders and [Health System Board] members over the last six days have undermined your assertion that the University Administration was taking these allegations seriously,” the letter read. “Specifically, [Ryan’s statement] sent on 9/7/24 less than 24 hours after the respectful message he co-signed with Rector Robert Hardie has destroyed what little trust in him remained.”
In the same letter, the group of faculty refuted the notion that there is no evidence to back the allegations leveled against Kent and Kibbe. They listed a range of specific meetings and correspondences dating back to Sept. 2021, stating that each communication was an instance in which concerns linked to the letter of no confidence were raised. This list included meetings between the School of Medicine Faculty Senate, Kent and Kibbe and University Physicians Group Board correspondences with administrators, among others.
The University’s announcement of the investigation comes amidst this ongoing discourse between some U.Va Health faculty and the University’s senior-most administrators. According to Coy, the University does not have a timetable for the investigation. He said the firm will send the initial results of the review to Ryan and the Board of Visitors.
“University leaders, including Executive Vice President for Health Affairs Craig Kent and Medical School Dean Melina Kibbe, agree on the need to pursue a thorough and independent review,” Coy said. “The Board and President Ryan will receive the findings of this review and work with U.Va. Health leaders to address any issues that may arise through this process.”
Read More
Student Council hears from Director of Diversity Education, talks parking fines
By Vyshnavi Tatta | 16 hours agoLaw Rep. Kasey Michaud introduced a bill encouraging students to donate food to local pantries by offering reductions in parking fees as an incentive.
10 years later — student journalists discuss retracted “Rolling Stone” article
By Merrill Hart | 16 hours agoThe graphic narrative ignited protests both on Grounds and at a national level.
U.Va. launches National Security Data and Policy Institute
By Sophie Long | 16 hours agoThe institute will develop AI-driven tools to process large data sets and aid analysts in identifying advancements and potential national security threats.
