The University will soon begin its search for a new leader of U.Va. Health following the resignation of Craig Kent, chief executive officer of U.Va. Health and executive vice president for health affairs. The end of his controversial five-year tenure comes at a precarious time for U.Va. Health, which faces, in addition to an eroded reputation, the highest degree of political uncertainty for hospitals in recent memory. At such a critical moment, U.Va. Health’s new CEO must be committed to embracing a radical shift which promotes a culture of trust and commits to providing equitable care.
Kent’s time at the University was cut short after he, along with School of Medicine Dean Melina Kibbe, faced a slew of misconduct allegations in a letter of no confidence signed by 128 U.Va. Health faculty in September 2024. Among the most serious accusations were cutting corners on safety, bullying residents, violating the University’s faculty code of ethics and fostering a culture of fear and retaliation. The bottom line is clear — according to these U.Va. faculty members, the ethos of U.Va. Health has been fundamentally broken.
The University commissioned an independent review of these allegations, and Kent’s resignation came immediately after the findings were presented to the Board of Visitors in February. Considering the University’s general unwillingness to comment on this review and their denial of a FOIA request by The Cavalier Daily, it appears unlikely the University will ever publicize its findings. However, Virginians may speculatively — and naturally — connect the review’s conclusion to Kent’s sudden resignation.
The University may have its reasons, such as the protection of sensitive personnel records, for withholding the findings. But make no mistake about how the community will interpret such opaqueness — a tacit admission of institutional wrongdoing coupled with a refusal of actual accountability. By withholding its findings, the University avoids confirming whether the alleged abuses were in fact taking place, and subsequently makes it far more difficult to determine whether these abuses have actually been addressed. In this sense, neglecting to publicize the report itself further erodes public trust in U.Va. Health.
In addressing these trust difficulties, the next CEO need not take accountability for past organizational actions, but they will inevitably be required to confront the unsavory reputation that the no-confidence letter has established for U.Va. Health. They must understand that continued secrecy remains a hurdle to rebuilding the culture of trust, trust which is necessary for U.Va. Health to succeed as a critical public resource and which must start at the top. Patients being skeptical of the basic integrity and cohesiveness of a hospital system — a likely sentiment considering the past year’s headlines — will undoubtedly hinder their willingness to utilize its services.
With this CEO appointment, University leadership responsible for the selection must think deeply about what precisely qualifies a candidate. After all, in the past, they have shown a willingness to dismiss red flags in candidate histories — Kent himself was hired in 2019 despite ironically already being named in a faculty letter of no confidence in his previous position as dean of the College of Medicine at Ohio State. Strikingly ominous allegations — a culture of distrust and retaliation — were apparently not enough to dissuade the University from hiring Kent. Ultimately, University officials showed a disregard for legitimate concerns when selecting Kent. With their next pick, they must be far more successful in finding a candidate whose track record aligns entirely with the University’s values of transparency, trust and respect.
The search for this type of ideal CEO could not come at a more critical time, as today’s politics of healthcare have made the actions of healthcare leadership more salient than ever. Today, a U.Va. Health CEO is not only tasked with mundane decisions like financing and staffing — they are also responsible for defending healthcare rights and critical research efforts upon which countless Americans depend. U.Va. Health has already become embroiled in controversies regarding gender-affirming care — first suspending such care for patients under 19 years old, then partially reversing this policy. Moreover, Universities around the country are currently battling massive funding cuts for medical research. U.Va. Health has the unique responsibility of insulating patients from such political upheaval, providing quality care equitably.
The CEO selected, therefore, must show a commitment to rebuilding a culture of trust and service from the ground up. This means relying upon faculty voices, not top-down edicts, as the basis for executive decisions related to U.Va. Health’s hiring and care policies. The CEO must genuinely prioritize U.Va. Health’s core values and principles — including accountability, integrity and transparency — even when this conflicts with financial incentives. Only in such an environment, where leadership and faculty exchange ideas on a level playing field, can systematic trust once again be instilled as a pillar of U.Va. Health. And only with such an internal system in place can U.Va. Health regain its reputation as a preeminent public health resource, not a profit-driven corporation.
Nathaniel Carter is a senior associate opinion editor who writes about health, technology and environment for The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at opinion@cavalierdaily.com.
The opinions represented in this column are not necessarily those of The Cavalier Daily. Columns represent the views of the authors alone.
Read More
KING: Virginia must step up for civic education
By Michael King | 2 days agoThese materials are paramount to teaching civics in the state, and officials must take due care to ensure any funding cuts will not hamper access to them.
OBITUARY: John Thomas Casteen III passes away at 81
By Elizabeth Ingeborg Casteen and John T. Casteen IV | 3 days agoCasteen may be best remembered as the founder of AccessUVA, a scholarship program to support undergraduate students whose qualifications were excellent, but whose families would be hard pressed to afford college tuition.
GARVIE: The Women’s History Month events are more performative than practical
By Adeline Garvie | 3 days agoPerhaps, it may seem as though the University is hosting a decent amount of events, and criticisms of its engagement or genuineness sound nitpicky.
