UNCLASSIFIED

1

UNCLASSIFIED

MEETING MINUTES

Meeting Date/Time: November 14, 2018, 1:30pm – 3:00pm

Location: USDA, 1400 Independence Ave, SW, 1st Floor, Room 1052(c) and Dial-in

Agenda:

1. Conference Recap

2. Mentoring Program Update

3. Discussion Topics

4. Membership Requests and Comments

Highlights:

1. Conference Recap

a. Thank-You to all who worked on putting on the conference and all who attended either 

in-person or virtually on Web-Ex.

b. A special shout-out to the Conference Committee (and Conference co-chair).

c. A good mix of presenters both from the ombuds community and individuals with other 

non-ombuds roles.

d. Thank-You to all survey participants and the survey link is still open if you would like to 

provide feedback.

https://www.surveygizmo.com/s3/4645774/COFO-Post-Conference-Survey

e. Conference committee will discuss feedback and report back to the group.

2. Mentoring Program Update

a. There are 11 mentees who will be matched with mentors.

b. Mentees have expressed areas they would like mentorship in and are being matched 

with mentors who are skilled in the requested areas.

c. Both mentees and mentors will participate in separate one-hour video orientation.

d. Two or three individuals are not eligible to be mentees according to the guidelines, and 

the committee will look to see if they can be matched with mentors nonetheless.

e. Thank-You to all of the Mentoring Committee members for the hard work in getting this 

program started.

f. If you have any questions and/or interested in becoming a mentor/mentee, please 

contact Wendy Kamenshine (Wendy.Kamenshine@cfpb.gov) and David Michael 

(David.Michael@nih.gov). 

3. Discussion Topic: Receipt of Petitions 

a. Does your office receive petitions from the public or on behalf of organizational 

members, and what is the process when a petition is received?
UNCLASSIFIED

2

UNCLASSIFIED

1. One office receives hundreds and even thousands of emails or letters all 

with the same subject and text. At first ombuds tried to respond to all 

senders but found they did not receive a response and discontinued 

responding. The subject matter and the number of writers is provided 

to the organizations Executive Secretariat for awareness.

2. Similar experience at another office, often the topics relate to a topical 

event in the news, many individual emails with the same or similar 

subjects and texts, leadership informed of topics and numbers but 

agency does not respond to mass correspondence. When constituents 

express concern about rule making or changed policy, office does 

inform sender that the ombuds office is not an agent of notice and

provides the correct venue to the sender.

3. Ombuds office email has been provided at outreach events and is now 

in circulation such that office receives numerous emails about specific 

concerns. Ombuds collects like issues and alerts leadership to the 

concerns being shared.

4. Office receives hundreds but not thousands of letters or emails looking 

to bring specific concerns to the attention of agency leadership. 

Limitations prevent the office from advocating for expanded privileges 

for the writers and the office informs the writers of the ombuds role.

4. Discussion Topic: Civility

a. How does your office fit into the organizational discussion of civility?

1. Served as an ad hoc member of agency task force on civility. Concern 

that task force recommendations could result in adverse actions being 

taken and needed to remain separate from group. Much of what is 

discussed as civility relates to situations where individuals should know 

right from wrong and some individuals walk right to the line of what is 

unacceptable, supervisors for example can be the worst offenders. 

Implementation of civility policy is the real challenge. 

2. Civility is not a topic incorporated into ombuds program or agency ADR 

but is part of agency’s anti-harassment program. Reluctance to get too 

involved, including a possible free speech concern. Agency is looking at 

civility policy but has not addressed bullying through policy and bullying 

is a bigger concern.

3. Civil treatment is a compliance issue for leaders, message is 

underscored for managers that they have an affirmative obligation to 

act. Might be able to learn from others, for instance it was once taboo 

to speak of safety issues but this taboo was removed, perhaps a similar 

process could affirm employees right to speak up about harassment.

4. Without management responsiveness, any program is useless, and 

ultimately the question can be; why hasn’t incivility been addressed 

with existing rules and policy?

5. Civility is being surveyed by a non-ombuds group at one agency.

6. The use of civility and associated training brings us to the lowest 

possible common denominator and into compliance mindset, ombuds 
UNCLASSIFIED

3

UNCLASSIFIED

work is inherently more complex and ombuds work results in the 

building and use of higher skills within an agency.

7. It is really about respectful interaction and there are themes that are 

shared with senior leadership to help them understand the problem.

8. Reminds me of an initiative towards mindfulness training in the past, 

need to be proactive to prevent things from happening and need to 

make people aware of the negative impact that unprofessional behavior 

and talk can have on the work environment.

9. Concerned that we might fall into the trap of following the bright and 

shiny object, civility is currently a hot topic, and agency has taken on the 

lack of respectful treatment as a cultural issue. Christine Porath has a 

quick read; Mastering Civility: A Manifesto for the Workplace, and 

several TEDx talks available online that discuss civility.

10. Porath spoke at one agency and the agency Chaplin is leading a lot of 

civility sessions. The ombuds office works with leaders to build both 

their confidence and confidence in working with conflict; teaching a 

“listening cycle”. The next topic for leaders is empathy training, there 

are senior leaders at the kindergarten level.

11. Our work is really more about organizational development than 

compliance with EEOC rules and reducing harassment complaints.

12. Simon Sinek has spoken about the need for mid-level leaders to practice 

and model positive behaviors.

13. The Harvard Business Review noted that conflicts in the corporate 

setting cost an average of $7800 a day.

14. Many EEOC judges are unaware about the work that goes on outside 

the formal channels, they would benefit from learning more about the 

work of ombuds. There is an opportunity at the next Excel Conference 

for ombuds to present information on ombuds work to the EEOC 

community. Information on conference and proposals is at: 

https://eeotraining.eeoc.gov/profile/web/index.cfm?PKwebID=0x2547d

970&varPage=location

5. Member Requests and Comments

1. If your agency has a good anti-harassment policy please contact Bill 

Maurer (William.Maurer@hq.doe.gov) or Scott Deyo 

(Scott.Deyo@hq.doe.gov) or call them at 202-586-0500.

2. COFO should consider using coordinated events to leverage our impact. 

The work of the Inter-Agency ADR Working Group was noted for its 

effort to share resources within the community. www.adr.gov for more 

information.

3. A member wished us all a happy, healthy and safe Thanksgiving.
UNCLASSIFIED

4

UNCLASSIFIED

Attendees:

In-Person

Berg, Mollie -National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency

Dea, Joanne -United States Department of Agriculture

Deyo, Scott –Department of Energy

Hill, Gary- National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency

Kinnavy, Noreen – United States Agency for Global Media

Maurer, Bill – Department of Energy

Perez, Neida –Organization of American States

Chad, (need last name) –Department of Energy

Call-In

Balick, Howard, FDA

Bedlivy, Dawn –National Security Agency

Bell, Alana –Transportation Security Administration

Behr, Virginia – Department of Health and Human Services

Berg, Mollie -National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency

Bookstein, Monique –Federal Bureau of Investigation

Byron, Jason –National Institutes of Health

Coleman, Jean – US Small Business Administration

Day-Lewis, Kimberley – Department of Homeland Security

Doyle, Bill- U.S. Secret Service

Fox, Angela -United States Department of Agriculture

Gordon, Laurel -–United States Marshals Service

Hurley, Nathan – Department of Health and Human Services

Larkins, Marcia – Department of Health and Human Services

Lenkel, Laurie – Department of Health and Human Services

Levine, Lisa –Department of Justice

McGuire, Carrie – Office of Government Information Services

McNeil, Tracey –United States Securities and Exchange Commission

Merrix, Celeste – Department of Homeland Security

Michael, David – Department of Health and Human Services

Milner, Heather – Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

Murphy, Martha – National Archives and Records Administration 

Rippy, Katherine – Department of Health and Human Services

Roman, Rafael –National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Semo, Alina – National Archives and Records Administration

Skodacek, Ken –Food and Drug Administration

Smith, Tyler – Department of Health and Human Services

Stukes, Jock - National Reconnaissance Organization

Todd, Julie –Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Weber, Guy - National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency

Wolfe, Lexi – Small Business Administration