A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Coalition of Federal Ombudsmen 

A UNIFIED MODEL FOR 

DEVELOPING AN 

OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Website: http://www.federalombuds.ed.gov/

1 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.......................................................................................................3 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................4 

CHAPTER 1: DESCRIPTION OF THE MODEL....................................................................5 

CHAPTER 2: VALUE-ADDED BY THE OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION ..............................7 

CHAPTER 3: KEY PROGRAM DEFINITIONS AND VALUES........................................12 

CHAPTER 4: DEVELOPING & EXECUTING AN OMBUDSMAN PROGRAM.............18 

CHAPTER 5: PROGRAM OPERATIONS............................................................................30 

CHAPTER 6: MAINTAINING AND REFINING THE PROGRAM....................................37 

CHAPTER 7: THE IMPORTANCE OF STANDARDS .......................................................43 

APPENDIX A: WORKSHOP FOR DEVELOPING AND IMPLEMENTING.....................46 

APPENDIX B: A COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS FOR THE OMBUDS OFFICE AT 

EASTWEST.............................................................................................................................51

APPENDIX C: SAMPLE PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT FROM THE U.S. 

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY...........................................................................................57 

APPENDIX D: POLICIES AND PROCEDURES: SAMPLE DOCUMENTS......................60 

APPENDIX E: POSITION DESCRIPTION...........................................................................85 

APPENDIX F: OMBUDSMAN GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS...................................90 

APPENDIX G: A GUIDE FOR FEDERAL EMPLOYEE OMBUDS ...................................93 

APPENDIX H: EEO/ADR/OMBUDSMAN FLOWCHART COMPARISON....................109 

2
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

TOP

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 

A Unified Model for Developing an Ombudsman Function was drafted through a 

coordinated effort of members of the Coalition of Federal Ombudsmen. Special thanks 

go to Edith Barton for significant general, structural and logistical support. Suggestions 

and feedback from many members have provided valuable input, thus the greatest 

recognition should go to the collective members of the Coalition itself. Without them, 

this document would not exist, nor would it be as accurate or helpful. 

3
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

TOP

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

In recent years, as the value of an ombudsman program has become apparent, many 

governmental, private sector, and academic organizations have chosen to design and 

implement a program. The reasons for this development are varied and are discussed in 

Chapter 2 of this manual. Simply stated, almost any organization can benefit from the 

informal dispute prevention and resolution processes offered by Ombudsmen. Benefits 

include improved organizational performance, avoidance of costly formal actions, 

correction of systemic problems and improved employee morale. Numerous 

psychological studies have demonstrated that if morale improves, productivity also 

improves. 

This manual provides a roadmap for structuring and implementing ombudsman programs 

that are an organizational “best fit” whether the program is a workplace program or 

oriented toward external parties. The model is most effectively applied when facilitated 

by outside ombudsman subject matter experts. 

This manual provides a roadmap for structuring and implementing an ombudsman 

program that is an organizational “best fit” whether the program is a workplace program 

or oriented toward external parties. 

4
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

TOP

CHAPTER 1: DESCRIPTION OF THE MODEL 

A. Structure of the Model 

An effective ombudsman function can be developed for almost any organization, but 

there is no single program structure appropriate for all (or even most) organizations. 

There is, in fact, a large array of possible organizational ombudsman program structures. 

Ombudsman programs must be carefully tailored to properly fit the specific culture and needs of each 

organization. 

B. Using the Model 

The model offers an active, participatory approach for organizations that wish to develop 

an ombudsman function. It recognizes that the project team best qualified to determine 

an effective ombudsman program structure at any given organization includes the people 

who work for that organization in consultation with external ombudsman experts. The 

people who work for an organization are the ones who best understand the organization’s 

vision, mission, culture, and overall business environment. In applying the model, an 

appropriate project team can design a unique program structure with a high probability of 

success. The process enables an organization to make sound decisions regarding the 

structure of their ombudsman program so that it is both appropriate for complaint and 

problem resolution needs, and integrated into existing business programs and formal 

problem resolution processes. A logical and practical ombudsman program is built 

through informed implementation of specific principles (neutrality, confidentiality, 

independence, etc.) by experienced personnel from that organization with the assistance 

of experienced ombudsman practitioners. 

5
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

 

The project team best qualified to determine effective program structure at any 

organization includes the people who work for that organization in consultation with 

external experts. 

6
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

TOP

CHAPTER 2: VALUE-ADDED BY THE OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

A. Identifying the Value-Added. 

The importance of establishing and communicating the value that an ombudsman 

program adds to the overall organization cannot be exaggerated. In today’s business 

environment, right-sizing, downsizing, economizing and outsourcing seem to be the 

rule. It is absolutely essential to the effectiveness and survival of the new program that 

products and services that add value to the organization are both implemented and 

communicated throughout the organization. In this connection, at some point the 

ombudsman organization should undertake development of a cost-benefit process. An 

approach to ombudsman cost-benefit analysis is included at Appendix B.

It is absolutely essential to the effectiveness and survival of the new program that 

products and services that add value to the organization are identified. 

B. The Program Charter 

To a great extent, the products and services that an Ombudsman organization provides 

are determined and driven by the nature of the ombudsman charter or mandate. The 

charter is a formal document that documents the existence of the office and establishes 

it. Approved by Congress, the organization’s Chairman, Director, President, 

Administrator or other top official, it formally establishes the office, describes its 

mission and functions, specifies Ombudsman “deliverables” (products and services) and 

creates (ideally) a direct reporting line to the organization’s top manager. The 

ombudsman program charter may limit the ombudsman to internal or external 

callers/visitors, a specific business area (or several) or a specific area of need 

7 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

(contracting); or the charter may implement a broad program providing many services to 

both internal and external contacts simultaneously. It depends on the charter! 

C. Products and Services 

Chief among value-added ombudsman products and services are dispute prevention and 

dispute resolution, conflict management and problem resolution. From an organizationwide perspective, creation of an ombudsman program sends a strong message to 

customers and employees that management 1) cares about them, and 2) seeks to provide 

effective and equitable dispute resolution. In addition, there are many other ombudsman 

products and services that add value, save resources, and contribute substantially to the 

organization. 

From an organization-wide perspective, creation of an ombudsman program sends a 

strong message to customers and employees that management cares about them. 

The products and services offered by an ombudsman program will vary from 

organization to organization and so will the specific types of value. They depend on the 

ombudsman charter, internal or external role, pre-existing conflict management services 

offered, reporting level, degree of management support, union/non-union environment, 

type of ombudsman (classical/organizational), operating environment (bureaucratic, 

unstructured) and other factors. The specific program notwithstanding, Ombudsman 

programs, if implemented carefully, can add value to management, the organization, and 

customer groups. 

The ombudsman provides products and services to managers, the organization, and 

customer groups. 

8 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

1. Management Services

a. Serve as an “early warning system” for managers. When process or 

policy problems are identified early, they can often be resolved before 

they become acute, thus preventing major disruptions. There is a much 

higher probability that problems will be resolved to the satisfaction of 

many when they are addressed at an early stage. In addition, when 

problems are identified early, they can often be resolved before 

productivity suffers or profit declines. 

b. Provide an office that managers/officials can approach for neutral 

assistance. The ombudsman can confidentially (no identifiers) provide 

useful feedback or reporting on business products and services (to the 

extent it is captured in the ombudsman data base tracking system). 

c. Through informal facilitation or mediation, help avert actions that can be 

extremely costly and damaging to the workplace, such as litigation or 

violence in the workplace. 

d. Help increase awareness of key issues or problems in the organization. 

When trends emerge, they can be shared with managers through routine 

reporting, as long as confidentiality is preserved, as appropriate. 

e. Make recommendations (workplace or business-oriented) that managers 

can use to take appropriate actions, that otherwise they would not have 

known were needed. 

f. Provide mechanisms for confidential feedback on operating programs. 

Organizations can request that the ombudsman provide confidential focus 

groups or facilitation services that will provide feedback on operating 

programs that would not otherwise have been available. 

g. Identify rumors that can be addressed through management 

communications. Serve as an information resource regarding rumors and 

assist management in providing information to employees. 

2. Customer Services

a. Provide an identifiable and accessible focal point for receiving 

complaints of any kind. This enhances trust of the organization by both 

employees and customers (depending on the focus of the ombudsman 

program). The ombudsman’s guarantees of confidentiality (to the limits 

of the law) with no fear of reprisal, and neutrality are unique services. 

b. Enhance morale and increase productivity (internal programs). 

c. Establish an informal channel of inquiry for those contacts who do not 

wish to pursue a formal channel. Informal channels are usually quicker, 

less disruptive or costly compared to more complicated and lengthy 

formal channels. 

d. Channel people to the correct process or formal procedure (outside of the 

ombudsman role), when appropriate, if the inquirer does not know what 

options are available. 

e. Provide services to all with no regard for position or type of issue 

(customers, employees, management, customers, contractors, regulated 

9 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

entities, etc). 

f. Furnish a channel of access to records and management officials to those 

who are not aware of their options. 

g. Provide a location where individuals can “be heard.” A frequent 

component of dissatisfaction, low morale and violent acting out is a 

perception of “never having been heard.” 

h. Provide a neutral source of confidential assistance for all types of 

problems (e.g. service-driven (customer), management, peer-to-peer, 

organizational) that is interest-driven rather than rights-driven. 

i. Provide inquirers or customers a place of last resort, when other 

recognized problem assistance processes have failed. 

3. Organizational Services

a. Provide a source of assistance for all business and administrative areas. 

The ombudsman’s charter, if drafted properly, prevents organizational 

isolation. He/she can assist all or several parts of the organization 

simultaneously or independently on a one-to-one basis. 

b. Review and resolve problems that cut across administrative or business 

functions, and recommend a broad or cross-functional remedy if a 

generalized problem or systemic difficulty emerges. 

c. Save the organization significant resources by enabling the organization 

to eliminate unfair processes and improve inefficient 

business/administrative processes. 

d. Be recognized as an “authority” that can evaluate issues, and recommend 

options after an impartial review of the matter (sometimes the fact that a 

review is occurring leads to a resolution of the problem). 

e. Create trust. The existence of an effective ombudsman function sends a 

strong message that management is serious about problem prevention and 

resolution. This alone can sometimes enhance morale and increase 

productivity. 

f. Support quality control through identification and resolution of systemic 

or process problems. 

g. Provide a means of internal control. Areas of vulnerability can be 

identified and corrections implemented before severe difficulties arise 

(e.g. accounting, contracting or auditing abuse; violence in the 

workplace; discrimination, litigation, productivity, etc.). 

h. Help reduce the severity of penalties to the organization that may result 

from litigation (private sector). If litigation is pursued, monetary 

penalties recommended by the Uniform Sentencing Guidelines can be 

significantly reduced when an ombudsman function is in place and 

operating effectively. An established ombudsman program demonstrates 

the intent of the organization to prevent problems and resolve disputes 

fairly and in a timely and effective manner. This established and 

verifiable intent may result in substantially reduced penalties in the event 

of a negative court ruling. 

10 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

i. Save valuable resources by preventing disputes and resolving them 

informally in lieu of costly litigation. 

j. Improve the image of the organization. No matter the outcome, inquirers 

are left with the conviction that a fair “hearing” has taken place. 

k. Assist other organizational components (e.g. EEO, union, EAP, etc.) 

when problems fall outside their role (e.g. communication issues, peerto-peer work problems, teamwork issues, etc.). 

4. Options 

The products and services mentioned in the context of value are options that may be built 

into the basic ombudsman program (internal or external) and documented in the 

ombudsman charter. Depending on the individual organization, they may or may not be 

appropriate or achievable. Specific services should be included in the ombudsman 

charter only after careful consideration of how they will be integrated into the current 

organization. For example, if an organization’s human resources area offers facilitation 

services for meetings, then the ombudsman may choose not to; similarly, if mediation for 

specific issues is already available under the auspices of a mediation program, then the 

ombudsman role may not need to include that service. The next chapter provides an 

overview of basic ombudsman program components that should, at a minimum, be 

considered before the program is implemented. 

Specific services should be included in the ombudsman charter only after careful 

consideration of how they will be integrated into the current organization. 

11 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

TOP

CHAPTER 3: KEY PROGRAM DEFINITIONS AND VALUES 

Introduction: Only in recent years has the ombudsman profession become prevalent in 

the United States. The role as we know it has existed since 1809 when the Swedish 

legislature (the Riksdag) created a “citizen’s protector” to investigate citizen complaints 

against the government. In this country, the role of ombudsman varies to a great extent. 

Customer or contact groups vary considerably across organizations. How the ombudsman 

is selected, the functions he/she performs, and even what the ombudsman is called can 

stray significantly form the original Swedish concept. Although these variations exist, 

there are certain commonalties that are shared across ombudsman practitioners. The 

purpose of this Section is to discuss the history of the profession briefly, the types of 

ombudsmen, and the traits that are shared by all those who are generally recognized as 

ombudsmen. 

Ombudsman: An Ombudsman is a neutral party who is trained to confidentially, 

neutrally and independently prevent or resolve problems, complaints or issues brought to 

him/her by individuals or groups, and to bring about systematic change where needed. 

Although there is variation across ombudsmen functions, there are certain critical 

elements shared by all ombudsman programs. 

Types of Ombudsmen: There are two major types of ombudsmen generally 

recognized: classical and organizational. Some characteristics of the 2 major 

types appear below. For an excellent description of some of the diverse 

ombudsman designations, refer to the ABA Ombudsman Standards. 

12 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

a. Classical: 

- Created by law; 

- Generally appointed by legislative bodies; 

- Receive complaints about acts of government agencies; 

- Designated neutrals; 

- Often have the power of subpoena; and 

- Perform formal investigations 

b. Organizational 

- May or may not be created by law; 

- Not appointed by legislative bodies; 

- Often serve internal staff; 

- May serve external parties [e.g. clients of the organization, or in the 

case of government, a regulated group]; 

- Handle problems and complaints informally; 

- Designated neutrals; and 

- Perform informal reviews – do not investigate. 

 c. Other Types (as identified by the ABA...and others) 

- Legislative 

- Executive 

- Advocate 

- Long-Term Care 

- Acquisition Ombudsmen 

B. Program Components: 

i. Neutrality: The importance of neutrality to the ombudsman role cannot be 

over-emphasized. There is no room to “bend” neutrality. If the program 

structure allows for “representation of” or “taking the side of” any inquirer, it is 

departing from generally accepted ombudsman practice, and therefore, strictly 

speaking, is not an ombudsman program. Ombudsmen can “take the side of” 

fair process, but absolutely cannot become the representative of any contact or 

“take the side of” an inquirer. A clear understanding of neutrality is essential, 

and it must be actively applied at all times when one functions in the role of an 

13 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

ombudsman. All ombudsmen, both organizational and classical, strictly adhere 

to neutrality. 

If a program structure allows for “representation of” or “taking the side of” any inquirer, 

it is departing from generally accepted ombudsman practice. 

ii. Informality: Informality is vital to the role of an organizational ombudsman 

and the success of the program. There is a unique flexibility inherent in 

organizational ombudsman work since the ombudsman is contacted prior to the 

point where parties have assumed a public commitment regarding the issue/s. 

There is greater opportunity to gather information and explore options at this 

point because contacts have not committed themselves to a particular avenue or 

strategy. Any findings, recommendations, or actions can be explored in an 

informal manner. Organizational ombudsmen distance themselves from 

inquirers or issues that are in formal process, since it can result in requests for 

information (e.g. discovery, subpoena, FOIA, Privacy Act, etc.) that may 

compromise confidentiality. Note that classical ombudsmen typically offer 

formal mediation, engage in formal processes and develop formal, public 

reports. 

Ombudsman work has a unique flexibility since the Ombudsman is contacted prior to the 

parties assuming a public commitment. 

iii. Confidentiality: 

a. Establishing and maintaining confidentiality is of critical importance 

to the ombudsman. Many times, assurance of confidentiality is the 

sole reason contacts will call the ombudsman’s office. As an 

alternative to other more formal processes, assurance of confidentiality 

14 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

along with neutral assessment of issues and disputes are characteristics 

that make the ombudsman function unique. Ways in which an 

ombudsman can endeavor to preserve confidentiality include: 

i. Avoiding the creation of any records unless absolutely necessary 

to conducting business; 

ii. Maintaining records that cannot be accessed by name or personal 

identifier; 

iii. Discarding informal notes and other non-record materials related 

to case issues once they have been resolved. 

iv. Maintaining a code of silence about who is or isn’t using the 

Ombudsman Office; and 

v. Refusing to testify (to the extent possible) if the case 

subsequently goes into litigation. 

b. The resolve of confidentiality also applies when the ombudsman is 

requested to come forward to testify in a court of law. Many ombudsmen 

have found themselves in a difficult situation by refusing to obey such a 

request. This is why it is vital for any organization to carefully consider 

the issue of confidentiality early in the ombudsman program 

development cycle. Ombudsmen recognize the value of confidentiality 

and attempt to uphold it even in a court of law. 

c. Confidentiality then, is an ombudsman value that makes the ombudsman 

role unique, and which is often not offered by other, more formal 

processes. Formal dispute processes do not guarantee confidentiality 

under all circumstances as does the ombudsman (except in cases of 

harmful or illegal activity). This is a vital difference, which is 

indispensable to the role of the ombudsman, since maintaining 

confidentiality is essential to eliminating the possibility of retribution or 

retaliation toward the contact. 

d. Although ombudsmen strive to maintain absolute confidentiality 

regarding contact, the standards of practice within the ombudsman 

profession have resulted in one exception to this pledge of 

15 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

confidentiality. An ombudsman will not hesitate to report any threat to 

someone’s physical safety. If there is a serious threat to property, it will 

be reported. In the federal government, evidence of criminal activity, 

waste, or abuse of power, are reported to the Inspector General. When 

people contact the Office of the Ombudsman for assistance, they should 

be apprised of these exceptions to absolute confidentiality. 

e. Classical ombudsmen also maintain confidentiality, but offer formal 

mediation, including identifiers, and participate in formal processes. 

They also develop reports that include specific information related to 

parties, process and recommendations. 

Many times, assurance of confidentiality is the sole reason that an individual will call. 

Ombudsmen recognize the value of confidentiality and uphold it even in a court of law. 

iv. Independence: An enabling attribute of an effective ombudsman is that he/she 

serves as an independent source of assistance. This means that the ombudsman 

is not dependent upon, nor does he/she report to functional managers or 

programs within the organization. This programmatic independence also 

ensures that the ombudsman has no conflict of interest. Since the ombudsman 

does not report to the organization’s business offices, it is unlikely that he/she 

will be influenced by the statements or activities of the senior managers in those 

offices. A related question, then, is “Who does the ombudsman report to?” The 

consensus of the ombudsman community is that the ombudsman function is 

much more effective if the ombudsman reports to a top-level manager. Since the 

ombudsman typically has no direct line authority, or decision making authority, 

the higher that he/she reports, the more effective he/she will be. Classical 

ombudsmen, like organizational ombudsmen, are independent of other 

organizational components and report to a high level official within the 

government, such as a state governor (U.S.), or a republic’s President or 

16 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Parliament (non-U.S.). 

Programmatic independence ensures that the ombudsman has no conflict of interest. The 

ombudsman does not report to the organization’s business offices, so it is unlikely that 

he/she will be influenced by the statements or actions of the senior managers of those 

offices. 

17 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

TOP

CHAPTER 4: DEVELOPING & EXECUTING AN OMBUDSMAN PROGRAM 

A. The Ombudsman Program Development Project: An effective ombudsman 

program is carefully researched, planned, and implemented like any systems project. The 

project is an effort to meet the unique problem resolution and conflict management 

requirements of the organization. All key program elements (such as neutrality, 

confidentiality, independence, reporting level, etc.) are carefully reviewed by the 

organization’s project team, management, and the ombudsman program owner to identify 

what form the elements will take and how the organization intends to incorporate them 

into the final program structure. As with any systems development effort, the 

organization’s program requirements must be accurately identified and documented, the 

system must be methodically designed and implemented, program assessment must be 

undertaken, and refinements must be made. Implementation of a preconceived 

ombudsman program that is not properly tailored to the culture of the organization will 

meet with resistance and provide limited value to clients or the organization. 

The Ombudsman Program Development Project is an effort to meet the unique problem 

resolution and conflict management needs of the organization. 

i. Using the Model: This model provides an active, participatory strategy 

for developing or refining an ombudsman function. The model is best 

applied with the assistance of a trained, third party facilitator or 

consultant, who is conversant with the principles of ombudsmanry. The 

approach recognizes that the people who are best qualified to define an 

effective ombudsman structure in any given organization are the people 

18 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

who work for that organization. They are the ones who best understand 

the organization’s mission, vision, culture, and overall business 

environment. The goal of the model is to achieve an ombudsman program 

“best fit” which will be certain to achieve buy-in from that organization’s 

top managers. The process enables an organization to make sound 

decisions regarding the structure of their ombudsman program so that it 

will: 

a. Incorporate the prerequisites of an ombudsman program 

(neutrality; 

b. programmatic independence and confidentiality); 

c. Meet customer needs; 

d. Add mission-related value; 

e. Fit within the established organizational structure; 

f. Avoid cost; and 

g. Provide needed services to business functions. 

The people who are best qualified to define an effective ombudsman program for any 

given organization are the people who work within that organization. 

ii. Components of the Model: The model consists of four major 

components: 1) Review of the key components of an ombudsman 

function; 2) Developing and implementing an organizational ombudsman 

program; 3) Program operations; 4) and Maintaining and refining the 

Program. The model represents a complete ombudsman program life 

cycle that begins with the program concept and includes: definition of 

ombudsman requirements, program development, implementation of 

operations, and program assessment and refinement within the context of 

the individual organization. 

19 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

The model is a complete ombudsman program life cycle that begins with the program 

concept and includes definition of key program elements, program design, operations, 

and refinement. 

iii. Key Components: At the initiation of the program and as program 

priorities evolve, review of key ombudsman program elements (neutrality, 

informal process, confidentiality and independence) should be undertaken. 

The review should include all major stakeholders. Chapter 3 includes a 

brief discussion of some of the major aspects of these elements. 

Following this review, the organization can identify if the current weight 

and direction of the program is effective. Organizations creating a new 

ombudsman function use this review to determine the form and direction 

for these key elements. 

Review and assessment of key ombudsman program elements should be undertaken 

periodically and should include all major stakeholders. 

iv. Developing and Executing the Program: An effective ombudsman 

program is carefully researched, planned, and implemented like any 

systems project. The project must meet the unique problem resolution and 

conflict management requirements of the organization. All key program 

elements (such as neutrality, confidentiality, independence, reporting 

level, etc.) are carefully reviewed by the organization’s management team 

and the ombudsman program owner to identify what form they will take 

and how the organization intends to incorporate them into the final 

program structure. As with any systems development effort, the 

20 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

organization’s program requirements must be accurately identified and 

documented, the system must be methodically designed and implemented, 

program assessment must be undertaken, and refinements must be made. 

Implementation of a preconceived ombudsman program that is not 

properly tailored to the needs of the organization will meet with resistance 

and provide limited value to the clients or the organization. 

Implementation of a preconceived ombudsman program not properly tailored to the needs 

of the organization will provide limited value to the intended clients of the organization. 

v. Conducting the Sessions. Based on experience gained from assisting 

several organizations in developing and refining their programs, the model 

strongly encourages securing a skilled facilitator or consultant to guide the 

development process. This speeds the process and contributes to 

developing a realistic yet high quality program structure. A facilitator 

guides the organization’s managers through the process illustrated in 

Table 1 over a period of approximately 1 to 2 days (time frame may vary). 

As the process moves forward, the decisions of the project team are 

documented. Products are reviewed as the process moves forward to 

ensure that everyone agrees with how the program is being defined. Over 

the course of the development effort an ombudsman program structure is 

defined that is appropriate to the culture of the individual organization. 

The facilitator ensures that all important topics are covered, key decisions 

made, and the draft program approved. After the program is defined, a 

proposal is sent forward for final management approval, as appropriate. 

21 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Table 1 shows the phases that make up the Ombudsman Program 

Development process. 

Over the course of the development effort an ombudsman program structure is defined 

that is appropriate to the culture of the individual organization. 

22 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Ombudsman Program Design 

Brainstorming Outline 

Goals Program Structure Stakeholders Mechanics 

1. What is the purpose 

of establishing an 

ombudsman function? 

What do you wish to 

accomplish? 

2. What are the 

outcomes you want to 

achieve? 

3. How will you know 

the program is 

successful? – Metrics 

4. What are the 

products and services 

you will provide? 

1. Who are the 

customers? 

2. Roles? 

3. Functions? 

4. Goals? 

5. Mission? 

6. Vision? 

7. Values? 

8. Barriers, 

opportunities, threats, 

potential pitfalls. How 

to avoid/manage. 

9. Sacred cows, 

parameters. 

1. Who is critical to 

your success? 

2. What are the existing 

dispute processes? 

3. Buy-in/involvement 

required of stakeholders 

for success? 

4. Ask customers what 

they want? 

5. Education re: 

ombudsmanry is needed 

for stakeholders. 

1. Time frames. 

2. Plan for 

design/implementation 

3. Protocols and 

processes. 

4. Resources (funding, 

equipment, 

telephone, etc.). 

5. Policies. 

6. Procedures. 

7. Training – staff, 

stakeholders 

8. Awareness and 

Outreach – business 

areas, customers, 

employees 

Communications Planning – Who, What, When 

Key success factors/characteristics:

1. Clear/reliable support from top management 

2. Independent 

3. Neutral 

4. Confidential 

5. No authority 

6. Informal option 

7. Resources 

Stakeholders may 

include: 

Inquirers 

Management 

Employees 

Contractors 

Industry Groups 

Formal process owners 

Others? 

What is a reasonable 

and specific planning 

and implementation 

schedule for 

communication? 

23 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

B. Critical Considerations: As the project team steps through the program 

development process there are several key program decisions that must be carefully 

considered. These are discussed below.

Key program decisions must be considered during the development process. 

i. Management Support. A program that enjoys the support of top-level 

management has several important advantages over those that do not. The 

ombudsman program is immediately legitimized through this top-level 

buy-in and support. Although the organizational ombudsman does not 

typically have decision-making authority, this link to top management 

provides an “informal license” to review and participate in the resolution 

of difficult or sensitive issues that often cut across organizational lines. In 

addition, this structure avoids potential conflicts of interest that can arise if 

the Ombudsman reports to the manager of a single program area (i.e. 

personnel). Finally, reporting to a management level high within the 

organization enables the program to adapt or evolve as new issues arise or 

as the organization changes. 

Ombudsman programs that enjoy the support of top management have important 

advantages over those that do not have such support. 

ii. Stakeholder Identification. An effective organization-wide program will 

include all major stakeholders (e.g. human resources, union, top managers, 

legal, etc.) in the development of the process. Key requirements will be 

24 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

identified, operational processes will be discussed and refined, and 

essential buy-in will be secured. 

An effective development project includes all major stakeholders. 

iii. Program Diversity. Every ombudsman program is unique. The program 

development team must seek an ombudsman program “best fit” to 

correspond as closely as possible to the organization’s culture, to 

maximize the probability that the targeted ombudsman program objectives 

are met, and that ombudsman program products and services are provided. 

An effort to carefully identify and research these program elements, their 

importance and place within the program, and their overall direction early 

in the developmental effort is an invaluable investment that will eliminate 

or diminish setbacks that can emerge as the program begins operation and 

matures. Major considerations include: 

a. Will the program be an internal or external ombudsman program or 

a hybrid of the two? 

b. Will the program serve all potential constituencies or will it serve a 

designated population? 

c. What types of services will the program provide? 

d. What are the occupational needs (e.g. space, staffing, automation, 

etc.)? 

e. Will the program provide services to the entire organization or will 

it operate within one branch or department? 

f. Is full service implementation practical or does phased 

implementation make sense? 

g. Has a schedule been defined? What schedule is “best”? 

The Ombudsman program development team must seek an ombudsman program “best 

fit” to correspond as closely as possible to the organization’s culture. 

25 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

iv. Educating Stakeholders. Almost any new program that is placed within 

an existing organization will create suspicion and stress. An important 

ombudsman task is to educate the offices directly affected by its activities 

so that suspicion is dispelled and valuable services recognized. If the 

ombudsman can establish that the activities of the office will actually 

assist and enhance the performance of other organizational components, 

these offices will support the ombudsman and look to him/her as part of 

the team. Effective education of key stakeholders regarding the mission 

and goals of the ombudsman will begin the “buy-in” process. “Buy-in” 

refers to the point at which other offices believe that the ombudsman 

function makes sense, contributes to the organization, and should be 

sustained. 

An important ombudsman task is to educate the offices directly affected by its activities 

so that suspicion is dispelled and valuable services recognized. 

v. Developing Stakeholder Partnerships. 

a. Programmatic “buy-in” doesn’t just happen. Even in advance of 

providing support to other organizational components the 

ombudsman can begin to establish beneficial program relationships 

by initiating and nurturing formal and informal partnerships. For 

instance, before ombudsman program initiation, the development 

team should initiate meetings with Partnerships are agreements for 

the provision of services or support that are beneficial to one or 

both of the offices. They can be unwritten and de facto 

commitments of mutual support or more formal written agreements 

for the provision of very specific types of support or services. 

The ombudsman function should establish mutually beneficial program relationships by 

initiating and nurturing partnerships. 

26 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

b. Another pro-active step is to initiate or participate in the 

establishment of an organization-wide Conflict Management and 

Dispute Resolution Steering Committee. This committee is made 

up of members from all sources of conflict management and 

dispute resolution within the organization. Meetings are held to 

share information on issues and to exchange best practices. A key 

product of such a committee is the development of an 

understanding that no one function (e.g. Ombudsman, EAP, union, 

HR, etc.) is trying to “do it all.” There is enough “problem 

resolution pie” to go around. This realization helps to dispel “turf” 

misunderstandings and can enable positive, productive 

partnerships. 

vi. Execution Planning. Like any large-scale systemic effort, implementing 

the total program from day one may be difficult and risky. Consideration 

should be given to running a pilot program or using a phased approach. 

This allows the program to get its “sea legs” before attempting to operate a 

fully implemented program serving all targeted customers with a full 

range of services. A full range of services might be rolled out over a 

period of several months rather than immediately. How will customers 

contact the ombudsman? Are the facilities configured to properly and 

safely receive “walk-in” contacts? What types of records will be kept? 

Will the ombudsman provide management reports? How will 

confidentiality be maintained? Will there be formal outreach efforts to 

inform the contact group/s that the ombudsman is available. Will the 

office develop an annual report? Are there mechanisms in place to assist 

ombudsman staff to resolve difficult cases or casework situations? 

Whatever form the final implementation plan takes, it is important for as 

many top managers and stakeholders as possible to be allowed to 

contribute ideas or comments to the ombudsman program implementation 

27 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

plan. By contributing to the development of the program the organization 

has a vested interest in its success. The process of partnership building 

should begin before the office even opens its doors for business. 

Whatever form the final implementation plan takes, it is important for as many top 

managers and stakeholders as possible to contribute ideas or comments to the plan. 

vii. Program Execution. Education of the total organization and other 

business components is vital. The Ombudsman function must be viewed 

as both non-threatening and capable of adding value to the organization’s 

mission. Based on the research and training conducted earlier, basic 

policies and procedures are put in place and problem resolution and 

conflict management services are begun. A progressive ombudsman 

program recognizes that problem resolution and conflict management 

services are secondary to the actual prevention of problems and disputes. 

Trend analysis and tracking of emerging issues enable the ombudsman to 

take steps in conjunction with other organizational components to defuse 

potentially troublesome situations early and in some cases to actually 

prevent difficult and sensitive problems from arising or becoming severe. 

A careful and measured ombudsman program implementation is more 

desirable than a rapid one, since modest and consistent success is infinitely 

superior to the major embarrassment of an overly aggressive program 

implementation failure. 

A careful and measured ombudsman program implementation is more desirable than a 

rapid one, since modest and consistent success is infinitely superior to the major 

embarrassment of an overly aggressive program implementation failure. 

28 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

viii. Assessing and Refining the Program. Any program must include 

mechanisms for gauging its progress. A valid program assessment process 

enables the ombudsman to reinforce strong program elements while 

simultaneously addressing areas in need of improvement. A periodic 

program assessment and refinement cycle not only provides the obvious 

benefits of increased effectiveness, but also provides the indirect benefits 

derived from the perception that the ombudsman improves overall 

organizational performance and assists in achieving the organization’s 

mission. Some methods of program assessment are: 

a. Customer satisfaction surveys; 

b. Cost/Benefit analysis; and 

c. Stakeholder Interviews. 

A valid program assessment process enables the ombudsman to reinforce strong program 

elements while simultaneously addressing areas in need of improvement. 

29 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

TOP

CHAPTER 5: PROGRAM OPERATIONS 

A. Overview of the Operating Program: The ombudsman program development 

effort must define specific needs of ombudsman operations. Although the basic building 

blocks for ombudsman operations are often not the most interesting parts of a program, 

they are the nuts and bolts that enable the ombudsman staff to carry out the program. 

Key categories that must be included in ombudsman program planning include: 

Although the basic building blocks for ombudsman operations may not be the most 

interesting topic, they are the nuts and bolts that enable the ombudsman to carry out the 

program. 

i. Administrative/Staffing resources; 

ii. Physical/Facilities Requirements; and 

iii. Policies and Procedures. 

B. Administrative Resources: These include the following.

i. Personnel Management Tools: 

a. Staffing authority/approvals; 

b. Position descriptions; 

c. Pay schedule; 

d. Other benefits; 

e. Employee evaluation tools; 

f. Professional development or training plans. 

ii. Fixtures/Furniture/Supplies; 

iii. Office Equipment (copier, shredder, etc.); 

iv. Budget and Accounting Tools; and 

v. Hardware/Software Resources: 

a. Case tracking database; 

30 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

b. Administrative systems; 

c. Telephone system; 

d. Standard software (word processing, graphics, etc.). 

B. Ombudsman “Grade” or Salary Level: An essential staffing consideration is 

salary level or “grade” of the Ombudsman. To enable consistently successful 

communications (e.g. staff and management will listen) at all levels, and to ensure that 

conflicts of interest do not arise, the Ombudsman herself/himself should always be an 

executive who is placed outside any existing business office or function, and who reports 

directly to the organization’s top management. Ombudsman specialists, assistants, 

deputies, support personnel, etc. can be graded at a level lower than executive, but it is 

essential for the Ombudsman, as program Director, to hold an executive position. 

The exact balance of resources and how they are managed will vary across organizations 

since they are all unique, and since each ombudsman program is tailored to the culture of 

the specific organization. To ensure effectiveness, the Ombudsman should always be at 

the executive level. 

C. Program Policies/Procedures: 

i. Policies: 

a. Ombudsman Charter/Roles and Responsibilities; 

b. Mission, vision and values; 

c. Statement of Values: Neutrality, Confidentiality, and 

Independence; 

d. Appeals of Decisions; 

e. Customer Service Standards; 

f. Records Creation/Retention; and 

g. Ombudsman Standards of Practice. Standards of practice are 

absolutely essential to the integrity of the program and its 

successful long-term operation. 

ii. Procedures: 

a. Hours of Operation; 

b. Case Management Procedures; 

c. Office/Staff Security; 

d. Systematic Change; and 

e. Media Inquiries. 

The appendix includes some examples of ombudsman program policies and procedures. 

31 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

D. Physical/Facilities Requirements: 

i. Office Space; 

ii. Secured Doors/Windows and Alarms; 

iii. Utilities/Overhead; and 

iv. Maintenance Agreements/Contracts. 

E. Enabling Characteristics: If an emerging ombudsman program has the support 

of top management, there will be fewer constraints on administrative, policy/procedure, 

and physical/facility program implementation. New programs should consider a budget 

strategy depending on how they wish to implement the program and how they envision 

the growth of the program. It is tempting to acquire space, equipment, systems, etc. if the 

funding is available. However, a slow program roll out will often be most successful. 

The ombudsman function should be implemented slowly and carefully as managers 

across the organization identify the benefits of the program and buy-in is secured.

The ombudsman function should usually be implemented slowly and carefully as 

managers across the organization identify the benefits of the program and buy-in is 

secured. 

F. Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities: The individuals selected must have attributes 

associated with successful ombudsmen. A generic ombudsman position description used 

in the federal government is included in the appendix. 

These attributes include. 

i. Good Listening Skills; 

ii. Established Analytical Ability; 

iii. Concern for Fairness; 

32 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

iv. Effective Stress Management Skills; 

v. Knowledge of organizational business lines. 

G. Case Intake and Management: 

i. A fundamental and necessary function of the office is to take calls or meet 

with contacts for the purpose of accepting cases problem resolution. Since 

an ombudsman is an informal source of assistance, the office DOES NOT 

accept cases that are engaged in the following formal processes: 

a. Union action; 

b. Administrative grievance; 

c. EEO casework; 

d. OIG activities; 

e. MSPB action; or 

f. Other agency appeals processes. 

ii. In the course of case intake and handling, the ombudsman provides a wide 

array of neutral and confidential problem resolution and complaint 

management services that are not offered by traditional service 

organizations. The ombudsman can: 

a. Provide information or identify resources confidentially; 

b. Provide answers to specific questions 

c. both neutrally and confidentially; 

d. Serve as an informal channel of inquiry for those who do not wish 

to pursue formal channels; 

e. Enable individuals to obtain access to records or management; 

f. Provide a location where contacts can be heard 

(conciliation/venting); 

g. Identify and explore unique options for problem or complaint 

resolution; 

h. Offer facilitation/mediation services; and 

i. Enable contacts to help themselves. 

If a contact verbalizes intent or displays behavior that strongly demonstrates or implies 

that they are a danger to themselves or others, the ombudsman must report this to the 

33 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

security office, an Office of the Inspector General or another appropriate authority. 

H. Reporting Issues and Trends: In the course of communicating and managing 

casework, the ombudsman will have the opportunity to identify and analyze 

organizational issues and trends. In reporting issues and trends the ombudsman provides 

an entirely different set of products and services. It is vital to recognize that the values of 

neutrality and confidentiality apply just as strictly in providing these services to managers 

as they do in providing services to single contacts. These services include:

i. Neutral review and reporting on issues and trends that are specific to 

organizational business areas; 

ii. Serving as an “early warning system” to alert managers of potential 

difficulties before they become full-blown problems; 

iii. Providing confidential feedback on operating programs; 

iv. Identifying new or revised operational needs that become apparent 

through problem resolution and complaint management activities; 

v. Identifying solutions that cut across organizational lines; 

vi. Serving as an information resource and a control center for unfounded and 

destructive rumors; 

vii. Saving resources through early intervention in potential problems before 

they escalate into major issues. 

The values of neutrality and confidentiality apply just as strictly in providing trend 

analysis reports to managers as they do in providing services to single contacts. 

I. Program Outreach: 

34 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

i. If time and budget allow, an ombudsman program will benefit from a 

carefully planned and managed outreach program. In providing 

educational or support services to other organizational components or 

outside groups, it is essential for the ombudsman to avoid creating the 

impression that the office is “creating problems to solve” or seeking to 

compete with other offices within the organization. If this impression is 

given, the ombudsman will lose goodwill and create an adversarial 

environment. Outreach activities can serve to announce the role of the 

ombudsman and provide an avenue for individuals and groups to approach 

the office. It is a public venue in which the ombudsman can communicate 

the kinds of goods and services it provides and channel individuals and 

groups to the appropriate source of services within the organization. 

If the ombudsman creates the impression during outreach that the ombudsman function is 

competing with other offices, he/she will lose goodwill and create an adversarial 

environment. 

ii. Outreach is accomplished by providing printed materials to or verbally 

communicating with outside parties. The information provided describes 

the kinds of services the ombudsman provides and the channels that can be 

used to obtain services. A creative ombudsman office will find that the 

opportunities for effective outreach are nearly limitless. Some examples 

are: 

a. Print and distribute informational letters, brochures, and flyers that 

describe the office; 

35 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

b. Speak at informal events organized by both internal and external 

organizations; 

c. Assist with panels, round table discussions, and focus groups; 

d. Support task groups and work groups that are created to solve 

problems; 

e. Serve on formal committees; 

f. Attend ongoing engagements and communicate with other 

organizational components to either achieve the organizational 

mission more efficiently or to avoid problems and disputes; and 

g. Create new opportunities for communication and create business 

partnerships within the organization. 

A creative ombudsman office will find that the opportunities for effective outreach are 

nearly limitless. 

36 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

TOP

CHAPTER 6: MAINTAINING AND REFINING THE PROGRAM 

A. Program Change: Organizations are not static. Like any other system, over 

time the mission, functions, needs, and internal dynamics change. From the beginning, 

ombudsman program staff should anticipate organizational change and a corresponding 

evolution of ombudsman functions. As the organization changes, the Ombudsman 

function needs to evaluate the nature and extent of the changes and adjust in parallel, or 

at a later point, if appropriate. The program should be structured to allow for this 

adjustment, and mechanisms should be in place to facilitate change. Partnerships and 

working relationships, when long-standing and mutually beneficial, enable the 

ombudsman to assume new functions or new roles. An ombudsman function that is 

perceived as overly reactionary or interventionist will not have the organizational support 

needed to expand, assume new roles, or perhaps, to survive in the long term. Since the 

Ombudsman Program is typically an informal source of assistance, and is successful to 

the degree that logic and persuasion are used effectively, the most effective mechanisms 

for change are not unilateral or aggressive, but are positive and supportive. They are 

institutionalized into the program at an early stage and allow for gradual evolution or 

adjustment through trust, consensus, partnership, and mutual gain. Measures likely to 

assist the program evolution include:

Partnerships and working relationships, when long-standing and mutually beneficial, 

enable the ombudsman to assume new functions or assume new roles. 

The most effective vehicles for change are not unilateral or aggressive, they are positive 

and supportive. 

37 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

B. Maintaining Management Support. Management support for the Ombudsman 

Program enhances the ability to assume new roles. Since the ombudsman is an informal 

source of assistance, top-level management support is important. It provides significant 

credibility and “license” which enable program change when needed. A reporting line to 

top management lends credibility and a certain “weight” to the ombudsman’s role, but 

other methods for building organizational support must be employed for the ombudsman 

to maintain an effective, long-term program. 

Top-level management support provides significant credibility and “license” which 

enables program change when needed. 

C. Organization-Wide Communications Network. When key managers and 

contacts throughout the organization have effective and satisfying interaction with the 

ombudsman, they are more likely to support program change and ombudsman activity in 

new program areas. Key causes of the lack of support from other program areas are: 

failure to communicate, failure to support other organizational components, and failure to 

recognize management as a customer. To the degree that the ombudsman builds effective 

organization-wide communication, ombudsman operations will be smoother, and 

organizational disputes will be avoided.

When key managers and contacts throughout the organization have effective and 

satisfying interaction with the Ombudsman, they are more likely to support program 

change and ombudsman activity in new program areas. 

D. Mechanisms for facilitating Program Change. 

38 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

i. Partnerships. As a facilitator of communication and cooperation, the 

ombudsman function assists in creating informal and formal partnerships 

among organizational components. Partnerships which have been 

successful and beneficial to other organizations create a precedent for 

smooth and effective relationships with the ombudsman. Concerted 

efforts to establish the ombudsman as a facilitator of partnership building 

has positive by-product of encouraging other organizations to “partner” 

with the ombudsman when new roles or functions are needed. 

Partnerships which have proven to be successful and beneficial to other organizations 

create a precedent for smooth and effective relationships with the ombudsman in the 

future. 

ii. “Policy of Least Intervention.” An ombudsman should attempt to 

resolve problems or disputes by enlisting the actions of the individual, 

manager, or organization closest to the problem. In addition, the 

ombudsman does to necessarily presume to “know the answer to the 

problem” but rather helps or enables the one closest to the problem to 

affect the solution. Through this approach the least disruptive and least 

costly solution is usually achieved. Managers or others should only be 

contacted when this “lowest level” approach is ineffective. In addition, by 

resolving problems at the level closest to the dispute the potential for 

perceived threat or intrusion by the ombudsman is minimized, since the 

ombudsman doesn’t seek the attention of high-level managers and does 

not presume to “know the business” better than the owner of that office or 

39 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

function. In fact, the contact or business owner is almost always capable 

of bringing about successful change. Who is better able than the problem 

“owner” or business owner to bring about needed change once the 

problem has been identified? Use of the “policy of least intervention” by 

the ombudsman will project an image of an “organization-oriented” helper 

or enabler. This approach decreases perceived threats and over time 

allows the ombudsman program to evolve and to expand successfully, 

since managers or other offices do not feel threatened. 

By resolving problems at the level closest to the dispute the potential for “perceived 

threat” or intrusion by the ombudsman is minimized. 

iii. Consensus Building. The ombudsmen must establish a reputation as a 

consensus-builder and facilitator. When this is accomplished, program 

changes will be viewed as less threatening. A consensus-builder is not 

likely to be viewed as turf-conscious or threatening. Consensus building 

should also be used as a day-to-day method for informing and working 

with other managers to effect systemic change. Before a need for change 

or new initiatives begin the ombudsman should meet with key managers 

and discuss what the requirement is, why it arose, why a systemic change 

is needed, and what the benefits will be for all concerned. This is 

especially important when change involves a departure from the 

established ombudsman role or expanding the authority of the 

ombudsman. All mechanisms for ombudsman program flexibility will be 

critical when such a change is needed. If other program areas are 

40 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

threatened change will be difficult. If the ombudsman has been perceived 

as an “oversight authority” that intervenes in non-ombudsman business 

areas, there will be resistance to systemic change, especially if it involves 

an expansion of the role or authority of the ombudsman. The effort to 

build flexibility into the ombudsman program begins the day the function 

is established. Effective, non-threatening partnerships and a history of 

mutually beneficial business relationships are the basis for ombudsman 

program flexibility. 

If other program areas believe they are threatened, change will be difficult. 

iv. Provision of Valued Services. The Ombudsman who consistently 

provides valued services to other offices will have a greater likelihood of 

enlisting the aid of those offices when the ombudsman function seeks to 

implement new activities or expand its functions. Very simply, offices 

that add value and assist other organizations are in turn valued and 

supported. 

v. Dispute Avoidance and Problem Resolution: A mature and successful 

ombudsman program may reach a point where dispute and problem 

resolution workloads have been so effectively addressed that it is not 

necessary to emphasize that role. A parallel to this situation can be found 

in the legal discipline. In some government organizations the legal 

workload (e.g. federal administrative law) has fallen to such a degree that 

some (administrative law judges) believe that fewer judges will be needed, 

41 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

and that more fruitful careers might be in the practice of Alternative 

Dispute Resolution.1 Similarly, when the frequency of disputes and 

problems falls to a low level, there are those who say that ombudsman 

staffing can be reduced or that the function is not really needed. In fact, 

when organizations find themselves in this happy situation, they have the 

unique opportunity to focus their energies on the much more positive and 

fruitful pursuit of “dispute prevention.” 

a. Although the resolution of problems and disputes is both a 

perfectly sensible goal and a positive achievement, a “more 

sensible” goal (and a greater achievement) is the avoidance of 

disputes entirely. “Dispute prevention” reduces operational 

difficulties and dispute related expenditures to a minimum and 

allows management to focus on: effective planning, program 

development, operations, and the accomplishment of missions. 

b. To diminish or marginalize an ombudsman program at precisely 

the point when it can provide the most benefit to an organization 

simply doesn’t make sense. If the frequency of the problems and 

disputes declines, the ombudsman should be allowed and 

encouraged to emphasize facilitation of communications, liaison 

across internal and external organizations, building partnership, 

identify opportunities for organizational or programmatic 

improvement, facilitate of positive change, provide information, 

neutral fact-finding, and management reporting of organizational 

trends. 

The ombudsman who consistently provides valued services to other offices will have a 

greater likelihood of enlisting the aid of those offices. 

 

1

 Administrative Law Judge. Interview at the “ADR and the Legal Profession Conference.” February 

1998. 

42 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

TOP

CHAPTER 7: THE IMPORTANCE OF STANDARDS 

A. The Importance of Standards: The identification and implementation of 

ombudsman program standards appropriate to the organization are essential steps in 

implementing a strong program and in safeguarding long-term program integrity. The 

implementation effort associated with any new business function (in any part of an 

organization) should include the identification of pre-existing standards that should be 

implemented and a determination as to whether new standards are needed to operate the 

program consistently and effectively.

Ombudsman program standards not only provide a pre-established legal defense of the 

program, if needed, but also enable effective and consistent ombudsman operations for 

day-to-day use. 

i. Ombudsman programs must include the adoption of standards related to 

confidentiality, neutrality and independence, and typically include 

standards related to key operating functions such as communications, 

records management and case handling. First and foremost, standards 

officially establish the quality operating intent of the program and the 

conditions under which it operates. In the event of a legal challenge or 

subpoena, this official statement (of standards) establishes the essential 

values and constraints of the program so that confidentiality, neutrality 

and independence can be asserted and defended more effectively in a court 

of law. Secondly, standards provide benchmarks to all staff members for 

consistent conduct of the work of the office. Thus, ombudsman program 

standards not only provide a pre-established legal defense of the program, 

43 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

if needed, but also enable effective and consistent ombudsman operations 

for day-to-day use. 

ii. Many ombudsman organizations have implemented program standards. 

The International Ombudsman Association (IOA) provides an excellent 

starting point for any organization that is implementing ombudsman 

program standards, particularly internal programs. While some 

organizations use the IOA standards verbatim, other organizations may 

wish to augment them or adjust them to be appropriate for their 

ombudsman function. Under IOA standards, Ombudsmen do the 

following: 

a. Provide confidentiality to the fullest extent possible (most 

applicable in internal/workplace programs); 

b. Assert that there is privilege with respect to communications; 

c. Exercise discretion regarding whether to act upon a concern of 

someone contacting the office; 

d. May initiate action on a problem he/she perceives directly; 

e. Are designated neutrals and remain independent of the 

organization: 

f. Operate informally and as an off-the-record resource; 

g. Foster communication about the philosophy and function of the 

office; 

h. Provide feedback on trends, issues, policies and practices; 

i. Identify systemic issues and provide support for change; and 

j. Keep professionally current by pursuing continuing education and 

training. 

The International Ombudsman Association (IOA) provides an excellent starting point for 

any organization that is implementing ombudsman program standards. 

B. American Bar Association Standards: The American Bar Association (ABA) 

has also developed ombudsman standards. There are several advantages to using, or 

44 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

referring to, the ABA Standards: 1) They were developed by a respected organization that 

is known to many; 2) Ombudsman associations participated in the process; and 3) each 

type of ombudsman is discussed individually. However, it should be noted that not all 

provisions included in the ABA standards are endorsed by the IOA or other ombudsman 

associations. As with any set of standards, review them carefully before adopting them. 

The American Bar Association (ABA) has also developed ombudsman standards. 

C. Federal Ombudsman Standards: The Coalition of Federal Ombudsmen (CFO), 

in conjunction with approximately 40 federal agencies, and in coordination with the 

Interagency ADR Steering Committee, developed standards appropriate for U.S. federal 

Ombudsmen. Any federal ombudsman function should, at a minimum, review the CFO 

federal ombudsman standards to determine if they are appropriate for implementation for 

their office. There are specific legal provisions that apply to federal ombudsmen that do 

not apply to non-federal ombudsmen that make these standards particularly appropriate 

for those practitioners. Such legal provisions include: Privacy Act, Freedom of 

Information Act, Inspector General Act, and others. 

Any federal ombudsman function should, at a minimum, review the CFO federal 

ombudsman standards to determine if they are appropriate for implementation for their 

office. 

45 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Appendix A 

WORKSHOP FOR DEVELOPING AND IMPLEMENTING 

AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

TOP

46 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Appendix A 1

WORKSHOP FOR DEVELOPING AND IMPLEMENTING 

AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

PROGRAM SCHEDULE: DAY ONE 

1. Description and Discussion of the Model 

2. An Overview of The Ombudsman Function 

a. What is an Ombudsman? 

i. Classical 

ii. Organizational 

1. Examples of Ombudsman Programs 

2. What are the Products/Value Added? 

b. Ombudsman Values 

i. Independence 

ii. Neutrality 

iii. Confidentiality 

iv. Informal Strategies for Dispute Resolution ...or, Would You 

Rather be in Court? 

c. Ombudsman Privilege and Records Retention 

d. Services, Functions, Roles 

i. Active Listening: The Opportunity to be Heard 

ii. Providing Information 

iii. Referral 

iv. Developing Options 

v. Reality Checks 

vi. Help to Help themselves 

vii. Facilitation 

viii. Shuttle Diplomacy 

ix. Looking into the Problem: Neutral Fact-finding 

x. Formal/Informal Mediation 

xi. Generic Strategies for Problem Solving 

xii. Systemic Change 

xiii. Follow Through 

xiv. Management Reporting 

1. Change Agent 

2. “Early Warning system” 

xv. Video: Employee Problems 

47 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

e. Issues Not Handled by the Ombudsman 

i. Issues Related to Formal Appeals Processes 

ii. Litigation 

iii. Grievance 

iv. Adverse Action 

v. EEO Complaints 

vi. OIG Audits or Investigations 

vii. Union Issues 

f. Operations 

i. Policies and Procedures 

ii. Alternative Dispute Resolution 

iii. Case Management Meetings 

iv. Crisis Casework 

v. Reporting 

vi. Outreach 

vii. Partnerships 

viii. Case Tracking 

ix. Physical Environment 

x. Training 

xi. Participation in the Ombudsman Community 

Activity: Discussion of the role of the Ombudsman 

48 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

PROGRAM SCHEDULE: DAY TWO 

3. Defining an Ombudsman Program Appropriate For The Organization 

a. What is the purpose for Establishing an Ombudsman Function in Your 

Organization (Statement of the Problem)? 

Activity: Why Are You Establishing an Ombudsman Function? 

b. What are the goals? 

Activity: Establish the goals 

c. Who are the stakeholders? 

i. Who is Critical to Your Success? 

1. Management 

2. Personnel 

3. Union 

4. Customers 

ii. What are the existing processes? 

iii. What is Needed to Secure Stakeholder Buy-in? 

iv. Are You Going to Meet With Them? 

v. Educate Them? 

Activity: Identify Stakeholders 

d. What are your Products and Services? 

Activity: What is the Value for Your Organization? 

e. Ombudsman Program Issues that Must be Addressed: 

i. Who are the Customers? 

ii. Mission, Vision, Values 

iii. Role of the Ombudsman Versus Other Functions 

iv. Define the Characteristics of the Program: 

1. Neutral 

2. Confidential 

3. Independent 

4. Authority 

5. Management Support 

6. Level of Reporting 

v. Constraints 

vi. Sacred Cows (Priorities that cannot be changed)? 

Activity: Brainstorming Customers, Mission, Vision, Values 

49 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

f. Implementing the Ombudsman Function 

i. Top Level Sponsorship 

ii. Developing a Charter 

iii. Schedule 

iv. Action Plan 

v. Personnel 

vi. Employee Development 

vii. Policies and Procedures 

viii. Periodic Reporting 

ix. Space/Environment 

x. Equipment 

START SLOWLY! 

- Consider a Phased Implementation 

Activity: What is the Ombudsman Structure That Will Work for Your Organization? 

Activity: Develop Action Plan for Implementation 

g. Institutionalizing and Maintaining the Program 

i. Maintaining Ombudsman Values 

ii. Providing Useful/Valuable Services 

iii. Partnerships 

iv. External Support: Ombudsman Organizations 

50 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Appendix B 

A COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS FOR THE OMBUDS OFFICE AT EASTWEST 

TOP

51 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Appendix B 1

A COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS FOR THE OMBUDS OFFICE AT EASTWEST 

The Corporate Ombudsman Office 

Before going into the cost benefit analysis of the Ombuds office, let me quote the IOA’s 

(International Ombudsman Association’s) statement on the cost of an Ombuds office. 

“It is important to understand that an Ombudsman program is not a 

‘bottom line’ position. An Ombudsman does not exist to make a profit, 

and the significant value of such a program probably cannot adequately 

be measured in terms of whether it returns more in savings than it costs 

to operate the program. Fundamentally, an ombudsman program exists 

to serve further those principles that cannot satisfactorily be quantified 

nor subjected to a cost-benefit analysis. An Ombudsman exists to 

further the ends of justice, to promote a humane system of 

administration, to provide people with options for hearing concerns and 

for efficient redress of grievances. Thus even if we assume that the 

quantifiable benefits of an ombudsman program did not exceed the cost 

of the program, that would not mean that the program would be 

valueless or wasteful. It would simply mean that we finally succeeded 

in identifying the actual cost of the program, that is, the difference 

between the apparent cost and the quantifiable benefits. It would be 

necessary to weight the actual cost against the ultimate benefits of the 

program as a means for pursuit of justice and as forum to give a hearing 

to the concerns of human beings.”1

As mentioned above the role of Ombudspersons does not add profit to the corporation 

(bottom line) the analysis will focus on cost effectiveness. This can be argued using a 

few serious cases. An award involving wrongful termination or harassment can easily be 

$800, 000. Preventing just one such case is enough to pay for the Ombuds office. 

Increases in productivity, savings in management time or other expenditures, and the 

avoidance of litigation and/or other costs, certain justifies the cost of the office.

52 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Increase in Productivity

Industry data have shown that about 10-15 percent of the work force will contact an 

Ombudsman within a year2. If we assume a success rate of 30 percent, that is 30 percent 

of he complaints are resolved or people feel better after visiting with an Ombudsperson 

(i.e. a termination is avoided, employee’s previous level of productivity is regained, work 

team morale is greatly improved, or injuries reduced). For Eastwest Corporation that is 

roughly 325 people. If we use a conservative average cost of $80,000 per employee 

(wages, benefits, operating expenses, and overhead), a five percent increase in 

productivity of 325 employees would result in a benefit of $1,300,000 to the corporation. 

This is more than twice the cost of the Ombuds office. 

Management Savings

Cost savings’ contributions can also be looked at from the point of view of the senior 

management time savings that would occur if an Ombudsperson would diffuse a serious 

personnel problem that would have consumed senior managers’ time. It is realistic to 

estimate that managers at all levels would collectively spend 2 to 4 days on a case. This 

would be about two percent of one senior manager’s annual working time. If we assume 

a full cost of a senior manager’s time to be $200,000, the annual cost savings attributable 

to the Ombuds office would be $4,000 per case. If half the cases that an Ombuds office 

had any impact at all (163 cases) were assumed to be “serious” (requiring senior 

managers’ precious time), the total annual benefits from this source would be $652,000 

or enough savings to cover the cost of the Ombuds office. 

53 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Turnover Cost

Staff turnover can be an element of cost to the organization. Termination payments, in 

accordance with company policy may be involved depending on the situation. There may 

also be recruitment costs, usually twenty to thirty percent of annual salary depending on 

the job market situation for the particular professional. There is the cost of bringing such 

new hires to speed in the organization either through training or orientation. There will 

be a break-in period before the employee can start producing to capacity. If we assume 

the total cost to replace a professional employee (recruitment, training, orientation, 

“break-in”) would be $25,000 or thirty percent of the average full cost for an employee. 

If three percent of the 332 exempt employees who contact the Ombuds office annually 

(or 11 professional employees) were to change their minds about leaving Eastwest, the 

annual savings to the company from this source would be $275,000. This is more than 

half of the cost for the Ombuds office. 

Savings in Legal Cost

There are situations when employer and employee disputes could end up in court and 

where the presence of an Ombudsperson could perhaps deter costly litigation. Whether 

the case is handled by corporate legal staff or by an outside law firm, the cost could be 

high depending on the case. This is in addition to the attention lost for the current 

business. An estimate of $50,000 per case would not be frivolous. If one adds to this the 

possible fines, court fees, and damages awarded to the plaintiff, the cost of mishandling 

an employee related issue could easily be in the $500,000 to $1,000,000 range. It would 

only take one successful resolution by the Ombuds office in such a case every few years 

to justify the existence of the Ombudspersons at Eastwest. 

54 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

There are a few other sources of savings and benefits that the Ombuds office can bring. 

These savings would include reduced theft, safety violations, sabotage, vandalism or 

bodily harm to other employees. Under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, the Ombuds 

office has a mitigating effect on any potential fines levied on the corporation in the case 

of a punishable violation. The feedback that the Ombuds office gives to senior 

management will lead to policy and/or procedural changes. This could generate a 

positive impact on productivity and morale. Although it is difficult to put a dollar value 

on this kind of contribution it is nonetheless a cost benefit. 

The above savings are somewhat additive. The institution of Ombuds office appears to 

be a cost effective measure. Table I summarizes the savings in the various categories 

above. These potential savings estimates are very conservative. The assumption is that 

less than one percent of the work force at Eastwest would have serious cases resolved 

between them and the corporation or fellow employees, by using the Ombuds office. The 

success rates in other companies are much higher than that. But even with such 

conservative estimates the estimated cost savings of $3,277,000 are over seven times the 

cost of operating the Ombuds office estimated at $461,000. Other companies report cost 

savings ratios of 1:6 to 1:10 

55 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Table I 

SAVINGS THROUGH THE OMBUDS OFFICE.

The cost benefit argument for having the Ombuds office is two fold. For only $461,000 

Eastwest will be able to provide a confidential, neutral and independent option for dispute 

resolution for the entire work force. When the potential savings resulting from the 

Ombuds institution of $2,816,000 (a highly conservative estimate), the Ombuds office 

will pay for itself many times over within a short period. 

Category Potential Cost 

Savings 

Comment 

 Increase in Productivity 1,300,000 With a 5% increase in productivity. 

 Sr. Management time savings 652,000 180 cases a year 

 Turnover Cost savings 275,000 By preventing 11 employees from 

leaving 

 Legal cost savings ** 50,000 Legal dept./outside firm time 

 Litigation prevention 1,000,000 Fines, court fees, and damages 

Total 3,277,000

 Cost of Ombuds Office per year -461,000 per 1996/97 budgets 

Cost Savings $2,816,000

**legal expenses incurred whether a case ends up in court or not. 

REFERENCES

1. The Ombudsman Association handbook, 1995 

2. Mary P. Rowe, “The Corporate Ombudsman: An Overview and Analysis.” 

Negotiation Journal, April, 1987. 

3. Mary P. Rowe et al, “Cases, methods, costs and impact of some corporate 

Ombudsperson.” TOA Survey, 1992. 

56 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Appendix C 

SAMPLE PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT FROM THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF 

THE ARMY 

TOP

57 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Appendix C 

SAMPLE PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT FROM THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF 

THE ARMY 

Partnership Agreement 

We, the undersigned, commit our organizations to a partnership of mutual support in 

attaining our vision: 

A Project Team Working In Partnership To Provide Timely, Accurate And Personal 

Services In Support Of The Organization’s and Customer’s Mission. 

In support of this vision we pledge to: 

1. Provide continuous feedback and information to each other. 

Our goal is to keep one another informed and “ in the loop” 

especially when we have significant contact with our 

managers, supervisors and employees. 

2. Be proactive in providing each other with the most recent and 

current information, particularly when it is a significant 

change to past practice or if it impacts large segments of our 

customers. Our goal is to ensure that we continue to maintain 

a keen awareness of key issues, topics and requirements and 

that we share this information in order to resolve problems 

and improve our service to customers. 

3. Actively seek each other’s opinion on topics of mutual 

interest, particularly on matters that might have high 

visibility or the potential for controversy. Our goal is to 

provide the customer with a unified approach to common 

problems and issues and to actively involve one another in 

the decision-making process. 

4. Coordinate with each other prior to making commitments for 

one another. Our goal is to ensure a mutual respect for each 

other’s workload and obligations. 

5. Create and foster attitudes that reinforce our partnership so 

that the quality, accuracy and timelines of our services are 

strengthened by our unity. Our goal is to do everything we 

can to ensure solidarity. 

58 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

6. Live up to our commitments, and if we cannot fulfill and 

provide reliable information and service to our customers and 

each other, work together to resolve obstacles. 

We Must Never Lose Sight Of Who Our Real Customers Are 

They are: ... Remember, Our goal is to make our vision statement a reality. 

 

59 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Appendix D 

Ombudsman Policies and Procedures: Sample Documents 

TOP

60 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Appendix D, Part 1 

OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN 

PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES MANUAL

SECTION: 1.1. Roles and Responsibilities 

CHARTER: Establishment of the Office of the Ombudsman 

Approved: Date: 

1. Purpose. To establish the Office of the Ombudsman. 

2. Scope. Washington OO only. 

3. Background.

The Office of the Ombudsman was established pursuant to (reference statutory 

basis or source of management mandate) 

4. Responsibilities

The responsibilities of the office of the Ombudsman are set forth in the attached 

Mission Statement and Strategic Goals. 

The Office of the Ombudsman is committed to preserve confidentiality and 

impartiality in its dealings with all its customers. 

5. Procedures.

The operating philosophy of the Office of the Ombudsman is set forth in the 

attached Vision, Mission and Value statements. 

6. Contact: 

If there are questions or comments associated with this document contact: (Insert 

the name of the ombudsman or ombudsman staff member). 

61 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

MISSION STATEMENT

The Office of the Ombudsman was created to: 

(The mission statement of the office should appear here.) 

FUNCTIONAL STATEMENTS

The Office of the Ombudsman

- Serves as a confidential, designated neutral for customers to raise concerns 

and request assistance to informally resolve conflicts and problems. 

- Develops, implements, evaluates and improves an independent, neutral, 

problem resolution service for: (employees, customers, the general public, 

etc.) 

- Serves as a change agent for the Corporation by identifying systemic 

problems in agency policies, procedures, or regulations and submitting 

recommendations for change. 

- Promotes an effective conflict management program throughout THE 

ORGANIZATION to facilitate effective and efficient operations. 

- Promotes the availability of the Ombudsman Office to external and 

internal customers. 

The Office of the Ombudsman has the following primary functions: 

- Communications Facilitation: This includes... 

- Problem Prevention: This is accomplished through... 

- Dispute Resolution: When disputes arise, the Office of 

the Ombudsman... 

62 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Functional Description

The major functions include: 

- Tracks inquiries, complaints and disputes to determine patterns and 

systemic issues that may need to be modified. 

- Works to explore possible changes in policy, procedures, or processes in 

response to trend analysis results. 

- Analyzes policies, operating programs and procedures to determine if 

existing or proposed programs accomplish organizational goals and 

objectives. 

- Evaluates and develops management reporting and other administrative 

systems and programs to identify systemic risk and track information 

flow. 

- Monitors the Ombudsman activities nationwide to ensure program 

compliance and progress toward achievement of stated goals and 

objectives. 

- Educates employees about the services of the Ombudsman. 

- Publicizes and develops proactive strategies to market ombudsman 

services to the public, financial community and trade and association 

groups. 

- Holds presentations, briefings, training sessions, and conferences for all 

customers to provide information about ombudsman programs and to 

discuss relevant and significant issues. 

Field Operations

The Ombudsman functions in each location are: 

63 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

VISION STATEMENT

The office shall be recognized as leader in... 

VALUE STATEMENT

The Office of the Ombudsman is committed to confidentiality, neutrality, organizational 

independence, and operational excellence. 

64 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

STRATEGIC GOALS

The Office of the Ombudsman will take a leadership role to: 

♦ Provide accessible, consistent and responsive service to all 

ombudsman contacts.

 Performance Measurements: 

• Program Compliance Reviews 

• Customer Surveys 

• Focus Groups and other feedback mechanisms 

• Customer service standards relating to the treatment and fairness of 

customers 

• Consistent customer treatment in conformance with established 

service standards 

• Continual evaluation of contact feedback and willingness to adjust 

operations to achieve improved performance and satisfaction 

♦ Ensure independence and neutrality of the Office of the Ombudsman, 

preserve confidentiality and prevent retribution in the complaint 

process.

 Performance Measurements: 

• Confidential feedback surveys addressing confidentiality and 

retribution. 

♦ Model and facilitate effective conflict management practices and 

processes, as appropriate throughout the ORGANIZATION.

 Performance Measurements: 

• Corporate conflict management training and education 

• Increased awareness of and use of alternative dispute resolution 

tools where appropriate 

• Decrease cost and time of dispute resolution 

♦ Develop and foster effective working partnerships throughout the 

Corporation.

 Performance Measurements: 

65 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

• Response from other program areas within established customer 

service standards 

• Other members of the organization volunteer information and 

cooperate in problem resolution 

• Two-way feedback from regularly scheduled inter-office working 

groups 

• Performance feedback from management reports regarding the 

efficiency of operations 

♦ Market and promote the Ombudsman program.

 Performance Measurements: 

 • Corporate awareness training and education 

• Random calls to program offices to review staff knowledge of 

Ombudsman program 

• Customer surveys and other participatory feedback mechanisms 

• Number of policy analysis requests from program areas 

♦ Address systemic issues affecting the organization and develop 

recommendations to influence change.

 Performance Measurements: 

• Ombudsman reports that detect patterns and trends 

• Feedback from customers 

• Program Compliance Reviews 

66 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Appendix D, Part 2 

 

CASE HANDLING/MANAGEMENT PROCEDURES 

1. Case Handling Procedures place the Ombudsman’s mission, vision, and values 

within a framework of processing and resolving inquiries, problems, and 

complaints. 

2. Ombudsman casework is the fundamental reason the ombudsman exists. 

3. The procedures are standard and apply to the entire organization at all locations. 

4. What do the procedures consist of? There are 6 fundamental components. 

 - Client Types; 

 - Avenues of Contact; 

 - General Resolution Strategies; 

 - Case Types; 

 - Standards for Response; and 

 - Avenues of Resolution. 

5. Client Types. What are the types of clients? There are 3 client types: 

 - Employees; 

 - The Public; 

- Other Companies/Organizations; 

- Etc. 

6. Avenues of Client Contact. What are the avenues by which clients contact the 

ombudsman? There are 3 avenues: 

 - Telephone; 

- Written (this includes electronic contacts that in turn include 

Internet); and; 

- Walk-in. 

67 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

7. Case Processing Strategies. There are broad cases processing strategies to 

employ, which lead to case resolution. They are: 

 - Express the ombudsman values: 

 - Independence, neutrality, confidentiality; 

 - Determine facts: 

 - Name; 

 - Phone #; 

 - Organization (Public/Private); 

 - Ask client, “Have you spoken to other personnel/offices?”; 

 - Record other relevant information (if needed). 

 - Seek permission to discuss case with other individuals or 

organizations; 

- Express the goal to identify alternatives and facilitate resolution; 

not to actively solve problems directly; 

- Determine what the client hopes to accomplish by 

calling/contacting the ombudsman; 

- Identify an avenue of resolution (discussed later); 

- Perform research, if needed; 

- Seek resolution, if possible; and 

- Execute final case disposition; call or write client to discuss 

action/inaction/resolution of case. 

8. Case Types. There are four case types. The four types are: 

 - General Assistance; 

 - Inquiries 

 - Problem Resolution; and 

 - Complaints. 

68 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

9. There are several types of contacts, which must be referred. These contacts are: 

 - Matters in Litigation; 

 - Matters being appealed to formal bodies; 

 - Matters being grieved – if there are formal grievance procedures; 

 - Crimes; and 

 - EEO Complaints – in the case of Federal agencies. 

10. Case Handling Standards. There are both general and specific standards for case 

handling. These standards are: 

 - Ombudsmen are always polite; 

- Ombudsman personnel are always responsive (actively pursue case 

resolution, follow up with clients); 

- Information is always confidential; 

- Phones will be manned during accepted business hours; 

- Following client contact by phone (voice mail), personnel will 

acknowledge that contact by phone within 24 hours; 

- Following client contact by letter, personnel will acknowledge that 

contact by phone within 5 business days.; 

- Ombudsmen personnel will strive to resolve cases within 10 

business days; 

- If cases are not resolved in 10 days, the contact will be called to 

apprise them of the progress achieved. 

- If the contact was by phone originally, this update of 

progress will be by phone. 

- If the contact was written (including E-mail) originally, the 

update will be by letter (never by E-mail); 

- Following the 10 day update on progress made the contact must be 

apprized of progress made periodically at the discretion of the 

Ombudsman analyst. 

69 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

11. Avenues of Case Resolution. There are several avenues of case resolution. They 

relate to the complexity of the case. These avenues are: 

 - General Assistance (Quick Answer); 

 - Research; 

 - Referral (often follows light research); and 

- Conflict Management. Conflict Management is defined as: 

“Process for managing client differences to develop cooperation 

and resolve problems.”1

12. Working with Contact Groups. Individuals from all contact groups should be 

handled in the same confidential, responsive manner discussed above. What 

varies are the types of inquiries received. 

13. Customer Satisfaction Surveys. 

Reviewing and Improving Case Handling/Management

1. After case resolution, what happens next? Systematically review ombudsman 

case handling effectiveness and improve it. This approach is known as business process 

improvement and is usually carried out by a representative group of ombudsman 

personnel or another objective reviewer. 

2. Inherent in the operations of any well-managed service organization is the 

assumption that there will be methods of self-evaluation. Why do we do self-evaluation? 

Quite simply, the ombudsman should know “how the office is doing” so that the office 

can constantly seek to improve its business processes (processes consist of everything 

that the office does in achieving its functions). 

 - Do we meet standards? 

 - Are customers satisfied (not with outcome of case; but rather with 

services)? 

 - Is management reporting informative and timely? 

 - Are our administrative functions efficient? 

 

1

 This definition was provided by Thomas Dunne, former Director of the IRS Center for Conflict 

Management. The term “process” as used in the definition includes facilitation, conciliation, informal 

mediation, neutral fact-finding, and shuttle diplomacy. 

70 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

3. Thus, process improvement, when managed properly, seeks to monitor all major 

processes (and some minor ones too), measure them (quantifiable statistics regarding 

effectiveness), generate recommendations for improvement, and implement appropriate 

recommendations. 

4. The carefully managed program does not stop monitoring processes after they are 

examined once. Characteristics of process improvement include: 

- A continual process. It does not stop when an area has been examined 

once; 

 - It is quantifiable; 

 - Everyone participates; 

 - It includes delegating authority/empowerment; and 

 - Does not include retribution for “bad” ideas, or mistakes. 

5. In addition, customer satisfaction surveys measure several aspects of how an 

ombudsman office performs. It answers the question: “How are we doing?” 

Case Closure

Following case resolution, the case is designated as “closed.” A case is defined as closed 

when one or more of the following are true: 

 a. No further actions are required to satisfy the client’s request; 

 b. The request is referred to an appropriate organization outside of the office 

of the ombudsman for resolution; or 

 c. No additional options are available. (This includes situations in which 

ombudsmen cannot become involved such as litigation, formal appeals or grievances, 

EEO complaints, or other formal processes.) 

Final Disposition Letters

Final disposition letters are sent when no further services are possible, or needed, given 

the specific conditions associated with a case. They are sent to apprize a contact that 

there is nothing further that can be done to assist them, although in some instances the 

client may not agree. The letter must state the reasons why there is nothing left to do, and 

that the ombudsman will take any new information into consideration that the client can 

provide, if it appears that it could affect the determination of the case. 

71 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Ombuds Case Sheet

Ombuds (name): __________________________ Date: (yr-mo-da): _______________ 

Agency: __________________________________ Department 

_________________________ 

Problem as reported by contact (narrative): 

Problem as identified by Office of the Ombudsman (narrative): 

Amount of time spent (# of hours): _________________ 

 a. telephone (yr-mo-da) 

 b. research (yr-mo-da) 

 c. personal visits (yr-mo-da) 

Resolution (narrative): 

Date closed (yr-mo-da): __________________ 

Operations improvements (narrative): 

72 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Customer Survey

(to be asked at the close of each case, with the consent of the customer) 

************************************************************************

****** 

“We want to evaluate the effectiveness of our pilot ombudsman program. Your feedback 

in this regard is important to us. Therefore, would you consider one of the following: 

a. Answering a few questions for me now? 

b. Allowing another ombuds to call and ask a few questions? 

a. Allowing me to send you a survey to complete and return anonymously? 

Your comments will not be associated with you in any way and are solely intended to 

provide us with information to determine the effectiveness of this program” 

************************************************************************

****** 

1. Would you use the Ombuds again? In what specific instances? 

2. Do you understand why the end result was the proper result? 

3. Was your issue handled in a neutral, non-threatening manner? 

4. Did this program offer you an avenue for problem solving that was not previously 

available? 

5. Do you have any other comments that will help us evaluate the program? 

73 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Appendix D, Part 3 

OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN 

PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES MANUAL

SECTION: 3.9 Operations 

CHAPTER: Office of the Ombudsman Security (Internal Program) 

Approved: Date: 

1. Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to identify and implement policies and 

procedures for Office of the Ombudsman casework security and physical security. 

2. Scope. These procedures will be applicable to... 

3. Background. The office periodically handles casework that involves handling 

angry, emotional or physically aggressive contacts. The office must safely manage these 

situations, termed crisis casework, to avoid physical harm, stress and anxiety. In 

addition, the cases must be referred to the appropriate organizational resource or outside 

authority, since they go beyond the mission, function and expertise of the office. 

Sections A of this procedure provide office staff with procedures and guidelines for crisis 

casework management. 

Physical security is important to business because it ensures the safety of the office. In 

the event of a fire, medical emergency, etc., each staff member should know the steps 

that must be taken. Section B specifies physical security procedures and guidelines for 

the office. 

4. Definitions. For the purpose of these procedures, the following definitions apply: 

a. Crisis Casework: Casework that demands skills beyond the communication 

and case resolution abilities commonly practiced by ombudsmen. These cases 

include crucial emotional or physical situations, which arise unexpectedly 

during the course of case resolution and that may be threatening or dangerous 

to people or property. 

b. Physical Security: Protection of personnel, facilities, and all material against 

unauthorized entry, trespass, damage, or other illegal or criminal acts in a 

workplace environment. 

74 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

b. Workplace Aggression: A range of behaviors which are generally 

unacceptable have a verbal and/or physical component of abuse, and have a 

negative effect on workers, the organization, and other individuals. 

d. Workplace Safety: The provision of a safe and sound environment that allows 

employees to work without life threatening circumstances. 

e. Emergency Preparedness: The ability to respond properly in emergency 

situations to minimize employee injury and property damage. 

f. Reckless Endangerment: Subjecting individuals to danger by engaging in 

conduct that creates substantial risk of serious physical injury. 

5. Policy. Management is committed to the safety of office staff, other employees, 

and the public and will take every practical step to ensure safety in the workplace. 

6. Procedures. Casework and physical security procedures and guidelines are 

presented in Sections A and B. 

A. Casework Security.

(1) Telephone Inquiries. Ombudsman staff should use conciliation, 

facilitation and mediation skills to the extent needed to focus 

contacts on their case issues and to avoid verbal or physical acting 

out. 

- Staff members should courteously but firmly terminate telephone 

conversations in which a contact refuses to cease abusive behavior. 

- Staff members should, to the best of their ability, attempt to 

determine the facts related to the threats against the 

organization/company or property so they can be reported to the 

Security Section or the police, as appropriate. 

- More detailed guidelines for handling emergency telephone calls 

can be found in attachment I. All staff must keep the Emergency 

Telephone Call Checklist near the phone. 

- Following conversations that are verbally abusive or threatening, 

ombudsman staff should confer with ombudsman managers to 

determine what steps should be taken, if any. These steps may 

include discussing the case in Case Management Meetings or 

referring the case to the Security Section. 

75 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

- If an emergency situation occurs that imminently threatens or 

impacts the safety of people or property, ombudsman staff should 

immediately call the Security Section. (Attachment I.). 

(2) Meetings. Ombudsman staff should take precautions to ensure 

safety when meeting with contacts. 

- When meeting with contacts who may be upset or agitated, staff 

should use meeting rooms with 2 doors when possible. Rooms 

which are in a central location are preferable, since other staffs are 

often nearby. 

- Contacts should be met at the door and escorted to the meeting 

room. Under no circumstances should a contact be admitted 

without identifying who they are and with whom they are meeting. 

- Whenever a meeting with an angry or emotional contact is to take 

place, staff should alert other staff that they are having the meeting 

and arrange for an OO staff member to check on the meeting at a 

prearranged time. 

- When meeting with contacts who may be upset or agitated, staff 

should carry a remote duress transmitter alarm to ensure that 

security can be alerted quickly if needed. 

- Following a meeting in which a contact becomes very emotional or 

agitated, or physically acts out, ombudsman staff should 

immediately confer with managers to determine what steps should 

be taken. These steps may include discussing the case in Case 

Management Meetings or referring the case to the Security 

Section. 

- More detailed guidelines for conducting safe meetings can be 

found in Attachment I (see Planning Meetings with Agitated or 

Unpredictable Contacts). 

B. Physical Security. 

(1) Prevention of Workplace Theft. Ombudsman staff should take 

precautions against theft. The organization is not responsible for 

lost or stolen items. 

- Staff should lock-up and adequately secure all personal and office 

valuables. This would include securing laptop computers and 

personnel files. 

76 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

- Staff should secure portable electronic equipment at the close of 

the business day and whenever they are absent from the work area 

for extended periods. 

- Staff should immediately report suspicious activity to OO 

managers. These activities should also be reported immediately to 

the nearest guard and to the Security Section at (XXX) XXXXXXX. 

(2) Prevention of Workplace Aggression. Ombudsman staff should 

adhere to work practices that are designed to make the workplace 

safer. (See company policies). 

- The company has implemented a zero tolerance policy for 

workplace aggression. Within the Office of the Ombudsman the 

appearance of verbal or physical aggression should be avoided. 

- Ombudsman staff planning to work after hours should notify the 

Security Section in advance. This will ensure optimal employee 

safety during non-typical work hours. 

(3) Fire Safety. Staff should know how to exit the building quickly in 

case of a fire. This requires staff to conduct emergency 

preparedness exercises. 

- If a staff member suspects that a fire has been started (evidence of 

flame, smoke, etc.) the nearest alarm should be activated and a 

manager alerted when it is practical to do so. When all staff are 

safe, the situation should be carefully assessed and appropriate 

action taken (e.g. inform building manager, security, etc.) 

- Staff should be familiar with where proper exists and fire fighting 

equipment are located. (See paragraph 6.B.5) Also, a manager or 

Floor Warden should be designated to ensure that everyone is out 

of the office in the event of fire. This advance planning could 

prevent fire deaths and injuries in the workplace. 

- When a fire is suspected or confirmed evacuation procedures 

should be implemented immediately. (See paragraph 6.B.3). 

- Where needed, special procedures for helping physically impaired 

employees should be implemented. 

- Office exits must not be blocked or locked to prevent emergency 

use when employees are within the building. In the event of fire, 

staff should leave the building through the main entrance and 

77 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

descend to the street level using the stairs in the elevator lobby. 

Leave the building through the back door and assemble across the 

street 

(4) Workplace Bomb Threats. Ombudsman staff should be familiar 

with established policy and guidance regarding the handling of 

bomb threats. Suspicious packages should be left alone and 

reported to Security. 

 (5) OO Physical Security Resources: 

 - First Aid Kit: A first aid kit is located... 

- Fire Extinguishers: There are fire extinguishers accessible to the 

office 

- Fire Alarms: Two fire alarms are strategically located just outside 

OO’s front entrance next to the stairs used for exiting during an 

emergency. Also located in that same area is an emergency phone 

that dials the fire department directly. It should be used if a fire 

occurs. 

- Security Guard: In case of an emergency, the nearest security 

guard is located on ... 

- If a staff member becomes aware of physical safety risks they 

should confer with OO managers to determine what the 

appropriate actions will be. 

7. Contacts. If there are questions or comments regarding these procedures or the 

information provided, please call _______________________ on (XXX) XXXXXXX.. 

78 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

ATTACHMENT I 

OO EMERGENCY PHONE CALL CHECKLIST 

During the Call:

 STAY CALM 

 -Breathe deeply. 

 KEEP THE CALLER ON THE LINE. 

 SPEAK SLOWLY IN A LOW VOICE. 

 BE SYMPATHETIC AND HELPFUL. 

 GET INFORMATION. 

 - Name; 

 - Location; 

 - Phone number; 

 - Accent or background sounds; 

 - Caller behavior, attitude; and 

 - Caller issues. 

 USE EMERGENCY E-MAIL BOX DURING CALL. 

 - E-mail address = q 

After the Call:

 CONSULT WITH MANAGERS IMMEDIATELY 

 OBTAIN SUPPORT FROM SECURITY, COUNSELORS OR 

POLICE 

79 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Planning Meetings with Agitated or Unpredictable Contacts

1. Plan ahead: 

 - Alert other that you are meeting; 

 - Have a buddy with your, or have someone check in with you.; 

 - Meet in a safe and neutral setting. 

 - Maintain distance; and 

 - Have a way to get out. 

2. Control the meeting; 

 - Remain calm; 

 - Breathe deeply; 

 - Speak with authority in a slow, low voice; 

 - Get information (see above, under Phone calls) 

 - Inform the contact that to achieve results cooperation is a must. 

 - Stop the meeting at the first sign of physical aggression (no heroes); and 

 - Get out of the room. 

3. Consult with managers/team leaders. 

4. Obtain support from Security, police and counselors. 

 - Important phone numbers attached. 

80 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

EMERGENCY PHONE NUMBERS

SECURITY: 

(9) 911 for local police or fire emergencies 

Other numbers:

 Security Services: 

 Office 

 Sky Pager PIN# 

 Physical Security 

 Office 

 Sky Pager PIN# 

 Guards: 

 Captain 202-8898-3557 

 Captain 703-516-5316 

 

EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM:

Call the EAP in emergencies – 1-800-XXX-XXXX

GUARD POST PHONE NUMBERS 

81 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Guidelines for Dealing with an Agitated Employee

1. De-escalation (calming down) is unnatural when someone is agitated. Expect 

more agitation than less. 

2. Try to calm yourself first before approaching the employee, and to remain calm. 

Talk to the employee in a firm, monotone, low-pitched voice. 

3. Focus on the process, that is, what is actually happening at that moment, (I’m so 

upset I just want to scream and throw things) not on the content (I hate my job). 

4. Stay at the same physical level as the employee. If he/she is sitting, then sit; if 

he/she is standing, stand. 

5. Stay at the same physical level as the employee. If he/she is sitting, then sit; if 

he/she is standing, stand. 

6. Stand or sit at more than on arm’s length away. 

7. Break eye contact; staring directly at the person can be threatening. 

8. If you have loose clothing on that can be pulled remove it before meeting with the 

employee. This includes long necklaces or other jewelry, scarves, ties. 

9. Remove objects from the room that could be used as weapons: staplers, scissors, 

etc. 

10. Stand at an angle to the person, not directly face-to-face. This may help you from 

being pushed over by the other person. 

11. Use the person’s name. Let him/her use your name. 

12. Don’t touch the person. 

13. Don’t argue. Be firm, calm, and controlled. Be authoritative, not authoritarian. 

14. Answer the employee’s concrete questions while calming him/her (Why do I have 

to do this new paperwork?); ignore their rhetorical ones (Why is life so hard for 

me?). 

15. Suggest alternative behaviors to cope with the pressure, the job, the specific 

situation which has caused the agitation. 

16. After the incident take time to discuss with someone what has happened. Let the 

rest of your staff who witnessed the incident take time to process it also. EARs 

Management line is a good place to assess an incident (1-800-608-7515). 

82 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Agitated Person 

The agitated person: 

1. perceives that he or she has been humiliated, 

2. displaces anger toward an object, person, or place that is not involved in the situation, 

3. uses denial to avoid being objective about his or her situation, 

4. needs to have someone intervene to facilitate a positive outcome 

When you talk to someone who is agitated: 

1. use sentences of seven words or less, 

2. use words of three syllables or less, 

3. focus on behavior and articulate that it is not okay to act out, 

4. don’t show emotion, or you will escalate the agitation, 

5. show the behavior that you want to be modeled, 

6. control gestures and movement or the person will become further agitated, 

7. focus on the person but don’t take notes in front of the person. Wait until the person 

leaves your office to write your notes. 

Fearful Person 

When you talk to a contact who appears fearful or who suggests that he or she is trapped: 

1. remain relaxed (gestures and movements can add stress), 

2. act controlled and confident, 

3. maintain a low, calm voice, 

4. maintain eye contact, 

5. show the promise of help through your body language 

Frustrated Person 

When you talk to a contact who appears frustrated: 

1. maintain control of the interview, 

2. model controlled behavior 

3. control impulses, 

4. keep hands relaxed and out with palms down, 

5. maintain a soft, quiet, firm tone of voice so that the person has to concentrate to hear 

you. 

Intimidating Behavior 

When you talk to someone who intimidates: 

1. do not model the intimidating behavior, 

83 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

2. don’t act fearfully, 

3. be clear about the consequences of intimidating behavior, 

4. don’t let the contact think the intimidating behavior is working, 

5. use eye contact sparingly because the intimidator sees eye contact as a challenge, 

6. use eye contact when you make a statement and then back off, 

7. avoid a fight and allow a flight, i.e., allow him or her to leave the office to cool off, if 

necessary, 

8. remember that you will never control an intimidator, 

9. if necessary to bring a coworker, bring in someone of the opposite sex to you. 

Acting Out 

Seldom is the case that an angry person will act out. 

A person who acts out tends to have: 

1. a limited support system, 

2. few social skills, 

3. emotional difficulties. 

The more elaborate the plan, the more likely the behavior. 

Look for a serious intent; look for a means. 

84 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Appendix E 

POSITION DESCRIPTION 

TOP

85 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Appendix E 

POSITION DESCRIPTION 

Management and Program Analyst 

GS-0343-14 

Ombudsman Specialist 

Office of the Ombudsman 

INTRODUCTION 

This position is located in the U.S. Department of Education, Federal Student Aid (FSA), and 

Office of the Ombudsman. The incumbent will manage customer complaint cases by receiving, 

reviewing and attempting to resolve complaints from student loan borrowers. In addition, the 

incumbent analyzes student loan borrower data and provides management with recommendations 

for improvements to FSA programs. The incumbent will have frequent contact with student loan 

borrowers and other agencies by conducting outreach, responding to complaints, managing the 

Ombudsman web site, and informing the public about the Ombudsman’s services. 

I. MAJOR DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 

As an Ombudsman Specialist, directs and develops plans for project teams or other groups in 

accomplishing/producing projects/studies. 

Analyzes and evaluates on a quantitative/qualitative basis the effectiveness of line program 

operations in meeting established goals and objectives. 

Evaluates and advises on organization, methods, and procedures. 

Analyzes management information requirements. 

Develops, analyzes, and evaluates new or modified program/management policies, regulations, 

goals, or objectives. 

Develops procedures and systems for assessing the effectiveness of programs/management 

processes. 

86 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

II. FACTORS 

Factor 1 - Knowledge Required FL 1-8 1550 POINTS 

Knowledge at a level to serve as an expert in the application of a wide range of 

qualitative and/or quantitative methods for the assessment and improvement of program 

effectiveness or the improvement of complex management processes and systems. 

Knowledge of a comprehensive range of administrative laws, policies, regulations, and 

precedents applicable to the administration of one or more important public programs. 

Knowledge of POC program goals and objectives, the sequence and timing of key 

program events and milestones, and methods of evaluating the worth of program 

accomplishments. 

Knowledge of relationships with other programs and key administrative support functions 

within the employing POC or other agencies. 

Skill to plan, organize, and direct team study work and to negotiate effectively with 

management to accept and implement recommendations, where the proposals involve 

substantial POC resources, require extensive changes in established procedures, or may 

be in conflict with the desires of the activity studied. 

Factor 2 - Supervisory Controls FL 2-5 650 POINTS 

The employee is subject only to administrative and policy direction concerning overall 

project priorities and objectives. The employee is typically delegated complete 

responsibility and authority to plan, schedule, and carry out major projects concerned 

with the analysis and evaluation of programs and organizational effectiveness. Analyses, 

evaluations, and recommendations developed by the employee are normally reviewed by 

management officials only for potential influence on broad agency policy objectives and 

program goals. 

Factor 3 - Guidelines FL 3-5 650 POINTS 

Guidelines consist of basic administrative policy statements concerning the issue or 

problem being studied. The employee uses judgment and discretion in interpreting and 

revising existing policy/regulatory guidance for use by others. Some employees review 

proposed regulations which would significantly change the basic character of POC 

programs, the way the POC conducts its business with the public or with the private 

sector. Develops study formats for use by others on a project team or at subordinate 

echelons in the organization. 

Factor 4 - Complexity FL 4-5 325 POINTS 

The work consists of projects and studies which require analysis of interrelated issues of 

effectiveness, efficiency, and productivity of substantive mission-oriented programs. 

Decisions about how to proceed in planning, organizing and conducting studies are 

87 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

complicated by conflicting program goals and objectives. Options, recommendations, 

and conclusions developed by the employee take into account and give appropriate 

weight to uncertainties about the data and other variables which affect long-range 

program performance. 

Factor 5 - Scope and Effect FL 5-5 325 POINTS 

The purpose of the work is to analyze and evaluate major management/program aspects 

of substantive, mission-oriented programs. The work involves identifying and 

developing ways to resolve problems or cope with issues which directly affect the 

accomplishment of principal program goals and objectives. Work products are complete 

decision packages and staff studies, and typically contain findings/recommendations of 

major significance which serve as the basis for new administrative systems, legislation, 

regulations, or programs 

Factor 6 - Personal Contacts 

 and 

Factor 7 - Purpose of Contacts Levels 3 and c = 180 POINTS 

Contacts are with persons outside the POC and with high level program officials in a 

moderately structured setting. The purpose of contacts is to influence managers or other 

officials to accept and implement findings and recommendations on organizational 

improvement or program effectiveness. The employee may encounter resistance due to 

organizational conflict, competing objectives, or resource problems.. 

Factor 8 - Physical Demands FL 8-1 5 POINTS 

Work is sedentary with occasional travel. 

Factor 9 - Work Environment FL 9-1 5 POINTS 

Work is typically performed in an office setting. 

 Total Points = 3690 

III. UNIQUE POSITION REQUIREMENTS 

Strong knowledge of all SFA programs and operations to perform program and process 

analyses. 

Knowledge of FSA systems (i.e., NSLDS, PEPS, etc.) to access and understand data for 

complaint resolution. 

Strong understanding of FSA partnerships with the financial aid community. 

88 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Working knowledge of the Department of Education programs (i.e. Direct Loan, Pell 

Grant, etc.) 

Ability to maintain confidentiality and neutrality. 

Strong analytical and problem-resolution skills used to recommend options for solving 

student loan borrower complaint cases. 

Understanding of the government structure and processes. 

Strong oral and written communication skills and interpersonal skills to operate in a oneon-one environment. 

Skills to conduct statistical and trend analyses as well as to develop recommendations for 

improvements to FSA programs. 

89 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

APPENDIX F 

Ombudsman Guidelines and Standards 

TOP

90 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Appendix F 

Standards 

"A Guide for Federal Employee Ombuds: A Supplement to and Annotation of the 

Standards for the Establishment and Operations of Ombuds Offices Issued by the 

American Bar Association". 

This Guide, developed by the Coalition of Federal Ombudsmen (CFO) and the Federal 

Interagency Alternative Dispute Resolution Working Group (IADRWG) Steering 

Committee, builds upon the Standards For The Establishment And Operation Of Ombuds 

Offices issued February 2004 by the American Bar Association (ABA) and is intended 

only for use by federal employee Ombuds in connection with their functions for the 

federal government. 

These standards apply to all Federal Ombudsman programs. 

Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1996 (ADRA) 

The Administrative Dispute Resolution Act (ADRA) of 1996 defines "alternative means of 

dispute resolution" to mean any procedure that is used to resolve issues in controversy, 

including, but not limited to, conciliation, facilitation, mediation, factfinding, minitrials, 

arbitration, and use of ombuds, or any combination thereof. ADRA contains specific 

provisions for Confidentiality that apply to all Federal Ombudsman. 

Federal Acquisition Regulations Ombudsman (FAR) 

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), Section 16.505, Ordering requires that the head of 

the agency shall designate a task-order and delivery-order ombudsman. The ombudsman 

must review complaints from contractors and ensure they are afforded a fair opportunity 

to be considered, consistent with the procedures in the contract. The ombudsman must be 

a senior agency official who is independent of the contracting officer and may be the 

agency's competition advocate. 

NASA's provides an example of how to implement their FAR Ombudsman program in 

Subpart 1815.70--Ombudsman of their procurement procedures. They require that all 

synopses announcing competitive acquisitions and each contract and task order contain 

substantially the same clause found at Subpart 1852.215-84. 

Records 

All Federal Programs, even a Federal Ombudsman Program, creates records needed to 

document activities for which they are responsible and demonstrate the effectiveness of 

91 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

the program. The National Archives and Records Administration’s (NARA), General 

Records Schedule 1, Civilian Personnel Records, Section 27, Alternative Dispute 

Resolution (ADR) Files contain general guidance on ARD record retention. 

Ombudsman should consult with their agency records officer and Legal Counsel when 

developing their record retention policy and ensure any records retention procedures do 

not conflict with Ombudsman confidentiality requirements. 

92 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Appendix G 

A Guide for Federal Employee Ombuds 

TOP

93 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Appendix G 

A GUIDE FOR FEDERAL EMPLOYEE 

OMBUDS

A SUPPLEMENT TO AND ANNOTATION OF THESTANDARDS FOR THE 

ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATIONS OF OMBUDS OFFICESISSUED BY THE 

AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION 

Coalition of Federal Ombudsmen (CFO) and Federal 

Interagency ADR Working Group Steering Committee 

FINAL VERSION 5/9/06 

94 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

FOREWORD 

This Guide, developed by the Coalition of Federal Ombudsmen (CFO) and the Federal 

Interagency Alternative Dispute Resolution Working Group (IADRWG) Steering 

Committee, builds upon the Standards For The Establishment And Operation Of Ombuds 

Offices issued February 2004 by the American Bar Association (ABA) and is intended 

only for use by federal employee Ombuds in connection with their functions for the 

federal government. [Currently, the CFO, the International Ombudsman Organization 

(IOA), the United States Ombudsman Association (USOA), the Forum of Canadian 

Ombudsman, the European Union’s Ombudsman and most other Ombudsman 

organizations continue to use the term “Ombudsman.” However, the term “Ombuds” is 

found in the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1996, 5 U.S.C. 571, et seq. 

(“ADRA”), as well as in the ABA Standards that serve as the basis for this Guide. 

Accordingly, and to maintain gender neutrality, the Steering Committee and CFO have 

opted to use “Ombuds” for purposes of this Guide.] 

Federal agencies establishing an Ombuds function, whether by mandate or 

administrative action, may wish to use the ABA Standards, which are set forth below in 

their entirety. However, there are specific areas, unique to federal Ombuds practice, that 

require additional practical guidance. For these areas – in particular, confidentiality, 

including the provision of notice, reporting and record keeping – the CFO and IADRWG 

Steering Committee have developed Federal Guidance Notes, which follow each of the 

pertinent ABA Standards and are set out in italics. 

NOTE: This Guide applies solely to the internal management and operations of 

the federal executive branch. It is not intended to create any new right, benefit, or trust 

responsibility, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or equity by a party against 

the United States, its agencies, its officers, or any person. Questions regarding 

interpretations of this Guide should be brought to the Office of the General Counsel or 

Legal Counsel in each department or agency. In addition, federal employee Ombuds must 

look to their Ombuds charters and to agency rules, regulations, directives and policies 

for guidance specific to their agencies. 

FINAL VERSION 2 5/9/06 

95 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

STANDARDS

1 

FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION OF OMBUDS 

OFFICES 

REVISED FEBRUARY, 2004 

1 

The ABA proposed a resolution of February 2004 that supports “the greater use of 

‘Ombuds’ to receive, review, and resolve complaints involving public and private 

entities” and endorsed Standards for the Establishment and Operation of Ombuds Offices. 

These standards modify those Standards in four regards. First, they clarify the issue of 

notice in Paragraph F; secondly, they modify the limitations on the Ombud’s authority; 

third, they provide for a new category for executive Ombuds that is described in 

Paragraph H; and fourth, they modify the definition of legislative Ombuds and the 

standards applicable to them to make them conform to the new category of executive 

Ombuds. The 2004 Standards, in turn, expand on a 1969 ABA resolution to address 

independence, impartiality, and confidentiality as essential characteristics of Ombuds 

who serve internal constituents, Ombuds in the private sector, and Ombuds who also 

serve as advocates for designated populations. 

PREAMBLE 

Ombuds

2 

receive complaints and questions from individuals concerning people within an 

entity or the functioning of an entity. They work for the resolution of particular issues 

and, where appropriate, make recommendations for the improvement of the general 

administration of the entities they serve. Ombuds protect: the legitimate interests and 

rights of individuals with respect to each other; individual rights against the excesses of 

public and private bureaucracies; and those who are affected by and those who work 

within these organizations. 

Federal, state and local governments, academic institutions, for-profit businesses, nonprofit organizations, and sub-units of these entities have established Ombuds offices but 

with enormous variation in their duties and structures. 

Ombuds offices so established may be placed in several categories: A Legislative 

Ombuds is a part of the legislative branch of government and addresses issues raised by 

the general public or internally, usually concerning the actions or policies of government 

entities, individuals or contractors with respect to public accountability. An Executive 

Ombuds may be located in either the public or private sector and receives complaints 

concerning actions and omissions of the entity, its officials, employees and contractors; 

an Executive Ombuds may work either to hold the entity or one of its programs 

accountable or work with entity officials to improve the performance of a program. An 

Organizational Ombuds may be located in either the public or private sector and 

ordinarily addresses problems presented by members, employees, or contractors of an 

entity concerning its actions or policies. An Advocate Ombuds may be located in either 

the public or private sector and, like the others, evaluates claims objectively but is 

authorized or required to advocate on behalf of individuals or groups found to be 

aggrieved. 

FINAL VERSION 3 5/9/06 2 

96 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

The term Ombuds in this report is intended to encompass all other forms of the word, 

such as Ombudsperson, Ombuds Officer, and Ombudsman, a Swedish word meaning 

agent or representative. The use of Ombuds here is not intended to discourage others 

from using other terms. 

As a result of the various types of offices and the proliferation of different processes by 

which the offices operate, individuals who come to the Ombuds office for assistance may 

not know what to expect, and the offices may be established in ways that compromise 

their effectiveness. The standards put forth here were developed to provide advice and 

guidance on the structure and operation of federal Ombuds offices so that Ombuds may 

fulfill their functions better and so that individuals who avail themselves of aid may do so 

with greater confidence in the integrity of the process. Practical and political 

considerations may require variations from these Standards, but it is urged that such 

variations be eliminated over time. 

The essential characteristics of a federal Ombuds are: 

• independence 

• impartiality in conducting inquiries and investigations, and 

• confidentiality 

Subsequent Update to ABA Standards: 

On November 1, 2004, new sentencing guidelines were issued by the United States 

Sentencing Commission, 2004 Federal Sentencing Guidelines. These guidelines were 

updated in compliance with the Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) Act. These guidelines were issued 

after the issuance of the ABA standards but specifically relate to the existence and 

establishment of an Ombuds office. 

Amendment 673 of the guidelines states that determination of fines for any publicly 

traded organization found guilty should be based on the seriousness of the offense and the 

culpability of the organization. The two factors that mitigate the ultimate punishment of 

an organization are: (i) the existence of an effective compliance and ethics program; and 

(ii) self-reporting, cooperation, or acceptance of responsibility. One of the primary 

aspects of an effective compliance and ethics program is to have and publicize a system, 

which may include mechanisms that allow for anonymity or confidentiality, whereby the 

organization’s employees and agents may report or seek guidance regarding potential or 

actual criminal conduct without fear of retaliation.” While the word Ombuds was not 

used, the “anonymity and confidentiality without fear of retaliation” language suggests 

the presence of an Ombuds and some federal regulatory entities have noted the need for 

and encouraged the use of Ombuds. Since many of the SOX requirements are being 

required in Federal operations, this may be a future area of consideration when 

developing an Ombuds office. 

ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATIONS 

A. An entity undertaking to establish an Ombuds should do so pursuant to a legislative 

enactment or a publicly available written policy (the “charter”), which clearly sets forth 

the role and jurisdiction of the Ombuds and which authorizes the Ombuds to 

FINAL VERSION 4 5/9/06 

97 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

:(1) receive complaints and questions about alleged acts, omissions, improprieties, and 

systemic problems within the Ombuds’ jurisdiction as defined in the charter establishing 

the office 

(2) exercise discretion to accept or decline to act on a complaint or question 

(3) act on the Ombuds’ own initiative to address issues within the Ombuds’ prescribed 

jurisdiction 

(4) operate by fair and timely procedures to aid in the just resolution of a complaint or 

problem 

(5) gather relevant information and require the full cooperation of the program over 

which the Ombuds has jurisdiction 

(6) resolve issues at the most appropriate level of the entity 

(7) function by means such as: 

(a) conducting an inquiry 

(b) investigating and reporting findings 

(c) developing, evaluating, and discussing options available to affected individuals 

(d) facilitating, negotiating, and mediating 

(e) making recommendations for the resolution of an individual complaint or a systemic 

problem to those persons who have the authority to act upon them 

(f) identifying complaint patterns and trends 

(g) educating 

(h) issuing periodic reports, and 

(i) advocating on behalf of affected individuals or groups when specifically authorized by 

the charter 

(8) initiate litigation to enforce or protect the authority of the office as defined by the 

charter, as otherwise provided by these standards, or as required by law. 

FINAL VERSION 5 5/9/06 

98 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Federal Guidance Notes: Although federal Ombuds offices generally are established 

under statutes, regulations and a variety of directives and memoranda, rather than 

formal charter documents, for purposes of this Supplement, we will refer to these sources 

of Ombuds authority as “charters.” Ombuds charters should set forth the scope of the 

Ombuds’ responsibilities and related matters dealing with how the Ombuds is to function 

within the federal organization. 

Many federal Ombuds are chartered specifically to deal with employment concerns. 

Consistent with collective bargaining obligations and agreements, Ombuds’ charters also 

may authorize Ombuds to participate in the resolution of bargaining-unit employee 

disputes. In this regard, the collective bargaining agreements should address the Ombuds 

role in employment dispute resolution. See the Federal Guidance Note below following 

the ABA’s Standard regarding “Limitations on the Ombuds’ Authority.” With respect to 

the above Standard, where an Ombuds serves in some capacity as a dispute resolution 

neutral, the Ombuds should consult two other documents prepared and being issued 

concurrently with this Guide by the Interagency ADR Working Group Steering 

Committee, namely “A Guide for Federal Employee Mediators” and “Protecting the 

Confidentiality of Dispute Resolution Proceedings: A Guide for Federal Workplace ADR 

Program Administrators”. 

Federal Ombuds should be aware that there are statutory provisions and there also may be 

regulatory provisions or internal agency guidance that may impact on the Ombuds’ 

functions in dealing with bargaining-unit employees, in particular those under the Federal 

Service Labor-Management Relations Statute, 5 U.S.C. Chapter 71. In this regard, certain 

individuals may not be excluded from a federal mediation, if their attendance and/or 

participation is mandated by federal law. For example, the Federal Service LaborManagement Relations Statute, 5 U.S.C. § 7114(A)(2)(a), entitles a labor organization 

representing bargaining unit employees to be represented at any “formal discussion” 

between one or more representatives of an agency and one or more employees in the unit 

the union represents. This right has been interpreted by the Federal Labor Relations 

Authority and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia as applying to 

mediation of formal EEO complaints when the complainant is a bargaining unit 

employee. See, e.g., Dep’t of the Air Force, 436

th 

Airlift Wing, Dover AFB v. FLRA, 316 

F.3d 280 (D.C. Cir. 2003); Luke Air Force Base, Ariz., 54 F.L.R.A. 716 (1998), rev’d, 

208 F.3d 221 (9th Cir. 1999). Federal employee mediators should consult with the 

agency’s ADR Program official, a Labor Relations Officer, labor counsel or other 

appropriate official when confronted with an issue of union attendance in a federal 

mediation pursuant to its “formal discussion” rights and to assure compliance with all 

such statutory, regulatory or other requirements. 

For those federal agencies whose Ombuds charters authorize initiation of litigation (per 

Standard A (8) above), the Ombuds should be mindful of their obligations regarding the 

maintenance of confidentiality whenever they prosecute such litigation. 

FINAL VERSION 6 5/9/06 

99 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

QUALIFICATIONS 

B. An Ombuds should be a person of recognized knowledge, judgment, objectivity, and 

integrity. The establishing entity should provide the Ombuds with relevant education and 

the periodic updating of the Ombuds’ qualifications. 

INDEPENDENCE, IMPARTIALITY, AND CONFIDENTIALITY 

C. To ensure the effective operation of an Ombuds, an entity should authorize the 

Ombuds to operate consistently with the following essential characteristics. Entities that 

have established Ombuds offices that lack appropriate safeguards to maintain these 

characteristics should take prompt steps to remedy any deficiency. 

(1) Independence. The Ombuds is and appears to be free from interference in the 

legitimate performance of duties and independent from control, limitation, or a penalty 

imposed for retaliatory purposes by an official of the appointing entity or by a person 

who may be the subject of a complaint or inquiry. 

In assessing whether an Ombuds is independent in structure, function, and appearance, 

the following factors are important: whether anyone who may be affected by actions of 

the Ombuds office (a) can control or limit the Ombuds’ performance of assigned duties, 

or (b) can (1) eliminate the office, (2) remove the Ombuds, or (3) reduce the budget or 

resources of the office for retaliatory purposes. 

(2) Impartiality in Conducting Inquiries and Investigations. The Ombuds conducts 

inquiries and investigations in an impartial manner, free from initial bias and conflicts of 

interest. Impartiality does not preclude the Ombuds from developing an interest in 

securing changes that are deemed necessary as a result of the process, nor from otherwise 

being an advocate on behalf of a designated constituency. The Ombuds may become an 

advocate within the entity for change where the process demonstrates a need for it. 

(3) Confidentiality. An Ombuds does not disclose and is not required to disclose any 

information provided in confidence, except to address an imminent risk of serious harm. 

Records pertaining to a complaint, inquiry, or investigation are confidential and not 

subject to disclosure outside the Ombuds’ office. An Ombuds does not reveal the identity 

of a complainant without that person’s express consent. An Ombuds may, however, at the 

Ombuds’ discretion, disclose non-confidential information and may disclose confidential 

information so long as doing so does not reveal its source. An Ombuds should discuss 

any exceptions to the Ombuds’ maintaining confidentiality with the source of the 

information

3

FINAL VERSION 7 5/9/06 

100 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Federal Guidance Notes: The independence of an Ombuds Office is a fundamental 

prerequisite to its effective operations. To ensure this independence, the federal Ombuds 

should, if possible, report and have direct access to the highest agency official. If the 

Ombuds reports to a designee, it is critical that the reporting relationship not present a 

conflict that would impact adversely the integrity, independence and impartiality of the 

Ombuds. Thus, it would not be appropriate for an Ombuds who is called upon to resolve 

employment related matters to report to the agency’s Director of Human Resources, even 

as the designee of an agency head. 

All federal employees, including federal employee Ombuds, are obligated to report 

incidents of fraud, waste and abuse in conjunction with the operation of federal programs 

and to cooperate with duly authorized federal investigative agencies and organizations. 

Indeed, federal Ombuds practice should be designed to facilitate reporting by federal 

employees raising allegations of possible fraud, waste and abuse, in part so that 

meaningful recommendations may be developed by the Ombuds (and forwarded to those 

having authority to act upon such recommendations) aimed at eradicating systemic 

conditions that foster fraud, waste and abuse. Also, on occasion, a federal Ombuds might 

have to respond to Congressional or agency management inquiries pertaining to possible 

fraud, waste and abuse within the agency. By the same token, the maintenance of 

confidentiality is of paramount importance to the effectiveness of federal Ombuds 

programs. To that end, Ombuds charters should expressly affirm the criticality to the 

Ombuds process of maintaining confidentiality. Moreover, Ombuds should be aware that, 

where they serve as neutrals, the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1996 (“ADR 

Act”) specifically protects against disclosure of “dispute resolution communications. A 

federal Ombuds thus may be presented with a conflict between (1) his/her confidentiality 

obligations and (2) his/her obligations to report fraud, waste or abuse. Situations may 

develop, for example, where employees who contact the Ombuds and describe 

circumstances involving fraud, waste or abuse, advise the Ombuds that they are not 

themselves willing to report such fraud, waste or abuse to appropriate agency officials. 

For all such instances where potential conflicts may arise, it is essential that federal 

Ombuds have access to independent or properly insulated legal counsel, in order to 

obtain competent advice regarding the resolution of conflicts. 

3 

A Legislative Ombuds should not be required to discuss confidentiality with 

government officials and employees when applying this paragraph to the extent that an 

applicable statute makes clear that such an individual may not withhold information from 

the Ombuds and that such a person has no reasonable expectation of confidentiality with 

respect to anything that person provides to the Ombuds. 

FINAL VERSION 8 5/9/06 

101 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

In terms of record keeping, federal Ombuds’ records may be subject to regulations 

administered by the U.S. National Archives & Records Administration (NARA), an 

independent federal agency that determines which records and reports should be 

maintained in accordance with the Federal Records Act. In this regard, a distinction 

should be drawn among three categories of Ombuds-related documents: (1) 

programmatic records related to the development and administration of the Ombuds 

program, including documents containing the Ombuds’ recommendations to higher 

authority for correcting systemic problems and the like; (2) statistical data reflecting 

conflict and issue trends – maintained by the Ombuds in a manner that respects 

confidentiality (by containing no information by which individuals can be identified); and 

(3) the Ombuds’ notes that are created in the context of work on specific cases. Whereas, 

the first and second categories of documents would be considered as “federal records,” 

Ombuds’ case notes ordinarily would not be regarded as “federal records,” pursuant to 

NARA regulations, so long as they are not “circulated or made available to employees, 

other than the creator, for official purposes, such as approval, comment, action, 

recommendation, follow-up, or to communicate with agency staff about agency business; 

and . . . contain unique information, such as substantive annotations or comments 

included therein, that adds to a proper understanding of the agency’s formulation and 

execution of basic policies, decisions, actions, or responsibilities. “ 36 CFR 1222.34(c). 

Federal Ombuds offices should review agency record development and retention 

procedures and, whenever needed, should consult agency counsel and records officers 

for guidance as to the creation, maintenance and destruction of records. In addition, 

Federal Ombuds should become familiar with their obligations for complying with the 

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (including the FOIA exemption provided under the 

ADR Act, applicable when Ombuds are serving as neutrals) as well as the Privacy Act, 

and should seek counsel to resolve any questions with regard to those statutes. 

LIMITATIONS ON THE OMBUDS’ AUTHORITY 

D. An Ombuds should not, nor should an entity expect or authorize an Ombuds to: 

(1) make, change or set aside a law, policy, or administrative decision 

(2) make binding decisions or determine rights 

(3) directly compel an entity or any person to implement the Ombuds’ recommendations 

(4) conduct an investigation that substitutes for administrative or judicial proceedings 

(5) accept jurisdiction over an issue that is currently pending in a legal forum unless all 

parties and the presiding officer in that action explicitly consent 

FINAL VERSION 9 5/9/06 

102 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

(6) address any issue arising under a collective bargaining agreement or which falls 

within the purview of any federal, state, or local labor or employment law, rule, or 

regulation, unless there is no collective bargaining representative and the employer 

specifically authorizes the ombuds to do so

4

, or 

(7) act in a manner inconsistent with the grant of and limitations on the jurisdiction of the 

office when discharging the duties of the office of the Ombuds. 

Federal Guidance Notes: Notwithstanding Standard D(5), it is recognized that an 

Ombuds working in government may be expected to remain involved in matters 

pertaining to public accountability and legislative oversight, whether or not a related 

issue is the subject of pending litigation. Ombuds charters may explicitly state that the 

Ombuds has the power to investigate “without regard to the finality of the administrative 

act” and thus to continue involvement in an issue, regardless of its status in terms of 

litigation. 

Standard D(6) provides that Ombuds may not “address” issues arising under a collective 

bargaining agreement, or an issue involving federal, state or local labor or employment 

law, rule or regulation, but implies that Ombuds may do so where “there is no collective 

bargaining representative” and where “the employer specifically authorizes the Ombuds 

to do so.” Charters for federal Ombuds frequently provide specific authority for the 

Ombuds to deal with employment related matters and, indeed, the sole focus of the 

federal Ombuds in many instances is in the area of employee related issues in 

controversy. Ombuds may also be specifically authorized to address issues “under a 

collective bargaining agreement or issues involving federal, state or local labor or 

employment law or regulation,” either by language included within the collective 

bargaining agreements themselves, within memoranda of agreement between labor 

unions and federal agencies, or through some other authorizing documents. Where such 

authority has been conveyed to an Ombuds, the above Standard D(6) does not apply, and 

does not limit the Ombuds’ involvement in federal employment matters. See the Federal 

Guidance Notes following ‘Establishment and Operations’ and ‘Independence, 

Impartiality, Confidentiality’ Standards. 

4 

Under these Standards, the employer may authorize an Ombuds to address issues of 

labor or employment law only if the entity has expressly provided the Ombuds with the 

confidentiality specified in Paragraph C(3). An Ombuds program as envisioned by these 

Standards supplements and does not substitute for other procedures and remedies 

necessary to meet the duty of employers to protect the legal rights of both employers and 

employees. 

FINAL VERSION 10 5/9/06 

103 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

REMOVAL FROM OFFICE 

E. The charter that establishes the Office of the Ombuds also should provide for the 

discipline or removal of the Ombuds from office for good cause by means of a fair 

procedure. 

Federal Guidance Notes: The procedure and grounds for discipline and/or removal of a 

federal Ombuds are controlled by 5 U.S.C. Chapter 75. 

NOTICE 

F. An Ombuds is intended to supplement, not replace, formal procedures

5

. Therefore: 

(1) An Ombuds should provide the following information in a general and publicly 

available manner and inform people who contact the Ombuds for help or advice that – 

(a) the Ombuds will not voluntarily disclose to anyone outside the Ombuds office, 

including the entity in which the Ombuds acts, any information the person provides in 

confidence or the person’s identity unless necessary to address an imminent risk of 

serious harm or with the person’s express consent 

(b) important rights may be affected when formal action is initiated and if notice is given 

to the entity 

(c) communications to the Ombuds may not constitute notice to the entity unless the 

Ombuds communicates with representatives of the entity as described in Paragraph 2 

(d) working with the Ombuds may address the problem or concern effectively but may 

not protect the rights of either the complainant or the entity in which the Ombuds 

operates

6 

(e) the Ombuds is not anyone’s lawyer, representative, or counselor or a substitute for 

any of these, and 

(f) the complainant may wish to consult a lawyer or other appropriate resource with 

respect to those rights. 

6 

The notice requirements of Paragraph F do not supersede or change the advocacy 

responsibilities of an Advocate Ombuds. 

5 

An Ombuds program, as envisioned by these Standards, supplements, and does not 

substitute for, the need of an entity to establish formal procedures to protect legal rights 

and to address allegedly inappropriate or wrongful behavior or conduct. 

FINAL VERSION 11 5/9/06 

104 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

(2) If the Ombuds communicates

7 

with representatives of the entity concerning an 

allegation of a violation, and – 

(a) the communication that reveals the facts of 

(i) a specific allegation and the identity of the complainant 

(ii) allegations by multiple complainants that may reflect related behavior or conduct that 

is either inappropriate or wrongful 

then the communication should be regarded as providing notice to the entity of the 

alleged violation and the complainants should be advised that the Ombuds communicated 

their allegations to the entity; otherwise, 

(b) whether or not the communication constitutes notice to the entity is a question that 

should be determined by the facts of the communication. 

(3) If an Ombuds functions in accordance with Paragraph C, “Independence, Impartiality, 

and Confidentiality,” of these standards, then- 

(a) no one, including the entity in which the Ombuds operates, should deem the Ombuds 

to be an agent of any person or entity, other than the Office of the Ombuds, for purposes 

of receiving notice of alleged violations, and 

(b) communications made to the Ombuds should not be imputed to anyone else, including 

the entity in which the Ombuds acts unless the Ombuds communicates with 

representatives of the entity, as described in Paragraph 2. 

Federal Guidance Notes: Where the employee raising an issue with a federal Ombuds 

wishes to remain anonymous, the Ombuds, acting as a conduit for the employee and at 

the employee’s request, may provide notice to the federal agency or other federal entity, 

to the extent notice is possible with an anonymous report, and should provide notice in 

such a way that anonymity is maintained. It is recognized that, in more instances than 

not, if the complainant remains anonymous, the communication by the Ombuds to the 

agency/entity may not have the effect of placing the agency/entity on notice. 

If the employee does not wish to remain anonymous, the Ombuds should direct the 

employee to the proper office within the agency/entity, in order to provide his/her own 

notice, and should either furnish the employee with information regarding what time 

limitations may apply or direct the employee to where such information may be under 

these Standards, any such communication is subject to Paragraph C(3). obtained. In other 

instances, the Ombuds may make recommendations for the resolution of a systemic 

problem to those persons who have the authority to act upon them. 

LEGISLATIVE OMBUDS 

G. A Legislative Ombuds is established by the legislature as part of the legislative branch 

who receives complaints from the general public or internally and addresses actions and 

omissions of a government agency, official, public employee, or contractor. 

FINAL VERSION 12 5/9/06 

105 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

In addition to and in clarification of the standards contained in Paragraphs AF, a 

Legislative Ombuds should: 

(1) be appointed by the legislative body or by the executive with confirmation by the 

legislative body

8 

(2) be authorized to work to hold agencies within the jurisdiction of the office 

accountable to the public and to assist in legislative oversight of those agencies 

(3) be authorized to conduct independent and impartial investigations into matters within 

the prescribed jurisdiction of the office 

(4) have the power to issue subpoenas for testimony and evidence with respect to 

investigating allegations within the jurisdiction of the office 

(5) be authorized to issue public reports, and 

(6) be authorized to advocate for change both within the entity and publicly. 

8 

This restates the 1969 ABA Resolution, which remains ABA policy, that a Legislative 

Ombuds should be “appoint[ed] by the legislative body or...by the executive with 

confirmation by the designated proportion of the legislative body, preferably more than a 

majority, such as two-thirds.” 

EXECUTIVE OMBUDS 

H. An Executive Ombuds may be located in either the public or private sector and 

receives complaints from the general public or internally and addresses actions and 

omissions of the entity, its officials, employees, and contractors. An Executive Ombuds 

may work either to hold the entity or specific programs accountable or work with 

officials to improve the performance of a program. In addition to and in clarification of 

the standards contained in Paragraphs AF, an Executive Ombuds: 

(1) should be authorized to conduct investigations and inquiries 

(2) should be authorized to issue reports on the results of the investigations and inquiries, 

and 

 (3) if located in government, should not have general jurisdiction over more than one 

agency but may have jurisdiction over a subject matter that involves multiple agencies. 

FINAL VERSION 13 5/9/06 

106 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

Federal Guidance Notes: In addition to general federal executive Ombuds, some 

agencies have been directed by statutes and regulations to create an Ombuds position to 

perform specific functions. For example, Section 16.505 of the Federal Acquisition 

Regulation (FAR) requires federal agency heads to create “task-order” and “deliveryorder” Ombuds for use in connection with multiple award indefinite quantity/indefinite 

delivery type acquisitions. There is great variation among federal agencies in the 

operations of these special purpose Ombuds. Charters for such Ombuds should be 

precise regarding the Ombuds’ location and scope of authority. 

ORGANIZATIONAL OMBUDS 

I. An Organizational Ombuds facilitates fair and equitable resolution of concerns that 

arise within an entity. In addition to and in clarification of the standards contained in 

Paragraphs A-F, an Organizational Ombuds should: 

(1) be authorized to undertake inquiries and function by informal processes as specified 

by the charter 

(2) be authorized to conduct independent and impartial inquiries into matters within the 

prescribed jurisdiction of the office 

(3) be authorized to issue reports, and 

(4) be authorized to advocate for change within the entity 

ADVOCATE OMBUDS 

J. An Advocate Ombuds serves as an advocate on behalf of a population that is 

designated in the charter. In addition to and in clarification of the standards described in 

Paragraphs A-F, an Advocate Ombuds should: 

(1) have a basic understanding of the nature and role of advocacy 

(2) provide information, advice, and assistance to members of the constituency 

(3) evaluate the complainant’s claim objectively and advocate for change or relief when 

the facts support the claim 

(4) be authorized to represent the interests of the designated population with respect to 

policies implemented or adopted by the establishing entity, government agencies, or other 

organizations as defined by the charter 

(5) be authorized to initiate action in an administrative, judicial, or legislative forum 

when the facts warrant, and 

FINAL VERSION 14 5/9/06 

107 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

(6) the notice requirements of Paragraph F do not supersede or change the advocacy 

responsibilities of an Advocate Ombuds. 

FINAL VERSION 15 5/9/06 

108 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

APPENDIX H 

EEO/ADR/Ombudsman Flowchart Comparison

TOP

109 
A UNIFIED MODEL FOR DEVELOPING AN OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION 

1 

EEO contacted within 45 calendar days of alleged discrimination or event in accordance with 29 CFR 1614. 

Referred to EEO. 

ADR contacted within 15 calendar days of alleged event. 

Individual receives EEO counseling. (Possible resolved within 30 to 90 days.) 

Individual elects mediation through ADR (90 days). Individual issued 

Notice of Right to 

File. 

Mediation scheduled. 

Resolution achieved. 

Settlement agreement signed. 

NO YES 

NO 

Elect arbitration if eligible. 

or 

Arbitration 

Individual formal procthrough EEADR 

If informal is unsuccesindividual then referreADR, or exformal pro

NO 

or 

1 2 

1 2

2

EEO ADR 

e

m

Employee Complaints 

EEO-based General ADR cases as part of the collective bargaining agreement. 

Employee complaints alleging discrimination 

based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual 

harassment, sexual orientation, national 

origin, age (40 and above), disability, 

parental status, genetic information, and 

reprisal based on the above. 

1

Formal complaint filed with Treasury Regional Complaint Center within 15 days of Notice. 

110