`[Senate Hearing 115-882]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]




                                 _____

                                                        S. Hrg. 115-882
 
                      STRENGTHENING AND EMPOWERING
                 U.S. AMATEUR ATHLETES: MOVING FORWARD
                             WITH SOLUTIONS

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               before the

                  SUBCOMMITTEE ON CONSUMER PROTECTION,
                       PRODUCT SAFETY, INSURANCE,
                           AND DATA SECURITY

                                 of the

                         COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
                      SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                     ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION

                               __________

                             JULY 24, 2018

                               __________

    Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
                             Transportation
                             
                             
                       _______

             U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 
 57-804             WASHINGTON : 2025
                         
                             


                Available online: http://www.govinfo.gov
       SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION

                     ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION

                   JOHN THUNE, South Dakota, Chairman
ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi         BILL NELSON, Florida, Ranking
ROY BLUNT, Missouri                  MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
TED CRUZ, Texas                      AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota
DEB FISCHER, Nebraska                RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut
JERRY MORAN, Kansas                  BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii
DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska                 EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts
DEAN HELLER, Nevada                  TOM UDALL, New Mexico
JAMES INHOFE, Oklahoma               GARY PETERS, Michigan
MIKE LEE, Utah                       TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin
RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin               TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia  MAGGIE HASSAN, New Hampshire
CORY GARDNER, Colorado               CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada
TODD YOUNG, Indiana                  JON TESTER, Montana
                       Nick Rossi, Staff Director
                 Adrian Arnakis, Deputy Staff Director
                    Jason Van Beek, General Counsel
                 Kim Lipsky, Democratic Staff Director
              Chris Day, Democratic Deputy Staff Director
                      Renae Black, Senior Counsel
                                 ------                                

  SUBCOMMITTEE ON CONSUMER PROTECTION, PRODUCT SAFETY, INSURANCE, AND 
                             DATA SECURITY

JERRY MORAN, Kansas, Chairman        RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut, 
ROY BLUNT, Missouri                      Ranking
TED CRUZ, Texas                      AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota
DEB FISCHER, Nebraska                EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts
DEAN HELLER, Nevada                  TOM UDALL, New Mexico
JAMES INHOFE, Oklahoma               TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
MIKE LEE, Utah                       MAGGIE HASSAN, New Hampshire
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia  CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada
TODD YOUNG, Indiana
                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page
Hearing held on July 24, 2018....................................     1
Statement of Senator Moran.......................................     1
Statement of Senator Blumenthal..................................     3
    Article posted August 11, 2014 from USA Gymnastics...........    58
    Article dated July 24, 2018 from the Orange County Register 
      entitled ``Suspended coaches still working at Southern 
      California gymnastics slub''...............................    86
Statement of Senator Peters......................................    47
    Joint statement from The Sister Survivors to President John 
      Engler and Members of the MSU Board of Trustees............    49
Statement of Senator Cortez Masto................................    52
Statement of Senator Hassan......................................    61

                               Witnesses

Hon. Chuck Grassley, U.S. Senator from Iowa......................     5
Hon. Dianne Feinstein, U.S. Senator from California..............     6
Hon. John Engler, Interim President, Michigan State University...     8
    Prepared statement...........................................    10
    Presidential Directive 2018-5 issued on June 19, 2018 by John 
      Engler, Interim President, Michigan State University.......    65
    Article dated July 21, 2018 from the Midland Daily News 
      entitled ``No ore shame: Midland gymnast discusses Nassar 
      case'' by Kate Carlson.....................................    67
    Article dated July 19, 2018 from the Bleacher Report entitled 
      ``The Woman Coming for Larry Nassar's Job'' by Alexandria 
      Neason, Senior Staff Writer, Columbia Journalism Review....    69
Susanne Lyons, Acting Chief Executive Officer, United States 
  Olympic Committee..............................................    19
    Prepared statement...........................................    20
Kerry Perry, President and Chief Executive Officer, USA 
  Gymnastics.....................................................    29
    Prepared statement...........................................    31
Han Xiao, Chairman, U.S. Olympic Committee Athletes' Advisory 
  Council........................................................    33
    Prepared statement...........................................    35

                                Appendix

Response to written questions submitted to Hon. John Engler by:
    Hon. Jerry Moran.............................................    93
    Hon. Richard Blumenthal......................................    93
Response to written questions submitted to Susanne Lyons by:
    Hon. Jerry Moran.............................................   101
    Hon. Richard Blumenthal......................................   102
    Hon. Catherine Cortez Masto..................................   114
Response to written questions submitted to Kerry Perry by:
    Hon. Jerry Moran.............................................   115
    Hon. Richard Blumenthal......................................   116
    Hon. Catherine Cortez Masto..................................   128
Response to written questions submitted to Han Xiao by:
    Hon. Jerry Moran.............................................   130
    Hon. Richard Blumenthal......................................   130
    Hon. Maggie Hassan...........................................   136
    Hon. Catherine Cortez Masto..................................   136


                      STRENGTHENING AND EMPOWERING



                 U.S. AMATEUR ATHLETES: MOVING FORWARD



                             WITH SOLUTIONS

                              ----------                              


                         TUESDAY, JULY 24, 2018

                               U.S. Senate,
      Subcommittee on Consumer Protection, Product 
              Safety, Insurance, and Data Security,
        Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:58 p.m. in 
room SR-253, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Jerry Moran, 
Chairman of the Subcommittee, presiding.
    Present: Senators Moran [presiding], Blumenthal, Grassley, 
Feinstein, Peters, Cortez Masto, and Hassan.

            OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JERRY MORAN, 
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM KANSAS

    Senator Moran. I call the Subcommittee meeting to order. 
We're going to recess in just a moment. I'm calling it to order 
so that Senator Young can go vote and return. That makes his 
presence here and puts him in order of questioning the 
witnesses. So I hope to have helped you.
    Senator Blumenthal is on his way. We're also awaiting the 
arrival of Senator Feinstein and Senator Grassley.
    So the Committee will stand in recess until the sound of 
the gavel. Thank you.
    [Recess.]
    Senator Moran. Our Subcommittee will come to order. Again, 
the Ranking Member, Senator Blumenthal, is en route. We've been 
joined by a couple of our colleagues. I'm going to begin with 
my opening statement. I apologize to our witnesses and to our 
audience for our tardiness in the start time.
    We had two votes on the Senate Floor. I don't think there 
are further votes this afternoon. So I doubt that we would be 
intruded any additional time from the Committee.
    So good afternoon. Welcome to today's Subcommittee hearing.
    In January, this Subcommittee launched an investigation to 
examine cultural and systemic issues regarding abuse in the 
Olympic movement following the horrific revelations that former 
USA Gymnastics Team doctor, Larry Nassar sexually abused and 
assaulted hundreds of athletes over a span of two decades, even 
well after numerous survivors alerted authorities about his 
actions.
    This Subcommittee, which exercises jurisdiction over the 
U.S. Olympic Committee and Amateur Sports, is fully committed 
to ensuring the health and safety of all American athletes, and 
today marks the third hearing in our ongoing investigation.
    I'd like to first acknowledge that the incredible statement 
made at last week's ESPY Awards watching over 100 survivors 
take the stage to accept the Arthur Ashe Courage Award. If any 
of you haven't had a chance to see that ceremony, I encourage 
you to do so.
    The actions, these brave actions of our young athletes who 
shed light on their painful past have invigorated a national 
calling for change, and I'm glad to have so many of them with 
us this afternoon.
    Since initiating our bipartisan investigation, this 
Subcommittee has held two critical hearings in which the 
members of the Committee and the American public heard from 
distinct witness panels on their experiences related to 
procedural missteps and cultural inaction experienced within 
these troubled organizations.
    In the first hearing, we heard testimony from four 
survivors of abuse across different Olympic sports who shared 
personal experiences about the systemic practices that have 
safeguarded perpetrators, have safeguarded perpetrators, have 
both inhibited victims from coming forward and have prevented 
victims' reports from coming to light.
    All the survivors we've met have highlighted the 
institutional failures that have allowed these heinous acts to 
continue, which we recommit ourselves to fixing by being here 
today.
    Once again, I'd like to echo my appreciation for those 
survivors and the many others who've spoken to us and to our 
staff regarding their painful experiences.
    Their insightful recommendations on what needs to be done 
to correct these failures are certainly appreciated and 
continue to be considered as this Committee works toward 
thoughtful and lasting change.
    In the second hearing, we called on former USA Gymnastics 
CEO, Steve Penny, former Women's Program Director of USA 
Gymnastics, Rhonda Faehn, and former Michigan State University 
President, Dr. Louann Simon, to provide testimony and to answer 
questions on how rampant abuse that took place in the hands of 
Nassar was able to perpetuate for as long as it did.
    I would also like to note that Scott Blackmun, the former 
President of U.S. Olympic Committee, and Martha Karolyi, the 
former National Team Coordinator for USA Gymnastics, were 
invited to attend but declined for medical reasons.
    There were a number of significant details that came to 
light from the questions this Committee posed in that hearing, 
including USA Gymnastics mishandling of critical medical 
records, lack of communication to and within Michigan State 
University related to sexual abuse reports against their 
employees, and, most significantly, the complete lack, a 
complete lack of cooperation demonstrated by Mr. Penny in his 
refusal to answer questions.
    From these findings, along with continued analysis of 
lengthy documentation produced by USA Gymnastics, U.S. Olympic 
Committee, and Michigan State University, we continue to pursue 
answers to many serious questions that remain with the current 
executives of these organizations.
    Most importantly, we expect to hear today which aspects of 
their systems and cultures have changed and how they plan to 
implement serious reforms moving forward.
    Joining us today is Mr. John Engler, Interim President of 
Michigan State University; Ms. Susanne Lyons, the Acting CEO of 
the U.S. Olympic Committee; Ms. Kerry Perry, President and CEO 
of USA Gymnastics; and Mr. Xiao, Chair of the U.S. Olympic 
Committee, Athlete Advisory Council.
    It is my expectation we will receive full cooperation of 
today's panel in answering the Subcommittee's questions to the 
best of their abilities.
    We are also honored to welcome the Chairman and Ranking 
Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Chuck 
Grassley of Iowa, and Senator Dianne Feinstein of California, 
to the Subcommittee to provide opening testimony.
    Given their leadership and work with Chairman Thune of the 
Commerce Committee to enact the Protecting Young Victims from 
Sexual Abuse and Safe Sport Authorization Act of 2017, let me 
also add that the Ranking Member of the Commerce Committee, 
Senator Nelson, their testimony today will be invaluable in 
helping this subcommittee further raise awareness and identify 
solutions that will make a difference.
    We have explored the U.S. Center for Safe Sports in our 
conversations and we appreciate the role that they do and may 
play.
    Let me thank you, Senators, Senator Grassley and Senator 
Feinstein, for your efforts in this regard in the past and the 
time you've taken to prepare and present your testimony today.
    I conclude my opening remarks by emphasizing the bipartisan 
approach that this Subcommittee has taken in its comprehensive 
investigation.
    With the consultation of law enforcement, survivors and 
advocates, we have worked closely together to identify 
meaningful reforms in the best interests of athletes and their 
families.
    During Aly Raisman's powerful speech last week at the ESPY 
Awards, she reminded survivors of abuse. She said, ``You are 
not alone.'' We are here today to remind all survivors of this. 
We are listening. We're committed to change, and we'll make 
certain the next generation of athletes are free to compete and 
represent our nation without fear of abuse.
    In regard to that bipartisanship, I want to recognize my 
Ranking Member, Senator Blumenthal, and his willingness to work 
closely with me and members of this committee to see that our 
work is well done.
    With that, I recognize Senator Blumenthal for his opening 
statement.

             STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, 
                 U.S. SENATOR FROM CONNECTICUT

    Senator Blumenthal. Thank you, Senator Moran, and thank you 
for your leadership on this Subcommittee and most particularly 
on this issue.
    We had a remarkable event this morning. We heard voices and 
saw faces of young athletes of all different ages, all 
different parts of the country, who suffered at the hands of 
Larry Nassar but equally so at the hands of the United States 
Olympic Committee and USA Gymnastics and Michigan State 
University.
    Not only was Nassar the immediate perpetrator of this 
unspeakably cruel and brutal criminal conduct, but also all of 
the organizations and individuals who were complicit by their 
silence or by their looking the other way, which was much 
easier to do.
    Last week, similarly in a remarkable display of unity, 
resilience, strength, more than a 140 heroic survivors came to 
the ESPY Awards and they were honored with the Arthur Ashe 
Award for Courage. No one better deserves it than they.
    These young women have come forth bravely, sacrificing 
their privacy, fighting through efforts to silence them 
directly and overtly to stop their voices, and then, in effect, 
revictimize them. That's a term of scientific art that has very 
apt application here.
    They have been revictimized by this whole process and they 
have risked their athletic careers and reputations to shed 
light on the heinous crimes committed by Nassar but he is only 
one of numerous perpetrators here, and the main point is that 
USOC and USAG, in effect, prioritized medals and money over 
athlete safety. They concealed the shocking pervasiveness of 
abuse across many sports as well as their own woefully 
inadequate systems to address and prevent it and Michigan State 
University officials looked the other way while athletes 
reported abuse over two decades.
    I am concerned that there has been continuing failure, 
loopholes, and lapses, and I am also concerned about the 
efficacy and independence of the U.S. Center for Safe Sports, 
the lack of transparency and responsibility on the part of USOC 
and USAG at the most basic level, the amount of empathy and 
support that officials at MSU have shown for survivors.
    At the last press conference we had before this one, one of 
the survivors said to me when I asked her what she would ask if 
she were sitting here, and she said she would want to know why 
wasn't one enough? Why was it two or three or a hundred forty-
one, or more hundreds around the country? Why wasn't one enough 
for these organizations to take action? The fact is that there 
were many, many more than one.
    These institutions have to answer to themselves, their own 
constituencies. They have to answer to history for their 
glaring failure. The system continues to be badly broken and 
now we are at a turning point.
    I said this morning when 80 of these wonderful, smart, 
accomplished athletes each said in introducing herself, ``USOC 
and USAG and MSU failed me,'' that I don't want to be at an 
event in a year or three or 5 years from now and have the 
refrain be ``and Congress failed me.''
    We have an obligation to do more and do better. So we're 
going to continue with these hearings and we're going to 
support action more than words. Action is necessary. As the 
saying goes, actions speak louder than words. In fact, in this 
instance, words are not enough. You are not alone, but we need 
to honor your pain with action.
    And I want to thank all of you. I look out at this audience 
and I see many of you, the survivors, here again. You have not 
only been brave and passionate but you have been so patient and 
energetic in this cause.
    I also want to mention again, as I did this morning, the 
role of the press in giving voice to the survivors. 
Organizations like the Indy Star, the New York Times, USA 
Today, deserve our thanks at a time when we need that free 
press more than ever.
    And, finally, my thanks again to Senator Moran for his 
leadership, Chairman Thune, and Ranking Member Nelson, and, of 
course, to the two of our colleagues who will begin today 
because Senator Feinstein and Senator Grassley have helped to 
lead this effort.
    Senator Moran. Senator Blumenthal, thank you very much.
    We do now turn to the two Senators from the Judiciary 
Committee, the Chairman, Senator Grassley, and the Ranking 
Member, Senator Feinstein.
    Senator Grassley, you're recognized for your testimony.

               STATEMENT OF HON. CHUCK GRASSLEY, 
                     U.S. SENATOR FROM IOWA

    Senator Grassley. Well, of course, good afternoon and thank 
you, Mr. Chairman, for convening this hearing and giving 
Senator Feinstein and me the opportunity to participate.
    For my part, as a parent and as a grandparent, I can think 
of no issue of greater importance than keeping children safe 
from sexual predators. The abuse scandal that's the focus of 
today's hearing is a grim reminder of that fact.
    Unfortunately, USA Gymnastics and Michigan State University 
aren't the only institutions that have made headlines over the 
years due to sexual abuse of young athletes. Other institutions 
also have struggled with this issue.
    Sexual abuse in any form is an especially troubling crime 
because its victims suffer both physical and mental trauma that 
can last a lifetime. When the abuse if by a coach or a team 
doctor and the victim is a minor, the betrayal of the trust is 
even greater.
    When, as here, there were adults who were in a position to 
intervene but they failed to act, it's a particularly tragic 
situation. The doctor you've referred to, Dr. Nassar, the 
former National Team doctor for USA Gymnastics, abused hundreds 
of victims over the period of years. The significant sentences 
he received ensure that he'll never again hurt a young gymnast 
or any other child, but we must do more to prevent these 
horrific crimes from happening again.
    Congressional oversight of the FBI falls within the 
jurisdiction of Senator Feinstein and my committee and after 
hearing one gymnast complaint about the FBI's handling of the 
allegations against Nassar, I wrote the FBI Director to request 
a briefing on the Bureau's involvement in this case.
    My committee staff spoke with the FBI yesterday and we were 
advised that the FBI's handling of this investigation has been 
referred to the Justice Department, Office of Inspector 
General, and where I have, particularly in this office, respect 
for the Inspector General, sometimes I see this as a move maybe 
to protect the FBI from some embarrassment, at least the 
immediate embarrassment.
    Our committee convened its own hearing on the importance of 
protecting amateur athletics last year. Also last year, I 
joined Senator Feinstein in introducing the bill entitled 
``Protecting Young Victims from Sexual Abuse in Safe Sports 
Authorization Act.''
    This new law requires amateur athletics governing bodies to 
immediately report suspected sexual abuse to the authorities. 
Our Judiciary Committee approved this measure and then worked 
closely with your committee and Chairman Thune on additional 
changes before the President signed the final version in 
February, and I thank this committee for that cooperation.
    The new law also authorizes the U.S. Center for Safe Sports 
to respond to instances of sexual misconduct within the U.S. 
Olympics and Paralympics Community and since its inception, 
Safe Sports has fielded more than 1,200 misconduct allegations 
and issued sanctions against 300 individuals. Its website, 
safesports.org, has a searchable data base that enables the 
public to find out if someone's been banned from a sport or 
otherwise disciplined.
    Just in the last month, I've convened two other Judiciary 
Committee hearings on the topic of sexual violence. I've 
learned that we still need to do more to educate adults who are 
in a position to protect children. We also must reduce 
opportunities for predators to exploit victims.
    For example, in many or most instances, adult coaches, 
trainers, and doctors shouldn't be left alone while working 
with young athletes.
    I'll conclude by thanking you again, Chairman Moran, for 
your leadership on the Consumer Affairs Subcommittee and 
holding several hearings on this issue. You've given a voice to 
people that until lately didn't have a voice, our sexual abuse 
victims.
    Thank you.
    Senator Moran. Senator Grassley, thank you very much. Thank 
you for your appearance today and your words.
    Senator Feinstein.

              STATEMENT OF HON. DIANNE FEINSTEIN, 
                  U.S. SENATOR FROM CALIFORNIA

    Senator Feinstein. Thanks very much, Mr. Chairman. Members, 
thank you for being here.
    It was well over a year ago that I had a meeting in my 
conference room with a group of women and I walked in and 
Senator Grassley. I looked at the faces with expressions that I 
had never seen before, and I realized that it was something 
really serious, and in the course of that discussion, events 
were related.
    We did a bill. Others joined. That bill has passed, and we 
have taken a giant step forward. Last week, in an extraordinary 
moment, broadcast for the whole world to see, USA Olympic 
Gymnasts Aly Raisman, Jordyn Wieber, Jamie Dantzscher, along 
with a hundred athletes, took the stage at the ESPY Awards to 
accept the Arthur Ashe Courage Award.
    It was an incredibly moving presentation, and I thought 
about that time in my office when these frightened faces were 
in front of me and the survivors, many of whom are here today, 
radiate today remarkable grace, beauty, and strength.
    I wonder if they would stand so that we might recognize 
them in this hearing room.
    [Applause.]
    Senator Feinstein. These sister survivors took the stage 
after having endured hellish abuse over many years. This abuse 
was compounded by the toll it has taken on them to come forward 
to tell their story, tell their truth, despite certain 
institutions' repeated attempts to silence them. Their 
solidarity and courage in coming forward, I marvel at it.
    I've worked with Chairman Grassley, Chairman Thune, Ranking 
Member Nelson to protect future victims through the Protecting 
Victims from Sexual Abuse Act, and I so appreciate the support 
of my colleagues.
    But the fact is revelations regarding institutional 
failures continue to force these victims from having to relive 
their experience over and over again. There must be a full and 
transparent accounting of what Michigan State University, the 
U.S. Olympic Committee, USA Gymnastics, and the FBI all knew 
and did about Dr. Larry Nassar while he continued to abuse 
young girls.
    Earlier this month, Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, 
Senator Blumenthal, and I wrote a letter to the FBI Director 
Chris Wray requesting information about why, after the FBI 
received information about Dr. Nassar in July of 2015, the FBI 
failed to intervene while dozens of athletes continued to be 
treated and abused by Dr. Nassar.
    Similarly, despite reports that officials within Michigan 
State University, the U.S. Olympic Committee, and USA 
Gymnastics knew that Dr. Nassar was alleged to have abused 
athletes he was allowed to continue to treat and molest young 
victims. Even after Dr. Nassar was finally arrested and 
prosecuted, hundreds of victims and their parents were never 
notified, contacted, or informed by these institutions about 
how they could obtain information about all that had happened 
to their children.
    To this day, many families of these survivors have yet to 
be contacted by officials at these institutions. Indeed, it 
appears that these institutions undertook massive public 
relations campaigns to preserve themselves rather than rallying 
to the side of these survivors and their families and let me 
say that is unacceptable.
    Last year, when we worked on the Protecting Victims from 
Sexual Abuse Act, the overarching principle for me was the 
question of how can we best support and empower survivors. I 
believe each of the bill's supporters had the same intention.
    Tragically, it does not appear that Michigan State, the 
USOC, USA Gymnastics, or even the FBI adhered to the same 
guiding principle. Instead, there have been disturbing 
revelations of cover-up and trying to silence vulnerable 
victims.
    Some victims were pressured to sign nondisclosure 
statements to silence them from coming forward. I and other 
Senators are looking closely at this issue.
    Ultimately, these institutions must all continue to re-
examine their mission and focus to truly serve as a beacon to 
lift up the well-being of athletes rather than to profit off 
them and protect the bottom line.
    Who can forget when Jessica Howard testified last year in 
our committee, Mr. Chairman, that USA Gymnastics officials 
stated its priority was ``money and medals'' and not the well-
being of young athletes in their care.
    As lawmakers, we must make sure, Mr. Chairman, that these 
institutions are held accountable. So, again, I would like to 
thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Blumenthal, and 
particularly those members who have taken the time to be here 
today, and to the sister survivors here with us again, I want 
to say thank you to them.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Moran. Senator Feinstein, thank you very much. I 
know you and Senator Grassley have a lot on your plate today 
and I appreciate the emphasis you've placed on the topic that 
this Subcommittee----
    Senator Feinstein. Thank you.
    Senator Moran.--is paying a lot of attention to.
    Senator Feinstein. Thanks very much.
    Senator Moran. You're welcome.
    We'll call our other witnesses to the table, please. I call 
the Honorable John Engler, the Interim President of Michigan 
State University; Ms. Susanne Lyons, the Acting Chief Executive 
Officer of the United States Olympic Committee; and Ms. Kerry 
Perry, President and Chief Executive Officer of USA Gymnastics; 
Mr. Han Xiao, the Chairman of the Athletes Advisory Council.
    Welcome. President Engler, Governor Engler, we'll start 
with you. Welcome.

  STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN ENGLER, INTERIM PRESIDENT, MICHIGAN 
                        STATE UNIVERSITY

    Mr. Engler. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Ranking 
Member Blumenthal, and members of the Subcommittee. Thank you 
for your invitation to discuss the important matter of 
protecting athletes.
    For me, next week will mark 6 months of service as Interim 
President of Michigan State. When I arrived on campus, Nassar 
was already behind bars. His crimes had shocked the MSU 
community and the Nation.
    The statements and testimony of survivors before your 
subcommittee and the courts have saddened all of us. Our hearts 
go out to them and we are truly sorry for that. A former 
faculty member perpetrated these crimes through his 
associations with MSU, USA Gymnastics, the U.S. Olympic 
Committee, and others. We all failed the survivors.
    At MSU, my commitment is to make sure this never happens 
again. We are seeking to simultaneously deliver what justice 
and healing we can for the survivors and put strong 
accountability measures in place to ensure that MSU is safe.
    As Senator Blumenthal just stated, actions are critical. I 
made clear from day one that we would do everything we could to 
cooperate with the several investigations and to seek to 
resolve the numerous legal claims.
    In May, I was pleased to announce that the MSU Board of 
Trustees and the many law firms representing more than 300 
survivors had agreed to an historic $500 million global 
settlement. The MSU parties have signed the agreement and it is 
now being finalized with the signatures of the survivors.
    We are proud of the settlement, but we have always believed 
that the legal settlement is only one part of the necessary 
response. From the start, we've made organizational changes 
geared toward improving safety and accountability.
    Our goal is to make Michigan State a campus that works 
aggressively to prevent sexual misconduct and assault and if 
prevention fails has appropriate procedures in place to 
respond.
    My written testimony details many of the actions we have 
taken and the progress we are making. Today, I'll touch on some 
of the most salient points. Very early on, and as a direct 
response to the abuse Nassar perpetrated, we put strong 
emphasis on ensuring the protection of minors and, indeed, 
everyone that comes to our clinics.
    We strengthened the standardized protocols for patient 
consent, for informing patients and parents of their rights, 
and for requiring chaperons in the examination room.
    In my first week, I acted to revoke the tenure of William 
Strampel, the former Dean who failed to supervise Nassar and 
failed to ensure compliance. Earlier this month, we reached an 
agreement and severed all of the former dean's ties to our 
university.
    We realigned our Medical Education and Clinical Operations 
to foster a healthy culture of safety and accountability. One 
important change, for example, the athletic trainers now report 
to the medical staff.
    In the area of prevention, while MSU policies were found to 
be comprehensive and robust, we have followed through on a 
number of expert recommendations to improve the Title IX 
program as detailed in again my written testimony.
    Early on, I appointed a Relationship Violence and Sexual 
Misconduct Expert Advisory Working Group consisting of 
nationally recognized faculty and staff, subject matter experts 
on our campus.
    The work group has been soliciting inputs from across the 
university community, assessing ideas for improving services, 
and making very specific recommendations that we have already 
implemented, including strengthening our policy on mandatory 
reporting obligations.
    Most recently, I created a new Office of Enterprise Risk 
Management, Ethics, and Compliance. It is charged with 
overseeing the development of a framework for identifying, 
prioritizing, and managing risk and ensuring that those who are 
in charge of compliance are doing their job.
    For new students, we've improved our Summer Orientation 
Programs to focus on the prevention of sexual misconduct. Over 
7,400 incoming students have already been trained. We also hope 
to reach into Michigan's high schools with prevention programs 
in the coming school year.
    In terms of personnel, we've added or budgeted for more 
than 30 new staff positions at the Title IX Office, counseling 
and psychiatric services, the MSU Sexual Assault Program, 
Campus Police, and our new Office of Enterprise Risk 
Management, among others.
    Let me just close by saying I'm proud of the way Michigan 
State community, my alma mater, have come together in this 
unbelievably difficult time to respond not only in support of 
the survivors but also to address the urgent issue of sexual 
misconduct and assault that is a serious challenge not just on 
every campus but in so many work places across America.
    MSU is a great global institution, more than 50,000 
students, all 50 states, 133 countries. This fall, we will 
welcome our largest, most diverse freshman class in our 
university's history. While they're settling in, the Board of 
Trustees Search Committee will be moving forward to identify a 
new president.
    In my remaining time, I pledge to continue to implement 
meaningful reforms, administrative changes that increase 
safety, accountability, and respect on the Michigan State 
campus.
    I hope that our experiences, the lessons we have learned, 
and the solutions we have identified may help other 
institutions, a reckoning with the persistent problems of 
sexual assault and harassment is clearly at hand for many 
institutions.
    We owe it to all survivors of abuse everywhere to dedicate 
ourselves to finding effective solutions.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, and Members for 
the opportunity to be with you today.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Engler follows:]

         Prepared Statement of John Engler, Interim President, 
                       Michigan State University
    Chairman Moran, Ranking Member Blumenthal, and Members of the 
Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify on behalf of 
Michigan State University (``MSU'') as we work together to identify 
solutions that will strengthen, empower, and protect our student 
athletes.
    In January, the MSU Board of Trustees appointed me to serve as 
Interim President. As an alumnus of the school, I returned to MSU with 
a heavy heart, recognizing the gravity of the situation and the number 
of lives tragically affected by Larry Nassar's abuse. I accepted the 
position without salary because I owe the University for the positive 
role it played in my success and in order to address the crisis and lay 
a positive foundation for a new president.
    Nassar's crimes shocked the MSU community and the Nation. The 
statements and testimony of the survivors, before your Subcommittee and 
the courts, have saddened all of us. I have apologized publicly to the 
survivors on behalf of the University for the harm Nassar caused. The 
survivors have our sympathy, our respect, and our sincere hope for 
recovery. Our hearts go out to them, and we are truly sorry that a 
former faculty member perpetrated these crimes through his associations 
with MSU, USA Gymnastics, the U.S. Olympic Committee, and others.
    Next week, I will mark six months as Interim President. It has been 
a challenging six months, and there are things I could and should have 
done differently and better. I regret my errors and have publicly 
acknowledged them. I recognize that there have been frustrating periods 
during that time, but I am also confident that we have accomplished 
much.
    Most importantly, we have entered into an historic $500 million 
settlement with the survivors. From the outset, I felt my first 
priority was to achieve a legal settlement with the survivor 
plaintiffs. This just and equitable settlement will avoid years of 
litigation for the survivors, and we hope it will allow them to 
continue their recovery and healing.
    We have always understood that the settlement is only part of the 
needed response. From the moment that I arrived at MSU, we moved 
decisively to make the organizational changes necessary to ensure that 
a monster like Nassar could never again hide on our campus. We are 
working to prevent sexual misconduct on and off our campus and to 
create a safer and more respectful community for all who attend, work 
at, or visit the university.
    To do that, we have to hold those responsible for ensuring the 
safety of our students accountable for their actions and results. 
Accountability is the most significant change that we are implementing 
in a culture of ``shared governance'' where there had been less 
emphasis on actual responsibility for achieving specific outcomes. We 
recognize that our reforms and our actions are our legacy, and we 
pledge to the survivors and to the community at large that we will do 
all we can to protect students, patients, athletes, and others.
    Below, I detail some of the most significant steps we have taken. I 
have also attached a document we have developed--``Michigan State 
University: Taking Action to Foster a Safer Campus''--that describes in 
more detail these and many other actions MSU has taken since Nassar's 
crimes were discovered. This document is updated regularly and is 
available, along with additional materials about our response to 
Nassar, on MSU's ``Our Commitment'' website, https://msu.edu/
ourcommitment/.
                                *  *  *
    Providing Assistance to Survivors. MSU recognized that before the 
healing process could begin in earnest, it would require more than 
policy changes. For the survivors and for the University to truly move 
forward, we would need to resolve the litigation and secure an 
equitable settlement for the survivors.
    In May, I was pleased to announce jointly with the survivors that 
the MSU Board of Trustees and attorneys representing more than 330 
survivors had agreed to a $500 million global settlement. All of the 
MSU parties have now signed the agreement, which is in the process of 
being finalized with the signatures of the survivors.
    We are confident this settlement was the right thing to do. The 
early and successful conclusion of mediation will be beneficial to 
those who have suffered at the hands of Nassar, and their families, by 
avoiding years of litigation and allowing them to begin the recovery 
and healing they seek. The settlement also allows MSU to turn our full 
attention to the institutional reforms and improvements already well 
underway.
    Removing Those Who Enabled Nassar. Within days of taking office, I 
took action to revoke the tenure of William Strampel, the former dean 
of the College of Osteopathic Medicine who supervised Nassar and failed 
to ensure compliance with patient contact requirements. I felt his lack 
of oversight, combined with other issues that came to my attention, 
merited his immediate removal. Even before the formal tenure revocation 
process could be completed, we were able earlier this month to reach an 
agreement under which all of Strampel's ties to the University were 
severed. While that was the most significant and public change, we have 
also taken other personnel actions related to the Nassar crisis, 
consistent with our expectation that faculty and staff be held 
accountable for their responsibilities.
    Protecting Patients and Improving Patient Care. MSU has implemented 
improved patient safety, privacy protocols, and quality of care 
recommendations following an external review of all MSU clinics. We 
have also reorganized the health colleges, clinical practices, and 
student wellness programs and created two new leadership positions to 
ensure improved oversight of the health system.
    Enhancing Student-Athlete Medical Care. Following a comprehensive 
external review, we have added new positions for athletic trainers, 
changed their reporting structure, and standardized chaperone and 
``consent to treat'' policies. The manual for athletic trainers is 
being revised and will be reissued this summer.
    Improving Student Counseling and Psychiatric Services. We have 
acted on recommendations from another external review to support the 
Counseling and Psychiatric Services office created last year. A new 
permanent director was hired in June, temporary counselors were 
retained, and licensed counseling providers have been embedded in 
certain campus neighborhoods to provide local counseling services. We 
have also adopted a single point-of-entry service and are this month 
launching integrated services for domestic and international students 
via a 24-hour phone and text hotline.
    Strengthening Protections for Youth Participants in Campus 
Programs. The University hosts numerous youth visits and programs. MSU 
has updated policies to require that all individuals with unsupervised 
access to minors, including those associated with external 
organizations using our facilities, to undergo annual criminal 
background checks within the prior 12 months. We have also expanded our 
training for employees to recognize and report child abuse and added 
new requirements for training and transportation of minors.
    Enhancing Title IX Policies and Communications. MSU commissioned an 
independent review of our Title IX policies and procedures from the 
respected law firm Husch Blackwell. That firm concluded that MSU's 
``policies and procedures are among the most comprehensive and robust 
we have seen'' and included ``a number of leading-edge practices that 
other schools would do well to consider as models for their own 
programs.'' Husch Blackwell determined that the University's ongoing 
work on its Title IX program ``reflects a strong and genuine 
institutional commitment to combatting sexual misconduct, creating a 
safe campus environment, as well as compliance with Title IX and 
Violence Against Women Act requirements.''
    A report on the second phase of the firm's review, released in May, 
challenged MSU to improve internal communications to raise awareness of 
relationship violence and sexual misconduct prevention resources, 
policies, and procedures. We have taken that recommendation to heart, 
and a variety of education and training improvements have been adopted 
or are scheduled for the academic year ahead, including updates to the 
orientation for incoming students and a comprehensive Title IX campus 
climate survey.
    Convening the MSU Relationship Violence and Sexual Misconduct 
Expert Advisory Workgroup. In February, I formed a new expert advisory 
workgroup to formalize recommendations drawn from the input of 
survivors, students, faculty, and staff from across campus. Chaired by 
a professor of psychology who is a nationally-recognized expert and who 
has conducted community-based research on violence against women and 
children for 25 years, the workgroup has collected feedback from more 
than 200 members of the community and has made numerous recommendations 
for improvements thus far, including many of those listed here.
    Creating an Office for Civil Rights and Title IX Education and 
Compliance. In response to feedback from the community and the 
recommendations of the workgroup, this new office oversees the Office 
of Institutional Equity (``OIE''), which investigates complaints, as 
well as the Title IX Prevention, Outreach and Education Office, which 
is also a new office, focused on increased knowledge and awareness. We 
have created six new positions under this office, adding service 
coordinators, a case manager, and an additional investigator, among 
others.
    Strengthening Mandatory Reporting Obligations. As part of an annual 
review of its Relationship Violence and Sexual Misconduct Policy, MSU 
enhanced the policy to address violations of mandatory reporting 
obligations. Employees who fail to report sexual assault allegations as 
required by the policy are subject to discipline, up to and including 
termination.
    Improving the Investigation of Sexual Assault Reports. MSU has 
adopted a new protocol to ensure coordination between various MSU 
entities. For example, the MSU Police Department now notifies OIE when 
it is investigating relationship violence, stalking, and sexual 
misconduct complaints. The MSU police also works with area police 
departments, sharing its expertise on sexual assaults. In addition, we 
have hired Kroll, a leading independent, third-party investigative 
services firm, to assist with Title IX investigations and reduce the 
response time for complaints.
    Creating an Office of Enterprise Risk Management, Ethics and 
Compliance and Establishing the Position of Chief Compliance Officer. 
The University is subject to numerous national, state and local 
regulations. In a shared governance environment where many units of the 
University operate independently, it is difficult to ensure enterprise 
compliance with all of them. In June, to address this issue, I 
established a new office to improve accountability for monitoring 
legal, ethical, and regulatory requirements. This office will oversee 
development of a consistent ethics and compliance program, improve 
recordkeeping, and develop campus-wide training and communications 
strategies. Earlier this month, I appointed an MSU law professor and 
authority on organizational compliance to launch and lead this office 
and to serve as our first Chief Compliance Officer. The position will 
report to me but will also work independently with the Board of 
Trustees' newly-established Committee on Audit, Risk, and Compliance.
                                *  *  *
    In conclusion, I never expected to serve as Interim President of 
MSU, and I deeply regret the circumstances that brought me back to 
campus. But despite the crimes of Nassar and the tremendous pain caused 
by him, MSU remains a great institution.
    We are the Nation's pioneer land-grant university and one of the 
top research universities in the world--one of 62 members of the 
prestigious American Association of Universities. The University's 
50,000 students come from all counties in Michigan, all 50 States, and 
133 other countries. This fall, we will welcome our largest freshman 
class in the University's history. Teaching and supporting them will be 
more than 5,600 faculty members and academic staff and more than 7,000 
other employees. When those students complete their studies, they will 
join a vibrant and supportive group of more than 500,000 living alumni.
    I am proud of the institution and particularly proud of the way the 
MSU community has come together in this difficult time to support the 
survivors and to improve our campus. Our efforts continue, and a search 
committee is moving forward to identify a new president. In my 
remaining time as Interim President, I pledge to continue to implement 
meaningful reforms that increase safety, accountability, and respect on 
our campus.
    I also believe that our experiences, the lessons we have learned, 
and the solutions we have identified may be able to help other 
institutions in the future. A reckoning with the persistent problems of 
sexual assault and harassment is clearly at hand for many institutions 
that have fallen short of their obligations. We owe it to the survivors 
of abuse everywhere to dedicate ourselves to finding effective 
solutions.
    Thank you again for the opportunity to testify.
                                *  *  *
Attachment: Michigan State University: Taking Action to Foster a Safer 
Campus
                                 ______
                                 
   Michigan State University: Taking Action to Foster a Safer Campus
    MSU is committed to achieving the highest standards in assuring 
patient care and safety; preventing relationship violence and sexual 
misconduct; providing supportive services to students, staff, and 
faculty experiencing these issues; and responding in a trauma-informed 
manner to reports of such incidents. The university is working with 
internal and external experts to improve policies, procedures, 
programs, and operations.
    As an indication of its resolve, the 2018-2019 budget includes 
funding for 13 new Title IX and related positions, including preventive 
and investigative staff; 10 positions in Counseling and Psychiatric 
Services; six new positions including advocacy, crisis intervention, 
and counseling staff in the Sexual Assault Program; four new MSU Police 
officers; two new Employee Assistance positions; two new Freedom of 
Information Act Office positions; and two positions in the new Office 
of Enterprise Risk Management, Ethics, and Compliance.
Protecting Patients and Improving Patient Care
    Michigan State holds the medical profession in high regard, but its 
trust must be backed by supporting policies, procedures, and 
verification. Health care at MSU has been reorganized and new positions 
added to ensure accountability and policy adherence. Model patient 
safety and privacy protocols have been instituted, along with quality 
of care recommendations from an external review. More resources are 
being directed toward student mental health services. Third-party 
quality and safety assurance reviews are planned for July 30 to August 
1, 2018 as we continue our commitment to achieving the highest quality 
of patient care and safety standards.

   Interim President John Engler in February, 2018 announced a 
        reorganization of the university's health colleges, clinical 
        practices, and student wellness programs to increase safety and 
        quality of care across all MSU health care offerings. Two 
        leadership positions were created to ensure proper oversight of 
        the health system.

     Norman J. Beauchamp, Jr., dean of the College of Human 
            Medicine, was appointed to the newly created position of 
            associate provost and assistant vice president for health 
            affairs. In this role, he works to increase safety and 
            quality practices across all of MSU's health care services.

     Anthony M. Avellino assumed the role of assistant 
            provost and chief wellness officer and MSU HealthTeam chief 
            medical officer. Avellino assists with strategic 
            development of initiatives and programs, assuring 
            compliance, best practices, and exemplary care. He oversees 
            core sports medicine and health care providers, guiding the 
            ongoing reorganization of student health and wellness.

   David Weismantel in July, 2018 was named executive director 
        of Student Health and Wellness, a new position. Reporting to 
        Avellino, he will be in charge of all health and wellness 
        services for students provided in Olin Health Center, 
        designated Neighborhood residence halls, and the Student 
        Services Building.

   Andrea Amalfitano, director of MSU's Clinical and 
        Translational Sciences Institute, provides new leadership to 
        the College of Osteopathic Medicine as interim dean.

   A triage protocol to review all reported allegations or 
        concerns of inappropriate practitioner-patient and 
        practitioner-student interactions has been implemented. A 
        multidisciplinary team reviews allegations within 24 hours of 
        receiving a report to determine if there is a risk to patients, 
        students, or staff. If there is any concern, the practitioner 
        is immediately removed from the care setting pending further 
        investigation.

     The team consists of representatives from all three 
            health colleges, the chief nursing officer, the chief 
            medical officer, the Office of Institutional Equity, and 
            individuals from legal and human resources.

     This measure is in addition to the required review by 
            the Office of Institutional Equity and the MSU Police 
            Department. The combined processes ensure a timely, 
            transparent review meant to be one of the Nation's most 
            responsive.

   Policies on sensitive examinations and chaperones have 
        undergone extensive reviews by the medical and nursing college 
        deans and HealthTeam staff to ensure MSU's policies are 
        stringent and uniform across MSU's clinical practices. They are 
        now considered national exemplars and epitomize the commitment 
        to protecting all involved with sensitive examinations 
        necessary to promote optimal health.

     Although initially developed over a year ago, the MSU 
            HealthTeam chaperone policy was revised in February 2018 to 
            ensure uniform patient workflow and documentation 
            requirements.

     Changes have been made to the electronic health record 
            to document the presence of a chaperone for sensitive 
            exams, and training for providers and staff was conducted. 
            The system went live in March 2018.

     A ``consent to treat'' form was adopted for patient 
            registrations. It gives consent to the provider for 
            treatment and also informs the patient of her or his right 
            to a chaperone, making it clear minors can have a chaperone 
            present.

     MSU's health colleges' leadership reviewed policies 
            and procedures governing simulated patients or models and 
            faculty assisting with sensitive exams training. MSU's 
            safety policies and procedures for sensitive exams that 
            occur in the educational setting are now among the most 
            stringent in the Nation.

   Other changes to MSU HealthTeam policies and procedures 
        include:

     Audits are to be conducted quarterly, or as needed.

     A practice location policy identifies approved 
            HealthTeam practice locations.

     The patient satisfaction survey system is being 
            reviewed to obtain better and more timely patient feedback.

     Uniform clinic signage for wayfinding and to inform 
            patients of their rights is in development.

   MSU is enhancing student-athlete medical care based on a 
        comprehensive review by external sports medicine physicians.

     Two athletic trainers will be added to the 13 
            currently employed, and all will report to medical 
            supervisors instead of athletic department staff.

     Chaperone and ``consent to treat'' policies now are 
            aligned with those of MSU HealthTeam clinics, as is on-site 
            signage raising awareness of such policies.

     ``360'' peer evaluation will be applied for sports 
            medicine and training staff.

     Athletic trainers' manual is being revised.

   The university is following through with a number of 
        recommendations for improvements to student counseling and 
        psychiatric services outlined in the 2016 report from Keeling & 
        Associates. Improvements to date include:

     Counseling and Psychiatric Services (CAPS) provides a 
            multi-disciplinary, inter-professional model of care and 
            services for students. After a national search, Mark 
            Patishnock was appointed director June 1, 2018.

     Single point-of-entry service now is accessible for 
            students by referral, phone, or in person. Counseling 
            services are generally short-term without explicitly 
            defined limits. Any student registered for one or more 
            credits is eligible for an initial consultation. The first 
            three psychiatry appointments are prepaid for enrolled MSU 
            students, after which, charges are billed to students' 
            insurance.

     Temporary counselors were retained while several new 
            positions were posted.

     Two licensed counseling providers were embedded within 
            the South and East Neighborhoods as part of a pilot project 
            funded through Residence Education and Housing Services. A 
            total of three embedded staff in residential neighborhoods 
            and another within the Graduate School are planned.

     A secondary CAPS location will open on the third floor 
            of the MSU Student Union in September, housing eight to 10 
            counselors to expand counseling capacity.

     In total, CAPS will grow from 42.8 staff last year to 
            a budgeted 59.8 positions in 2018-19.

     MSU is participating in the JED Campus Program for 
            support in comprehensive systems, program, and policy 
            development--building on existing student mental health, 
            substance abuse, and suicide prevention efforts.

     All MSU students now have 24-hour access through a 
            phone app to talk or instant message a counselor for 
            emotional or mental health services as part of an 
            integrated student support program. Available in multiple 
            languages, it also connects students to resources including 
            articles about anxiety, stress, and relationships. Students 
            with less severe conditions and lower risk can receive 
            counseling without the typical 2-4 week waiting time for 
            services.
Prevention of Relationship Violence, Sexual Misconduct and Sexual 
        Assault
    MSU's Title IX policies are compliant with all applicable legal 
requirements. The law firm of Husch Blackwell reviewed MSU's Title IX 
policies and procedures and in addition to finding them compliant with 
all applicable legal requirements, the review found MSU to be at the 
forefront of a number of practices. MSU is implementing a number of 
recommendations stemming from the review.

   A second phase of the Husch Blackwell review, released in 
        final form in May 2018, assessed awareness and outreach, 
        prevention and education programs, and crisis and advocacy 
        support services. The report recommended improving internal 
        communications to promote awareness, increasing mental health 
        support services, improving alignment of training, awareness, 
        and prevention programs and clarifying responsibilities and 
        accountability within the Title IX office.

     MSU hired a new communications manager in December 
            2017 to support communication and outreach related to Title 
            IX programs. Work is underway to further enhance and 
            implement strategic communication plans for fall 2018.

     The Office for Civil Rights and Title IX Education and 
            Compliance are collaborating with IT Services and with 
            Communications and Brand Strategy to explore new avenues 
            for communication and outreach to students and employees.

     MSU's Office of Institutional Equity held five campus 
            climate forums prior to the release of the second phase 
            final report to solicit feedback from students and 
            employees. Suggestions for improving communications, 
            education, and training, with consideration of special 
            populations, were incorporated into the report.

     Other education and training improvements underway 
            include:

     developing and implementing stronger and more 
            impactful education programs for students who live on 
            campus and their residential hall resident assistants;

     reviewing online and in-person prevention education 
            programs to improve effectiveness while continuing to meet 
            compliance obligations; and

     planning for a comprehensive Title IX campus climate 
            survey for students, staff and faculty during the 2018-19 
            academic year. The survey results will provide important 
            insights to improve resources and responses and fuel 
            creation of prevention, outreach, and education programs.

   Public input focused on prevention is being solicited and 
        received by the interim president's Relationship Violence and 
        Sexual Misconduct Expert Advisory Workgroup through its online 
        contact channel and through consultation with diverse campus 
        and community groups. The workgroup is using the feedback to 
        develop recommendations for improving MSU's programs and 
        practices.

   To institute clear institutional lines of accountability for 
        monitoring legal, regulatory, and ethical requirements, Interim 
        President Engler established a new Office of Enterprise Risk 
        Management, Ethics and Compliance in June, 2018. The office is 
        charged with overseeing development of a consistent ethics and 
        compliance program and a framework for identifying, 
        prioritizing and managing risk.

     Nicholas Wittner, a national authority on compliance 
            programs and professor in residence at the MSU College of 
            Law, was named acting director and chief compliance 
            officer.

   Other enhancements to education and training programs 
        currently in planning include:

     new education and outreach programs for student-
            athletes as well as Intercollegiate Athletics coaches and 
            staff. In collaboration with Intercollegiate Athletics, 
            these programs will include new MSU-developed educational 
            programs and ongoing peer-facilitated dialogues;

     new education and outreach programs to support the 
            complex and unique needs of graduate students and graduate 
            student employees;

     a new high school outreach program to provide 
            prevention education to high school students and their 
            parents;

     alignment of Academic Orientation Program with Title 
            IX prevention education efforts, inclusion of resource and 
            training materials in AOP materials, and addition of AOP 
            sessions focused on connecting incoming students with real-
            life stories of students and the importance of living our 
            Spartan values to foster a culture of safety and respect; 
            and

     collaborating with the Residence Hall Association and 
            Residence Education and Housing Services to develop 
            education programs for on-campus residents and enhance 
            programs provided to resident assistants and other REHS 
            employees.

   All students and employees are required to complete an 
        online training program. Both the student and employee programs 
        focus on:

     information to identify sex discrimination and sexual 
            harassment, relationship violence, stalking, and sexual 
            misconduct;

     awareness of the impact of these issues on the campus 
            community and encouraging community members to end these 
            types of violence;

     advising members of the MSU community about their 
            rights and reporting responsibilities under the 
            Relationship Violence and Sexual Misconduct Policy;

     communicating behavioral expectations for all members 
            of the MSU community;

     connecting community members with support and 
            resources that are available when issues or assaults occur;

     and training employees on their roles in administering 
            the policy.

   The Office for Civil Rights and Title IX Education and 
        Compliance, in partnership with Academic Human Resources and 
        Human Resources, launched a new leadership development training 
        program in March 2018 for MSU supervisors and administrators 
        focused on prevention and response to harassment and 
        discrimination. New protocols for information sharing between 
        campus units were introduced as part of the session content.

   MSU is training employees how to recognize and report child 
        abuse. The university introduced enhanced training in March 
        2017 for individuals managing youth programs that includes 
        information about mandatory reporting requirements and 
        recognizing signs of child abuse. This training was expanded to 
        a full-day workshop in March 2018.

   MSU established a Youth Programs Policy in 2013, which has 
        evolved over time with multiple revisions that are detailed 
        online.

     In May 2017, MSU strengthened protections for youth 
            participating in campus programs. The university's youth 
            program policy has been updated to mandate that all 
            individuals who have unsupervised access to minors are 
            required to undergo criminal background checks within the 
            past 12 months. This extends to any external organization 
            using MSU facilities. New requirements are in place 
            regarding annual trainings, reporting protocols, and 
            transportation of minors.

   MSU hired a Youth Program Director to help manage and 
        oversee all youth programs. David Chupak joined MSU in November 
        2017 to oversee youth programs including any class, camp, 
        program, or other learning activity held on and off campus that 
        includes participation by minors.

     A Youth Programs Advisory Board was established in 
            January 2018, from multiple campus units, to consult on 
            youth program policies and procedures.

     Training was expanded for youth program coordinators 
            and directors, including presentations from subject experts 
            in policy compliance, identifying maltreatment, reporting 
            requirements, gender equity, police response, and mental 
            health.

     Youth program policy revisions are in process, 
            covering topics that include one-on-one adult/youth 
            exposure and electronic communications. New requirements 
            will include application of industry guidelines for 
            supervisor-to-youth ratios. Consequences for non-compliance 
            with youth protection policies will be clarified.

     Handbook templates containing uniform program 
            requirements also will be developed, including the topics 
            of central policies, communication processes, and conduct 
            rules for program participants.

     Program compliance audits commence in summer 2018.

     Director Chupak provides ongoing consultations with 
            youth program directors.

   MSU's Sexual Assault and Relationship Violence Prevention 
        Program is using a grant from the office of Gov. Rick Snyder to 
        implement the ``Greeks Take the Lead'' program, which focuses 
        on sexual assault awareness training for students affiliated 
        with fraternities and sororities.

   The campus-wide ``It's On Us'' campaign held a Spring Week 
        of Action April 2-6, 2018. MSU faculty, staff, and students 
        participated in a series of awareness activities to lead off 
        national Sexual Assault Awareness Month.

   Interim President Engler wrote to college deans, program 
        directors, and department chairpersons in April 2018 to clarify 
        the responsibilities of MSU leaders and managers with respect 
        to employee evaluations. He urged diligence in documenting 
        workplace behavior of concern among subordinates in personnel 
        performance reviews.

   MSU coordinated a working group to ensure consistent and 
        connected messages about relationship violence and sexual 
        misconduct (RVSM) are sent as new students transition, 
        beginning at Academic Orientation Program sessions and 
        continuing throughout the academic year.

     New RVSM resources were added to the Spartan Resource 
            Guide and Planner distributed to students.
Responding to Relationship Violence, Sexual Misconduct and Sexual 
        Assault
    The University Policy on Relationship Violence and Sexual 
Misconduct is clear: MSU is committed to maintaining a learning and 
working environment for all students, faculty, and staff that is fair, 
humane, and responsible--an environment that supports career and 
educational advancement on the basis of job and academic performance. 
Relationship violence, stalking, and sexual misconduct are not 
tolerated at MSU.

   The MSU Sexual Assault Program (MSU SAP) and MSU Safe Place 
        have assisted thousands of people impacted by violence in 
        accessing resources and support. The university has dedicated 
        significant new resources to strengthen these programs and 
        improve our efforts to combat sexual and relationship violence.

   Interim President Engler in February 2018 convened the MSU 
        Relationship Violence and Sexual Misconduct Expert Advisory 
        Workgroup, composed of campus leaders with deep expertise in 
        the areas of sexual assault and relationship violence. The 
        workgroup gathers input from students, faculty, staff, alumni 
        and community members and works closely with other 
        organizations, committees, and units on campus. The workgroup 
        advises the president on best practices and makes 
        recommendations about trauma-informed policies and programs to 
        ensure that MSU is responsive to survivors. The Workgroup was 
        expanded in June 2018 with the addition of two new members.

     The workgroup quickly recommended increasing the 
            number of therapists and victim advocates in the MSU Sexual 
            Assault Program. MSU SAP, which last year served more than 
            650 clients and provided individual therapy to nearly 300 
            MSU students, is a primary resource on campus for student 
            sexual assault survivors. The demand for services has risen 
            sharply in recent years. The workgroup collaborated with 
            the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services to 
            secure grant funding through the Victims of Crime Act 
            (VOCA) to create four full-time positions for MSU SAP, 
            including two therapists and two victim advocates. MSU is 
            also funding an additional full-time crisis counselor and a 
            new clinical supervisor.

     In April 2018, MSU SAP added a ``canine advocate'' 
            named Justice, to lend emotional support to sexual assault 
            survivors in police interviews and court proceedings.

   Increased resources directed to response in recent months 
        include expansion of MSU's Title IX office from 15 to 30 
        employees, and authorized growth of the MSU Sexual Assault 
        Program from 11 to 17 employees.

   The Office for Civil Rights and Title IX Education and 
        Compliance was created upon recommendation by the workgroup to 
        align all Title IX-related functions in one organizational 
        structure. The office oversees the Office of Institutional 
        Equity (OIE) and the Title IX Prevention, Outreach, and 
        Education office.

     Two service coordinators are being hired as primary 
            points of contact for claimants and respondents throughout 
            the investigation and adjudication processes, ensuring that 
            individuals are connected with the supports and resources 
            needed.

     Four additional positions have been created to support 
            the work of the Office for Civil Rights and Title IX Office 
            and OIE.

     Additionally, an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) 
            coordinator--previously combined with the Title IX 
            coordinator role--will now be a dedicated, full-time 
            position.

     An additional OIE investigator will bring the total 
            number of OIE investigators to 10.

   The new Title IX Prevention, Outreach, and Education office 
        will be dedicated to prevention of sex and gender 
        discrimination, relationship violence, stalking, and sexual 
        misconduct. The office will also focus on outreach--in 
        alignment with MSU's land-grant mission--emphasizing our 
        commitment to cultural change through increased knowledge and 
        awareness.

     The office will be staffed by a director, full-time 
            clerical support, and five prevention specialists with the 
            intention of addressing gaps in programming.

     Specialist focus areas are based on feedback from the 
            MSU community and recommendations from the Husch Blackwell 
            phase 2 report. The specialists include:

     a faculty/staff education and community outreach 
            specialist;

     a Sexual Assault and Relationship Violence (SARV) 
            Prevention Program and specialized workshop specialist;

     a bystander network specialist;

     a graduate and professional student outreach and 
            education specialist;

     and a male engagement specialist.

   MSU strengthened its policy on mandatory reporting 
        obligations as part of an annual review of its Relationship 
        Violence and Sexual Misconduct Policy. Employees who fail to 
        report sexual assault allegations as required by the policy are 
        subject to discipline, up to, and including, termination.

   MSU has hired Kroll, a leading global independent, third-
        party investigative services firm, to assist with 
        investigations and reduce the response time for complaints 
        filed under MSU's Title IX Relationship Violence and Sexual 
        Misconduct Policy. Investigators are used, as needed, to handle 
        complex complaints and to reduce the time between filing and 
        finding.

   The MSU Police Department and the Office of Institutional 
        Equity implemented new protocols to ensure that police notify 
        OIE when investigating relationship violence, stalking, or 
        sexual misconduct complaints.

     The new reporting protocol will enable full 
            communication and accountability between these two MSU 
            units. The protocol will also ensure all victims receive 
            information about campus resources and options from OIE.

     Additionally, interlocal agreements bring local police 
            agencies in East Lansing, Meridian, Bath, and Lansing 
            townships and the Michigan State Police into MSU's system 
            so that MSU gains awareness of off-campus misconduct or 
            assaults.

   MSU Police are taking over incident reporting at the Eyde 
        MSU HealthTeam clinical buildings from the Meridian Township 
        police department to prevent gaps in complaint reporting and 
        increasing patrols and training staff in other clinics.

     The MSU HealthTeam is obtaining proposals from 
            independent peer review experts to assist with the review 
            of sensitive cases.

     The MSU HealthTeam also is evaluating replacement 
            systems for its incident reporting system to have the 
            ability to follow up and ``close the loop'' for reporting 
            purposes.

   MSU created a Healing Assistance Fund, which has disbursed 
        more than a half million dollars in payment or reimbursement 
        for counseling and mental health services to victims of Larry 
        Nassar. The fund was set up by the Board of Trustees in 
        December 2017. A 24-hour phone line is available to connect 
        victims with qualified care providers close to where they live.

https://msu.edu/ourcommitment/our-actions

    Senator Moran. Thank you. Ms. Lyons.

  STATEMENT OF SUSANNE LYONS, ACTING CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, 
                UNITED STATES OLYMPIC COMMITTEE

    Ms. Lyons. Good afternoon, Chairman Moran, Ranking Member 
Blumenthal, and the members of the Subcommittee.
    Last February, I agreed to serve as the Acting CEO of the 
U.S. Olympic Committee because I felt an obligation to help the 
organization address the critically important issues of athlete 
safety and empowerment.
    Two weeks ago, we announced that Sarah Hirshland will be 
the next CEO of the Olympic Committee. She's joining us in the 
audience today because of the importance of this issue and she 
looks forward to working with Congress as she leads and 
implements the reforms and the initiatives that the Olympic 
Committee has currently begun.
    Like all of you, I was deeply saddened and angered by Larry 
Nassar's abuse. I heard the stories of victims and survivors in 
court, before this Committee, and last week in the moving 
ceremony at the ESPYs and as recently as the press conference 
today, and many of those same athletes, as you know, are 
joining us in this room.
    Some survivors shared stories of seeking help from the 
Olympic community and finding it unresponsive, needlessly 
complex, and fraught with risks to their Olympic dreams. This 
is appalling and unacceptable.
    The Olympic community failed the people it was supposed to 
protect and I apologize again to each and every one of them and 
their families. I want you to know your voices have been raised 
and we hear you. We have an obligation to do better and we will 
do better.
    When I became the CEO, I announced a series of initiatives 
to address issues of abuse and other structural weaknesses and 
I'd like to update you on our efforts.
    First, we accelerated our efforts with the Center for Safe 
Sport and our own Athlete Safety Programs. We doubled our grant 
to the center, enabling it to build on its investigative 
capabilities.
    We also instituted new reporting requirements of our own, 
requiring national governing bodies to report to us on ongoing 
investigations, unresolved complaints, and banned and suspended 
members.
    Second, we are working to increase the voice and the power 
of athletes. We engaged with the Athletes Advisory Council to 
understand its priorities and recommendations. We are proposing 
changes to the role of the Athlete Ombudsman and we are 
creating a new Athlete Services Department to assist with 
athlete grievances.
    Third, we announced a governance review and launched a 
commission to study and report on engagement with athletes and 
with the national governing bodies. This commission is headed 
by WNBA President Lisa Borders.
    The commission will provide recommendations on potential 
changes to the Ted Stevens Act, the Bylaws of the Olympic 
organizations, as well as other policies.
    Rebuilding USA Gymnastics is our fourth category of focus 
and after we insisted that the previous CEO and then the entire 
Board resign, we helped USA Gymnastics implement governance 
changes and elect a permanent Board with a majority of 
independent directors.
    USA Gymnastics has now completed all of the immediate 
requirements that we set in January for it to maintain its 
certification as a national governing body. They know they 
still have a long way to go.
    We will continue to support USA Gymnastics on its way to 
implementing a true change in culture.
    A fifth category will develop when we receive the report of 
the independent investigation. The investigation focuses on 
both the Olympic Committee and USA Gymnastics and we will make 
the report public in its entirety and take whatever actions are 
appropriately based on whatever the findings may be.
    As Congress considers additional solutions, I'd 
respectfully ask to offer some input.
    First, Congress can support further funding of the Center 
for Safe Sport. The Center's independence is critical to its 
success and expanding its sources of funding will strengthen 
that independence.
    Second, the Olympic Committee encourages the Congress to 
look closely at the recommendations that will come from the 
Athlete and NGB Engagement Commission.
    Third, the Safe Sport Act provides the Center with 
liability protection for sharing information on bans and 
suspensions. We ask Congress to consider extending those 
protections to bans and suspensions imposed by national 
governing bodies.
    We have begun to make significant progress in strengthening 
protections for athletes but our collective efforts must not 
cease. We must support the victims and survivors and honor 
those who have stood up against abuse. We promise to lead the 
Olympic community to bring real and lasting change.
    I would be happy to answer your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Lyons follows:]

 Prepared Statement of Susanne Lyons, Acting Chief Executive Officer, 
                    United States Olympic Committee
    Good afternoon Chairman Moran, Ranking Member Blumenthal, and 
Senators of the Subcommittee. Last February, I agreed to serve as the 
acting CEO of the U.S. Olympic Committee because I felt an obligation 
to help the organization address the critically important issues of 
athlete safety and empowerment. Two weeks ago, we announced that the 
Olympic Committee had selected Sarah Hirshland to serve as the 
organization's next chief executive officer. We expect that Ms. 
Hirshland will assume her role in late August, after she concludes her 
current obligations with the U.S. Golf Association. Ms. Hirshland is 
joining us in the audience today, and she asked that I convey to you 
that she looks forward to working with you as she continues to 
implement the reforms and initiatives that the Olympic Committee 
currently has underway. It has been an honor to serve as acting CEO 
during this important period in the Olympic Committee's history.
    Like all of you, I was deeply saddened to hear the statements of 
the girls and women who were the victims of Larry Nassar, and I was 
devastated and angered to find that he was able to perpetuate his abuse 
for so long. I heard the powerful and compelling stories of victims and 
survivors in court, in testimony before this committee, and just last 
week in the moving ceremony at the ESPY Awards. Most concerning, some 
survivors shared stories of seeking help from people in the Olympic 
community and finding the system unresponsive, needlessly complex, or 
fraught with risks to their Olympic dreams. This is appalling and 
unacceptable. The Olympic community failed the people it was supposed 
to protect, and I apologize again to each and every one of them, and 
their families, for the Olympic community's failings. We have an 
obligation to do better, and we will do better.
    When I became acting CEO, I announced a series of initiatives to 
strengthen our handling and response to issues of abuse and address 
other structural weaknesses within the Olympic community. We have made 
significant progress on those initiatives, and at the same time, we 
have continued to refine our plans for reform, adding new initiatives 
and efforts as we identified additional areas in need of attention.
    Our reform efforts fall generally into four categories. I would 
like to update the Committee on our efforts in each area. In addition, 
attached to my written testimony are further details on the actions 
that we have taken in connection with this effort, which we call our 
Athlete Safety and Advocacy Action Plan.
1. SafeSport and Athlete Safety Programs
    First, we are redoubling our efforts with the Center for SafeSport 
and athlete safety programs. The Center launched just last year as an 
independent entity, and it is already clear that it is serving an 
essential role. The Center has experienced a significant increase in 
the number of reports of abuse. Although any report is disheartening, 
this is precisely the reason that we need the Center: It provides a 
safe and independent path for athletes to report concerns so that the 
Olympic and Paralympic community can address them. We fulfilled our 
commitment to double the Olympic Committee's funding of the Center, 
adding $1.55 million to our existing annual grant to enable the Center 
to hire more staff, conduct more investigations, and undertake 
additional educational activities. The NGBs have also committed to 
increasing their funding for the next Fiscal Year. At its launch, the 
Center focused on sexual abuse cases, as that was the most pressing 
need. Now we are supporting their work to find ways to investigate 
other abuses such as bullying and hazing in appropriate cases, and 
assisting them with the development of database systems. Additionally, 
after more than a year of experience, the Center is working hard on its 
policies and procedures to identify potential improvements, and we are 
working hard to support that effort as well.
    We have also made reforms within the Olympic Committee, including 
updating our Athlete Safety Policy to reflect the SafeSport 
authorization legislation enacted this year, and hiring a new senior 
director of athlete safety. In our leadership role in the Olympic and 
Paralympic community, we have instituted new reporting requirements on 
national governing bodies, requiring them to report on ongoing 
investigations, unresolved grievances and ethics complaints, and banned 
and suspended members not submitted to the Center for SafeSport. We 
have an ongoing effort to improve the coordination and information 
sharing among the Center, the Olympic Committee, and the national 
governing bodies regarding individuals on banned or suspended lists. We 
need to make it easier for parents, athletes, and potential employers 
to access information about coaches and athletes on banned and 
suspended lists.
2. Athlete Advocacy
    Second, we are listening to and enhancing the voices of athletes in 
Olympic Committee governance and the Olympic and Paralympic community. 
The Ted Stevens Act already requires all Olympic governing bodies to 
include a significant number of athletes in their governance, and we 
want to increase the involvement of the broader community of athletes 
in providing feedback and assistance in strengthening our policies and 
procedures. The cornerstones of this effort are a number of athlete 
surveys and a series of athlete working sessions that we have begun and 
will continue this year. Initial survey results have been shared with 
the Athletes' Advisory Council, national governing bodies, and the 
Center for SafeSport. We are also launching leadership training for 
athletes who are part of the governance process at the Olympic and 
Paralympic Assembly. We have worked with the Athletes' Advisory Council 
to identify its priorities and recommendations, including seeking its 
input on athlete representation on the Olympic Committee's board. We 
also added a position within the office of the Athlete Ombudsman 
dedicated to increased communication with athletes about services and 
resources available to athletes, and we are creating a new athlete 
services department that will focus on assisting with individual 
athlete grievances. Finally, we are planning an athlete symposium to 
bring together a diverse set of athletes and provide a forum for 
raising concerns and identifying issues in need of attention by the 
Olympic Committee.
3. Olympic Committee Engagement with National Governing Bodies and 
        Athletes
    Third, we announced a governance review to inform our engagement 
with national governing bodies and athletes, and our oversight of the 
Olympic and Paralympic movements in the United States. In recent years, 
the relationship between the Olympic Committee and the national 
governing bodies has evolved, particularly with respect to the Center, 
which removed the national governing bodies' authority to investigate 
and resolve issues of sexual abuse. More recently, the Olympic 
Committee took a very active role in the reform of USA Gymnastics. We 
need to make sure we are organized and empowered to take appropriate 
steps like this especially where needed to protect athletes.
    Because of the critical importance of this issue and the need to 
seek input from independent sources, the Olympic Committee elected to 
create a formal commission to study and report on the manner in which 
the Olympic Committee engages with national governing bodies and 
athletes. The Olympic Committee created a charter for an Athlete and 
NGB Engagement Commission and selected Lisa Borders, the president of 
the Women's National Basketball Association, as the chair of the 
commission. The commission will include athletes, representatives from 
national governing bodies, and individuals with governance expertise in 
relevant organizations. The commission is tasked with reviewing the 
Olympic Committee's interaction with and oversight of national 
governing bodies and its engagement with athletes. The commission will 
also provide recommendations, including whether changes are needed to 
the Ted Stevens Olympic and Amateur Sports Act, the bylaws of the 
Olympic Committee or national governing bodies, and other policies and 
procedures. Even before getting input from the commission, the Olympic 
Committee is also creating a new committee of its board of directors 
dedicated to athlete and national governing body engagement, which will 
include the chairs of the Athlete Advisory Council and the National 
Governing Bodies Council.
4. Reform of USA Gymnastics
    Rebuilding USA Gymnastics is the fourth category of our ongoing 
focus. We committed to a $1.3 million grant to the National Gymnastics 
Foundation, for athlete assistance programs, medical support, and 
counseling, matching USA Gymnastics' commitment to that effort. The 
Olympic Committee's leadership is in nearly constant contact with CEO 
Kerry Perry, the USA Gymnastics board, and others at USA Gymnastics. 
After we insisted that the previous CEO and then the entire board 
resign, we worked closely to advise USA Gymnastics on seating the 
interim board composed of new voices with more independence. We 
supported the interim board as they implemented governance reforms 
consistent with best practices. We provided financial assistance for 
USA Gymnastics to engage outside assistance in the seating of a new 
board and training in board best practices. On June 20, 2018, ahead of 
the deadline the Olympic Committee had set, USA Gymnastics seated a 
permanent board with a majority of independent directors. I am pleased 
to report to the Subcommittee that USA Gymnastics has now completed all 
of the requirements contained in the Olympic Committee's January 25 
letter to the organization.
Independent Investigation
    Even as we push forward on these four categories, there is an 
important fifth category that will develop in the coming months when we 
receive the report of the independent investigation being conducted by 
Ropes & Gray. The Olympic Committee's board of directors retained Ropes 
& Gray to conduct a fully independent investigation into Nassar's 
abuse. We instructed the investigators to identify who knew about the 
abuse, what they knew and when, and what they did or did not do with 
this information. Importantly, Ropes & Gray will also investigate the 
circumstances that allowed the abuse to continue for so long. They are 
authorized to report on any other findings on abuse in other sports or 
related information that they deem important. The investigation covers 
both the Olympic Committee and USA Gymnastics. We have been resolute in 
ensuring that Ropes & Gray has independence in the conduct of the 
investigation and the resources needed to carry it out fully and 
effectively. We will make the report public in its complete and 
unabridged form. The Olympic Committee's board has committed to taking 
whatever actions are appropriate based on the facts that emerge from 
the investigation and the report.
Role of Congress
    As the Committee and others in Congress consider moving forward 
with additional solutions, as the title of this hearing indicates, I 
respectfully want to offer some brief input.
    First, Congress can support further funding for the Center for 
SafeSport, as it has done historically for the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency 
by contributing approximately $10 million per year. As the Committee 
knows, funding for the Center was a significant challenge in its 
launch. Additionally, the Olympic Committee believes that the Center's 
independence from the Olympic Committee is critical to its success. 
Although the Olympic Committee elected to provide the bulk of the 
Center's funding in an effort to get the Center launched as soon as 
possible, it would be preferable for the Center's independence if it 
had additional sources of funding. In the 2018 omnibus spending bill, 
Congress established a grant program directed at athlete safety, and we 
expect the Center will compete for this grant. This is an important 
development and we support consistent and dedicated Federal funding for 
the Center. To be clear, the Olympic Committee is committed to ensuring 
that the Center has the resources necessary for its important mission, 
and we will continue to provide significant funding for the Center. We 
believe that expanding its sources of funding with strengthen its 
independence.
    Second, the Olympic Committee encourages Congress to look closely 
at the recommendations that may come from the Athlete and NGB 
Engagement Commission. Although the Olympic Committee believes that the 
Ted Stevens Act provides it with the authority to take the actions we 
are taking today, the commission may identify areas for potential 
clarification or expansion of the Olympic Committee's authority, or 
other needed reforms, including outside of the Act.
    Third, in the Protecting Young Victims from Sexual Abuse and Safe 
Sport Authorization Act, Congress provided the Center with liability 
protection for the exercise of certain of its official functions, 
including protection against lawsuits for defamation, libel, or 
slander. This liability protection has proven to be important for the 
Center's ability to provide information on people banned or suspended 
from Olympic sports. Neither the Olympic Committee nor the national 
governing bodies are covered by these provisions. Congress should 
consider whether these protections should be extended to other Olympic 
and Paralympic organizations or whether the language should be 
clarified to encompass information published by the Center that relates 
to a national governing body adjudication, to help enable broader and 
more comprehensive information for athletes, parents, and others.
    The Olympic Committee and the broader Olympic and Paralympic 
community have made significant progress in strengthening protections 
for athletes, but our collective efforts must never cease. We must 
support the victims and survivors, and honor those who have stood up 
against abuse. We promise to lead the Olympic community to bring real 
and lasting change.
U.S. Olympic Committee and National Governing Bodies
    The Olympic Committee was founded in 1894. It serves as both the 
National Olympic Committee and National Paralympic Committee for the 
United States. The Olympic Committee is responsible for the training 
and funding of the United States' teams for the Olympic, Paralympic, 
Youth Olympic, Pan American, and Parapan American Games, and serving as 
a steward of the Olympic movement throughout the country.
    In 1978, the Amateur Sports Act (now called the Ted Stevens Olympic 
and Amateur Sports Act) appointed the Olympic Committee as the 
coordinating body for all Olympic athletic activity in the United 
States. Pursuant to the statute, the Olympic Committee supports 
athletes through funding, health insurance, tuition grants, marketing 
opportunities, and career services. The Olympic Committee supports the 
Olympic Training Centers and Olympic Training Sites for athletic 
training, conditioning, sports medicine, and nutrition assistance. The 
Olympic Committee also oversees the process by which U.S. cities bid to 
host the Olympic and Paralympic Games, the Youth Olympic Games, and the 
Pan/Parapan American Games.
    The Ted Stevens Act also authorizes the Olympic Committee to 
recognize a national governing body for any sport that is included in 
the various Olympic Games. The Olympic Committee may recognize only one 
such governing body for each sport (except as it may relate to the 
Paralympics). Once selected, that organization takes on a number of 
obligations related to amateur athletic activity in that sport in the 
United States, including sanctioning and conducting competitions, and 
recommending teams to represent the United States in the Olympic Games. 
The national governing bodies also oversee the training and development 
of athletes in their respective sports.
    Today, there are 50 organizations that have been recognized by the 
Olympic Committee as a national governing body. There is a large degree 
of variation among these organizations. For example, U.S. Soccer 
manages national soccer activities that range from local recreational 
soccer programs for children to the U.S. National Men's and Women's 
soccer teams. These diverse soccer programs include thousands of 
coaches and officials and hundreds of thousands of athletes. Olympic 
activity, therefore, is a small part of U.S. Soccer's focus and 
activities. Conversely, USA Pentathlon is a smaller organization and 
Olympic activities are a primary focus of the organization.
    Because each national governing body is the primary organization 
that manages and oversees the activities of coaches and athletes, each 
organization has its own rules and procedures related to athletes and 
coaches. On key areas of governance, however, the Olympic Committee 
uses its designation authority under the Ted Stevens Act to require 
each national governing body to adopt certain standards. And in 
challenging areas that affect the entire Olympic and Paralympic 
community, we have gone even further to establish entities that are 
independent of any individual national governing body and dedicated to 
addressing specific challenging topics. This is the approach that we 
took in response to doping issues in the late 1990s, and it is the 
approach we have taken with the Center for SafeSport.
U.S. Center for SafeSport
    The Olympic Committee has long worked with the national governing 
bodies on efforts to protect athletes from sexual and other abuses. In 
2010, the Olympic Committee determined that the issue warranted renewed 
attention following public reports of sexual abuse cases concerning 
swimmers. The Olympic Committee convened a working group to study the 
problem and make specific recommendations for improvements to the 
Olympic Committee board. Nina Kemppel, a four-time Olympic skier and 
current board member of the Olympic Committee, chaired the working 
group. The working group produced six comprehensive recommendations for 
action by the Olympic Committee: Increase its leadership role; lead by 
example; develop training materials; develop resources for use by local 
clubs and organizations; standardize services that promote safe 
training environments; and encourage national governing bodies to adopt 
policies to address sexual and physical misconduct.
    Since then, the Olympic Committee has implemented each of the 
working group's recommendations. As it was implementing the working 
group's recommendations, the Olympic Committee concluded that the 
Olympic sports program would benefit from an independent entity 
dedicated to protecting youth athletes' safety. In June 2014, the 
Olympic Committee's board approved the creation of an independent 
SafeSport entity and began the process of establishing the Center for 
SafeSport. In September 2015, the Olympic Committee established the 
Center's nominating and governance committee. In January 2016, the 
first board of the Center was seated and held its first meeting. In 
June 2016, the Olympic Committee's board approved the launch of the 
Center. In November 2016, the Center selected its first chief executive 
officer, Shellie Pfohl, who previously served as the executive director 
of the President's Council on Fitness, Sports, and Nutrition. In March 
2017, the Center officially opened.
    The Center's activities are guided by a SafeSport Code that covers 
everything from harassment and hazing to physical and sexual 
misconduct. In addition to the Code, the Center for SafeSport has 
adopted practices and procedures and procedural rules for arbitration 
that govern its investigation and resolution of alleged violations. 
These important procedural improvements centralize and clarify the 
process by which allegations of abuse are investigated and resolved. By 
adopting clear procedures that apply to all investigations by the 
Center, we seek to ensure a fair process that permits swift actions to 
protect children.
    The Olympic Committee requires each national governing body to 
participate in the Center for SafeSport as a condition of being 
recognized by the Olympic Committee. Specifically, under section 8.7(l) 
of the Olympic Committee's bylaws, each national governing body must 
comply with the Olympic Committee's policies related to SafeSport and, 
additionally, the policies and procedures of the Center for SafeSport. 
These provisions require all national governing bodies and their 
personnel to report suspected sexual abuse to the Center and to law 
enforcement. The Center has exclusive authority within the Olympic and 
Paralympic community to investigate and resolve violations involving 
sexual misconduct. Additionally, the Center has discretionary authority 
to assume responsibility for the investigation and resolution of other 
violations of the Code; if not exercised, the applicable governing body 
retains the authority and obligation to investigate and resolve the 
allegation.
    The Olympic Committee's regular and periodic audits of the 
independent national governing bodies include auditing of the 
organizations' compliance with the requirements of SafeSport. In 2017, 
the Olympic Committee engaged a third-party auditor, Baker Tilly 
Virchow Krause, to audit the compliance of the Olympic Committee and 
all the national governing bodies with SafeSport policies and 
procedures. The audit focused on compliance with the Athlete Safety 
Policy and the policies associated with the then-new Center for 
SafeSport. After the initial audit, each organization (including the 
Olympic Committee) was required to address deficiencies, and the 
Olympic Committee is monitoring and reviewing follow up. The audit 
results are available on our website. The Olympic Committee is now 
undertaking rolling audits of national governing bodies throughout the 
year, using its internal audit division supplemented by outside 
assistance.
    The Center for SafeSport seeks to address the barriers and 
disincentives that victims may face when seeking to report abuse. The 
Center creates an independent path for reporting and an independent 
system for investigating and resolving cases of sexual abuse. With the 
Center, we have created a system that removes the investigation and 
resolution of allegations of sexual abuse from the control of any 
national governing body, including USA Gymnastics, and a resource 
dedicated to education and awareness of the importance of reporting 
abuse. We believe that these changes will significantly improve the 
protection of youth athletes from sexual and other abuses.
    The approach that we have taken with the Center for SafeSport is 
similar to the approach that we previously adopted in establishing the 
U.S. Anti-Doping Agency in 1999. The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency has been 
very successful at concentrating expertise and ensuring independence in 
investigations of doping issues. By following this model in the 
creation of the Center for SafeSport, we will also bring expertise and 
independence to our efforts to prevent abuse of youth athletes.
    Recently, Congress and the President enacted the Protecting Young 
Victims from Sexual Abuse and Safe Sport Authorization Act, which 
complements and further strengthens the reporting requirements of the 
Olympic Committee and the Center. The law imposes a mandatory reporting 
requirement on any adult authorized by a national governing body or 
member to interact with a minor or amateur athlete at an amateur sports 
organization facility or at an event sanctioned by a national governing 
body or member. The legislation also provides Federal authorization for 
the Center. The Olympic Committee supported this legislation and worked 
with Congress on its passage. The legislation helpfully brings the 
force of Federal law behind the mandatory reporting requirements of the 
Center's rules.
USA Gymnastics
    Over the months since the launch of the Center in March 2017, we 
have unfortunately continued to see new and concerning revelations 
about the Olympic community's failure to protect athletes, particularly 
with respect to USA Gymnastics, and in other sports as well. In June 
2017, Deborah Daniels issued a report that examined USA Gymnastics' 
bylaws, policies, procedures, and practices related to handling sexual 
misconduct matters. After conducting more than 160 interviews, Ms. 
Daniels recommended a number of structural and policy changes within 
USA Gymnastics. The USA Gymnastics board voted unanimously to accept 
her recommendations.
    Most significantly, in January 2018, the entire Olympic community 
was shocked and horrified to hear the powerful statements from the 
victims of Larry Nassar. On January 24, 2018, the Olympic Committee 
issued an open letter to all Olympic athletes announcing that it would 
launch an independent investigation into the detection and reporting of 
Nassar within both USA Gymnastics and the Olympic Committee. On January 
25, 2018, the Olympic Committee issued a letter to the board of USA 
Gymnastics outlining six specific steps that the Olympic Committee is 
requiring of USA Gymnastics. In the letter to USA Gymnastics, the 
Olympic Committee specifically indicated that completion of these 
actions was necessary for USA Gymnastics to retain its recognition as 
the national governing body for Olympic gymnastics.
    First, the Olympic Committee required all members of the USA 
Gymnastics board to resign. That process was completed on January 30, 
2018. Second, the Olympic Committee required USA Gymnastics to seat an 
interim board, consistent with its current bylaws, with all new 
membership (except that the athletes may reelect their representatives) 
by February 28, 2018. That process was completed on February 27, 2018. 
Third, USA Gymnastics was required to create a new permanent board 
within one year, which it completed on June 20, 2018. Fourth, for the 
next year, an Olympic Committee representative must participate in each 
board meeting of USA Gymnastics, the USA Gymnastics board must discuss 
and report on progress instituting reforms, and USA Gymnastics must 
cooperate with the independent investigation, among other requirements. 
Fifth, all USA Gymnastics staff and board members were required to 
complete SafeSport training within three months, which they have now 
completed. And, sixth, all USA Gymnastics staff and board members must 
complete ethics training within six months, which they have now 
completed.
    The Olympic Committee took these unprecedented actions because it 
concluded that an entirely new leadership structure was needed to 
rebuild USA Gymnastics. The Olympic Committee offered to assist USA 
Gymnastics with its rebuilding effort. Indeed, officials of the Olympic 
Committee have been working closely with USA Gymnastics' new CEO, Kerry 
Perry, on supporting the selection and seating of new board members, 
the other reforms required by the Olympic Committee, and revisions to 
USA Gymnastics' bylaws to provide a more independent board. Again, the 
Olympic Committee explicitly stated that if USA Gymnastics fails to 
implement these reforms, the Olympic Committee will pursue termination 
of USA Gymnastics' designation as a national governing body.
    On February 2, 2018, a special committee of the board of the 
Olympic Committee announced that it had hired the law firm Ropes & Gray 
to conduct the independent investigation announced on January 24. The 
investigation is now examining the decades-long abuse by Nassar to 
determine when individuals affiliated with USA Gymnastics or the 
Olympic Committee first became aware of any evidence of Nassar's abuse 
of athletes, what that evidence was, and what they did with it. Joan 
McPhee and James Dowden, both former Federal prosecutors, are leading 
the investigation. The investigators have full discretion to carry out 
the investigation and make findings as they deem appropriate. The 
Olympic Committee directed Ropes & Gray to prepare and issue a public 
written report at the conclusion of the investigation. The Olympic 
Committee pledged its full support to the investigation, including 
access to relevant documents and witnesses. USA Gymnastics has also 
confirmed its cooperation.
    Most recently, the Olympic Committee has assisted USA Gymnastics 
with governance reforms, including the selection of a new permanent 
board containing a majority of independent directors. USA Gymnastics 
seated that new permanent board on June 20, 2018. USA Gymnastics has 
now completed all of the requirements contained in the Olympic 
Committee's January 25 letter.
                                *  *  *
    Thank you for the opportunity to address these critically important 
issues. We owe it to the victims and survivors of abuse in sports to 
ensure that our efforts to improve the safety and security of Olympic 
athletes never cease. I would be happy to answer your questions.
                                 ______
                                 
       Commitment to a Safer U.S. Olympic & Paralympic Community
    The United States Olympic Committee is deeply focused on critical 
initiatives and collaboration across the entire U.S. Olympic and 
Paralympic community to protect, support and empower America's 
athletes.
    Across the world, girls and women in particular are bravely sharing 
the egregious sexual abuse, harassment and discrimination they have 
faced for too long. This behavior has no place in the U.S. Olympic and 
Paralympic community, and now is the time for organizations, 
institutions and individuals alike to reignite a culture of athlete 
empowerment and competitive excellence--one that is a safe, respectful 
and supportive environment. The USOC has made significant progress to 
strengthen protections for athletes, and the collective efforts to 
improve athlete safety must never cease.
Athlete Safety & Advocacy Action Plan
    Building upon actions taken starting in 2010, the USOC created and 
implemented the overarching, multi-disciplinary Athlete Safety & 
Advocacy Action Plan in 2018 to provide a safer environment for 
athletes and enable the organization to more effectively achieve its 
mission. Through the Action Plan, the USOC is both examining the past, 
and taking short-and long-term action to create a safer and more 
empowering environment now and in the future.

  1.  Important Lessons Learned
     The USOC is at a critical point in its history. The U.S. Olympic 
        and Paralympic community has an obligation to find out how the 
        Nassar tragedy and other instances of sexual abuse happened, 
        and take the necessary steps to help prevent such atrocities 
        from ever recurring.

  2.  Commitment to Change
     While awaiting the findings of an independent investigation, the 
        USOC is taking important actions now based on what is already 
        known.

  3.  The Path Forward
     Moving forward, the USOC is reviewing the culture of elite sports 
        in the U.S. to determine what safeguards must be strengthened 
        and modernized to ensure the safety of the athletes it serves.

    The Action Plan involves four major workstreams, which each involve 
several projects aimed at addressing shortcomings. Project lifespans 
range from six months to one or more years and beyond.
Action To Date (as of July 20, 2018)
1.  SafeSport & Athlete Safety Programs
    This pillar is intended to improve the USOC's athlete safety 
policies and procedures, while also increasing the capabilities of the 
U.S. Center for SafeSport via additional funding and support.

   Originally enacted in December 2012, the USOC Athlete Safety 
        Policy was updated in April 2018 to comply with the Protecting 
        Young Victims from Sexual Abuse and Safe Sport Authorization 
        Act of 2017. Per the Act, any knowledge of possible sexual 
        misconduct must be reported to both law enforcement and the 
        U.S. Center for SafeSport within 24 hours. Following the 
        formation of an Athlete Safety Advisory Group, the policy will 
        be further reviewed and modified as necessary.

   The USOC hired a senior director of athlete safety in May 
        2018 to ensure that best practices are regularly reviewed, and 
        athletes and survivors are fully supported. A director of 
        ethics and safe sport was originally hired in April 2011, with 
        the role transitioning to the U.S. Center for SafeSport in 
        2017.

   The USOC doubled its annual funding of the U.S. Center for 
        SafeSport to enable it to hire more investigators and staff, 
        improve the speedy resolution of cases, enhance ongoing 
        communication for survivors and their families, provide age-
        appropriate training to recognize and prevent abuse, and offer 
        better and more accessible resources via SafeSport.org.

   In exercising increased NGB compliance engagement, the USOC 
        has required NGBs to disclose all designated committee members 
        related to funding and team selection, ongoing investigations, 
        unresolved grievances and ethics complaints, permanently banned 
        members, and suspended members not submitted to the U.S. Center 
        for SafeSport.

   All USOC employees and board members have completed safe 
        sport and ethics trainings, and an independent partner is being 
        identified to provide broader cultural training for all NGBs.

   With the aim of educating a broader audience, safe sport 
        training resources are being expanded to include agents and 
        representatives. Safe sport training became mandatory for the 
        USOC and NGBs on January 1, 2014.

   Planning has begun for an athlete assistance fund that will 
        extend to all sports within the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic 
        movements to provide support and assistance to victims of all 
        types of abuse.

   The USOC is supporting efforts to strengthen the U.S. Center 
        for SafeSport's website, and produced and launched a pair of 
        public service announcements that resulted in a 30 percent 
        increase in traffic to SafeSport.org.

   The USOC is working with the U.S. Center for SafeSport to 
        investigate a case management system to track grievances 
        (including non-sexualized cases of bullying and harassment) 
        that will be accessible and integrated with NGB, USOC and 
        center data. We are also working on ways to use the data in 
        that system to create a comprehensive information resource on 
        banned and suspended individuals, across the USOC, NGBs, and 
        the Center.

   The USOC and the U.S. Center for SafeSport have established 
        bi-monthly meetings with leadership from both organizations to 
        ensure alignment on key issues.

   The USOC has created a charter for an Athlete Safety 
        Advisory Group to provide strategic direction on the actions 
        the USOC is taking to create a safe environment across all 
        sport. The process is underway to identify a chairperson to 
        lead the group.
2.  Athlete Advocacy
    This pillar is aimed at empowering athletes to shape key USOC and 
NGB policies and programs, and improving education and communication to 
set athletes up to be successful leaders.

   The USOC sought input from its Athletes' Advisory Council to 
        identify top issues requiring action by both the USOC and NGBs.

   A total of 939 athletes provided feedback via a survey, 
        allowing the USOC to gather insights into improving policies, 
        programs and services, and to better understand athletes' 
        priorities and issues. The survey results are being shared with 
        the Athletes' Advisory Council, NGBs, the U.S. Center for 
        SafeSport and athlete respondents, along with immediate actions 
        that the USOC is taking to address feedback.

   The USOC is evaluating and reconstructing portions of its 
        website--including the ombudsman and athlete safety sections--
        to enhance and highlight the resources available to athletes.

   A position was added within the athlete ombudsman office 
        with the specific responsibility to increase communication with 
        athletes regarding services, resources and issues.

   The USOC is working with its Athletes' Advisory Council to 
        review athlete representation on the USOC board.

   Plans are being developed to host an athlete symposium with 
        the aim of engaging a diverse set of athletes in a dialogue 
        around key issues and actionable response to areas of concern.
3.  Evaluate and Reform USOC Engagement with NGBs and Athletes
    This pillar addresses how the USOC interacts with and oversees the 
49 NGBs, and how the organization can better engage with the athletes 
it serves.

   The USOC drafted a charter for the Athlete & NGB Engagement 
        Commission and selected WNBA President Lisa Borders as 
        chairperson. The commission, which is currently being 
        populated, will be comprised of at least seven members, 
        including athlete, NGB and independent board representation, 
        plus one or more individuals with governance expertise in 
        relevant organizations. The commission will specifically review 
        how the USOC interacts with and oversees the 50 diverse NGBs, 
        and how the organization can better engage with the athletes it 
        serves. The commission is expected to make a series of 
        recommendations that will be implemented over the coming 
        months, including examining whether changes are needed to the 
        Amateur Sports Act, the USOC or NGB bylaws, or other policies 
        and procedures.

   A board review of the USOC's mission statement was initiated 
        to ensure it is aligned with the responsibilities of the 
        organization.

   An Athlete & NGB Engagement Committee is being formed by the 
        USOC board with the aim of providing leadership to address 
        issues of greatest importance and concern to key athletes and 
        NGBs. The committee will provide input on the governance, 
        policies and procedures that may impact stakeholder groups, and 
        will review or suggest the implementation of best practices, 
        bylaws changes, communications or other actions deemed 
        appropriate. The committee will act as the board-level method 
        for discussing and addressing athlete issues raised to the 
        USOC.

   The USOC is developing a plan to better align activities 
        within the organization related to support for athletes and 
        NGBs.
4.  Reform USA Gymnastics
    This pillar focuses on the stabilization of USA Gymnastics by way 
of structural and cultural changes aimed at creating a safe and 
supportive training environment for its athletes.

   The USOC performed a forensic evaluation of USA Gymnastics 
        to determine the NGB's ability to support its athletes, and 
        identify the resources required to undergo the necessary 
        changes. Recommendations were offered for options to supplement 
        the executive leadership team in supporting management 
        transition and focusing on organizational transformation.

   The USOC is requiring that USA Gymnastics complete 70 
        specific actions related to the recommendations made in the 
        Daniels Report, and is regularly auditing the organization for 
        compliance. To date, USAG has completed 31 of the 70 actions. 
        Of the remaining 39 actions, 24 are in process, and plans are 
        being developed for an additional 12. The final three are 
        culture-related, with current and ongoing efforts.

   Among the leadership changes at USA Gymnastics, Chris Tebo 
        was hired as general counsel, Tom Forster was hired as women's 
        national team coordinator, and searches for a chief financial 
        officer and chief marketing officer are in progress. Prior to 
        the action plan, the USOC forced the resignation of both the 
        CEO and full board of directors.

   The USOC has had representation at all of USA Gymnastics' 
        interim board meetings and supported the scheduling of the 
        first meeting of the new permanent board in July 2018.

   Following a mandate by the USOC to reseat its board of 
        directors by July 1, 2018, the USA Gymnastics interim board of 
        directors confirmed the election of the organization's new 
        board at its meeting on June 20. Additionally, each of USAG's 
        five competitive disciplines selected two representatives to 
        serve on the newly created Programs Council, which will provide 
        a forum for its representatives to provide input, perspective 
        and guidance on a variety of relevant topics, including 
        operations, strategic planning, and developing best practices 
        and uniform criteria and guidelines for program administration.

   The independent investigation was promoted on the USA 
        Gymnastics website to encourage individuals with relevant 
        information to speak with the independent investigators.

   USA Gymnastics expanded its safe sport department to include 
        five new positions--four of which will be regionally based--to 
        better support, train, educate and serve its members.

   The USOC made a $1.3 million grant to the Athlete Assistance 
        Fund established by the National Gymnastics Foundation to 
        provide resources to survivors of sexual abuse.

   USA Gymnastics issued broad communication to its current 
        adult athletes, parents/guardians of minor athletes, 
        professional members, member clubs and survivors' legal counsel 
        regarding medical risks from sexual assault and resources 
        available.

   USA Gymnastics is being required to review and update its 
        ethics and conflict of interest policies, and has conducted 
        ethics training with its board and staff.

   USOC and other NGB policies are being provided to USA 
        Gymnastics to assist in identifying best practices.

   The USOC is working with USA Gymnastics to identify 
        alternative training sites following the removal of Karolyi 
        Ranch as the USA Gymnastics National Team Training Center. 
        While a permanent solution is identified, the USOC has offered 
        the U.S. Olympic Training Center in Colorado Springs, Colorado, 
        as an interim solution.

    Senator Moran. Thank you.
    Ms. Perry.

    STATEMENT OF KERRY PERRY, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE 
                    OFFICER, USA GYMNASTICS

    Ms. Perry. Chairman Moran, Ranking Member Blumenthal, and 
members of the Subcommittee, thank you for inviting me to 
testify today.
    I want to commend the Subcommittee for their excellent work 
aimed at preventing amateur athletes from abuse.
    This is your third hearing in the series and it is 
incredibly important because today, we focus on what we are 
doing to provide a safe and empowered environment for our 
athletes.
    As I have said before the House, I will say again today. On 
behalf of USA Gymnastics, I apologize to our athletes, many of 
whom are here today. What Larry Nassar did to these incredibly 
brave women is unconscionable.
    I joined USA Gymnastics in December 2017 from outside the 
sport and the Olympic movement. My primary focus is to 
transform USA Gymnastics into an athlete-centered organization 
with a supportive and empowering culture that helps our 
athletes achieve their gymnastics dreams in a safe environment.
    I have heard the heart-wrenching stories of these 
courageous athletes who have been harmed by those that they 
should have been able to trust. I commit to you that I will 
keep their words and experiences at the core of every decision 
I make every day as the leader of this organization. Their 
stories have broken my heart but also strengthened my resolve.
    USA Gymnastics is on a new path with new leadership and a 
commitment to creating a culture that puts athletes first. Here 
are just a few of our decisive actions to put USA Gymnastics on 
a new course in the past months.
    We closed the National Training Center at the Karolyi Ranch 
and we are seeking proposals on a new high-performance training 
and wellness facility.
    We hired a new high-performance team coordinator for the 
Women's Program through a selection process that involved both 
athletes and coaches.
    We created an Athlete Task Force where our former athletes 
are helping to shape our organization's future. Just last week, 
we announced the five core members, one of whom is a survivor 
of sexual abuse.
    We expanded our Safe Sport Department to include new 
regional positions to better support, train, educate, and serve 
our members.
    We are extensively revising our Safe Sport policy. We are 
educating and training our staff, Board, and members on the new 
Safe Sport policy and a new Ethical Code of Conduct.
    I am pleased to report that our staff and Board are 100 
percent compliant with both and beginning this season, all 
professional members must be Safe Sport-certified as a 
condition of membership.
    We continue to implement the Deborah Daniels 
recommendations. 86 percent of the recommendations are either 
implemented or in progress. Today, I'm announcing that we are 
making publicly available on our website exactly what we have 
done to implement these recommendations.
    We've made reporting of abuse easier with a dedicated toll-
free number and online reporting. We are participating in 
mediation in order to resolve the athletes' claims fairly and 
expeditiously.
    We created an Athlete Assistance Fund in cooperation with 
the National Gymnastics Foundation that provides the survivors 
of abuse with the needed financial resources for counseling and 
medical services.
    These changes and others we have made are part of a 
cultural shift that reflects our commitment to prioritize the 
safety of all of our athletes and members and to become the 
standard bearer of change.
    At the same time, I have ideas that I would be happy to 
share with the Subcommittee regarding what changes Congress 
might consider to help USOC and all national governing bodies 
do more to further protect athletes.
    I have traveled the country listening to athletes, 
listening to survivors, listening to parents and listening to 
coaches. My mission is to ensure that USA Gymnastics emerges as 
a stronger, more empowered organization that is focused on our 
athletes so that generations to come will be able to share 
their stories of how gymnastics positively impacted their 
lives.
    I am testifying today on behalf of the new USA Gymnastics. 
Our incredible athletes have always been and will continue to 
be a great source of national pride.
    We will be there for them to help them realize their 
potential in a safe and supportive environment. Athlete safety 
must be at the forefront of everything we do every day.
    Thank you, and I'm happy to answer your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Perry follows:]

   Prepared Statement of Kerry Perry, President and Chief Executive 
                        Officer, USA Gymnastics
    Chairman Moran, Ranking Member Blumenthal, members of the 
Subcommittee on Consumer Protection, Product Safety, Insurance and Data 
Security, thank you for inviting me to testify today.
    I want to commend the Subcommittee for its excellent work aimed at 
protecting amateur athletes from abuse. This is your third hearing in 
the series, and it is incredibly important, because today we focus on 
what we are doing to provide a safe and empowered environment for our 
athletes. As I have said before the House, I will say again today; on 
behalf of USA Gymnastics, I apologize to our athletes and everyone who 
was hurt by Larry Nassar. What he did to these incredibly brave women 
is unconscionable. As the new leader of this organization, I refuse to 
let any of our survivors, our athletes from the past, our athletes 
today, or our athletes tomorrow to be defined by the actions of one 
despicable human being. We have a responsibility to all of our athletes 
and an opportunity to demonstrate that we are committed to transforming 
to a highly empowered organization, one where all of our athletes have 
a voice and are part of a future that all can be very proud of. To that 
end, USA Gymnastics is moving forward with a strong commitment to 
safety with a smarter, more focused governance and organizational 
structure; new policies and procedures that are designed to help 
prevent, spot, and punish misconduct; creating a culture that 
encourages speaking up; and providing our athletes with a new place to 
train.
    I joined USA Gymnastics in December 2017 from outside the sport and 
the Olympic movement. My primary focus is to transform USA Gymnastics 
into an athlete-centric organization with a supportive and empowering 
culture that helps our athletes achieve their gymnastics dreams in a 
safe environment. I have heard the heart-wrenching stories of the 
courageous athletes who have been harmed by coaches, doctors, and 
adults they should have been able to trust. I commit to you that I will 
keep their words and experiences at the core of every decision I make, 
every day, as the leader of this organization. Their stories have 
broken my heart, but also strengthened my resolve.
    USA Gymnastics is on a new path, with new leadership, and a 
commitment to implement a culture that puts athletes first. To that 
end, we are working hard to regain the trust and confidence of our 
athletes, their families, and all who are a part of the gymnastics 
community. Here are just a few of our decisive actions to put USA 
Gymnastics on a new course:

   We closed the National Team Training Center at the Karolyi 
        Ranch, and we have sought and received information on a new 
        training facility. We will soon issue requests for proposals as 
        part of our aggressive effort to find a new permanent training 
        and wellness facility.

   We hired a new High Performance Training Coordinator for the 
        Women's Program through a selection process that involved both 
        athletes and coaches. Tom Forster, the new coordinator, 
        believes in coaching through inspiration.

   We created an Athlete Task Force where our former athletes 
        are helping to shape our organization's future in its strategic 
        and operating decisions, including participating in the process 
        to identify the new permanent training and wellness center. 
        Just last week, we announced the five core members, one of whom 
        is a survivor of sexual abuse.

   We expanded our Safe Sport department to include seven new 
        positions; five of which will live in the regions they cover 
        throughout the United States to better support, train, educate 
        and serve members.

   We are extensively revising our Safe Sport Policy with input 
        from representatives throughout our gymnastics community. You 
        will see results from this effort by late summer.

   We are incorporating expert ideas and strategies to enhance 
        our Safe Sport education and create a best-in-class, customized 
        curriculum.

   We are educating and training our staff, Board, and members 
        on the new Safe Sport Policy and a new Ethical Code of Conduct. 
        I am pleased to report that our staff and Board are 100 percent 
        compliant with both. Beginning this season, all professional 
        and club members must be Safe Sport certified as a condition of 
        membership.

   We fully support both the U.S. Olympic Committee and 
        Congressional independent investigations that we hope will shed 
        light on how Larry Nassar was able to commit these horrific 
        crimes so that we can ensure this never happens again.

   We fully support Federal legislation--now a law--that will 
        help safeguard amateur athletes.

   We continue to implement the Deborah Daniels recommendations 
        stemming from an independent evaluation of USA Gymnastics' 
        policies. As of today, eighty-six percent of the 
        recommendations are either implemented or in progress--and we 
        intend to implement all of them.

   We made reporting of abuse easier with a dedicated toll-free 
        number (833-844-SAFE), e-mail address (safesport@usagym.org), 
        and online reporting.

   We have and will continue to amend our bylaws to support the 
        cultural commitment to athlete safety and provide a basis for 
        further developing our safe sport programs and governance, 
        including by:

     Mandating compliance with the policies and procedures 
            of the U.S. Center for SafeSport;

     Acknowledging that the U.S. Center for Safe Sport has 
            exclusive jurisdiction over all complaints of sexual 
            misconduct;

     Instituting interim measures to protect the community 
            during ongoing investigations; and

     The establishment of a standing Safe Sport Committee.

   We are continuing our Listening Forums and outreach to as 
        many of our survivors, athletes and member clubs as possible to 
        help guide USA Gymnastics policies and procedures.

   We made important structural and staff changes and 
        reorganized the Board of Directors in order to have a 
        streamlined and more focused group of leaders aligned with USA 
        Gymnastics' cultural transformation.

   We are participating in mediation in order to resolve the 
        athletes' claims fairly and expeditiously.

   We created an Athlete Assistance Fund, in cooperation with 
        the National Gymnastics Foundation, that provides the survivors 
        of abuse with the needed financial resources for counseling and 
        medical services.

    These necessary changes are part of a cultural shift that reflects 
our commitment to prioritize the safety of all our athletes and 
members. They also reflect our commitment to becoming the standard-
bearer for change.
    As I have traveled the country, listening to athletes, parents, and 
coaches, one thing has stood out to me. I am inspired every day by the 
stories of how gymnastics has changed their lives in such a positive 
way. There are a lot of really great people volunteering their time 
each and every day to make lasting memories for our athletes. My 
mission is to ensure that USA Gymnastics emerges as a stronger, more 
empowered organization that is focused on our athletes, so that 
generations to come will be able to share their stories of how 
gymnastics positively impacted their lives.
    I am testifying today on behalf of the new USA Gymnastics. We have 
taken decisive action to grow into a more athlete-centered 
organization, committed to helping our athletes fulfill their dreams. 
Our incredible athletes have always been, and will continue to be, a 
great source of national pride. We will be there for them to help them 
realize their potential in a safe and supportive environment. Athlete 
safety must be at the forefront of everything we do, every day.
    Thank you, and I am happy to answer your questions.

    Senator Moran. Thank you.
    Mr. Han Xiao.

    STATEMENT OF HAN XIAO, CHAIRMAN, U.S. OLYMPIC COMMITTEE 
                   ATHLETES' ADVISORY COUNCIL

    Mr. Xiao. Chairman Moran, Ranking Member Blumenthal, and 
members of the Committee, good afternoon, and thank you for 
inviting me to testify here today.
    My name is Han Xiao, and I'm the elected Chair of the U.S. 
Olympic Committee Athletes' Advisory Council, also known as the 
AAC.
    In 1978, the U.S. Congress enshrined the AAC into U.S. law 
and designated it as the voice of the athletes of the United 
States.
    I'm here before you today as the official spokesperson for 
elite athletes under the USOC umbrella, including U.S. 
Olympians and Paralympians.
    My testimony will reflect what I believe is the most 
accurate opinion of the athletes who comprise Team USA. On 
behalf of these athletes, I want to thank you for exercising 
oversight of the Olympic and Paralympic system during this 
critical juncture.
    America's gymnasts and their courageous testimony at the 
Nassar hearings have brought the national media and all of you 
in the Senate here today. While establishing the U.S. Center 
for Safe Sport is an important step in the right direction, it 
should not be the only outcome of their suffering.
    First, we cannot allow the U.S. Center for Safe Sport to 
fail in its mission. The athlete abuse problem is far bigger 
than the USOC or any of us anticipated. The center received its 
1,000th complaint of sexual abuse after just 15 months of 
opening its doors.
    The center needs increased funding so that it has the 
capacity to handle this caseload as well as embark on critical 
education efforts.
    To be successful, Safe Sport must have the technical 
expertise to conduct investigations and hearings and it must be 
able to preserve its full independence to retain the trust of 
athletes and the public.
    The adjudication process for complaints must improve with 
input from subject matter experts. Right now, I fear that none 
of those criteria are being fully met.
    The sexual abuse of athletes is just one symptom of broader 
systemic issues that must be addressed to substantially empower 
and protect U.S. athletes moving forward.
    Individual athletes have almost no power in our system. 
Instead, the USOC and national governing bodies hold the dreams 
of our athletes in their hands and athletes fear these coaches 
and administrators armed with congressionally granted monopoly 
power will retaliated if they protest or dissent.
    One failure to be compliant or obedient could mean the end 
of that athletic future. There is no other Olympic committee or 
Paralympic committee to appeal to to get a chance to compete 
for America.
    Our athletes aren't just powerless to remedy sexual abuse. 
They're also powerless to address financial injustices and many 
serious governance issues. To combat this problem, I have made 
two major recommendations.
    First, I recommend establishing an autonomous inspector 
general's office reporting to Congress and the AAC. The role of 
this office would be to hear athlete concerns confidentially 
without fear of retaliation about the governance and operation 
of the USOC and NGBs, to independently investigate issues in 
the Olympic and Para-Olympic movement, and to determine 
necessary corrective actions.
    Establishing this office and providing additional oversight 
would contribute greatly to a necessary cultural shift within 
our movement toward a focus on serving our country's athletes.
    I also recommend the establishment of an athlete advocate. 
In 1998, Congress amended the Sports Act to require a new 
position, the Athlete Ombudsman. The position was meant to 
solve the recurring problem of athlete conflicts with their NGB 
or the USOC.
    However, the Ombudsman's Office currently only advises 
athletes of their rights, directs them to available resources, 
and provides mediation services in most individual athletes' 
cases. These are essential and valuable functions for the 
athlete body. However, individual athletes and the AAC need 
independent legal advice and sophisticated professional athlete 
advocacy.
    The athlete advocate's role would be to provide 
confidential legal advice to athletes and actively advocate for 
their rights and interests on a full-time basis.
    In addition to directly representing athletes when 
necessary with an attorney-client relationship, the athlete 
advocate would work with other athlete representatives in the 
movement to raise repetitive issues with the USOC, NGBs, and 
other organizations.
    I presented several other governance problems in my written 
statement, along with more detailed information supporting my 
remarks today.
    I'd like to note, however, that we've been down this road 
many times before. In 1978, the Amateur Sports Act was 
established in part to provide athletes with rights. However, 
it also set up an unregulated monopoly.
    In the 40 years since the 1978 Act, we have seen a cycle of 
scandals followed by internal USOC reforms. Now is the time to 
implement significant structural reforms to increase 
transparency and accountability, limit unnecessary bureaucratic 
expansion, and shift power to athletes.
    The USOC must reorient its primary missions for its 
supporting the Nation's Olympic and Paralympic athletes in 
service to this Nation. Today's problems are not merely bad PR 
for the Olympic and Paralympic movement. Instead, it is time 
for Congress to enact structural changes that can bring about a 
cultural change.
    If, in another decade, with the Olympic and Paralympic 
Games coming back to the U.S., we find ourselves here again 
asking the same questions and searching for the same answers, 
we will have failed Team USA athletes again, including the 
heroic gymnasts who will have brought these issues to our 
attention for naught.
    Thank you for your time.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Xiao follows:]

    Prepared Statement of Han Xiao, Chair, Athlete Advisory Council
    Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee:

    My name is Han Xiao, and I am the elected Chair of the U.S. Olympic 
Committee Athletes' Advisory Council, also known as the AAC. I have 
served in this position since January 2017. Prior to that, I served as 
a representative for the sport of table tennis in the AAC from 2013-
2016, and served on the board of directors of USA Table Tennis from 
2008-2016.
    In 1978, the U.S. Congress enshrined the AAC into law and 
designated it as the voice of the athletes of the United States.\1\ As 
the Chair of the AAC, I am providing this testimony as the official 
spokesperson for elite athletes under the USOC umbrella, including U.S. 
Olympians and Paralympians. My testimony will reflect what I believe is 
the most accurate opinions of the athletes who comprise Team USA. On 
behalf of these athletes, I want to thank you for exercising oversight 
of the Olympic and Paralympic system during this critical juncture.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ 36 U.S.C. Sec. 220501 et seq., available at: https://
www.teamusa.org/Footer/Legal/Governance-Documents
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    To be clear; we believe athlete sexual abuse is a symptom of 
broader systemic issues that must be addressed to empower and protect 
U.S. athletes moving forward. Sexual abuse is the canary in the coal 
mine. I will highlight some of the key concerns of athletes in this 
testimony and provide some possible solutions.
1.  The U.S. Center for SafeSport must succeed
    National media and Congress have rightly focused on the sexual 
abuse of athletes throughout the past year. It is vitally important 
that we continue to make substantive improvements to the SafeSport 
system. The problem is far bigger than the USOC anticipated; the U.S. 
Center for SafeSport received its 1000th complaint of sexual abuse 
after just 15 months of opening its doors.
    But even after the heroic testimony of our gymnasts, the Center 
could still fail in its mission to protect athletes. For example, 
SafeSport efforts could be derailed by the stories we're hearing 
suggesting that the rights of the accused are not being appropriately 
protected. In other cases, we hear that SafeSport complaints are being 
used by staff against athletes, as yet another way to exercise power 
over them. If the Center does not have buy-in from the stakeholders, 
including athletes, coaches, club owners and officials, it will not be 
able to protect athletes.
    The prevention arm of the U.S. Center for SafeSport, its education 
and training, varies in thoroughness and effectiveness greatly from 
sport to sport. Athletes have informed me that in some sports, 
receiving a SafeSport ``certification'' for completion of training is a 
mere formality that can be granted upon viewing a video or having 
someone pick up their certificate for them.
    To be successful, SafeSport must have the technical expertise to 
conduct investigations and hearings, and it must have independence from 
the USOC. Congress must increase funding for the U.S. Center for 
SafeSport so that it has the resources to adequately fulfill its 
mission and reduce the Center's reliance on funding from the USOC and 
national governing bodies (NGBs). The firewall between the U.S. Center 
for SafeSport and NGBs' legal counsel must be ironclad. Subject matter 
experts, including prosecutors, academics, abuse survivors, victims' 
advocates, and parties interested in protecting the due process rights 
of all the parties involved should all be engaged to improve the 
adjudication process.
2. Insufficient Reporting Channels for Athlete-Whistleblowers
    Retaliation against athlete-whistleblowers has been a concern 
within our movement for many years. This problem is exacerbated when 
the whistleblower is a currently-competing athlete, who has issues that 
they need to report, yet are still dependent on their NGB for future 
Team USA membership, funding and support. The set-up is unfair; it is 
unrealistic to expect athletes to require their NGB comply with the 
Sports Act or to enforce good corporate governance. Below is a summary 
of what an athlete must do to resolve a dispute with their NGB.
    Under current procedures, athletes must file a formal grievance 
under their NGB's prescribed procedures. If the issue still has not 
been resolved after exhausting their remedies within the NGB, the 
athlete can file what's known as a ``Section 10 Complaint'' with the 
USOC, alleging NGB noncompliance with the Sports Act.\2\ The complaint 
is then heard and adjudicated by a three-person hearing panel. I have 
sat personally on one of these hearing panels. The ultimate sanction in 
a Section 10 complaint process is decertification of the NGB. In other 
words, the athlete's remedy is to remove recognition from the NGB 
entirely, with a new governance group and organization potentially 
taking over as the new NGB. Understandably, the NGB staff sees the 
athlete as a problem. This is a precarious and impossible position for 
any Olympic or Paralympic hopeful.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ Id. 36 U.S.C. Sec. 220501 et seq., available at: https://
www.teamusa.org/Footer/Legal/Governance-Documents
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    To make matters worse, the Section 10 process has no anonymity; 
even if the athlete prevails through the process and corrective changes 
or sanctions against the NGB are prescribed, their conflict often leads 
to tensions between the athletes initiating the complaint and staff or 
even other athletes within their sport.
    Additionally, the process does not allow whistleblowers to raise 
issues that are not explicitly addressed by the Sports Act. For 
example, if an athlete is concerned that his/her NGB is prioritizing 
staff compensation above supporting elite athletes, this is not a 
complaint that the athlete can have adjudicated through a Section 10 
complaint, because staff compensation, consistent with other similar-
sized non-profits, or fair distribution of NGB resources between staff 
and athletes, is not part of the Sports Act. Similarly, if an athlete 
is concerned that athletes are being intimidated by coaches and staff 
members to remain quiet about staff incompetence, that too is not 
explicitly listed in the Sports Act, and cannot be resolved with the 
remedy provided in the Sports Act. However, given a trend of similar 
complaints regarding an NGB or the USOC itself, it would be prudent to 
have an improved method to investigate such concerns in a timely 
fashion.
    Finally, under the Sports Act, an athlete cannot recover their 
attorney's fees in bringing a Section 10 complaint. Some of these 
Section 10 complaints take a year's work or more, and can result in 
hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees and costs. Even an 
athlete who prevails 100 percent on the merits of their case is still 
responsible for these legal fees. Meanwhile, the NGBs generally have 
far more resources to combat these complaints. NGBs and the USOC are 
not reliant on pro-bono legal care, as many athletes are. For these 
reasons, the athlete should not be responsible for guaranteeing that 
the USOC and NGBs comply with the Sports Act.
3. Instituting an Office of the Inspector General
    To address these problems, Congress should establish an autonomous 
authority to receive complaints confidentially, investigate facts, and 
report on necessary corrective action for the USOC, NGBs, and other 
actors within the Olympic and Paralympic movement, such as the U.S. 
Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) and the U.S. Center for SafeSport. The role 
of this authority would be like that of an Office of Inspector General 
that would oversee a Federal or state agency. While the Inspector 
General would communicate with the USOC, ideally the position would 
report to the Senate Commerce Committee and the AAC, rather than 
directly to the USOC. Most of the same qualifications, authorities, and 
responsibilities outlined in the Inspector General Act of 1978 and 
subsequent amendments in 2008 should also apply to this new office. 
Congress may wish to further examine some of the key questions 
regarding who appoints the Inspector General, what authorities are 
given to this position, and the reporting mechanisms for the position. 
One potential model, for example, would have the Inspector General 
appointed and removed by the Chair of a separate Senate committee, most 
likely the Senate Judiciary Committee, and require the Inspector 
General to report on its operations to the Senate Commerce Committee on 
an annual basis. I would be happy to have follow-up conversations with 
appropriate members and staff to discuss these specifics.
    The benefits of the establishment of an Inspector General's Office 
would include, but not be limited to:

   Preserving the anonymity of athletes raising legitimate 
        concerns about their NGBs and the USOC; thereby providing 
        protection for whistleblowers;

   Allowing for the investigation of other issues that arise 
        outside the protections afforded by the Sports Act;

   Assisting in proactively identifying issues within NGBs and 
        the USOC, including possible corrective actions;

   Contributing to more routine and proactive oversight of the 
        USOC and the entire Olympic and Paralympic system;

   Improving the athletes' and the American public's trust in 
        USOC and NGB governance;

   Reducing legal costs for all parties due to the reduction in 
        necessary Section 10 hearings and their binding arbitrations 
        when the Inspector General intervenes.

    I will reiterate some of these same themes in other observations 
and recommendations below, which further highlights the potential 
advantages of establishing this office.
4. Instituting Professional Athlete Advocacy; The Athlete Advocate
    The growth and professionalization of Olympic and Paralympic sports 
has caused a shortage of athlete advocacy services. These services are 
needed for many reasons.
    First, in many types of grievances, such as the right to compete 
\3\ or suspected doping violations, the athlete may need legal advice 
before deciding upon a course of action. Currently the Athlete 
Ombudsman's Office only advises athletes of their rights, informs 
athletes of available resources, and provides mediation services; the 
Athlete Ombudsman is not able to represent an athlete, or advocate for 
the athlete in a dispute. In addition, resolving these disputes are 
expensive; as stated earlier, there is no attorney's fee provision in 
the Sports Act. Considering the time, effort and expense of pursuing 
the rights granted to them by Congress, athletes may decide against 
pursuing their case altogether. To truly protect athletes' rights, 
Congress should fill the current void of competent and affordable 
athlete advocacy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ In ``right to compete'' grievances, the athlete is typically 
arguing that the NGB did not properly comply with their own Team USA 
selection criteria, or that the NGB unfairly imposed a discipline on 
them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Currently, the AAC is the primary body actively advocating for 
athletes' rights. The AAC is structurally limited; it can only 
effectively address policy and governance issues and has no authorities 
beyond its ability to nominate representatives to various boards and 
serving as a communication channel. In addition, the AAC is comprised 
solely of volunteers, whereas USOC and NGB staff members are full-time 
employees. In general, the AAC is better suited to providing feedback 
for policy proposals and procedures and advocating for athlete 
interests' at a high level; it is not the resource to advocate for the 
rights of individual athletes or to provide legal advice to athletes.
    To address many of these concerns, Congress should establish a new 
position, an Athlete Advocate. The Athlete Advocate's role would be to 
provide confidential legal advice to athletes and actively advocate for 
their rights and interests on a full-time basis. In certain cases, 
especially those that impact many athletes or those that have the 
potential to set important precedent in the Olympic movement, the 
Athlete Advocate's office could choose to directly represent the 
athletes involved, or to assist the athletes in hiring competent 
representation. For cases that exceed the capacity of the office, the 
Athlete Advocate could provide preliminary legal advice, recommend 
competent representation, have a budget for outside legal counsel, and 
follow up after the case is adjudicated. In addition to directly 
representing athletes, the Athlete Advocate would work with other 
athlete representatives in the movement to raise observed issues with 
the USOC, NGBs, and other organizations and advocate for athletes' 
rights; to give the 20,000 foot view of athlete-issues.
    There are several funding and reporting models that could 
potentially work for the Athlete Advocate's office. However, for the 
office to be effective, it must be able to maintain attorney-client 
privilege when working with athletes. In addition, the Athlete Advocate 
position must come with enough autonomy from the USOC and the NGBs so 
that athletes can trust that the Athlete Advocate will always put their 
best interests first in any situation. The Athlete Advocate cannot be 
beholden to the USOC CEO or an NGB. As with the Inspector General's 
office, Congress may wish to further examine questions regarding who 
appoints the Athlete Advocate, what authorities are granted to this 
position, and the reporting mechanisms for the position. A potential 
structure here would be authorizing the AAC to appoint and/or remove 
the Athlete Advocate directly with the approval of the Senate Commerce 
Committee.
5. Improving NGB Oversight for Sports Act Compliance
    Congress has given the USOC the power to investigate and adjudicate 
noncompliance complaints and influence NGBs to comply with the 
requirements of the Sports Act.\4\ Historically, USOC staff took the 
approach that the NGBs were independent organizations and that the USOC 
had limited leverage to affect their behavior, the main levers being 
reduction in funding, probationary status, and decertification. Their 
argument in support of their ``hands off'' approach was that any of 
these behaviors had the potential to hurt athletes and impact athlete 
support.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ See attached memo from The Committee to Restore Integrity to 
the USOC, on the Sports Act and USOC Bylaws that provide the USOC with 
the authority to audit and oversee NGBs, submitted March 12, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In fact, the USOC can and must hold NGBs accountable while 
continuing to directly support elite athletes in cases of 
noncompliance. We have seen this in practice; recently the USOC flexed 
its muscle as the parent organization, when the USOC demanded the 
resignation of the CEO of USA Gymnastics, as well as its Board of 
Directors, as the depth of Dr. Larry Nassar's sexual abuse became 
known, including the NGB's failures to protect some of the country's 
best gymnasts.
    Congress should leave no doubt that the USOC must proactively 
provide NGB oversight and serve as the main point of adjudication for 
NGB compliance with the Sports Act. This can be done by giving the USOC 
the tools and authority to provide NGB oversight as the Sports Act 
currently does, and probably more importantly, also holding the USOC 
responsible within the Sports Act for continuing to recognize NGBs that 
are not appropriate fulfilling their requirements under the law or are 
failing to protect and support athletes.
    USOC oversight of NGBs should be focused on organizational 
governance as well as functions critical to athletes' interests, such 
as more objective team selection criteria, ethical codes of conduct for 
coaches and staff, and conflict of interest policies. In addition to 
responding to Section 9 and Section 10 complaints, the USOC should 
periodically audit each NGB and follow up on recommendations from 
institutions such as the Athlete Ombudsman's Office as well as the 
Inspector General and Athlete Advocate, as they are established. 
Providing effective NGB oversight and enforcing best practices in many 
of these key areas will contribute to better support for athletes, more 
fairness in team selection, fair athlete funding, and fewer situations 
where athletes are placed in vulnerable situations without recourse. In 
turn, this will cultivate trust between the athlete body and the entire 
USOC family.
    It is also important to note the special importance of the 
Inspector General in this initiative if Congress were to establish that 
office. As mentioned previously, the Inspector General would contribute 
substantially to improving the oversight of NGB operations, especially 
in areas where systemic issues arise. The ability for the Inspector 
General to identify threats and weaknesses in the system would allow 
the USOC to hear what the problems are and where additional audits and 
corrective actions should be focused. The Inspector General would also 
be able to ensure that the USOC is fulfilling its mandate to provide 
NGB oversight and allow Congress to hold the USOC accountable if it is 
not performing this function in a satisfactory manner through its 
routine reporting on USOC and NGB issues.
6. Consistently Defining Paralympic Governance and Management
    Paralympic athletes currently are governed and managed in a variety 
of different ways; there is very little consistency in approach. Some 
Para sports and disciplines are fully integrated into an NGB structure. 
Other Para sports are only managed by an NGB but do not have defined 
Para governance. Still other Para sports are managed completely by non-
NGB entities. Yet another group of Para sports are operated and 
governed by the U.S. Paralympics. Depending on the sport, Para athletes 
may or may not have defined representation within the governance of the 
sport. This inconsistency makes it particularly difficult for Para 
athletes to know how or if they are being represented and heard within 
their respective sports.
    In addition, it can be extremely difficult for the same 
representatives who represent able-bodied athletes to represent the 
interests of Para athletes, not only because of differences between 
sporting disciplines, but also because the Paralympics are a maturing 
brand with unique characteristics compared to the Olympic Games. In 
short, Para athletes have a very different set of challenges and often 
have significantly different priorities than their Olympian 
counterparts. In boardrooms where Paralympic interests are integrated 
with those of the rest of the organization, there is often little to no 
voice advocating for the interests of Para athletes on a routine basis. 
In others, where there happen to be one or more board members who are 
aware of Para athlete priorities, the question ``But what about Para 
athletes?'' can often be heard after discussion of key topics affecting 
athletes.
    It is my opinion that Congress should begin working with 
stakeholders and Para athletes to determine the course of action that 
is in the best interest of Para athletes moving forward. A possible 
approach would be to more clearly define the responsibilities and 
governance requirements of the existing Paralympic sport organizations 
(PSO) as defined in the Sports Act. There is currently no requirement 
for these organizations to provide any sort of board or oversight 
committee to govern the management operations of each of these 
programs, which should be a requirement of each PSO. NGBs that have 
integrated Para athletes under their governance should work 
collaboratively to determine how best to ensure that Para athletes can 
be adequately represented within those sport governance structures.
    In general, we must have a clear and consistent approach to the 
governance and management of Para athletes moving forward so that the 
system serves their needs, especially as the Paralympics continue to 
grow in profile.
7. Routine Oversight of the Olympic and Paralympic System
    Since the last amendment to the Sports Act in 1998, we have seen 
increasing professionalization of Olympic and Paralympic sports, as 
significantly more funds move into the system. In the past decade, we 
have also seen several obstacles, including the sexual abuse scandals, 
and bloated executive compensation and bureaucracy. Several systemic 
concerns must be addressed.\5\ As these concerns grow, adjusting the 
governance system to correct systemic flaws becomes more complex and 
difficult. The USOC suffers from organizational inertia, primarily due 
to its size, and its monopoly-status, as granted by Congress. The 
Olympic and Paralympic system are uniquely immune from market 
pressures. While this inertia may have provided stability at one time, 
it has also proven to slow the organization's response to both current 
and potential threats and weaknesses within the movement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\ See section 2 and 3 for a more thorough discussion of 
structural changes to the Sports Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Olympic and Paralympic movement need more routine oversight, as 
well as consistent evaluations of systemic and governance flaws that 
must be corrected. The Inspector General's office would provide to more 
independent oversight, but routine USOC Board oversight would also 
allow the USOC to react more swiftly to situations and more readily 
question policies, procedures, and behaviors that seem problematic or 
suboptimal. I recommend one of two potential solutions: the first would 
be for Congress to establish an oversight committee in the same model 
as the U.S. Service Academies. An independent USOC Oversight Committee 
should consist of well-respected non-profit or civic leaders with the 
requisite expertise to evaluate the business practices of the USOC, 
provide recommendations to the USOC Board of Directors, and report 
directly back to Congress periodically. Alternatively, Congress could 
appoint several members of the USOC Board of Directors in a bi-partisan 
manner. Both models would provide more outside perspective to the 
USOC's governance structure without significantly impacting the 
stability of the organization.
    Ideally, the reports from Congressional appointees overseeing the 
USOC would be combined with reports from the Inspector General's 
office, reports from the USOC CEO, and information from other 
stakeholders to provide a balanced view of the current health of the 
Olympic and Paralympic ecosystem in the U.S. as well as the crucial 
issues facing the movement. Congress would be able to use this 
information to more iteratively and accurately amend the Sports Act 
when necessary.
8. Establishing a truly Athlete-First culture within the USOC
    To fully protect and empower athletes within the Olympic and 
Paralympic system, there must be a shift to a truly ``athlete-first'' 
culture throughout the movement. Although many staff members are 
inspired by Team USA athletes and provide excellent service and 
support, there are examples of employees, policies, procedures, and 
behaviors that would suggest the USOC does not have a culture of doing 
whatever it takes to maximize athlete support and protection. These 
examples include:

   The USOC's lack of urgency protecting athletes' safety and 
        well-being: the USOC response to athlete sexual abuse has been 
        delayed. Only under hell-hot temperatures from the public, 
        media and you, the Congress, has the USOC sped up its response. 
        As mentioned previously, SafeSport training within each sport 
        is too often ineffective, inconsistent and seen as a formality 
        and a box to check. Fewer than half of the NGBs have easily 
        accessible online disciplinary records listing any suspended 
        and banned members. In another well-documented issue involving 
        athlete well-being, post-Games depression, the Athlete Career 
        and Education Program provides some resources to some athletes, 
        but the issue does not seem to be a demonstrable priority for 
        the USOC and the NGBs.

   The movement's excessive and wasteful spending: I was 
        elected to serve as one of two athlete services coordinators 
        providing services to Team USA for the 2016 Rio Olympics. 
        Several months before the Games, we participated in an exercise 
        called the ``high-performance strategy meeting.'' Around 70 
        staff members from the USOC and various NGBs flew to Rio de 
        Janeiro to participate in this multi-day meeting, which 
        included venue visits, high performance training site visits, 
        and several strategy sessions to plan for both success and 
        adversity at the Games. The trip was fun and it added some 
        value, but I am skeptical that so many people needed to travel 
        to Brazil to participate. Most athletes who hear the story 
        agree, and some athletes have recounted similar excessive 
        travel by their NGB staff, especially around international 
        competitions and preparation for major international 
        competitions. This leads the athletes to question the fiscal 
        decisions and expense policies of the USOC and NGBs, asking 
        whether the USOC assets are truly are being managed and 
        controlled appropriately. As described earlier, there is no 
        remedy in the Sports Act for athletes to challenge wasteful 
        spending.

   The USOC underutilizes many resources: By my understanding, 
        the Olympic Training Center in Colorado Springs has seen a 
        substantial reduction in residency programs over the past few 
        decades. I have been told that there are currently just over 
        100 resident athletes and coaches, even though the training 
        center has a capacity of 500. With the facilities, staff, and 
        infrastructure already in place, the marginal cost of adding 
        additional resident athletes is minimal compared to the cost 
        the same athletes would bear on the open market to secure food, 
        shelter, and appropriate training conditions. There are elite, 
        Olympic and Paralympic level athletes that would greatly 
        benefit from these training facilities and support services. 
        Although some of the unused capacity of the Colorado Springs 
        training center is rented out to campers and foreign teams to 
        generate additional revenue, by all accounts the training 
        center is nowhere near capacity in terms of its operation, even 
        with these other users. Unless the USOC plans to hand off 
        ownership and management of the Colorado Springs training 
        center as it did with its Chula Vista, California training 
        center, increasing the center's utilization with high-
        performance athletes in the development pipelines of various 
        sports would certainly indicate a greater commitment to athlete 
        support.

   The USOC rewards staff with medal bonuses: In 2016, several 
        athletes discovered that staff members were delighted to be 
        receiving high medal bonuses due to the excellent performances 
        of our athletes at the Rio Olympics and Paralympics. I was told 
        by a staff member that part of their compensation included 
        bonuses based on whether Team USA reached certain medal counts 
        during the Games. Naturally, the athletes found this extremely 
        troublesome and some of us questioned this practice. The 
        explanation we were given was that staff were more responsive 
        to athletes' needs if they had at-risk compensation based on 
        athlete performance. This is problematic on several levels, not 
        least because one would think that supporting athletes should 
        already be the primary motivation of USOC employees.

   Imbalance of power between USOC/NGB staff and athletes: 
        Athletes report to me they are put into inherently vulnerable 
        situations and feel that they have little or no recourse. This 
        is especially true for those in sports with subjective team 
        selection criteria, where the coaches and administrators hold 
        even more power over an athlete's future. In some sports, 
        coaches and other staff members have absolute power over 
        athletes by completely controlling both team selection and 
        funding decisions, with minimal checks over this unconditional 
        authority. This has led to situations where athletes feel they 
        must sacrifice their own physical and mental well-being to 
        comply with the wishes of NGB staff. The athlete must be hyper-
        obedient and compliant to have the opportunity to succeed 
        athletically. This can even be an issue if the athletes are 
        successful and winning medals, since the NGB often credits the 
        staff members overseeing the program with the success of the 
        program, rather than the hard work and sacrifice of the 
        athlete. In some extreme cases, staff members see athletes as 
        expendable pieces that can be easily replaced. One athlete 
        representative mentioned overhearing a staff member saying that 
        athletes come and go, but the staff and administrators are 
        always there. Under these conditions, it should be no surprise 
        that our athletes cannot report abuse.

   NGBs that intentionally circumvent athlete representatives: 
        In the past five years, several AAC representatives have 
        reported that their NGBs attempted to circumvent their 
        authority using a variety of tactics. These have included, but 
        are not limited to:

     Using appointed rather than elected athlete 
            representatives to sign documents;

     Keeping an electronic signature of the AAC 
            representative on file to sign documents;

     Giving an AAC representative a document with very 
            little time before a submission deadline and asking for a 
            signature; and

     Circumventing athlete representation by scheduling 
            meetings such that competing athlete representatives cannot 
            attend, or unilaterally removing what the NGB perceives to 
            be a problematic athlete representative.

    Issues have included team selection criteria and funding decisions, 
among others, which are vital athletes' rights issues.
    These are just a few reasons why the culture within the Olympic 
movement is not an athlete-first culture. Although there are staff 
members that do want to support athletes, it does not appear that the 
system is prioritizing the support of athletes above all other 
concerns. The recommendations that have appeared in this testimony 
should contribute to changing this organizational culture through 
effective and more routine oversight.
    In addition to those initiatives, some adjustments can be made to 
further strengthen athletes' voices within the USOC and NGBs. For 
example, the 20 percent athlete representation rule within the Sports 
Act should be revisited. The statute should specify that athlete 
representation within USOC and NGB boards, committees, and entities 
should be elected by athletes, just as AAC representatives must be 
elected by athletes. In addition to the Athlete Advocate, Congress 
should also strengthen the athlete voice in the Olympic movement by 
extending the eligibility requirements for an athlete representative. 
Currently under the Sports Act, elite athletes are eligible for up to 
ten years after their last qualifying international competition. 
Although this requirement ensures that these athletes have more recent 
experience competing internationally, older retired athletes can 
receive relevant current information from currently competing athletes 
while bringing more professional experience, stability, and time to the 
position. Extending the eligibility requirement has the potential to 
greatly strengthen athlete advocacy within the movement and bring more 
engaged athlete voices into critical discussions and decision making 
processes.
9. Conclusion
    The sexual abuses that have emerged within Olympic and Paralympic 
sport are a tragedy that has shed light on the movement's cultural 
deficiencies. Athletes have minimal power to report injustices, 
especially while they are competing, due to governance design flaws. 
More resources must be made available to support a properly running 
U.S. Center for SafeSport, to address the unprecedented avalanche of 
sexual abuse reports, and to assure that these cases can be handled 
properly.
    Unfortunately, the U.S. Center for SafeSport itself is not enough 
to combat the systemic issues that I see within our system. The Olympic 
movement is inherently reactive, and athlete-whistleblowers still have 
far too little recourse. Congress can give a voice to those who have 
legitimate concerns about how our sport organizations are governed and 
operated. Congress must create an independent Inspector General 
position, as well as an Athlete Advocate, in order to protect our 
athletes by shifting power.
    Even after the Nassar victims have spoken up so bravely, and so 
eloquently, it is still too difficult for individuals who are 
passionate about improving the USOC family to have their opinions heard 
and heeded. I'm therefore asking you, as the Chair of the AAC, and as 
the leader of Team USA athletes, to amend the Amateur Sports Act so 
that the USOC can become a model non-profit organization in service to 
our athletes and so that the Olympic and Paralympic system can protect 
the interests of Team USA athletes long into the future.
    I appreciate this Committee's continued efforts to provide 
oversight, and I thank you for considering the perspectives of American 
athletes in that process.
    I am happy to respond to any questions members of the Committee may 
have.

    Senator Moran. Mr. Xiao, thank you very much.
    I think your testimony was very valuable to me. You and 
I've not met. I've not had a conversation. I didn't know what 
you were going to say till I read your testimony, and I find it 
valuable and useful and a good admonition that it's not a path 
we want to go down again. We need to solve the problems today. 
Thank you for being here.
    Let me start with Ms. Lyons. Congress gave the Olympic 
Committee, the NGBs, and the U.S. Center for Safe Sport 
immunity from defamation lawsuits unless a witness or entity 
speaks or acts with malice.
    Congress clearly wants Safe Sport to be able to publish the 
names of banned members who abuse children and I believe if 
athletes and parents are to know they are safe, the knowledge 
of who has been banned is absolutely essential.
    When will USOC require that all NGBs make the list of their 
banned members public?
    Ms. Lyons. We also agree that one of the most powerful 
things that we can do is get the names of people who are banned 
and suspended in the public domain for parents, for potential 
employers, for anyone who works with the athlete community.
    The Center for Safe Sport is beginning serious work on 
this. They already have a searchable database for the cases 
that they personally have adjudicated.
    One of the things that I mentioned in my opening statement, 
and perhaps there's misunderstanding about this, is the NGBs do 
not believe that they have that same limited liability that 
would protect them if they make their names public and that's 
causing a bit of a roadblock at the moment.
    So I think we need to investigate is that true and perhaps 
Congress can assist by ensuring that the NGBs feel that they do 
have that liability protection, as well. They are, in general, 
very, very willing to make this information public and 
transparent and they're working right now with us and with the 
Center to figure out how the data base systems will work to 
allow us all too seamlessly share that information, but that is 
a stumbling block we'd like to overcome.
    Senator Moran. So today, the database only includes at U.S. 
Safe Sport those individuals that are involved in cases that 
have been referred to U.S. Safe Sport since its creation?
    Ms. Lyons. That's correct. What we also have that the 
Center is publishing on a bi-weekly basis is what they're 
calling an adjudication log. That's actually a written log of 
all of the banned and suspended individuals that the NGBs have 
reported. We know who they are and that's being updated every 2 
weeks but it's not yet public.
    Senator Moran. So there is a list of banned coaches and 
employees?
    Ms. Lyons. Correct.
    Senator Moran. And who knows about that list?
    Ms. Lyons. At the moment, that's an internal list between 
the NGBs and the Center for Safe Sport, but the system that 
we're hoping to develop would allow that to become public.
    Senator Moran. Would there still be coaches who are on that 
banned list who are coaching or employees who are still 
employed?
    Ms. Lyons. Well, there certainly should not be and I think 
we just discovered just in the past few days that there are 
still some weaknesses in the communication system that, when 
someone is banned, not only does that individual need to be 
notified immediately but anywhere where they are currently 
employed that we could possibly be aware of also needs to be 
simultaneously advised.
    We've discovered that there has been some lag in timing in 
that system and that needs to be closed, close that loop.
    Senator Moran. So the point you are making is that if 
someone is banned, only the banned person, the coach or 
employee, gets notified, not simultaneously is the employer 
notified?
    Ms. Lyons. The employer should be notified simultaneously. 
I read an article, and I don't know if this is factual, that 
the employer of one of those individuals did not receive 
notification until a few days later and that individual was 
still coaching in that interim period.
    Senator Moran. To your knowledge, what FBI checks have been 
run on current coaches or employees?
    Ms. Lyons. Current----
    Senator Moran. Current process by which someone is 
investigated by the FBI.
    Ms. Lyons. Well, we have background checks. All of these 
individuals go through standardized background checks and we 
have a standard list of things that needed to be checked. I'm 
not entirely sure if the FBI is a part of that background 
check.
    Senator Moran. And when you say all these folks, does that 
mean every coach? I don't know what the category would be of 
what type of employees but all NGBs?
    Ms. Lyons. For all NGBs, anyone who is authorized to have 
contact with athletes. It could be medical staff, it could be 
coaches, or it could be trainers. They are all required every 2 
years to undergo a background check.
    Senator Moran. Has there been any anonymous inquiries 
requesting anonymous information from athletes in which they 
can provide information about experiences they've had that are 
inappropriate?
    Ms. Lyons. I'm sorry. Could you rephrase your question?
    Senator Moran. Has the athletes involved in the U.S. 
Olympics been--has there been an inquiry by which they can 
anonymously respond about any experiences they've had that 
would reflect sexual abuse or other bad behavior?
    Ms. Lyons. Right. Within the USOC and adjacent to the AAC, 
there's an Athlete Ombudsman who has a strong relationship with 
the AAC. Any information that's provided to them is 
confidential. It does not have to be shared with the USOC as an 
entity, and an athlete has the opportunity to reach out to the 
Ombudsman and make known to them any information they have.
    If that information involves sexual abuse, the Ombudsman is 
required by law to report that to the Center immediately.
    Senator Moran. The questions I just asked you about banning 
coaches, investigations, background checks, and anonymous 
ability to report something to an ombudsman, when did that come 
into existence?
    Ms. Lyons. Well, the Ombudsman has been in existence for 
quite a long time. It has been----
    Senator Moran. Including the times in which Nassar was 
doing the things he was doing?
    Ms. Lyons. Yes. One of the issues that I think we need to 
all work on is education amongst the athlete population to even 
know that there is an Ombudsman. We recently did some research 
that showed that many athletes are unaware of that position, 
not necessarily sure how to reach out to them.
    Similarly, they need to know how to reach out to the 
Center.
    Senator Moran. Ms. Perry, at our last hearing, Rhonda Faehn 
testified that Amy White, an employee of USA Gymnastics, was 
directed by Steve Penny, her boss, to go to the Karolyi Ranch 
and to take documents from the National Training Center back to 
USAG Headquarters in Indianapolis. Have you seen those 
documents?
    Ms. Perry. Thank you, Senator Moran. So what I know is that 
instruction, it was told to me that that instruction was given 
to Ms. White and that Ms. White came back to the office with a 
suitcase and some boxes. Where those documents went from there, 
I don't know.
    I was also told that there was not a sort of logging-in, if 
you will, of those documents in the organization, but those 
documents were given to the CEO. Steve Penny.
    Senator Moran. Do you know that those documents were given 
to Mr. Penny?
    Ms. Perry. Of course, I wasn't there, Senator Moran, but 
that's what I was told.
    Senator Moran. And we've made inquiry of USA Gymnastics, so 
an extensive request for documents. Those documents have not 
been provided.
    Ms. Perry. I know we've produced close to a million 
documents in production. So those documents could be in there, 
they may not be, but I don't know. I don't know where those 
documents are. Steve Penny would know where those documents 
are.
    Senator Moran. There would be no chance that those 
documents exist within your custody at USA Gymnastics, unless 
they were provided to us, unless they're included in the list 
that--the million documents that you provided us.
    Ms. Perry. Right.
    Senator Moran. Otherwise, you can assure me that they don't 
exist within your custody?
    Ms. Perry. To my knowledge, they do not exist in our 
custody.
    Senator Moran. OK. Senator Blumenthal.
    Senator Blumenthal. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Engler, are you familiar with Kaylee Lorincz?
    Mr. Engler. Yes.
    Senator Blumenthal. She's here today, and she remembers a 
conversation with you in which you said, and I'm quoting her, 
``Mr. Engler then looked directly at me and asked ''right now 
if I wrote you a check for $250,000, would you take it? When I 
explained that it's not about the money for me and that I just 
want to help, he said, ``Well, give me a number.'' That's 
accurate, correct?
    Mr. Engler. No, sir, it is not.
    Senator Blumenthal. Well, you offered her money, did you 
not?
    Mr. Engler. No, sir.
    Senator Blumenthal. You never spoke to her about money?
    Mr. Engler. No, sir.
    Senator Blumenthal. Did you meet with her absent her 
attorney?
    Mr. Engler. Yes, at her request and her mother's request.
    Senator Blumenthal. And there was no discussion of money at 
that meeting?
    Mr. Engler. There was not any discussion of any settlement. 
She is not part of the settlement that has been reached----
    Senator Blumenthal. Was there in another meeting discussion 
about paying her individually----
    Mr. Engler. There was----
    Senator Blumenthal.--in connection with her silence?
    Mr. Engler. No.
    Senator Blumenthal. Let me ask you, Ms. Lyons. You know, 
I've listened to your apologies and I would have found them 
more credible if today were Thursday before the filing of an 
Answer by your organization in court. That Answer in effect 
disclaimed any and all responsibility.
    Did you authorize the filing of that Answer?
    Ms. Lyons. I did, and----
    Senator Blumenthal. And are you aware that in effect it 
denies that USOC had any responsibility for Larry Nassar?
    Ms. Lyons. That is not our intent. I've publicly stated and 
I will state again that we believe we do have responsibility 
and accountability, along with the rest of the movement, in 
failing these athletes.
    The questions in the Motion to Dismiss are a different set 
of questions about the legal liabilities and our relationship 
with Larry Nassar is different than the relationship----
    Senator Blumenthal. Well, the contention in your--excuse me 
for interrupting, but my time is limited.
    In those court papers, your organization stated that there 
was no legal grounds to sue because Nassar never worked for the 
Federation nor were his crimes foreseeable. In other words, you 
couldn't anticipate, couldn't expect or suspect any crimes by 
him. Is that the position of your organization?
    Ms. Lyons. Yes, and I'm not a lawyer. That is a legal term, 
whether something can be foreseeable, and I think that the 
courts will have to determine if we have legal liability. We 
certainly have social and ethical liability.
    Senator Blumenthal. Well, in effect, you have said you have 
no reason--the Plaintiffs have no reason to hold you 
accountable in a court of law. That's correct, right?
    Ms. Lyons. That's correct, from a legal perspective and the 
court can determine if that's true.
    Senator Blumenthal. So, in effect, you've washed your hands 
of it?
    Ms. Lyons. I'm sorry if it would appear that that's the 
impression you've gotten. That is certainly not our intent. We 
are actively engaged in everything we can do to help keep 
athletes safe.
    Senator Blumenthal. Except being part of the legal process 
that will impose any sort of court orders, impose any kind of 
accountability or responsibility.
    Ms. Lyons. I think the court will determine if we need to 
be part of those proceedings and if they determine we should 
be, we absolutely will be.
    Senator Blumenthal. Let me ask you, Ms. Perry, because your 
organization filed a similar filing and I think in your case, 
it was a Motion to Dismiss and that was on behalf of the new 
USA Gymnastics.
    You said in one of the parts of that Motion to Dismiss when 
the issue was whether Nassar was a certified athletic trainer, 
osteopathic physician, national medical director, and national 
team physician, the response was denied, is that correct?
    Ms. Perry. Senator Blumenthal, I am not sure what Motion to 
Dismiss you're referring to or the timing of that or the timing 
of that statement.
    Senator Blumenthal. Well, it may have been an Answer. I'm 
not sure whether it was an Answer or a Motion to Dismiss, but 
in either event, you denied that contention, correct?
    Ms. Perry. I don't--I'm not familiar with that. If there's 
a document that I can look at, I'm happy to read that and 
provide answers to you.
    I do know, Senator Blumenthal,----
    Senator Blumenthal. Well, then, let me ask you a different 
way.
    Ms. Perry. Yes.
    Senator Blumenthal. Isn't it true that he was a certified 
athletic trainer, osteopathic physician, national medical 
director, and national team physician?
    Ms. Perry. I don't know all of his designations, but I will 
say----
    Senator Blumenthal. But he worked there, correct?
    Ms. Perry. Yes, he was a volunteer and he had----
    Senator Blumenthal. Well, when you say he was a volunteer, 
he was compensated, correct?
    Ms. Perry. He was compensated for--from what I've been 
told, he was compensated for expenses and travel and things 
like that.
    Senator Blumenthal. And he received fringe benefits?
    Ms. Perry. I don't know what fringe benefits that would 
have been but----
    Senator Blumenthal. And he received the stature and 
prestige of being announced as, and I'm quoting, ``part of the 
USA Gymnastics Medical Task Force to provide leadership and 
oversight of USA Gymnastics practices, procedures, and 
protocols.''
    Ms. Perry. Senator Blumenthal, that was before my time, 
that designation, but here's what I think is important is that 
from day one when I came onboard, I made it very publicly known 
that this organization is going to be making every attempt we 
can to resolve this situation.
    The survivors are the most important thing and the reason 
that I took this job is because their voices and their courage 
moved me so much.
    Senator Blumenthal. I'm out of time.
    Ms. Perry. But I----
    Senator Blumenthal. I accept your words.
    Ms. Perry. Yes.
    Senator Blumenthal. But just last Friday, you filed this 
Answer that strikes me as a blatant falsehood.
    Ms. Perry. I'm not familiar with that action, Senator 
Blumenthal.
    Senator Blumenthal. Did you authorize it?
    Ms. Perry. I'm not familiar with that. I would like to see 
that and be able to answer your question.
    Senator Blumenthal. Well,----
    Ms. Perry. A Motion to Dismiss?
    Senator Blumenthal.--are you here with counsel today?
    Ms. Perry. I am.
    Senator Blumenthal. I would suggest that maybe your counsel 
should show it to you because you're testifying here and both 
you and Ms. Lyons are responsible for those filings in court, 
not just for the legal position but the factual assertions, and 
I hope that you'll review them before you leave here.
    Ms. Perry. I will.
    Senator Blumenthal. And, Mr. Engler, I am not sure how to 
follow up on your denial of any conversation with Ms. Kaylee 
Lorincz, but I'm going to do so.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Moran. Senator Peters.

                STATEMENT OF HON. GARY PETERS, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM MICHIGAN

    Senator Peters. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member. 
Thank you again for this hearing, putting together this 
hearing.
    You know, this morning, I had an opportunity to hear 
directly from a number of very courageous survivors and many of 
them are here in the audience for this hearing right now.
    Mr. Engler, in talking to them, they feel very strongly 
that you have not listened to them, that if you have listened 
to them, you certainly haven't heard what they have to say and 
the concerns that they've expressed, and today as their 
Senator, I want to amplify their voices and ask some of the 
questions that they raised.
    First off, the Detroit News has reported that in the past 
20 years, 20 years, at least 14 people, most of whom are or 
were MSU employees, were notified of Nassar's behavior.
    So in the interest of time, I'm just going to ask some yes 
or no questions. If you'd answer yes or no, I'd appreciate it.
    First, yes or no, have you subjected any of these 
individuals to any disciplinary action?
    Mr. Engler. Yes, the immediate action that I took with 
regard to Dean Strampel was an indication of my assessment that 
his leadership as the Dean of the College of Osteopathic 
Medicine fell far short of appropriate performance standards.
    Senator Peters. So you have one--just in time, you have one 
individual you took the disciplinary action, Mr. Strampel?
    Mr. Engler. Well, I think all of these happened--I arrived 
in February of 2018.
    Senator Peters. So, no, you haven't. That's fine. So, no, 
no is the answer. Mr. Strampel, I understand you called in in 
February for revocation of his tenure----
    Mr. Engler. That's correct.
    Senator Peters.--but that did not happen. He is actually 
allowed to retire according----
    Mr. Engler. No. His tenure--that's correct. His retirement 
has separated him from the university and so he is no longer 
connected in any way with the university.
    Senator Peters. Right. So he was allowed to retire and he 
received a $175,000, as well, as part of the severance, I 
understand.
    Mr. Engler. That was the settlement that we judged as more 
in the interests of the university and the survivors to have 
him gone and separated versus a tenure proceeding which 
administrative procedures could run more than a year and cost 
much more than a $175,000.
    Senator Peters. Right. So that was that situation. Yes or 
no, beyond Nassar and Strampel, so none--no other person has 
been fired?
    Mr. Engler. And there is an ongoing investigation, I would 
remind the Senator, by the Attorney General of the State of 
Michigan at the request of the Board of Trustees to see if 
anyone else should be subject to sanctions.
    Senator Peters. So all these individuals will be 
interviewed?
    Mr. Engler. I believe they have been.
    Senator Peters. And that's done by the Attorney General's 
Office?
    Mr. Engler. That is correct.
    Senator Peters. Yes or no, do you believe that there was a 
culture of enabling and covering up the actions of a predator 
over 20 years at MSU?
    Mr. Engler. Well, I wasn't there until February of 2018, 
but when I arrived, I felt that there were weaknesses in 
procedures and protocols. I felt that the shared governance 
model at the university didn't lead to specific accountability 
and so I thought those weaknesses----
    Senator Peters. So there were problems? I need to keep 
moving, if I could, President.
    Mr. Engler. OK. But I will try to--if I can answer the 
questions.
    Senator Peters. Well, that was a yes or no and if you were 
not there, you think, yes, there were some issues, you will 
answer.
    Mr. Engler. Well, there are issues for sure.
    Senator Peters. So you answered it yes. Do you believe 
there's a job as to instill trust?
    Mr. Engler. Oh, absolutely. I think trust and trust is done 
by accountability and people accepting responsibility for their 
roles, be that as someone in charge of compliance in a medical 
school or someone in charge of, you know, assuring that an 
investigation is done properly in a department.
    Senator Peters. And I appreciate that. In addition to 
making sure there's accountability, it's also the people you 
put in place to instill trust. One thing that the survivors 
feel very strongly about and I think many of us believe is true 
is that you should bring outside perspective into leadership. 
Fresh eyes are very important.
    Having national searches to bring in folks who are going to 
bring a different view on how things are happening at Michigan 
State is important. We have seen--you have pledged or you 
pledged to do that for your athletic director, have a national 
search. That didn't happen. You hired somebody from within the 
university.
    You also hired the Head of the Office for Civil Rights and 
Title IX, someone who is actually assigned to defend Michigan 
State University against sexual assault lawsuits as opposed to 
being someone traditionally in many universities, someone who 
works with diversity and working with students, is really a 
defender and a champion for students, as opposed to the 
university.
    So I think for what came out very clear to me is, in 
addition to some of your hiring decisions that I mentioned 
briefly, your lack of empathy and respect of survivors, 
especially for Kaylee Lorincz, which I think Senator Blumenthal 
in your remaining time are going to ask more questions about 
that.
    We also have a situation with Rachael Denhollander, who you 
accused of receiving kickbacks for manipulating other 
survivors.
    Are you willing to apologize to her?
    Mr. Engler. Oh, I've already done so.
    Senator Peters. Have you done that publicly verbally?
    Mr. Engler. Yes, I have.
    Senator Peters. So, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to enter into 
the record a letter signed by over a 120 survivors written to 
members of the MSU Board of Trustees into the Committee record, 
if I may.
    Senator Moran. Without objection.
    [The letter referred to follows:]

 A Joint Statement on President John Engler and Select Members of the 
                         MSU Board of Trustees
    We, the Sister Survivors of Larry Nassar's horrific sexual abuse, 
stand together against the recent character attacks made towards us and 
derogatory statements aimed at all survivors of sexual abuse by 
Michigan State University President John Engler. While our hope had 
been that President Engler would bring accountability, transparency, 
and change to MSU, it is clear to us that he cannot.
    We recognize that the greatest measure of an abusive culture is how 
survivors are viewed, and whether perpetrators and enablers will be 
held accountable and the environment in which they thrive remediated. 
On all these metrics, President Engler has only reinforced the culture 
of abuse at MSU. Our deepest concern is the impact his statements and 
behavior will have on survivors who are still living in silence, and in 
creating an unsafe environment on campus by communicating a demeaning 
and derogatory attitude towards survivors of abuse who still seek the 
confidence to speak up. This is not leadership. President Engler's 
statements and behavior are subtle threats against anyone who dares to 
speak up against their abuser and the environment that enabled their 
predatory conduct, lest they be ridiculed, lied about, and shamelessly 
mocked by a person of immense power.
    President Engler's abhorrent behavior--including gaveling down a 
survivor who only wanted him to listen and belligerently abrasive 
statements unmasking a survivor who only sought the comforts of 
confidentiality--has sent a chilling message across MSU's campus, 
causing damage that cannot be repaired until he is gone.
    The most recent public disclosure of e-mails only further reveals 
the damaging minds he has towards sexual abuse survivors who come 
forward. President Engler clearly views sexual abuse survivors as 
either manipulators out to use people for personal gain (having the 
same minds as our abuser), or as themselves manipulated into being used 
by someone for personal gain (victims yet again).
    To President Engler, board members who support him, and other 
leaders at MSU who agree with his position, we say ``no''. We have not 
become like our abuser-manipulating for self-gain. We chose to speak up 
at great personal cost because it was right. Because we care about 
those still silenced. Because we stand to protect those who are still 
at risk. Future and c1ment survivors who have not yet spoken up need to 
know that they will not be attacked and assigned the same motivations 
as their abuser when they demand justice.
    And we are not being revictimized, manipulated for the benefit of 
someone else. We chose this fight. We chose to speak up because it was 
clear that no one at MSU would. We chose to speak up because it was the 
right thing to do. Future and current survivors who deserve justice 
should know they can raise their voice without being characterized as 
pawns too foolish to know they are manipulated.
    We have made our motivations clear at every turn: we never want 
there to be another survivor of sexual abuse on MSUs campus who fears 
to speak up against their abuser and whose cries go unheard by its 
adminislration. The environment which will allow this dream to become a 
reality requires leadership whose statements and behavior engenders 
trust and models exemplary conduct--not leaders who destroy trust and 
set a bad example. In his e-mails, President Engler suggested a debate 
on who is doing more for survivors. We are here to tell you that all 
the organizational changes and policy and procedure enhancements in the 
world mean nothing if there is not leadership that creates an 
environment where survivors feel safe to speak up.
    On the point, there is no debate: President Engler has failed 
miserably. President Engler and leaders at MSU have refused to listen. 
They persist in attacking our character, our integrity and our 
intelligence. These attacks send a clear message that survivors who 
speak up will likewise be attacked. They send a clear message that 
perpetrators and enablers will not be held accountable. They send a 
clear message that nothing at MSU--none of the mindsets that allowed 
Larry Nassar to abuse children for decades--have changed. Therefore, it 
is our position that MSU cmmol move forward and become an institution 
of integrity and safety until John Engler is no longer President, and a 
new interim leader who will stand against an abusive culture is found.
    Each member of the MSU board of trustees who chose President Engler 
and have refused to stand against his attacks and characterizations of 
sexual assault survivors is complicit in his abusive mindset and in 
continuing the culture of abuse at MSU.
    We call on Trustees Melanie Foster, Brian Breslin, Milch Lyons, 
Joel Ferguson, Dan Kelly and George Perles to stand against this 
mindset and these attacks. We call on them to stand for what is right 
by demanding President Engler's immediate resignation, and removing him 
if he refuses to resign. The lack of courage these trustees have 
displayed to this point is discouraging, and their silence is 
deafening.

        To Trustee Melanie Foster: Your choice as a woman to stand by 
        in silence while hundreds of female sexual abuse victims are 
        attacked and vilified--some of us as young as 15 years old--is 
        appalling. You are aligning yourself with misogyny, and against 
        not only women, but even children. Until you find the courage 
        to speak up like so many funs survivors before you, it is clear 
        you value political loyalty and cronyism over personal 
        integrity.

        To Trustee Brian Breslin: Your silence and complicity--
        protecting John Engler over sexual assault survivors, over what 
        is best for MSU, and over the current students and children who 
        attend and visit your campus--is horrifying. Your refusal lo 
        stand against these attacks is an alliance with them, putting 
        cronyism and self-protection ahead of what is right, and ahead 
        of human beings.

        To Trustee Mitch Lyons: Your willingness to fight hard on the 
        football field has been duly noted. We are deeply disturbed at 
        your unwillingness to fight over something that matters so much 
        more: the safety of women and children. Your refusal to stand 
        against these attacks and the culture of abuse puts every 
        survivor and potential victim on MSU's campus at risk. We arc 
        asking you to bring the tenacity and determination you brought 
        to a sport to something much bigger: Leading a university. You 
        have six months left in your term. Please don't lose your 
        willingness to fight hard for what is right at the end of the 
        fourth quarter.

        To Trustee Joel Ferguson--Your alliance with John Engler and 
        his positions me unsurprising, given how you have spoken of the 
        survivors in the past, and the way you clearly believe 
        fundraising and sports centers outrank little girls. But it is 
        never too late to do the right thing, and we are asking you to 
        do it now.

        To Trustee Dan Kelly: Your position on sexual abusers, 
        pedophiles, and assault survivors as a defense attorney makes 
        your lack of moral integrity clear. Your position remains clear 
        in your alliance with a leader who characterizes survivors of 
        sexual abuse as manipulators and pawns. Until you stand against 
        these abusive mindsets in a position of leadership, your 
        inability to lead at MSU is obvious.

        To Trustee George Perles: We know you arc undergoing serious 
        call issues--please know that our thoughts and prayers are with 
        you. However, we also must recognize that yon still have 
        authority and a responsibility in this situation. We are asking 
        you to do the right thing, to stand against an abusive culture 
        and do what is neccssa1y to restore integrity and safety to 
        MSU's campus.

    President Engler has refused lo apologize for his attacks and lies, 
und instead issued a public statement which referred to these attacks 
and lies as ``tensions'' which existed in the ''past.'' Yes, we may 
have settled the lawsuits. However, our determination to make sure that 
no child, student, or anyone else is ever abused on MSU's campus or by 
one of its employees again will not cease until MSU has a leadership 
who creates an environment where no child, student or person fears to 
speak up and their tears are wiped away while a comforting car listens 
to their cries.
    President Engler was correct when he said that ``actions matter, 
and that is how the success of our work will be determined.'' President 
Engler's actions are clear. Now the Board must be clear. Our actions as 
survivors have been clear. We stood against an abuser. We stood against 
an abusive culture. Now we are asking you to stand against it too and 
lead MSU forward into real change.
            Sincerely,

The Sister Survivors


Abigayle Bergeron        Grace Schneider          Lisa M. Johnson
Alaina Bamfield          Gwen Anderson            Louise Harder
Alex Neil-Sevier         Hannah Morrow            Lyndsy Gamet
Alexandra Bourque        Jade Capua               Madeleine Jones
Alexandro Romano         Jaime Doski              Margaret Renee Twitty
Alexis Alvarado          Jane 115 Doe             Marion Siebert
Alexis Moore             Jane A12 Doe             Marta Stern
Alison Chauvette         Jane A2 Doe              Megan Ginter
Aly Raisman              Jane A38 Doe             Megan Halicek
Alyssa Avery             Jane B10 Doe             Melissa Hudecz
Amanda Barterian         Jane B12 Doe             Melissa Vigogne
Amanda Cormier           Jane B49 Doe             Michael & Zsuzsanna
                                                   Mahon
Amanda Green             Jane B56 Doe             Morgan Margraves
Amanda Smith             Jane B59 Doe             Morgan McCaul
Amanda Thomashow         Jane B60 Doe             Morgan Valley
Amy Labadie              Jane B7 Doe              Natalie Venuto Hawkins
Anna Ludes               Jane B77 Doe             Nicole Reeb
Annette Hill             Jane B92 Doe             Nicole Soos
Arianna Castillo         Jane Doe 92              Olivia Venuto
Ashley Yost              Jane Doe B8              Parents of Jane A38
                                                   Doe
Becca Boeving            Jenelle Moul             Rachael Denhollander
Bethany Bauman           Jennica Lurie            Rebecca Mark
Bree Randall-Gay         Jennifer Bedford         Reed Anderson
Brittany West            Jennifer Hayes           Samantha Ursch
Carrie Hogan             Jessica Schedler De      Sara Teristi
                          Rodriguez
Catryina Brown           Jessica Smith            Sarah Klein
Chandler Lynn            Jessica Tarrant          Savannah Coomer
Charla Burill            Kaitlyn Basel            Selena Brennan
Chelsea DeLamielleure    Kara Abigail             Stephanie Robinson
Chelsea Zerfas           Kara Johnson             Sterling Reithman
Christina Barba          Kate Mahon               Steve and Judy Brady
Christina Holmes         Katie Lovellette         Survivor 11
Courtney Faynor          Kayla Galecka            Tamera Bourque
Danielle Moore           Kayla Spicher            Taundra Mitchell-
                                                   Faynor
Elizabeth Heilman        Kaylee Lorincz           Taylor Stevens
Emily Goetz              Kourtney Weidner         Tiffany Dutton
Emily Meinke             Larissa Boyce            Tiffany M. Lopez
Emma Ann Miller          Laura Scudder            Trinea Gonczar
Erin McCann              Leslie R. Miller         Valerie Webb
Eve Petrie               Lindsey Schuett          Victim 13
Grace French             Lisa Hovey               Whitney Burns
 


    Senator Peters. I would like to read a couple brief 
passages. The first passage in this letter, signed by 120 
survivors, ``We recognize that the greatest measure of an 
abusive culture is how survivors are viewed, and whether 
perpetrators and enablers will be held accountable and that the 
environment in which they thrive is remediated. On all of these 
metrics, President Engler has only reinforced the culture of 
abuse at MSU,'' and they go on to say, ``We are here to tell 
you that all the organizational changes and policy and 
procedure enhancements in the world mean nothing if there is 
not leadership that creates an environment where survivors feel 
safe to speak up and it is our position that MSU cannot move 
forward and become an institution of integrity and safety until 
John Engler is no longer president and a new interim leader who 
will stand against the abusive culture is found.''
    Mr. Chairman, I just have one last question and this is a 
question that came from Jessica Smith, who I met with this 
morning, another one of the courageous survivors, and she had 
one question for you, and I would like you to ask, especially 
after hearing excerpts from this letter from 120 survivors, and 
there's much more in that letter.
    Her question was, if your presence is so harmful to 
survivors, why should you keep your job? Would you answer that, 
please?
    Mr. Engler. Absolutely. Be happy to. Under my leadership, 
accountability is being instilled across the university. We're 
seeing the number of complaints coming forward. People are 
being willing to bring complaints. The Office of Institutional 
Equity, our Title IX Office of Investigation. We have fixed the 
problems in the Medical Clinic now by strengthening the 
protocols, strengthened the chaperone policy, strengthened the 
building and reporting procedures in the department, 
strengthened the evaluation of deans and gatekeepers 
themselves, arrived at a $500 million settlement to put the 
litigation behind, fully cooperated with all the 
investigations, and we are also starting a process to bring a 
new president in.
    You mentioned earlier appointments. You mentioned only two, 
but there is a national search underway for the Head of the 
Title IX Office. You neglected to mention that. The man is an 
interim there.
    The Athletic Director was somebody chosen from outside the 
Athletic Department. Yes, he was part of the university, but he 
was chosen with the strong support of your constituents in 
Michigan, constituents who include not only the football and 
the basketball and the soccer and the golf coaches of the men's 
and the women's side, but alumni supporters and everybody who 
feels that this man, who has a legal degree and a Master's 
degree from Northwestern University, has a strong commitment to 
compliance, is exactly the right person to come in and be 
strong as a leader in the department, and in having a national 
search, we would have found an outsider just as I found an 
outsider of the department, but we could not do a better job 
and he deserves your support and mine.
    Senator Peters. So the national search wasn't conducted. 
You said you will do one for this other individual.
    Mr. Engler. I said it's being done, Senator.
    Senator Peters. It is being done. Yes, that is being done, 
and there is now a national search for a permanent president.
    Mr. Engler. Yes, sir.
    Senator Peters. My understanding, you will not be part of 
that search and if offered the position, you will not take it?
    Mr. Engler. I am not a candidate and I strongly support the 
Board's decision to move forward. They're in the process of 
hiring a search firm and compiling a search committee. I would 
hope that they would have somebody very quickly and when that 
person arrives, you'll give them their support.
    Senator Peters. Very good. Thank you.
    Senator Moran. Senator Cortez Masto.

           STATEMENT OF HON. CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, 
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM NEVADA

    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and Ranking 
Member Blumenthal. Thank you for continuing your work and 
leadership to bring witnesses before this Committee that can 
provide us real answers.
    I know that members of this Committee take this very 
seriously and are hard at work to provide more structured 
safeguards for our Olympic athletes and then to the survivors 
in this room, I want to personally thank those who have stood 
together to present an image for the world and are standing up 
and telling their story. I know it's not easy, but you are 
athletes with unimaginable strength and courage, and I thank 
you for everything you do every day, for using your voices.
    As elected leaders, we must remain committed to our 
obligation to demand reforms and provide for real thoughtful 
solutions that will make positive change. I remain committed to 
working with my colleagues, survivors, advocacy groups, and 
many others to make fundamental changes to the governance and 
oversight of amateur sport in this country.
    And so, Ms. Lyons, let me start with you, and I want to 
follow up on a conversation with the Chair that you started 
with regarding the ban list.
    Can I ask you, what are the consequences that the USOC 
outlines if a member club hires a coach or an individual on the 
banned list?
    Ms. Lyons. That is an excellent question. To my knowledge, 
we do not--we at the USOC do not have anything that is written 
as to what would happen if an outside club hired someone on the 
banned list.
    Typically, the USOC is not aware of which coaches are at 
which clubs. That's generally something that the NGBs are much 
more aware of, but I think you point out a structural issue. 
That is something that we should look at.
    Senator Cortez Masto. So, Ms. Perry, let me ask you this. 
What actions is USA Gymnastics taking to identify and remove 
coaches, athlete directors, employees, and officials who 
witnessed emotional and physical abuse of athletes and did not 
report child abuse to the authorities and did nothing to stop 
it?
    Ms. Perry. So we have made both our permanently ineligible 
list and our suspension list public on our website. There are 
several ways that we communicate that information out.
    Of course, we provide notice to the adverse party and we 
provide notice to the club owners and we also ask the club 
owner to provide notice to the membership in their club area 
and so----
    Senator Cortez Masto. So let me ask you this. So you are 
actually taking action to identify and remove coaches, athlete 
directors, employees, and officials who witnessed emotional and 
physical abuse of these athletes and did not report the child 
abuse to authorities?
    Ms. Perry. As long as we have a report and we're made aware 
of it, we are going to follow our Safe Sport policy and our 
Bylaws, which allows us to take action and again, depending on 
the nature of the misconduct, if it's sexual misconduct, that 
goes to the Center. If it's non-sexual misconduct that stays 
presently with the national governing body and so we have 
specific processes that we follow.
    Some of that, of course, is governed by not only our Bylaws 
and our Safe Sport policy but by the Ted Stevens Act and so we 
follow all of those processes to find at the end of a hearing 
panel, for example, what their decision is and, based on their 
decision in that hearing panel, the action is taken.
    Senator Cortez Masto. So are you currently taking any 
actions to identify and remove current employees who knew about 
the sexual abuse and didn't do anything to report it but stay 
silent?
    Ms. Perry. Did you say current employees?
    Senator Cortez Masto. Mm-hmm.
    Ms. Perry. So right now, we are going through an 
independent investigation, the Ropes and Gray, and that 
information, I think, is not only critical for this body and 
all of the investigations that are going on but it's very 
critical for us because it's important that we learn the facts 
around this and so, you know, if there are----
    Senator Cortez Masto. All right. So let me stop you there.
    Ms. Perry. Sure.
    Senator Cortez Masto. I hate to filibuster but I only got 5 
minutes and will follow up with you.
    In the testimony offered by Mr. Rick Adams of the USOC in 
March 2017, he testified that there was ``an environment that 
discouraged victims from reporting abuse'' at NGBs, including 
the USAG.
    Do you agree with Mr. Adams' assessment of the culture at 
USA Gymnastics prior to your tenure?
    Ms. Perry. Senator, I saw immediately that we had to become 
an athlete-centric organization.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Does that mean yes?
    Ms. Perry. I saw immediately that this organization and 
probably very many other organizations need to focus their 
priorities on the safety of the athletes.
    Senator Cortez Masto. So let me ask--is it Mr. Xiao?
    Mr. Xiao. Yes.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you very much.
    You've heard the opening statements of the individuals that 
are on the panel with you. Let me ask you this. Is there 
anything that they have said that satisfies your concern that 
structural change is going to occur?
    Mr. Xiao. I think that we're engaging in this process in 
good faith on the Athletes' Advisory Council and will continue 
to provide our suggestions for structural changes, but in the 
end, as I said in my testimony, I do think that we've done this 
before. I think we've done independent commissions. We've done 
sweeping governance changes. We've done the Tagliabue 
Commission not too long ago and here we are today.
    Senator Cortez Masto. That's my concern. So did you hear 
anything different today that's going to change your mind or at 
least satisfy concerns that changes will occur?
    Mr. Xiao. Personally, I don't think so. I think that it's 
not a failing, necessarily, even of the organization. I think 
it's a failing of the entire system the way it's set up.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you. I know my time has run 
out. Thank you.
    [Applause.]
    Senator Moran. Mr. Xiao, Ms. Cortez Masto went down a path 
that I was intending to go and let me take what you just said a 
step further.
    My question was and perhaps is so we've heard testimony 
from Mr. Engler, Ms. Lyons, and Ms. Perry. I would summarize 
their testimony and what we've heard from them in other 
meetings is that things are different today than they were. We 
take sexual abuse seriously. We put protocols in place. We have 
reporting requirements. We've created Safe Sport.
    You weren't on the advisory committee, I would guess, prior 
to Ms. Lyons or about the same time of her arrival, but is the 
world of Olympic athletes and the relationship between USA 
Olympics and the governing bodies, is it different today than 
it was at the time of Larry Nassar or is the only thing that's 
different today is that Larry Nassar is in prison?
    Mr. Xiao. I don't think that the only thing that's 
different is that Larry Nassar is in prison. I do think that in 
many cases the presence of Safe Sport has pushed certain 
national governing bodies to do more to protect athletes, but I 
don't think that there has been necessarily a sea change in the 
relationship between athletes and the NGBs or the athletes and 
the USOC.
    Senator Moran. And my understanding of your testimony, and 
this may be putting words in your mouth, but part of that 
significant problem is the monopolistic nature of the U.S. 
Olympic Committee.
    So when you say that there are things wrong, it hasn't 
changed in the way that it needs to. The structure is flawed. 
The problem is the relationship between athletes and the U.S. 
Olympic Committee, which is their only option to compete and to 
perform. That's the story? I mean that's your testimony?
    Mr. Xiao. I think that's accurate.
    Senator Moran. Thank you.
    Let me ask Ms. Lyons. Former President Scott Blackmun of 
the U.S. Olympic Committee stated in his written responses to 
questions for the record that ``a confidential memo summarizing 
the chronology of events relating to the athletes' report of 
abuse in the summer of 2015 and the actions taken by USA 
Gymnastics, including its engagement with the FBI, was drafted 
by USAG and forwarded to USOC in September 2015.''
    So Mr. Blackmun's written response, his testimony was that 
there was a report forwarded from USAG to the U.S. Olympic 
Committee in September 2015 and that report indicated referral 
or conversation, engagement with the FBI.
    This document has not been provided to the Subcommittee for 
our review. Are you aware of the existence of this document, 
and why was it not provided in our request to the USOC for 
documentation?
    Ms. Lyons. I am not aware of the existence of that 
document. I have not seen it. My understanding was that the 
initial--it was a conversation that informed Mr. Blackmun that 
USAG was informing the FBI and that was back, I believe, in 
July.
    I have not seen any document that would be a chronology of 
events that was produced in September.
    Senator Moran. If that document exists, would you know 
about it? If that document exists within your custody of the 
U.S. Olympic Committee, would you know about it?
    Ms. Lyons. You would think from all of the search that we 
have done on keywords and the like that something that 
contained any of those keywords about gymnastics, Nassar, et 
cetera, should have been revealed, if it existed.
    Senator Moran. Just like with the documents that were 
retrieved from the Karolyi Ranch, we've yet to see--this is a 
document that I think would be very valuable to us, and I would 
ask you to pursue the possibility that it exists within your 
custody and provide it, if it does. That I assume you're 
willing to do.
    Ms. Lyons. Absolutely. We are willing to do that.
    Senator Moran. Ms. Perry, do you know anything about that 
document?
    Ms. Perry. I do not.
    Senator Moran. So I suppose a copy could exist that was 
forwarded from U.S. Gymnastics to the U.S. Olympic Committee. 
One would think there might be a document. Again, same story 
with the Karolyi Ranch documents. If it's in your custody, I 
assume you will look--you will pursue it further and provide 
it, if it exists?
    Ms. Perry. Yes, sir.
    Senator Moran. Thank you.
    Ms. Lyons. Senator Moran, may I add, because my attorney 
has just advised me of which document we're talking about.
    Senator Moran. Yes, ma'am.
    Ms. Lyons. I believe there was a document sent from Steve 
Penny to us at the time Chief of Security, Larry Boondorf, and 
my understanding is that that document has been provided.
    Senator Moran. That is the document that was provided to 
your security director, your security chief. I don't believe we 
have that document and again I would ask you if you'd provide 
it, if it does exist, and apparently it does.
    Ms. Lyons. This one I have.
    Senator Moran. So thank you for checking with your 
attorney----
    Ms. Lyons. Yes,----
    Senator Moran.--and we would appreciate you providing it--
--
    Ms. Lyons.--we will ensure you have.
    Senator Moran.--to the Committee. Thank you.
    Senator Blumenthal.
    Senator Blumenthal. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Engler, I want to be fair to you and give you a chance 
to go back to your previous answer. The comments made by Kaylee 
Lorincz were in a public comment session. She recounted that 
conversation and you denied that the meeting with her, without 
her attorney, in which you offered money took place, correct?
    Mr. Engler. I did not deny there was a meeting. She waited 
some 45 minutes with her mother to meet with me and I, along 
with two women who were on my staff, Carol Lavente and Emily 
Garonte, did meet with her.
    Senator Blumenthal. But there was no discussion--you deny 
any discussion of a payment?
    Mr. Engler. No, our discussion was about what is it among 
all of the actions that we've taken, many of which were in my 
written testimony, is there anything else that, from the 
survivor perspective, could be done and the discussion was how 
do we hear from people about what is it that might help.
    Senator Blumenthal. So no discussion of money? I want to be 
absolutely clear.
    Mr. Engler. No discussion. We were in settlement talks. 
There'd be no point in having a settlement with a single 
victim.
    Senator Blumenthal. Did you consider it proper to meet with 
her without her attorney present? You knew she was represented.
    Mr. Engler. That was up to her. I asked that question to 
her and her mother, if they could meet with me. It's 
appropriate. I could meet with them but could they meet with me 
and they asked that would this be done privately that nothing 
be said. They could get in big trouble. It was not a problem on 
my side. It was an issue for them.
    Senator Blumenthal. And----
    Mr. Engler. And I have met with others.
    Senator Blumenthal.--you made no offer of money, as she 
very specifically said you did?
    Mr. Engler. No, I was not doing settlement negotiations 
with one plaintiff. That would be----
    Senator Blumenthal. So are you saying----
    Mr. Engler.--silly.
    Senator Blumenthal.--that she lied when she made that 
comment?
    Mr. Engler. I have said publicly that we have very 
different recollections. The people in the room that were part 
of the university have different recollections of that 
conversation than she has.
    Senator Blumenthal. Did you comment on Dean William 
Strampel in that meeting with her?
    Mr. Engler. I don't remember. I might have because I think 
I might have mentioned the fact that we'd already begun the 
tenure revocation.
    Senator Blumenthal. Did you say about the charges of 
misconduct against him that they were ``no big deal?''
    Mr. Engler. No.
    Senator Blumenthal. You deny that you said that?
    Mr. Engler. Absolutely. I mean, we're revoking a 
gentleman's tenure, that's a big deal, and the actions that--
you know, the failures of his leadership were a very big deal.
    Senator Blumenthal. Ms. Perry, earlier, I referred to the 
Answer filed on Thursday and I also made mention of the Motion 
to Dismiss filed by the United States Olympic Committee.
    I want to be clear. You were saying that Larry Nassar never 
worked for USA Gymnastics in a way that would make you in any 
way legally responsible?
    Ms. Perry. No, Senator Blumenthal, I am not saying that at 
all. What I'm saying is that he was not an employee of USA 
Gymnastics. Of course, as the team doctor, there was definitely 
a relationship there with USA Gymnastics at the time, and, of 
course, I wasn't there, but he was known as the team doctor for 
USA Gymnastics.
    Senator Blumenthal. But that seems contrary to what you 
have said in court. I mean, in court, you said he in effect was 
like a volunteer who just happened to be there and you have no 
responsibility for anything he did.
    Ms. Perry. Senator,----
    Senator Blumenthal. By the way, that contention is belied 
by your own documents.
    I'm going to ask that the Chairman put in the record a 
statement of July 11, 2014, which describes, quote unquote, 
services. I mentioned it earlier.
    Senator Moran. Without objection.
    [The statement referred to follows:]

       USA Gymnastics solidifies leadership for program services

                          posted on 08/11/2014

    INDIANAPOLIS, Aug. 11, 2014--Athlete care is one of the top 
priorities for USA Gymnastics, and in 2013, the USA Gymnastics Medical 
Task Force was established to provide leadership and oversight of USA 
Gymnastics' practices, procedures and protocols regarding athlete care. 
USA Gymnastics has an experienced and dedicated cadre of medical and 
training professionals who give their time and expertise to support the 
country's top gymnasts. Each of the disciplines has a primary staff for 
its athletes and events.

   Women' s gymnastics: Dr. Larry, D.O., Holt, Mich., and 
        Debbie Van Horn, A.T.C./D.P.T., Huntsville, Texas

   Men's gymnastics: Dr. David Kruse, M.D., Huntington Beach, 
        Calif., and Don Rackey, A.T.C., Gilbert, Ariz.

   Trampoline and tumbling: Dr. George Drew, D.O., Three 
        Rivers, Mich., and Van Horn

   Rhythmic gymnastics: Beth Darling, A.T.C./D.P.T./P.T., Erie, 
        Pa.

   Acrobatic gymnastics: Dr. Jay Binder, M.D., Metairie, La.

   USA Gymnastics National Team Training Center: Van Horn

    The members of the USA Gymnastics Medical Task Force are: Binder, 
chairman of the task force; Darling; Dr. Drew; Dr. Kruse; Dr.; Ralph 
Reiff of Indianapolis, Ind., the executive director of St. Vincent 
Sports Performance; Alicia Sacramone of Winchester, Mass., 2008 Olympic 
team silver medalist; and Van Horn.
    The steady and continued growth of each of the five disciplines has 
resulted in an increased demand for medical support. USA Gymnastics and 
the Medical Task Force have recognized that to meet these needs, the 
national office will provide more support, and each discipline must 
play a bigger role in this area. To help manage this, Dr. Kruse has 
been appointed as the athlete care coordinator and will assume some of 
the responsibilities previously overseen by Dr., who will continue to 
serve as the medical lead for the U.S. Women's National Team.
    ``Larry's leadership and hard work provided the foundation for our 
medical system,'' said Dr. Binder. ``With the five disciplines evolving 
and expanding, we recognized the need to reallocate responsibilities to 
provide more administrative support, streamline our procedures, and 
utilize our medical professionals' time, expertise and strengths 
efficiently and effectively.''
    ``David is a good fit for this role and responsibility at this 
time,'' said. ``There have been many rewarding moments for me over the 
years, and I am proud of the progress and system we have created. I am 
looking forward to being able to focus on providing support to the 
women's national team and serving on the Medical Task Force.''
    Kruse will serve as the primary liaison between the Medical Task 
Force and USA Gymnastics staff and assist with the implementation of 
athlete care protocols, policy, assignments for the network of medical 
professionals working with the organization, and prioritizing and 
addressing health and safety matters for the gymnastics

    Ms. Perry. Senator Blumenthal, I joined USA Gymnastics in 
December 2017. So I've been with USA Gymnastics for 7 months. 
The legal actions and the statements that I believe you refer 
to, based on the date, were made prior to my becoming the CEO 
of USA Gymnastics.
    Senator Blumenthal. Well, the court filing was on Thursday.
    Ms. Perry. I have to look at that, yes.
    Senator Blumenthal. Well, I would look at it really hard--
--
    Ms. Perry. Yes.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Blumenthal.--and I would decide, and I'm being very 
serious, whether your organization really wants to stand by 
that representation, which in my view is entirely disingenuous 
and false, and I want to add one more point.
    I don't know how athletes, parents, or communities can 
trust an organization that says Larry Nassar wasn't employed 
when in fact he was the team doctor.
    Ms. Perry. No. Absolutely. He was. The only clarification I 
made was that he wasn't an employee. He was an employee of 
Michigan State, but I will find out about that. I have counsel 
here. I'm not aware of a Motion to Dismiss by USA Gymnastics, 
but I will get to the bottom of that.
    And I do want to say this, Senator Blumenthal, that really 
from day one----
    Senator Blumenthal. Well, I want to correct your 
misimpression just to be clear. USA Gymnastics filed an Answer. 
I'm not familiar with Michigan Civil Procedure.
    Ms. Perry. OK.
    Senator Blumenthal. And apparently it was in Federal court, 
but just so the record is clear, it was an Answer. U.S. Olympic 
Committee filed a Motion to Dismiss about that.
    Ms. Perry. OK. Great. Thank you for clarifying that.
    Senator Blumenthal. Ms. Perry, in a letter, dated February 
9, 2018, to Chairman Moran and me, you denied that USA 
Gymnastics used nondisclosure agreements as part of your 
investigations. Do you recall that letter?
    Ms. Perry. Senator Blumenthal, I would have to look at that 
letter, but I don't recall denying----
    Senator Blumenthal. Well, I have copies of it. I'm sure 
your counsel does.
    Ms. Perry. Yes. So there was a nondisclosure agreement that 
I think everybody is aware of that was put in place a few years 
ago, prior to my being the CEO, and when I found out about that 
nondisclosure, I immediately instructed our legal team to 
release that individual from any nondisclosure agreement, as I 
will not tolerate silencing of any sexual abuse victims, and 
from that point, as well, as I'm the new CEO, I said there will 
not be any nondisclosure agreements that silence sexual victims 
as long as I'm leader of this organization.
    Senator Blumenthal. There was, in fact, with McKayla 
Maroney a nondisclosure agreement which contained a clause that 
would fine her a $100,000 if she were to speak out about her 
abuse, and are there any others?
    Ms. Perry. I am not aware of any others prior to my being 
CEO, Senator Blumenthal, but, again, it's very important that 
everybody understands that that is not acceptable, and I 
released and made very public that this organization will not 
stand by that.
    Senator Blumenthal. And you would commit here that if there 
are any other agreements, you will release on behalf of your 
organization those individuals from that commitment?
    Ms. Perry. I will not allow a survivor or a victim of 
sexual abuse to be silenced, to be able to speak out about 
their sexual abuse. I absolutely commit to that.
    Senator Blumenthal. Going forward and retrospectively?
    Ms. Perry. Absolutely.
    Senator Blumenthal. Have you ever discussed with Mr. 
Parilla, Paul Parilla, the former USAG Board Chairman, his 
involvement in the use of that nondisclosure agreement?
    Ms. Perry. I was aware that he was involved in that 
situation, but to the extent that he made the decision or who 
made the decision, I'm not aware.
    Senator Blumenthal. Did you ever talk to him about it?
    Ms. Perry. I asked him about it. Absolutely.
    Senator Blumenthal. What did he say?
    Ms. Perry. It was his recollection that that was something 
that was agreed upon by both parties and that's pretty much the 
information he shared with me.
    Senator Blumenthal. And I have one last couple of 
questions, one last----
    Senator Moran. One last couple of questions.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Moran. Just so you know you're not pulling one over 
on me.
    Senator Blumenthal. I told the survivors this morning that 
I had a lot of questions, but I warned that we had only limited 
amounts of time. So I thank the Chairman for allowing me 
unlimited remaining questions. I'm just kidding, Mr. Chairman.
    Are you familiar with a report in the Orange County 
Register of yesterday with regard to two coaches, two suspended 
coaches still working in Southern California Gymnastics Club? 
Their names are Colden Raisher and Terry Gray.
    Ms. Perry. I am.
    Senator Blumenthal. Can you explain how they can be 
suspended but USA Gymnastics still permits them to work?
    Ms. Perry. Senator Blumenthal, I believe that the 
individual that wrote the article was absolutely correct in 
that--and I think to Mr. Xiao--am I pronouncing your name----
    Mr. Xiao. Xiao.
    Ms. Perry. Xiao. His point is this illustrates a systemic 
and structural challenge that we have and again I look at it 
from outside the Olympic movement, but here's what happened 
with Mr. Gray.
    Mr. Gray was a U.S. Center for Safe Sport case and when the 
USA Gymnastics was instructed of the allegation, USA Gymnastics 
acted swiftly and put that individual on an interim suspension. 
That interim suspension is on our website, so it's public.
    I was told there was notice given to the parties that 
should have been given to. Under the Ted Stevens Act, when you 
take anybody out of the field of play, that individual is 
entitled to a hearing panel. That hearing panel heard the--so 
he was on interim suspension and USA Gymnastics acted swiftly. 
So the hearing panel occurred and they reduced the consequence, 
if you will, down to no contact with a minor child.
    Senator Blumenthal. They are coaching minors then?
    Ms. Perry. I'm sorry?
    Senator Blumenthal. They are coaching minors, aren't they?
    Ms. Perry. So this illustrates, Senator Blumenthal, one of 
the areas where I think Congress can really help us.
    Senator Blumenthal. And Mr. Xiao highlighted one of those 
areas.
    Mr. Xiao, have you talked to Ms. Lyons about the structural 
reforms that you've suggested?
    Mr. Xiao. Some of them. Some of them are issues that the 
AAC has raised before and continues to brainstorm solutions.
    Senator Blumenthal. And how has the U.S. Olympic Committee 
received those suggestions?
    Mr. Xiao. Ms. Lyons has engaged on many of those reforms.
    Senator Blumenthal. Have they adopted any?
    Mr. Xiao. Not fully. I think we're waiting for the Athlete 
and NGB Engagement Working Group to begin, which has been 
assembled but I have not received information about when it's 
going to start work.
    Senator Blumenthal. So nothing's happened?
    Mr. Xiao. Not that I have seen on most of the large-scale 
reforms.
    Senator Blumenthal. Thank you.
    Senator Moran. Senator Hassan.
    We're going to try to conclude this hearing in the near 
future and, Senator Hassan, you are recognized.

               STATEMENT OF HON. MAGGIE HASSAN, 
                U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE

    Senator Hassan. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I 
want to thank you and Ranking Member Blumenthal for your 
continued attention to the issue of sexual abuse in the Olympic 
system, and I also just want to thank all of the survivors 
again for not only being here today but for everything you've 
done to really focus the greater public on this horror and on 
the treatment you've all experienced, and I am grateful that 
your extraordinarily harrowing stories are finally being heard. 
Thank you. Thanks to the persistence of these young men and 
women.
    I'll start with a question to you, Ms. Perry. Thanks to the 
tireless work of journalists, like those at the Indianapolis 
Star-Tribune, they made sure that these stories were heard when 
they published their expose in 2016.
    But let's not forget that these athletes and their families 
have been trying to protect themselves and each other for a 
long time and even today, certain individuals are still 
attacking these men and women for sharing these incidents and 
for pursuing legal action.
    USA Gymnastics engaged in an egregious response over the 
course of decades, keeping a file of the complaints against 
more than 50 coaches hidden away in a drawer and refusing to 
report these complaints of sexual abuse, misconduct, and 
potential child abuse to authorities.
    Now your testimony today focused on the very many things 
you're doing to reorganize leadership and structure, but I 
would like to hear from you, Ms. Perry, what exactly are you 
planning to do to ensure that transparency, reporting, and 
disclosure policies are in place so young athletes are 
protected from this kind of abuse?
    So not just reorganizing but how are you going to make sure 
that when somebody comes forward not only are they respected 
and not only is there a process but that there is the kind of 
transparency, reporting, and disclosure that we all know is so 
necessary in this area?
    Ms. Perry. Thank you, Senator. I think that it is not only 
incredibly important that we address all of the things in an 
organization, the structure, as you mentioned, the systems, the 
policies, but also the culture, and it's unacceptable, it's 
absolutely unacceptable that our athletes at any point in time 
could feel that their voices weren't important.
    And so one of the things that--a lot of the things that 
we've done in a very short period of time is we've not only 
through just the actions that I've taken, speaking to 
survivors, asking them what do we do, and, quite frankly, I'm 
very hopeful that more survivors will join our efforts, but we 
are looking at everything from top to bottom.
    One of the things that I noticed right away is that there 
was very inadequate tracking mechanisms in place. So we began 
keeping track in a database of all complaints that came into 
the organization and then we went and we're not going to wait. 
We're not going to wait for others. We're not going to wait 
whether the Center takes on all forms of misconduct, which, 
quite frankly, I think is a great idea.
    We started looking and investing in software programs 
similar to the Center to say we've got to get our handle on 
this. So we are launching the Maxient Software Program, which 
is similar to what--it's exactly what the Center's using, and 
it's my hope that they will talk because I think one of the 
greatest challenges we have as a national governing body is our 
ability to understand what's going on at the Center.
    Senator Hassan. So I thank you for that, and I'm going to 
stop you there----
    Ms. Perry. Sure.
    Senator Hassan.--because I have one other question I want 
to ask and I'm sensitive to the length of the afternoon for 
everybody.
    But it's also really important that adults understand that 
they will be held legally responsible----
    Ms. Perry. Absolutely.
    Senator Hassan.--if they fail to report and disclose and 
take action----
    Ms. Perry. Absolutely.
    Senator Hassan.--and that is at the core of much of this, 
right?
    Ms. Perry. Yes.
    Senator Hassan. So that it's not just about tracking, it's 
about letting people know that they have an obligation, it's 
not optional, right,----
    Ms. Perry. Yes.
    Senator Hassan.--and that even if it damages the 
institution or other people's reputations, it's not optional 
because protecting our athletes has to be the priority.
    Ms. Perry. Absolutely, Senator.
    Senator Hassan. Thank you.
    Ms. Perry. And I want you to know that the things that 
we're doing as an organization to make sure that that is not 
only our actions but each time a member, a professional member, 
for example, is registering for either a new application or 
renewing, as a condition of their membership, they go through 
the Safe Sport course, which talks to them about those kinds of 
things.
    Senator Hassan. All right. Thank you.
    I want to just turn, and with a little bit of indulgence 
from the Chair, last question to Mr. Engler, please.
    One of the things that concerns me the most, it has been 
shocking and saddening, is that the individuals have come 
forward and they've not only had to relive their worst 
nightmares to tell their stories but when they do, they are 
often still not being believed or their motives and personal 
character are attacked, and I am sorry to say that you recently 
made remarks doing just that.
    I am appalled by the e-mail you sent earlier this year 
disparaging Ms. Denhollander, a gymnast who was abused by Dr. 
Larry Nassar under the watch of Michigan State and others.
    Your treatment of this issue raises concerns about how MSU 
will move forward here. Even with all the evidence, why did you 
doubt Ms. Denhollander?
    Mr. Engler. The e-mail, of course, was in the midst of our 
very difficult negotiation and it was private. It was never 
public and it reflected, I guess, just the passions of the 
moment about whether or not there were referral fees being 
paid.
    The reality is that our actions today, I think, have 
consistently shown our support for the survivors and that is 
what we have to create. We have to have a culture----
    Senator Hassan. I'm going to interrupt you, Mr. Engler. I'm 
sorry.
    When you write an e-mail referring to athletes as being 
manipulated, not only are these strong, accomplished, smart 
athletes who have overcome enormous barriers in their lives to 
reach the pinnacle of their sport, they have survived 
unspeakable abuse,----
    Mr. Engler. Right.
    Senator Hassan.--and the notion that you would think they 
could be manipulated by trial lawyers and that you would speak 
of them that way is just deeply, deeply offensive.
    Private e-mail or not, it reflects an attitude at the top 
of the institution that you're asking this committee, your 
current students, your current athletes, your alumni to trust, 
and I think you have some repair work today to put it mildly.
    [Applause.]
    Mr. Engler. Well, I think you're right. That's why I 
apologized.
    Senator Hassan. Well, thank you for the apology. I just 
want to note that we keep applauding survivors of abuse for 
coming forward and then, even though we say the right words, we 
haven't yet really taken a look at the adults and institutions 
who were in charge and held them accountable and what we do is 
we keep trying to make excuses for this unbelievable horror 
that these young people have experienced and it really needs to 
stop.
    We need to take responsibility here. Michigan State needs 
to take responsibility. The committees need to take 
responsibility, and we need to change laws and hold people 
accountable, and I know that that's what this hearing is about. 
I know that that's what we're trying to do here, but at the end 
of the day, private e-mail or not, disparaging these survivors 
takes all of the good work that so many people are trying to do 
to make sure this never happens again and moves us backward.
    Mr. Engler. Senator, I appreciate that and, as I said, that 
is why I apologize. I have three daughters, age 23, exactly the 
same age as many of the survivors, and I know exactly what 
you're talking about. I recognize in my own family what, you 
know, could have happened and I feel very deeply.
    That's why we worked so hard over the nearly six months 
I've been at Michigan State to fix the problem. When you're in 
litigation with 11 firms, emotions do get high. It's an 
adversarial process. I confess to getting very frustrated, but 
at the end of the day, we did get the settlement done. We have 
fixed the policies. We've strengthened accountability.
    Mr. Chairman, I'd like to submit for the record an 
Executive Order that I did to create the Office of Risk 
Management, Ethics, and Compliance.
    It's exactly--it's part of the actions that--as Senator 
Blumenthal said, there's a lot of talk out there. There's a lot 
of support but at Michigan State, we are fixing the problem and 
you could not have a Larry Nassar again at Michigan State.
    You've got a challenge, I think, on the part of all 
universities and a lot of organizations to fix the 
relationships between sexes and how do we deal with assault and 
misconduct, but I would argue that when we're done, we hope 
that what we've done at Michigan State can be a model for 
others.
    I brought also two articles that are excellent articles, 
one from Midland Daily News, the local paper of my own old 
district, one from The Bleacher Report. These are survivors' 
testimonies, just as you said, where the media told the story. 
They got it out and it helps to explain how challenging this is 
to fix, but I feel this deeply from a personal standpoint and 
my actions have been consistent with my belief that this should 
never ever happen again. None of these women should have to--no 
future woman should have to go through what these women have 
gone through.
    Senator Hassan. And one might suggest that they never 
should have needed to sue the university in the first place.
    Thank you,----
    Mr. Engler. I would agree with that.
    Senator Hassan.--Mr. Chair.
    Mr. Engler. Thank you.
    [Applause.]
    Mr. Engler. Mr. Chairman, may I submit these for the 
record?
    Senator Moran. Senator Hassan, thank you.
    The documents will be submitted for the record without 
objection.
    Mr. Engler. All right.
    [The information referred to follows:]

    GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT

    
                           Midland Daily News

          No more shame: Midland gymnast discusses Nassar case

Kate Carlson, kcarlson@mdn.net Updated 8:41 am EDT, Saturday, July 21, 
                                  2018


    Helena Weick poses for a portrait on July 10 in downtown Midland. 
(Katy Kildee/kkildee@mdn.net)

    Minutes before she was supposed to give her victim impact statement 
at the sentencing hearing for a once-respected USA Gymnastics doctor, 
Helena Weick was still unsure about going public with her story.
    The January 2018 sentencing where 156 women shared how Dr. Larry 
Nassar sexually abused them under the guise of medical treatment lasted 
seven days. Helena is a Midland native who was sexually abused by 
Nassar when she was 12, and spoke publicly about her abuse for the 
first time. The former gymnast, now 19, ultimately decided she did not 
want to hear her story read anonymously in court.
    ``I said to him, this isn't my shame anymore, it's yours,'' Helena 
said. ``It just didn't feel right to read that anonymously, it felt 
like I was hiding, keeping that shame.''
    Helena grew up in Midland and started training at Midland 
Gymnastics Training Center when she was a toddler. Her sisters and 
brothers were in the sport too, and like all serious gymnastics 
families, knew Nassar as the doctor to go to. Helena remembers their 
family had a cupboard with important phone numbers listed on it, and 
Nassar's number was among them written on a sticky note.
    ``The fact that he was so admired and trusted, I felt like it was 
an honor to go see him, so I would never question him,'' Helena said.
    Helena saw Nassar at his MSU office for the first time when she was 
8 for her feet, then four times when she was 12 for back issues. The 
last time Helena saw him was when Nassar digitally penetrated her. She 
quit gymnastics about a year later because her back issues made it too 
hard for her to continue practicing gymnastics. Helena didn't realize 
at the time that she was sexually abused by the doctor, but knows now 
that could have subconsciously contributed to her decision to leave the 
sport.
    Reading Rachael Denhollander's story of how she was sexually abused 
by Nassar in the Indianapolis Star in March 2016 was the first time 
Helena was able to recognize herself as a survivor of sexual abuse.
    ``The way I always put it in my mind was, 'It was a weird doctor's 
appointment,' '' Weick said.
    As a 12-year-old, there was ``no category'' in her mind for sexual 
abuse or molestation, which only contributed to the fact that Nassar 
had such an excellent reputation at the time for helping gymnasts. Her 
mother was also in the room with her when it happened, adding another 
layer of confusion to the situation.
    ``This admired, trusted doctor is there telling you it's OK,'' she 
said. ``Telling you it's OK that it feels weird, telling you that it's 
normal that it feels weird, and that he knows what he's doing and 
you're the child, he's the doctor.''
    Nassar was sentenced Jan. 24, 2018, to 175 years in prison after 
Helena and more than 150 others came forward alleging they were 
sexually abused by the former gymnastics doctor.
    Lawsuits are still ongoing related to the decades of abuse Nassar 
inflicted on a growing number of survivors coming forward.
What needs to change
    On July 18, the Arthur Ashe Courage Award was presented to more 
than 140 survivors of abuse from the former sports doctor on the 2018 
ESPYS stage in Los Angeles.
    The fact that it took over 150 women during the January sentencing 
to repeat back the abuse that happened to them in front of their abuser 
for so many people to pay attention is a hard pill to swallow, Helena 
said. The sexual abuse Nassar inflicted on gymnasts and other clients 
was first brought to public attention with the first Indianapolis Star 
story in March 2016, but was not in the forefront of the Nation's 
attention until the sentencing at the beginning of this year.
    As one of the hundreds of survivors of sexual abuse at the hands of 
Nassar, Helena wants people to know that when someone reports being 
sexually assaulted or abused, it needs to be taken seriously.
    ``At Michigan State University there were policies in place, it's 
not like we need to come up with this whole big new system on how to 
stop sexual assault, it was there,'' she said. ``The people in charge 
just decided to look the other way.''
    People were reporting sexual assault to authority figures and were 
having their situation judged before it was reported to the top, she 
explained.
    ``If somebody comes to you saying they were sexually assaulted, you 
need to report it,'' she said. ``It's not your judgment call whether or 
not they did it, you just need to report it. It's that simple.''
    Can MSU come back from covering up for Nassar? Helena thinks it 
still can, but only with an overhaul of leadership, and different 
people in charge of choosing the new leaders of the university.
    ``I think there's a lot of good people at MSU and a lot of the 
students are very good people that want change,'' she said. ``That's 
why a lot of them are fighting for change because they care about the 
university.''
    Helena also wants people to realize that Nassar was just one of 
many ``untouchables'' in power at MSU and in society in general that 
need to be taken off their pedestal. The problem is not removed from 
Midland, she said, because it happens everywhere.
    ``Nobody should just be allowed to do whatever they want just 
because of their status,'' she said. ``Unfortunately that's what 
happened. The reputation of these people has been put in front of the 
welfare of children, which is ridicules.''
Message to survivors
    There are still people who victim blame, shame and deny survivors 
of sexual assault, Helena explained, but she hopes that does not stop 
survivors from coming forward.
    When Helena was abused by Nassar and did not understand initially 
what happened, she was confused and felt shameful because she thought 
there was something wrong with her. Victim shaming only makes it easier 
for abusers, because they can hide behind their victim's shame, she 
explained.
    ``But I would hate for anyone to ever be silent about this because 
they don't think they are going to be supported,'' she said. ``We're 
here for you and we're going to fight for you.''
    The intensity of Nassar's sentencing was emotionally hard to 
handle, Helena said, but at the same time it was refreshing to be 
around so many people who knew what she was going through. Through the 
difficult process of speaking in court and to news outlets about her 
abuse, Helena is glad she has been able to connect with a community of 
gymnasts along the way that continue to serve as some of her biggest 
role models.
    ``Whether you're public or not, whether you still feel broken and 
ashamed, we're going to be here for you and we're going to fight for 
you,'' she said.
Aftermath of abuse
    Years from now, Helena hopes she can look back on the sport of 
gymnastics, and MSU, and it will be unrecognizable from the toxic 
environment that has surrounded the institutions.
    Helena's own gym in Midland was rare because of how supportive the 
coaches were.
    ``There were obviously times that were frustrating and people got 
upset, but my coaches genuinely cared about me. They were excellent 
coaches,'' Helena said.
    This is not the case at all gyms, she said.
    ``It was kind of an open secret in gymnastics that there was 
abuse,'' Helena said. ``We all know that stuff happened but I never 
really witnessed it firsthand. Hearing all of these other girls' 
stories from their gym, I just felt so lucky to be at that gym. There 
was none of that I ever experienced.''
    There was no question of Helena's parents believing her when she 
told them years after the fact that Nassar had sexually abused her, but 
they still felt shocked and betrayed.
    Helena's parents and family continue to be her biggest support 
system. She is glad she can speak out about her abuse and be an 
advocate for others, but also feels sometimes it distracts from her own 
personal healing.
    Helena is now a freshman at Taylor University in Indiana studying 
psychology. She still thinks about Nassar every day.
    ``It all starts small in gyms with parents learning warning signs 
in their gyms and outside,'' she said. ``Gymnastics definitely needs to 
change for it to be safe for everyone.''
    Part of the problem is how intense the sport is, Helena explained, 
because usually gymnasts peak at 14, so they are treated years older 
than they are. Children need time to just be kids, feel empowered, and 
be able to know they have authority over their own body and life, she 
said.
    Despite its current problems, Helena still has love for the sport 
that was such a big part of her childhood. ``It was very important to 
me, it still is. It is a beautiful sport,'' Helena said. ``Larry is not 
going to ruin that.''
                                 ______
                                 

                            Bleacher Report

                The Woman Coming for Larry Nassar's Job

                    ALEXANDRIA NEASON--JULY 19, 2018


    B/R

    Michigan State University, known locally as State, is a sprawling 
campus in East Lansing marked by a series of roads that wind into each 
other like irrigation channels. On the drive to the school, green 
plains dot the landscape and the backs of passing cars and trucks 
almost universally announce their collegiate loyalty in green and 
white.
    When Selena Brennan and I arrive on a sunny day in mid-May, the 
bustle of the spring semester has ended, but students wearing backpacks 
still fill the sidewalks. Selena has just finished up her freshman year 
at MSU--enough time to know her way around. Not today, however: To get 
us there, she sheepishly plugs the street address into her cell phone, 
trusting the omniscience of an app over her own memory. After a quick 
re-route, and later, some directions from Dad, we pull into a 
nondescript parking lot near an off-campus apartment complex that will, 
come fall, be her new home.
    I hadn't asked her to, but Selena, 19, brought us here anyway--
here, in front of a tall, silver and blue building. This was it. A year 
earlier, during a visit to the school with friends, just being within 
eyesight of this building had reduced her to tears. MSU was her dream 
school, but the possibility of having to spend time on this side of 
campus had been a concern. Her counselor intervened, suggesting that 
she come back here to learn how to separate the building from the 
trauma she'd endured in it, how to separate the man responsible for the 
pain from the dream she'd come to MSU to chase. Today, Selena is in 
control. Her hands relax on the steering wheel of her mother's SUV as 
she stares intently at a sign that announces the building's occupants: 
Michigan State University Health Team.
    ``Now I can sit here. It's still weird, but I know nothing is going 
to happen,'' she told me. ``I'll be in there one day. Running that 
show.''
                                 ______
                                 
    The ``show,'' as Selena calls it, had been headed by disgraced 
sports physician Larry Nassar for years. MSU had been his professional 
home since 1997; he had run shop out of his office here, at this 
building, until the university fired him in the wake of numerous 
allegations of sexual abuse being publicized.
    Nassar's fall from grace began out of the public eye in 2014, when 
he was on the faculty at Michigan State's College of Osteopathic 
Medicine. That April, MSU graduate Amanda Thomashow filed a Title IX 
complaint against him, alleging sexual misconduct. She said she had 
been sexually assaulted by Nassar during treatment for a hip injury, 
and a criminal investigation was opened. But Nassar continued to see 
patients at MSU for 16 months before the university alerted local 
prosecutors on July 1, 2015. That summer, Nassar dodged the spotlight 
again, when USA Gymnastics, which had received formal complaints of 
abuse a year earlier, dismissed him without alerting his other 
employers or law enforcement.


    Nassar during a hearing. JEFF KOWALSKY/Getty Images

    It would be another year before the world caught wind of Nassar's 
crimes. In August of 2016, the Indianapolis Star published a landmark 
investigation revealing the chronic, systemic failure by USA 
Gymnastics, the sport's governing body, to report the allegations of 
abuse of children by their coaches. Just a few weeks after the story 
was published, Rachael Denhollander, a former gymnast, filed a criminal 
complaint with police against Nassar, alleging that he had sexually 
abused her as a teenager, when she was his patient. She was the first 
to publicly accuse him. The Indianapolis Star again ran the story.
    Over the next several months, hundreds of women and girls, 
including several Olympians, were emboldened to step forward, one by 
one, both publicly and anonymously, with stories of abuse by Nassar. 
He'd worked as the team physician for the women's Olympic team for four 
seasons and treated hundreds of underage athletes over a decades-long 
career working at MSU, Twistars--an elite gymnastics training facility 
in Lansing--and at Holt High School.
    Selena had been Nassar's patient for six years while nursing a back 
injury. Her last appointment with him was in late August, right before 
he was arrested and charged.
                                 ______
                                 
    Like many kids, Selena got her start in gymnastics in a toddler 
class. She was a sports girl from a sports family in a budding sports 
powerhouse town called Clarkston. Her father, Tim, had been an athlete; 
he had both played and coached high school football, so he was invested 
in his daughter's progress. By the time Selena was 5, she had moved up 
to a recreational gymnastics program, taking hour-long classes once 
weekly. When her coaches opened a new gym, Stars and Stripes Kids 
Activity Center, and announced the beginning of a competitive program, 
Selena was selected as an inaugural athlete.


    Brennan, 8, smiles after winning every event and all around at a 
level 4 event. Courtesy of Selena Brennan

    As the number of hours she spent in the gym increased, it became 
clear that this wasn't just a phase; gymnastics was Selena's sport. She 
took her training seriously, performing the best on floor and vault, 
and she never had to be convinced to go to practice.
    Tim watched his daughter move from level to level, and like any 
good coach, he threw himself into the numbers. ``I started tracking it 
a little bit to get an idea of what percentile she was [in],'' he said. 
``Those first three years [that she competed], she was always in that 
top 3-10 percentile. Regardless of where the meet was, who it was 
against, what state we were in. And I got a better idea of whether it 
was real. I saw that she had the focus to maybe do really well in the 
long haul.''
    By the time Selena was 11 years old and in the fifth grade, she was 
competing on a level 7 team at Stars and Stripes. The training was 
grueling and repetitive. Her craft, artistic gymnastics, required a 
delicate combination of strength, flexibility, power and speed. So she 
structured her life almost entirely around gymnastics practice: After 
school, she ate and changed in the car on the way to the gym, where she 
trained until 9 p.m. four days per week. On Saturdays, she spent up to 
six hours practicing.
    One day, while executing a front walkover, a basic skill, Selena 
cracked two vertebrae in her back. ``I was in a lot of pain,'' Selena 
said. ``And I thought I just pulled a little muscle or something, I 
didn't think it was a big deal.''
    She continued to practice through the pain for four months--it was 
competition season--before finally seeking medical treatment. Doctors 
diagnosed her with stress fractures, and prescribed that she wear a 
rigid, plastic back brace that, using velcro straps, would wrap around 
Selena's torso. She was to wear it at all times, and doctors even 
suggested that Selena consider quitting sports altogether.
    Where other kids might have tired of repeat appointments, growing 
frustrated with the pain and lack of answers, Selena was resolute. 
During one visit, a nurse walked her through the intricacies of the MRI 
process, showing Selena images of her own spine as the machine hummed 
and rotated around her. Seeing her own anatomy fascinated Selena. She 
had found a second dream.


    Brennan, 10, gets ready before a level 6 event. Courtesy of Selena 
Brennan

    Selena took some time off before returning to the gym, but the 
brace, bulky and imposing on her short frame, was clearly not a 
solution. And neither was quitting. ``It was really awkward. If I had 
to bend down and pick something up, I had to keep a straight body or I 
had to do the drop-and-squat,'' Selena said. ``We all kind of realized 
how ridiculous it was.''
    The constant immobilization was weakening her core strength, a 
hindrance in a sport that relies so heavily on it. So a trusted coach 
at her gym suggested they make an appointment with a star gymnastics 
doctor she had heard of, to get a second opinion and a more realistic 
assessment of rehabilitation time. His name was Larry Nassar.
    Selena's parents quickly made her an appointment.
    ``He worked with athletes all the way up to Olympians. And he's 
looking for ways to rehabilitate and strengthen things that may have 
been a weakness, that may have caused the injury,'' Tim said, 
remembering his daughter's first appointment. ``So it made a lot more 
sense. It sounded a lot better. You go to his office, all the 
impressive letters and pictures. And you know, looking back on it, the 
guy had the perfect setup for being the nutty pervert that he was. It's 
crazy.''
    (Unbeknownst to the Brennans, court records show that at that 
point, in 2010, at least four victims had reported abuse against 
Nassar, including at MSU. Later, it would be revealed that around this 
time, Nassar also kept computer files containing thousands of images of 
child pornography. Additional court records say he had begun abusing a 
six-year-old girl--a daughter of a family friend--in 1998, the year 
Selena was born.)
    Selena was seeing Nassar for treatment regularly, and her interest 
in medicine began to build.
    Finally, here was a doctor with whom she shared a vocabulary, 
someone who did not need to be taught what a front walkover was. Here 
was a doctor who understood what was expected of her in the gym and who 
could treat her injury in a way that catered to that. It was through 
that lens that she started to see a future in sports medicine for 
herself.
    ``Just being able to be with a doctor who understood the sport made 
it a lot easier. It was like I could take a deep breath, and I didn't 
have to explain how [I do] what I do. Sometimes primary care doctors 
give you some type of way to cope with the pain. But when you're 
practicing that much in a gym, you're constantly putting pressure on 
your back,'' Selena said. ``Those things don't necessarily work, 
because there's a ton more pressure on your body than the average 
person. It was nice to have reasonable tools be given and be like, `OK, 
this is something I can actually do, this might actually make a 
difference.' After my [first] visit I was like, `I'm doing this.' I 
ended up telling him, 'I want to do what you do.' ''


    Brennan, 12, competes on the balance beam during a regional event 
at level 8. Courtesy of Selena Brennan

    Among friends, Selena was the doctor of the crew, quick to offer an 
amateur diagnosis whenever anyone got hurt. By age 12, she decided she 
would not only study to become a physician, but would do so at MSU, 
where Nassar worked and where two of her uncles had once been students. 
She became familiar with the hour-long drive to MSU from Clarkston, and 
despite the vertebral fractures, she returned to the gym for training 
and was eventually cleared to compete again.
    Just before the start of what would have been her level-nine 
season--gymnasts compete until level 10 before earning the designation 
``elite,'' which qualifies them to compete internationally--Selena quit 
gymnastics. Despite having returned to training and being cleared to 
compete, she finally tired of the constant pain and other interests she 
couldn't pursue. Freed from the demands of the gym, she got more 
involved in her school community and joined a dance team. But she 
continued seeing Nassar to treat her back. (She had developed 
spondylolisthesis, a spinal disorder exacerbated by sports like 
gymnastics, and also suffered from upper back problems.)
    Throughout this time, over the course of six years, Nassar groomed 
and repeatedly abused Selena. For the first two years, he groped her 
during treatment. She was 13 when the molestation began.
    Selena was too young to understand what was happening when it 
started, and as is common among victims of sexual abuse, it was near 
impossible to clearly articulate that something was wrong. She made 
attempts, though. After one appointment, Selena described to her 
friends what she knows now was abuse, telling them that he made her 
feel uncomfortable.
    ``When something would happen, I had a couple close friends that I 
said something to, like 'Isn't this weird?' But they were just as young 
as I was and we didn't know, so it wasn't like they were pointing it 
out like `You need to tell somebody.' Everybody just was like, `It's 
your doctor,' '' Selena said.
    ``I just assumed, like, this is my doctor, that must have been an 
accident. I kind of justified it in my head because my parents were in 
the room, and to me, it was weird, but it didn't send off an extreme 
red flag, I didn't know any better. For so long, I was so tricked by 
[Nassar]. Even though I felt uncomfortable, I didn't think anything was 
seriously wrong. I was never by myself with him, so I was just like, 
What could be [wrong]? If something was really wrong, somebody would 
know besides me.''
    Tim and Angie, Selena's parents, remember their daughter mentioning 
that she felt uncomfortable on one occasion. But at the time, and given 
the nature of her injuries, they never suspected that Selena's 
discomfort was a warning sign. Doctors enjoy a certain amount of public 
trust, which is a necessary precondition for patients to make 
themselves vulnerable when they receive care. Doctors are good people, 
conventional wisdom goes, so we show up and we trust them with our 
bodies, with the bodies of our children, and we wait for them to heal 
us. Nassar and predators like him exploit this social contract, taking 
advantage of our desire to be healthy, and of our reliance on them to 
help make it so.
                                 ______
                                 
    The summer before her senior year, in 2016, Selena was, by all 
accounts, a normal teenager: She hung out on her family's boat, swam in 
the many lakes that surround Clarkston and spent time with a crew of 
her best friends. She visited her grandparents and daydreamed about the 
basketball team's chances in the upcoming season. (Her high school was 
a perennial contender.) She also managed her chronic back pain.


    Larry Nassar appears in court to listen to impact statements prior 
to being sentenced after being accused of molesting about 100 girls 
while he was a physician for USA Gymnastics and Michigan State 
University, where he had his sports-medicine practice on January 16, 
2018 in Lansing, Michigan. Nassar has pleaded guilty in Ingham County, 
Michigan, to sexually assaulting seven girls, but the judge is allowing 
all his accusers to speak. Nassar is currently serving a 60-year 
sentence in Federal prison for possession of child pornography. Scott 
Olson/Getty Images

    Nassar became a household name very suddenly that fall. When the 
news of his crimes broke, Selena was at powder puff football practice. 
Meaghan Mulvihill, one of Selena's closest friends, vividly remembers 
the moment she heard the reports. A friend of the crew, Isabel, who was 
also a gymnast, rushed into practice late, visibly shaken.
    ``She went right to Selena and was like, `I need to talk to you.' 
We were like, `What is going on?' Once practice ended, we kind of 
figured it out. The articles were coming out and we knew he was her 
doctor. I remember she stayed in the parking lot for a long time. She 
was too hysterical to even drive herself home,'' said Mulvihill. ``I 
was reading every article, talking to my parents about it. Not knowing 
what to say to her.''
    ``Once the story broke, I instantly knew and I was so in shock, but 
there was not a single hint of doubt in my mind because I was like, How 
can I be reading something that happened to me, that nobody else 
knows?'' said Selena. ``And I came home really, really, really upset.''
    Selena tried to tell her parents on the day the news broke, but she 
was overwhelmed and couldn't get it out. ``I thought I had said enough, 
but I didn't. In my head. I was thinking I was, but I really wasn't 
saying much at all,'' she said.
    Her parents remember things similarly. ``I remember her coming into 
our bedroom and I was talking about it,'' Tim said. ``And of course [we 
were] like, `How can that be?' Keep in mind, every time we were there 
for six years, one of us was there. Selena was never with that guy 
without one of us there. So it still doesn't register in your mind as a 
parent that that happened to your daughter. One, you don't want to 
believe it did. And two, you were there. And it doesn't compute.
    ``I'm sure her subconscious blamed us. Like, maybe she didn't sit 
there and go, `It's my parents fault,' but subconsciously--how do you 
digest all that as a young kid? I think she had a huge amount of 
resentment and fought with us and hid up in her room and we're going, 
`What the hell?' I didn't even connect the dots. Looking back, you 
wonder why I didn't know that's what was going on.''
    In a matter of weeks, the news became the biggest sports story in 
the country as more and more women stepped forward to tell their 
stories. On Sept. 20, 2016, Nassar was fired from MSU. On Nov. 21, he 
was charged with three counts of criminal sexual conduct with a person 
under 13, and by Dec. 15, he had been charged with possession of child 
pornography. He was stripped of his medical license in January of 2017. 
Denhollander and 17 additional, anonymous victims sued MSU, USA 
Gymnastics and Twistars the same month.
    Through all of this, Selena was left to navigate the terms of her 
own trauma amid a cloud of confusion and speculation. The people 
closest to her knew her desire to be a sports physician. They also knew 
that she had built a desire for the profession and learned the ins and 
outs of it because of her injuries and her visits with Nassar. So 
Selena found herself doing the painful work of coming to terms with the 
reality of her abuse--with an audience.
    As is the case with many survivors of abuse, it would be months 
before she could clearly articulate what had happened. During this 
time, her parents--with whom she normally had a close-knit 
relationship--and friends noticed a change in her demeanor. Angie 
remembers Selena seeming persistently angry. Mulvihill recalls an 
occasional emotional outburst.
    ``Selena is always the strong one. She's always the one that. . 
.when something is wrong, you go to Selena and she knows what to say,'' 
Mulvihill said. ``She would talk about it sometimes to me. Last summer, 
we were at one of our friends' graduation parties, we were all hanging 
out and she was really upset. She was hysterically crying about it and 
she was like, `I don't want to have to deal with this all year.' ''


    Courtesy of Selena Brennan

    The public conversation about Nassar was intensely painful for 
Selena at times. Her friends did the best they could, offering her 
compassion and sensitivity at arguably the most difficult point of her 
life. But the larger school community sometimes unwittingly caused her 
pain. One time, in an AP U.S. government class, a teacher incorporated 
a news article about Nassar into a class discussion, which caused 
speculation among her peers about whether she had been assaulted.
    ``They would be reading it and looking at me, and reading it and 
looking at me. And it was really hard. Because without saying anything, 
everybody was looking at me, people who had heard me say his name 
before. I just had to sit there, because if I get up and leave the 
room, I'm just confirming it for everyone in this room,'' Selena said. 
``I knew that it was going to get brought up at one point, but it was 
hard to make a decision. Do I get up so I can go do what I need to do 
to relax, or do I just sit here and try to hold it all in?''
    The pressure of the questions weighed on her.
    ``The smallest things would be triggers for me. And I would just 
shut down and freak out, just crying, hyperventilating and having 
really bad panic attacks,'' Selena remembered. ``Anytime I'd go 
anywhere or do anything [with] my friends, anytime I felt like I was 
like having a good time, it was weird. I felt like I shouldn't be 
[having a good time], like why are you happy right now? And then I'd 
start thinking about everything and just get out of control.''
    Mulvihill recalled that once, she had to bring an inconsolable 
Selena into a dark closet in the middle of a party, huddling together 
with her until she could breathe. Another time, on a St. Patrick's Day 
trip to visit Mulvihill's sister at MSU, they drove past Nassar's old 
office and the color drained from Selena's face.
    After one particularly bad panic attack, Selena's brother, Maxx, 
went to his parents, scared and concerned for his big sister. A 
conversation finally ensued. Selena tried her best to articulate what 
she had been feeling.
    ``It wasn't just hard for me to get it out, but it was hard for me 
to see my parents finding out. For months, I hadn't looked at them and 
been like, `This and this and this happened.' They knew that I was 
upset about it because we had been with him for so long, but it was 
like they were finding out [that Nassar was a sexual predator] for the 
first time again,'' said Selena.
    The conversation was difficult not just in the obvious ways. Tim 
and Angie were present during Selena's visits with Nassar, but they 
weren't aware of the abuse taking place under their noses--a fact they 
struggled with.
    ``Initially I'm thinking, Oh, my God, for all this time she thinks 
that we knew and we didn't do anything,'' Tim said. ``Then also it 
dawns on me, Wait a minute! This guy did this and I'm there. So now I'm 
going, My one and only thing is to protect my kids, and I'm sitting 
there while this guy's doing this? It's beyond tough to deal with. . . 
. Like, how could this happen? Especially with us there. And you feel 
like you know a person, you know?''


    Selena and her father, Tim, after a 2006 competition. Selena 
Brennan

    After Nassar was arrested, Angie started looking for a new doctor 
for her daughter--this time, a woman, because Selena didn't want to see 
male doctors anymore. For at least a year, Nassar had been unable to 
find the source of the pain. But the next sports physician Selena saw 
administered a single MRI and immediately offered a new diagnosis: a 
degenerative disc.
    ``And that's all it took,'' Selena said.
    Soon thereafter, Tim and Angie enrolled Selena in therapy. (When I 
asked if they had sought therapy as a couple, Angie told me that they 
hadn't, but that they probably should. Their focus right now is 
entirely on Selena.) In her sessions, Selena thought hard about the 
decision to attend MSU, given that the university had several 
opportunities to address concerns about Nassar before it finally acted.
    ``I questioned going to State because of [worrying about] being 
able to mentally handle being in the same area where everything 
happened,'' Selena said. ``I had put State on a pedestal for so long 
because I wanted to go there so badly.''
    Her parents reassured her that she wasn't beholden to her childhood 
dream, that it would not be a failure to pick a different school. But 
Selena worked hard to build her courage. When it came time to make a 
decision, she declined to let Nassar rob her of her dream. She enrolled 
at MSU.
                                 ______
                                 
    In some ways, Selena's freshman year was like any other. She 
arrived last fall, like other teens. She roomed with Mulvihill--a 
number of her girlfriends from her hometown had chosen MSU for 
college--in student housing. (They stayed on the sixth floor of Holden 
Hall in a room they nicknamed ``the cubicle,'' and made friends with 
their suitemates.) Selena threw herself into her studies--her major is 
kinesiology--and she joined a sorority, Sigma Kappa. She also got a 
moped to get around on campus.
    But in other ways, the experience couldn't have been further from 
the norm. The campus was at the center of a national scandal, and 
midway through the fall semester, the #MeToo movement caught on. 
Students around campus were rallying around Nassar's survivors--and 
loudly so. They shamed the university's administration for its 
inaction, which they saw as complicity.
    Amid the campus activism--marches and protests, teal ribbons tied 
around trees, therapeutic fitness classes exclusive to survivors--
Selena worked hard to untangle her love of sports medicine from Nassar. 
He was at once an example of what she wanted to be and exactly the type 
of person whom she did not want to become. She questioned her ambitions 
and worried she had been misled.
    What if he was leading me down the wrong path, career-wise? She 
thought. What if he wasn't giving me real advice, or what if he was 
setting me up to fail in my education because I was listening to what 
he was saying? I've based years off of this, so what am I going to do 
now?
    The calls for change kept crescendoing and plateaued for seven 
extraordinary days in mid-January, when 156 survivors of Nassar's 
crimes showed up in court ready to confront their assailant. They 
brought with them their devastating stories--stories that demonstrated 
the impossible scope of Nassar's crimes, the sickening deception and 
repeated violation of trust they suffered. Thousands tuned in to bear 
witness.
    Selena followed the news coverage of the trial diligently, and when 
she heard survivors were being allowed to speak, she made the careful 
decision to go. The first day, Jan. 16, as 29 women spoke, Selena was 
in the courtroom watching with her mom. She made it through two hours 
of testimony before feeling so drained from the experience that she had 
to leave. (Mulvihill remembers running into her later that day and 
described her face as blank.)


    Scenes from Nassar's court hearing. JEFF KOWALSKY/Getty Images

    ``It was just really, really weird seeing him again. Especially 
like that, it was really odd and hard. But then when I saw girls get up 
there and speak, and speak to not only the court and Judge Aquilina, 
but to him. . .I was sitting there and I could feel their anger, and it 
made me feel better,'' Selena said. ``Watching them get angry at him 
made me angry too. It felt good to put it on him. Right after the first 
day, when I got back to my dorm, I typed up everything that I would 
want to say to him.''
    Selena wanted in, so she filed a police report with a detective, 
who contacted the attorney general and got her a time slot to make a 
victim impact statement. She returned to the courtroom two more times 
to build up her courage. She was scheduled to speak on the sixth day of 
the hearing, and Selena made one request of her father, who had driven 
to East Lansing with Angie.
    ``She said, `I want to try not to get emotional today. I want to be 
strong today. We all need to be strong,' '' Tim said. ``She made that 
comment in the car and I thought, Yes, we need that.''
    In the courtroom, Tim and Angie gripped Selena's hands as they 
waited for her turn to speak. When it came, Selena stood at the podium 
and did not waver as she described to the court how Nassar had earned 
her trust and then violated it, potentially misdiagnosing her.
    ``The last few years, I was seeing him for another back problem 
that he, for some unknown reason, couldn't figure out. Now, I sit here 
and wonder if that was on purpose. I got one MRI after he was fired, 
and from that one MRI, I figured out what was wrong with me. And it 
turns out I was exactly right. So tell me, how does someone as educated 
as Larry not figure that out? Did he want to keep me around for his own 
use? This is something I may never know,'' she said.
    In watching their daughter speak, Tim and Angie saw that she had 
made a turning point in her recovery.
    ``She did what the intention of an impact statement is supposed 
to--which is to give the girls a chance to take control back to a 
degree, and start healing from it,'' Tim said.


    An emotional moment in the courtroom. JEFF KOWALSKY/Getty Images

    ``[She was] taking control. That's what I felt. Like she was 
telling him she's in charge,'' Angie added.
    Then, Selena turns and quickly looks at him, taking a subtle breath 
before glancing back down at her notes. Her long, black wavy hair is 
draped across her shoulders, like armor. She demands that he look her 
in the eye as she speaks:
    ``It's really unfortunate to me that even now, standing here today, 
seeing you upset, for some sick reason, makes me upset,'' she says. 
``This week has been my time to face you. But today is your time to 
face me.''
    Her gaze grows more stern, and her tone drips with anger as she 
continues, speaking slowly and deliberately:
    ``I want you to continue to look at me while I speak, because that 
is the attention I deserve. I trusted you for six years and so did my 
family. I have listened to a lot of other brave survivors tell their 
stories to get you the worst possible punishment, but no punishment 
will ever be enough for the pain and suffering you have caused 
everyone. I want you to know that you have not defeated me. I am 
joining the strongest force of women making change so this type of 
sexual abuse is never tolerated or ignored. I was inspired by the field 
of sports medicine because of you unfortunately, but that is one thing 
I will not let you take from me. Today, I am more determined than ever 
to actually become a respected, knowledgeable, helpful, caring and 
successful sports medicine physician and person, the kind of doctor and 
person people only thought you were. I plan on taking your job, Larry, 
and making sure no patient of mine ever feels the way I do.''
    When Selena finished her remarks, she thanked the judge, grabbed 
her piece of paper and returned to the rear of the hearing room, where 
her parents awaited her. She didn't know how few or how many people 
were tuned in. Who had seen what she said. Mulvihill was watchingfrom 
the screen of a laptop a few miles away on campus. Selena had practiced 
her speech out loud three times the night before in a spate of nerves 
and anticipation. She cheered as Selena spoke.
    ``I was like, `Oh, my God. That's my best friend! That's the 
strongest girl I've ever met.' It made me proud. She tore him apart,'' 
said Mulvihill.
    Not long after Selena got back to MSU, President Lou Anna Simon and 
athletic director Mark Hollis resigned. William Strampel, Nassar's boss 
and a dean at MSU, was charged with propositioning and groping medical 
students some months later. By the time of our campus visit, someone 
had written the names of 150 of Nassar's survivors on The Rock, a 
campus landmark, in black Sharpie. Brennan's name was among them. Next 
to the names, a ``Thank You,'' was written with a heart and a hashtag, 
#TimesUpMSU.


    Women from the Michigan based victim advocacy groups End Violent 
Encounters and Firecracker Foundation cheer for women as they leave the 
courthouse after the sentencing of disgraced doctor Larry Nassar in 
Ingham County Circuit Court on January 24, 2018 in Lansing, Michigan. 
The former USA Gymnastics and Michigan State University doctor was 
sentenced to up to 175 years in prison for sexual assault after more 
than 150 women and girls confronted him in court and spoke of their 
abuse. Anthony Lanzilote/Getty Images

    It was clear where she would go from here: She would return to MSU 
ready to work. She would keep pressing forward. She's already thought 
ahead to medical school, where she wants to be, who she wants to 
become. She has considered staying at MSU, an act of ownership that 
feels in defiance of a man who desecrated the school's importance in 
her life and that of so many others.
    She would also dedicate herself to remedying the conditions that 
made the Nassar situation possible in the first place--increase the 
ranks of women doctors in gymnastics. I asked her if she ever felt like 
sports medicine was a field that harbored too many painful memories for 
her to linger in.
    ``I did question it for a while,'' she said. ``Before I knew what 
kind of person [Nassar] was, I wanted to be him. But now I can be 
better than him, I can do what he should have done. Not only can I help 
athletes with injuries, I would be the woman doctor to be there. I 
realized that I didn't need him to help me figure out what I was going 
to do. I trusted my gut on it and said I can still do what I've wanted 
to do. He doesn't have to take that away from me, too.''

Alexandria Neason is a senior staff writer at Columbia Journalism 
Review.

    Senator Moran. I'm going to try to ask just a couple of 
questions. Senator Blumenthal has agreed that I have now equal 
time to his excessive questions.
    But, first of all, let me go back to Senator Blumenthal's 
question to you, Ms. Perry. I don't understand the flaw in the 
system that the two people that are coaching in Southern 
California. The flaw that allows them to do that is what?
    Ms. Perry. So the example that I gave, Senator Moran, is 
with the coach, his last name is Gray, and we have--our Bylaws 
allow us to invoke immediate action, called interim suspension, 
when we feel that our membership is in harm's way.
    In the Ted Stevens Act, anybody that is removed from the 
field of play is entitled to a hearing. So we invoked the 
interim suspension immediately. The hearing panel heard the 
interim suspension and said we come back with this finding. 
We're going to reduce it from suspension to no contact with 
minor children.
    So you've got that at play and you also have the Center, 
which also is problematic in terms of this whole scenario that 
is in charge of investigating and has complete jurisdiction 
over sexual misconduct.
    So the information they give to us to present to the 
hearing panel is very limited. So you've got this system that's 
in place----
    Senator Moran. So it is a gymnastics club in Southern 
California that has allowed these coaches to coach?
    Ms. Perry. That's correct. It's a member club.
    Senator Moran. A member of the USA Gymnastics? Is that the 
way to say that?
    Ms. Perry. Yes.
    Senator Moran. OK. Apparently not. You were hesitant to 
agree with me.
    Ms. Perry. Member of USA Gymnastics.
    Senator Moran. OK.
    Ms. Perry. The coach, right.
    Senator Moran. So they've been notified that the 
restrictions on the coach is reduced to no contact with minors, 
but they're still coaching and, at least according to Senator 
Blumenthal, they're coaching minors.
    Ms. Perry. They have to be--according to the hearing panel 
recommendation, that individual is still allowed to coach but 
has to have supervision.
    Senator Moran. With supervision.
    Ms. Perry. Right.
    Senator Moran. So they coach with supervision. Why would 
any gymnastics group want that circumstance to be the case?
    Ms. Perry. And this is exactly, Senator Moran, why we have 
such challenges, is that, Number 1, we've got the U.S. Center 
for Safe Sport who has jurisdiction but cannot tell us the 
facts in great detail about that situation. So if it's sexual 
misconduct it goes right to the Center. They inform us about 
it. USA Gymnastics makes a decision based on the limited 
information that the Center has given to us and we're going to 
err on the side of athlete safety every time.
    So we made a decision as an organization to put that 
individual on interim suspension, so they get removed from 
coaching, right.
    Senator Moran. I understand the scenario.
    Ms. Perry. Right.
    Senator Moran. I don't understand why the person is still 
coaching at the gymnastics club in Southern California, having 
been censured in a way that prohibits him or her from having 
contact without supervision with young athletes.
    Ms. Perry. But that's one of the challenges with the Ted 
Stevens Act, is that prior to our ability to invoke interim 
measures, that an individual that goes through the process, if 
you will, an adverse party, is entitled to a hearing.
    Senator Moran. All of which I understand. The hearing 
occurred. The findings were held in the sense that----
    Ms. Perry. Right.
    Senator Moran.--something bad had happened or some reason 
for restricting this coach's capabilities to have contact with 
minors.
    Ms. Perry. So the hearing panel found that they lessened 
the consequence from suspension--am I not answering?
    Senator Moran. I understand all the facts----
    Ms. Perry. OK.
    Senator Moran.--as you described them.
    Ms. Perry. Right.
    Senator Moran. But what keeps you from making certain that 
that group--first of all, I don't understand why a group would 
take the risk of hiring somebody in that circumstance, but, 
secondly, what is your authority to do something about it when 
they do, and the answer to that is nothing because the person 
presumably is being supervised?
    Ms. Perry. No. So our answer, USA Gymnastics' answer, is to 
put an individual on interim suspension. This is a sexual 
conduct case. So there are a lot of things that fall under 
sexual misconduct.
    So when the Center tells us about this case, the case went 
to the Center and the Center tells us about a case, we have 
very limited information given from the Center and we have to 
make a decision at that point in time. Our decision is do you 
put that individual on interim suspension or do you wait until 
the hearing process goes through at the Center because that's 
where it occurs and once the investigation and the disciplinary 
hearing takes place, then the Center comes back and says we're 
done with our finding. This is how we resolved this situation.
    All throughout that process, we don't know what's going on 
and for the most part we have no idea how long it's going to 
take. So in the meantime, we have this----
    Senator Moran. So these individuals or this individual can 
be there until there is a final determination by----
    Ms. Perry. By the Center.
    Senator Moran.--the Center for Safe Sport?
    Ms. Perry. That's true.
    Senator Moran. And that's what you're waiting on now?
    Ms. Perry. And they're still in that process.
    Senator Moran. And when that finding occurs, then what's 
your enforcement against the clubs?
    Ms. Perry. So then depending on the facts, and I don't know 
the facts----
    Senator Moran. Make this one more hypothetical. So you have 
somebody who has been determined to be--it's inappropriate for 
them to be coaching. The Center for Safe Sports hypothetically 
has determined that. What prohibits a club from continuing to 
hire people who they should not hire?
    Ms. Perry. So there are two things. One is as a requirement 
of their membership, they have to--for example, in this case, 
if another club looks at hiring this individual and they're on 
the permanently ineligible list or they're on the suspension 
list, they have to look at those lists. That's a requirement of 
their continued membership.
    They have to do background screening. They have to get 
references. There are a series of things that that club owner 
has to do and if, for any reason, they've hired somebody on a 
permanently ineligible list in this situation, the organization 
has the right to revoke their membership as a club owner.
    Senator Moran. And the consequence of being a club that no 
longer has membership with USAG is what?
    Ms. Perry. Membership is a privilege. That club still can 
operate their business. They just can't participate in USA 
Gymnastics-sanctioned kinds of events.
    Senator Moran. You were asked, Ms. Perry, about 
nondisclosure agreements.
    Ms. Lyons, any nondisclosure agreements at work at the U.S. 
Olympics?
    Ms. Lyons. No. I've asked that question and none to our 
knowledge.
    Senator Moran. And, Mr. Engler, President Engler, at 
Michigan State?
    Mr. Engler. No nondisclosure agreements. Everything we 
don't disclose is leaked.
    Senator Moran. And in regard to reports about next steps, 
Ms. Lyons, the U.S. Olympic Committee has hired outside folks 
to review process procedure, find out the facts, I assume make 
recommendations to improve the circumstance. Is that all 
accurate? I mean, I'm describing that correctly?
    Ms. Lyons. Yes, we have a number of initiatives, including 
outside folks.
    Senator Moran. And when will we, the public, be able to see 
the results of that study or those studies?
    Ms. Lyons. Well, there are a lot of interim things that 
will happen before those studies are completed. As you know, we 
are doing a lot of interim steps, but the commission that is 
looking at the governance will begin and probably begin early 
September. We finalized or pretty much are finalizing the 
membership of that committee and I know that seems slow. We're 
moving as quickly as we can, but we want to make sure we have 
the right people on that.
    Senator Moran. Is this the Committee that Mr. Xiao is 
speaking of?
    Ms. Lyons. Yes, and he will be a member of that committee, 
as well.
    Senator Moran. But you've hired a law firm to evaluate----
    Ms. Lyons. Oh.
    Senator Moran.--process and procedure and when we last 
visited, I think we were expecting a report from that effort 
this summer.
    Ms. Lyons. I think you're referring to the Ropes and Gray 
investigation,----
    Senator Moran. I am.
    Ms. Lyons.--which is not so much looking at policies and 
procedures. It's looking at who knew what when,----
    Senator Moran. Yes.
    Ms. Lyons.--and we expect probably in September. Our 
understanding is they've pretty much completed their 
investigations at the USOC and I think also at the USAG. 
They've a few more interviews to do at the Center for Safe 
Sport. I believe they're almost close to finishing their 
investigation and then they would write their report. They've 
given us to understand probably early September is when we 
would look at it.
    Senator Moran. Mr. Engler, if there was conversations about 
the Michigan State Attorney General, the State of Michigan's 
Attorney General, I also think was there a legislative inquiry?
    Mr. Engler. There were a couple of different committees. 
They've wrapped up their work.
    Senator Moran. So your who, what, when, and where reports 
have been completed and are known publicly?
    Mr. Engler. That's correct. The Attorney General, we think, 
is nearing the end. They've interviewed, I believe, more than a 
hundred people on campus. We don't know when that report will 
be done. We hope soon, and that should be it for the state 
level reporting.
    Senator Moran. And Michigan State didn't hire anybody 
separate from the state efforts to----
    Mr. Engler. We did not.
    Senator Moran. OK. And, Ms. Perry, at USA Gymnastics?
    Ms. Perry. There are several investigations that are 
ongoing. One includes the Ropes and Gray independent 
investigation. There are, of course, the congressional 
investigations and others, and according to Ms. Lyons and what 
we've been informed, the Ropes and Gray should near its end 
around beginning of the fall.
    Senator Moran. We, in my view, certainly would not be able 
to conclude our work until we see the who, what, when, and 
where reports from your organizations.
    I think this is it, Senator Blumenthal, for me. Center for 
Safe Sports, just want to give you further license. Center for 
Safe Sports, I want to talk about it for a moment, and this 
would be to Mr. Xiao and Ms. Lyons.
    One of the primary concerns that we've heard through my 
conversations with athletes and our investigation is the belief 
or concern that the center is not truly independent from USOC 
and there's a resulting lack of trust on the part of the 
athletes.
    So they see the center as something created by the U.S. 
Olympic Committee and I'd like to hear--let me start with you, 
Mr. Xiao. Is that an accurate assessment of where we are, and 
what can we do about it?
    Mr. Xiao. As a collective, I think there is a little bit of 
a concern not necessarily with the Board of the Center for Safe 
Sport but a little bit of the funding model because, to be 
honest, not many entities have been interested in funding the 
Center for Safe Sport, as I understand, and so a lot of the 
funding comes from the USOC and the national governing bodies.
    Senator Moran. And athletes I've talked to have expressed 
concern because the funding of the U.S. Olympic Committee of 
Safe Sport, but I also would say what you just said, which is 
in the absence of the funding of the U.S. Olympic Committee, I 
doubt that the funding is there for Safe Sport, is that fair?
    Mr. Xiao. And that's certainly a challenge and I think 
that's fair.
    The other issue that we're concerned about is the presence 
of former USOC staff members still operating in a staff 
capacity at the Center for Safe Sport, which raises some 
concerns for some people.
    Senator Moran. Say that sentence again, make sure I 
understand you.
    Mr. Xiao. There are staff members at Safe Sport who were 
formerly staff members at the USOC Committee. I can think of 
one. I don't know if there are others, but that certainly 
raised concerns within the community, as well.
    Senator Moran. Ms. Lyons?
    Ms. Lyons. Just comment on the same question?
    Senator Moran. Yes.
    Ms. Lyons. Let me first say I separate two parts of 
independence. In terms of the investigations of the Center for 
Safe Sport is 100 percent independent. We have no insight into 
that. It is all completely confidential and there is no USOC 
employee who has any involvement with any of the ongoing 
investigations in any way.
    There are areas where I think in the interest of all of the 
athletes, the NGBs, the USOC, and the Center need to 
collaborate and that is things like creating these data bases 
so that we can provide information and I think it is in helping 
to find additional funding because they don't have enough to be 
successful at their mission and much like USATF, which had its 
origins within the USOC but then became a fully independent 
organization with not just funding from the USOC but also from 
the government, we think that that is really the evolution that 
the center needs to have so that it can truly become 
independent of any influence from us or anyone else.
    Senator Moran. Senator Blumenthal.
    Senator Blumenthal. I want to ask, Mr. Chairman, that we 
put in the record the article I referenced earlier from the 
Orange County Register, dated yesterday.
    Senator Moran. Without objection.
    [The news article referred to follows:]

SPORTS

Suspended coaches still working at Southern California gymnastics clubs

USA Gymnastics accused of policy loopholes and not notifying clubs 
        about suspended coaches

       By SCOTT M. REID / sreid@scng.com / Orange County Register

 PUBLISHED: July 23, 2018 at 7:20 pm / UPDATED: July 24, 2018 at 12:12 
                                   pm


    Southern California gymnastics coaches Colden Raisher, left, and 
Terry Gray, right, continue to work with underage gymnasts even though 
the sport's national governing body has suspended them while it 
conducts investigations into alleged rules violations. Photos courtesy 
of Instagram and USA Gymnastics.

    Two Southern California gymnastics coaches continue to work with 
underage gymnasts even though the sport's national governing body has 
suspended themwhile it conducts investigations into alleged rules 
violations, the Southern California News Group has learned.
    Colden Raisher is coaching at The Klub Gymnastics, a gym club near 
the Silver Lake area of Los Angeles where the top director was unaware 
of his suspensionby USA Gymnastics on Friday.
    Similarly, former U.S. national team coach Terry Gray has continued 
to work with young athletes at SCEGA, a club in Temecula, despite his 
suspension by USAGymnastics and the U.S. Center for Safe Sport. Gray 
was placed on USA Gymnastics' suspension list on June 29, and the list 
was updated on the organization's website that day.
    ``No notice was given to us nor Terry from USA Gymnastics prior to 
the list going out on online,'' said Kathy Strate, an SCEGA director.
    SCEGA officials actually had to call USA Gymnastics to find out 
information on Gray's suspension after it was brought to the club's 
attention by members of the gymnastics community.
    ``We were told by USA Gymnastics that we would be receiving a 
letter in the mail,'' Strate said. SCEGA received a letter from USA 
Gymnastics the following day.
Failure to notify clubs
    SCNG has learned that USA Gymnastics has routinely failed to notify 
clubs and gyms when it suspends coaches and other employees under 
investigation for alleged sexual misconduct.
    Under terms of their suspensions, Gray and Raisher can continue to 
coach, but can have ``no unsupervised contact with minors.''
    The Gray and Raiser cases highlight loopholes in USA Gymnastics and 
the Safe Sport center's policies and the complexity of balancing the 
protection of young athletes and the rights of accused coaches and 
officials, according to longtime observers of American gymnastics and 
the U.S. Olympic movement's struggles to address sexual abuse.
    The cases also raise questions about USA Gymnastics commitment to 
protecting young athletes months after USA Gymnastics President Kerry 
Perry vowed the organization would be more transparent and accountable 
in pursuing sexual abuse cases in the wake of the Larry Nassar/Karolyi 
Ranch scandal, say former gymnasts and athlete rights advocates.
    ``It's still not providing protection from alleged predators for 
our kids,'' Jessica O'Beirne said of USA Gymnastics and Safe Sport 
policies that allow some coaches and officials to continue to work with 
young athletes while under investigation. O'Beirne is the founder of 
the podcast GymCastic.
    ``But you also can't prevent a person from working and making a 
living,'' O'Beirne continued. ``So what do you do? But this doesn't 
protect kids. Period.''
Raisher denies any wrongdoing
    Raisher said last week he didn't have time to go into the specifics 
of the allegations against him.
    ``There was no physical or sexual abuse,'' Raisher said. ``I've 
never done anything questionable. I'm one of the good guys in the 
sport. USA Gymnastics is trying to cast a very wide net. They're trying 
to catch a lot of bad guys. I agree with that. But now anybody can 
report anything.''
    He said the allegations were made by officials at another gym. He 
previously worked at Golden State Gymnastics in Burbank.
    ``This has nothing to do with Safe Sport or anything sexual,'' 
Raisher said. ``I changed gyms a couple of months ago and they're 
retaliating against me.''
    Golden State said in a statement that it ``has not made any 
complaints against Colden Raisher.''
    Raisher said he would be willing to talk about his case and explain 
why he was innocent of the allegations when he had more time, but did 
not respond to subsequent requests to do so.
    While USA Gymnastics has not publicly described the nature of the 
allegations against the two coaches, Gray's suspension is based on USA 
Gymnastics bylaws 9.3 and 10.5, according to the organization. 
Raisher's suspension is based on 10.5, USA Gymnastics said.
    Bylaw 9.3 states that USA Gymnastics ``shall report and refer all 
allegations of sexual misconduct to the (U.S. Center for Safe Sport), 
and all such matters will be within the Center's exclusive 
jurisdiction. The Center shall investigate such allegations or reports, 
issue any interim suspension or other measures pending the conclusion 
of the investigation and any hearing(s), make recommendations of 
sanctions or disciplinary action as a result of such investigation, and 
fully adjudicate such matters.''
    Bylaw 10.5 reads, ``At any point before a complaint is resolved 
under the provisions of this Article 10, interim measures may be 
imposed to ensure the safety and well-being of the gymnastics community 
or where an allegation is sufficiently serious that an Adverse Party's 
continued participation could be detrimental to the sport or its 
reputation.''
4 others under investigation
    Raisher and Gray are two of six coaches with California ties 
currently under investigation by USA Gymnastics and/or Safe Sport. 
Stephen Graham, Ron Manara, Antoine Billingsly and Michael Ujin Sanders 
are suspended from ``all contact'' pending their hearings, according to 
USA Gymnastics records.
    Billingsly and Graham are suspended under bylaw 9.3, Manara and 
Sanders under 9.3 and 10.5.
    Manara is a former UC Davis assistant women's gymnastics coach and 
member of the university's physical education faculty. A university 
spokesperson said Manara is no longer employed at the school. The 
university has no record of inappropriate behavior by Manara, the 
spokesperson added.
    Graham, a former assistant coach at Eastern Michigan, worked at a 
series of California clubs and camps, including Gymnastics Olympica in 
Van Nuys, Pasadena's Vernon Lee Gymnastics Amateur Gymnastics Academy, 
SoCal Training Center in San Marcos, Monarchs National in Newbury Park 
and Woodward West in Tehachapi.
    Billingsly previously worked at American Kids Sports Center in 
Bakersfield. SCNG was unable to find any employment records for 
Sanders.
    USA Gymnastics issued the following statement to SCNG: ``The safety 
and well-being of our athletes is USA Gymnastics' top priority, and the 
USA Gymnastics Safe Sport Policy and other policies and procedures are 
in place for that reason. USA Gymnastics Safe Sport Department sends a 
letter to a suspended member at his/her last known mailing and e-mail 
addresses, as well as to the respective club owner. Member clubs are 
informed of any suspension restricts and are responsible for enforcing 
those restrictions. If a parent is aware of a coach violating the terms 
of a suspension, they should report it. The list of members placed on 
the interim suspension (and permanently ineligible individuals) is 
posted on usagym.org''
    Even when officials at local clubs and gyms are able to contact USA 
Gymnastics and Safe Sport about suspensions, the organizations share 
only minimal information about allegations against coaches or 
employees. This often leaves gym and club owners with incomplete data 
when making decisions about allowing a suspended employee to continue 
working with young athletes.
    In Gray's case, USA Gymnastics told SCEGA the allegations were 
cited in bylaws 10.5 and 9.3, Strate said. USA Gymnastics told SCEGA 
``these allegations did not take place in our facility, and dated back 
to a 2012 allegation.''
    ``We have been given no other information,'' Strate said.
    Gray, a U.S. national team coaching staff member from 1995 to 2005, 
worked for Brown's Gymnastics in Las Vegas in 2012. Gray also is under 
investigation for inappropriate behavior at a gym in Ohio, according to 
those familiar with the investigation. He previously worked under 
Olympic team coach Mary Lee Tracy at Cincinnati Gymnastics, where he 
coached two Olympians.
    Brown's officials declined to comment. Gray did not respond to 
requests for comment.
    ``In Mr. Grays case, a third party made an allegation to the 
Center,'' Russell Prince, an attorney for Prince, said in an e-mail to 
SCNG. ``USAG made an immediate full `no contact' suspension as an 
Interim Measure. Mr. Gray was allowed an interim measures hearing and 
the panel looked at the allegations and facts and did not believe a no-
contact suspension to be appropriate. During that hearing Mr. Gray was 
willing to stipulate to a duty change that would allow him to continue 
to coach under supervision and allow the Center, the independent body, 
to finalize their investigation.
    ``A complete investigation by the Center is in the best interests 
of Mr. Gray.''
Parents complain they weren't informed
    Some SCEGA parents have complained that they were not informed of 
Gray's suspension by the club.
    ``We notified all the families of the gymnasts that are coached by 
Terry, as these were the only families impacted,'' Strate said.
    Strate said the decision to allow Gray to continue to coach was 
made after USA Gymnastics ``informed us that Terry was cleared to come 
back to the gym under an interim measure.''
    SCEGA's decision to allow Gray to continue coaching came shortly 
after the club sent out an e-mail limiting parents viewing access to 
training sessions for top boys and girls training groups.
    Under the policy, there is ``no viewing'' from 3:30-7 p.m. Monday 
through Thursday, a primary training period for top groups. Parents are 
allowed to view training on Friday and Saturday.
    ``In an effort to to help with traffic congestion and viewing room 
crowding, the following policy is in effect,'' the e-mail said. ``We 
will be meeting with families who are not adhering to the policy. This 
also applies to watching on the bleachers at the Temecula location.''
Scott M. Reid
    Scott M. Reid is a sports enterprise/investigative reporter for the 
Orange County Register. He also covers Olympic and international sports 
as well as the Los Angeles' bid to host the 2024 Olympic Games. His 
work for the Register has led to investigations by the International 
Olympic Committee, the U.S. Department of Education, the California 
Legislature, and the national governing bodies for gymnastics and 
swimming. Reid's 2011 reporting on wide spread sexual abuse within USA 
Gymnastics and the governing body's failure to effectively address it 
led to Don Peters, coach of the 1984 record-setting Olympic team, being 
banned from the sport for life. His reporting also prompted USA 
Gymnastics to adopt new guidelines and policies dealing with sexual 
abuse. Reid's 2012 and 2013 reporting on sexual abuse within USA 
Swimming led to the banishment of two top level coaches. Reid has won 
11 Associated Press Sports Editors awards for investigative reporting 
since 1999.
    He has also been honored by APSE for game writing, and enterprise, 
news, and beat reporting. He was an Investigative Reporters and Editors 
award finalist in 2002 and 2003. Prior to joining the Register in 1996, 
Reid worked for the Atlanta Journal-Constitution and the Dallas Times 
Herald. He has a B.A. in the History of the Americas from the 
University of Washington.

    Senator Blumenthal. And just point out that, Ms. Perry, it 
says that no notice of these individuals' suspension was 
provided, is that true?
    Ms. Perry. Senator Blumenthal, I checked into that this 
morning and I was told that notice was given through both an e-
mail and a first-class mail.
    Senator Blumenthal. So you're saying that Terry Gray worked 
with the SCEGA Club in Southern California and did so with 
notice, despite Cathy Strait, the director of that club, 
saying, ``No notice was given to us nor Terry from USA 
Gymnastics prior to the list going out online?''
    Ms. Perry. That individual--yes. I'm sorry.
    Senator Blumenthal. That's a lie?
    Ms. Perry. I apologize, Senator. I was told this morning 
because I quickly checked into that to make sure that notice 
was because that's part of our procedure and I was told 
positively that both an e-mail and a letter was sent out.
    Senator Blumenthal. So that's just not true, that 
statement?
    Ms. Perry. I was told that----
    Senator Blumenthal. Her statement?
    Ms. Perry. I was told that they were sent out.
    Senator Blumenthal. You know, we seem to have differences 
in accounts here.
    Mr. Engler, I'm not going to let this issue go. I think it 
goes to the heart of why we're here in part because these 
survivors were disbelieved for so long and I just want to say 
for the record I believe Kaylee Lorincz and her account.
    [Applause.]
    Senator Blumenthal. I regret that we're at this point in 
the testimony where there are differences in factual accounts 
of what happened and I want to say, and I mean this as a lawyer 
and as a trial lawyer, there are all kinds of defenses that 
parties can make in court, but there's also a moral 
responsibility here and if the U.S. Olympic Committee and USA 
Gymnastics are really serious and sincere, they will put aside 
these characterizations of Larry Nassar's relationship to your 
organization that, very respectfully, let me say 
disingenuously, disclaim any legal responsibility.
    If you're serious and sincere, you will withdraw that 
Answer and Motion to Dismiss because you need to be part of the 
legal solution, not just come here and apologize and say 
there's a new USA Gymnastics because it is the new USA 
Gymnastics that filed that Answer and Motion to Dismiss on the 
part of the U.S. Olympic Committee.
    Ms. Perry. Senator Blumenthal, I am not aware of a Motion 
to Dismiss and I think you corrected that, that it wasn't USA 
Gymnastics, but I will be very--and I want to reassure all of 
the Senators and all of the survivors and everybody in this 
room that USA Gymnastics is absolutely dedicated and committed 
to legal resolution and we've gone through mediation. We're 
going to continue until we get resolution and you're absolutely 
right. We have a moral obligation.
    Senator Blumenthal. You have a moral obligation but you 
also have a legal obligation.
    Ms. Perry. And we have a legal obligation.
    Senator Blumenthal. And you will withdraw that Answer and 
correct it or amend, whatever the correct procedure is under 
those Rules, and you will accept that Larry Nassar worked for, 
was employed by, was an agent of, and therefore imposes that 
legal responsibility on USA Gymnastics.
    Ms. Perry. And, Senator Blumenthal, Larry Nassar was 
absolutely an agent of USA Gymnastics, I've never said any 
different than that, as a team doctor, and I will find out what 
that is that you're referring to. I don't know what legal 
action. I know that there wasn't a Motion to Dismiss, but I 
will find out what that was about. It could be----
    Senator Blumenthal. Yes. I'm not saying it was a Motion to 
Dismiss.
    Ms. Perry.--a lot of different things.
    Senator Blumenthal. It was an Answer, and I want to make 
clear I'm not trying to impose pressure on you from this 
position because you're entitled to your legal rights. Your 
lawyer is entitled to advise you as to those rights. You're 
entitled to assert those rights.
    But as part of your moral responsibility, in my view, with 
all due respect, it is also to accept legal responsibility 
because that will make you a part of the solution. It will make 
you part of any court order. The same goes for the United 
States Olympic Committee.
    Ms. Perry. And I--Senator Blumenthal, I want to reinforce 
to you again that this organization under my leadership has and 
will continue to be committed to legal resolution with our 
survivors. These are our athletes and we will do whatever it 
takes to get to that point.
    Senator Blumenthal. Thank you. And, again, I want to thank 
the survivors who are here today. Your presence sends a 
powerful message and is an important statement and, again, my 
thanks to the Chairman of this subcommittee, Senator Moran.
    Senator Moran. Senator Blumenthal, thank you very much.
    Let me, as I have in every hearing that I've chaired, ask 
the witnesses if they have anything they'd like to put on the 
record that they were unable to do so, that they want to 
correct something they said or felt like there's something we 
need to know that we didn't ask about.
    Mr. Engler. I would simply say, Mr. Chairman, that I 
appreciate the opportunity to come here to clarify the issues. 
I understand there might be differences in interpretation but 
the opportunity to come here and talk about the changes we've 
made, to put those on the record, to talk about a $500 million 
settlement that's part of the healing is an opportunity that we 
very much appreciate.
    We're proud of what we've done, we're proud of what we're 
doing, and we think when we're done, universities around the 
country are going to look to Michigan State to say what 
policies did you put in place and how might they help us.
    Senator Moran. Anyone else?
    Ms. Perry. Senator Moran and Senator Blumenthal and all 
Senators, I want to thank you. This is an incredibly important 
time for our organization and we take it very seriously. These 
are our athletes and we're going to do whatever we can to earn 
back their trust and I want to say that coming from outside the 
Olympic movement, there are things that I think we can address 
moving forward with the help of Congress and the funding of the 
Center that will help us do everything we can in our power to 
prevent what happened.
    Thank you.
    Ms. Lyons. Mr. Chairman, I would just like to say I am 
coming to the end of my tenure as the CEO at the USOC, and I 
hope that in some way we have begun a journey that will get us 
to a new culture that is all about the athletes, that they are 
the center of that, and the reason that's happening is because 
of the brave voices of the women behind me in this room, and I 
hope that small amount of time that I've been able to devote to 
them yields some results in the future.
    Thank you.
    Mr. Xiao. I'd just like to say from the Athletes' Advisory 
Council, we will continue to do our job. We're going to 
continue to engage in good faith in all of the reform efforts 
here, but I also wanted to point out that the core problem 
here, until that's solved, there are just going to be more 
problems, more different symptoms that are going to arise, and 
the core problem being athlete representatives have heard 
administrators, staffers, coaches, sometimes express the same 
sentiment, which is athletes come and go, and athletes are 
replaceable. Until that changes we're never going to get 
anywhere.
    Thank you.
    Senator Moran. Again, we thank you all for being here 
today. I thank you for testifying. We appreciate those in the 
audience today, including the survivors.
    The hearing record will remain open for two weeks. During 
that time, Senators are asked to submit any questions for the 
record. Upon receipt, this would be questions to you, our 
witnesses, the witnesses requested to submit their written 
answers to the Committee as soon as possible but no later than 
August 21 of 2018.
    This concludes the hearing and the hearing is now 
adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 5:11 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                            A P P E N D I X

     Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Jerry Moran to 
                            Hon. John Engler
    Question. Last month it was reported that the MSU attorney who 
defended the institution against sexual abuse lawsuits has now been 
placed in charge of the University's Office of Civil Rights and Title 
IX Education and Compliance. Given the nature of this newly created 
office and its important role in developing education and outreach 
programs as it relates to sexual assault, do you think it is proper to 
appoint someone who has defended the University from claims of sexual 
assault to run this office? Do you think actions such as this undermine 
the public's confidence on whether the focus of the MSU Title IX office 
is on protecting students and athletes versus liability issues?
    Answer. In June, the head of MSU's Office of Civil Rights and Title 
IX Education and Compliance accepted a new job outside of Michigan. Rob 
Kent, a member of MSU's Office of General Counsel, was appointed to 
serve in that role in an interim capacity, and a national search for a 
permanent associate vice president is underway. We do not believe that 
Kent's interim service in this role will undermine public confidence in 
the office. He was instrumental in establishing the University Policy 
on Relationship Violence and Sexual Misconduct and has worked closely 
with the U.S. Department of Education Office of Civil Rights during 
their reviews of MSU's handling of sexual assault cases. Moreover, as I 
testified, we have taken many actions to strengthen the Title IX 
office, including providing increased resources to allow it to grow 
from 15 to 30 employees, creating a new Title IX Prevention, Outreach, 
and Education Office, and hiring a leading third party investigative 
services firm to assist with investigations and reduce response times 
for Title IX complaints. All of these demonstrate the importance we 
place in the Title IX office and its work.
                                 ______
                                 
 Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Richard Blumenthal to 
                            Hon. John Engler
    Question 1. Is there anything from your oral testimony on July 24, 
2018 that you'd like to retract or further clarify (especially with 
respect to your responses on questions regarding your interaction with 
Ms. Kaylee Lorincz)?
    Answer. No.

    Question 2. Over 120 survivors joined together and penned a letter 
to the MSU Board of Trustees, calling for your resignation. Did you 
read the letter sent by the survivors, and if so, do you have any 
response to it? Several U.S. Senators--including myself--have also 
called for your resignation. Do you believe that you are still the 
right person for the job? Do you think you can help the University 
heal?
    Answer. Yes, I have read the letter. I was hired by the Board of 
Trustees to address the crisis caused by Nassar's massive crimes. I 
have responded by initiating the reforms and actions that I outlined in 
my testimony to this committee.

    Question 3. The MSU Residence Halls Association (RHA), MSU student 
groups and MSU Faculty Senate--the representative body of the faculty 
at the University--have all issued emphatic votes of no confidence in 
the Board of Trustees for their selection and support of you as Interim 
MSU President. Two members of the Board of Trustees have publically 
voted for you to be ousted. What do these votes mean to you? Do you 
believe that the support of these University groups matter? What have 
you done during your tenure to engage in faculty and student groups at 
the University that have clearly objected to your selection and your 
actions toward survivors during your brief tenure?
    Answer. The voices of University groups absolutely matter to me. 
Since arriving at the University, I have sought to engage faculty, 
staff, and students to make organizational changes geared toward 
improving safety and accountability. As just one example, I appointed a 
Relationship Violence and Sexual Misconduct Expert Advisory Working 
Group consisting of nationally-recognized faculty and staff who are 
subject-matter experts on our campus, and the Group has been soliciting 
input from across the University community. Many of the changes we have 
implemented have been the result of that input.

    Question 4. Do you have any empathy for the survivors of abuse?
    Answer. Yes. My heart goes out to the survivors, and we are truly 
sorry that a former faculty member perpetrated his crimes through his 
associations with the University, USA Gymnastics, U.S. Olympic 
Committee, and others. The best way to show genuine empathy is by 
actions. My goal is to make those reforms necessary to ensure that 
nothing like this happens again on MSU's campus.

    Question 5. What is the appropriate way to follow up on a Title IX 
complaint?
    Answer. We have put into place a wide array of reforms to ensure 
that any complaint is investigated and assessed under the University's 
Relationship and Sexual Misconduct Policy (RVSM), which is available at 
https://www.hr.msu.edu/policies-procedures/university-wide/
RVSM_policy.html. All of our employees are annually trained on the 
requirements of RVSM, and we have expanded the list of employees who 
are mandatory reporters to ensure that a complaint of any form of 
sexual misconduct is promptly reported not only to the Office of 
Institutional Equity as well as to the MSU Police Department. Employees 
who fail to adhere to their reporting obligations are subject to 
disciplinary action, up to and including termination.

    Question 6. Do you believe that it was appropriate to take a 
meeting with a plaintiff involved in ongoing litigation against 
Michigan State without her attorney present? Do you believe that it was 
appropriate to suggest that a survivor of Nassar's horrific abuse was 
merely looking for money and could be easily paid off?
    Answer. I met with Ms. Lorincz and her mother at their request. 
They waited hours demanding the meeting and requesting that it be kept 
confidential. There was no discussion of a settlement of her ongoing 
litigation during that meeting.

    Question 7. How do you believe that you handled Michigan State's 
overall relationship with the survivors of Nassar's abuse?
    Answer. I am proud of the way the entire University community has 
come together to not only support the survivors, but to also address 
the urgent issues of relationship violence and sexual misconduct on our 
campus. It has been a challenging six months, and there are things I 
could and should have done differently and better. I regret my errors 
and have publicly acknowledged them. I recognize that there have been 
frustrating periods during that time, but I am also confident that we 
have accomplished much.

    Question 8. As the head of a University that was unquestionably 
complicit in the most abominable, horrific sexual abuse scandal in 
modern history, do you believe that behaving in a confrontational and 
cavalier manner is helpful for either the University or for survivors?
    Answer. Since arriving at MSU six months ago, I have tried to 
address the crisis and lay a positive foundation for a new president. I 
do not believe that I have been confrontational or cavalier, but I have 
made errors which I regret and for which I have apologized. I do 
believe that the many actions we have taken, detailed in my testimony, 
and including the historic $500 million settlement, have been helpful 
to the University and the survivors.

    Question 9. Nassar was close friends with many coaches and 
trainers. These friendships influenced the judgement of these staff 
members, and allowed Nassar to manipulate decisions even as he abused 
scores of athletes. Do you feel that relationships or friendships 
between MSU doctors and coaches can compromise or influence doctors 
decisions, diagnoses and treatment of student athletes?
    Answer. I am personally unaware of Nassar's friendships and 
influence. At the University, however, medical decisions are made by 
team doctors and athletic training staff. No member of any coaching 
staff has hiring or supervisory responsibility for any team doctor or 
any member of the athletic training staff. Coaching staff do not 
determine the assignment of team doctors, nor is their input sought in 
the process. All medical and athletic training staff are instructed to 
report any inappropriate attempt to influence their treatment of a 
student-athlete to the Office of Compliance Services to ensure that 
coaching staff do not adversely affect the healthcare services that 
student-athletes receive or the decisions of healthcare providers 
concerning such services.

    Question 10. Do you believe that it is appropriate for the 
University to absolve itself of blame in the Larry Nassar scandal, or 
other sexual assault cases, in order to reduce liability?
    Answer. We have not attempted to ``absolve'' the University of 
anything. Instead, as stated in my testimony, we have launched a number 
of reforms to ensure that no future Nassar could shelter on our campus. 
We have also achieved an historic settlement with over 300 survivors.

    Question 11. Do you believe that these same relationships or 
friendships between coaching and medical staff can impede a mandatory 
reporter's ability to objectively report wrongdoing or abuse involving 
a student athlete?
    Answer. No. Pursuant to the University's Relationship Violence and 
Sexual Misconduct Policy, coaches are mandatory reporters and, 
therefore, are obligated to bring reports of relationship violence, 
stalking, and sexual misconduct to the Office of Institutional Equity 
and the MSU Police Department. Failure to do so will lead to 
disciplinary action, including discharge.

    Question 12. MSU Healing Assistance Fund: Do you think this fund 
was set up as quickly as it could have been?
    Answer. I was not serving as Interim President when the Healing 
Assistance Fund was established; therefore, I cannot comment on the 
timing of the establishment of the Healing Fund. On July 27, 2018, it 
was reported that Michigan State University has suspended payments from 
a $500 million fund set up to pay the victims of former sports doctor 
Larry Nassar due to allegations of fraud. A notice on MSU's Healing 
Assistance Fund website states, ``Due to an investigation into 
fraudulent claims made to the Healing Assistance Fund, the university 
is suspending payments until the investigation is complete. Please 
check back to this website for future updates.''

    Question 13. Are payments to survivors still suspended? How long 
were payments to survivors suspended?
    Answer. The Healing Fund was established before the University's 
settlement with over 300 survivors, and the Fund is not and never has 
been a part of the settlement. The Fund was created to provide 
immediate and temporary support for survivors until a settlement could 
be achieved. The Healing Fund vendor that distributed reimbursements 
for survivor mental health treatments reported that it believed that 
more than 10 percent of the funds it disbursed were on fraudulent 
claims of treatment. Payments have been suspended since July 26, 2018. 
The investigation into the scope of fraudulent claims is ongoing.

    Question 14. Have you reported the fraud to law enforcement? Which 
law enforcement?
    Answer. Yes. The MSU Police Department is involved in the 
investigation and will determine what additional criminal referrals 
need to be made once the investigation is completed.

    Question 15. What do you know about the scope and nature of the 
fraud?
    Answer. See answer to Question 13.

    Question 16. How do you expect survivors to pay for their treatment 
(i.e., medication or counseling) while payments are or were suspended?
    Answer. See answer to Question 13.

    Question 17. What assistance will you provide to survivors whose 
payments are [sic] may be in arrears as a result of the unforeseen 
interruption in payments?
    Answer. See answer to Question 13.

    Question 18. How will you notify victims when the Healing 
Assistance Fund is operational again?
    Answer. See answer to Question 13.

    Question 19. Athletic Director: When you took over as Interim 
President of Michigan State, you promised that during your search for a 
new permanent Athletic Director, no internal candidates from the 
department would be considered, and a ``national search'' would take 
place. However you broke that promise in naming Acting-Athletic 
Director Bill Beekman as the permanent Athletic Director for MSU.
    Given the major challenges that MSU--and its athletic program in 
particular--face moving forward following the Nassar scandal do you 
believe that Beekman, an MSU official with no previous experience in 
athletic administration, crisis management, or expertise in Title IX is 
the appropriate choice?
    Answer. Yes.

    Question 20. Beekman has worked for MSU since 1995. Why did you opt 
for a deeply entrenched, internal hire for this position, as opposed to 
conducting a national search for an outside candidate, as you 
originally promised?
    Answer. Mr. Beekman was chosen from outside the Athletic 
Department. Mr. Beekman had, and continues to have, the strong support 
of the Athletic Department, coaches, and University community as a 
leader with a strong commitment to compliance.

    Question 21. Were any candidates outside of Michigan State 
seriously considered?
    Answer. A national search would not have identified a better or 
more principled person than Mr. Beekman.

    Question 22. Do you believe that this hire sends the right message 
that MSU is dedicated to moving forward past its grievous mistakes?
    Answer. Yes.

    Question 23. Has Beekman undergone any form of mandatory reporting, 
gender discrimination, sexual abuse, or violence prevention training?
    Answer. Yes.

    Question 24. MSU Athletic Department Staff under investigation by 
Michigan State Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs: On June 
8, 2018, it was reported that six current or former Michigan State 
University medical professionals with ties to the Larry Nassar scandal 
were under investigation by the state's Department of Licensing and 
Regulatory Affairs (LARA). Some of these staff were allegedly informed 
of abuse, and failed to report it. Others directly supervised Nassar.
    As reported by the Lansing State Journal, the six individuals under 
LARA investigation include \1\: Dr. William Strampel, Dean of the 
College of Osteopathic Medicine; Destiny Teachnor-Hauk, sports trainer 
who was a medical expert during MSU's 2014 Title IX investigation of 
Nassar; Dr. Brooke Lemmen, medical expert during MSU's 2014 Title IX 
investigation of Nassar; Lianna Hadden, current sports trainer who was 
told about concerns regarding Nassar by two of his victims more than a 
decade ago; Dr. Douglas Dietzel, head of MSU Sports Medicine clinic, 
where Nassar served as team doctor for the women's gymnastics and crew 
teams; and Dr. Gary Stollak, former MSU clinical psychologist who was 
told about sexual abuse by Nassar in 2004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ https://www.lansingstatejournal.com/story/news/local/2018/06/
08/larry-nassar-michigan-state-licensing-inquiries-strampel-hadden-
teachnor-hauk-dietzel-stollak-msu/684359002/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    For the individuals under investigation by LARA who are still 
employed by MSU, why is that? Why are they still able to continue to 
work with athletes while under investigation?
    Answer. Drs. Strampel, Lemmen, and Stollak are no longer employed 
by the University. LARA has closed its licensing investigations and 
found no violations for Drs. Dietzel and Kovan. While it appears that 
LARA's licensing investigations for Hadden and Teachnor-Hauk remain 
open, both athletic trainers continue to work with student-athletes 
because there has been no substantiating evidence that either Hadden or 
Teachnor-Hauk violated any law, regulation, or University policy.

    Question 25. When do you expect to know the outcome of this 
investigation?
    Answer. To my knowledge, LARA has not communicated to the 
University when LARA expects its ongoing investigations to conclude.

    Question 26. If the investigation has already concluded, how does 
MSU plan to respond to the results?
    Answer. As explained above, LARA has closed its licensing 
investigations of Drs. Dietzel and Kovan, who have been cleared of 
wrongdoing.

    Question 27. Has MSU already conducted its own investigation into 
these individuals? Who conducted that investigation? What has that 
investigation uncovered?
    Answer. Prior to my arrival, the law firms of Skadden, Arps, Slate, 
Meagher and Flom LLP and Miller, Canfield, Paddock and Stone PLC were 
retained to assist the University in responding to allegations of 
misconduct regarding Nassar. The firms were retained to facilitate the 
University's cooperation with appropriate law enforcement and 
regulatory agencies, advise the University on any internal reviews so 
that such reviews were carried out in a manner that would best assist 
the University's response and not compromise any law enforcement 
actions concerning Nassar, and advise and assist in anticipation of and 
with respect to any civil litigation.
    Accordingly, the firms were tasked with reviewing all of the 
underlying facts, and the firms were directed that if they found 
evidence substantiating that anyone at MSU other than Nassar knew of 
his criminal behavior or did anything to conceal or facilitate it. Any 
such evidence of criminal conduct would be reported immediately to law 
enforcement and the University. Those firms found no reportable 
misconduct by MSU employees concerning crimes associated with Nassar.
    It has also been publicly reported that the FBI investigated this 
matter, and the FBI's review led to no criminal charges. Further, at 
the request of the University's Board of Trustees, Michigan's Attorney 
General is also conducting an independent investigation of the Nassar 
matter. The Attorney General's investigation is ongoing. Significantly, 
the Skadden law firm advised the Attorney General that the firms 
believe that the evidence will show that no University official 
believed or understood that Nassar committed sexual abuse prior to 
newspaper reports in late Summer 2016.

    Question 28. Ms. Lianna Hadden, MSU Athletic Trainer: Lianna Hadden 
is a current sports trainer at MSU, working with athletes from the 
wrestling, and swimming and diving teams. As reported by the Detroit 
Free Press, at least two of Nassar's victims (Ms. Jennifer Rood Bedford 
and Ms. Tiffany Lopez) have said that they told Hadden about concerns 
more than a decade ago.\2\ Hadden failed to report these concerns. Is 
Ms. Hadden still employed and actively working with athletes at MSU?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ https://www.freep.com/story/news/2018/03/30/2-msu-employees-
still-job-though-informed-nassar-ex-athletes-say/417731002/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Answer. Yes, Hadden is still employed by the University as an 
athletic trainer and, therefore, is working with student-athletes. To 
date, there has been no substantiating evidence that Hadden knew or 
believed that Nassar was committing sexual abuse or that she violated 
any law, regulation, or University policy.

    Question 29. Given her alleged connection to the Nassar scandal and 
failure to report serious concerns about abuse, why is Ms. Hadden still 
employed at Michigan State University and actively working with 
athletes? Has she issued any kind of public apology and/or remorse for 
her inaction?
    Answer. Please see my response above. I am certain that Hadden--
like all the members of the University community--is sorry that Nassar 
perpetrated his crimes against the survivors through his associations 
with the University, USA Gymnastics, U.S. Olympic Committee, and 
others.

    Question 30. Has Ms. Hadden undergone any form of training or re-
training in mandatory reporting, sexual abuse, or child abuse training? 
Please provide dates completed of any such training.
    Answer. Yes. All employees receive such training annually. Hadden's 
last date of training was May 4, 2017.

    Question 31. Ms. Teachnor-Hauk, MSU Athletic Trainer: During the 
2014 Title IX investigation of Nassar, Ms. Teachnor-Hauk told a 
university investigator that she had never had a complaint about Nassar 
in 17 years and had no concern about him crossing a line between 
medically appropriate and inappropriate. On the contrary, and as 
reported by the Detroit Free Press, Nassar survivor Tiffany Lopez told 
Treachnor-Hauk [sic] of her complaint about Nassar in the early 2000s. 
Recounting the experience to reporters, Lopez said, ``I felt like she 
didn't believe me. She called me crazy; she told me I was crazy for 
thinking that . . . the treatment that I had been receiving this entire 
time wasn't, like, actual medical treatment.'' Teachnor-Hauk 
discouraged Ms. Lopez from filing a formal complaint.
    Had Teachnor-Hauk treated Ms. Lopez's allegations seriously, 
hundreds of women could have been spared from Nassar's abuse. Is she 
still employed by MSU? Has she issued any kind of public apology and/or 
remorse for her inaction and misleading investigators?
    Answer. Yes, Teachnor-Hauk is still employed by the University as 
an athletic trainer and, therefore, is working with student-athletes. 
To date, there has been no substantiating evidence that Teachnor-Hauk 
knew or believed that Nassar was committing sexual abuse or that she 
violated any law, regulation, or University policy.

    Question 32. Has Ms. Teachnor-Hauk undergone any form of training 
or re-training in mandatory reporting, sexual abuse, or child abuse 
training? Please provide dates completed of any such training.
    Answer. Yes. All employee receive such training annually. Teachnor-
Hauk's last date of training was May 4, 2017.

    Question 33. Ms. Brooke Lemmen: As reported by the Lanasing [sic] 
State Journal, in fall 2016, after sexual assault allegations against 
Nassar were first made public by the Indianapolis Star, Ms. Lemmen 
removed patient files from the university at Nassar's request. She 
reported taking the files to her house instead of to Nassar and brought 
them back to MSU the next day, her attorney wrote in a letter to the 
university last year.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2017/03/17/
larry-nassar-brooke-lem
men-gymnastics/99338982/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Lemmen reportedly had second thoughts about removing the records 
and called MSU Health Administrator Susan Dolby, who convinced Lemmen 
to return the records.
    Did Susan Dolby report the stolen documents to her supervisors or 
the authorities after being notified by Ms. Lemmen?
    Answer. Yes.

    Question 34. Several attorneys suing MSU, Nassar and USA Gymnastics 
have said in lawsuits that some of their client's medical records, 
provided by MSU, were devoid of mentions of intravaginal procedures 
their clients said were performed, and in some cases the university 
could not provide medical records that were requested. Are you certain 
that none of the documents Ms. Lemmen transported were destroyed?
    Answer. It is my understanding that no such documents were 
destroyed.

    Question 35. Ms. Lemmen was advised by Nassar that USA Gymanastics 
[sic] was investigating him in July 2015, yet she kept this information 
to herself. Between July 2015 and when the Indy Star expose was 
announced, there were at least 40 more victims of Nassar's abuse, 
according to the New York Times. Was Ms. Lemmen ever reprimanded for 
her inaction during her tenure at MSU? Did the University put pressure 
on Ms. Lemmen to resign following the unveiling of this complicit 
behavior?
    Answer. Dr. Lemmen resigned from the University before my arrival 
as Interim President. It is my understanding that the University 
informed Dr. Lemmen that it had concerns regarding her exercise of 
judgment and behavior, and Dr. Lemmen subsequently resigned.

    Question 36. Ms. Lemmen was interviewed by then-MSU Title IX 
coordinator Kristine Moore as an expert, not a witness, in the 2014 
Title IX investigation into Nassar. The Lansing State Journal reported 
that Lemmen, as well as other experts interviewed for the 
investigation, were chosen based on Nassar's recommendation despite the 
personal relationships with him \4\. Is it ever appropriate to allow 
the subject of a Title IX investigation to supply character witnesses 
who have close personal relationships with the subject? Do you believe 
it is appropriate to view these testimonies as ``expert'' given the 
witness' close personal relationship with the subject of a Title IX 
investigation? Does MSU still have a policy of allowing Title IX 
investigation subjects to provide a list of expert witnesses that may 
also be friends with the subject testify on behalf of the subject?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ https://statenews.com/article/2018/04/police-report-msu-
employee-actions-during-nassar-investigation
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Answer. In 2014, under procedures then in place, both the claimant 
and respondent could ask the Title IX investigator to interview 
witnesses who may have relevant information. During the 2014 
investigation of Nassar, the Title IX investigator interviewed both the 
claimant's identified witnesses and Nassar's identified witnesses: Dr. 
Lemmen and Teachnor-Hauk, both of whom worked directly with Nassar. 
Subsequently, the Title IX investigator determined that she needed to 
independently consult with additional osteopathic doctors. The 
investigator sought recommendations from the then-Dean as to other 
doctors who could provide an informed and impartial analysis of the 
matter. Drs. DeStefano and Gilmore were recommended and utilized 
because they did not work directly with Nassar. Neither had a close 
personal relationship with Nassar. Title IX investigative protocols 
have since been revised to require consultation with non-MSU experts.

    Question 37. As reported by the Detroit Free Press, ``A comment 
[Ms. Lemmen] made about the university's attorneys conducting the 
internal [2014 Title IX] investigation also made one staff member feel 
`pressured not to fully cooperate in the investigation,' according to 
Strampel's [December 12, 2016] letter.\5\ What lessons has MSU learned 
from its botched 2014 Title IX investigation and what can it do in the 
future to make sure investigations are conducted expediently and 
accurately?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\ https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2017/03/17/
larry-nassar-brooke-lem
men-gymnastics/99338982/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Answer. Respectfully, Strampel's December 12, 2016 letter referred 
to the University's review of the Nassar matter in 2016, not the 2014 
Title IX investigation. Nonetheless, the University expects and 
requires that all Title IX investigations be conducted promptly and 
equitably.

    Question 38. MSU Medical Manipulation Specialists: According to an 
article in Deadspin \6\: ``Dr. Lisa DeStefano, a former MSU medical 
manipulation specialist, is accused of knowing about Nassar's methods 
of abuse and deeming them to be medically appropriate treatment. She is 
now the faculty department chair of MSU's College of Osteopathic 
medicine. ``Dr. Jennifer Gilmore, a former MSU medical manipulation 
specialist, is also accused of knowing about Nassar's abuse and 
characterizing it as medically appropriate. She is now an assistant 
professor.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\ https://deadspin.com/a-list-of-people-accused-of-enabling-
larry-nassar-1822393026
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Have Dr. DeStefano and Dr. Gilmore issued any kind of public 
apology and/or remorse?
    Answer. To date, there has been no substantiating evidence that 
DeStefano or Gilmore knew or believed that Nassar was committing sexual 
abuse, as opposed to the medically approved procedure they believed he 
was using. Nor is there any substantiating evidence that they violated 
any law, regulation, or University policy. Even though there is no such 
evidence, I am certain DeStefano and Gilmore--like all the members of 
the University community--are sorry that Nassar perpetrated his crimes 
against the survivors through his associations with the University, USA 
Gymnastics, U.S. Olympic Committee, and others.

    Question 39. Have Dr. DeStefano and Dr. Gilmore undergone any form 
of training or re-training in mandatory reporting, sexual abuse, or 
child abuse training? Please provide dates completed of any such 
training.
    Answer. Yes. All employee receive such training annually. 
DeStefano's last date of training was February 5, 2017, and Gilmore's 
last date of training was December 3, 2017.

    Question 40. Dr. Doug Dietzel: Dr. Douglas Dietzel is the head of 
MSU Sports Medicine clinic, where Nassar served as team doctor for the 
women's gymnastics and crew teams. According to his testimony given to 
police, Dr. Dietzel recalls William Strampel telling him about the 
sexual assault allegations against Nassar in 2016.
    Is Mr. Dietzel still employed and working with athletes at MSU? 
Given his connection to the Nassar scandal and role as Nassar's 
supervisor, why is Mr. Dietzel still employed at Michigan State 
University and actively working with athletes?
    Answer. Yes, Dietzel is still employed with the University and is 
working with student-athletes. To date, there has been no 
substantiating evidence that Dietzel knew or believed that Nassar was 
committing sexual abuse or that he violated any law, regulation, or 
University policy. LARA has cleared Dr. Dietzel of wrongdoing. Note: 
Dietzel's statement to the police indicated that Strampel told him 
about the sexual assault allegations against Nassar in 2016 after 
Nassar was removed clinical practice.

    Question 41. Has Dr. Dietzel undergone any form of training or re-
training in mandatory reporting, sexual abuse, or child abuse 
prevention training? Please provide dates completed of any such 
training.
    Answer. Yes. All employee receive such training annually. Dietzel's 
last date of training was March 11, 2017.

    Question 42. Past Mistakes and Forward Solutions: There were not 
only failures in the processes and operations at MSU, but also in the 
general culture at the school and in the athletic department. It is 
clear that Administrators at MSU fostered a culture of widespread 
denial, inaction, and information suppression regarding complaints of 
discrimination and sexual and dating violence and abuse.
    What have you done to identify and remove current employees who 
knew about sexual abuse and not only did not report, but stayed silent?
    Answer. To date, there has been no substantiating evidence that any 
employee knew or believed that Nassar was committing sexual abuse prior 
to 2016 when Ms. Denholender filed her MSU police complaint and made 
explicit allegations that Nassar digitally penetrated her. As noted in 
my testimony and these answers, one of the reforms instituted is the 
expansion of the employees subject to mandatory reporting requirements 
and imposition of accountability for failure to make a mandatory report 
of sexual misconduct.

    Question 43. Has anything been done to identify and remove coaches, 
athletic directors, employees, and officials who witnessed sexual, 
emotional, or physical abuse of athletes and did not report child abuse 
to authorities and did nothing to stop it?
    Answer. To date, there has been no substantiating evidence that any 
employee knew or believed that Nassar was committing sexual abuse prior 
to 2016.

    Question 44. In order to begin to restore trust, are you willing to 
disclose to the public all of the previously mishandled sexual abuse 
claims made against individuals within the MSU athletic community? Are 
you able to explain why these failures happened and what you are doing 
to make sure they will not happen again?
    Answer. To date, there has been no substantiating evidence that any 
employee knew or believed that Nassar was committing sexual abuse prior 
to 2016. If such evidence is obtained regarding Nassar's abuse, it will 
be reported and disclosed. In my testimony, I detailed the many steps 
we have taken to make sure this will not happen again. Among all of 
them, accountability is the most significant change that we are 
implementing in a culture of ``shared governance'' where there had been 
less emphasis on actual responsibility for achieving specific outcomes. 
Ensuring accountability is the charge of the new Office of Enterprise 
Risk Management, Ethics and Compliance, which I created to monitor 
legal, ethical, and regulatory requirements. We pledge to the survivors 
and the community at large that we will do all we can to protect 
students, patients, athletes, and others.

    Question 45. Have University officials ever sought to withhold the 
names of athletes or coaches in campus police records, or delete data 
from incident reports? How does MSU plan to combat this problem?
    Answer. To my knowledge, this has not occurred.

    Question 46. In what ways has the University consulted with 
survivors or experts in sexual abuse and violence in crafting new 
policies or new mandated training?
    Answer. I appointed a Relationship Violence and Sexual Misconduct 
Expert Advisory Working Group consisting of nationally-recognized 
faculty and staff who are subject-matter experts, and the Group has 
been soliciting input from across the University community, including 
from survivors. This is just one example where the University is 
seeking input on policies and training from all stakeholders.

    Question 47. What policies have been initiated to detect, prevent, 
and punish the use of emotional and physical abuse by coaches and other 
individuals involved in the athletes [sic] training?
    Answer. Pursuant to our Standards for Safeguarding Institutional 
Governance of Intercollegiate Athletics at Michigan State University, 
the University is committed to promoting the safety, health, and well-
being of every student-athlete, as well as providing and coordinating a 
comprehensive array of professional healthcare services. Emotional and 
physical abuse by coaches is contrary to the Institutional Standards. 
Individuals can report violations of the Institutional Standards, as 
well as any other misconduct involving athletics, to the Office of 
Compliance Services or through the Misconduct Hotline, where reports 
can be made anonymously.

    Question 48. Ms. Rachael Denhollander's Questions: As you know, Ms. 
Rachael Denhollander was the first woman to publicly accuse Larry 
Nassar of sexual abuse. In a Facebook post dated July 24, 2018, Ms. 
Denhollander wrote: ``How you as leaders think about and what you 
communicate about sexual assault is the determining factor in whether 
your institution is safe or not. Procedural or policy changes matter 
little when the example from the top is shaming, blaming, and refusing 
to honestly assess and admit when failures have occurred.''
    Ms. Denhollander had several questions that she hoped would be 
asked to leaders at MSU, USAG, and USOC. They have been copied below in 
their entirety.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\ https://www.facebook.com/notes/rachael-denhollander/questions-
for-john-engler-kerry-perry-and-susanne-lyons-at-their-senate-hearing/
1914933721920272/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    If you want to move forward to create effective change, why have 
you not commissioned an independent investigation into what went wrong, 
so you know what to change and how to do better? Why have you not 
investigated who knew what about Nassar and when, or identified the 
breakdowns and failures that let him sexually abuse children for 
decades? (MSU, USAG and USOC have not commissioned a public 
investigation into what happened with Nassar--something the survivors 
have been requesting for nearly two years.)
    Answer. At the request of the University's Board of Trustees, 
Michigan's Attorney General is currently investigating the Nassar 
matter. Please also see my response to Question 27.

    Question 49. Have you otherwise identified any specific breakdowns 
or failures of policy or individuals that is responsible in whole or 
part for allowing Nassar to abuse children for decades?
    Answer. Since Fall 2016, we have identified the following issues 
and taken the following actions, among many others:

   Strengthened mandatory reporting obligations.

   Ended William Strampel's connection with the University.

   Reorganized the University's health colleges, clinical 
        practices, and student wellness programs.

   Instituted a triage protocol to review all reported 
        allegations or concerns of inappropriate practitioner-patient 
        and practitioner-student interactions.

   Revised policies on sensitive examinations and chaperones.

   Enhanced student-athlete medical care after review by 
        external sports medicine physicians.

   Implemented a number of recommendations for improvements to 
        student counseling and psychiatric services as outlined in 
        Keeling & Associates' report.

   Created the Office of Enterprise Risk Management, Ethics and 
        Compliance.

   Strengthened protections for youth participating in campus 
        programs.

    I would also draw your attention to the attachment to my written 
testimony--``Michigan State University: Taking Action to Foster a Safer 
Campus''--which details these and other changes we have implemented. We 
will continue to update this publication and provide additional 
materials and resources on MSU's ``Our Commitment'' website at https://
msu.edu/ourcommitment/.

    Question 50. If you HAVE identified some failures, why have these 
not been identified and disclosed, with consequences for any individual 
failures?
    Answer. As noted above, the University has taken action on a wide 
variety of issues associated with Nassar and has identified those 
issues publicly in many ways, including my testimony and the ``Our 
Commitment'' website.

    Question 51. If you HAVE identified failures, why have the victims 
received no disclosure of these failures, or specific apology for them?
    Answer. The University has endeavored to take action and 
communicate those actions publicly. We have also apologized many times 
for failing the survivors, including in my testimony.

    Question 52. If you have NOT identified specific failures, why have 
you not taken that basic step?
    Answer. Please see my responses to the prior questions.

    Question 53. Moving forward, have you identified any specific 
failures in how leaders have talked about, characterized, or spoken of 
survivors of abuse?
    Answer. Yes.

    Question 54. Have you retracted and apologized for each of these 
statements?
    Answer. I have publicly apologized to Ms. Denhollander for the 
comments I made in a private e-mail. The comments were wrong, and it 
has never been my intent to have an adversarial relationship with any 
survivor.

    Question 55. What message do you believe has been communicated 
about how sexual assault survivors are viewed in the statements made 
publicly about these women, and made privately in e-mails and internal 
correspondence?
    Answer. I am proud of the way the entire University community has 
come together to support the survivors.

    Question 56. Do you or did you at one believe the statements made 
by leaders at MSU (including Mr. Engler) that sexual assault survivors 
are in this for money, being manipulated by trial attorneys, pushing 
legislative reform for personal gain, receiving kickbacks, or lying 
about what was said in private meetings for personal gain?
    Answer. I never stated that the survivors were ``in it for the 
money.'' The comment I made in a private e-mail concerning Ms. 
Denhollander was made in the heat of the moment as we worked to 
finalize an historic settlement with the survivors, and I have 
apologized for it.

    Question 57. If you do not and did NOT believe these statements, 
why would you say them or allow others to say them unchallenged and 
uncorrected?
    Answer. Please see my prior response.
                                 ______
                                 
    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Jerry Moran to 
                             Susanne Lyons
    Question 1. With respect to the Center for SafeSport, one of the 
primary concerns we have heard through the course of this investigation 
is that the Center is not truly independent from USOC, which results in 
a lack of trust on the part of athletes. I would like to hear your 
perspective on this matter. First, do you believe it is true that 
SafeSport is not truly independent? If not, why? What can be done to 
either rectify this or reassure athletes that SafeSport is truly 
independent and is focused entirely on their best interests, not that 
of USOC?
    Answer. When launching the Center for SafeSport, the U.S. Olympic 
Committee chose to create it as an independent entity because we agree 
that independence is important to engendering trust in its processes 
and to minimizing potential conflicts of interest within the Olympic 
community. Nonetheless, the Center would not have launched without the 
assistance of the Olympic Committee, including organizational 
assistance and financial support. Building trust in the Center's 
operations is an important and ongoing goal of the Olympic Committee. 
For example, the Center's investigations and adjudications are entirely 
independent, and the Center does not provide information about specific 
ongoing cases to the Olympic Committee or, to our knowledge, national 
governing bodies. The Center's staff operates independently and places 
a high priority on maintaining its operational independence. Because 
the Olympic Committee is committed to the success of the Center, there 
are other areas where collaboration is beneficial. For example, the 
Olympic Committee and the Center are currently working to improve 
coordination and consistency related to banned lists. And, of course, 
the Olympic Committee continues to be a primary funder of the Center. 
As noted in my testimony, the Olympic Committee believes that 
increasing the Center's sources of funding can help contribute to 
demonstrating its independence. In the meantime, because the success of 
the Center is so important to the entire Olympic community, the Olympic 
Committee is committed to ensuring that the Center has the resources it 
needs to be successful.

    Question 2. Do the Center for SafeSport, the USOC and NGBs have 
adequate insurance in place to cover the devastating and lifelong 
impact for what we now know is an incredibly large population of abused 
athletes? What insurance number would you deem adequate, and what would 
that be based on?
    Answer. The Olympic Committee has continuously maintained insurance 
policies commensurate with its operations and activities. The current 
issues were, of course, very much unanticipated. It is not possible 
currently to estimate an amount necessary to address the needs of all 
victims or the role of insurance in addressing the needs of victims. I 
cannot speak to the current insurance position of the Center or the 
national governing bodies.
                                 ______
                                 
 Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Richard Blumenthal to 
                             Susanne Lyons
    Question 1. Larry Nassar was the team doctor for the USA Gymnastics 
Olympics Team. Is that right?
    Answer. This question is best answered by USA Gymnastics. From the 
perspective of the Olympic Committee, USA Gymnastics selected and 
advanced Nassar for credentialing as a doctor for the gymnastics team 
in connection with various Olympic events.

    Question 2. What role does the USOC Sports Medicine have in 
approving NGB doctors? Was Larry Nassar a part of the USOC Sports 
Medicine team?
    Answer. The Olympic Committee's Sports Medicine department does not 
approve national governing body doctors. Rather, national governing 
bodies submit medical professionals to the Olympic Committee for 
credentialing in connection with certain events, and the Olympic 
Committee conducts a criminal background check and a medical credential 
review for the proposed professional. Nassar was not a part of the 
Olympic Committee's Sports Medicine department. To my knowledge, his 
involvement with the Olympic Committee's medical operations were one 
instance serving as a medical volunteer at an Olympic Training Center 
and serving on an advisory board for the National Medical Network.

    Question 3. Why is USOC is now arguing in the lawsuit it has no 
duty to protect these women and that Nassar was never employed by USOC? 
Will you withdraw the petition to remove USOC as defendants in the 
lawsuits filed by several survivors of Nassar's abuse?
    Answer. Respectfully, that is not the position of the Olympic 
Committee. As I testified, the Olympic community failed the athletes 
that it was supposed to protect. The Olympic Committee has instituted 
deep and systemic reforms to strengthen significantly the protection of 
athletes, including working to rebuild USA Gymnastics under new 
leadership, and launching the U.S. Center for SafeSport, which provides 
a safe and independent path for reporting and investigating issues of 
abuse. We are also committed to understanding all facts about the 
Nassar abuse, and we look forward to receiving the report of the 
independent investigation that we launched earlier this year. We will 
make that report public. The legal filings address an entirely 
different and more specific question, namely the legal responsibility 
for Nassar's crimes. As you noted, he was not employed by the Olympic 
Committee.

    Question 4. How can USOC can do a credible job of protecting 
athletes in the future if you refuse to take responsibility for past 
failures and hold your people accountable?
    Answer. We have taken responsibility, we do take responsibility, we 
have held people accountable, and we will continue to hold people 
accountable.

    Question 5. USOC has failed to provide proper oversight and protect 
athletes from physical, emotional and sexual abuse not only in 
gymnastics but in many other sports including swimming and figure 
skating for decades. The current chairman, Mr. Larry Probst has been in 
office since 2008 and has arguably failed to provide the leadership 
that the organization needs to move forward. Many survivors have called 
for his resignation.
    a. How does USOC intend to restore public confidence in USOC while 
Mr. Probst is still chairman?
    Answer. When I became acting CEO, Mr. Probst and I announced a 
series of initiatives to strengthen our handling and response to issues 
of abuse and address other structural weaknesses within the Olympic 
community. As discussed more fully in my testimony, we have made 
significant progress on those initiatives, and at the same time, we 
have continued to refine our plans for reform, adding new initiatives 
and efforts as we identified additional areas in need of attention. In 
my testimony, I outlined our initiatives and progress in the areas of 
SafeSport and athlete safety programs, athlete advocacy, the Olympic 
Committee's engagement with national governing bodies and athletes, the 
reform of USA Gymnastics, and the ongoing independent investigation. I 
sincerely hope and believe that these efforts to address the important 
issues of athlete safety will help restore public confidence in the 
organization. In my experience on the board, where we discussed the 
topic of SafeSport at nearly every meeting, Mr. Probst both ensured 
this topic was a priority and consistently urged more speed in the 
implementation of the Center for Safe Sport.

    b. How can USOC restore public confidence while the same board is 
still in place?
    Answer. There have been several changes in the composition of the 
board. Some board changes have occurred in the ordinary course, and 
some board changes, such as the resignation of Mr. Blackmun, have not. 
Board service is subject to term limits to ensure both continuity and 
fresh perspectives on the board. For example, at the end of this year, 
there will be three to four additional changes in board composition as 
individuals reach the end of their terms.

    Question 6. The Ted Stevens Amateur Sports Act provides in part 
that the USOC ``may review all matters related to the continued 
recognition of an organization as a national governing body and may 
take action it considers appropriate, including placing conditions of 
the continues recognition [of the NGB].'' What is it about this 
language limits USOC from being active and fixing issues, especially 
those pertaining to sexual abuse, that arise?
    Answer. Nothing. Indeed, the Olympic Committee's bylaws require 
that national governing bodies maintain and enforce athlete safety 
policies and procedures, and that national governing bodies are subject 
to the jurisdiction of the Center for SafeSport and the SafeSport Code. 
The Olympic Committee will use these and other elements of its rules 
and procedures to be active in fixing issues as they arise.

    Question 7. Is USOC responsible for the safety of the athletes it 
sends to the Olympic, Pan American, and Paralympic games? Is protecting 
them from sexual abuse a top priority?
    Answer. Yes, the Olympic Committee is responsible for providing a 
safe environment for athletes competing in the Games. Yes, protecting 
athletes from sexual abuse is a top priority.

    Question 8. It was not until January of 2018 that USOC commissioned 
a ``USAG Working Group'' to understand the sexual abuse that occurred 
in its organization for so many years. This was over two and a half 
years since its knowledge of Larry Nassar, over one year since Larry 
Nassar's abuse broke publicly in September of 2016, and only shortly 
after USA Gymnastics, MSU and USOC came under fire at the sentencing 
hearings in Michigan after so many survivors took the stand in the 
courtroom to deliver victim-impact statements.
    Why did it take so long to form this working group? What was USOC 
doing for those two years, and why didn't it do something sooner?
    Answer. Respectfully, this question mischaracterizes the nature of 
this working group. The working group formed in January 2018 was 
directed at (1) the selection of an independent investigator to 
investigate both USA Gymnastics and the Olympic Committee and (2) the 
intense focus necessary to rebuild USA Gymnastics after the Olympic 
Committee required the removal of its entire board. The Olympic 
Committee was deeply involved in these issues much earlier, such as 
when it required the resignation of Steve Penny in March 2017. 
Moreover, as explained in more detail in my testimony, the Olympic 
Committee board and executives have been working on the SafeSport 
initiative since 2010.

    Question 9. What has USOC done to ensure that athletes across NGBs 
are not misled into thinking that required to submit written 
complaints?
    Answer. The Olympic Committee requires national governing bodies to 
abide by the procedures of the Center for SafeSport. The Center's 
procedures provide multiple methods of reporting, including by 
telephone. For example, both the Sexual Misconduct Incident Reporting 
Form and the Center's procedures posted on its website provide a 
telephone number for reporting. Educating athletes about appropriate 
reporting procedures is a priority for the Olympic Committee, as well 
as the Center and national governing bodies in my experience.

    Question 10. Are athletes across NGBs now able to submit anonymous 
complaints?
    Answer. Yes. The Center's procedures permit anonymous reports. For 
example, the Center's online Sexual Misconduct Incident Reporting Form 
states at the top, in all capital letters, ``YOU MAY REPORT 
ANONYMOUSLY.''

    Question 11. You served on the USOC Board of Directors for over 
seven years before taking over as acting CEO. During that time, do you 
believe you were well-informed as to the health and status of the 
organization? If yes, why did the abuse of athletes continue for so 
long and what should be done to avoid similar situations in the future? 
If no, who or what was responsible for keeping the Board of Directors 
in the dark about what was happening and what is the USOC doing to keep 
that from happening again?
    Answer. During my tenure on the board, we discussed SafeSport 
issues, including our efforts to launch the Center, at nearly every 
meeting. Like everyone across the Olympic community, and indeed the 
country, the board was not aware of the devastatingly broad scope or 
magnitude of the abuse that occurred. In January 2018, the Olympic 
Committee announced that it would be launching an independent 
investigation to determine how an abuse of this proportion could have 
gone unreported for so long. We need to know when complaints were 
brought forward and to whom. Although the investigation is ongoing, the 
Olympic Committee is not waiting on the results of the investigation to 
act. In February 2018, I announced a series of reforms and initiatives 
to strengthen our handling and response to issues of abuse and address 
other structural weaknesses within the Olympic community. Additional 
details about these efforts are contained in my written testimony.

    Question 12. If a coach is suspended by an NGB, and the USOC knows 
that coach is still coaching at their local club, what action can USOC 
take to ensure that coach doesn't coach at that club? Can USOC take 
action independent of the NGB? Why or why not?
    Answer. Your question highlights some of the significant challenges 
that we collectively face as we work to address issues of abuse. 
Although a national governing body can terminate memberships and the 
Olympic Committee can cease recognitions, the Olympic community has no 
authority over the hiring decisions of unaffiliated local clubs. We can 
partially address these issues by improving information sharing, such 
as coordination and publication of banned lists, to enable parents and 
local clubs to know when a particular coach has been disciplined.

    Question 13. What can USOC do to enforce the suspension of a coach 
for sexual abuse?
    Answer. While the specific enforcement would generally fall to the 
national governing body, the Olympic Committee has a unique leadership 
role to lead changes in the entire Olympic community. For example, we 
are working with the national governing bodies and the Center to 
facilitate the sharing of banned and suspended lists, and to make them 
available to athletes, parents, and potential employers, and anyone who 
works in the athlete community. If necessary, the Olympic Committee can 
use its authorities under the Ted Stevens Act to require a national 
governing body to enforce a suspension, including decertification as a 
national governing body.

    Question 14. What can the Center for SafeSport do to enforce the 
suspension of a coach for sexual abuse?
    Answer. Although the Center is in the best position to answer this 
question, the Center already makes publicly available a searchable 
database of adjudicated cases. The Center also circulates an 
adjudication log, on a biweekly basis, to all of the national governing 
bodies that contains additional information concerning interim 
measures. If the Center found that a national governing body was not 
enforcing a suspension, I expect that the Center would bring that to 
the attention of the Olympic Committee.

    Question 15. Does the USOC need to be explicitly made responsible 
for the obligations of any national governing body under its authority?
    Answer. In my view, the provisions of the Ted Stevens Act 
sufficiently specify the relationship between the Olympic Committee and 
national governing bodies. The Act allows the Olympic Committee to have 
a strong leadership role in areas such as athlete safety. Exercising 
that authority, for example, the Olympic Committee created and launched 
the Center for SafeSport. It must lead to further concrete steps and 
changes in policy, and, as I testified, it has and will.

    Question 16. Executive Compensation: In response to a QFR, former 
USOC CEO Scott Blackmun explained that his ``salary was based 50 
percent on comparable nonprofits, 25 percent on sport and 25 percent on 
for-profit companies.'' Based on the most recent available tax filings, 
Blackmun earned $1.075M in total compensation in 2016, of which 
$646,000 was base salary. It's also my understanding that Deloitte, a 
USOC sponsor, is responsible for this formula and benchmarking data for 
salaries for USOC executives. Is this consistent with your 
understanding? If not, please explain in detail how USOC executives are 
compensated.
    Answer. This is generally accurate. In addition to Deloitte, the 
compensation committee of the board received benchmarking from other 
outside advisors.

    Question 17. Do you think it is a conflict of interest for Deloitte 
to establish executive compensation for the very executives who will 
also be responsible for negotiating and approving Deloitte's 
sponsorship agreement? Do you think that is a proper and transparent 
way to conduct business?
    Answer. The compensation committee of the board and, ultimately, 
the full board establishes compensation for Olympic Committee 
executives. Those decisions were informed by Deloitte as well as other 
outside advisors. As noted, Deloitte is a sponsor of the Olympic 
Committee and some of its sponsorship is provided in the form of in-
kind services. Such arrangements permit the Olympic Committee to 
operate more efficiently, reducing costs for the benefits of the 
organization and the athletes that it supports. In my experience, the 
market data provided by Deloitte has been consistent with the data 
provided by other compensation experts, such as Mercer.

    Question 18. Please explain how athletes are typically compensated 
across NGBs. Does USOC set any rules or guidelines regarding how 
athletes are compensated?
    Answer. The Olympics operate very differently from professional 
sports. Athletes are not compensated for athletic participation.
    To help develop athletic excellence, the Olympic Committee 
maintains a number of athlete support programs to provide resources to 
Olympic and Paralympic athletes. These programs include cash stipends, 
athlete health insurance, support for the Olympic Training Centers, 
sports medicine, sport sciences, and other programs.

    Question 19. From your personal experiences, would you agree with 
reports that USOC has engaged in exorbitant and lavish spending--flying 
executives and spouses on first class and providing excessively 
generous per diems?
    Answer. No.

    Question 20. What do you think of the fact that Mr. Penny took $1 
million from the non-profit USAG as part of his severance package, yet 
refused to answer questions at this Subcommittee's last hearing 
regarding conduct he had engaged in on behalf of USAG?
    Answer. I share the Committee's frustration that Mr. Penny did not 
answer the Committee's questions. I believe it is essential that we 
understand all of the facts related to athlete abuse.

    Question 21. Athlete Compensation: After the 2016 Rio Olympics, the 
USOC's board of directors gave five executives $100,000 or more in 
bonuses, many already making six figures. Meanwhile, an athlete winning 
a gold medal received just $37,500. Do you see anything wrong with an 
organization that is supposed to be centered on athletes, perpetrating 
such a ridiculous wage gap between staff?
    Answer. As noted above, Olympic athletes are not compensated like 
professional athletes. They are not employees of the Olympic Committee. 
Approximately 75 percent of the Olympic Committee's budget is dedicated 
to programs and services aimed at helping athletes achieve the elite-
level success that they seek.

    Question 22. Does USOC still pay athletes and programs that have 
the highest achieving athletes? Are there any plans by USOC to end this 
``Money for Medals'' Program?
    Answer. There is no such ``Money for Medals'' program. As part of 
its efforts to support athletic excellence, the Olympic Committee is 
proud to provide a host of athlete benefits aimed at helping athletes 
achieve the elite-level success that they seek. Resources are generally 
allocated toward athletes who have the potential to achieve their 
dreams in international competitions. The program that awards a cash 
payment to Olympic and Paralympic athletes who win a medal in the Games 
recognizes their extraordinary achievements in representing our Nation.

    Question 23. Do you believe that the profound inequity in salaries 
and financial support earned between USOC and NGB officials and Team 
USA perpetuates a power imbalance? Don't you think this is antithetical 
to athlete safety? Do you believe that the inequity between athletes 
and executives qualifies as financial abuse?
    Answer. No.

    Question 24. Do you think athletes across NGBs are adequately and 
fairly compensated--particularly in comparison to inflated executive 
compensation and personal fringe benefits at NGBs and USOC? Do you 
believe that the salaries given to elite athletes affords them a high 
quality of life?
    Answer. As noted above, Olympic athletes are not compensated like 
professional athletes (they do not receive a salary) and executive 
compensation is set by the board of directors after assessing 
benchmarks, with the support of outside advisors. Approximately 75 
percent of the Olympic Committee's budget is dedicated to programs and 
services aimed at helping athletes achieve the elite-level success that 
they seek.

    Question 25. Has the USOC board put forward an actionable timeline 
to significantly increase the paltry 8 percent of its 336 million 
dollar revenue that goes to the support of athletes?
    Answer. Respectfully, this question mischaracterizes the Olympic 
Committee's support of athletes. Approximately 75 percent of the 
Olympic Committee's budget is dedicated to programs and services that 
support athletes (with the remainder aimed at enabling the Olympic 
Committee to best provide these programs and services). I believe that 
the 8 percent number referenced in the question refers to the portion 
of athlete support that is composed of direct payments to athletes.

    Question 26. Mr. Rick Adams also testified in March of 2017 that 
there was ``a flawed culture, where the brand, the sport, and their 
(competitive) results are given a higher priority than the health and 
well-being of athletes.'' Do you agree with Mr. Adams' testimony?
    Answer. Yes.

    Since Mr. Adams testified, now over a year ago, has the USOC done 
anything (taken any measures, adopted any policies, implemented any new 
guidelines) to fix this culture discussed by Mr. Adams?
    Answer. Yes. In my testimony, I outlined our initiatives and 
progress in the areas of SafeSport and athlete safety programs, athlete 
advocacy, the Olympic Committee's engagement with national governing 
bodies and athletes, the reform of USA Gymnastics, and the ongoing 
independent investigation.

    Question 27. Your Oversight of USA Taekwondo: From February 27, 
2012 through October 10, 2013, USA Taekwondo was on probation because 
the USOC found that it was non-compliant with USOC membership 
obligations set forth by the Sports Act. During this time period, you 
were actually Chair of the Hearing Panel that monitored USAT's path to 
compliance, correct?
    Answer. I was appointed chair of a three-member hearing panel that 
considered two consolidated complaints, under section 10 of the Olympic 
Committee's bylaws, against USA Taekwondo filed in August 2011, 
Robinson v. USA Taekwondo (Aug. 5, 2011) and Harris v. USA Taekwondo 
(Aug. 10, 2011). The complaints asserted that USA Taekwondo was not 
meeting its obligations and responsibilities as a national governing 
body in certain administrative respects and that USA Taekwondo failed 
to conduct fair and impartial elections for its board seats in 2010.

    Question 28. You were responsible for overseeing USAT when an 
official Ethics Complaint was filed against USAT Coach Mark Gitelman in 
September 2013, and when additional reports were made to the police 
October 2, 2013--correct?
    Answer. No, I was not responsible for overseeing USA Taekwondo. I 
was chair of a three-member hearing panel that considered two specific 
section 10 complaints against USA Taekwondo.

    Question 29. Despite all of this, on October 10, 2013, you 
officially lifted USAT's probationary status, and announced that USAT 
had ``addressed outstanding grievances and ethics complaints,'' and 
``revamped its grievance and ethics procedures to ensure that such 
grievances and ethics complaints are dealt with timely and fairly.''
    It wasn't until after Gitelman was criminally convicted in 
September 2015 that USA Taekwondo banned him from coaching.
    Why did this take so long? Do you think you could have done more at 
the time? What could you have done? Why or why not?
    Answer. I was not made aware of the complaint involving Gitelman 
prior to the USA Taekwondo probation being lifted. I became aware of 
Gitelman's conduct in March 2014, and at that time, I immediately 
notified appropriate Olympic Committee personnel. As I was not involved 
in USA Taekwondo's consideration of the Gitelman matter, the remaining 
questions would be best addressed by USA Taekwondo.

    Question 30. You had direct knowledge that USAT athletes were in 
harm's way. And yet, you defend the USOC's inaction, writing in an e-
mail, ``This is no longer in our purview.'' Why should athletes trust 
you when you have directly allowed athletes to be in harm's way in the 
past?
    Answer. Respectfully, the question mischaracterizes my e-mail and 
the history of the matter. The quoted statement comes from a March 10, 
2014, e-mail in which I expressed outrage upon learning about 
allegations of abuse at USA Taekwondo. I immediately notified the 
appropriate Olympic Committee personnel of the allegations. As I stated 
in the e-mail, ``[a]llowing a potential sexual preditor [sic] to 
continue to coach without having an appropriate investigation and 
conclusion is unacceptable.'' The excerpt from my e-mail above refers 
only to the fact that the hearing panel's jurisdiction had concluded. 
Nonetheless, I and Olympic Committee personnel acted swiftly to ensure 
that the allegations were addressed.

    Question 31. Questions about the Center for SafeSport's 
Independence: For the Center for SafeSport to be effective, it needs to 
be independent. Victims will avoid reporting to the Center if they view 
it as an arm of the USOC, which cares more about its reputation than 
about them. Are you aware of concerns regarding the Center's 
independence? What have you heard and how do you plan to address these 
concerns? Are you aware of any other concerns regarding SafeSport?
    Answer. When launching the Center for SafeSport, the Olympic 
Committee chose to create it as an independent entity because we agree 
that independence is important to engendering trust in its processes 
and to minimizing potential conflicts of interest within the Olympic 
community. Nonetheless, the Center would not have launched without the 
assistance of the Olympic Committee, including organizational 
assistance and financial support. Building trust in the Center's 
operations is an important and ongoing goal of the Olympic Committee. 
For example, the Center's investigations and adjudications are entirely 
independent, and the Center does not provide information about specific 
ongoing cases to the Olympic Committee or, to our knowledge, national 
governing bodies. The Center's staff operates independently and places 
a high priority on maintaining its operational independence. Because 
the Olympic Committee is committed to the success of the Center, there 
are other areas where collaboration is beneficial. For example, the 
Olympic Committee and the Center are currently working to improve 
coordination and consistency related to banned lists. And, of course, 
the Olympic Committee continues to be a primary funder of the Center. 
As noted in my testimony, the Olympic Committee believes that 
increasing the Center's sources of funding can help contribute to 
demonstrating its independence. In the meantime, because the success of 
the Center is so important to the entire Olympic community, the Olympic 
Committee is committed to ensuring that the Center has the resources it 
needs to be successful.

    Question 32. What kind of resources, other than funding, does USOC 
provide to the Center? Please detail all resources USOC provides, to 
SafeSport, whether monetary or through services, personnel, or other 
formats.
    Answer. In terms of resources, the Olympic Committee provides 
primarily funding to the Center. As noted above, the Olympic Committee 
is committed to the success of the Center, and Olympic Committee staff 
work collaboratively with the staff of the Center on issues of mutual 
concern that are unrelated to investigations.

    Question 33. What is your understanding of the Center for 
SafeSport's investigative powers and enforcement authority?
    Answer. The Olympic Committee requires national governing bodies to 
provide jurisdiction to the Center. The Center's activities are 
governed by the SafeSport Code and the Center's policies and 
procedures. It has exclusive authority within the Olympic community to 
investigate and resolve issues of sexual or sexualized abuse, and 
discretionary authority to investigate and resolve other issues of 
abuse.

    Question 34. As you know, the Center's Chief Operating Officer 
Malia Arrington was a longtime employee of USOC. She was hired by USOC 
in 2010 without sexual abuse expertise and switched over to the Center 
for SafeSport in 2017. Many survivors and athletes feel she was largely 
responsible for USOC doing nothing as NGBs mishandled sexual abuse 
allegations and do not trust her to be independent from USOC. She once 
said in a deposition that she had no authority to make USA Taekwondo 
ban a coach, blaming the Ted Stevens Act.\8\ Do you understand why some 
may be skeptical about the Center's independence given its staffing 
decisions? What are you doing to address them?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\ https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/olympics/an-athlete-
accused-her-coach-of-sex-abuse-olympic-officials-stayed-on-sideline/
2017/02/14/35a6fc76-d2eb-11e6-a783-cd3fa950f2fd_story
.html?utm_term=.6891a726cf0c
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Answer. Ms. Arrington had a significant role in the launch of the 
Center, reflecting the Olympic Committee's commitment to creating a 
safe and independent path to report, investigate, and resolve issues of 
abuse. The Center now has the ability to require a national governing 
body to ban a coach. As noted above, the Olympic Committee considers 
the Center's independence to be important to its mission and 
credibility. Today, the Center is an independent entity that makes its 
own staffing decisions. In recognition of the Center's independence, 
the Olympic Committee plays no role in the Center's personnel 
decisions. In my experience, Ms. Arrington has operated independently 
of the Olympic Committee.

    Question 35. As you know, Mr. Rick Adams is Chief of Sport 
Operations and Paralympics for USOC. According to Mr. Rick Adam's 
online bio at teamusa.org, ``Prior to the Center's launch in March 
2017, Adams led the hiring of a CEO and a nine-member, independent 
board of directors that includes a diverse membership of subject-matter 
experts in the areas of abuse prevention, investigation and 
compliance.'' \9\ If Mr. Adams, a USOC executive, was responsible for 
hiring the Center for SafeSport's CEO and nine-member board, why would 
anyone think the Center is independent?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\ https://www.teamusa.org/about-the-usoc/inside-the-usoc/
leadership/executive-team/rick-adams
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Answer. Mr. Adams was the lead Olympic Committee official 
supporting the launch of the Center. Mr. Adams did not serve on the 
Center's Nominating and Governance Committee, which selected the 
Center's board. The Center's board selected the Center's CEO.

    Question 36. Is the Center for SafeSport strictly prohibited from 
communicating allegations to USOC, or is it up to their discretion? How 
about communicating allegations to NGBs? What is done to make sure that 
everything is done in lockstep with law enforcement?
    Answer. The Center is an independent entity and it is best 
positioned to answer this question. The SafeSport Code specifies the 
instances in which the Center can share information, including to 
notify a national governing body of an allegation involving a covered 
individual, when the Center imposes an interim measure, when the Center 
proceeds to a full investigation, and upon a final decision. Covered 
individuals under the Code must report suspected instances of child 
abuse to both the Center and law enforcement.

    Question 37. How can athletes be assured of the Center for 
SafeSport's independence? How iron-clad is the separation of the Center 
from NGBs and USOC?
    Answer. When launching the Center for SafeSport, the Olympic 
Committee chose to create it as an independent entity because we agree 
that independence is important to engendering trust in its processes 
and to minimizing potential conflicts of interest within the Olympic 
community. Nonetheless, the Center would not have launched without the 
assistance of the Olympic Committee, including organizational 
assistance and financial support. Building trust in the Center's 
operations is an important and ongoing goal of the Olympic Committee. 
For example, the Center's investigations and adjudications are entirely 
independent, and the Center does not provide information about specific 
ongoing cases to the Olympic Committee or, to our knowledge, national 
governing bodies. The Center's staff operates independently and places 
a high priority on maintaining its operational independence. Because 
the Olympic Committee is committed to the success of the Center, there 
are other areas where collaboration is beneficial. For example, the 
Olympic Committee and the Center are currently working to improve 
coordination and consistency related to banned lists. And, of course, 
the Olympic Committee continues to be a primary funder of the Center. 
As noted in my testimony, the Olympic Committee believes that 
increasing the Center's sources of funding can help contribute to 
demonstrating its independence. In the meantime, because the success of 
the Center is so important to the entire Olympic community, the Olympic 
Committee is committed to ensuring that the Center has the resources it 
needs to be successful.

    Question 38. How often does USOC communicate with the Center for 
SafeSport? How often do you personally initiate communication with the 
Center? How often does the Center initiate communication with you? What 
is the purpose of that communication?
    Answer. In the interest of its independence, the Olympic 
Committee's communications with the Center are limited. The Olympic 
Committee's director of athlete safety is the lead Olympic Committee 
official responsible for communication with the Center. In general, the 
communications relate to areas of cooperation (such as the work on 
banned lists mentioned above) and understanding ways in which the 
Olympic Committee can help to ensure that the Center has the resources 
that it needs to be successful. The director of athlete safety and 
others at the Olympic Committee are not a party to specific 
investigations.

    Question 39. Effectiveness of the Center for SafeSport: Do 
SafeSport materials contain clear expectations for appropriate 
relationships and ethical behavior that have been developed by experts 
in the field? Who was evaluated and reviewed materials generated for 
SafeSport?
    Answer. The Center is best positioned to answer questions regarding 
its materials.

    Question 40. Has the USOC mandated that all SafeSport materials be 
required reading for every NGB employee and that it be distributed by 
every NGB to each member parent, coach and individual?
    Answer. The Olympic Committee's NGB Athlete Safety Policy requires 
national governing bodies to implement a policy requiring education and 
training concerning the key elements of the national governing body 
athlete safety program for individuals the national governing body 
authorizes, approves, or appoints to a position of authority over, or 
to have frequent contact with athletes, and national governing body 
staff.

    Question 41. Has the Center for SafeSport hired outside psychiatric 
experts in the relevant fields of abuse to develop training materials 
that protect young athletes from sexual abuse? If no, when it will plan 
to do so?
    Answer. The Center is an independent entity that makes its own 
staffing choices. The Center is best positioned to answer this 
question.

    Question 42. Has Center for SafeSport directed NGBs to hire sport 
specific psychiatric professionals to help them develop their own 
educational materials to protect their athletes from abuse? For what 
sports has the Center does this for, so far? What is the timeline for 
doing so?
    Answer. The Center is an independent entity and is best positioned 
to answer this question.

    Question 43. What assurances do you have that the Center for 
SafeSport does not notify alleged perpetrators of any ongoing 
investigation nor accusation unless and until authorized by law 
enforcement to do so?
    Answer. The Center is an independent entity and is best positioned 
to answer this question. The SafeSport Code specifies the instances in 
which the Center may share information.

    Question 44. How are SafeSport training materials publicized and 
disseminated to parents, coaches and athletes?
    Answer. The Olympic Committee's NGB Athlete Safety Policy requires 
each national governing body to publish SafeSport materials to its 
members, which must include online resources. Information concerning 
SafeSport is also available to all parents, coaches, and athletes on 
the Olympic Committee and Center websites.

    Question 45. Can the Center for SafeSport issue mandatory standards 
on NGBs? Can USOC issue mandatory standards on NGBs?
    Answer. Yes, the Olympic Committee has mandatory standards for 
national governing bodies. For example, the Olympic Committee requires 
national governing bodies to provide jurisdiction to the Center and 
adhere to its policies and procedures. The Center also promulgates 
policies and procedures and can update its code. These materials are 
obligatory for national governing bodies via the Olympic Committee's 
requirements.

    Question 46. How do you respond to concerns that SafeSport is 
little more than a ``USOC brand created to make parents feel better and 
make reporters go away''?
    Answer. I disagree. The Center is a significant and important 
undertaking, and it is an unprecedented and groundbreaking entity--no 
other sports organization in the world has anything similar to the 
Center. The Center has already demonstrated that it is serving an 
essential role in making it easier for victims and survivors to report 
concerns. Notably, the Center has recently experienced a significant 
increase in the number of reports of abuse.
    Although any report is disheartening, this is precisely the reason 
that we need the Center. It provides a safe and independent path for 
athletes to report concerns so that the Olympic and Paralympic 
community can address them. The Center removes the investigation and 
resolution of allegations of sexual abuse from the control of national 
governing bodies, and it is a resource dedicated to education and 
awareness of the importance of recognizing and reporting abuse.

    Question 47. Banned Lists: Have all NGBs agreed to publish and make 
easily accessible lists of all banned and suspended individuals? Will 
you decertify any NGBs that refuse to do so? Can you promise a date by 
which all of these will be available?
    Answer. The Olympic Committee instituted new reporting requirements 
on national governing bodies in May 2018. These new requirements 
include reporting to the Olympic Committee banned and suspended members 
that have not been submitted to the Center. We are engaged in an 
ongoing effort to improve the coordination and information sharing 
among the Center, the Olympic Committee, and the national governing 
bodies regarding individuals on banned or suspended lists. We need to 
make it easier for parents, athletes, and potential employers to access 
information about coaches and athletes on banned and suspended lists.
    As noted in my testimony, Congress should consider extending the 
liability protections in the Protecting Young Victims from Sexual Abuse 
and Safe Sport Authorization Act to other Olympic and Paralympic 
organizations. Congress provided the Center with liability protection 
for the exercise of certain of its official functions, including 
protection against lawsuits for defamation, libel, or slander. This 
liability protection has proven to be important to the Center's ability 
to provide information on people banned or suspended from Olympic 
sports. These provisions cover neither the Olympic Committee nor the 
national governing bodies. Congress should consider whether these 
protections should be extended to other Olympic and Paralympic 
organizations or whether the language should be clarified to encompass 
information published by the Center that relates to a national 
governing body adjudication, to help enable broader and more 
comprehensive information for athletes, parents, and others.

    Question 48. Have you provided NGBs with any specific requirements 
regarding what information should be provided on those banned lists? 
For example, will date and reason for the ban also be included? What 
other information are you considering should be included on the banned 
lists? Why or why not?
    Answer. These issues are part of our ongoing discussions described 
above.

    Question 49. What consequences are there for any member clubs that 
hire a coach or individual on the banned list?
    Answer. The primary consequence or such a club is the termination 
of its membership in the relevant national governing body.

    Question 50. Has the USOC demanded the implementation of strong 
policies to keep banned members away from events sanctioned by the USOC 
or individual NGBs?
    Answer. The Olympic Committee expects that each national governing 
body will preclude banned members from participating in events 
sanctioned by the national governing body. We are engaged in an ongoing 
effort to improve the coordination and information sharing among the 
Center, the Olympic Committee, and the national governing bodies 
regarding individuals on banned or suspended lists. With respect to the 
events sanctioned by the Olympic Committee, the Olympic Committee also 
enforces such policies.

    Question 51. Decertification: When does the USOC deem it necessary 
to exercise its authority over NGBs and put conditions on continued NGB 
recognition?
    Answer. Section 8 of the Olympic Committee's bylaws establishes the 
conditions by which the Olympic Committee can consider suspending, 
revoking, or otherwise taking action concerning national governing body 
recognition. The Olympic Committee also generally considers recognition 
when a member of a national governing body brings a complaint alleging 
the body is not fulfilling its responsibilities or when a sports 
organization seeks to replace a national governing body, under sections 
10 and 11, respectively, of the Olympic Committee's bylaws.

    Question 52. As you mention in your testimony, the USOC asked for 
the resignation of USAG's CEO and subsequently, in January 2018, the 
entire board of USAG. Why didn't USOC think the same logic should apply 
to the USOC board?
    Answer. When it became clear to the Olympic Committee board that 
the former USA Gymnastics CEO should no longer serve in that role, the 
board sought his resignation. Likewise, when it became clear that USA 
Gymnastics did not have a board structure and membership that the 
organization needed to bring a culture of change and address the 
significant issues that the organization faced, the Olympic Committee 
board required the resignation of the USA Gymnastics board. The Olympic 
Committee board leads the entire Olympic community in the United 
States, including the community of athletes and the national governing 
bodies for each individual sport. The Olympic Committee board has 
created and launched the Center for SafeSport, launched an independent 
investigation of the Olympic Committee and USA Gymnastics, and 
instituted additional reforms and initiatives as discussed in my 
testimony.

    Question 53. Does the USOC Board of Directors and executive 
leadership feel that it has the authority to take strong action--like 
forcing a board to resign--when it becomes aware of athlete abuse in a 
sport? If yes, why didn't they? If not, why did they not ask Congress 
for the authority to do so?
    Answer. Yes. In recent years, the relationship between the Olympic 
Committee and the national governing bodies has evolved, particularly 
with respect to the Center, which removed the national governing 
bodies' authority to investigate and resolve issues of sexual abuse. 
More recently, the Olympic Committee took a very active role in the 
reform of USA Gymnastics. These developments demonstrate that the 
Olympic Committee can and will use its persuasive and moral leadership 
to bring change in the Olympic community when needed.

    Question 54. USOC has routinely stated, and in hearings to the U.S. 
Senate Committee, that it's main--if not only--recourse with National 
Governing Bodies is to de-certify those bodies. In fact, USOC has 
threatened, or actually de-certified other National Governing Bodies 
(aside from USA Gymnastics) for much less egregious violations than 
Nassar's horrific misconduct. For example, in 2002, USOC was 
considering de-certifying the Track and Field Program for record-
keeping issues. Please describe all instances in which USOC was 
considering decertification for a NGB.
    Answer. With respect to complete decertification as a national 
governing body, the Olympic Committee decertified the U.S. Team 
Handball Federation in 2006 and the National Rifle Association in 1994. 
There are numerous instances in which the Olympic Committee placed a 
national governing body on probation, or the Olympic Committee pursued 
or discussed decertification and then proceeded with a remediation plan 
instead. For example, the Olympic Committee commenced a decertification 
hearing against the U.S. Taekwondo Union in 2004, and the Taekwondo 
Union subsequently entered into a remediation plan with the Olympic 
Committee. Similarly, the Olympic Committee agreed not to seek 
decertification after the U.S. Bobsled and Skeleton Federation entered 
a remediation plan in 2006. Other examples include a restructuring plan 
at the USA Karate-do Federation in 2007, and governance and management 
changes at USA Table Tennis in 2007. The Olympic Committee has also 
placed various national governing bodies on probation, including USA 
Boxing in 2002, USA Taekwondo in 2012, USA Judo in 2015, and the U.S. 
Bowling Congress in 2017.

    Question 55. Why is USOC so reluctant to decertify USAG? Under what 
circumstances do you think decertification would be appropriate?
    Answer. As the Olympic Committee expressed to USA Gymnastics in 
January this year, the Olympic Committee is not at all reluctant to 
pursue decertification if necessary. In this instance, USA Gymnastics 
agreed to a wholesale leadership change in the board and key 
executives, and dramatic internal reforms to address its shortcomings. 
These changes are largely similar to the changes that would accompany 
decertification. Unfortunately, past experience has shown that full 
decertification can harm the athletes the most. If USA Gymnastics were 
to fail to adhere to the reform criteria the Olympic Committee 
established, we have made clear that we will pursue decertification.

    Question 56. Under the Ted Stevens Amateur Sports Act, the USOC has 
the power to de-certify National Governing Bodies for non-compliance 
with USOC rules, guidelines, and bylaws. Since USAG was not 
decertified, at any point throughout the Nassar scandal, is it USOC's 
position that USAG has been in compliance with all USOC policies, 
rules, guidelines, and bylaws from 1986 to present?
    Answer. No. Additionally, as noted in my testimony, in January 
2018, the Olympic Committee provided USA Gymnastics with a specific 
list of reforms that were necessary for USA Gymnastics to remain as a 
national governing body.

    Question 57. Athlete Whistleblowers: There are numerous accusations 
that whistleblowers are routinely retaliated against in the Olympic and 
Paralympic system. In particular, currently competing athletes are 
often scared to speak out, out of fear that it will have to mean the 
end of their athletic careers. What specific plans do you have to 
prevent this from happening in the future?
    Answer. First, if you are aware of any instances of retaliation, I 
encourage you to bring them to my attention personally or to the 
attention of my successor. Retaliation is unacceptable, and I would 
appreciate the opportunity to take action against anyone who has 
engaged in retaliation.
    Second, concerns about disincentives to speak out were a core 
reason that the Olympic Committee created the Center for SafeSport. It 
provides a safe and independent path for athletes to report concerns 
about abuse, and an independent system--separate from the national 
governing bodies and the Olympic Committee--for investigating and 
resolving cases of sexual abuse. The Center's independence is critical 
for encouraging victims to come forward about their abuse.
    Finally, the Olympic Committee's Athlete Safety Policy includes 
anti-retaliation provisions. This policy states that ``[t]he USOC will 
not encourage, allow or tolerate attempts from any individual to 
retaliate, punish, allow or in any way harm any individual(s) who 
reports a concern in good faith.'' Any allegations of retaliation 
should be reported immediately.

    Question 58. Athletes and victims' advocates have pointed out vast 
imbalances in power between staff members and athletes in many 
situations. This puts athletes in an inherently vulnerable situation. 
What is the USOC doing to minimize these risks?
    Answer. Athlete advocacy is a cornerstone of the reforms and 
initiatives that I announced in February. We have worked with the 
Athletes' Advisory Council to identify its priorities and 
recommendations, including seeking its input on athlete representation 
on the Olympic Committee's board. We also added a position within the 
office of the Athlete Ombudsman dedicated to increased communication 
with athletes about services and resources available to athletes, and 
we are creating a new athlete services department that will focus on 
assisting with individual athlete grievances. Additional details are in 
my written testimony.

    Question 59. Testimony by Mr. Rick Adams, Chief of Sport Operations 
and Paralympics, USOC: In March of 2017, Rick Adams of the USOC 
testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee and stated, ``The 
Olympic community failed the people it was supposed to protect.'' Mr. 
Adams also stated, ``We do take responsibility, and we apologize to any 
young athlete who has ever faced abuse.''
    Are you aware that USOC is now attempting to deny responsibility in 
the civil lawsuits of these Olympians, according to recent filings?
    Answer. Respectfully, that is not the position of the Olympic 
Committee. As both Mr. Adams and I testified, the Olympic community 
failed the athletes that it was supposed to protect, and we do have 
responsibility and accountability. The legal filings address an 
entirely different and more specific question, namely the legal 
responsibility for Nassar's crimes.

    Question 60. Was Mr. Adams speaking out of turn, when he said these 
things?
    Answer. No.

    Question 61. Does USOC hold itself responsible for what happened to 
these women?
    Answer. Yes.

    Question 62. Is USOC changing its position, now that it is in 
litigation?
    Answer. No.

    Question 63. Are you aware that incoming USOC CEO Sarah Hirshland 
refused to speak with Olympic gold medalist and Nassar survivor Ms. Aly 
Raisman following the Subcommittee hearing? If you are not aware, you 
can read more about that interaction here: https://www.usatoday.com/
story/sports/olympics/2018/07/24/aly-raisman-rebuffed-sarah-hirshland-
us-olympic-committee-ceo/831061002/ and https://thinkprogress.org/new-
u-s-olympic-head-snubs-aly-raisman-after-senate-hearing-on-sex-abuse-
7e970bda4c53/
    a. What kind of message do you think this sends to survivors?
    Answer. As Ms. Hirshland communicated directly to Ms. Raisman, this 
was a misunderstanding. Ms. Hirshland apologized directly and quickly 
to Ms. Raisman for the misunderstanding, and invited her to talk in 
person whenever it is convenient for Ms. Raisman.

    b. Did you instruct Ms. Hirshland did not to speak with Ms. Raisman 
or other survivors of sexual abuse?
    Answer. No.

    c. Why do you think she said she was instructed not to speak with 
Ms. Raisman?
    Answer. In February 2018, Ms. Raisman's counsel, Mr. John Manly, 
demanded that the Olympic Committee not communicate with any of his 
clients.

    d. Do you expect Ms. Hirshland to speak to survivors of sexual 
abuse as CEO of USOC? If not, how do you expect to see a culture 
change?
    Answer. Yes.

    e. Have you ever been given instructions regarding with whom you 
should or should not speak?
    Answer. As noted above, Ms. Raisman's counsel, Mr. John Manly, 
demanded that the Olympic Committee not communicate with any of his 
clients. Ms. Raisman also approached me at the hearing, and I was 
pleased to have the opportunity to speak with her extensively. 
Understanding her perspective is important to me, and important to the 
future of the Olympic Committee.

    Question 65. Ms. Rachael Denhollander's Questions: As you know, Ms. 
Rachael Denhollander was the first woman to publicly accuse Larry 
Nassar of sexual abuse. In a Facebook post dated July 24, 2018, Ms. 
Denhollander wrote: ``How you as leaders think about and what you 
communicate about sexual assault is the determining factor in whether 
your institution is safe or not. Procedural or policy changes matter 
little when the example from the top is shaming, blaming, and refusing 
to honestly assess and admit when failures have occurred.''
    Ms. Denhollander had several questions that she hoped would be 
asked to leaders at MSU, USAG, and USOC. They have been copied below in 
their entirety.\10\ If you want to move forward to create effective 
change, why have you not commissioned an independent investigation into 
what went wrong, so you know what to change and how to do better? Why 
have you not investigated who knew what about Nassar and when, or 
identified the breakdowns and failures that let him sexually abuse 
children for decades? (MSU, USAG and USOC have not commissioned a 
public investigation into what happened with Nassar--something the 
survivors have been requesting for nearly two years.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \10\ https://www.facebook.com/notes/rachael-denhollander/questions-
for-john-engler-kerry-perry-and-susanne-lyons-at-their-senate-hearing/
1914933721920272/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Answer. In January 2018, the Olympic Committee announced that it 
would be launching such an independent investigation. On February 2, 
2018, the Olympic Committee announced that it retained the law firm 
Ropes & Gray to conduct a fully independent investigation into Nassar's 
abuse. The investigation includes both the Olympic Committee and USA 
Gymnastics. The investigation is ongoing.

    Question 66. Have you otherwise identified any specific breakdowns 
or failures of policy or individuals that is responsible in whole or 
part for allowing Nassar to abuse children for decades?
    Answer. Although the investigation is ongoing, the Olympic 
Committee is not waiting on the results of the investigation to act. In 
February 2018, I announced a series of reforms and initiatives to 
strengthen our handling and response to issues of abuse and address 
other structural

    Question 67. If you HAVE identified some failures, why have these 
not been identified and disclosed, with consequences for any individual 
failures?
    Answer. As noted above, the investigation is ongoing, and we are 
already instituting reforms. Additional details about these efforts are 
contained in my written testimony.

    Question 68. If you HAVE identified failures, why have the victims 
received no disclosure of these failures, or specific apology for them?
    Answer. When Rick Adams testified before the Senate Judiciary 
Committee in March 2017, he apologized to all of the victims of abuse. 
When I testified before the House Commerce Committee and the Senate 
Commerce Committee, in May and July 2018, respectively, I also 
apologized to all of the victims and survivors. As noted above, the 
lawyer for many of the victims and survivors has instructed us that we 
may not reach out to them to offer individual apologies.

    Question 69. If you have NOT identified specific failures, why have 
you not taken that basic step?
    Answer. In addition to the above, we have committed to taking 
whatever additional steps are necessary after we receive the report of 
the independent investigation.

    Question 70. Moving forward, have you identified any specific 
failures in how leaders have talked about, characterized, or spoken of 
survivors of abuse?
    Answer. It is clear that we need to do more to ensure that victims 
and survivors feel entirely safe to speak up and report issues of 
abuse. I have sought to speak with empathy and respect toward all the 
victims and survivors.

    Question 71. Have you retracted and apologized for each of these 
statements?
    Answer. As leaders of the Olympic community, I feel it is necessary 
for the Olympic Committee to acknowledge the community's failings and 
to apologize for them, as I have done.

    Question 72. What message do you believe has been communicated 
about how sexual assault survivors are viewed in the statements made 
publicly about these women, and made privately in e-mails and internal 
correspondence?
    Answer. I believe that the culture of the Olympics must always 
honor and respect athletes. The Olympics would be nothing without the 
athletes.

    Question 73. Do you or did you at one believe the statements made 
by leaders at MSU (including Mr. Engler) that sexual assault survivors 
are in this for money, being manipulated by trial attorneys, pushing 
legislative reform for personal gain, receiving kickbacks, or lying 
about what was said in private meetings for personal gain?
    Answer. No.

    Question 74. If you do not and did NOT believe these statements, 
why would you say them or allow others to say them unchallenged and 
uncorrected?
    Answer. I am not aware of such statements from the Olympic 
Committee. The Olympic Committee commends the bravery of the victims 
and survivors of sexual assault, and honors those who have stood up 
against abuse.
                                 ______
                                 
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Catherine Cortez Masto 
                            to Susanne Lyons
    Question 1. In your hearing testimony before the House Commerce 
Committee in May, you promised to look into requiring that ``ban 
lists'' be made publicly available. Has the USOC required that all 
NGB's publish and make easily accessible lists of all banned 
individuals?
    Answer. The Olympic Committee instituted new reporting requirements 
on national governing bodies in May 2018. These new requirements 
include reporting to the Olympic Committee banned and suspended members 
that have not been submitted to the Center. We are engaged in an 
ongoing effort to improve the coordination and information sharing 
among the Center, the Olympic Committee, and the national governing 
bodies regarding individuals on banned or suspended lists. We need to 
make it easier for parents, athletes, and potential employers to access 
information about coaches and athletes on banned and suspended lists.
    As noted in my testimony, Congress should consider extending the 
liability protections in the Protecting Young Victims from Sexual Abuse 
and Safe Sport Authorization Act to other Olympic and Paralympic 
organizations. Congress provided the Center with liability protection 
for the exercise of certain of its official functions, including 
protection against lawsuits for defamation, libel, or slander. This 
liability protection has proven to be important to the Center's ability 
to provide information on people banned or suspended from Olympic 
sports. These provisions cover neither the Olympic Committee nor the 
national governing bodies. Congress should consider whether these 
protections should be extended to other Olympic and Paralympic 
organizations or whether the language should be clarified to encompass 
information published by the Center that relates to a national 
governing body adjudication, t help enable broader and more 
comprehensive information for athletes, parents, and others.

    Question 2. USOC has a duty to keep young athletes safe and to 
``promote a safe environment in sports, that is free from abuse. . .of 
any amateur athlete.'' What are those explicit protections and do they 
apply only at Olympic events and training centers?

   Where does that extend to--a duty to protect minors in the 
        Olympic Village? Hotels? Of-site venues?

   What individual is most responsible for that protection?

   Who is the most accessible person for athletes to go to in 
        order to report any issue, abuse or otherwise?

    Answer. The Olympic Committee's Athlete Safety Policy is the 
primary document outlining the specific policies and procedures related 
to athlete safety. The policy specifies the persons and locations to 
which it applies and the various methods of reporting concerns. The 
policy is attached to this response.

    Question 3. As a follow-up, in writing, to the question I asked in 
the hearing, what are the consequences, as outlined by USOC, for NGB 
member clubs that hire a coach or individual on the banned list? Has 
the USOC demanded the implementation of strong policies to keep banned 
members away from events sanctioned by the USOC or individual NGB'S?
    Answer. The primary consequence for such a club is the termination 
of its membership in the relevant national governing body. Similarly, 
the primary consequence for a national governing body that failed to 
enforce its athlete safety policies (or those of the Center) is the 
Olympic Committee ceasing to recognize it as a national governing body.
    Additionally, the ability of the Olympic Committee to exercise 
control over certain national governing body actions will be part of 
the governance review that the Olympic Committee recently launched. 
Recently, the Olympic Committee created the Athlete and NGB Engagement 
Commission and selected Lisa Borders, the president of the Women's 
National Basketball Association, as the chair of the commission. The 
commission will review the Olympic Committee's interaction with and 
oversight of national governing bodies and its engagement with 
athletes.
                                 ______
                                 
    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Jerry Moran to 
                              Kerry Perry
    Question 1. Your testimony states that 86 percent of the 
recommendations from Deborah Daniels' report are ``either implemented 
or in progress.'' While you also clearly state that USAG intends to 
implement all of the recommendations, can you please explain what 
recommendations make up the remaining 14 percent? What is the reason 
for their delayed implementation?
    Answer. USA Gymnastics remains committed to implementing the 
recommendations from the Deborah Daniels report, all 70 of which our 
Board of Directors unanimously approved. We have created a website, 
www.usagymprogressreport.com, that provides the full report and tracks 
the status of each recommendation. The significant majority of the 
recommendations have either been implemented or are in progress. The 
remaining recommendations, which are either ongoing or in the planning 
phase, reflect those that require both specific action and continued 
cultural improvement, or those that require enterprise-wide 
implementation. For recommendations in the planning phase, USA 
Gymnastics is planning appropriate and responsive measures to 
meaningfully address each recommendation, including collaborating where 
needed with other organizations such as the U.S. Center for SafeSport 
(the ``Center'').

    Question 2. Your testimony describes the creation of the Athlete 
Task Force. Will you please elaborate on the specific member makeup of 
this group and their strategic mission? Is USAG required to act on the 
recommendations of this body?
    Answer. The aim of the Athlete Task Force is to include our 
athletes in shaping the future of USA Gymnastics, including its 
strategic initiatives such as, but not limited to, the search for a 
permanent high-performance training facility, key athlete-focused 
initiatives for the organization, an athlete mentoring program, 
educational initiatives for safe sport, the concept of an ombudsman for 
USA Gymnastics athletes, and increasing involvement of former national 
team members and energizing the alumni network. The Athlete Task Force 
is also encouraged to bring forth ideas and proposals that are 
important to them. The Athlete Task Force consists of up to nine former 
athletes, all volunteers, including the athlete directors on the Board 
of Directors for men's and women's gymnastics and one former elite 
athlete per competitive discipline with relevant work experience. Each 
member serves a one-year term with an option of a second year. Current 
members on the Athlete Task Force are Shenea Booth (acrobatic 
gymnastics), Ivana Hong (women's gymnastics), Jazzy Kerber (rhythmic 
gymnastics), Steven Legendre (men's gymnastics), and Leigh Hennessy 
Robson (trampoline and tumbling).

    Question 3. Do the Center for SafeSport, the USOC and NGBs have 
adequate insurance in place to cover the devastating and lifelong 
impact for what we now know is an incredibly large population of abused 
athletes? What insurance number would you deem adequate, and what would 
that be based on?
    Answer. USA Gymnastics is committed to putting the safety of our 
athletes first, including providing assistance to those who have 
suffered sexual abuse. The Athlete Assistance Fund, created in 
partnership with the National Gymnastics Foundation, serves to provide 
the survivors of abuse with resources for counseling and medical 
services. USA Gymnastics, in the ordinary course of its business, 
maintains insurance coverage in the amount and type appropriate to the 
organization's activities. Additionally, USA Gymnastics is committed to 
working with its insurers and the plaintiff-survivors, through the 
mediation process, to resolve the pending litigation. USA Gymnastics 
cannot answer on behalf of the Center, the U.S. Olympic Committee, or 
other National Governing Bodies (``NGBs'').

    Question 4. Your testimony stated that USAG plans to issue requests 
for proposal (RFPs) as part of replacing the closed Karolyi Ranch 
training center. Will the RFPs include an organizational requirements 
as it relates to staffing and reporting structures for alleged abuse? 
If so, is there anything unique about the organization/reporting 
requirements for the National Team Training Center compared to the rest 
of USAG and its member club?
    Answer. Every USA Gymnastics member club must have a policy 
consistent with the requirements of the Center's SafeSport Practices 
and Procedures for the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Movement (the 
``SafeSport Procedures''). Accordingly, and pursuant to the SafeSport 
Procedures and the forthcoming revised USA Gymnastics Safe Sport Policy 
(the ``Safe Sport Policy''), in addition to any obligations under 
relevant laws, Covered Adults are required to report suspected child 
abuse, including sexual misconduct, to the appropriate legal 
authorities and to the U.S. Center for SafeSport.1 In addition, USA 
Gymnastics requires compliance with the Protecting Young Victims from 
Sexual Abuse and Safe Sport Authorization Act of 2017, which requires 
adults authorized by an NGB to interact with minor or amateur athletes 
to report suspected child abuse, including sexual abuse, to the proper 
legal authorities within 24 hours.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ The Safe Sport Policy defines ``Covered Adult'' to include any 
individual over the age of 18 ``who currently is, or was at the time of 
a possible SafeSport Code Violation, within the governance or 
disciplinary jurisdiction of USA Gymnastics or who is seeking to be 
within the governance or disciplinary jurisdiction of USA Gymnastics'' 
or ``who is an Athlete or Non-Athlete Participant that USA Gymnastics 
formally authorizes, approves or appoints to a position of authority 
over Athletes or to have frequent contact with Athletes[.]''
    The Safe Sport Policy defines reportable sexual misconduct to 
include ``conduct of which [the adult] become[s] aware that could 
constitute (a) sexual misconduct, (b) misconduct that is reasonably 
related to the underlying allegation of sexual misconduct, and (c) 
retaliation related to an allegation of sexual misconduct as set forth 
in the [Center's] Code.''
    The Safe Sport Policy was last revised in June 2017. USA Gymnastics 
is in the process of further revising the policy and expects to publish 
these updates in the upcoming months.

    Question 5. During the hearing it was brought to the attention of 
the Committee that two coaches, Colden Raisher and Terry Gray, had been 
suspended by USAG but were still permitted to coach minors. In what 
situations is a suspended coach allowed to continue coaching?
    Answer. According to the Center's SafeSport Code for the U.S. 
Olympic and Paralympic Movement (the ``SafeSport Code''), the Center 
maintains exclusive jurisdiction over the investigation and resolution 
of all matters involving allegations of sexual misconduct and/or sexual 
abuse. The Center has the authority to impose interim measures, 
including suspension. The Center's authority to impose interim 
measures, however, is not exclusive. The SafeSport Procedures state 
that NGBs, which include USA Gymnastics, are not prohibited by the 
SafeSport Procedures from taking appropriate interim measures upon 
notice of an imminent threat of harm. It is USA Gymnastics' policy to 
assess each case and impose interim measures, such as suspension, when 
the Gymnastics community may be at risk. In the case of complaints 
originating with the Center, however, USA Gymnastics has limited 
information on which to assess the case and may have to rely on the 
Center's notification as the basis for implementing an interim measure.
    In 1990, USA Gymnastics was the first NGB to publicize a list of 
persons deemed to be permanently ineligible for membership. USA 
Gymnastics continues to do so today. USA Gymnastics also publicly 
maintains a list of members currently under suspension (including 
suspensions with modified restrictions, such as no unsupervised contact 
with minors) by the Center or by USA Gymnastics. This list includes the 
individual's name; the state where the violation occurred, where the 
individual resides, or where the member club is located; duration of 
suspension; for those declared ineligible after January 1, 2012, the 
Bylaw, rule, regulation, or policy that was violated; and the 
suspension type or interim measure. Interim measures may include, but 
are not limited to, suspension, altering training schedules, providing 
chaperones, implementing contact limitations, or member club 
restrictions. Both lists may be found on USA Gymnastics' website. 
Currently, Colden Raisher and Terry Gray are not permitted to have 
unsupervised contact with minors. Please see https://usagym.org/pages/
aboutus/pages/suspended_members.html.

    Question 6. Furthermore, reports claim that SCEGA, the club that 
employed Mr. Gray, did not receive notification prior to contacting 
USAG to confirm his suspensions. What is the official notification 
protocol to the respective club when USAG decides to suspend a member? 
Was this protocol followed in notifying SCEGA of Mr. Gray's suspension?
    Answer. USA Gymnastics notifies the relevant or affiliated member 
club of imposed interim measures simultaneously with the implementation 
of any interim measures. The member clubs are required to ensure that 
the imposed interim measures are followed, and USA Gymnastics may 
revoke a club's member status for disregarding the implementation of 
interim measures.
                                 ______
                                 
 Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Richard Blumenthal to 
                              Kerry Perry
    Question 1. What enforcement mechanisms do you have to compel 
member gyms to comply with all of your bylaws and policies?
    Answer. USA Gymnastics is a membership organization whose members--
whether an individual or a club--are required to follow USA Gymnastics' 
Bylaws, all policies such as the Safe Sport Policy, and the U.S. Center 
for SafeSport's (the ``Center'') Code for the U.S. Olympic and 
Paralympic Movement (the ``SafeSport Code''), the Center's SafeSport 
Practices and Procedures for the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Movement 
(the ``SafeSport Procedures''), and all applicable laws. Members that 
do not comply--either by violating an applicable policy such as the 
Bylaws, the Safe Sport Policy, or the SafeSport Code (including a 
failure to lodge a mandatory report), or by causing another to violate 
an applicable policy--are subject to discipline. USA Gymnastics may 
revoke a club's member status for disregarding the implementation of 
imposed disciplinary measures.

    Question 2. What consequences have you and will you impose on 
member gyms that do not take USAG's banned and suspended lists 
seriously, or any other parts of your bylaws?
    Answer. Please refer to the answer to Question 1.

    Question 3. How can banned and suspended lists be made more 
effective? How can you make sure they contain pertinent information--
like dates or reason for the ban or suspension?
    Answer. In 1990, USA Gymnastics was the first National Governing 
Body (``NGB'') to publicize a list of persons deemed to be permanently 
ineligible for membership. USA Gymnastics continues to do so today. 
This list includes the individual's name; the state where the violation 
occurred, where the individual resides, or where the member club is 
located; and, for those declared ineligible after January 1, 2012, the 
Bylaw, rule, regulation, or policy that was violated.
    USA Gymnastics also publicly maintains a list of adult members 
currently under suspension (including suspensions with modifying 
conditions, such as no unsupervised contact with minors) by the Center 
or by USA Gymnastics. This list includes the individual's name; the 
state where the violation occurred, where the individual resides, or 
where the member club is located; the duration of suspension; the 
grounds for suspension; and the suspension type or interim measure.
    Both lists may be found on USA Gymnastics' website.

    Question 4. An article recently published in the Orange County 
Register revealed that two Southern California gymnastics coaches 
continue to work with underage gymnasts, despite being suspended. 
Despite your promises to institute change, gymnasts appear to remain at 
risk. In your view, whose fault is it that the gyms were unaware of 
these coaches' suspension: the USAG member gym, the Center for 
SafeSport, or USAG? Please explain.
    Answer. According to the SafeSport Code, the Center maintains 
exclusive jurisdiction over the investigation and resolution of all 
matters involving allegations of sexual misconduct and/or sexual abuse. 
The Center has the authority to impose interim measures, including 
suspension. The Center's authority to impose interim measures, however, 
is not exclusive. The SafeSport Procedures state that NGBs, which 
include USA Gymnastics, are not prohibited by the SafeSport Procedures 
from taking appropriate interim measures upon notice of an imminent 
threat of harm. It is USA Gymnastics' policy to assess each case and 
impose interim measures, such as suspension, when the Gymnastics 
community may be at risk. In the case of complaints originating with 
the Center, however, USA Gymnastics has limited information on which to 
assess the case and may have to rely on the Center's notification as 
the basis for implementing an interim measure. Interim measures may 
include, but are not limited to, suspension, altering training 
schedules, providing chaperones, implementing contact limitations, or 
member club restrictions.
    USA Gymnastics notifies the relevant or affiliated member club of 
imposed interim measures simultaneously with the implementation of any 
interim measures. The member clubs are required to ensure that the 
imposed interim measures are followed. Notice is also provided to the 
general public via the USA Gymnastics website. USA Gymnastics may 
revoke a club's member status for disregarding interim measures.
    Currently, the two individuals mentioned in the article in the 
Orange County Register, Colden Raisher and Terry Gray, are not 
permitted to have unsupervised contact with minors. Please see https://
usagym.org/pages/aboutus/pages/suspended_members.html.
    As briefly mentioned during the hearing, USA Gymnastics encourages 
Congress to consider the topic of interim measures; specifically, to 
review the current overlapping authority held by the Center, hearing 
panels, and USA Gymnastics, and to consider streamlining the decision-
making process by designating one entity with the exclusive authority 
to impose interim measures in regards to sexual misconduct and/or 
abuse.

    Question 5. You have vowed to be more accountable in pursuing 
sexual abuse cases. Are you willing to take the extra steps--any extra 
e-mails and phone calls--to make sure that young athletes are being 
protected from sexual abuse?
    Answer.USA Gymnastics is committed to promoting a safe gymnastics 
environment for all participants, including from sexual abuse. The 
organization continues to review, evaluate, refine and strengthen our 
policies and procedures, including by committing to incorporate all 
recommendations from the independent and comprehensive report from 
former U.S. Attorney Deborah Daniels. USA Gymnastics is committed to 
working with athletes, survivors, and all members of the gymnastics 
community to rebuild trust and develop a culture in which athletes and 
members can thrive.

    Question 6. As the new President of USA Gymnastics, have you spoken 
to anyone at USOC regarding the systemic failures at USA Gymnastics 
that led to the sexual abuse of countless minors and young athletes? If 
yes, when have those conversations occurred and with whom? If no, why 
haven't you?
    Answer. On September 3, 2018, former USA Gymnastics President and 
CEO Kerry Perry resigned. USA Gymnastics is in the process of searching 
for a new President and CEO and a management committee has been 
established to provide organizational oversight until a new President 
and CEO is named. USA Gymnastics cannot answer on behalf of Ms. Perry 
or the U.S. Olympic Committee (the ``USOC'').

    Question 7. Given your perspective as a new leader of an NGB, do 
you believe that USOC is taking the appropriate measures to ensure that 
NGB's are prepared to prevent future abuse and tragedies like the 
Nassar scandal from happening again? Do you have any ideas on how USOC 
can improve?
    Answer. The USOC and the Center have various measures that promote 
the safety and well-being of athletes. Both the Center's SafeSport Code 
and USA Gymnastics' Safe Sport Policy articulate the requirements and 
standards to which members are held, and provide for reporting and 
disciplinary procedures to enforce these policies.
    On September 3, 2018, former USA Gymnastics President and CEO Kerry 
Perry resigned. USA Gymnastics is in the process of searching for a new 
President and CEO and a management committee has been established to 
provide organizational oversight until a new President and CEO is 
named. USA Gymnastics cannot answer on behalf of Ms. Perry or the USOC.

    Question 8. Have you ever criticized the prior board at USA 
Gymnastics--the Board that hired you? If so, what criticisms have you 
lodged?
    Answer. On September 3, 2018, former USA Gymnastics President and 
CEO Kerry Perry resigned. USA Gymnastics is in the process of searching 
for a new President and CEO and a management committee has been 
established to provide organizational oversight until a new President 
and CEO is named. USA Gymnastics cannot answer on behalf of Ms. Perry.
    USA Gymnastics continues to undergo a leadership transition, with a 
new Board of Directors (``Board''), composed of a majority of 
independent directors, having been elected in June, and an ongoing 
search for a new President and CEO. USA Gymnastics also underwent a 
reorganization that resulted in staff changes. It is the intent of USA 
Gymnastics to ensure that, going forward, the leadership reflects the 
organization's mission and is focused on protecting athletes and 
creating a culture that encourages athletes to speak freely.

    Question 9. What have you done to identify and remove current 
employees who knew about sexual abuse and not only did not report, but 
stayed silent? Is there anyone else still employed at USAG who knew 
about sexual abuse but did not do anything about it?
    Answer. USA Gymnastics takes seriously the issue of abuse and 
prioritizes athlete safety. The organization's forthcoming revised Safe 
Sport Policy requires that Covered Adults report all allegations of 
child abuse and sexual misconduct to the Center, which has the 
exclusive authority and jurisdiction to investigate and adjudicate 
these matters. Covered Adults are also required to report suspected 
child abuse, including sexual abuse, to the appropriate legal 
authorities.\11\ The Center has the authority to impose interim 
measures, including suspension, but the Center's authority to impose 
interim measures is not exclusive. USA Gymnastics may take appropriate 
interim measures upon notice of an imminent threat of harm, although 
for cases originating with the Center, it may have to rely on the 
Center's notification as the basis for implementing an interim measure. 
A final sanction imposed by the Center resulting from the exercise of 
its exclusive or discretionary authority must be enforced by all NGBs. 
Members who violate the Safe Sport Policy (including a failure to lodge 
a mandatory report), or cause another to violate the Safe Sport Policy, 
are subject to discipline by USA Gymnastics. In addition, USA 
Gymnastics requires compliance with the Protecting Young Victims from 
Sexual Abuse and Safe Sport Authorization Act of 2017, which requires 
adults authorized by an NGB to interact with minor or amateur athletes 
to report suspected child abuse, including sexual abuse, to the proper 
legal authorities within 24 hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \11\ The Safe Sport Policy defines ``Covered Adult'' to include any 
individual over the age of 18 ``who currently is, or was at the time of 
a possible SafeSport Code Violation, within the governance or 
disciplinary jurisdiction of USA Gymnastics or who is seeking to be 
within the governance or disciplinary jurisdiction of USA Gymnastics'' 
or ``who is an Athlete or Non-Athlete Participant that USA Gymnastics 
formally authorizes, approves or appoints to a position of authority 
over Athletes or to have frequent contact with Athletes[.]''
    The Safe Sport Policy defines reportable sexual misconduct to 
include ``conduct of which [the adult] become[s] aware that could 
constitute (a) sexual misconduct, (b) misconduct that is reasonably 
related to the underlying allegation of sexual misconduct, and (c) 
retaliation related to an allegation of sexual misconduct as set forth 
in the [Center's] Code.''
    The Safe Sport Policy was last revised in June 2017. USA Gymnastics 
is in the process of further revising the policy and expects to publish 
these updates in the upcoming months.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    USA Gymnastics has and continues to fully cooperate with 
investigations related to the abuse of athletes by Larry Nassar, 
including investigations by all law enforcement as well as the 
independent investigation being conducted by outside counsel Ropes & 
Gray LLP. USA Gymnastics looks forward to reviewing the findings of the 
independent investigation when the investigation is complete and taking 
appropriate action.
    USA Gymnastics continues to undergo a leadership transition, with a 
new Board of Directors, composed of a majority of independent 
directors, having been elected in June, and an ongoing search for a new 
CEO and President. USA Gymnastics also underwent a reorganization that 
resulted in staff changes. It is the intent of USA Gymnastics to ensure 
that, going forward, the leadership reflects the organization's mission 
and is focused on protecting athletes and creating a culture that 
encourages athletes to speak freely.

    Question 10. Has anything been done to identify and remove coaches, 
athletic directors, employees, and officials who witnessed emotional 
and physical abuse of athletes and did not report child abuse to 
authorities and did nothing to stop it? If not, do you plan to do so? 
What is the timeline for that?
    Answer. Please refer to the answer to Question 9.

    Question 11. In order to begin to restore trust, have you 
proactively disclosed to law enforcement and the public all of the 
previously mishandled sexual abuse claims made against individuals 
within the USAG community? Are you able to explain why these failures 
happened and what you are doing to make sure they will not happen 
again?
    Answer. USA Gymnastics' forthcoming revised Safe Sport Policy 
requires that Covered Adults report suspected child abuse, including 
sexual misconduct, to the appropriate legal authorities as well as the 
Center. In addition, USA Gymnastics requires compliance with the 
Protecting Young Victims from Sexual Abuse and Safe Sport Authorization 
Act of 2017, which requires adults authorized by an NGB to interact 
with minor or amateur athletes to report suspected child abuse, 
including sexual abuse, to the proper legal authorities within 24 
hours.

    Question 12. Will you promise the victims of Larry Nassar that USAG 
will no longer deny all responsibility for their protection of sexual 
predators? Are you willing to take responsibility as an organization 
for the decades-long failure of the organization to protect its young 
athletes from sexual abuse?
    Answer. USA Gymnastics unequivocally and vehemently condemns the 
despicable and criminal conduct of Larry Nassar, any individual who 
commits sexual misconduct and/or abuse, or any individual who failed to 
report the same. USA Gymnastics is undertaking and will continue to 
pursue wide-ranging and decisive action to prevent sexual abuse and 
misconduct, to implement a culture that prioritizes athlete safety, and 
to work to regain the trust and confidence of our athletes and members. 
This has included a complete overhaul of our Board of Directors and the 
CEO and President, a reorganization that resulted in staff changes, 
amending our Bylaws and policies and procedures, commissioning and 
implementing recommendations from the independent and comprehensive 
report from former U.S. Attorney Deborah Daniels, expansion of our Safe 
Sport department, creation of an Athlete Task Force, creation of an 
Athlete Assistance Fund, and educating and training our Board, staff, 
and members on the Safe Sport Policy.
    USA Gymnastics deeply regrets that it did not know of Nassar's 
despicable conduct sooner. If it had known, it could and would have 
acted. As soon as USA Gymnastics became aware of allegations against 
Nassar, it promptly acted to address those allegations, including 
hiring an investigator and reporting the allegations to the FBI--twice. 
USA Gymnastics is fully committed to continuing to work with the 
plaintiff-survivors to resolve the pending litigation through mediation 
and to promote healing and transformation within the gymnastics 
community.

    Question 13. In your prior testimony before the House Energy and 
Commerce Committee, you repeatedly testified about how you apologize 
for the abuse that occurred. Were you apologizing for the horrible acts 
of abuse that happened or USA Gymnastics' systemic failures at 
protecting them? Do you understand there is a difference and the 
importance of apologizing for your organization's complicity in the 
abuse?
    Answer. On September 3, 2018, former USA Gymnastics President and 
CEO Kerry Perry resigned. USA Gymnastics is in the process of searching 
for a new President and CEO and a management committee has been 
established to provide organizational oversight until a new President 
and CEO is named. USA Gymnastics cannot answer on behalf of Ms. Perry.
    USA Gymnastics apologizes for the horrible and criminal conduct of 
Larry Nassar. USA Gymnastics also regrets that it did not know of 
Nassar's despicable conduct sooner.

    Question 14. Has USAG hired independent psychological professionals 
for its elite athletes that will honor doctor patient confidentiality?
    Answer. USA Gymnastics is committed to putting the safety of our 
athletes first, including providing assistance to those who have 
suffered sexual abuse. The Athlete Assistance Fund, created in 
partnership with the National Gymnastics Foundation, serves to provide 
the survivors of abuse with resources for counseling and medical 
services.

    Question 15. What policies have been initiated to detect, prevent 
and punish the use of emotional and physical abuse by coaches and other 
individuals involved in the athletes training? Especially at the 
national team level?
    Answer. USA Gymnastics' forthcoming revised Safe Sport Policy 
strengthens our approach to athlete safety. Every USA Gymnastics member 
club must comply with the policy, which, among other requirements: 
increases the number of individuals who fall under USA Gymnastics' 
jurisdiction; increases the number of categories of misconduct; 
addresses and prohibits boundary violations and ``grooming'' behaviors; 
requires Covered Adults to report suspected child abuse, including 
sexual misconduct, to the appropriate legal authorities; requires 
Covered Adults to notify the Center of any child abuse or sexual 
misconduct; and requires all members to take a designated safe sport 
course every two years. All USA Gymnastics staff, Board of Directors, 
and members have been trained on the Safe Sport Policy. Beginning in 
2018, all professional and club members must be Safe Sport certified as 
a condition of membership.
    All USA Gymnastics members are also expected to follow the 
organization's Bylaws and all applicable laws. Members that do not 
comply--whether athlete, professional, or club members--are subject to 
discipline.

    Question 16. Do you understand what a ``mandatory reporter'' is? If 
so, please explain your understanding of that term. Have you ever 
received any mandatory reporter training from the USOC, USAG, or any 
other entity?
    Answer. Pursuant to the SafeSport Procedures and USA Gymnastics' 
forthcoming revised Safe Sport Policy, and in addition to any 
obligations under the relevant laws, Covered Adults are required to 
report suspected child abuse, including sexual misconduct, to the 
appropriate legal authorities, as well as to the Center.\12\ In 
addition, USA Gymnastics requires compliance with the Protecting Young 
Victims from Sexual Abuse and Safe Sport Authorization Act of 2017, 
which requires adults authorized by an NGB to interact with minor or 
amateur athletes to report suspected child abuse, including sexual 
abuse, to the proper legal authorities within 24 hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \12\ Please see footnote 11 for additional details.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    As described in Question 15, USA Gymnastics requires all members to 
take a designated safe sport course every two years. All USA Gymnastics 
staff, Board of Directors, and members have been trained on the Safe 
Sport Policy. Beginning in 2018, all professional and club members must 
be Safe Sport certified as a condition of membership.

    Question 17. What have you done to make sure that USAG officials 
understand their legal duties under mandatory reporting laws?
    Answer. Please refer to the answer to Question 16.

    Question 18. How would you describe your relationship with the 
community of gymnasts who are survivors of sexual abuse?
    Answer. The safety and well-being of our athletes and other members 
is USA Gymnastics' top priority. Hearing the powerful stories of our 
athlete-survivors motivates and underlies our mission to create a 
supportive culture that helps our athletes achieve their gymnastics 
goals in a safe environment. USA Gymnastics still has work to do to 
regain the trust and confidence of our athletes, members, and the 
gymnastics community. The organization's recent and ongoing initiatives 
are intended to continue that work. USA Gymnastics looks forward to 
continuing to work with its members to transform and improve the sport 
and the community. In addition, USA Gymnastics is committed to working 
with the plaintiff-survivors, through the mediation process, to resolve 
the pending litigation. USA Gymnastics believes that resolving the 
litigation is an important step toward enabling communication with 
survivors and promoting healing within the gymnastics community.

    Question 19. How do you plan to you improve your relationship with 
the community of gymnasts who are survivors of sexual abuse?
    Answer. Please refer to the answer to Question 18.

    Question 20. Larry Nassar was the national team doctor for women's 
artistic gymnastics, correct?
    Answer. Larry Nassar served as a volunteer in various capacities 
for USA Gymnastics from 1987 to 2015. During this period, he appears to 
have titled his positions and/or was called ``Medical Coordinator'' 
(1996 to 2015) and ``Women's National Team Physician'' (1995 to 2015). 
Larry Nassar was not an employee of USA Gymnastics. Rather, he was an 
employee of Michigan State University (``MSU'').

    Question 21. Larry Nassar was the former National Team Medical 
Coordinator for all of USA gymnastics, correct?
    Answer. Please refer to the answer to Question 20.

    Question 22. In a recent filling, USAG denied civil liability for 
the sexual misconduct of convicted former national team doctor Larry 
Nassar. When asked if Nassar was employed by USAG from approximately 
1986 to 2015 in such positions as certified athletic trainer, 
osteopathic physician, national medical director and national team 
physician, USAG said, ``Denied. Admitted only that Nassar served as a 
volunteer in various capacities for USAG from 1987 to 2015.'' \13\ I 
asked you about this filing during the hearing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \13\ https://www.law360.com/articles/1065655/usa-gymnastics-says-
it-isn-t-liable-in-nassar-abuse-suit

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Were you not aware of this filing during the hearing?

   Are you now familiar with this filing?

   Are you now aware that USAG continues to try to disclaim all 
        responsibility in this matter--not even admitting that Larry 
        Nassar served as the national team doctor, and in an official 
        capacity on the USA Gymnastics Medical Task Force?

   How can athletes, parents, communities, trust an 
        organization that can't even admit the simple fact that Nassar 
        was employed by USAG?

   Will you commit to withdrawing this filing?

    Answer. Please refer to the answer to Question 20. On September 3, 
2018, former USA Gymnastics President and CEO Kerry Perry resigned. USA 
Gymnastics is in the process of searching for a new President and CEO 
and a management committee has been established to provide 
organizational oversight until a new President and CEO is named. USA 
Gymnastics cannot answer on behalf of Ms. Perry. USA Gymnastics is 
fully committed to continuing to work with the plaintiff-survivors to 
resolve the pending litigation through mediation and to promote healing 
and transformation within the gymnastics community.

    Question 23. Code of Ethical Conduct--At the last hearing, I asked 
Ms. Faehn, VP of Women's Program at USAG, about the Code of Ethical 
Conduct and why it still contained language \14\ suggesting that 
complaints submitted to USAG must be signed, written, and perhaps even 
corroborated, in order for USAG to follow-up with an allegation of 
misconduct. It also encouraged complainants to first address concern 
directly with their abuser. At the time, the Code of Ethical Conduct 
had last been updated in April of 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \14\ Code of Ethical Conduct (April 2016): Any Member 
(`Complainant') who believes that another Member of USA Gymnastics has 
failed to meet such Member's obligations under this Code is, under all 
but the most egregious circumstances, encouraged to first address that 
concern directly to that Member. If that action does not result in a 
satisfactory resolution, the Complainant may file a written complaint 
with the President, program director or other appropriate staff member 
of USA Gymnastics. That complaint must be signed and state specifically 
the nature of the alleged misconduct.

  a.  At what point did you become aware of problems with the Code of 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Ethical Conduct?

  b.  Who made you aware?

  c.  Are you aware that the survivor community had taken issue with 
        the Code of Ethical Conduct for some time?

  d.  Why didn't you take steps to update it sooner? Why does it seem 
        as though it was not until I raised this at the last 
        Subcommittee hearing that this was updated?

    Answer. As part of USA Gymnastics' commitment to the safety and 
well-being of our athletes, USA Gymnastics has reviewed and amended 
certain policies and procedures, including the Code of Ethical Conduct. 
The Code of Ethical Conduct was most recently revised on July 10, 2018. 
It addresses members' ethical obligations and the resolution of ethical 
issues. It is intended to work in conjunction with the Safe Sport 
Policy, which provides the definitions and mandatory reporting 
requirements for sexual misconduct and abuse. USA Gymnastics' work is 
ongoing, including implementing all recommendations from the Deborah 
Daniels report, which we recognize requires ongoing activities, 
initiatives, monitoring, and other actions as appropriate.

    Question 24. Non-Disclosure Agreements--During the hearing, I asked 
if you were aware of other any other NDAs USAG had signed that would 
silences sexual abuse victims. You referenced the NDA with Ms. McKayla 
Maroney, but denied there being any others, saying, ``I am not aware of 
any others prior to my being CEO. . .''

  a.  Your testimony at the hearing contradicts the letter you sent to 
        me and Senator Moran on April 16, 2018, and an article 
        published in the Orange County Register on April 4, 2018, which 
        describes other USAG settlements with victims of sexual abuse 
        that included NDAs. Would you like to correct the record?

  b.  As President and CEO of USAG, are you committed to leading with 
        transparency and integrity? Will you commit to being forthright 
        and honest in your responses?

    Answer. USA Gymnastics is aware of six settlement agreements since 
2005 that relate to allegations of sexual abuse and to which USA 
Gymnastics was a party. Two of these settlement agreements were entered 
into this year. While we are unable to locate one of the settlement 
agreements, the five we have located contain confidentiality and/or 
nondisclosure provisions. Of the five we have located, only one (from 
2016) included a provision that applied the confidentiality and/or 
nondisclosure requirements to the underlying facts of the abuse. USA 
Gymnastics has since released that party from the provisions of the 
agreement that would prohibit the athlete's ability to speak publicly 
about the abuse. The other four agreements' confidentiality and/or 
nondisclosure provisions govern the settlement terms, such as the 
amount of the settlement payment, but do not prohibit the athlete from 
speaking of the abuse. Going forward, USA Gymnastics will not enter 
into, or enforce, agreement terms that prevent or prohibit victims of 
sexual abuse from speaking publicly about their abuse.

    Question 25. Athlete Task Force--In your testimony, you discussed 
the creation of an ``Athlete Task Force'' that will help shape USAG's 
future strategic and operating decisions. As you may know, this 
``Athlete Task Force'' has been met by skepticism by the survivor 
community.

  a.  Considering the prevalence of sexual abuse in the sport and the 
        sheer magnitude of survivors of sexual abuse by Larry Nassar, 
        why is there no Nassar survivor on this Athlete Task Force? Did 
        you ever reach out to the survivors?

  b.  How can the Athlete Task Force help direct the program away from 
        the same toxic environment and culture of abuse that enabled 
        Larry Nassar in the first place if there are no survivors of 
        Nassar's abuse on the task force?

  c.  I have heard from survivor advocates that you need at least two 
        survivors on a panel or a working group for them to feel safe 
        and empowered to advocate for reforms necessary on behalf of 
        abuse survivors. What do you think of that idea? Will you 
        implement that recommendation? When?

  d.  Have you spoken directly with any survivors? Who?

    Answer. The aim of the Athlete Task Force is to include our 
athletes in shaping the future of USA Gymnastics, including its 
strategic initiatives such as, but not limited to, an athlete mentoring 
program, educational initiatives for safe sport, and the concept of an 
ombudsman for USA Gymnastics athletes. The Athlete Task Force is also 
encouraged to bring forth ideas and proposals that are important to the 
athletes. Current members on the Athlete Task Force, who are all 
volunteers, are Shenea Booth (acrobatic gymnastics), who is a victim 
and survivor, Ivana Hong (women's gymnastics), Jazzy Kerber (rhythmic 
gymnastics), Steven Legendre (men's gymnastics), and Leigh Hennessy 
Robson (trampoline and tumbling). USA Gymnastics is committed to 
working with athletes, survivors, and all members of the gymnastics 
community to rebuild trust and develop a culture in which athletes and 
members can thrive. In addition, USA Gymnastics is fully committed to 
continuing to work with the plaintiff-survivors to resolve the pending 
litigation through mediation and to promote healing and transformation 
within the gymnastics community.

    Question 26. Removal of Medical Records removed from the Karolyi 
Ranch--In the Senate testimony by Ms. Rhonda Faehn, she indicated that 
an individual employed by USA Gymnastics was instructed to leave 
Indianapolis, go to the Karolyi Ranch, purchase suitcases, and then 
load them with medical records, in 2017.

  a.  Have you investigated these claims by Ms. Faehn?

  b.  Why were these medical records removed from the Karolyi Ranch? 
        Who ordered this action?

  c.  Who took these records? Why?

  d.  Whose medical records were these?

  e.  Did you ever speak with Ms. Amy White about her involvement with 
        these medical records? Or Ms. Renee Jamison? If yes, what did 
        they indicate to you?

  f.  What are the statuses of these individuals' employment at USA 
        Gymnastics?

  g.  After these records were taken, what was done with these records 
        by USA Gymnastics?

    Answer. These questions address a matter that USA Gymnastics 
understands to be the subject of an ongoing criminal investigation in 
Texas. Accordingly, USA Gymnastics cannot comment on these questions at 
this time. USA Gymnastics has fully cooperated with law enforcement 
agencies, including the Texas Rangers, and will continue to do so. Most 
recently, USA Gymnastics through counsel, reached out to Walker County 
District Attorney's Office to offer access to documents that may have 
been collected from the Karolyi Ranch and brought back to Indianapolis.

    Question 27. USAG Medical Records--As you may know, several 
National Team Members and Olympians requested their medical records 
from USA Gymnastics. In response, only a few pages of records were 
produced for these women. For example, Aly Raisman, who competed with 
USA Gymnastics since a little girl, on the National Team for five 
years, only received approximately 12 pages of medical records.

  a.  Where are these records? What happened to them?

  b.  USOC implemented a new electronic health records system during 
        the 2012 Olympics. What happened to these electronic medical 
        records? Shouldn't you have these?

  c.  To the best of your knowledge, did Larry Nassar keep any medical 
        records for his abusive treatments of gymnasts?

    Answer. In response to requests from various athlete-members for 
their medical records, USA Gymnastics conducted a search of its records 
reasonably calculated to identify the requested records and provided 
the records to the athlete-member. Requests for records in the 
possession of other entities, such as the USOC or MSU, should be 
directed to those entities. USA Gymnastics cannot answer on behalf of 
other entities.

    Question 28. SafeSport Training--

  a.  Who will have access to SafeSport training materials? (i.e., 
        athletes, parents, coaches, volunteers, gym owners, etc.)

  b.  At what point in the membership process are USAG members required 
        to complete SafeSport training? How frequently is such training 
        required?

  c.  Which USAG members will have in-person SafeSport training? What 
        percentage of members will have some kind of live training?

  d.  How much of USAG's resources will be directed to ensuring members 
        are trained in SafeSport?

  e.  Are NGBs responsible for expenses related to SafeSport, or is the 
        Center for SafeSport for those expenses?

  f.  Is USAG generating its own sport-specific SafeSport training 
        materials? If yes, what individuals and groups have provided 
        input on the content of these materials?

  g.  Have you taken all three SafeSport courses? When did you first 
        take these courses? How many times have you taken these 
        courses?

  h.  Have you ever received any kind of training regarding how to 
        detect signs of grooming, sexual abuse, or sexual assault? Who 
        provided this training? Was it mandatory or voluntary?

    Answer. In June 2017, USA Gymnastics adopted a Safe Sport Policy 
which requires mandatory reporting, delineates specific types of 
misconduct (including sexual and physical misconduct, as well as verbal 
and emotional, among others), sets standards to prohibit ``grooming'' 
behavior and establishes greater accountability. All USA Gymnastics 
members must comply with this policy, which, among other things, 
requires that all members complete a designated safe sport course every 
two years. Additionally, USA Gymnastics has taken steps to educate its 
members through online tools, live presentations at regional and 
national events, including the topic in athlete, parent and staff 
discussions, and producing appropriate written collateral materials. 
All USA Gymnastics staff, Board of Directors, and members have been 
trained on the Safe Sport Policy. In addition to training staff and 
members on the Safe Sport Policy, the organization has hired a former 
prosecutor who previously prosecuted child abuse and sex crime cases to 
provide supporting legal counsel on SafeSport matters. The organization 
also recently named child advocate Shelba Waldron to be its Director of 
Safe Sport Education and Training, a new position that will lead USA 
Gymnastics' efforts to educate its members and the gymnastics community 
on topics related to SafeSport and corresponding policies and laws. USA 
Gymnastics has also taken measures to simplify reporting. The Safe 
Sport page on USA Gymnastics' website permits members to report 
misconduct, reminds adult members of the obligation to report abuse--
sexual or otherwise--to law enforcement, provides contact information 
for the reporting of sexual misconduct to the Center, and provides a 
form, e-mail address (reportfirst@usagym.org), and hotline (1-833-844-
SAFE) to report other, non-sexual misconduct to USA Gymnastics.

    Question 29. Relationship with the Center for SafeSport

  a.  When the Center for SafeSport is investigating an allegation of 
        sexual abuse, who determines whether an individual should be 
        temporarily suspended during that investigation--USAG or the 
        Center for SafeSport? Does who makes this determination vary by 
        NGB? If USAG provides that determination, what information is 
        provided to USAG in order to make that determination? At what 
        stage of the investigation is USAG advised of this?

  b.  If the Center for SafeSport determines sexual misconduct has 
        occurred, would the Center or USAG determine whether the guilty 
        individual is banned or temporarily suspended? What discretion 
        would USAG have on that matter? If USAG makes that decision, 
        what information is provided to them in order to make that 
        decision?

  c.  How long has it generally taken for the Center for SafeSport to 
        investigate a sexual misconduct complaint for USAG's cases?

  d.  Do you think the Center has sufficient number of investigators?

  e.  Have you been satisfied with the Center for SafeSport's 
        communication with you? How could it be improved? Please be 
        specific.

    Answer. The Center maintains exclusive jurisdiction over the 
investigation and resolution of all matters involving allegations of 
sexual misconduct and/or sexual abuse. The Center has the authority to 
investigate the report, issue any interim suspension or other measures 
pending the conclusion of the investigation and any hearing(s), make 
recommendations of sanctions or disciplinary action as a result of such 
investigation, and fully adjudicate such matters. In matters that are 
adjudicated by the Center that result in permanent ineligibility for 
membership and that are published on the Center's searchable database, 
USA Gymnastics will also publish the information to its list of 
permanently ineligible members.
    The Center's authority to impose interim measures, however, is not 
exclusive. The SafeSport Procedures state that NGBs, which include USA 
Gymnastics, are not prohibited by the SafeSport Procedures from taking 
appropriate interim measures upon notice of an imminent threat of harm. 
It is USA Gymnastics' policy to assess each case and impose interim 
measures, such as suspension, when the Gymnastics community may be at 
risk. In the case of complaints originating with the Center, however, 
USA Gymnastics has limited information on which to assess the case and 
may have to rely on the Center's notification as the basis for 
implementing an interim measure. Interim measures may include, but are 
not limited to, suspension, altering training schedules, providing 
chaperones, implementing contact limitations, or member club 
restrictions. The list of adult members currently under suspension 
(including suspensions with modifying conditions, such as no 
unsupervised contact with minors) by the U.S. Center for SafeSport or 
by USA Gymnastics is also publicly maintained.
    USA Gymnastics cannot answer on behalf of the Center regarding its 
investigations, including length of time and staffing.

    Question 30. Athlete and Executive Compensation

  a.  Please describe how USAG executives are compensated and how 
        compensations packages are determined.

  b.  Are bonuses given to executives based off of athlete medal 
        performance?

    a.  If yes, why is that?

    a.  If no, have bonuses ever been given off of this model in the 
            past? When did this happen?

  c.  Please describe how gymnasts are compensated at different levels.

  d.  From your personal experiences, would you agree with reports that 
        USOC has engaged in exorbitant and lavish spending--flying 
        executives and spouses on first class and providing excessively 
        generous per diems? Do you think USAG is similarly engaged in 
        exorbitant and lavish spending in any way?

  e.  What percent of USAG expenses go toward Administration and 
        Fundraising?

  f.  How many employees does the USAG have?

    Answer. USA Gymnastics interprets ``executive'' or ``executives'' 
to mean USA Gymnastics Officers or Directors.
    The USA Gymnastics Board of Directors receive no salary or 
compensation for serving as a Director. Directors may receive 
reasonable compensation for services rendered in any other capacity, 
subject to review and approval by the Ethics and Grievance Committee 
and as permitted by Board policy. Directors' expenses may be 
reimbursed, provided the expenses are reasonable and supported by 
appropriate documentation.
    USA Gymnastics' Officers, except for the President, receive no 
salary or compensation for serving as an Officer. Officers may receive 
reasonable compensation for services rendered in any other capacity, 
subject to review and approval by the Ethics and Grievance Committee 
and as permitted by Board policy. Officers' expenses may be reimbursed, 
provided the expenses are reasonable and supported by appropriate 
documentation. The Board's Finance, Compensation and Audit Committee 
advises the Board on matters pertaining to the compensation and 
benefits for the President to ensure that compensation and benefits are 
fair, effective, transparent and accountable.
    Athletes may qualify for financial support as a result of 
competitive success at National Championships. Where NCAA and other 
rules allow, there is also a bonus structure for some athletes based on 
performance at designated events.
    Data regarding our revenues, expenses, and other metrics, such as 
the number of employees, may be found in our audited financial 
statements and tax returns, which are publicly available on the USA 
Gymnastics website. As reported on our IRS Form 990 for 2016, the last 
year for which we have reported data, we employed 69 employees. We 
anticipate filing our 2017 forms later this year.

    Question 31. Athlete-Whistleblower Retaliation--In the Mach 2017 
testimony of Mr. Adams, he indicated that at USA Gymnastics there were 
``barriers'' and ``disincentives'' to reporting about by victims.

  a.  Do you know what ``disincentives'' he was talking about? Do you 
        know what barriers he was talking about?

  b.  If you don't know, then have you consulted with Mr. Adams who had 
        these criticisms? Have you discussed the concerns he expressed? 
        What did he tell you? How do you plan to address these 
        criticisms?

  c.  If you haven't spoken with Mr. Adams, then why not? Will you 
        commit to doing so?

  d.  Do you think there are still cultural issues in place that 
        prevent gymnasts with knowledge of sexual abuse from coming 
        forward?

    Answer. USA Gymnastics is committed to promoting a safe gymnastics 
environment for all participants, including from sexual abuse. We have 
worked to review, evaluate, refine and strengthen our policies and 
procedures, including by revising our Bylaws, Code of Ethics, and 
adopting a Safe Sport Policy. We are also incorporating all 
recommendations from the independent and comprehensive report from 
former U.S. Attorney Deborah Daniels. USA Gymnastics cannot answer on 
behalf of Mr. Adams.

    Question 32. Are you aware that incoming USOC CEO Sarah Hirshland 
refused to speak with Olympic gold medalist and Nassar survivor Ms. Aly 
Raisman following the Subcommittee hearing? If you are not aware, you 
can read more about that interaction here: https://www.usatoday.com/
story/sports/olympics/2018/07/24/aly-raisman-rebuffed-sarah-hirshland-
us-olympic-committee-ceo/831061002/ and https://thinkprogress.org/new-
u-s-olympic-head-snubs-aly-raisman-after-senate-hearing-on-sex-abuse-
7e970bda4c53/

  a.  What kind of message does this send to you?

  b.  What message do you think this sends to other survivors of sexual 
        abuse across sports?

  c.  Do you understand why Ms. Hirshland did not speak with Ms. 
        Raisman?

  d.  Has USOC ever given you any instructions regarding with whom you 
        should or should not speak?

  e.  Has the USAG Board ever given you any instructions regarding with 
        whom you should or should not speak?

    Answer. USA Gymnastics stands behind our community of survivors, 
whose willingness to speak publicly about the abuse is courageous. An 
important part of our mission to changing our culture is to include our 
athletes' voices, including athlete-survivors, in the organization's 
strategic and operating decisions. USA Gymnastics is committed to 
working with athletes, survivors, and all members of the gymnastics 
community to rebuild trust and develop a culture in which athletes and 
members can thrive. USA Gymnastics cannot answer on behalf of the USOC.

    Question 33. USAG Funding: What were the 2017 revenues from USA 
Gymnastics? Have the revenues been impacted by the Larry Nassar 
scandal? Please describe the breakdown of any lost revenue--from 
sponsorships, advertising, fundraising, membership dues, etc.
    Answer. Data regarding our revenues, expenses, and other metrics 
may be found in our audited financial statements and tax returns, which 
are publicly available on the USA Gymnastics website. We filed our 2016 
IRS Form 990 on November 14, 2017 and anticipate filing our 2017 form 
later this year.

    Question 34. Michigan State University settled with the victims of 
Larry Nassar's sex abuse for half a billion dollars. What is the 
contingency plan, if any, for USOC and USAG to withstand the cost of 
legal action filed against them?
    Answer. USA Gymnastics continues to seek resolution of the pending 
litigation through mediation, which involves both the plaintiffs and 
USA Gymnastics' insurers. USA Gymnastics cannot answer on behalf of the 
USOC.

    Question 35. In May 2010, according to its 2016 990, USA Gymnastics 
took financial control as a fiscal agent of all of the bank accounts 
women's and men's state and regional chapters. The state and regional 
account balances are now listed under the nonprofit's Schedule D 
section under ``Escrow and Custodial Arrangements.'' If USAG falls 
under the weight of pending litigation, are the funds of these state 
and regional chapters vulnerable? How would the loss of these funds 
endanger the grassroots activities of these chapters, and therein, 
local gymnasts?
    Answer. Please refer to the answer to Question 34.

    Question 36. What do you think of the fact that Mr. Penny took $1 
million from the non-profit USAG as part of his severance package, yet 
refused to answer questions at this Subcommittee's last hearing 
regarding conduct he had engaged in on behalf of USAG?
    Answer. USA Gymnastics continues to undergo a leadership 
transition, with a new Board of Directors, composed of a majority of 
independent directors, having been elected in June, and an ongoing 
search for a new CEO and President. Mr. Penny resigned in March 2017. 
Thus, at the time of the June 5, 2018 hearing before this Subcommittee, 
Mr. Penny had no role with USA Gymnastics, and he still has no role 
with USA Gymnastics.

    Question 37. Ms. Rachael Dehollander's Questions: As you know, Ms. 
Rachael Denhollander was the first woman to publicly accuse Larry 
Nassar of sexual abuse. In a Facebook post dated July 24, 2018, Ms. 
Denhollander wrote: ``How you as leaders think about and what you 
communicate about sexual assault is the determining factor in whether 
your institution is safe or not. Procedural or policy changes matter 
little when the example from the top is shaming, blaming, and refusing 
to honestly assess and admit when failures have occurred.''
    Ms. Denhollander had several questions that she hoped would be 
asked to leaders at MSU, USAG, and USOC. They have been copied below in 
their entirety.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \15\ https://www.facebook.com/notes/rachael-denhollander/questions-
for-john-engler-kerry-perry-and-susanne-lyons-at-their-senate-hearing/
1914933721920272/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    If you want to move forward to create effective change, why have 
you not commissioned an independent investigation into what went wrong, 
so you know what to change and how to do better? Why have you not 
investigated who knew what about Nassar and when, or identified the 
breakdowns and failures that let him sexually abuse children for 
decades? (MSU, USAG and USOC have not commissioned a public 
investigation into what happened with Nassar--something the survivors 
have been requesting for nearly two years.)
    Answer. In late 2016, USA Gymnastics engaged Deborah Daniels, a 
former Federal prosecutor and U.S. Attorney, to conduct an independent 
review of USA Gymnastics' Bylaws, policies, procedures and practices 
related to handling sexual misconduct matters, and to make 
recommendations for improvement in the interest of protecting young 
athletes from abuse. Her review partnered with Praesidium, a company 
that specializes in preventing sexual abuse in organizations that serve 
youth and vulnerable adults. The resulting 100-page report, released in 
June 2017 and available online via USA Gymnastics' website, made 70 
recommendations, all of which our Board of Directors unanimously 
approved and the significant majority of which have been implemented or 
are in progress. USA Gymnastics remains committed to implementing all 
recommendations from the report.
    In February 2018, a special committee of directors for the USOC 
engaged outside counsel Ropes & Gray LLP (``Ropes & Gray'') to conduct 
an independent investigation into the abuse of athletes by Larry 
Nassar, including investigating its contributing circumstances. USA 
Gymnastics is fully cooperating with the investigation. USA Gymnastics 
understands that Ropes & Gray's report, when complete, will be released 
in its entirety to the public. USA Gymnastics looks forward to 
reviewing the findings when the investigation is complete and taking 
appropriate action.
    Additionally, USA Gymnastics has worked diligently to pursue 
compliance with all policies from the U.S. Center for SafeSport, as 
well as any requirements or recommendations from the USOC. USA 
Gymnastics has also undertaken its own initiatives, such as the Athlete 
Assistance Fund and the Athlete Task Force.

    Question 38. Have you otherwise identified any specific breakdowns 
or failures of policy or individuals that is responsible in whole or 
part for allowing Nassar to abuse children for decades?
    Answer. Please refer to the answer to Question 37.

    Question 39. If you HAVE identified some failures, why have these 
not been identified and disclosed, with consequences for any individual 
failures?
    Answer. Please refer to the answer to Question 37.

    Question 40. If you HAVE identified failures, why have the victims 
received no disclosure of these failures, or specific apology for them?
    Answer. Please refer to the answer to Question 37.

    Question 41. If you have NOT identified specific failures, why have 
you not taken that basic step?
    Answer. Please refer to the answer to Question 37.

    Question 42. Moving forward, have you identified any specific 
failures in how leaders have talked about, characterized, or spoken of 
survivors of abuse?
    Answer. Please refer to the answer to Question 37.

    Question 43. Have you retracted and apologized for each of these 
statements?
    Answer. Please refer to the answer to Question 37.

    Question 44. What message do you believe has been communicated 
about how sexual assault survivors are viewed in the statements made 
publicly about these women, and made privately in e-mails and internal 
correspondence?
    Answer. USA Gymnastics unequivocally and vehemently condemns the 
despicable and criminal conduct of Larry Nassar, any individual 
involved in sexual misconduct and/or abuse, or any individual who 
failed to report the same. USA Gymnastics stands behind our community 
of survivors, whose willingness to speak publicly about the abuse is 
courageous.

    Question 45. Do you or did you at one believe the statements made 
by leaders at MSU (including Mr. Engler) that sexual assault survivors 
are in this for money, being manipulated by trial attorneys, pushing 
legislative reform for personal gain, receiving kickbacks, or lying 
about what was said in private meetings for personal gain?
    Answer. On September 3, 2018, former USA Gymnastics President and 
CEO Kerry Perry resigned. USA Gymnastics is in the process of searching 
for a new President and CEO and a management committee has been 
established to provide organizational oversight until a new President 
and CEO is named. USA Gymnastics cannot answer on behalf of Ms. Perry 
or any individuals at MSU.
    USA Gymnastics stands behind and supports our community of 
survivors, whose willingness to speak publicly about the abuse is 
courageous.

    Question 46. If you do not and did NOT believe these statements, 
why would you say them or allow others to say them unchallenged and 
uncorrected?
    Answer. Please refer to the answer to Question 45.
                                 ______
                                 
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Catherine Cortez Masto 
                             to Kerry Perry
    Question 1. Are you engaging with the elite-level victims of sexual 
abuse to help direct the gymnastics program away from this widely 
reported culture of abuse that enabled predators like Larry Nassar in 
the first place? How and in what capacity?
    Answer. USA Gymnastics is committed to working with athletes, 
survivors, and all members of the gymnastics community to rebuild trust 
and develop a culture in which athletes and members can thrive. This is 
reflected in our commitment to implementing every recommendation from 
the Deborah Daniels report, all 70 of which our Board of Directors 
unanimously approved. One of these recommendations focuses on a culture 
change, which USA Gymnastics recognizes requires ongoing activities, 
initiatives, monitoring, and other actions as appropriate. We created 
an Athlete Task Force to include our athletes in shaping the culture 
and future of USA Gymnastics, including its most important strategic 
initiatives. The Athlete Task Force consists of up to nine former 
athletes, all volunteers, including one former elite athlete per 
competitive discipline with relevant work experience and the athlete 
directors on the Board of Directors for men's and women's gymnastics. 
Current members on the Athlete Task Force are Shenea Booth (acrobatic 
gymnastics), Ivana Hong (women's gymnastics), Jazzy Kerber (rhythmic 
gymnastics), Steven Legendre (men's gymnastics), and Leigh Hennessy 
Robson (trampoline and tumbling). While the organization's ability to 
communicate directly with plaintiff-survivors is currently limited due 
to the ongoing litigation, USA Gymnastics is committed to and looks 
forward to working with the plaintiff-survivors, through the mediation 
process, to resolve the pending litigation.

    Question 2. As a follow-up, in writing, to the question I asked in 
the hearing, what actions is USA Gymnastics taking to identify and 
remove coaches, athlete directors, employees, and officials who 
witnessed emotional and physical abuse of athletes and did not report 
child abuse to authorities and did nothing to stop it?
    Answer. USA Gymnastics takes seriously the issue of abuse and is 
focused on prioritizing athlete safety. Under the forthcoming revised 
Safe Sport Policy, Covered Adults are required to report all 
allegations of child abuse and sexual misconduct to the U.S. Center for 
SafeSport (the ``Center''), which has the exclusive authority and 
jurisdiction to investigate and adjudicate these matters. Covered 
Adults are also required to report suspected child abuse, including 
sexual abuse, to the appropriate legal authorities.\16\ The Center has 
the authority to impose interim measures, including suspension, but the 
Center's authority to impose interim measures is not exclusive. USA 
Gymnastics may take appropriate interim measures upon notice of an 
imminent threat of harm, although for cases originating with the 
Center, it may have to rely on the Center's notification as the basis 
for implementing an interim measure. A final sanction imposed by the 
Center resulting from the exercise of its exclusive or discretionary 
authority must be enforced by all National Governing Bodies (``NGBs''). 
Members who violate the Safe Sport Policy (including a failure to lodge 
a mandatory report), or cause another to violate the Safe Sport Policy, 
are subject to discipline by USA Gymnastics. USA Gymnastics will take 
swift and decisive action if it learns that any member was involved in, 
or failed to report, child abuse or sexual misconduct. In addition, USA 
Gymnastics requires compliance with the Protecting Young Victims from 
Sexual Abuse and Safe Sport Authorization Act of 2017, which requires 
adults authorized by an NGB to interact with minor or amateur athletes 
to report suspected child abuse, including sexual abuse, to the proper 
legal authorities within 24 hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \16\ The Safe Sport Policy defines ``Covered Adult'' to include any 
individual over the age of 18 ``who currently is, or was at the time of 
a possible SafeSport Code Violation, within the governance or 
disciplinary jurisdiction of USA Gymnastics or who is seeking to be 
within the governance or disciplinary jurisdiction of USA Gymnastics'' 
or ``who is an Athlete or Non-Athlete Participant that USA Gymnastics 
formally authorizes, approves or appoints to a position of authority 
over Athletes or to have frequent contact with Athletes[.]''
    The Safe Sport Policy defines reportable sexual misconduct to 
include ``conduct of which [the adult] become[s] aware that could 
constitute (a) sexual misconduct, (b) misconduct that is reasonably 
related to the underlying allegation of sexual misconduct, and (c) 
retaliation related to an allegation of sexual misconduct as set forth 
in the [Center's] Code.''
    The Safe Sport Policy was last revised in June 2017. USA Gymnastics 
is in the process of further revising the policy and expects to publish 
these updates in the upcoming months.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    USA Gymnastics continues to undergo a leadership transition, with a 
new Board of Directors, composed of a majority of independent 
directors, having been elected in June, and an ongoing search for a new 
CEO and President. USA Gymnastics also underwent a reorganization that 
resulted in staff changes. It is the intent of USA Gymnastics to ensure 
that, going forward, the leadership reflects the organization's mission 
and is focused on protecting athletes and creating a culture that 
encourages athletes to speak freely.

    Question 3. As a follow-up, in writing, to the question I asked in 
the hearing, what actions are being taken to identify and remove 
current employees who knew about sexual abuse and not only did not 
report, but stayed silent or did not report in a timely manner?
    Answer. Please refer to the answer to the previous Question.

    Question 4. In previous witness testimony, we have heard about the 
conflict of interest issue within the USA Gymnastics selection 
committee composition. What has USAG done to address the obvious 
conflict of the athlete representative in their role as both an 
``athlete advocate'' and as a member of the selection committee that 
controls the international assignments of selection to the National 
Team, and therefore the career fate of the athlete? What are the future 
plans?
    Answer. This issue was addressed in the Deborah Daniels report. USA 
Gymnastics plans to separate the role of the athlete representative on 
the selection committee from the ``athlete advocate'' position. USA 
Gymnastics remains committed to implementing the recommendations from 
the Deborah Daniels report, all 70 of which our Board of Directors 
unanimously approved. We have created a website, 
www.usagymprogressreport.com, that provides the full report and tracks 
the status of each recommendation. USA Gymnastics is also instituting a 
Conflict of Interest Policy that it hopes to release soon.

    Question 5. What policies have been initiated to detect, prevent 
and punish the use of emotional and physical abuse by coaches and other 
individuals involved in the athletes training? Not only at the national 
team level, but what about for other youth programs?
    Answer. In June 2017, USA Gymnastics adopted a Safe Sport Policy, 
which requires mandatory reporting, delineates specific types of 
misconduct (including sexual and physical misconduct, as well as verbal 
and emotional misconduct, among others), sets standards to prohibit 
``grooming'' behavior, and establishes greater accountability. All USA 
Gymnastics members must comply with this Policy, which, among other 
things, requires that all members complete a designated safe sport 
course every two years. Additionally, USA Gymnastics has taken steps to 
educate its members through online tools, live presentations at 
regional and national events, including the topic in athlete, parent 
and staff discussions, and producing appropriate written collateral 
materials. All USA Gymnastics staff, Board of Directors, and members 
have been trained on the Safe Sport Policy. In addition to training 
staff and members on the Safe Sport Policy, the organization has hired 
a former prosecutor who previously prosecuted child abuse and sex crime 
cases to provide supporting legal counsel on SafeSport matters. The 
organization also recently named child advocate Shelba Waldron to be 
its Director of Safe Sport Education and Training, a new position that 
will lead USA Gymnastics' efforts to educate its members and the 
gymnastics community on topics related to SafeSport and corresponding 
policies and laws. USA Gymnastics has also taken measures to simplify 
reporting. The Safe Sport page on USA Gymnastics' website permits 
members to report misconduct, reminds adult members of the obligation 
to report abuse--sexual or otherwise--to law enforcement, provides 
contact information for the reporting of sexual misconduct to the 
Center, and provides a form, e-mail address (reportfirst@usagym.org), 
and hotline (1-833-844-SAFE) to report other, non-sexual misconduct to 
USA Gymnastics.

    Question 6. Since taking over as the President of USA Gymnastics, 
how many complaints of abuse (physical, sexual or emotional) have you 
received, and/or been involved with handling?
    Answer. On September 3, 2018, former USA Gymnastics President and 
CEO Kerry Perry resigned. USA Gymnastics is in the process of searching 
for a new President and CEO, and a management committee has been 
established to provide organizational oversight until a new President 
and CEO is named.
    USA Gymnastics is aware of receiving an estimated 50 reports in 
2017 and 109 reports in 2018 (through October 12, 2018) relating to 
matters regarding sexual abuse. The 2018 figure includes cases reported 
directly to USA Gymnastics as well as those where the Center notified 
USA Gymnastics. All reports received by USA Gymnastics were forwarded 
to the Center. USA Gymnastics recently launched a data collection and 
reporting system, based on the Maxient software platform, for current 
and future reports, complaints, or allegations of any form of abuse.

    Question 7. As a follow-up, in writing, to the question I asked in 
the hearing, since taking over as President of USA Gymnastics, have you 
implemented any changes to address this ``environment'' that 
``discouraged victims from reporting abuse''?
    Answer. Please refer to the answer to the first Question above.

    Question 8. Will you commit to disclosing to law enforcement all of 
the previously mishandled sexual abuse claims made against individuals 
within the USAG community?
    Answer. USA Gymnastics' forthcoming revised Safe Sport Policy and 
the Center's SafeSport Practices and Procedures for the U.S. Olympic 
and Paralympic Movement require that Covered Adults report suspected 
child abuse, including sexual misconduct, to the appropriate legal 
authorities as well as the Center. In addition, USA Gymnastics requires 
compliance with the Protecting Young Victims from Sexual Abuse and Safe 
Sport Authorization Act of 2017, which requires adults authorized by an 
NGB to interact with minor or amateur athletes to re ort suspected 
child abuse, including sexual abuse, to the proper legal authorities 
within 24 hours.
                                 ______
                                 
     Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Jerry Moran to 
                                Han Xiao
    Question. With respect to the Center for SafeSport, one of the 
primary concerns we have heard through the course of this investigation 
is that the Center is not truly independent from USOC, which results in 
a lack of trust on the part of athletes. I would like to hear both of 
your perspectives on this matter. First, do you believe it is true that 
SafeSport is not truly independent? If not, why? What can be done to 
either rectify this or reassure athletes that SafeSport is truly 
independent and is focused entirely on their best interests, not that 
of USOC?
    Answer. I believe that the SafeSport board is independent. However, 
there are concerns regarding SafeSport's funding sources as well as the 
presence of former USOC employees within the SafeSport staff. Having 
the majority of SafeSport funding come from the USOC and NGBs and 
having former USOC staff on the payroll cause some athletes and 
advocates to question whether the Center is truly independent, 
especially when they are dissatisfied with the Center's operations or 
policies. Both of these concerns will take time to rectify, but they 
will need to be addressed long-term to reassure athletes that SafeSport 
is completely independent and is focused entirely on protecting 
athletes.
    In the meantime, a crucial step to instill confidence in athletes 
is to improve both the competence and transparency of the Center for 
SafeSport's operations. Ensuring that cases are handled in a timely 
manner, improving processing time of cases, protecting confidentiality, 
and communicating in a consistent manner throughout an investigation 
are all ways that the Center can earn the trust of all parties 
involved. In addition, competently investigating cases while protecting 
due process rights of all parties will prevent the SafeSport complaint 
process from being weaponized. Increased transparency into the process 
by which SafeSport investigates and adjudicates cases will also allow 
athletes to see whether the Center is acting in an independent manner 
and allow the Center to receive more applicable feedback and 
continuously improve its process. This would go a long way towards 
increasing trust in the Center for SafeSport while independence 
concerns continue to be addressed.
                                 ______
                                 
 Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Richard Blumenthal to 
                                Han Xiao
    Question 1. In your testimony, you write that ``sexual abuse is the 
canary in the coal mine.'' What are the larger systemic issues that you 
believe need to be addressed by USOC?
    Answer.

  1.  The system as it stands requires more structured and consistent 
        oversight to investigate and report on a variety of governance 
        and operational issues. There are insufficient counterbalances 
        to the power of the USOC, NGBs, and other organizations within 
        the system, which should be rectified to support the rights and 
        interests of athletes. For example, even many Olympic and 
        Paralympic medalists are struggling to support themselves due 
        to limited financial support, leaving themselves open to 
        intimidation and exploitation as well as limiting their ability 
        to train and compete to their maximum ability. Rather than 
        attempting to anticipate every possible future issue, we should 
        have an independent entity that can serve as a watchdog for 
        organizations within the system. Relying on a monopoly to self-
        report is inadequate.

  2.  Athletes have a legitimate fear of retaliation for voicing 
        concerns, whether it's a right to compete issue, a compliance 
        issue, a financial issue, or an athlete safety issue. Speaking 
        out against the actions of staff members or board members can 
        jeopardize an athlete's career. Even in the current climate, 
        athlete representatives within certain sports have reported 
        blowback from administrators for bringing up general athlete 
        concerns within their sport. If athlete directors on boards are 
        facing criticism for voicing athlete concerns, one can only 
        imagine how difficult it would be for a currently competing 
        athlete to criticize anything or anyone within the movement.

  3.  The relationship between the USOC and athletes need to be 
        changed. Leaders at the USOC are consistently receiving their 
        information from staff members. Although staff members have 
        valuable perspective, the athletes are the centerpiece of the 
        movement and should be treated as such. The governance leaders 
        and the executive staff of the USOC should be in touch with the 
        athlete base to fully understand athlete issues and concerns, 
        as well as what athletes' lives are like. Alternatively, an 
        athlete advocacy body, whether it be the AAC or an independent 
        athlete advocacy organization, should be empowered to advise 
        the USOC on athlete issues. USOC leadership should trust such a 
        body to provide sound advice and consistently act on its 
        recommendations barring extraordinary circumstances. Having 
        athlete needs and athlete experiences drive the decision making 
        of the organization would be a significant competitive 
        advantage internationally.

  4.  Athlete support should be the main priority of the USOC. Whether 
        that means ensuring that NGBs are appropriately prioritizing 
        athlete safety and athlete support, or maximizing the resources 
        that are dedicated specifically to supporting our athletes, the 
        organization must refocus its mission to being athlete focused.

    Question 2. What should, in your opinion, be USOC's first priority 
as it seeks to address the widespread abuse and toxic culture 
surrounding athletes?
    Answer. In my opinion, the first priority of the USOC should be to 
change its culture, which currently prioritizes brand and 
organizational reputation above the needs and concerns of individual 
athletes. This has manifested itself in many ways, including sexual, 
physical, and mental abuse of athletes, a lack of financial support for 
athletes, a lack of mental health support for athletes facing post-
Games depression, etc. Team USA athletes are often treated as a 
collective; it is easy to lose sight of the fact that it is composed of 
individuals who have sacrificed a tremendous amount to contribute to 
the success of Team USA. When individual athletes have reported sexual 
abuse, many of them have not been believed or their concerns were 
secondary to organizational liability and embarrassment. This culture 
must not be allowed to stand.

    Question 3. It's been reported that two former Chairs of the USOC 
Athletes' Advisory Council, Micki King (Diving, '68 and '72) and Ed 
Williams (Biathlon, '68), met with Scott Blackmun, former head of the 
USOC in Colorado Springs, along with John Ruger, the Athlete Ombudsman 
and Debra Yoshimura, Director of the USOC Audit Division. Their message 
was that the USOC's in-house oversight and review of NGB compliance by 
the USOC's Membership Working Group was not working; NGBs were out of 
compliance, to the detriment of athletes. King and Williams suggest 
that the USOC's compliance functions mandated by the Sports Act be 
taken over by the Audit Division of the USOC. Did you have any role in 
this meeting or in the message that Former-Chairs King and Williams 
brought to Blackmun? What came of this meeting? Have any of their 
suggestions been implemented?
    Answer. I did not have any role in this reported meeting. However, 
I have brought similar concerns to the organization and have pushed for 
more proactive enforcement of NGB compliance. Recently, the USOC has 
begun to audit NGBs for compliance via the Audit Division. Currently, 
the department's efforts are focusing on compliance with specific 
provisions of the Amateur Sports Act and the USOC Bylaws. I have 
recommended additional steps to enforce best practices that when not 
enforced put athletes at risk, such as clear conflict of interest 
policies for key committees of the NGB, objective team selection 
criteria, transparency in areas such as team selection and athlete 
funding decisions, etc.

    Question 4. In your testimony, you provided thorough and helpful 
suggestions, including a suggestion to create a new fulltime Athlete 
Advocate position and an independent Inspector General to establish 
oversight over USOC and NGBS, and better communications between these 
organizations and athletes. Have you ever raised these suggestions with 
any USOC executives--perhaps Ms. Lyons? If so, what was Ms. Lyons' 
reaction to this feedback?
    Answer. I have raised some of these suggestions with USOC 
executives in the past. Although the Inspector General was never 
directly raised with the USOC, Ms. Lyons has expressed disagreement 
with the concept in general and has been more focused on internal 
policies and procedures that the USOC believes would better protect 
athletes. The idea of alternative athlete advocacy models has been a 
consistent theme of discussion, particularly with Kacie Wallace, the 
Athlete Ombudsman. Ms. Wallace has been supportive of exploring the 
area of athlete advocacy. In discussions with Ms. Lyons, the overall 
reaction has been one of agreement with the general philosophy of 
strengthening athlete voice but disagreement regarding the mechanisms 
to achieve that. There has been resistance to creating independent 
entities outside the USOC as well as adding outside oversight.

    Question 5. Has Ms. Lyons ever discussed with you the idea of 
creating an ``Athlete Advocate'' who would report to Mr. Rick Adams, 
Chief of sport operations and Paralympics for the USOC? Can you explain 
why that would be problematic?
    Answer. Yes, Ms. Lyons raised this idea with me in a phone call. I 
expressed then that I was skeptical that many athletes would support 
such a model. Athletes must be able to trust without a doubt that an 
Athlete Advocate would be serving their interests unconditionally and 
advocating strongly for their rights. There must be no possible 
suspicion that the advocate would be prioritizing the interests of the 
USOC or an NGB above those of the athlete at any time. Although 
independence would not guarantee this type of trust and that trust 
would need to be built up over time, such a position within the USOC 
has the potential to be counterproductive and further erode athlete 
confidence in the system. An Athlete Advocate would have a limited role 
in many cases when athletes have grievances against other athletes, so 
most cases involving such advocacy efforts would involve issues of 
fairness, or an athlete grievance against an organization in the 
system. In such cases, the Athlete Advocate certainly should not be a 
USOC employee to remain fully impartial.

    Question 6. In general, do you feel that leadership at USOC take 
the feedback and work that the AAC gives seriously? Have you felt that 
your concerns have been listened to? Are there changes that you can 
think of that would grant the AAC more power and more of a voice in the 
process?
    Answer. I feel that the AAC's feedback is considered at times for 
certain issues, but overall for contentious issues or issues where the 
AAC's opinion significantly differs from that of key staff members the 
AAC's feedback is not taken seriously. Executives and board members of 
the USOC have expressed several times recently that the USOC should 
hear from more athletes, rather than relying on the elected 
representatives of the AAC. Board members also often question whether 
the AAC has consensus on many issues rather than accepting the work the 
AAC has done to understand athlete issues and distill them to core 
themes. There are also concerns that the USOC has attempted to fill key 
athlete representation positions, such as AAC leadership and board of 
director positions, with athletes that toe the company line rather than 
those who voice potentially contentious athlete concerns and challenge 
the status quo.
    Among changes that would grant the AAC more power and more of a 
voice in the process, I would include:

  1.  The addition of professional athlete advocacy in the system to 
        work in tandem with the AAC and provide professional and legal 
        expertise, as well as time and resources the AAC does not have 
        to effect change.

  2.  Removal of the 10-year rule for athlete representation. Although 
        recent competition experience is a benefit, older retired 
        athletes sometimes have more passion, more time, more 
        professional experience, and fewer conflicts of interest. 
        Allowing athletes to decide who would most effectively 
        represent their interests would be a more effective model of 
        athlete representation than the current restrictions would 
        allow.

  3.  Having the Chair of the AAC sit as an ex officio board member of 
        the USOC. This would not only ensure a consistent voice from 
        the AAC on the Board, but would reduce barriers between the 
        USOC and the athlete body and alleviate any ``us against them'' 
        mentality from either side.

  4.  Having periodic reports to Congress come from not only the CEO of 
        the USOC as mandated in the Ted Stevens Amateur Sports Act, but 
        also from either the AAC and/or an Athlete Advocate to report 
        on the current state of the system from an athlete perspective.

  5.  The AAC would have more power as a quasi-independent organization 
        with bylaws separate from those of the USOC and more control 
        over its budget and staff. This is a system that Germany is 
        adopting and I believe that we should also explore the benefits 
        of an independent athlete voice.

    Question 7. Do you believe the Ted Stevens Amateur Sports Act 
sufficiently protects athletes? How does it fall short?
    Answer. I do not believe that the Ted Stevens Amateur Sports Act 
currently sufficiently protects athletes. It falls short in several key 
areas:

  1.  As mentioned previously, it does not provide effective oversight 
        of the system to enforce its provisions. A monopolistic system 
        such as ours requires more outside regulation and oversight, 
        such as Congressionally appointed directors on the USOC board 
        and an Inspector General's office.

  2.  It does not mandate the USOC to focus on athlete support or 
        athlete safety, and additionally does not specify a 
        responsibility of the USOC to ensure NGB compliance. Although 
        the Protecting Young Victims from Sexual Abuse and Safe Sport 
        Authorization Act establishes a baseline for protecting 
        athletes from sexual abuse, the USOC should have more clear 
        expectations within the Act regarding protection of athlete 
        well-being and NGB compliance.

  3.  Para athletes are not adequately protected by the current 
        revision. They are essentially an afterthought and do not have 
        a consistent governance structure or voice guaranteed to them. 
        For example, Para athletes managed by U.S. Paralympics do not 
        have a voice in the governance of their sports since there is 
        not a direct board of directors they can sit on that would 
        govern their sport other than the USOC Board of Directors. 
        These athletes should have their interests protected to an 
        equal standard as their able-bodied counterparts within the 
        movement.

  4.  The financial imbalance between staff members and athletes must 
        be addressed. Appropriate constraints should be placed on the 
        USOC's overhead expenses and appropriate levels of athlete 
        support should be guaranteed in some way. The specific methods 
        can be debated, but with the huge influx of revenue into the 
        Olympic and Paralympic system and nobody to negotiate terms on 
        behalf of athletes collectively within the movement, athletes 
        have been left behind compared to the other stakeholders.

    Question 8. In your testimony, you mention that you have heard 
stories that reveal that ``the rights of the accused are not being 
appropriately protected'' during SafeSport investigations. Do you 
believe that SafeSport can potentially become weaponized as a means of 
retaliating against athletes?
    Answer. SafeSport can absolutely be weaponized as a means of 
retaliation against athletes, coaches, staff members, etc. Due to the 
growing pains of the U.S. Center for SafeSport, athletes have reported 
investigations taking a long time, confidentiality not being protected 
appropriately in certain cases, confusion over policies and procedures, 
etc. We know of cases where people have suffered severe consequences 
such as a loss of employment without any hearing or sanction. The 
specter of being under SafeSport investigation is sometimes enough to 
cause substantial harm. Athletes and staff in some sports have already 
realized that a SafeSport complaint can sometimes justify strong 
interim measures or suspensions, and the lack of clarity surrounding 
the process means that due process is sometimes lacking.

    Question 9. Is there a culture of retaliation in elite athletics? 
How can the reporting channels for athlete whistle blowers be improved 
to prevent retaliation? Do you believe that the Sports Act needs to be 
revised to explicitly prohibit the prevention of whistleblowing via 
intimidation?
    Answer. There is certainly a culture of defensiveness and sometimes 
retaliation when staff members are faced with athlete concerns and 
criticism. I believe that the most effective way for athlete whistle 
blowers to have reporting channels without fear of retaliation is to 
make those reporting channels independent of the organizations they are 
reporting about, such as an Inspector General's Office. I believe that 
the Sports Act needs to be revised to provide these independent 
reporting channels with the authority to investigate and report on 
whistle blower concerns. Although explicitly prohibiting the prevention 
of whistleblowing via intimidation would be a positive step, there 
remains the possibility that given a big enough allegation, appropriate 
action to protect athletes based on whistleblower reports would be 
delayed and whistleblowers could be silenced or placated even if they 
were not retaliated against directly. From an athlete perspective, an 
independent reporting channel would certainly be optimal to eliminate 
as much fear of retaliation as possible, which should lead to a 
healthier system overall.

    Question 10. The U.S. Center for SafeSport has been heralded by 
USOC as an independent organization to investigate abuse. In your 
testimony, you argue for the creation of an Office of the Inspector 
General, in addition to SafeSport to investigate complaints and 
recommend corrective action to USOC and NGBs. Why do you believe that 
SafeSport alone is not sufficient as a means to investigate 
malfeasance?
    Answer. The U.S. Center of SafeSport cannot investigate governance 
issues or mismanagement within the system as a response to complaints. 
For example, if an athlete reports that there are rampant conflicts of 
interest in his or her sport that are compromising the organization and 
putting athletes at risk through biased team selection and financial 
decision making, and the USOC is not appropriately investigating and 
providing solutions, it would benefit athletes to have an entity 
capable of doing so and bringing urgent issues directly to the 
attention of Congress.
    In addition, the Inspector General can provide oversight and act as 
a check and balance for USADA and the U.S. Center for SafeSport. The 
Center is authorized to investigate and adjudicate athlete abuse issues 
and has protection from civil liability in performing its role. An 
Inspector General can respond to concerns about the state of SafeSport 
and work with Congress and stakeholders within the system to improve 
SafeSport operations rather than having that responsibility fall to the 
USOC. This would help maintain pressure on the Center to operate fairly 
and efficiently while also maintaining its independence from other 
entities in the Olympic and Paralympic movement.

    Question 11. Regarding Executive Compensation at USOC, NGBs: This 
hearing, and the others before it have rightfully focused on the 
scourge of sexual abuse in amateur and elite athletics. However a theme 
that has also consistently come up is the imbalance of power between 
the USOC and NGB staff and athletes. This imbalance is perpetrated 
because of the profound inequity in salaries and financial support that 
Team USA athletes, and USOC and NGB executives.
    You talk about this problem extensively in your written testimony. 
Can you highlight briefly what the athletes you represent think of high 
executive salaries and the practice of executives receiving massive 
bonuses for medal performance?
    Answer. Currently, many successful athletes are struggling to 
support themselves while some staff who athletes do not see 
contributing significantly to their success or well-being are extremely 
well compensated, leading to dissatisfaction.
    The more contentious issue among athletes is the practice of 
executives and staff members receiving bonuses for medal performance. 
Athletes are skeptical of the impact of these staff members in driving 
the medals that athletes are earning on the field of play. In addition, 
the rationale given for these medal bonuses is to focus the staff on 
the success of the athletes. This is troublesome for two main reasons: 
first, this can create the perception among staff members that athletes 
who do not medal are of lesser value to them; second, one would hope 
that staff members working at a non-profit supporting Olympic and 
Paralympic athletes would care about the success and well-being of 
those athletes without requiring monetary bonuses to motivate them.

    Question 12. Do you think athletes across NGBs are adequately and 
fairly compensated--particularly in comparison to inflated executive 
compensation and personal fringe benefits at NGBs and USOC?
    Answer. Overall, athletes are not compensated fairly. Although 
there are exceptions, there are gold medalists who I have spoken to who 
indicate a monthly stipend of $1,000 per month. A two-time Olympic gold 
medalist in rowing confirmed to me that her highest stipend was a 
little over $2,000 per month. Although there are training and 
competition costs reimbursed for these athletes, they are certainly not 
fairly compensated in their opinion compared to staff members and are 
struggling to support their careers.

    Question 13. Do you believe that the salaries given to elite 
athletes affords them a high quality of life?
    Answer. Certainly not. Some athletes need to work a separate day 
job to support themselves. With Olympic and Paralympic sports becoming 
more professionalized, these athletes feel that they cannot afford a 
high quality of life and are also at a competitive disadvantage 
compared to their international competitors.
    The USOC often points to the fact that the vast majority of its 
funds are being used for programmatic expenses. NGBs often point to 
similar breakdowns in how funds are being allocated. However, athlete 
services, no matter how impactful, cannot help an athlete who cannot 
afford appropriate food, housing, and other expenses to take care of 
their body. Some athletes do not use the majority of athlete service 
being provided. There is therefore a difference between funds used for 
programmatic expenses such as public relations and direct financial 
support for athletes.
    The low stipends athletes receive are contributing to a potential 
decline in performance that many people including non-athletes fear has 
already arrived. With other countries putting more resources into their 
athletes, our existing competitive advantages will decrease, especially 
in non-NCAA sports. Conversely, experts have noted that in major sports 
an increase in compensation often following athlete unionization not 
only benefits the performance of the athletes but also stimulates 
growth throughout the system.

    Question 14. How does this financial imbalance contribute to the 
imbalance of power between athletes and the USOC and NGBs?
    Answer. Athletes are often afraid to voice concerns since their 
already low stipends can be cut very easily. Athletes have reported 
that their stipends have been cut without notification, and are 
certainly afraid that criticizing their NGB or the USOC could easily 
result in their stipends being cut. This is certainly an unhealthy 
dynamic and contributes to the power imbalance between the athletes and 
the USOC and NGBs.
    In addition, grievances between athletes and NGBs that cannot be 
resolved easily often require arbitration. Many athletes simply can't 
afford to pit their meager resources against the resources of their NGB 
and/or the USOC. Some athletes simply drop their cases because they 
cannot find pro bono legal representation and cannot afford to take 
their case to arbitration.

    Question 15. According to reports, USOC still pays athletes and 
programs that have the highest achieving athletes. Do you think this is 
antithetical to athlete safety?
    Answer. Although I don't think that this practice in itself is 
antithetical to athlete safety, I think it does contribute to the 
culture that athletes are only worth something if they are medalists or 
medal contenders. Athletes feel that this attitude is prevalent in the 
movement and many athletes feel that athletes are seen as a collective 
medal count rather than individuals with value. It is this culture that 
is antithetical to athlete safety, especially for athletes who may not 
even have qualified for an Olympic or Paralympic Games.
    Many athletes have concerns about the current funding model. The 
USOC defunds programs that are not medal contenders, prioritizing 
short-term medal contenders over any long-term pipeline investment. In 
fact, NCAA programs tend to be the best predictor of our medals. This 
leads many athletes to question whether the current funding practice 
drives medals or merely follows them. We agree that high performing 
programs should receive appropriate funding to fuel their continued 
success, but defunding sports in this manner will lead not only to the 
devaluation of athletes in that sport, but also a decline in overall 
performance long-term.

    Question 16. Do you believe that this inequity qualifies as 
financial abuse?
    Answer. For athletes whose careers are to pursue their Olympic and 
Paralympic dreams, one can argue that it would qualify as financial 
abuse. These athletes have nowhere else to turn since the system is a 
monopsony. Their ability to acquire substantial sponsors can sometimes 
be limited as well due to IOC Rule 40 and other commercial rights 
restrictions.
    Ultimately it is a choice to pursue an athletic career in this 
system. Even if one does not consider this inequity as financial abuse, 
it is significantly impacting our ability to compete in a variety of 
athletic disciplines. It is extremely difficult to develop a pipeline 
of athletes when so many of them stop competing due to the inability to 
support oneself as an elite athlete in their sport. This is why NCAA 
programs are the primary driver of medals in most sports.

    Question 17. Mr. Rick Adams also testified in March of 2017 that 
there was ``a flawed culture, where the brand, the sport, and their 
(competitive) results are given a higher priority than the health and 
well-being of athletes.'' Do you agree with Mr. Adams' testimony?
    Since Mr. Adams testified, now over a year ago, do you believe that 
the USOC has done anything (taken any measures, adopted any policies, 
implemented any new guidelines) to fix this culture discussed by Mr. 
Adams?
    Answer. I agree with Mr. Adams' testimony. Since his testimony, the 
USOC has begun to make some movements in the areas of athlete safety 
and NGB compliance. For example, the USOC hired a Director of Athlete 
Safety and began conducting some NGB compliance audits within the Audit 
Division. The USOC is also making efforts to review governance, 
policies and procedures, and its overall mission. Although the rhetoric 
is somewhat different and some actions have been taken, I have not yet 
seen a significant culture change in how the USOC values athletes and 
athlete voice. Athletes in some sports are still receiving criticism 
from staff members for raising athlete issues, which we find difficult 
to understand in the current climate. In addition, our continued 
feedback regarding athlete support and the need to challenge the 
organization's financial priorities has not been met with much 
enthusiasm.
    I do think that there has been significant discussion and movement 
regarding policies. However, the lack of focus on cultural change is 
troubling. In some sports, we are seeing SafeSport complaints being 
used between athletes and staff members for clearly non-SafeSport 
issues. In other sports, athletes have reflected that SafeSport 
training is not taken seriously and is a ``check the box'' exercise. 
Despite an increased willingness to engage athlete voices, overall 
there is still a lot of defensiveness around contentious issues 
throughout the movement that affect both staff members and athletes, 
such as coach selection, coach evaluation, athlete financial support, 
etc.
                                 ______
                                 
    Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Maggie Hassan to 
                                Han Xiao
    Question. Senate Select Committee on Sexual Abuse within USA 
Gymnastics: As you may know, my colleague Senator Shaheen, the senior 
senator from my state of New Hampshire, recently led efforts requesting 
that a select committee be established in the Senate with the purpose 
of providing further exploration into what role the U.S. Olympic 
Committee and USA Gymnastics had in allowing serial pedophile Larry 
Nassar to abuse hundreds of girls over the course of three decades.
    I joined these bipartisan calls for action and hope Senate 
leadership makes this a top priority.
    If a select committee were established, do you commit to fully 
participate in this investigation and provide additional materials and 
testimony if called upon?
    Answer. Yes, I would commit to fully participate in such an 
investigation and would be honored to provide additional materials and 
testimony as necessary.
                                 ______
                                 
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Catherine Cortez Masto 
                              to Han Xiao
    Question 1. Is the USOC leadership, or NGB leadership, actively 
engaging with the Athletes' Advisory Council and victims of sexual 
abuse to help direct the programs to stamp out a culture of abuse that 
enabled predators like Larry Nassar in the first place? In what 
capacity?
    Answer. We are not aware of programs directly designed to stamp out 
a culture of abuse at this moment. The USOC has hired a Director of 
Athlete Safety whom I have been in contact with occasionally, but we 
have not been engaged in any programs directly related to changing 
abusive culture in sport.

    Question 2. Who do you know within the USOC organization has 
sufficient knowledge and experience with victims of severe emotional, 
physical and sexual abuse to make pro-victim decisions that will not 
further harm the athlete-victim in their desire to report abuse but not 
irreparably damage their athletic career?
    Answer. I am not aware of any such individuals within the USOC 
organization. I do know that external victims' advocates with subject 
matter expertise such as Nancy Hogshead-Makar have been in contact with 
both the USOC and the U.S. Center for SafeSport to provide feedback.

    Question 3. Do you know if Safe Sport recommended the most direct 
way for the USOC to communicate their material to all of their NGB's 
and on to the member clubs?
    Answer. I am not aware of such recommendations. To the best of my 
knowledge, the Center has been focused primarily on handling an 
unforeseen volume of cases and has not been able to focus heavily on 
education and outreach efforts. However, we have not been heavily 
engaged in many of the operational aspects of the Center and have 
limited insight into those details.

    Question 4. Does USOC still pay athletes and programs that have the 
highest achieving athletes? Are there any plans by USOC to end this 
``Money for Medals'' Program?
    Answer. The USOC has consistently employed a model where short-term 
medal contending programs are funded and others are not. Many athletes 
have concerns about a number of aspects of this approach, including the 
effectiveness from a performance standpoint. In addition, it 
contributes to a culture where non medal contenders or athletes who 
have not qualified for an Olympic or Paralympic Games are devalued by 
the system. To the best of my knowledge, there is no plan to 
significantly alter the current resource allocation model.

    Question 5. USOC has a duty to keep young athletes safe and to 
``promote a safe environment in sports, that is free from abuse. . .of 
any amateur athlete.'' What are those explicit protections and do they 
apply only at Olympic events and training centers?

   Where does that extend to--a duty to protect minors in the 
        Olympic Village? Hotels? Of-site venues?

   In your experience, what individual is most responsible for 
        that protection?

   In your experience as an athlete, who is the most accessible 
        person for athletes to go to in order to report any issue, 
        abuse or otherwise?
    Answer. The USOC and NGB's duty to protect minors extends to all 
sanctioned clubs, venues, events, competitions, etc. Ultimately, we 
need to create a culture of collective protection. The responsibility 
should not fall primarily on any one individual, but all the members of 
the Olympic and Paralympic community. We have made the mandatory 
reporting requirements clear via the SafeSport authorization bill of 
2017, but we should also be striving to create a culture where 
regardless of venue, if a member of our community witnesses athlete 
abuse, he or she will report it and will intervene in any way possible 
to protect our athletes, especially minors. This is a culture that must 
start from the executive leadership of the USOC and our NGBs.
    In my experience, there is no fixed person who is most accessible 
or most responsible for athlete protection and for reporting. Athletes 
typically will go to their coach for many issues, but if the coach has 
created an unhealthy athletic culture or is actively involved in 
athlete abuse, clearly this reporting structure breaks down. Outside of 
this, some athletes have NGB staff or USOC staff who they are 
acquainted with and feel comfortable confiding in. This is usually not 
a fixed person or position and varies by athlete.
    In attempting to create any position that would be a clear 
reporting channel for athletes, those people must prioritize 
establishing an informal relationship with athletes. This involves 
interacting with athletes and socializing in a low-pressure environment 
rather than a competition environment such as a team trials event. 
Athletes who get to know a staff member in this manner will 
instinctively report issues to that staff member if a rapport has been 
built in this way. In my experience, having a former athlete in that 
position or someone else athletes can easily relate to make this 
process faster and more reliable. Creating these relationships by 
design is the most reliable way to designate an accessible person for 
athletes to go to in order to report issues. Ideally this person should 
also belong to an independent entity rather than any stakeholder in the 
system to minimize any fear of retaliation or loss of confidentiality.`