1. VA’s Chief of Staff Made False Representations to a VA Ethics Official and Altered an Official Record, Resulting in VA Improperly Paying for Dr. Bari’s Air Travel
The OIG found that in April 2017 Chief of Staff Wright Simpson instructed staff to seek approval from VA ethics officials for Dr. Bari to be designated as an “invitational traveler.” This would have authorized VA to pay her expenses on the trip. VA ethics officials initially declined to approve Dr. Bari as an invitational traveler on the grounds that the available information did not show that her presence would serve a “sufficient government interest.” In response, Ms. Wright Simpson became personally involved and communicated directly with VA Designated Agency Ethics Official (DAEO) Tammy Kennedy. The OIG found that in order to obtain a favorable decision, Ms. Wright Simpson falsely represented to DAEO Kennedy that Secretary Shulkin would receive an award while in Denmark, which Ms. Wright Simpson understood to be the criterion that would justify Dr. Bari’s travel at VA expense.[1] When Ms. Kennedy asked for additional information about the award that Ms. Wright Simpson told her would be presented to Secretary Shulkin, the following emails were exchanged:
- Ms. Wright Simpson to Program Specialist Gough: “Hey, when at the event in Denmark, will Dr. Shulkin be receiving an award or special recognition[?]”
- Mr. Gough immediately replied: “Not that I’m aware of. However, all of the planning is still in draft phase, and has not been finalized by Denmark.”
- Four minutes later, Mr. Gough sent another email to Ms. Wright Simpson: “We’re working on having a dinner at the US Ambassador’s Residence in honor of SECVA, but that has not been confirmed by US Embassy Copenhagen yet.”
- Ms. Wright Simpson then altered this second email, making it appear that Mr. Gough wrote: “We’re having a special recognition dinner at the US Ambassador’s Residence in the honor of SECVA.”
- Ms. Wright Simpson then forwarded the altered email to Ms. Kennedy with a note: “Let me know if you need more.”
- Ms. Kennedy emailed in response: “Vivieca – This is exactly what I needed. Thanks. I am in the middle of drafting an e-mail which addresses the below and should serve as an approval to proceed.”
- ↑ See Travel Expenses to Attend Awards Ceremony––Spouse of Recipient, 69 Comp. Gen. 38, 40 (Comp. Gen. October 26, 1989, interpreting 5 U.S.C. § 4503 to authorize payment of travel expenses for a federal employee’s spouse to attend an award ceremony in which the employee is the recipient of an award presented by the agency. As detailed in the report, the OIG concluded that this guidance was inapplicable because there was no award being made by VA.
