The longest government shutdown in U.S. history began October 1, 2025, lasting 43 days – but federal government agency whistleblower programs, whistleblower reporting and accountability oversight controls continue to feel the impact.
Several crucial elements collectively contribute to the operations of a well-run and effective whistleblower program, including:
- Funding
- Staffing and resources
- Whistleblowers
- Trust and transparency in the system
- Consistent and fair accountability
When any one of those elements is missing or unbalanced, disruptions to whistleblower programs result, no matter whether that whistleblower program is run by a private-sector organization or a public-sector federal government agency.
How shutdowns disrupt whistleblower programs
When a government shutdown occurs, the tangible impact for whistleblowers is longer wait times to have their reports addressed or investigated. If proper oversight and accountability controls are not in place – or are lacking – compromised whistleblower protections are another potential result.
A government shutdown does not just have bureaucratic consequences. In worst-case scenarios, a shutdown could significantly increase health and safety risks. For example, during a shutdown, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is forced to triage whistleblower reports, addressing only matters that pose an “imminent threat” to human life or the protection of property. Non-emergency investigations are suspended during a government shutdown, according to the Department of Labor’s contingency plan.
Compromised accountability and checks-and-balances
When the necessary funding, staffing, or resources of critical whistleblower oversight agencies are intentionally withheld, the impact can be further reaching and longer lasting. For example, in October 2025, the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) defunded the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE) by withholding appropriated funds. In November 2025, the OMB reversed its decision, apportioning approximately $4.3 million to CIGIE so that it can operate through January 30, 2026.
Since 2008, CIGIE has served as the umbrella organization for all 72 federal Offices of Inspector General (OIG). CIGIE’s Oversight.gov website serves as a central clearinghouse for the independently managed websites of 28 of these OIGs, each of which maintain whistleblower hotlines and other resources for the public to report suspected government misconduct. Oversight.gov is where OIG hotlines and reports are housed.
Among the OIGs that CIGIE’s Oversight.gov platform hosts include the Department of Justice, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA), the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Interior, the Department of Energy, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and many more. Without access to funding, the whistleblower portals of these OIGs become shuttered, preventing whistleblowers from reporting potential allegations of suspected government waste, fraud, or abuse.
Delayed reporting and investigations
Aside from funding, a well-functioning whistleblower program requires proper staffing and resources. The Inspector General Act of 1978, whose purpose is to prevent corruption at the Executive Branch level and instill a system of checks-and-balances, authorizes inspectors general (IGs) to investigate and report on a wide variety of matters, including:
- Allegations of whistleblower retaliation;
- Waste, fraud, and abuse, including abuse of authority;
- Violations of laws, rules, regulations, and other forms of misconduct; or
- Matters that pose a danger to public health and safety.
According to CIGIE’s 2024 annual report, in fiscal year 2024, IGs issued 2,042 audit, inspection and evaluation reports and conducted investigations that resulted in 3,675 criminal prosecutions and 1,015 civil actions. These findings highlight the critical oversight role IGs play to maintain a fair system of checks-and-balances and ensure accountability at the Executive Branch level.
Since January 2025, President Donald Trump has terminated 19 IGs. Many of these openings remain vacant. Because of the critical government watchdog role that IGs play, the potential results of these vacancies on whistleblower programs and whistleblower reporting are reduced independent oversight, weakened checks-and-balances in the audit and investigation process of whistleblower reports, and a higher risk of whistleblower retaliation allegations.
Increased risk of retaliation
In February 2025, the head of the U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC) was terminated. As an independent federal investigative and prosecutorial agency, the primary mission of the OSC is to “safeguard the merit system by protecting federal employees and applicants from prohibited personnel practices (PPPs), especially reprisal for whistleblowing.”
The OSC also investigates and prosecutes violations relating to 14 PPPs, including whistleblower retaliation and cases where non-disclosure agreements prohibit whistleblowing.
The agency has authority “to seek corrective action to make a whistleblower whole and to initiate disciplinary action against civilian government officials who commit PPPs,” according to an OSC report describing its whistleblower protection role.
Additionally, the OSC operates a secure channel where current or former federal employees, and applicants for federal employment, may disclose wrongdoing. These reports are handled within the federal government’s executive branch.
The OSC’s Disclosure Unit is tasked with investigating six types of disclosures:
- Violations of a law, rule, or regulation
- Gross mismanagement
- Gross waste of funds
- Abuse of authority
- A substantial and specific danger to public health or safety, and/or
- Censorship related to research, analysis, or technical information
The OSC also enforces the Hatch Act, a federal law passed in 1939, whose purpose is to ensure that federal programs are administered in a nonpartisan fashion; to protect federal employees from political coercion in the workplace; and to ensure that federal employees are advanced based on merit, not political affiliation.
As with IGs, the head of the OSC plays a critical government oversight role. When this position is left vacant, the potential results on whistleblower reporting include compromised independent oversight, weakened checks-and-balances in the audit and investigation process, and whistleblower protections and retaliation allegations not receiving the oversight and attention they deserve.
Retaliation in the Workplace
Learn how to create, enforce and track programs that reduce workplace retaliation, harassment and bullying.
Impacts on speak-up culture
Every government shutdown, no matter how brief, brings a high degree of uncertainty: uncertainty around how long the shutdown will last, how long employees will be furloughed, and what the broader impact will be on each agency’s whistleblower program, such as capacity to protection whistleblowers who come forward with reports of fraud, waste, or abuse.
The fear of losing one’s job, or facing other forms of retaliation for speaking up, are common reasons why employees and other would-be whistleblowers may choose not to report potential misconduct.
For whistleblowers to come forward, there needs to be certainty in the process. As with private-sector organizations, public-sector federal government agencies must not only communicate the value of a speak-up culture, but stand by it.
Fostering trust in the process requires backing up the whistleblower program with appropriate funding, staffing, and resources. Most importantly, there must be a leader at the helm who champions the whistleblower program, who ensures appropriate and necessary checks and balances, and who holds wrongdoers accountable.
Actions to take now for whistleblower advocacy and protection
Amid continued defunding of government oversight agencies, or in preparation for a future government shutdown, there are many avenues available for continuing to promote whistleblower advocacy protections. Proactive and ongoing measures should include reinforcing messages of whistleblower support and educating and communicating with federal agency employees – and the public – on where to continue to report concerns.
The following are resources available to whistleblowers:
Office of the Whistleblower Ombuds
The
Office of the Whistleblower Ombuds provides confidential services to member offices and House Committees to support their work with whistleblowers. While the Office of the Whistleblower Ombuds cannot receive whistleblower reports or provide legal advice or representation, it does provide several publicly available resources for whistleblowers.
The Whistleblower Protection Act (WPA): A Legal Overview
This resource provides whistleblowers with an overview of the history of
The Whistleblower Protection Act, the agencies that it covers, the types of disclosures that are protected, how to bring a retaliation claim, and the process for carrying out corrective and disciplinary actions. Additionally, this
Fact Sheet provides an abbreviated summary of the WPA.
Government Accountability Project
The stated goal of this nonpartisan nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization is to promote corporate and government accountability “by protecting whistleblowers, advancing occupational free speech, and empowering citizen activists.” To date, since its founding in 1977, the
Government Accountability Project has represented over 8,000 whistleblowers. This organization also protects the public from fraud, waste, and abuse within the government.
The National Whistleblower Center
The National Whistleblower Center is a non-partisan organization that advocates for the rights of whistleblowers. The organization, in partnership with the non-profit Whistleblower Legal and Defense Fund, provides a free whistleblower attorney referral program for whistleblowers seeking legal advice. It can be accessed by filling out a confidential intake form.
The NAVEX perspective: How to uphold whistleblower protections amid disruption
Even when a government shutdown occurs, there are many steps government agencies can take to ensure it has an effective and robust whistleblower program in place. Those steps are discussed in more detail below.
Offer multiple avenues to report concerns
Not all whistleblowers are employees; they can also be contractors, subcontractors, or even industry competitors. This is why it so important to offer multiple reporting channels that are not only internally available to employees, but externally for those to report potential wrongdoing outside of the walls of an organization or agency. This includes offering reliable, easily accessible phone and web reporting options to give reporters the option to report their concerns anonymously.
Capture and organize all whistleblower-related interactions in a centralized incident management system
One major benefit of having a centralized incident management system is that it provides an automated way to intake whistleblower reports and ensure timely and consistent updates with reporters, whether those reports were made anonymously or not. A second key benefit of capturing and organizing all whistleblower-related interactions in a centralized incident management system is having a defensible audit trail should questions arise about how the organization handled or resolved a whistleblower matter.
Take all whistleblower reports seriously
At times, even the most trivial reports can signify a much larger issue, or information provided could be critical to a current investigation. Taking all whistleblower reports seriously fosters trust and a speak-up culture, as well as providing compliance, risk and legal functions with valuable information they need to mitigate regulatory compliance and legal risks.
Keep lines of communication open with whistleblower reporters
After a whistleblower has reported a concern, regular communication is essential to maintain trust in the process. This includes keeping the reporter informed of next steps in the investigation process and when to expect an update next. Reporters who are left in the dark about the status of their report might lose faith that they are not being listened to or not being taken seriously.
Communication is critical, because loss of trust in a speak-up culture has a cascading effect that seeps into the organization, reducing the likelihood of other employees reporting potential misconduct in the future. Once a case or internal investigation has closed, notify the reporter and share any information about the resolution that can be provided.
Educate case managers on any information-sharing limitations
At times, organizations or government agencies have explicit rules as to what data can or cannot be shared during an investigation or at the resolution stage, including information pertaining to disciplinary actions. As a result, the case manager responsible for keeping the reporter apprised of updates should be aware of any information-sharing limitations. It is best practice for any organization or agency to have a consistent procedure in place for what type of information can or cannot be shared.
Demonstrate a zero-tolerance approach to retaliation
The fear of losing one’s job, or facing other forms of retaliation for speaking up, are common reasons why employees choose not to come forward to report potential misconduct or code of ethics violations.
Retaliation can take a variety of forms – from subtle avoidance and to assigning an unreasonable amount of work to terminating an employee without following fair and formal procedures. This is another reason why it is critical to maintain ongoing communication with the employee, because if retaliation occurs, it needs to be addressed immediately.
Train employees on organization’s zero-tolerance approach to retaliation
Employees need to be educated on the organization’s zero-tolerance approach to retaliation, while leaders and supervisors need to be trained on what constitutes retaliation and the type of behaviors the organization will not tolerate. Just having a whistleblower intake system and providing training is not enough.
As the NAVEX 2025 Whistleblowing and Incident Management Benchmark Report demonstrates, whistleblowers want to know that their organization takes retaliation seriously. When misconduct and/or whistleblower retaliation does occur, it must be followed up with consistent and fair disciplinary action, no matter the employee’s level of seniority.
The cost of silence and the need for preparedness
Whistleblowers play a critical role for both private-sector organizations and public-sector government agencies, serving as independent watchdogs.
When potential waste, fraud, and abuse of the system occur, whistleblowers are there to bring to light issues that may otherwise go unaddressed, such as self-dealings, the mismanagement of government funds, other illegal activities and critical health and safety matters. When a government shutdown occurs, or a government agency’s funding or staff are compromised in other ways, whistleblower silence has its costs.
During a government shutdown, whistleblowers should be more empowered to come forward, not less. It’s a time when transparency and accountability is needed most. It’s a time for true leaders within their respective government agencies to champion whistleblower advocacy efforts and foster a speak-up culture that will prevail in the face of future government shutdowns – or any other challenges that may come its way.
Learn how NAVEX can help you stand up a reliable whistleblowing and incident management program and an effective anti-retaliation training program.
Whistleblowing Software & Solutions
NAVEX whistleblowing solutions help you manage reports effectively, meet global regulations and turn employee feedback into a cornerstone of your compliance program.
