UCI Whistle-Blowers’ Payouts Dwarf Others : Settlements: $900,000 awarded in clinic scandal is 87% of total for all UC cases over five years, regents are told.

The $900,000 in settlements paid to three whistle-blowers at UC Irvine in the fertility clinic scandal accounts for 87% of the total paid in all such whistle-blower cases throughout the University of California system in the past five years, the Board of Regents learned Friday.

The three UC Irvine settlements--for $495,000, $325,000 and $96,000--dwarf seven other such settlements averaging $20,000 at UC’s nine campuses since 1990, a UC administrator told the board. The seven settlements ranged from $1,500 to $46,000.

“I’m pleased that the total exposure to whistle-blower claims appears to be low, meaning that we probably don’t have a rampant problem,” said Lt. Gov. Gray Davis, who requested the tally in response to revelations of the settlements at UCI.

But Davis said the oral report to the Board of Regents by Lubbe Levin, UC’s assistant vice president for human resources, was “cursory” and left important information out.

UC officials looked only at the 33 claims by university employees alleging retaliation under the protection of the state whistle-blower law, of which 10 claims were settled. Not all claims of retaliation invoke the law, and information on the disposition of other cases is scattered at the nine campuses and not readily accessible, Levin said.

Under prodding by Davis, UC officials agreed to tally the amounts paid to employees in all settlements systemwide and to do case studies of retaliation settlements at two campuses. Davis said after the meeting that he would insist UC Irvine be one of two singled out for study.

A follow-up report addressing Davis’ concerns is expected by October.

Davis said he remains concerned that the unusually high UC Irvine settlements went through without approval from the Board of Regents, the university system’s governing board, and included confidentiality clauses. The clauses kept the three UC Irvine whistle-blowers who leveled accusations of medical and financial wrongdoing at UCI’s Center for Reproductive Health from discussing the terms of the settlements.

UC Irvine later sued the three doctors who ran the clinic, alleging that they stole human eggs from patients and implanted them in others without permission, among other misconduct. The doctors deny the allegations.

The whistle-blowers--Debra Krahel, Marilyn Killane and Carol Chatham--contended that they were retaliated against for coming forward.

Critics have characterized the confidential settlements as “hush money” intended to keep the burgeoning UC Irvine scandal under wraps. University officials strongly dispute that contention, saying the confidentiality clauses were needed to protect patient privacy and the integrity of investigations into the fertility clinic.

Levin said four other whistle-blower settlements in the past five years have contained confidentiality clauses.

Davis and other regents said that greater accountability is needed in the process by which settlements are approved.

“We can’t be in the position where university funds . . . are not appropriately spent,” said Regent Frank W. Clark Jr.

The UC Irvine settlements were endorsed on campus by Chancellor Laurel L. Wilkening and received final approval by UC risk managers in Oakland. They were not required to be approved or reported to the Board of Regents, under current UC policy.

That policy, however, could change soon. In a report to the board Friday, James E. Holst, the UC system’s general counsel, acknowledged that the process by which settlements are approved at the University of California is complex and confusing. Some cases are required to go to the board for approval, some to the general counsel’s office and others to risk managers. He assured the regents that a more “rational” policy of settlement approval will be proposed in the coming months.

Davis said he believes that any settlement exceeding $100,000 ought to be endorsed by the board, and regents should at least be notified of all other settlements.

“My concern is that the university [administrators] be more fully forthcoming when there is a major problem like that at UCI,” Davis said. “Hopefully this whole episode will convince administration to be more cooperative, candid and forthcoming.”

* UCI MEDICAL CENTER CHIEF: Regents confirm Mark Laret as the top administrator. A32

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Settling with Whistle-Blowers

During the five-year period 1990-94, 33 complaints were filed systemwide with the University of California under auspices of the state’s whistle-blower law. Ten of those complaints were settled for a total of more than $1 million, the vast majority of which was paid in three cases involving UCI’s fertility clinic problems. Monetary division in 10 settled cases:

UCI fertility clinic cases: 87%

Other cases: 13%

Here’s what happened in all 33 complaints:

Denied after investigation: 11

Settled: 10

Withdrawn or dropped by employees: 3

Sustained, employees reimbursed for lost earnings: 2

Resolved by transfer to new position: 1

Filed in untimely manner: 1

Pending resolution: 5

Source: University of California; Researched by JULIE MARQUIS / Los Angeles Times