When VA employees are placed on administrative leave or excluded from federal programs, what public notices are required and by which VA office?
Executive summary
The VA’s internal guidance and federal rules require reporting when employees are placed on administrative leave beyond statutory limits and direct which VA offices are responsible for those notices, but the publicly available materials in this packet stop short of describing a broad public‑facing disclosure regime for exclusions from federal programs. VA Handbook 5011 ties reporting triggers to 38 U.S.C. 717 and to time limits on paid administrative leave, the Office of Personnel Management has issued implementing regulations that agencies must adopt, and the Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer (OCHCO) and related HR offices are identified as responsible within VA policy [1] [2] [3] [4].
1. What statutory triggers require VA reporting when employees are put on administrative leave
VA Handbook 5011 makes clear that reporting obligations flow from 38 U.S.C. 717: in particular, VA must meet reporting requirements if an employee will be on administrative leave for more than 14 days and, in certain circumstances, the Secretary must notify Congress if the Secretary approves a waiver from the 14‑day limit [1]. The Handbook also outlines procedural limits on investigative and notice leave (for example, investigative leave initiation and the 10‑workday investigative cap), framing those statutory and internal limits as the point at which formal reporting obligations attach [1].
2. Which VA office is identified as responsible for notices and related employee‑action administration
VA policy documents identify human resources and personnel offices as the responsible entities for administering leave, notices, and employee relations: VA Handbook 5021/29 lists the Office of Human Resources and Administration/Operations, Security and Preparedness (HRA/OSP) and the Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer (OCHCO), specifically its Employee Relations and Performance Management Service, as responsible offices for employee/management relations and related notices [4]. This aligns with VA Handbook 5021/31 which situates processing of non‑duty paid status and disciplinary/appeal consideration within HR/employee relations channels [5].
3. How federal OPM rules affect VA’s notice and reporting duties
The Office of Personnel Management finalized regulations covering administrative, investigative, and notice leave that agencies—including VA—must implement; those rules became effective in early 2025 with agencies given until September 13, 2025, to adopt internal policies consistent with 5 U.S.C. 6329 provisions and the new 5 C.F.R. subparts [2] [6] [3]. OPM’s materials emphasize proper coding and agency reporting of leave categories and set governmentwide expectations for when agencies must record and report leave usages, which will shape VA’s internal notice practices and its reporting to oversight bodies [2] [3].
4. What public notices beyond Congress notification are required — and the limits of available reporting
The available VA handbooks and OPM materials establish formal reporting to Congress and internal HR responsibility for notices but do not lay out a requirement that VA publish routine public notices to employees or the general public whenever an employee is placed on administrative leave or is “excluded from federal programs”; the package of sources does not document a VA‑wide public‑facing disclosure obligation for exclusions from federal programs, nor does it specify the communications vehicle for such disclosures beyond internal notifications and statutory congressional notification [1] [4] [2]. Therefore, while internal reporting and congressional notification are documented [1] [2], the record provided here does not support asserting broader public‑notice duties; that absence should be interpreted as a gap in the sources reviewed rather than proof such notices never occur.
5. Competing perspectives, policy proposals and hidden agendas that shape notice rules
Legislative and advocacy voices have pushed competing reforms that would tighten or loosen VA accountability around employee suspensions and leave—Representative Takano’s discussion of caps on paid administrative leave and proposals to change VA termination authority illustrates political pressure to limit long paid leaves and increase transparency or accountability, a dynamic that colors how notice and reporting rules are debated even if not reflected in procedural handbooks [7]. The OPM regulatory push to standardize leave reporting across agencies can be read as an attempt to close transparency gaps, but it also forces agencies to reconcile longstanding agency‑specific authorities, such as VA’s Title 38 exceptions noted in the OPM rulemaking [2].
Conclusion
In sum, VA’s handbooks and OPM regulations require internal reporting when administrative leave extends past statutory limits and assign responsibility to OCHCO/HRA‑OSP elements for employee relations and notice functions, with a specific statutory trigger to notify Congress for certain long‑duration leave actions [1] [4] [2]. The documents provided do not, however, prescribe a general public‑facing disclosure requirement for employee administrative leave or program‑exclusion actions; confirming whether VA publishes additional public notices in specific categories would require sources beyond the materials in this packet [1] [4].