BUFFALO, N.Y. — Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center released a report that says the cancer center's response to claims of racial discrimination was inconsistent, confusing, and ignored.
"So significant and pervasive are the diversity and racial discrimination issues at Roswell Park that we cannot limit our recommendations to line edits to the existing policies and procedures of the institution," the report said.
It was prepared by the Cozen O'Connor law firm last year for Roswell's board of directors in response to several lawsuits filed against Roswell Park over the last eight years. Those lawsuits alleged discrimination based on gender, race, and disability.
2 On Your Side and Investigative Post recently highlighted a federal whistleblower lawsuit filed by Roswell Park Physician Dr. Anne Grand'Maison that alleged her warnings were dismissed and her work at Roswell Park was undermined due to "a work environment which was hostile to female physicians in innumerable ways."
The report recommends, "A top-down significant structural change in the handling of these issues is necessary in order to restore community confidence in racial and gender relations within the organization and in the handling of allegations of discrimination in the workplace."
'Not adequately addressed'
The law firm's report was written in 2022 and kept secret despite multiple requests to make it public. The cancer center posted it on its Diversity Equity and Inclusion page Thursday evening. To read the report, you must first watch a three-minute video message from Roswell Chief Diversity Officer Crystal Rodriguez-Dabney, who was hired two months ago.
She says, "Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center has been intentional in creating a more inclusive, diverse, and truly equitable organization. There is room for improvement on all these fronts."
The report highlights the need for change at Roswell. Investigators reviewed thousands of documents and interviewed fourteen individuals over multiple meetings. It concluded that substantial change was required to Roswell's existing policies regarding reporting racial discrimination and related complaints because the current system was confusing and lacked credibility.
"These infirmities contribute to a perception shared by a number of people we interviewed that discrimination and related misconduct, particularly among senior professional staff, are not adequately addressed at Roswell Park," the report said.
It referred to a perception among Roswell Park staff of a class of "untouchable" senior physicians and researchers, and complaints about discrimination committed by this group of untouchables would be ignored.
2 On Your Side later asked Rodriguez - Dabney in an on camera interview about those top level individuals who might be involved in highly lucrative research projects or collaborations or the actual treatment of cancer patients.
Reporter: Researchers, physicians supposedly who some people feel can just away with discrimination and then nothing - there aren't gonna be recriminations How are you going to address that?
Rodriguez-Dabney: It's going to start with the top-down approach and we started by sending out the message that this type of behavior is not going to be allowed."
Reporter: Do you think you could lose some of those people?
Rodriguez-Dabney: Quite possibly and that would be unfortunate than they would take that position but cancer is the most inclusive disease that I know of."
She added: "We want to be as inclusive as the disease that we're trying to cure, and so the people who are part of this organization need to understand than this is the behavior that will not be tolerated, and if you'd like to stay, then we need you to get on board with that."
We also asked that since management was specifically criticized and there was this "top-down" approach with a need for "structural change" mentioned if we could also speak with Roswell Park President and CEO Dr. Candace Johnson.
Reporter: Some people might say that this report is very critical of leadership and yet we're not hearing directly from Dr. Johnson. What would you say to them?
Rodriguez-Dabney: Well, Dr. Johnson had some interviews. She's the one who took the leadership initiative to say that we need this.
Rodriguez-Dabney added: "She has said to me, she's a researcher, and that's where her expertise lies. This area is where my expertise lies, and she's going to lend me and give me a voice to be able to exercise that."
The report went on to say, "A number of witnesses whom we interviewed ... expressed the belief that these deficiencies are symptomatic of a lack of commitment by Roswell Park's leadership to meaningfully confront issues of discrimination."
A Roswell Park spokesperson later clarified that the law firm's report only interviewed 12 staff members and two other individuals who are not employees.
In Roswell Park's video, Rodriguez-Dabney said Roswell Park commissioned the report more than three years ago and that "many of the issues raised in the report are not unique to Roswell Park."
She promises that "enhancing our DEI culture is a foundational pillar of success within our strategic plan as we position Roswell Park for continued success."
An initial statement from Roswell Park to 2 On Your Side said, "What's been reported so far is dangerously skewed and inaccurate, and we look forward to providing crucial facts and context now that we have the opportunity to respond." We were later told that applied to the confidential internal report from the law firm and the way it was interpreted.
We were also informed that newly installed Roswell Park Board Chair Leecia Eve advocated for the release of the confidential report during a board meeting on Thursday night and it was unanimously approved by the board members.
They also say it was originally launched under the leadership of Dr, Johnson and former board chair Michael Joseph. Joseph resigned under pressure amidst reports that a lawsuit had been filed against his Clover real estate property management firm with allegations that other Clover executives followed racist policies in management decisions. The company denies those claims.