SBA Office of the National Ombudsman:
Overview, History, and Current Issues
Updated June 19, 2020
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
R45071

SBA Office of the National Ombudsman: Overview, History, and Current Issues

Summary
The Office of the National Ombudsman was created in 1996 as part of P.L. 104-121, the Contract
with America Advancement Act of 1996 (Title II, the Smal Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 [SBREFA]). Housed within the U.S. Smal Business Administration (SBA),
the office’s primary purpose is to provide smal businesses, smal government entities (those
serving populations of less than 50,000), and smal nonprofit organizations that believe they have
experienced unfair or excessive regulatory compliance or enforcement actions (such as repetitive
audits or investigations, excessive fines, and retaliation by federal agencies) a means to comment
about such actions.
The Office of the National Ombudsman is an impartial liaison that reports smal business
regulatory fairness matters to the appropriate federal agency for review and works across
government to address those concerns and reduce regulatory burdens on smal businesses.
SBREFA also created 10 Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards, one in each of the SBA’s
10 regions, to advise the National Ombudsman on matters related to federal regulatory
enforcement activities affecting smal businesses.
Specifical y, the National Ombudsman
 works with each federal agency with regulatory authority over smal businesses
to ensure that smal businesses are provided a means to comment on the federal
agency’s regulatory compliance and enforcement activities;
 receives comments from smal businesses regarding actions by federal agency
employees conducting smal business regulatory compliance or enforcement
activities;
 refers comments to the affected federal agency’s inspector general in appropriate
circumstances while maintaining the confidentiality of the person or smal
business making these comments;
 issues an annual report to Congress and affected federal agencies evaluating the
agency’s compliance and enforcement activities, including a rating of their
responsiveness to smal businesses;
 provides the affected federal agency with an opportunity to comment on the
annual report prior to publication and includes in the report a section in which the
affected federal agency may comment on issues that are not addressed by the
National Ombudsman in revisions to the draft; and
 coordinates and reports annual y on the Smal Business Regulatory Fairness
Boards’ activities, findings, and recommendations to the SBA Administrator and
the heads of affected federal agencies.
This report examines the Office of the National Ombudsman’s origin and history; describes its
organizational structure, funding, functions, and current activities; and discusses a recent
legislative effort to enhance its authority. During the 115th Congress, S. 1146, the Smal Business
Regulatory Relief Act of 2017, would have, among other provisions,
 expanded the National Ombudsman’s authority to work with federal agencies on
the development of best practices for educating, training, and assisting smal
entities in understanding and complying with federal regulations; and
 authorized the National Ombudsman to evaluate federal agency regulatory
compliance guides, ensure that those guides are available to smal business
Congressional Research Service

SBA Office of the National Ombudsman: Overview, History, and Current Issues

development centers and other SBA management and training resource partners,
conduct smal business customer service surveys on an ongoing basis to assess
the timeliness and quality of federal agency regulatory activities, and develop an
outreach program to promote awareness of the National Ombudsman’s activities.
This report also discusses some chal enges facing the Office of the National Ombudsman:
 although it is general y recognized as an independent, impartial office, it is
housed within the much larger SBA and remains subject to its influence;
 the National Ombudsman has often stayed in the position for a relatively short
time. Frequent turnover can lead to continuity problems for the office;
 it does not have the authority to compel federal agencies to undertake specific
actions to resolve disputes. As a result, although its annual rating of federal
agency responsiveness to smal business concerns does provide it a means to
exert some influence on federal agency actions, its role in resolving disputes is
somewhat constrained; and
 its relatively limited budget and staffing level restrict its ability to engage in
outreach activities that could increase smal business awareness of its existence
and services.
Congressional Research Service

SBA Office of the National Ombudsman: Overview, History, and Current Issues

Introduction
There are about 150 ombudsman offices located throughout the federal government.1 About a
third of them are statutorily authorized. The others were created through executive action.2
Although there are differences among them in terms of their origin, staffing, funding, and
organizational structure, they are al tasked with receiving and helping to resolve disputes in an
impartial manner. Some ombudsman offices are limited to helping to resolve disputes that arise
within the federal agency in which they are housed. Others are limited to helping to resolve
disputes received from the agency’s clients. Stil others may help to resolve disputes that arise
both within the federal agency and from the agency’s clients.3
The Office of the National Ombudsman, housed within the U.S. Smal Business Administration
(SBA), is fairly unique in that it is authorized to help resolve disputes received from the public
across federal agencies.4 It was created in 1996 as part of P.L. 104-121, the Contract with
America Advancement Act of 1996 (Title II, the Smal Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 [SBREFA]).5 It is a relatively smal office, with six employees: the National
Ombudsman (Stefanie Baker Wehagen), the Deputy National Ombudsman (Mina Wales), an
external relations manager, an administrative specialist, and two case management specialists.6
The National Ombudsman position is appointed by the SBA Administrator.

1 Carole S. Houk et al., “Supplementary T able, Master List of Federal Ombuds Offices,” in The Ombudsman in Federal
Agencies–Final Report, Washington, DC: Administrative Conference of the United States, 2016 , at https://acus.gov/
report/ombudsman-federal-agencies-final-report-2016.
2 The Ombudsman in Federal Agencies–Final Report. For example, the Small Business Ombudsman for defense audit
agencies was authorized by P.L. 112-239, the National Defense Aut horization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Division A,
T itle XVI), §1612(a), “ Small Business Ombudsman for Defense Audit Agencies.” T he Small Business Ombudsman at
the Consumer Product Safety Commission is not statutorily authorized. Also, several statutes direc t state agencies
implementing federal programs to establish ombudsman offices for those programs. For example, state education
agencies are required to have an ombudsman to monitor and enforce public and private school equity requirements
related to federal programs to assist children identified as failing, or most at risk of failing, to meet state academic
standards. See 20 U.S.C. §6320.
3 The Ombudsman in Federal Agencies–Final Report, “Part 2. Research Report,” pp. 20, 33-38.
4 T he Office of the National Ombudsman’s statutory title is the Office of the Small Business and Agriculture
Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman. See P.L. 104-121, the Contract with America Advancement Act of 1996 (Title
II, the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996), §30, “ Oversight of Regulatory Enforcement.”
5 SBREFA’s seven statutory purposes are to (1) implement certain recommendations of the 1995 White House
Conference on Small Business regarding the development and enforcement of federal regulations; (2) provide for
judicial review of chapter 6 of T itle 5, U.S. Code (which deals with federal regulatory analysis); (3) encourage the
effective participat ion of small businesses in the federal regulatory process; (4) simplify the language of federal
regulations affecting small businesses; (5) develop more accessible sources of information on regulatory and reporting
requirements for small businesses; (6) create a more cooperative regulatory environment among agencies and small
businesses that is less punitive and more solution-oriented; and (7) make federal regulators more accountable for their
enforcement actions by providing small entities with a meaningful opportunity for redress of excessive enforcement
activities. See P.L. 104-121, the Contract with America Advancement Act of 1996 (T itle II, the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996), §203, “ Purposes.”
For additional information and analysis concerning the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 ,
see CRS Report RL32240, The Federal Rulem aking Process: An Overview, coordinated by Maeve P. Carey; and CRS
Report R43992, The Congressional Review Act (CRA): Frequently Asked Questions, by Maeve P. Carey and
Christopher M. Davis.
6 U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA), “SBA Plan for Operating in the Event of a Lapse in Appropriations,” p.
37, at https://www.sba.gov/document/report —sba-plan-operating-event-lapse-appropriations; SBA, Office of the
National Ombudsman, “Office Directory,” no longer online; and SBA, Office of Advocacy, “Correspondence with the
author,” June 19, 2020.
Congressional Research Service

1

SBA Office of the National Ombudsman: Overview, History, and Current Issues

The Office of the National Ombudsman’s primary purpose is to provide smal businesses, smal
government entities (those serving populations of less than 50,000), and smal nonprofit
organizations that believe they have experienced unfair or excessive regulatory compliance or
enforcement actions (such as repetitive audits or investigations, excessive fines, and retaliation by
federal agencies) a means to comment about such actions.7 As an impartial liaison, the Office of
the National Ombudsman refers “comments submitted by a smal business to the appropriate
agency for high-level fairness review, and ... works across the federal government to address
those concerns to help smal businesses succeed.”8
SBREFA also created a five-person Smal Business Regulatory Fairness Board in each of the
SBA’s 10 regions to advise the National Ombudsman on matters related to federal regulatory
enforcement activities affecting smal businesses.
Specifical y, SBREFA directs the SBA Administrator to designate an ombudsman to
 work with each federal agency with regulatory authority over smal businesses to
ensure that smal businesses that receive or are subject to an audit, on-site
inspection, compliance assistance effort, or other enforcement-related
communication or contact by federal agency personnel are provided a means to
comment on those regulatory compliance and enforcement activities;
 receive comments from smal businesses regarding actions by federal agency
employees conducting smal business regulatory compliance or enforcement
activities;
 refer comments to the affected federal agency’s inspector general in appropriate
circumstances and maintain the confidentiality of the person or smal business
making these comments;9
 based on substantiated comments received from smal businesses and Smal
Business Regulatory Fairness Boards, annual y report to Congress and affected
federal agencies an evaluation of the federal agency’s regulatory compliance and
enforcement activities, including a rating of the agency’s responsiveness to smal
businesses;
 provide the affected federal agency with an opportunity to comment on the
National Ombudsman’s annual report to Congress prior to publication and
include in the final report a section in which the affected federal agency may
comment on issues that are not addressed by the National Ombudsman in
revisions to the draft; and
 coordinate and report annual y on the Smal Business Regulatory Fairness
Boards’ activities, findings, and recommendations to the SBA Administrator and
the heads of affected federal agencies.10

7 SBA, Office of the Ombudsman, “What We Do,” at https://www.sba.gov/about-sba/oversight-advocacy/office-
national-ombudsman.
8 SBA, Office of the Ombudsman, “What We Do.”
9 SBREFA specifies that the National Ombudsman “seek to maintain the identity of the person and small business
concern making such comments on a confidential basis to the same extent as employee identities are protected under
section 7 of the Inspector General Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.) .” See P.L. 104-121, the Contract with America
Advancement Act of 1996 (T itle II, the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996), §30,
“Oversight of Regulatory Enforcement.”
10 P.L. 104-121, the Contract with America Advancement Act of 1996 (Title II, the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996), §30, “ Oversight of Regulatory Enforcement.”
Congressional Research Service

2

SBA Office of the National Ombudsman: Overview, History, and Current Issues

This report examines the Office of the National Ombudsman’s origin and history; describes its
organizational structure, funding, functions, and current activities; and discusses a recent
legislative effort to enhance its authority. During the 115th Congress, S. 1146, the Smal Business
Regulatory Relief Act of 2017, would have, among other provisions,
 expanded the National Ombudsman’s authority to work with federal agencies on
the development of best practices for educating, training, and assisting smal
entities in understanding and complying with federal regulations;
 authorized the National Ombudsman to evaluate federal agency regulatory
compliance guides, ensure that those guides are available to smal business
development centers and other SBA management and training resource partners,
conduct smal business customer service surveys on an ongoing basis to assess
the timeliness and quality of federal agency regulatory activities, and develop an
outreach program to promote awareness of the National Ombudsman’s activities;
and
 authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out these
additional responsibilities.
Origin
On March 19, 1996, the Senate passed, 100-0, S. 942, the Smal Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996. The bil , which included provisions creating the Office of the
National Ombudsman and 10 regional Smal Business Regulatory Fairness Boards, was later
incorporated into P.L. 104-121, the Contract with America Advancement Act of 1996. The bil
was based on recommendations of the 1995 White House Conference on Smal Business.11
The 1995 White House Conference on Smal Business, like its 1980 and 1986 predecessors, was
preceded by state conferences and regional meetings.12 The 1,904 delegates to the 1995 White
House Conference on Smal Business considered more than 150 policy recommendations
forwarded from the regional meetings and six petitions. Through a series of votes, the delegates
narrowed the list of policy recommendations to 60, which were sent to the President and
Congress for consideration.13 Improving the Regulatory Flexibility Act was the 3rd-highest vote-
getter (1,398 votes) at the conference and paperwork and regulatory reform was the 25th-highest
vote-getter (1,046 votes).14 SBREFA addressed both recommendations. The Office of the

11 U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Small Business, S. 917 and S. 942: Implementing the White House Conference
on Sm all Business-Recom m endations on Regulations and Paperwork, hearing, 104th Cong., 2nd sess., February 28,
1996, S.Hrg. 104-443 (Washington: GPO, 1996), pp. 1 -33.
12 About 20,000 people participated in 59 state conferences held between June 2, 1994 , and April 13, 1995. T hey
elected 1,130 delegates to participate in six regional conferences held between April 18, 1995, and May 12, 1995. T he
five-day 1995 White House Conference on Small Business was held on June 11, 1995, to June 15, 1995. SBA , The
State of Sm all Business: A Report of the President, Washington, DC, 1996, p. 45; and U.S. Congress, Senate
Committee on Small Business, S. 111, National Conference on Sm all Business Act, 106th Cong., 1st sess., October 19,
1999, S.Hrg. 106-380 (Washington: GPO, 1999), p. 4.
13 U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Small Business, Implementation of the Sm all Business Agenda, 104th Cong., 2nd
sess., June 5, 1996, S.Hrg. 104-579 (Washington: GPO, 1996), pp. 57-78; White House Conference on Small Business
Commission, Foundation for a New Century: A Report to the President and Congress, Washington, DC, June 1995.
Also see SBA, Office of Advocacy in cooperation with the White House Conference on Small Business, Foundation
for a New Century: Issue Handbook, Second Edition, Washington, DC, January 1995, at https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/
pt?id=umn.31951d00289409m.
14 Sen. Kit Bond, “Consideration of the Comprehensive Regulatory Reform Act,” remarks in the Senate, Congressional
Congressional Research Service

3

SBA Office of the National Ombudsman: Overview, History, and Current Issues

National Ombudsman and the Smal Business Regulatory Fairness Boards were created to
address the recommendation concerning federal regulatory reform.
During Senate floor debate, the bil ’s proponents argued that the Office of the National
Ombudsman was part of the bil ’s overal effort to create a “more cooperative and less punitive
regulatory environment between agencies and smal business that is less threatening and more
solution-oriented than we have achieved in the past.”15 They argued that it would “help smal
businesses get fair and legal treatment from the government if they have been treated unfairly”
and “also assist smal businesses in recovering legal fees as a result of unfair Government
actions.”16
During floor debate, Senator John Glenn indicated that he supported the legislation but was
concerned that the Office of the National Ombudsman and the Smal Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards could “end up creating a one-sided record of complaints that wil distort the
broad public mission of our agencies.”17 He also indicated that federal agencies are not “the
enemy when they carry out the laws passed by the people’s representatives in Congress” and was
“happy, at least, that in the final version of the bil before us, the Ombudsman wil focus on
general agency enforcement activity and not attempt to evaluate or rate the performance of
individual agency personnel.”18
Senator Carl Levin also supported the legislation but argued that “the committee [on Smal
Business] should have taken more time to look at the pros and cons of placing an ombudsman in
each regulatory agency, rather than relying on a lone ombudsman in the Smal Business
Administration to cover al agencies.”19

Record, vol. 141, part 115 (July 17, 1995), p. S10139 ; and U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Small Business, S. 917
and S. 942: Im plem enting the White House Conference on Sm all Business-Recom m endations on Regulations and
Paperwork, hearing, 104th Cong., 2nd sess., February 28, 1996, S.Hrg. 104-443 (Washington: GPO, 1996), pp. 14, 28.
15 Sen. Jeff Bingaman, “Consideration of S. 492, the Small Business Regulatory Fairness Act of 1995,” remarks in the
Senate, Congressional Record, vol. 142, part 38 (March 19, 1996), p. S2310 .
16 Sen. John Kerry, “Consideration of S. 492, the Small Business Regulatory Fairness Act of 1995,” remarks in the
Senate, Congressional Record, vol. 142, part 38 (March 19, 1996), p. S231 0.
17 Sen. John Glenn, “Consideration of S. 492, the Small Business Regulatory Fairness Act of 1995,” remark s in the
Senate, Congressional Record, vol. 142, part 38 (March 19, 1996), p. S2311.
18 Sen. John Glenn, “Consideration of S. 492, the Small Business Regulatory Fairness Act of 1995,” p. S2311.
19 Sen. Levin argued that it was unreasonable to expect the ombudsman “to become familiar with the operations of
hundreds of programs in dozens of agencies” and stated that
rather than investigating and mediating individual disputes himself or herself, the ombudsman
would have to refer alleged cases of agency misconduct to the inspector general of the relevant
agency. In other words, the ombudsman wouldn ’t receive information for the purpose of mediating
disputes, solving problems, and fostering collaboration between agencies and regulated parties.
Instead the ombudsman would receive information primarily for assessing agency performance.
T hat doesn’t help get immediate and specific problems solved. At the hearing on S. 942 in the
Small Business Committee, several representatives of the small business community said th at they
would prefer to have a single ombudsman in the Small Business Administration rather than an
ombudsman in each individual regulatory agency. T hey argued that agency ombudsmen could be
influenced by internal agency politics and that, because of this, small businesses would be
susceptible to intimidation by regulators if they came forward with complaints. While I understand
the reluctance of small businesses to complain directly to an agency official about inappropriate
regulatory practices, I believe that ombudsmen in regulatory agencies can be given sufficient
independence from the regulatory structure to act fairly and to assure regulated parties that their
inquiries will not be used against them.
See Sen. Carl Levin, “ Consideration of S. 492, the Small Business Regulatory Fairness Act of 1995,” remarks in the
Congressional Research Service

4

SBA Office of the National Ombudsman: Overview, History, and Current Issues

History
Initial y, the Office of the National Ombudsman was located in Chicago and had a three-person
staff.20 The first National Ombudsman (Peter Barca) was appointed in November 1996, and 50
smal business owners were appointed to the 10 Smal Business Regulatory Fairness Boards in
that same month. The Smal Business Regulatory Fairness Boards were al chartered by February
1997, and became operational in June 1997.21
During its first year, the Office of the National Ombudsman also created its first smal business
appraisal form to receive smal business comments, developed a structure to evaluate federal
agency regulatory compliance and enforcement activities, instructed Smal Business Fairness
Board members about SBREFA, published a brochure, established its toll-free 1-888-REGFAIR
telephone number, created a website, and held 10 public hearings across the nation “to enable
smal businesses to publicly bring forth their concerns of the regulatory enforcement structure.”22
The Office of the National Ombudsman also received 735 telephone cal s, had more than 56,000
hits on its website, and had 110 smal businesses initiate an appraisal form. Fifty smal businesses
filed a completed appraisal form, and 33 of these forms were forwarded to federal agencies for
responses.23
To the dismay of some Members, the Office of the National Ombudsman did not issue a report
card on federal agency compliance and enforcement practices in its first annual report to
Congress, dated December 31, 1997, primarily because the National Ombudsman felt that the
office had not had sufficient smal business participation to grade the agencies’ performance.24
Instead, the National Ombudsman provided synopses of 12 smal business appraisal forms that
il ustrated what the National Ombudsman identified as “four common themes in the regulatory
environment” that are faced by smal businesses: “(1) agencies change their rules in the middle of
the game; (2) agencies disregard the economic and other consequences of their actions on smal
businesses; (3) smal businesses often get ensnarled in conflicting regulatory requirements when
two federal agencies’ jurisdiction overlap; and (4) smal businesses fear federal agency
retaliation.”25

Senate, Congressional Record, vol. 142, part 38 (March 19, 1996), p. S231 4.
20 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Small Business, Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform and Paperwork
Reduction, The First Report to Congress by the Sm all Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcem ent Om budsman ,
hearing, 105th Cong., 2nd sess., March 4, 1998, Serial No. 105-37 (Washington: GPO, 1998), p. 6.
21 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Small Business, Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform and Paperwork
Reduction, The First Report to Congress by the Sm all Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcem ent Om bu dsman,
hearing, 105th Cong., 2nd sess., March 4, 1998, Serial No. 105-37 (Washington: GPO, 1998), pp. 3, 40.
22 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Small Business, Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform and Paperwork
Reduction, The First Report to Congress by the Sm all Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcem ent Om budsman ,
pp. 4, 40, 41.
23 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Small Business, Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform and Paperwork
Reduction, The First Report to Congress by the Sm all Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcem ent Om budsman ,
p. 42.
24 U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Small Business, Oversight of the Regulatory Flexibility Act and the Red Tape
Reduction Act, 106th Cong., 1st sess., March 10, 1999, S.Hrg. 106-292 (Washington: GPO, 1999), pp. 58-61; and U.S.
Congress, Senate Committee on Small Business, The President’s Fiscal Year 1999 Budget Request for the Sm all
Business Adm inistration, 105th Cong., 2nd sess., March 18, 1998, S.Hrg. 105-637 (Washington: GPO, 1998), pp. 63, 64,
157.
25 U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Small Business, The President’s Fiscal Year 1999 Budget Request for the
Sm all Business Adm inistration, 105th Cong., 2nd sess., March 18, 1998, S.Hrg. 105-637 (Washington: GPO, 1998),
Congressional Research Service

5

link to page 10 SBA Office of the National Ombudsman: Overview, History, and Current Issues

In FY1998, the SBA provided the Office of the National Ombudsman its first annual budget (see
Table 1). The SBA provided $500,000 ($351,000 was actual y spent that year), sufficient to hire
seven staff members (a writer, clerk or receptionist, agency investigator, attorney, public
information officer, special assistant, and policy coordinator), and pay for travel, printing, and
overhead expenses (photocopying, telephone line, postage, supplies, etc.).26
Table 1. Office of the National Ombudsman, SBA Funding
(includes direct and indirect costs)
Fiscal Year
Amount
1998
$351,000
1999
$524,000
2000
$514,000
2001
$554,000
2002
$362,000
2003
$1,200,000
2004
$1,469,000
2005
$1,348,000
2006
$1,111,000
2007
$1,257,000
2008
$1,518,000
2009
$1,236,000
2010
$1,426,000
2011
$1,787,000
2012
$1,770,000
2013
$1,270,000
2014
$1,804,000
2015
$1,804,000
2016
$1,309,000
2017
$967,000
2018
$1,313,000
2019
$1,511,000
2020
$1,638,000
2021 (request)
$1,712,000
Sources: U.S. Smal Business Administration (SBA), SBA Budget Request and Performance Plan: FY2003
Congressional Submission, p. 12; SBA Budget Request and Performance Plan: FY2004 Congressional Submission, p. 5;
FY2007 Budget Request and Performance Plan, p. 29; FY2008 Performance Budget, p. 25; FY2009 Performance Budget
and FY2007 Performance Report, p. 27; FY2010 Congressional Budget Justification, p. 19; FY2011 Congressional Budget

pp. 42-43.
26 U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Small Business, The President’s Fiscal Year 1998 Budget Request for the
United States Sm all Business Adm inistration, 105th Cong., 1st sess., February 26, 1997, S.Hrg. 105-44 (Washington:
GPO, 1997), p. 60; and SBA, “FY2002 Budget Request and Performance Plan,” p. 47.
Congressional Research Service

6

SBA Office of the National Ombudsman: Overview, History, and Current Issues

Justification and FY2009 Annual Performance Report, p. 21; FY2012 Congressional Budget Justification and FY2010
Annual Performance Report, p. 27; FY2013 Congressional Budget Justification and FY2011 Annual Performance Report, p.
27; FY2014 Congressional Budget Justification and FY2012 Annual Performance Report, p. 28; and FY2021 Congressional
Budget Justification and FY2019 Annual Performance Report, p. 102.
Notes: These funding amounts include direct costs from the SBA operating budget, including contracts;
compensation and benefits; agency-wide costs, such as rent and telecommunications; and indirect costs.
Actual staffing levels have varied somewhat over the years. Including the National Ombudsman,
there were 3 staff members in FY1997, 11 in FY1999, 9 in FY2000, 8 in FY2002, 7 from
FY2007 to FY2014, 4 in FY2015 and FY2016, 5 in FY2017 and FY2018, and 6 in FY2019 and
FY2020.27
The Office of the National Ombudsman’s annual report to Congress subsequently included its
mandated report card on federal agency regulatory performance, and that section of the report
became the focus of congressional hearings, primarily because several federal agencies received
relatively low grades, especially in the timeliness of their responses to smal business
comments.28 The National Ombudsman added a “best practices” section to the annual report to
Congress “so one agency would know what the other agencies are doing and have that dialogue
going on, and to encourage them” to do better.29
Peter Barca left the National Ombudsman position in July 1999, leaving the position vacant until
January 2000 when Gail A. McDonald was appointed the second National Ombudsman. Shortly
after her appointment, the SBA’s Administrator at that time, Aida Alvarez, decided to relocate the
Office of the National Ombudsman from Chicago to SBA’s headquarters in Washington, DC,

27 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Small Business, Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform and Paperwork
Reduction, The First Report to Congress by the Sm all Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcem ent Om budsman ,
hearing, 105th Cong., 2nd sess., March 4, 1998, Serial No. 105-37 (Washington: GPO, 1998), p. 6; U.S. Congress,
House Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the
Judiciary, and Related Agencies, Departm ents of Com m erce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies
Appropriations for 2000, Part 4: Justification of the Budget Estim ates, hearing, 106th Cong., 1st sess., January 1, 1999
(Washington: GPO, 1999), p. 1019; U.S. Congress, House Committee on Small Business, Subcommittee on Regulatory
Reform and Paperwork Reduction, Hearing on the National Om budsm an’s 2000 Report to Congress and the
Regulatory Fairness Program , hearing, 106th Cong., 2nd sess., June 15, 2000, Serial No. 106-65 (Washington: GPO,
2000), p. 95; SBA, Office of the National Ombudsman, “ 1999 National Ombudsman’s Report to Congress: Securing
Rights and Benefits for Small Business,” 1999; SBA, Office of the National Ombudsman, “ Office Directory,” no
longer on-line; SBA, Office of the National Ombudsman, “ National Ombudsman’s Annual Reports to Congress,” at
https://www.sba.gov/document/report —national-ombudsmans-annual-reports-congress; and SBA, Office of the
National Ombudsman, “Correspondence with the author,” June 19, 2020.
28 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Small Business, Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform and Paperwork
Reduction, Hearing on the National Om budsm an’s 2000 Report to Congress and the Regulatory Fairness Program ,
hearing, 106th Cong., 2nd sess., June 5, 2000, Serial No. 106-65 (Washington: GPO, 2000), pp. 6, 7.
29 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Small Business, Subcommittee on Regulatory Refor m and Paperwork
Reduction, Hearing on the National Om budsm an’s 2000 Report to Congress and the Regulatory Fairness Program , p.
7. At that time, agencies that provided, on average, a written response to small business comments within 45 days of
receipt were rated as excellent on this criteria; those that took, on average, 46 to 60 days were rated good; those that
took, on average, 61 to 90 days were rated average; and those that took, on average, more than 90 days were rated
unsatisfactory. T he 1999 Annual Report to Congress rated the timeliness of two federal agency responses to small
business comments as unsatisfactory and the 2000 Annual Report to Congress rated the timeliness of eight federal
agency responses to small business comments as unsatisfactory .
Congressional Research Service

7

SBA Office of the National Ombudsman: Overview, History, and Current Issues

reportedly in an effort to increase the office’s “visibility” within the administration.30 The
physical relocation was completed in August 2001.31
In 2002, the Office of the National Ombudsman entered into a memorandum of understanding
with the SBA Office of Advocacy in which both parties “pledged the highest degree of
cooperation” and the Office of Advocacy (which focuses on issues related to the development of
federal regulations and their impact on smal businesses) agreed “to offer the services of its
Regional Advocates in planning the Ombudsman’s regional fairness board hearings.”32
In 2003, the third National Ombudsman, Michael L. Barrera, testified during a congressional
hearing that “as public awareness of ONO [Office of the National Ombudsman] grows,
cooperation among the smal business community and Federal regulatory agencies is [also]
growing.”33 He noted that federal agency attendance at Smal Business Regulatory Fairness Board
hearings “has improved dramatically” and pointed out that the Internal Revenue Service, through
its Taxpayer Advocate system, “now attends every RegFair Hearing and Roundtable conducted by
ONO.”34
In 2006, the Office of the National Ombudsman renewed its previous memorandum of
understanding with the SBA Office of Advocacy “to foster increased cooperation between the
offices as they both work to provide a more smal business friendly regulatory environment.”35
Specifical y, the Office of the National Ombudsman agreed to
 receive comments and concerns regarding the impact of regulations on smal
business and the burden of regulatory compliance and federal regulatory
enforcement;
 where appropriate, forward such comments to the Office of Advocacy;
 provide information and materials generated through the Office of the National
Ombudsman’s activities that are more appropriately within the Office of
Advocacy’s jurisdiction; and
 promote the SBA’s programs and services, including the Office of Advocacy’s
regulatory and research role, through its various hearings and roundtables and

30 T he relocation took place during the second quarter of FY2001. See U.S. Congress, House Committee on Small
Business, Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform and Paperwork Reduction, Hearing on the National Om budsm an’s
2000 Report to Congress and the Regulato ry Fairness Program , hearing, 106th Cong., 2nd sess., June 5, 2000, Serial
No. 106-65 (Washington: GPO, 2000), p. 4.
31 SBA, Office of the National Ombudsman, Creating a More Small Business Friendly Regulatory Enforcement and
Com pliance Environm ent: Fiscal Year 2001 Report, p. 4, at https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/files/
ombud_ono2001.pdf.
32 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Small Business, Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform and Oversight, Small
Business Advocacy Im provem ent Act of 2003 , 108th Cong., 1st sess., April 1, 2003, Serial No. 108-9 (Washington: GPO,
2003), pp. 33, 34.
33 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Small Business, Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform and Oversight, Federal
Agency Treatm ent of Sm all Business, 108th Cong., 1st sess., May 15, 2003, Serial No. 108-15 (Washington: GPO,
2003), p. 35.
34 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Small Business, Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform and Oversight, Federal
Agency Treatm ent of Sm all Business, pp. 4, 35.
35 SBA, Office of Advocacy and SBA, Office of the National Ombudsman, “Memorandum of Understanding Between
the Office of Advocacy, U.S. Small Business Administration and the Office of the National Ombudsman, U.S. Sm all
Business Administration,” at https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/MOU_National_Ombudsman.pdf. For additional
information and analysis of the SBA’s Office of Advocacy, see CRS Report R43625, SBA Office of Advocacy:
Overview, History, and Current Issues, by Robert Jay Dilger.
Congressional Research Service

8

SBA Office of the National Ombudsman: Overview, History, and Current Issues

“include the Office of Advocacy Regional Advocates in the planning and
implementation of those activities as appropriate.”36
The SBA Office of Advocacy, which has a larger budget and more staff than the Office of the
National Ombudsman, agreed to
 provide material that may be distributed to participants in the Office of the
National Ombudsman’s Regulatory Fairness Program; and
 provide the National Ombudsman with regulatory complaints and other
information generated by smal business interests that are more appropriately
within the Office of the National Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.37
The Office of Advocacy’s FY2020 appropriation is $9.12 mil ion and it has authorization for 52
full-time equivalent employees.38
In recent years, Congress has focused increased attention on the Office of the National
Ombudsman’s efficacy in helping smal businesses resolve their regulatory disputes with federal
agencies, as opposed to focusing on how many smal businesses contacted the office, submitted a
formal comment, or participated in one of the office’s hearings and roundtable discussions. For
example, in 2016, the House Committee on Smal Business noted that the National Ombudsman
“has no investigative capacity nor authority to overrule, stop or delay a federal action” and asked
the National Ombudsman to report back to the committee the percentage of cases that were
referred to federal agencies for resolution in FY2014 (420) that resulted in a favorable outcome
for the smal businesses, “such as reduction of a penalty.”39 The National Ombudsman reported
that 41 of the 420 smal businesses (about 10%) that had a regulatory compliance or enforcement
dispute forwarded to a federal agency in FY2014 for resolution received a favorable outcome.
Current Organizational Structure and Funding
As noted previously, the Office of the National Ombudsman currently has six employees: the
National Ombudsman (Stefanie Baker Wehagen), the Deputy National Ombudsman (Mina
Wales), an external relations manager, an administrative specialist, and two case management
specialists.
The 10 Smal Business Regulatory Fairness Boards are required to meet at least annual y to
advise the National Ombudsman on matters related to federal agency smal business regulatory
activities, report substantiated instances of excessive federal enforcement actions against smal

36 SBA, Office of Advocacy and SBA, Office of the National Ombudsman, “Memorandum of Un derstanding Between
the Office of Advocacy, U.S. Small Business Administration and the Office of the National Ombudsman, U.S. Small
Business Administration,” at https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/MOU_National_Ombudsman.pdf.
37 SBA, Office of Advocacy and SBA, Office of the National Ombudsman, “Memorandum of Understanding Between
the Office of Advocacy, U.S. Small Business Administration and the Office of the National Ombudsman, U.S. Small
Business Administration,” at https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/MOU_National_Ombudsman.pdf.
38 SBA, FY2020 Congressional Budget Justification and FY2018 Annual Performance Report, p. 181, at
https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/2019-04/
SBA%20FY%202020%20Congressional%20Justification_final%20508%20%204%2023%202019.pdf ; and SBA,
Office of Advocacy, FY2021 Congressional Budget Justification and FY201 9 Annual Perform ance Report, p. 201, at
https://www.sba.gov/document/report —congressional-budget-justification-annual-performance-report.
39 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Small Business, Subcommittee on Investigations, Oversight and Regulations,
Oversight of the Office of Advocacy and the Office of the National Om budsm an at the SBA , hearing, 114th Cong., 2nd
sess., February 10, 2016, H.Hrg. 114-042 (Washington: GPO, 2016), p. 37.
Congressional Research Service

9

SBA Office of the National Ombudsman: Overview, History, and Current Issues

businesses, and prior to publication, comment on the National Ombudsman’s annual report to
Congress.40
The boards are composed of five volunteers who are an owner, operator, or officer of a smal
business.41 Board members are appointed by the SBA Administrator, after receiving the
recommendations of the chair and ranking minority member of the House Committee on Smal
Business and the Senate Committee on Smal Business and Entrepreneurship.42 No more than
three board members may be of the same political party; they cannot be a federal officer or
employee, in either the executive branch or Congress; and they serve at the pleasure of the SBA
Administrator for terms of three years or less.43
The boards are based in the SBA’s 10 regions
 Region 1 (serving Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode
Island, and Vermont);
 Region 2 (serving New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin
Islands);
 Region 3 (serving Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia,
and the District of Columbia);
 Region 4 (serving Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North
Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee);
 Region 5 (serving Il inois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin);
 Region 6 (serving Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas);
 Region 7 (serving Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska);
 Region 8 (serving Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and
Wyoming);
 Region 9 (serving Arizona, California, Hawai , Nevada, and the territories of
Guam and American Samoa); and

40 P.L. 104-121, the Contract with America Advancement Act of 1996 (Title II, the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996), §30, “ Oversight of Regulatory Enforcement.”
41 Small Business Regulatory Fairness Board members serve without compensation but are allowed reimbursement for
travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence at rates authorized for federal employees while away from
their homes or regular places of business in the performance of services for the Board. See P.L. 104-121, the Contract
with America Advancement Act of 1996 (T itle II, the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996),
§30, “ Oversight of Regulatory Enforcement.”
In recent years, the SBA has focused on finding ways to reduce vacancies on Small Business Regulatory Fairness
Boards. In FY2016, nearly one-quarter (24%) of Small Business Regulatory Fairness Board seats across the SBA’s 10
regions were vacant. In FY2017, the board vacancy rate increased to 54%, primarily because board vacancies were not
filled due to the change in Administrations “to preserve the prerogative of the incoming SBA Administrator to make
appointments based upon recommendations by the incoming National Ombudsman.” See SBA, Fiscal Year 2019
Congressional Budget Justification and Fiscal Year 201 7 Annual Perform ance Report, p. 100, at https://www.sba.gov/
sites/default/files/aboutsbaarticle/SBA_FY_2019_CBJ_APR_2_12_post.pdf.
42 Although the SBA Administrator is required by statute to make these appointments after receiving the
recommendations of the chair and ranking minority member of the House Committee on Small Business and the Senate
Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship , some Members have complained that the SBA has often ignored
this statutory requirement. See U.S. Congress, House Committee on Small Business, Subcommittee on Investigations,
Oversight and Regulations, Oversight of the Office of Advocacy and the Office of the National Om budsm an at the SBA ,
hearing, 114th Cong., 2nd sess., February 10, 2016, H.Hrg. 114-042 (Washington: GPO, 2016), pp. 10, 11.
43 P.L. 104-121, the Contract with America Advancement Act of 1996 (Title II, the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996), §30, “ Oversight of Regulatory Enforcement.”
Congressional Research Service

10

link to page 10 SBA Office of the National Ombudsman: Overview, History, and Current Issues

 Region 10 (serving Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington).44
As shown in Table 1, the SBA provided the Office of the National Ombudsman $1.511 mil ion in
FY2019 and $1.638 mil ion in FY2020. The SBA has requested $1.712 mil ion for FY2021.45
Unlike the SBA’s Office of Advocacy, which is also tasked with serving as an independent
advocate for smal businesses in the regulatory process (but primarily at the developmental stage),
the Office of the National Ombudsman does not have its own funding account. The SBA funds
the Office of the National Ombudsman through its salaries and expenses’ executive direction
subaccount. That account includes funding for the SBA’s Office of the Administrator, Office of
General Counsel, Office of Government Relations, Office of Hearings and Appeals, Office of
Marketing and Communications, Office of Performance Management and Chief Financial
Officer, and the National Ombudsman.46 The Office of Advocacy was also funded through that
account, but Congress directed the SBA to provide the Office of Advocacy its own budgetary
account in P.L. 111-240, the Smal Business Jobs Act of 2010, as a means to enhance the Office
of Advocacy’s independence from the SBA Administrator. To date, similar legislation has not
been introduced to provide the Office of the National Ombudsman its own funding account
within the SBA. Instead, ombudsman advocates have argued that ombudsman offices “should not
have duties within the agency that might create a conflict with their responsibilities as a neutral,
and their budgets should be publicly disclosed.”47
The Ombudsman’s Regulatory Activities and
Outreach Efforts
Smal businesses that believe they have experienced excessive or unfair federal regulatory
compliance or enforcement actions may file a formal comment with the Office of the National
Ombudsman. The formal comment typical y includes the following basic information and a
signed consent form (SBA Form 1993) authorizing the Office of the National Ombudsman to
pursue the matter with the federal agency:
 a description of the specific action taken by the federal agency and the results of
this action;
 the specific resolution sought; and
 any relevant documentation.48
These comments may be filed online or in paper form, and commenters can receive information
regarding the comment form or information about the Office of the National Ombudsman by

44 SBA, Office of the National Ombudsman, “Fairness Boards,” at https://www.sba.gov/ombudsman/regional-
regulatory-fairness-board-members.
45 T his funding amount includes direct costs from the SBA operating budget, including contracts; compensation and
benefits; agency-wide costs, such as rent and telecommunications; and indirect costs. See SBA, FY2021 Congressional
Budget Justification and FY2019 Annual Perform ance Report, p. 102.
46 SBA, FY2020 Congressional Budget Justification and FY2018 Annual Performance Report, p. 8.
47 Carole S. Houk, Mary P. Rowe, Deborah A. Katz, Neil H. Katz, Lauren Marx, and T imothy Hedeen,
“Recommendation,” in The Ombudsman in Federal Agencies – Final Report, Washington, DC: Administrative
Conference of the United States, 2016, at https://acus.gov/report/ombudsman-federal-agencies-final-report-2016.
48 SBA, Office of the National Ombudsman, 2015 Annual Report to Congress, p. 3, at https://www.sba.gov/sites/
default/files/ONO_2015.pdf.
Congressional Research Service

11

SBA Office of the National Ombudsman: Overview, History, and Current Issues

cal ing the National Ombudsman’s Regulatory Fairness Helpline at 888-REG-FAIR.49 In
addition, smal businesses may file comments “on-the-spot” at any of the Office of the National
Ombudsman’s regional hearings and roundtables.
Once a comment is submitted, a case management specialist reviews the case and any supporting
documentation to ensure that the necessary authorization and other information are present. The
case management specialist then determines how the Office of the National Ombudsman can best
assist the smal business, advises the smal business of expected next steps, and, if the comment is
to be forwarded to a federal agency, explains the parameters of the SBREFA review.
Comments forwarded to a federal agency include a request for “a prompt, high-level, responsive
review of the matter reported.”50 The federal agency is asked to consider the fairness of the case
from a smal business perspective and “to provide a practical, timely response that balances the
spirit of the regulation with the specific circumstances of the smal business.”51 Al comments are
handled on a confidential, protected basis, and can be raised anonymously, if preferred by the
smal business.
The case management specialist then follows up with the federal agency and the smal business as
appropriate and communicates with the smal business owners the actions taken to assist them.52
In FY2019, the Office of the National Ombudsman assisted 292 smal businesses, responded to
numerous general inquiries, conducted 7 regional regulatory fairness roundtables across 4 of its
regions, completed 45 outreach events, and initiated contact with many national and local trade
associations.53 The National Ombudsman also met with senior officials representing 25 federal
agencies.54
In addition, the National Ombudsman’s annual report includes a report card providing letter
grades (which can range from A to F) for each federal agency (and in several instances, for
individual offices within the federal agency):
 two grades rating the agency’s responsiveness to smal business concerns (the
timeliness of the agency’s response and the quality of the response);
 three grades rating the agency’s compliance with SBREFA (the agency’s
nonretaliation policies against smal business commenters, the provision of
regulatory compliance assistance to smal businesses, and the provision of notice
to smal businesses of their rights under SBREFA); and
 an overal grade.55

49 SBA, Office of the National Ombudsman, 2015 Annual Report to Congress, p. 3.
50 SBA, Office of the National Ombudsman, 2015 Annual Report to Congress, p. 4.
51 SBA, Office of the National Ombudsman, 2015 Annual Report to Congress, p. 4.
52 SBA, Office of the National Ombudsman, 2015 Annual Report to Congress, p. 5.
53 SBA, Fiscal Year 2021 Congressional Budget Justification and Fiscal Year 2019 Annual Performance Report, p.
104. T he Office of the National Ombudsman assisted 420 small businesses in FY2014, 412 in FY2015, 316 in FY2016,
460 in FY2017, and 354 in FY2018.
54 SBA, Fiscal Year 2021 Congressional Budget Justification and Fiscal Year 2019 Annual Performance Report, p.
104.
55 SBA, Office of the National Ombudsman, 2018 Annual Report to Congress, pp. 24-29, at https://www.sba.gov/
document/report —national-ombudsmans-annual-reports-congress.
Congressional Research Service

12

SBA Office of the National Ombudsman: Overview, History, and Current Issues

In FY2018, 32 federal agencies and offices received an overal grade of A, 5 received an overal
grade of B, 2 received an overal grade of C, and the Department of Veterans Affairs received an
overal grade of D.56 No agencies received an overal grade of F.
Current Congressional Issues
Some Members and smal business advocates have argued that the Office of the National
Ombudsman should be provided additional resources. For example, on March 29, 2017, a smal
business advocate argued the following at a Senate Committee on Smal Business and
Entrepreneurship hearing:
Where the Office of Advocacy works on the front end of a development of a significant
regulation, the Office of the National Ombudsman is charged with helping small businesses
on the back end, with all regulation compliance. It serves as the conduit for small
businesses to have their grievances about compliance problems, or other issues, with
Federal agencies, heard directly by the agencies, in an effort for successful resolution. In
this way, the Office of the National Ombudsman, and the agencies, can detect patterns of
compliance problems so that the agencies can revisit rules for modification.
This important component of the rulemaking process is woefully underfunded. The Office
of the National Ombudsman actually relies on volunteers to help get the message out about
its vital small business services. It is, for the most part, unknown and underutilized. If
Congress really wants to help small businesses with Federal regulations, invest more in the
small business outreach, support, and feedback loop.57
As mentioned previously, many smal businesses that submit formal comments to the Office of
the National Ombudsman do not receive a favorable outcome from the federal agency. Some
Members and smal business advocates have argued that the Office of the National Ombudsman
should be provided additional authority to assist smal businesses in their efforts to resolve their
regulatory disputes with federal agencies. For example, during the 115th Congress, S. 1146, the
Smal Business Regulatory Relief Act of 2017, would have, among other provisions,
 expanded the National Ombudsman’s authority to work with federal agencies on
the development of best practices for educating, training, and assisting smal
entities in understanding and complying with federal regulations;
 authorized the National Ombudsman to evaluate federal agency regulatory
compliance guides, ensure that those guides are available to smal business
development centers and other SBA management and training resource partners,
conduct smal business customer service surveys on an ongoing basis to assess
the timeliness and quality of federal agency regulatory activities, and develop an
outreach program to promote awareness of the National Ombudsman’s activities;
and
 authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out these
additional responsibilities.

56 SBA, Office of the National Ombudsman, 2018 Annual Report to Congress, pp. 35-37.
57 U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, Examining How Small Businesses
Confront and Shape Regulations, hearing statement by Frank Knapp Jr., co -Chairman, American Sustainable Business
Council (ASBC); President and CEO, South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce, 115 th Cong., 1st sess.,
March 29, 2017, S.Hrg. 115-21 (Washington: GPO, 2017), p. 13.
Congressional Research Service

13

SBA Office of the National Ombudsman: Overview, History, and Current Issues

Others Members appear unconvinced that providing the Office of the National Ombudsman
additional resources and/or authority is necessary. They have argued, for example, that the best
way to reduce smal business regulatory burden is not more government but less regulation.58
Concluding Observations
The Office of the National Ombudsman is a smal office with a relatively large mandate—to
serve as an impartial liaison across federal agencies for smal businesses that believe they have
not been treated fairly in the enforcement of federal regulations. It faces several chal enges.
First, the Office of the National Ombudsman is general y recognized as being an independent,
impartial office, but it is housed within the SBA and remains subject to its influence through (1)
its proximity to the agency and its organizational culture; (2) the budgetary process, which
provides the SBA Administrator the authority to determine the Office of the National
Ombudsman’s budget; and (3) the appointment and removal process, which provides the SBA
Administrator the authority to hire and fire the ombudsman. In addition, the sheer size of the SBA
(more than 4,600 full-time employees) relative to the Office of the National Ombudsman (6
employees), and the existence of the SBA’s Office of Advocacy, which has a similar mission (but
focused primarily on regulatory development as opposed to regulatory compliance and
enforcement), makes it more difficult than would otherwise be the case for the Office of the
National Ombudsman to be recognized by stakeholders as the definitive voice for smal
businesses in the regulatory process.
Second, the National Ombudsman has often had a relatively short tenure. Prior to Stefanie Baker
Wehagen’s appointment in June of 2019, the previous two National Ombudsmen (Earl L. Gay
and Nathan J. Mil er) each served for about a year.59 The National Ombudsman has left office for
various reasons, such as a change in Administration or for opportunities in the private sector.
Frequent turnover can lead to continuity problems for the office.
Third, the Office of the National Ombudsman does not have the authority to compel federal
agencies to undertake specific actions to resolve disputes. As a result, although its annual rating
of federal agency responsiveness to smal business concerns does provide it a means to exert
some influence on federal agency actions, its role in resolving disputes is somewhat constrained.
Final y, the Office of the National Ombudsman’s relatively limited budget and staffing level
restricts its ability to engage in outreach activities that could increase smal business awareness of
its existence and services.

58 For example, see U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, Examining How Small
Businesses Confront and Shape Regulations, hearing statement by Sen. John Kennedy, 115th Cong., 1st sess., March 29,
2017, S.Hrg. 115-21 (Washington: GPO, 2017), p. 22.
59 Nine people have served as the National Ombudsman: Peter Barca (1996 -1999), Gail A. McDonald (2000-2001),
Michael L. Barrera (2001-2005), Nicholas N. Owens (2006-2009), Esther H. Vassar (2009-2012), Brian M. Castro
(2013-2015), Earl L. Gay (2015-2016), Nathan J. Miller (2017-2018), and Stefanie Baker Wehagen (2019 -). SBA,
Office of Congressional and Legislative Affairs, correspondence with the author, December 18, 2017; and SBA, “ SBA
Appoints T wo New Executives,” at https://www.sba.gov/about-sba/sba-newsroom/press-releases-media-advisories/sba-
appoints-two-new-senior-executiveshttps://www.sba.gov/about -sba/sba-newsroom/press-releases-media-advisories/
sba-appoints-two-new-senior-executives.
Congressional Research Service

14

SBA Office of the National Ombudsman: Overview, History, and Current Issues

Author Information

Robert Jay Dilger

Senior Specialist in American National Government

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should n ot be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

Congressional Research Service
R45071 · VERSION 14 · UPDATED
15