This post was updated Sept. 19 at 2:46 p.m.

Seven current and former UCLA employees alleged in at least 22 separate whistleblower and retaliatory reports that the university’s head of strategic communications fostered a toxic work environment and mismanaged department funds, according to court documents. 

Mary Osako, UCLA’s vice chancellor for strategic communications since 2019, filed a lawsuit against the UC Board of Regents on Aug. 26 to block the release of an investigative report that she claimed would damage her reputation. The investigation – which was conducted by Grutman Law, P.C. and commissioned by the UC Board of Regents – includes details about Osako’s conduct and workplace relationships, according to court filings. 

UCLA posted in its whistleblower portal Feb. 20 that Grutman’s investigation substantiated multiple allegations brought forth in the whistleblower reports and that they forwarded the findings to Chancellor Julio Frenk’s office, according to court documents. Osako has remained in her position since.

[Related: UCLA head of strategic communications sues UC Regents, seeks to block report release]

“The ongoing misconduct and mismanagement by Vice Chancellor Mary Osako of Strategic Communications at UCLA has persisted unchecked for far too long,” said Amanda Savercool, the former executive director of integrated marketing under strategic communications, in a June 2025 whistleblower complaint. “Staff have endured intimidation, retaliation, and unethical conduct, made worse by a leadership style that isolates, silences, and punishes.” 

Osako allegedly secured contracts with consulting firms owned by her friends and spent millions of dollars to hire communications consultancies for overlapping work, said Larisa Cuculovic-Janjic, the director of special projects within strategic communications, in an April 2025 whistleblower report. 

Cuculovic-Janjic alleged that Osako used university funds to decorate her office and hire Cuore Collective – an external communications consultancy that Cuculovic-Janjic said was owned by two of Osako’s personal friends – to manage her personal brand and LinkedIn strategy. 

Osako paid Cuore Collective $600,000 in fiscal year 2024-25, and continually pushed to allocate more funds to the firm, Cuculovic-Janjic alleged in the report. 

Osako follows Cuore Collective on Instagram, as well as the two personal accounts of the owners – Pia Arthur and Kelly Cheeseman. She has left comments on posts from Cheeseman’s and Arthur’s personal accounts. 

Osako’s LinkedIn also shows that she, Arthur and Cheeseman all worked for Amazon’s communications team from 2012-2014. 

Savercool alleged in court documents and in her whistleblower report that Osako also hired Michelle Suttell, another former Amazon employee, as a consultant for planning Frenk’s inauguration. Savercool also alleged that Osako told her she had to go on the record saying it was a good idea to hire Suttell, even though Savercool disagreed with the decision. Suttell worked with Osako at Amazon from 2009-2014, according to her LinkedIn. 

“Vice Chancellor Mary Osako has engaged in repeated, deliberate misuse of university resources — financial, human, and material — to benefit herself personally and professionally,” Cuculovic-Janjic said. 

Paul Rigali, Osako’s lawyer, said in an emailed statement on behalf of Osako that the accusations are false and that Osako has not faced any disciplinary action. He added that Frenk’s support of Osako “speaks volumes.”

“The filings reveal regurgitated and categorically false assertions made by a handful of disgruntled individuals,” Rigali said in the statement. “In complaints like these, anyone can allege anything, but that doesn’t make it true.”

UCLA Media Relations and the seven current and former employees did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the whistleblower and retaliatory reports. 

The employees who filed the whistleblower reports requested the investigative report under the California Public Records Act, a state law that allows the public to request records from government agencies including the UC. A CPRA request can be denied if its publication would violate privacy. 

Osako told staff in March 2025 that the department would potentially cut its budget and layoff staff, Savercool said in her complaint. But Osako retained two external consultants – costing the department nearly $1 million, Savercool alleged. 

“These consultants have produced minimal output – mostly an internal process document – yet appear to serve primarily to shield Ms. Osako from engagement and accountability,” Savercool said in the report. 

During the spring 2024 pro-Palestine encampment, Osako removed a team of strategic communications staff from UCLA’s emergency response center due to personal disagreements with other leaders, Wileen Wong Kromhout, associate director of operations in the strategic communications department, alleged in an April 2025 whistleblower report. 

Protesters erected tents outside Royce Hall to demand the University divest from companies associated with the Israeli military. 

Counterprotesters attacked the encampment the night of April 30, 2024, throwing scooters, fireworks and tear gas into the area. Osako said in a 12:12 a.m. statement May 1, 2024 that law enforcement had been called for immediate support. Police, though, did not intervene until more than two hours later. 

[Related: Pro-Israel counter-protesters attempt to storm encampment, sparking violence]

Police then swept the encampment May 2, resulting in more than 200 student arrests. 

“This directly impeded information flow and essential team coordination during a high-risk campus event that turned out to be one of the worst crisis in the university’s history,” Kromhout said. 

Gary Stevens, the director of digital strategy and marketing under strategic communications, alleged in an April 2025 whistleblower report that Osako restructured the department at least five times, leading to high staff turnover and a lack of stability. 

Shilo Munk, Osako’s chief of staff since February 2020, alleged that though she did not file any whistleblower reports against Osako, she was retaliated against after participating in an interview with Grutman in September of 2025.

Munk, who has worked at UCLA since 2009, alleged in a retaliatory complaint that after Osako learned she participated in the interview, she removed Munk from important leadership meetings, excluded her from routine decision-making processes, undermined her role by communicating with others in the department and restricted her access to significant information. 

Munk alleged in the report that Osako performed “ongoing retaliatory conduct that created professional harm, diminished my role and authority, and interfered with my ability to perform my assigned responsibilities.”

Marianna Wolfe, a former chief administrative officer and chief financial officer for strategic communications who was moved to UCLA central human resources July 22, said in the court documents that she filed a CPRA request because she wanted to understand what Grutman found in its investigation and why Osako was not held accountable for her mismanagement.

“I wanted to understand what the University had determined and why there appeared to be no accountability for Vice Chancellor Osako’s conduct,” Wolfe said. “I also wanted to understand why I continued to experience retaliatory conduct after participating in the investigation, particularly when the University’s whistleblower policies prohibit retaliation and provide protections for employees who report concerns.”

Wolfe alleged in three whistleblower reports filed in April 2025 that Osako fostered a culture of toxicity and hostility within the department. She punished employees who disagreed with her and hired external companies to do their work, Wolfe alleged. 

Wolfe also alleged in her report that many competent employees left strategic communications because intimidation from Osako negatively impacted their mental health – or because they feared retaliation.

“Mary Osako, is a narcissist that continues to abuse her power,” Wolfe said. 

Michael Callahan, the editorial director of UCLA Magazine within strategic communications, alleged in a May 8, 2025 whistleblower complaint that the two external consultants Osako hired were acting as “aggressive gatekeepers” and made the department inefficient. Callahan added that it was impossible to get work done because Osako frequently left the office without explanation, and her approval was necessary to move forward in most projects.

“Our department is under siege by a vice chancellor who is bullying, dismissive of people’s legitimate concerns, who gives no thought to people’s personal time or personal lives and the impact her capricious decision-making and constant indecisiveness make, who belittles people, who is openly hostile and dismissive,” Callahan said in the report. 

Callahan said he experienced severe emotional distress because of Osako’s behavior. 

“She cares about only one thing, which is “looking good” to the new chancellor and making sure to curry his favor, no matter what the cost to the people who work for her,” Callahan said.