2026 Whistleblowing Statistics

Median Reports per 100 Employees once again reached an all-time high. At 1.65 in 2025, reporting increased nearly 5% over the sustained record levels of the previous two years. This is particularly notable given that past periods of economic uncertainty often led to lower reporting levels due to fear of calling attention to oneself. 

Fewer organizations are experiencing very low reporting activity, and more are receiving higher Reports per 100 employees. Reporting increased across nearly all organization sizes, with the largest enterprises remaining near five-year highs. 

Organizations that track all intake channels – Web, Hotline and other sources – consistently report higher visibility into concerns. Monitoring all reporting avenues remains essential to understanding an organization’s full risk profile, particularly as increased reporting places greater demands on response systems.

One of the most significant findings this year relates to Case Closure Time. The median increased by seven days year-over-year, from 21 to 28 days – a 33% increase. No organization size was immune, and nearly every Risk Type experienced longer investigation timelines. 

Workplace Civility cases, which historically resolved more quickly, increased from 19 to 31 days. While the percentage of cases open for more than 100 days declined, cases closed within 10 days decreased significantly, signaling pressure on investigative systems. 

Workforce reductions, economic pressures and increasing case complexity may be influencing timelines. Additionally, integration of AI-enabled tools may introduce additional review steps that enhance insight while extending duration. Regardless of cause, timely resolution remains essential to sustaining reporter confidence.

Workplace Conduct continues to represent the largest category of reports, with Workplace Civility remaining the most common Risk Type. However, overall Workplace Conduct reporting declined slightly in 2025. 

Several Risk Types increased in both frequency and median reporting value, including Workplace Civility, Retaliation, Political Activity, Environment and Imminent Threat. These categories often require deeper fact-finding and may contribute to the longer investigation timelines observed this year. 

Retaliation reporting remains particularly important for leadership to monitor. Although reporting increased, substantiation rates declined and median Case Closure Time rose from 32 to 35 days. Because retaliation concerns strongly influence whether employees feel safe speaking up, boards and executive leaders should continue to track this metric closely. 

At the same time, financial and asset-related concerns moved closer to historical levels, suggesting reporting patterns are continuing to normalize following pandemic-era shifts.

After reaching an all-time high in 2024, the overall Substantiation Rate declined modestly to 44% in 2025 but remains within the mid-40% range that has characterized much of the post-pandemic period. 

Nine of the 24 Risk Types had a Substantiation Rate over 50%, with Imminent Threat to a Person, Animals or Property most likely to be substantiated at 83%. Global Trade matters were substantiated at 56%. 

None of the Workplace Conduct Risk Types reached 50%, though the category’s median Substantiation Rate has remained consistent over five years. Reports of retaliation were substantiated at 16%, significantly below the overall rate, reinforcing the need for careful oversight. As reporting volumes rise and case complexity increases, modest moderation in substantiation is not unexpected.

Outcome data suggests organizations are applying more deliberate and differentiated corrective actions. “No Action” outcomes for substantiated cases declined to a five-year low, while Training and Discipline increased and Employment Separation declined across several major Risk Categories. 

These shifts point toward more graduated accountability. Rather than defaulting to termination, organizations appear to reinforce expectations through corrective training and documented discipline. 

However, when corrective action is less visible than termination, organizations may need to reinforce through communication that concerns are taken seriously and addressed consistently. Consistency, proportionality and visibility in corrective action remain essential to maintaining confidence in speak-up systems as reporting volumes and investigative complexity grow.

Web reporting continues to exceed Hotline reporting by frequency. Employee Hotline usage declined over a three-year period, while Web intake increased. Reports submitted through Other channels rose modestly. 

Organizations that track intake across all available sources report significantly higher median reporting levels than those that track only limited channels, reinforcing that visibility drives insight. 

Web reports remain more likely to be anonymous yet continue to demonstrate strong substantiation rates. Follow-up engagement with anonymous reporters reached a five-year high, showing that anonymity does not prevent meaningful dialogue. As reporting behaviors shift, organizations should ensure all channels remain accessible, well-publicized and integrated within a unified case management framework.

Third-party reporting represented approximately 10% of identified reporter relationships in 2025 and provides important external visibility into business integrity and financial risk. 

Third parties submit a disproportionately high share of Accounting, Auditing & Financial Reporting and Business Integrity concerns compared to employees. Anonymity among third-party reporters remained lower than among employees, and the share of third-party reports resulting in “No Action” has steadily declined. 

Maintaining accessible and credible reporting avenues for external stakeholders is essential, as their unique perspective can surface risks not visible internally.

Ownership structure highlights meaningful differences in reporting behavior. Government entities reported the highest median reporting levels, while public companies reported the lowest. Private organizations demonstrated higher Substantiation Rates and higher frequencies of Employment Separation compared to public companies. 

These differences likely reflect variations in regulatory oversight, stakeholder expectations and governance frameworks. Ownership does not determine program effectiveness, but it shapes how reporting and response patterns emerge. Benchmarking against similarly situated organizations is essential to ensure meaningful comparisons and accurate interpretation of trends. 

Ownership analysis continues to highlight differences in reporting behavior. Government entities reported the highest median reporting levels, while public companies reported the lowest. Private organizations showed higher Substantiation Rates and higher frequencies of Employment Separation compared to public companies.