Principles of good administration also require that the substantive assessment of the information disclosed under Article 22b be carried out carefully, impartially and objectively. The official who discloses such information obviously expects that the authorities informed take action. On the other hand, the primary obligation of these authorities is thoroughly to evaluate the disclosed information before deciding on the appropriate follow-up action. In some circumstances, it may be appropriate not to take any follow-up action at all. However, whatever the decision may be, the authority informed should give reasons for it. Doing so properly and explaining to the whistleblower the steps taken in the handling of his or her disclosure would avoid giving the impression that the authority approached on the basis of Article 22b of the Staff Regulations did not assess the file at all or that there was collusion between that authority and the institution concerned by the disclosure.