List date(s) this work was published or aired.
Oct. 19, 20 and 30, 2011 (submitted as a “designated series”)
Provide a brief synopsis of the story or stories, including any significant findings.
A former executive at a large, popular nonprofit hospice came forward with allegations of Medicare fraud. I was able to obtain emails, letters and financial documents to show that the hospice had a pattern of keeping patients for much longer than the industry average, and that it had been under scrutiny by federal auditors before suddenly discharging a large percentage of patients. Although the hospice’s CEO, several board members and even the hospice spokesman initially refused to talk to me, they did issue a statement the following day, which is why we ran the response on Day 2. In the course of investigating this particular hospice, I found numerous similar allegations against other hospices and hospice chains around the country.
Explain types of documents, data or Internet resources used. Were FOI or public records act requests required? How did this affect the work?
Much of the initial piece was based on a lawsuit filed by the whistle-blower. But I also obtained the IRS tax returns for the hospice, a 501-c-3, and I searched property records to see what and how much the CEO owned. Most of the other documents– the emails, memos and internal financial documents– were provided by people who wished to remain anonymous, and by themselves they were not strong enough to show a pattern of behavior. I did file an FoI request with the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, but the response did not come in time to help.
Explain types of human sources used.
My main source was the former vice president of finance– the whistle-blower. But I also had off-the-record conversations with numerous board members and former board members to corroborate the things I was hearing.
Results:
The jury is still out. I am told the FBI is investigating, though the FBI won’t substantiate this. The Florida Attorney General’s Office announced it is “monitoring” the situation, and the lawsuit is still in its early stages. But I have received emails from former hospice donors saying they will not make any more contributions until the mess is cleaned up and/or the current hospice CEO is out of the picture.
Follow-up (if any). Have you run a correction or clarification on the report or has anyone come forward to challenge its accuracy? If so, please explain.
There have been no corrections or clarifications, and the only one to allege that there were inaccuracies is the hospice CEO, who won’t provide specifics. I have continued to investigate paperwork that was filed with the state Agency for Health Care Administration within days of the initial story’s publication after rumors that the CEO was attempting to sell the hospice. So far, I have not been able to verify that claim nor any prospective buyers, and the state tells me the paperwork is a mere formality.
Advice to other journalists planning a similar story or project.
Public records are your best friend. Without the filing of a lawsuit and the details of a Form 990, I wouldn’t have had much meat for the story– especially since this was a popular nonprofit with well-attended fundraising events and a reputation for helping families through emotionally draining times. Ultimately, the allegations of fraud didn’t outrage our readers as much as the details of the very generous compensation the CEO was making (from what was supposed to be a faith-based nonprofit helping society’s most vulnerable citizens) and the fact that he earned a sizable per-patient bonus. The latter made him seem greedy– and ghoulish. Also, even though it didn’t provide a wealth of information, it helped to approach the board members delicately, letting them know that I really just wanted the truth, whatever it was. By getting some independent corroboration from them, I had the assurance that our whistle-blower wasn’t some embittered executive bent on revenge. I also investigated his background at length, both in Florida and his previous state of residence– an important step I would remind any journalist to take.