
VAS MANAGEMENT OF THE
FEDERAL EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION ACT PROGRAM
TESTIMONY OF
RICHARD J. GRIFFIN, INSPECTOR GENERAL
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND INVESTIGATIONS
March 25, 1999
Mr. Chairman and Members of the
Subcommittee, I am pleased to be here today to comment on opportunities for improving
management of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Federal Employees Compensation
Act (FECA) program, also known as the Workers Compensation Program (WCP). While
VAs management has made improvements in the administration of the WCP, recent OIG
audits and investigations have found that the Department is still significantly at risk
for program fraud, abuse, and unnecessary costs.
In our view, enhanced management and
oversight of VAs WCP is essential as the Department is a significant Federal
employer and annually incurs substantial costs associated with WCP claims resulting from
injury (physical injury, illness, or disease) sustained in the performance of duty. The
Departments Fiscal Year 1998 payment for WCP costs to the Department of Labor (DOL),
which administers the FECA program for the Federal Government, totaled about $140.8
million. These costs are based upon actual payments made by DOL in Charge Back Year (CBY)
1996 for the period July 1, 1995 to June 30, 1996.
In order to address the Departments
risk in the WCP area, we have applied a three-step approach: comprehensive national
audits; joint OIG and Veterans Health Administration (VHA) investigative and fraud
detection efforts; and the development of a protocol package and handbook for use by VA
managers for enhanced program oversight and fraud detection. Our efforts have shown that
there are opportunities for the Department to reduce program fraud and abuse with more
effective review and oversight of WCP claims.
OIG Initiatives in the Workers
Compensation Program
1985 OIG WCP Audit
In 1985, the OIG conducted an audit of
claims filed under FECA. The report cited that the absence of clear program guidelines and
the lack of overall program management resulted in higher WCP costs. The report projected
that program cost would increase from $85 million to $98 million by 1990 if corrective
actions were not taken to control costs. The principal audit recommendation was to assign
responsibility in VA for program review, oversight, and evaluation of Department, agency,
and facility activities. In response to the recommendation, VA established a part-time WCP
Specialist position and developed program guidelines. A circular, which provided
instructions for managing WCP cases and costs, was issued in 1989.
1992 OIG WCP Audit
In 1992, the OIG conducted an audit of the
WCP as part of a government-wide review of the FECA program sponsored by the
Presidents Council on Integrity and Efficiency. Government-wide, VA had the fourth
largest FECA program, costing $116 million. The audit focused on VHA claims because they
accounted for about 95 percent of all VA WCP claims. This audit found management of the
WCP could be improved. The audit findings were based on case reviews of national
statistical samples and questionnaires completed by 108 VHA field activities.
Specifically, the audit found that:
- Work-capable employees were not returned to work because
VHA field activities were not proactively monitoring WCP cases. We estimated that for the
year ended June 30, 1992, about $11 million of WCP costs could have been avoided by
returning claimants to work.
- In addition, we noted that long-term claimants received
over 50 percent of the WCP compensation benefits paid. By returning to work current
claimants who are no longer disabled, VA could reduce future payments by an estimated $232
million.
- Additionally, we found that VHA field activities did not
consistently offer light duty positions to partially recovered employees.
We found that VHA field activities also
did not have current medical information for some claimants, and in some instances, did
not even have case files. Accordingly, the field activity could not monitor the
claimants recovery process. Additionally, we found that VA was not aggressively
challenging questionable claims. As a result, we estimated that VA could not verify $17.8
million in annual WCP compensation payments.
We recommended that the Under Secretary
for Health take actions to ensure that work-capable WCP claimants were removed from the
rolls, and to improve management of the WCP area by developing a system to monitor program
effectiveness. We also recommended that VA provide accountability at the local level by
changing policy so that associated WCP costs were charged back to local facilities. In
response to the audit findings, VA began charging part of the WCP costs to local
facilities in 1994 and all of the costs in 1995. VA also began developing a WCP Management
Information System (WC-MIS) in 1994, and issued new policies and procedures in August of
1997.
1995 Joint OIG/VISN Task Force to
Prevent and Detect Fraud
In 1995, a joint OIG Office of
Investigation and VHA effort at 4 VHA field activities in the New York City area resulted
in 14 indictments and convictions for fraudulent WCP claims. Fines and restitution ordered
totaled over $500,000 and lifetime savings from removal of the claimants from the WCP
rolls would be about $4.3 million. Our efforts used numerous investigative techniques
including surveillance, grand jury subpoenas, record reviews, and interviews.
One investigation involved a former motor
vehicle operator at a VA Medical Center (VAMC) who received $85,800 in workers'
compensation benefits between May 1991 and June 1996. In May 1997, the employee pleaded
guilty to one count of making false statements in order to receive workers' compensation
benefits. The employee admitted that he had submitted false statements to the Government
indicating that he was unable to work due to an on-the-job injury at the VAMC while, in
fact, he was the owner and operator of a restaurant. In August 1997, the employee was
sentenced to 6 months' home confinement, 5 years' probation, and ordered to pay $85,800 in
restitution. It is estimated that VA will realize a savings and cost recovery of $843,574.
Civil action is pending.
In another case, a former food service
supervisor at a VAMC through his wife, a former chief of labor relations at the same VAMC,
filed for workers' compensation benefits in July 1990, after reporting he sustained an
injury to his lower back, and has received approximately $128,000 in benefits. In
September 1996, the employee was indicted on one count each of false statements and
conspiracy and his wife was indicted on one count of conspiracy. In November 1996, the
employee pleaded guilty to both charges. He admitted that, while he was receiving workers'
compensation benefits, he owned and operated a limousine service. In February 1997, his
wife, the chief of labor relations, pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to defraud
the Government. The wife admitted she assisted her husband in the preparation of the false
documents he submitted. In April 1997, the employee was sentenced to 1 month's
imprisonment, 36 months' supervised release, to include 6 months' home detention, and was
ordered to pay $40,000 in restitution to the Government. In June 1997, the wife was
sentenced to 4 months' imprisonment and 24 months' supervised release, to include 5
months' home detention. It is estimated that VA will realize a savings and cost recovery
of $930,000.
A discussion of some of the other program
fraud cases we developed is presented in the Appendix to this testimony.
1998 National Audit of VAs WCP Costs
In 1998, at the request of Department
officials, the OIG conducted a national audit of VAs WCP costs. The objective of the
audit was to identify opportunities for the Department to reduce costs associated with WCP
claims. The audit focused on the effectiveness of VAs case management of WCP claims.
The audit report was issued on July 1,
1998 and found that VA had made improvements in returning injured workers back to work and
that overall program costs had been reduced for three Charge Back Years by a total of 6
percent. However, we found a lack of effective WCP case management at some VA facilities
and that the Department was still at risk for program abuse, fraud, and unnecessary costs.
A national statistical sample of active cases found that better case management could be
achieved in 20.4 percent of the WCP cases reviewed. Based on the sample results, we
estimated that VA in CBY 1996 could have potentially avoided $17.5 million in WCP
compensation costs by returning employees back to work and/or removing employees from WCP
rolls. We also estimated a future cost avoidance of about $247 million in reduced WCP
compensation costs for projected lifetime benefits for claimants. Our review also
identified 26 potential fraud cases that were referred to the OIG Office of
Investigations. Based on the sample results, we estimated that in CBY 1996 there were over
500 fraudulent WCP cases totaling about $9 million.
The audit found that there are
opportunities for VA to further reduce WCP compensation costs nationally with improvements
in key case management areas. Key areas that can be enhanced included:
- Offering light duty to employees.
- Providing more timely follow-up actions.
- Maintaining case files on all open/active WCP cases.
- Providing more consistent resources to the program.
- Collecting and using "Continuation of Pay" cost
information as a management tool for monitoring potential WCP cost and employee health and
safety issues.
- Establishing more comprehensive WCP policies and procedures
that take advantage of the best practices and proven case management methods identified in
our review.
- Completing certain WC-MIS modifications to enhance the use
of the system.
The report included recommendations that
should strengthen WCP case management and reduce program cost by more effectively
identifying employees to be brought back to work or removed from the rolls. Given the
significance of the audit findings and the continued risk of program abuse and fraud, we
recommended that the WCP continue to be monitored by the Department and included on its
potential material weakness watch list of Internal High Priority Areas.
1998 Joint OIG and VHA Fraud Detection
Efforts in Veterans Integrated Service Networks (VISNs) 2 and 22
Our audit and investigative experience has
shown that potential WCP fraud can be profiled using selected case attributes or "red
flags". Identification of these red flags range from analysis of automated data to
detail discussions with appropriate facility staff and/or review of WCP claim and
personnel files. Examples of red flags that can be identified through analysis of
automated data are:
- High compensation costs with little or no medical costs.
- Claimant lives out-of-state or has a Post Office box
address.
- Extremely old case.
Examples of red flags that can be
initially identified through analysis of automated data but are also dependent on local
economies or other factors are:
- Claimant has marketable job skills.
- Claimant alleges soft tissue injuries such as lower back
injuries.
- Claimant has a history of WCP claims.
Examples of red flags that can only be
identified by review of WCP claim and personnel files and/or discussions with appropriate
facility staff are:
- Employees that are about to be terminated or have an
adverse personal action taken.
- Temporary or seasonal work about to end.
- A tip from facility employees or other sources such as
local newspapers.
During 1998 we used the red flags
identified by our audit and investigative efforts and developed methodologies for
identifying questionable and potential fraudulent WCP claims. Through initial analysis of
CBY 1996 WCP data and discussions with VHAs Chief Network Officer, VISN 22 (Long
Beach, CA) was selected for testing and refinement of our protocol package review
methodology. At the request of the Network Officer, we also reviewed WCP claims in VISN 2
(Albany, NY) using CBY 1997 WCP data.
Our initial case selection criteria was
made through automated analysis of WCP claims that received compensation payments in a
given CBY using the red flag of high compensation with little or no medical cost. Cases
were reviewed and analyzed to identify potential fraud and to determine and/or prioritize
what actions needed to be taken to remove the claimants from the WCP rolls. Our efforts
included:
- Site visits to DOLs Office of Workers
Compensation Program (OWCP) District Offices in San Francisco, New York, and Jacksonville.
- Discussions with the DOL Office of Inspector General,
Office of Investigations.
- Discussions with the California State Insurance Fraud
Division.
We selected only those WCP cases with
compensation payments over $5,000 and medical payments less than $1,500 in the CBY being
reviewed. Our review efforts have shown that these cases have the highest potential for
fraud and removal from the WCP rolls. Although all WCP cases should be reviewed, using the
above methodology assisted in determining which cases should be reviewed first.
These reviews have identified a number of
potential fraud cases and claimants that have or will be removed from the WCP rolls.
Overall, these reviews resulted in potential lifetime benefit reductions in compensation
payments totaling about $45 million.
Development of WCP Protocol Package
and Handbook
Based on work that we jointly completed
with the Department in VISNs 2 and 22, a protocol package was developed to provide a
methodology for enhanced VISN level review and oversight of WCP claims. Key aspects of the
review methodology include:
- Coordination of review efforts with DOLs OWCP
District Office to establish procedures for requesting assistance such as interpretations
of information in OWCP case files.
- Identification of best practices and other tools that can
be used to enhance case management and reduce program costs.
- Automated case targeting package for each VISN that
prioritizes cases for review that have the highest opportunity for potential removal from
the rolls and identification of fraudulent claims.
- Case review instructions and worksheets to organize the
start of review efforts.
In addition to the protocol package, we
also developed a handbook to aid individual VA WCP coordinators and specialists with
day-to-day case management and fraud detection. This handbook contains key information and
instructions from the protocol package but is designed for individual facilities. The
methodology presented in the handbook was tested in VISNs 2 and 22 with the very
successful results that I have discussed in this testimony. Although the protocol package
was developed to provide VISNs with an effective methodology to enhance review and
oversight of WCP claims and reduce annual VHA costs, these methodologies can be used by
all Departmental offices.
One of the most important factors
identified in our protocol package for effective WCP case management and fraud detection
is providing sufficient program resources. In addition, our review found that the use of
ergonomics and back programs is very effective in reducing employee injuries. There should
be an ergonomic technical advisory group established to oversee the development of
policies that emphasizes safety and training.
There should also be an accident review
team that reviews all accidents that occur at the facility. This team should be made up of
the WCP specialist, the safety officer, someone from occupational health, and a management
representative. The accident review team should evaluate the circumstances of the accident
to determine what should be done to prevent a recurrence.
The protocol package also contains an
automated analysis of WCP claims as well as instructions on how to review WCP cases for
identifying potential fraud. The automated analysis of WCP claims provides a basis to
prioritize cases for review and identify cases most likely to be fraudulent based on
indicators developed during recent OIG initiatives in this program area.
Once the WCP cases have been prioritized
through automated analysis, individual case reviews are needed to identify actions to
remove the claimants from the rolls and to identify potential fraud. Specific
instructions, including worksheets to aid in review and analysis, for case reviews are
presented in the protocol package and handbook. Additionally, documents that will be
reviewed and indicators of fraud are discussed. The case analysis and review worksheets
provided with the protocol package were designed to provide a structured methodology for
classifying WCP cases.
This concludes my testimony. I would be
pleased to answer any questions you may have.
APPENDIX
Program Fraud Case Examples
WCP fraud occurs when someone knowingly
and with intent to mislead, presents or causes to be presented, any written statement that
is materially false and in order to obtain some benefit or advantage. Our 1998 audit of
WCP costs showed that an estimated $9 million of CBY 1996 WCP costs could potentially be
the result of program fraud.
The following examples are provided to
highlight some of the types of FECA fraud cases that we have identified involving VA
employees.
A former director of a Regional Education
Medical Center received $530,000 in workers' compensation benefits since 1989. Information
provided by the VAMC in 1994 indicated that the employee was teaching on behalf of an
international organization, traveling throughout Europe and the Far East. The employee
filed for workers' compensation benefits in 1989, claiming that an on-the-job automobile
accident in 1987, in which he sustained injuries to his head and neck, also aggravated an
injury to his lower back, which he reportedly sustained in 1983. As a result, the employee
claimed he could not work. A Federal search warrant was executed on the employee's home
and 15 boxes of evidence were seized including: financial records, tax returns,
correspondence identifying employment related activities and travel records. In mid-1997,
the employee and the United States Attorney's office (criminal and civil) reached a civil
agreement. The employee agreed to relinquish any right to receive further benefits and to
pay back to the Government $260,000. A certified check was received 2 weeks later.
A former nurse's assistant at a VA
extended care center received nearly $160,000 in workers' compensation benefits from March
1980, until her conviction in March 1997. The employee is a licensed practical nurse and
was employed by at least six employers including another VA facility while she received
her workers' compensation benefits. In December 1996, the employee was indicted on one
count of false statements and in March 1997, was sentenced to 5 years' probation. It is
estimated that VA will realize a savings and restitution of $320,600.
A former electrician at a VAMC received
approximately $320,000 in workers' compensation benefits since 1989, when he claimed
post-traumatic stress disorder. The employee was arrested in July 1996 and admitted he had
been employed while receiving workers' compensation benefits. In December 1996, the
employee pleaded guilty to a one-count information and in April 1997, was sentenced to 6
months' home detention and 2 years' probation. In November 1997, the employee agreed to a
civil settlement of approximately $38,000. It is estimated that VA will realize savings of
$440,000.
A former VA registered nurse received
$271,600 in workers' compensation benefits since 1980, when she claimed a lower back
injury. Inquiries determined that the employee has worked for three different employers
while collecting workers' compensation benefits. In April 1997, the employee was indicted
on one count of submitting a false statement to the Government. We estimate projected
savings of $370,000.
An individual received workers'
compensation while operating several contracting businesses and receiving 100-percent VA
compensation benefits based on unemployability. In February 1996, the individual pleaded
guilty to one count each of mail fraud and fraudulent acceptance of VA benefits. In June
1996, the individual was sentenced to 36 months' imprisonment and 2 years' probation. VA
created a compensation overpayment of $46,163.
A former VA police officer received
$82,600 in workers' compensation benefits from March 1977 until June 1996, for a claimed
lumbar injury. In May 1996, a one-count information was filed in U.S. District Court
charging the employee with failure to report his employment with a local roofing
contractor while receiving workers' compensation benefits. In August 1996, the employee
pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 5 months' imprisonment, 5 months' home confinement,
and 3 years' probation. VA will realize savings of $102,322.
A former licensed practical nurse received
workers' compensation from April 1988 until December 1996 for a claimed electrical shock.
The investigation established that she had worked from 1993 through 1995 while receiving
workers' compensation benefits. The employee was indicted in November 1996, on 15 counts
of making false statements. In February 1997, the employee pleaded guilty to all 15 counts
and was sentenced to 6 months' home detention, 36 months' probation, and was ordered to
pay $30,804 in restitution. The Government will realize recovery and savings of $81,554.
A VA claims clerk received workers'
compensation from 1985 until June 1997. The employee was indicted on three counts of
making false statements to the Government in order to obtain workers' compensation
benefits. In September 1997, the employee pled guilty and admitted that she had lied when
she claimed not to be working when, in fact, she was employed numerous times as a licensed
vocational nurse. She was sentenced to 6 months' imprisonment, 6 months' home confinement,
3 years' probation, and was ordered to pay $46,245 in restitution. As a result of her
false statements, she was overpaid more than $159,000 in workers' compensation. It is
estimated that VA will have savings of $295,000.
Back to News From Hearing on
Management of
Federal Employees Compensation Act at the VA |