Philadelphia’s Blue Cross pays $22.5 Million to settle Medicare fraud suit

Posted on

By Jeff Newman, Esq., MBA, with AI help

Independence Blue Cross agreed to resolve federal claims that its nurses’ chart reviews identified diagnoses that increased Medicare payments, while leaving diagnoses the same reviews could not support in place. The former employee who sued in 2020 will receive $3.825 million.

PHILADELPHIA — A woman who had worked inside Independence Blue Cross filed the lawsuit under seal in the federal courthouse on Market Street on Nov. 18, 2020. For nearly six years, the public knew nothing about it. On Sept. 30, the Justice Department announced the outcome.

Independence Blue Cross, the Philadelphia insurer known across the region as IBX, agreed to pay $22.5 million to resolve allegations that it violated the federal False Claims Act by submitting, and then failing to withdraw, inaccurate diagnosis codes for patients in its Medicare Advantage plans. The whistleblower, Suzanne Crawford, a former IBX employee, will receive $3,825,000 of the recovery, according to the settlement agreement and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania’s announcement.

IBX denies the allegations. The agreement states that it is not an admission of liability, and the government notes that the claims are allegations only, with no determination of liability. In a statement to Becker’s, the company said it settled to avoid “the delay, uncertainty, expense, and distraction of prolonged litigation.”

This is a Philadelphia case from start to finish. The defendant is a Pennsylvania corporation with its principal place of business in the city. The whistleblower came from inside the company. The suit was filed and resolved in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, and David Metcalf, the United States Attorney whose office sits on Chestnut Street, announced the settlement. Assistant U.S. Attorney Peter Carr and litigation consultant Lauren M. Cordrey of the Philadelphia office handled the case, with Wendy Zupac of the Justice Department’s Civil Fraud Section and support from the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General.

“The Medicare Advantage program depends on accurate data about patient health,” Mr. Metcalf said. “When insurers inflate their profits and the government’s costs by submitting or failing to correct unsupported diagnoses, my office will continue to hold them accountable.”

How the money moves

Medicare Advantage, also called Part C, lets eligible Medicare recipients leave the traditional government program and enroll in private plans. The government pays those plans a fixed monthly amount per member and adjusts it upward for sicker members who are expected to cost more. The plans tell the government how sick their members are by submitting diagnosis codes. More codes for serious chronic conditions generally mean higher payments.

The stakes are large. “The government pays private insurers over $530 billion each year to care for Americans enrolled in Medicare Advantage,” said Brett A. Shumate, the assistant attorney general who leads the Justice Department’s Civil Division.

Because the system runs on the plans’ own data, federal rules require that every submitted code be supported by the patient’s medical record. Each year a plan must certify, “based on best knowledge, information, and belief,” that its data is “accurate, complete, and truthful.” The settlement agreement notes that IBX signed such a certification every year. The whistleblower’s lawyer is Joseph Callow of Cincinnati.

The review that looked only one way

At the center of the government’s case is a program the settlement agreement identifies by name: “IBX Review.”

For services delivered from 2016 through 2020, which drove Medicare payments for 2017 through 2021, IBX retrieved patients’ charts from doctors and hospitals and retained nurse reviewers to go back through them and identify every risk-adjusting condition the records supported. When the nurses found conditions doctors had not coded, IBX sent those additional codes to Medicare, and in some cases, Medicare paid more.

But the government contends the same reviews cut the other way, too. Doctors had sometimes reported diagnoses that IBX’s own nurses, reading the same charts in search of every supported condition, did not find. The government says those codes were unsubstantiated and invalid, and IBX did not investigate or withdraw them all because doing so would have required it to pay Medicare back. It then certified that its data was accurate.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office put the allegation plainly: IBX used its chart reviews to find chances to seek more money from Medicare while ignoring the same results when they showed IBX had been overpaid.

The agreement’s recitals describe three legal theories: false claims for payment, false attestations material to those payments, and what lawyers call a “reverse” false claim, knowingly avoiding or decreasing an obligation to repay the government. That third piece matters. It reaches money a company keeps, not only money it requests.

A familiar theory, a different ending

The theory is not new. In March 2020, federal prosecutors in Manhattan sued Anthem, now Elevance Health, alleging a similar “one-sided” chart review program that the government said often generated $100 million or more a year in additional revenue. Elevance denies wrongdoing and continues to contest the case. A federal judge in Manhattan refused to dismiss it in 2022, and Elevance’s most recent quarterly report to the Securities and Exchange Commission says discovery is still underway, with expert discovery scheduled to close in May 2027.

Ms. Crawford filed her complaint in Philadelphia eight months after the Anthem suit. The public record does not show whether the timing was connected.

The Philadelphia case stands apart because of its outcome. The government’s flagship case on this theory is still in discovery more than six years after it was filed; the case a Philadelphia insider brought is paid and closed. Mr. Shumate seemed to have the contrast in mind: the government, he said, will hold insurers accountable “whether they are a small regional plan or a large nationwide organization.”

The fine print

The settlement agreement, which the Justice Department posted publicly, contains details that did not make the headlines.

  • Half is restitution. Of the $22.5 million, $11.25 million is designated as restitution. The total is exactly twice that figure.
  • Interest is running. IBX owes interest at 4.25 percent a year on the full amount from Sept. 6, 2026, until paid, with payment due within seven days of the agreement’s effective date.
  • The whistleblower’s share is 17 percent. Ms. Crawford’s $3,825,000 works out to 17 percent of the settlement, within the 15-to-30-percent range the False Claims Act allows.
  • Legal fees were settled separately. A successful whistleblower is entitled to have the defendant pay reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. IBX and Ms. Crawford resolved that claim in a separate agreement whose terms are not public.
  • The government kept its options open. The release covers only the conduct described. The United States expressly reserved any criminal liability, any liability of individuals, and its authority to exclude the company from federal health programs.
  • No second bite. IBX agreed not to resubmit previously denied diagnoses related to the conduct and to withdraw any pending appeals of those denials.
  • Signed in September. The agreement was signed on IBX’s behalf by its chief financial officer on Sept. 11.

Not the first time

This is not IBX’s first encounter with a whistleblower from its own ranks. On Sept. 3, 2020, the same U.S. Attorney’s Office announced that two IBX subsidiaries, Keystone Health Plan East and QCC Insurance Company, would pay $2.25 million plus interest to resolve allegations that they miscalculated prior costs in their Medicare Advantage bids for 2009 and 2010, causing Medicare to overpay. An IBX employee, Eric Johnson, also brought that case, and the government intervened. Mr. Johnson received $499,438.05.

Ms. Crawford’s lawsuit was filed eleven weeks after that announcement.

The bigger picture

The IBX settlement lands in a year of reckoning for Medicare Advantage risk adjustment. In January, affiliates of Kaiser Permanente agreed to pay $556 million, the largest Medicare Advantage fraud settlement to date, over allegations that they added unsupported diagnoses to patients’ records; the whistleblowers, former Kaiser employees, were set to receive about $95 million combined. Health care fraud made up more than $5.7 billion of the $6.8 billion in False Claims Act settlements in fiscal year 2025, according to Justice Department data reported by Healthcare Dive.

By those measures, $22.5 million is modest. But IBX is not a national giant. It covers more than 2.2 million members across southeastern Pennsylvania, southern New Jersey and Delaware, according to Healthcare Dive. The message from the Philadelphia office is that regional plans, the ones that dominate a single city’s market, are squarely in view.

What the public record does not show

Several questions remain unanswered by the public documents:

  • What Ms. Crawford’s job was at IBX, or how she came to see the conduct.
  • Whether the government formally intervened in her case. Neither the announcement nor the agreement says.
  • How much IBX was allegedly overpaid, which diagnoses were involved, or how many patients.
  • Who represented Ms. Crawford. Her counsel’s signature on the posted agreement is not legible.

Why it matters in Philadelphia

The case began with one person who saw something from the inside and went to federal court. The False Claims Act lets private citizens sue on the government’s behalf, file under seal while the government investigates, and share in any recovery. The act separately protects employees from retaliation for doing so.

Philadelphia is a city built around medicine: hospital systems, academic medical centers, insurers, pharmacies and home-health agencies. The people who understand how the data flows are the nurses who review charts, the coders who assign diagnoses, and the analysts who reconcile what was submitted with what the records support. In this case, the government’s allegation turned on a single comparison: what IBX’s own reviewers found in the chart, set against what IBX had already told Medicare. Someone inside had to notice that the comparison was not being made.

Jeff Newman Law is a national whistleblower law firm that handles Medicare and Medicaid fraud as well as other healthcare fraud matters. The website is www.Jeffnewmanlaw.com and the  telephone number is 617-823-3217

Sources

  • U.S. Attorney’s Office, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, press release, Sept. 30, 2026: https://www.justice.gov/usao-edpa/pr/independence-blue-cross-agrees-pay-225-million-resolve-allegations-it-violated-false
  • Settlement Agreement, United States ex rel. Crawford v. Independence Blue Cross, No. 20-cv-5818 (E.D. Pa.): https://www.justice.gov/opa/media/1463421/dl
  • Becker’s ASC Review (IBX statement): https://www.beckersasc.com/asc-coding-billing-and-collections/independence-blue-cross-to-pay-22-5m-over-inflated-diagnosis-codes/
  • Healthcare Dive: https://www.healthcaredive.com/news/independence-blue-cross-to-pay-to-resolve-ma-fraud-allegations/831998/
  • U.S. Attorney’s Office, E.D. Pa., Keystone Health Plan East/QCC release, Sept. 3, 2020: https://www.justice.gov/usao-edpa/pr/pennsylvania-medicare-advantage-plan-provider-agrees-pay-225m-resolve-allegations
  • Elevance Health Form 10-Q, quarter ended June 30, 2026: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/0001156039/000115603926000060/elv-20260630.htm
  • KFF Health News on the Kaiser settlement: https://kffhealthnews.org/news/article/medicare-advantage-record-fraud-settlement-kaiser-permanente-556-million/