DOJ Sues Medicare Advantage Insurers & CVS Under False Claims Act & Antikickback Statute

May 5, 2025

The Department of Justice is suing three of the nation’s largest health insurance companies — Aetna Inc. and affiliates, Elevance Health Inc. (formerly known as “Anthem”), and Humana Inc., CVS Health Corporation, and three large insurance broker organizations — eHealth, Inc. and an affiliate, GoHealth, Inc., and SelectQuote Inc. for violating the False Claims Act (“FCA”) and Antikickback Statute. In the second complaint of its kind in recent months, the Justice Department complaint in ex rel. Shea v. eHealth, et al., No. 21-cv-11777 (D. Mass. May 5, 2025) accuses the defendants of paying or receiving kickbacks to steer Medicare Advantage enrollees to the defendant insurers.

Medicare Advantage Antikickback & False Claims Rules

Under the Medicare Advantage (“MA”) Program, also known as Medicare Part C, Medicare beneficiaries may choose to enroll in health care plans (MA plans) offered by private insurance companies, like defendants Aetna, Anthem, and Humana. Many Medicare beneficiaries rely on insurance brokers to help them choose an MA plan that best meets their individual needs.

Under the FCA, private parties can file an action on behalf of the United States and receive a portion of the recovery. The FCA permits the United States to intervene in and take over the action, as it has done here. If a defendant is found liable for violating the FCA, the United States may recover three times the amount of its losses plus applicable penalties

In a lawsuit originally filed by a former eHealth employee as a qui tam whistleblower complaint, the Justice Department charges that the defendant insurers paid hundreds of millions of dollars in illegal kickbacks to the defendant brokers in exchange for enrollments into the insurers’ Medicare Advantage plans from 2016 through at least 2021. Rather than acting as unbiased stewards, the Justice Department charges that the defendant brokers allegedly directed Medicare beneficiaries to the plans offered by insurers that paid brokers the most in kickbacks, regardless of the suitability of the MA plans for the beneficiaries.

According to the complaint, the broker organizations incentivized their employees and agents to sell plans based on the insurers’ kickbacks, set up teams of insurance agents who could sell only those plans, and at times refused to sell MA plans of insurers who did not pay sufficient kickbacks.

The Justice Department also alleges that Aetna and Humana each conspired with the broker defendants to discriminate against Medicare beneficiaries with disabilities whom they perceived to be less profitable. Aetna and Humana allegedly did so by threatening to withhold kickbacks to pressure brokers to enroll fewer disabled Medicare beneficiaries in their plans.

The Justice Department further alleges that, in response to these financial incentives from Aetna and Humana, the defendant brokers or their agents rejected referrals of disabled beneficiaries and strategically directed disabled beneficiaries away from Aetna and Humana plans.

Commonwealth Care Alliance Prior Kickback Settlement

The eHealth suit against the defendants is not first of its kind. In January, 2025, the Justice Department announced that MA Program insurer Commonwealth Care Alliance, Inc. (“CCA”) agreed to pay $520,355.65 to resolve allegations that Reliance HMO, Inc. (“Reliance”), a company CCA acquired in 2022, violated the FCA by providing cash payments to induce the referral of Medicare beneficiaries to enroll in Reliance’s Medicare Advantage Plan in violation of the Anti-Kickback Statute after CCA voluntarily self-disclosed the conduct to the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

In April 2019, CMS authorized Reliance to operate a MA plan for Medicare beneficiaries in Michigan, with beneficiaries receiving coverage starting in January 2020. On March 31, 2022, CCA announced the completion of its acquisition of a 70% stake in Reliance. After the acquisition, CCA identified concerns regarding certain marketing-related outreach and payments that Reliance agents had made to personnel at physician practices. In particular, CCA disclosed two schemes.

First, from April 12, 2019, through December 22, 2020, Reliance provided cash payments to healthcare professionals and administrative staff in physician practices, in exchange for providing Reliance with the contact information for patients who had agreed, through executing so-called “permission to contact” cards, to be contacted by Reliance regarding its MA plan offerings.

Second, in November 2019, prior to Reliance’s MA plan becoming active, Reliance paid each of four physicians and physician practices $2,500, which Reliance characterized as advances on “coordination of care” services to be provided by the physicians to beneficiaries when the MA plan became active in 2020.

The Justice Department alleged these payments were intended to induce the referral, recommendation, or arrangement of enrollment of Medicare beneficiaries in Reliance’s MA plan. Such payments, the United States alleges, were impermissible kickbacks in violation of the False Claims Act.

The CCA settlement resolved these charges. The settlement gave CCA credit for voluntarily self-disclosing this conduct to the Justice Department; taking remedial measures, including terminating the employees directly involved with the decision to offer the prohibited payments; and providing the United States with a detailed written statement describing its investigation, along with other supplemental information to assist the United States in its investigation.

Alleged Medicare Advantage Insurer Risk Adjustment Padding

Medicare Advantage insurers also are under investigation by the Justice Department for other alleged abuses. The Justice Department recently has investigated certain Medicare Advantage insurers for alleged manipulation of risk data to increase their capitated payments from Medicare. For Instance, the Justice Department recently sued MA Program insurer Independent Health Association and its affiliate, Independent Health Corporation (collectively, “Independent Health”) for allegedly illegally manipulating risk data used to set risk adjustment rates paid by Medicare to their Medicare Advantage plans in United States ex rel. Ross v. Independent Health Association et al., No. 12-CV-0299(S) (WDNY). To settle the litigation, Independent Health agreed to pay up to $98 million to resolve allegations that it violated the False Claims Act by knowingly submitting or causing the submission of invalid diagnosis codes to Medicare for Medicare Advantage Plan enrollees to increase payments that Independent Health received from Medicare. Under the terms of the settlement, Independent Health promised to make guaranteed payments of $34,500,000 and contingent payments of up to $63,500,000 on behalf of itself and DxID, which ceased operations in 2021. Its Chief Executive Officer separately agreed to pay $2,000,000. In addition, Independent Health entered into a five-year corporate integrity agreement (“CIA”) with HHS-OIG that requires among other things, that Independent Health hire an Independent Review Organization to annually review a sample of Independent Health’s Medicare Advantage patients’ medical records and associated internal controls to help ensure appropriate risk adjustment payments.

The Justice Department touts all of these and other investigations and enforcement actions against Medicare Advantage insurers as demonstrating its commitment to hold Medicare Advantage insurers and brokers accountable for kickbacks or other misconduct. In the Justice Department’s press release about the e-Health litigation, Deputy Assistant Attorney General Michael Granston of the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “We are committed to rooting out illegal practices by Medicare Advantage insurers and insurance brokers that undermine the interests of federal health care programs and the patients they serve.”

Risks For Insurers, Brokers, Health Plans & Fiduciaries

These and other actions send a strong warning to insurers and brokers to abstain from prohibited risk adjustment, kickbacks, or other prohibited conduct. Brokers and insurers also should keep in mind that these activities- whether in connection with the sale of Medicare Advantage or other insurance products Past history demonstrates that these activities carry risks beyond the Antikickback Statute and False Claims Act. They also can create exposures under other federal or state laws. The 2004 bid rigging prosecution of Marsh & McClennon by then New York Attorney General Elliott Spitzer is illustrative. On October 14, 2004, then New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer sued Marsh & McClennan and Marsh, Inc. (“Marsh”) for bid rigging and violation of various other state laws through its compensation arrangements between Marsh and several insurance companies, and bidding manipulation by Marsh. The largest U.S. insurance broker at the time, Marsh agreed in January 2005 to pay $850 million and end improper bid-rigging in a civil settlement with Spitzer. Attorney General Spitzer also brought criminal charges against individuals involved, some of which produced several guilty pleas. The last of these criminal prosecutions dragged on until 2011, when the New York Attorney General finally dismissed the remaining criminal charges against former Marsh executive marketing director William Gilman and former Marsh global placement director Edward McNenney. Marsh and others also faced charges in other states and private litigation from the scandal.

Kickbacks or other inappropriate compensation arrangements between insurers, brokers or other plan service providers also can create issues for health plan fiduciaries, sponsors, brokers and advisors. Self-insured health plan sponsors, fiduciaries, administrators and their consultants, brokers and insurers also should keep in mind that practices like those challenged in the Justice Department actions also are likely to raise concerns under the fiduciary responsibility and prohibited transaction rules of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”). Consequently, employer and other plan sponsors, their fiduciaries, and their brokers and advisors may wish to visit with experienced legal counsel about the advisability of conducting due diligence into the past, current, or future plan vendor relationships with their own programs.

The Justice Department is touting the lawsuit as an example of its commitment to hold Medicare Advantage insurers and brokers accountable for kickbacks or other misconduct. In the Justice Department’s press release about the action, Deputy Assistant Attorney General Michael Granston of the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “We are committed to rooting out illegal practices by Medicare Advantage insurers and insurance brokers that undermine the interests of federal health care programs and the patients they serve.”

 More Information Or Help

We hope this update is helpful. For more information about these or other health or other employee benefits, human resources, insurance, or health care legal developments, please contact the author, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer, via e-mail or telephone at (214) 452-8297.

Solutions Law Press, Inc. invites you to receive future updates by registering on our Solutions Law Press, Inc. Website and participating in and contributing to the discussions in our Solutions Law Press, Inc. LinkedIn SLP Health Care Risk Management & Operations Group, HR & Benefits Update Compliance Group, and/or Coalition for Responsible Health Care Policy.

About the Author

Cynthia Marcotte Stamer is a Martindale-Hubble AV-Preeminent (highest/top 1%) practicing attorney recognized as a “Top Woman Lawyer,” “Top Rated Lawyer,” and “LEGAL LEADER™” in Health Care Law and Labor and Employment Law; among the “Best Lawyers In Dallas” in “Labor & Employment,” “Tax: ERISA & Employee Benefits,” “Health Care” and “Business and Commercial Law recognized for her experience, scholarship, thought leadership and advocacy on health and other employee benefits, insurance, healthcare, workforce, HIPAA and other data and technology and other compliance in connection with her work with health care and life sciences, employee benefits, insurance, education, technology and other highly regulated and performance-dependent clients.

Board certified in labor and employment law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and a Fellow in the American College of Employee Benefits Counsel, Ms. Stamer is nationally recognized for her decades of leading edge experience on the design, sponsorship, administration and defense of health and other employee benefit, workforce, insurance, healthcare , data and technology and other operations to promote legal and operational compliance, reduce regulatory and other liability and promote other operational goals.

Along with her decades of legal and strategic consulting experience, Ms. Stamer also contributes her leadership and experience to many professional, civic and community organizations. She currently serves as Co-Chair of the ABA Real Property Trusts and Estates (“RPTE”) Section Welfare Plan Committee, Co-Chair of the ABA International Section International Employment Law Committee and its Annual Meeting Program Planning Committee, Chair Emeritus and Vice Chair of the ABA Tort Trial and Insurance (“TIPS”) Section Medicine and Law Committee, and Chair of the ABA Intellectual Property Section Law Practice Management Committee. She also has served as Scribe for the Joint Committee on Employee Benefits (“JCEB”) annual agency meetings with the Department of Health and Human Services and JCEB Council Representative, International Section Life Sciences Committee Chair, RPTE Section Employee Benefits Group Chair and a Substantive Groups Committee Member, Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group Chair, as TIPS Section Medicine and Law Committee Chair and Employee Benefits Committee and Workers Compensation Committee Vice Chair, Tax Section Fringe Benefit Committee Chair, and in various other ABA leadership capacities. Ms. Stamer also is a former Southwest Benefits Association Board Member and Continuing Education Chair, SHRM National Consultant Board Chair and Region IV Chair, Dallas Bar Association Employee Benefits Committee Chair, former Texas Association of Business State, Regional and Dallas Chapter Chair, a founding board member and Past President of the Alliance for Healthcare Excellence, as well as in the leadership of many other professional, civic and community organizations. She also is recognized for her contributions to strengthening health care policy and charitable and community service resolving health care challenges performed under PROJECT COPE Coalition For Patient Empowerment initiative and many other pro bono service involvements locally, nationally and internationally.

Ms. Stamer is the author of many highly regarded works published by leading professional and business publishers, the ABA, the American Health Lawyers Association, and others. Ms. Stamer also frequently speaks and serves on the faculty and steering committee for many ABA and other professional and industry conferences and conducts leadership and industry training for a wide range of organizations.

For more information about Ms. Stamer or her health industry and other experience and involvements, see http://www.cynthiastamer.com or contact Ms. Stamer via telephone at (214) 452-8297 or via e-mail here.

About Solutions Law Press™

Solutions Law Press™ provides health care, insurance, human resources and employee benefit, data and technology, regulatory and operational performance, and other business risk management, legal compliance, management effectiveness and other coaching, tools and other resources, training and education. These include extensive resources on leadership, governance, human resources, employee benefits, data security and privacy, insurance, health care and other key compliance, risk management, internal controls and operational concerns. If you find this of interest, you also be interested reviewing some of our other Solutions Law Press™ resources or training.

If you or someone else you know would like to receive future updates about developments on these and other concerns, please be sure that we have your current contact information including your preferred e-mail by creating your profile here.

NOTICE: These statements and materials are for general information and purposes only. They do not establish an attorney-client relationship, are not legal advice or an offer or commitment to provide legal advice, and do not serve as a substitute for legal advice. Readers are urged to engage competent legal counsel for consultation and representation considering the specific facts and circumstances presented in their unique circumstances at the particular time. No comment or statement in this publication is to be construed as legal advice or admission. Solutions Law Press and its authors reserve the right to qualify or retract any of these statements at any time. Likewise, the content is not tailored to any particular situation and does not necessarily address all relevant issues. Because the law constantly and often evolves, subsequent developments that could impact the currency and completeness of this discussion are likely. Solutions Law Press and its authors disclaim and have no responsibility to provide any update or otherwise notify anyone of any fact or law-specific nuance, change, limitation, or other condition that might affect the suitability of reliance upon these materials or information otherwise conveyed in connection with this program. Readers may not rely upon, are solely responsible for, and assume the risk and all liabilities resulting from their use of this publication.

Circular 230 Compliance. The following disclaimer is included to ensure that we comply with U.S. Treasury Department Regulations. Any statements contained herein are not intended or written by the writer to be used, and nothing contained herein can be used by you or any other person, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties that may be imposed under federal tax law, or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related transaction or matter addressed herein.

©2025 Cynthia Marcotte Stamer. Non-exclusive right to republish granted to Solutions Law Press.™ For information about licensing for republication, please contact the author directly. All other rights reserved.

Comments Off on DOJ Sues Medicare Advantage Insurers & CVS Under False Claims Act & Antikickback Statute | compliance, Corporate Compliance, Discrimination, false claims act, health benefit, Health Benefits, health insurance, health insurance marketplace, health plan, Health Plans, Insurance, insurance fraud, Managed Care, Medicare Advantage, pharmacy | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

$2.7 Million FCA Cyber Liability Settlement Shows New Tool In Government’s Strategy To Fight Cyber Insecurity By Holding Businesses & Leaders Accountable

May 4, 2024

The $2.7 million settlement government contractor Insight Global LLC, (“Insight”) is paying to settle a Justice Department (“DOJ”) False Claims Act civil suit for lax cybersecurity shows government contractors now must add possible False Claims Act prosecution to the already substantial and ever-widening potential consequences all organizations and leaders when their organizations experience a cyber incident.

Supplementing the strength and reach of existing cybersecurity laws by using the False Claims Act, federal securities, employee benefit fiduciary responsibility. and other laws as tools to pressure organizations and their leaders to strengthen their cybersecurity compliance and defenses is a key component of the National Cybersecurity Strategy the Administration announced in March, 2023 to battling the ongoing pandemic of cyber incidents. As National Cybersecurity Strategy states, “Continued disruptions of critical infrastructure and thefts of personal data make clear that market forces alone have not been enough to drive broad adoption of best practices in cybersecurity and resilience. … We must hold the stewards of our data accountable for the protection of personal data; drive the development of more secure connected devices; and reshape laws that govern liability for data losses and harm caused by cybersecurity errors, software vulnerabilities, and other risks created by software and digital technologies.

The National Cyber Security Strategy goes on to warn, “We will use Federal purchasing power and grant-making to incentivize security.”

With holding businesses and their leaders accountable a key component of the Federal government’s National Cybersecurity Strategy, government contractors specifically and all businesses and their leaders generally should heed the use of the DOJ’s use of the False Claims Act as another tool in its expanding arsenal for holding businesses experiencing cyber breaches accountable as proof of their own growing imperative to manage their own cyber security and liability in response to exploding strains of cyber threats and liabilities.

Government Contractor False Claims Act Cyber Risk

DOJ’s adoption of the False Claims Act as a tool for imposing liability against government contractors experiencing a cyber breach is part of a broader effort to persuade organizations and their leaders to tighten their cyber security defenses and responses by ratcheting up the liability and other consequences organizations and their leaders face when their organizations experience a cyber incident. The False Claims Act imposes treble damages and penalties on those who knowingly and falsely claim money from the United States or knowingly fail to pay money owed to the United States.

A Civil Cyber-Fraud Initiative announced by DOJ on October 6, 2021 adds potential False Claims Act civil lawsuits by DOJ or private whistleblowers to the already significant and expanding consequences government contractors and grant holders can face for failing to fulfill requirements to properly secure protected health information or other sensitive data as required in their government contracts.

According to DOJ’s May 1, 2024 announcement, Insight will pay $2.7 million to resolve DOJ False Claims Act charges for failing to have adequate cybersecurity measures to protect health information obtained during COVID-19 contact tracing under the new of the Settlement shows DOJ is following through on its promise.

$2.7 Million Insight FCA Cyber Settlement

The $2.7 million Settlement settles a whistleblower lawsuit, United States ex rel. Seilkop v. Insight Global LLC, No. 1:21-cv-1335 (M.D. Pa.). Filed under the whistleblower provisions of the False Claims Act that permit private parties to sue on behalf of the government when they believe that defendants submitted false claims for government funds and to receive a share of any recovery, DOJ intervened in the suit. Whistleblower, Terralyn Williams Seilkop, a former Insight Global staff member who worked on the contact tracing at issue, will receive a $499,500 share of the $2.7 million settlement amount.

The lawsuit alleged the Pennsylvania Department of Health hired Insight to provide staffing for COVID-19 contact tracing and paid Insight using federal funds from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Although keeping personal health information of contact tracing subjects confidential and secure was part on its contractual duties, Insight failed to secure the protected health information. Instead, DOJ claimed, for example, Insight transmitted certain personal health information and/or personally identifiable information of contact tracing subjects in the body of unencrypted emails, stored and transmitted the information using Google files not password protected, making them potentially accessible to the public via internet links and allowed staff to use shared passwords to access that information.

DOJ additionally alleged that from November 2020 through January 2021, Insight managers received complaints from Insight staff that protected health information was unsecure and potentially accessible to the public, but failed to start remediating the issue until April 2021 after deficiencies came to light.

When Insight eventually began remediating these cybersecurity breaches and deficiencies in 2021, the announcement states Insight cooperated with the DOJ investigation of the cause and scope of the incident. It also took steps to remedy cybersecurity deficiencies by strengthening internal controls and procedures, adding more data-security resources and issuing a public notice regarding the scope of the potential exposure and offering free credit monitoring and identity protection services to those affected. FOJ also reports Insight also cooperated with the United States’ investigation.

DOJ’s Insight settlement announcement warns other government contractors of DOJ’s “continuing commitment to ensure that government contractors fulfill their cybersecurity obligations.” Its announcement quotes Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Brian M. Boynton, head of the Justice Department’s Civil Division as stating, “The Justice Department will hold accountable those contractors who knowingly fail to satisfy cybersecurity requirements.”

Meanwhile, Special Agent in Charge Maureen R. Dixon of the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (HHS-OIG) is quoted as stating “Contractors for the government who do not follow procedures to safeguard individuals’ personal health information will be held accountable.”

Cyber Risk Implications For Government Contractor & Other Organizations

Potential False Claims Act liability under the DOJ False Claims Act Civil Cyber-Fraud Initiative add additional liability risks for government contractors to already substantial and growing federal and state regulatory, contractual, and civil and criminal liabilities and other consequences that cyber breaches and other cybersecurity weaknesses create for business and other organizations, their health plans and their leaders. Examples of these other exposures that lax privacy, data security, data breach and other cybersecurity practice may create include:

  • Business operating losses from resulting operational disruptions and damages to customer, business partner, shareholder and public trust;
  • Federal Sentencing Guidelines organizational criminal liability arising from violations of electronic crime and other federal criminal data privacy and security laws;
  • Federal Trade Commission Act and state unfair business practices liability for deceiving customers about privacy practices;
  • Security and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) criminal and civil actions and shareholder lawsuits under the Security and Exchange Act;
  • Health Insurance Portability & Accountability Act civil monetary penalty and criminal exposures for health plans, health care providers, health care clearinghouses and their business associates;
  • Employee Benefit Security Act fiduciary liability for health fiduciaries;
  • Liability for violation of Fair and Accurate Transaction Act, Internal Revenue Code, or other federal privacy or confidentiality laws;
  • damages and other penalties and judgments arising under state identity theft, data security, privacy and other state statutory, contractual and tort laws; and
  • More.

These and other constantly emerging exposures show the imperative for government contractors and all other organizations and their leaders to ensure their organizations take adequate, well-documented efforts to protect their systems and data and fulfill all otherwise applicable cybersecurity rules.

With new cyber attacks and strains of cyber liability, emerging constantly, organizations, and their leaders increasingly must change the way they think about and address their own cyber security and other technology, budgets and management. The escalation of cyber incidents and risks necessitates that organizations and their leaders to treat cybersecurity as critical components of their operational and business plans and priorities.

Amid the pandemic of constantly evolving cyber threats, even the most diligent efforts to secure systems and data cannot guarantee the prevention of a breach or other cyber incident. Given this challenge, organizations and their leaders must focus both on taking meaningful steps to adequately secure their systems and data against a cyber breach or incident as well as position their organizations and leaders to defend their actions and mitigate exposures through appropriate strategic planning, documented oversight and risk assessment, monitoring and response of threats and safeguards; preparation and timely response to cyber events using attorney-client privilege and other evidentiary tools to promote the defensibility of pre-breach, breach investigation and post-breach investigation and decision-making.

As the availability of funding can radically impact the effectiveness of these and other risk mitigation efforts when a cyber incident occurs, these preparations also should incorporate insurance and other arrangements to provide for breach investigation funding and response.

For Additional Information

We hope this update is helpful. Solutions Law Press, Inc. invites you to receive future updates by registering on  here and participating and contributing to the discussions in our Solutions Law Press, Inc. LinkedIn SLP Health Care Risk Management & Operations Group, HR & Benefits Update Compliance Group, and/or Coalition for Responsible Health Care Policy

If you need have questions or need assistance with this or other cybersecurity, health, benefit, payroll, investment or other data, systems or other privacy or security related risk management, compliance, enforcement or management concerns, to inquire about arranging for compliance audit or training, or need legal representation on other matters,  contact the author Cynthia Marcotte Stamer via e-mail or via telephone at (214) 452 -8297. 

About the Author 

Cynthia Marcotte Stamer is a practicing attorney board certified in labor and employment law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and management consultant, author, public policy advocate and lecturer widely known for 35 plus years of cybersecurity, workforce, technology and other compliance, risk management and mitigation, incident and other investigations,regulatory and government affairs, and other strategic, operational, regulatory and legal and consulting management work for government contractors and other public and private businesses; managed care and other health and life science, insurance, technology, and other performance and data dependent organizations,

A Fellow in the American College of Employee Benefit Counsel, Co-Chair of the American Bar Association (“ABA”) International Section Life Sciences and Health Committee and Vice-Chair Elect of its International Employment Law Committee, Chair-Elect of the ABA TIPS Section Medicine & Law Committee, Past Chair of the ABA Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Scribe for the ABA JCEB Annual Agency Meeting with HHS-OCR, past chair of the ABA RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Group and current co-Chair of its Welfare Benefit Committee, and Chair of the ABA Intellectual Property Section Law Practice Management Committee, Ms. Stamer is most widely recognized for her decades of pragmatic, leading-edge work, scholarship and thought leadership with healthcare and life sciences, employment and employee benefits, managed care and insurance, data and technology and other related industries and organizations. Known for her skill combined use of her extensive legal and operational knowledge to help these and other clients develop, operationalize and defend employment, employee benefits, compensation and other staffing and workforce; data, systems and other technology; heath benefit and other healthcare and life science, managed care and insurance; employee benefits, safety, contracting, quality assurance, compliance and risk management, and other legal, public policy and operational actions and practices. She speaks and publishes extensively on these and other related compliance issues.

Ms. Stamer’s work throughout her career has focused heavily on working with health care and managed care, life sciences, health and other employee benefit plan, insurance and financial services and other public and private organizations and their technology, data, and other service providers and advisors domestically and internationally with legal and operational compliance and risk management, performance and workforce management, regulatory and public policy and other legal and operational concerns. Author of a multitude of highly regarded publications on HIPAA and other medical record and data privacy and scribe for the ABA JCEB Annual Meeting with the HHS Office of Civil Rights, her experience includes extensive involvement throughout her career in advising health care and life sciences and other clients about preventing, investigating and defending EEOC, DOJ, OFCCP and other Civil Rights Act, Section 1557 and other HHS, HUD, banking, and other federal and state discrimination investigations, audits, lawsuits and other enforcement actions as well as advocacy before Congress and regulators regarding federal and state equal opportunity, equity and other laws. 

For more information about Ms. Stamer or her health industry and other experience and involvements, see www.cynthiastamer.com or contact Ms. Stamer via telephone at (214) 452-8297 or via e-mail here. 

About Solutions Laws Press, Inc.™

Solutions Law Press, Inc.™ provides human resources and employee benefit and other business risk management, legal compliance, management effectiveness and other coaching, tools and other resources, training and education on leadership, governance, human resources, employee benefits, data security and privacy, insurance, health care and other key compliance, risk management, internal controls and operational concerns. If you find this of interest, you also be interested in reviewing some of our other Solutions Law Press, Inc.™ resources available here. 

IMPORTANT NOTICE

If you or someone else you know would like to receive future updates about developments on these and other concerns, please be sure that we have your current contact information including your preferred e-mail by creating your profile here.

NOTICE: These statements and materials are for general informational and educational purposes only. They do not establish an attorney-client relationship, are not legal advice or an offer or commitment to provide legal advice, and do not serve as a substitute for legal advice. Readers are urged to engage competent legal counsel for consultation and representation in light of the specific facts and circumstances presented in their unique circumstances at any particular time. No comment or statement in this publication is to be construed as legal advice or an admission. The author and Solutions Law Press, Inc.™ reserve the right to qualify or retract any of these statements at any time. Likewise, the content is not tailored to any particular situation and does not necessarily address all relevant issues. Because the law is rapidly evolving and rapidly evolving rules make it highly likely that subsequent developments could impact the currency and completeness of this discussion. The author and Solutions Law Press, Inc.™ disclaim, and have no responsibility to provide any update or otherwise notify anyone of any such change, limitation, or other condition that might affect the suitability of reliance upon these materials or information otherwise conveyed in connection with this program. Readers may not rely upon, are solely responsible for, and assume the risk and all liabilities resulting from their use of this publication. Readers acknowledge and agree to the conditions of this Notice as a condition of their access to this publication. 

Circular 230 Compliance. The following disclaimer is included to ensure that we comply with U.S. Treasury Department Regulations. Any statements contained herein are not intended or written by the writer to be used, and nothing contained herein can be used by you or any other person, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties that may be imposed under federal tax law, or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related transaction or matter addressed herein.

©2024 Cynthia Marcotte Stamer. Limited non-exclusive right to republish granted to Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

Comments Off on $2.7 Million FCA Cyber Liability Settlement Shows New Tool In Government’s Strategy To Fight Cyber Insecurity By Holding Businesses & Leaders Accountable | Antitrust, Attorney-Client Privilege, Banking, board of directors, Brokers, Civil Monetary Penalties, Claims, compliance, Corporate Compliance, corporate governance, Cybercrime, Cybersecurity, Data Breach, Data Security, Department of Defense, DFAR, Disaster, Educational Privacy, Emergency, Employee Benefits, Employer, Employers, Employment, Employment Policies, enforcement, ERISA, false claims act, FTC, Government Accountability, Government Contractors, government employer, group health plan, health benefit, Health Benefits, health Care, Health Care Fraud, health plan, Health Plans, HIPAA, HR, Human Resources, Identity Theft, Insurance, insurers, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Managed Care, OFCCP, Personal Health Records, Personal Health Recordss, Physician, Plan Admistrator, Protected Health Information, Provider, self insured health plan, Technology, third party administrators, tpa, Whistleblower | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer