Where to report fraud, waste, abuse, or retaliation

The Social Security Administration OIG investigated whistleblower allegations that an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) in West Virginia received cash in exchange for fraudulently granting disability benefits to individuals represented by a particular attorney. SSA OIG’s investigation substantiated these allegations and uncovered the largest fraud scheme in the history of the Social Security program. The scheme involved multiple co-conspirators and spanned approximately 3,149 disability claims to whom SSA awarded more than $550 million in lifetime disability benefits. As a result of SSA OIG’s investigation, the ALJ pleaded guilty to two felonies and was sentenced to four years in prison. The attorney fled to Honduras but was later apprehended and sentenced to 27 years in prison.

The Department of Transportation OIG was contacted by the Allied Pilots Association (APA), whose members raised safety issues in the American Airlines (AA) flight test program, including the use of unqualified pilots and a culture of suppressing safety complaints. The APA previously contacted the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) but stated its concerns had remained “largely unaddressed for over 18 months.” Based on evidence from APA and a review of relevant documentation, the Transportation OIG initiated an audit to examine FAA’s oversight of AA. The Transportation OIG found that the FAA “lacked objectivity” at its office overseeing American Airlines and recommended actions to improve FAA’s oversight of AA’s flight test program, as well as FAA’s responsiveness to safety concerns.

DoD OIG investigated whistleblower allegations that multiple sources brought to the Senate Armed Services Committee. The sources alleged that a U.S. Marine Corps Brigadier General created a hostile work environment through disparaging treatment of personnel that led to a “general distrust” of his impartiality toward women and his overall leadership. The DoD OIG investigation substantiated the allegation that the General’s overall course of conduct disparaged, bullied, and humiliated subordinates, devalued women, and created a negative work environment that led to a general distrust of his impartiality and leadership. The OIG determined that his overall course of conduct violated 10 U.S.C. Section 5947, “Requirement of Exemplary Conduct,” DoD 5500.07-R, “Joint Ethics Regulation,” DoD Instruction 1020.03, “Harassment Prevention and Response in the Armed Forces,” and U.S. Navy Regulations, “Responsibility,” and “Abuse of Authority.”