Health Agencies Accused of Ethical Misconduct with Watchdog Agency

An aerial view of the NIH campus An aerial view of the NIH campus National Institutes of Health Library

Officials at federal health agencies, including the Department of Health and Human Services and National Institute of Health, have been accused of ethical misconduct, according to The Huffington Post. The accusations by the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen say that officials at those agencies worked too closely with their oversight organization, the Office for Human Research Protections in lessening the severity of criticism concerning a study involving premature babies.

The specific study ran from 2005 to 2009 and researched the optimal oxygen levels for premature babies. Tests were performed on more than 1,300 infants, but the OHRP in a March 2013 letter reported that 23 sites had not adequately informed parents of the risks of the study. Those risks included blindness, brain damage, and death.

A second letter published two months later was less harsh in its criticism, adding that guidelines needed clarification, promising public meetings on the issue, and dropping a compliance enforcement effort against the University of Alabama Birmingham, the study’s main research institution.

Included in the many emails Public Citizen accessed under a FOIA request:

During the period between the two reports, officials at the NIH reached out to senior HHS officials to “chat about” the SUPPORT study. On May 1, 2013, the director of the NIH, Dr. Francis Collins, wrote to Bill Corr, the deputy secretary at HHS, explaining that his staff had been working with top HHS officials “to develop a consensus set of statements that OHRP could put forward to clarify the situation with the SUPPORT study.”

Subsequent emails show continued discussions between HHS, NIH and OHRP. In mid-May, Jerry Menikoff, the director of OHRP, exchanged correspondence with NIH officials in which they appeared to be going over potential edits to the second letter.

The issue has already attracted the attention of at least one congressional representative. Democrat Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut told HuffPo, "“What appears to have happened here is that NIH, despite substantial conflicts of interest, was allowed to interfere and, in my view, improperly influence the investigation.” She has requested an inquiry into the affair from HHS Inspector General Daniel Levinson.

Stay up-to-date with federal news alerts and analysis — Sign up for GovExec's email newsletters.
Close [ x ] More from GovExec

Thank you for subscribing to newsletters from
We think these reports might interest you:

  • Sponsored by G Suite

    Cross-Agency Teamwork, Anytime and Anywhere

    Dan McCrae, director of IT service delivery division, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

  • Data-Centric Security vs. Database-Level Security

    Database-level encryption had its origins in the 1990s and early 2000s in response to very basic risks which largely revolved around the theft of servers, backup tapes and other physical-layer assets. As noted in Verizon’s 2014, Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR)1, threats today are far more advanced and dangerous.

  • Federal IT Applications: Assessing Government's Core Drivers

    In order to better understand the current state of external and internal-facing agency workplace applications, Government Business Council (GBC) and Riverbed undertook an in-depth research study of federal employees. Overall, survey findings indicate that federal IT applications still face a gamut of challenges with regard to quality, reliability, and performance management.

  • PIV- I And Multifactor Authentication: The Best Defense for Federal Government Contractors

    This white paper explores NIST SP 800-171 and why compliance is critical to federal government contractors, especially those that work with the Department of Defense, as well as how leveraging PIV-I credentialing with multifactor authentication can be used as a defense against cyberattacks

  • Toward A More Innovative Government

    This research study aims to understand how state and local leaders regard their agency’s innovation efforts and what they are doing to overcome the challenges they face in successfully implementing these efforts.

  • From Volume to Value: UK’s NHS Digital Provides U.S. Healthcare Agencies A Roadmap For Value-Based Payment Models

    The U.S. healthcare industry is rapidly moving away from traditional fee-for-service models and towards value-based purchasing that reimburses physicians for quality of care in place of frequency of care.

  • GBC Flash Poll: Is Your Agency Safe?

    Federal leaders weigh in on the state of information security


When you download a report, your information may be shared with the underwriters of that document.