OIG Screening Responsibility: Who Owns It? [Answered] (42 CFR § 1001.1901)
Executive Summary
Exclusion screening is a critical compliance obligation for healthcare providers participating in federal healthcare programs. Under 42 CFR § 1001.1901, no payment may be made for items or services furnished, ordered, or prescribed by excluded individuals or entities. In small clinics, where staff frequently perform multiple roles, confusion often arises over who is responsible for conducting OIG exclusion screenings.
While screening tasks may be delegated internally, ultimate responsibility always rests with the clinic itself. Failure to clearly assign, perform, and document screening activities can expose small clinics to non-payable claims, repayment obligations, and enforcement actions. This article explains the regulatory framework, clarifies responsibility for OIG screening, examines a real-world enforcement scenario, and provides structured tools to help small clinics establish clear accountability.
Introduction
Small clinics typically operate with lean staffing models. Physicians may serve as owners, office managers may handle billing and HR functions, and nurses may support both clinical and administrative tasks. In this environment, exclusion screening can be overlooked or assumed to be someone else’s responsibility.
OIG regulations do not require a specific job title to perform screening, but they do require results. When excluded individuals participate in services connected to federal healthcare programs, claims become non-payable regardless of internal misunderstandings or delegation failures.
Clarifying responsibility for OIG screening is therefore essential for compliance and financial protection.
Regulatory Breakdown
42 CFR § 1001.1901 – Effect of Exclusion
42 CFR § 1001.1901 establishes the scope and effect of exclusion from participation in federal healthcare programs. The regulation provides that:
-
Exclusion applies to Medicare, Medicaid, and all other federal healthcare programs.
-
No payment may be made for items or services furnished by an excluded individual or entity after the effective date of exclusion.
-
Payment is also prohibited for items or services furnished at the medical direction of, or on the prescription of, an excluded individual when the furnishing party knew or had reason to know of the exclusion.
-
Excluded individuals may not submit claims or take assignment of claims during the exclusion period.
The regulation applies to both clinical and non-clinical roles when those roles are connected to federally reimbursed services.
What the Regulation Says About Responsibility
42 CFR § 1001.1901 does not specify who within a clinic must perform exclusion screening. Instead:
-
The provider or clinic is responsible for ensuring excluded individuals do not participate in federally reimbursed services.
-
Screening tasks may be delegated to staff such as office managers, HR personnel, or compliance coordinators.
-
Delegation does not transfer legal accountability away from the clinic or its owners.
In enforcement actions, OIG evaluates whether the clinic exercised reasonable diligence, not whether a particular employee failed to perform a task.
Why Responsibility Confusion Creates Risk
When responsibility for screening is unclear:
-
Screenings may not occur consistently
-
Documentation may be incomplete or missing
-
Potential matches may not be escalated promptly
-
Leadership may be unaware of compliance gaps
These failures increase the likelihood that excluded individuals remain undetected and that claims become non-payable.
Case Study: Unassigned Responsibility
A small family practice employed a billing coordinator and relied informally on an office manager to handle compliance tasks. Exclusion screening was performed at hire but not assigned as an ongoing responsibility.
During a Medicaid audit, investigators discovered that the billing coordinator had been excluded months earlier. Because the coordinator processed claims tied to federal healthcare programs, all associated claims were reviewed.
Outcome
-
Identified overpayments were required to be repaid
-
Additional enforcement scrutiny followed
-
OIG emphasized that lack of assigned responsibility did not excuse non-compliance
Key Lesson
Delegation without accountability is ineffective. Clinics must assign responsibility clearly and verify execution.
Self-Audit Checklist: Assigning Screening Responsibility
-
Formal Assignment
Has a specific role or individual been designated to perform OIG screenings? -
Leadership Oversight
Does clinic leadership review screening logs regularly? -
Pre-Engagement Screening
Are employees, contractors, and vendors screened before engagement? -
Recurring Screening Schedule
Are screenings conducted on a consistent, documented schedule? -
Documentation Standards
Do logs include dates, reviewer initials, and results? -
Escalation Procedures
Are there written steps for handling potential matches? -
Record Retention
Are screening records retained in accordance with federal retention standards?
Common Pitfalls and How to Avoid Them
Assuming “Someone Else” Is Responsible
Avoidance: Document responsibility in job descriptions and policies.
Screening Only at Hire
Avoidance: Establish recurring screening intervals.
Overlooking Non-Clinical Roles
Avoidance: Include billing, administrative, and vendor roles.
Failing to Document
Avoidance: Maintain dated logs with evidence of each screening.
No Leadership Review
Avoidance: Require periodic sign-off by owners or managers.
Best Practices for Small Clinics
-
Create a written exclusion screening policy
-
Assign screening duties to a specific role
-
Require leadership review of logs
-
Use OIG’s free LEIE tools
-
Integrate screening into routine administrative workflows
These practices help demonstrate diligence during audits and investigations.
Building a Culture of Accountability
Responsibility for exclusion screening should be understood across the organization. When staff know who performs screenings, how issues are escalated, and why compliance matters, errors are less likely to occur.
Leadership involvement reinforces accountability and signals that compliance is a priority, not an afterthought.
Conclusion
Under 42 CFR § 1001.1901, employing excluded individuals renders related claims non-payable and exposes small clinics to serious financial and enforcement risk. While screening tasks may be delegated, ultimate responsibility always remains with the clinic.
By clearly assigning responsibility, maintaining documentation, and ensuring leadership oversight, small clinics can reduce compliance risk and protect their operational stability.