My Father My Son Rehabilitation and Counseling Center: Alleged Unlicensed In-Home Counseling on Licensed Claims
In the My Father My Son Rehabilitation and Counseling Center fraud case, the practice and its owner paid $230,000 to resolve allegations that they billed Medicaid as though licensed staff had delivered in-home counseling performed by unlicensed workers. For an insider who knew who went into the home and who appeared on the claim, the gap would be concrete. The government was paying for a professional’s work. The allegation was that somebody else did it.
My Father My Son was a private behavioral health practice serving the greater New Haven, Hartford and Bridgeport communities in Connecticut. It provided in-home mental health and substance-use counseling. Its owner was a state-licensed alcohol and drug counselor enrolled as a Licensed Behavioral Health Clinician in Independent Practice in the Connecticut Medical Assistance Program, which includes Medicaid.
The government’s allegations covered March 1, 2017 through May 5, 2018. The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Connecticut announced the civil settlement on October 1, 2020, describing the practice as already dissolved.
What the Claims Said About the Person in the Home
The government alleged that My Father My Son and its owner repeatedly billed Medicaid for services as if a licensed individual had provided them when an unlicensed individual actually did the work. The owner’s own professional license and program enrollment sat alongside an allegation about the qualifications of the people delivering the counseling.
An enrolled practice’s name does not tell us who treated the patient.
Here, the alleged substitution was between licensed and unlicensed care. A staff assignment and a claim could describe the same visit while identifying different people as responsible for delivering it. We look at that difference because it connects the staffing decision inside the practice to the representation made for payment.
Why In-Home Counseling Matters
In-home counseling makes the actual visitor central to the billing question. The allegation concerns the person who went out to provide mental health or substance-use services, and the professional qualifications represented to Medicaid for that work.
For an insider describing a similar practice, we would compare the visit schedule, staff assignments, treatment notes and claims. A schedule can identify the person assigned to a patient. The note can describe the work, and the claim can identify the professional whose service the payer was asked to fund. Credentials have to be connected to that worker and that service date.
A counselor may know the visits they actually performed. A scheduler may know who was sent. A biller may see the name used for payment. Our work is to connect those perspectives to the claimed service, so an insider’s knowledge of daily operations becomes a clear account of what the government was told.
The Same Credential Gap in Other Counseling Cases
In the Today’s Youth case, the government’s announcement explained that supervision of an unlicensed provider did not satisfy the Connecticut independent-practice program’s rendering-provider rule.
The Settlement and the Investigation Behind It
My Father My Son and its owner entered the settlement with the federal and state governments to resolve allegations under the federal and state False Claims Acts. The Justice Department said they had paid the settlement to reimburse Medicaid.
The case grew out of a broader behavioral health investigation jointly conducted by the Office of the Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Medicaid Fraud Control Unit of the Chief State’s Attorney’s Office, and the Connecticut Office of the Attorney General. The Connecticut Department of Social Services supported that investigation.
What Evidence Does a Whistleblower Need?
For a health care billing concern involving in-home counseling, the useful evidence connects the actual worker and visit with the professional and service represented on the claim. We examine how the staffing, credentials and treatment records fit the payment request, and what the people involved knew about the difference. Your firsthand knowledge helps us understand a mismatch that looks routine to someone reading only the bill. If you made the visits or entered the claims yourself, speak with us about your role and what you saw.
A whistleblower case under the False Claims Act can pay 15% to 30% of what the government recovers. Our whistleblower experts work with you on the connection between the care delivered and the healthcare claim.
You Know Who Made the Home Visit
If the person sent into the home differs from the licensed professional shown on the Medicaid claim, speak to one of our whistleblower experts about what you saw. We build your strongest Medicaid whistleblower case with you around the actual visits and billing decisions, and bring in behavioral health fraud whistleblower lawyers who understand professional credentials. We stay beside you through the pursuit of a recovery.
