Updated: Aug. 15, 2024
On Aug. 9, Bloomberg Law, a national online publication, published an article by reporter Tony Pugh about allegations of conflicts of interest involving UNOS Chief Technology Officer Ankit Mathur.
The article, “HHS, Senate Probe for Ethical Conflict in Organ Group’s Hire,” contained at least three significant errors of fact. The originally published article largely ignored the detailed responses provided by UNOS after he reached out with questions on Aug. 8.
After UNOS sent an email to Pugh demanding corrections to the errors and acknowledgment in the form of an editor’s note, the reporter and his editor made significant changes and additions to the article.
Here are details of the changes and additions to the article:
Now states: While Mathur was at US Digital Service, the office had a memorandum of understanding to support HHS plans to modernize the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network.
Original: While at US Digital Service, Mathur worked to support HHS plans to modernize the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network.
Bloomberg Law also added the following paragraphs to its story:
UNOS responds
In a response to questions from Bloomberg Law, UNOS disputed HRSA’s claim that Mathur was its intended hire for CIO, saying the company doesn’t have a CIO position. They said Mathur’s name was submitted to HRSA in February as a candidate for CIO at the OPTN. But UNOS withdrew his candidacy for that job after he became CTO for UNOS in March. A private company, UNOS is separate from the OPTN.
In addition, UNOS cited a passage from Mathur’s post-employment guidance from the US Digital Service that says “USDS leadership and the USDS HRSA team have confirmed, that you did not work on or supervise USDS’s work at HRSA, and you did not received any competitive sensitive information about past, current, or future HRSA contracts related to organ procurement and transplantation.”
In a statement to Bloomberg Law, UNOS disputed HRSA’s contention that it was ignoring the agency’s inquiries. UNOS said they’ve been “extremely diligent” in following up with HRSA regarding Mathur.
UNOS said it “has been fully responsive and proactive in communicating with HRSA and has sent communications to HRSA in response to this matter asking for further meetings, and asking how UNOS could mitigate any concerns.”
The Aug. 5 letter from HRSA to UNOS seeks a “detailed document” that delineates the role of CIO from CTO, and a copy of Mathur’s “final signed OMB post-employment guidance.”
In its response on Thursday, UNOS said that Mathur “has no motive not to comply with the government’s post-employment guidelines, nor would UNOS expect any party to insinuate non-compliance without providing evidence. To date, HRSA has declined to specify or produce any information or substantiation that a conflict exists regarding Mathur.”
Grassley’s office announced that it sent the letter on Friday, and said in a press release that “UNOS’ decision to hire Mathur flies in the face of clear and repeated warnings from the Health Resources & Services Administration (HRSA) and may give UNOS an unfair advantage in the upcoming bidding process to retain management of the organ donation system.”
Federal government told UNOS that CTO posed no conflict of interest
Today, Bloomberg Law, a national online publication, published an article by reporter Tony Pugh about allegations of conflicts of interest involving UNOS Chief Technology Officer Ankit Mathur.
The article contains at least three significant errors of fact, including two in the first three paragraphs. The article overall is false and defamatory, and it largely ignores the detailed responses we provided within hours to the reporter after he reached out to UNOS on Aug. 8.
UNOS has sent an email to Pugh demanding corrections to the errors and acknowledgment in the form of an editor’s note. While we await word from the reporter and his editor, we want to correct the record by highlighting the errors and sharing the facts.
The following are passages from the article that contain errors:
The story reads:
Mathur was originally slated to become UNOS’ chief information officer after leaving his previous job as chief delivery officer at US Digital Service, a technology unit within the Executive Office of the President of the US, according to HHS and committee letters made available to Bloomberg Law.
Mathur was never “slated” to be CIO of UNOS. In fact, UNOS does not have a role of CIO. Mathur was submitted as a candidate for the role of OPTN CIO in February. His candidacy was withdrawn by us in April after UNOS – a private company – had already hired him as CTO of UNOS. He started in that role in March. So Mathur was never rejected by HRSA as a candidate for OPTN CIO.
Additionally, HRSA does not have to approve the hiring of any UNOS employees. UNOS is a private company that is separate from the OPTN.
While at US Digital Service, Mathur worked to support HHS plans to modernize the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network.
Mathur did not perform any work for the OPTN in his role at USDS. We provided the full text of his post-employment guidance (PEG) to the reporter on Aug. 8. Here’s what the government wrote in its PEG to Mathur: “Both USDS leadership and the USDS HRSA team have confirmed, that you did not work on or supervise USDS’s work at HRSA, and you did not receive any competitive sensitive information about past, current, or future HRSA contracts related to organ procurement and transplantation.” By reporting information to the contrary, Bloomberg’s article defames Mathur.
The letter, sent to UNOS CEO and executive director Maureen McBride, summarizes the broad restrictions Mathur faces in his new job. It also continues HRSA’s four-month effort to obtain more information from UNOS about Mathur’s hiring and job responsibilities.
The reality of the situation is 180 degrees from this statement. Not only did HRSA not engage in a “four-month effort to obtain more information from UNOS about Mathur’s hiring and job responsibilities,” the effort was entirely on the part of UNOS to try to understand HRSA’s concerns about Mathur.
UNOS leadership made countless, fruitless attempts to secure details from HRSA leadership about any concerns it had with Mathur playing a future role in the OPTN. Again, we provided that context to the Bloomberg reporter when he reached out with questions on Aug. 8, but he ignored our response.
There is no evidence that HRSA has articulated its concerns about Mathur. UNOS leadership has asked via email. We’ve asked leadership on phone calls. We’ve asked in person. We’ve gotten nothing from HRSA about any specific concerns about Mathur. HRSA’s non-response led UNOS to contact the Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) Office of General Counsel (OGC) requesting to meet to understand HRSA’s concerns. On June 17, HHS OGC informed UNOS: “At this time I understand HRSA does not have a need to meet regarding Mr. Mathur.”
In addition to these factual errors, it’s clear that the reporter developed the story and narrative before he even reached out to UNOS with questions.
UNOS awaits corrective action from Bloomberg Law. This will be updated when we receive a response.
