Dana-Farber Pays $15M to Settle False Claims Act Allegations of NIH Grant Fraud

Posted December 22, 2025

By the Constantine Cannon Whistleblower Team

Last Tuesday (December 16), the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced that Boston-based Dana-Farber Cancer Institute agreed to pay $15 million to settle allegations it violated the False Claims Act by fraudulently securing and using National Institutes of Health (NIH) research grants.[1] It is just the latest in a series of False Claims Act enforcement actions against research institutes and universities for fraudulently procuring or misusing federally funded research grants.

What Was the Nature of Dana-Farber’s Grant Fraud?

According to the Government, over a ten-year period (2014-2024), Dana-Farber secured NIH grants through false and misleading statements and spent grant funds on unallowable expenses. Dana-Farber admitted as part of the settlement that (i) its researchers used six NIH grants to research and write 14 scientific journal publications that contained misrepresented and/or duplicated images and data, (ii) it did not exercise sufficient oversight over these researchers, (iii) it spent funds from these grants outside the scope of the grants, and (iv) another researcher received four NIH grants based on a journal article containing misrepresented and/or duplicated images and data.

Is Grant Fraud a DOJ Enforcement Priority?

The Dana-Farber settlement follows a long history of DOJ using the False Claims Act to go after prestigious universities and research centers for alleged grant fraud, especially when NIH funding is involved.

The most notable example is the March 2019 settlement under which Duke University agreed to pay $112.5 million to settle False Claims Act charges of falsifying research funded by NIH and EPA grants. In April 2020, Harvard University likewise settled False Claims Act allegations of grant fraud, paying roughly $1.4 million for allegedly procuring NIH grant funding by overstating the time and effort it spent working on the grants.[2] And in May 2024, the Cleveland Clinic Foundation agreed to pay $7.6 million to settle False Claims Act allegations of fraudulently procuring NIH grants by misrepresenting its affiliation with foreign institutions.

These are just a few of the more prominent examples of DOJ slapping down universities and research centers for what it saw as fraudulently securing or spending federal grants. The most recent settlement with Dana-Farber is a clear indication that grant fraud remains very much in DOJ’s False Claims Act enforcement crosshairs.

Indeed, in announcing the settlement, the Government stressed the importance of integrity in scientific research and its commitment to go after research centers and universities — no matter their size and reputation — that use federal funds to support fraud or misconduct in scientific research.

As U.S. Attorney Leah Foley for the District of Massachusetts put it:

“There is no place in scientific research, particularly cancer research, for fraud, waste and abuse, and my office will continue to investigate institutions, no matter how prestigious, to ensure that research data is not tainted and that taxpayer funds are used appropriately. Patients, and the medical community, rely on the important research conducted by institutions like Dana-Farber. It is critical, to say the least, that all research findings are accurately reported.”

DOJ Civil Chief Brett Shumate agreed, noting how “NIH has limited resources to support important research being conducted at institutions across the country,” and that the settlement with Dana-Farber demonstrates how DOJ “will pursue grantees that undermine the integrity of federal funding decisions by failing to use research funds appropriately or by failing to abide by grant awards’ terms and conditions.”

Constantine Cannon whistleblower partner Marlene Koury points to the Dana-Farber settlement as another cautionary tale for high-profile academic institutions and research entities to make sure they play by all the rules when securing and spending federal funding. According to Koury, “That means being fully transparent when procuring the funds, using the funds only for work clearly prescribed by the grant, maintaining accurate records of how the funding is spent, and ultimately, avoiding any foul play in connection with the funding and the work it supports.”

What Role Can Whistleblowers Play in Exposing Grant Fraud?

Koury warns it is not just the Government these institutions need to be mindful of when it comes to grant fraud. “They also must recognize the critical role whistleblowers play in exposing this type of misconduct.” Under the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act, whistleblowers may bring lawsuits on behalf of the Government against those that commit fraud against the Government. Over the past thirty years, whistleblowers have originated the majority of False Claims Act cases.

Whistleblowers are especially prevalent in cases involving grant fraud because of the difficulty for the Government to detect this kind of fraud. Koury says, “It often comes down to individuals on the inside with first-hand exposure to the wrongdoing, or to those with particular scientific expertise who can readily detect anomalies in the grant-funded research and results.”

That was the case with the Dana-Farber case. It originated with a qui tam case filed by Sholto David, a microbiologist from Wales, who identified what he viewed as scientific research fraud. He will receive a whistleblower award of roughly $2.6 million from the proceeds of the Government’s recovery.

A whistleblower also originated the False Claims Act case that led to the blockbuster Duke settlement. Duke researcher Joseph Thomas filed that qui tam action, motivated by his concerns that the university was not transparent about the integrity of the NIH-funded research. He received a whistleblower award of almost $34 million from the proceeds of the Government’s recovery.

Constantine Cannon Has Substantial Experience Representing False Claims Act Whistleblowers

Constantine Cannon has substantial experience representing whistleblowers under the False Claims Act. If you would like to learn more about the firm’s whistleblower successes, grant fraud in particular, or what it means to be a whistleblower more broadly, please do not hesitate to contact us. We will connect you with an experienced member of the Constantine Cannon whistleblower team for a free and confidential consultation.