My New Book Features Dr. Anna Chacko

There seems to be some confusion about my new book, The Definitive Dossier on PTSD in Whistleblowers.

The book can be bought through Amazon by following this link. 

The book has five relatively long chapters and all of Chapter four is dedicated to the exploits of Dr. Anna Chacko. So, if you're looking for the book, follow this link. 

Miller and Chacko

UPDATE: Please also check out my new book, The Definitive Dossier on PTSD in Whistleblowers, in which I dedicate chapter four entirely to the exploits of Dr. Anna Chacko. 

The Pittsburgh Tribune has the story.

A letter to Shinseki from Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., and Rep. Brad Miller, D-N.C., centers on allegations from a former VA physician who says he was forced out of the agency in retaliation for raising questions about money for brain injuries, the "signature injury" of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Defense and Veterans Brain Injury Center reports 10 percent to 20 percent of troops with combat exposure there suffered concussions from roadside bombs.

Then, there are parallels drawn between this and Dr. Anna Chacko.

Van Boven's case appears to parallel that of radiologist Anna Chacko, who says VA officials ousted her from her post at the Pittsburgh VA facility in Oakland after she questioned spending and treatment practices.

I'm left confused. After all in May of 2009, the same Congressman Miller said this of Dr. Anna Chacko.


Senate Letter 2009-05-19[1][1][1] -

Then as Chacko was about to get terminated in January of this year, he said this.

He said that assuming the VA followed proper procedures in Chako's termination, he did not plan further involvement.

Chacko had been suspended from her job in the spring but was reinstated in late summer, only to be placed on administrative leave in October. The termination letter was issued last week.

While they have declined to comment on the issues leading to Chacko's suspension and termination, VA officials said an internal investigation refuted claims by Chacko that patient care might have been compromised by excessive radiation during treatments.

So, does Congressman Miller think that proper procedures were followed in the case of Dr. Chacko? It was apparently neither asked or answered. Miller does hint at it in the latest article.

Miller said told the Tribune-Review he is troubled by "an emerging pattern" of VA administrators using boards of inquiry to punish and silence whistleblowers.
"I would encourage the VA to look into whether the process is being abused," he said.

If that's the case why didn't he step in before Chacko was fired? That was also neither asked nor answered. Here is the statement from Senator Burr's office about the "emerging pattern" that Congressman Miller spoke about.

The “emerging pattern” that Rep. Miller referenced in his comments to the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review were made independently of the specific issues raised jointly by Sen. Burr and Rep. Miller in the letter to Gen. Shinseki. I strongly suggest you take up your concerns with Rep. Miller’s staff as they may have more insight into the reasoning for Rep. Miller’s comments.

Here's the full letter that Burr and Miller drafted to Shinseki and Chacko is not mentioned in it. Both Shinseki and Miller's office have yet to respond for comment.

Shinseki Ltr

Here's the full dossier of Anna Chacko.

What Brian Casey Missed in His Anna Chacko Article

UPDATE: Please also check out my new book, The Definitive Dossier on PTSD in Whistleblowers, in which I dedicate chapter four entirely to the exploits of Dr. Anna Chacko. 

In his article on the radiological website, Aunt Minnie, Brian Casey listed the charges by Dr. Anna Chacko against the Pittsburgh VA in detail. Most of it comes from the memo she had published on the internet. Here's one of the charges repeated by Casey of Chacko's against the Pittsburgh VA.

Chacko and Melhem also butted heads over clinical issues, such as the hospital's use of technetium-99m, the radiopharmaceutical that's been in short supply due to repairs at the Canadian nuclear reactor that produces most of North America's supplies.
Chacko said that due to its lower radiation dose compared to an alternative radioisotope, thallium, she preferred that VA physicians work around technetium supply shortages to ensure that patients were scheduled when the radioisotope could still be used. But Chacko said she found cases in which orders made by nuclear medicine physicians for technetium studies were changed without their knowledge to use thallium instead. Substituting radiopharmaceuticals without the prescribing physician's knowledge is a serious violation of U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) rules, she said.

In fact, the VA was asked about this specific charge and here's they responded to other media about it.

Frantz said the VA Medical Inspector General investigated whether the radiation doses affected patient care and concluded that "no issues were identified."

Yet, the fact that this specific charges was investigated by the Inspector General's office and found to be without merit is NOT mentioned anywhere in the piece. Casey has also not responded to multiple emails for comment on the ommission.

Another Chacko Update

UPDATE: Please also check out my new book, The Definitive Dossier of PTSD in Whistleblowers, in which Chapter 4 is dedicated entirely to the exploits of Dr. Anna Chacko. 


In the Aunt Minnie piece, Dr. Chacko suggests that she may try and get her old job back.

Ironically, Chacko claims that the Pittsburgh VA has put Chacko's former job as chief of radiology out to bid for the second time after failing to find a candidate in its first search. A representative with the Pittsburgh VA declined to comment on personnel matters at the facility, citing privacy concerns.
With the political winds appearing to shift in her favor, Chacko says she's considering whether to apply for the Pittsburgh VA job again.
"I'm going to apply," Chacko said. "I know the corruption in the VA better than anyone else. I want to make the VA safe for veterans."

In March of this year, Dr. Chacko was terminated as head of radiology at the Pittsburgh VA. The position has not yet been filled. Dr. Chacko is claiming that she plans on applying again for this position. Here's how a congressional source with knowledge of the situation characterized her chances.

I’m confident that it’s beyond the realm of possibility for someone who’s been terminated from the VA for cause to get another job there – especially the job from which they were removed!

...
On that note, here's how one veteran radiologist described the medical profession.

there are high percentages of the entitled, sociopaths, arrogants, and logic-challenged in the medical field. Take your pick!

That may explain in some small way the whole Dr. Anna Chacko affair.

Dr. Anna Chacko and Saul Alinsky

UPDATE: Please also check out my new book, The Definitive Dossier on PTSD in Whistleblowers, for only $3.95, in which I dedicate chapter four entirely to the exploits of Dr. Anna Chacko. 

Anyone who has watched even five minutes of Glenn Beck knows that he has no use for the current President of the United States. If you've watched him for ten minutes, you also know that he has no use for Saul Alinsky, the famed community organizer and author of Rules for Radicals. Beck is especially fond of harping on two of Alinsky's techniques. First is his rule number thirteen.

Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it.

The second involves throwing out so much information all at once into the media that it distracts from your true intentions.

Obama perfected the tactics that so-called community organizers like ACORN use every day. It's the tactic of misdirection.
The community organizer mentality — the ACORN mentality — is to distract you from their main goal, so even though some people are looking at their voter registration fraud, we should follow the money, too.
While politicians talk about 46 million people without health care, what's their real agenda? And what's the effect on the 255 million with health care?

Both these strategies should be kept in mind as I again analyze the tale of Dr. Anna Chacko. In October of 2008, Dr. Anna Chacko arrived in Pittsburgh to work at the VA hospital there. She arrived there following a fourteen month stint at St. James Hospital in Butte, Mt. Prior to that, she spent just over a year at the Boston University Medical Center in Boston. That means that Pittsburgh would be her third job in her third city since 2006. At this time, Dr. Anna Chacko was 64 years old.
Almost immediately, there were complaints about Dr. Chacko. These complaints were filed by members of the administration like Dr. Mona Melham. They were also filed by members of the radiology department. The complaints included accusations that Dr. Chacko threatened legal resident aliens with calls to immigration if they crossed her. There were allegations of threats, lies, and bullying behavior. One doctor complained that Dr. Chacko called their other employer and spread lies about them there.
This is not merely accusations made by me. In fact, radiologists testified to all these threats in not one but two investigative boards held against Dr. Chacko by the Pittsburgh VA. In January of 2009, a doctor working at the Pittsburgh VA slipped in their driveway and fell. She thought her wrist was broken when she came to work at the Pittsburgh VA. Dr. Mona Melham approved for this doctor to have her wrist x rayed even though she was an employee and not a patient.
Upon hearing this, Dr. Chacko complained to the Inspector General's office of the VA and claimed that Dr. Melham committed fraud. She then demanded that an administrative investigative board be formed to determine if Dr. Melham be removed. Only by then, Dr. Chacko had alienated most of the radiology department that the Pittsburgh VA held an ABI to determine if Dr. Chacko herself should be removed herself. That's exactly what the board recommended in March.
Then, Dr. Chacko hired a lawyer and reached out to Congressman Brad Miller of North Carolina. Congressman Miller had his own history with both the Pittsburgh VA and Dr. Melham. He'd conducted an investigation into this Pittsburgh VA over some destroyed strands of legionella in 2006 and determined that Dr. Melham had acted with malice in destroying them. It appears that Dr. Chacko had in fact convinced Congressman Brad Miller to side with her because on May 15th, 2009 he wrote to General Shinseki on her behalf.


Senate Letter 2009-05-19[1][1][1] -
After this Dr. Chacko was given her job back and returned on August 1st, 2009. Her behavior didn't improve and several employees of the Pittsburgh VA began reaching out to her former colleagues at St. James. One such employee, using a dummy email account, reached out to an individual with whom I was communicating. They became my first source on the story.

I wrote my first article on September 2nd, 2009, and wrote several more throughout the month of September. At the end of September, Dr. Chacko was put on indefinite administrative leave and terminated the following March. This time her political friends wouldn't stand up for her, and Congressman Miller would only explain his involvement this way.

Miller said he wrote the letter because "it appeared that a VA hospital which was given to infighting was proceeding in the same way again."
He said the 2008 investigation showed management at the Pittsburgh VA "appeared to be chaotic and a very valuable collection was destroyed out of spite."
The congressman said the Legionella investigation concluded that local VA officials "proceeded in the wrong direction for the wrong reasons."
He said that assuming the VA followed proper procedures in Chako's termination, he did not plan further involvement.

Neither Miller nor Shinseki have ever responded to my repeated requests for comment about their involvement with Chacko. Since her termination, Dr. Chacko has reached out to anyone with a sympathetic ear with claims that she's a whistleblower and that she was only fired as retaliation. First, she found a sympathetic ear in Dr. Vijay Mehta who allowed her to publish a manifesto on his site detailing the charges made by her against the Pittsbugh VA. Curiously, Dr. Chacko demanded that he take this manifesto down when Roche reported on it in the Pittsburgh Tribune.
Then, Congressman and Senatorial candidate Joe Sestak referenced Chacko in his press release for his bill the Transparency for Heroes Act.

Until March of 2010, Dr. Pamela Gray was a rheumatologist at the Hampton VAMC. It is her contention that she was subsequently terminated as a VA employee as a result of her actions to stop the over-prescription of Schedule II narcotics. Dr. Gray joins Dr. Anna Chacko formerly of the Pittsburgh VAMC and Dr. Robert Van Boven formerly of the Central Texas Veterans Healthcare System in alleging retaliation for exposing practices they believed negatively affected patient care. I respect the fact that these physicians put their careers and reputations at risk to advance the treatment of our Veterans.

Then, the radiology website, Aunt Minnie, wrote a largely sympathetic article in which her charge were listed in detail while my charges against her were characterized and retold like this,

But what's more, it characterized her as a "psychopath" and included a laundry list of accusations that included salacious details allegedly drawn from Chacko's personal life.

While systematically listing the charges, the author, Brian Casey, failed to mention that one of them, Chacko's assertion that thallium was being used to great harm to the patients, was investigated by the VA IG and it was found that there was no problem. Furthermore, the article failed to mentioned that Dr. Chacko has financial interest in Moly99Montana, a company which manufactures molybdenum, which just happens to compete with thallium.
Chacko has also received support from others including those that go onto my site. In a recent posting, someone identifying themselves as FBI said this.

Keep the entertainment go on while Moreland is forced to taking early retirement, Mona Melhem is forced to step down from ACOS and Jain is detailed against his wishes in DC. You follow the money{hope you are getting paid from one of the above}, she follows the money, the above members are following the money, the veterans suffer and the truth is lost. For some of us who witness this daily at VA, it is just an entertainment played by some educated fools called Radiologists, Pathologists, investigative journOlists and of course the dietitians at VAPHS.

Shame to all of the above for bragging how rightful they are while ignoring the plight of the veterans. Watch Veterans watchdog for more entertainement and 60 minutes!!!

All of it is meant as misdirection. Chacko is attempting to go after the Pittsburgh VA because they're an easy target. After all, the VA system has a history of corruption. The Pittsburgh VA itself has been the subject of a congressional inquiry. She dumps all sorts of charges in their lap. It's all very Alinsky like. Pick a target, isolate, freeze them, and escalate. It's all beside the point. Corruption in the VA, and at the Pittsburgh VA specifically, is not the issue. The charges against Chacko have nothing to do with corruption but bullying, lying and manipulating.

Furthermore, and much more importantly, the Pittsburgh Va is not the first place where these charges have been made. While at St. James, the radiology manager, Kristi George, also claimed that Dr. Chacko was attacking her in a systematic attempt to sully her reputation so that George would get fired. In fact, Kristi George filed charges against St. James, while both she and Chacko, were still working there.
5[1][1].29.09 Second Amended Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial

In this complaint, George says that Chacko's attacks became so brutal that she had to take a leave of absence in order to seek psychological help. Furthermore, Chacko began to attack Kristi George before they'd technically even worked together. Chacko's first day, Kristi George was still on vacation but that didn't stop Chacko from going around the hospital and complaining that Kristi George was incompetent. This case was eventually settled and the dispostition sealed. It's one of five lawsuits involving Chacko during her time at St. James. She was only there for fourteen months.

Then, there's Linda Murphy, the only person that would put their name to charges against Dr. Anna Chacko. Murphy is Chacko's former secretary at St. James. Murphy told me that Chacko would routinely call her at 2 or 3 in the morning and demand that she get out of bed to fix Chacko's computer or other minor task. If Murphy didn't answer the phone, Chacko would call over and over until she did.

On one occasion, Murphy went on a three day vacation with her son right before he went to college. Murphy told me that Chacko called her repeatedly, forced her to come back a day early, and then made her work a sixteen hour day upon returning. Murphy says that she suffered a systematic psychological torture at the hands of Dr. Anna Chacko. Not coincidentally, the daughter of another of Chacko's secretary's describes a similar experience.

My mom worked for this tyrant, as her admin, for 3.5 years (mom always makes us add the .5 to the 3 yrs as it was torture working for her!). She absolutely sucked the life out of my mother. She finally got relief when AKC was removed from Lahey Clinic. I was not aware that anyone knew how evil this woman is and am relieved to know that the word is spreading. My whole family suffered as a result of the way she treated my mom as well as other co-workers.

According to Murphy, when she was fired, she was told that she was being fired because

You know too much about Anna(Chacko)

Then, there's this story retold to me by a radiologist at Lahey Clinic, where Dr. Chacko worked from 2001-2006.

The resident, an American educated daughter of immigrant Indian professionals, was a resident in Radiology in our department from July 01 to June 05 and had first hand trauma from her. She made a minor error, tiny and not clinically significant. But she had resisted Dr. Chacko's effort to make a big deal out of it. She did not become
subservient and grovel. At the next staff meeting, the resident was assigned to attend and Dr. Chacko laid into her, called her lazy, careless, stupid, etc. We, the staff, sat in horror, too amazed to speak up. We looked at each other in shock, and just as we were about to say enough, lets move on, she stopped and discussed another issue. But she swung that issue around to residents and then began the attack this resident anew. We were too shocked to say anything, we looked around like “are we hearing this correctly, this is too much”. We were whispering and about to say move on when she stopped, started on another item. The item was again artificially swung to residents in general and then on to this resident again. We again listened and were about to speak up and the cycle repeated itself 6 or 7 times, each time a shorter echo but no less personally violent.

The target, now working in a hospital just outside Chicago, confirmed this story to me.

Mike, I remember it like it was yesterday

She, like most people, refused to give her name, however.

Finally, there is another former colleague of Chacko's. This doctor also worked with Chacko at Lahey Clinic. They confided in me that they thought of committing suicide after Chacko repeatedly attempted to have their license revoked by repeated complaints to the Massachusetts Medical Board. This doctor hired a private investigator and had to get a second job just to pay to defend themselves against Chacko's charges.

There are thousands of stories like this, from hospitals all around the country. So, of course, Dr. Chacko would like everyone to talk about the corruption at the Pittsburgh VA. That way no one notices a long and documented history of abuse, blackmail, lying, and many other misdeeds.

Epilogue:

This is to all my sources, commenters, and so called cheer leaders. I'm told I'm a rock star at the Pittsburgh VA. I believe the same is true at St. James and at Lahey. That's nice. It's also largely irrelevant. I will protect anyone's anonymity to my grave. I will go to jail before I reveal an anonymous source.

That said, hiding behind anonymity as everyone, short of Linda Murphy, has done is cowardly and all it does is put me in the crosshairs. That's fine, but the truth will never be revealed until someone has the courage to stand up and speak on the record.

I recently spoke to an individual at the Pittsburgh VA who didn't want to do that saying that just wanted to do their job. That's fine. No one signs up to take on Dr. Anna Chacko. I'd just point you all to Emery Joe Yost. He was a Chicago park district instructor when one day he noticed that Kevin Long was exposing himself. He reported Long to authorities and this started a ten year nightmare. It ended when the same Kevin Long was caught with several knives in the Daley Plaza a couple months back. He didn't sign up to be in the eye of the storm of a significantly mentally disturbed individual. He didn't flinch when it happened. That makes him courageous. Hiding behind anonymity is cowardly. As Shakespeare once said,

some men are born great, some develop greatness, and others have greatness thrust upon them.

Greatness has been thrust upon you, and someone has to respond to the call. If you think it doesn't matter, that everyone already knows who she is, there's a thread right now on Aunt Minnie defending her.

Here's the full dossier of Dr. Anna Chacko.

Chacko Update

UPDATE: Please also check out my new book, The Definitive Dossier on PTSD in Whistleblowers, for only $3.95, in which I dedicate chapter four entirely to the exploits of Dr. Anna Chacko. 

The radiology website Aunt Minnie has a piece on Dr. Anna Chacko. (you may need to create user id to read the article)

Incidentally, Congressman Joe Sestak has introduced the Transparency for America's Heroes Act, HR 3843, and in the text of the bill is this,

Until March of 2010, Dr. Pamela Gray was a rheumatologist at the Hampton VAMC. It is her contention that she was subsequently terminated as a VA employee as a result of her actions to stop the over-prescription of Schedule II narcotics. Dr. Gray joins Dr. Anna Chacko formerly of the Pittsburgh VAMC and Dr. Robert Van Boven formerly of the Central Texas Veterans Healthcare System in alleging retaliation for exposing practices they believed negatively affected patient care. I respect the fact that these physicians put their careers and reputations at risk to advance the treatment of our Veterans.

There's no response yet from Congressman Sestak's office about Dr. Chacko's inclusion in the text of the bill. I don't know if Congressman Sestak read my dossier on her before declaring her a hero but here it is anyway.
Finally, Dr. Chacko seems to have a liberal interpretation of our first conversation. In the piece, it's described this way.

The next day she received a phone call from Michael Volpe, a blogger with a self-styled government watchdog website on Blogspot.com called TheProvocateur, who said he was writing an article on Chacko. Chacko spoke with him briefly, but she claims she was shocked when his article appeared, entitled "Clout: Congressman Brad Miller, General Shinseki, and the Pittsburgh VA ."

In her memo, she described the conversation this way.

On September 2nd, a blogger (Michael Volpe) called me at my office and told me that he would be writing up slanderous and very injurious articles about me on the Internet. Since I did not know Mr. Volpe personally, I asked him what his sources of information would be. He claimed and subsequently has stated on his blog that his sources of information would be the VA.

So, to one source she describes the conversation as brief and vague and to another source she claims that I said the piece would be "slanderous." Here's the piece in question.

The Chacko Memo

UPDATE: Please also check out my new book, The Definitive Dossier on PTSD in Whistleblowers, for only $3.95, in which I dedicate chapter four entirely to the exploits of Dr. Anna Chacko. 


Here's a copy of Dr. Chacko's entire memo in which she lays out what happened during her time at the Pittsburgh VA. Let's just say she didn't like things much at Shangri La.


The following memorandum will illustrate the many problems with the VAPHS and the VISN 4. There is no doubt that their practices currently adversely affect patient care. Their corruption and malfeasance have flourished unfettered, and have become institutionalized.
I am outlining this document with the VA, VAPHS and VISN – 4 and have organized it into three separate parts:
I. Systemic Issues with the VA
A. Equipment Issues
B. Personnel Issues
C. Patient Care Issues
How I have been retaliated and reprised against.
II. My Issues with the VAPHS
A. Fraud, Waste and Abuse, Misuse of Authority and ensuing Reprisal
B. Non-Merit Based Discrimination
III. Synopsis - Timeline
I would recommend that you peruse Part I - Pages 2 through 6. These will delineate the issues that need to be investigated thoroughly and corrected. Parts II and III deal with these issues as they apply to me and chronicle my arduous process of discovery and disillusionment. I have disclosed no HIPAA information – but would be willing to do so if I can be assured that this is allowed, is prudent and of value.
It will become abundantly clear from perusal of my memoranda, the news and other sources that write about the VHA, that there is little if any motivation or incentive to improve their operations and align them with their purported mission.
The Honorable Secretary is isolated from bad news and surrounded with millions of dollars of window-dressing so that he can “leave behind a legacy”. The careerists, (such as Ms. Wolf, Drs Jain and Melhem and Mr. Michael Moreland, Mr. Schoenhard), who may be corrupt and/or inept continue to work to shore up their jobs. Ultimately, the individuals who suffer are the veteran and the taxpayer.
Certain favored individuals are allowed to run roughshod over areas of concern such as patient care, hiring practices, credentialing, and equipment acquisition. There is no accountability or adult supervision of these individuals or their favored subordinates. While the VA has several handbooks which outline how the agency should be run, little attention is paid to these. As you will see after reading my memorandum, the inner circle makes the VA’s rules.
The VA has apparently developed a well-honed and scripted method of dealing with whistleblowers – humiliation, isolation, character and professional assassination etc. Their goal is clearly one, which is designed to stabilize their jobs, to demoralize and destroy the whistleblower and to silence anyone who would like to see the VA keep its covenant with the veteran. They are supported by yet other agencies, which are infirm, inert or apathetic.
This is to request you to help me expedite any oversight or investigation of the corrupt practices of the VA, specifically of this VA and this VISN that you may have initiated. Given the public interest in healthcare reform, it would be important to use a reformed VA to be the template for healthcare reform rather than the example of a government agency gone to perdition. Please help direct the necessary energies to changing the future for our veterans who are among the nation’s most disenfranchised and those who would minister to them – individuals such as you and I .
Sincerely

Anna K. Chacko MD
COL (ret) USA2359 Railroad St #3101, Pittsburgh, PA 15222

Here is a message from another concerned physician. While it may be hard to decipher who is right between two quarreling parties one thing we can agree on is that inapt organization is wasting tax payer dollars. If all of us who are witnessing fraud and abuse the powers have no option but to fix the system. ~Vijay Mehta

---

Systemic Issues at Pittsburgh VA
Post by Vijay Mehta on Today at 11:45am

PART I - SYSTEMIC ISSUES WITH THE VA
A. Equipment – Acquisition, Composition and Maintenance
1. Fraud and negligence in acquisition and procurement of high dollar value equipment.
At the VAPHS and VISN 4, during my tenure as Program Leader in Radiology, the composition of the High Dollar and High tech Committee was chaired by an Internist (Dr. Glenn Snyder COS at Clarksburg VA), who had neither knowledge of the need for nor the elements that defined the purchases in Radiology in the VISN. This accounts for the unnecessary purchases of a third linear accelerator, the fifth Gamma Camera or the low field strength Orthopedic Scanner.
2. Oversight by the VACO.
This was not evident in any judgment exercised in the equipment purchased.
For instance, a) when the 1.0 T Orthopedic Unit was acquired and upgrade to the 1.5 T unit was available and could have been purchased. Currently with the 1.0T scanner, few if any scans are performed. Patients who have been scanned in the 1.0T unit are then rescanned in the higher strength units. This translates to a wasted sum of ≈ $600,000 for the purchase of the unit and an expenditure of 10% of the purchase price for maintenance.
b) A second example is the acquisition of a fifth SPECT scanner when the need is for a SPECT-CT unit was clearly obvious. This has resulted in a number of cases being “fee-based” to UPMC or elsewhere for SPECT-CT scanning.
3. No input from Subject Matter experts –
Neither Dr. Melhem who was the Service Line VP nor the Committee accepted any input from radiologists who worked with the equipment and had the requisite training. Instead input was solicited from non-radiologists such as the Administrator of the Radiology Department and the Business Manager of the Service Line who are trained Dieticians and the Service Line VP who is a pathologist. For e.g. a) The Storage device purchased for the Nuclear medicine and PET scans are a system, which does not provide the features, which are fundamentally needed for retrieval for comparison purposes.
b) The Nuclear medicine physician had provided input regarding the purchase of a SPECT-CT unit. His input was ignored. I provided input and was fobbed off.
4. Inadequate optimization for purchased equipment.
The necessary firm/hard and software for equipment is not addressed in a consistent fashion.
The most notable omission in the acquisition of new equipment was the additional purchase of Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS) for the scanners. With the frequency of thunderstorms and power outages in the city, equipment is frequently affected. Without adequate maintenance contracts, the institution has to spend substantial sums of money to have the repair contractors arrive to restart the equipment causing not just expenditure of unnecessary sums of money but also waste of time.
MRI Scanners were purchased to address the issues of cardiac disease, breast cancer, degenerative joint problems etc. Omitting the purchase of the necessary software and coils for imaging the body parts in question is a serious error.
5. Acceptance testing
The acceptance testing on the equipment purchased at the VAPHS in Radiology is sporadically applied. In the case of the PET-CT scanner, I am told that no acceptance testing was done. The same is allegedly true of the CT scanners. The vendor was asked for their input in the acceptability of the equipment and their word was taken in lieu of acceptance testing.
6. Faulty equipment
When there have been persistent quality problems with equipment, there is no advocate for the physician who will make the company provided the necessary repairs/upgrades in order to make the equipment functional.
For e.g. a) the Fat Suppression sequences on the Siemens 1.5 T scanners have been unacceptable. I was not allowed to demand that the company make the necessary changes in order to render the image interpretation safe.
b) The calibration of the CT scanners and the reporting of the Housnsefield units on the CT scanners were consistently faulty. This precludes the accurate tissue characterization of various pathologies and organs. I was prevented from insisting on that the vendor affect necessary repairs and changes.

B. Personnel Issues – Hiring, Workload, Board Certification, Credentialing, Peer review, Disparate incomes etc.

1. Hiring of Radiologists and Nuclear Medicine Physicians.
This has been extremely arbitrary and based on nothing other than the whim of the Assistant chief of Staff.
For e.g.: a) Dr. P, a Nuclear Medicine physician was purportedly based on the fact that he walked in through the door and asked for the job
b) When I was hired, there should have been interviews with members of the Executive Leadership Board or the Medical executive Board.
c) Inadequate documentation and follow-through on checking on credentials. When I insisted on checking on the training and the certification of the training of one the doctors in the department, I was told to “lay off”. She had completed only 1.5 years of training in an ACGME certified fellowship. The required additional training of 0.5 years was not completed at an ACGME certified program. She also claimed that she had completed one year of PET-CT fellowship, which was inaccurate.

2. Enticement with inaccurate representation of the position and remuneration.
No mention has been made to some of the physicians that there would be a probationary period of TWO years.
Although a relocation bonus was promised, it was not given. The plea has been that this was not allowed – one should question as to why this was even raised and promised.
One of the physicians was told that she would be making more than the chairman of Radiology at the University – which was a gross misrepresentation of fact.

3. “Sweetheart” deals made for some of the physicians:
The Assistant chief of Staff who has been given free reign in making promises to hires allowed them to set their pick of what they would do. For instance, when a Nuclear Medicine Physician is hired, it is expected that they would do all aspects of the specialty particularly when there was a need in the department.
The Assistant Chief of Staff has also claimed that she makes it a point to hire women even if they were not the best candidates so that she could help with removing the glass ceiling for women.
IV. Unfair implementation of standards of payment
One of the female physicians (of Asian extraction) has habitually and deliberately never completed her work within the specified time of 24 hours. Despite this Dr. Melhem made no issue of her lack of performance. By contrast, a male Caucasian physician was docked a significant amount of pay for minor tardiness.

Physicians with less experience and in some instances, an inferior work ethic have been compensated at a higher rate merely because the ACOS decided it was so.

When the job title has changed to a higher one, the institution does not make any restitution to pay the employee at the higher rate – merely because the employee is a whistleblower.
V. Workload and compensation
A female physician (VAG) with very little experience is compensated at a higher rate than those with more experience and qualifications.
In order to reward her for aiding in harassing physicians who were not in favor with Dr. Melhem and Dr. Jain, she has been rewarded with a promotion to the Section Chief.
VI. Tours of duty memoranda and comp time
Some of the favored physicians are allowed to arrive at work and leave at their convenience – frequently working a mere fraction of the time that they were supposed to work.
Some of the physicians are allowed to arrive late to work while the VAPHS pays for the ancillary staff who have to wait around not doing any work due to the tardiness of the physician in question.
Comp time is allowed for physicians who do minimal work on call despite the fact that allowing for comp time is apparently not allowed according to HR regulations.
VII. Credentialing and Privileging
Certain of the physicians had been allowed privileges in practicing in areas which they clearly had neither expertise nor experience, while this was denied to a male Caucasian physician who had the necessary boards and certification – merely needed supervised or mentored work.
VIII. Peer Review
Certain physicians have been allowed to practice without regard to the number of complications that have accompanied their practice.
These physicians have been allowed to make specious accusations regarding the competency of others who may not have been in favor with Drs. Melhem and Jain.

Continued

---

Systemic Issues at Pittsburgh VA Page 2
Post by Vijay Mehta on Today at 11:45am

C. Patient Care Issues: Abandonment, Practising on patients without privileges/credentials, Excessive and indiscriminate radiation

1. Work not completed on time
There have been some radiologists/Nuclear Physicians who have not completed their work in time and not had to face any consequences. As a matter of fact, they have actually been rewarded (for testifying and complaining against physicians in disfavor) despite their problematic work ethic.

2. Abandonment of patients
One of the female physicians left her post while on call telling the clinicians that she would not be available for the rest of the day – leaving the hospital without coverage. When I attempted to hold her accountable, I was severely chastised for getting the physician to be accountable.
Referring clinicians have complained bitterly about her non-availability, refusal to perform studies that were necessary, unacceptable and unprofessional interactions. These were transmitted to the COS and ACOS to no avail.

3. Administration of excessive and unnecessary radiation to patients
When there was a temporary shortage of radioactive Technetium 99m, two of the subject matter experts advised that the material be acquired from other sources. These orders were countermanded by individuals (Dr. Melhem, Ms Weihrauch and Ken DiSibio) who were neither subject matter experts nor authorized users. This resulted in subjecting eight veterans to 2.5+ times the body radiation dose. Additionally the images obtained were suboptimal and did not provide the information needed.

4. Allowing technologists to prescribe the procedure in Nuclear Medicine and CT scanning
For the administration of radioactive material or prescribing procedures, which deliver a significant radiation dose to the patient, it is imperative that the physician (radiologist/Nuclear Medicine) be involved in the prescription. Assigning this task to a technologist is a dangerous process.

5. Presence of a physician at the time of injection of radioactive material
The appointed Nuclear medicine physician was rarely ever present at the time of the injection of the patients in PET Scanning. This task was generally unmanned. There was no accountability exercised or enforced by the leadership.

6. Unhygienic and unsafe facilities
Despite the fact that there was a leakage from pipes in the ceiling, the only changes made to repair this was in the physician reading area. There was a continuing leakage in the patient scanning area – with contaminated water leaking over the biopsy table and equipment. Any changes I asked for ignored and the Engineering Department was instructed not to follow through.
I asked for certification of the area as being safe. The COS and the ACOS deliberately misrepresented the issue and claimed that the Engineering facility had “deemed it clean”. I discovered that this was a deliberate falsehood and the the COS and ACOS had full knowledge of the lack of certification on the issue.

7. NRC Violations
The hot lab door in the PET Scanning area was unsecured for several months – despite the fact that I made several appeals to the ACOS to instruct that this be repaired – my please were ignored and I was severely penalized for raising an issue of patient concern and possible violation of NRC regulations.

---

Dr. Chacko's Issues with Pittsburgh VA
Post by Vijay Mehta on Today at 11:47am

PART II - MY ISSUES WITH THE VAPHS;
Anna Chacko Vs. Dr. Rajiv Jain, Dr. Mona Melhem, Ms. Terry Gerigk Wolf of The Veterans Administration Pittsburgh Healthcare System (VAPHS) and Mr. Michael Moreland of VISN – 4.

These fall into two categories:
A. Retaliation and reprisal for blowing the whistle on fraud and abuse
B. Retaliation and reprisal for having exercised my EEO rights.
I am listing the pertinent issues with the VAPHS and its leadership. I had brought these to their attention with disastrous consequences to my career and me.
A. Retaliation For Blowing The Whistle: Fraud, Waste And Abuse And misuse of authority
I exposed the following issues and was reprised and retaliated against:
1. Fraudulent use of Government Resources - Doctors not adhering to their tour of duty memoranda. Doctors abandoning patients to attend to their personal affairs (Gupta, Kanderi). This has cost the VA large sums of money. When VA doctors are not available – patients get sent to University of Pittsburgh Medical Center at prohibitively high costs to the taxpayer.
2. Improper use of Radiopharmaceuticals: - Unauthorized users overturning the prescriptions of authorized users. Violation of Nuclear Regulatory Commission guidelines. Violation of ALARA (As Low as Reasonably Achievable) principles
3. Flawed healthcare provided to veterans – Multiple complications by practitioners. I was not allowed to put measures in place, which would have made healthcare safe for the patients. Multiple complications by one practitioner (Dr. Vidhi Gupta) who has a protected status per orders of Dr. Jain.
4. Inadequate documentation and implementation of patient safety issues – I was prevented from documenting or remedying safety issues – re practitioners in the department. I was ordered not to set up a Magnetic Resonance safety Committee by Dr. Jain.
5. Disparate compensation – There is unchecked discrimination against Caucasians in the department. Favoritism is rampant and is perpetrated by the leadership. One of the neuroradiologists is compensated far less than the other Neuroradiologist despite having the additional qualification of being a neurointerventionalist.
One of the Nuclear Medicine doctors is allowed to appear for work at any time it suits her. She is also allowed to pick and choose what she will do despite the fact that she has been recruited into a specific subspecialty – Nuclear Medicine.
6. Intimidation and Harassment – Use of ABIs, SRBs for intimidation and harassment for blowing the whistle and for exercising EEO rights. This appears to be modus operandi for the VA pursuant to media articles. It is well known that the ABIs, SRBs and other investigative tools fall into one of three groups: witch hunts, whitewashes, and fair and balanced. My personal experience indicates that the two ABIs and the SRB were virtual witch-hunts. I believe that the Boards had been given verbal marching orders to find a basis for terminating my employment. Consequently, they exceeded their scope.
7. Retaliation and Reprisal for approaching the congress and the senate for further scrutiny. I went though the chain of command and got no response and was therefore left with no recourse.
8. RICO – Using slander and libel to threaten and intimidate whistleblowers - in my case to besmirch my professional reputation. A blogger (Michael Volpe – a stranger to me) has been solicited to publish derogatory information, half-truths, and innuendoes and outright lies, which were fed to him. Every one of his allegations can be proved to be wrong. He has identified some one in the leadership of the VA being his source of information. He disclosed this fact to a third party and to that individual he indicated that his source was Dr. Melhem.
9. Perjury –Director Terry Gerigk Wolf has informed me that she canceled the first Administrative Board of Investigation because it was improperly conducted. It has become clear to me that it was done expressly for the purposes of
a. Concealing the erroneous and possibly perjured statements made by Dr. Jain, Dr. Melhem, Dr. Gupta, Dr. Bandi, Dr. Kanderi, and Ms. Weihrauch.
b. Concealing the fact that the ABI exceeded the scope of their charge letter.
c. Concealing the fact that Dr. Melhem had engaged in fraud which had been condoned by the leadership - Dr. Jain (the chief of Staff) and Ms. Terry Wolf, (the Director of the VISN).
10. Disparate implementation of peer review standards –Dr. Jain has deliberately applied different professional standards for different physicians, anonymized complainants’ identities in order to protect doctors who made spurious complaints to harass colleagues who happen to be veterans. I had provided him with information regarding the multiple errors made by Dr. Gupta and the complaints made about her by referring clinicians. He acknowledged receipt of these yet did nothing about it.
11. Flawed hiring process: The VA provides VISA-waivers and work permits for doctors. These individuals are required to obtain their board certification. There are individuals in this department who have yet to be board certified (Dr. Mourad). I understand that the VA has to re-advertise the position in the trade journals every two years. While the VAPHS may have done this – there is no indication that they actively considered any Americans for the positions. We accuse private companies of out-sourcing – the VA is guilty of handing over jobs to non-Americans while better-qualified Americans are looking for jobs. This has been a deliberate action instituted by Drs. Melhem and Jain.
12. Rewarding fraud: - Dr. Vidhi Gupta has been protected by Dr. Jain et al despite complaints from multiple sections of the hospital that she was a subpar physician, and often abandoned her post to the detriment of veteran care. Her record of adverse outcomes has been unmatched in the department – yet she is retained despite my protests as the department Chief.
Dr Kanderi – There is ample evidence that she has NEVER been to work on time or been available in the hospital to supervise when patients were being injected with radioactive material. There is also ample evidence that while working at the VA she performs only a small fraction of the work she performs while at her other job at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center – Hillman Cancer Center
Furthermore, when the VAPHS decided to make the position a full-time one – no economic analysis was performed. The position was not advertised which, according to HR personnel, was against regulations. It was done as a ploy to compensate Dr. Kanderi for testifying against me. . She has now been given a full time position at the VAPHS. I understand that she continues to be tardy as usual. I also understand that there has been no commensurate increase in the number of patients seen after the increase in her status.
Continued

---

Dr. Chacko's Issues with Pittsburgh VA Page 2
Post by Vijay Mehta on Today at 11:48am

B. Non-Merit Based Discrimination
1. Hiring
When the VAPHS hired me – the process was flawed from the start. I, however, not having been a GS employee, had no idea of the flawed nature of the recruitment or the magnitude of the flaws.
I was never informed in writing that this was a two-year probationary period. I learned of this probationary issue in May 09 - 8 months after the hiring when Dr. Jain handed me a copy of my SF-50. I had never heard of an SF-50 until then.
I was told that I would be making more in compensation than the Chairman of Radiology at UPMC. I have this in writing on email from Dr. Melhem. I discovered later that he makes over $750.000. While I did not expect to make in excess of the VA imposed cap on salaries, I believe that it is discriminatory and fraudulent that I was deliberately lied to,.
I was promised that I would be the radiology expert for the VISN because the current chair of the Radiology committee is an internist and has "no knowledge " of radiology issues - which accounts for the profligate spending of money at VAPHS.
2. Abusive and disrespectful language and behavior:
Employees/subordinates have used abusive language against me – both directly as well as in staff meetings. When I approached Dr. Jain and asked for assistance on multiple occasions, I was denied any relief.
3. Refusal to grant supervisory privileges and access to computers. When I was detailed to Butler VAMC, Dr. Jain left instructions that I was to read 5 studies per day. However, he refused to allow me to have privileges to access the computer. This was done in a deliberate attempt so that he could accuse me later of not following orders.
Once I had returned to VAPHS in August, It took several weeks before I was granted access to supervisory menus on VISTA. This was done deliberately and not granted despite several requests. This was yet another attempt to entrap me.
4. Professional and academic oppression:
After being appointed professor at University of Pittsburgh, in March 09, I was invited to lecture to the BioMed engineering students at UPitt. Dr. Melhem who has used this venue for giving lectures several times in her own career, refused to give me permission to lecture. She put several roadblocks in the way including demanding that I get an official letter on letterhead from the University. This was an acute embarrassment to me.
Dr. Gupta who is one of the staff radiologists received permission to take off for two weeks in August 09 to “study” MRI at University of Pittsburgh Medical Center. Although I was the Chief of Radiology and was back at the VA at the time, I was not notified of her absence. She purportedly went for a course. When I inquired, I found that this was not a formal course, no continuing education credits were attached to it.
By contrast, I had secured permission to attend the Radiological Society of North America annual course in November 09. Dr. Jain had given me permission and I registered for the course and paid for the hotel reservations ahead of time. At the last minute, he withdrew his permission and Ms. Wolf refused to let me go. I had to take leave and pay for the entire course personally.
By placing me on administrative leave for more than 8 months, the VAPHS has significantly affected my professional future. I have not practiced any radiology except from the computer and from textbooks.

5. Inadequate preparation for supervisory role.
• I was given every assurance that I would be given the tools to do the job.
• The COTR training was promised in July 09 but not provided.
• When I joined the VA Pittsburgh as the chief of Radiology, I was given no preparatory courses. No training in the VA’s supervisory modules was provided. In December 08, I met with Dr. Jain and asked if he would let me go for one of the courses where the material was presented in the form of lectures. He was silent about this and waited until the time for registration was over – so that I could not go.
• When the chiefs of Radiology across the VA were gathering for their annual meeting in May 09, I was not allowed to go. A very junior radiologist was sent in stead. After much protesting, I succeeded in getting permission to attend the meeting.
• There is a two-week leadership seminar provided in Shepherdstown for new supervisors. After booking me for the two weeks, the VAPHS withdrew the booking for the first week claiming that they would rebook me for a later date. This should have been done almost immediately. They failed to do this. It is my contention that they planned to kill my career from the very outset even though they had canceled the first ABI and re-instated me.
• I brought this to the notice of VACO – to no avail.
6. No Authority to perform my job: I was NEVER given any actual authority to perform my job as the Chief of Radiology, or support from higher management.
• To evaluate any of the personnel employed in the department,
• To implement any tour of duty memoranda for the physicians in the department
• To supervise the timekeeper who was falsely documenting the time that physicians came to work
• To insist that the equipment vendors correct problematic issues with the department.
• To correct or optimize the millions of dollars of equipment that had been purchased by the VAPHS. Any suggestions that I made were canceled or disregarded by Dr. Melhem and the Radiology Hi-Tech equipment at the VISN level.
7. Inadequate office and administrative support:
• I have spoken with other Service Chiefs - specifically Dr. Wilson. He told me that he was hired to improve the department of Surgery. He was given every tool that he needed to build a world-class department. I was given no such support.
• While he and other Service chiefs were provided Business Managers, I was given a poorly trained and poorly performing Administrative officer. I had a GS-5 administrative assistant who had to be shared with the rest of the radiology staff where all other service chiefs were provided at least more than one administrative assistant.
8. Action taken before conclusions of the ABI:
• Even before the ABI was concluded, Dr. Jain announced in the Executive leadership counsel that he was looking for my replacement. This occurred in early October 09 and was reported to me in writing by one of the attendees. It has been abundantly clear that this has always been a witch-hunt. The ABIs were given direction that they were to find a basis to terminate me.
• The administration at the direction of Ms.Wolf downloaded my hard-drive to look for incriminating evidence while all the while coming to the table for an ADR.
• There was a thorough and exhaustive search was made of my phone records wherein every phone number was traced to the party I called.
9. Summary judgment before investigations (SRB) was concluded.
The VAPHS posted the job for Imaging Service Line Chief even before the SRB published their recommendations as can be seen by the job number. This again demonstrates that the VAPHS never intended to give me a chance to succeed at my job despite the ADR.
10. No VP designation after appointing me as Service Line Chief
The Clinical Service Line Chiefs are designated as Vice-Presidents. This was not provided to me.
11. No provision of supervisory access to Administrative Computer systems
After I returned to work at VAPHS, I was not given access to the supervisory menus on the Computers despite repeated requests to Dr. Jain. Nothing had improved; as a matter of fact it had gotten worse.
12. No pay increase even after changing my job title.
When I was returned to my position in June of 09 as Imaging Line Service Chief, I was not given the commensurate increase in pay of ≈ $50,000 per annum. However, when this position was advertised, the notice in USAJOBS posted the pay for a Service Line Chief as being $50,000 higher than a Program Leader,
13. No evaluation, No pay increase based on performance
I had to define the elements of my own position since Dr. Melhem had no idea of what these might be. Despite the fact that I had identified severe issues of fraud and abuse, and provided methods for correction etc, no performance pay increase was given to me. This appears to be a tactic that has been used by the VAPHS administration in the past.
Dr. Melhem wrote to the Radiology community in Feb/Mar 09 and asked if anyone had a narrative of the job for a Chief of Radiology. Of course, she excluded me from the universal email to the Radiology Chiefs. Paradoxically she gave me a glowing appraisal on March 6th, 09. Not surprisingly, when I asked for a copy of the document, nobody seemed to be able to find it. Finally in March 2010, when the VAPHS sent me my personnel and personal papers out of the Department secretary’s office, it was there with Dr. Melhem’s signature.
In summary
i. I was not given the tools to affect change,
ii. I was actively subverted in affecting the change
and then
iii. I was accused of attempting to make any changes with the limited resources I had.

---

Dr. Chacko's Timeline Part 1
Post by Vijay Mehta on Today at 11:50am

Part III. SYNOPSIS OF EVENTS/TIMELINES:
A synopsis of the events that transpired at the VAPHS follows:
1. In and around October/November 07, Dr. Melhem, the Assistant Chief of Staff at the VAPHS actively recruited me for the position of Chief of Radiology at the VAPHS. She claimed that there was a leadership vacuum at the hospital in the department of Radiology. This had resulted (according to her) in major decisions being left to be made by her (a Pathologist) and the Administrative Officer (a Nutritionist). She said that she wanted me to come in and take a look at the inefficiencies in the department, the fraudulent use of duty hours by radiologists and waste of government resources. She said that she wanted me to provide her with “snapshot” and come up with a plan for correcting these issues.
2. In and around May 08: After much discussion and debate, I signed the contract to join the VA as their chief of Radiology. I also spoke with General Peake who was then secretary of the VA. General Peake had been the Army Surgeon General when I was serving – during my last tour of duty. I believed that there was a mission to be accomplished in “cleaning up the department and realizing its fullest potential”.
3. In July 08: I was approached by one of the radiologists (Dr. Robin Prasad) who cautioned me that Dr. Melhem, the Director – Michael Moreland, and Dr. Jain (Chief of Staff) ran a highly dysfunctional hospital. He said that there had been a Congressional investigation of Mr. Moreland Dr. Melhem and Dr. Jain in their harassment of two VA doctors (Victor Yu and Janet Stout) and findings of perjury, harassment and intimidation by the committee.
4. In August 08: I raised questions about this with Dr. Melhem only to be told that it was all false and that she was not at liberty to discuss them. Subsequently I found out that Dr. Melhem had not told me the truth and I had no means of verifying the veracity of her statements.
5. At about the same time: The entire staff of the radiology department took me to dinner and articulated all their problems with Dr. Melhem and Dr. Jain. They said that they had approached Dr. Jain several times regarding these issues only to be verbally threatened and harassed by Dr. Melhem. They also said that prior to my arriving at the VA, four separate chiefs of radiology had stepped down or relieved by dr. Melhem.
6. In September 08 to January 09: I started working for the VAPHS in September 08 as the Program leader for the Radiology program with Dr. Melhem as my supervisor. I was directed to look into all the critical issues in radiology. In my survey, I found several issues including the following;
a. Fraudulent use of leave and
b. Unauthorized use of comp time by the doctors,
c. A very poorly structured peer review program,
d. Arbitrary hiring practices,
e. Inequitable and secret compensation schemes where certain favorites were paid more than others,
f. Possible illegal hiring practices on individuals requiring visa waivers,
g. Purchase of millions of dollars worth of equipment which had not been optimized for use Despite the advice of subject matter experts unnecessary equipment purchase was planned and executed – SPECT Scanner without CT, Low field strength MRI unit which is barely ever utilized, High field Strength MR. unit without adequate safety planning, more linear accelerators than were necessary.
h. Equipment which was inadequately resourced causing problems with patient care (e.g. no UPS on major equipment, no calibration on CT scanners)
7. In the third week of January of 09, I asked Dr. Melhem for a recommendation letter since I had applied for an academic position at the University. She gave me a glowing recommendation.
8. In the first week of February 09: I found that Dr. Melhem was ordering x-rays on an individual ineligible for care at the VA. I spoke to Dr. Jain about this and he told me to “kill it – sweep it under the rug”. At no time did he tell me that this was legal and had been authorized by the VAMC, although he later claimed, as did Ms. Wolf that this was legal. I called former secretary of the VA Dr. Peake and asked him for advice – he suggested I put it in writing and hand it to Dr. Jain.
9. In mid-February 09: Dr. Jain told me that an Administrative Board of Investigation would be convened. What he neglected to tell me was that the ABI was to be convened against me. I went unprepared for the meeting.
The Board refused to accept any additional information and evidence I attempted to provide them,
10. In mid February 09: I also found that Dr. Melhem had violated Nuclear Regulatory Commission guidelines by countermanding our prescription for radioactive materials and replacing them with “2nd string” radiopharma--ceuticals which produced poor images and increased by 3 to 8 times the radiation burden to veteran patients. She had put in place radiopharmaceutical contracts with vendors with no input from the authorized users of radioactive materials. When I complained in writing about this to the VAIG no action was taken to insure that such an event would not occur again.
11. In mid- late February 09: I found that one of the doctors (Dr. Vidhi Gupta) was consistently providing poor care to our patients – with larger number of complications than her peers. I brought this to Dr. Jain’s notice – he told me he would take care of this and that I was not to interfere or investigate this.
12. In early February 09, I apprised Dr. Jain of the fact perusal of the workload and attendance data, some of the doctors notably Dr. Kanderi never fulfilled her time obligations. He told me not to interfere with this since this was Dr. Melhem’s area of concern.
13. In early May 09:
a. Dr. Jain received the recommendation of the ABI and called me for an interview to inform me that I would be terminated based on the recommendation of a Summary Review Board. I was then escorted off the premises with a police escort and told not to return except for medical care at which time I would have to notify them in advance so that they could have me under police surveillance.
b. At this time Dr. Jain gave me a copy of my SF-50 detailing the probationary nature of my employment. This was the first time I had heard of this. He informed me that I was JUST a probationary employee and could be summarily fired. I had never seen this document prior to this. Apparently this should have been in my recruitment package.
c. I also found out that some of the other doctors (for- e.g. Dr. Shah) who had been hired at the same time did not receive their SF-50. Dr.Gupta received her SFG-50 - she had been hired a few days before I was.
14. In mid May 09: Ms Wolf sent for me and said that she was canceling the board and its findings because she was convinced that it was done illegally and that I had been treated unfairly. She also told me that at no time was I to blame and that she knew that Dr. Melhem was to blame and that she would discuss this with me at a later date because it was a long story.
15. In late May 09 and June 09: I was detailed to Butler VAMC until things “had settled down”. During this time she would get an executive coach from the National Center for Organizational Development to assess the situation and help in team building. The coach and her team turned up. They managed to alienate my entire team of technologists who refused to meet with them. I secured Ms. Wolf’s permission to dispense with using the NCOD team to interface with my department while retaining their offices to help me with my issues if any. I understand from outside sources, that Ms. Wolf retained the NCOD to “dig up dirt” on me.
16. In July 09: I was sent for some of the many courses I should have taken as a new supervisor in September 08 but were denied to me by Dr. Melhem.
The radiologists at the VAPHS allegedly met with Mr. Michael Moreland and secured an understanding from him that I would be removed from my position within 90 days. Dr. Prasad reported this to me when I returned to work at the VAPHS

---

Dr. Chacko's Timeline Part 2
Post by Vijay Mehta on Today at 11:50am

17. In August 09: I started back at VAPHS now as the Service chief. Dr Melhem was removed as the supervisor of Radiology. I was asked to look into administrative issues in Radiology and to surface them with Dr. Jain. I brought the many issues I found in radiology to Dr. Jain, who said that he would help me attend to these. Dr. Jain set up frequent meetings with me 8/3, 8/10. 8/21. 8/24. 8/28 and 9/3. At no time did Dr. Jain discuss that there was a problem with my management style. He never informed me that there were any complaints. He specifically gave me directions to start setting up the procedures for mammography
18. In September 09:
a. I had filed an EEO complaint against Dr. Jain in May. This came for ADR on September 1st 09. It was agreed upon verbally that Dr. Jain would support me in implementing solutions to problematic issues in the hospital. He would let me know if things were going wrong and suggest course-corrections.
b. On September 2nd, a blogger (Michael Volpe) called me at my office and told me that he would be writing up slanderous and very injurious articles about me on the Internet. Since I did not know Mr. Volpe personally, I asked him what his sources of information would be. He claimed and subsequently has stated on his blog that his sources of information would be the VA.
c. On September 3rd, Dr. Jain and Ms Wolf called me in to tell me that there had been several complaints about me and they would be issuing a letter informing me of forthcoming disciplinary action. She then said that she had not investigated this. She told me that her source was complaints from the blogger. She assured me not to worry and that this letter was not a serious one – it was designed to get my attention. When I asked her why I had not been told that there was an issue, she said that she was telling me now.
d. In mid September: Dr. Jain asked me to perform a focused peer review on several cases read by one of my staff – Dr. Shah. These had been turned in by an anonymous source. I discovered on logging into the system that Dr. Gupta lodged these complaints. She had made several critical errors in reading and in patient care. This was used as a red herring to cloud the issue of her problematic and subpar performance. I had brought this to Dr. Jain’s attention at the time of her evaluation and was directed to give her a good evaluation. I refused and said that at best I would give “damn her with faint praise”.
e. On the 29th of September 09, Ms. Wolf came to my office to tell me that she was on my team to give me a hug and that I should not worry about anything. She said things were proceeding very smoothly
19. On October 2nd: Dr. Jain called me in off leave to tell me that I was the subject of yet another Administrative Board of Investigation. This was convened in the 2nd week of October. It was clear from the Board chairman Mr. Goldman (VA chiropractor) was that they had spent an inordinate amount of time downloading my hard drive indicating that they had started this process prior to any rapprochement they had initiated. This clearly indicates that they had never any intention of supporting me in my initiatives to “clean up” the department – they were waiting for an opportune moment to lower the boom again!!
20. In December 09:
a. I was notified that the ABI had recommended that I be separated from the VA. When they provided me with the depositions that they had considered, it was clear that they had NOT heeded the recommendations of several of the key personnel including the Chief Technologist Hallie Montgomery.
b. I was then summoned before a Summary Review Board (SRB) , which has recently concluded that I be removed. This was to have occurred on January 25th, 2010.
c. The SRB conceded that the issues I had raised were legitimate but they I had not corrected them. There is no mention made of the fact that I was directed not to take any corrective actions. During the period that I was placed on Administrative leave May – August 09 Dr. Jain had ample opportunity to take corrective actions himself which he did not do.
d. Furthermore, the attempts I took to implement corrective solutions were deemed as harassment and I have been punished severely for this.
21. In January ’10:
a. The Detroit Office of Special Counsel transferred my files to the Detroit Office. Mr. Eric Calhoun from the Detroit Office is now handling the matter. They were successful in getting a stay for 60 days from the VA. He tells me that he is requesting records, phone logs and emails from the VA to look at this investigation.
b. I had sent an email to COL Jonathan Jaffin of the Army Medical Department asking if there was a position I could take in Afghanistan for the Army particularly since I knew the culture and was fluent in Urdu, the language spoken in Pakistan. He responded saying that he would send the letter to his executive Office, the chief of Consultants and the Radiology consultant, COL Breitwieser. Dr. Sri Kottapally of VAPHS called to tell me on Friday 29 January 2010 that a copy of my email had appeared on the blogger blogsite with the usual vicious narrative.
c. I called COL Jaffin and found out that he had no idea of who might have sent this to the blogger. He said he would be handing this to the Med COM JAG and to head of Medical Corps with a copy to LTG Schumacher for further investigation. He read the blog and was very distressed at the contents of the blog. But more importantly, he was concerned that an internal AMEDD document was sent to a blogger.
d. I called the FBI, Agent Deborah Mitchell, (412-432-4722) at the Pittsburgh Office and notified her of my concerns regarding the blogger and his use of the Internet to terrorize and intimidate. I also told her that the Chicago Office had indicated that this fell in the realm of RICO and needed to be followed up – but by the field office where I resided rather than where the blogger resided.
22. In March 09
I was informed that I would be separated from the VA on the 25th of January. The Office of Special counsel had taken over the retaliation and reprisal portion of my complaint and is currently investigating it. They secured a stay for 60 days and I was terminated on the 26th of March 2010.

Here is the full dossier of Dr. Anna Chacko.

Dr. Chacko, the Media, and Judicial Purity

UPDATE: Please also check out my new book, The Definitive Dossier of PTSD in Whistleblowers, for only $3.99, in which I dedicate Chapter 4 entirely to the exploits of Dr. Anna Chacko. 


Following my last Dr. Anna Chacko piece, I received this comment from George Love.

Dr. Chacko's termination is a complicated matter, in that only the deciding officials know the real motive. The articulated reaon is merely a pretext. The working assumption is what we refer to as a mixed motive, that is reprisal /retaliation for (1)whistle blowing and (2) prior EEO activity. Silence is not deafening, it is appropriate for all parties concerned while the issues are investigated and subjected to discovery proceedings in the appropriate legal forum. It is interesting that the basis for much of your writing on Dr. Chacko is based on information that could only be given to you outside the scope of anyone's legal authority to share that information and thus be a violation of the privacy act, which would indicate that your source has no qualms about violating federal statues for thier own personal motives. Of course that only applies to those statements that are truthful. I do not believe that a lie is a violation of the privacy act. It is fitting and just that we have a legal system so that people are not tried in the press which often times makes conclusions on half truths, innuendos, false assumption and erroneous conclusions which are supplied by individuals with their own bias and motives as a means of character assasination. I believe that you have arrived at faulty conclusions relative to Dr. Chacko based on ojectionable hearsay. I look forward to the day that Dr. Chacko will prevail in the apprpriate legal forum and I will keep you advised. Sincerely, George H. Love, Jr

I've spoken privately with Mr. Love and it should be noted that he's an attorney. (Besides that, our conversations shall remain private.) That's important because Mr. Love views the world through the prism of an attorney. He sees the court room and the legal process as the purist path to truth. That's where evidence must be properly processed, delivered, and analyzed. Mr. Love doesn't want the Dr. Chacko affair to turn into the O.J. affair and many other affairs in which trials were tried in the press.

There's some truth to his concerns. Still, a member of the press sees the media as the last protector against corruption. So, be it a court proceeding or any other endeavor, the press is the last place someone can turn to if all other places are corrupt.

George Love would have us believe that when a trial is going on press coverage only pollutes the air in the trial and since taints it. He would rather the trial move forward and media coverage happen afterwards.

Let's take a look at a few stories I'm working on now to test that theory. Mark Clements was falsely convicted of arson and four counts of murder after a confession was received through torture. This torture was part of a torture ring headed by Jon Burge. In fact, there was scant media attention of Clements case or most of the cases in Burge's ring. Clements continued to appeal his conviction and finally after 28 years it was overturned. Now, if we are to believe Mr. Love, we should have waited forever to say anything about this case. After all, this case was being adjudicated throughout. We wouldn't want to taint the court proceeding. In fact, what was tainted was the court proceeding itself. What needed to be exposed was the proceeding. It took nearly thirty years and Clements spent all that time in jail.

Then, there's the case of Tony Demasi. On February 5th, a judge, Judge William T. O'Brien, raised Demasi's bail to $1 million on a charge of criminal destruction of property, barely a felony. While in prison, here's what John Kass said about the chain of events.

Demasi's brain is like a dangerous egg, and if the FBI ever cracks what's in there, some guys who know guys figure they'll get fried. That's because Demasi knows whose itch he scratched for the city liquor licenses and building and occupancy permits, which determine how crowded a club can be. And he knows what he says he paid to promote legislation in Springfield permitting VIP bottle service, which allows club owners to milk the suckers. Since he was locked up Feb. 5, news began circulating among his old crowd. Some are worried. And I don't want Demasi getting accidentally hit by a bolt of lightning or choking himself to death with plastic bags in the jail shower. That might ruin Chicago's reputation.

Kass told me himself that in part he wrote this article because he worried that Demasi's life was in danger. If you view the world from the eyes of George Love, Kass should have left well enough alone and hope.

Then, there's the story of Dr. Susan Diamond. Dr. Diamond was involved in a divorce in which a corrupt psychiatrist used the system to milk millions from her and her husband. Dr. Diamond told me that she couldn't get anyone to tell her story because most media didn't want to do a story involving a divorce because they see both sides as crazy. Not coincidentally, divorce court is among the most corrupt parts of our judicial process.

In all these cases, it was the judicial process itself that was suspect. Only media attention could have solved the problem. In the case of Dr. Chacko, there hasn't yet been a court proceeding and that's what George Love is objecting to. He would like for that process to continue uninhibited without the stain of partial facts coming from the likes of me to taint it.

For me, the issues that are revealed in the Dr. Chacko affair are much greater than any court proceedings. A court proceeding would only answer the question of fault in her time at the Pittsburgh VA. It would not answer any other questions. For instance, Dr. Chacko worked in Boston and Butte, Montana all since 2006 when she arrived at the Pittsburgh VA. That would have been three cities in three years for a woman in her 60's. That's a serious red flag ignored and it's vital the public understand why.

Furthermore, I've shown a clear pattern of behavior by Dr. Chacko that goes back more than a decade. Yet, she continues to find work. How this continues to happen won't be answered by any trial. Mr. Love is weary of me, my motives, and my sources.

It is interesting that the basis for much of your writing on Dr. Chacko is based on information that could only be given to you outside the scope of anyone's legal authority to share that information and thus be a violation of the privacy act, which would indicate that your source has no qualms about violating federal statues for thier own personal motives. Of course that only applies to those statements that are truthful. I do not believe that a lie is a violation of the privacy act.

Mr. Love is awfully harsh and judgmental about me and my sources considering he doesn't know my motives, my sources, and certainly not the motives of my sources. Here's what I know. I found this story by accident. I wrote a piece about Ken Hodges. An individual from Butte, Montana reached out to me because they told me they saw similarities in their story and the one about Hodges. During the course of my contact with them, they turned me to an individual at the Pittsburgh VA. That became my first source on the Dr. Chacko story. I wrote a piece and from their my email and phone lit up and people from all over the country began telling me stories about Dr. Chacko. Each story was more shocking, jaw dropping and amazing than the last. The process was totally organic and I knew from the first moment that I had something unlike any other story. I knew that if this story was fully exposed it wouldn't only be compelling but would expose flaws in our society, our medical system, and our legal system. These stories have been featured here since and if you've read more than one, it paints a general picture of Dr. Chacko. That comes from conversations with dozens of people that don't know each other but describe Chacko in the exact same way. If this is a "half truth" so be it. I stand by what I've reported and I believe what I've uncovered would never find its way into a court room. Despite that, I believe that exposing it is vital and the public has a right to know, even if that means tainting the judicial process.