Auditor: DHS wrongly ignored autism kickback complaints, misread its own authority
An audit by the Office of the Legislative Auditor found Minnesota DHS’s Office of Inspector General repeatedly declined to investigate kickback‑only complaints in the EIDBI autism program because staff mistakenly believed state law didn’t cover those allegations — a confusion traced to a decades‑old DHS administrative rule that cited the wrong federal fraud statute. The report documents uninvestigated complaints and internal decision‑making, flags broader fraud‑screening and case‑selection weaknesses, and urges rewriting rules, retraining OIG staff and creating explicit procedures after lawmakers made the authority clear in a 2025 statute.
📌 Key Facts
- The Office of the Legislative Auditor (OLA) found that the Department of Human Services’ Office of Inspector General (OIG) mistakenly believed it lacked authority to investigate "kickback-only" complaints in the EIDBI autism program, even though state law already granted that authority.
- A longstanding DHS administrative rule cited the wrong federal fraud statute, which confused staff about when they could suspend or deny Medicaid payments and contributed to decades of under‑enforcement of suspected kickback schemes.
- OLA says DHS could have corrected the administrative‑rule error at any point over roughly 30 years but did not do so; lawmakers made the authority explicit through a 2025 statutory change.
- The audit documents repeated instances in which DHS OIG declined to open investigations into EIDBI autism kickback complaints and includes internal communications and decision paths showing leadership failed to fix the error after concerns were raised.
- The report quantifies the volume and timing of uninvestigated kickback complaints in the EIDBI program and flags broader, systemic weaknesses in DHS fraud‑screening and case‑selection criteria beyond autism services.
- OLA recommended that DHS rewrite the incorrect rules, retrain OIG staff on their actual statutory powers, and establish an explicit process to ensure kickback allegations trigger investigations instead of being screened out.
📊 Relevant Data
Somali immigration to Minnesota began in the early 1990s, primarily as refugees fleeing the Somali Civil War, with resettlement facilitated by U.S. refugee programs, leading to the largest Somali diaspora in the U.S. and significant demographic changes in the state.
How Minnesota became the center of the Somali diaspora — Sahan Journal
The Somali population in Minnesota has grown to approximately 107,000 by 2025, representing about 2% of the state's population, but this group accounts for a high proportion of welfare usage, with 81% of Somali households relying on government welfare programs.
How Misreading Somali Poverty Led Minnesota into Its Largest Welfare Scandal — American Enterprise Institute
In Minnesota's Feeding Our Future fraud scandal, the majority of defendants were Somali immigrants, despite Somalis comprising only 2% of the population, indicating overrepresentation in these fraud cases.
Learning From Minnesota's Somali Fraud Scandal — Imprimis - Hillsdale College
Autism prevalence is higher among Somali children in Minnesota, with 1 in 12 diagnosed compared to 1 in 36 nationally, potentially linked to environmental factors such as vitamin D deficiency due to darker skin in a northern climate.
A mysterious connection: autism and Minneapolis' Somali children — MinnPost
Genetic factors contribute to autism risk, with recent studies showing that both genetic and environmental influences account for variance in autism, including polygenic risk scores differing by racial groups.
Genetic and environmental influences in autism: guiding the future of treatment — PMC
📰 Source Timeline (3)
Follow how coverage of this story developed over time
- The Office of the Legislative Auditor’s full report details how DHS’s Office of Inspector General repeatedly declined to open investigations into EIDBI autism kickback complaints on the theory that state law didn’t cover 'kickback‑only' allegations.
- The audit traces the problem back to a long‑standing DHS administrative rule that cited the wrong federal fraud statute, which confused staff about when they could suspend or deny Medicaid payments and led to decades of under‑enforcement.
- It documents specific internal communications and decision paths within DHS showing that, even after concerns were raised, leadership failed to fix the error until lawmakers hard‑coded the authority in 2025 legislation.
- The report quantifies the volume and timing of uninvestigated kickback complaints within the EIDBI program and flags systemic weaknesses in DHS fraud‑screening and case‑selection criteria beyond just autism services.
- The audit lays out formal recommendations for DHS to rewrite rules, retrain OIG staff on their actual statutory powers, and build an explicit process to ensure kickback allegations trigger investigations instead of being screened out.
- OLA found DHS’s Office of Inspector General mistakenly believed it lacked authority to investigate kickback‑only complaints in the EIDBI autism program, despite already having that authority under state law.
- The agency operated for decades under an administrative rule that cited the wrong federal fraud statute, contributing to confusion over its power to suspend Medicaid payments in suspected kickback schemes.
- The report stresses that DHS could have corrected this rule error at any point over roughly 30 years, but did not do so until lawmakers made the authority explicit in a 2025 statutory change.