A recently filed federal lawsuit claims that an executive at a nonprofit organization was terminated after raising concerns about potentially improper billing practices related to federally funded healthcare programs. The complaint, filed by Valerie Barnes on April 16, 2026, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, names the Urban Minority Alcoholism and Drug Abuse Outreach Program (UMADAOP) of Cincinnati as the defendant.
According to court documents, Barnes began working for UMADAOP of Cincinnati in December 2019 and held several executive leadership roles, including Chief Financial Officer and most recently Chief Operating Officer until her termination on November 13, 2025. Her responsibilities included financial oversight, grant management, regulatory compliance, governance reporting, and monitoring public and grant funds. The complaint states that during her tenure, UMADAOP received federal funding and participated in programs such as Medicare and Medicaid.
Barnes alleges that she was dismissed for “insubordination,” specifically an accusation that she improperly disclosed confidential documents to Joe Mallory. However, Barnes asserts there was no identified misconduct or written directive supporting this claim. She states that “the allegation of insubordination was not based on any identified misconduct, written directive, or progressive discipline” and further claims there were no prior disciplinary records or documentation to support her termination.
The filing outlines a series of events beginning in late 2024 through 2025 during which Barnes says she engaged in protected activity under federal law by investigating what she believed were violations involving the submission of false claims to Medicare and Medicaid. She reports discovering changes made by UMADAOP’s CEO to electronic medical record systems—specifically reclassifying client program assignments from Medication-Assisted Treatment (MAT) to Office-Based Opioid Treatment (OBOT)—which allegedly did not reflect actual clinical practices or meet regulatory requirements.
Barnes contends these changes resulted in claims being excluded from billing workflows or appearing as if no reimbursable service had occurred. She also alleges that services were billed under OBOT designations even though UMADAOP lacked proper credentialing or physician oversight required for such services. According to the complaint: “Defendant submitted OBOT-coded claims to Medicare and Medicaid for reimbursement at times when Defendant had not satisfied required OBOT program conditions.” Barnes maintains she raised these issues with both the CEO and Board of Directors but received no corrective action.
The complaint describes how Barnes escalated her concerns about billing irregularities as well as workplace safety issues involving staff treatment by leadership. On September 24, 2025, she submitted a written report to the Board detailing these matters. She alleges that following this report there was a change in communication from board leadership: “The Board Chair ceased direct engagement with Plaintiff regarding matters within her executive responsibilities… This change in treatment occurred after Defendant became aware of Plaintiff’s protected activity.”
Barnes asserts that her termination came approximately forty-nine days after submitting her report to the Board and shortly after a staff meeting where organizational changes were discussed by board leadership. She notes that she was the only employee terminated among those present at this meeting despite previously regular participation in board communications.
In addition to alleging retaliation under the False Claims Act (31 U.S.C. § 3730(h)), Barnes brings a claim for wrongful termination under Ohio public policy prohibiting retaliation against employees who report misuse of public funds or regulatory noncompliance within healthcare organizations. The complaint argues: “Ohio recognizes a clear and well-established public policy protecting employees in healthcare and publicly funded organizations who report regulatory noncompliance… These protections exist independently of federal statutory remedies.”
Barnes seeks various forms of relief from the court including reinstatement or front pay instead; double back pay with interest; compensatory damages covering lost wages, benefits, earning capacity; special damages such as reputational harm; punitive damages where permitted; costs; litigation expenses; attorneys’ fees; and any other relief deemed appropriate by the court.
Valerie Barnes is representing herself in this matter without legal counsel. The case is identified as Case No. 1:26-cv-00381-MWM-KLL before Judge J. McFarland.
