New Jersey organ procurement organization under congressional investigation after 『alarming』 whistleblower claims

作者

Key Points

  • Ongoing Investigation: Research suggests the New Jersey Sharing Network (NJ Sharing Network), the state's primary organ procurement organization (OPO), is facing a congressional probe by the U. S. House Ways and Means Committee over allegations of unethical and potentially illegal practices, including attempts to harvest organs from patients showing signs of life.✅
  • Whistleblower Claims: It seems likely that multiple whistleblowers have raised concerns about out-of-sequence organ allocations, fraudulent research to manipulate performance metrics, and pressuring families without proper consent, highlighting potential abuses of public trust.
  • Recent Developments: Evidence leans toward increased scrutiny following a December 2, 2025, hearing where testimonies from affected individuals and experts called for accountability, though no immediate decertification has been reported as of December 6, 2025.
  • Broader Implications: The case reflects wider industry issues, with similar probes in other states, and could lead to reforms in oversight, though all sides emphasize the importance of ethical organ donation to save lives.

Background

The NJ Sharing Network, a tax-exempt nonprofit designated by the federal government to manage organ and tissue recovery in New Jersey, has been under investigation since at least July 2025 as part of a broader congressional review of OPOs across the U. S. (see https://waysandmeans.house.gov/). Led by Committee Chairman Jason Smith (R-MO) and Oversight Subcommittee Chairman David Schweikert (R-AZ), the probe intensified after interviews with nearly a dozen whistleblowers revealed patterns of misconduct. A letter dated November 19, 2025, demanded documents and interviews, setting a December 3, 2025, deadline, with threats of subpoenas if unmet.✅

Main Allegations

Whistleblowers described a culture prioritizing metrics over ethics, including a case at Virtua Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital where organ recovery proceeded despite the patient reanimating, only halted by hospital intervention. Other claims involve discarding 100 pancreata in one day to boost CMS ratings and bypassing national waitlists, potentially harming patients. These actions may violate laws on consent and allocation (e.g., National Organ Transplant Act).

Organization's Response

As of December 6, 2025, NJ Sharing Network has not publicly issued an official statement addressing the claims, despite requests from media outlets like CNN. Their website (https://www.njsharingnetwork.org/) contains no references to the investigation.

Next Steps and Context

A December 2, 2025, hearing featured testimonies urging reforms like better transparency and informed consent to restore trust, amid similar issues in Kentucky and Missouri. The committee is considering legislative changes, including penalties for violations, while acknowledging the critical role of OPOs in addressing organ shortages.

The New Jersey Sharing Network (NJ Sharing Network), officially known as the New Jersey Organ and Tissue Sharing Network (NJTO), serves as the federally designated organ procurement organization (OPO) for the state of New Jersey. As one of 55 such nonprofits nationwide, it operates under the oversight of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) and the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS), coordinating the recovery, preservation, and allocation of organs and tissues for transplantation. These organizations are tax-exempt under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, requiring them to function exclusively for charitable, scientific, or educational purposes. However, a recent congressional investigation has cast doubt on whether NJ Sharing Network meets these standards, prompted by whistleblower allegations of systemic ethical breaches and potential legal violations.

The investigation, spearheaded by the U. S. House Committee on Ways and Means, began in earnest in July 2025 as part of a nationwide scrutiny of OPOs. This broader effort has already led to actions against other organizations, such as the decertification of the Life Alliance Organ Recovery Agency in Miami in September 2025 due to unsafe practices and paperwork errors, and probes into the Indiana Donor Network for misuse of funds like private jet travel. In New Jersey's case, the committee's focus intensified after receiving tips from nearly a dozen whistleblowers, leading to a detailed letter sent on November 19, 2025, to NJ Sharing Network's President and CEO, Carolyn Welsh. The letter, signed by Chairman Jason Smith (R-MO) and Subcommittee Chairman David Schweikert (R-AZ), described the allegations as representing an "extreme abuse of public trust" and raised questions about the organization's eligibility for tax-exempt status and Medicare reimbursements.✅

Central to the allegations is a Donation After Circulatory Death (DCD) case at Virtua Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital in Camden, New Jersey. Whistleblowers reported that after the patient was pronounced dead, organ recovery began, but the individual "reanimated," showing signs of life such as purposeful movement. Despite on-site staff concerns, Welsh—lacking clinical training—allegedly instructed the team via phone to proceed from outside the hospital. Hospital personnel ultimately intervened, halting the process, but documents related to the case were purportedly deleted or manipulated, including taking email servers offline around July 13, 2025, to facilitate record alterations. The committee possesses evidence suggesting the OPTN Donor Record for this case was stripped down to a "skeleton" version, while the organization retains the original file.

Beyond this incident, whistleblowers accused NJ Sharing Network of out-of-sequence organ allocations, where over 25% of organs were distributed offline via unrecorded phone calls on personal devices, bypassing the national waitlist managed by UNOS. This rate exceeds the median for all OPOs by more than 10%, according to Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) data as of July 2025. Such practices allegedly stemmed from a 2022 cyber-attack that went unreported to federal agencies, leading to allocations guided by an internal "aggressive centers" list. The committee estimates this resulted in hundreds of patients being skipped, with dozens dying on the waitlist and over 100 others remaining affected. Motivations appear tied to improving certification metrics for CMS tiering and Medicare reimbursements, potentially violating the National Organ Transplant Act of 1984 and CMS regulations.

Additional claims involve fraudulent research practices, particularly with pancreata. On March 26, 2024, the organization discarded 100 pancreata processed for "research" in a single day, as documented in an internal Excel spreadsheet. Whistleblowers allege these organs were recovered not for legitimate scientific purposes but to inflate performance metrics, avoiding classification as "discards" that could harm ratings. An email from Chief Administrative Officer Sharyn Sawczak on March 18, 2024, referenced a new pancreas research project, coinciding suspiciously with media reports on federal OPO investigations. Despite NJ Sharing Network's denial in an August 21, 2025, staff meeting that practices had changed, evidence suggests otherwise, raising concerns about transparency and compliance with tax-exempt requirements for research activities.

Consent issues also feature prominently. The organization reportedly partners with New Jersey's Motor Vehicle Commission (MVC) to access "Documents of Gift"—redacted driver transaction histories lacking explicit donor status indications. These are allegedly used to claim first-person consent, even if individuals had revoked their donor designation or were not registered. Whistleblowers described aggressive tactics pressuring grieving families, effectively mimicking an "opt-out" system contrary to U. S. opt-in norms and potentially violating New Jersey law (N.J. Rev. Stat. § 26:6-82), which allows revocation through inconsistent actions.✅

The committee further accused NJ Sharing Network of misleading Congress, including discrepancies in reported pancreas discards (79 claimed vs. 100 documented), failure to provide requested documents like a CMS survey folder from November 2024, and unilateral deadline extensions. A culture of fear and retaliation against staff was noted, though the focus remains on executive leadership.

In response to these allegations, the committee demanded unredacted documents and transcribed interviews with over 30 named individuals, including Welsh, Chief Operating Officer Alyssa D』Addio, and Medical Director Dr. Jeffrey Miskoff, by December 3, 2025. Non-compliance could trigger subpoenas. The letter warned that proven violations—such as fraudulent Medicare billing or illegal consent practices—could jeopardize tax-exempt status, citing IRS guidelines and Supreme Court precedents that prohibit exemptions for organizations engaging in illegal activities.

A subcommittee hearing on December 2, 2025, amplified these concerns. Testimonies included Nyckolleta Martin, a former OPO employee from Kentucky, who drew parallels to a 2021 case involving T. J. Hoover, where organ recovery proceeded despite the patient regaining consciousness. Martin highlighted systemic failures, including document destruction and retaliation, and urged reforms for transparency and informed consent. Jennifer Erickson, an organ donation policy expert, testified on OPO interference in death determinations and taxpayer funding via Medicare, the largest payer for transplants. Heather Knuckles shared a personal story of her mother's death from a cancerous liver transplant procured by Mid-America Transplant in Missouri, underscoring accountability gaps.✅

Post-hearing updates as of December 6, 2025, indicate no immediate resolution. Media reports describe the testimonies as "shocking" and "horrific," with calls for HHS, CMS, and HRSA to replace deficient OPOs. However, NJ Sharing Network has not publicly responded, and their website lacks any mention of the probe. This silence contrasts with the committee's push for legislative reforms, including enhanced record retention, stricter consent frameworks, and penalties like excise taxes for manipulative practices.

The case underscores broader challenges in the U. S. organ procurement system, where demand far outstrips supply—thousands die annually on waitlists—yet metrics-driven incentives may encourage unethical shortcuts. Similar issues in Kentucky (Network for Hope and Kentucky Organ Donor Affiliates) and elsewhere suggest a pattern, prompting bipartisan Senate reports in June 2025 on OPO loopholes and conflicts of interest. While the investigation aims to restore public trust, it also risks deterring donors if not balanced with recognition of OPOs' life-saving role.✅

Allegation CategorySpecific DetailsPotential ViolationsSupporting Evidence/Source
DCD Case Cover-UpPatient reanimated during recovery; CEO ordered continuation; documents manipulated.Ethical breaches, possible fraud in records.Whistleblower accounts, committee letter (Nov 19, 2025).
Out-of-Sequence Allocation>25% organs allocated offline, skipping waitlist; linked to cyber-attack.National Organ Transplant Act, CMS rules.HRSA data, internal lists.
Fraudulent Research100 pancreata discarded March 26, 2024; recovered to game metrics, no real research.Tax-exempt status, Medicare fraud.Internal spreadsheet, emails.
Lack of ConsentUse of MVC documents to override revocations; family pressure.State law (N. J. Rev. Stat. § 26:6-82).✅Whistleblower reports.
Misleading CongressIncomplete responses, discrepancies in discard numbers.Federal statutes on investigations.Committee communications.

This detailed examination highlights the need for vigilant oversight to ensure organ procurement remains a beacon of hope rather than controversy, balancing efficiency with unwavering ethical standards.

Key Citations

发表评论