A federal jury convicted Patrick Britton-Harr, the owner of a laboratory based in Annapolis, Maryland, of orchestrating a fraudulent Medicare billing scheme totaling $18.7 million during the coronavirus pandemic. The scheme involved submitting claims for respiratory pathogen panel tests that were not medically necessary, not ordered by physicians, and, in some instances, never conducted on nursing home residents.

Britton-Harr, 42, operated Provista Health, which offered coronavirus testing services to nursing homes nationwide in 2020, a period when many facilities faced significant challenges obtaining COVID-19 tests. Prosecutors presented evidence at trial indicating that while coronavirus specimens were collected and sent to external laboratories for testing, Britton-Harr billed Medicare for separate, more expensive panel tests screening for over 30 respiratory pathogens. Several physicians testified that they had never ordered such panels for their patients.

Over a six-month period, Provista Health submitted Medicare claims totaling $18.7 million, resulting in payments exceeding $7.2 million, according to court records. The prosecution detailed how Britton-Harr directed staff—including inexperienced employees and family members as well as high school and college interns—to generate claims for respiratory pathogen panel tests each time a coronavirus test was performed.

Additionally, evidence showed that Britton-Harr continued billing for tests purportedly conducted at his Arizona laboratory after the facility had closed, when access had been restricted and the necessary equipment was no longer operational. Some claims submitted included tests for residents who had already died, highlighting the extent of the fraudulent activity.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Maryland emphasized its commitment to identifying and prosecuting fraud schemes that exploit vulnerable populations and misappropriate taxpayer funds. FBI Special Agent in Charge Jimmy Paul noted that Britton-Harr had a prior conviction related to an unrelated investment fraud case involving private individuals.

Attempts to reach Britton-Harr’s legal representation for comment were unsuccessful.