Because plaintiffs are able to submit more than one type of accusation against a provider, the different combinations of accusations that could be waged against providers were extensive. However, some accusations were more common than others. The three most common accusations were: 1) miscoding, 2) misrepresenting non-coded information, and 3) miscoding and simultaneously misrepresenting non-coded information. Together, those three accusation combinations represented a total of 117 (50. 2 percent) of the 223 cases.

lists the frequency with which each type of accusation, or combination of accusations, was waged. By assessing the eight individual accusation categories, further trends appear. It should be noted that when studying the accusations by type, the individual categories are not exclusive of each other. For instance, the two most common types of accusations—miscoding and misrepresenting non-coded information—were sometimes waged against the same provider in the same case. As such, those cases must be included in the individual category assessments for both miscoding and misrepresenting non-coded information.

Thus, the data on miscoding represent every case in which miscoding was an accusation, regardless of whether other accusations were also included in the case. This is the only way to study all the cases in which a certain accusation was waged; to 91 subtract the cases with multiple accusations would skew the results on how often any certain accusation type has been filed. When studying the two most common accusation types, it is clear that the frequency with which such accusations are filed is remarkably similar to the overall frequencies for FCA cases filed.