Record
Health care exclusions that took effect in 2002
the Office of Inspector General's exclusion list held 2,671 exclusions that took effect in 2002 and were still in effect as of September 2026, according to HHS-OIG’s List of Excluded Individuals and Entities.
Of these, 2,521 are on individuals and 150 on entities. That is 3.2% of every exclusion on the list, and ranks 14th of the 48 years whose total prints, in the hub’s year table.
The year is the exclusion date, when the exclusion took effect, not when the conduct behind it occurred. The list holds only exclusions still in effect, so an early year counts what remains of it, not what OIG imposed then.
| Measure | Value |
|---|---|
| Individuals | 2,521 |
| Entities | 150 |
| All exclusions | 2,671 |
| Share of the list | 3.2% |
| Rank among the years | 14th of 48 |
By state, DC and territory
The place is the one on the exclusion’s row, not the person’s home. Of the 53 places with a row from 2002, 16 have their individuals withheld, because they are fewer than 11 or because a printed total would give such a count back; their entities print.
1 more column on a wider screen
| Place | Exclusions | Entities |
|---|---|---|
| California | 353 | 16 |
| Florida | 249 | 74 |
| Texas | 228 | 3 |
| New York | 142 | 11 |
| Illinois | 121 | 2 |
| Arizona | 119 | 1 |
| Pennsylvania | 102 | 6 |
| Mississippi | 84 | 0 |
| New Jersey | 78 | 2 |
| Ohio | 72 | 3 |
| Colorado | 60 | 1 |
| Louisiana | 57 | 1 |
| Minnesota | 55 | 1 |
| Oklahoma | 53 | 0 |
| Massachusetts | 52 | 3 |
| Virginia | 51 | 1 |
| Alabama | 48 | 3 |
| Arkansas | 48 | 2 |
| Kentucky | 48 | 1 |
| Tennessee | 47 | 0 |
| Missouri | 45 | 1 |
| Utah | 39 | 1 |
| Indiana | 36 | 0 |
| Rhode Island | 36 | 0 |
| Iowa | 34 | 0 |
| Nebraska | 32 | 0 |
| Michigan | 31 | 3 |
| Vermont | 29 | 0 |
| North Carolina | 28 | 1 |
| Kansas | 28 | 0 |
| Georgia | 27 | 5 |
| Washington | 26 | 0 |
| Wisconsin | 25 | 2 |
| Connecticut | 25 | 0 |
| Maryland | 24 | 2 |
| South Carolina | 21 | 0 |
| Maine | 16 | 1 |
| Idaho | Withheld to protect a count under 11 | 1 |
| Nevada | Withheld to protect a count under 11 | 1 |
| West Virginia | Withheld to protect a count under 11 | 1 |
| A foreign address | Withheld to protect a count under 11 | 0 |
| Alaska | Withheld to protect a count under 11 | 0 |
| Delaware | Withheld to protect a count under 11 | 0 |
| District of Columbia | Withheld to protect a count under 11 | 0 |
| Hawaii | Withheld to protect a count under 11 | 0 |
| Montana | Withheld to protect a count under 11 | 0 |
| New Hampshire | Withheld to protect a count under 11 | 0 |
| New Mexico | Withheld to protect a count under 11 | 0 |
| North Dakota | Withheld to protect a count under 11 | 0 |
| Oregon | Withheld to protect a count under 11 | 0 |
| Puerto Rico | Withheld to protect a count under 11 | 0 |
| South Dakota | Withheld to protect a count under 11 | 0 |
| Wyoming | Withheld to protect a count under 11 | 0 |
A row of OIG’s list is an exclusion action, not a person. A count is not explained by any cause here, and no person is named. How these figures are made.
Sources
- List of Excluded Individuals and Entities (LEIE) — U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General · Public domain — U.S. Government work · retrieved November 8, 2026
- List of Excluded Individuals and Entities (LEIE)
Compiled automatically from List of Excluded Individuals and Entities (LEIE) by a checked SQL query · Editor: Kian O'Connor · How this site is built
Data retrieved