FOIA Case Study 
 

Reporter: John Solomon

Publication: Associated Press

Story: “Patients not told of researchers’ financial ties to studies”

Date of publication: January 11, 2005 

Background

Through a FOIA request, the Associated Press found that researchers at the National Institutes of Health were collecting royalties on drugs and devices they were testing on patients who did not know of their financial interests in the products.

Much of the AP story was based on the information received from the FOIA request, including the dollar amounts and total number of researchers collecting royalties. Reporter John Solomon complemented the FOIA documents with interviews showing how the agency had failed for five years to comply with its own disclosure rules. 

Why was this information important for the public? 

Such royalty collections by NIH researchers breached an NIH promise to Congress in 2000, and the practice ended under a new policy announced when the story hit the wire.  

What information was requested?

Solomon initially requested information on two researchers. The agency then allowed him to verbally amend that request to include all researchers agency-wide. 

How long did the reporter wait for the requested information?

Some of the documents were processed in less than two months. However, information still has not been received about one individual’s financial disclosure reports from 2001 – 2003, even though the request is from fall 2004. 

How complete was the information?

There were no redactions in the records that were received. However, the second half of the FOIA request seeking the ethics disclosure reports for one NIH doctor remains in appeal. The agency is trying to argue that a public ethics disclosure report shouldn't be made public. AP has written about this specific dispute because it illustrates the extent to which agencies are trying to exempt information from disclosure. 

Were there heavy fees or objections to a fee waiver request?

The fee was waived without objection.